It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (Part 2 - A Madder World)

In case the note above was missed: I'm clueless on this starting topics stuff. ;-) Yay, a new Mad World Topic is needed! And so soon. Thanks to everyone for your participation!

How appropriate a subtitle these days. ;-) From one of the many AIG bonus articles: Liddy said that on Tuesday, he had "asked those who have received retention payments in excess of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments." Some have "already stepped forward and returned 100 percent," he added. Asked by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., whether he would turn over the names of individuals who received the money, as well as the amounts, he said he would do so only if assured the information not be made public. When Frank said he might seek a subpoena, Liddy said he was concerned about the safety of the employees and their families, and read aloud from a death threat received by one of them. Ah, why be askeered for their safety if they did nothing wrong.

I want them to move on from this debacle. I bet Liddy is sorry he came out of retirement to take this $1./yr job, only to be grilled by those slugs. I'm not into finger-pointing....blame-games only feed the ego of self-centered people who want to feel important and above it all. Dodd facing fresh political firestorm http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090318/pl_politico/30833 It serves no purpose ...and $168M is a drop in the $170B that AIG got. Free Timmy and let him get on with the plan to buy the toxic assets of the banks. The sooner they get that plan going and yes ,get the next stimulus package in place, the sooner the economy will start to recover. Banks first; then housing. Now is no time to change Treasury Secs I say. He's got a full plate; let him focus.

sorry

From what I've been reading, Dodd looks like he may be toast in the next election.

I want them to move on from this debacle. When a bunch of rich people get more money, it is time to leave it alone and move on, but other things deserve investigation. From what I've been reading, Dodd looks like he may be toast in the next election. He's been blaming it on some unnamed people from Treasury, who advised against the provision because of "lawsuits." *rolling eyes* I would imagine it will all come out today as to the source.

Looks like you and O are on the same page, Evelyn: " I know Washington's all in a tizzy, and everybody is pointing fingers at each other, and saying it's their fault, the Democrats' fault, and the Republicans' fault. Listen: I'll take responsibility. I'm the President. We didn't draft these contracts. We've got a lot on our plate. But it is appropriate when you're in charge to make sure that stuff doesn't happen like this, so we're going to do everything we can to fix it. So for everybody in Washington who's busy scrambling to try to figure out how to blame somebody else, just go ahead and talk to me, because it's my job to fix these messes even if I don't make them. But what's just as important is that we make sure we don't find ourselves in this situation again, where taxpayers are on the hook for losses in bad times, and all the wealth that's generated in good times goes to those who are at the very top of the income ladder."

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs getting bonuses too? When did the definition of bonuses lose its meaning from producing agreed-upon or better-than-targeted results? Surely these aren't signing bonuses, like in the NBA. It isn't as if the job market is tough and you have to lure really good people away from positions. Lots of out of work people. Lots of management people who have been forced to take separation packages over the last decade. So retention can't be an issue. This is perversity writ large. :-( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/18/AR2009031803188.html?hpid=topnews

You gotta wonder if these "business" reporters actually know how businesses operate. Big wigs don't move offices unless they're getting better digs. Other departments might be moved into smaller spaces to save money. Also, does Citigroup own the building? Are they planning on leasing out the vacated space here or wherever the consolidated ops come from? With so much downsizing, I would expect to see tons of vacant space but little demand for it in Manhattan. Bailed-Out Citi Plans $10M CEO Office Citi, Which Has Received $45B in Govt. Funds, Will Spend $10M on NYC Exec Offices By ZUNAIRIA ZAKI ABC News Business Unit March 19, 2009� Citigroup, which has received $45 billion in taxpayer bailout money, plans to spend $10 million on new offices at its Park Avenue headquarters for CEO Vikram Pandit and his deputies. A Citi source confirmed the renovation plans to ABC News, which were first reported by Bloomberg News. The source added that the renovation is part of an overall effort to cut costs by consolidating offices. Last month, Pandit testified before Congress about the way his company is using taxpayer dollars received through the Troubled Asset Relief Program. "The American people are right to expect that we use TARP funds responsibly, quickly and transparently to help American families, businesses and communities," he said. Earlier this year, Citigroup reversed a decision to buy a $50 million corporate jet under pressure from the government. The Citi source likened the $10 million in office renovations to refinancing a home: You need to put money down so you can save money over time. Permits for the renovations were filed in September 2008, according to the source. "This office space consolidation is part of a global effort to create greater operating efficiencies and generate millions of dollars in savings in the years ahead," Citi told ABC News in a statement. "Through this project, senior executives in our corporate headquarters are moving from two floors to smaller, simpler offices on a single floor." "These changes, combined with greater use of shared work spaces and alternative work arrangements, will double the overall occupancy rate on the remaining floor," the company added. "In addition, based on estimates made when the project was initiated, we expect to generate savings in the next few years well in excess of the project costs compared to our current utilization of headquarters executive space." Bloomberg reported that the company plans to spend at least $3.2 million for basic construction, such as wall removal, plumbing and fire safety, but that the overall cost would be at least three times as high. [Thain filler] According to Bloomberg, plans for Citi's renovations on file with the city specify the installation of at least one Sub-Zero Inc. refrigerator and icemaker, "premium grade" millwork and a Madico Inc. "Safety Shield 800" blast-proof window film. The project includes 17 private offices, each with space for administrative assistants, two conference rooms and open areas with "soft seating." [Ed note: hardly damning specs] http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=7121558&page=1

I don't think they only started to owe the back taxes since January 20th. But maybe it was one of those corporate tax reduction things. ;-) From Reuters: Some bailed-out companies owe U.S. taxes-lawmaker Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:19am EDT WASHINGTON, March 19 (Reuters) - Some top recipients of U.S. bailout money owe the federal government more than $220 million in unpaid taxes, a U.S. lawmaker said on Thursday. Representative John Lewis, a Democrat who heads the U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means oversight subcommittee, said 13 bailed-out companies owe the federal government taxes. Two of them owe more than $100 million each. Lewis said that the firms, which he did not name, signed statements at the time of receiving federal aid stating that they owed no federal taxes. Lewis said the revelation raises further questions about the bailout program. http://www.reuters.com/article/americasRegulatoryNews/idUSWEN620420090319

Ex-Bush admin official: Many at Gitmo are innocent By ANDREW O. SELSKY, Associated Press Writer SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico � Many detainees locked up at Guantanamo were innocent men swept up by U.S. forces unable to distinguish enemies from noncombatants, a former Bush administration official said Thursday. "There are still innocent people there," Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a Republican who was chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, told The Associated Press. "Some have been there six or seven years." Wilkerson, who first made the assertions in an Internet posting on Tuesday, told the AP he learned from briefings and by communicating with military commanders that the U.S. soon realized many Guantanamo detainees were innocent but nevertheless held them in hopes they could provide information for a "mosaic" of intelligence. "It did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance," Wilkerson wrote in the blog. He said intelligence analysts hoped to gather "sufficient information about a village, a region, or a group of individuals, that dots could be connected and terrorists or their plots could be identified." Wilkerson, a retired Army colonel, said vetting on the battlefield during the early stages of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan was incompetent with no meaningful attempt to discriminate "who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation." Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, declined to comment on Wilkerson's specific allegations but noted that the military has consistently said that dealing with foreign fighters from a wide variety of countries in a wartime setting was a complex process. The military has insisted that those held at Guantanamo were enemy combatants and posed a threat to the United States. In his posting for The Washington Note blog, Wilkerson wrote that "U.S. leadership became aware of this lack of proper vetting very early on and, thus, of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released." Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney fought efforts to address the situation, Wilkerson said, because "to have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership." Wilkerson told the AP in a telephone interview that many detainees "clearly had no connection to al-Qaida and the Taliban and were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Pakistanis turned many over for $5,000 a head." Some 800 men have been held at Guantanamo since the prison opened in January 2002, and 240 remain. Wilkerson said two dozen are terrorists, including confessed Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was transferred to Guantanamo from CIA custody in September 2006. "We need to put those people in a high-security prison like the one in Colorado, forget them and throw away the key," Wilkerson said. "We can't try them because we tortured them and didn't keep an evidence trail." But the rest of the detainees need to be released, he said. Wilkerson, who flew combat missions as a helicopter pilot in Vietnam and left the government in January 2005, said he did not speak out while in government because some of the information was classified. He said he feels compelled to do so now because Cheney has claimed in recent press interviews that President Barack Obama is making the U.S. less safe by reversing Bush administration policies toward terror suspects, including ordering Guantanamo closed. The administration is now evaluating what to do with the prisoners who remain at the U.S. military base in Cuba. "I'm very concerned about the kinds of things Cheney is saying to make it seem Obama is a danger to this republic," Wilkerson said. "To have a former vice president fearmongering like this is really, really dangerous."

Just like I've been saying (and reading) for quite a while.

Wilkerson said, because "to have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership." Because God forbid they'd have to admit...*gasp*....a *mistake*! Heinous people.

I said that ages ago ...let them all go. Now looks like it will happen Gitmo inmates could be released in US http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=89075§ionid=3510203

From what I've been reading, Dodd looks like he may be toast in the next election. Of course that's a long way off and he's got lots of time to 'cover-up his...." I just came from a lecture by Paul Gigot (Op Ed WSJ) and he agrees with you, however. Along with Murtha. I don't know what scandal he's involved in. Can't keep up nowdays, LOL.

Re Murtha, same thing as many of them. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/16/AR2009031601393.html?hpid=topnews

*yawn* Note to self: Must send this to son who graduated from Penn State.

AIG is making sure employees are watching their backs. http://gawker.com/5175745/aig-corporate-securitys-tips-for-surviving-an-angry-mob I enjoyed many of the comments.

More on Dodd and his lack of candor. http://gawker.com/5175448/chris-dodd-is-a-liar?skyline=true&s=i And this is interesting to note re foreign recipients of AIG bonus $$: http://gawker.com/5175726/british-con-men-exempt-from-aig-tax Jim Cramer Can't Quit Jon Stewart http://gawker.com/5175094/jim-cramer-cant-quit-jon-stewart

I ddidn't watch the president on Leno. Youtube probably has it. anything important?...I seldom watch Leno

Other than the Special Olympics remark, you mean? I didn't see it either and only heard the remark through a sleepy haze on the radio alarm.

I saw it on Youtube. Funny; good sense of humor Other than the Special Olympics remark, you mean? Pfft. I don't pick-up on that stuff. I know he doesn't intend it as a mean remark. I was glad he defended Tim though. Waiting to see if The Daily Show has Senator Dodd on .

I know he doesn't intend it as a mean remark. No, exactly, but as I said to someone today, I think he sometimes forgets he's President and he has to watch how he says certain things now. I wouldn't have thought anything of it had one of my friends said it I'm sure.

Back to the drawing board I say... Auditors project deeper deficits for Obama budget By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer � 18 mins ago WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama's budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush's presidency, congressional auditors said Friday. The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama's budget than the new administration predicted just last month � a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It's a prospect even the president's own budget director called unsustainable. In his White House run, Obama assailed the economic policies of his predecessor, but the eye-popping deficit numbers threaten to swamp his ambitious agenda of overhauling health care, exploring new energy sources and enacting scores of domestic programs. The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda. By CBO's calculation, Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019. [.....] http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090321/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_budget

And there's more stimulus packages to go. "But Obama insisted on Friday that his agenda is still on track. "What we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term," Obama said. "That's why our budget makes a historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform. That's why it enhances America's competitiveness by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and building a clean energy economy" I'm placing my bet on higher taxes. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090321/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_budget

I don't necessarily have a problem with that to some degree. Let those tax breaks given over the last decade expire. Let corporations start paying their fair share. Let the IRS actually collect the corporate taxes they are owed that haven't been paid. Of course frankly, the taxes should probably be imposed because the US has spent a bizillion dollars on a war we shouldn't have been in and not put it where it needed to go. It's gotta be made up somehow. The day of reckoning is at hand for that ill conceived folly among other things. Not one of us really and truly sacrificed anything. It's coming.

Let corporations start paying their fair share. Let the IRS actually collect the corporate taxes they are owed that haven't been paid. More than 35%? Music to their ears. I can see the tsunami of industry moving back to Ohio. Now maybe collecting taxes from members of Congress and his cabinet who have been (ahem)remiss might help. And just in cases you haven't read: Obama's moving troops to Afghanistan. To paraphrase James Carville: "It's his budget...."

I can see the tsunami of industry moving back to Ohio. They didn't do it over the past 8 years. In fact, that's when they all moved overseas.

I forgot the ;-) There's a reason they left...35% corporate tax with more to come apparently. Though Tim said "after the recession". Ireland has 12% Hungary 16% Slovakia (where I visited last yr and there are industrial parks all over)19% http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/1466.html Ultimately the cost is passed on to the consumer anyway. Soooooo.

Hungary 16% Slovakia (where I visited last yr and there are industrial parks all over)19% Huh? The reason there are industrial parks is because the labor is dirt cheap. Always good to compare onself to emerging, post-Soviet bloc countries. How about Mexico and Guatamala? What's their corporate tax rate? It has always been about the labor cost. Cheap labor, not taxes.

Cheap labor, not taxes. Exactly. I heard someone talking the other night, can't remember who, but they were saying about the corporate tax cuts given with the idea of the companies creating jobs....except they didn't. They "kept" the money and sent jobs overseas since it was a pittance compared to here.

(Evelyn) There's a reason they left...35% corporate tax with more to come apparently. So, if I understand correctly from what you're saying, is that after all the tax breaks corporations got over the past several years, that their tax rate ended up at 35%. Then it would follow that the tax rate was greater prior to that. Am I reasoning that correctly?

Labor and materials are the two biggest costs. They also relocate production facilities to these countries because they can pollute the hell out of those countries and use materials and practices outlawed in this country, you know, like lead paint or child labor.

I have no comment about it at the moment. Just thought this interesting. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20299.html

Look! A liberal critical of O's financial guys (and by extension, O). Not a rare occurrence on this side of the aisle. Bet he won't be apologizing either. ;-) Paul Krugman | New York Times Blog March 20, 2009, 9:05 am AIG Preliminary thoughts on the tax bill: 1. It’s not the way you should make policy — it’s clumsy, and it will punish some innocent parties while letting the most guilty off scot-free 2. But — there wasn’t much alternative at this point. And for that I blame the Obama people. I’ll leave to others the question of who knew or should have known that the bonus firestorm was coming; but it’s part of a pattern. At every stage, Geithner et al have made it clear that they still have faith in the people who created the financial crisis — that they believe that all we have is a liquidity crisis that can be undone with a bit of financial engineering, that “governments do a bad job of running banks” (as opposed, presumably, to the wonderful job the private bankers have done), that financial bailouts and guarantees should come with no strings attached. This was bad analysis, bad policy, and terrible politics. This administration, elected on the promise of change, has already managed, in an astonishingly short time, to create the impression that it’s owned by the wheeler-dealers. And that leaves it with no ability to counter crude populism.

but they were saying about the corporate tax cuts given with the idea of the companies creating jobs....except they didn't. There's lots of misinformation out there, Comrades;-) If the administration wants to cap all bank executive salaries, they can certainly restrict corporate tax reduction to firms that expand, increase jobs and most importantly ,locate in the US...perhaps even tie-in tax reduction to states that have highest unemployment, with oversight. Labor and materials are the two biggest costs I won't argue there...v. important, non-union. But a lot of what you say is generalizing and impassioned rhetoric;-) (Krugman)"that financial bailouts and guarantees should come with no strings attached. " This is simply not true. I still support Tim;give him a chance. Sometimes I think it's just me and the President, LOL.

Reid seeks to clarify stimulus rule on casinos "LAS VEGAS (AP) -- Nevada Sen. Harry Reid has sent a letter to President Barack Obama asking for clarification to a provision that restricts casinos from using federal stimulus funds".... http://www.krnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10043348 And he's the leader in the Senate. Lord Save Us.

Well, well, well....here's The Great Statesman, Maxine Waters, piling on the President..., "'Well, you know, they've got some explaining to do and I think the president is going to have to clarify to the American public what took place between Treasury and Mr. Dodd. Obviously there was, appears to have been, some kind of agreement that they would protect the AIG from having to give those bonuses. I don't know who said what and when. Chris Dodd said he wrote the language but that he was pressured practically by Treasury. Maybe the president is not up to speed on what is going on. But I think it is going to have to be clarified.'" http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0309/Obama_has_some_explaining_to_do_Waters_says.html "...the president not up to speed..."How dare she!! Think Jon Stewart will have her on the show?;-) Nah! Though he and others;-) hammered & sickled Rick Santelli and all he did was disagree with the stimulus package.

Think Jon Stewart will have her on the show?;-) Maybe, maybe not, but Bill Maher already did 2 wks ago, though this news wasn't out and he would've brought it up if it had. She did say things were much worse than anyone knew though.

(Evelyn)I still support Tim;give him a chance. Sometimes I think it's just me and the President, LOL. LOL, I'm still onboard, too. Maybe today's plan announcement will help, though once again, it won't happen overnight. And banks and other "private partners" being asked to invest will want all sorts of guarantees. . . like don't tell me what kind of bonuses I can pay. Will be politically unpopular. The big O better don his kevlar vest, and buy one in every color.;-) There was an excellent show on NBC last night, taking you through the mortgage mess step by step. Banks made all sorts of commissions to sell the subprime mortgages--even falsifying applicants' wage data to get it through the underwriters. Some even had the underwriters reporting to the sales departments--no objectivity there. Then they'd sell them to Wall Street (e.g., Bear Stearns, Lehman, etc.) who in turn would package them into "mortgage securities" and sell them to various investors (e.g., pension funds, 401(k)s), etc. No one was looking at the viability of the underlying mortgages. Mortgage apps from people earning $1,300 per month were falsified to read $9,300 per month. Or just jamed through underwriting--anything to get the sale and the commission. Greedy bastards.

there was a similar doc on CNBC a few weeks ago called "House of Cards" with David Faber, great financial reporter. Not only banks made commissions, but so did mom 'n pop mortgage companies in California. They hired salesman off the street, fergodsake. One was a guy who went from being a pizza delivery man to a multi -K $$$ a week mortgage broker. WSJ warned of this scam yrs ago. http://www.realestatejournal.com/buysell/mortgages/20050721-anders.html "Skeptics worry that this easy-credit euphoria could end with a real-estate crash and waves of problem loans. Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan warned in June that housing prices in some areas appeared "unsustainable," adding that he was concerned about "the dramatic increase in the prevalence of interest-only loans." In a recent Wall Street Journal survey of 56 leading economists, 11 named a possible housing bust as their biggest worry for the economy." But 45 of the leading econs obvioulsy missed it!! Don't tell me Congress didn't know what was going on. But as a country we govern under the habitual practice of "IF it ain't broke, don't fix it". And then by panic...witness the recent "mob rule" law to tax bonuses *retroactively*!

(Evelyn)Not only banks made commissions, but so did mom 'n pop mortgage companies in California. Absolutely, I shouldn't have just said banks. They talked about Countrywide last night, and something else called People's Choice, just to name two. (Evelyn)But as a country we govern under the habitual practice of "IF it ain't broke, don't fix it" And then by panic...witness the recent "mob rule" law to tax bonuses *retroactively*! . I completely agree on both counts. Thanks for the '05 WSJ article. Terrible.

From O&E (Dorine)No continuation of the Duplicity interview on CR tonight. It's all about the economy. I'm taping as it looks interesting anyway. The one columnist from the NYT, Andrew-something was on Bill Maher last Friday. Your friend Paul Krugman wasn't happy with Mr Obama. But then he never is, unless one totally agrees with him. A v. narrow-minded individual:"My way or your *wrong*!! Andrew Sorkin, Financial reporter for NYT. Junk asset plan"could" work. Depends if investors are enchanted with getting in partnership with the government; afer last week, there are doubts out there. I say:"Muzzle Congress".

I'm not making a judgement on the content of the first, I just LOL at the snarkiness and I agree with the sentiment of the second. GOP overwhelmed by kos Tue Mar 24, 2009 at 02:20:04 PM PDT So today we've seen Republicans try out their new line of attack: that Obama is throwing out "too many ideas" on the economy, with little cohesion. A DNC spokesman fires back: "I guess when you have no new ideas, anything more than zero must seem overwhelming." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ President Obama confronts the filter, round two by Jed Lewison Tue Mar 24, 2009 at 05:52:57 PM PDT Paraphrasing a comment by Chris Kofinis on 1600 earlier today, here's a translation of the message President Obama is delivering to his Republican critics: "We gave you guys 8 years to screw up this country -- can you at least give us 8 months to start fixing it?"

(Evelyn) Your friend Paul Krugman wasn't happy with Mr Obama. But then he never is, unless one totally agrees with him. A v. narrow-minded individual:"My way or your *wrong*!! Can't call him my friend as I don't read him often enough to have an opinion of him. I knew he hasn't been happy with much of the economic policy of late. And BTW, what if he's really right?

*Some people*;-) might say he's being irresponsible and unpatriotic;-; (The Great One)can you at least give us 8 months to start fixing it?" I admire his optimism:-D GOP overwhelmed by kos LOL I wondered when Marcos Mocoso was going to surface again.

*Some people*;-) might say he's being irresponsible and unpatriotic;-; Krugman? How? By disagreeing? The (at least highest profile) people who said people like that were unpatriotic are fortunately retired from public service. ;-) Thought you'd appreciate comments from Kos. ;-)

Thought you'd appreciate comments from Kos. ;-) LOL..Hate to disappoint you... I scrolled through the narrative. Sorry;-) You just didn't get my quote, Comrade.

What narrative? I only posted those snippets that they had posted. There was no narrative or link. My comment about appreciating Kos was facetious as well. ;-)

From O&E, Note to Karen: if this belongs back there, pl. move it. Julianne Moore To Play Hillary Clinton by Peter Knegt (Updated 17 hours, 13 minutes ago) I saw that yesterday but opted not to post it. (Karen)but I see that Peter Morgan is up to his usual: Why do you that? I liked "The Queen". Wow! What a line-up of actors who wanted to play Bill. Philip seymour Hopkins? He's have to lose a little weight. Question: Wonder who is going to play Monica?

That's a movie, it should be O&E.

*shrugging shoulders* Eh! Can't be bothered.

Et tu Rahm....? From THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage giant Short Freddie Mac stay made him at least $320,000 "....On Emanuel's watch, the board was told by executives of a plan to use accounting tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits the government-chartered firm was then reaping from risky investments. The goal was to push earnings onto the books in future years, ensuring that Freddie Mac would appear profitable on paper for years to come and helping maximize annual bonuses for company brass. The accounting scandal wasn't the only one that brewed during Emanuel's tenure..." http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-rahm-emanuel-profit-26-mar26,0,5682373.story

Tired of the Sunnies, Shitites and Kurds? Welcome to the warring histories of the Pastuns, the Uzbecks, the Tajiks and the Hazara Shiites of Afghanistan.... WASHINGTON TIMES: ..... "The Holbrooke-Petraeus-Clinton faction, according to the sources, prevailed. The result is expected to be a major, long-term military and civilian program to reinvent Afghanistan from one of the most backward, least developed nations to a relatively prosperous democratic state. " ...... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/26/inside-the-ring-23718486/

Well, that is the thing at this point. It will be all for naught if they don't get a handle on our "friends" Pakistan. Apparently this guy didn't appreciate all of Eleanor Roosevelt's or any other First Ladies contributions over the years or think they had much of a "historic role". Rep. Issa pushing to limit first lady�s power to �protect� her �historic role.� Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and his conservative allies are pushing for legislation that would limit the first lady�s ability to do substantive policy work. Issa had originally proposed the bill last year, in fear of Bill Clinton moving back in to the White House. But he insists the bill is only about ensuring �transparency� for the work of first ladies, adding, �We are trying actually to protect the historic role of the first lady.� Or, as Gawker summed up Issa�s proposal in its headline, �Congressman Wants Michelle Obama To Shut Up And Look Pretty.� http://thinkprogress.org/

"first lady�s ability to do substantive policy work." Depends what one means by "policy". First ladies aren't elected, but they certainly have made great contributions.

Exactly!

*ACORN* ...at best a little ham-fisted...or perhaps the guillotine.... "The Obama administration's constant bashing of CEOs and capitalism, the circus atmosphere in Connecticut where ACORN has been sponsoring tours of the homes of AIG executives, and the confrontations that have occurred are modern versions of the Place de la Concorde circa 1793-94. " http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/27/uncle-sams-heavy-hand/

Gives new meaning to the word: Contrived Obama Town Hall Questioners Were Campaign Backers http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/03/27/obama_town_hall_questioners_we.html?hpid=topnews so much news....so little time....;-(

History in the making here today. Pres O has just walked into No 10. I will be glued to the TV today. Moreso, to monitor news re:protestor disturbances. Unfortunately, DH works close by to the hot spots,he doesn't get to stay at home, business as usual for him :-( Double edged sword to watch history in the making, but I will be glad when G20 has left town.

The customised tank seen in this footage is right outside my DH's building. He took a photo of it from his office window. His street is thankfully now blocked off and guarded by Police. Yikes. From TV coverage there are significant crowds outsid whom look a little restless. Leaflets are being distributed saying 'hang the bankers' and the like. Your's very nervous :-( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7976444.stm

From TV coverage there are significant crowds outsid whom look a little restless significant crowds are gathered outside Bank Of England. I saw some crowd jostling. Must be a nightmare for the Police on the ground. Thank goodness DH no longer works in Threadneedle Street Branch, which is right across a narrow road from B of E. Not too good for those poor colleagues today and tomorrow looks to promise more of the same :-(

Here are some scenes from this mad, mad, mad London, today. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7975851.stm

I knew this would happen. Protests turned nasty. Protestors entered RBS Threadneedle Street, smashed windows, Smoke bombs, protestors trying to get inside bank. V.V.worrying.

(Sue) Your's very nervous :-( As soon as I logged on this morning and saw the headline, I immediately thought of Ant.

Thank you Sue. We're getting footage of the protests on our television this morning. I'm thinking of you all.

So far Ant's building is safe, but I will not deny I am very worried and keeping a close track of movements via the news coverage here. He has to navigate Liverpool Street tonight. I won't breath easy until he is home safe Shocking seeing scenes unfolding of RBS Threadneedle Street being trashed. Thankfully the building is empty today, though I didn't know that when the story first broke. A couple of protesters got onto the roof but it sounds like it was mainly small offices on the ground floor which were penetrated. Kinda scary seeing smoke coming from an upper window, but I think it might have been a smoke bomb which was lobbed into the building. Graffiti on walls, and items from inside the office have been stolen (Computers) and a chair was lobbed through a window. It's been reported some protesters are wearing Police Uniform, those caught have been arrested and take away. Riot Police on horseback are now controlling the crowds. Sheesh! and I am sure there will be more to come tomorrow. A group of hoodie protestors were seen trying to enter the cordoned off part of Bishopsgate, nearer to where Ant works. Police gave chase by hoodies escaped. I feel for the Police and their families, very worrying. http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090401/tuk-g20-protesters-clash-with-police-6323e80.html

Thanks, Karen and Evelyn. The protesters are now chanting and protesting at being penned in after trashing RBS building. Apparently there are concerns as to the legality of holding them in as to their right to protest. The protesters say all they want is the right to move further up the road. Yeah and to cause more chaos! Sheesh,What about the right of those whom have to carry out their normal working day. I am not against peaceful protest, but.............

On another note, Pres 'O', enters #10. Interesting video http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/video_and_audio/default.stm

first picture is of protesters attacked RBS Threadneedle Street. Following security warning, DH's building has now been evacuated, goodness knows what's going to happen next. Thankfully he is on his way home now. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1166349/Protests-turn-violent-thousands-anti-capitalists-converge-Bank-England-G20-riot.html

Obviously the UK doesn't do what we do here with protesters....give them permits and pen them up blocks away from the meetings. Glad Ant got out of there. Reminds me of the World Trade Organization riots in Seattle 10 years ago.

(Dorine)Obviously the UK doesn't do what we do here with protesters....give them permits and pen them up blocks away from the meetings. Heaven forbid the UK would worry it would infringe the protesters rights, pfftt. I am shocked the front line police were not more suitably armoured. My heart goes out to those guys on the front line and their families whom must be very worried. I know the banks are culpable, the RBS is one of the main villains, and don't get me started on the monitory gluttony of Fred Goodwin! but the Government is also culpable, and Gordon Brown still hasn't publically apologised for their part in this mess! Irresponsible reporting, in sighting anger and hatred, is also to blame for today's events. The Press are also culpable.

They aren't anywhere near the meeting at 10 Downing, and the article did say there were barricades at the Old Lady of Threadneedle St, just in cases. But the focus on RBS is warranted from the British perspective, as it would be like people in the US converging on AIG.

However culpable the RBS, IMO, there is no excuse for the violent scenes I witness via the news channel today. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7977063.stm

pen them up blocks away from the meetings. Well, to be honest, I don't actually agree with this policy. At least keeping them so far from the action. There were at least a couple of competing protesting factions of Pro-Israelis ( Anti-Iran) and Pro-Palestinians during a UN meeting where I think Armidinijhad was speaking a few years ago. They penned them up several blocks away, and then over a block too from where the UN was, so really no one by the UN bldg could see or probably hear them. I think the protesters have every right to be near what they're protesting (though perhaps in a penned area), esp as they were given the permits. I don't agree they should be able to run amok and be a danger to others though.

(Dorine)I think the protesters have every right to be near what they're protesting (though perhaps in a penned area), esp as they were given the permits. I don't agree they should be able to run amok and be a danger to others though. Totally agree. I am not against protests, but, unfortunately these events usually attract the non peaceful faction (thugs). The protests started out peacefully today, but a minority usually turn nasty, which, IMO, tarnishes and clouds the message the protesters are trying to make.

I had no problem with the protesters doing their thing at all...it was the tremendous bitch it became to get around anywhere in midtown by every means of transportation for almost a week that got me because of security with major throughways and surrounding streets being blocked off as travel routes for dignitaries).

there is no excuse for the violent scenes I witness via the news channel today. Of course not, but unfortunately there are always some people hellbent on causing trouble. I wouldn't try to rationalize their motives and was only giving some perspective, as the US news hasn't been focused on the financial situation in other countries. We have enough problems here and some may not know why the protestors have targeted RBS.

Ah, I was writing while you posted and didn't see your response before submitting. Yes, I agree while it creates attention to be more violent, it is a smear on the message credibility at times.

(Karen)We have enough problems here and some may not know why the protestors have targeted RBS. I understand :-) Whilst RBS are guilty, no question about it. Other banks are equally as culpable, but they don't get the same coverage. Of course 'Fred the Shred' Goodwin and his extortionate pension, hasn't helped matters. Lord Myners has a lot to answer for too. IMO! I really mustn't start, gotta watch the BP ;-(

I will say one thing though, I admire much of Europe's willingness to participate in small and especially large scale protests of any kind. I admire their passion to get involved, as happened here in the 60's, like with the anti-Iraq war protests several years ago (although a lot of good it did). We don't get involved like that anymore for the most part, including myself honestly, and it saddens me some. The last I saw was just after the Prop 8/gay marriage ban was passed. Good size demonstrations in NY/CA (SF I think). I know some people who went to the demonstrations and I was proud to see it. I think Moon went to some gathering on the DC Mall a couple of years ago for something. Not sure if I remember that correctly.

(Dorine) I think Moon went to some gathering on the DC Mall a couple of years ago for something. It was an anti-war protest that coincided with the big book fair on the Mall.

I did not know what was happening in the news today until I logged unto Drool. I hope and pray that all of our Drool members and families in the UK are kept safe. I'm really sorry Sue. This is a difficult time for you and I just want you to know I'm thinking of you.

Thank you. Marlena. I'm feeling calmer now. Ant is now home safe and well and downing a strong cuppa tea ;-) But we can't help wondering what tomorrow will bring.

Glad to hear Ant is safely on his way home, Sue. The police have an extraordinarily difficult job to do. I wonder that these G-meetings take place in city centers. As Dorine posted, there were terrible riots in Seattle, Italy had lots of trouble a year or so ago, and now London. I think they need to go to a mountaintop retreat;-), if only to minimize risk to the rank and file employees, bystanders, and police.

Yes, perhaps the scenery would be soothing. ;-)

I have no problem with the protesters doing their thing at all I don't either, but no one has a right to participate in violent behavior, and put others in danger. PS I even marched for ERA* ...a million yrs ago, LOL. It was fun... we went by bus. Hey, it was a party. *For our British friends. Equal Rights Amendment . Equal Rights for women. (Didn't do much good...)

sorry... It's a pci of our President and Michelle at Buckingham Palace featured on Yahoo now. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090401/ap_on_re_eu/eu_obama Michelle looks so pretty. What engaging smiles they have.

LOL, this is so, cute ;-)

Oh My, just seen an updated TV report. There was an attempt to set fire to Threadneedle RBS. Police were inside and were able to extinguish the fire.

Thanks Sue, that's the pic I was trying to post. LOL. Didn't realize they were so tall. The Queen looks so tiny. I wonder what she carries in that purse in her own house. Police were inside and were able to extinguish the fire. Are the police allowed to use mace in such circumstances?

(Sue)Police were inside and were able to extinguish the fire. (Evelyn)Are the police allowed to use mace in such circumstances? I believe they are. When reports first came through I was shocked to see the Police standing back and apparently letting the protesters smash windows and enter the building. One brave (peaceful) protester asked the thugs to stop, he said it's a peaceful protest. Of course the thug ignored him and proceeded to set light to the office blinds. Sadly, I believe, it was naive to believe the protest would remain peaceful today. A protester on the TV has described the violence and damage as justified! beggars belief!

Apparently Pres 'O' gave the Queen an ipod as a present, awe. It's nice to see some peace and harmony from today :-)

An effigy of a banker is now being burnt outside Bank Of England. Talks of it escalating again! This aint over yet, worryingly so :-(

My opinion about this now is bring in the army!

Russell Brand was in amongst the crowd. Why am I not surprised. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Showbiz-News/Russell-Brand-Joins-G20-Protest-Outside-Bank-Of-England-Ahead-Of-Summit/Article/200904115253399?lpos=Showbiz_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_4&lid=ARTICLE_15253399_Russell_Brand_Joins_G20_Protest_Outside_Bank_Of_England_Ahead_Of_Summit

One has to wonder how many of those "protesters" are passionate about the cause (whatever it is!) and how many are unemployed, on the dole, and looking for some excitement. I've seen some of those London marches in Soho and wondered:"Don't these people have jobs?" I doubt they can get nr the American Embassy in Mayfair.

One has to wonder how many of those "protesters" are passionate about the cause (whatever it is!) and how many are unemployed, on the dole, and looking for some excitement. Agree. IMO, if that is the case (cynic me) they are biting the hands that feeds them. The workers (including bankers) at least pay taxes to pay benefits/Dole! BTW, Not forgetting the sad news and loss of life from the North Sea Helicopter crash near Aberdeen today. RIP

how many are unemployed, on the dole, and looking for some excitement. Perhaps unemployed and just mad as hell? I agree the cause may not even affect them directly. I have no problem with Russell Brand being there. He may support the protest, but not the violence per se. Being there observing and being there participating are 2 different things. If I wasn't such a chicken s***, I would love to get near events like this to observe them first hand. But violence is a bad scene for sure.

One protester gives his reasons... Protesters focused the Royal Bank of Scotland because it was bailed out by the British government after a series of disastrous deals brought it to the brink of bankruptcy. Still, its former chief executive Fred Goodwin � aged just 50 � managed to walk off with a tidy annual pension of 703,000 pounds ($1.2 million) � just as unemployment in Britain is at 2 million and rising. "Every job I apply for there's already 150 people who have also applied," said protester Nathan Dean, 35, who lost his information technology job three weeks ago. "I have had to sign on to the dole (welfare) for the first time in my life. You end up having to pay your mortgage on your credit card and you fall into debt twice over." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090401/ap_on_re_eu/g20_protests

One protester gives his reasons... Reasons to protest peacefully, yes. But there is no justification for the violence today.

Quelle horreur! ;-) http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1888962,00.html

I guess chalk another one up for Comedy Central for saying what really should be said. Colbert, Mocking Beck, Goes Where 'NYT' Would Not By Greg Mitchell Published: April 01, 2009 3:20 PM ET NEW YORK (Commentary) Was it another Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer take down? Another case of a fake newsman going where the mainstream press dared not go? It was shocking last night to watch the usually pro-right-wing Stephen Colbert faux persona lay into Fox News' TV host Glenn Beck without an ounce of sympathy. It came just one day after that New York Times front page profile of Beck aired only a small portion of his dirty laundry and mainly treated him as just another popular entertainer. Colbert, on the other hand, expressed (albeit with his usual twinkle and silly Halloween coda) all of the passion, and skill, shown by Stewart when he went after Cramer. He was not just foolin' around. Something obviously got to him. Perhaps it was a part left out of the Times' piece, which covered Beck's new "9/12" movement without mentioning that Beck had attacked 9/11 families and said he was "sick" of hearing about it and them. The Colbert punch line: "The 9-12 project is not for families directly affected by 9/11 -- just people building their careers on it." Compare this to the Times' treatment of Beck as largely a voice for "conservative populist anger" with his "moral lessons" and "passion" and "outrage." Yes, the Times did bring up the "rodeo clown" aspect of Beck and his musings about FEMA camps. But the truly toxic Beckisms were ignored, and they go well beyond calling Obama a "Marxist" and Hillary Clinton a "stereotypical bitch." Who can forget (beyond the Times reporters) when he asked the Muslim U.S. congressman to "prove to me that you are not working with our enemies." Now, will Beck go on Colbert's show, a la Jim Cramer? One doubts it, but watch Beck's show tonight for any quick response. All this comes on the heels of the new Rasmussen poll showing that 1 in 4 Americans now see the Comedy Central late-night shows as "viable" news outlets. And today The Onion won a Peabody Award for its videos mocking cable news. Not an April Fools joke, folks! See full Colbert video at our blog: http://www.eandppub.com Greg Mitchell (gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com) is editor. His new book, his ninth, is "Why Obama Won." http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003957744

I never watch Beck so I don't know what the hell Comedy Central is talking about. Nor do I watch Colbert....ever. Have watched Stewart a few times....*shrugging shoulders* Eh, You have to be a hard-nosed lefty to appreciate his predatorial interviews of conservatives. His MO seems to be "Search & Destroy" Now, will Beck go on Colbert's show, a la Jim Cramer? Why should he? *rolling eyes*

On a more important note:-)))) TIME has a great gallery of pics of Michelle's outfits in London. http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1888971,00.html Oh , and I like her new pulled back hair style . Jason Wu can really dress her. Oh, I could lift 10 lbs weights all day and never have upper arms like hers....

Here's the pic I like:

OMG! The moon has passed in front of the sun and I've been pitched into total darkness!

I love that one , Mari. Hadn't seen it.I suppose they were posing for a pic. Thanks. But not everyone did... http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090402/wl_time/08599188896200 I beg to differ with the writer...not to have returned an obvious affectionate gesture ..and stood there paralyzed-stiff...would have been a put-down to the Queen.

LOL and Awe, it's cute, good to see the 'human' touch with the Queen.

I thought it was very sweet also. Was thinking about how many presidents and PMs the Queen has seen come and go. She is such a rock, a constant, bless her. How old is Gordon Brown, BTW? His wife is young and attractive. Britain has certainly shown wonderful hospitality.

According to Wikipedia, Gordon was born 20 February 1951(age 57)

Thanks, Sue. Seems things were calmer today?

Much calmer today, thanks, Mari. A protester collapsed and died yesterday. Police are investigating but it's thought there are no suspicious circumstances. The Police raided a squat near by and arrested a number of the protesters thought to be involved in violence and criminal damage to RBS

For Evelyn: from now on, Silvio needs to bring his pals to the birthday parties.;-)

Glad to hear it, Sue.

What's wrong with that picture? Hmmm... Yes, I've got it! Does that look like a bunch of guys working on fixing the global economy? Or does it look like a bunch of guys, seeing the strippers come out to perform? ;-)

I suppose they were posing for a pic. Thanks. But not everyone did... http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090402/wl_time/08599188896200 Oh I'm sorry, was the link to the Michelle touching the Queen story I posted in #103, to the original Time article I found through the same Yahoo story (that you linked to instead later in 109), not good enough information? Is Time on the blacklist of links you won't read either? ;-)

(Dorine)Is Time on the blacklist of links you won't read either? ;-) LOL.Cute. You couldn't resist, could you;-)*shaking head* But you are maligning me....I didn't realize you had posted the same story. Actually,Yahoo had picked it up from TIME.... .....one of my favorite periodicals;-D (Mari)Britain has certainly shown wonderful hospitality. I was thinking the same thing. Hard to top that one. Oh, I love the pic of The Three Muskateers.I tried to post it earlier. I only wished they could have included the US Benefactor ,President Hu, And PM Brown. But nice that the market went up on the news of the G-20 $1.T boost from the IMF to the World Bank. Gives the world hope.

An update on all that touchy feeliness... Michelle Obama charms queen away from protocol AP * Buzz Up * Send o Email o IM * Share o Delicious o Digg o Facebook o Fark o Newsvine o Reddit o StumbleUpon o Technorati o Yahoo! Bookmarks * Print Raw Video: Obama's meet with Queen Play Video AP � Raw Video: Obama's meet with Queen * Obamas meet Queen Elizabeth II Slideshow:Obamas meet Queen Elizabeth II * Michelle Obama Stylin' in London Play Video Video:Michelle Obama Stylin' in London ABC News * Michelle Obama And The Queen Hug It Out Play Video Video:Michelle Obama And The Queen Hug It Out CBS 3 Philadelphia Michelle Obama, wife of U.S. President Barack Obama, left, walks with Britain's AP � Michelle Obama, wife of U.S. President Barack Obama, left, walks with Britain's Queen Elizabeth II at � By JENNIFER QUINN, Associated Press Writer Jennifer Quinn, Associated Press Writer � Thu Apr 2, 2:15 pm ET LONDON � Michelle Obama's meeting with Queen Elizabeth II began with a handshake and ended in a hug. The first lady arrived Wednesday with President Barack Obama. After separate meetings on the eve of the G-20 summit, the couple attended an evening reception for world leaders hosted by the queen. Mrs. Obama clearly made an impression with the 82-year-old monarch � so much that the smiling queen strayed slightly from protocol and briefly wrapped her arm around the first lady in a rare public show of affection. It was the first time Mrs. Obama � who is nearly a foot taller � had met the queen. The first lady also wrapped her arm around the monarch's shoulder and back. A Buckingham Palace spokesman who asked not to be identified because of palace policy said he could not remember the last time the queen had displayed such public affection with a first lady or dignitary. "It was a mutual and spontaneous display of affection," he said. "We don't issue instructions on not touching the queen." When the former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating put his arm around the queen in 1992, the tabloids dubbed him the "Lizard of Oz." When his successor, John Howard, was accused of doing the same, a spokesman insisted: "We firmly deny that there was any contact whatsoever." In 2007, President George W. Bush gave the queen a sly wink during a visit she paid to the United States. The Daily Mail said the "two women clearly took to each other." Wednesday's reception was followed by a dinner at Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Downing Street home, where the leaders' spouses were joined by notable British women, including "Harry Potter" author J.K. Rowling and Olympic gold medal runner Kelly Holmes. "Michelle walks in and she is as she seems," Holmes told reporters Thursday. "So warm, engaging, a beautiful, beautiful lady � and I quickly got my photo in the middle of her and Sarah Brown," the prime minister's wife. Mrs. Obama also seemed to win over the often feral British press. The last time a first lady made such a hit in Britain was last year with French President Nicolas Sarkozy's wife, the former fashion model and songwriter Carla Bruni. But on Thursday, London's Times newspaper had moved on, writing "Carla who?" The BBC described Mrs. Obama as her husband's co-star rather than supporting act � appropriate for a Harvard-educated lawyer. Mrs. Obama visited an all-girls school in north London on Thursday afternoon. She told the 240 girls about growing up on Chicago's south side, and urged them to think of education as "cool." "I never cut class. I liked being smart. I liked getting A's," she said. "You have everything you need. Everything you need to succeed you already have right here." At the end of the visit, Mrs. Obama doled out hugs to the students, and was swarmed by them � to the extent that some Secret Service agents stepped nervously forward. Earlier Thursday, Mrs. Obama attended a performance at the Royal Opera House with the other spouses and guests. The program included music by Handel and a dance performance by Ballet Black, a troupe set up to give performing opportunities to black and Asian classical dancers. Wearing a bright teal blue dress by Jason Wu � who designed her inauguration gown � and a sweater by Junya Watanabe, Mrs. Obama posed for photographs with Sarah Brown, Therese Rein, wife of Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso's wife Chikako Aso, and Laureen Harper, who is married to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, on the stage of the opera house. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090402/ap_on_re_eu/g20_michelle_obama

Yikes, for once I forgot to edit an article. Ugh. I hate that. (Evelyn) Actually,Yahoo had picked it up from TIME... I know, Yahoo's where I got it. ;-) Stories on Yahoo disappear over time as well as condense material from their sources, so occasionally I prefer to copy it from the original. Except AP. I never copy or really even link to AP. They're real sticklers about copyrighted material being copied elsewhere without permission. I like how conservative yet very classy Michelle has looked there so far. Carla Sarkozy was the same, as I recall, on their first visit there.

I tell ya, Mother Nature is a wonder. I love the incredibly mundane name it's been given. Huge Sea Worm Captured in Britain AOL posted: 1 HOUR 26 MINUTES AGO (April 2) - Staff at a British aquarium have captured a massive sea worm that had been terrorizing other aquatic life. For months, the 4-foot-long creature -- which staffers call "Barry" -- had been devastating coral reef at Newquay's Blue Reef Aquarium, the Daily Mail newspaper reported Tuesday. The menacing monster also apparently injured a Tang fish. Initially, aquarium workers weren't sure what was harming the coral, which in some cases was cut in half. After weeks with no clues, they decided to take the display apart to see if they could find the culprit, the Mail reported. Workers laid bait traps, which were mysteriously destroyed in the night, as the glutton apparently devoured the fish hooks right along with the bait. Finally, staffers spotted the tropical worm, which bit through a 20-pound fishing line before staffers were able to successfully remove it from the tank. The creature is covered with nasty bristles that sting and can cause permanent numbness in humans, the newspaper said. "It really does look like something out of a horror movie," Matt Slater, the aquarium's curator, told the Mail. "It's over 4 feet long with these bizarre-looking jaws." Slater said he suspects Barry arrived as a baby in a shipment from another aquarium. The worm now lives in his own tank. http://news.aol.com/article/giant-sea-worm/412269?icid=webmail|wbml-aol|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Fgiant-sea-worm%2F412269

Hmmmm, the link to post the pic is invisible. Not even an X box. Click on the link. You have to see it. That's part of what makes the story so interesting.

Wednesday was a difficult day for me, which was made easier by the support and kind words posted here and emails of support which I received :-) I just wanted to say a heart felt 'Thank You', Ladies :-) Ant has told me his office still has extra security and barricades surrounding the building, which is comforting to know. Two people have been charged. The anger towards RBS and Sir Fred has now moved to Edinburgh today. The week of G20 demonstrations will move to Edinburgh today when protesters target the annual shareholder meeting of Royal Bank of Scotland, where the row over Sir Fred Goodwin's pension will result in the bank's pay policies being voted down. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/apr/03/rbs-goodwin-protest-shareholder-meeting Problematic thing is, RBS workers, such as my DH, whom have kept their heads down, worked hard through the years, are seemingly being vilified and punished for the gluttony and selfish attitude of a few RBS workers, whom should know better. I guess,that's life :-(

of a few RBS workers Amendment to above, I should also say and a few RBS executives! It sickens me, sorry, just had to vent.

The G20 protests, which have caused two days of disruption in London, will continue when protesters from People and Planet, a network of student campaigners, will simultaneously converge on the AGM in Edinburgh and the bank's London offices in Bishopsgate. [Ed Note: Oh great, my DH's office! :-( ] The campaign group said last night the protest was designed to highlight the bank's investment in fossil fuels which, it claimed, make it the UK bank with largest investments in oil, gas and coal projects.

Opss

protesters from People and Planet, a network of student campaigners...to highlight the bank's investment in fossil fuels Bandwagaon jumpers. The press is there, so why not. :-(

Nice video of Pres Obama & Michelle being greeted by Pres Sarkozy & Carla. http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=12803081&ch=4226714&src=news Can't see Michelle's coat...is it flowered??? Hope not.

More terrible news. I know there are New York Ladies here. I sinerely hope no one here or their families are involved or affected by this. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7982313.stm

It is an emsemble, although Carla's ensemble dress looks more interesting

Oh .... I like *both* outfits . Thanks Michelle's is v. pretty. Love the hot pink, with maybe a solid dress underneath. Actually, that grey number looks a little matronly for Carla.

Another icon newspaper on the chopping block.... Times co. threatens to shut down Globe http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2009/04/times_co_threat.html Comments are interesting.....

My favorite is #24. More bandwagon jumping... when the real problem boils down to two cliched sayings: (1) why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free and (2) closing the barn door after the horses have left. These are failures of management, who probably haven't had their salaries frozen for years or made any concessions in their compensation packages.

I thought #25 was interesting. What union hasn't gotten a raise in 7 yrs? Please.

Hope this comes out...it did on the practice page.*crossing fingers* Prez and First Lady attending a cultural event in Baden Baden. Looks like an official reception to me.. Another pretty dress. Yahoo had lots of pics in their gallery. http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//090404/481/3ca9e44aca0547159f341a4a920c0a05/#photoViewer=/090404/ids_photos_wl/r65830454.jpg A few with Hill who looks v. pretty in pink pants suit.

Love that dress and her hair. You can tell they're having a blast. I hope he works out in the end. I really like them.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090405/ap_on_bi_ge/nytimes_globe Insiders say Globe threat a warning to newspapers Boston Newspaper Guild president Daniel Totten told the Globe the concessions could include pay cuts, the end of company pension contributions and the elimination of lifetime job guarantees. The Guild is the Globe's biggest union, representing more than 700 editorial, advertising, and business employees. Lifetime job guarantees?! Say what?!

Silvio Berlusconi's top 10 gaffes and pranks Silvio Berlusconi, Italy�s prime minister, prides himself on his ability to connect with ordinary people. But he has developed a reputation after making a string of gaffes on the world stage. After his latest mis-step at the G20 conference in London, which earned him a rebuke from the Queen, we count down our favourite Berlusconi moments. 1. Silvio Berlusconi missed a symbolic Nato photo and a ceremony for fallen soldiers because he was too busy talking on his mobile phone. 2. April 2009 Days earlier, he was accused of embarrassing his country by yelling a greeting at US President Barack Obama and earning a rebuke from the Queen during an official G20 photo shoot in London. Footage of the Italian prime minister becomes a YouTube hit in Italy, with one clip posted on the website titled �Bothersome Berlusconi, reproached by the Queen.� 3. March 2009 The 72-year-old self-made billionaire said his response to the global economic crisis was different to that of President Obama because �I�m paler�. �I�m paler because it�s been so long since I went sunbathing. He�s more handsome, younger and taller,� said the media mogul. Also accused of being racist, or at least gauche, in November 2008 when he hailed then President-elect Obama as �handsome, young and also suntanned�. Mr Berlusconi accused his critics of lacking a sense of humour, and a few days later repeated the observation about Mr Obama�s mixed-race skin tone. 4. January 2009 Mr Berlusconi caused outrage by saying that although he was considering deploying 30,000 troops to Italy�s cities, there would never be enough soldiers to protect Italy�s many �beautiful girls� from rape. 5. January 2007 Mr Berlusconi said to a former showgirl and men�s magazine model, Mara Carfagna: �I�d go anywhere with you, even to a desert island. If I weren�t already married, I would marry you straight away.� His wife, Veronica Lario, reacted by writing a letter published on the front page of La Repubblica newspaper calling for a public apology. She duly received one. Mr Berlusconi later made Miss Carfagna his equal opportunities minister. 6. July 2003 Caused a political row at the start of Italy�s EU presidency by referring to a German MEP, Martin Schulz, who criticised him for his alleged links to the mafia, as a �concentration camp guard�. He told the German: �I know that in Italy there is a man producing a film on Nazi concentration camps - I shall put you forward for the role of Kapo (a guard chosen from among the prisoners) - you would be perfect.� He later claimed he had been joking and had been thinking of a character from the popular TV series Hogan�s Heroes, set in a Second World War POW camp. 7. 2006 Offended China by declaring: �Read the black book of Communism and you will discover that in the China of Mao, they did not eat children, but had them boiled to fertilise the fields.� Later conceded: �It was questionable irony ... because this joke is questionable.� 8. Boasted that he had had to �dust off my playboy charms� to convince Finland�s female prime minister to set up the EU Food Safety Authority in Parma, Italy, rather than in Finland. Added the observation that: �Parma is synonymous with good cuisine. The Finns don�t even know what prosciutto is.� 9. He advised investors in New York to relocate to Italy because the secretaries were better looking than their American counterparts. �Another reason to invest in Italy is that we have beautiful secretaries... superb girls.� He also told the New York stock exchange: �Italy is now a great country to invest in... today we have fewer communists and those who are still there deny having been one.� 10. During a group photo of EU leaders in 2002 he made the Italian horned �cuckold� gesture with his hand behind the head of the Spanish foreign minister, suggesting he was being cuckolded. Mr Berlusconi said he was �just joking� and was trying to amuse a group of boy scouts who were nearby, but the gesture was felt to be out of place at an international summit. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/5106644/Silvio-Berlusconis-top-10-gaffes-and-pranks.html

Lifetime job guarantees?!... Just like tenure You'd think The Telegraph would have more to do than count My Silvio's gaffes. Next thing you know they'll be doing Joe Biden's;-)

That would be funny.

(Dorine) Lifetime job guarantees?! Say what?! That's insane. No one has that, except tenured profs and maybe postal employees. It's been done away with for over 20 years.

Postal employees don't have it either...now. Or certain levels don't.

And of course, I know there is tenure for teachers, but for virtually any other job, no. Though actually, I'd have to say many/most union jobs have been considered lifetime guarantees. Ever try to get rid of union employees....the ones that are bad employees and deserve to be gotten rid of? Damn near impossible.

Am guessing most people in the US mildly familiar with the etiology of this bit...calls for do over for the US Senate election in Alaska since Ted Stevens lost after the corruption trial with a subsequent conviction was found to be poorly handled by the Justice Dept, was overturned in the last week and won't be retried. Top 10 elections that needed do-overs by Jed Lewison Sat Apr 04, 2009 at 06:20:05 PM PDT In the spirit of the demand by Sarah Palin and the Alaska GOP that there by a do-over of November's U.S. Senate election, here's the top 10 elections that should have been done-over: 10. Gore-Bush, 2000: Because even though Gore won, Bush somehow became president. 9. Kerry-Bush, 2004: Because the media didn't grow a spine until Hurricane Katrina happened in 2005. 8. FL-16, 2004: Because voters didn't know that Mark Foley was into underage pages. 7. TX-GOV, 1994: Because if Bush hadn't won that election, he'd never have become president, and America would be a better, stronger country. 6. GA-SEN, 2002: Because Max Cleland deserved another shot at that worthless chickenhawk, Saxby Chambliss. 5. ID-SEN, 2002: Because Larry Craig deserved a shot at running as who he really is. 4. FL-STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 32, 2006: Because Bob Allen waited until after the election to offer a cop $20 for the right to perform fellatio. 3. LA-SEN, 2004: Because voters didn't know that David Vitter was one of the DC Madame's most prominent clients. 2. Republican primary, New Hampshire, 2008: Because independents in New Hampshire didn't know McCain was stupid enough to pick Palin as VP. 1. McCain-Obama, 2008: Because if the NH primary were done over, there's no way McCain would have been the GOP nominee. Of course, this is just one top 10 list. There've got to be many more that should be added to the docket... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/4/716571/-Top-10-elections-that-needed-do-overs

Color me surprised....NOT. (Same people who did the study and reported on the bogus numbers, reports and press releases about released Gitmo detainees.) Newark, NJ - Today Seton Hall Law delivered a report establishing that military officials at the highest levels were aware of the abusive interrogation techniques employed at the detention camp at Guant�namo Bay (GTMO), and misled Congress during testimony. In addition, FBI personnel reported that the information obtained from inhumane interrogations was unreliable. [Ed. note - *cough*] Professor Mark Denbeaux, Director of the Seton Hall Law Center for Policy and Research, commented on the findings: "Who knew about the torture at GTMO? Turns out they all did. It's not news that the interrogators were torturing and abusing detainees. We've got FBI reports attesting to this. But now we've discovered that the highest levels knew about the torture and abuse, and covered it up. "Abu Ghraib was the flashpoint and provoked the FBI to formally hand its reports to the DOD, which in turn forced the DOD to respond with what became known as the Schmidt Report. Schmidt's investigation was essentially a whitewash, but, ironically, the abuse was so pervasive that his team turned up still more incidents. To conceal the problems documented by both the FBI and the military, the DOD published an incomplete, sanitized report, culminating in Schmidt testifying before Congress that there was no torture or abuse at GTMO. "Five generals were either complicit in the abusive interrogation techniques or were central figures in their cover-up. They concealed these practices from Congress, to which they are ultimately accountable. They undermined our democracy, and undercut America's claim to the moral high ground in the fight against terror." http://law.shu.edu/administration/public_relations/press_releases/2009/shl_students_reveal_generals_4109.htm

Doesn't the first third of this sound a bit like money laundering in essence? Treasury working overtime to undo Congressional restrictions by David Waldman Sat Apr 04, 2009 at 09:02:02 AM PDT WaPo reports that Treasury and other administration officials are actively seeking ways around Congressional restrictions on the use of TARP and other extraordinary assistance funds for executive bonuses. And once again, the excuse for going out of their way to make sure execs get our their money is that they're concerned that firms won't participate in the free money giveaways unless their executives are allowed to skim fat wads of it right off the top and pocket them. How does it work? " The administration believes it can sidestep the rules because, in many cases, it has decided not to provide federal aid directly to financial companies, the sources said. Instead, the government has set up special entities that act as middlemen, channeling the bailout funds to the firms and, via this two-step process, stripping away the requirement that the restrictions be imposed, according to officials." Sound strangely familiar? " In one program, designed to restart small-business lending, President Obama's officials are planning to set up a middleman called a special-purpose vehicle -- a term made notorious during the Enron scandal -- or another type of entity to evade the congressional mandates, sources familiar with the matter said." Ah, what a perfect solution! Add Enron accounting to the already toxic mix of meltdown, bailout and bonus embarrassment. Sigh. Are we really going to have to put limiting instructions in the appropriations bills, now? Prohibit the use of funds in appropriations bills for use in establishing these work-around entities? Or perhaps we should take it out of the hides of the people who have such hardons for giving this money away. You want the bonuses paid? To these guys who make a hundred times what you make? Fine. No funds from the appropriations bills may be used to pay the salaries of any government official whose work involves establishing or administering such entities. There's another good idea in the article, too: " Congress has exempted the Treasury from applying the restrictions in a fourth program, which aids lenders who modify mortgages for struggling homeowners." That's an interesting approach. What about using bonuses as a carrot? You're exempt from the restrictions if you hold a significant number of residential mortgages, and agree to some formula whereby you agree to renegotiate them such that distressed homeowners are relieved. I think it's a fair bet that people would be a little less outraged about the bonuses if it wasn't also the case that the same execs pocketing the money are squeezing homeowners to death and driving them out of their homes. And here's a random, but disappointing note: " At first, when the initiative was being developed last year, the Bush administration decided to apply executive-pay limits to firms participating in this program. But Obama officials reversed that decision days before it was unveiled on March 3 and lifted the curbs, according to sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private." Ouch. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/4/716492/-Treasury-working-overtime-to-undo-Congressional-restrictions

Moving on ..changing the subject... I like this one... Pretty cheeky...LOL/

Hope this one comes out here; it did on the practice pad... Michelle in Prague.. I found this write-up somewhere else.. " Having apparently been warned about Prague's omnipresent cobblestones, Mrs. Obama wore flat shoes. She also wore a black Michael Kors skirt, matching Alaia Azzedine cardigan and white Moschino top on a chilly morning that slowly warmed into a beautiful spring day." Actually the least favorite outfit for me...I don't go in for big bows. Yahoo has a good slide show of them in Prague. Having just been there, it was fun to relive locations. One of the First Lady at the Jewish Quarter is especially moving.

I hadn't seen this one... From THE TELEGRAPH Rioters force Michelle Obama and Carla Bruni to cancel Strasbourg cancer hospice visit How disappointing. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/5105467/Rioters-force-Michelle-Obama-and-Carla-Bruni-to-cancel-Strasbourg-cancer-hospice-visit.html "Some 1,000 protesters chanted and waved banners outside the hospice, accusing the leaders' wives of being "spoiled tools of capitalism", according to one banner. When violence broke out around 100 officers responded by throwing flash bombs and volleys of tear gas into the crowds" Bet they were glad to get outta Strasbourg.

Really, who gives a rat's ass what she wears? Most of it is pretty pedestrian IMO, which is likely the point, but not worth my time/effort. Apparently there are still vestiges of the "lifetime employment guarantee" at the Globe. This article says 430 of 1,400 union employees have that guarantee status, so it is not part of every union contract that has employees at the paper or has been phased out. Anyway, 1,400 isn't total employees either. Some of them have already taken paycuts, but greedy management still gave themselves raises and bonuses. Yeah, must have been for creating a dynamic future business plan for their comapny. *rolling eyes* Whatever happened to lead by example? Disgusting http://www.boston.com/ae/media/articles/2009/04/05/union_employees_open_to_concessions_but_demand_management_cuts_as_well/?p1=Well_MostPop_Emailed5

(Karen) Whatever happened to lead by example? Disgusting The bull market and booming capitalism, tax policies and other legislation that favor the top 1% and corporations with virtually no restrictions. Have I left anything out? ;-) Kind of a given an inch, take a mile philosophy on the management side. Or the, if I can get away with it (giving myself a raise/new office decor/etc) without spending a dime of my own money, why not? philosophy. It's because they had to make the "hard decisions" that they get the "reward". :-(

I can go both ways ;-)). Am amazed to realize either A) the Obama's are so tall, or B) most of Europe's leaders are "short". Sarkozy and Carla always seemed taller to me. I had read about the cancelled Cancer Hospital visit. It is a shame. My friend's gfriend got out of town (Strasbourg) just in time. She lives there (with her family when not at her apt in Nice) and flies back and forth to here every couple of months. She left there Friday morning. Good timing. I don't know if she lives near any of the "excitement" going on.

(Dorine) Have I left anything out? ;-) Should've said it was a rhetorical question, but you did leave out probably the most important factor - the rise of the MBA and its quick-fix, short-term focus.

Really, who gives a rat's ass what she wears?.... Comrade, "Have you forgotten how to scroll?";-)

Well, looks like this is the end of the European fashiion show...:-((( In Prague, Michelle Obama visits cathedral, Jewish cemetery 05 April 2009, 20:02 CET (PRAGUE) - US First Lady Michelle Obama toured Prague's hulking Saint Vitus Cathedral and historic Jewish Cemetery on Sunday as her husband met with European leaders. Wearing a black skirt and a white blouse with a big bow, she visited the brooding cathedral that looms over the Czech capital from the grounds around Prague Castle. In front of the castle, the US president gave his wife a quick peck on the cheek before taking to the podium before a rapturous crowd of 30,000 to give his only public speech on the third leg of his maiden tour to Europe. Launching into his speech, he said: "Today, I am proud to stand here with you in the middle of this great city, in the center of Europe. And ... I am also proud to be the man who brought Michelle Obama to Prague." After her husband left for his first summit with EU leaders, the First Lady headed to Prague's Jewish quarter to tour the Jewish Cemetery, one of the city's most noted sites. At the cemetery, she first visited the historic Pinkas Synagogue, which has the names of 80,000 Holocaust victims from Czechoslavakia inscribed on its walls. In line with the Jewish tradition, Michelle deposited a wish on a small piece of folded paper near the grave of Rabbi Loew (1525-1609), who inspired the Golem of Prague legend. Obama then returned to the United States, leaving her husband to continue his trip on to Turkey, the final leg of his first trip outside North America since taking office in January.[my bolds] http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1238954522.12 Wonder why she didn't go to Turkey...she's missing the Hagia Sophia. Oh, hey..... maybe she's getting more clothes and fly back to Turkey. Hope so.

sorry

Awful news from Italy. At least 50 people have been killed in a powerful earthquake that struck central Italy, near to Rome. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7984867.stm

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L6566682.htm Italy muzzled scientist who foresaw quake Source: Reuters By Gavin Jones 06 Apr 2009 11:22:00 GMT ROME, April 6 (Reuters) - An Italian scientist predicted a major earthquake around L'Aquila weeks before disaster struck the city on Monday, killing dozens of people, but was reported to authorities for spreading panic among the population. The first tremors in the region were felt in mid-January and continued at regular intervals, creating mounting alarm in the medieval city, about 100 km (60 miles) east of Rome. Vans with loudspeakers had driven around the town a month ago telling locals to evacuate their houses after seismologist Gioacchino Giuliani predicted a large quake was on the way, prompting the mayor's anger. Giuliani, who based his forecast on concentrations of radon gas around seismically active areas, was reported to police for "spreading alarm" and was forced to remove his findings from the Internet. Italy's Civil Protection agency held a meeting of the Major Risks Committee, grouping scientists charged with assessing such risks, in L'Aquila on March 31 to reassure the townspeople. "The tremors being felt by the population are part of a typical sequence ... (which is) absolutely normal in a seismic area like the one around L'Aquila," the civil protection agency said in a statement on the eve of that meeting. "It is useful to underline that it is not in any way possible to predict an earthquake," it said, adding that the agency saw no reason for alarm but was nonetheless effecting "continuous monitoring and attention". As the media asked questions about the authorities' alleged failure to safeguard the population ahead of the quake, the head of the National Geophysics Institute dismissed Giuliani's predictions. "Every time there is an earthquake there are people who claim to have predicted it," he said. "As far as I know nobody predicted this earthquake with precision. It is not possible to predict earthquakes." Enzo Boschi said the real problem for Italy was a long-standing failure to take proper precautions despite a history of tragic quakes. "We have earthquakes but then we forget and do nothing. It's not in our culture to take precautions or build in an appropriate way in areas where there could be strong earthquakes," he said. AlertNet news is provided by

Looks like ther is another bonus "bru-ha-ha" coming down the road http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090403-707525.html Mortgage giants Fannie (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) expect to pay about $210 million in retention bonuses to 7,600 employees over a year and a half, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday. The top retention bonus for any individual executive under the plan will total $1.5 million during the 18 months ending in early 2010, according to the report, which cited a letter from the mortgage firms' regulator.

BTW, I'm not an evangelist on the art of scrolling like others.

A retention bonus is different than a merit or reward bonus. If they had it in contracts at the start of their employment, and are still working there when it's due to be paid out, they're entitled. If they're new retention bonuses, because they can't keep or get people otherwise, I reserve judgement for now as I haven't read the details, but on the face of it, I don't necessarily have a problem. Depends on who's getting it.

From what I read about the Fannie & Freddie retention bonuses before, these are recent. Evidently, those companies feel that the people they need to work in their world are so unique. *rolling eyes*

Well, this is a switch. Interesting as I didn't know they were overseas. Sallie Mae to shift 2,000 jobs to U.S. from overseas Reuters 57 mins ago NEW YORK (Reuters) � Student loan company Sallie Mae plans to move its overseas operations back to the United States, creating 2,000 domestic jobs, in what analysts called an attempt to curry favor with the Obama administration. SLM Corp, as the company is legally known, said on Monday it plans to add staff over the next 18 months in call centers, information technology and operations support across the United States. Analysts called the move a bid to build political capital in Washington as the Obama administration plots major changes to the student loan market. The administration has proposed a 2010 budget that could hurt Sallie Mae's business by shifting all federal student loans into a program administered by the Department of Education. Michael Taiano, analyst at Sandler O'Neill & Partners in New York, said of Sallie Mae's maneuver, "Will it help them overturn Obama's budget proposal? I don't think so." The company is likely hoping that moving jobs back to the United States will earn it goodwill from the administration, Taiano said, putting Sallie Mae in a better position when the details of the student loan program are worked out. "It probably doesn't hurt to build up political capital, and bringing jobs back to the U.S. certainly does that," he said. Albert Lord, Sallie Mae chief executive, said in a statement, "The current economic environment has caused our communities to struggle with job losses. They need jobs, and we will put 2,000 of them into U.S. facilities as soon as we possibly can." The company did not immediately disclose the location of the overseas operations to be shut down. Sallie Mae employs more than 8,000 people in the United States. It has struggled during the credit crunch to finance the loans it makes to students. Sallie Mae shares were up 25 cents, or 4.7 percent, at $5.60 in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange. The shares have fallen 39 percent this year. (Reporting by Elinor Comlay; Editing by Derek Caney and John Wallace) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090406/us_nm/us_salliemae_jobs

Officials say 91 dead, 1,500 hurt in Italy quake http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090406/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_earthquake Moon...I hope none of your friends/relatives are nr this area.

(Linda) They felt three sharp hits at 3:30am and were far enough away to only have things fall off shelves, etc, but no structural damage. Wow, it was strong enough to wake them up though? Or were they already up? I guess falling stuff would wake me up, maybe. Glad they're ok.

Summers' Takeaway... April 6, 2009 A Rich Education for Summers (After Harvard) By LOUISE STORY Lawrence H. Summers plays down his stint in the hedge fund business as a mere part-time job � but the financial and intellectual rewards that he gained there would make even most full-time workers envious. Mr. Summers, the former Treasury secretary and Harvard president who is now the chief economic adviser to President Obama, earned nearly $5.2 million in just the last of his two years at one of the world�s largest funds, according to financial records released Friday by the White House. Impressive as that might sound, it is all the more considering that Mr. Summers worked there just one day a week. Much is known about Mr. Summers�s days in Washington and Cambridge, but little attention has been paid to his two years in New York, from late 2006 to late 2008, advising an elite corps of math wizards and scientists devising investment strategies for D. E. Shaw & Company. Mr. Summers said in an interview that his experience at Shaw, however brief, gave him valuable insight into the practical realities of Wall Street, insight he is now putting to use in shaping economic policy in the White House. �I have a better sense of how market participants sort of think and react to things from sort of listening to the conversations and listening to the way the traders at D. E. Shaw thought,� he said. Mr. Summers and Shaw executives say his role there was to be a sounding board for Shaw�s traders. But interviews with friends and former colleagues suggest that Mr. Summers�s role at D. E. Shaw was wider and more complex. Mr. Summers, these people say, was a marquee hire, a prized spokesman for Shaw. He routinely made himself available for private consultations with Shaw�s clients, an attractive perk for investing with the firm, as one client put it. Mr. Summers, who taught economics and public policy at Harvard while advising Shaw, also met with investors in the United States, as well as in the cash-rich Middle East and Asia. He spoke at industry conferences, mixing with officials from public pension funds, endowments and other large institutions with many billions of dollars to invest. While at Shaw, Mr. Summers also peered into the inner workings of the $2 trillion hedge fund industry, which the Obama administration is now relying on to buy billions of dollars of worrisome assets from the nation�s beleaguered banks. Some of his critics worry that such ties raise questions about whether the government�s ever-changing effort to bolster the financial industry will benefit Wall Street in general, and hedge funds in particular, at the expense of taxpayers. �This is what might be called contamination,� said Andrew Sabl, an associate professor of public policy at the University of California, Los Angeles. �Did Summers spend so much time with the hedge fund, or its investors, sovereign wealth funds and so on, that he started to think like them?� Mr. Summers joined the hedge fund world after his tempestuous, five-year term as the president of Harvard came to an unhappy end in February 2006, after a statement he made that women might lack an intrinsic aptitude for math and science. It was at that time, to the surprise of some colleagues, that Mr. Summers seriously contemplated his options on Wall Street in part because he believed his chances to return to a prominent position in Washington had dimmed, friends say. Although he once compared finance to ketchup sales, Mr. Summers discussed job possibilities with Goldman Sachs, long considered the premier Wall Street bank, and with Citigroup, where Robert E. Rubin, Mr. Summers�s predecessor as Treasury secretary, had become a senior adviser. Then a young Harvard graduate named Julius Gaudio, whom Mr. Summers had met at alumni events, raised another possibility: D. E. Shaw, where Mr. Gaudio is a managing director. As part of Shaw�s rigorous screening process � the firm accepts perhaps one out of every 500 applicants � Mr. Summers was asked to solve math puzzles. He passed, and the job was his. In a rare interview, David E. Shaw, who founded the firm in 1988 above a communist book shop in Greenwich Village, put it simply: Mr. Summers is �a brilliant, brilliant guy.� That is from a former computer science professor at Columbia who now spends his time researching areas like treatments for cancer, while others run his hedge fund day-to-day. D. E. Shaw does not like to talk about what goes on inside its modish headquarters near Times Square. There, esoteric trading strategies are imagined, sketched on whiteboards and modeled on supercomputers by an elite corps of math wizards and scientists, most of them unknown to the outside world. It is nothing like a button-down Wall Street brokerage firm. Jeans, sweatshirts and sandals are common. The firm has not one, but two libraries, where textbooks on computer coding are stacked near academic finance journals dating to the 1960s. For a time, the d�cor included light bulbs strung from the ceiling on various lengths of wire, each determined by a computerized random-number generator. It is a quicksilver business and wildly lucrative. Mr. Shaw is said to be worth $2.7 billion, and today his firm manages $30 billion. At Shaw, Mr. Summers, the professor, was often the student. The arrogant personal style that turned off some Harvard colleagues seemed to evaporate, Shaw traders say. Mr. Summers immersed himself in dynamic hedging, Libor rates and other financial arcana. He seemed to fit in among Shaw�s math-loving �quants,� as devotees of math-heavy quantitative investing are known. Traders joked that Mr. Summers was the first quant Treasury secretary because he had once ordered dollar bills to be printed with the transcendental number pi � 3.14159... � as the serial number. �We could call or e-mail him anytime,� a former Shaw trader said. �He always asked me more questions than I could ask him. He would dig through my entire way of thinking.� At Harvard and at Shaw, Mr. Summers cultivated a small circle of financial professionals � particularly hedge fund managers � to serve as an informal brain trust. He consults with them on policy matters from his perch in the White House. Among these insiders are Kenneth D. Brody and Frank P. Brosens, the founding partners of another hedge fund, Taconic Capital Advisors, for whom Mr. Summers did consulting work from 2004 to 2006. Mr. Summers reached out to Mr. Brosens in December to discuss the Obama administration�s economic priorities. This year, he campaigned to have him run the federal office overseeing the $700 billion bailout program. Mr. Brosens withdrew his name from consideration last month. Others in this inner circle include Nancy Zimmerman, a longtime friend and hedge fund manager in Boston; Laurence D. Fink, the chairman and chief executive of BlackRock, a large money management company that hopes to play a potentially lucrative role in the administration�s bank rescue plan; H. Rodgin Cohen, the chairman of the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, who was briefly considered for a senior Treasury post; and three other top fund managers, Orin S. Kramer, Ralph L. Schlosstein and Eric M. Mindich. Friends of Mr. Summers say he has always been meticulous about avoiding conflicts of interest and that he was just as careful at D. E. Shaw. For instance, Mr. Summers went to lengths to pay the Social Security taxes on payments he made to even occasional babysitters from the 1980s, said Jeremy Bulow, an economics professor at Stanford, who has known Mr. Summers since graduate school. �To Larry, it was not about figuring out where the line is and making sure you�re on one side of it,� Mr. Bulow said. �He would never even get close to it.� In addition to his salary at Shaw, Mr. Summers enjoyed growing wealth through investments in the firm�s funds. Unlike most hedge funds, which lost money as the markets plunged in 2008, Shaw posted returns of about 7 percent in its so-called macroeconomic fund. A separate multistrategy fund lost 8 percent, far less than most hedge funds. When investors rushed en masse to withdraw their money from hedge funds last year, Shaw asserted its right to block redemptions from its fund. An exception was made for Mr. Summers, however, because the White House job he was taking required him to divest. A spokesman for Shaw said Mr. Summers�s main job was not to act as a salesman. But in the fall of 2007, as the financial crisis simmered, Mr. Summers traveled to Dubai for a series of meetings with Shaw�s marketing staff and potential investors. Bankers from across the region flew in for the event. Mr. Summers spoke at several lavish dinners and met with local parties involved in Shaw�s real estate investments in the area, people briefed on his trip said. Last September, Mr. Summers explained to Shaw traders what appeared to be an aberration in a key interest rate, the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, thus helping its traders avoid losses. He spoke at the firm�s 20th anniversary gathering for its investors and at a prominent hedge fund investor conference in Boston, weeks before the presidential election. In December, he attended the firm�s annual holiday party, held in the American Museum of Natural History in New York, beneath the giant model of a blue whale. Even so, Mr. Summers, who, before the crisis broke out, spoke and wrote about the need for greater financial regulation, has not resisted the efforts to tighten up on hedge funds like Shaw. The administration, for instance, is moving toward closing a tax loophole that these funds have long enjoyed. A White House spokeswoman says his actions supporting hedge fund regulation prove he is not biased. Some people in the financial world say they have more confidence in the White House�s plans because of Mr. Summers� time at D. E. Shaw. �He had insights into one of the best hedge funds in the world. That can only add value to the things the government is struggling with right now,� said Robert Borden, chief investment officer of South Carolina�s pension fund, which has invested $350 million with Shaw. Mr. Borden met Mr. Summers to discuss how much money a large institution should allocate to hedge funds. �It was a nice perk to have access to some of his thoughts and insights,� Mr. Borden said. Mr. Summers�s experience in hedge funds might leave some wondering if he will return to private investing when his latest White House assignment ends, perhaps even to run his own lucrative fund. Asked about that, Mr. Shaw laughed. �Oh, boy, I have no idea,� he said. �Thankfully he�s doing what he�s doing. I�m really glad he�s running this. It�s a scary time, and I can�t think of anybody I�d rather see there.�

Sorry... meant to add... "Go for it Larry, before The Big O takes it all away...." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/business/06summers.html?_r=1&ref=us&pagewanted=print

"Go for it Larry, before The Big O takes it all away...." He can't go for anything until he steps down from this job. It required him to divest his hedge fund interests, if I read it right.

"Mr. Summers, these people say, was a marquee hire, a prized spokesman for Shaw. He routinely made himself available for private consultations with Shaw�s clients, an attractive perk for investing with the firm, as one client put it. " I dunno......if this passes the smell-test;-) Some people last night on a Bloomberg panel said he should give $$$$ back. Whoa! "Hedge Funds" are a like the plague these days...

Every high profile consultant in firms like that did the same thing. Standard business. The difference is, he actually seemed to work for it unlike many others who seem to just collect a paycheck for associating their names with the firm for positions like that. Gave them cache without having to do much. I don't see what was wrong with that. He actually seems to be much smarter than most of the people who do that.

"The difference is, he actually seemed to work for it unlike many others who seem to just collect a paycheck for associating their names with the firm for positions like that" Read it again... a "marquee hire"...to entice people to invest in Shaw's hedge fund. Hey, I'm all for capitalism...nothing wrong with earning $$$ ...not hypocrisy though;-)Don't start trashing Wall St , CEOs & hedgies now that you're sitting in the WH.

I read it and I stand by my remarks. "Marquee hires" are usually hired for the name only (as I said), not necessarily that they'll do any kind of work, though they may do an occasional meet and greet. From the impression I got in the article, he was very involved in not only meeting and greeting whenever they asked, he also was very into the learning the nuts and bolts of it.

Some people in the financial world say they have more confidence in the White House�s plans because of Mr. Summers� time at D. E. Shaw. Pretty much all the economic advisors and Treasury bigwigs have worked on Wall Street, including top management positions. Personally, I would agree. The knowledge is vital and criticizing this guy because he actually knows the nuts and bolts of the biz is nuts. Slamming someone with knowledge??? *shaking head* Yeah, better to appoint a political hack. (Dorine) "Marquee hires" are usually hired for the name only You're quire right. Standard practice and includes the big law firms as well.

Oh I have no trouble with people making money legally...I'm the capitalist, remember? My beef is that after being one of "them", he now sits and derides the same group he was part of.

Well here's a thought to appease the Left. REVIEW & OUTLOOK APRIL 7,2009 An Idea for Mr. Summers He could pay higher taxes�if he thought that "Larry Summers, the White House economic guru, is taking some hits from the left after his official disclosure forms revealed late last week that he got rich thanks to the financial industry he is now charged with reviving and reregulating. The appearance-of-a-conflict-of-interest crowd isn't happy that Mr. Summers earned $5.2 million last year working for the beneficent hedge fund, D. E. Shaw & Co. He also made a bundle in speaking fees, including $135,000 for a single appearance for Goldman Sachs. That must have been some stemwinder, though we're confident Goldman figures it didn't overpay given Mr. Summers's later White House prominence. We've got nothing against getting rich, though it is worth noting that Mr. Summers will pay Bush-era tax rates on his Wall Street windfall profit. So if the man who would still like to be Federal Reserve Chairman is looking to make a gesture of political solidarity with the middle-class masses, here's an idea: Honor your principles, and pay taxes on that income at Bill Clinton-Barack Obama rates. Mr. Summers could simply calculate his taxes for 2008 based on what he'd pay if President Obama's tax proposals had been law. Thus his top marginal income tax rate would rise from 35% to 39.6%, plus the phase outs in deductions and exemptions, which would make the rate roughly 41.6%. Mr. Summers could write a check to the IRS for the difference. And of course he wouldn't forget to deduct any charitable giving at only 28 cents on the dollar, rather than 35 or 41.6 cents. Mr. Obama likes to say it's the "era of responsibility," and if that's true then we assume Mr. Summers will want to lead by example. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123905884295394797.html

Love this line... "AP shakes fist at Google. Tells Internet to get off its damn lawn," US newspaper owners are "mad as hell" AFP by Chris Lefkow � Tue Apr 7, 10:10 pm ET WASHINGTON (AFP) � US newspaper owners, their advertising revenue evaporating, their circulation declining and their readership going online to get news for free, are fighting mad. The enemy? Websites that use their stories without paying for them. "We are mad as hell, and we are not going to take it any more," said the chairman of the Associated Press, a cooperative of over 1,400 US newspapers, borrowing a line from the anchorman character in the 1976 movie "Network." "We can no longer stand by and watch others walk off with our work under misguided legal theories," Dean Singleton said at a meeting this week of the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) in San Diego, California. Singleton's battle cry came just a few days after News Corp. chairman Rupert Murdoch launched a broadside against Internet giant Google, whose Google News website is one of the most popular news aggregators on the Internet. "Should we be allowing Google to steal all our copyrights?" asked Murdoch, the owner of newspapers in Australia, Britain and the United States, where his holdings include The Wall Street Journal and New York Post. "Thanks, but no thanks," the News Corp. chairman said. Robert Thomson, the managing editor of The Wall Street Journal, used even harsher language than his boss in describing the situation. "There is no doubt that certain websites are best described as parasites or tech tapeworms in the intestines of the Internet," Thomson said in an interview with the newspaper The Australian. "It's certainly true that readers have been socialized -- wrongly I believe -- that much content should be free," he said. "And there is no doubt that's in the interest of aggregators like Google who have profited from that mistaken perception." The salvos by Singleton, Murdoch and Thomson appear to have been uncoordinated but they reflect rising anger among an industry facing a deepening crisis. Two newspapers, the Rocky Mountain News of Denver, Colorado, and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, have shut down in recent weeks and several big newspaper groups have declared bankruptcy, including the Tribune Co., publisher of the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times and other dailies. Hearst Corp., owner of the San Francisco Chronicle, has threatened to shut down the paper unless unions agree to major staff cuts and The New York Times Co. has threatened to close the Boston Globe unless unions there do the same. According to the NAA, last year was the worst ever for the US newspaper industry with print advertising revenue falling 17.7 percent and even online advertising revenue dropping -- by 1.8 percent. The decline in print advertising revenue has been exacerbated by the global recession but the more fundamental problem according to media analysts is that the business model that has sustained the industry for decades is broken. The counter-attack by US newspaper owners has met with a mixed reaction from analysts, with some saying it's about time they went on the legal offensive to defend copyright and others saying they're wasting their time. "What the AP is doing now, like many newspapers, is too little too late in recognizing the threat of the Internet," said Tom McPhail, professor of media studies at the University of Missouri, St. Louis. "The court system is too slow for their needs and purposes," McPhail told AFP. "They need a short term victory and that isn't going to happen." Peter Kafka, writing on his blog MediaMemo, derided the efforts. "AP shakes fist at Google. Tells Internet to get off its damn lawn," read the headline on a post Kafka wrote about the AP threat to go after websites that use its content or that of its member newspaper without permission. A Google lawyer, Alexander Macgillivray, on Tuesday defended the practice of linking to newspaper articles from Google News, saying it was driving traffic to newspaper websites and providing them with advertising revenue. Google chief executive Eric Schmidt walked into the lion's den himself on Tuesday, appearing before the assembled newspaper executives in San Diego just a day after the AP chairman issued his rallying cry. Schmidt said the reality is the "vast majority" of readers are going to opt for news for free and that newspapers should see Google as a partner and not as a rival as they try to increase their online advertising revenue. "We have to embrace what users want together and by doing that I think we can win big," he said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090408/lf_afp/usmediaindustrynewspapersinternetgoogle_20090408021655

To get back to Summers... Some of his critics worry that such ties raise questions about whether the government�s ever-changing effort to bolster the financial industry will benefit Wall Street in general, and hedge funds in particular, at the expense of taxpayers. �This is what might be called contamination,� said Andrew Sabl, an associate professor of public policy at the University of California, Los Angeles. �Did Summers spend so much time with the hedge fund, or its investors, sovereign wealth funds and so on, that he started to think like them?� Inherently, there's nothing wrong with thinking like them. In fact, it should be considered a big bonus. Can't see how there can be critics yet, when there's no plan to criticize so far, but yes, there could be a potential for those concerns down the road I suppose.

apparently, you haven't read the lefty blogs.. my sources;-) say they are livid Here's what the mother of all lefty mags have to say.... http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090420/scheer?rel=hp_picks (Dorine)Inherently, there's nothing wrong with thinking like them. That has to be qualified; I think Professor Sabl means that it would inspire a "bias"on Summer's part. I don't think Summer is dishonest. But personally, I want the hedge funds reined in.

Mr. Obama likes to say it's the "era of responsibility," and if that's true then we assume Mr. Summers will want to lead by example. What a bunch of hooey. So if the man who would still like to be Federal Reserve Chairman is looking to make a gesture of political solidarity with the middle-class masses, here's an idea: Honor your principles, and pay taxes on that income at Bill Clinton-Barack Obama rates. Principles? Huh? Do they think he's an ideologue? I really doubt it. In another article, he was referred to as a "quant." This is a guy who just works the numbers. He's not tied to any philosophy but a task. I doubt he cares either way, but is challenged by working the numbers. Who better to regulare this esoteria than someone who understands it and can design systems to catch and deal with abuse. I don't understand the innuendo of dishonesty, conflict of interest, etc. (Dorine) In fact, it should be considered a big bonus. Precisely what I've been saying. "What the AP is doing now, like many newspapers, is too little too late in recognizing the threat of the Internet," said Tom McPhail, professor of media studies at the University of Missouri, St. Louis. Like I wrote before: Horse, barn door. ;-)

Any comments on "The Nation" article???? Me thinks it was a little inflammatory.

Haven't gotten to it yet, but will.

Now here's a deal... Time to cough-up girls.... Take your pick of prizes... Hillary Clinton supporters to auction 'American Idol' finale tickets to help retire campaign debt BY David Saltonstall DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT Friday, April 10th 2009, 4:00 AM She was once America's biggest loser, but now she wants to send you to "American Idol" - for a price. Friends of Secretary of State Clinton are trying to raise money to retire her old presidential campaign debt, and they're doing it by raffling "fantastic prizes" for a handful of lucky supporters - including two tickets to next month's "American Idol" finale. "You and a guest will watch live as the 'American Idol' judges make their final comments and decisions on this year's most anticipated season finale!" James Carville, a longtime Clinton adviser, wrote in a breathless e-mail Thursday to loyal Clintonistas. The other prizes? There's a day in New York with former President Bill Clinton. If that doesn't thrill you, you can opt to head to Washington for lunch with Carville and fellow Democratic guru Paul Begala. "We will talk about politics, you will get to tour all the amazing sites D.C. has to offer, and who knows what else could happen!" wrote Carville, hinting that maybe - just maybe - a sitdown with Clinton could be in the offing. There is no cost to enter the online contest, but organizers are clearly hoping to raise big bucks, with calls for donations included in the e-mail. The former First Lady conceded defeat to primary challenger and now-President Obama last June, leaving behind a pile of campaign debt that stands at about $6 million, records show. Like any sitting cabinet member, Clinton is allowed to continue raising money to retire old debt. But federal ethics laws prohibit her from personally soliciting donations. That job now apparently falls to Carville.The Fox-produced show does not sell the tickets, but gives them all away. The ducats were not given to Camp Clinton by Fox or its parent, News Corp., a representative of media mogul Rupert Murdoch said.

WRAPUP 4-Warships track U.S. hostage floating to Somalia http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN1134689120090412 Pay the ransom!

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04122009/news/nationalnews/glamour_first_164080.htm "Michelle Obama is the nation's first first lady to add a full-time makeup artist to her traveling entourage, according to stylists who have worked with presidential wives over the past 16 years" I'd have one too if the whole world was looking at me. I've always liked her hair; especially the one at the palace. Talking about make-overs...Hill is looking v. v. glam these days. During the campaign she looked haggard. Grueling schedule.

He's free! AP " Administration officials say President Barack Obama approved the military operation that rescued a U.S. captain held hostage by Somali pirates. The officials say Obama ordered the Defense Department to use military resources to rescue Richard Phillips from a lifeboat off the Somali coast. The officials discussed this information on the condition of anonymity because they were not yet authorized to disclose the president's decision-making process. Obama praised the captain for his bravery and courage. The president also said the United States needs help from other countries to deal with the threat of piracy and to hold pirates accountable." http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iqznz3bUMKIUbrDYAUHHuMQ4vyJAD97H45GO1

What Daily News is that Hillary/American Idol story from. There's no link.

(Evelyn) During the campaign she looked haggard. Grueling schedule. Trying to make peace with the rest of the world is a walk in the park by comparison I'm sure. ;-) I haven't seen her in weeks.

I Googled it: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/04/10/2009-04-10_hil_places_her_debts_on_idol.html

Trying to make peace with the rest of the world is a walk in the park by comparison I'm sure. ;-) You talkin' to me? She was all over the place (in the background)during the Europe jaunt; (with hairdresser, ya/ think?;-)Maybe Michelle "shared". I remarked to someone that she certainly took a lowlier spot than she would have as a former first lady; don't know why she took that job. Though I'm grateful it wasn't Joe. Who said he was given a *choice*. Yeah, sure.

(Evelyn) You talkin' to me? Just playin' with ya. I imagine she's super busy and it's grueling in its own right with her new job. As I said, I can't remember the last time I saw her. Maybe right after she took the job 3 months ago. I can't say if she looks better or worse. While Joe does come off kind of buffoonish in public sometimes, I know he's got a good handle on foreign policy, so I wouldn't have been worried about him very much. Only during press conferences. ;-) Evelyn, Frank Rich discussed Summers today in more detail than I'd read about and seems concerned with potential conflicts of interest as well, from what I can tell. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/opinion/12rich.html?pagewanted=1&em Thanks, Karen.

Excellent news! The Maersk Alabama's Capt Phillips has been rescued safely from the Somalian Pirates. Gotta hand it to US Navy, a stellar job. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7996213.stm

I see a TV movie of the week coming next year.

Frank Rich is harder on Summer than I was. My beef is his hypocrisy which Frank didn't touch.

I don't have time to reread now, but I got the impression that he was so hard on him addressing exactly that hypocrisy.

So glad Capt. Phillips is free! I had a bad feeling about it as the days dragged on. Nice to see something end well.

(Evelyn)I remarked to someone that she certainly took a lowlier spot than she would have as a former first lady Yeah, here's hoping for a major world crisis, so she can get to show her mettle. *fingers crossed* ;-) ;-)

You think she'll get credit? I wonder. This is a v. egocentric WH IMO.

Bo!! *snort* Yeah, he promised "the kids" a dog. ;-)

Catching up here. Portuguese Water dogs is one of my favs. My friends in Miami have one since 1991, and it was love at first sight. Berlusconi has been an angel and great leader for the people of Aquila. He deserves high praise for his quick actions. Almost 300 dead and they keep finding bodies. I don't have any relatives there, but I have been there. There is a fantastic castle built by the Spaniards, but I have had no word on its condition. The other monuments and the Cathedral... it is a shame. A terrible tragedy. That whole area is prime for earthquakes, Umbria and Toscany too. :-( Obama did not bow to Queen Elizabeth, but he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, that is wrong.

Those are beautiful dogs. Bo looks fun! He was going to get a rescue dog, but now will give a donation to ...the DC Humane Society or something similar. Forget which one I read now. I didn't get the bowing thing, though I only got a quick glance at a pic.

(Me) I see a TV movie of the week coming next year. I was wrong. A reality show. :-((( http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090413/ts_alt_afp/entertainmentsomaliapiracyusshipping_20090413222206

LOL! Reality shows are cheaper.

True dat!

LOL! Reality shows are cheaper. And not as easy to "fictionalize". I can't see Hollywood being kind or even *true* to the military. They would rather revel in Mai Lai-like events.

Here's the video with the bow: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Obama_bow_king/2009/04/08/201193.html?s=al&promo_code=7DA6-1

When or how often has Hollywood not been kind to the military in the past?

Oh Please...let me count the ways. Of recent times..only Private Ryan of the big films. And no VN films that I can remember I can just see the movie focusing on.... 'pre-emptive shooting", not "reading the pirates their Miranda Rights"...blah, blah, blah...

(Dorine) When or how often has Hollywood not been kind to the military in the past? If your script is nice to the military--portrays them in the best possible light--then they'll give you the stars and the moon in terms of access, support, etc. If negative, slightly critical, wrong image, etc, then bupkis.

LOL! Reality shows are cheaper. And not as easy to "fictionalize". But fictonalizing takes a writer, one has to pay. Reality shows are all about the money. They're cheap, cheap, cheap. No need to pay actors according to union scale. This isn't about bias, slants, prejudicial leanings, etc. Why does everything have to be about that. Getting really sick of that attitude.

That's your perception It's not an *attitude*,IMO, it's the truth.

(Karen) If your script is nice to the military--portrays them in the best possible light--then they'll give you the stars and the moon in terms of access, support, etc. If negative, slightly critical, wrong image, etc, then bupkis Right. But I wasn't asking in reference to what kind of actors/stars they'd get. Just the tone. It's not like the military have always been saints and should be always portrayed in a positive light if it's not true. I was basically asking if (or how often) Evelyn thought the military was portrayed in what she thought was an unkind light, basically wrongly.

Bo!! Slideshow of a bunch of pics introducing Bo to the media. Lots of repeats, but new ones interpersed. Gorgeous dog. http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Obama-family-picks-Portuguese-water-dog/ss/events/pl/041209obamadog

April 15th Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party ! Get your protest signs ready! Get out and march!

LOL!!! Where's the winkie? ;-)

That's your perception It's not an *attitude*,IMO, it's the truth. I have a right to my opinion, don't I? But I hadn't realized that when you do it is a "truth." Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party ! What utter silliness, obviously engineered by Repubs with nothing better to do than stir up trouble. The only ones who should be protesting are those making over $250K, but there will be plenty of idiots (Joe the Plumber types) who don't get it. :-( Better they should dump their tea on Wall Street, the source of everyone, who used to have "savings" and "investments" for retirement, etc., real problems. Deception, subterfuge, obfuscation. Sickening.

I think most *stars* get paid about $250K for stints on these reality shows. Blagojevich to star in 'Celebrity' Impeached Illinois governor set for reality TV By MICHAEL SCHNEIDER They may want to name it "I'm a Disgraced Public Figure... Get Me Out of Here." Impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is set to star in NBC's upcoming summer reality skein "I'm a Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here," the Peacock confirmed Tuesday. But there's a catch: A federal judge must first give his OK. According to the Chicago Tribune, which first broke the story, Blagojevich's attorney has asked a judge handling the corruption case against the former governor to loosen his travel restrictions. That's because Blagojevich would be required spend time on Costa Rica, where the show will take place and air live this summer on NBC. Since his departure from the Illinois gubernatorial job, Blagojevich has maintained a very public profile, having just served as a guest host on Chicago's WLS talk radio station. "Based on the hit U.K. reality show, "I'm a Celebrity...Get Me Out of Here!" is a groundbreaking live series event premiering June 1 and stripped over four weeks in June," NBC said in a statement. "Ten celebrities of various backgrounds will be dropped into the heart of the Costa Rican jungle to face challenges designed to test their skills in adapting to the wilderness and to raise money for their favorite charities. Rod Blagojevich will be a participant on the show pending the court's approval." http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118002427.html?categoryid=1043&cs=1 [Ed note: I wonder what Rod's charity is. But I'd bet it is one Patty set up. *snort*]

Anti-Obama 'tea party' protests mark US tax day by Sebastian Smith Sebastian Smith 1 hr 16 mins ago NEW YORK (AFP) � Critics of President Barack Obama marked national tax day Wednesday with "tea party" protests that Republicans are calling the birth of a grassroots opposition, but Democrats dismiss as a fraud. [Ed note: a synonym for truth] Organizers promised hundreds of protests across the country against taxes and Obama's big-spending budget proposals. Obama says his budget will jump start the economy out of recession, but protesters warn the country will instead sink beneath its debt burdens. The demonstrations, styled on the famous 1773 Boston Tea Party revolt against British colonial taxes, came as Americans rushed to meet the annual deadline for filing income tax returns. Protests were to feature dumping of teabags, iced tea and other tea-related stunts. But despite the catchy theme and revolutionary-era symbolism, there were questions about whether the scattered Republican forces would be able to ensure a significant turnout. Organizer Eric Odom said protests would take place in almost 800 cities. Calling it "a new day for the freedom movement," he estimated that tens of thousands would take to the streets. Dick Armey, chairman of the conservative Freedom Works group, described the tea parties as "the shot across the bow as taxpayers defend themselves against out of control government spending." But Democrats scathingly attacked the tea parties as an imitation grass roots movement manufactured by fringe elements of the right. The tea parties "have been largely a creation of the same gang that already ran conservatism off the rails," wrote David Waldman on the liberal Daily Kos politics blog. Meanwhile, Obama was to meet with working families to "discuss the unprecedented action his administration has taken to give tax cuts to the Americans who need them, while jump-starting growth and job creation in the process," the White House said. The man credited with sparking the protests is CNBC television commentator Rick Santelli, who called in February for a "tea party" to oppose government bailouts for mortgage defaulters. The clip of Santelli's angry outburst has been viewed on YouTube more than a million times. The protests stand out for the use of Web-savvy marketing, something barely seen in John McCain's unsuccessful battle for the White House against Democrat Obama. Odom described Wednesday as the birth of a new Republican movement able to match Obama's formidable support network. "New leaders will come into play, new coalitions will form, new tax groups will be born, and a new energy will surround us all across the country," Odom wrote. "A completely new face will be put on a movement that has suffered at the hands of attempted top down control and old school political hacks over the years." But Democrats were working overtime, well in advance of the protests, to dismiss them as irrelevant. Criticism ranges from allegations that the protests are a political con staged by corporations, to poking fun at Republicans' seemingly innocent vow to go "tea-bagging" -- a word that in slang signifies a sex act. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090415/ts_alt_afp/uspoliticstaxprotest

I read last night, this is no true grassroots operation....lobbyists behind it. Lots of $$ and organization behind it. "And Think Progress: Despite these attempts to make the "movement" appear organic, the principle organizers of the local events are actually the lobbyist-run think tanks Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works. The two groups are heavily staffed and well funded, and are providing all the logistical and public relations work necessary for planning coast-to-coast protests" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Corporate Lobbyists Raising Money For Tea Parties By: Jane Hamsher Monday April 13, 2009 7:16 am Teabaggers are having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that "grassroots" demonstrations aren't orchestrated by corporate lobbyists. Understandable -- if you didn't have any experience organizing a demonstration that didn't have millions in free PR from Fox News and well-funded GOP fat cats providing a national infrastructure, you wouldn't know the difference. They seem to be particularly upset about links I sent out yesterday on Twitter (using the teaparty hashtags #tcot and #teaparty) regarding a report by Lee Fang at Think Progress documenting the involvement of corporate lobbyists FreedomWorks in organizing the teabaggers. FreedomWorks is run by ladies' man (and registered lobbyist) Dick Armey, and if they're not "organizing" the Tea parties, it's news to them. From the FreedomWorks website: " With your help, we have been able to organize hundreds of Taxpayer Tea Parties across the country, from Santa Barbara, California to Amarillo, Texas, and all the way to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. [] If you are not able to organize or attend a Taxpayer Tea Party, you can still help the cause by donating or buying a t-shirt. You can also spread the word via email, facebook and word of mouth. If you would like to post updates on tea parties in your state, or if you’d like to get in touch with other people planning tea parties, visit our Tea Party HQ. We have created an interactive Google map that you can use to locate a tea party near you!" The "donation" for the Tea Parties page goes to -- you guessed it -- the FreedomWorks Foundation. The "thank you" lettter is signed by Matt Kibbe, President & CEO, who cut his teeth working for Lee Atwater. He was behind the attempt to get Ralph Nader put on the ballot in Oregon in 2004, prompting a complaint to the FEC of illegal collusion with the GOP. FreedomWorks was launched [as] a GOP version of MoveOn. "We believe that hard work beats daddy's money," said Dick Armey at the time. Armey seems to be a bit irony challenged -- Steve Forbes is on the FreedomWorks board. As Krugman notes, their money comes from the Koch, Scaife, Bradley, Olin and other reliable funders of right wing infrastructure including Exxon Mobil. I don't know which is sadder -- the fact that the Teabaggers don't understand that it would be impossible for them to do what they're doing without this kind of infrastructure behind them, or the fact that they're being manipulated by the very people they appear to be raging against who are only looking to channel their anger for their own purposes. Whatever. Glenn Reynolds seems to have blown a gasket over the whole thing today, and that's always a good thing. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/14/719949/-Its-official:-GOP-is-the-tea-bag-party

From an interview on Fox Business News' show with Stuart Varney, this interview excerpt... Varney: There are thousands of parties and you're saying is the nature of this fraud? Leser: Well, if you look back at it. The Chicago tea party.com website was actually created or registered in August of 2008 that's long before Obama was president had a chance to enact any of his policies. This has actually been in the works for a very long time. It's being portrayed as something recent and spontaneous and it's anything but that. [Ed. note - I read this previously several other places in the past couple of weeks.] I would ask them, where were they during the last 28 years, 20 of which when we had a Republican administration in office that ran up massive deficits. Varney: It's only in the last two or three months, or six weeks that the extent of this problem has emerged. The extent of congressional spending the extent of the deficit, the impending huge tax increases that we face. It's only become apparent in the last six weeks, during which time we've had a Democrat Congress and a Democrat in the White House. Leser: I can't let you get away with that one, Stuart... It's amazing to me that any Republican with a straight face would try and talk about fiscal responsibility. Republicans have absolutely no credibility on fiscal responsibility. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ For the rest of the

Oops... for the rest of the transcript and video of the interview between Stuart and Steve Leser, the Editor of OpEdNews, go here: http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/lesser-tea-parties-these-tax-day-tea-pa

This upsets me more than that ridiculous tea protest. From the AP: Afghans Stone Women Protesting Sex Law KABUL (April 15) -- A group of some 1,000 Afghans swarmed a demonstration of 300 women protesting against a new conservative marriage law on Wednesday. The women were pelted with small stones as police struggled to keep the two groups apart. The law, passed last month, says a husband can demand sex with his wife every four days unless she is ill or would be harmed by intercourse � a clause that critics say legalizes marital rape. It also regulates when and for what reasons a wife may leave her home alone. Women's rights activists scheduled a protest Wednesday attended by mostly young women. But the group was swamped by counter-protesters � both men and women � who shouted down the women's chants. Some picked up gravel and stones and threw them at the women, while others shouted "Death to the slaves of the Christians!" Female police held hands around the group to create a protective barrier. The government of President Hamid Karzai has said the Shiite family law is being reviewed by the Justice Department and will not be implemented in its current form. Governments and rights groups around the world have condemned the legislation, and President Barack Obama has labeled it "abhorrent." Though the law would apply only to the country's Shiites � 10 to 20 percent of Afghanistan's 30 million people � it has sparked an uproar by activists who say it marks a return to Taliban-style oppression. The Taliban, who ruled Afghanistan from 1996-2001, required women to wear all-covering burqas and banned them from leaving home without a male relative. Shiite backers of the law say that foreigners are meddling in private Afghan affairs, and Wednesday's demonstrations brought some of the emotions surrounding the debate over the law to the surface. "You are a dog! You are not a Shiite woman!" one man shouted to a young woman in a headscarf holding aloft a banner that said "We don't want Taliban law." The woman did not shout back at the man, but told him: "This is my land and my people." Women protesting the law said many of their supporters had been blocked by men who refused to let them join the protest. Those who did make it shouted repeatedly that they were defending human rights by defending women's rights and that the law does not reflect the views of the Shiite community. Fourteen-year-old Masuma Hasani said her whole family had come out to protest the law � both her parents and her younger sister who she held by the arm. "I am concerned about my future with this law," she said. "We want our rights. We don't want women to just be used." As the back-and-forth continued, another demonstration of Shiite women who said they support the law began. "We don't want foreigners interfering in our lives. They are the enemy of Afghanistan," said 24-year-old Mariam Sajadi. Sajadi is engaged, and said she plans to ask her husband's permission to leave the house as put forth in the law. She said other controversial articles � such as one giving the husband the right to demand sex from his wife every fourth day � have been misinterpreted by Westerners who are anti-Islam.

IMO, those Shiite women were forced by their husbands to speak in favor. The Shiites are now the majority rule in Iraq thanks to Bush. Saddam Hussein who was a Sunni tolerated even the Christians, in fact some of his cabinet were Christians. Bush has turned back the clock in that country. The US should have been concentrating in Afghanistan and the Taliban instead of pulling out troups for Iraq. I feel for those women. Impeach Bush and Cheney! Or stone them.

I agree, Moon, that's awful. Saw that this morning. Impeach Bush and Cheney! Huh????

No huh, about it, Dorine. Is it too late to impeach? It's their fault we abandoned Afghanistan and created the Iraq disaster. Would you prefer to stone them? I'm up for it. You know where they would be in Dante's inferno.

Oh dear....all of a sudden only Liberals can protest. LOL. FYI it wasn't only Repubs...saw some Dems there as well who are protesting the riduculous budget. I seem to remember...vaguely....people braying around here about the debt...No mo' Had a wonderful time at the Tea Party. Perfect spring day. Band playing, flags flying, buntings on the stands,the ice cream truck, college kids ,moms with strollers. And of course, the Tea Party tee shirts ...people voicing their opinions. As American as it gets. Made me appreciate democracy. "There�s not a lot of countries, of course, that afford their people that, that type of right. It�s a great thing.�

Deception, subterfuge, obfuscation. Sickening. Oh dear...strong words. No use getting sick over this. Besides, not nicey to make fun of my cause...I don't denigrate yours;-((( (Karen)But I hadn't realized that when you do it is a "truth." To me it is. I don't speak for anyone else. (Dorine)I read last night, this is no true grassroots operation....lobbyists behind it. Lots of $$ and organization behind it. Probably, ...that's bad? But I didn't see no George Soros Hedge Fund types around...;-) I guess they're busy funding lib causes...;-)

Probably, ...that's bad? It's fraudulent for one thing. (Moon) Is it too late to impeach? Um, Moon, yes...yes, it is.

Isn't the purpose of impeachment to bring to trial and, if found guilty, to ultimately remove from office????? Those two men are no longer in office.

Oops, this time you beat me to the draw, Dorine. :-)

Probably, ...that's bad? It's fraudulent for one thing. How do you know they were funded by lobbyists or organizations? (Pl , no Daily Kos.) At least they didn't hire protesters!!(NIMBY anyway;-) I had a wonderful day...only having my Drool friends with me would have made it better;-D

LOL, Kathryn. Moon, I completely agree with your sentiment, but what's done is done now (with regard to Cheney and Bush). They should be brought to The Hague, then maybe stoned ;-), but that's a whole 'nother conversation. FYI it wasn't only Repubs...saw some Dems there as well who are protesting the riduculous budget I have nothing against protests, or even protests against the debt, when genuine. And some of those people are genuine. Actually many of them are genuine, except some of them have no freakin' clue what they're talking about nor have any clue what's on some of the stupid signs they're carrying. A lot of them are Joe the Plumbers, and we all know how astute he was. Though just like that guest on the FBN show I posted about earlier, I'm curious where all these same poor, disgruntled people (and I guess you, since you say you support these "tea parties") were over the past 8 years as the debt was being racked up. Nary a peep. It didn't happen a few months ago.

I posted stuff from all over how that's know who funded it. If you read it, you'll know too.

Or how about this.... I was going to post excerpts from this earlier, but now I'll just post the link for the whole thing. http://washingtonindependent.com/38533/tea-party-activists-tax-day-events-will-attract-silent-majority In it, among many links in blue (that I'm sure you'll feel free to ignore also ;-)), is this .... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13krugman.html?em from where this excerpt comes: "Last but not least: it turns out that the tea parties don�t represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They�re AstroTurf (fake grass roots) events, manufactured by the usual suspects. In particular, a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey, the former House majority leader, and supported by the usual group of right-wing billionaires. And the parties are, of course, being promoted heavily by Fox News. But that�s nothing new, and AstroTurf has worked well for Republicans in the past. The most notable example was the �spontaneous� riot back in 2000 � actually orchestrated by G.O.P. strategists � that shut down the presidential vote recount in Florida�s Miami-Dade County."

I posted stuff from all over how that's know who funded it. I'm not sure what I meant to take out or leave in this sentence, LOL!!

(Me) A lot of them are Joe the Plumbers Was just rereading today's comments and OMG, I totally skipped over, Karen, that you made a Joe the Plumber reference, too, regarding the protesters. Ha!

Good?

(Dorine)Actually many of them are genuine, except some of them have no freakin' clue what they're talking about nor have any clue what's on some of the stupid signs they're carrying. A lot of them are Joe the Plumbers, and we all know how astute he was. Not a v. kind statement about the populists...coming from "the elite"????????;-) PS Joe was right! Wealth distribution! and I guess you, since you say you support these "tea parties") were over the past 8 years as the debt was being racked up ah yes, .... the good ole days when we were only $1.T in debit;-)) Sorry...Am now signing off....Opera takes precedence ...don't be offended ;-)"Lucia di Lammermoor" coming on PBS with Ana Netrebko, gorgeous Russian soprano...Don't miss it. "Rabble -Rouser -evelyn" as one of our lurking friends calls me.LOL. My socialist son's warning: "Pl don't get arrested mom". Wonnnnnderful day:-))))

I went to the final dress rehearsal for that last fall. Loved that one. Enjoy! ah yes, .... the good ole days when we were only $1.T in debit;-)) The point being...of course....that at least you...and I'll bet a good amount of those people out there now, weren't out there then. The material questions being....why not? And why now? Is there a limit over which it's inspiring to protest publically? One 1T didn't cut it, I guess. That was ok. Now 10T (which I'm not happy with either) is another matter. If you do get arrested, I'm sure the mug shot would be priceless. :-D

Not a v. kind statement about the populists...coming from "the elite"????????;-) If common sense and critical thinking makes me elite (and perhaps a socialist, too!) I'm proud to wear that banner. :-)

I will say, that there is something that bothers me about Obama's supporters, who worked for his campaign locally and have formed a local branch of his Health Care advocacy group that I joined. They've had several meetings, only one of which I could go to since most of the time they give extremely short notice that they're occurring. But the thing I learned there is that there are 2 plans, Obama's and the Baucus plan. They keep saying we need to call and write this person and that person asking for support for Obama's plan. Except, I'm not sure I can fully support his plan (or Baucus' for that matter), until there's more of an actual..... plan. I can't totally get behind any of the ideas yet, since they're more concepts than plans. I know what'd I'd like to see as a result of any reform, but until some kind of details form, I can't get super involved, unless it's actively supporting healthcare reform vs. no reform at all. That is what I'm totally behind him on. No more status quo. And back to protests, I have nothing at all against people protesting. Matter of fact, I think there was way too little of it for any cause and too much complacency over the past 6-8 years.

(Dorine)One 1T didn't cut it, I guess. That was ok. Now 10T (which I'm not happy with either) is another matter. $1 T. manageable @2% growth which is really what most econs are predicting. Even at 4 % which is the WH predictable $9-10T goes on for generations. I'm with you on the Health Plans...devil is in the details. I still like Hill's plan best and Romney's.. even if Mass. is going broke with it. But we will get a redesign of some kind. Read this article which son sent me ...bu Dr. Atul Gwande in the NYer A bit optimistic, but gives good historical perspective. He was on CR one night. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/01/26/090126fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all

While I'm not saying we shouldn't be cognizant of, nor help the Afghan women, we'd better look in the mirror and clean up our own house first. This is appalling, though I've read some about this before. http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/31/military.sexabuse/index.html It's great you like Hill's plan, but really, is that an option anymore? Is that on the table in some form at this point? If not, and potentially won't be, there's no need to reference it anymore. I need to read more on what MA's plan ended up, but yes, it is breaking them. I read yesterday they just worked initially to cover everyone first, then figure out the cost containment part later. Not sure I thought that was the brightest idea, but I need to read more.

And actually, if I remember correctly, wasn't HRC and O's plans extremely similar? Isn't that what was said during the campaigns? Effectively, there is no Hill plan anymore. She's got other things to do.

But the ideas are still there and can be incorporated into a consensus. She didn't copyright them;-) I need to read more on what MA's plan ended up, but yes, it is breaking them. Raise taxes. Isn't that NY is doing?Raising taxes...and The Donald wants to move, LOL If states want to expand benefits, the residents should pay for such, IMO; why expect other states to cover their bills, whose citizens don't enjoy them.

During the campaign Obama copied Hillary's plan except that it did not cover everyone. I've said and even posted here that Obama should have sat with McCain and let McCain trim some of that pork, it would have presented a Bi-partisan united front. They should be brought to The Hague, then maybe stoned ;-) I still can't believe they were not impeached. I certainly signed every petition I saw. I was thinking of the Hague too.

that it did not cover everyone. That's right, that's the difference I keep forgetting. What I really need to research about both is single payer vs. public/private insurance options. And honestly, I think I've tended toward single payer. The problem is, everyone (insurance co's, providers, patients) will have to give up or alter something in the current system to make the new system work. That includes you and me, and Joe Blow down the street. Sacrifices will have to be made and I honestly don't think any of them will be willing to (and I won't elaborate right now on where I think each entity should make the greatest alterations). Everyone gets a piece of the pie now. The pie itself has to shrink where everyone gets less or has to contribute more in some way. IMO. ;-)

$1 trillion in debt? Much higher. That's the cost of the Iraq war alone, and it's a conservative estimate. Bush kept the funding off the books, funding it via "emergency" supplements rather than through the usual budgetary process, so it wasn't reflected in his budgets. But I believe we still owe it.;-) Must ask China.;-) There were no tea parties in Philly or NJ; we're too busy going to work every day and paying taxes.;-) Honestly, if I hadn't read it here, I wouldn't have known what it was.

Actually, there was one in Philly. :-) Found a link this morning to a blog with pics from there that I thought about posting, but hadn't decided yet. Now I will, in a little while.

It got no news coverage that I could see. Nothing in the papers, nothing on the evening news. A non event.

Go through these pics in the first link. Some of the signs are funny. And ironic if you think about it. http://phillybits.blogspot.com/2009/04/yes-its-true-philadelphia-was-heavily.html http://www.philebrity.com/2009/04/15/from-the-desk-brendan-james-walsh-big-wet-tea-bag-decends-on-love-park/ I thought the caption on this was rather priceless http://www.philebrity.com/2009/04/15/more-readers-cameraphone-tea-bag-aerial-view-reveals-small-possibly-poisonous-red-white-and-blue-shrub/ Honestly, I don't disagree with the sentiment of being upset over budget spending, high taxes, etc. It's the hypocrisy that NOW it's a bad thing. Again, where were all these people over the past even few years. Because going from a surplus to a debt in the first place wasn't bad enough (having been dug out of the debt hole we were in the from that previous administration)? And I read last night that the proposed tax changes will still keep people at a level 10% lower than during Reagan's time.

(Mari) Nothing in the papers, nothing on the evening news. A non event. Well, when you see how many were there, or not there as the case may be, I'm not surprised. Though not even the local Fox station was there? Philly's very Democratic? The PTB couldn't get enough local support. That's actually a good thing to investigate. Where the larger protests were.

(Evelyn) Isn't that NY is doing?Raising taxes... Some, but I don't smoke (and raise those to the roof as far as I'm concerned, maybe eveyone will quit). Nor eat a lot of junky sugary stuff (though I think that's off the table now). And my property taxes are spread between all of us in my building. But they ARE raising the MTA fares by beaucoup bucks and cutting service on top of that. That's what I'm up in arms about.

I don't know what people are so upset about taxes anyway for...at the rate we're going, no one's going to be working, so no one will have any taxes to pay with no real money coming in. ;-D

(Moon)that it did not cover everyone. Dorine)That's right, that's the difference I keep forgetting Big diff...if there's no mandate , it won't work. He made a point of criticizing Hill for that...but I agree. Single payer....noooooooo. A non event. I had a good time;-D

I still can't believe they were not impeached. They would have to find The Blue Dress :-D

(Dorine)at the rate we're going, no one's going to be working, so no one will have any taxes to pay with no real money coming in. ;-D Oh dear...now,don't be so despondent. As I tell my family .."be indispensable in your job, you are a good worker, and they can't do w/o you":-) I am v. optimistice about the future of the economy of our country. I have great faith in Tim's bailout plan for banks. LOL..of course it's probably me & the President. But we'll get through this. Of course who's gonna buy those toxic assets...is the $63K question.

(Me), I still can't believe they were not impeached. (Evelyn), They would have to find The Blue Dress :-D Wow, so now Iraq is a great big BJ? ;-) Clinton should have said from the start that it was a private topic between him and his wife. NEVER should the American people have gotten to know about it. I felt so bad for Hillary, that was a private affair between man and wife. He should not have lied, but he should not have been in a position to lie either. The lies of WOMD as an excuse to invade a country is impeachable, IMO. Iraq was better off with Saddam Hussein. Now on to Obama, he wants to get our rail system in order, and I'm all for it. We are so far behind EU and Japan. There are jobs to be had there.

(Evelyn) "be indispensable in your job, you are a good worker, and they can't do w/o you":-) Nice sentiment, but old fashioned. It was true at one time. Unfortunately, I know first hand that's utter BS. Both of my own experiences and most recently a friend at the Met among quite a number of others. Very, very few people are indispensible and many excellent workers lose jobs for no other reason than to save $$. Or some due to job politics. Of course the economy will get better, to some degree, it always does. Just depends on how well, how fast. And how far it will go to bottom out first. But I just hope that ALL the policymakers pull together and take advantage of this opportunity to reboot many things that need rebooting, and do it for the public, not just private good. At least make it a win-win situation for everyone. It's an opportunity that won't (I hope) come again in my lifetime. (Moon) Clinton should have said from the start that it was a private topic between him and his wife. NEVER should the American people have gotten to know about it. Ken Starr and the rest of the Repubs who dug and dug for dirt on him would never have let that be it, and obviously didn't. Have you read any books on how much digging they had to do to get something on him? If only half the effort was made to do something good in this world instead. Unfortunately Bill is his own worst enemy and made it worse by lying and trying to hide it once it came out. Just throw it out there, say you're sorry and move on. Betcha no one would've cared in several months. Frankly, no one should've cared in the first place as it was. But then again, to me, that didn't give Ken Starr, et al the reason or right to spend $72 million of our $$ trying to get that out of him. What a freakin' waste. Those fiscally responsible repubs again. Spending our hard earned money on BS. Just like the Iraq War (though in all fairness, many Dems.... including St. Hillary.... are guilty of that as well for letting it happen, along with the public). Now on to Obama, he wants to get our rail system in order, and I'm all for it. We are so far behind EU and Japan. There are jobs to be had there. Just like Eisenhower with the Interstate highway system in the 50's. But they need to make that train travel much more efficient and accessible than it is now.

Knew that would stir you all up on a dull day.....;-))))

Crap. I'll repost if you delete the above, Karen, please. (Evelyn) Big diff...if there's no mandate , it won't work. He made a point of criticizing Hill for that...but I agree. Single payer....noooooooo. Why not? I haven't decided yet myself. I think I'm leaning to public/private. My ideal on the surface would be....everyone should have access to basic and preventative healthcare. For anything above and beyond that...dialysis, surgeries (at least elective), anything elective really that isn't needed for emergency diagnostic purposes at the very least, should be covered by private insurance that people get either through work or on their own. This is just my initial thoughts and there's so much to consider. The main thing that I think needs to happen (but I have truly no confidence that it will)....and I've said this before, is that there needs to be a tremendous shift in attitude and expectations on the part of each and every individual about their own health and their own responsibility for it. Now I see the concept of it creeping into an increasing number of articles that even remotely touch on healthcare reform, as well as those that focus on a variety of completed studies on various aspects of treatment. Basically what it comes down to is healthcare frequently can't help those who don't help themselves. It was a philosophy I imparted to my patients and especially in rehab it's true. I can give them the tools, equipment and exercises, but it was up to them to do the actual work and help to get themselves better, to maximize their potential. I couldn't do it for them. Unfortunately, people expect the magic pill to make them all better, and it doesn't frequently work that way. And the system can't continue to afford that attitude. *steps off soapbox*

(Evelyn) Knew that would stir you all up on a dull day.....;-)))) *snort* You rabblerouser, you!

(Evelyn) If states want to expand benefits, the residents should pay for such, IMO;why expect other states to cover their bills, whose citizens don't enjoy them. I don't quite understand the etiology of this comment. Did I miss something? What states are expecting other states to cover their bills? What type of services?

This is a long piece, but I think worth copying here. I found this very logical and reasoned. And actually, what I found rather notable about it, is this is the second piece I've read in 2 days that mentions Mumia protests, and he's done it twice here. I don't remember where I read the other article that mentioned Mumia. For those inclined, in the original article I've copied, there are a number of links highlighted in orange that may be of interest for further reading, for clarification, etc. Atrios: "All fun aside, there's obviously nothing wrong with the right attempting to engage in protest politics. The problem is that it was never clear what they were protesting. So far Obama has cut taxes for most of the population and... well, that's it. The protests of "The Left" have long been mocked for lacking message discipline. That criticism has often been fair. The difference is that our side's protests generally have a single point ("don't do this stupid fucking war in Iraq") which gets hijacked by a bunch of other causes when the speakers hit the stage. But the teabaggers... honestly, I still have no idea what it was about. I mean, I know it was about tribal allegiance against Barack Mumia Saddam Obama III. But it wasn't actually about anything else." Now's as good a time as any to take a break from mocking the teabaggers in favor of a more serious look at what they accomplished yesterday. I've never made a secret for my distaste of most street protests, and of groups like Code Pink that think they are accomplishing anything with their street theater. But when I set out to write Taking on the System, my book on effective organizing in the 21st century, I had to dig deep to figure out why I didn't like them, and how to differentiate the usual ineffective ANSWER-organized protests with those that actually had a positive effect (e.g. the Jena Six and pro-immigration protests of a few years ago). I finally determined that for a protest to be effective it needed to: 1. be novel and/or unexpected 2. have a sympathetic, singular, and media-friendly message 3. provide great visuals 4. tap into a hot-button and timely issue. The usual leftist protests fail most of these, falling into the worst, cartoonish stereotypes. They feature a mishmash of causes and issues, with no unifying theme. Is the protest about the Iraq War? Or Palestine? Or American imperialism? Or freeing Mumia? Or legalizing marijuana? Or blah blah blah blah? Who the heck knows? Who the heck cares? This is a classic clip from the Daily Show after one such protest: Stewart: On Saturday, a 100,000 strong peace march descended on Washington seeking to crystallize America's dissatisfaction with the war into one single idea. Clip of young male speaker: Peace! Stewart: Okay. Clip of male speaker: Justice! Stewart: (pause) Fine. Clip of male speaker: Environmental protection! Stewart: (pause, confused look on face) Clip of male speaker: No racism! Stewart: (dumb-founded, and then says in Valley Girl-like voice) Dude! I didn't hike from Oberlin for this. There's nothing novel, new, or interesting about these protests, making them easy to ignore. We've seen them a million times, the visuals are easily mockable, with the dreads and the stupid puppets and whatnot. And not only are they patently ridiculous, but we saw just how ineffective they were during the Bush years. No one gave a damn about them, not the media, not powers-that-be (in either party), and certainly not the public. It wasn't the protest movement that moved the Democratic Party left on Iraq, it was Joe Lieberman's loss in his Democratic primary in 2006. Prior to that, Rahm Emanuel, as head of the DCCC, was telling Democratic candidates to steer clear of the war. After that primary, the Dems fully embraced ending the war in their campaigns and won huge that fall. In other words, the anti-war cause was best served via electoral politics. After Lieberman's loss, not even the media could ignore the saliency and validity of the anti-war position. "Patriotism" could no longer be used to silence anti-war voices, we had helped mainstream them. So now conservatives are out in the cold, far from the levers of power. They are feeling marginalized, ignored, powerless. We know the feeling. It wasn't long ago that we were there. But instead of adopting the tactics that best served liberals on our way back to power, conservatives seemed to have learned the exact wrong lesson, adopting our most ineffective ones. And having decided to do street protests, rather than learn from the people that have done effective street protests (like the pro-immigration forces), they decided to go the Code Pink/ANSWER route. So looking at our list above: 1. be novel and/or unexpected Other than anti-abortion protests, the Right doesn't really do protests. Their instinct is to laugh at the hippies out on the streets, not take to the streets themselves. So yeah, these were kind of new and unexpected. Give them a point. 2. have a sympathetic, singular, and media-friendly message What was the message? Too much taxes? I didn't see many bank executives and Wall Street types out on the streets. And coming on the heels of the biggest tax cut in American history, almost entirely directed at the middle class, this message didn't have much salience. Furthermore, the theme of these protests "taxation without representation", was pretty silly considering that these people did have representation. It's just that they lost the elections, which sort of happens in a democracy. "Representation" doesn't mean you always get your way, it means that you have a vote. So it was an indefensible frame to base the protests around. That's probably why the crowds didn't easily rally around it, deciding to freelance it instead. So there was talk about pork barrel spending! And bail outs! And wanting to stick a knife in Obama's eye (at 1:07)! And secession! And Obama's birth certificate! And Obama taking away their guns! And the American taxpayers are the Jews for Obama's ovens! And Obama is Hitler! And blah blah blah blah. Conservatives were doing their best to impersonate the "free Mumia!" crowd. Throw in the terrible name (you really don't want to be associated with sex acts), and it simply wasn't a great message day for these guys. 3. provide great visuals Did the country really need another group of people getting together to chant crazy slogans and wave stupid signs? It's boring and trite when the ANSWER/Code Pink crowd does it, and it's boring and trite when dumbass conservatives do it. I mean, after all the time conservatives have spent mocking those dirty fucking hippies, they really thought it'd be a good idea to do the exact same thing? The small number of protesters certainly proved counter-productive. If you claim a mass popular uprising, you can't have hundreds of people show up to events. Remember, conservatives claimed that 10 million anti-war protesters back in 2003 were fringe (Bush called them a "focus group"), what's that make 100-250,000 protesters nationwide? That's less than what some cities got during the anti-war and pro-immigration rallies. If we wanted to paint the protesters as part of some fringe (which we did, because they are), there was no better way to do so than to laugh at the pathetic turnout. Throw in an exclusively white crowd protesting our nation's first black president (to the great delight of the Stormfront crowd), and really, the visuals were simply terrible. There's only so much that Fox News' tight crowd shots could do to pretend otherwise. 4. tap into a hot-button and timely issue Tax Day is a good time to protest taxes, sure, but their problem is that taxes aren't currently a hot topic of national debate. As much as they may think otherwise, the nation is focused instead on economic matters, as the financial, jobs, and real estate crisis has decimated families and plunged us into the worst economy since the Great Depression. People like government stimulus spending. Many are benefiting from it. The only people who have any gripes about taxes are those making over $250,000 a year, and there isn't going to be any broad sympathy among the broader public for that crowd (hence the small crowds), especially in this environment. So what did the teabaggers ultimately accomplish yesterday? They proved that even with the combined might of Fox News and Conservative Talk Radio (and their tens of millions of listeners), they couldn't mobilize a significant part of their base to take to the streets. They showed that their views, contrary to their beliefs, are simply not striking a chord with the broader public. They showed that they have learned the worst lessons from progressives (while we were learning the best lessons from their side). They gave their ideological opponents (like us) more visual proof of their fringiness (like Texas Gov. Rick Perry talking secession). And they did a great job motivating and entertaining our side as well (we had our best traffic day in a while yesterday). So what now? The teabaggers are talking about a new round of protests on July 4th, which will likely feature rhetoric and signage, on our nation's most patriotic holiday, dominated by talk of secession and independence from ... the United States of America. Go for it. For a floundering movement desperately seeking a leader (Sarah! Rush! Glenn!) and a cause, there's nothing better for us than seeing them stick with the ANSWER/Code Pink playbook. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/16/720821/-Why-yesterdays-protests-were-stupid

Not sure why she thinks turning the US newspapers into Izvestiya is such a hot idea. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/16/obama-appointee-suggests-radical-plan-newspaper-bailout/ But critics say her proposal would spell an end to the independent media and make journalists reliant lapdogs. Funny, I thought it was this way already to a large degree with current corporate ownership. The decline of print journalism and the rise in online journalism, or "journalism" is a big theme running through the new film, State of Play (v.g. by the way).

I can't possibly disagree more with this statement from Obama: "This is a time for reflection, not retribution," Obama said. "We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past." http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090417/pl_afp/usattackspoliticstorture_20090417030812

I don't read Daily Kos..links or copy/paste material. Sorry

You really don't have to keep repeating that. We get it. But other people do, at least sometimes.

Sorry. AAA

Well, certainly no need to be sorry. :-) Better watch out, the new type of identity theft... but not to take your money, it's for advocacy. This paper is from somewhere in Mass. It was a bit of a fluke they found out. Published: April 13, 2009 03:21 am Elderly used as front in letter-writing campaign 'Grass-roots' effort looks more like Astroturf By Ken Johnson kjohnson@eagletribune.com Across Massachusetts, senior citizens are writing letters to newspapers demanding that their representatives in Congress protect a form of health insurance called Medicare Advantage. At least that's what newspaper editors are supposed to think. Some of those seniors are unaware that they have sent any such letters to newspapers. Some of them hadn't even heard of Medicare Advantage. "I did not write a letter to the editor. It's not from me," said Gloria Gosselin, 75, of Lawrence. Gosselin's name was on one of three strikingly similar letters touting the Medicare Advantage program that were sent to The Eagle-Tribune. [.....cont...] http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_103032149.html

(Dorine), (though in all fairness, many Dems.... including St. Hillary.... are guilty of that as well for letting it happen, along with the public). Excuse me, but her husband had just finished 2 terms as President, and she knew that the President is privy to secret information. She trusted that Mr Bush was giving out information that left no doubt as to Iraq having WOMDs because her husband would not have gone to Congress and the American people unless there was proof positive. Re: our rail system: if we are to up then standards as in EU and Japan, that means high/speed rail. The US would highly benefit from it. And many jobs will be created. Re: Healthcare: we need to Socialized it. As I've posted here, I've had nothing but good experiences in Europe with the system.

I'm not one of the seniors to be contacted, nor do I subscribe to Medicare Advantage, but I know people in my church who do. IMO the administration is trying to pay for national type health care over the backs of these folks . Medicare Advantage picks up the 20% Medigap that Medicare doesn't pay; at a minimum premium. A real help to lower middle class seniors on fixed incomes who can't afford Medigap premiums which can be hefty,and do not qualify for Medicaid. Medicare Advantage is not a rip-off as as Jules Stein of the Center for Medicare Advocay implies. Perhaps they would like to subsidize the Medigap premiums in lieu of political contributions.

Excuse me, but her husband had just finished 2 terms as President, and she knew that the President is privy to secret information. She trusted that Mr Bush was giving out information that left no doubt as to Iraq having WOMDs because her husband would not have gone to Congress and the American people unless there was proof positive. That's your story and your stickin' to it! ;-D Well, excuse me ;-)), but apparently some other people still felt the need to vote "no". And why would they have any more info than she did? Because, of course, no one knows anything in Washington about what's going on unless the President (and Colin Powell) tells them.

Pssst. They all got the same intel;-) Incl intelligence committees ,UK & Russia ...American people unless there was proof positive. Moon, FYI there's never "proof positive" in intel assessments. They get thousands of reports a day; some conflicting A v. amorphous business.

FYI there's never "proof positive" in intel assessments. They get thousands of reports a day; some conflicting And we found out later the Admin cherry picked what they wanted of that info to support the plan they already had to attack.

And we found out later the Admin cherry picked what they wanted of that info to support the plan they already had to attack. And where did you get that info...."from something you read"? From someone who wrote a book for profit? ..someone in the Bush administration who had been passed over for promotion? Someone who was perhaps fired? ...maybe an "unidentifed source"? Dissect your sources for the rea son of divulging that information. Did George Tenet say that? Anyone who was in the inner circle? As much as I enjoy Bob Woodward books, if you look closely... He never gives verifiable footnotes to his conversations . There were mistakes made in the administration...but I've never been convinced that the president maliciously lied . But I know others have that opinion And I respect their right to do so.

And where did you get that info...."from something you read"? Where have you been the last 8 years? It came out in the British press.

There was a play written about it. Stuff Happens.

Someone in the UK, help me out here. Save me some time having to go back and look this stuff up.

Nevermind. It was the Downing Street Memos. I can't believe I couldn't remember the name of these off the bat. They could be considered modern day Pentagon Papers. That guy risked his life getting copies of those memos. Just like Daniel Ellsberg. " a remark attributed to Richard Dearlove (then MI6 head) that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed [by the U.S.] around the policy" of removing Saddam Hussein from power, which was taken to show that US intelligence on Iraq prior to the war was deliberately falsified, rather than simply mistaken.[3] As this issue began to be covered by American media (Los Angeles Times on page 3 May 12, 2005, Washington Post on page 18 May 13, 2005[4]), two other main allegations stemming from the memo arose: that the UN weapons inspection process was manipulated to provide a legal pretext for the war, and that pre-war air strikes were deliberately ramped up in order to soften Iraqi infrastructure in preparation for war, prior to the October U.S. Senate vote permitting the invasion.[5] Some elements of the U.S. media have portrayed the document as faked or fraudulent, and Dana Perino referred in her daily White House press briefing on December 4, 2008 to the fact that the Bush administration has "debunked" the document previously. The British have tacitly validated its authenticity (as when Tony Blair replied to a press conference question by saying "that memorandum was written before we then went to the United Nations."[6])"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo

And then related to this passage: "The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force." Well, Saddam did let the inspectors back in. They weren't finding anything and something like 2-3 days prior to the start of the bombing campaign ("shock and awe"!!) the inspectors were told to leave by the US govt or they could be killed when the bombing started. They wanted to stay, but that wasn't an option as far as the US was concerned. The bombing was happening anyway. I'm not going over to the bookcase to look in my book for the exact timeline now, written by one of the lead inspectors on the ground at that time. I do tend to read a bit more information than found in blogs.

And can't believe I forgot about this website that I used in a debate with someone else several years ago. The page I'm linking to includes the pdf of the actual memos and a host of other associated documentation. There's a lot of interesting reading there. I've at least skimmed a great deal of it at one time or another. http://downingstreetmemo.com/related.html#DODIGF040507 An interview with the journalist who broke the story. I strongly suggest reading it. http://downingstreetmemo.com/msmith-interview.html I'm done on this for now. There's plenty to keep people busy.

(Evelyn), There were mistakes made in the administration...but I've never been convinced that the president maliciously lied. Thanks Dorine for post looking up and posting the info. Also, let's not forget that Bush Jr wanted to show up daddy and get Saddam Hussein. At least his father knew not to go into Iraq, he knew that if he toppled SH what would come after would be much worse. I wish Jr had had his father's intelligence report. But Jr listened only to Cheney and Rumsfeld. :-(

Downing Street Memo Originals Destroyed The so-called Downing Street Memo - which was presumed to be authentic when Bush administration critics began touting it last month as evidence the president committed impeachable crimes - is actually a manually recreated copy - with the source of the memo now admitting he retyped the document before destroying the originals. British reporter Michael Smith, who broke the memo story in the London Times on May 1, revealed to The Associated Press over the weekend that "he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals Smith's admission means there's now no independent way to determine the accuracy of the Downing Street Memo, i.e., whether he made any typos or transcription errors that could have changed the memo's meaning. The revelation has conjured up memories of the CBS News forged document scandal last year, where anchorman Dan Rather argued that damaging records he obtained from President Bush's National Guard file were essentially accurate, even though they had been faked by his source. While British officials hadn't disputed the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo, a senior member of the Blair government who reviewed the memo in light of reporter Smith's admission could say only that its contents "appeared authentic." That official, however, requested anonymity, refusing to make an on-the-record endorsement of the memo's accuracy. New questions about the authenticity of the Downing Street Memo come at a particularly awkward time for Democrats in America. Only last week, House Democrats staged a mock impeachment hearing based on the re-created document. Former presidential candidate John Kerry announced on June 2 that he intended to confront Congress with the Downing Street Memo, believing at the time that the document's authenticity was beyond reproach. "I think it's a stunning, unbelievably simple and understandable statement of the truth and a profoundly important document that raises stunning issues here at home," he told a reporter. Last week, a Kerry aide said his boss was sending a letter to President Bush demanding that he answer questions about the fake memo http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/6/20/105038.shtml

Was just looking in my bookcase to see which Bob Woodward books I have and forgot I had this: http://www.amazon.com/Hoodwinked-Documents-that-Reveal-Bush/dp/1565849027 Apparently in later printings, they changed the back cover description, as what's in the Editorial Review is not like what's on mine, except for the list of documents, to which they've also added one. My copy says: "As the world concludes that President Bush had little justification for his war on Iraq, Hoodwinked makes publicly available for the first time the primary source documents that show how intelligence on Iraq was consistently distorted, manipulated, and ignored by the administration. Compiled by National Security Archive analyst John Prados, these documents are reproduced, fully annotated, and placed in the context of a detailed narrative of the events leadig up to the conflict. Expanded sections examines the four most contentious issues: the Iraqi nuclear program, unmanned aerial vehicles, uranium from Niger, and the question of Saddam Hussein's link to Al Qaeda and 9/11. Via these "smoking gun" documents, parados offers readers a firsthand view of what may be the biggest government deception since Watergate, bringing out incontrovertible eveidence that we were had. " The list of the documents at the link above is the same except mine doesn't list the first one. It's an incredibly dense and detailed read. It took me a while to get through it and it's hard to assimilate it all. I just opened up to pages 98-99 where they talk about the DOE and a couple of other agencies doing their assessments of the aluminum centrifuges that were supposed to be so critical to their WMD program. Tenet practically contorted himself to use that info for justification to attack when it showed that the tubes were actually the wrong size and that while yes, in some time they could possibly be modified for a weapons program, there was no way it was happening anytime soon and there was no immediate danger as the govt indicated.

And don't forget the highly organized and coordinated propaganda program run by the Defense Dept and the White House using the media and their stable of military analysts, who knew they were being lied to at times and in turn lied themselves to us, all in order to keep their access to the govt for their businesses. It's a very, very long article that took me days to read in the paper. It was at least 2 full pages of that little print inside, plus a good amount on the front page. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2 There's also a sidebar at the NYT site on: How the Pentagon Spread Its Message Audio, video and documents that show how the military�s talking points were disseminated. * Excerpts From Selected Documents * All Documents Released (Department of Defense Web Site) So, in conclusion, it appears to be a little bit more than *opinion* that *all* those people lied through their teeth about the war. Unfortunate, to say the least. On a side note, did anyone ever watch the amazing documentary, Fog of War? I highly recommend it. There are parts in it of excerpts of tapes recorded in the White House of Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara talking about various aspects of the Vietnam War that almost mirror some things that were happening in the Iraq War (troop buildups/strategy/propaganda). It was almost as if you could replace McNamara with Rumsfeld and Johnson with Bush or Cheney. Scary actually, because one would've thought the US had learned something from what happened in Vietnam and not let it happen again. The music from Philip Glass was pretty awesome, too.

*snort* Hate to tell you, Evelyn, you're rather predictable. I was reading some stuff last night about them being destroyed and the Newsmax reference and thought to myself, she'll point that out if saying nothing else. Because really, what else is there to say? Also, so what if they're destroyed. The AP has the pdf's of the copies up. I read 4 1/2 of them last night. The copies exist out there. "Following the advice of company lawyers, Michael Smith, the journalist who first reported on the Downing Street Memo, has said that he protected the identity of his source by reproducing all documents and returning the 'originals' back to the source. In some cases, a document was retyped from a photocopy, and the photocopy destroyed.[43] This has led some to question the document's authenticity, but no official source has questioned it, and it has been unofficially confirmed to various news organizations, including the Washington Post, NBC, The Sunday Times, and the LA Times. Several other documents obtained by Smith, and treated similarly (see below), were confirmed as genuine by the UK Foreign Office.[44]" "According to CNN, currently classified documents which were dated at the same month as the Downing Street memo, March 2002, were uncovered in Iraq, and contained evidence that Russian intelligence notified Iraq about the "determination of the United States and Britain to launch military action."[48]"

You read the interview with the journalist, right? This explains the copies/originals. We can presume the original originals are still intact I suppose. (Michael Smith) "A: I was given the first six documents in September 2004. I have referred to these documents as the originals because they were the first documents that I was given. But these were of course not the "originals" of the actual documents. They were photocopies of the original documents. Such documents have to be registered and the source could not have walked off with them without being found out. Quite apart from that there were a number of different copies of the documents in circulation within government. There was always more than one copy of each of the original documents held by the government. For instance, the Straw letter to Blair was marked strictly personal. But there would still have to have been at least two copies of it, one held by Blair's office and one by Straw's."

You know what? It's a hard pill to swallow and I'd imagine disillusioning. I never thought I'd see something like this happen outside of movies.

Guess it was my turn to stir up the nest on a slow day with: And we found out later the Admin cherry picked what they wanted of that info to support the plan they already had to attack. ;-)

Ok, for the sake of argument, let's say the Downing St Memos aren't real. Or even don't exist. What is real and does is exist is the transcript of Hans Blix's UN testimony on March 7, 2003 where he says they found *nothing* so far of a credible WMD program. Wasn't that the reason given to go to war? Because they could launch a missile in 45 mins to hit it's neighbors? The "mushroom cloud" and all that? But they were finding *nada*....2 wks before the invasion. They'd been looking since November when they were allowed back in. Regardless of what the intel said or didn't say, if there was nothing at that point found, there was no reason to attack at that particular time, if at any time at all. Plain and simple.

Let's see what happens.... Obama: Like families, govt to make hard choices By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer 41 mins ago WASHINGTON � Families are making tough decisions about their money and so too will their government, President Barack Obama said Saturday, promising that spending cuts are coming � and soon. At a Cabinet meeting Monday, the president will ask department and agency heads for specific proposals for trimming their budgets. "If we're going to rebuild our economy on a solid foundation, we need to change the way we do business in Washington. We need to restore the American people's confidence in their government � that it is on their side, spending their money wisely, to meet their families' needs," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address, released while he attended the Summit of the Americans in Trinidad. To help achieve his goal of an efficient government, Obama announced the appointment of Jeffrey Zients, a founder and managing partner of the investment firm Portfolio Logic, as chief performance officer. Zients, who also will serve as deputy director for management of the Office of Management and Budget, will work to streamline processes and cut costs. On that front, Obama gave notice he wants to act quickly. "In the coming weeks, I will be announcing the elimination of dozens of government programs shown to be wasteful or ineffective," he said. "In this effort, there will be no sacred cows and no pet projects. All across America, families are making hard choices, and it's time their government did the same." Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is ending consulting contracts to create new seals and logos that, Obama said, have cost the department $3 million since 2003. Obama also cited Defense Secretary Robert Gates' plan to overhaul contracting procedures and eliminate billions in wasteful spending and cost overruns. The president praised Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., who are leading the effort in Congress. Republicans have kept up a steady stream of criticism of Obama's spending, both of his $787 billion stimulus plan and his $3.6 trillion budget proposal. "Earlier this week, President Obama said that we need to get serious about fiscal discipline by trimming waste in the federal budget," Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said in the GOP address. "Republicans couldn't agree more. We want to work with the president to get our financial house back in order." "It's irresponsible to borrow more than all previous American presidents combined. And it must stop if we want to get our economy moving again," McCarthy said. "When will all this spending and borrowing end?" Obama said he's determined to try to cut costs. "That is why I have assembled a team of management, technology and budget experts to guide us in this work," he said, "leaders who will help us revamp government operations from top to bottom and ensure that the federal government is truly working for the American people." Along with Zients at chief performance officer, Obama named Aneesh Chopra, currently the technology secretary for Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia, as the country's chief technology officer. On Feb. 3, Nancy Killefer withdrew her candidacy to be the first chief performance officer for the federal government, saying she didn't want her mishandling of payroll taxes on her household help to become a distraction for the administration. Killefer was one of several Obama choices for top positions who have dealt with tax problems. ___ On the Net: Obama address: http://www.whitehouse.gov McCarthy address: http://www.youtube.com/RepublicanConference Portfolio Logic: http://www.portfoliologic.com http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090418/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_economy;_ylt=Ap7IKSsh9UFH4nam4VNvGc2s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJmdmNrZnE4BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNDE4L29iYW1hX2Vjb25vbXkEY3BvcwM1BHBvcwMxMQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNvYmFtYWxpa2VmYW0-

(me) Tenet practically contorted himself to use that info for justification to attack when it showed that the tubes were actually the wrong size and that while yes, in some time they could possibly be modified for a weapons program, there was no way it was happening anytime soon and there was no immediate danger as the govt indicated. Hey!! Somebody give that man a medal for his successful work leading us up into the war! Oh wait, they did. :-(((

Dorine, Dorine....you're giving me narratives...not hard core proof . No NYT, no Hans Blix "said"... I didn't say there were WMDs, I said I am convinced Pres. Bush did not maliciously lie. If the proof was there, I am sure Rep. Conyers would have acted on it long ago while Bush 43 was in office. Now,.... I'm going to go to the movies and out to dinner...so I want you to keep looking for ... The Blue Dress See you later;-)

I didn't say there were WMDs You didn't say it, but the Bush Administration did. Hence this whole discussion about going to war. http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/07/sprj.irq.un.transcript.blix/index.html Conyers and others tried, and as became a pattern throughout the rest of both his terms, Bush, et al, refused to comply with the requests. Why not? Did they have something to hide? "On 5 May 2005, Congressman John Conyers sent a letter to President Bush signed by 89 of his colleagues demanding an explanation of the revelations in the memo. No specific White House response to the letter was ever made publicly. In response to the Bush Administration's refusal to answer the congressional delegation's questions, Conyers et al. have given serious consideration to sending a fact-finding mission to the UK.[8] Conyers initially requested 100,000 signatures from citizens (a petition) to request that President Bush answer the questions in his letter. The letter has been getting between 20,000 and 25,000 signatures a day, which was boosted by MoveOn.org joining the campaign on 9 June. By 13 June 2005, the letter had received over 540,000 signatures from citizens, and more congressmen had signed on, bringing the total to 94.[9] As of 16 June 2005, over 100 congressmen had signed the letter, including then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. On June 16, 2005; Conyers presided over a hearing or forum on the Downing Street memo in a basement room in the Capitol where Joseph C. Wilson and Cindy Sheehan among others testified.[10][11][12] The House Republican leadership did not allow Conyers to use an official hearing room and compelled him to hold the hearing in the basement because the hearing was unofficial." I said I am convinced Pres. Bush did not maliciously lie. And this is it a nutshell. You don't want to believe it, so you won't. It is indeed your prerogative. I, of course, wanted and believed every bit of it to be true, simply because I'm a dirty, stinkin' liberal who disliked Bush for no reason whatsoever except his party affiliation, didn't use any kind of critical thinking or do a significant amount of reading from various sources about anything and believed everything that Bush critics told me is true. Conversely, a lot of people are convinced Jesus Christ was the Messiah, too. And I'd say the evidence about that is a helluva lot less convincing or evident than something like the Downing Street Memos. Actually, don't get me started on the concept of religion and believing or not believing things to be true. ;-)) It's also a lot easier for you to accuse me of not finding "proof" and make me work at finding more things (which has been relatively easy to do) rather than actually coming up with any counterargument or proof to the contrary, with the exception of a weak piece from Newsmax, of all places. I have to find NYT, WaPo, etc pieces as what you consider credible sources.....and you come up with .....Newsmax. Hardly on par with the others, would you say? And I know, if you had some other argument or "proof" to the contrary that was credible, you wouldn't hesitate to post it. I can only gather that it's because as I said before, there's not much more of a counterargument to be made. And I don't understand by what you mean by more narratives vs. proof, but I suspect just more attempts at obfuscating the fact that you have found nothing else to counter the other info that isn't refutable in some way. Believe what you want to believe if it makes you feel better. Denial is a drug cheaper and safer than Oxycontin. I'm off to make a yummy Pacific salmon dinner, have some wine and watch a bunch of BBC TV things I've been saving. Had a great afternoon in Central Park, playing frisbee on a most beautiful day and will now relax with some good food and entertainment.

You know on second thought....I don't really believe in the concept of gravity, that the earth is round, or that E=mc(squared). I haven't seen Sir Isaac Newton's, Einstein's or any of the early philosophers' actual writings where they determined these things to be true. I've only seen it written about in textbooks and other sources (don't know that I've ever read it in the NYT)....and not even reproductions of the writings at that! Just narratives on the subjects. ;-))

God love ya, Evelyn. You are a great sport and you're the only one sticking your neck out here with opinions like those. I truly admire that (even if I don't agree with you). :-D

Now...now...it's only Drool you know. We're not at the UN. I take it all with great humor,and I never take offense no matter how many "shoes" come my way..., LOL. Actually, don't get me started on the concept of religion and believing or not believing things to be true. ;-)) Believe me, I won't;-) But you better stay on topic .....I got knuckles rapped a few months ago... To a happier subject.. Loved "State of Play". Thanks for recommending. Thanks also to Working Title, Tim Bevins and Eric Fellner. Edge of seat movie. Russell Crowe...what a star! Never duplicates a role. Helen Mirren steals every scene she's in. Poor Ben Affleck, he did his best, but he was out of the league on this one; didn't think he made a credible Congressman. I'm off to make a yummy Pacific salmon dinner, have some wine Oh, that's what I made for Easter (poached in Cab Blanc)..though really I was "fished-out" after Lent. Went well with Vouvray.

LOL, Evelyn. Did you wear a blue dress for Easter? ;-) (Dorine), You know on second thought....I don't really believe in the concept of gravity, that the earth is round, or that E=mc(squared). I haven't seen Sir Isaac Newton's, Einstein's or any of the early philosophers' actual writings where they determined these things to be true. I've only seen it written about in textbooks and other sources (don't know that I've ever read it in the NYT)....and not even reproductions of the writings at that! Just narratives on the subjects. ROTF, Dorine! My kind of gal! Add believing in the Theory of Evolution to that list. ;-) And to add that History text books are written by the winners, there is a lot of one sided approach to history that is taught in schools, shame on them.

(Evelyn) Now...now...it's only Drool you know. We're not at the UN. No, it is not Drool. I don't know why you persist in thinking it is.

We-el it's a message topic in bold letters on the Drool screen,(not a separate website like the other listed "offerings", nor listed by Terry on the Spring conferences, hosted by a revered Drool member;-) with only Drool members posting.... Soooo, ergo, a Drool topic.......to me;-) (I don't speak for anyone else.) *evelyn wearing her favorite blue dress*;-)

Given that I am host of Drool, what I say is the answer. This is fact, not opinion. This is not Drool. I do not know why this is such a problem for you to comprehend or maybe I do. End of discussion.

End of discussion. Okey, dokey...:-))).. makes no diff to me. *I* did not initiate the discussion

*I* did not initiate the discussion Again, not factual.

Well, ironically Evelyn did agree with you at one point when she refused to post here before....because she didn't go outside of Drool, IIRC. I'm glad to have her participation at whatever she calls it, even if she pushes my buttons. ;-)) Evelyn, I'm giving you a new nickname....Timex. ;-D (I think I'd like to use that for my next pet's name, but people might think I treat it poorly and it keeps hanging on.) (Moon) Add believing in the Theory of Evolution to that list. ;-) *slaps forehead* Of course! How could I forget that. LOL.

(Dorine) because she didn't go outside of Drool LOL! Thanks for reminding me of her frequent response when asked to take a comment to Mad World: "donn't go outside of Drool" So, she did recognize it as not Drool. ;-)

Oh you girls...LOL. Pile it on! My error: Mad World is *on* the Drool page. You flatter me for requesting my presence on this topic; I thought you would want the conservative viewpoint. You know....Fair and Balanced???? However, pivotal question comes to mind: Does one have to be a member of ( Drool Darlin') to post on Mad World? Replete with password etc. A simple yes or no will suffice.... And if no...why doesn't Terry have it with the Politics agenda??? I see Karen posts there. I don't see Dorine, however.

Pile it on? I was defending you! :-D I think I may have been to the Politics one to browse a long time ago, when I was seeing what else was on Spring. People talk in it?

(Evelyn) Mad World is *on* the Drool page. Correction: a link is on the Drool page, as there is to amazon.com, the Jennifer Ehle website, and many others, none of which I would also call "Drool." (Dorine) I think I may have been to the Politics one to browse a long time ago, when I was seeing what else was on Spring. Didn't you choose News because the content was going to be eclectic and not just politics?

Yes, I did.

People talk in it? Yeah...you'll love it. They all think like you do;-) Thank you for "defending" me, ole sparring pardner....i do v. well as a solo, me thinks. (Karen)Correction: a link is on the Drool page, as there is to amazon.com, the Jennifer Ehle website, and many others, none of which I would also call "Drool." i acknowledged that...those are websites, not posting topics. But pl. answer my question: Yes or no on posting on Mad World: does one have to be a Drool Darlin'? Ecleclectic and not just politics? eclectic is right...anything from salmon for dinner (how was it BTW?), to Michelle's shoes... to derivatives!! Reminds me of the Ramble Board on Pemberley.com. Moon, do you still post there? Hey, beats culling for Durham restaurants on Google any day;-D Back to Little Dorrit. This series must have cost a bomb to film. All those locations. See ya' tomorrow.

(Evelyn) i do v. well as a solo, me thinks. Okee dokee. :-) Salmon dinner, v. good. With Trader Joe's Garlic Aioli Mustard I made into a sauce and a side of (Trader Joes!) Garlic Basil Linguini and a New Zealand Savignon Blanc. Yum! I forgot about that Pemberley place. I used to go there for a while a number of years ago. Question: Does anyone know how or if it's possible to capture/copy images online that are in Adobe Flash? There have some pics I wanted to post here last night and other topics at other times, but right clicking didn't work. I didn't want to post the link to the site as I didn't need to point out all the pics, just a few.

New Zealand Savignon Blanc. Yum! Oh purrrfect...I've had that, mobetta than Vouvray. Oh for Trader Joe's.

Moon, do you still post there? No. It's a great site Pemberley, but I prefer my good friends here.:-)

Evelyn) i do v. well as a solo, me thinks. Okee dokee. :-) But I do appreciate it. Might have to call on you some time for support...911! Ya' never know around here...;-) LOL XXX Bwah!

Pulitzer's are out. I bolded a few things that have come up as discussion topics or somewhere...in the Drool/Mad World vicinity. ;-)) Papers win Pulitzers for bringing down gov, mayor By DEEPTI HAJELA, Associated Press Writer � 26 mins ago NEW YORK � Two newspapers hit hard by a historic downturn won Pulitzer Prizes on Monday for exposing sex scandals that brought down a governor and a big-city mayor, in what was hailed as a victory for old-fashioned watchdog journalism at a time when the industry's very survival is in question. The New York Times received five Pulitzers in all, including one for being the first to report that then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer was a client of a high-priced call girl ring � a discovery that led to his resignation. The Detroit Free Press won for obtaining a cache of steamy text messages that destroyed then-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick's political career. Three Pulitzers were awarded for coverage of Barack Obama's historic election. But in a surprising turn, not one prize was handed out for the other big story of 2008 � the financial meltdown. Some suggested it could be a criticism of the press for not sounding enough of a warning before the crisis. "If I had to guess, I feel like there is going to be some reluctance to give prizes for after-the-fact reporting no matter how good it is, period," said Dean Starkman, managing editor of Columbia Journalism Review's The Audit, which focuses on the business press. The awards were announced after one of the most depressing years ever for the newspaper industry, with layoffs, bankruptcies and closings brought on by the recession and an exodus of readers and advertisers to the Internet. Many of Monday's winners were among the hardest hit; in fact, one of the winners, a reporter in Arizona, was laid off a few months ago. "These are tough times for America's newspapers, but amid the gloomy talk, the newspaper winners and the finalists are heartening examples of the high-quality journalism that can be found in all parts of the United States," said Sig Gissler, administrator of the prizes. "It's quite notable that the watchdog function of journalism is underscored in this year's awards. The watchdog still barks, and the watchdog still bites." Despite a rule change that allowed online-only news organizations to compete for Pulitzers this year for the first time, none of the 65 entries won any prizes. However, the Pulitzer Board said online content played a role in several of the winning entries. [Ed. note - I wish they'd elaborated on exactly how that content played a role] In a measure of how bad things have gotten, the Detroit paper less than a month ago cut back home delivery to three days a week. Similarly, the Metro staff that broke the Spitzer story at The New York Times has since been cut back, and Metro was eliminated as a standalone section and folded into the main news part of the paper six days a week. The Las Vegas Sun won the Pulitzer for public service for exposing a high death rate among construction workers on the Las Vegas Strip. Alexandra Berzon described how the rush to build quickly and at highly congested work sites led to deadly shortcuts. Her work led to changes in workplace conditions. "The fact that this series stopped people from dying on Las Vegas Strip construction projects is the most important part of what we did," said Managing Editor Michael J. Kelley. The Free Press was honored in the local reporting category for helping to expose an extramarital affair between the mayor and his chief aide. Kilpatrick pleaded guilty to perjury, lost his office and served 99 days in jail after the text messages made it clear he had lied under oath in denying the affair while testifying in a lawsuit. The judges also awarded a second Pulitzer in local reporting, honoring the East Valley Tribune of Mesa, Ariz., for revealing how a sheriff's focus on immigration enforcement endangered investigations of other crimes. Paul Giblin, one of the reporters who wrote the prize-winning series, was laid off in January. "It is kind of sad," Giblin said. "I wish I was still at the Tribune. I'd have a party with them right now." The only multiple winner besides The New York Times was the St. Petersburg Times. It was honored for national reporting for fact-checking what the candidates said during the 2008 White House campaign, and for feature writing for Lane DeGregory's story on a neglected girl who was unable to talk or feed herself. The presidential race also figured in the Pulitzer awarded in commentary: Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post was honored for his columns on Obama's run for the White House. The prize for editorial cartooning went to Steve Breen of The San Diego Union-Tribune, which was sold last month to a private equity firm after its advertising plunged and employees were forced to take unpaid furloughs. No Pulitzers were awarded for coverage of the biggest financial crisis since the Depression, even though five finalists � including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The New York Times � were recognized for their coverage of some aspect of the meltdown. Among them was Times columnist Paul Krugman, who was commended for his "prophetic columns" on the economic perils. In addition to winning in the breaking-news category for the Spitzer scandal, The New York Times collected Pulitzers for international reporting for its coverage of deepening U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan; for criticism, for Holland Cotter's art reviews; for feature photography, for Damon Winter's coverage of Obama's campaign; and for investigative reporting to David Barstow, for revealing how the networks used military commentators who had ties to the Pentagon or defense contractors. The five Pulitzers won by the Times are the second-highest total in the newspaper's history; it received seven in 2002, in large part for its coverage of the 9/11 attacks. The prize for explanatory reporting went to the Los Angeles Times for its coverage of the cost and effectiveness of efforts to fight wildfires across the West. In the breaking news photography category, Patrick Farrell of The Miami Herald won for his images of the humanitarian disaster that unfolded in Haiti after Hurricane Ike. "I'm walking on Cloud Nine. I'm overwhelmed, I'm humbled � it's such a huge honor," exulted Farrell, 49. But noting the cutbacks that have swept the Herald, he said: "This is the last week for a few of our colleagues. I would prefer not to have won this in this climate, but I'm just grateful." Mark Mahoney of 32,000-circulation Post-Star in Glens Falls, N.Y., received the Pulitzer in editorial writing for his pieces on government secrecy and the public's right to know. "If I'm going to win, I'm glad it's for that," Mahoney said. "I think this indicates that we really are making a difference." The Pulitzers are the most prestigious awards in journalism and are given out annually by Columbia University on the recommendation of a 19-person board. Each award carries a $10,000 prize except for the public service award, which is a gold medal. ___ On the Net: http://www.pulitzer.org http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090420/ap_on_re_us/pulitzers;_ylt=An7bo6brJ0RwM9HaC.0dynqs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJibzhkb2RrBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNDIwL3B1bGl0emVycwRjcG9zAzcEcG9zAzE0BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3BhcGVyc3dpbnB1bA--

I hope the Pulitzer Prize for the NYT translates into better ad revenew. That's where the $$$ is apparently, and it's tanking. Among them was Times columnist Paul Krugman, who was commended for his "prophetic columns" on the economic perils. I hope it's not too "prophetic"; he don't like Timmy's plan, and that's all we have to hang on to. I also saw that Jon Meacham's book on John Adams won; a great read, I've given it for graduation gifts (whether they ever read it , one wonders) Thanks.

Ron Paul: Legalize Marijuana and Reduce Crime Rep. Ron Paul declares that the federal war on drugs is a failure and legalizing marijuana would reduce the prison population and in effect the crime rate. �I think we should look at the federal drug war, and I would say the federal drug war has failed so we should reject it,� the Texas Republican, who ran for president last year, told CNN. �When I talk about changing the law, I want to go back to a constitutional approach to a problem like this, and that is through the states. �Up until 1937 there wasn�t even a law against marijuana, and at that time they just passed a law to tax it. So we�ve had an experience in this country where we didn�t have all these laws, but it was regulated by the states. "Alcohol is legalized by the federal government but it�s regulated by state laws.� Paul said he is particularly disturbed by the federal government�s efforts to override state laws allowing some people to legally obtain medicinal marijuana, as has happened in California. �They�ll pass a law that says that sick people can use it. So people who are dying with AIDS or cancer are getting benefit from marijuana. Then the federal government comes in and says we don�t care about the state law, and they just override it and put people into prison for this. �We have over 500,000 people that never committed a violent crime in prison for drug use, and there are mandatory jail sentences under these conditions. "This makes no sense. It�s so expensive, and it hasn�t achieved anything.� Paul included other drugs in the discussion when he said: �We�re creating a monstrous legal problem costing hundreds of billions of dollars and putting people in prison who should be treated as sick people. They shouldn�t be treated as criminals. �The problems we have is because the price for these drugs is about a thousand times greater than it would be� if they were legal and regulated. �We�ve created most of the problems for ourselves,� he added, �and these drug wars are a consequence of our policies.� Newsmax Ron Paul was satirized in Sacha Cohen "Bruno" film. Look it up on Youtube, very funny.

�The problems we have is because the price for these drugs is about a thousand times greater than it would be� if they were legal and regulated. Aren't jail sentences for the *dealers*, not the recreational user; which I agree should not be criminalized. Absurd.

(Evelyn) I hope the Pulitzer Prize for the NYT translates into better ad revenew. Missing a winkie? Has absolutely no connection to ad revenue. Only #'s....numbers of subscribers if not how many papers sold overall. Just like magazines. They base ad rates on forcasting a certain number of subscriptions. And TV bases ad rates on # of viewers. Web sites sell ads based on page views. Quality and awards aren't variables. It's all dependent on the number of people who use your product in some capacity.

(Evelyn) Aren't jail sentences for the *dealers*, not the recreational user In NY, you can go to jail for years, simply for possession of a relatively miniscule amount.....the Rockefeller laws. I think I mentioned in passing here they are looking to repeal them this year. No idea what drug laws are in other states.

I'm watching it play out and not sure if it's even on the national news at all, but I'm giving a heads up about the following: Jane Harman, Alberto Gonzales, illegal wiretapping, AIPAC. If nothing comes of it, so be it. If it becomes something, don't say you never heard there is a connection between all of them. Though this is all I'm mentioning for now. Want to know more, Google. :-)

It's all dependent on the number of people who use your product in some capacity. I know that....that's why they are practically giving away magazine subscriptions to increase the readership for ads.

(Me) It's all dependent on the number of people who use your product in some capacity. (Evelyn) I know that....that's why they are practically giving away magazine subscriptions to increase the readership for ads. But no one's picking up a newspaper or magazine because of awards. It's content and even more specifically, how fast they can get that content. In the case of papers, the decline is attributed to readers going online for news because it's updated faster/more frequently. They say the older demographic is the one sticking with print while all the other demos get the majority of their news/information online. Re magazines, speaking for myself, I have let all my subscriptions go because I wasn't keeping up with them anymore, it was expensive...and can read them online should I choose, where I tend to get most of my info anyway. In that respect, I'm in line with my age demographic. I do still get my NYT weekend subscription, though I mostly wonder why as I read little of the print ediition and not a lot online. I guess because I can take the NYT Magazine with me and read it over several days on buses and trains.

I've also stopped my mag sub. and the one for the Wash Post. I also read online. Going green. Bad news, I read that Borders might close. To celebrate Earth Day, I just bought a beautiful red handbag made from vegan leather. Waving to Livi~~~~

I can't take my desktop on planes or anyplace I have to wait...thus I subscribe. So are you into Kindle from amazon?

No, no Kindle for me yet. I have a work blackberry now, so I sometimes read the news and check email on it on short hops around, or waiting in the train station to go home. I forgot, I do still get Vanity Fair. I do like to take that mag on trains, though since they're so heavy, I rip them apart and take bits at a time. I do also read the free daily newspapers if I can find one. They aren't very big. Yeah, I read a while ago that Borders either was headed for or had filed bankruptcy. Or maybe they were looking for a buyer in lieu of bankruptcy if possible.

The Freddie Mac CFO was a neighbor of yours, Moon? When I saw the news this a.m., it only said Fairfax county, but I heard Vienna on the news a little while ago and one article said Hunter Mill estates. Now, this item has the makings of a potential thriller movie a la The Intl.

I heard Reston and Fairfax this morning, but I thought of you also, Moon.

There's a movie in here somewhere as well. State of Play 2? ;-) Pelosi Said She Knew Harman Was Wiretapped By Edward Epstein, CQ Staff Wed Apr 22, 1:40 pm ET Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday that she was first informed in a confidential briefing a few years ago that Rep. Jane Harman had been recorded by spy agencies, but that she couldn't tell Harman or anyone else about it. Pelosi said the briefing from intelligence agencies was usual practice in the Capitol, where top congressional leaders are always told when a member of Congress pops up during the course of secret investigations. Pelosi wouldn't comment on the substance of the briefing about Harman. "I was not in a position to raise it with Jane Harman. All they said was that she was wiretapped," said Pelosi, who said she couldn't remember if the secret briefing took place in 2005 or 2006. "When you are briefed on something it isn't your role to share it with anybody else," said Pelosi, who served on the Intelligence Committee for a decade until she entered the House Democratic leadership about six years ago. "Even if I wanted to share it with her I would not have had the liberty to share it with her," she added at a roundtable sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor. Congressional Quarterly reported April 19 that National Security Agency eavesdroppers heard Harman agreeing in 2005 to an appeal from a suspected Israeli agent to intervene in an effort to reduce espionage-related charges lodged against two former officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, Washington's most powerful pro-Israel organization. The New York Times published a similar front-page story Monday, adding that Harman was told in the conversation that Haim Saban, a wealthy Democratic donor, would threaten to withhold political contributions to Nancy Pelosi, also a California Democrat, unless Harman was tapped to head the House Intelligence panel. CQ confirmed that account in its "SpyTalk" blog Wednesday. Harman has launched a media offensive to dispute the sources' accounts, and has written to the Justice Department demanding that it release all transcripts of any recorded conversations. And Pelosi said the threat of a cutoff in donations never happened. "Haim Saban has been a friend of mine for many years," she said, adding that their friendship and political partnership persisted even though they disagreed on some issues, such as the war in Iraq. "Many, many of Jane's friends talked to me about her being named chair, but never in a threatening way," Pelosi added. The speaker defended Harman. "I have great confidence in Jane Harman. She is a patriotic American," she said. Since Pelosi named Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, as Intelligence chairman after Democrats took back the House in 2006, accounts have differed as to why Harman didn't get the post she sought. Some said it was because Pelosi and Harman differed on Iraq. Others said the two Californians had never been close. And now the latest reports raise the spectre of financial pressure on Pelosi. The speaker said none were true and that the real reason was much more mundane. Pelosi said Democratic caucus rules provide that a member can be the party's top-ranking Intelligence member for two terms. Harman had reached that limit when Democrats won the 2006 election, she said. "The only reason Jane was not chosen is because she already had two terms. It had nothing to do with wiretaps or Iraq," she said. On another topic, Pelosi reiterated her support for a "truth commission" to look into interrogation techniques used in the George W. Bush administration against suspected terrorists, but said those investigated by the panel should not get blanket immunity from possible prosecution. On Tuesday, President Obama said some officials who developed the policy for harsh interrogation could face prosecutions. "My thinking has long been that we should have a truth commission. But I think we should be more selective in granting immunity," she said. Pelosi said she supports the House Judiciary Committee looking into the interrogation issue. Some Democrats in Congress have called for impeachment proceedings against Jay Bybee, a federal appeals court judge in California, who as a Bush administration official was an author of the so-called "torture memos." Pelosi said before she decides whether to support an impeachment probe she wants more information. "It's important to get the facts from his confirmation hearings," Pelosi said, referring to President Bush's nomination of Bybee to the federal bench. Before that, Bybee had served in the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, where the memos authorizing tough interrogation techniques were written. "But I do think that the legal opinions issued by the Office of Legal Counsel did not serve our country well or represent its values," Pelosi added. http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/politics3100474;_ylt=Am81vRQ5eXPcJFBlwiAdfbCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJoOTRpcmFiBGFzc2V0A2NxLzIwMDkwNDIyL3BvbGl0aWNzMzEwMDQ3NARjcG9zAzkEcG9zAzE3BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3BlbG9zaXNhaWRzaA--

Perhaps a fashion show Livia shouldn't have missed. ;-) http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2009/04/22/2009-04-22_ratinfested_yards_site_stirs_catcalls.html

LOL, Dorine, too bad Livi didn't think of it first. ;-) Yes, he lived in Vienna, not far from me. I do wonder why he did it? In Miami, my neighbors were the sports guys. Heat, Marlins, Dolphins. Once, I was behind OJ in my local supermarket line, creeped me out. He tried to be friendly too.

(Moon) I do wonder why he did it? If it wasn't for personal reasons (nonwork related), then something is about to be disclosed about Freddie Mac. Maybe a little embezzlement on top of all the normal, everyday greed. Or it wasn't suicide but murder? Like I said, a movie. ;-)

then something is about to be disclosed about Freddie Mac. That was my first thought.

Speaking of Amazon Kindle....yeah, I'll be running right out to get one. Amazon's Kindle 2 Retails for Nearly Double Its Cost * By Patricia Resende, newsfactor.com - Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:37PM EDT http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nf/20090422/tc_nf/66123

Waving to Evelyn, Berlusconi is a genius: Italy earthquake town L'Aquila to host G8 summit: Berlusconi http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6153912.ece I'm so happy! Such a good call! The G8 protesters are stumped, they don't know what to do now. Heehee.

Just a little more of that non-lying updated 1:46 p.m. EDT, Fri October 5, 2007 Bush: 'This government does not torture' WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Friday defended his administration's methods of interrogating terrorism suspects, insisting, "This government does not torture people." [Ed. note - Um, yes, yes it seems we did.] [snip] Bush said his administration sticks to "U.S. law and our international obligations." [Ed note - Um, no, it seems we didn't] http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/05/bush.torture/index.html

From indieWire: The Collison of Politics, Celebrity and the Media: Barry Levinson Goes To �PoliWood� by Peter Knegt �In the most simplistic way, it�s really about the collison of politics, celebrity and the media,� Barry Levinson told indieWIRE about his new documentary �PoliWood,� premiering next Friday night as part of the Tribeca Film Festival. �Basically, how they collide and how they feed off one another. That�s the theme of the piece.� More specifically, the piece uses interviews with a variety of high-profile celebrities and political figures (from Anne Hathaway to Ellen Burstyn to Sting), exploring the influence Hollywood has over today�s political process. Levinson is attempting to exemplify the exceedingly thin line between politician and actor, and news and entertainment. �I think it�s interesting to watch, and it can pose a lot of questions,� Levinson said of the film in an interview earlier this week at the SoHo Grand Hotel in New York City. �Or you might just enjoy it on a level of watching all of these people navigate these channels for ninety minutes.� The film came together a few weeks before the Democratic National Convention. �There was no preconceived notion of exactly what it was going to be about,� Levinson recalled of the film�s origins. �It was simply to follow the events as they unfolded and see where that went, and then allow the piece to begin to direct itself in a way. I didn�t want to impose any ideas upon it intially. I wanted to let it breathe on its own and then see what happens. And then I began to see how these things begin to intersect with one another.� Documentary was not always something Levinson has aspired to take on. �It just came up,� he said. �I�ve always been interested in politics, I�ve always been interested in entertainment, and I�ve always been interested in the media.� Levinson has exemplfied this in much of his narrative work, from �Wag The Dog,� about a spin-doctor and a Hollywood producer who join efforts to fabricate a war in order to cover-up a presidential sex scandal, to �Man of the Year,� which folows a comedian who decides to run for president, and a computerized voting machine malfunction gets him elected. �With this film I could see what it was really like,� Levinson said in respect to his previous work.� How absurd does it, in fact, become?� What it has become, it seems, is that everything has been turned into entertainment. �That has become the rule,� Levinson explained. �Why politics has to be entertaining, I don�t know. But it has to be, because its on television all the time. So therefore, there�s an upside/downside to that, naturally. We will frivolize a lot of very important issues and we will find a way to distract from the main issues. Because sometimes a distraction is more entertaining than the real issue. So what we do is constantly move away from what�s sometimes the essentials, onto the non-essentials. Because the non-essentials are more interesting to us. You watch it happen constantly. I mean you can watch recently and see how much time has been spent on Obama shaking hand with Chavez. Was he shaking hands with him? Was he smiling? Should he have been smiling? Does that show weakness? I mean, look how much time we spent on a visual of that. That has no relevance to anything. It�s nonsense. We�ve taken these silly things that may e entertaining and made it an essential. That�s frightening.� What Levinson also finds frightening is the political division in America, where issues that should never fall into the left/right, Democrat/Republican divide, do. �I mean, the idea that education or arts in the schools has become a political issue seems insane,� he argued. �It�s like, what, we�re opposed to music programs in school? Does that have to do with being a Republican or a Democrat? We are facing a potential catastrophe in terms of our environmental issues, and it becomes a left or right issue? I always say to someone who says that no one has really confirmed that there�s global warming: �Well, guess what, what happens if there really isn�t global warming? What would be the downside? We cleaned up the environment for no reason? Oh my god! How can that be political? It became that because it�s much more entertaining.�� For �Poliwood,� the biggest challenge for Levinson was a different kind of division. �The challenge is to bring all these elements together and have some cohesiveness, without imposing too much on the piece,� he explained. �I want it to be free and loose with people meandering into things and talking about stuff. There�s a casualness about it. But at the same time, it can�t be so casual and so meandering that it�s all over the place. So you have to be able to give it a little more coherence, without ultimately beginning to bend it one way or another.� An interesting footnote to the film came a few weeks ago, when Kal Penn - best known as an actor on televison series �House� and in movies like �Harold and Kumar� and �The Namesake� - quit Hollywood to take a job at the Obama White House as Associate Director of the White House Office of Public Liaison. He�s certainly not the first celebrity turned politician, but the most recent to personify the collison at the heart of Levinson�s documentary. �I mean, look, there�s a lot of people in the entertainment business that have political aspirations and there�s nothing wrong with that,� Levinson said when asked to comment on Penn. �At the end of the day, no matter what field you�re in, sometimes you�re a concerned citizen. Sometimes you can work within the government and you think that�s a way to be helpful, then I think that�s great.� �Poliwood� screens Friday, May 1, 6:00 pm at the BMCC Tribeca Performing Arts Center. Following the screening, MSNBC political analyst Lawrence O�Donnell will lead a discussion about this convergence of politics and Hollywood with Levinson and actors Josh Lucas, Rachael Leigh Cook, Tim Daly, Lynn Whitfield, Tony Goldwyn, Robert Davi and Matthew Modine, who all appear in the film. http://www.indiewire.com/article/the_collison_of_politics_celebrity_and_the_media_barry_levinson_on_his_poli/pem

I know some people won't bother to click on the link for whatever reason, but watching the Dublin FF interview, with its mention of Abba, reminded me of this Daily Show piece on "Socialism in Sweden." Benny is interviewed in part 2, but you should watch both. They are a riot. http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=225113&title=The-Stockholm-Syndrome http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=225126&title=The-Stockholm-Syndrome-Pt.-2

Monday, April 27, 2009 Karl Rove, conservative Republicans, and Susan Collins opposed money spent on pandemic preparedness by John Aravosis (DC) on 4/27/2009 10:01:00 AM Now that we're in the middle of a public health emergency, the media might want to be asking the Republicans some questions about this: When House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who has long championed investment in pandemic preparation, included roughly $900 million for that purpose in this year's emergency stimulus bill, he was ridiculed by conservative operatives and congressional Republicans.... [T]he arguments former White House political czar Karl Rove advanced in February to frame opposition to the stimulus package Obey crafted in the House.... Rove specifically complained that Obey's proposal included "$462 million for the Centers for Disease Control, and $900 million for pandemic flu preparations." Who helped lead the charge against emergency disease preparedness in the Senate? None other than Maine Republican Susan Collins, who Joe has always argued is a conservative in moderate's clothing: Famously, Maine Senator Susan Collins, the supposedly moderate Republican who demanded cuts in health care spending in exchange for her support of a watered-down version of the stimulus, fumed about the pandemic funding: "Does it belong in this bill? Should we have $870 million in this bill No, we should not." Even now, Collins continues to use her official website to highlight the fact that she led the fight to strip the pandemic preparedness money out of the Senate's version of the stimulus measure. This part is especially bad: Obey and other advocates for the spending argued, correctly, that a pandemic hitting in the midst of an economic downturn could turn a recession into something far worse -- with workers ordered to remain in their homes, workplaces shuttered to avoid the spread of disease, transportation systems grinding to a halt and demand for emergency services and public health interventions skyrocketing. Indeed, they suggested, pandemic preparation was essential to any responsible plan for renewing the U.S. economy.

From AOL news: No Saudi Women Allowed on Television, in Print The same Saudi Arabian clerics who two months ago said it was okay for men to marry 10-year-old girls are now trying to ban ALL women from appearing in print and TV media. In a letter to new Information Minister Abdul Aziz al-Khoja the clerics called images of women in popular newspapers and magazines "obscene," and decried music and dancing on television. Images of women on television, said the clerics, are "a sign of growing 'deviant thought,'" whatever that means. The letter said the country was trying to "westernize" Saudi women by "reducing their rights to a question of removing veils, wearing makeup and mixing with men ... There is no doubt that this is religiously impermissible." We wonder what images the media will use to replace the ones of women. Is there a long waiting list of male models in Saudi Arabia waiting to get their big break? Saudi women lack a variety of basic rights, including the ability to drive cars. And even Arab women who come to the U.S. find it difficult to take advantage of their relaxed rights. In Dearborn, Mich., which has the largest Arab-American population in the U.S., many worry about whether they're following the lifestyle of a good Muslim woman by going out unaccompanied by a male or listening to the radio. There may be hope in sight. Saudi King Abdullah Bin Abdul-Aziz earlier this month appointed the first woman to a ministerial post. And Arab females both here and in the Middle East are starting to have a say in what goes on in their culture -- on blogs. Some, like blogger Saudi Eve, are even as bold as to write about romance and religion. A whole list of others, some in English and other in Arabic, can be found here: http://saudiblogs.blogspot.com/

Another reason my DH is proud to be Italian: Cruise ship fends off pirate attack with gunfire An Italian cruise ship with 1,500 people on board fended off a pirate attack far off the coast of Somalia when its Israeli private security forces exchanged fire with the bandits. A great story. Read it here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090426/ap_on_re_eu/piracy

Interestingly, their private security was Israeli.

Yeah....the mayor didn't know. I'm sure there's a bridge someone can sell me. Apparently the White House, for all their computer savvy, has never heard of Photoshop. :-((((( I'm so glad I wasn't anywhere near there to see it. I'd probably have freaked. Those poor people down there. Planes Create 'Total Panic' in Manhattan By SARA KUGLER,AP posted: 1 HOUR 1 MINUTE AGO http://news.aol.com/article/low-flying-planes-create-total-panic/447862?icid=webmail|wbml-aol|dl3|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Flow-flying-planes-create-total-panic%2F447862

That was in bad taste. Thanks, Dorine! So Mari, PA now has a new Democratic senator?

He's pulling a Lieberman, but is doing it ahead of time rather than look like the sore loser Lieberman was. At least he's leaping all the way across the aisle rather than sitting on the philosophical middle (Independent), not that I'd necessarily have a problem with that. But he was going to lose the Repub primary big, from the way it was looking.

Analysis: Specter defection shrinks GOP's reach By CHARLES BABINGTON � 29 minutes ago WASHINGTON (AP) � With Sen. Arlen Specter's switch to the Democrats, the Republican Party is in serious danger of being viewed as strictly Southern and solidly conservative, an identity that might take years to overcome. Specter's move, which rocked Congress and the political world Tuesday, is the latest blow to Republicans, especially in the Northeast where the GOP has been reduced to a scant presence in the House and a dwindling influence in the Senate. But his defection has symbolic and immediate ramifications for the GOP nationwide. While Barack Obama was cruising to the White House last fall, Republicans were losing long-held Senate seats in Alaska, New Mexico, North Carolina and Virginia. A moderate Republican lost his seat in Oregon, and the same seems almost certain to happen when Minnesota's long recount is settled. In the House, Republicans have suffered deep losses in the last two elections, especially in the Northeast. Congressional Republicans' base is shrinking, leaving them with strongholds only in the South and parts of the mountain West. With the departure of each centrist, including Pennsylvania's Specter, the party also appears more firmly right-of-center. For the foreseeable future, that is a recipe for continued minority status in Congress and for uphill bids for the presidency. "By the process of subtraction, the Republican Party is getting more conservative," said Rutgers University political scientist Ross Baker. "They are losing disaffected people. Obama's candidacy put that into overdrive." In the 1980s and early 1990s, the nation's political realignment favored the GOP. Voters in many of the 11 former Confederate states ousted Democrats by the dozens, no longer accepting the old odd-bedfellows alliance of Southern conservatives and more dominant Northern liberals. With the Northeast still home to many GOP centrists, or "Rockefeller Republicans," the realignment pinched Democrats hard. In more recent years, however, the tide has reversed. Moderate-to-liberal voters in the Northeast and Pacific West felt increasingly at odds with the national Republican Party, and they began electing more Democrats to local and federal posts. The result is a shrinking and increasingly right-leaning GOP. Specter said Tuesday, "the Republican Party has moved farther and farther to the right." "I've found myself increasingly at odds with the Republican philosophy," he said. Still reeling from their 2008 losses, Republican leaders now have new problems to confront.

(Dorine)He's pulling a Lieberman, but is doing it ahead of time rather than look like the sore loser Lieberman was. At least he's leaping all the way across the aisle rather than sitting on the philosophical middle (Independent), not that I'd necessarily have a problem with that. That's not fair (am I shocked??;-) Joe Liberman does caucus with the Dems.

(Dorine) He's pulling a Lieberman, but is doing it ahead of time rather than look like the sore loser Lieberman was. But what guarantees are there that he'll win a Dem primary? Could be a deal was made that he'll run unopposed on the Dem slate. At least he's leaping all the way across the aisle rather than sitting on the philosophical middle (Independent) He says it is philosophical, but is it? How "at odds" has he been in the past, oh, eight years with the Admin?

(Karen).. "at odds" has he been in the past, oh, eight years with the Admin? His last election wasn't exactly a landslide...lots of Republican $$$$$ went into his coffer to make it. Anyway, at 79 he should hang it up; let a young'un take over.

Look's like this journalist was looking into a crystal ball... " You did beat Pat Toomey in a primary back in 2004, by a mere two points, but I doubt that would happen again, if only because so many moderate Pennsylvanians in recent years have left the GOP and signed up with the Democrats. Hundreds of thousands have switched teams. Those were your people; in 2010, they won�t be eligible to participate in the primary and help you survive another blood feud." " And some liberals are probably still ticked about the way you questioned Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings in 1991 (although today�s 35-year-old Democratic voter probably couldn�t care less about that episode, since said voter was only in high school at the time)." "But if you really want to win another six-year term in 2010, keep your title as Pennsylvania�s senior senator, and hike that tenure percentage to 42 at the age of 86, you�ve got to weigh the obvious benefits of renouncing your troubled affiliation with the GOP. Think opportunistically, just as you did way back in �65, when you left the Democrats because you saw the opening to run for Philadelphia D.A. as a Republican. " LOL. He does seem to be a little opportunistic chameleon. And will be 86 at the end of his next term as senator! http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/americandebate/40957872.html

I've generally been lukewarm on Spector, agreeing with him on a number of things, disagreeing on others. Am sure I voted for him at some point when I lived in PA. When he was DA of Philly, maybe. He is a moderate, and I think he honestly believes the R party has become too radical right. BTW, Evelyn, he went to U OK (before moving on to U of P). My son just texted me that they have 4 "probable" cases of swine flu at UD. They are waiting for CDC confirmation, and are setting up add'l health clinics. The 4 kids appear to have "mild" symptoms and will recover, thank God.

(Karen) Could be a deal was made that he'll run unopposed on the Dem slate. Appears so. http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/labor/pa-gov-rendell-promised-specter-hed-be-unopposed-in-dem-primary/#comments (Evelyn) Look's like this journalist was looking into a crystal ball... I only skimmed through that article initially....that print was practically microscopic...that's painful to try to read! ;-) Did he also mention whether his crystal ball said that perhaps it was because he's been trailing Toomey by double digits for weeks and was most assuredly going to lose the Rep primary unless there was a massive turnaround? Which probably wasn't going to happen, due to in part, what he says above about voters switching parties themselves. Was going to post other links to stories here, but I think all the recent ones are about Specter and are interesting on their own and together. Just go here: http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/

His last election wasn't exactly a landslide...lots of Republican $$$$$ went into his coffer to make it. *cough* Lieberman *cough*

What's the difference between this and any other flu? (Suppose I need to read up more on it) More easily transmitted? I never understood the West Nile Virus stuff, too. I'm guessing Swine Flu is not carried by birds or mosquitos, eliminating the need to be sprayed on with chemicals like we were for West Nile (here anyway).

Was just listening to the news and they said the biggest diff is that there's no vaccine for this one. They did point out that thousands of people die here each year from regular old flu.

(Mari)I've generally been lukewarm on Spector, agreeing with him on a number of things, disagreeing on others. "Ditto" I'm a moderate, so generally I liked him, (esp on Anita Hill;-) But still think he's too old to run again. His last election wasn't exactly a landslide...lots of Republican $$$$$ went into his coffer to make it. (Dorine)*cough* Lieberman *cough* LOL...Including my piddling pesos.

That's kind of what I'm wondering. Is it just an "off-season" flu that happens to have no vaccine? I'm curious if this just transmits faster, because otherwise, I don't see the reason this would be big news. There was something really odd and seemingly quite virulent going around in Jan, a bunch of people I know got it as well as people they worked with, but it wasn't in the news and it didn't appear to be a flu. Literally virtually everyone I've ever known has gotten sick after getting the flu shot (which is why I don't and haven't gotten the flu anyway). I know a lot of people who don't get the flu shot and don't get sick either for whatever reason. It's all pretty random I think.

Sweet! Photoshop would've been a tad cheaper. Apr 29, 2009 9:11 am US/Eastern FAA Memo: Feds Knew NYC Flyover Would Cause Panic Threatened Federal Sanctions Against NYPD, Secret Service, FBI & Mayor's Office If Secret Ever Got Out Furious Obama Apologizes: "It Will Never Happen Again" CBS News Interactive: Sept. 11 And Since Reporting Marcia Kramer NEW YORK (CBS) ― A furious President Barack Obama ordered an internal review of Monday's low-flying photo op over the Statue of Liberty. CBS 2 HD has discovered the feds will have plenty to question. Federal officials knew that sending two fighter jets and Air Force One to buzz ground zero and Lady Liberty might set off nightmarish fears of a 9/11 replay, but they still ordered the photo-op kept secret from the public. In a memo obtained by CBS 2 HD the Federal Aviation Administration's James Johnston said the agency was aware of "the possibility of public concern regarding DOD (Department of Defense) aircraft flying at low altitudes" in an around New York City. But they demanded total secrecy from the NYPD, the Secret Service, the FBI and even the mayor's office and threatened federal sanctions if the secret got out. What are your feelings on federal officials demanding the NYC flyover be kept secret by the NYPD and the mayor's office? "To say that it should not be made public knowing that it might scare people it's just confounding," Sen. Charles Schumer said. "It's what gives Washington and government a bad name. It's sheer stupidity." The flyover -- apparently ordered by the White House Office of Military Affairs so it would have souvenir photos of Air Force One with the Statue of Liberty in the background -- had President Obama seeing red. He ordered a probe and apologized. "It was a mistake. It will never happen again," President Obama said. The cost of the frivolous flight was about $60,000 an hour and that was just for Air Force One. That doesn't include the cost of the two F-16s that came along. The flight by the VC-25, a modified Boeing Co. 747, and two F-16 fighter jets cost $328,835, Air Force spokeswoman Vicki Stein said. That includes $300,658 for the larger plane, which flew a three-hour mission, and about $28,178 for the F-16 jets, which flew 1.8 hours each, Stein said in an e-mailed statement. The NYPD was so upset about the demand for secrecy that Police Commissioner Ray Kelly vowed never to follow such a directive again and he accused the feds of inciting fears of a 9/11 replay. "Did it show an insensitivity to the psychic wounds New York City has after 9/11? Absolutely. No questions about it. It was quite insensitive," Kelly said. The mayoral aide who neglected to tell Mayor Michael Bloomberg about it was reprimanded. http://wcbstv.com/topstories/air.force.one.2.996457.html

(Mari) He is a moderate, and I think he honestly believes the R party has become too radical right. Saw a clip of his announcement yesterday and the opportunism is quite evident in this shocking statement:I am not prepared to have my 29-year record in the United States Senate decided by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate--not prepared to have that record decided by that jury, the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate.The mayoral aide who neglected to tell Mayor Michael Bloomberg about it was reprimanded. LOL! The guy was keeping it a secret, as required. ;-)

(Karen)the opportunism is quite evident in this shocking statement Hey, at 117 years old, I guess he figures he's beyond having to BS, LOL! What I meant by my earlier statement is that his 30-year record in the Senate shows genuine and clear differences with where the R Party has been headed. Yes, his switch is opportunistic--so what? It's not inconsistent with his record, so I have no problem with it. PA lost over 200,000 registered Republicans to the Dems during the last election--most of them from the moderate Philly suburbs. That group is Specter's bread and butter. If those moderates are no longer in the Party, then he has no shot at winning a Republican primary. Plus Michael Steele threatened to cut off Party campaign funds after Spector voted for the stimulus bill. Wow.

Dorine, you asked what's different about this flu. From Rear Adm. Anne Schuchat, CDC's interim science and public health deputy direct, speaking to the Senate Homeland Security Committee: She said the strain is particularly worrisome because "it's a virus that hasn't been around before. The general population doesn't have immunity from it." People have various levels of protection against other more common types of flu because they are exposed to it over time, and that protection accumulates. She suggested that some older people might have more resistance to this particular strain than younger people because its traits might resemble outbreaks of decades ago.

Thanks, Mari. That does make sense.

(Mari) They did point out that thousands of people die here each year from regular old flu. I know. They're acting like there's a Typhoid Maria epidemic or similar.

That's why I keep asking why this is so special. WHO has up'd their pandemic scale to 5, the highest it could go. And apparently it had never been at 4 til they raised it yesterday or the day before. Mubarek ordered all the pigs slaughtered in Egypt (how biblical!) to prevent the spread, but I wondered how he knew they had anything to spread. The farmers all ganged up and stopped the govt trucks coming to get the animals and turned them away saying they were poor and uneducated and they were coming to take all they had to make a living. The trucks were turned away last I read. Not sure how many farms that happened on. What an incredible waste of food. I had how people kill animals senselessly without blinking. I could see if this is Ebola or similar, but only one person in the US has died so far.

David Broder in the WASHINGTON POST Specter the Defector An opportunistic move by one of the most opportunistic politicians of modern times. But I haven't signed on the WP. Anybody else have it?

Sorry

Specter the Defector By David S. Broder Thursday, April 30, 2009 It's been more than four decades since Arlen Specter, senator from Pennsylvania, earned the nickname "Specter the Defector." With his decision this week to leave the Republican Party, he confirmed that it is indeed an accurate description of his political character. I was a kid reporter for the New York Times back in 1965, when Specter's flip-flopping first attracted attention, and the report I filed recounts the circumstances that led to his unflattering nickname. Specter, then a Democrat, had been an assistant district attorney in Philadelphia, and he harbored an ambition to run against his lackluster boss, James Crumlish. The Democratic bosses of Philadelphia were not encouraging Specter because, as one of them told me, "We don't want another young Tom Dewey," the reform-minded New York prosecutor who launched himself into the governorship and two presidential nominations by sending a string of prominent officeholders of both parties off to jail. So Specter, with the encouragement of such prominent Pennsylvania Republicans as Sen. Hugh Scott and Gov. William Scranton, said he would run against Crumlish on the GOP ticket. To hedge his bets, and to help himself gain Democratic votes, he waited until he won the race to change his party registration. Over the decades since, Specter has become one of the senior Republican senators and the best Republican vote-getter in Pennsylvania. But his frequent defections from GOP orthodoxy, not just on abortion but also on labor issues, taxes and spending, have made him vulnerable to challenge in the state's Republican primary. Former representative Pat Toomey, a right-wing ideologue, came close to upsetting Specter in the 2004 primary, and next year, Toomey looked to be a better-than-even-money bet to knock off the incumbent. On one level, Specter's decision is symptomatic of the narrowing of the GOP spectrum, a sign of the increasing dominance of that shrunken party by its most conservative, Southern-accented members. There are no Republican House members left in New England. A traditionally Republican House seat in Upstate New York has flipped to the Democrats, and both coasts, the Southwest and the upper Midwest are increasingly voting for Democrats. That is why Republicans have lost their majority and their veto power over legislation in the House and why they may soon lose the ability to filibuster and delay Democratic measures in the Senate, after Specter's switch and once Al Franken finally claims the Minnesota seat. But much as Specter's decision reflects an increasingly serious weakness in the Republican Party, there is no escaping the fact that it is also an opportunistic move by one of the most opportunistic politicians of modern times. The one consistency in the history of Arlen Specter has been his willingness to do whatever will best protect and advance the career of Arlen Specter. In 2004, when some in the GOP caucus challenged his elevation to the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Specter assured them that he would not use the post to block any of President Bush's Supreme Court nominees. And despite his sometimes liberal record, he voted for both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. Just a few weeks ago, when he was still calculating how he might survive a Republican primary against Toomey, he announced that -- despite his friendship with labor -- he would not support the so-called card check legislation that is the No. 1 priority of the unions. This is the man who now has the strongest claim upon the Democratic nomination in Pennsylvania. Specter has been welcomed to the Democratic Party by President Obama and Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, the most influential Democrat in Harrisburg. That makes it unlikely that Specter will face any serious challenge in next year's Senate primary. And, if his health holds up, he will be a strong favorite against Toomey in the November election. So, once again, Specter is likely to reap political rewards from his maneuvering. But the Democrats should be open-eyed about what they are gaining from his return to his original political home. Specter's history shouts the lesson that he will stick with you only as long as it serves his own interests -- and not a day longer. davidbroder@washpost.com Nice guy, huh?

(Evelyn) Nice guy, huh? Specter, I'm guessing you mean.

Nice guy, huh? When did he ever give that appearance? Certainly not when he was questioning Anita Hill? The one consistency in the history of Arlen Specter has been his willingness to do whatever will best protect and advance the career of Arlen Specter. I think the Pa Dems should run their own candidate and show this slimeball the door. He's shown he has no principles. Enough is enough. The world does not revolve around Arlen Specter.

(Karen)I think the Pa Dems should run their own candidate They certainly won't get any opposition from the Repubs in Pa...they're a dying breed up there.

A politician who's an opportunist? Shocking!;-)

Didn't realize today was the anniversary of "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq. I had to LOL at this exchange between John Cole, the NYT ombudsman and the Public Editor. Potato - Potatoe? http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=20658

This "manufacturered" news stuff has got to stop. All to fill the airways of a 24-hr news cycle. From the AP: Swine flu may be less potent than first feared The swine flu outbreak that has alarmed the world for a week now appears less ominous, with the virus showing little staying power in the hardest-hit cities and scientists suggesting it lacks the genetic fortitude of past killer bugs. President Barack Obama even voiced hope Friday that it may turn out to be no more harmful than the average seasonal flu. In New York City, which has the most confirmed swine flu cases in the U.S. with 49, swine flu has not spread far beyond cases linked to one Catholic school. In Mexico, the epicenter of the outbreak, very few relatives of flu victims seem to have caught it. A flu expert said he sees no reason to believe the virus is particularly lethal. And a federal scientist said the germ's genetic makeup lacks some traits seen in the deadly 1918 flu pandemic strain and the more recent killer bird flu. Still, it was too soon to be certain what the swine flu virus will do. Experts say the only wise course is to prepare for the worst. But in a world that's been rattled by the specter of a global pandemic, glimmers of hope were more than welcome Friday. "It may turn out that H1N1 runs its course like ordinary flus, in which case we will have prepared and we won't need all these preparations," Obama said, using the flu's scientific name. The president stressed the government was still taking the virus very seriously, adding that even if this round turns out to be mild, the bug could return in a deadlier form during the next flu season. New York officials said after a week of monitoring the disease that the city's outbreak gives little sign of spreading beyond a few pockets or getting more dangerous. All but two of the city's confirmed cases so far involve people associated with the high school where the local outbreak began and where several students had recently returned from Mexico. More than 1,000 students, parents and faculty there reported flu symptoms over just a few days last month. But since then, only a handful of new infections have been reported � only eight students since last Sunday. Almost everyone who became ill before then are either recovering or already well. The school, which was closed this past week, is scheduled to reopen Monday. No new confirmed cases were identified in the city on Friday, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the outbreak in New York had so far proved to be "a relatively minor annoyance." In Mexico, where swine flu has killed at least 15 people and the confirmed case count has surpassed 300, the health secretary said few of the relatives of 86 suspected swine flu patients had caught the virus. Only four of the 219 relatives surveyed turned up as probable cases. As recently as Wednesday, Mexican authorities said there were 168 suspected swine flu deaths in the country and almost 2,500 suspected cases. The officials have stopped updating that number and say those totals may have even been inflated. Mexico shut down all but essential government services and private businesses Friday, the start of a five-day shutdown that includes a holiday weekend. Authorities there will use the break to determine whether emergency measures can be eased. In the Mexican capital, there were no reports of deaths overnight � the first time that has happened since the emergency was declared a week ago, said Mayor Marcelo Ebrard. "This isn't to say we are lowering our guard or we think we no longer have problems," Ebrard said. "But we're moving in the right direction." The U.S. case count rose to 155 on Friday, based on federal and state counts, although state laboratory operators believe the number is higher because they are not testing all suspected cases. Worldwide, the total confirmed cases neared 600, although that number is also believed to be much larger. Besides the U.S. and Mexico, the virus has been detected in Canada, New Zealand, China, Israel and eight European nations. There were still plenty of signs Friday of worldwide concern. China decided to suspend flights from Mexico to Shanghai because of a case of swine flu confirmed in a flight from Mexico, China's state-run Xinhua News Agency reported. And in Hong Kong, hundreds of hotel guests and workers were quarantined after a tourist from Mexico tested positive for swine flu, Asia's first confirmed case. Evoking the 2003 SARS outbreak, workers in protective suits and masks wiped down tables, floors and windows. Guests at the hotel waved to photographers from their windows. Scientists looking closely at the H1N1 virus itself have found some encouraging news, said Nancy Cox, flu chief at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its genetic makeup doesn't show specific traits that showed up in the 1918 pandemic virus, which killed about 40 million to 50 million people worldwide. "However, we know that there is a great deal that we do not understand about the virulence of the 1918 virus or other influenza viruses" that caused serious illnesses, Cox said. "So we are continuing to learn." She told The Associated Press that the swine flu virus also lacked genetic traits associated with the virulence of the bird flu virus, which grabbed headlines a few years ago and has killed 250 people, mostly in Asia. Researchers will get a better idea of how dangerous this virus is over the next week to 10 days, said Peter Palese, a leading flu researcher with Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. So far in the United States, he said, the virus appears to look and behave like the garden-variety flus that strike every winter. "There is no real reason to believe this is a more serious strain," he said. Palese said many adults probably have immune systems primed to handle the virus because it is so similar to another common flu strain. As for why the illness has predominantly affected children and teenagers in New York, Palese said older people probably have more antibodies from exposure to similar types of flu that help them fight off infection. "The virus is so close," he said. In the United States, most of the people with swine flu have been treated at home. Only nine people are known to have ended up in the hospital, though officials suspect there are more. In Mexico, officials have voiced optimism for two days that the worst may be over. But Dr. Scott F. Dowell of the CDC said it's hard to know whether the outbreak is easing up in Mexico. "They're still seeing plenty of cases," Dowell said. He said outbreaks in any given area might be relatively brief, so that they may seem to be ending in some areas that had a lot of illness a few weeks ago. But cases are occurring elsewhere, and national numbers in Mexico are not abating, he said. A top Mexican medical officer questioned the World Health Organization's handling of the early signs of the swine flu scare, suggesting Thursday that a regional arm of the WHO had taken too long to notify WHO headquarters of about a unusually late rash of flu cases in Mexico. The regional agency, however, provided a timeline to the AP suggesting it was Mexico that failed to respond to its request to alert other nations to the first hints of the outbreak. The Mexican official, chief epidemiologist Dr. Miguel Angel Lezana, backtracked Friday, telling Radio Formula: "There was no delay by the Mexican authorities, nor was there any by the World Health Organization." In the U.S., Obama said efforts were focused on identifying people who have the flu, getting medical help to the right places and providing clear advice to state and local officials and the public. The president also said the U.S. government is working to produce a vaccine down the road, developing clear guidelines for school closings and trying to ensure businesses cooperate with workers who run out of sick leave. He pointed out that regular seasonal flus kill about 36,000 people in the United States in an average year and send 200,000 to the hospital. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090501/ap_on_he_me/med_swine_flu Personally, I preferred Stephen Colbert's report on the outbreak of donkey flu. ;-)

There was a kind of snarky piece in the Metro paper today about the flu (swine and other animal named) that I wanted to see if I could find online to post here. I, too, thought the reaction seemed so over the top compared to what was happening. It's why I kept asking what was supposed to be so special about this, like it was the second coming of the plague. Hillary's a busy, busy bee. Her Rival Now Her Boss, Clinton Settles Into New Role By MARK LANDLER Published: May 1, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/world/02clinton.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Buffett dispenses gloom at Berkshire fest Reuters By Jonathan Stempel And Lilla Zuill Sat May 2, 5:07 pm ET OMAHA, Nebraska (Reuters) – Warren Buffett told a record crowd at a somber annual meeting of his Berkshire Hathaway Inc that first-quarter operating profit fell and the company's book value declined 6 percent, as the recession hurt many of the company's businesses and investments. Operating profit fell about 12 percent from a year earlier to $1.7 billion, as most of Berkshire's businesses were "basically down," Buffett told an estimated 35,000 people at the meeting in downtown Omaha. The decline in book value results in part from falling stock prices and higher losses on derivatives contracts, and comes on top of a 9.6 percent decline last year, the biggest drop since Buffett began running the company in 1965. Buffett acknowledged that Berkshire will probably lose money on derivatives tied to the credit quality of junk bonds, though he still expects to make money on a much larger and longer-term derivatives bet that stock prices will rise. Berkshire's cash stake fell to about $22.7 billion on March 31 from $25.5 billion at year end, Buffett said. Berkshire expects to report results on May 8. The outlook punctuated a meeting that had a decidedly more serious and somber tone from years past as many investors expressed worries about the economy, Berkshire's investments, and how long the 78-year-old Buffett plans to stay on the job. Half the questions were pre-screened by journalists, providing a tougher and more substantive dialogue with Buffett and his 85-year-old vice chairman, Charlie Munger. Berkshire's stock has fallen 39 percent since December 2007, but Buffett said no stock buybacks are planned because Berkshire's share price is not "demonstrably below" the company's intrinsic value. Profit fell 62 percent last year. Buffett offered a gloomy forecast for parts of the economy and Berkshire itself, saying some units are laying off workers as managers "look at the reality of the current situation." He also said massive federal efforts to stimulate activity could pay off, at a possible cost of higher inflation. "It has been a very extraordinary year," Buffett said. "When the American public pulls back the way they have, the government does need to step in.... It is the right thing to do, but it won't be a free ride." DERIVATIVES Buffett said housing prices have yet to stabilize broadly, that retailers may be under pressure for a "considerable period of time," and that he would not buy most U.S. newspaper companies "at any price." He also said that in insurance, which comprises about half of Berkshire's operations, the earnings power "was not as good last year as normal" and "won't be as good this year." Buffett had transformed Berkshire from a failing textile maker into a company with close to 80 businesses that sell such things as Geico car insurance, paint, ice cream and underwear. Buffett is often considered the world's greatest investor, but recent missteps have prompted speculation the world's second-richest person has lost his touch. Berkshire still has three internal candidates to replace him as chief executive, including one the board could appoint immediately if the occasion arose. Buffett said the four candidates to replace him as chief investment officer failed in 2008 to outperform the Standard & Poor's 500, which fell 38 percent that year. But he said the candidates' performance has been "modestly to significantly better than average" over 10 years, and that he was confident they could repeat that in the next 10 years. Marc Rabinov, a shareholder from Melbourne, Australia, who said he was attending his 13th meeting, called succession a "big problem." But he added: "They are very good at being able to assess character, and that's the most important thing about who replaces him." Much of the worry about Berkshire has focused on Buffett's use of derivatives in making long-term bets on the direction of stocks and junk bonds, and which have so far resulted in billions of dollars of paper losses. While Buffett still expects the contracts tied to equity stock indexes to make money, he said "we have run into far more bankruptcies in the last year than is normal." He said he now expects the contracts tied to credit defaults, which mature between 2009 and 2013, will show a loss before investment income, and perhaps after as well. Buffett distinguishes his derivatives from others, given that he collects billions of dollars of premiums upfront to invest and posts little collateral. He called other derivatives "a danger to the system. There is no question about that." CONFIDENCE IN BANKS Buffett expressed confidence in Wells Fargo & Co, one of Berkshire's biggest investments, saying it has "by far the best competitive position" of any large U.S. bank. He noted that Wells Fargo shares fell below $9 earlier this year, and that at that price, "If I had (to) put all of my net worth into stock, that would be the stock." The bank's shares closed Friday at $19.61. Buffett added that if he wanted to turn Berkshire into a bank holding company, "I would love to buy all of US Bancorp, or I would love to buy all of Wells." He also defended Berkshire's roughly 20 percent stake in Moody's Corp, and said the credit rating agency "made a huge mistake" but was not alone in failing to foresee the housing and credit crisis. He also said "the rating agency business is probably still a good business." Buffett also said Berkshire can weather its recent loss of its "triple-A" credit ratings from Moody's and Fitch ratings. "The 'triple-A' is not going to be material to Berkshire," he said, "but it still irritates me." While declining to name candidates to replace him as chief executive officer and chief investment officer, Buffett said "it would be impossible" to replace Ajit Jain, who runs much of his insurance businesses and whom investors believe is a CEO contender. "We won't find a substitute for him," Buffett said. Buffett also said that while Berkshire is less nimble than when it was smaller, "our sustainable competitive advantage is we have a culture and business model that people would find very, very difficult to copy." Munger added that "the stupidity in the management practices of the rest of the corporate world" will likely benefit Berkshire in the future. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel and Lilla Zuill, editing by Vicki Allen) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090502/bs_nm/us_berkshire

Tsk, tsk on Silvio. Berlusconi's wife wants divorce: reports AFP by Ljubomir Milasin Ljubomir Milasin – 1 hr 14 mins ago ROME (AFP) – Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's long-suffering wife Veronica Lario is to seek a divorce after running out of patience with his roving eye, newspapers reported on Sunday. The 72-year-old Berlusconi himself refused to comment on the details of the reports but acknowledged that he was going through a "painful" period in his private life after nearly 30 years of marriage. A government source later stressed that Berlusconi had not been asked to react to "a concrete event, such as divorce papers". "Veronica's choice: Farewell Silvio," said the frontpage headline of La Stampa while the rival la Repubblica led with the headline: "I've decided, I want a divorce," with both papers quoting close friends. The two papers both said that Lario had contacted a divorce lawyer and given instructions to proceed towards a separation as quickly as possible. Italian news agency ANSA later echoed the reports. The reports said she had been particularly infuriated by her husband's decision to attend an 18th birthday party in Naples last week for the blonde daughter of one of his business associates even though he never went to any of his own children's coming-of-age parties. "My marriage is over. I can't stay with someone who cavorts with minors," Lario was quoted as saying by one of her friends. "I read in the papers about how he has been hanging around a minor -- because he must have known her before she was 18 -- and how she called him 'Papa' and about their meetings in Rome and Milan. "This is no longer acceptable. How can I stay with such a man," she was quoted as saying in La Stampa. The reports come only three days after Lario wrote an open letter to newspapers saying that her husband's well-known penchant for pretty women was a source of "suffering". "I want it to be clear that I and my children are the victims and not accomplices in this situation. We must put up with it and that makes us suffer," she wrote in a letter splashed across the Italian press. The letter, the second such public outburst from Veronica, dealt mainly with Berlusconi's choice of candidates from his People of Freedom party to stand in European Union elections set for June. Some are reportedly pretty young women with no political experience, including a television actress and a former Miss Italy candidate. Berlusconi had reacted to the letter by saying his wife should not believe the "left-wing press" but he acknowledged on Sunday that his marriage was going through a rocky period. "This is a painful personal episode which should remain private and it does not seem to me to be right to be talking about it," he told the Italian media. Opposition reaction was swift and blunt. Said Mario Adinolfi, a member of the main opposition Democratic Party's ruling council: "Let's leave the hypocrisy behind and say it clearly: Berlusconi's divorce is a political issue and an opportunity for the PD. "The person who knows him best says 'he's not right' or 'he is cavorting with minors'. "Can you imagine (US President Barack) Obama hit with such a blow by Michelle, or (French counterpart Nicolas) Sarkozy suffering in the same way from Carla Bruni, without any public and political debate?" The couple married in 1980 and have three children, all in their 20s. The 52-year-old Lario is a former stage actress who is 20 years Berlusconi's junior and his second wife. The pair, who are rarely seen in public together, have long had a tempestuous relationship. In January 2007, Berlusconi issued a public apology to Lario after she learned through the press of his verbal dalliance with a pretty young lawmaker. "Please forgive me, and take this public testimony... as an act of love, one among many," he said after Lario wrote an open letter to the daily La Repubblica demanding he show contrition. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090503/ts_afp/italypoliticsberlusconipeople_20090503200706

I too feel strongly about this and sincerely hope some good comes out of Joanna's meeting with Gordon and that he hasn't given a load of the Government spin. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8036036.stm

I have great respect for the Gurkhus who have always fought bravely in the British army...but why does that brigade want to settle in the UK? Political asylum?

I have always believed political asylum to be their reason for wanting to settle in the UK. I can accept the Government doesn't want to 'open the flood gates' but these guys fought alongside the UK army risking their lives for the UK. The Government have allowed asylum to less worthy cases.

(Sue) I have always believed political asylum to be their reason for wanting to settle in the UK. I can find absolutely nothing to this effect. The word asylum enters into discussions only because the case goes before the "Immigration and Asylum Board." From my gleanings, the basis of this movement has to do with your nationalized benefits (health care, etc.), which they want (and most would consider they've earned) but that the rules were changed, making it impossible for most Ghurkas (and there aren't many anymore) to meet. The courts overturned that law, but the government has yet to act on it. There seems to be widespread support for honoring the Ghurkas' history and sacrifice, so I would imagine there will be a satisfactory result. Read that Ghurkas protected Harry in Afghanistan just recently.

(Sue) I have always believed political asylum to be their reason for wanting to settle in the UK. I can find absolutely nothing to this effect. The word asylum enters into discussions only because the case goes before the "Immigration and Asylum Board." My bad then. I just believe these guys have fought for the UK (my country) and shouldn't be so easily sidelined as seems to be the case with the present government!

I don't no much about Ghurkas, but as long as they are not Muslim.... ;-) I do know about Berlusconi, and his always absent "actress" wife, the one who wrecked his first marriage. His wife is never seen in public with him, has never acted as his "First Lady" either. She's just a gold digger who wants a divorce. It has been a complete set up that incident in Naples. Good news is that the Italian people are on his side.

(Sue) My bad then. I just believe these guys have fought for the UK (my country) and shouldn't be so easily sidelined as seems to be the case with the present government! No argument from me. They've been a valued and valorous part of your army for such a long time. Surely, the idiot argument that it would create some sort of precedent for other foreign nationals who have been members of the military is silly. Had they been from a Commonwealth country, the 20 year service rule wouldn't have applied at all. Your courts have thrown out the requirement. But the issue is not that they are being persecuted in Nepal.

.... umm...to my knowledge

Just posting this to save it for future comments I hope to get back to. There's a number of things posted in the last couple of weeks I wanted to comment on, but been putting it off for various reasons. Health groups offer $2 trillion in cost savings AP By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writers Sun May 10, 9:00 pm ET WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama's plan to provide medical insurance for all Americans took a big step toward becoming reality Sunday after leaders of the health care industry offered $2 trillion in spending reductions over 10 years to help pay for the program. Hospitals, insurance companies, drug makers and doctors planned to tell Obama on Monday they'll voluntarily slow their rate increases in coming years in a move that government economists say would create breathing room to help provide health insurance to an estimated 50 million Americans who now go without it. With this move, Obama picks up key private-sector allies that fought former President Bill Clinton's effort to overhaul health care. Although the offer from the industry groups doesn't resolve thorny details of a new health care system, it does offer the prospect of freeing a large chunk of money to help pay for coverage. And it puts the private-sector groups in a good position to influence the bill Congress is writing. Six major groups plan to deliver a letter to Obama and pledge to cut the growth rate for health care by 1.5 percentage points each year, senior administration officials said Sunday. They spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to sketch the offer before full details are revealed at a White House event scheduled for Monday. Obama has offered an outline for overhauling the health care system, and he wants Congress to work out the details and pass legislation this year. His plan would build on the current system in which employers, government and individuals share responsibility for paying the cost and care is delivered privately. The government would play a stronger role by subsidizing coverage for many more people and spelling out stronger consumer protections. "We cannot continue down the same dangerous road we've been traveling for so many years, with costs that are out of control, because reform is not a luxury that can be postponed, but a necessity that cannot wait," Obama said in prepared remarks the White House released Sunday. "That is why these groups are voluntarily coming together to make an unprecedented commitment." The industry groups are trying to get on the administration bandwagon for expanded coverage now in the hope they can steer Congress away from legislation that would restrict their profitability in future years. Insurers, for example, want to avoid the creation of a government health plan that would directly compete with them to enroll middle-class workers and their families. Drug makers worry that in the future, new medications might have to pass a cost-benefit test before they can win approval. And hospitals and doctors are concerned the government could dictate what they get paid to care for any patient, not only the elderly and the poor. Obama has courted industry and provider groups, inviting their representatives to the White House. There's a sense among some of the groups that now may be the best time to act before public opinion, fueled by anger over costs, turns against them. It's unclear whether the proposed savings will prove decisive in pushing a health care overhaul through Congress. There's no detail on how the savings pledge would be enforced. And, critically, the promised savings in private health care costs would accrue to society as a whole, not just the federal government. That's a crucial distinction because specific federal savings are needed to help pay for the cost of expanding coverage. Indeed, costs have emerged as the most serious obstacle to Obama's plan. The estimated federal costs range from $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion over 10 years, and so far Obama has only spelled out how to get about half of that. Administration officials would not say Sunday how much they think Obama's plan will ultimately cost, but they indicated they were confident it can be paid for. A reduction of 1.5 percentage points a year in the rate of increase in costs may not sound like much, but administration officials said it amounts to slowing the current 7 percent annual increase in costs by about one-fifth. That's significant when health care spending keeps running far ahead of inflation year after year. They estimated, for instance, that five years from now, such private cost curbs could save a family of four an average of $2,500 a year in health care costs. Administration officials said they didn't expect all the saving strategies to be announced Monday, nor did they have access to specifics on how the groups reached their estimates and analysis. But the initial reaction was positive. "While serious questions remain about the details, AARP believes the agreement of providers to slow the skyrocketing cost of health care is critical for the health reform we are all working toward," said John Rother, policy director for the seniors' lobby. "Reducing the skyrocketing cost of health care is the only way to create a health care system that works for all Americans; after all, what good is access to a system that we can't afford?" Ron Pollack, director of Families USA, a liberal group that supports coverage for all, said the health insurance industry came up with the target of a 1.5-percentage-point reduction. Karen Ignagni, president of the insurers trade group, America's Health Insurance Plans, took the idea to other major interest groups, said Pollack, who was familiar with the talks among the industry groups. "If these cost savings are truly achievable, this may be the most significant development on the road to health care reform," said Pollack. "It would cut costs for families and businesses and enable subsidies to be offered so everyone has access to quality, affordable health care." The groups include the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the Service Employees International Union, the California Hospital Association and the Greater New York Hospital Association, which represents facilities in four states. Obama's plan envisions that people would be able to keep the coverage they now have. Those working for big companies probably would not see major changes. But the self-employed and those working for small businesses would be able to get coverage through a new kind of insurance purchasing pool. Called an "exchange," the pool would offer stable rates and predictable benefits. Plans in the exchange wouldn't be able to deny coverage to those who are sick and would have to follow other new consumer protection rules. Lawmakers in Congress are generally following Obama's outline, but the Senate plan is likely to go further by requiring all Americans to carry health insurance, much as states now require motorists to carry auto coverage. Democrats hope to get legislation to the floor this summer. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_health_overhaul_savings;_ylt=AoqbZY2SRhlNwnqGWkRbfgis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJzcW01cmJoBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTExL3VzX2hlYWx0aF9vdmVyaGF1bF9zYXZpbmdzBGNwb3MDNgRwb3MDMTMEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDaGVhbHRoZ3JvdXBz

STIMULUS WATCH: Early road aid leaves out neediest AP By MATT APUZZO and BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE, Associated Press Writers 10 mins ago WASHINGTON � Counties suffering the most from job losses stand to receive the least help from President Barack Obama's plan to spend billions of stimulus dollars on roads and bridges, an Associated Press analysis has found. Although the intent of the money is to put people back to work, AP's review of more than 5,500 planned transportation projects nationwide reveals that states are planning to spend the stimulus in communities where jobless rates are already lower. One result among many: Elk County, Pa., isn't receiving any road money despite its 13.8 percent unemployment rate. Yet the military and college community of Riley County, Kan., with its 3.4 percent unemployment, will benefit from about $56 million to build a highway, improve an intersection and restore a historic farmhouse. Altogether, the government is set to spend 50 percent more per person in areas with the lowest unemployment than it will in communities with the highest. The AP reviewed $18.9 billion in projects, the most complete picture available of where states plan to spend the first wave of highway money. The projects account for about half of the $38 billion set aside for states and local governments to spend on roads, bridges and infrastructure in the stimulus plan. The very promise that Obama made, to spend money quickly and create jobs, is locking out many struggling communities needing those jobs. The money goes to projects ready to start. But many struggling communities don't have projects waiting on a shelf. They couldn't afford the millions of dollars for preparation and plans that often is required. "It's not fair," said Martin Schuller, the borough manager in the Elk County seat of Ridgway, who commiserates about the inequity in highway aid with colleagues in nearby towns. "It's a joke because we're not going to get it, because we don't have any projects ready to go." The early trend seen in the AP analysis runs counter to expectations raised by Obama, that road and infrastructure money from the historic $787 billion stimulus plan would create jobs in areas most devastated by layoffs and plant closings. Transportation money, he said, would mean paychecks for "folks looking for work" and "folks who want to work." "That's the core of my plan, putting people to work doing the work that America needs done," Obama said in a Feb. 11 speech promoting transportation spending as a way to expand employment. Also, Congress required states to use some of the highway money for projects in economically distressed areas, but didn't impose sanctions if they didn't. States can lose money, however, if they don't spend fast enough. The AP examined the earliest projects announced nationwide, the ones most likely to break ground and create jobs first. More projects are continually being announced, and some areas that received little or no help so far may benefit later. The Obama administration could also encourage states to change their plans. To determine whether there was a disparity in where the money would go, the AP divided the nation's counties into four groups by unemployment levels. The analysis found that, no matter how the early money is measured, communities suffering most fare the worst: _High-unemployment counties, those in the top quarter of jobless rates, are allotted about 16 percent of the money, compared with about 20 percent for areas least affected by joblessness. _In low-unemployment counties nationwide, those in the bottom quarter of jobless rates, the federal government is spending about $89 a person compared with $59 a person in the worst-hit areas. _In counties with the largest populations, the government is spending about $69 a person in areas with the lowest unemployment and $40 a person in places with the greatest job need. The analysis also found that counties with the highest unemployment are most likely to have been passed over completely in the early spending. Among them: Wheeler County, Ore.; Steuben County, Ind.; Macon County, Ga.; and Crowley County, Colo. Many others are getting minimal help in this round: Vermillion County, Ind.; Lapeer County, Mich.; Presidio County, Texas; Tallahatchi County, Miss. Those counties still will benefit from job creation elsewhere in their states, said Lana Hurdle, a Transportation official overseeing the agency's stimulus money. "Even if you have to drive to it, it's better than no job," Hurdle said. Joel Szabat, who also oversees the stimulus for the Transportation Department, said the agency presses states to build projects in struggling areas but does not normally consider how much money is going to each county. Presented with AP's findings, he said: "I will be going back to ask our folks to do this kind of analysis, the overall amount for the projects." "Our goal, and I think it is a goal that will be achieved, is that you will see that a fair share of this money will go to these areas," Szabat said. Obama's plan sends $38 billion to states and local governments for roads, bridges, transit and other infrastructure, about 5 percent of the overall program that also includes money for, among other things, schools, community development, technology, worker training and tax breaks. All counties will receive some stimulus relief eventually. But the haste voiced by the White House is not reflected in the flow of highway money so far. "We cannot wait," Vice President Joe Biden said last week when announcing a $30 million transit project in his hometown of Wilmington, Del., where the 7.7 percent unemployment rate remains below the national average. "We're spending a lot of time and money. Why? It's about ... jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. That's why we cannot wait." Yet residents of Perry County, Tenn., will have to wait. County Mayor John Carroll said he's disappointed his community, which suffers from 25.4 percent unemployment, won't receive a dime any time soon for its road needs. "It's pretty easy to draw a connection between the high unemployment rate and the lack of any four-lane highways," he said. Federal auditors acknowledge they can't yet track the transportation money that is leaving Washington and there is no single list of the thousands of projects planned in each state. For its analysis, the AP used lists of projects approved through March by the Transportation Department and collected lists of stimulus projects that have been announced in 49 states, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Federal officials have approved 2,800 projects. The remaining projects on the AP list represent the states' official plans for the money. Only Virginia, which has not announced its plan, is not included. As the number of projects grows, places like Elk County, Pa., could still be left out because they could not afford the upfront costs needed to put proposals in the pipeline. "It's all based on this 'shovel readiness,'" said Elk County Commissioner Daniel Freeburg. "That's been our stumbling block." Elk County surely could use jobs. The once thriving north central Pennsylvania county is home to metal factories that equip the nation's auto industry. Layoffs are mounting. Freeburg is pinning hopes on getting future stimulus money, such as for energy conservation programs, that will create jobs and rekindle the local metal and lumber industries. In promoting his plan, Obama went to hard-hit communities such as Elkhart, Ind., and Peoria, Ill., and promised the jobs would come. "Now, I know that some of you might be thinking, 'Well that all sounds good, but when are we going to see any of that here in Elkhart?'" Obama said. "'What does all that mean for our families and our community?' Those are exactly the kind of questions you should be asking of your president and your government." Obama kept his promise to Elkhart, which so far is expected to receive $13.7 million, and Peoria, which should receive at least $10.6 million. But other, similar counties have not been so lucky. For now, laid-off workers in Elk County, Pa., question why they've missed out, while money flows to more prosperous places. "Why are they helping them?" asked Wendy Cameron, 50, of Saint Marys, Pa., who lost her job in a metal factory last year. She doesn't have health insurance and would gladly take road work. "They're not in need. We are. "What are these people going to do? Is everybody going to go on welfare? I've never been on welfare. I don't want to be on welfare." ___ Associated Press writer Cal Woodward contributed to this report. ___ On the Net: Interactive tracking stimulus money on a map: http://tinyurl.com/orulga http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_on_re_us/us_stimulus_left_out;_ylt=AkrDh0jyoPCN9EzffV8imK0XIr0F;_ylu=X3oDMTJuazhrZDBrBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTExL3VzX3N0aW11bHVzX2xlZnRfb3V0BGNwb3MDMwRwb3MDMwRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA3N0aW11bHVzd2F0Yw--

Loved how the Kansas congressman said that Fort Leavenworth (the max security military prison on US govt land) wasn't equipped to handle them. *rolling eyes* I don't see how he even has a say on a military prison. Maybe the fort itself should be closed down entirely. I know of many states that have had military installations closed down and would welcome the biz. Senate votes to block funds for Guantanamo closure By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer � 20 mins ago WASHINGTON � In a major rebuke to President Barack Obama, the Senate voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to block the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the United States and denied the administration the millions it sought to close the prison. The 90-6 Senate vote � paired with similar House action last week � was a clear sign to Obama that he faces a tough fight getting the Democratic-controlled Congress to agree with his plans to shut down the detention center and move the 240 detainees. The vote came as FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress that bringing Guantanamo detainees to the United States could pose a number of risks, even if they were kept in maximum-security prisons. Mueller's testimony to a House panel put him at odds with the president and undercut the administration's arguments for shuttering the facility. "The concerns we have about individuals who may support terrorism being in the United States run from concerns about providing financing, radicalizing others," Mueller said, as well as "the potential for individuals undertaking attacks in the United States." Last month, Obama asked for $80 million for the Pentagon and the Justice Department to close the facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by January. In the eyes of the world, the prison has come to exemplify harsh U.S. anti-terror tactics and detention without trial for almost all of its inmates, most of whom were captured in Afghanistan. The administration put its Democratic allies in a difficult spot by requesting the Guantanamo closure money before developing a plan for what to do with its detainees. Obama is scheduled to give a major address Thursday outlining in more detail his plans for Guantanamo, but it's already clear that many in Congress have little appetite for bringing detainees to U.S. soil, even if the inmates would be held in maximum-security prisons. In recent weeks, Republicans have called for keeping Guantanamo open, saying abuses at the facility are a thing of the past and describing it as a state-of-the-art prison that's nicer than some U.S. prisons. And they warn that terrorists who can't be convicted might be set free in the United States. "The American people don't want these men walking the streets of America's neighborhoods," Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said Wednesday. "The American people don't want these detainees held at a military base or federal prison in their backyard, either." In another development Wednesday, a federal judge said the United States can continue to hold some prisoners at Guantanamo indefinitely without any charges. Obama's new Pentagon policy chief, Michele Flournoy, said it's unrealistic to think that no detainees will come to the United States, and that the government can't ask allies to take detainees while refusing to take on the same burden. "When we are asking allies to do their fair share in dealing with this challenge we need to do our fair share," Flournoy told reporters. Obama ally Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., pointed out that not a single prisoner has ever escaped from a federal "supermax" prison and that 347 convicted terrorists are already being held in U.S. prisons. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, among the few Republicans joining former GOP presidential nominee John McCain of Arizona in calling for Guantanamo to be closed, scoffed at the idea that the government can't find a way to hold Guantanamo prisoners in the United States. Graham noted that 400,000 German and Japanese prisoners were held during World War II. "The idea that we cannot find a place to securely house 250-plus detainees within the United States is not rational. We have done this before," Graham said. "But it is my belief that you need a plan before you close Gitmo." While allies such as Durbin have cast the development as a delay of only a few months, other Democrats have made it plain they don't want any of Guantanamo's detainees sent to the United States to stand trial or serve prison sentences. Despite the setback, some Democrats said Obama should not be underestimated. "The president's very capable of putting together a plan that I think will win the approval of a majority of members of Congress," said moderate Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson. "I can't imagine that he won't."

I know of many states that have had military installations closed down and would welcome the biz. I doubt it. No body wants them.NIMBY. Maybe yours. Think Schumer is going to take them in Camp (now Fort) Drum? Why doesn't Durbin take them at Fort Sheridan? ...they have 90 acres to build a supermax prison there. That's a kiss of death for a politician's addition to his/her re-election resume.

Senate votes to block funds for Guantanamo closure There's a word for these people that begins with a P, that I shall not use, but does apply IMO.

I doubt it. The fort itself. Besides, why spend the money to build when you already have a facility. Wasteful spending. Fort Sheridan was closed. Most of the land was sold to developers and is probably some of the most valuable RE owned by the military. Sort of like Presidio land. It is contiguous to Highland Park, highly affluent area and along the lakefront. Glenview Naval Air Station was also closed and is now almost a new town in and of itself, called The Glen.

Or Alcatraz...I hear the view is terrific. Actually, I say give 'em a green card and a one-way ticket to San Francisco;-)

This kind of sums it up for me on the prisoner subject. And brings up some of the same subjects and questions I have. I forgot about that Supermax prison in CO, but I did remember all the famous criminals there. World's Dumbest Talking Point Gets Traction by Cenk Uygur Wed May 20, 2009 at 01:25:36 PM PDT For weeks now, Republicans have been talking about how we can't bring Guantanamo detainees to the US as if we'd be bringing them in for a picnic. They have pretended that bringing them to the US is the same thing as releasing them out in the middle of Kansas or Oklahoma (or right by Ground Zero as the dumbass Peter King suggested). We've talked about this on our show from time to time to mock them mercilessly, but I didn't bother writing about it because who would be dumb enough to believe this inane talking point? Well, now we have our answer. Almost the entire Senate. They just voted 90-6 to say that the Obama administration cannot have the funds they need to close Gitmo and bring the detainees for trial here in the US. Rep. King was outraged at the idea that the people who carried out 9/11 would be tried near Ground Zero. Where the hell else would they be tried? That's where the crime happened. That's how our system works. Where are we supposed to try them - on Mars? Well, the Bush administration came up with the novel idea of turning our military base at Guantanamo Bay into a legal version of Mars. And since it's been ongoing for almost eight years now, everybody seems to find that a credible solution. But that's crazy. The United States cannot create a legal black hole where we put anyone we don't like and hold them there indefinitely. That was the whole problem with the Bush administration and Gitmo in the first place. ...... So, let's get to the main and most obvious point here - bringing detainees to America does not mean we release them in America. The people who planned and carried out the first World Trade Center bombing are now in the United States! Everyone, panic! Oh no, that's right, they're locked up in a Supermax prison in Colorado, from which they will never emerge. Problem solved. Why is that so hard to understand? FBI Director Robert Mueller testified today in Congress that if they are even held in a prison in the US, they could radicalize the other prisoners. Here are some of the other prisoners at the Supermax in Colorado - the Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols, World Trade Center bombers Ramzi Yousef and the Blind Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, the Olympic Park bomber Eric Rudolph. Who are the Gitmo detainees going to radicalize, the Unabomber? This is absurd. If we're going to try people for crimes they have committed against the United States, of course we have to try them in the United States. We have plenty of prisons that are completely secure and that they have absolutely no chance of breaking out of and that they can spend the rest of their lives in. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/20/733714/-Worlds-Dumbest-Talking-Point-Gets-Traction

This kind of sums it up for me on the prisoner subject. And brings up some of the same subjects and questions I have. Sorry, I dont read Daily Kos articles...

You know, I had a disclaimer line that said I was posting it knowing at least one person wouldn't read it. Then decided to delete it because that's been pretty well covered and it seemed unnecessary for me to point it out, again. Obviously I was wrong.

We-ell I was only trying to be polite in telling you why I didn't answer your queries. It's OK if you mention me by name: Evelyn, don't read" "or you won't like this....or"E. don't waste your time" etc. I always look at the end of an article for the provenance before i waste my time. Give me credit....geeze...at least I read the topic.

Thank you. :-) at least I read the topic. Well, only maybe the topic name depending on the post. ;-)

Someone on this topic said that some states would welcome some extra money.... now here's one that could use it. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sell off San Quentin to ease budget crisis http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6289694.ece Prime real estate.Look at that view

Unfortunately, it's not a seller's market. I'd be surprised if they got that much for either, or even got viable bids.

....even got viable bids. I mean....How about the Feds for our alleged terrorists? I bet California would take $80M in a minute and would relish the jobs potential. You know...."Cells with a view"

How about the Feds for our alleged terrorists? Housing them there (and in the Supermax prison, noted in the piece above you said you won't read), was my first thought actually. Assuming they have the room.

My links are from mainstream papers:-D They house 5000 prisoners...600 on death row. Surely theres' room for 240. Other states don't want them. Not even Kansas when Kathleen Sibelius was governor...of course now that she's in the cabinet.......... Diane Feinsteing said Alcatraz was one of our "historical treasures" *rolling eyes.*

Why should the Federal govt buy another prison, when it already has its own. Like I said, use existing federally owned facilities.

Does anyone here really care if they bring any of those people to appropriately maximum security prisons in their states? If so, why? I don't care with regards to here, honestly. What makes the Gitmo prisoners any different than any other criminals in those places? Especially since we have terrorists in our prisons already. Including the first WTC bombers.

The thing is that as far as I know, none of the prisoners has actually been convicted of anything so presuming they are innocent until proven guilty, I don't think we can call them criminals. In fact, I think most of the prisoners have not even been charged with any crimes. Most have been held for 8 years without due process. We have a similar situation here in Canada with our "security certificates". Several individuals have been held in jail based on national security interests but they are not permitted to defend themselves against the accusations nor even see the evidence. There are no easy solutions to either situation but I feel personally diminished by my country's actions which fly in the face of everything democracy means to me.

(me) I don't think we can call them criminals oops .... I mean, I don't think I can call them criminals.

Hard to overrule that 90-6 vote in the Senate not to house those alleged terrorists in the states. Some of those guys are up for re-election in '10 Bagram anyone? We have prisoners there. Also how about twisting a few arms of their home countries to receive them back. BTW Yemen said they would take them. (Bet they would spring to stay in Gitmo)

Op-Ed Columnist When Did Cowboys Get Wimpy? By GAIL COLLINS Published: May 22, 2009 Out of all the problems we have run into in dealing with the giant hairball that is known as the Bush War on Terror, one of the weirdest is the reaction to President Obama�s plan to close down Guant�namo. In the rank of threats to public safety, putting the Guant�namo inmates in maximum-security prisons in the United States has got to come in way behind, say, making it easy for customers to purchase firearms at gun shows. But to hear the howls coming from Congress, you�d think the Obama administration was planning to house the prisoners in suburban preschools. �Terrorists. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you,� warned a Republican Web video, which mixed pictures of accused terrorists with road signs in states where the G.O.P. predicted they might be sent. In another production, the occasionally loyal opposition resurrected the infamous �Daisy� countdown ad to show a little girl picking petals off a flower while the president prepares to close Gitmo. �To bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come,� snarled Dick Cheney in his �no middle ground� speech. Although really, for the sake of the national mental health, it might be better if we all just ignore the former vice president until he agrees to undergo therapy. Forget I ever mentioned it. Instead, consider the case of Hardin, Mont., a community of 3,400 people just down the road from the place where Custer made his Last Stand. Lately, things have not been going any better for Hardin than they did for the general. Unemployment is rife. �You go look at our downtown, there�s many closed businesses ... you�ll see drunks laying in the street. It�s not a pretty sight,� the head of the town�s economic development authority told National Public Radio. The town built a $27 million, 464-bed prison under the theory that other parts of the state would pay to have Hardin look after their problem residents. But it�s been empty since it was declared open for business nearly two years ago, and the construction loans are in default. So, with the town council�s enthusiastic support, Hardin volunteered to take the Guant�namo prisoners. It�s unlikely that the White House would have accepted the offer, but it was certainly an example of pluck and you�d think everyone would give Hardin three cheers. Instead, Montana�s Democratic senators went ballistic. �We�re not going to bring Al Qaeda to Big Sky Country � no way, not on my watch,� said Max Baucus. �If these prisoners need a new place, it�s not going to be anywhere near The Last Best Place,� said Jon Tester. This shows us two things: 1) Montana has given itself many nicknames. 2) Montanans are more easily frightened than Manhattanites. Think about it. New Yorkers live in the top terror target in the nation. This week four new would-be terrorists were arrested for plotting to blow up synagogues in the Bronx. On the same day, President Obama announced that the first Guant�namo prisoner to be tried in the United States would be coming to court in Lower Manhattan. Even though it appears the guys involved in the Bronx case were deeply, deeply inept, this is still not the kind of news package you want to hear. But nobody had a fit over it. �Bottom line is we have had terrorists housed in New York before,� said Senator Charles Schumer. New Yorkers aren�t the only ones who have learned to calmly resist both international terrorism and national hysteria. The small town of Florence, Colo., has a 490-bed high-security facility known as Supermax, which houses 33 terrorists, including Ramzi Yousef, who led the first World Trade Center bombing; the failed shoe-bomber Richard Reid; and Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted of conspiring in the Sept. 11 attacks. The local residents seem fine with it, possibly because they know the prisoners spend 23 hours a day in their cells, which are made of poured concrete and furnished with concrete tables and bunks. Nobody escapes from maximum-security prisons. But even if they did, who would you rather have on the lam in your neighborhood � a native of Afghanistan whose history suggests an affinity for jihad? Or a resident of your own state whose history suggests an affinity for breaking into people�s houses, tying them up and torturing them? The nation, as we all know, is divided into crowded states and empty states, and I was always under the impression that folks in the empty places were particularly brave and self-reliant. Those of us who live in the crowded parts have many good qualities, but we are not necessarily all of pioneer stock, given the critical importance we assign to restaurants that deliver at 2 in the morning. Who knew we were tougher than Montanans? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/23/opinion/23collins.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

(Sandy) I don't think we can call them criminals. In fact, I think most of the prisoners have not even been charged with any crimes. Most have been held for 8 years without due process. That's quite true. Some of these people it turns out were just victims of bounty hunters and pissed off neighbors. And even the ones that did do something, do not deserve indefinite detention without due process, or a flawed process such as the military tribunals that were stopped by the Supreme Court in the end due to the Hamdan case because they, among other things, violated federal and international law. Bagram = Gitmo 2 (actually it was there before Gitmo if I'm not mistaken). It needs to go too. That's the amazing thing about it. It's no different, but didn't get the attention of Gitmo. No pics I guess. (Evelyn) Some of those guys are up for re-election in '10 Of course and nothing else matters. Apparently esp common sense on their or the public's parts. Well people are freaked out thanks to the wonderful Rep propaganda campaign (including dragging out that git, Cheney).

Cuba's prisons are full of political dissidents. Some of them were turned in by pissed of neighbors who coveted a property or money. I care more for those people than I do for the Gitmo prisoners who are there for a reason, whether they have been charged or not. Because they have not been charged, some politicians have been talking about releasing some of those prisoners to their family members in VA, where there is a big Muslim population. I don't want them here. Trouble is sure to follow. I also wish the world would consider South and Central America as much as they do Africa.

(Dorine) Does anyone here really care if they bring any of those people to appropriately maximum security prisons in their states? Nope. I checked and the only Federal prison in Illinois is at Marion, which used to be a supermax facility and was renovated and downgraded to medium security in 2006. Interestingly, it was built to replace Alcatraz and the worst of the worst were housed here, including convicted mobsters and spies. Now the Colorado facility is the only supermax in the country. By design, the higher security prisons have been built in the middle of Nowheresville, USA. Arguments for creating a detention center in any populated area are specious, inflammatory, irrational and a complete waste of everybody's time. BTW, love the NY Times op-ed piece. But to hear the howls coming from Congress, you�d think the Obama administration was planning to house the prisoners in suburban preschools. LOL! If you want to politicize the decision, just put them in a state that is has voted Republican and would continue to do so no matter what. Also how about twisting a few arms of their home countries to receive them back. So they can release them the next day? *scratching head*

the Gitmo prisoners who are there for a reason, whether they have been charged or not. What makes you so certain they're any different than the Cuban prisoners. Excellent example BTW, of wrongly imprisoned people.

In my Archie Bunker style: the Muslim prisoners in Gitmo are not political dissidents, were any of them living in Israel? I think not. Do they oppose the US? Yes. And I do believe they are there for a reason, whether they'd been charged or not.

My point was...political dissidents = wrongly accused.

(Me)Also how about twisting a few arms of their home countries to receive them back. (Karen)So they can release them the next day? *scratching head* scratch all you want , some people;-) consider them innocent, and want them released in Virginia to their families For the record: I want Gitmo closed (as did GWB). And I want it given to Fidel , so he can house his political dissents there. I am sure he would appreciate the good fortune; it's a staate-f the- art venue. Think that would make the ACLU happy???? (Karen)If you want to politicize the decision, just put them in a state that is has voted Republican and would continue to do so no matter what. LOL.Not-so secret agenda creeping out;-) Remember that some of those 90 votes were Dems too.

as did GWB Maybe he really did, but he had a funny way of showing it. He said that in June 2006. What did he/his administration do to work toward that goal since then? Obama's in, what, a few weeks and he's at least announcing it's going to close within a definite time period (and we'll see if that timeline stays). At least this administration is making an effort. What effort was made previously aside from lip service?

Dorine, I don't think your point can be used for the Muslims in Gitmo. (Evelyn), For the record: I want Gitmo closed (as did GWB). And I want it given to Fidel , so he can house his political dissents there. Please no. No more gifts for Fidel.

(Karen)If you want to politicize the decision, just put them in a state that is has voted Republican and would continue to do so no matter what. LOL.Not-so secret agenda creeping out;-) I said If. But I'm not. My position has always been put them in an appropriate and existing Federal facility. There is only one such place: the Colorado one. There's no reason to buy a new place, build a new place or lease a new place. Or put them in Wyoming. By census count, there isn't enough population to rate a congressional district, but constitutionally it has to have at least one representative. Cheney can guard them. I'd feel a whole lot more safe if he stood watch. ;-)

He's killed 2 birds with one stone....a Hispanic and a woman. And relatively young as well. AP sources: Obama picks Sotomayor for high court AP By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer 28 mins ago WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama tapped federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice. If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Two officials described Obama's decision on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made. Administration officials say Sotomayor would bring more judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice confirmed in the past 70 years. A formal announcement was expected at midmorning. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090526/ap_on_go_su_co/us_obama_supreme_court;_ylt=Al0d08ZPxwdDJLk7CDXBQ4Cs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJudXE0c24xBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTI2L3VzX29iYW1hX3N1cHJlbWVfY291cnQEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3Nvbmlhc290b21heQ--

But did she pay her taxes;-)

I don't know anything about her, but I like the choice.

Sonia is an historic choice! What an exciting selection not only for Hispanic women, but for anyone who raised themselves up from poverty and challenging life circumstances to excel at the highest levels. From a Bronx housing project to Princeton and Yale, and now the highest court, and she brings a wealth of judicial experience with her. A quintessentially American success story.

You won't get any hits from me....a Catholic, Newyorkican woman :-)))) And as my Senator Coburn said: "She deserves a fair and open hearing and a dignified confirmation".

"Newyorkican" This term puzzles me. I always thought it was "Newyorican" (New-Yo-Reecan). That's what I've heard people say here anyway. Maybe I misheard them all these years. Or it's not spelled as it sounds.

Pronounced with a silent "k",(Nuyurican) but spelled with it. (Leave the "yo" out of it...we're not from the 'hood;-) http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2009/05/67275855/1 Or at least that's how yahoo spelled it today too.

Nuyurican Ah yes, I've seen this.

Wonder if the people who run our Puerto Rican Day parade have already called her to invite her to be co-Grand Marshall for the parade in a couple of weeks. Don't remember who it is this year. Obama High Court Choice Poses Political �Peril� for Republicans By James Rowley and Kim Chipman May 27 (Bloomberg) -- By nominating Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the first Hispanic justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, President Barack Obama all but dared Senate Republicans to risk alienating Latinos by trying to block her confirmation. Sotomayor, 54, whose upbringing by a single, Puerto Rican mother in New York City public housing is the basis of what Democrat Obama called �an inspiring life�s journey,� may be a difficult political target for Republicans. After losing the 2008 elections, the party is seeking to appeal to women and to Hispanics, the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. electorate. Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat designated by the White House to spearhead the confirmation effort, said the nomination will be �more a test of the Republican Party� than of Sotomayor. Republicans �oppose her at their peril,� he said. �The risk here is not just that they could be seen as anti-Latino or anti-woman, but just more anti, the party of no,� said pollster Michael Dimock, associate director of the Washington-based Pew Research Center. Hispanics make up potent voting blocs in such states as Florida, California, Texas and New York. Support among Hispanic voters enabled Obama to carry North Carolina, Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico in the presidential election, when he garnered 65 percent of the Latino vote. [cont'd....] http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=antcPk557oGw&refer=home

Media hype, and inflamatory rhetoric from the infamous Charles Shumer ...what was your word yesterday, Dorine...a git? She's going to get confirmed; she won't be "Borked" And I will say that the Republicans will afford her more courtesy than some of the Democrats to the first Italian-American that was nominated to the Supreme Court. And to his family...that was a circus! Moreover.. It didn't seem to alienate the Italian -Americans vote. Though some of my friends of Italian heritage were offended I maintain that every president has the right to appoint the nominee of his choice with the "advice and consent of the Senate". But that doesn't mean that the opposition party cannot conduct an appropriate,fair, dignified hearing . Beisdes it was the Dems in 2003 that derailed the nomination of Judge Miguel Estrada to the US Court of appeal by Pres Bush. http://spectator.org/blog/2009/05/26/sotomayors-radical-legal-group Didn't hurt tham then. FYI the Republican Hispanic National Assembly sent an email yesterday heralding her accomplishments and congratulating her.

GOP carrying out strategy to oppose Sotomayor Posted 1d 7h ago WASHINGTON (AP) � Republican Senate leaders won't call U.S. Supreme Court nomineeSonia Sotomayor a racist. But they're not opposing Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich doing so to rile up the out-of-power party. This is part of the strategy being cobbled together by Republican lawmakers and officials to oppose Sotomayor, an appeals court judge and the first Hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court. While some of Sotomayor's past comments could pose a challenge for President Obama's nominee, elected leaders are navigating a tricky question of how to object without alienating the nation's fast-growing � and increasingly politically active � Hispanic population. For now, it appears Republican lawmakers will urge respect. But they won't prevent talk-show host Limbaugh from calling Sotomayor a "racist" or former House Speaker Gingrich from saying she's a "Latina woman racist." The two-sided strategy would allow Limbaugh and Gingrich � who hold tremendous sway among the Republican faithful � to do the political attacks while those facing election can avoid potential backlash if they derail a historic nomination. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-06-01-republicans-sotomayor_N.htm?csp=34

Classy. Tuesday, June 02, 2009 Group friendly to GOP equates Sotomayor with Klan by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/02/2009 12:59:00 PM The Council of Conservative Citizens, a southern group that has been wooed by former GOP Senate leader Trent Lott and current GOP presidential hopeful Haley Barbour, has a doctored photo on its Web site of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in KKK garb. The CCC also calls Sotomayor "whitey hating." The ADL says that the CCC is an "extremist group" that is "squarely within Southern racist traditions." The Southern Poverty Law Center calls the CCC "brazenly racist." More from SPLC on the CCC: "[A] hate group that routinely denigrated blacks as "genetically inferior," complained about "Jewish power brokers," called homosexuals "perverted sodomites," accused immigrants of turning America into a "slimy brown mass of glop," and named Lester Maddox, the baseball bat-wielding, arch-segregationist former governor of Georgia, 'Patriot of the Century.'" The ADL and the SPLC both note that former GOP chairman, and current GOP presidential hopeful, Haley Barbour spoke to a CCC gathering after the scandal that ensued when Trent Lott's associations with the group were revealed (in other words, Barber knew full well what the group was about and he still wooed them). Someone needs to ask Republican party chair Michael Steele, who is himself black, what he thinks of the Council of Conservative Citizens, of Haley Barbour wooing them, and of the CCC comparing Sotomayor to the Klan. http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/group-friendly-to-gop-equates-sotomayor.html

Classy. No. Rubbish! Moreover part of WH spin. There are radicals (ie Move on.org types) in all parties. (They who took a full page ad in the NYT calling General Betrayous ) Moderates (in either party;-)don't pay attention to such.

(Evelyn) There are radicals (ie Move on.org types) in all parties. Really?! 8-O Moreover part of WH spin. Um....wha? 'Splain, please.

In keeping with the new WH buzz term : "unfortunate choice of words";-) From THE ATLANTIC Gingrich Explain-ogizes For "Racist" Comment http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/06/gingrich_explain-ogizes_for_racist_comment.php However, I know what he and Ms Sotomayor meant by their remarks. Neither deserved the inflamatory responses by the media....and don't get me started about those far-out blogs and politico groups. I could quote remarks from such opinioniated hot-heads as Olberman, Maddow...and to say the least, that loon ex Pres Carter. But I consider it an insult to your intelligence to post such. They do not represent the Democratic Party. A waste of my time and yours. Don't fall into that camp. You're better than that.

I'll thank you for saying I'm better than that. Problem is, I'm not sure what "that" is? I'm not sure what you're upset about, exactly. I don't understand... don't get me started about those far-out blogs and politico groups. About what exactly? Fringe right wing groups that doctor images of SCOTUS candidates to wear KKK gear? The original BTW... http://cofcc.org/?p=5135 Sure there are fringe groups on either side. I could quote remarks from such opinioniated hot-heads as Olberman, Maddow...and to say the least, that loon ex Pres Carter. I don't agree with them all the time, esp Olberman when he gets really worked up. He can get a little out of control which does no one any good. Maddow is generally quite level headed. I have no opinion really on Carter. Are you saying I should not point out that Gingrich and Limbaugh are calling her racist, which is quite inflammatory? My only point in any of this is to show the contrast between the reports of Congress members open statements of conciliation vs opposition out there that is less than conciliatory (and may or may not be the voice of the Congressional opposition). Not like it wouldn't make sense. I was making no judgements or not intending to sound judgemental (well, except for the "Classy" comment on that pic and rightly so IMO. That would be ridiculously tacky from either side). I don't always agree with everything I post, but put it out there to be informative, on either side. Are you saying there's a WH media conspiracy about something? I'm not saying there's not (it's not uncommon), I just don't understand what it would be about.

Is that all they've got on her? Calling her a racist? LOL!

Exactly. Still, it's rude.

Not sure how I ran across this, but thought it was interesting. A bit long, but stick with it. http://onthemedia.org/transcripts/2009/05/29/01

Rubbish! I've never received a fundraising request based on any inflamatory remark. And I wouldn't ,even if I did receive such. Gingrich has apologized for the remark ,and probably in the hearings she will explain the inference of her comments. On The Jim Lehrer News Hour last night they announced that in the Pew Poll t she has almost the same favorable rating as Sam Alito had at this stage; 49% vs 52% for the latter. He didn't exactly *sail* through, and neither will she, but she'll make it But remember what the Dems put the Italian American nominee through in the process; it was not their finest hour. And for someone who didn't vote for either Roberts or Alito on the basis of ideology , Pres Obama, for all his charm ,has some nerve insisting that she be confirmed rapidly.

I've never received a fundraising request based on any inflamatory remark. I don't think they just come out and ask for it like that (well, I suppose some do), but as it says they bank on people supporting them with $$ through donations for a group that espouses a particular viewpoint/ideology (racist or otherwise), the pundits who sell their books, give Q&A's, donate to like-minded politicians, buy magazines and newspapers that espouse the view that person favors, etc. And you wouldn't give, but there's plenty who would and have. I thought she had a higher favorable rating than that, but I hadn't been paying attention. Actually, I don't remember what Alito went through at all (when there's a Polish or Scottish candidate I'll perk up and pay attention more ;-)). Whatever the assuming somewhat minor attention I paid to his process is long forgotten. I don't even remember 98% of the details of the Thomas hearings and I did follow that quite a bit. By August recess doesn't seem *that* rapid.

hot-heads as Olberman, Maddow I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever refer to Maddow as a hot-head, except maybe by someone who has never watched/heard her. Pres Obama, for all his charm ,has some nerve insisting that she be confirmed rapidly. I believe that request is de rigeur.

How were Italian Americans insulted by the Alito hearings? What did the Dems "put him through" that other nominees didn't face?

From today's WASHINGTON POST David Broder: "Based on the Obama precedent, the White House can hardly complain if Republicans push beyond the question of Sotomayor's qualifications and examine her values -- and her biases. Someday, the Senate may again be satisfied to examine only professional credentials, recognizing the uncertain dynamics of a nine-person bench. But while the Bork and Obama precedents live, that is not likely. " http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/03/AR2009060303237.html

the White House can hardly complain if Republicans push beyond the question of Sotomayor's qualifications and examine her values -- and her biases. I don't believe anyone here has said or implied that examining all that should not be done. It's the extreme rhetoric that is unnecessary and uncalled for. Also, Obama was on target with his (5%) reservations about Roberts as his voting record while on the SCOTUS has attested to.

I'm sorry I can't answer everyone's questions/comments online. There's only one of me and three of you, LOL. I just don't have the time to devote to writing lost posts.(or read them;-) But you all have my phone #, so call me some evening . I can talk faster:-)

Gosh, it took me all of two seconds to Google this Alito thing, and the culprit was Chris Matthews, who misrepresented a document and injected the whole Italian-American aspect to it. Read the whole thing: http://mediamatters.org/research/200511010009 Love Howard Dean's line near the end: "All I'm trying to say is, you know, this guy is not the best prosecutor since sliced bread." Frankly, after the Harriet Meirs stunt the WH pulled, who wouldn't go after any subsequent candidates.

(Karen) after the Harriet Meirs stunt That was insulting to the institution of the SC as well as the fellow justices I thought.

That was insulting to women. It was a stunt, so that the WH could say it had tried to nominate a woman to replace Sandra Day O'Connor but the Senate wouldn't have it. Then the WH could go ahead and nominate whomever it really wanted, knowing that the Senate wasn't going to place itself in the bad guy role by continuing to raise a fury over another candidate.

I can't imagine anybody not seeing through the Meir play.

I don't read Media Matter, sorry. It's the hearings you want to find...not Media Matter. LOL about your perception of Harriet Meirs nom.*shaking head* you always come back to GWB. So transparent . And Howard Dean...another loon. FYI her nomintation was not popular with the Conservatives and it was *they* who asked for her nomination to be cancelled.

Because she couldn't have been less qualified and everyone knew it. They'd have been laughingstocks to take that nomination seriously.

Howard Dean was speaking in his capacity as chairman of the DNC. The uproar about Harriet Meirs was unanimous. Like I said it was a stunt. "Oh, we tried to nominate a woman, but who we wanted wasn't good enough." *sniff sniff* Two sseconds later, they put up their real nominee. Talk about being transparent.

I don't read Media Matter, sorry. But Media Matters confirms that this was a Chris Matthews problem, not a problem with anything that Democratic elected officials did or said. If you don't read MM, fine, but maybe you can link to an acceptable source that supports the notion that his heritage was denigrated. It's the hearings you want to find...not Media Matter. I have found the hearings transcript simply by googling "Alito hearings transcript." Where in the transcript is Alito's heritage denigrated?

Howard Dean was speaking in his capacity as chairman of the DNC. Worse! I never considered him to be representative of the party. I don't think the new administration likes him either. Witness his conspicuous absence at the innauguration & other festivites.Don't blame them. Your'e new leader is not shrill....ahem*sane*

I guess this is what you're referring to. In some other quick reading, there's also some evidence that it wasn't just Raum, but the DLC (Democratic Leadership Council) who were against Dean as well. The Clintons (and I believe Raum) are strong members in that group. IIRC, the DLC and DNC had been competing for power over the Dem party. Or something like that. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/democratic-party/the-decline-of-dean.html

I'm not talking about now, but then, during the Alito confirmation hearings. It would be appropriate for him to speak on behalf of the party at that time, just as Michael Steele now speaks for the Big-Tent-of-Welcome-to-the-Fold Republicans.

Then....*Now...* In the party ...*Out* of the party... He's a loser. I like Michael Steele...he's gentlemanly-like....not shrill. Got off to a shaky start...but he's doing OK. Loved the repartee at the WH dinner(they're friends, BTW)

I liked the President's speech. Looks like we're hug-hug/ kiss-kiss with Muslims. "Keep your friends close, but keep......" Wonder where he stayed. I stayed at the Mena House an Oberoi hotel next to the Pyramid at Giza. Fabulous.

(Evelyn) He's a loser. Um, Obama won using his strategy. That doesn't look or sound like a loser to me. Steele's a boob, but I actually like him. He's not really so much one of them and it shows in what he says. His true feelings keep popping through in his attempts to tow the party line. At the same time he's an opportunist. Will say anything to keep his top dog status.

His true feelings keep popping through in his attempts to tow the party line. some people think that is like trying to find middle ground; instead of ramming through with no exceptions. Ok by me. At the same time he's an opportunist Carpe diem/ OK by me. But I like Tim Kane too. I'm so easy to get along with:-)))))))

some people think that is like trying to find middle ground; He very well may be, and that's ok with me, but not ok so much with the people (in power and further on the right) he speaks for.

BTW, I'm guessing you're still poring through those Alito transcripts looking for the Italian-American bashing by the Dems in the hearings. :-)

LOL. Just the bashing of SA who happened to be an IA. And then there's the lynching of Clarence Thomas....... But you wouldn't remember that.....er, too young;-)

But you wouldn't remember that.....er, too young;-) Not even 20 yrs ago? LOL, I'm not *that* young!... even though I may look it. ;-D (In my dreams :-)).

I think this might be more appropriate here... Has anyone seen that movie, Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism? The documentary about Fox News. I finally got around to seeing it. OMG, was that painful (yet somewhat fascinating) to watch. Matter of fact, I couldn't watch it all at one sitting. Took me 3 times. Part of it I think was because Fox News shows are so shrill and to have tons of clips all concentrated in one 90 min film (broken up by moments of commentary) was just sensory overload. Plus, I think being reminded of some of the BS they spewed was quite disheartening as well. I'm of course well aware of their style and tactics, but to see it all presented concentrated at once was just too much. That being said, I did at one time watch Brit Hume's show on Sunday and during the week for quite a while, and at times Hannity and O'Reilly's shows, just to see what they had to say. (Also listened to Limbaughs show years ago for a while). And last thing....that Hannity and O'Reilly are total asses, but gotta give 'em credit, they're damn good at what they do (deceiving the public -including flat out lying - and distorting information).

Anybody doing a documentary on MSNBC? I'd have to bring a barf-bag;-) I want to see the doc on VALENTINO; THE LAST EMPEROR A documentary portrait about the legendary fashion designer Valentino Garavani Depicts the behind-the scene of the great fashion house. Was just thinking...I know why people don't want to post here. No one has to time to document resource material for anything they say. Really. I blow you all away, but not everyone wants to be that rude;-))))LOL

Wow! I'm not sure anyone has had that high opinion of themselves since Arami.

(Evelyn) I'd have to bring a barf-bag;-) I'll lend you the one I used. ;-) No one has to time to document resource material for anything they say. Well, as Karen and Mari (and myself) have shown just this week, it takes mere seconds to minutes to Google virtually any information you want. Please! Blow us away! :-D It's not being rude. It's called debating. MSNBC was brought up in clips and an interview from....their CEO or someone like that. I forget now. Plus, MSNBC isn't even remotely as influential (for promoting an agenda and ignorance if nothing else) as Fox has been. That's one of the points brought up in it. Fox was so successful at getting ratings that other outlets, including MSNBC have made steps to copy it in various ways, unfortunately. I mention the Valentino one on Q&E. I only mentioned Outfoxed here because of it's obvious political connections.

No one has to time to document resource material for anything they say. Because we're all so busy poring through all the personal and professional minutiae of Colin's life. ;-)

LOL. Which is a lot more fun. Though, I'm not doing much "poring" these days. Well, as Karen and Mari (and myself) have shown just this week, it takes mere seconds to minutes to Google virtually any information you want. But, but....I'm not as talented as you, Karen and Mari...you know that. I'm just honored to be in your company;-) Still, I don't get no credit around here for trying. evelyn, *the poor Newyorkican on Drool*

Still, I don't get no credit around here for trying. *cough, cough!* I think you need to rethink that statement (and perhaps the length of your sideburns should you have any? ;-))

LOL...do stray hairs on chinny -chin-chin count;-) Hey lookee, lookee....I might have to look at the ole boy after awl http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090605/ap_on_en_tv/us_tv_colbert_in_iraq

I guess this is the aforementioned Steele trying to work the middle ground. *cough* ;-)) Steele On Sotomayor: �God Help You If You�re A White Male Coming Before Her Bench� Last week, while guest-hosting Bill Bennett�s radio show, RNC Chairman Michael Steele urged Republicans to stop �slammin� and rammin�� Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor with personal attacks. Instead, Steele argued that conservatives should �move on to the substance of the conversation about what this woman believes, why she believes it.� But just one week later, while hosting the same show, Steele couldn�t help but paint Sotomayor as a racist. �God help you if you�re a white male coming before her bench,� declared Steele before agreeing with a caller who who wanted the GOP to raise questions about her �character�: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/05/steele-sotomayor-white-male/ And from last week: �I�m excited that a Hispanic woman is in this position,� Steele said. He added that instead of �slammin� and rammin�� on Sotomayor, Republicans should �acknowledge� the �historic aspect� of the pick and make a �cogent, articulate argument� against her for purely substantive reasons. Steele warned that because of the attacks, �we get painted as a party that�s against the first Hispanic woman� picked for the Supreme Court. �We don�t need to play this the way the Democrats have played it in the past,� Steele said, adding that Republicans can�t do this because they don�t have the �liberal media� on their side, the way Dems did. Said Steele: �MSNBC will rip everything we have to say up into shreds.� Steele didn�t mention Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich, the two leading proponents of the racially-loaded attacks on Sotomayor. It�s a reminder of Steele�s predicament: He knows how badly these attacks are damaging the party and how neatly they play into the hands of Dems, but he can�t call out the leading figures launching those attacks, because that risks infuriating the base and feeding the meme that the GOP is hopelessly divided. [Ed note - what did I tell ya] http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/republican-national-committee/steele-gop-needs-to-stop-slammin-and-rammin-on-sotomayor/

Oh and btw, Evelyn, the reason I find time to get info as backup.....because I google....and I read blogs, who do the work of aggregating the news and information for me from various mainstream and other sources. Why should I do all the work of finding stuff when they'll do it for me?!

Hey, it's Friday night, Dorine.... Time to play. Let's take the weekend off.... Anybody find what Michelle is wearing in Paris? I didn't even know she was on the trip. Didn't see her at Dresden this morning. Hill looked good at the mosque yesterday, though , in Cairo.

The weather here is too crappy to play anywhere but here.

Evelyn thought Obama had nerve asking for a SCOTUS confirmation by August, which seems plenty of time for something like that to me. But I think his more highly ambitious agenda of getting a health care reform bill on his desk by Oct 1 is a lot more than nervy. I really don't agree with it it yet, esp seeing even so far how things are playing out. This column gives a time time for various reform related issues til then. EXCLUSIVE: The Finance Committee's Health Care Timeline I was given an internal Finance Committee memo today that offers the clearest look yet on the Congress's timetable for health-care reform. Staffers in various Senate offices affirmed that the dates sync with the schedule they've been given. The document, as you might expect, has the most information on the Finance Committee's efforts, but it outlines the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee's schedule, the legislation being built in the House, and Congress's overall goal: A bill on the president's desk by Oct. 1. The Finance Committee: According to the memo, Finance will meet next week to discuss the issues where it sees an emergent consensus. These include delivery system and insurance market reforms -- "80-90% of the bill," the memo says. The author also outlines the "3 major sticking points": Public plan, employer pay or play, and financing. [cont'd] http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/06/exclusive_the_finance_committe_1.html

To quote Mark Darcy, "This really is the most incredible shit." Gingrich: Americans �surrounded by paganism.� bidenfire On Friday, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, and Oliver North visited Rock Church in Hampton Roads, Virginia to give a three-hour long lecture on �Rediscovering God in America.� The speakers warned the audience about the �continuing availability of abortion, the spread of gay rights, and attempts to remove religion from American public life and school history books.� The Virginia-Pilot reported that Gingrich argued that, while Christianity is the foundation of American citizenship, Americans are experiencing a period where they are being �surrounded by paganism�: GINGRICH: I am not a citizen of the world. I am a citizen of the United States because only in the United States does citizenship start with our creator. [...] I think this is one of the most critical moments in American history. We are living in a period where we are surrounded by paganism. Huckabee also equated America�s victory against the British in the Revolutionary War with the right-wing�s success in the Proposition 8 fight in California as being miracles �from God�s hand.� http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/06/gingrich-paganism/ http://hamptonroads.com/2009/06/huckabee-gingrich-urge-political-engagement-va-beach

(Karen)Evelyn thought Obama had nerve asking for a SCOTUS confirmation by August,... *scratching head* Yeah? Did I say that? I remember saying he had a nerve asking everyone to vote for Sotomayor since he didn't vote for either Ailto or Roberts. I didn't think I put a timetable on it...makes no diff to me. But Dorine, your "incredible shit" is somebody else's belief. What's wrong with people voicing their opinions of the current culture? It's OK...no "skin off your nose" on that one.

FLOTUS in Normany... Dress by Michael Kors, coat by Narciso Rodriquez, metallic Jimmy Choo shoes with lantern heels, Givenchy belt. How clever to add the French touch. Question to our resident fashionista: Moon, what are lantern heels I love this stuff.:-))))

LOL, Evelyn. Just got your SOS. 'Lantern' is the name Jimmy Choo uses for the shoe, maybe because the heel reflexes like an outdoor lantern, go figure: Here it is. Very nice.

You always come through with style, Moon. Thanks. I like her taste in clothes and shoes. Though I'd never wear a striped tee shirt ($10 on sale @The Gap), and flower sweater; she can pull it off. Nancy Reagan looking v. fragile. They were so sweet to her at the unveiling of RR statue at the Rotunda. I follow all this stuff on C-Span.

(Evelyn) I didn't think I put a timetable on it.. Well, you said... Pres Obama, for all his charm ,has some nerve insisting that she be confirmed rapidly. He asked she be confirmed by the August recess, which you equated to rapidly by your statement IMO. Christianity is the foundation of American citizenship, Uh, since when is religion of any kind in my country a foundation, or anything at all, of citizenship??? Since when does religion have any place per se in history books? And where is it not being included and where does he feel it should be? If it's relevant, fine, if it's not relevant to the events, it shouldn't be in there. Plus I find his problem with paganism rich coming from the Christian hypocrite. I have some other problems with his statements and inferences and other things of this ilk in general, but I'll leave it here. As someone in the comments noted, how is Christianity lacking in America when someone's falling over a church everytime they turn around in not a small number of places. I have 2 churches and 3 synagogues within a literal 6 block radius. That's a lot I realize, but this country doesn't lack churches IMO.

Glad your're keeping track of what i say...LOL. Thanks. I take it back, I don't care. I not going to defend Newt or his opinions. I don't care. But why is he a hypocrite? Married 2/3 times? So? Lighten-up, Dorine;-)

Aw, I think too many people being a bit too light is partially how we're in the state we're in today. :-) But as you request: Stephen Colbert shaves head for US troops in Iraq AP By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 7 mins ago BAGHDAD � It's official. Stephen Colbert has declared victory in the war in Iraq. But the top U.S. commander in the country says not so fast. Colbert, wearing a camouflage suit and tie, brought "The Colbert Report" � Comedy Central's political satire in which he plays a conservative TV pundit � to hundreds of U.S. troops at Camp Victory, the U.S. military headquarters on the western edge of Baghdad. He drew rousing applause from the uniformed audience when he poked fun at the fact that many of them have been deployed to Iraq multiple times and could end up in Afghanistan as soon as the U.S. effort there accelerates. "It must be nice here in Iraq because I understand some of you keep coming back again and again," he said during the taping of the first show on Sunday. "You've earned so many frequent flyer miles, you've earned a free ticket to Afghanistan." But the loudest roars came when his first guest, Gen. Ray Odierno, accepted a videotaped order from President Barack Obama to shave Colbert's head. The towering, bald general started the job with an electric razor, although a stylist finished it off. The back-and-forth was humorous, but it took on serious undertones as Colbert sought to cast a spotlight on the declining attention paid to the 6-year-old war in Iraq. Colbert, who traveled to Iraq from Kuwait on Friday on board a military transport plane, has said he was spurred to make the trip when he noticed economic news coverage eclipsing reports from Baghdad. The four shows, which were being taped in the domed marble hall at Saddam Hussein's former Al Faw Palace, will air Monday through Thursday next week at 11:30 p.m. EDT. Claiming the war must be over because nobody's talking about it anymore, Colbert invoked the power of cable television to "officially declare we won the Iraq war." He offered a list of successes and commentary to bolster his point. They included finding weapons of mass destruction, which was deemed "easier than we thought," and telling the troops that President Barack Obama should deploy them to the struggling General Motors. However, his first guest, Odierno, disagreed the war has ended. "We're not quite ready to declare victory," he said. "Things are moving forward but again, it's about bringing long-term stability." Colbert, who sat at a desk propped up by sandbags painted to simulate an American flag, responded by asking Odierno if he can bring long-term stability to the United States when he's done in Iraq. He also joked about the economic crisis, congratulating a soldier in the audience who recently got his college degree while serving in Iraq for being the lone 2009 graduate with a job. Colbert has promoted the trip for weeks but because the military urged caution, he only trumpeted a vague trip to "the Persian Gulf." He showed a clip claiming he himself didn't know his destination until he got off the plane and somebody threw a shoe at him. That was a reference to a December news conference at which an Iraqi journalist threw a shoe at then-President George W. Bush. He also made fun of himself with a previously taped skit that showed him arriving at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, in a stretch limousine for a "the full 10 hours" of basic training, which included him struggling to do push-ups and sit-ups. Odierno later told him he had too much hair to be a soldier, prompting the crewcut. "Definitely the highlight was seeing him sacrifice his hair," said Spc. Ryan MacLeod, 35, of Greenville, South Carolina. Former Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain also made a surprise appearance in a videoclip in which he thanked the troops for their service and reminded them to clean their muskets. Celebrities have frequently traveled to Iraq to entertain the troops. But the series of half-hour shows � dubbed "Operation Iraqi Stephen: Going Commando" � mark the first time anyone has broadcast a taped show from Iraq from a tour intended to entertain U.S. troops. USO senior official John Hanson said the production faced a major setback when a sandstorm grounded the crew on Saturday, forcing it to cancel plans for an outing. Both the character Colbert (silent "t") and the real Colbert (pronounced "t"), a Catholic family man, are ardent supporters of the troops. He has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Yellow Ribbon Fund (a charity that assists injured service members and their families), and he's a board member of DonorsChoose.org, which is raising money for the education of children of parents in the military. The trip came about when former Assistant Secretary of Defense Bing West suggested it after an interview last July on "The Colbert Report." The show sent about 30 production workers, about a third of the show's regular staff, to Iraq. Troops in the audience said they enjoyed Colbert's equal opportunity humor. "I especially appreciate the fact that he could make fun of both sides and you'd learn something and you'd laugh," said Chaplain Lt. Col. Barbara Sherer, 52, from Springfield, Missouri. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_en_tv/ml_tv_colbert_in_iraq

Atta girl! thank you. You must have read my mind, I was going to ask those of you who watch Colbert to tell me when his Iraq show was on...or as he says my "Bob-Hopeing trip"

I think he's on all this week, or Mon-Thurs, not sure if he's on Fridays.

Colbert week to watch. Conan as usual is awful. I miss Leno. Now, great news on the EU front! The right has won in all the EU countries which had elections this past weekend. The push to the right has come about because Europeans are not happy with all the illegals from Muslims countries coming through Africa.

Always the classy lady... Laura Bush Endorses Sotomayor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rLWquRy4GY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ebreitbart%2Etv%2F%3Fp%3D356083&feature=player_embedded

(Moon)Now, great news on the EU front! The right has won in all the EU countries which had elections this past weekend. Great news indeed. Clean sweep! LOL, while the US moves to the left. "Some right-leaning parties said the results vindicated their reluctance to spend more on company bailouts and fiscal stimulus to combat the global echttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_re_eu/european_electionsonomic crisis." And they don't even have GM! Silvio must be v. happy. Even Spain! Is Zapatero out?..I hope.

No, neither Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert has programs on Fridays, except during the conventions, when it went Tues-Friday, as I recall. Anyway, Stephen was doing his "Where in the Gulf" thing for months, where he'd spin a wheel and you'd get a little tidbit about some country. (Moon) Conan as usual is awful. I miss Leno. So true. I watched the first show and that was it. Nothing to tempt me. Thought I'd put the link up here, as this is really funny. I received an audio version of this via email. Click on #37, the Homicide Phone Call. Evidently this guy loves to put on telemarketers. It is brilliant. http://www.tommabe.com/videos.php Dumbass Parking isn't bad either. ;-)

FLOTUS in London! Cute wrtie-up Fish and chips for the First Lady: Michelle Obama takes her daughters to traditional English pub for �7.95 dinner http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1191620/Fish-chips-First-Lady-Michelle-Obama-takes-daughters-English-pub-7-95-dinner-London-tour-continues.html I like her belt..I read it's a Sacai ..??? She wore it on the cover of ESSENCE magazine. Dress is from Talbot's on sale , BTW Wow...I can see where Michelle gets her sense of style.

Sorry...here's the website: http://photos.essence.com/galleries/may_essence_issue_first_lady_michelle_obama__mom#129071

Guess I'd better padlock the doors. Or better yet, run for my life. And esp don't go to work since that'll get me even closer. They're here, they're here! Ok, well, only one so far, but still, it's one of *them*. ;-) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090609/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_guantanamo_detainee;_ylt=AmUCZk5SKjI7V70Pe8TFt3Ws0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJuaGZyajduBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNjA5L3VzX2d1YW50YW5hbW9fZGV0YWluZWUEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA2p1c3RpY2VkZXB0MQ-- That dress she wore to the pub couldn't be less flattering. Even with that belt. Granted it seems like a poor paparazzi shot, but still. In one of those pics at the Daily Mail, it shows Malia, I think, sitting with her back to the window. I'm shocked they'd let any of them sit by a window. I'm sure it wasn't bulletproof.

If you read the caption, I think they say Malia is not pictured. But aren't those windows bullet-proof. "He's" not the problem. You're safe from poor lil' Ahmed;-) It's his friends and co-horts...some in the US that could be security threats. FBI might have a reason for not endorsing this "endeavor". Read below: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105128523 FBI really doesn't know how many deranged people could want to take vindication for such...INYBY or mine.

I don't care for the look or the dress. Good news: in Italy so many regions that have always been left/Communist have turned to the right in the last elections. And that includes Umbria! LOL! It is not a happy day for the Firths. ;-)

OK, where'd they get the money to repay? I'd be concerned over their real financial health and motivation, as is alluded to in this AP article: 10 big banks get OK to repay $68B in bailout money By DANIEL WAGNER and STEVENSON JACOBS, AP Business Writers Daniel Wagner And Stevenson Jacobs, Ap Business Writers � 1 hr 55 mins ago WASHINGTON � The Treasury Department has approved 10 of the nation's largest banks to repay $68 billion in government bailout money. The department on Tuesday said the banks, which were not named, will be allowed to repay the money they received from the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program created by Congress last October at the height of the financial crisis. The banks have been eager to get out of the program to escape government restrictions such as caps on executive compensation. All eight banks that took TARP money and last month passed government "stress tests" confirmed that they received permission to repay the bailout funds. They are: JPMorgan Chase & Co., American Express Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., U.S. Bancorp, Capital One Financial Corp., Bank of New York Mellon Corp., State Street Corp. and BB&T Corp. Morgan Stanley did not pass the government test, but on Tuesday said it had raised enough capital quickly and was approved to repay its TARP money. Northern Trust Corp. was not among the 19 banks subjected to stress tests, but the company said it also had received permission to repay the bailout funds. Experts say allowing 10 banks to return $68 billion in bailout money illustrates some stability has returned to the system but caution that the crisis isn't over. Some worry the repayments could widen the gap between healthy and weak banks. Stocks zigzagged after the Treasury's widely expected announcement. In midday trading, the Dow Jones industrial average dropped about 30 points. Broader indices were mixed. More than 600 banks nationwide have received nearly $200 billion in TARP money and 22 smaller banks already have repaid it. "These repayments are an encouraging sign of financial repair, but we still have work to do," Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said in a statement. But some analysts warned that strong performance at the largest banks might obscure greater dangers in the broader banking industry. Smaller banks are still saddled with billions of dollars in risky commercial real estate loans, which could cause heavy losses depending on the speed of economic recovery. And large banks continue to hold the toxic, mortgage-backed assets at the heart of the financial crisis. Longtime bank analyst Bert Ely called the repayments a positive sign for the banking sector but not a reason to celebrate. He noted that three of the nation's biggest banks � Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. and Bank of America Corp. � are still tied to the bailout. The repayments show "that some of the major players have strengthened and will be able to ride out the crisis. The question is how will the other banks manage. It's not even clear the recession is bottoming out," Ely said. Even the banks permitted to repay the bailout funds are still dependent on government support, including debt guarantees from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and credit lines from the Federal Reserve. The firms now have the right to purchase the warrants Treasury holds in their firm "at fair market value." Besides Treasury's potential income from the sale of the warrants, the 10 banks already have paid dividends on the preferred stock totaling about $1.8 billion over the last seven months. Testifying before a Senate panel Tuesday, Geithner said the value of the warrants for banks permitted to repay TARP funds are in the "several billion dollar range." Treasury spokesman Andrew Williams said the banks can begin repaying immediately � "as soon as they figure out where to send the check." Dividend payments received for all TARP participants are about $4.5 billion to date, according to Treasury. The amounts the banks could repay are: � JPMorgan: $25 billion � Morgan Stanley: $10 billion � Goldman Sachs: $10 billion � U.S. Bancorp: $6.6 billion � Capital One: $3.6 billion � American Express: $3.4 billion � BB&T: $3.1 billion � Bank of New York Mellon: $3 billion � Northern Trust: $1.6 billion � State Street: $2 billion The push to repay the funds comes a month after "stress tests" of the nation's 19 largest financial firms found that 10 needed to raise $75 billion more to protect against future losses. All of those banks, including Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Bank of America, had submitted plans by late Monday to bolster their capital cushions that were enough to help them survive a deeper recession, the Fed said. The other nine institutions had to prove they could raise enough private capital without federal guarantees before they could return the money. So far, 16 of the 19 banks have raised $75.2 billion, mostly by selling common stock. [Ed note: They've diluted the value of the stock even further.] Regulators want to avoid letting a bank repay its TARP money only to have it return months later in worse shape, seeking another handout. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090609/ap_on_bi_ge/us_tarp_winners_and_losers

OK, where'd they get the money to repay? Bonds & Preferred. Sallie Mae and Wells Fargo sold bonds last month. Great interest and some short term . The motivation is obvious. I don't know how they can stop them.

Neither of those two are on the list. The article says the banks issued more stock from their treasury, a dilutive effect.

Today's

sorry... Today's WASHINGTON POST reports that the banks were able to raise capital. I am sure common stock was part of that capital Though financial stocks have been improving and haven't shown signs of being "diluted" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/09/AR2009060900891.html?nav=rss_business "The list of banks granted permission to repay the government was longer than many financial analysts had expected, in part because banks have been able to attract billions of dollars in new capital from private investors following the conclusion of government stress tests" The way I read it is that the financial strategy is working . LOL. But what do I know;-)

Given that the article I posted did say they issued more common stock...

AP Fiat closes deal to take bulk of Chrysler's assets Not enough to tempt me... I'm shopping for a new car and for the first time in my life I'm not buying an American car. UAW has taken enough of my tax $$$.

I don't know how many other companies do, but Honda has American plants. Still American made, if not designed.

"Two-thirds of "foreign imports" are, in fact, built in the United States in nonunion shops, where it costs at least $2,000 less in labor to build each vehicle." ..."The UAW, for its part, has tried to unionize the international plants in the South, to no avail. Its membership is down 17 percent from 2007, to 464,910 � the lowest since the Great Depression. " http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1205/p01s04-usec.html So I would still be supporting the American worker vs a total import.

You know, I think I'll worry more about these nuts rather than friends of foreign terrorists. http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2009/06/10/holocaust-museum-shooter-had-close-ties-to-prominent-neo-nazis/

I'm posting this mostly for the amusing comments comparing us to corrupt Chicago-land politics. And guess who comes out smelling better? ;-) http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=22378

V. sad about the killing at the Holocaust Museum Unrelenting hatred ,be it religious, political, ethnic,ideological.. leads people to violent behavior...And there is so much of it around. All you have to do is read the blogs, talk radio, yes, Keith Olberman. Why does he always have to end his program with "...days since Mission Accomplished". This guy makes a living out of mocking and hatred for anyone who doesn't agree with him. Funny??? Sick.

This guy makes a living out of mocking and hatred for anyone who doesn't agree with him. Thanks for singling out Olberman. Because Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Hannity are saints, of course.

I saw yesterday London's having a transit strike. I'm feeling for you all. I know what it's like.

Because Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Hannity are saints, of course. OReilly isn't in that category, if you listened to him. His program is not all politics..takes on pedophiles and child porn big time. Limbaugh is talk radio , which I mentioned, and so are the others. They have just transferred their style to Tv. I don't know Glen Beck..but don't think he feeds on hate .

(Dorine) I'm posting this mostly for the amusing comments comparing us to corrupt Chicago-land politics. And guess who comes out smelling better? ;-) LOL! Sounds to me like you guys could just get rid of your legislature and its salaries and save some money. ;-) Nice of him to take time to go over there. He has been actively supporting the troops for a long time and makes a pitch for an organization called DonorsChoose, where you can pick projects that support school projects for the military's children. The link is on his website: http://www.donorschoose.org/donors/leadershipboard.html?category=94

Thank you. Nice man IRL. I don't look at his show though. His humor never hits me . These overseas shows must have different writers.

(Evelyn) His humor never hits me . LOL!! The irony of this amuses me, yet doesn't surprise me. :-) OReilly isn't in that category, if you listened to him. His program is not all politics..takes on pedophiles and child porn big time. Limbaugh is talk radio , which I mentioned, and so are the others. They have just transferred their style to Tv. I don't know Glen Beck..but don't think he feeds on hate . I have listened/watched all of them at one time or another as well as following what they say in other media accounts. Hate is their M.O. as well as preying on people's fears, manipulation of facts and disinformation.

These overseas shows must have different writers. Huh? You mean locals? You must be kidding. BTW, I saw Lora's son's name on the credits this week. Hate is their M.O. as well as preying on people's fears, manipulation of facts and disinformation. Exactly how I would characterize it.

Hate is their M.O. as well as preying on people's fears, manipulation of facts and disinformation. You forgot to add IMO;-) Your perceptions , of course, which you are entitled to. Remember ....your "perceptions" are other people's beliefs, which they ,as citizens, are guaranteed too;-D OK....anybody else????

Yeah, the nutjobs have to have their leaders or "entertainment" as well.

Regardless of where these people come from (radio) or if you call them "entertainment," the fact (not opinion) is that they reside on a NEWS channel. It is called Fox News. Not Fox Family. Not Fox Comedy. IMO (you did see that didn't you, IMO) that makes all the difference.

Hate is their M.O. as well as preying on people's fears, manipulation of facts and disinformation. (Evelyn) You forgot to add IMO;-) No I didn't. ;-) It's has been documented any number of places when facts are distorted or outright ignored and I just watched a whole documentary about FOX doing each one of the things above. And there are a number of websites (that *some* people don't read ;-D) that do keep track of things I list above from everywhere, not just FOX. I've only seen the Monday Colbert Report so far. That was v.v. funny! Obama crackin' on his ears, LOL! I look forward to watching the rest. I wondered if Lora's son would be going. Though he doesn't necessarily need to go to write I'd think. They took 30 people with them, but I wasn't thinking writers.

LOL. You two are so righteous;-) Funny. Good thing I don't take you seriously.

(Dorine) I've only seen the Monday Colbert Report so far. That was v.v. funny! Actually, I thought Monday's the least funny show, except for Obama's message. There are messages from others. One guest message last night fell v. flat, but I liked Wednesday's show best. Really good guest. v. funny. And I love his boot camp films.

I'll check the rest out this weekend hopefully.

(Evelyn) LOL. You two are so righteous;-) Funny. I know, we're cards, ain't we? ;-D

Sometimes (well, maybe more) I really hate my city government. :-(( Their goose is cooked! City to kill at least 2,000 geese near LaGuardia, JFK over bird strike fears By Lisa L. Colangelo DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER Thursday, June 11th 2009, 5:51 PM The city and Port Authority are mounting an all-out war on Canadian geese, vowing to wipe out at least 2,000 birds living within a five-mile radius of the airports. "The serious dangers that Canada geese pose to aviation became all too clear when geese struck US Airways Flight 1549," Mayor Bloomberg said Thursday in announcing the aggressive plan. "The incident served as a catalyst to strengthen our efforts in removing geese from - and discouraging them from nesting on - city property near our runways." Federal wildlife officials will be dispatched to net and euthanize the molting birds over the next few weeks at 40 city parks and other locations near LaGuardia and Kennedy airports. In addition, the Port Authority will train and arm supervisors to shoot the birds in an emergency situation. Over the past six years, more than 1,200 geese have been netted and gassed on nearby Rikers Island in an effort to reduce the population and potentially dangerous collisions with planes. But after a bird strike forced Flight 1549 to land in the Hudson River, there were calls for tougher measures. Deputy Mayor Ed Skyler said the city will contract with the U.S. Agriculture Department to round up the geese and share the cost with the Port Authority. "They have experience at Rikers," Skyler said. "They know how to do it as humanely as possible." Geese will be targeted at Flushing Meadows Corona Park and Fort Totten. Skyler said the feds will work with the Parks Department to figure out the least disruptive time to remove the geese. "Research has shown that resident Canada geese in several New York studies stay within five miles of a particular location and that 74% of wildlife strikes occur at or near the airport," said Martin Lowney, director of the USDA Wildlife Services program in New York. Port Authority Executive Director Chris Ward said the agency is also installing a trial bird radar program and hiring a second wildlife biologist to investigate other ways to cut the bird population. Federal Aviation Administration officials said there have been 77 goose strikes in the city over the past 10 years. http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/06/11/2009-06-11_their_goose_is_cooked_city_to_kill_at_least_2000_geese_near_laguardia_jfk_in_bir.html#ixzz0IBc80fHl&D

Forgot to add, sometimes I hate humans, too.

Can't remember who was on what night, but the Deputy Prime Minister was v.g. and the packing USO boxes bit with Tom Hanks was v.g. Tonight's ride with the Thunderbirds was hilarious. Just watching him walk up to the jet with his rolling carryon bag! LOL! I liked that tonight's included a segment that more representative of his usual fare: Tip of the Hat, Wag of the Finger and it wasn't military-centric, as all the other bits have been.

Very cute. Obama writes girl a note for missing school AP By RYAN J. FOLEY, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 31 mins ago GREEN BAY, Wis. � Ten-year-old Kennedy Corpus has a rock-solid excuse for missing the last day of school: a personal note to her teacher from President Barack Obama. Her father, John Corpus of Green Bay, stood to ask Obama about health care during the president's town hall-style meeting at Southwest High School on Thursday. He told Obama that his daughter was missing school to attend the event and that he hoped she didn't get in trouble. "Do you need me to write a note?" Obama asked. The crowd laughed, but the president was serious. On a piece of paper, he wrote: "To Kennedy's teacher: Please excuse Kennedy's absence. She's with me. Barack Obama." He stepped off the stage to hand-deliver the note � to Kennedy's surprise. "I thought he was joking until he started walking down," Kennedy said after the event, showing off the note in front of a bank of television cameras. "It was like the best thing ever." The fourth-grader at Aldo Leopold elementary in Green Bay already knew what she was going to do with the note: frame it along with her ticket to the event. She said she'd make a copy for her teacher. Kennedy said she had never seen Obama before. "He's really nice," she said.

Yeah...that Town Hall exchange was funny. He doesn't always need a teleprompter;-) I bet she gives the teacher a copy and frames the original. Forgot to add, sometimes I hate humans, too. LOL...Gotta quit that hate-stuff, Dorine. (I'm gonna keep reminding you; we're happy, remember?;-) ...it wasn't military-centric, as all the other bits have been. He did say at the beginning that he wasn't going to pander. But hey, Just the fact that's he *went* to Iraq is complimentary enough. I'll watch the other shows this weekend too. Nice change for all those shows. I'm so tired of the SOS

He did say at the beginning that he wasn't going to pander. Huh? That is what he does. He has said every night to guest that it was "pandering is his job." I expect you've missed his irony.

(Karen) LOL! Sounds to me like you guys could just get rid of your legislature and its salaries and save some money. ;-) The Daily News likes your thinking! http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/06/12/2009-06-12_its_time_to_punish_the_albany_knuckleheads_join_our_dont_pay_the_bums_campaign.html

Boy is this a gift. The irony of this column showing up now in light of our conversation. Think Krugman's a lurker here? ;-)) Also, Evelyn, don't point out it's only his opinion, please. :-) That means nothing to me as a response. The Big Hate By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: June 11, 2009 Back in April, there was a huge fuss over an internal report by the Department of Homeland Security warning that current conditions resemble those in the early 1990s � a time marked by an upsurge of right-wing extremism that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. Conservatives were outraged. The chairman of the Republican National Committee denounced the report as an attempt to �segment out conservatives in this country who have a different philosophy or view from this administration� and label them as terrorists. But with the murder of Dr. George Tiller by an anti-abortion fanatic, closely followed by a shooting by a white supremacist at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the analysis looks prescient. There is, however, one important thing that the D.H.S. report didn�t say: Today, as in the early years of the Clinton administration but to an even greater extent, right-wing extremism is being systematically fed by the conservative media and political establishment. Now, for the most part, the likes of Fox News and the R.N.C. haven�t directly incited violence, despite Bill O�Reilly�s declarations that �some� called Dr. Tiller �Tiller the Baby Killer,� that he had �blood on his hands,� and that he was a �guy operating a death mill.� But they have gone out of their way to provide a platform for conspiracy theories and apocalyptic rhetoric [Ed note - i.e., playing on people's fears], just as they did the last time a Democrat held the White House. And at this point, whatever dividing line there was between mainstream conservatism and the black-helicopter crowd seems to have been virtually erased. Exhibit A for the mainstreaming of right-wing extremism is Fox News�s new star, Glenn Beck. Here we have a network where, like it or not, millions of Americans get their news � and it gives daily airtime to a commentator who, among other things, warned viewers that the Federal Emergency Management Agency might be building concentration camps as part of the Obama administration�s �totalitarian� agenda (although he eventually conceded that nothing of the kind was happening). [Ed. note - i.e., preying on people's fears and disinformation] But let�s not neglect the print news media. In the Bush years, The Washington Times became an important media player because it was widely regarded as the Bush administration�s house organ. Earlier this week, the newspaper saw fit to run an opinion piece declaring that President Obama �not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself,� and that in any case he has �aligned himself� with the radical Muslim Brotherhood. [Ed. note - i.e., manipulation of facts and disinformation] And then there�s Rush Limbaugh. His rants today aren�t very different from his rants in 1993. But he occupies a different position in the scheme of things. Remember, during the Bush years Mr. Limbaugh became very much a political insider. Indeed, according to a recent Gallup survey, 10 percent of Republicans now consider him the �main person who speaks for the Republican Party today,� putting him in a three-way tie with Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich. So when Mr. Limbaugh peddles conspiracy theories � suggesting, for example, that fears over swine flu were being hyped �to get people to respond to government orders� � that�s a case of the conservative media establishment joining hands with the lunatic fringe. [Ed. note - i.e., ....oh, you get the picture ;-)] It�s not surprising, then, that politicians are doing the same thing. The R.N.C. says that �the Democratic Party is dedicated to restructuring American society along socialist ideals.� And when Jon Voight, the actor, told the audience at a Republican fund-raiser this week that the president is a �false prophet� and that �we and we alone are the right frame of mind to free this nation from this Obama oppression,� Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, thanked him, saying that he �really enjoyed� the remarks. Credit where credit is due. Some figures in the conservative media have refused to go along with the big hate � people like Fox�s Shepard Smith and Catherine Herridge, who debunked the attacks on that Homeland Security report two months ago. But this doesn�t change the broad picture, which is that supposedly respectable news organizations and political figures are giving aid and comfort to dangerous extremism. What will the consequences be? Nobody knows, of course, although the analysts at Homeland Security fretted that things may turn out even worse than in the 1990s � that thanks, in part, to the election of an African-American president, �the threat posed by lone wolves and small terrorist cells is more pronounced than in past years.� And that�s a threat to take seriously. Yes, the worst terrorist attack in our history was perpetrated by a foreign conspiracy. But the second worst, the Oklahoma City bombing, was perpetrated by an all-American lunatic. Politicians and media organizations wind up such people at their, and our, peril. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/opinion/12krugman.html A version of this article appeared in print on June 12, 2009, on page A27 of the New York edition. Here's the comment section for this, which I haven't really been through yet to know who agrees and disagrees. http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/opinion/12krugman.html

A review of Colbert's shows from Iraq with comparisons to Bob Hope's shows. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/arts/television/12watch.html?em

LOL...Paul Krugman is a columnist.... "Columnist � A person who writes a regular column giving a personal opinion." http://nie.brownsvilleherald.com/newspaperterms.htm I have nothing more to add. Actually, I consider him a liberal "blabberer". That is, a blogger with creds. IMO, of course;-) (NYT)Today�s troops are hardly starved for entertainment... Oh but they are. Nothing beats live entertainment. Gives them someplace to go besides their barracks to go on the computers; a touch of home. Kudos to Colbert.

Oops I missed! One more time... But, of course. The more I read, the more I realize health care reform will be a sham. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090613/ap_on_go_co/us_senate_disclosures

Oh I'm confident we'll get some kind of fix that will have consensus. Perhaps not a permanent one this time around, but like Medicare, it can have improvements as it progresses. Everyone seems to be on board . The biggest hurdle seems to be $$$$$ w/o raising personal taxes. He never should have boxed himself into that one. There's just not enough tax $$ from those earning over $250K to cover.

Well, if POTUS and SoS are excited about the vote in Iran, I guess, I am too...:-( From Reuters Obama "excited" by Iran's robust election debate" http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed1/idUSTRE55B4SG20090612

Colbert and crew (with Rob) was in Iraq at the time of the WHCD. Excellent shows. Now my 2 cents. I like Glenn Beck and I think you would like him too Evelyn. And I can't put Bill O'Reilley down because during the Pres. primaries, he was fair to Hillary and he was impartial. Nothing to do with what CNN were doing at the time. Changing subject: I wonder what Obama will do about that bogus election in Iran? A is not giving up the power.

Interesting article, thanks Evelyn! But he can not be so naiveas to think that there is a debate going on in Iran, LOL! The voting results are a fraud. :-(

(Moon)The voting results are a fraud. :-( I know that , and so does he. But this way he can take some credit that extending his hand to Iran had an impact. Really, I wish we would just face up to the fact that Iran and North Korea are not going to give up their nukes. It's an illusion to think we are going to change their minds. And no one seems to be concerned that Pakistan has nukes. Put up the anti-ballistic missiles and get on with it. LOL I do remember Hillary commenting how fair FOX had been . And it seems to me that everyone around here was for Hillary and no one made a comment re: FOX and fairness at the time.

Wait... I did comment here at the time that I only watched Fox News because they were fair to Hillary. That's when I started watching Glenn Beck. And no one seems to be concerned that Pakistan has nukes. India is.

Great, they were fair to Hillary. But for 98% of the other time and on other topics they have a well documented history of distorting facts, flat out lying and the aformentioned playing on people's fears. And the beloved Bill O'Reilly has told people to "shut up" countless times on his show. Isn't he a real sweetie? ;-)

Oh yeah, and on Iran, of course O knew things weren't right and that was his way of putting it out there without saying so. Looking forward to the debate? LOL. His way of saying he hopes the opposition puts up a fight. All that is so bogus. And cutting off phone and text service, Skype and social media sites like Facebook. No, nothing to see here, move along. :-((

You know, many times I don't go looking for stuff like this, *at all*, but these bits just keep falling into my lap as I surf. I don't make this stuff up, truly (nor do people like Krugman). I don't have to. This is a contrast between what Pres O said and how Hannity on his show distorted what was said.... President Obama: If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. Sean Hannity: He honors the national day of prayer behind closed doors. Now, on his Middle East apology tour, the President calls the U.S. a "Muslim nation." President Obama: We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, or a Jewish nation, or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens, who are bound by ideals. Sean Hannity: The same president who insists the U.S. is not a Christian nation is now calling us a Muslim nation.

I don't understand your postings on 549 and 550? Where did this all come from? Are you well? I'm concerned.

I don't understand what confuses you. I'm following up two different conversations on here, on Iran and Fox content being less than honest. Seems kinda clear cut to me. *scratches head* I'm fine thanks, though a bit tired from a short night's sleep and sitting in Central Park for 6 hrs (from 7am) for Shakespeare in the Park tix (pray it doesn't rain tonight!). ;-)

Uh oh, I have an idea Moon isn't going to like this... Prrrrretty daring... this is the larger version, but it's Photo Shop and I didn't think it would copy here. http://mrs-o.org/?paged=2 Running to light candles for dry balmy night, in Central Park:-)))) Tell us how it goes...

LOL, Evelyn, that outfit is awful. Not even youthful looking, just a mess. I'm following you, Dorine, but the media in general play with quotations to suit them at the time. The important issue with Fox was that they were fair with Hillary.

"She's likes her...she really likes her..." (Hope she didn't wear that little flower number) Michelle Obama, girls get rare London palace tour By NANCY ZUCKERBROD, Associated Press Writer Nancy Zuckerbrod, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 29 mins ago LONDON � First came the hug, then a guided tour of Buckingham Palace. First Lady Michelle Obama, on a visit to London last week, got permission from Queen Elizabeth II for a guided tour of the palace with her daughters, Sasha and Malia. They were shown around the queen's official residence and its gardens and the queen herself greeted them afterward, according to a royal source who spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was private. In April, during a visit to Britain with her husband, Michele Obama made a warm impression on the queen � so much so that the monarch strayed from protocol and briefly wrapped her arm around the first lady in a rare public show of affection. The first lady also put her arm around the monarch. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090614/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_michelle_obama

Like Tiananmen Sqare all over again... On Yahoo Huge pro-reform rally defies crackdown threats Such brave people .

Absolutely!

This is when the United Nations should step in. It's a useless and expensive organization paid for by our tax dollars. Shut it down. And Obama's silence? What's he waiting for?

(Moon)And Obama's silence? What's he waiting for? Agree... These poor people need to know the free world is behind them. ...we did it for China and more recently Georgia. Yesterday on Meet the Press Biden gave a *weak* endorsement...

(Moon)And Obama's silence? What's he waiting for? Agree... Because at this juncture no moderate politician in Iran will back a movement sanctioned by the U.S. They'd have to oppose it for political cover. C'mon. Our "support" has to come in the back door through diplomatic channels. Plus the ayatollahs control what happens; their president doesn't wield the real power there. It's a theocracy, remember?

Bless him, he's taking his case right to the docs; Godspeed, Barack: Obama presses doctors to back health care overhaul By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer CHICAGO � President Barack Obama asked skeptical doctors Monday to get behind an overhaul of the nation's health care system, declaring the system a "ticking time bomb" for the federal budget that could force the entire nation to "go the way of GM." The difficulty of his sales job was evident when he said he was against limiting awards in malpractice lawsuits, a top priority for doctors. That statement brought him a smattering of boos � a remarkable public response to a popular president accustomed to cheering audiences. Flying to his hometown to speak at the annual meeting here of the American Medical Association, Obama struck back at critics of his efforts to reshape the health care delivery system to bring skyrocketing health care costs under control and expand coverage to the millions of uninsured. He had his sharpest rhetoric yet for those critics, calling them "naysayers," "fear-mongers" and peddlers of "Trojan horse" falsehoods who should be ignored. He warned interest groups and lobbyists not to use "fear tactics to paint any effort to achieve reform as an attempt to socialize medicine." The president directly took on criticism from former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, though not by name. On Sunday, Romney, widely expected to consider another run at the White House in 2012, called Obama's support for creating government-sponsored insurance as an option alongside private coverage a "Trojan horse" for a single-payer system like Britain's. "When you hear the naysayers claim that I'm trying to bring about government-run health care, know this: they are not telling the truth," Obama said. Even before Obama spoke, Republicans offered push-back. GOP Rep. Tom Price of Georgia � a former orthopedic surgeon � accused Obama of pushing a "government takeover" of health care. Speaking to reporters on a conference call organized by the Republican National Committee, Price contended that a committee established within Obama's administration to study the effectiveness of various medical treatments would turn into a "rationing board" to overrule doctors and deny patients care. And Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and other Republicans introduced legislation to ban the rationing of care on such a basis.The economic stimulus legislation that passed over the winter provides funding for "comparative effectiveness research," and the GOP proposal would block the government from using the results to "deny coverage of an item or service" in a federal health care program. The president said for the first time publicly that health care reform, including covering the almost 50 million Americans who have no insurance, would cost about $1 trillion over 10 years. "That's real money, even in Washington," he said. "But remember: That's less than we are projected to have spent on the war in Iraq. And also remember: Failing to reform our health care system in a way that genuinely reduces cost growth will cost us trillions of dollars more in lost economic growth and lower wages." Aides have said previously that the administration wants to keep the cost around $1 trillion, while also acknowledging it might go higher. Obama said he's "open" to requiring all Americans to have health insurance, stressing that the plan would permit assistance for those who cannot afford it on their own. A "health care exchange" would be set up to provide additional options for the uninsured. "A big part of what led General Motors and Chrysler into trouble," he said, "were the huge costs they racked up providing health care for their workers � costs that made them less profitable and less competitive with automakers around the world." "If we do not fix our health care system," Obama said, "America may go the way of GM � paying more, getting less, and going broke." Obama has taken steps in recent days to outline just where money for the overhaul could be found. For instance, he wants to cut federal payments to hospitals by about $200 billion and cut $313 billion from Medicare and Medicaid over 10 years. He also is proposing a $635 billion in tax increases and spending cuts in the health care system as a "down payment" for his plan. Obama traveled to Chicago to talk to the 250,000-physician group in hopes of persuading doctors not to fight him. The nation's doctors, like many other groups, are divided over the president's proposals. He drew hearty applause with a focus on the particular concerns of the medical profession: telling them any system that relies on them "to be bean-counters and paper-pushers" is out of whack and that his push to investigate best-practices and eliminate unnecessary procedures "is not about dictating what kind of care should be provided." But the malpractice issue is the most provocative with this audience. Doctors chafe at the rising and eye-popping costs of malpractice insurance, and support limits on malpractice lawsuits. Obama started by sympathizing with doctors "who feel like they are constantly looking over their shoulder for fear of lawsuits" and with their desire for some way to curb them. The crowd burst into loud support. "Don't get too excited yet. ... Just hold onto your horses here, guys," Obama said as he prepared to deliver the disappointing news. "I want to be honest with you. I'm not advocating caps on malpractice awards," the president said. He explained that he thinks such limits would be unfair to patients who had been harmed � a line interrupted by boos. Instead, he said, without offering specifics, that expensive "excessive defensive medicine" can be curbed in other ways. Democrats have long opposed caps on medical malpractice payouts � something former President George W. Bush pushed for. Trial lawyers' groups stepped up their efforts. The Center for Justice and Democracy, which says it advocates for injured consumers, attorneys and others, released a letter to Obama signed by 64 survivors of medical malpractice saying they didn't want to be used as a "political bargaining chip" in the president's efforts to win support from doctors. "We are extremely concerned that the rights of medical malpractice patients may be stripped away as part of your national health care proposal," they wrote. The main lobby for trial lawyers also disputed Obama's statement that it's "a real issue" that doctors order more tests and treatments to avoid legal liability. "The notion that 'defensive medicine' is leading to higher health care costs is not supported by empirical data or academic literature," Les Weisbrod, president of the American Association for Justice, said after Obama's speech. "Limiting the legal rights of injured patients will do nothing to lower health care costs or aid the uninsured," Weisbrod said. Obama co-sponsored legislation with Hillary Rodham Clinton when both were in the Senate in 2005 that would have created a program to allow patients to learn of medical errors and establish negotiated compensation with the offer of an apology.

"Instead, he said, without offering specifics, that expensive "excessive defensive medicine" can be curbed in other ways. " Like? He's bowing to the trial lawyers like he did to the UAW. Hey, it pays to float($$$$) the winning candidate.

(Mari) Plus the ayatollahs control what happens; their president doesn't wield the real power there. It's a theocracy, remember? And how amazing is it that Khamenei finally made a turnaround and agreed publicly to look into the issue. Whether anything comes of it in the end there's no telling as it's quite unprecedented.

"The notion that 'defensive medicine' is leading to higher health care costs is not supported by empirical data or academic literature," Les Weisbrod, president of the American Association for Justice, said after Obama's speech. Not supported by the facts, eh? But I suppose it is his "opinion" that it is not supported by the facts. *shaking head*

ABC News to air Obama interview on health care AP Mon Jun 15, 11:54 am ET NEW YORK � ABC News will present a prime-time interview with President Barack Obama on health care issues next week. The special will air June 24 at 10 p.m. Eastern, on two-hour tape delay. Charles Gibson and Diane Sawyer will moderate the White House discussion with a live audience, also taking questions submitted by viewers. After a break for local news, the discussion will continue on "Nightline." That morning, Sawyer will interview Obama for "Good Morning America." Gibson will anchor that evening's edition of "World News" from the White House Blue Room. Obama has been carefully doling out access to broadcast networks. NBC had big ratings with its inside peek at the White House. Obama has also given interviews to CBS' "Face the Nation" and "60 Minutes."

Godspeed to Obama. I want Socialized medicine in the US. (Mari) Plus the ayatollahs control what happens; their president doesn't wield the real power there. It's a theocracy, remember? And the West must fear stepping on their toes because they retaliate with bombings and killing innocent people. So our leaders don't speak out? That's not right.

Yeay! He did it! AP on Yahoo... Obama: Iranian voters' voices should be heard 1 hr 3 mins ago WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama on Monday said Iranian voters have a right to feel that their ballots matter and urged the investigation into vote-rigging allegations to go forward without additional violence. Obama said reports of violence that followed Iranian elections trouble him and all Americans. Peaceful dissent should never be subject to violence that followed weekend elections that gave President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a second term, he said. "It would be wrong for me to be silent on what we've seen on the television the last few days," Obama told reporters at the White House. Obama said he had no way of knowing whether the results are valid � the United States, he noted, had no election monitors in the country � but he added that it is important that the voters' choices be respected. Hundreds of thousands marched in central Tehran. Gunfire from a pro-government militia killed one man and wounded several others while the government cracked down on dissent. An Associated Press photographer saw at least one demonstrator killed and several others with what appeared to be serious injuries. The march came as Iran's most powerful figure, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, ordered an investigation into vote rigging against reform leader Mir Hossein Mousavi. "I am deeply troubled by the violence I've been seeing on TV," Obama said. Obama said he would continue to engage the Middle East nation, even if Ahmadinejad's re-election is upheld. Obama said the United States must work with the country to prevent a nuclear arms race in the region. He emphasized that he disagrees with Ahmadenijad's "odious" beliefs and said the United States has serious disagreements with Iran's foreign policy. Yet, he said, the United States has a broader interest in stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons or exporting terrorism. The president was careful not to wade too deeply into Iran's domestic politics, recognizing "sometimes, the United States can be a handy political football." He said it's up to Iran to determine its own leaders but that the country must respect voters' choice. However, Obama praised protesters and the nation's youth who question results that showed Ahmadinejad winning a second term in a landslide. "The world is watching and is inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was," he said. Obama's remarks came at the end of an Oval Office meeting with Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi. ~~~~~~~~ I didn't know Silvio was here:-)))) I doubt v. much if we get Euro-care. There will be some kind of expanded medical medicine by consensus to include the people who don't have insurance . Everyone seems to be on board for that one.

Somehow I get the feeling The Liberal Left doesn't like PM Netanyahu. Why do they always side with the Palestinians? From THE NATION Bibi's Media Manipulations By Neve Gordon June 11, 2009 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is beginning to sweat. Notwithstanding the agreement between President Barack Obama and Netanyahu on issues such as the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and the insistence that the Palestinians renounce violence, there are currently points of serious contention between the two leaders. These include Obama's position that the two-state solution is the only way to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, his demand that Israel stop building settlements and his intimation that all the settlements are illegal. Other points of strife include Obama's call for regional nuclear nonproliferation (which, in effect, assumes that Israel's nuclear capacity will be part of the negotiations with Iran), his recognition of the plight of Palestinians, including the refugees, and his claim that Hamas is a legitimate rather than a terrorist organization. So far Obama's challenges to Israel have been theoretical, and the only substantive demand that Washington has made involves the 100 or so Jewish outposts in the West Bank. Reiterating President Bush's directive, Obama recently asked Netanyahu to begin dismantling the outposts. Legally the outposts are just like the 121 settlements (that is, they are all illegal), only the outposts were built following the 1993 Oslo accords and, as opposed to the settlements--which are now home to close to half a million Jews or about 7 percent of Israel's citizenry--almost all the outposts are extremely sparsely populated with fewer than a dozen people in each one. Netanyahu did not refuse, but instead of carrying out the job, he decided to put on a show. Last week, the government sent troops to dismantle two outposts. The television networks were invited to cover the event, and that evening viewers watched how a group of settlers struggled against the most powerful military in the Middle East. Within hours of the news broadcasts, the settlers had already rebuilt the outposts, and thus today we are, once again, back to square one. The perceptive viewer understands that the government and the settlers are staging the events, using the media to broadcast them to the world. The images of lawless fundamentalists fighting the military convey a clear message to the audience at home: if Netanyahu dares to dismantle the outposts, the settlers will not only topple his government but there will be blood. More specifically, the not-so-latent inference is that if Netanyahu goes ahead with Washington's directive, he will be responsible for a civil war. While all of the major news networks provided a similar narrative, Channel Two, the most popular news provider, dedicated fourteen minutes of prime time to the issue. In the segment, a reporter is shown interviewing a Jewish settler named Araleh from Karnei Shomron in the West Bank about the dismantling of Jewish outposts. The two men are standing on a mountain ridge overlooking Palestinian fields that had been set on fire. The settler asserts that, "This is the price tag.... People need to know that if they dismantle anything in Judea and Samaria, there is a price." He then looks at the horizon and asks, "Do you see all these mountains?" and immediately responds, "They are all ours." When the reporter inquires what the settlers will do if a nearby outpost is dismantled, Araleh exclaims that they (the government) will not destroy it, and then adds, "They might destroy a little shack in the outpost to send pictures to the nigger in the United States." The crux of the matter is that this pathetic racist settler is right: the images of troops dismantling a few outposts and the forceful resistance are all part of a well-choreographed spectacle that is being produced specifically for Washington. Otherwise why remove only two outposts at a time instead of forty at once and getting the job done? And why invite the networks to cover the events and not to dismantle the outposts by surprise in the early morning hours when the settlers are not ready? The answer is straightforward: Netanyahu wants Obama to think that Israel will end up in a civil war if the White House stands firm. The question now is whether Obama will back off or whether he will he have the courage to make Netanyahu dismantle both the outposts and the settlements. If Obama hesitates, Israel will become a full-blown apartheid regime, while if he remains bold he will probably be remembered as the president who helped save Israel from itself. To do so he will have to make Netanyahu sweat much more. About Neve Gordon Neve Gordon teaches politics at Ben-Gurion University, Israel http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090629/gordon

(Evelyn) I doubt v. much if we get Euro-care. Damn straight we won't. That would mean every player would get much less of the pie, esp docs, so it won't happen.

I saw on CNN, while President A was making his re-election speech, that the council has 3 days to certify the results. I didn't realize how many votes there were either. I wonder what kind of voting machines they have or everything's by hand (hint: I didn't read the whole article yet ;-)). Speed of Iran vote count called suspicious AP By JASON KEYSER, Associated Press Writer � 49 mins ago CAIRO � How do you count almost 40 million handwritten paper ballots in a matter of hours and declare a winner? That's a key question in Iran's disputed presidential election. International polling experts and Iran analysts said the speed of the vote count, coupled with a lack of detailed election data normally released by officials, was fueling suspicion around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's landslide victory. Iran's supreme leader endorsed the hard-line president's re-election the morning after Friday's vote, calling it a "divine assessment" and appearing to close the door on challenges from Iran's reformist camp. But on Monday, after two days of rioting in the streets, he ordered an investigation into the allegations of fraud. Mir Hossein Mousavi, Ahmadinejad's reformist challenger, claims he was robbed of the presidency and has called for the results to be canceled. Mousavi's newspaper, Kalemeh Sabz, or the Green Word, reported on its Web site that more than 10 million votes were missing national identification numbers similar to U.S. Social Security numbers, which make the votes "untraceable." It did not say how it knew that information. Mousavi said some polling stations closed early with voters still in line, and he charged that representatives of his campaign were expelled from polling centers even though each candidate was allowed one observer at each location. He has not provided evidence to support the accusations. His supporters have reported intimidation by security forces who maintained a strong presence around polling stations. Observers who questioned the vote said that at each stage of the counting, results released by the Interior Ministry showed Ahmadinejad ahead of Mousavi by about a 2-1 margin. That could be unusual, polling experts noted, because results reported first from Iran's cities would likely reflect a different ratio from those reported later from the countryside, where the populist Ahmadinejad has more support among the poor. Mousavi said the results also may have been affected by a shortage of ballot papers in the provinces of Fars and East Azerbaijan, where he had been expected to do well because he is among the country's Azeri minority. He said the shortage was despite the fact that officials had 17 million extra ballots ready. Interior Ministry results show that Ahmadinejad won in East Azerbaijan. The final tally was 62.6 percent of the vote for Ahmadinejad and 33.75 for Mousavi � a landslide victory in a race that was perceived to be much closer. Such a huge margin also went against the expectation that a high turnout � a record 85 percent of Iran's 46.2 million eligible voters � would boost Mousavi, whose campaign energized young people to vote. About a third of the eligible voters were under 30. Ahmadinejad, who has significant support among the poor and in the countryside, said Sunday that the vote was "real and free" and insisted the results were fair and legitimate. "Personally, I think that it is entirely possible that Ahmadinejad received more than 50 percent of the vote," said Konstantin Kosten, an expert on Iran with the Berlin-based German Council of Foreign Relations who spent a year from 2005-06 in Iran. Still, he said, "there must be an examination of the allegations of irregularities, as the German government has called for." But Iran's electoral system lacks the transparency needed to ensure a fair election, observers said. International monitors are barred from observing Iranian elections and there are no clear mechanisms to accredit domestic observers, said Michael Meyer-Resende, coordinator of the Berlin-based Democracy Reporting International, which tracked developments in the Iranian vote from outside the country. He noted that the election was organized and overseen by two institutions that are not independent, the government's Interior Ministry and the Guardian Council, a 12-member body made up of clerics and experts in Islamic law who are closely allied to the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Meyer-Resende said that to be sure of the results announced by the Interior Ministry, it must release data all the way down to the level of each polling station. One of the central questions was how 39.2 million paper ballots could be counted by hand and final results announced by authorities in Tehran in just over 12 hours. Past elections took at least twice as long. A new computerized system might have helped speed the process in urban centers, where most Iranians live, though it is unclear if that system was extended to every small town and village. And each ballot � on which a candidate's name was written in � would still have to be counted by hand before any data could be entered into a computer, aggregated and transmitted to the Interior Ministry in Tehran. "I wouldn't say it's completely impossible," Meyer-Resende said. "In the case of Iran, of course, you wonder with logistical challenges whether they could do it so fast." Susan Hyde, an assistant political science professor at Yale University who has taken part in election monitoring missions in developing countries for the Carter Center, agreed that would be uncharacteristically fast. "If they're still using hand counting, that would be very speedy, unusually speedy," she said. The Interior Ministry released results from a first batch of 5 million votes just an hour and a half after polling stations closed. Over the next four hours, it released vote totals almost hourly in huge chunks of about 5 million votes � plowing through more than half of all ballots cast. Arshin Adib-Moghaddam, a professor of Middle East politics at the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies, said a major rigging process would require the involvement of powerful advisory bodies, including those in which one of the other candidates and a key Mousavi backer are prominent figures. "Given that Mohsen Rezaei, one of the other presidential candidates, is the head of the powerful Expediency Council, for instance, it is highly unlikely that he wouldn't have received any information of such a strategic plan to hijack the election," Adib-Moghaddam said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_iran_fraud_allegations;_ylt=At7hA2gxwqGZDfH1vu0UCKis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJxNmRldDZ2BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNjE2L21sX2lyYW5fZnJhdWRfYWxsZWdhdGlvbnMEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA2lyYW5lbGVjdGlvbg--

Well, The American Conservative seems to elaborate on Mari's point earlier about Obama reaction. The President of the United States is not and must not be seen as a partisan in the elections of other nations. No matter the party and no matter the country, their cause is not and cannot be the same as his. For another thing, such a symbolic display of solidarity in the absence of action would be interpreted, correctly, as worse than doing and saying nothing. Nothing would please his domestic enemies more than to be able to mock his empty symbolism and falsely impute Islamist sympathies to him, and nothing would suit Mousavi�s enemies more than to be able to tie Mousavi to the United States through that symbolic identification. While we�re at it, it would be seen as an attempt to use worldwide sympathy for the movement in question to bolster himself politically while doing absolutely nothing for the people with whom he supposedly sympathizes. It would give the regime the pretext of treating Mousavi as an American lackey. They may do this in any case, but Washington need not enable or provide justificatio for this. The administration�s wait-and-see approach is the right one http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2009/06/15/political-colors/

Tweets from Iran and pics. Multiple deaths apparently. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/livetweeting-the-revolution.html#more

(Dorine) I wonder what kind of voting machines they have or everything's by hand On CR last night Roger Cohen (NYT) reported on the phone from Tehran. There were four other Middle East scholars on the show . The consensus is that no one really knows who won...it could be President A. "Voting Machines"..don't think so. Try hand ballots which in some instances they ran out of. "The administration�s wait-and-see approach is the right one" I am v. happy with his pronouncements yesterday. The US doesn't have to align itself with Mousavi, but we do with people who want their votes to count. And that is what BO statement said. Wasn't so "wait and see" on Saturday...remember I posted that article ... And my comment was if he was happy, I guess I would be too.

Back to healthcare for a moment.... (Evelyn) I doubt v. much if we get Euro-care. (Me) Damn straight we won't. That would mean every player would get much less of the pie, esp docs, so it won't happen. It's possible some form will happen, but I'll bet so riddled with loopholes as to be almost not worth it except for the ability to make the statement that something was done. But then again, in 1999 when the Prospective Payment System for nursing homes was put into effect, a variety of entities experienced some negative effects (mass job losses/facility closings/limitations in patient care/manipulation of patient care to ensure maximum reimbursement) all for the common good of saving Medicare money in the end. Eventually, facilities figured out how to work the system along with there being much tweaking on the part of Congress because some of the cuts in reimbursement turned out to be quite draconian. One of the things that I think it achieved though to some degree was to reign in the billing excesses from the fee-for-service days. At the same time, that created some scenarios regarding maximizing reimbursement that I found quite disillusioning as an altruistic clinician. I went to a meeting one night about healthcare reform and watched this. I mentioned it very briefly here a couple of months ago. It was very interesting to see how various countries utilize healthcare. As you can read (and see if you watch it), they aren't perfect systems, but people are helped and in general it costs less to provide that care proportionally than here. I highly recommend watching it. It's only an hour. (Watch Online link at top of page). http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/

From today's Philly Inquirer; these guys conducted a poll 3 weeks ago: Iran vote may be accurate An independent effort to take the pulse of the country's electorate found that Ahmadinejad was poised to win reelection handily. By Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a ratio of more than 2-1 - greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election. While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead. Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, pre-election polls there are either conducted or monitored by the government and are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, the poll undertaken by our nonprofit organizations from May 11 to May 20 was the third in a series over the past two years. Conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, the field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. Our polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our pre-election survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, a member of the second-largest ethnic group in Iran, after Persians. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad 2-1 over Mousavi. Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youths and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, and 18- to 24-year-olds were the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad. The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians. When our poll was taken, almost a third of Iranians were still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud. Some might argue that the professed support for Ahmadinejad in our poll simply reflected fearful respondents' reluctance to provide honest answers to pollsters. Yet the integrity of our results is confirmed by the politically risky responses Iranians were willing to give to a host of questions. For instance, nearly four of five Iranians - including most Ahmadinejad supporters - said they wanted to change the political system to give them the right to elect Iran's supreme leader, who is not currently subject to popular vote. Similarly, Iranians chose free elections and a free press as their most important priorities, virtually tied with improving the national economy. These were hardly politically correct responses in a largely authoritarian society. Indeed, consistently among all three of our surveys over the past two years, more than 70 percent of Iranians also expressed support for providing full access to weapons inspectors and a guarantee that Iran will not develop or possess nuclear weapons, in return for outside aid and investment. And 77 percent of Iranians favored normal relations and trade with the United States, another result consistent with our previous findings. Iranians view their support for a more democratic system, with normal relations with the United States, as consonant with their support for Ahmadinejad. They do not want him to continue his hard-line policies. Rather, Iranians apparently see Ahmadinejad as their toughest negotiator - the person best positioned to bring home a favorable deal, rather like a Persian Nixon going to China. Allegations of fraud and electoral manipulation will serve to further isolate Iran, and are likely to increase its belligerence and intransigence against the outside world. Before other countries, including the United States, jump to the conclusion that the Iranian presidential elections were fraudulent - with the grave consequences such charges could bring - they should consider all independent information. The fact may simply be that the reelection of Ahmadinejad is what the Iranian people wanted. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit that researches attitudes toward extremism. Patrick Doherty is deputy director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. The groups' poll consisted of 1,001 interviews, and its margin of error was plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. This appeared in the Washington Post.

It may be, but according to this, just before the election Ballen indicated it he thought it could be much closer, with a run off. I guess not having a lot of confidence in his own poll? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/iran-pre-election-polling_b_214452.html This is the liveblog via Twitter of that event she mentions. The first half dozen lines refer to the election. http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/06/08/liveblogging-iran-pre-election-public-opinion-results/

I had read elsewhere that the outcome could be so as Ahmadinijad could've lost Tehran, because of the concentration of younger, more educated voters who tended to be the opposition supporters, but won the outer regions since there's less of that demographic there. I suspect this is their equivalent of our 2004 election in many ways, but we didn't turn violent when Kerry lost (surprisingly to many).

Somehow I get the feeling The Liberal Left doesn't like PM Netanyahu. Why do they always side with the Palestinians? This is only a select, but very vocal, bunch of self-loathing Jews and/or Israelis that the media loves to publish as reprsentative. Read Deshowitz on the subject.

What got me from the article in The Nation was that the author was a professor at Ben _Guerion university in Israel. *I* say, he's not being v. loyal Anyway, I have a problem , as you know ,with people who aren't loyal to their patria and criticize it abroad any chance they get. The Nation as a whole is v. critical of the Israeli cause. Read Deshowitz on the subject. Where? The poll that The Philly paper quotes is one that was discussed last night. But i think it was taken in May. In the last two weeks (they said) Moussavi gained popularity. I have that PBS Healthcare show on my DVR from last year! IMO we have to take "baby steps" with expanded health care. It will improve incrementally...like Medicare has. Government run care isn't that great, I can tell you from experience. And the services mostly deal with people who are healthy. The guys at the VA have a hard time getting adequate care etc. Competition always helps.

Dershowitz on Neve Gordon: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1162378347880 Competition always helps. No, it does not. Examples: telcoms and cable companies. You see your rates go down...ever????

Yes, my phone bill has even with AT&T. I pay less with landline, international, wireless and DSL Premium than I paid for landline alone. Remember when you paid by the minute and only called long distance in the evenings and Sundays when the rates were lower ? Some cable has gone up if you subscribe singularly, but still there are deals out there if you "bundle". Wow Dershowitz sure doesn't like Gordon. But what motivation does Gordon have when he has a job in Israel and yet hates the country?

(Evelyn) Government run care isn't that great, I can tell you from experience. And the services mostly deal with people who are healthy. Is there any way you could be a little bit more specific on what you mean "govt run"? Are you talking about Medicare? Can you be any more specific about what services aren't so hot that you may be referring to? You mention the VA, is that what you refer to? The reason I ask is basically so I can know whether to agree with you or not, or simply be informed regarding your statement about dealing with healthy people mostly. The VA is being so poorly run in many areas, but I don't know that competition would make a difference in their case per se. IMO we have to take "baby steps" with expanded health care. This is what I keep saying to people when the subject comes up.

Closing tags This is what I keep saying to people when the subject comes up Good for you! Govern run care. VA, Military. And my Native-American friends tell me the Indian Health Service is not so great either. I don't think there are any other gov't run medical services. Medicare comes from the Fed, but it's also state run and outsourced to private insurance companies in different areas of the country. . Different states cover different procedures and costs. ie...New York Medicare is a bear to deal with. My DHbecame ill in NY 8 months before he died Medicare refused to pay for the ambulance to take him to the airport from 2 wks in hospital; even with physician's orders because he was on 24 hr oxygen. I tried appealing, unsucessfully, and finally gave up and settled with the ambulance company. Some states will allow more than 2 weeks rehab in a nursing facility.; some cut you off. I'm not complaining...just explainin';-) Hey: "Life is a series of compromises"; there you are...your thought for the day. LOL

closing tag But what motivation does Gordon have when he has a job in Israel and yet hates the country? Let me be clear. People are free to criticize their country, but the man's degrees, etc., are irrelevant to me. One can be book smart and street stupid. This man and others, like good old Noam, are naive. Who is talking about goverment run care? The health care reform plans put the government into the insurance companies' role, as an alternative provider. I see no difference from one bureaucracy to another. Anyone who has ever dealt with an insurance company denying them coverage would know that.

What's the difference between Fed run and gov't run? Actually, both Medicare and Medicaid are federally funded programs with Medicaid being administered by individual states. Medicare services/rules are uniform across the country. The subsidized managed Medicares still get Fed money, not state, but yes, are managed by private insurance co's which is where differences in coverage may occur over and above the basic Medicare coverage that all are entitled to though they can limit where you get those services. Those insurance co's (not the state) can be much more limiting and makes it difficult for providers like my company to provide enough proper services or any at all if we don't have a contract with them. And yes, those plans are definitely a bear for patients and families to deal with, esp when medical issues become more chronic and comprehensive. It's very much a shame. Yes, Medicare is limited for ancillary services such as home health aides, transport, getting labs done, etc. That's why a lot of people have dual coverage with Medicaid (here anyway) because Medicaid will cover the difference or a larger chunk. Or there's the Medigap plans, too, though at least here, I think straight Medicaid is better. I think NY (straight) Medicaid pays for everything under the sun, or so it seems. I know all about how it works in rehab in nursing facilities (in many states) having worked in literally dozens all over. I could go on for days. It's not the state that dictates your stay. It's the insurance you have and facilities. The facilities do a lot of manipulation to max out reimbursement. There's a variety of reasons why one could be cut off or the converse, kept there longer than necessary. I've seen it work both ways. But that's a much longer discussion. Hey: "Life is a series of compromises"; With healthcare for sure, that's the truth.

The guys at the VA have a hard time getting adequate care etc. All because of lack of funding.

The current health care system is unsustainable. Period. We can't fix the economy without fixing health care. And the employer-based system, which is where most of us get our coverage, is unsustainable if we can't get the costs under conrol. Lots of companies are cutting back on coverage and will start to eliminate it because they can't afford it and it's making them completely uncompetitive. Many have already eliminated retiree medical coverage, meaning if you retire before you're Medicare eligible, you're shit out of luck. After working all your life. How's them apples? Did you know that the #1 reason for personal bankruptcies is lack of health insurance? People are going broke trying to pay their medical bills. These are working people. Was listening to Kathy Sebelius head of HSS talking about this the other day. She said what I've said as far back as pre-election: the public plan which doesn't have to be run by the government. You can have nonprofit cooperatives. A public plan could be offered along with private ones (competition!) through an insurance purchasing pool, where individuals and small businesses (and maybe even big ones) could opt for coverage. Opponents would have you believe that a "public plan" is the same as a government plan. Nope. Doesn't have to be.

(Dorine) I think NY (straight) Medicaid pays for everything under the sun, or so it seems. And then there's Medi-Cal . No wonder they're broke. Massachusetts seems to have a successful program. At least all the citizens are happy. Taxes go up; sure, but one has to expect that. Everyone should be compelled to buy insurance..just like car insurance for a license. Mari, my friends who retired and had to get private insurance stayed with Cobra or AARP at 50. There are many coverages..including some reasonable premiums if you up the deductible. Takes some researching. Non-profit coops seems to be taking on a life. But utimately, one has to read the fine print. *Glorious rhetoric* alone doesn't cut it.

(Mari) Did you know that the #1 reason for personal bankruptcies is lack of health insurance? Yes! Lots of companies are cutting back on coverage One of the big selling points of my company to employees (and quite unheard of anymore I think), was the no-cost to us insurance. That changed the beginning of this year. I had the best plan so I had to start paying. If I'd dropped down to the lower plan, I wouldn't have had to, but then some things would've been limited. Many have already eliminated retiree medical coverage Is this like a medical pension of some sort? I also saw that bit from Sebelius the other day and wasn't so sure about all that. It's something I need to read and understand more about. I keep coming back in my head to public basic care for all and for more complex issues, private coverage.

(Evelyn)Everyone should be compelled to buy insurance..just like car insurance for a license. I agree. my friends who retired and had to get private insurance stayed with Cobra or AARP at 50. COBRA is only good for 18 months. Major Medical AARP for 50-64 is not available in NJ (or many other states). They only offer hospital indemnity insurance--just covers room and board, nothing else. Here's another kicker that more people are just waking up to: If you have your child under your employer health insurance, most plans will only let you cover the child until age 19, unless they're a full time student in which case you can keep them on until age 25. Presumably, after college or high school they can get coverage under *their* employer. But in this economy? Only 25% of college grads this year have found jobs. The big hole in relying on employer-sponsored coverage is that . . . you have to have an employer!;-) I have so many friends whose kids are in this boat. *Glorious rhetoric* alone doesn't cut it. No, of course not. But let's see the plan first. I applaud O for giving this a top priority. I hope he can succeed where Hillary and Bill could not because they lacked consensus 15 years ago. But now, more are on board. Will still be a tough slog and I hope to God it's not so watered down once every special interest group gets its fingerprints on it. Insurance companies hate it.

Everyone should be compelled to buy insurance..just like car insurance for a license. Proof of insurance is required to get plates, permits, renew your license, etc., yet I'm required to buy "uninsured drivers" insurance here as well. When I had COBRA coverage, it was only for one year. Maybe it has been extended, which would make sense given the situations. If finding (and getting) insurance is soooooooo easy, then why are more than 40 million Americans doing without. I don't think it is because they can't read the print of any size.

When I had COBRA coverage, it was only for one year. Maybe it has been extended My son was out of a job for 2 yrs and kept COBRA (guess who paid?;-)) (Karen)then why are more than 40 million Americans doing without. I don't think it is because they can't read the print of any size. Many don't want to pay anything; esp the young....who are never sick. They ran into that prob in Mass. That number is inflated, I hear. The folks who really needed it get Medicaid. It's the ones who fall in between the cracks that we want to insure. I'm not for subsidizing folks who make three digits or even $88K (Mari)Major Medical AARP for 50-64 is not available in NJ (or many other states). Move! It's cheap...doctors hate it like they do Medicare, because they don't reimburse enough. In most big cities doctors only take quota of Medicare. I had a hard time finding a Primary Care Physician when I moved 2 yrs ago. (Mari)The big hole in relying on employer-sponsored coverage is that . . . you have to have an employer!;-) I have so many friends whose kids are in this boat. Yup...was like that when my sons graduated too. And we bought hospital insurance for them from Allstate. Older son went on 'n 'on'n on to grad scholl and we paid too. (somebody)hope he can succeed where Hillary and Bill could not because they lacked consensus 15 years ago. But now, more are on board. It was v. dictatorial & it lacked details. V. obscure. This WH crowd is more savy (read: not nearly as arrogant;-) Both sides are smarter:-))) Sorry this is so long...but I'm the only one around:-(((((

Last time I was eligible for COBRA several years ago, I believe it was 18 mos. I didn't take it as I couldn't afford it. I wasn't workin'!! (Evelyn) doctors hate it like they do Medicare, because they don't reimburse enough. And HMO's. Make your posts as long as you want. I don't scroll through. ;-D

Everyone should be compelled to buy insurance..just like car insurance for a license. I disagree. I think it is every citizen's right to have health care coverage for free. Let the Gov. legalize pot and sell it. Let us raise cigarette taxes, and alcohol taxes and use that money for it. Let the superfluous pay for the necessary.

I had health coverage for free. Which was OK, as long as you're healthy, or one can't afford otherwise. I'm all in favor of medical care for the underserved. Now I want " choice" vs regimentation; I don't mind paying "fee for service". Nothing beats "choice", let me tell you.

And that will probably happen. In Europe with socialized medicine, there are still private clinics one can go to if you want to pay. There is a choice.

(Moon)there are still private clinics one can go to if you want to pay. My friends in UK take out private insurance for "choice": treatment, doctors, hospitals. Not cheap, but remember what I said about "compromises". Cut back somewhere else.

The cut back should be me cutting back all the money I pay for health insurance.

Many don't want to pay anything; esp the young....who are never sick...That number is inflated, I hear. If that helps you sleep at night... I'm always amazed at the beneficence of those who never had to pay for their health insurance.

(Evelyn)My son was out of a job for 2 yrs and kept COBRA (guess who paid?;-)) Your son's former employer was generous. The law states they only need to offer it for 18 months, but emplioyers can be more magnanimous--few are--than what the law requires. (Dorine)didn't take it as I couldn't afford it. I wasn't workin'!! Of course you couldn't! I pay over $1,500 per year to cover just myself (most employers require an employee contribution--few free rides left unless you're in a union). If I add in what my company contributes, it's well over $6,000 per year, just for one person. For COBRA, you'd be paying that full $6,000. Not many unemployed people can afford that. Now, under Obama's Recovery Act, the government is now subsidizing 65% of that (for a 9-month max) for people who were laid off from 9/08 through 12/09. After that, who knows, unless Congress extends it. At least this is somewhat of a helping hand for working people who have been so hurt by this recession. I'm tellin' ya--I like the big O. He is trying. Move! Now there's practical solution.;-) I just checked their website and plugged in about a half dozen states at random--no AARP major medical offered. Yeah, I even checked OK.

(Mari) I'm tellin' ya--I like the big O. He is trying. LOL, Leslie doesn't share your sentiment, I'll tell ya. Ran into her the other night and had a brief conversation where I mentioned healthcare was being discussed here and too bad she didn't have time to join in. She said I didn't want to get her started, but I did anyway. :-O Oh boy, I may have been right, LOL!! She was like a racehorse out of the gate on it. But, she's coming at it all from a medical business perspective and what she/her practice stands to lose in the end with this reform ($$). She's not happy with the excessive price tag this is seemingly going to cost as well. I can't say I agreed with her on everything she said (except the part about needing to see an increase in social/personal responsibility in the whole process and the final reform), but it was interesting to hear her point of view. Basically, too, she's thinking this reform will end up like credit card reform also, sounds great, less filling...if you know what I mean. She sent me a WSJ article to read that I haven't gotten into yet. I'll post it another time.

LOL. Hey, I'm mild compared to Leslie;-) She doesn't want to come on here...do you blame her? I'm the only chump;-)LOL. I do think O is trying...as long as he puts potential solutions out there to be discussed, not hamfisted through. I know folks who have the AARP insurance.Doctors hate it. The Cadillac insurance is the premium Blue Cross.Pricey. Hey you get what you pay for. Ya' think you'll be able to walk into any private hospital carrying your little government insurance card in your clammy little hand ? Get thee to Bellevue;-) The $9. T debt is obscene; the only ones who seem concerned were the ones at the Tea Party.

Not that she doesn't want to, just no time. I didn't realize how much that practice had grown til she mentioned it the other night, plus she does a variety of things after work, too (though not screenings so much as I rarely see her). She did mention you, Evelyn, and admiring your chutzpah for posting here though. ;-D Re: AARP...if you need home care here (after a hospitalization or not) and have it as your secondary insurance, you're out of luck. You'll only get what Medicare or whatever your primary insurance will cover.

(Dorine)She did mention you, Evelyn, and admiring your chutzpah for posting here though. ;-D Chutzpah?...ROTF ,you mean "boba"! The insults, sarcasm and snarkiness goes a little over the top at times ...but as I said, I blow it all away. I know that deep down inside you like me;-D Homecare is v. expensive, Dorine. I don't have it as a secondary either. I'm at the mercy of the Mr Obama;-)

I found this very interesting and his opinion seems to be echoing the concerns that I have mentioned here about the reform ending up as basically a sham in the end because no one wants to give up their share of the pie. I found his story about how CA insurance companies have been getting around the mandate that premiums can be increased only a limited amount per year very interesting. Quite clever, yet so simple. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/18/744056/-Without-a-Public-Option,-Its-Not-Really-Reform

And I wonder whether health reform will stop this kind of behavior. Ties into Mari's comments about health care bills causing personal bankruptcies. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-rescind17-2009jun17,0,3508020,full.story

Good article, Dorine. Proponents of a public plan seized upon the hearing, saying it showed why access to healthcare cannot be left to private insurance companies. The insurance companies are their own worst enemy. I'm glad they got blasted from both sides of the aisle. They want a seat at the table but the way some of them have conducted business is unconscionable. People paid premiums in good faith and had their coverage cancelled when they needed it most. A disgrace. Another problem with trying to get isurance on your own is they don't want to cover pre-existing conditions. Insurance companies want people who don't need insurance. :-( I'm hoping that competition from a public plan will put a stop to this nonsense.

And I'm sure it will. Competition can alter people's behavior. Of course they are a for-profit business, and have shareholders to answer to. Perhaps it's the shareholders' fault for wanting dividends and profits;-) Enter: Co-op non-profit... But I digress.... Love this jacket. She uses belts over jackets.(Note to self, must get some belts) Yesterday at a Volunteer Award ceremony

(Evelyn) Of course they are a for-profit business, and have shareholders to answer to. I can't speak for other not-for-profits, but I can tell you our board of directors are not happy at the moment and might as well be shareholders. We just had some more layoffs this week. Don't let anyone tell ya that because healthcare is always needed that jobs in that industry are safe. I like the belt/shirt color.

(Dorine)but I can tell you our board of directors are not happy at the moment and might as well be shareholders No job is safe in this climate; healthcare or not. DIL was laid-off from Houston hospital. But why is your board of directors not happy? Any reason? Not enough reimbursements?

Losing money, period. It's do or die time for my job, too. Not sure the time frame.

This is starting to take a nosedive fast, all in the name of bipartisanship (F that!) and expediency (why is there such a quick time table?). The employer taxes bit is one thing that got Leslie's goat and I see where she's coming from on that. Democrats pare back subsidies in health care bill AP By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent � 23 mins ago WASHINGTON � Key Senate Democrats, bidding for bipartisan support on health care, pared back subsidies designed to make insurance more affordable on Thursday and floated a compromise that rules out direct government competition against private insurers. Despite the cost-cutting, the proposal backed by Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, requires most individuals to purchase coverage and forbids insurance companies from denying it on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions. The brief outline did not specify how the government's costs would be covered, although Baucus and many Republicans favor a tax on certain employer-provided health benefits. The Montana Democrat has said he intends to hold the cost of the legislation to about $1 trillion, well below the $1.6 trillion estimate the Congressional Budget Office made of an earlier set of options. Across the Capitol, Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee privately circulated a list of possible tax increases to pay for expanded health care. They ranged from raising the Medicare tax, slapping a 10 percent tax on a can of sweetened drink, raising the alcohol tax, imposing a new tax on employers equal to 3 percent of payroll and taxing employer-provided health insurance benefits above certain levels. Also under consideration was a value added tax, a sort of national sales tax, of up to 1.5 percent or more, with housing, education, financial services and medical care potentially exempt. House Democrats were expected to unveil an outline of their own to expand health coverage on Friday, although several officials said they did not plan to include mention of the tax increases under consideration. Taken together, the developments reflected an eagerness by congressional Democrats in both houses to meet a self-imposed deadline of having health care legislation to the floor of both houses of Congress by summer. President Barack Obama has made the issue one of his top priorities. Neither the Senate Finance Committee outline nor the list of tax options under review by House Democrats was made public. The Associated Press obtained copies of both. "There's no doubt in my mind we're going to get a bipartisan bill," Baucus told reporters as he emerged from a meeting with a small group of Republicans he referred to as a "coalition of the willing." The senior Republican on the Finance Committee was not nearly as bullish. "I'm still at the table. I wouldn't be at the table if I didn't think there was some hope for it," said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. "But tomorrow it could be an entirely different story." According to a 10-page outline that described the proposal, federal subsidies would be available to help families up to 300 percent of poverty, or $66,000, purchase insurance. An earlier proposal set the level at 400 percent of poverty, or $88,000. At the same time, the new outline could require higher out of pocket costs from individuals because companies would be permitted to offer policies that cover less of an insured's anticipated medical costs than was earlier proposed. Many Democrats want the government to be able to offer insurance in competition with the private industry, a provision they say would hold down costs. But most Republicans are opposed. The outline presented at meeting with Republicans left the matter open, but suggested creation of nonprofit co-ops to offer insurance, rather than the government. The co-ops could accept federal loans for startup operations, but would have to repay the money. Similarly, the outline leaves open the question of requiring larger employers to provide insurance. As an alternative, it suggests requiring companies to pay a portion of the cost of insurance for lower income workers not offered coverage at work. While Baucus supports a tax on health benefits, Obama opposed it in last year's presidential campaign and attacked his rival, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for proposing it. Administration officials have refrained from criticizing it in recent weeks, but organized labor is opposed, fearing it would mean higher taxes for some of its members. Congressional aides say Democrats are eager to exempt union contracts from the proposed tax, but Republicans want to include them. In its most recent form, the proposal would impose a tax on plans in which the combined employer and employee premiums are above about $17,000. That would raise an estimated $270 billion over a decade, less if union-negotiated plans were exempt. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090619/ap_on_go_co/us_health_overhaul;_ylt=Ai65845kPwsheCPx18LolvSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJqZGdpc2JwBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNjE5L3VzX2hlYWx0aF9vdmVyaGF1bARjcG9zAzEEcG9zAzIEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDZGVtb2NyYXRzcGFy

(Me) Losing money, period. From a variety of reasons... - state Medicaid cuts - having too many cases with HMO's/managed Medicares/Medicaids and not enough straight Care/Caids - decreased reimbursement from HMO's, etc. - poor internal management (for too long) of cases to maximize reimbursement and cut losses and/or shift potential losses (ie, chronic cases) to programs with better reimbursement. - poor intake management (taking everything to get a leg up on competition including obvious money losers rather than being more discerning) - lots of competition

And more Medicaid and Medicare cuts are in the pipeline I read. Folks on chemo are going to get hit. Medicare doesn't want to pay for infusion of chemo drugs..and want the drugs at the cost price to the hospital. Hospitals say, they lose $$$ now. Doctors (who take Medicaid) tell me it's a pro bono deal. They lose $$$. Raising taxes is a given. I said that when the guy was running. You people kept telling me "only for those earning over $250K." Ha! He shouldn't have boxed himself in . I understand.

(Evelyn) Folks on chemo are going to get hit. They already do as well as others on other infusion treatments like IV antibiotics. If they want to go home for it, they're looking at potentially thousands of dollars a day for the meds alone. The insurance pays for the nurse and other services, but they still have to pay for the drugs somehow and they aren't covered much if at all. So they have to stay in a facility usually. Occasionally a deal is worked out with certain pharmacies and sometimes the hospital.

House targets Fed in Bank of America investigation By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON � A House panel has subpoenaed documents that lawmakers say could shed new light on Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's role in Bank of America's acquisition of Merrill Lynch. The subpoena comes ahead of a hearing next week in which Bernanke is scheduled to testify. Lawmakers have accused Bernanke and President Bush's treasury secretary, Hank Paulson, of pressuring Bank of America Corp. Chief Executive Kenneth Lewis into the deal and urging him to keep quiet about Merrill's financial problems. Not divulging that information would have violated Lewis' fiduciary duty to the bank's shareholders. Lawmakers also have questioned whether Lewis threatened not to go through with the merger in order to squeeze money from the government. Bank of America ultimately received $45 billion from the government's bank bailout program, $20 billion of which was tied to its acquisition of Merrill Lynch. The subpoena is the second of its kind by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Last week, chairman Rep. Ed Towns, D-N.Y., and ranking member Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said the panel had reviewed documents that proved the merger was a "shotgun wedding" that came at the expense of the taxpayer. "The question may be ... who was holding the shotgun?" Towns asked at a June 11 hearing. In one e-mail reviewed by committee staff, Bernanke said he thought Lewis' threat to pull out of the deal was a "bargaining chip" and "we do not see it as a very likely scenario at all." In testimony before the committee, Lewis said publicly for the first time that his job was threatened after he expressed second thoughts about the merger. Lewis said then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and federal regulators made clear that if the bank reneged on its promise they would force his ouster and that of board members at the bank. "What gave me concern is that they gave that threat to a bank in good standing," Lewis told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. "So it showed the seriousness with which they thought that we should not" back out. Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke also pledged government aid to Bank of America to help absorb the losses, Lewis said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bank_of_america

Forgot to post this, Stephen did a really funny bit on Silvio a couple days ago: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/230970/june-17-2009/alpha-dog-of-the-week---silvio-berlusconi

Cute. But did they have to find such an ugly pic of Silvio? Think that's really him "starker"? He's done this before..remember the one i found for someone's b'day? wonder how long before Stephen's hair grows back. I miss the long black locks.

The guy standing up is Mirek Topolanek, the former Czech prime minister.

They (pharma) are getting something out of this (or at least not losing anything). What is it? Someone will dig hard enough to find out. Eventually, when it's too late I'm sure. Baucus, White House in deal with drug industry AP by DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent 17 mins ago WASHINGTON � The pharmaceutical industry agreed Saturday to spend $80 billion over the next decade improving drug benefits for seniors on Medicare and defraying the cost of President Barack Obama's health care legislation, capping secretive negotiations involving key lawmakers and the White House. "This new coverage means affordable prices on prescription drugs when Medicare benefits don't cover the cost of prescriptions," Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement announcing the accord. The deal marked a major triumph for Baucus as well as the administration. Obama praised the deal. "The agreement by pharmaceutical companies to contribute to the health reform effort comes on the heels of the landmark pledge many health industry leaders made to me last month, when they offered to do their part to reduce health spending $2 trillion over the next decade," Obama said. "We are at a turning point in America's journey toward health care reform." Baucus, a Montana Democrat, has been negotiating with numerous industry groups for weeks as he tries to draft legislation that meets Obama's goal of vastly expanding health coverage, has bipartisan support and does not add to the deficit. Baucus' announcement said drug companies would pay half of the cost of brand-name drugs for seniors in the so-called doughnut hole � a gap in coverage that is a feature of many of the plans providing prescription coverage under Medicare. Other officials said wealthier Medicare beneficiaries would not receive the same break, but there was no mention of that in the statement. In addition, the entire cost of the drug would count toward a patient's out-of-pocket costs, meaning their insurance coverage would cover more of their expenses than otherwise. Billy Tauzin, president and CEO of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), said, "Millions of uninsured and financially struggling Americans are depending on us to accomplish comprehensive health care reform this year. Today, America's pharmaceutical research and biotechnology companies are signaling their strong support for these critically important efforts." While none of the changes in the prescription drug program would directly lower government costs, several officials also said the industry agreed to measures that would give the Treasury more money under federal health programs. In particular, officials said drug companies would likely wind up paying pay higher rebates for certain drugs under Medicaid, the program that provides health care for the poor. Those funds would be used to help pay for legislation expanding health insurance for millions who now lack it. One official said the deal was agreed to late Friday night when Tauzin called Baucus. The senator's statement said the White House was involved in the agreement. It was not clear what leverage the agreement would give Baucus with other health care providers with whom he is in negotiations. But at a minimum, the agreement served as an effective counter to impression that the drive to enact health care legislation was sputtering. The disclosure of negotiations came near the end of an up-and-down week for the administration and its allies on health care. Congressional Budget Office estimates showed early versions of two major Senate bills were either too costly or failed to make a large enough dent in the ranks of the uninsured. Republicans seized on the reports as evidence that Democrats were losing traction. They leapt again when it was disclosed that House Democrats were considering a wide array of tax increases to finance their legislation, including an income tax surcharge, a tax on employers based on the size of their payroll and a value-added tax, a form of a national sales tax. House Democrats on Friday unveiled draft legislation they said would cover virtually all of the nation's nearly 50 million uninsured but it came without a price tag or an indication of how it would be paid for. Major provisions of the 850-page measure would impose new responsibilities on individuals to obtain coverage and on employers to provided it. It also would end insurance company practices that deny coverage to the sick and create a new government-sponsored plan to compete with private companies. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she hopes the legislation can clear the House before lawmakers leave for their annual August vacation. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090620/ap_on_go_co/us_health_overhaul;_ylt=ApHLSw.wErrYMDGje6MZ2Fes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJrZjZnb210BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNjIwL3VzX2hlYWx0aF9vdmVyaGF1bARjcG9zAzMEcG9zAzEwBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA2JhdWN1c3doaXRlaA--

Data like this is exactly why I've been skeptical on healthcare reform of late and illustrates a bit my comments about various entities not giving up their piece of the pie. http://www.lavidalocavore.org/diary/1937/why-american-policy-sucks

And keep in mind, that data is from just one quarter (Q109). The mind reels.

And they didn't even list the UAW;-)

I didn't honestly get past the healthcare companies to see who else is on it.

And they didn't even list the UAW;-) Perhaps because they didn't spend $1 million or more for lobbying in one quarter. That was the criteria and methodology or did you scroll over it as well as the signficance of the entire list?

Quite a good piece on the young people (estimated at 30% of the uninsured) without health insurance on CBS News the other night. I didn't get the sense that they didn't feel they needed it, but that they couldn't afford it and their employers weren't providing. The insurance companies have named this group (19-29 year olds) the "young invincibles." You can read and watch the vid here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/20/eveningnews/main5100607.shtml?tag=stack

Well I did google and found this... "In 2008 alone, the UAW gave $4,161,567 to the Democratic Party, including Barack Obama." http://osmoothie.com/2009/06/10/uaw-gives-23-million-to-democratic-party-receives-55-of-chrysler-175-of-gm-and-billions-of-dollars/ Not that I blame them. I would sell a kidney if my job was at stake. He rescued them. Now we'll see if he has to rescue them again.

The list Dorine posted was for lobbying members of Congress, not political contributions to a party. I'm sure those corporations also gave a gazillion through various and sundry ways to the RNC.

Somehow in all this talk of the UAW, the point of my post was lost. :-((

And I love it, the article Evelyn googled happens to be written by Newt, of all people.

But then, no matter about that or the UAW. The comments are quite interesting at that link I posted. Someone broke down the #'s and figured out the total figures would = $84,000 per each of the 535 members of Congress. And that's just one quarter! We do need some serious campaign reform. And also, if you really look at it, not only was the PHRMA lobbying group the top contributor, look how many others are from individual pharma co's as well. And they say they came to some kind of deal to help out with covering drugs in the donut hole of Med D coverage? As I mentioned before, they have to be getting something for it (tax breaks maybe?). There's no way they'd be so magnanimous after spending all that money lobbying Congress. They aren't so generous.

Someone broke down the #'s and figured out the total figures would = $84,000 per each of the 535 members of Congress. And that's just one quarter! In healthcare only.

(Evelyn) Well I did google... I suppose you're looking for applause, well, you also need to find things on the same subject. (Dorine) Somehow in all this talk of the UAW, the point of my post was lost. :-(( Not to those who read it. ;-) (Dorine) As I mentioned before, they have to be getting something for it (tax breaks maybe?) Extensions on patents, plus prohibiting the ability to import drugs from, say, Canada. That was a huge one they got.

I actually find this hysterical. From Montana, of all places, a state that boasts about its individualism. LOL! City asks applicants for Internet passwords By MATT GOURAS, Associated Press Writer - Fri Jun 19, 2009 HELENA, Mont. - Job applicants with the city of Bozeman are finding that their private Internet discussions and pictures may not be so private after all. The city is asking job seekers for the user names and passwords to Internet social networking or Web groups to which they belong. The decision is sparking an outcry from those who say the policy goes way too far. The issue has spawned hundreds of comments on Web forums and sharp criticism from legislators and the ACLU. "I liken it to them saying they want to look at your love letters and your family photos," said Amy Cannata, with the American Civil Liberties Union of Montana. "I think this policy certainly crosses the privacy line." The city argues that it only uses the information to verify application information � and says it won't hold it against anyone for refusing to provide it. City officials say such checks can be useful, especially when hiring police officers and others in a position of public trust. Bozeman officials have been hammered with e-mails and phone calls ever since KBZK-TV of Bozeman reported the policy on Wednesday, including an excerpt from the city application form that states "Please list any and all current personal or business Web sites, web pages or memberships on any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc." Bozeman City Commissioner Jeff Rupp said he was unaware city officers had implemented the policy, and expects the city commission will be talking about it. But Rupp said it is not as bad as it sounds since applicants are not scored negatively for refusing to answer the question. "I can tell you I would not provide it in an application I submit," Rupp said. "I have been told repeatedly it is not scored, and the application is not discarded if not provided." Rep. Brady Wiseman, a Bozeman Democrat, led the state's fight against the Patriot Act when the Legislature issued a harsh critique of the federal act, arguing it trampled civil liberties and put the government into a position of snooping on citizens. Wiseman said Bozeman now is going too far. "Asking for passwords is over the line," Wiseman said. "I think that this notion opens up a whole new line of debate on privacy." The intense pressure generated in just a couple days is hitting the city hard. Bozeman City Attorney Greg Sullivan told the Bozeman Daily Chronicle Thursday that the city may look at changing the policy so that they could view an applicant's social networking sites without asking for login information. One option would be to have an applicant add the city as a "friend" on such sites as Facebook. "We've already began that discussion," Sullivan said. Cannata, with the ACLU, said her organization has not found another government body that asks for such information. And even though the ACLU has not done a full legal analysis, she said the Bozeman policy doesn't pass the smell test. "It's one thing, and I think totally reasonable, if someone has a public profile to go check it out," Cannata said. But private groups and profile could reveal information employers could not legally base hiring decisions on, such as a person's religion, she added. "Are they going to go in and look at those things?" Cannata said. "And even if they don't intend to look at those things, it's still there for them to see." http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090619/ap_on_hi_te/us_internet_background_checks

I saw that! I can't believe that anyone would have the sense to give them that info. I'd give them all fake info. Or set up fake accounts (under my name, but that are virtually inactive) and give them passwords to those. What a can of worms that opens up.

Bozeman City Commissioner Jeff Rupp said he was unaware city officers had implemented the policy Really on the ball! ;-) The city argues that it only uses the information to verify application information Anybody buying this one? Is it cheaper than hiring someone to do background checks? *snort*

We do need some serious campaign reform. ROTF Foolish antelope. That's campaign rhetoric. Do you really think all those congressmen are going to give up all that cashola ? Who's gonna finance those campaigns? Who's gonna buy those seats in the senate?

No, I certainly don't think they will at all (I could use that 84K a quarter, too ;-)). But I still think it's needed. A pipe dream for sure.

The same with lobbyists. "K" Street is here to stay. Some of those congressmen's wives and relatives are lobbyists, fergodsake. *shaking head* Hopeless.

They aren't really lobbyists, all of them. Just on the payroll. ;-)

Can't say I agree or disagree with all of this as I haven't read it all so far, but I don't disagree with the first point at the moment. 5 keys to getting health care deal Politico http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23995.html

I don't think you can even say competition is driving people away from the VA. Incompetence is. Not the only place. Some other states people were getting HIV or Hepetitis or something from colonoscopies. Or something like that (not looking it up now). Even when they were admonished by the VA administration to in general straighten up their acts, they did nothing to improve things it turns out. But Karen was right about the funding. Been a problem for a long time. Newspapers: VA in Penn. botched cancer treatments http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/20090622_Phila__VA_errors_went_uncorrected_for_years.html

Could they finally be growing some? I have been skeptical of the co-ops, with good reason IMO, depending on how it/ they're set up. Democrats may go it alone on gov't insurance plan AP By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 1 min ago WASHINGTON � Democrats generally are standing behind their position that a health care system overhaul must include a government-sponsored plan that would be available to middle-class workers and their families. A key Democrat, New York Sen. Charles Schumer, said this option now seems even more of a necessity in view of unsuccessful behind-the-scenes attempts to get a deal with Republicans on nonprofit co-ops as an alternative to a public plan. Schumer told The Associated Press Sunday night that those efforts have proved frustrating, saying that he and his Democratic colleagues now may have to go it alone. The co-ops were seen as perhaps the last hope for compromise on the notion of a public health care option, a contentious issue that threatens any remaining prospects of bipartisan support for President Barack Obama's sweeping plan to remake the health care system. "I don't think I could say with a straight face that this (co-op proposal) is at all close to a nationwide public option," Schumer, D-N.Y., told The Associated Press on Sunday. "Right now, this co-op idea doesn't come close to satisfying anyone who wants a public plan." The public plan that most Democrats envision would be offered alongside private plans through a new kind of insurance purchasing pool called an exchange. Individuals and small businesses would be able to buy coverage through exchanges, but eventually businesses of any size might be able to join. Proponents say the option of a public plan in the marketplace would put a brake on costs and check the power of insurers. But Republicans, insurers and many business leaders say a government plan could drive private insurance companies out of business. "The most important thing for us to make sure is that we do increase coverage to a basic plan for more Americans and the way we're going to do that is starting with where people get most of their health care, and that's their employer," House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Monday. "We've got to be sure to make it so those employers can keep their health care costs down." Cantor, appearing on ABC's "Good Morning America," said that "a government plan, no matter what you call it, will increase costs" and limit choices. Two recent news media polls have found public support for a government plan, even if many people are unsure about its implications. The most recent survey, a New York Times-CBS News poll released Sunday, found that 72 percent supported the idea, including half of those who identified themselves as Republicans. "The polling data backs up our subjective view that to make health care reform work, you need a public option," said Schumer. Schumer's role is important because he had been acting as an intermediary between liberal Democrats and moderates who are trying to strike a deal on the issue with Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee. Of the five House and Senate committees working on health care, Finance is the only one that appears to have a chance at reaching a bipartisan agreement. Schumer said Finance Republicans had rejected several proposals designed to beef up the suggested nonprofit insurance co-ops. These included setting up a national structure for the co-ops, $10 billion in government seed money, power to negotiate payment rates to medical providers nationwide and creation of a presidentially appointed board of directors. Without "dramatic" changes, Schumer said he would oppose the co-ops deal and urge other Democrats to do so as well. The Finance Committee compromise could be unveiled as early as this week. Senators were forced to start again last week because initial cost estimates were well above their 10-year, $1 trillion target. The next few weeks will be pivotal in the debate. Democrats want to push ahead as far as they can before the July 4 congressional recess. Over the break, comments from constituents could determine whether Congress sticks to its goal of passing legislation this summer. Both sides are nervous. Some Democrats say they doubt the plan has enough Democratic support to clear the Senate. "I think there's a lot of concern in the Democratic caucus," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, said lawmakers are rethinking their wish list, which includes coverage for all and slowing the rate of medical cost increases � goals that may be in conflict. "So we're in the position of dialing down some of our expectations to get the costs down so that it's affordable and, most importantly, so that it's paid for because we can't go to the point where we are now, of not paying for something when we have trillions of dollars of debt," said Grassley, also appearing on CNN. Associated Press writer Philip Elliott contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul

(AP)Democrats may go it alone on gov't insurance plan (Diana Feinstein)"I think there's a lot of concern in the Democratic caucus," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "Even when they were admonished by the VA administration to in general straighten up their acts, they did nothing to improve things it turns out." They're a gov't entity. V. difficult to fire a civil service employee. (Dorine)But Karen was right about the funding. Been a problem for a long time. All government hospitals are short of funds. Horror stories from the Indian Health Service Hospitals. Shortage of physicians for one thing. Most of the times one sees a PA or Nurse Practioner. Healthcare assistants are the wave of the future. I see them now for colds, sinus etc. They can prescribe most meds in some states.

I read this in my morning WSJ and just found the article online. Iran's Web Spying Aided By Western Technology "The infiltration of Iranian online traffic could explain why the government has allowed the Internet to continue to function -- and also why it has been running at such slow speeds in the days since the results of the presidential vote spurred unrest. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562668777335653.html#mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular Now there's a cause for LaBB.

(Evelyn) "Even when they were admonished by the VA administration to in general straighten up their acts, they did nothing to improve things it turns out." They're a gov't entity. V. difficult to fire a civil service employee. It wasn't about firing people. It was about following the proper policies and procedures in a number of facilities. All government hospitals are short of funds. Many hospitals period are short of funds, too. We had 2 in Queens close at the beginning of the year and another in the city a year or so ago. Even after consolidation into larger entities, some still can't survive.

It was about following the proper policies and procedures in a number of facilities Think that scares the staff? There are too many hospitals. Esp private hospitals that specialize in procedures (hips, knees)and surgeries (heart) that bring in the most money. Leaving gall bladders , hernias , hemorrhoids and ERs to the general hospitals. Big article in WSJ last week.

This pretty much puts in a nutshell the reservations I've had with those healthcare co-ops. "As envisioned, the co-op proposal would create a bunch of member operated plans around the country, none of which would have the clout to compete with private insurance or really lower prices with providers and drug companies. [Ed. note - So why bother then?] Also, another note of caution: A co-op is a legal structure. In a co-op, members of the co-op are legally liable for the co-op. That means that if a co-op was, say, sued for doing something wrong, its members might be liable for the legal bills and damages." http://blog.healthcareforamericanow.org/2009/06/12/a-co-op-for-the-public-option-lets-talk-principles/ Sen. Kay Hagan is apparently upset the private insurers might lose some business with a public option. "Hagan worries that such a federally run insurer may prompt companies to drop their private plans, or prompt individuals to run to a cheaper alternative, and destabilize the insurance market." http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/06/22/article/hagan_says_she_wants_a_health_bill_that_can_pass

"Hagan worries that such a federally run insurer may prompt companies to drop their private plans, or prompt individuals to run to a cheaper alternative, and destabilize the insurance market The president addressed this issue in this mornings news conference. If you are happy with your insurance..[ (me)as 73% or the people are] they you don't have to take the fed's insurance The federally run plan is bound to be a bare-bones health care, with limitations; similar to some HMO's, PPO and some v. low-cost premium insurances . Some folks might like to have a choice of doctors, hospitals and accessibility to tests etc. The option is there. Only one hospital in our area will take Community Care (a Medicare Advantage) because they reimburse at a loss to the hospital.

Only one hospital in our area will take Community Care (a Medicare Advantage) because they reimburse at a loss to the hospital. Of course, because it's nothing but an HMO (federally subsidized). The federally run plan is bound to be a bare-bones health care, with limitations; similar to some HMO's, PPO and some v. low-cost premium insurances . Some folks might like to have a choice of doctors, hospitals and accessibility to tests etc. The option is there. On basic care, there shouldn't be limitations IMO. The question then becomes, what's "basic" care? But I've been an advocate of a plan like that with more catastrophic/chronic care requiring some other kind of policy. Perhaps publically funded, perhaps not.

Euro-Care.

Ok.

These are perilous times. I understand. He wants to cut down on entitlements to pay for ObamaCare. I'd rather he raised my taxes. Too many folks rely on entitlements for their sole income.

FLOTUS is in Californai this week Mrs. O is in California this week to kick off the 2009 National Conference on Volunteering and Service. Joined by the first lady of California, Maria Shriver Mrs. O spoke at the conference wearing a sleeveless dress that combined print and texture. Above: Mrs. O wears the Reid dress by Rachel Roy Dunno if I go for this one. Original price $1195. But one website has it on sale for $575.

I like it. But not the price. Guess Old Navy or wherever it was isn't cuttin' it anymore.

Is anyone following the story on Mark Sanford, Republican SC Governor (whose name was bandied about for 2012 Pres race), who up and disappeared for 5 days without telling anyone where he was going, including staff and wife apparently? Have no idea what TV news is or is not saying. This guy's kind of nuts. First decides to turn down stimulus money for his state, but is court ordered to take it. Then, he disappears for 5 days...to Argentina! Because of an affair with an Argentinian woman started over an email! *runs to make buttered popcorn and watch replay of news conference on FOX (where they conveniently mislabel him a Dem)*

(Dorine) news conference on FOX (where they conveniently mislabel him a Dem) LOL! Naturally. Yeah, I started picking up on him yesterday, when his staff were staying he was "on walkabout" on the Appalachia Trail. Didn't know it (the trail) went all the way down to Argentina. Old Navy *snort* Close, it is and was J. Crew.

LOL, I didn't think that was right, but nothing else was coming to mind. :-) I'm enjoying some of the comments at Firedoglake on Sanford: "It is easy to understand how the staff and all could have mixed up Ar-gen Tina and Ap-a-la-chan Trail. So similar." "I think it is outrageous that Sanford outsourced his adultery to a foreigner." "Sanford was so overflowing with Family Values he needed to share them with another family, far away in the Argentine!" "I�m so glad that only gays can destroy the institution of marriage." "Sanford�s killing the Dow today. I thought only Obama could do that?" and of course the obvious... "Don�t Cry for Me Argentina!" As they also noted, his poor family. How humiliating for his wife and for the kids, since he disappeared for Father's Day. I see a rumor some paper down there was sitting on the story about him and his mistress. No idea if that's so or not.

My favorite line: I went down to Argentina....it's a beautiful city, you know" Yeah...sure. He went down there to do some sightseeing! Another one..."I started to go hiking, but then changed my mind" He's toast....finished. Should resign from office. Republicans aren't as tolerant about "it's his private life"as Democrats were about Clinton and all his affairs before running for president. Never mind while in office. I will say , at least Sanford was a little more discreet and went to another continent. But not only were his actions immoral, but there is direliction of duty involved. He is the head of his state and should be on call all the time. I agree ...he's irrational; career-suicidal. Investigations are sure to follow...whose money did he use for the high-dollar air ticket? Kudos to his wife, for not standing next to him at the news conference. The ultimate humiliation for a woman. I'm glad she threw him out. First inkling of something "rotten"was when she said she didn't know where he was and "didn't care"!

"Don't Cry for Me, Argentina" LOL! Good one. Can't wait to see Stephen tonight, as this is SC, his home state. Should be great. BTW, this is why ALL political parties need to get off the family values soapbox. Not one of these jerks can pass the scrutiny. They're all hypocrites of the highest degree. Why anybody follows a politician or party professes to stand for family values is beyond me. Politics and families (or values for that matter) don't mix and shouldn't. I've held this view consistently for yonks.

He's never been popular with the "family values" guy. A political maverick. The Family Values crowd will throw him out. What's wrong with family values? If you don't profess such, why hit-up on people who do? They don't do me any harm; anymore than atheists, or no-family -values folks. Let people profess what they want, I say. I ....don't....care...

What's wrong with family values? She's not talking about family values in general or per se. If you don't profess such, why hit-up on people who do? Really....you don't get what she's saying? Or are you just playing?

Republicans aren't as tolerant about "it's his private life"as Democrats were about Clinton and all his affairs before running for president. Never mind while in office. Yeah, Larry Craig and David Vitter got raked over the coals by their Republican colleagues for their indiscretions. Not. He definitely should resign for dereliction of duty. What's worse, is if his Lt. Gov did know and considered himself in charge, then didn't tell anyone. I bet this isn't the end of this story.

I bet this isn't the end of this story. That's what I said. Neither Craig nor Vitter got a free pass. No one excused their behavior as being "private life". When one runs for public office, one doesn't have a "private life." Period. Only the tax cheats seem to get away with it. No I'm not "playing". If family values means a lot to people then they have the right to subscribe / vote for a candidate that professes such. Personally, it's no biggie with me. I prefer honesty & integrity.

they have the right to subscribe / vote for a candidate that professes such But that's kind of the point, or a point. The candidates shouldn't be professing such.

Someone will have to let me know how O does on his town hall tonight. I'm recording as I'm all over the house doing things before going away for a few days and being out tomorrow night. I can't watch the TV at the same time.

LOL!! An anonymous reader writes: Subject: Inside word from Sanford It was a slight miscommunication between Sanford and his staff. He told them he'd be "spiking some Argentina tail," and they thought he'd said, "hiking the Appalachian trail." It was an honest mistake. I think they handled it well...family values and all.

(Evelyn) He's never been popular with the "family values" guy. A political maverick. I'm not sure why or where you came to this opinion, but apparently someone doesn't agree with your assessment. Sanford Affair a Blow to GOP Values Brand June 24, 2009 04:59 PM ET By Dan Gilgoff South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's admission today that he had an extramarital affair strikes another blow to the GOP's brand as the party of family values, particularly in a region of the country�the Deep South�that has become ever more critical to Republicans, who've lost ground recently in the Northeast and the West. Outside South Carolina, "Sanford is most well known in states like North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, which are growing more competitive for Democrats," says Cornell Belcher, a Democratic pollster who worked for Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee during the 2008 campaign season. "This is devastating for the Republican Party in the very region where it has to make gains." Fast on the heels of an admitted affair by Nevada Sen. John Ensign�another emblem of the GOP's values brand�Sanford's announcement also makes it harder for the national Republican Party to maintain credibility with the values voters who've been most loyal to it. "As far as the Republicans go, this raises the issue of how marriage is treated by political leaders," says Wendy Wright, the president of the conservative group Concerned Women for America. Belcher, the Democratic pollster, says the recent string of Republican sex scandals is redolent of the run-up to the 2006 midterm elections, when former House Leader Tom DeLay resigned after being indicted in a campaign finance investigation and Florida Rep. Mark Foley was caught sending lewd text messages to young male congressional pages. Both were Republicans, and Belcher, who was then pollster for DNC Chair Howard Dean, watched the Republican advantage on values issues shrink from more than 20 percentage points to around 5 points over the course of the '06 election cycle. The Democrats won 31 seats in the House, regaining control of the chamber. Belcher says he has not conducted national polls since last year's election. "But at this point, when it comes to values, the Republican brand has deteriorated more, and their hopes of making gains in the coming midterms has to be dramatically undermined," he says. "My guess is that we've now gone from a tossup on values with the Republicans to [Democrats] having at least a 4- or 5-point advantage." Sanford, who was considered a potential 2012 White House contender, has long been a darling of "pro-family" religious conservatives. In the 2008 election, Christian right activists who were unenthusiastic about the Republican presidential field tried unsuccessfully to draft him as a presidential candidate. http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/06/24/sanford-affair-a-blow-to-gop-values-brand.html

Family Research Council removes Sanford�s picture from Values Voters Summit website. Previously, the website for the Family Research Council�s Values Voters Summit 2009 featured a picture of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, advertising that he was a potential speaker. But Pam Spaulding points out that following Sanford�s announcement of an affair, his picture was quickly removed from the website. http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/24/sanford-frc-website/ (there are before and after pictures of the website in question at the link)

I thought this was an interesting comment at the NYT in an interesting piece about politicians surviving sex scandals. "Of course Demos have been caught in sex scandals, but there is a key difference: Dems don�t lecture Repubs re. their lack of Christian values and morals, whereas GOPsters can hardly draw a breath between their harangues damning Demos as immoral. And isn�t it a blast and a half that it�s always the most puffed up GOP blowhards that are the most often caught. Such fun to see each one of these monumental hypocrites hoist with his own petard." http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/how-do-politicians-survive-sex-scandals/

BTW, I only had to google "sanford family values" to find such info. http://news.google.com/news?q=sanford+family+values&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&ei=eOxCStXjNIKJtge47JiXCQ&sa=X&oi=news_group&resnum=1&ct=title

Ah, I see. This sheds light on his maverick reputation. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/mark_sanford/index.html

The burning question is: Who leaked the emails, which came from Sanford's private email account ,to the SC Carolina newspaper. Apparently , they had them for a year and couldn't confirm them. Also; Who tipped off the newspaper that Gov Sanford was coming into Hartsfield airport in Atlanta ...instead of the Columbia SC airport. Could be inside job: "Morning Joe".

They had them from December I read.

@#$% One of those links shut down my window and I've lost all my comments/responses. *sniff sniff* Anyway, the NYT excerpt you posted, Do, pretty much says everything I had in response. "Of course Demos have been caught in sex scandals, but there is a key difference: Dems don�t lecture Repubs re. their lack of Christian values and morals, whereas GOPsters can hardly draw a breath between their harangues damning Demos as immoral. And isn�t it a blast and a half that it�s always the most puffed up GOP blowhards that are the most often caught. Such fun to see each one of these monumental hypocrites hoist with his own petard." Amen, sistah! Also, BTW, Larry Craig served out his term.

What I find incongruous is that the party that rails against Big Government holds the banner for family values and morals, areas which are and should always remain outside legislation.

it�s always the most puffed up GOP blowhards that are the most often caught Even with some of the Dems. Spitzer was an even much bigger blowhard than Guiliani. I guess it's the play harder, fall harder scenario. Or Icarus, or whatever. :-)

(Evelyn)But not only were his actions immoral, but there is direliction of duty involved. He is the head of his state and should be on call all the time. As a citizen, it's the dereliction of duty that to me is the deciding factor on whether he's fit to continue. His affair is a private, family ordeal, though very ironic for someone who called for Clinton's impeachment. I understand the wife kicked him out 2 weeks ago. Could be inside job That's what I think and it goes to whether or not he was accessible. I think someone on his staff dropped the dime on him. I think there were people who knew exactly where he was. Had to be. There are so many of these hypocrites getting caught. My question is: when people vote for "family values" what is it they are voting for? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just want to understand. (Karen)What I find incongruous is that the party that rails against Big Government holds the banner for family values and morals, areas which are and should always remain outside legislation. The most horrible example of government intrusiveness: Terri Schiavo. The FL legislature passed a law to force them to keep her alive and Jeb Bush championed it.

(Mari) My question is: when people vote for "family values" what is it they are voting for? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just want to understand. Mainly, or for starters, they want a candidate who is pro-life (anti-abortion), pro-abstinence (pre-marital) and anti-gay rights (in order to preserve the sanctity of marriage, of course).

Here are the titles of the breakout sessions of that Family Values Voter conference where Sanford was to possibly speak. (Excuse the capitals, I just cut and pasted, no editing to small letters) * SPEECHLESS - SILENCING THE CHRISTIANS * THUGOCRACY - FIGHTING THE VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY * DEFUNDING PLANNED PARENTHOOD * ACTIVISM AND CONSERVATISM: FIT TO A TEA (PARTY) * THE THREAT OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION * OBAMACARE: RATIONING YOUR LIFE AWAY * MARRIAGE: WHY IT'S WORTH DEFENDING AND HOW REDEFINING IT THREATENS RELIGIOUS LIBERTY * THE NEW MASCULINITY * WAIT NO MORE: FINDING FAMILIES FOR WAITING KIDS * TURNING THE TIDE IN YOUR GENERATION http://www.valuesvotersummit.org/

Sorry, here's the link with the descriptions of all the sessions. There's even an anti-feminism one. http://www.valuesvotersummit.org/schedule

Rachel Maddow interviewed the reporter from The State, who had the Sanford emails and found him at the airport. "Some very interesting revelations: 1. Smith said The State received the Sanford e-mails in December from an anonymous source, though she hadn't had them the entire time. 2. Because of the e-mails, Smith had a hunch that Sanford might be in Argentina. As a result, she decided to drive to Atlanta and wait outside the gate where a flight from Argentina would land. 3. Sanford was surprised when he saw Smith and took several minutes to compose himself before claiming that he had initially intended to go hiking, but instead went to Argentina to enjoy the coast. 4. Smith did not confront Sanford about the e-mails at the airport, and Sanford did not confirm an affair. 5. After interviewing Sanford at the airport, The State communicated with Sanford's office about the existence of the e-mails. So here's the question raised by Maddow: if The State hadn't been in possession of the e-mails (which they apparently received anonymously, which could have explained why they hadn't been published earlier), would we ever have found out that Sanford had gone to Argentina -- and the reason why? Or, as seems probable, would Sanford and his office have continued their stream of lies concerning the his whereabouts and availability to act as governor?" http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/25/746533/-Maddow:-E-mails-may-have-forced-Sanfords-hand

I post this finding it is one of the worst loading websites I've ever been to. Social conservatives fall from moral high ground Republicans retreat from values claims By S.A. Miller (Contact) | Thursday, June 25, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/25/social-conservatives-fall-from-moral-high-ground/

(Dorine)I post this finding it is one of the worst loading websites I've ever been to. Really? I get it via email and never have a problem. Good quotes in that article. A couple of guys don't reflect the who party. ...but instead went to Argentina to enjoy the coast. I posted my remarks on that one yesterday;-) (Mari)My question is: when people vote for "family values" what is it they are voting for? I'm not a single issue voter, so I wouldn't know. None of the ones Dorine posted fit me. Sorry. Actually, I'm a hybrid. There are some good Democratic viewpoints that I agree with: Joe Lieberman. Mostly I dispise their righteousness and intolerance for anyone who doesn't fall inline. And all of their blogs;-D

Well, if the stadiums and Bowls did it...why not? New York Subway Goes the Way of Lehman Brothers http://www.minyanville.com/articles/INTC-GE-KO-Budget-bcs-New/index/a/23274/from/yahoo LOL.I can hear the directions now... "You get on at Procter and Gamble, change at Cambell Soup and get off at Heinz Ketchup."

(Evelyn) A couple of guys don't reflect the who party. Come on. The point of the article (and my posting it) is not about "a couple of guys". Surely you got that.

(Evelyn), "You get on at Procter and Gamble, change at Cambell Soup and get off at Heinz Ketchup." For what it's worth, a new Monopoly game, LOL!

The subway stops were the only thing left. There are ads in all the stations on the walls, on the side of subway cars, plastered all over the inside of Penn Station (giant poster size) and the bars of the turnstiles.

I hope they left Grand Central unscarred by those dreadful posters.

For all the money they spent restoring it, I'd certainly hope so.

Thanks to Jackie Kennedy who had it declared a landmark in the 60's. Otherwise it was have suffered the same fate as Penn Station that was torn down in the name of progress. Paris made a spectacular museum out of their RR station no longer used, but no, we demolish.

Well, Penn Station was to be restored to its original glory, glass roof and all and renamed Moynihan Station, but I think that's pretty much dead in the water now due to funding issues.

Sanford Wife Shocked by Argentine Trip By BRUCE SMITH,AP SULLIVANS ISLAND, S.C. (June 26) - South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford sat in her oceanfront living room Friday, recalling how her husband repeatedly asked permission to visit his lover in the months after she discovered his affair. South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford said she learned about her husband's affair in January, when she found a letter from him to the other woman. "I've done everything in my power possibly to keep him from going to see her and to really make sure she was off the table, including asking him to leave," she said in an interview Friday. Click through to read more about the scandal. "I said absolutely not. It's one thing to forgive adultery; it's another thing to condone it," Jenny Sanford told The Associated Press during a 20-minute interview at the coastal home where she sought refuge with their four sons. They were her first extended comments on the affair. She said that when her husband, Gov. Mark Sanford, inexplicably disappeared last week, she hoped he was hiking on the Appalachian Trail, as his staff told those who inquired about his absence. That he had dared to go to Argentina to see the other woman left her stunned. "He was told in no uncertain terms not to see her," she said in a strong, steady voice. "I was hoping he was on the Appalachian Trail. But I was not worried about his safety. I was hoping he was doing some real soul searching somewhere and devastated to find out it was Argentina. It's tragic." The Sanfords had separated about two weeks ago. She said her husband told the family that he wanted some time away to work on writing a book and clear his head. The first lady said, "I had every hope he was not going to see her." "You would think that a father who didn't have contact with his children, if he wanted those children, he would toe the line a little bit," she said. Sanford, who is staying at the official residence in Columbia, returned Wednesday to end days of speculation on his whereabouts, publicly confess his cheating and emotionally apologize. Jenny Sanford, a Georgetown-educated, former Wall Street vice president, did not stand next to her husband Wednesday during his pained public confession. Sanford said she discovered her husband's affair early this year after coming across a copy of a letter to the mistress in one of his files in the official governor's mansion. He had asked her to find some financial information, she said, not an unusual request considering her heavy involvement in his career. She would not comment on what was in the letter except to say "enough to figure out an affair was going on." She felt "shocked and obviously deeply hurt. I didn't think he had it in him," she said. "It's hard to find out your husband is not who you thought he was." The first lady said she confronted her husband immediately, and he agreed to end the affair. She said she wasn't sure Friday whether he had done so. "I guess that's what we will have to see. I believe he has," she said. "But he was down there for five days. I saw him yesterday and he is not staying here. We'll just see what kind of spirit of reconciliation he has himself." The governor declined to discuss details of the letter and how he handled it with his wife. "This goes into the personal zone," Sanford said Friday. "I'd simply say that Jenny has been absolutely magnanimous and gracious as a wonderful Christian woman in this process." Jenny Sanford cried at the end of the interview, and said the couple have been to counseling. "When I found out in January, we both indicated a willingness to continue working on the marriage, but there's not room for three people in a marriage," she said. "I've done everything in my power possibly to keep him from going to see her and to really make sure she was off the table, including asking him to leave." About an hour after Jenny Sanford talked of her pain and feelings of betrayal, her husband brushed aside any suggestion he might immediately resign, citing the Bible and the story of King David � who continued to lead after sleeping with another man's wife, Bathsheba, having the husband slain, then marrying the widow. "What I find interesting is the story of David, and the way in which he fell mightily � fell in very, very significant ways, but then picked up the pieces and built from there," Sanford told members of his cabinet in a session called so he could apologize to them in person and tell them the business of government must continue. Meanwhile, questions grew about a trip to Argentina he took last summer. While Sanford has agreed to reimburse the state for part of a more-than $8,000 tab that enabled him to see the mistress, state officials indicated they never intended a South American economic development trip to hold meetings in Argentina. That was only done at the governor's behest, said Kara Borie, a spokeswoman for the state Commerce Department. Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer said he did not immediately know whether Sanford's request for business meetings would have allowed him to have taxpayers cover the entire Argentina visit. Some Republican leaders have called for Sanford to resign and some lawmakers and watchdog groups are pressing for investigations into whether he improperly used state money. For Jenny Sanford, the focus is the couple's four sons. During her interview, she wept as she displayed the stellar report cards earned by her eldest two sons at their exclusive private school in Columbia. On the coffee table was a collection of devotional books, including a book of commentary on the Bible's Book of Job, the story of a man whose faith God tests to the extreme. "Parenting is the most important job there is and what Mark has done has added a serious weight to that job," she said.

"Jenny Sanford, a Georgetown-educated, former Wall Street vice president, " With Lazard Freres as VP of M&A, no less. "....recalling how her husband repeatedly asked permission to visit his lover in the months after she discovered his affair. " The cheek of him. He has to be deranged. Wealthy in her own right. Why does she put up with this slug.

Since it is now public, she won't. They're done. She doesn't need him anymore. I'm sure that when she initially found out about it, she thought she could end it and keep it all private, which wouldn't harm any national plans they had. I looked up Sullivan Island. It is part of Charleston county. Must be right off the coast of Charleston.

She seems like a classy lady who wanted to keep her marriage vows ...for whatever reason...children, "national plans", religion (she's RC)... I hope she doesn't write a book.

Today's WSJ. I have the hard copy and just found it online. SEX AMERICANA Infidelity is no longer a career-killer for politicians. But weirdness, mendacity and ineptitude just might be. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204120604574252223853818460.html Who doubts that part of the considerable popular appeal of President Barack Obama is that he is an evidently decent family man; a husband clearly in love with his wife and devoted to his daughters. Polls still show that overwhelming majorities of voters believe character is important to their assessment of a politician�s appeal. Personally, I think if you lie to your spouse, you're going to lie to the public. But lying/cheating , as long as one doesn't get caught, seems to have public approbation today. I suppose I'm too old-fashioned. LOL, but I'm working on it:-))))

Coleman Concedes to Franken in MN Senate Race: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/06/minn_supreme_court_declares_fr.html?hpid=artslot Happy to have another comedian in DC. ;-)

*Finally* A bit of levity... http://news.aol.com/article/obama-duck-phone-ring-tone/550066?icid=main|main|dl3|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Fobama-duck-phone-ring-tone%2F550066

Can't wait til this issue of VF shows up in my mailbox! http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24392.html

That rag sheet! I dumped VF after the vitriolic article on Bill by Dee Dee Myers husband, of all people. Talk about back- stabbing.

Was that in the last year? I think I may have read it.

Bwaaah I want this stone-colored jacket...grey belt is Givenchy This afternoon at some United Health Care event

A few night's ago at a luau on the WH lawn. Is this Sasha or Malia? I get them mixed up.

That dress in the last pic does nothing for her. It's one step away from a housedress, just remove the lace. I can't keep the kids straight.

(Dorine) It's one step away from a housedress LOL! But you're right. Hideous and the lack isn't helping. As for the kids, since they're always referred to as S&M, that would mean S is the older one. They go in order. This is obviously the older one pictured. Look how tall she is.

And it gets worse...in this pic the dress has a dippy hem in the back. Look how tall she is. And she's only 12. But look at the parents.

Actually, Malia is the older girl. Just think: M comes before S and Malia came before Sasha. Nice kids, and seemingly very unaffected.

How odd? I always hear them referred to as S&M, although when I think about it, O said that M&S had earned their dog. Parents always go in order.

Anybody see the WaPo scandal today? And the funny part is a lobbyist of all people blew the whistle.

An item about this on some blog caught my eye simply because I saw the name Beaker (you know, the muppet :-)). I have no inkling of who this guy is and I didn't watch, or rather didn't listen to the video. I just played it to get a good look at his face to see if he did really look like Beaker as is said. And he does, LOL!! (Beaker is probably my favorite muppet). Also, I had to LOL at what it says he called the bloggers he's upset with. He sounds like a complete doof (to say the least). http://www.businessinsider.com/dennis-kneale-flips-out-calls-bloggers-dickweeds-2009-7

Kurtz is kind of a dweeb. HOWARD KURTZ WONDERS IF BLACK WOMEN CAN COVER MICHELLE OBAMA OBJECTIVELY. http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=07&year=2009&base_name=howard_kurtz_wonders_if_black

It sickens me that the Obama administration is pulling this crap, too. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/obamas-bogus-new-excuse-for-se.html

I should start a poll on reasons why Sarah Palin is quitting her governorship. Before the real reason eventually comes out in the news. Very curious.

(Dorine) It sickens me that the Obama administration is pulling this crap, too. Sometimes it is hard to stop the cogs in a bureaucracy. Before the real reason eventually comes out in the news. You mean before she announces she is running for a senate seat or something higher? ;-)

No way. I don't believe for a sec she's quitting in the middle of a first term to run for higher office. Who in their right mind would take her seriously? Esp for Pres. No need to resign now for that. She just wouldn't need to run again in 2010. And why resign at all to run for anything? Almost no one else does. Something smells fishy and it ain't the COHO salmon.

Oh and by the way, I believe she said she was going to continue outside of government.

And to go further....if she's going to run for higher office, why not just say so now. Did anyone watch the video? Rambling. I truly thought she was using all her might not to cry at certain points, too.

No, I didn't watch the video, so I can't comment on how it looked. Fighting back tears. Hmmmm (Dorine) I don't believe for a sec she's quitting in the middle of a first term to run for higher office. Middle? Her term ends next year. She got elected in 2006. I'd say that she wants a national (DC) office, so when she does run she can say she had as much national experience as Obama. From a NYT article: Ms. Palin is one of a number of Republican governors who are considering seeking the presidential nomination in 2012 and whose terms expire in 2010. Many Republican strategists have argued that it would be very difficult for someone to run for governor in 2010 and turn around immediately, while running a state, to run for president in 2012. Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota announced last month that when his term expires in 2010 he would not seek re-election, as he considers a presidential bid. However, leaving office in the middle of a term is highly unusual. Ms. Palin�s decision set off a round of speculation among her critics and bloggers that another embarrassing scandal may be about to unfold. It also empowered critics in both parties who said that this episode would only serve to reinforce doubts among many Americans about her stability, political competence and fortitude. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/04/us/politics/04palin.html?ref=global-home

No, she wasn't quite to tears. It was more her voice and the expression. She was talking kind of fast, too. She's got 18 months left. Not the exact middle, but not just a hop, skip and a jump from end of term either. I'm telling you, I'm convinced she's not heading for higher office. Why not just say so? Why quit this job early? Also, Andrea Mitchell said her sources said she's out of politics. It was also a Friday news dump. On a holiday weekend no less. And to top it off, there are rumors in Alaska of a pending federal indictment. Could be all talk. Time will tell. She's already been shown to be highly ethically challenged in Alaskan politics. Until this, I'm certain she was looking at higher office.

The holiday weekend. That convinces me as well. Another big shoe will drop. Wonder if her husband will go on I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Whatever... ;-)

I saw some footage and her answering a question. She seemed more excited than anything. At least that's how I'd categorize her behavior.

She didn't take any questions at the press conference, so I don't know what you saw.

Wonder if Michelle will dress down a bit, so as not to appear to flashy in comparison. Or maybe she won't care. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090704/ap_on_re_eu/eu_russia_us_first_ladies

(Dorine, I think)And to top it off, there are rumors in Alaska of a pending federal indictment. Could be all talk. Time will tell. She's already been shown to be highly ethically challenged in Alaskan politics. LOL. At least you hope so;-D Why dump on her so much. Why not give her a chance before indicting her?*shaking head* I detect a little obsession here;-) I am sure FLOTUS will do us proud ; as she always does:-))))))

I detect a little obsession here;-) I consider it my duty as an American to make sure she gets nowhere near a higher office. Not in her present state anyway. And she has done virtually nothing to earn my respect. Except maybe raise a bunch of clean, healthy kids. Why not give her a chance before indicting her? No skin off my nose. I'm just repeating what's out there. There's something rotten in Denmark with her.

Saw a list of Top 10 reasons Palin was resigning. My favs were: -- After 30 months as governor, she's cracking under the stress of protecting the U.S. from Russia. -- She doesn't want her tenure as governor to overshadow her experience as mayor of Wasilla.

LOL. Tough crowd here:-) Just remember...in a week...there will be Sonia to run over the coals:-) "I consider it my duty......";-D

Of course you could add: --She found the view of Argentina from her frontyard so alluring that she had to hit the Appalachian Trail

"Just you wait, 'enry 'iggins, just you wait! You'll be sorry, but your tears'll be too late!..... " Just saw "My Fair lady" in summer theatre last week....

From her Facebook page: And though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. Implies that she too is leaving for a higher calling." Wonder what that might be. I've never thought I needed a title before one's name to forge progress in America. I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness! Head of the RNC? No, that has a title. ;-)

Interesting to see how anything Sarah says or does attracts media attention. I've never seen a former candidate get such notice. John Kerry certainly didn't.

She held a press conference.

As for John Kerry, he didn't resign and is serving out his term in office.

You mean he ran again. Obama resigned after two yrs. Senator Burris was the lucky successor.

You're really off point again. Why am I not surprised? So let me make it crystal. She gets attention because she calls attention to herself. She resigned from her office. She (or someone on her staff) updated her Facebook to seek further attention.

(Evelyn) Interesting to see how anything Sarah says or does attracts media attention. Um, excuse me, she puts herself out there just as much. Matter of fact, I keep forgetting about her then she pops up with something to say again. And you know, supposedly she couldn't take the heat of the media anymore (if I heard her correctly in the middle of that word salad of a press conference)........what happened to that self-proclaimed "pitbull with lipstick" who basically told Hillary to man-up about her complaints about media sexism?? Hillary's been taking some intense media criticism since 1992 and survived and still had the balls to run for President and take more (though she did complain about the sexism). Sarah wishes she had the balls and class of Hillary's pinky finger.

From her Facebook page: And she's Twittered 3 times since Friday, supposedly. Head of the RNC......she strikes me as a female Michael Steele. Somehow not the change I think the party would be looking for. Actually, I don't think she said she couldn't take the heat of the media anymore, that was extrapolation from pundits, etc ....she didn't say why exactly she's quitting....but regardless, she did complain about the media and the rest of my statement stands. Funny Top 10 reasons, esp She found the view of Argentina from her frontyard so alluring that she had to hit the Appalachian Trail (SP) for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. Um, no Sarah, we hold you to the same standards. You just don't meet them sometimes and don't like it when people tell you so.

(Dorine)Sarah wishes she had the balls and class of Hillary's pinky finger. Well, er....Hill might have monster balls,now that you mention it...(nasty rumors about that one for years)...she's a little more feminine than Hill and has *killer* legs:-D

she's a little more feminine than Hill and has *killer* legs: All qualities I look for in a (female) candidate for any office...as well as whether they seem cool to have a beer with. ;-) An amusing, mildly snarky opinion piece on Sarah... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/04/opinion/04collins.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

(Dorine) Funny Top 10 reasons, esp She found the view of Argentina from her frontyard so alluring that she had to hit the Appalachian Trail Thank you. ;-) she didn't say why exactly she's quitting....but regardless, she did complain about the media and the rest of my statement stands. She has been complaining about the cost ($$$) to Alaska of responding to all these inquiries into ethics violations, misuse of power, etc. But resigning wouldn't necessarily end those investigations or shouldn't.

Seems to me if they can afford to give refunds of over $3K to each resident of Alaska from oil profits, they can afford some bills from investigations.

(Karen) As for John Kerry, he didn't resign and is serving out his term in office. (Evelyn) You mean he ran again. He was re-elected in 2002, ran and lost the Presidential race in 2004 (without resigning), continued to serve until re-election in 2008.

Not that it had anything to do with my point, Obama resigned *after* he'd won the presidency. He didn't resign in order to run, just as Hillary didn't or McCain or anyone else in recent memory.

I was simply clarifying. I was making nor supporting a point.

Well, I see the Monday Morning Mauling of Sarah continues...LOL MSMBC is covering Sa-rah! all day today . And from Wasilla *drum roll* that famous objective reporter: Andrea Mitchell is giving us minute by minute reporting. ROTF Morning Joe had interesting takes on all her options. Methinks Joe knows more than he's say;-) But I digress ....

And from Russia with love.... Here they come.... Love that they took those cute girls. Russians are big family people, they'll love that.

(Dorine) I was simply clarifying. I was making nor supporting a point. My additional point wasn't directed at yours. And thank you for spelling out Kerry's terms and their dates. Well, I see the Monday Morning Mauling of Sarah continues. Right, blame the media when they interviewed maulers like Karl Rove and Mike Huckabee yesterday.

(Evelyn) Morning Joe had interesting takes on all her options. Such as?

The blogs aren't talking about Joe's options?;-) Have to listen to him then. Actually, he's been on other shows this morning . Kerry ...Gore, the Bore....ye-ah;-) How about FLOTUS' dress. She's such a style-setter. Everyone is copying her belts over cardies, mini-jackets etc. Have to be slim though...and no tum-tum.

(Karen)Right, blame the media when they interviewed maulers like Karl Rove and Mike Huckabee yesterday. And throw in George Will for good measure. Most of the "mauling" came from her own party. But getting back to the *substance* of what she did, Evelyn, what do you thnk she has in mind? I thought the "lame duck" excuse was well, lame. Most everyone who holds an office is a lame duck at some point.

(Evelyn) The blogs aren't talking about Joe's options?;-) Have to listen to him then. Actually, he's been on other shows this morning . No time for blogs today. I watch very little tv anymore and esp no daytime tv.

(Mari)Most of the "mauling" came from her own party. Not as overt as Maureen Dowd and others on MSNBC.And lets not mention the blogs. Today's WSJ has an article citing the bloggers (by name!)who have ridiculed the poor Down-Syndrom baby. Now that's cruel. However, the most unforgivable is the back-stabbing from the McCain campaign thugs...trying to blame her for their own ineptness. Mari, I think she would like to position herself as a conservative voice out there , outside of politics. Rush, Hannity ...they have more sway than any pol. Hey, the night she was on SNL was the highest rating in 15 yrs for that show. IMO any network would give her a show. Probably FOX News would be her best bet. She has a huge following with right -wing conservatives (I belong to the moderate Republicans, remember???;-)including union workers and other working-class. I view her as Howard Dean was to the Dems. Most cringed at his outrageous rants.But she raises tons of money and is a voice of populism ; so is Huckabee. She has tons of debt..could go on a speaking tour and easily erase it. Books, newspaper columns, . She's a rock star and why not get paid as one instead of having to take the s*** and not get compensated. Now I gave you my views...my opinion. They aren't facts, so pl don't massacre me. LOL.(Only kidding, I know that's not your MO) But I really don't have time to go and research to websites for resource to back-up what I'm saying. It's just a composite.

Today's WSJ has an article citing the bloggers (by name!)who have ridiculed the poor Down-Syndrom baby. Now that's cruel. I've looked for it and cannot find it. I saw references in one article to the bloggers who have touched on improprieties with her job. That is all. the night she was on SNL was the highest rating in 15 yrs for that show. You're forgetting to give Tina Fey her due. But I really don't have time to go and research to websites for resource to back-up what I'm saying. It's just a composite. In other words, it is worthless.

A breakdown of the "millions" of dollars she complained about for investigations of those ethics complaints (including one she brought against herself). Her legal bills totaled around $600,000. http://www.adn.com/palin/story/850854.html?pageNum=3&&mi_pluck_action=page_nav#Comments_Container Which WSJ article were you referring to, Evelyn? There are 2 on the most read or emailed list there. Is it the top one? trying to blame her for their own ineptness. I don't know how much ineptness was on their part, but it was obvious she was not devoid of that quality herself. How do you know none of that article is true? Just because it's in VF? Are you not going to read it? Is it out already? I don't have mine yet. :-( I think my subscription is to automatically renew. She was a godsend for SNL. And I really don't like Maureen Dowd much.

(Evelyn) It's just a composite. In other words, it is worthless. In all fairness, she gave what Mari asked for, her opinion/supposition based on what anyone knows at this point, which is not much.

Am referring to broad-stroked generalizations that don't seem to mesh with fact. Bet the WSJ article is only print. *snort*

And for someone who *won't* read blogs, she'll accept what the WSJ says is in a blog but not you.

I really don't think there is anything to fear with Sarah's decision. We'll know soon enough if she has a plan. But I don't think America will vote her into office any time soon.

(Me)But I really don't have time to go and research to websites for resource to back-up what I'm saying. It's just a composite. (Karen)In other words, it is worthless. LOL. Yes. I've always said that anything I post is worthless. Esp my opinions That's the only thing you seem to concur with me:-(((( (karen)Bet the WSJ article is only print. *snort* LOL. Right ....as usual. I only get the print WSJ. The article was on pg. 3 But later when I have a time I'll cite the names. None I recognized. I agree Moon. She's not electable any time soon. She's young , but she has a voice and there's a group out there listening.

If you give the title of the article we can look for it at their site. They're probably the Alaska bloggers, one who used to post anonymously until a few months ago an Alaskan politician who was criticized by her dug up info on her and she was outed by name (and address??). Another blogger who said SP was headed for indictment was on MSNBC or something I think yesterday. I think her name was Shannon or Sherilyn or something like that.

Yeah..Shannyn Moore. The other one is Sarah "hate-blogger"Linda Lellen Bliegel "Several days ago, a photo appeared on a blog showing Gov Palin holding a baby with the super-imposed head of a conservative talk-show host. " ..."Ms Bielel said the photo was intended as a parody of the talk-show host and in no way meant to disparage Trig which 'never even crossed my mind'" Don't these people have other things to do except sling this mud around. Even if true. Sick. GRowing Criticism at Home Took Toll on Palin pg 3 WSJ.

Kellen middle name.

PS to Mari: Next time you want my opinion....email me;-)))

(Me) Another blogger who said SP was headed for indictment Correction...said there were rumors of an indictment, not that there actually was one. Hey! No fair with the emailing! :-) You know, I hadn't heard a peep about that cartoon (that I have to track down as I haven't seen it) until all the brouhaha over her resignation. Trig...the baby she used as a prop during a convention at an ungodly hour for a baby to be up, in a hypersensory environment with screaming crowds, blasting music and bright lights? I'm sure the cartoon had to be more offensive. ;-)

Ya know, you can't just take these people at their word about making fun of a special needs baby. Apparently, it was the same photo that Letterman's people used and put Dave's head on the kid and no one said 'boo.' In this case, a local conservative talk show host's head was pasted on. No one was making fun of the baby. Interesting that these "hate Sarah" bloggers are local. But they must have East Coast liberal lefty establishment ties. ;-) Here's the blog of Linda Kellen Biegel, who was raising funds to investigate Palin. Love her entry about "Gardening." LOL! http://www.divasblueoasis.com/ This Poor Me/Sarah defense is typical and I ain't buying it for a second. Nice entry at Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/akmuckraker/palin-blasts-local-blogge_b_221113.html

You know she has no support when... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/06/fox-news-contributor-rips_n_226370.html

I like that Linda. Did you read her front page? Loved 2 things... 1. She pointed this out.. Among those Wonkette posts was a little gem under the title "win of the afternoon"...they highlighted a comment from Alaska Girl: "She didn't finish her term as mayor, stepping down to run for Lt. Governor. She didn't finish her term on the petroleum board ethics panel, she resigned in protest and then ran for Governor. She doesn't want the office, she just likes running for office. She doesn't want (can't actually) accomplish anything, she just wants to talk about it." That was absolutely correct. However, before that, Sarah Palin left the Wasilla City Council only one year into her second three-year term in order to take the Mayor's job. And, if you go all the way back, it took her five years and five colleges to get a Journalism degree. Quitting before the job is done is her modus operendi. and 2., she pointed out the same thing I did yesterday.... --In Palin's resignation speech, she continued her steady drumbeat of whining about the media, bloggers, the internet...everyone who has criticized her or made her life difficult. Yet, during the campaign, she reamed Hillary Clinton for her "whining" about the press: [Ed note - shows video of said whining] ``````````````````````````` Linda also has that fabulous fuscia pic on her front page. I have one in my kitchen window and didn't know what it was, but the blooms are the same. Mine's scrawny in comparison. She isn't the blogger that was outed. She's on Mudflats, a blog I really like and discovered after SP was announced as the VP candidate. Daily Kos pointed out the Liz Trotta piece earlier today, joking she apparently didn't get the memo not to criticize SP, but I didn't bother to watch the video they had, mainly because I don't know LT. I just did now. That guy tried desperately to deflect her criticism.

*snort* A comment from a WaPo chat today: Arlington, Va.: Given that President Obama is in Russia at the moment, I wonder if he can see Sarah Palin's house from there? And a comment on a NYT column today: Austin, TX July 6th, 2009 6:23 am Dear Mr. Douthat, I think a more reasonable view of what happened to the Governor is that she is the "victim" of the type of cut-throat politics that her party polished, pushed and perfected. If you feel she was not treated fairly (this is what I think you are hinting at in your column), then look at the predecessors, such as the "Swift Boat Veterans" smear campaign against John Kerry, or the Ken Starr Whitewater investigation that morphed into voyeurism, even the "Willie Horton" ads against Michael Dukakis. If the party of "No" looks in the mirror, or the Governor was to look in the mirror, they may see the more recent examples of baiting the traps that they may have fallen into themselves. I think of her rallies where people called out and said Obama was Muslim, was a traitor, and used racial epithets and she did nothing to stop them. I also think of the constant push on ties to "terrorists", the focus on a preacher for a church he attended for a time, and other prying tactics used incessantly during the campaign. I look at the fact that we, the people, did not force her to run, accept the nomination, or have the interviews with Katie Couric and Charles Gibson. Even more to the point, we did not force her to bring her children to the convention in St. Paul, nor did we force her to appear on "Saturday Night Live" just before the election in multiple cameo roles (opening skit, the news desk with singing and dancing, etc.) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/opinion/06ross.html

How about Mr Douthat 's column? (who was on Morning Joe yesterday. He's the other conservative writer for NYT (young fella...recently hired was on CR ) along with David Brooks I never heard those racial epithets at her rallies. Perhaps the writer attended some; I only saw them on TV.

How about Mr Douthat 's column? What about it? Not sure what you're asking. BTW, no one on any blog I was at said anything about Morning Joe or his comments. So I still don't know what he was saying. I read about the behavior of participants at those rallies last year.

Linda also has that fabulous fuscia pic on her front page. I have one in my kitchen window and didn't know what it was, but the blooms are the same. Mine's scrawny in comparison. It's mainly an outdoor plant. This is the first year I haven't hung up a hanging basket of one someplace in the yard, although I use several of the autumnale variety in planters. I also like one to use the Gartanmeister, a more upright one with peachy/coral flowers and really dark leaves, in planters as well. Fuchsia is actually a bush. One of the sites says our overheated homes are too warm for them to overwinter. Maybe I should try as mine is far from that. ;-) http://www.bachmans.com/tipsheets/indoor_plants/Fuchsias_print.cfm http://www.squidoo.com/fuchsia-plant (Dorine) I read about the behavior of participants at those rallies last year. I saw it several times last year in video clips from her rallies, with interviews of individuals attending, with her encouraging the cries.

Peoople said hateful things about Romney being a Mormon too. Blogs and some far left periodicals. So not approving of Obama having been a Muslim is not a shocker. But I never heard of Palin being even peripherally involved in racial slurs...not even in mainstream media. And I am sure if she had ,it would have been trumpeted. They certainly were looking for anything to pin on her. Perhaps in blogs.

Perhaps on video.

Fact is that McCain was loco crazy to have picked Sarah as his VP mate. If he wanted a female R, there is one congresswoman from Minn. who would have been perfect (forget her name). She's been interviewed on CNN, etc. She's intelligent and has experience and is known. I don't think that Sarah has enough fans or backing to be a problem in the future. She's no longer worth discussing. Romney, I don't take Mormons seriously.

You're not referring to that nutjob Michele Bachman, are you?

OMG, not her. She is crazy. Fact is that McCain was loco crazy to have picked Sarah as his VP mate. Yet you supported and defended them both at one point IIRC so I'm guessing that was ok with you, at the time anyway. But I don't disagree with your statement. She's no longer worth discussing. If she hadn't continued saying things in the media (and the media would stop bringing up people like her not-future-son-in-law talking about her), I would have continued to have forgotten about her.

Romney looks better to me every day; I didn't support him either first time around. But at least he's a seasoned business man. The economy sucks. Market down again today. Investors have no confidence and neither does business. Where's the growth going to come from? 4% this year? In your dreams. And now they talk of Stimulous II. Ha! Had they included more jobs the first time instead of padding it with all kinds of social programs , things might be different.

Oh news pics of FF in Moscow... Hope they're in order....

Nursing College at St Dimitry Sisters of Mercy in Moscow. "What might appear to be a print is in fact thousands of embroidered french knots, representative of Jason Wu's fine craftsmanship. The bright blues of the Matryoshka doll in Mrs. O's hands, a gift from her hosts, pop against the graphic black and white of her dress"

Sorry...I pushed my luck...LOL. They are all Getty photos, BTW

(Evelyn)I think she would like to position herself as a conservative voice out there , outside of politics. Rush, Hannity ...they have more sway than any pol. . . Probably FOX News would be her best bet. Ok, I can see Fox giving her a show. But wouldn't she have to become more schooled on the issues? Just a little bit?;-) However, the most unforgivable is the back-stabbing from the McCain campaign thugs...trying to blame her for their own ineptness. There's a lot of that in the Vanity Fair article. The aides weren't solely to blame, IMO. There's a lot of the "poor me" about her, and oui saw that again in the resignation speech. She has tons of debt..could go on a speaking tour and easily erase it. Books, newspaper columns, . She's a rock star and why not get paid as one instead of having to take the s*** and not get compensated. People who voted for her have a right to expect that she would have completed her term. That's what she pledged to them. No one enters public life thinking they're going to get rich quick. This is what will hurt her the most if and when she throws her hat in the presidential ring. Being a quitter, bailing out when the going got tough, etc. I don't blame her for wanting to erase her debt and rake in some bucks, but IMO she should have waited another 18 months. BTW, I do appreciate your worthwhile opinions, Evelyn!

And now they talk of Stimulous II. Krugman said he didn't think it was big enough the first time around.

(Mari)People who voted for her have a right to expect that she would have completed her term. That's what she pledged to them. I do agree with you there. I was disappointed too. After all 18 months isn't an eternity. Ok, I can see Fox giving her a show. But wouldn't she have to become more schooled on the issues? Just a little bit?;-) . You are kind:-))) She needs a *lot* of coaching , but she's got charisma and that part isn't learned. The part of my opinions....Thanks, but I'll stick with emails on that one Esp. on next week's supreme court nom. But you already know what I think:-))))))

But you already know what I think:-)))))) About Sotomayor? I don't and guess I won't from what you say.

And to add, I have zero opinion of her. I still haven't read up on her.

Thanks for the fuscia links, Karen! Very helpful. Maybe I'll get something eventually resembling a bush some year. Transplanting to a bigger pot may help come to think of it. But then it wouldn't fit on my kitchen windowsill. Well, I can only guess a Fox gig wouldn't be too stressful for her. Since announcing that she would resign as governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin (R) has been blaming her decision on the �main stream media� and political operatives who accused her of �all sorts of frivolous ethics violations.� However, last year, Palin pointedly criticized Hillary Clinton during the presidential election for complaining about �excess criticism� and being put under �a sharper microscope�: PALIN: When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or you know maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, �Man that doesn�t do us any good � women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country.� I don�t think it bodes well for her, a statement like that. Because, again, fair or unfair, it is there, I think that�s reality, and I think it�s a given. I think people can just accept that she is going to be under the sharper microscope. So be it. I mean, work harder, prove yourself to an even greater degree that you�re capable, that you�re going to be the best candidate, and that of course is what she wants us to believe at this point. [shows video of statement] http://thinkprogress.org/

I have never understood why they publicize stuff like this. Can't they just fix it in silence and not give anyone any hope or ideas? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090708/ap_on_go_co/us_federal_buildings_security

Lookeee they're in Rome,,with President of Italy. What's his name Moon?

Earlier I was trying to post a really nice pic of O and Silvio, but the URL didn't seem right. You can maybe catch it still here... http://news.yahoo.com/ Silvio looks like he came from Madame Tussaud's though.

Italy's President is Napolitano, a card carrying Communist. :-( Michele Bachman has always been articulate and well informed. I didn't know she was crazy? ;-) She would have been a much better choice for McCain. Love Michelle's pointed flats, I have a thing for pointed shoes. Hated the round toe fad. Also she wears her belt high and gives the outfits an empire waist look, it works well. BTW, Berlusconi commented on the Guardian article that Bethan posted on the CF topic, he said that the UK should step aside for Spain, since the UK has a lower Per Capita Income than Italy and their GNP is also lower than Italy's. I did find that Guardian criticism stupid and uninformed.

I know there are lurkers out there who didn't vote for The Guy...so this one's for you. Others skip it; you'll hate it, but it's clever & funny. http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=3CAX3aJCoDg Particularly poignant for me since I just saw "Little Night Music" last Friday night at Summer Theatre.

Nice to have a little fair assessment from a confirmed card-carrying liberal... Salon.com Camille Paglia Dear Camille, Just wondering. Do you still think Sarah Palin is ready for the big stage? James L. Somers Good question! And very timely after Palin's shock resignation as governor of Alaska this past Fourth of July weekend. I assume that family priorities -- personal as well as financial -- had become all-consuming. Given her success with finalizing the massive Alaska pipeline project, I think Palin should have stuck it out, but of course she is master of her own fate. What certainly was blameworthy was the chaotic and rushed statement itself. Something so politically consequential needed more careful composition and rehearsal. Why provide more fodder for the vultures and harpies of the Northeastern media? Unfortunately, it's pretty obvious that Palin still lacks that cadre of trusted pros who are the invisible elves behind every successful national politician -- the assistants who gather and vet material and who filter proposals and plan logistics. In a way, this is part of her virtues -- her complete freedom from routine micromanagement and business as usual. She does her own thing with seat-of-the-pants gusto. It's why she remains hugely popular with the Republican grass-roots base -- as I know from listening to talk radio. Callers coming fresh from her rallies are always heady with infectious enthusiasm. Of course you'd never know that from reading hit jobs like Todd Purdum's sepulchral piece on Palin in the current Vanity Fair. Scurrying around Alaska with his notepad, Purdum still managed to find comically little to indict her with. Anyone with a gripe is given the floor; fans are shut out. This exercise in faux objectivity is exposed at key points such as Purdum's failure to identify the actual instigator of Palin's extravagant clothing bills (a crazed, credit-card-abusing stylist appointed by the McCain campaign) and his prissy characterization of Palin's performance at the vice-presidential debate as merely "adequate." Hey, wake up -- Palin cleaned Biden's clock! By the end, Biden was sighing and itching to split. Whether Palin has a national future or not will depend on her willingness to hit the books at some point and absorb more information about international history and politics than she has needed to know in her role as governor. She also needs a shrewder, cooler take on the mainstream media, with its preening bullies, cackling witches, twisted cynics and pompous windbags. The Northeastern media establishment is in decline, and everyone knows it. Palin should not have gotten into a slanging match with David Letterman or anyone else who has been obsessively defaming her or her family. Let surrogates do that stuff. The vicious double standard is pretty obvious. Only the tabloids, for example, ran the photos of a piss-drunk Chelsea Clinton, panties exposed, falling into her car outside London clubs a few years ago. If Chelsea had been the scion of Republican bigwigs, those tacky scenes would have been trumpeted from pillar to post in the U.S. as signals of parental failures or turmoil in clan Clinton. As a Democrat, I detest the partisan machinations that have become standard in Northeastern news management and that are detectable in editorial decisions at major metropolitan newspapers nationwide. It's why I, like a host of others, have shifted my news gathering to the Web. http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/07/08/reader_letters/ Her opinion, of course;-)

Interesting viewpoint. Apparently her answer to the initial question is a "no". Though she was quite diplomatic about it. Why is it only about the "Northeastern media" for her? Don't remember anything about that stuff with Chelsea I wonder what her sources for news on the web are that she prefers to use. She apparently isn't using the Evelyn-acceptable mainstream print papers from what she implies. My VF finally came in the mail today. I'll read it over the weekend. There's a number of interesting topics in it in addition to the Sarah Palin article, including one on Heath Ledger, who's on the cover.

She apparently isn't using the Evelyn-acceptable mainstream print papers from what she implies. I apologize, I forgot my winkie. :-)

you'll hate it Why do you think that?

Don't remember anything about that stuff with Chelsea I don't either...but just reinforces what she says about the US media bias. It's"hands-off" family except the Bush twins and Palin kids. Nauseating. She apparently isn't using the Evelyn-acceptable mainstream print papers from what she implies. LOL. Thanks for the winkie, but I narrow it even further....has to be WSJ, Wash Times, or Christian Science Monitor. Dvid Brooks in NYT...:-) Also CR amd PBS News Hour on air. Interesting interview with Roger Altman last night on CR. I will say I'm glad the video didn't include David Gregory & Jim Leher as the "clowns"; they are fair . But they left out Bill Moyer, Judy Woodruff and Gwen Ifill. IMO, of course;-)

Oh I remember the Chelsea Clinton photos. When she was a student at Oxford. Her boyfriend had to hold her up. Don't recall where I saw them though. (Evelyn)It's"hands-off" family except the Bush twins and Palin kids. Naw, the Bush twins were actually arrested for underage drinking, but I honestly don't recall any pics of them in that state. Do you? They may exist, but the media, rightly, did not jump on them. It was reported, and then quickly forgotten because it was a family matter. In any event, I never thought less of the families becuse of the kids' hijinks. I think any parent can sympathize. The Clintons and the Bushes always strove to protect their girls' privacy, and for the most part they succeeded. Their daughters have all turned out very well, a credit to their families. The eldest Palin daughter is more out there. She was a part of the campaign, and she posed for a cover and photo spread in People mag recently to talk about teen pregnancy. I'm fine with that--BUT when you willingly court the media, you invite both the good and the bad, and leave yourself open to becoming a commodity. If you shun the spotlight and fly under the radar, you tend to be left alone.

Also, was any politician's child more in the media's crosshairs than JFK Jr.? They hounded him. Media camped outside his apartment. Followed him and his girlfriend, later his wife, all around. Always digging for dirt. He couldn't show a hair on his head without it being reported. Where was the "U.S. media bias" then? I honestly don't understand this "poor me" whining and the perpetuation of the "us vs. them" mentality. It's not helpful.

The unmarried pregnancy was blasted first by the blogs. Thanks to the two bimbos from Alaska. The teen pregnancy bit came after all that publicity. Of course, the parents could have said :No interviews ,period. When Chelsea and Bush twins were college age the media was more conosiderate with family privacy and they weren't competing with the internet and blogs. Anyway...that's my opinion;-)

I agree about whining and being "thin-skinned" about any opposing views/comments . ie...the President's constant zingers about FOX. Get over it! No one forced him to take the job. And wanting to curb Talk Radio...hey , he's not Hugo Chavez.... Yet;-)

Thanks to the two bimbos from Alaska. And do you recall reading about that then, about these bloggers? If it was just the bloggers you don't read (let alone ones from Alaska), how would you even have know she was pregnant? Did you even know there were 2 bimbos (and even more) from Alaska writing about anything then?

The unmarried pregnancy was blasted first by the blogs Sure, blame the blogs. No one would've noticed otherwise. ;-) And why would anyone pay attention to her pregnancy at all, pray tell? Not the irony of it vs. her mom's stated platform on abstinence I'm sure.

Actually, what was put out by the blogs was that Trig was actually Bristol's baby, so to counteract that, the McCain/Palin campaign put out a press release stating Bristol was currently pregnant.

George Clooney is in Aquila with Bill Murray today. It seems that Clooney is opening a movie theater there and has brought the new Wes Anderson film to show. They were touring the earthquake rubble area.

I "read it somewhere" that the bimbo bloggers broke the news of Bristol preggers. Anyway...here's two outfits I have missed.... OOOOh, I like that. A little too sedate. Too much like Talbot's stuff. It's by Isaac Miza....(whatever his name it..the guy from Target)

(Evelyn)When Chelsea and Bush twins were college age the media was more conosiderate with family privacy and they weren't competing with the internet and blogs. They still didn't leave JFK Jr. alone. Or his mother. Nowadays anybody can blog, tweet, or snap pics with their cell phones. And the mainstream media has really lowered its newsworthy standards to compete. Wall to wall Michael Jackson coverage? Ehhhh . . . the President's constant zingers about FOX. Get over it! Does he really? I haven't heard that, but LOL! Love the one-shouldered outfit. I like the purple too. In Aquila today, she's in yellow.

(Evelyn), It's by Isaac Miza....(whatever his name it..the guy from Target) ROTF! The guy from Target? If he had known he wold be known as the guy from Target, he might not have done it. ;-) Some of his Oscar gowns have been my fav's. Publicity and the kids: it goes with the public persona of the parents and the media attention. Most of the kids end up using the media later on anyway. Jenna Bush and her book comes to mind. And Caroline K coming out for senator, even if it did not go her way.

I "read it somewhere" that the bimbo bloggers broke the news of Bristol preggers. Perhaps you read it incorrectly or your source was not accurate. The thing the bloggers were saying was what I noted before. It was also known in that community already that she was pregnant. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/republican_race/2008/09/01/2008-09-01_bristol_palins_pregnancy_was_an_open_sec.html http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1837862-1,00.html http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/513141.html And an article that briefly touches on things that Mari, you and I mentioned today about Presidential children in the media, also mentioning the Palin/Bush kids momentarily. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090102305.html

Saw my first bumper stick today.... Bankrupt America

Bankrupt America "Yes We Can"

America's been bankrupt for a while. The Chinese have been owning us. ;-)

Oh, wait, did it mean financially or morally? ;-)

I'd pay $5 a month for the NYT online without getting the print edition. I pay much more than that now for the weekend only paper. NY Times considers charging for website access 16 hours ago NEW YORK (AFP) � The New York Times Company is considering charging a fee for access to its website, and has begun asking its print edition subscribers how such a charge would affect their subscriptions. In a survey targeting existing subscribers, the media company said it was "considering charging a monthly fee of five dollars to access its content, including all its articles, blogs and multimedia." The survey then asks: "How likely would you be to pay a 2.50 dollar monthly fee -- which would be a 50 percent discount for home delivery subscribers -- for continued, unlimited access to nytimes.com?" At present, users can access all content on the nytimes.com website for free, but the company has experimented with access charges before. In 2005, it launched Times Select, which charged a fee for access to some opinion and editorial content, but it shut the program down two years later. The proposal described by the survey Thursday suggested a much broader attempt to increase revenue for the media company, amid falling profits across the industry. Company spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said that a monthly access fee was only one possibility being considered. "We are doing research on a variety of scenarios," Mathis told AFP. The survey Thursday seemed designed to gauge the effect of additional charges on The New York Times' existing print subscription base, asking subscribers to respond to a series of assertions about possible fees. Respondents were asked to click on a range of options from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree" in response to statements including: "I would gladly pay for access to nytimes.com in order to support the Times' quality journalism" and "I think it is wrong for The New York Times to charge anyone for access to nytimes.com."

This is so sad! Zoo May Close, Euthanize Animals Budget Cuts Threaten Boston Zoo POSTED: 9:14 pm EDT July 10, 2009 UPDATED: 7:19 pm EDT July 11, 2009 BOSTON -- The Franklin Park Zoo, the only Boston institution of its kind, may be forced to close and euthanize some of its animals, zoo officials said Friday. http://www.thebostonchannel.com/money/20021259/detail.html

That's uncalled for. I am sure other zoos would be happy to take them. Making up $4M. is not insurmountable through private donors/foundations. Where is PETA ? Instead of going after women who wear furs.

*snort* Serves him right. Mr. I Was Unconfirmed For A Judgeship Because of My Apparent Racial Bias. What a git. He something else stupid to her too as an inference, though not sure where I saw it. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/07/14/sotomayor-surprises-sessions/

That is...he *said* something else stupid to her....

"seeking to discredit Judge Sonia Sotomayor�s judicial philosophy, " I have watched the hearings and I wouldn't say Sen Sessions was *discrediting* her philosophy. Instead he was asking for "clarification"; isn't this what hearings are about? And he wasn't stupid unless you were put-off by his southern accent;-)

This seems up Evelyn's alley. :-) http://www.bvonstyle.com/2009/07/13/michelle-obama-fashion-repeat/?icid=webmail|wbml-aol|dl1|link4|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bvonstyle.com%2F2009%2F07%2F13%2Fmichelle-obama-fashion-repeat%2F

Hey, I didn't like her on the campaign trail either. In fact , for a while the "Handlers" hid her; too abrasive. I like to think that she is more rested now and relaxed;-) anyway...here are some new outfits I hadn't seen (Wonder how long she can keep this up...it would become tiresome to me) I like the Ghana one the best. The chartreuse skirt is from J. Crew and sweater is Liz Clayborne. Nice how she moves from designer to middle class stuff.

Getting reports on Sky News of some entrances to Capitol building being sealed off due to gun shots?

(Evelyn) Hey, I didn't like her on the campaign trail either. In fact , for a while the "Handlers" hid her; too abrasive. I like to think that she is more rested now and relaxed;-) Funny, this isn't the comment I was expecting. I posted it because of the fashion....her willingness to re-wear things, and your interest in her fashions.... not whether she was liked or not. Hmmmm...

I was refering to a sentence in the article...not your posting. Yes, I am intensely interested in her fashions....hey, she's setting them. She doesn't repeat them too often. Thanks.

That silly "news" channel... Fox News graphics department has shaky grasp of Mideast geography http://mediamatters.org/blog/200907270040 I found the comments rather entertaining.

Can someone in the UK answer this (or anyone from any non-US country)... With your single payer/universal health care, are people who are chronically ill covered indefinitely and with no limits on the types of treatments given for those such as diabetics on dialysis and cancer patients on long-term recurrent chemo txs. I asked someone from the UK last week, when we were discussing health care systems here and around the world, if patients who are on longterm treatments on NHS continue indefinitely and doesn't it become a financial drag on that health system? (I found his answer rather ludicrous...they just stop treating them at some point). Is the NHS going broke? I'd swear I read or heard that somewhere.

It truly boggles the mind.... "As mcjoan wrote earlier, during the second quarter alone, AHIP, the health insurance industry's political arm, has bankrolled anti-reform efforts to the tune of at least $133 million. To put the insurance industry's largesse in perspective, they spent about as much in the second quarter as the Bush-Kerry campaigns spent in the 2004 general election combined and 50% more than the Obama campaign's quarterly average." http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/3/761425/-Reform-allies-blast-GOP,-health-insurance-industry It�s not like the industry has been inert. But the insurers have played the inside game, spending about $40 million on an army of lobbyists and lavishing campaign contributions on Democrats and Republicans to kill the public option. In all, the health industry spent $133 million in the second quarter alone, more than a million bucks a day. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25709.html I recommend this and many of mcjoan's stories... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/3/761171/-Healthcare-RoundupWhats-Ahead Just giving the link because of all the hyperlinks embedded http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/3/761171/-Healthcare-RoundupWhats-Ahead

I have to LOL against my will at this. August 5, 2009 GOP turns tables on Democrats Posted: August 5th, 2009 05:00 PM ET From CNN Political Editor Mark Preston WASHINGTON (CNN) — National Republicans turned the tables on their political counterparts Wednesday by redirecting angry telephone calls coming into their switchboard to the Democratic National Committee. The DNC released a Web video early in the morning accusing the GOP of inciting mob activity at town hall meetings. At the end of the video, the DNC instructs people to call the Republican National Committee to express outrage. Callers who dial the RNC's main number to voice their concern about the DNC's charges are told to press 1, which sends them to the DNC's main switchboard. DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse described the RNC's redirection as a "neat trick," but said it just further proves the Democrats' point about the GOP. "The RNC is inciting angry mobs to shout out legitimate discussion at public events across the country and now they want to ignore people who deplore their tactics," Woodhouse said. "Republicans don't want to have a discussion about the future of health care reform – they want to shout out – and now completely ignore – anyone who disagrees with them." RNC spokeswoman Gail Gitcho dismissed the DNC's charge and accused Democrats of "trying to divert attention from the widespread opposition to President Obama's government-run health care experiment. "The fact is many Democrats are opposed to the president's plan, including many Democrats in Congress," she said. "We wanted to make sure that callers who believe only 'rabid extremists' are opposing the president's health care plan have the opportunity to express those concerns to the DNC." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/05/gop-turns-tables-on-democrats/#more-63234

I'm no longer an Eagles fan. :-( QB Michael Vick signs 2-year deal with Eagles AP By ROB MAADDI, AP Sports Writer Rob Maaddi, Ap Sports Writer � 16 mins ago PHILADELPHIA � Michael Vick is back in the NFL, landing a job with the Philadelphia Eagles. "He signed with the Eagles," agent Joel Segal told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Thursday. He said it was a two-year deal. Vick, once the NFL's highest-paid player, has not played since 2006. The former Atlanta Falcons quarterback was convicted in August 2007 of conspiracy and running a dogfighting operation, and served 18 of a 23-month sentence in federal prison. He also was suspended indefinitely by the NFL. Commissioner Roger Goodell conditionally lifted Vick's suspension on July 27, allowing him to sign with a team, practice and play in the last two preseason games. Once the season begins, Vick can participate in all team activities except games, and Goodell said he would consider Vick for full reinstatement by Week 6 (Oct. 18-19) at the latest. The Eagles went to the playoffs last season under quarterback Donovan McNabb, and are still looking for their elusive first Super Bowl win. The team, though, is a surprise landing point for Vick. It was among 26 clubs that said there was no interest in Vick, but that may have changed when backup Kevin Kolb strained a knee ligament earlier this week. Kolb's injury isn't serious and he's expected to return next week. The Eagles also have veteran A.J. Feeley. When news of Vick's signing circulated in the press box during the first half of the Eagles' preseason opener against New England, even the team's public relations staff seemed surprised. ___

Not sure what the Eagles had in mind with this. Most fans here (not all) are pissed! My own take: I think they did it as a favor to Donovan McNabb. I seem to think they went to Syracuse together (Donovan would have been a senior, Vick a freshman) and I think he saw himself as a mentor. And I think their mothers are friends. Plus, DM said today that he lobbied for it. This way, MV can ease his way back into the NFL, and catch on with another team next year, now that the Eagles have broken the ice. We sure don't need another QB. Am watching a replay of the press conference now. Tony Dungy is vouching for him.

I for one would love to see the day when we could hold up all our celebrities, athletes, movie stars etc. as paragons of virtue and role models for truth, fairness and clean living. Sadly, I live in Canada and although it's lovely it's still not Utopia. Some people are just not very nice. But the man has paid the price for his misdeeds and I think he should be allowed to earn a living to the best of his ability. In fact, seeing him on the field will be a reminder of what he did wrong which may be better than never hearing about it or him again.

(Sandy) I for one would love to see the day when we could hold up all our celebrities, athletes, movie stars etc. as paragons of virtue and role models for truth, fairness and clean living. I don't care if he's some shmuck that lived down the street. What he did was despicable. (Sandy) But the man has paid the price for his misdeeds and I think he should be allowed to earn a living to the best of his ability. In fact, seeing him on the field will be a reminder of what he did wrong which may be better than never hearing about it or him again. Living in obscurity, working as a short order cook would be more appropriate to me. Working again in a high profile job, with a high profile team, making more $$ in a week than I make in a year even if he was being paid the lowest wage for his position in the NFL is too good for him. He's bankrupt? BFD. Cleaning stables or working with animals in some way, being forced to deal with animals in a compassionate manner, everyday, to remind him of what he did is what he deserves IMO. Sound judgemental? Yep. And I'm ok with that. He's a heinous individual. People who can do that to animals also tend not to treat humans properly either.

(Sandy) In fact, seeing him on the field will be a reminder of what he did wrong Could you please explain your reasoning here? Thank you for commenting. :-)

(Me) In fact, seeing him on the field will be a reminder of what he did wrong (Dorine)Could you please explain your reasoning here? Well, my reasoning is that anytime he steps on the field someone is saying "Oh yah, he's the despicable skunk who was so cruel to his dogs. Such a heinous individual shouldn't be allowed the same privileges as other people." And if that message gets across to one person who might have followed his lead, well it's worth it. I'm not trying to defend him or his actions in the least. I agree that he is the lowest of the low. It's just that society/courts have decided that 18 months in jail is an appropriate punishment for what he did and I don't see continuing to punish him. It's not illegal to be pond scum :-)

White House appears ready to drop 'public option' AP By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer � 32 mins ago WASHINGTON � Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul;_ylt=AkjzdhrwMz3tiaXHBrUlJaes0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM1dG9ncGIzBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwODE2L3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX292ZXJoYXVsBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDd2hpdGVob3VzZWFw ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If this is true, it's come to pass as I said. "Healthcare reform" in the US is a sham. For now anyway. If they pass something now on the understanding it's the first step of a complete overhall, I would feel better about it, but then again, I can't think of anything particularly meaningful now to even vote on. But with a dropping of a public option (in lieu of going whole hog on a single payer system) and the deal the White House/the Senate made with the pharma industry (yet again) for starters, I'm not sure what the point is to continue this charade. Forget it this year and try again next year. I hope to be proved wrong in the future and pray this is some sort of "bigger plan" with a capital P. I'd love to know Sen. Kennedy's thoughts on how this is progressing. The irony that he should be in significantly declining health and increasing unable to participate while his career cause is now front and center is almost mindboggling. I've argued against it often enough when the following has been said to me, but it's true, there's a significant amount of stupid Americans in this country. And they revel in it. The mainstream media as a whole at this point is doing none of them or anyone any favors either on this subject by neglecting to give factbased, reasoned reporting and actually doing a service of educating people on what is really in these bills being brought up on the Hill and what is really being proposed. They choose to listen to and broadcast vapidness and outright lies from people like Sarah Palin (who was for End of Life Care counseling in Alaska before she was against it this week), Newt Gingrich, members of Congress, etc. Are there people out there who have valid criticisms of the reform? Absolutely. Unfortunately the media almost universally chooses not to focus on them. They choose to focus on the people on Medicare, Medicaid or who have military insurance who decry the "socialistic"/govt run public option and literally scream about it at Town Hall meetings (though granted, some of them are plants). They themselves are on such govt run plans, but are too stupid to realize it because they listen to their party leaders (and whoever) without doing any kind of due diligence themselves. I know people have sometimes little time to watch much news and feel they have to rely on the mainstream media to get their information, but at this point, as with their own health, it's time to start taking personal responsibility for the information they take in and should be more discerning of the sources they choose to use for that purpose. *steps off soapbox* (*wonders to self...does anyone notice I'm madder than a wet hen?*)

Forgot to say thank you, Sandy, for your reply. LOL, no, it's definitely not illegal to be pond scum (though maybe it should be ;-)), but I will just have to agree to disagree with you about MV. He was on 60 Minutes tonight and forgot to watch it. Though can't say it was necessarily Must See Tv for me either. I'll catch it online if I'm so inclined.

Sad. :-( Well not for them I guess. Healthcare insurers get upper hand Obama's overhaul fight is being won by the industry, experts say. The end result may be a financial 'bonanza.' By Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger August 24, 2009 Reporting from Washington - Lashed by liberals and threatened with more government regulation, the insurance industry nevertheless rallied its lobbying and grass-roots resources so successfully in the early stages of the healthcare overhaul deliberations that it is poised to reap a financial windfall. The half-dozen leading overhaul proposals circulating in Congress would require all citizens to have health insurance, which would guarantee insurers tens of millions of new customers -- many of whom would get government subsidies to help pay the companies' premiums. "It's a bonanza," said Robert Laszewski, a health insurance executive for 20 years who now tracks reform legislation as president of the consulting firm Health Policy and Strategy Associates Inc. Some insurance company leaders continue to profess concern about the unpredictable course of President Obama's massive healthcare initiative, and they vigorously oppose elements of his agenda. But Laszewski said the industry's reaction to early negotiations boiled down to a single word: "Hallelujah!" The insurers' success so far can be explained in part by their lobbying efforts in the nation's capital and the districts of key lawmakers. The bills vary in the degree to which they would empower government to be a competitor and a regulator of private insurance. But analysts said that based on the way things stand now, insurers would come out ahead. "The insurers are going to do quite well," said Linda Blumberg, a health policy analyst at the nonpartisan Urban Institute, a Washington think tank. "They are going to have this very stable pool, they're going to have people getting subsidies to help them buy coverage and . . . they will be paid the full costs of the benefits that they provide -- plus their administrative costs." One of the Democratic proposals that most concerns insurers is the creation of a "public option" insurance plan. The industry launched a campaign on Capitol Hill against it, grounded in a study published by the Lewin Group, a health policy consulting firm that is owned by UnitedHealth Group. The lobbyists contended that a government-run plan, which would have favorable tax and regulatory treatment, would undermine private insurers. Opposition increased this month when boisterous critics mobilized at town hall meetings held by members of Congress home for the August recess. The attacks, supplemented by conservative critics on talk radio and other forums, drew national attention. Leading insurers, including UnitedHealth, urged their employees around the country to speak out. Company "advocacy hot line" operations and sample letters and statements were made available to an army of insurance industry employees in nearly every congressional district. Some insurers supplemented the effort with local advertising, often designed to put pressure on specific members of Congress. Late in the spring, Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina -- the home state of several conservative Blue Dog Democrats -- prepared ads attacking the public option. Leading Democrats have fought back, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) last month calling the industry "immoral" for its past treatment of customers and suggesting insurers were "the villains" in the healthcare debate. Still, recent support for the public option has declined, and the stock prices of health insurance firms have been rising. Undermining support for the public option wasn't the only gain scored by insurance lobbyists. In May, the Senate Finance Committee discussed requiring that insurers reimburse at least 76% of policyholders' medical costs under their most affordable plans. Now the committee is considering setting that rate as low as 65%, meaning insurers would be required to cover just about two-thirds of patients' healthcare bills. According to a committee aide, the change was being considered so that companies could hold down premiums for the policies. Most group health plans cover 80% to 90% or more of a policyholder's medical bills, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service. Industry officials urged that the government set the floor lower so insurers could provide flexible, more affordable plans. "It is vital that individuals, families and small-business owners have the flexibility to choose an affordable coverage option that best meets their needs," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's Washington-based lobbying shop. Consumer advocates argue that a lower government minimum might quickly become the industry standard, placing a greater financial burden on patients and their families. "These are a bad deal for consumers," said J. Robert Hunter, a former Texas insurance commissioner who works with the Consumer Federation of America. Meanwhile, companies would probably see a benefit by providing less insurance "per premium dollar," Hunter said. "It would be quite a windfall," said Wendell Potter, a former executive at Cigna insurance company who has become an industry whistle-blower. Consumer and labor advocates acknowledged the industry's lobbying success. In the first half of 2009, the health service and HMO sector spent nearly $35 million lobbying Congress, the White House and federal healthcare offices, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics. With more than 900 lobbyists, that sector -- whose top spenders are insurance giants UnitedHealth, Blue Cross Blue Shield and Aetna -- was poised to spend more than in 2008, a record lobbying year. UnitedHealth spent the most, $2.5 million in the first half of 2009, and hired some of Washington's most prominent political players, including Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader who served as an informal health policy advisor to Obama. "They have beaten us six ways to Sunday," said Gerald Shea of the AFL-CIO. "Any time we want to make a small change to provide cost relief, they find a way to make it more profitable." tom.hamburger@latimes.com kim.geiger@latimes.com http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/healthcare/la-na-healthcare-insurers24-2009aug24,0,6925890.story

"UnitedHealth spent the most, $2.5 million in the first half of 2009, and hired some of Washington's most prominent political players, including Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader who served as an informal health policy advisor to Obama." Wasn't he nominated to be Secretary of Health & Human Services under the Obama administration til some tax problems surfaced? So along with being a tax evader he also seems to be deficient in loyalty.

Yeah, though I think I did read somewhere around that time that he did have some industry ties that may not have seemed kosher for the position he would be in. Or maybe if he couldn't beat 'em, he'd join 'em.

I'll guess by the time anyone reads this they'll know Ted Kennedy died. What an immense loss, especially at this time. I'd like to think a healthcare reform would be in a different place now had he been able to really contribute to the fullest.

And Eunice Shriver dying just a week or so ago. How awful for everyone in that family.

There was a picture from Eunice Shriver's funeral I wanted to post, but apparently forgot. It's of one of the (great?) granddaughters putting her hand to Sargent Shriver's face like she's comforting him while he's sitting in one of the church pews. It was adorable and a little heartbreaking at once. I'll go back and look for it later.

Here it is. She's like a living doll.

He has Alzheimer's; must be almost mid- ninety. I think the little girl's grandmother is the one who wrote the book explaining Alzheimer's to children.

Maria Shriver was one of the people behind the Alzheimer's Project, a multi-part series on HBO. She hosted the and narrated the segment entitled "Why Grandpa(?) Doesn't Know Me" (or something like that). There were some lovely stories with children who actively provided companionship for their afflicted grandparents.

"What's Happening to Grandpa" I saw her interviewed on The Today Show.

"Grandpa, Do You Know Who I Am?" http://www.hbo.com/alzheimers/ I missed one because it had two parts and I only DVR'd one. Guess I'll have to watch it online.

I quoted the name of the book, not the TV series. I know there were many parents and grands who found the book most inspiring and helpful. A devastating disease.

Anyone watching the Kennedy funeral? Beautiful. Loving his son Teddy's eulogy.

Man, Patrick's shouting his eulogy as it goes on.

V. impressive. Placido Domingo and Yo Yo Ma together performing the Panis Anglelicus was memorable . Never have heard them together. I missed the soprano who sang the Ave Maria ..I think it was Susan Graham from the Met. Three of the finest artists from today's classical world Great music from pre-guitar Catholicism.

Yes, it was Susan Graham. They're running waaaaayyyy behind on stopping at the Capitol and on to Arlington. They were supposed to be at the Capitol almost 2 hrs ago. Sen Byrd is out front waiting for them with the staffers. Even the public is there. He is looking frail. In a wheelchair. And they say it's pretty hot there today.

I have to say, I'm not sure that I knew Bobby Kennedy was buried at Arlington very close to JFK. And I've been there several times. If I did know, I'd completely forgotten.

I was/am deeply offended by the attacks on the President over this education speech. The far right will credit him for nothing. I feel sorry for the children whose parents refused to let them hear this message, and in turn what that parental message sent to the kids. Staying in School and the 'Socialist Agenda' By E.J. Dionne | September 8, 2009; 1:30 PM ET Washington Post We have just gone through one of the most shameful episodes of the young Obama presidency -- shameful because of the behavior of the right wing, shameful because the media played into an extremist agenda, shameful because we proved that our political system has become so dysfunctional that a president gets punished for doing the right thing. Upon Barack Obama�s election, even my most conservative friends who supported John McCain said Obama could do a world of good for poor children in the country by stressing the importance of education, hard work, staying in school and taking responsibility. Yes, those are often thought of as conservative values. But when Obama proposed to do just that on the first day of school, the far right -- without asking any questions or seeking any information -- decided to pounce, on the theory that everything Obama did should be attacked relentlessly as part of some secret and dangerous ideological agenda. Out popped Jim Greer, the Florida Republican chairman, who accused the president of trying to �indoctrinate America's children to his socialist agenda." In a normal world, the media would have asked Greer for proof of such a wild charge and, since he didn�t have any, his press release would have gone into the circular file. But, no, the media is so petrified of being criticized for being �liberal� that it chose to take a lunatic charge seriously and helped gin up this phony controversy. The only rationale for assailing Obama was a single line in a long memo from the Department of Education listing eight steps that students could take to further their goals. It listed the categories for those goals as �personal, academic, community, country." Far from encouraging students to fight for a political agenda, the guidelines emphasized that teachers should focus on �personal and academic� goals. Then came the �controversial� sentences: �Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals." In validating their decision to allow the madcap right to dominate several news cycles with their attacks on Obama, many reporters and commentators kept repeating that all this was the fault of that single sentence written by Education Department �bureaucrats� -- as if this sentence was reason enough to give wide publicity to an outright lie about what Obama was up to. In context, it was absolutely clear that the supposedly offending sentence was in no way about politics. But just to make sure, the Education Department rewrote the passage to clarify that the students� letters should focus on their �short-term and long-term education goals.� Yes, it would have been nice if the Ed Department had used such a sentence in the first place. (In general, it would be nice if memos of this sort were written in plain English.) But nothing in the original document justified the paranoia the far right let loose. And, of course, Obama�s speech was not at all �political� in any conventional definition of that word. It was about highlighting the importance of individual achievement. Here is an example of the president�s �socialist� propaganda, from the text of his speech: I�ve talked a lot about your government�s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren�t working where students aren�t getting the opportunities they deserve. But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world -- and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed. And that�s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself. If that�s �socialist,� then Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and just about every parent in America are �socialists.� Oh, yes, and after reading the president�s remarks, the aforementioned Jim Greer, the Florida GOP chairman, declared: �It's a good speech. It encourages kids to stay in school and the importance of education, and I think that's what a president should do.� But not a word of apology for helping set off a dishonest and destructive episode that led who knows how many parents to keep their kids home today or to forbid them from listening to a president urging them to do well in school. One other point: Defenders of the right-wing argue that the left said terrible things about George W. Bush. That�s true. What the apologists miss is that the deep anger at Bush did not set in until he had been president for several years. Despite the rage over Florida and the Supreme Court�s Bush v. Gore decision, Bush did not face until much later in his administration anything like the hostility that Obama already confronts. Liberals, staunch liberals, were even willing to work with Bush on some issues -- remember, for example, Ted Kennedy�s work on the �No Child Left Behind� Act. And the entire country, including almost all of the left, united behind Bush after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. (Here, to provide a personal example, is my own column of Oct. 12, 2001. Yes, what I wrote looks naive now, but I�m still glad I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt at that moment.) The far, far left that trashed Bush immediately after 9/11 was isolated and treated as cranky and even subversive by the mainstream media. Note how quickly Van Jones was driven from his administration job for singing that wacky post-9/11 petition. The far left faces much tougher public and media discipline than the far right. The right-wing decided almost from Day One that a president elected with 53 percent of the vote (and 365 electoral votes) was illegitimate. They are trashing a moderate liberal as a socialist propagandist. They are getting a lot of press coverage for doing so. Where is the accountability? Am I continuing to be naive in believing that, one of these days, a phalanx of responsible conservatives will stand up to the extremists? Boy, do I miss William F. Buckley Jr.

I'd like to say it boggles the mind, but at this point, perhaps I'm becoming inured to this type of ridiculousness from people who promote such distorted agendas and the media that eggs it on, as well as the people who exist from day to day "without asking any questions or seeking any information". Ignorance breeds contempt. On the other hand, it all incenses me.

I realize that you must be offended, Mari. I was too when George Bush's speech was criticized . That seems to be the MO for the opposition. I listened on C-Span and found the speech v. inspiring. However, let's role the tape some .. The president's political advisers met with the Education Secretary and suggested that a component be added to the lesson plan accompanying the speech: Clarence Page today explains it better than I can: " The Education Department didn't help matters with the darkly suggestive wording that someone, dare I say, stupidly included in a set of classroom activites posted on the department's web site to accompany the speech. It suggested that students "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president"..A WH spokesman acknowledged that the original was 'inartfully worded'. Translattion from government-ese: Somebody messed up." "Out went the old wording. The updated version asks students to write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and 'long-term education goals'" Good. The speech went on TV to rave reviews. The Florida Republican chairman was on TV last night on the Leher Report and said he found the speech excellent and yes, his children would view it. On "Face the Nation" Sunday Education Arne Duncan acknowledged that some of the materials provided to local school officials were poorly worded and may have lead to some confusion about the speech's goals. Now: Imagine the hoop-la from the liberal left if such materials would have accompanied a speech by George Bush. Case closed. But remember folks: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" Or does that only apply to liberals. ;-)

(Evelyn)I was too when George Bush's speech was criticized . Which one? Bush didn't come in for heavy criticism from the left until well into his term. The right pounced on O from the start. It suggested that students "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president".. That is a very innocuous statement and you know it was meant in the context of education, improving youself, working hard, helping the country by succeeding in your life, making a contribution. Only those who would willfully misinterpret it would take exception. The "oops" from the WH and Duncan went overboard; there was nothing to be sorry about. Another example of O bending over backwards to meet halfway with people who have no intention of meeting him anywhere. The Florida Republican chairman was on TV last night on the Leher Report and said he found the speech excellent and yes, his children would view it. With no regret expressed over the trouble he caused. Shouldn't he have asked for a copy f the sppech to review before he shot his dumb mouth off? No, shout first, ask questions later. "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" This isn't honest dissent. It's about manipulating public opinion no matter the cost to the country. It's about teaching kids that it's ok to blow off the president and disrespect the office because you don't like him. The radical right will continue to self destruct.

Some people will dispute your perception of honest dissent. I understand your disappointment.....believe me,I was there for 8 yrs. It's a sinking feeling. At least no Republican has called the president a liar from the House floor. Now that was disrespect for the office. No president ever gets all of his policies through Congress easily. He's going to have to get used to it.

(Evelyn) At least no Republican has called the president a liar from the House floor. Now that was disrespect for the office. It appears you are incorrect.

I know...last night when I heard the heckler, I though "Yikes!" I spoke too soon. But Rep Wilson did apologize immediately. More than Senator Kennedy (RIP)or Speaker Pelosi ever did. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/10/gop-lawmakers-heckling-draws-fire/?source=newsletter_must-read-stories-today_more_news_carousel And Pres Bush (43) is still ahead of him by one ...*and* a shoe;-) Still , it was a shocking display of bad manners, disrespect and inexcusable.

That's m'boy.... Berlusconi says is best leader in Italy's history "why Italians like me and I have 68.4 percent of approval and admiration," said Berlusconi, who has been elected three times and is now the longest-serving leader in Italian post-war history." http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE5894RC20090910

"You like me! You really like me!! ;-D

Italians really do like him. Except Livia and her cavaliere husband. Every chance he gets he tries to put B down in interviews. No Italian leader has had those kinds of approval ratings ever. Go Silvio, annoy the hell out of Colin & Co! LOL I was surprised to receive an email from my son's highschool asking if we would allow him to see Obama's speech!? Since when? It's not as if he's Bin Laden. What a ridiculous world we are living in.

Good article from Salon. Can't believe anyone would defend this old pig. Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/index.html

Damn it. I just spent a ton of time typing up a response (in between work stuff) and it disappeared. &*^*&^*%*%!!!

Poor Do. :-(

All is not as it seems, Mari. I don't condone it, but the girl looked much older, she looked 18, plus she was wearing a outfit that would not be suitable for a 13 year old. She told him she was 18, she did the drugs. Her mother sent her to get a film role. The whole thing is screwed up but as I said, but it's not just a case of rape case. He was also a victim of one of the worst crimes ever committed in the US. He has paid his dues. He's not some sort of pervert that we must fear.

She "looked older?" So, it would be ok to drug, rape and sodomize an 18 year old? She told him no, pled with him to stop, repeatedly. I am not insensitive to the tramua in his life. It's heartbreaking. But many millions of people have endured the murder of loved ones or survived the Holocaust without becoming rapists. What dues did he pay? Having to live in France and suffer snooty Parisian waiters for the past 30 years? No one is above the law. He chose to run. Now he's caught. The fact that many years have passed does not change his crime. Here's an interesting quote from an interview he gave Martin Amis, a year after fleeing: �If I had killed somebody, it wouldn�t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But� f�ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f� young girls. Juries want to f� young girls. Everyone wants to f� young girls!� Uh, even if you have to take them by force, right RP? Pig.

I certainly don't condone what happened, but the "justice" system that Slate (Salon?) writer spoke so passionately about did not appear to mete out the punishment one would think for this crime in the first place. First off, because he pled way down to a much lesser charge (which also threw out the drug charges). Then they ordered him to a 90 psych eval, which was suspended while he....wait for it....went out of the country!, to finish a film! Strangely (or not), he came back at that point to do that eval. Then, they let him out....wait for it....early! After 42 days. Then he ran, after he thought they were going to give him a harsher sentence than had been bargained for (probably probation and/or extremely short jail time). I'm curious how much time he thought he was going to end up with. A short 6 mos to a year could've freaked him out for all anyone knows, which doesn't seem that much considering. I also frankly am of the mindset that if the victim wants that part of it to be done with at this point, so be it. She's a middle aged woman and if she's ok with him not being punished for it at this point, I'm ok with that. There are people who forgive people's murderers too, believe it or not and advocate for various things on the criminals' behalf. If they're ok with it, who am I to say otherwise, esp after an extended period of time? If the woman in RP's case felt the civil suit settlement was the end of it, ok. And really, at this point, unless they give him the sentence he was going to get originally after the plea bargain, how could they even address it clearly now? Throw him in jail for however long for the act of fleeing before the sentence was given, fine. I find it all a bit hypocritical at this point on the justice side. I've read the excuses that he couldn't be apprehended sooner because of a variety of BS reasons. I really am very curious as to why now. Oh right I remember a plausible explanation, the Swiss are being more cooperative probably in light of their settlement with the US over helping people with tax evasion and such in their banks. Remember that woman who had been in one of those domestic terrorist groups and found "hiding" as a years married housewife in Minnesota or some such place? Maybe she turned herself in? I think she ended up serving like 2 yrs or something? I can't remember if originally she escaped from jail, or escaped prior to sentencing like him or prior to conviction? Anyone know who I mean? I can't remember her name or I'd look her up. I think she served some time, they let her go, then took her back when they discovered they let her go a bit early by mistake.

Of course everyone will realize above I meant a 90-day psych eval. :-)

It was either leave the US or be charged. He left. As I've said, all is not what it seems, her mother dropped her off, she was dressed to seduce, she told him she was 18, she did the drugs. It's a case of she said he said, IMO. But she did go to see him to get a movie part, let's not be naive, she's not the first one to F or be sodomized for a role. I see it as a big publicity stunt by the mother. I don't condone what he did, but there are two sides to this story. �If I had killed somebody, it wouldn�t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But� f�ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f� young girls. Juries want to f� young girls. Everyone wants to f� young girls!� That is the sick/sad truth of this modern world. He was only stating the obvious. :-(

A nude photograph of the actress Brooke Shields aged 10 has been removed from a Tate Modern exhibition on police advice. http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article6856148.ece?&EMC-Bltn=CAIDIB

It was either leave the US or be charged. It was either leave the US or be charged. Moon, he was already charged, copped a plea, and convicted. He was awaiting final sentencing. But she did go to see him to get a movie part, let's not be naive, she's not the first one to F or be sodomized for a role. And the sad part is it still continues to happen on a daily basis. Wasn't it a fashion designer who was just sentenced to like a bazillion yrs in jail for preying on young women wanting to be models? And in a similar case to Polanski, James Barbour, a Broadway actor just went through the same thing and I think got a slap on the wrist. I don't think he got jail time. That I'll look up.

Here's the bit about James Barbour from Wikipedia. He got a little jail time. In April 2006, Barbour was arrested and charged with sex abuse and sodomy for having inappropriate relations with a female minor four years prior.[16][17][18] In the Fall of 2006, he was indicted by a grand jury in New York for said crime.[19][20][21][22][23] In January 2008, Barbour pleaded guilty to two misdemeanour counts of endangering the welfare of a minor in exchange for a lesser sentence of 60 days in jail and three years probation. Also, in accordance with his plea bargain, Barbour, under oath, made a public allocution admitting to his felonious acts.[24][25][26] On February 29, 2008, Barbour began his sixty-day jail sentence at Rikers Island and three years probation.[27] And the NY Times summary http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/nyregion/04actor.html?ref=nyregion I do have to admit I'm curious about something. In both this and the Polanski case, why were they allowed to plea down if the crimes were so bad?

All I can say is assuming Polanski makes it back to the US, I'd hate to be the presiding judge. What a circus that will be.

(Dorine), I do have to admit I'm curious about something. In both this and the Polanski case, why were they allowed to plea down if the crimes were so bad? I'll let Polanski answer that one: �If I had killed somebody, it wouldn�t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But� f�ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f� young girls. Juries want to f� young girls. Everyone wants to f� young girls!� The sick/sad truth of the modern world. Why do you think the internet porn industry is so huge? And one of the most popular subject: young school girls. :-(

Ok, now this is really stupid. This is the first time I've read any specifics on how much he'd have had to go to jail for which made him run. From an AP report: "However, he was released after 42 days by an evaluator who deemed him mentally sound and unlikely to offend again. The judge responded by saying he was going to send Polanski back to jail for the remainder of the 90 days and that afterward he would ask Polanski to agree to a "voluntary deportation." Polanski then fled the country, on Feb. 1, 1978, the day he was scheduled to be sentenced to the additional time." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091002/ap_en_mo/eu_switzerland_polanski What an incredible doof. The guy gets a gift (not to the victim obviously) of pleading down with a slap on the wrist sentence and he chooses to run.... from an extra 48 days in jail?? I guess he completed the "voluntary deportation" part of the sentence. And now he'll probably get more than that for skipping out. That's something.

To say she asked for it (by her dress, her mother's actions, etc.) implies that she had it coming to her. And that is so wrong, IMO. Victims have been subjected to that macho, misogynistic argument forever. No wonder relatively few decide to come forward. Their actions are put on trial--not the bastard who raped them. Of course the woman (now adult) wants no part of it. Her privacy is destroyed. Plus she received a financial settlement from him. He brought this on himself. He drugged and raped a child. Then he ran away to avoid being subject to the law. But now he is so lawyered up that I doubt he will ever have to come back. His attorneys will tie this up for years, whatever it takes. If you have enough money you can buy enough justice.

(Mari) Then he ran away to avoid being subject to the law. Yeah, the brutal 90 days in jail (or the 48 extra days). Amazing. He'll come back. Too much made of this now. The prosecutor would look like a laughing stock after all this if he didn't make sure he got back. Whatever happens it'll probably be reduced to time served for however long it takes him to deal with this. Of course the woman (now adult) wants no part of it. Her privacy is destroyed. Plus she received a financial settlement from him. If that works for her at this point in time, that works for me.

(Mari) Of course the woman (now adult) wants no part of it. Her privacy is destroyed. Plus she received a financial settlement from him. (Dorine) If that works for her at this point in time, that works for me. She has no part of it. It was a criminal case, not civil. Besides, he pled out to a lesser offense. It was over. She was totally done, after giving testimony. Nothing about what will go one with the extradition, sentencing, or imprisonment has anything to do with her. Requires nothing of her. She has no further obligations to do or say anything in conjunction with his case. Maybe Roman's lawyers covered every eventuality in her payoff papers and they can require she speak as a "character witness" at sentencing. LOL! All the crying about the judge's improper behavior (or renegging on the deal) is nonsense. Deals are struck between the prosecution and defense and presented to the court, when agreement has been reached. Just as a judge can vacate a jury's decision, he can deem a plea unacceptable. Could be the judge figured out that there would be outrage at time served or 42 days for rape, though no longer the charge on the table.

(Karen) Just as a judge can vacate a jury's decision, he can deem a plea unacceptable. Right, but if it's true in that AP piece, the judge just wanted to give him the full 90 days. And it says he fled on the day of his final sentencing. The lower charge was standing and final, but the sentence was potentially changing, correct? I don't know what the sentencing range was for that particular charge. I'm just rather amazed that all the ire is directed at Polanski and his crime (and rightly so), yet none at the "justice" system that was basically giving him a slap on the wrist or had up until that point. And that same justice system that waited until 2005 to put out an international warrant for him. Yeah, they were really workin' on getting him back up until then.

the judge just wanted to give him the full 90 days. Within his rights. Evidently the judicial misconduct has to do with an ex parte conversation with the prosecutor. http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-09-30/polanskis-lost-alibi/?cid=hp:beastoriginalsR1

(Karen) She has no part of it. It was a criminal case, not civil. Besides, he pled out to a lesser offense. It was over. She was totally done, after giving testimony. This isn't true, not everywhere anyway. In regular proceedings, a variety of people can speak on behalf or the opposite about the convicted to the court prior to sentencing that the judge can take into account or ignore. The victims of Bernie Madoff were virtually (but not literally) lined up around the block for the chance to speak about him before sentencing. They picked 10 to represent I believe. "The court shall consider the risk assessment report and presentence reports, if any, including any victim impact statement and criminal history, and allow arguments from the prosecutor, the defense counsel, the offender, the victim, the survivor of the victim, or a representative of the victim or survivor, and an investigative law enforcement officer as to the sentence to be imposed." http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.94A.500

Yeah, I saw that about that guy. I don't believe his claim now that he lied for a second. I find his excuse BS and non-sensical.

(Karen) She has no part of it. It was a criminal case, not civil. Besides, he pled out to a lesser offense. It was over. She was totally done, after giving testimony. (Dorine) This isn't true, not everywhere anyway. In regular proceedings, a variety of people can speak on behalf or the opposite about the convicted to the court prior to sentencing that the judge can take into account or ignore. Obviously you're not reading what I wrote, as I mentioned the "character witness" portion of the sentencing hearing in my first posting on this matter. She isn't required to do it. The key words are "allow." She isn't required to speak. Frankly, given his fleeing the country, I doubt anything anybody would say matters, if he actually makes it into a court room.

I didn't say I believed this guy but that was what Polanski's people and the doc are claiming. Anyway, this is what Marcia Clark says in conclusion: But Polanski wasn�t willing to risk any time waiting in prison while his lawyer figured it out. No doubt, any improper sentence would�ve been set aside, but that doesn�t mean Polanski would get the benefit of his bargain, either. Generally speaking, a judge is never bound to accept a plea bargain he doesn�t approve of. Judge Rittenband could legally have let Polanski withdraw his plea and either set the case for trial or set new terms for the plea bargain and see if Polanski would accept them. If the director had agreed to do more time, it certainly wouldn�t have been because he thought he deserved it. His statements both then and now show he doesn�t think what he did was any big deal. According to him, �no one got hurt.�

(Karen) Frankly, given his fleeing the country, I doubt anything anybody would say matters, if he actually makes it into a court room. Yes. His statements both then and now show he doesn�t think what he did was any big deal. According to him, �no one got hurt.� I read last night that the woman was awarded $500K in that settlement, but she and her lawyer were fighting 2 years later to get the money as he hadn't paid. It's not known for sure if he did finally, but with interest, the amount would be $600K.

(Mari), To say she asked for it (by her dress, her mother's actions, etc.) implies that she had it coming to her. And that is so wrong, IMO. Victims have been subjected to that macho, misogynistic argument forever To clear this up. Her mother set her up. Her mother knew what would happen. IMO, it is the mother who should go to jail. She sent her daughter to a Hollywood party dressed to seduced, told her she should fake her age to 18 if asked. That's wrong. And when the daughter came back without a promised film role, the mother decides for publicity. She's despicable. I don't agree with the macho/misogynistic argument, but it is obvious her mother was counting on it. :-( According to him, �no one got hurt.� True.

Need a new O&E topic. So forgive my faux-pas. Dorine, please ask them if it might show on BBC/America. The late night saga continues, this was funny: http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b147625_david_lettermans_drama_may_be_craig.html

OK, I'm in shock, you know what I'm talking about. He must really be the Messiah/Devil if things just keep going to him with no effort. Wow. But to keep things in perpective, they gave it to Arafat too. ;-) It is a indeed a mad, mad, mad, mad world.

I have to admit I don't think it's a great choice at this point. I understand their reasoning, but I'd have liked to have seen it even a year down the road to see what fruits his labor will bear. Something more concrete that his efforts made a difference.

I am very proud of him. Obama's remarks on winning Nobel Peace Prize By The Associated Press (AP) � 17 minutes ago Text of President Barack Obama's remarks at the White House Friday on winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, as provided by the White House: OBAMA: Good morning. Well, this is not how I expected to wake up this morning. After I received the news, Malia walked in and said, "Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo's birthday!" And then Sasha added, "Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up." So it's good to have kids to keep things in perspective. I am both surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee. Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations. To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize � men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace. But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women, and all Americans, want to build � a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents. And I know that throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action � a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges can't be met by any one leader or any one nation. And that's why my administration has worked to establish a new era of engagement in which all nations must take responsibility for the world we seek. We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people. And that's why we've begun to take concrete steps to pursue a world without nuclear weapons, because all nations have the right to pursue peaceful nuclear power, but all nations have the responsibility to demonstrate their peaceful intentions. We cannot accept the growing threat posed by climate change, which could forever damage the world that we pass on to our children � sowing conflict and famine; destroying coastlines and emptying cities. And that's why all nations must now accept their share of responsibility for transforming the way that we use energy. We can't allow the differences between peoples to define the way that we see one another, and that's why we must pursue a new beginning among people of different faiths and races and religions; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect. And we must all do our part to resolve those conflicts that have caused so much pain and hardship over so many years, and that effort must include an unwavering commitment that finally realizes that the rights of all Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security in nations of their own. We can't accept a world in which more people are denied opportunity and dignity that all people yearn for � the ability to get an education and make a decent living; the security that you won't have to live in fear of disease or violence without hope for the future. And even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today. I am the commander in chief of a country that's responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies. I'm also aware that we are dealing with the impact of a global economic crisis that has left millions of Americans looking for work. These are concerns that I confront every day on behalf of the American people. Some of the work confronting us will not be completed during my presidency. Some, like the elimination of nuclear weapons, may not be completed in my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone. This award is not simply about the efforts of my administration � it's about the courageous efforts of people around the world. And that's why this award must be shared with everyone who strives for justice and dignity � for the young woman who marches silently in the streets on behalf of her right to be heard even in the face of beatings and bullets; for the leader imprisoned in her own home because she refuses to abandon her commitment to democracy; for the soldier who sacrificed through tour after tour of duty on behalf of someone half a world away; and for all those men and women across the world who sacrifice their safety and their freedom and sometimes their lives for the cause of peace. That has always been the cause of America. That's why the world has always looked to America. And that's why I believe America will continue to lead. Thank you very much.

I am optimistic that one day Obama will truly deserve this honour but at this point I think it is very premature. What has he actually accomplished? I am also inclined to think that it is inappropriate to award the honour to the leader of a country that is actively at war, regardless of whether that war is "just".

AP Newsbreak: Nobel jury defends Obama decision By IAN MacDOUGALL and KARL RITTER, Associated Press Writers – 19 mins ago OSLO – Members of the Norwegian committee that gave Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize are strongly defending their choice against a storm of criticism that the award was premature and a potential liability for the U.S. president. Asked to comment on the uproar following Friday's announcement, four members of the five-seat panel told The Associated Press that they had expected the decision to generate both surprise and criticism. Three of them rejected the notion that Obama hadn't accomplished anything to deserve the award, while the fourth declined to answer that question. A fifth member didn't answer calls seeking comment. "We simply disagree that he has done nothing," committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland told the AP on Tuesday. "He got the prize for what he has done." Jagland singled out Obama's efforts to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down a Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe. "All these things have contributed to — I wouldn't say a safer world — but a world with less tension," Jagland said by phone from the French city of Strasbourg, where he was attending meetings in his other role as secretary-general of the Council of Europe. He said most world leaders were positive about the award and that most of the criticism was coming from the media and from Obama's political rivals. "I take note of it. My response is only the judgment of the committee, which was unanimous," he said, adding that the award to Obama followed the guidelines set forth by Alfred Nobel, the Swedish industrialist and inventor of dynamite, who established the Nobel Prizes in his 1895 will. "Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year," Jagland said. "Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?" Aagot Valle, a left-wing Norwegian politician who joined the Nobel panel this year, also dismissed suggestions that the decision to award Obama was without merit. "Don't you think that comments like that patronize Obama? Where do these people come from?" Valle said by phone from the western coastal city of Bergen. "Well, of course, all arguments have to be considered seriously. I'm not afraid of a debate on the peace prize decision. That's fine." In Friday's announcement, the committee said giving Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration. The left-leaning committee whose members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen the U.S. role in combating climate change. However, the decision stunned even the most seasoned Nobel watchers. They hadn't expected Obama, who took office barely two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline, to be seriously considered until at least next year. The award drew heated derision from Obama's political opponents in the Republican party, and was even questioned by some members of Obama's own Democratic party, who wondered what the president had done to merit the $1.4 million honor. Michael S. Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said naming Obama showed "how meaningless a once honorable and respected award has become." In a fundraising letter, Steele wrote that "the Democrats and their international leftist allies want America made subservient to the agenda of global redistribution and control. And truly patriotic Americans like you and our Republican Party are the only thing standing in their way." Columnist Thomas Friedman wrote in the New York Times that Obama "has not done anything yet on the scale that would normally merit such an award." Even in Europe, where Obama is hugely popular, many editorials and pundits questioned what he had done to deserve the award. "Scrap the Nobel Peace Prize," foreign affairs commentator Bronwen Maddox wrote in The Times of London. "It's an embarrassment and even an impediment to peace. President Obama, in letting the committee award it to him, has made himself look vain, a fool and dangerously lost in his own mystique." Yet Obama was humble in acknowledging the prize. "Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations," Obama said Friday in the White House Rose Garden. "To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize." Nobel Committee member Inger-Marie Ytterhorn noted that the president didn't greet the news with joy. "I looked at his face when he was on TV and confirmed that he would receive the prize and would come to Norway, and he didn't look particularly happy," she told AP. Some of the most celebrated peace prize laureates include Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela. The award has occasionally honored more controversial figures, like the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Sometimes it raises the profile of peace workers or activists, such as Rigoberta Menchu of Guatemala in 1992 or Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai in 2004. "Whenever we award the peace prize, there is normally a big debate about it," said Ytterhorn, a nine-year veteran of the award committee. Asked whether there was a risk that the prize could backfire on Obama by raising expectations even higher and give ammunition to his critics, Ytterhorn said "it might hamper him," because it could distract from domestic issues such as health care reform. Jagland said he didn't think the Nobel Peace Prize would hurt Obama domestically but added the committee did not take U.S. politics into consideration when making their decision. "I'm not so familiar with American politics, and I don't want to interfere with it, because this is a totally independent committee," he said. "We should not look at internal politics." Kaci Kullman Five, a former Conservative Party parliamentarian and longtime Nobel committee member, said "we all expected that there would be a discussion" about awarding Obama. She declined further comment, deferring to the Nobel Peace Prize tradition of only having the committee chairman discuss prize selections publicly. Valle, who left her seat in Parliament last week because of her Nobel panel appointment, said the criticism shouldn't overshadow important issues raised by the prize. "Of course I expected disagreement and debate on the prize, on giving him the prize," she said. "But what I want now is that we seriously raise a discussion regarding nuclear disarmament." ___ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091013/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nobel_peace_obama;_ylt=AsiWcj2nZEV2eFCj.yy8zays0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTMyM2YyaDAzBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMDEzL2V1X25vYmVsX3BlYWNlX29iYW1hBGNwb3MDMgRwb3MDNgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDaW5yYXJlcHVibGlj

I have been in Europe the past three weeks and their papers reflected surprise at the choice. Even though the President is hugely popular. But, I have to agree with John McCain . �I congratulate President Obama on receiving this prestigious award. I join my fellow Americans in expressing pride in our president on this occasion,...� Polanski is a creepy pig ;how can anyone condone the actions of this man. Good to be back.

Welcome back, Evelyn!! Hope you had fun.

Welcome home, Evelyn! I've missed you.

Thank you all....Glorious trip. But it's good to be home....I guess, LOL.

OMG, what a fabulous story. Made me tear up. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4696315n

I think this is a wonderful family portrait of the O's. http://news.aol.com/article/official-white-house-obama-family/733531

So he'll get no time for running for all that time? Polanski could face two years prison if extradited By Sam Cage and Lisa Jucca Sam Cage And Lisa Jucca � 1 hr 22 mins ago ZURICH (Reuters) � Film director Roman Polanski could face two years in prison if extradited to the United States after fleeing sentencing in California on child sex charges in 1978, the Swiss justice ministry said. "The United States want him to be extradited for sexual intercourse with a minor. This carries a maximum sentence of two years under U.S. law," justice ministry spokesman Folco Galli said on Friday. The United States had formally asked Switzerland to extradite Polanski, the ministry said earlier, adding it would reach a decision based on a hearing and information provided by Polanski's lawyer, but that there was no deadline. "If he agrees voluntarily to the extradition, the process can be concluded rapidly," Galli said. "If he fights it all the way, it will take months and months." Polanski will be able to appeal against any extradition decision to the Swiss Federal Criminal Court and, in the last instance, the Federal Supreme Court, the ministry said. The 76-year-old Oscar-winning director, who holds dual French and Polish citizenship, was arrested to comply with a U.S. warrant when he flew into Switzerland on September 26 to receive a lifetime achievement award at a film festival. Polanski fled the United States when he was due to be sentenced for having unlawful sex with a girl aged 13. U.S. judicial sources have said the extradition process is complex and could take years if Polanski challenges it. A Swiss court this week rejected a bid by Polanski for release on bail, saying the risk that he would flee was too high. Polanski's lawyer Herve Temime told Reuters that his client's strategy remained unchanged. "Mr. Polanski will continue to fight this extradition request and demand that he be freed," he said. TURBULENT LIFE Polanski was originally indicted on six charges, including rape, for having sex after plying the girl with champagne and drugs. He pleaded guilty to a single count of having sex with a minor and spent 42 days in prison undergoing psychiatric tests. But he fled the United States before the case was concluded because he believed a judge would sentence him to up to 50 years behind bars despite a plea agreement for time already served. The Swiss ministry noted that Polanski had admitted to unlawful sex with a minor during the U.S. investigation: "He is wanted by the U.S. authorities with a view to passing sentence for this offence," it said. U.S. law changed on July 1, 1977, reducing the maximum sentence Polanski could face for this offence to two years, the ministry said. "Although Polanski committed the offence before this date, he was not due for sentencing until after July 1, 1977, meaning that sentencing according to the new law applies," said Galli. Polanski has avoided countries such as Britain that have extradition treaties with the United States, but he repeatedly visited Switzerland, where he owns a chalet in the mountain resort of Gstaad, though he was only arrested on this occasion. He has never returned to Los Angeles, where his pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate, was murdered by followers of Charles Manson in 1969. Polanski was born in Paris to Polish-Jewish parents in 1933. His mother died in the Nazi concentration camp at Auschwitz. His first full-length feature, "Knife in the Water", won a number of awards, and his reputation grew with "Repulsion", his study of a woman terrified by sex who becomes a murderer. Polanski, who is married to the French actress Emmanuelle Seigner and has two children with her, scored huge hits in the United States with his 1968 horror thriller "Rosemary's Baby" and his 1974 corruption thriller "Chinatown". He won his first and only Best Director Oscar in 2002 for "The Pianist", the story of a Polish-Jewish musician who sees his world collapse with the outbreak of World War Two. (Additional reporting by Jason Rhodes in Zurich and Elizabeth Pineau in Paris; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

World Series! Phillies vs. Yankees! So Mari, what should the bet be....cheesesteaks vs cheesecake like the mayors? Cheesesteak vs. our best pizza? I'd like my cheesesteak from Jim's on South Street thanks. Steak and Whiz, no onions. :-D

(Dorine)cheesesteaks vs cheesecake like the mayors? Cheesesteak vs. our best pizza?I'd like my cheesesteak from Jim's on South Street thanks. Steak and Whiz, no onions. :-D Ok, a Jim's "whiz/wit'out" for you if the Yanks win. If the Phils win, and in keeping with the cheese theme, I'll take a box of goodies from Ferrara's on Grand St., to include: Sfogliatella, Baba Ricotta, and Cannoli. *Heaven*! I've got tix for Sunday night's game! We went to Game 3 of the National League Championship series vs. the Ddodgers. Did you hear the "You took steroids!" chants whenever Manny Ramirez was up? We were just warming up for A-Rod.:-) I would say let the best team win, but that would be the Yankees, so I'll just say, let's have a great Series!:-)

*sniff, sniff* Is that Cheese Whiz I smell?? ;-)

Yes I guess it is. But you have to come down here to get it.;-) Congrats.

I would be happy to actually. Thanks!

Americans in the hinterlands can rest easy now. NY is steppin' up to the plate to take not just some Gitmo detainees, but the worst ones. Wonder how I'll sleep at night. AP Source: Gitmo 9/11 suspects to NY for trial By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer � 4 mins ago WASHINGTON � Self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court, an Obama administration official said Friday. The official said Attorney General Eric Holder plans to announce the decision later in the morning. The official is not authorized to discuss the decision before the announcement, so spoke on condition of anonymity. Bringing such notorious suspects to U.S. soil to face trial is a key step in President Barack Obama's plan to close the terror suspect detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama initially planned to close the detention center by Jan. 22, but the administration is no longer expected to meet that deadline. It is also a major legal and political test of Obama's overall approach to terrorism. If the case suffers legal setbacks, the administration will face second-guessing from those who never wanted it in a civilian courtroom. And if lawmakers get upset about notorious terrorists being brought to their home regions, they may fight back against other parts of Obama's agenda. The New York case may also force the court system to confront a host of difficult legal issues surrounding counter-terrorism programs begun after the 2001 attacks, including the harsh interrogation techniques once used on some of the suspects while in CIA custody. The most severe method � waterboarding, or simulated drowning � was used on Mohammed 183 times in 2003, before the practice was banned. Holder will also announce that a major suspect in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, will face justice before a military commission, as will a handful of other detainees to be identified at the same announcement, the official said. It was not immediately clear where commission-bound detainees like al-Nashiri might be sent, but a military brig in South Carolina has been high on the list of considered sites. The actual transfer of the detainees from Guantanamo to New York isn't expected to happen for many more weeks because formal charges have not been filed against most of them. The attorney general has decided the case of the five Sept. 11 suspects should be handled by prosecutors working in the Southern District of New York, which has held a number of major terrorism trials in recent decades at a courthouse in lower Manhattan, just blocks from where the World Trade Center towers once stood. Holder had been considering other possible trial locations, including Virginia, Washington, DC, and a different courthouse in New York City. Those districts could all end up conducting trials of other Guantanamo detainees sent to federal court later on. The attorney general's decision in these cases comes just before a Monday deadline for the government to decide how to proceed against 10 detainees facing military commissions. In the military system, the five Sept. 11 suspects had faced the death penalty, but the official would not say if the Justice Department would also seek capital punishment against the men once they are in the federal system. The administration has already sent one Guantanamo detainee, Ahmed Ghailani, to New York to face trial, but chose not to seek death in that case. At the last major trial of al-Qaida suspects held at that courthouse in 2001, prosecutors did seek death for some of the defendants. Mohammed already has an outstanding terror indictment against him in New York, for an unsuccessful plot called "Bojinka" to simultaneously take down multiple airliners over the Pacific Ocean in the 1990's. Some members of Congress have fought any effort to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial in the United States, saying it would be too dangerous for nearby civilians. The Obama administration has defended the planned trials, saying many terrorists have been safely tried, convicted, and imprisoned in the United States, including the 1993 World Trade Center bomber, Ramzi Yousef. Mohammed and the four others � Waleed bin Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi and Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali � are accused of orchestrating the attacks that killed 2,973 people on Sept. 11, 2001. Mohammed admitted to interrogators that he was the mastermind of the attacks � he allegedly proposed the concept to Osama bin Laden as early as 1996, obtained funding for the attacks from bin Laden, oversaw the operation and trained the hijackers in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The charges against the others are: � Bin Attash, a Yemeni, allegedly ran an al-Qaida training camp in Logar, Afghanistan, where two of the 19 hijackers were trained. Bin Attash is believed to have been bin Laden's bodyguard. Authorities say bin Laden selected him as a hijacker, but he was prevented from participating when he was briefly detained in Yemen in early 2001. � Binalshibh, a Yemeni, allegedly helped find flight schools for the hijackers, helped them enter the United States and assisted with financing the operation. He allegedly was selected to be a hijacker and made a "martyr video" in preparation for the operation, but was unable to get a U.S. visa. He also is believed to be a lead operative for a foiled plot to crash aircraft into London's Heathrow Airport. � Ali allegedly helped nine of the hijackers travel to the United States and sent them $120,000 for expenses and flight training. He is believed to have served as a key lieutenant to Mohammed in Pakistan. He was born in Pakistan and raised in Kuwait. � Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, a Saudi, allegedly helped the hijackers with money, western clothing, traveler's checks and credit cards. Al-Hawsawi testified in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, saying he had seen Moussaoui at an al-Qaida guesthouse in Kandahar, Afghanistan, in early 2001, but was never introduced to him or conducted operations with him. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091113/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_guantanamo_us_trial;_ylt=AkEC1meKkNEiG1aDu1C7JSGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM4NmwzMGZ1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTEzL3VzX2d1YW50YW5hbW9fdXNfdHJpYWwEY3BvcwM3BHBvcwM0BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDYXBzb3VyY2VnaXRt

I hope ...keep all of them there...permanently ...safe and sound. (But, so far,by what I hear, it's only for the trial):-(((((

They can go to the Supermax jail in CO after the trial where all the other big terrorists are (Unabomber, 1st WTC bombers, etc).

*snort* Oh...so, NY is just "stepping up to the plate" for the trail. Big Deal Is it definite that they're going to the "hinterland " of Co? I thought Co didn't want them. They can go to Ca....they're hungry for $$$$.

Who knows where they'll ultimately end up.....hell, perhaps? ;-) But CO has had that Supermax jail there for years with the highest security, so I don't think they're worrying about it. As I said, the first WTC bombers, the Unabomber and I forget now who else is there. I think everyone there is in solitary confinement. If the 9/11 Gitmo people should get the death penalty (if that's even an option), CA won't want them either. Death row inmates cost more to house than the regulars.

They should be sent to a State that will not chicken out of the death sentense. IMO, Death row should last no longer than two weeks. Save tax payers money.

(Dorine)CA won't want them either. Death row inmates cost more to house than the regulars. They're Federal prisoners, the state gets paid for their "lodging". Your tax $$$$$$:-)))

States would not get paid for Federal prisoners held in a Federal facility, like Supermax. Only if they're housed in local facilities.

Well, though she's right about me..us...paying for them if their Federal prisoners, correct? This conversation reminded me of Timothy McVeigh. I couldn't remember for sure if he was convicted of federal crimes and possibly at the Supermax in CO (he was), so I looked him up. On his Wikipedia page, there was a link to an article about use of isolation as a punishment and I found this bit interesting. I didn't know there were more Supermax prisons around the country. I wonder why the "big name" criminals are all at the same one (though the guy they refer to in the article -not a big name, to me anyway- is in one in PA). "Gawande turns up shocking facts: The feds built the first Supermax prison in 1983. By the end of the 1990s there were 60 of them. There are now 25,000 inmates in Supermax prisons, and another 50,000 to 80,000 in "restrictive segregation units" that are pretty close to solitary confinement. The Supermax idea was sold on the hope of reducing prison violence. As Gawande admits, it makes intuitive sense: "If the worst of the worst are removed from the general prison population and put in isolation, you'd expect there to be markedly fewer shankings and attacks on corrections officers." But it didn't work. Studies of the violence rate show no correlation between the use of isolation and reduced violence, perhaps because prison violence has real causes such as overcrowding." Read more: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/federal-prison-reform-033109#ixzz0Wmoy0kMu

their = they are. Sheesh. The Supermax in CO is this ADMAX according to this. I haven't read the whole entry to see if they explain the difference between this one and other Supermax's. "The U.S. government houses a number of convicted terrorists, gang leaders, spies and similar prisoners in a Supermax prison known as ADMAX, the Federal administrative maximum security prison in Florence, Colorado, west of Pueblo. Al-Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui was sentenced to life without parole at Florence upon his conviction on May 4, 2006. Residents also include Theodore Kaczynski, a terrorist otherwise known as the Unabomber who once attacked via mail bombs, Robert Hanssen, American FBI Agent turned Soviet spy, Terry Nichols, an accomplice to the Oklahoma City bombing, and Richard Reid, an Islamic fundamentalist jailed for life for attempting to detonate explosive materials in his shoes while on board an aircraft." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermax

Looks like the Gitmo people might be headed to a Drooler's neck of the woods. I'm quite confused over the line that states that the only Supermax prison is in CO in contrast to an article linked to above that states there are multiple ones. Source: Illinois prison eyed for Gitmo inmates AP By TAMMY WEBBER, Associated Press Writer � 31 mins ago CHICAGO � The Obama administration may buy a near-empty prison in rural northwestern Illinois to house detainees from Guantanamo Bay along with federal inmates, a White House official said Saturday. The maximum-security Thomson Correctional Facility, about 150 miles west of Chicago, was one of several evaluated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and emerged as a leading option to house the detainees, the official told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because a decision has not been made. President Barack Obama wants alleged terrorism suspects from the controversial military-run detention center in Cuba to be transferred to U.S. soil so they can be prosecuted for their suspected crimes. Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn has been hinting at a possible new use for Thomson, and he issued a statement saying he would hold a news conference Sunday to outline those plans. Quinn's spokeswoman Marlena Jentz did not return a phone message from the AP Saturday. Thomson was built by the state in 2001 with 1,600 cells, but budget problems prevented it from fully opening, and it now houses about 200 minimum-security inmates. It is unclear how many Guantanamo detainees � many held without charges since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan � would be transferred to Illinois or when. Obama initially planned to close the Guantanamo Bay prison by Jan. 22, but the administration is no longer expected to meet that deadline. If the Federal Bureau of Prisons buys the facility, it would be run primarily as a federal prison, but a portion would be leased to the Defense Department to house a limited number of Guantanamo detainees, the White House official said. Perimeter security at the site would be increased to surpass that at the nation's only Supermax prison, in Florence, Colo., the official said. Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the Senate's second-highest-ranking Democrat, said in a statement Saturday he would support the plan. He said the prison would house fewer than 100 Guantanamo detainees and would have a "significant positive impact on the local economy" by generating more than 3,000 jobs. Thomson Village President Jerry Hebeler said the move would generate desperately needed revenue for the town of about 500 residents near the Mississippi River. "It's been sitting there for eight to nine years and our town is like a ghost town," Hebeler said of the prison, adding that a tavern recently closed and a planned housing development fell through. "Everybody moved or got different jobs." Some lawmakers opposed the idea of terrorism suspects being brought to Illinois. U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, a Northbrook Republican running for Obama's old Senate seat, circulated a letter among elected officials asking them to write to Obama opposing the plan, saying bringing Guantanamo prisoners to the state would make it a target for terrorist attacks. U.S. Rep. Don Manzullo, whose district includes Thomson, said he adamantly opposed the proposal and that he has consistently joined with a majority of his colleagues "in fighting efforts to bring these terrorists onto our shores ... where they could one day be released into our communities." Guantanamo Bay "is set up to house these dangerous terrorists, and they should stay there," said Manzullo, an Egan Republican who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade. Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat, said Kirk and other Republicans were "pandering to irrational fears" and that closing the Guantanamo Bay facility would strengthen national security because al-Qaida used it as a recruiting tool. Phone and e-mail messages left with Jim O'Connor, a spokesman for Illinois Sen. Roland Burris, were not immediately returned. Thomson is not the only U.S. town that had hoped to lure Guantanamo detainees. Officials in Marion, Ill., Hardin, Mont., and Florence, Colo., also have said they would welcome the jobs that would be generated. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091115/ap_on_re_us/us_illinois_prison_obama;_ylt=AogWxbES0ilCt5srNIxcYmGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM2aWRrOXRuBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTE1L3VzX2lsbGlub2lzX3ByaXNvbl9vYmFtYQRjcG9zAzIEcG9zAzUEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3NvdXJjZWlsbGlubw--

Saw that last night...Il.can use the $$$ too. I know that the Fed prisons are not operated with state money, but the people who work there do live in that state...earn salaries and pay taxes. So indirectly, the state does benefit. Assuming of course, that they are convicted;-) Anyone see Attorney General Holder's interview with Jim Lehrer on The News Hour on Friday night? Interesting....mystifying and in some ways even disturbing.

No, I didn't see it. Why do you say that? Wonder if Jim Lehrer has interviews on his website like Charlie Rose. At this point, I'd bet any and every state can use the $$.

No, I didn't see it. Why do you say that? I am sure it's on the PBS website. I TiVo nightly. Best newscast on TV. Margaret Warner, and Jim are great. Always unbiased and no "gotchas". You would have to see it..I didn't take notes and I wouldn't want to misquote him.

(Dorine) Looks like the Gitmo people might be headed to a Drooler's neck of the woods. And, as you can see from the article, the people here want it and aren't ranting and carrying on like fools. Toward the end of the article, it even mentions the facility at Marion, which would also want them. I'm quite confused over the line that states that the only Supermax prison is in CO in contrast to an article linked to above that states there are multiple ones. CO's is entirely supermax, while only portions of existing facilities are maintained at that level.

Officials in Marion, Ill., Hardin, Mont., and Florence, Colo., also have said they would welcome the jobs that would be generated. I think Hardin, MT is the place they built some new prison that was going to be run by some slick outside security company that turned out to be run by frauds and/or criminals. It was empty for a while until they got these people, now they're back where they started. (Karen) CO's is entirely supermax, while only portions of existing facilities are maintained at that level. Got it.

A terrorism trial's myths By Andrew Cohen Saturday, November 14, 2009 It's official. Sooner rather than later, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an al-Qaeda leader who by all accounts spearheaded planning for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, will stand trial in a federal civilian court near the scene of the crime. A Mohammed trial for Sept. 11 crimes -- the case might actually be styled United States v. Mohammed -- could be one of the biggest legal landmarks in American history. It's not surprising that bringing one of the "faces of terror" to within blocks of Ground Zero would generate a lot of fear, trepidation and political hysteria. So let's try to separate sizzle from steak. Here are six myths about Mohammed and his trial that ought to be destroyed: -- One: Mohammed's lawyers are going to rely on the fact that he was waterboarded to get his case dismissed. Fact: Ain't gonna happen. Depending on who is running the show (Mohammed wanted to represent himself at his military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay), it's likely that the government's post-capture treatment of Mohammed will be a factor in the trial. But it won't determine the outcome, especially if the government does not seek to introduce any of Mohammed's post-torture statements to jurors. The fact that the feds are bringing him to New York to stand trial indicates that they have plenty of other evidence that they can use to get their conviction. -- Two: Mohammed's judge won't be able to find an impartial jury. Fact: Media saturation has made jury selection in America a perversion of what it once was. Judges and lawyers no longer even pretend that they are seating jurors who don't have preconceived notions about a case. All they ask of jurors is that they be able to set aside their pre-judgments and fairly evaluate the evidence shown at trial. Under this low standard, Mohammed will get a jury, and, after he's convicted, the jury's verdict almost certainly will be upheld on appeal if the defense challenges its fairness. ad_icon -- Three: Trying Mohammed in New York will significantly raise the risk of another terrorist attack there. Fact: No one can determine how big that increased risk would be. But New York has long been able to safely host trials of terrorism suspects -- including the trial that followed the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center -- and its security systems are among the world's finest. I have seen, during the Zacarias Moussaoui trial in 2006, just how intense security can be in terrorism cases. It's awe-inspiring. -- Four: The transfer of Mohammed to a federal civilian court is a concession of defeat by the government and a soft-on-terror approach to suspects. Fact: The Bush administration tried to prosecute these people in military tribunals but wasn't able to come up with a set of rules that were deemed constitutional. As a result, six years after Mohammed was apprehended, he still hasn't been convicted. A civilian trial is the best chance of ensuring conviction and sentencing. I don't consider that a defeat. I consider it progress. We are one step closer to the end of this guy's story. Remember, too, that the Republican senators who are crying loudest now about this civilian trial were the ones who precluded the use of military tribunals by insisting that they be constitutionally unfair to defendants. -- Five: Mohammed will be acquitted on some technicality endorsed by a federal judge. Fact: After eight years of reporting on terrorism law, I am not aware of any judge, anywhere, who is eager to pervert the law to give Mohammed a break. The idea that the federal courts are soft on terrorism is unfair to the hundreds of jurists who have repeatedly endorsed government policy on terrorism, both before and after the 2001 attacks. Capital murder suspects get off on "technicalities" (read: constitutional rights) far less often than you see in prime time. And even if Mohammed is somehow acquitted, which isn't going to happen, the feds will then immediately pick him up and put him back in the military brig. -- Six: Mohammed will turn his trial into political theater. Fact: Yes, he will try. But he will mostly fail. There are many rules in place to ensure that Mohammed behaves in court. There is upside here, too. It seems likely, given Mohammed's in-court conduct at Guantanamo Bay, that he will proudly declare in front of judge and jury his allegiance to al-Qaeda and his involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. If this occurs, it will make it easier for jurors to convict him and for the appellate courts to endorse his sentence. The writer is chief legal analyst for CBS News. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/13/AR2009111303586.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

These are all speculations..not certainties. We shall see what transpires.

Before I get jumped on...;-) " *i* shall see what transpires"

Giuliani believes the trial should not be held in NYC. He fears other attacks as did happen after the first World Tower trial. I agree with him. The trial should not be in NYC.

Funny, I was just coming on here to comment about Giuliani. I could care less what Giuliani thinks....a guy who didn't listen to the FBI and experts who told him to put the Emergency Ctr in Bklyn, not under the WTC where he put it, because it was a prime target. As a result of his stellar judgement to ignore them, he literally almost lost his life and the life of the (now known corrupt) police commisioner he appointed. And to top it off, he either instituted or left in place the police and fire dept communication systems that were not compatable, highly likely to have contributed to an unknown number of NYPD/NYFD deaths/injuries. Yeah, I give a shit what Giuliani thinks.

LOL, Dorine. Tell me how you really feel. ;-) Granted he has made mistakes, but I believe he learned from them. I still think it's dagerous to hold the trials in NYC.

but I believe he learned from them Excuse me while I get back off the floor from laughing so hard. ;-) It's always dangerous and we're always a target. Just another day..... That being said, I'm not too keen on how much the security will cost. The city's already hurting for $$. Glad I don't have to really be downtown too much. Where would you suggest they have it? I think the logical choice would be D.C.

LOL! There are maybe more Muslims in the DC tri-State area than NYC. I think not. The trial should be close to the prison, so that would be Chicago. Waving to Karen. ;-)

LOL, Dorine. Tell me how you really feel. ;-) LOL Besides he's member of the *other* party;-) Running for gov???? against Patterson???? ,(Dorine) I'm not too keen on how much the security will cost. The city's already hurting for $$. According to the Mayor they're broke. They'll probably send the bill to DC like Boston did for Kennedy's funeral.

(Evelyn) Besides he's member of the *other* party;-) Running for gov???? against Patterson???? I'm not shallow enough to dislike someone simply for their party. Just for their viewpoints. *snort* Patterson....he'll be lucky to make it out of the gate. If he even ultimately runs. Guiliani would be a horrible govenor. That being said, he did do some good things for the city, but he doesn't have the personality for the guv. According to the Mayor they're broke. I keep reading about the huge bonuses some Wall Street people are getting this year, so if they start spending more (and having bigger paychecks to take taxes out of), that'll help I suppose.

Escape From New York A new study says taxes are driving people away. In the Empire Center study, two of the top states to send taxpayers to New York�Illinois and Michigan�were also among the worst population losers overall. Greener pastures that drew New Yorkers included states like Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, in addition to the usual suburban locales of New Jersey and Connecticut. Liberals continue to insist that they can raise taxes ever higher without any effect on behavior, but the New York study is one more piece of evidence that this is a destructive illusion http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703574604574499772371161800.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular Best to be young and poor, I guess.

Oops the dog must have eaten the first part of the article.... "An old saying goes that the time to live in New York is when you're young and poor, or old and rich�otherwise, you're better off somewhere else. That wisdom is getting an update this week from a study by the Empire Center for New York State Policy that shows middle-class people leaving the state in droves. Between 2000 and 2008, the Empire State had a net domestic outflow of more than 1.5 million, the biggest exodus of any state, with most hailing from New York City. The departures also have perilous budget consequences, since they tend to include residents who are better off than those arriving. Statewide, departing families have income levels 13% higher than those moving in, while in New York County (home of Manhattan) the differential was even more severe. Those moving elsewhere had an average income of $93,264, some 28% higher than the $72,726 earned by those coming in. In 2006 alone, that swap meant the state lost $4.3 billion in taxpayer income. Add that up from 2001 through 2008, and it translates into annual net income losses somewhere near $30 billion. That trend is part of a larger march for New York: In 1950 the state accounted for 19% of all Americans, but by 2000 that number had fallen to 7%. The city's main saving grace has been its welcome mat for foreign immigrants, who have helped to replace some of those who flee. As the study's authors, E.J. McMahon and Wendell Cox, suggest, no single reason can be fingered for a million migrants seeking their fortunes across state lines, but one place to start is New York's notorious state and local tax burden. According to the Tax Foundation, between 1977 and 2008, New York has ranked first or second in the country for its state-local tax burden compared to the U.S. average. In the years considered by the Empire Center study, New York's state and local tax burden ranged between 11% and 12% of income. The peak year for taxes, 2004, was followed by the peak year for departures�as New York lost nearly 250,000 people to other states in 2005. And that's before another big tax hike this year. That pattern is consistent with the annual migration patterns, showing that highly taxed and economically lackluster states were most likely to end up in residents' rear view mirrors. According to the annual study by United Van Lines, states like New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Illinois have been big losers in recent years. " ...........

Jon Stewart did a great piece on The Daily Show tonight on Giuliani's hypocrisy where 9/11 terrorists are concerned comparing his views from 2006 and now. I don't know how long it takes them to get clips up on their site.

Yes, the taxes here are horrible. I actually in concept don't have a problem with higher taxes if I thought we were getting value back. But we don't in many cases. Especially with the MTA (Metropolitan Transit Authority. A lot of people move out of NYC in search of better public schools and more housing space/land for the dollar. Or maybe even cheaper private schools, if there is such a thing.

Especially with the MTA (Metropolitan Transit Authority Charge more $$$$ Other countries do ...have better service and they're cleaner!

They already have! We don't get our money's worth for the most part with service interruptions, esp during the weekends. I feel very bad for tourists who come on the weekend when many trains are not running, running on other routes or skipping stations. I have to do some massive planning and rerouting to get around then, it is almost impossible for them to. One weekend recently, every single line but one was rerouted or interrupted for work. We have many brand new trains that are very clean. At one point it was discovered the MTA kept 2 sets of books. And don't get me started on the MTA's'union.

And don't get me started on the MTA's'union I will repeat what I have heard here: "They're only trying to make a living wage."

Heard from whom or where? Them? ;-)

You!

I find it almost impossible to believe I'd say something like that about them of all people. Find the facts: Something smells about the MTA-union wage arbitration Editorials Saturday, August 22nd 2009, 7:55 PM The Metropolitan Transportation Authority was ideally positioned to negotiate a contract that was fair to transit workers and protected straphangers - except the brass fled from their duty. Rather than fight to protect gains hard won after the Transport Workers Union's illegal 2005 strike, MTA Chairman Dale Hemmerdinger and former CEO Elliot Sander prematurely threw the matter into arbitration, presented, by all indications, a confused case and wound up getting the public's clock cleaned. The sequence of events and the questions of who did what why are murky at best. But a rising odor suggests that the agency and its political masters used arbitration as a cover for giving the TWU a sweet deal. There's the fact that Sander and Hemmerdinger went to arbitration without consulting the MTA board. There's the fact that the MTA's law firm bowed out, feeling that it was not allowed to engage fully. There's the fact that the MTA bounced all over the place on wage demands and suddenly withdrew its major request for contract reform - a provision that would have allowed for computerized train operation - after arbitration was well under way. There's TWU President Roger Toussaint's charge that Mayor Bloomberg gave his blessing to 4% annual hikes. And there's Bloomberg's denial - plus City Hall's assertion that he intervened with Gov. Paterson to prevent Sander from boosting pay that much. Accountability, please. New York must know what happened. The powers that be are determined to stay undercover. Which is why we thank and support former MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow for demanding answers under the freedom-of-information law. He has asked for all the inside documents, along with those relating to any communications with the governor's office. The MTA must turn all the records over, regardless of whether they are covered by the open-government law. The public must get the full story of the great train robbery. Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/08/23/2009-08-23_find_the_facts_something_smells_about_the_mtaunion_wage_arbitration.html#ixzz0XEltLsPO

And at the same time, it's more than absurd what salaries and perks the MTA managers and board members get that are forbidden in their contracts. That adds up to a pretty penny, too. All we get are higher fares.

Some say it's better to rent in Manhattan than own. So is it cheaper to live in London?

Yes, now it is better to rent than own.

I'd have thought with the real estate downturn, that now would be a time to pick up something more realistically priced. Anyway, I don't like New York being criticized. They face challenges that few other areas do--whether it's terrorism, absorbing new immigrants (both legal and not) with the enormous amounts of $$$$$$ they cost, etc.

Well, the mantra of the day seems to be: "Tax the rich some more". Ya' know....re-distribution of wealth and all that stuff. ;-)

I was actually looking at govt job listings last week. Most of them were for people with finance backgrounds (IRS, jobs that deal with large dept budgets). State, local budget cuts a "time bomb" for U.S. jobs Reuters 42 mins ago NEW YORK (Reuters) � Budget shortfalls pose a direct threat to millions of U.S. jobs, many in the private sector, as state and local governments lay off workers and cut spending on contracts and other business services, a think tank said on Thursday. State and local governments will have to raise taxes and cut spending in the current and next two fiscal years to cover shortfalls totaling $469 billion, according to an Economic Policy Institute report. The think tank -- where White House adviser Jared Bernstein spent years developing ideas found in the $787 billion economic stimulus plan he oversees -- said the U.S. government must give states and cities $150 billion in direct budget relief to save between 1.1 million and 1.4 million jobs. "Given the fragility of the economy, already high unemployment and the magnitude of the budget shortfalls, it is clear that we cannot afford inaction," the report said, calling the gaps "a ticking time bomb for the economy." While many economists believe the worst recession in decades ended recently, cities' budget deficits are expected to continue at least through 2012. "The low point for cities typically comes 18 months to 24 months after the low point for the recession," said Christopher Hoene, research director for the National League of Cities, at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. on Thursday. States, too, face future hardship, with the National Governors Association recently saying they are at the beginning of a "lost decade" of budget struggles. Those struggles will trickle out to the private sector, EPI said. According to its estimates, for every dollar of budget cuts, more than half the jobs and economic activity lost will be in the private sector. When asked at the Brookings meeting about the aid their cities need most, four mayors representing both political parties and cities large and small said the federal government must make credit more available to small businesses. "I'm not looking for a sugar high," said Mayor Scott Smith, a Republican from Mesa, Arizona, about direct federal aid that could be withdrawn after a short time. "On Main Street the credit market is completely shut off." If banks were to lend again to small businesses in her town of Bowling Green, Kentucky, then businesses would hire more people, increasing the city's income tax and job fee collection for years, said Democratic Mayor Elaine Walker. SPENDING CUTS SLASH NUMBERS OF WORKERS State governments, too, have had to lay off workers, shedding 26,000 jobs from October 2008 to last month, according to the Labor Department. But nearly one-third of state spending goes to public provisions such as infrastructure, which is usually awarded to private contractors, said EPI, which says it is an independent nonprofit nonpartisan institute that researches the impact of economic trends and policies on workers. Direct government services, such as fire departments and education, also affect the private sector through supply orders. Bernstein, speaking at the Brookings meeting, said that without the stimulus plan passed in February, job losses would have been deeper. When indirect spending is taken into consideration -- on things such as equipment for the roads projects in the bill -- the stimulus was responsible for more than 1 million jobs, he said. The plan has already allocated about $144 billion in relief to state and local governments, which has likely saved at least 360,000 jobs, EPI said. Most of that money has gone to state governments and has yet to reach cities and counties. Cities have only seen direct help through community development block grants to combat blight and police force funding. They also will soon receive grants for energy efficiency. And while they would like to see credit flowing, the mayors said they also need some direct stimulus. "I have no complaints, other than I can't use a dime for budgetary challenges," said Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, about the stimulus. "On one day we could announce ... in the morning a new grant opportunity from the federal government and later that afternoon announce more layoffs and service cutbacks. The public is confused," he said. (Reporting by Tom Ryan; Additional reporting by Lisa Lambert in Washington; Editing by James Dalgleish) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091120/pl_nm/us_usa_economy_states_jobs;_ylt=Akp52ZFdAiRgHnBYy2yYpWus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM4a25xaWtiBGFzc2V0A25tLzIwMDkxMTIwL3VzX3VzYV9lY29ub215X3N0YXRlc19qb2JzBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMwRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDZnVsbG5ic3BzdG9y

"I have no complaints, other than I can't use a dime for budgetary challenges," said Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, about the stimulus He has two choices: Cut the budget or raise taxes. If the FEd govt has no input into their budget, why should they be part of the solution?

He has two choices: Cut the budget or raise taxes. Nutter has already cut the budget and now he's down to bone. A number of libraries throughout the city have been closed. It's the poor kids who will suffer.

Completely closed up or hours reduced/some days closed?

Completely closed.

Well then he has to raise taxes. People wouldn't mind if they knew it was going to libraries or some public benefit; not to build another stadium or state of the art jail. Every state/city has had to cut back. Even my city, which is not in dire need, is cutting the police force...."just in cases", before the shortfall becomes too overwhelming.

This story gets better every minute....now the WH admits this couple even met the president... Doubt Michaele would have made it if she hadn't been such a beautiful blonde. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_state_dinner_uninvited_guests;_ylt=AqEqDHhnUry913uzGK43VLas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNldGhhbXVlBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMTI4L3VzX3N0YXRlX2Rpbm5lcl91bmludml0ZWRfZ3Vlc3RzBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDc2VjcmV0c2Vydmlj

*Somebody's* getting so fired. A bunch of somebodies.

Evelyn, your honey's getting beat up. Italian Premier Berlusconi punched in the face AP Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi leaves Duomo's square with blood on his face after a political party meeting in Milan Reuters � Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi leaves Duomo's square with blood on his face after a � By FRANCES D'EMILIO, Associated Press Writer � 10 mins ago ROME � Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi was punched in the face at the end of a rally on Sunday by a man holding a small statue in his hand, leaving the 73-year-old media mogul with a bloodied mouth and looking stunned, police said. The 42-year-old man accused of attacking Berlusconi in Milan as he signed autographs was immediately taken into custody. TV showed the stunned leader with blood under his nose, on his mouth and under one eye being lifted to his feet by aides after the attack. Berlusconi was hustled into the back of a car, but he immediately got out, apparently in an effort to show he was not badly injured. After looking out into the crowd, the premier, without saying a word, was pulled back into the vehicle. The attack occurred after Berlusconi had just finished delivering a long, vigorous speech at the rally to a crowd of applauding supporters from his Freedom People party at about 6:30 p.m. Officials at Milan's police headquarters, speaking on customary condition of anonymity, said the premier was conscious and apparently not badly injured. They said the attacker was wielding a miniature statue of Milan's Duomo, the city's gargoyled cathedral and symbol, but couldn't say what the souvenir was made of. Berlusconi's spokesman, speaking by telephone from the emergency room from San Raffaele hospital where the premier was taken, told Sky TG24 TV that doctors had decided to keep the premier in the hospital overnight for observation. "We'll see what the doctors say tomorrow morning," spokesman Paolo Bonauiti told Sky. The exams of his jaw area included a CT scan, Bonaiuti said. Police identified the man they were questioning as Massimo Tartaglia, 42. They said Tartaglia didn't have any criminal record. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091213/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_berlusconi;_ylt=Ahrzzo3bfahpSdX.HTVXLtOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNuYjBscjV1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMjEzL2V1X2l0YWx5X2Jlcmx1c2NvbmkEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwM0BHBvcwMxBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDaXRhbGlhbnByZW1p

Oh, mio Dio, Poor baby. Them Italians really take their politics seriously, don't they.

Taking this over here (Dorine) Re. House to house Vs apt to apt trick or treating.....no one outside of NYC lives in apts? ;-) Of course they do, but not like the Manhattan doorman-attended bldgs, except to a limited degree. We have high rises with doormen, of course, and kids wouldn't be allowed to gain entry and run amuck in the hallways, knocking on doors. I watched some program that showed kids in LA being chauffered around, house to house, by their parents.

Can't speak for other buildings, but in mine generally at least one parent goes along. Plus u know I was playing and wasn't in complete disagreement with your sentiment.

The three wealthiest states are down at the bottom of the Happiness Barometer? What's going on ? http://www.livescience.com/culture/091217-happy-state-list.html

LOL, very different from their survey just last month. http://www.livescience.com/culture/091110-fifty-happy-states.html

Here's more from your source: "Happy States are Wealthy and Tolerant." http://www.livescience.com/culture/091110-happy-states.html Of course no one takes these "polls" seriously. I have to say: I've been poor in my life, and I've been comfortable, and I'm much happier being comfortable, LOL! Having seen both sides of the coin, I'm very thankful for what I have, and never take it for granted.

The data were taken pre-Katrina, so even the study people believe the "happiest" state (Louisiana) no longer would be. ;-)

Can't wait for next month's poll Watch this space:-D

I often wonder if stuff like this is real, but it is funny:

LOL!!! I have to pass that one along to a few people. It's hilarious! Thanks Karen.

LOL!!! *shakes head*

One has to wonder what "John" would have said if it had been the other way around. The rat.

A different take on Xmas traditions...and why not?! LOL! I think 99% of the commenters need a bit of a sense of humor. The Boston Globe (Susan Levin for The Boston Globe) Have yourself a twisted little Christmas By Clif Garboden December 24, 2009 MY CHILDHOOD Christmas memories include a three-foot-diameter silver-plastic wreath with a red Styrofoam reindeer leaping through its center that my father won as a door prize at some neighborhood bar. The thing was beyond garish, way past hideous. It redefined tacky, and Pop knew it. So each December, we faithfully hung it above the couch, right below the likewise traditional/likewise low-taste aluminum-foil “Happy Holidays’’ sign. Sometimes we hung beer cans on our Christmas tree. Mostly we did these things to tease my mother, who, we sensed, had confused Christmas with a religious occasion fraught with sacred traditions. When Mom hung a more tasteful wreath from the living room ceiling fixture, we improvised a game keeping score as we aimed balls of crumpled-up wrapping paper at its center. We invented our own traditions, the unifying theme of which was making fun of things other people had been convinced to hold dear. No shrink-wrapped off-the-rack Hallmark holiday for us. As an adult, with a family and living room of my own, I’ve done my best to keep those values alive. When my son, Phil, was about 2, we sent out a photo card showing him trashing a miniature manger display with a two-headed-dragon action figure. Sacrilege? I beg your tinsel-tangled pardon. As far as celebrating the birth of Christ is concerned, the sacrilege boat sailed a long time ago - long before “Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer’’ retired the label.Look at it this way: whatever its one-time significance, Christmas is largely a secular celebration reliant on packaged traditions - talking cards, inflatable lawn snowmen, special-edition M&Ms - contrived to stimulate the marketplace. But why buy when you can do it yourself? Who wants to celebrate someone else’s holiday? Do it your way and steal Christmas back from the holiday hucksters. Trim your tree in high-concept kitsch. Back when you could still get Polaroid film, I would shoot pictures of our tree, before and after trimming, and then hang the instant prints on the tree itself. I found that quarter-inch reel-to-reel audio tape was an only fair substitute for garland unless I personalized it by recording something on it first. To this day I festoon our tree with a 40-second track of my infant son’s colic cry. (Those are technologically dated examples, but you get the idea.) And as my family decorates the tree, we always listen to, not carols or even the Atco Records “Soul Christmas’’ anthology (classic concept-kitsch though it is), but the Beatles’ “Please Please Me’’ album. Continuing the monster-in-the-manger theme, the kids and I annually desecrate our table-top porcelain Dickensian Village with Godzilla and Mothra figures, axe-wielding Lego guys and dismembered Nutcracker dolls, hoards of plastic ants, blood-dripping snowmen, and simulated house fires. We call it Calamityville. Even the kitchen can be yours again. Traditional cut-out cookies take on renewed energy when you mutate them. Drape half a rectangle of rolled dough over the edge of a cutting board and stamp out the outline of half of a given cookie cutter, leaving the shape unfinished at the fold. Then turn the dough around so the cut half hangs over the edge and complete the shape using a different cutter (carefully matching the points where the two cuts intersect, of course). You’ve got a reindeer head atop a Christmas tree, a Santa torso on a half-star, an combo angel/gingerbread boy. Experiment. Don’t go for cute; seek the ridiculous. Remember, this is all about scaring Aunt Mildred at Boxing Day tea.Of course, those are my family’s home-grown rituals, offered here as inspiration. To make Christmas yours, you need to come up with some things your family does that nobody else exactly understands. So trim your tree with travesty; deck your halls with disrespect; croon your own carol. Embrace the season without fea of breaking any molds. Celebrate December 25 as if you owned it. Christmas is for everybody, but it doesn’t have to be the same for everybody. Clif Garboden is a Boston-area freelance writer. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/12/24/have_yourself_a_twisted_little_christmas/?comments=all

Comment: "Can you even imagine the UPROAR it would cause if this paper (or any other) chose to run a similar story about Hanukkah or Kwanzaa??? Don't worry, THAT will NEVER happen." Says it all. Christians are wimps.

Seniors worry about Medicare Advantage cuts AP By MATT SEDENSKY, Associated Press Writer � Sun Dec 27, 10:24 am ET MIAMI � Insurers constantly caution seniors that their Medicare Advantage perks such as hearing aids, dental payments and even gym memberships will fizzle if Democrats get their way and cut government subsidies for them. But tens of billions of Medicare dollars funneled through insurers also pay for extras that never reach beneficiaries: multimillion-dollar salaries, executive retreats in Hawaii, Scotland and Cancun, and massive expenditures on marketing to lure more customers to the privately administered Advantage plans that serve as an alternative to government-provided Medicare. The government-subsidized benefits that seniors on Advantage plans receive � often at premiums lower than Medicare premiums � are real, and are legitimately in danger in some cases if Democrats succeed in their health care overhaul. Medicare Advantage subsidies are on the chopping block to pay for the overhaul. Though there are marked differences between House and Senate versions, both bills would lower payments to private Medicare Advantage plans, which on average cost the government 14 percent more than traditional Medicare. The harshest critics of the Advantage program say patients are exchanging hassle-free coverage for a plan with cheap perks that may ultimately deny them necessary treatment. "They're giving special benefits that are valuable," said Mary Johnson, policy analyst for The Senior Citizens League, a nonpartisan, 1.2-million-member group. "But what people don't understand are the trade-offs." Though AARP � which lends its name to a Medicare Advantage plan � and other senior advocacy groups support the Advantage cuts, it is likely that at least some seniors will see their premiums rise, benefits cut or plans close. "I get too upset over it," said 71-year-old Charlotte Casey of Miramar, Fla., who is on an Advantage plan through Coventry Health Care. "The seniors are going to get the worst of it." Casey first enrolled in a Humana plan, but she dropped it over problems with its prescription drug coverage. She plans to switch from her current plan, too, because her primary care doctor will no longer be covered and she'd have to travel farther for non-emergency hospital services. She has had to fight for payment sometimes, but overall she says it is the best fit for her because she doesn't need a costly MediGap plan to cover what traditional Medicare would not. "Regular Medicare is the best one, but you have to pay for a supplement," she said. "With this, sometimes you want something and they don't want to give it to you." Despite the belief that Advantage plans offer broad savings for seniors, a Government Accountability Office report last year found wide differences depending on the plan, including home health service costs that could be up to 84 percent more than traditional Medicare. A half-million Advantage enrollees were in plans with no co-pay for hospital stays. But a roughly equal number were in plans with high hospital co-pays and no limits on out-of-pocket inpatient expenses, potentially costing patients thousands more. The disparity was greatest for some of the sickest seniors, those who return to the hospital within 60 days of discharge, the GAO found. Under traditional Medicare, those patients would not pay any deductible. Under many Advantage plans, the deductibles can be steep. Many of the perks offered by Advantage plans are relatively cheap. Vision coverage cost insurers $3.37 a person each month, on average, according to 2007 filings with the government. Hearing coverage cost less than a dollar. "The little stuff, the nickle-and-dime stuff, it's good," said John Arline, who was faced with a huge bill for his 84-year-old grandfather Mervyn Urquhart earlier this year. "But people don't need coverage for the nickle-and-dime stuff." Urquhart, though suffering from Alzheimer's disease, is a reasonably healthy engineering retiree living in Wheatley Heights, N.Y. After treatment for a stomach virus and deep vein thrombosis in January, he was so weak from time in a hospital bed that doctors agreed he needed rehabilitation and physical and occupational therapy. His Advantage plan turned him down, even though Medicare covers such treatment. Arline and other relatives footed the roughly $12,000 bill for rehab. With it, Urquhart is now able to walk, to feed himself and to live a fairly normal life. "They violated this patient's rights," Arline said. "They did that because it was cheaper." Insurers participating in the Advantage program responded to inquiries by Senate Democrats that led to a report this month providing some fuel in their fight against the subsidies. The companies reported, on average, spending more than 15 percent of premium revenues on profits, marketing and corporate expenses, nearly 10 times the rate of traditional Medicare. Meanwhile, Advantage companies were paying for multimillion-dollar corporate retreats in exotic locales and hundreds of their executives were being paid more than $500,000 annually. Government reports have shown Medicare Advantage providers continually outpace profit projections. The congressional review released this month showed 34 Advantage companies devoted $27 billion in government subsidies from 2005 through 2008 to profits, marketing cost and other corporate expenses. Still, Advantage enrollment has burgeoned, doubling to nearly 11 million people in the six years since Congress approved lucrative subsidies to insurers that allowed them to expand their reach. About one in four seniors are now on private plans. Provisions were added to the Senate legislation to grandfather in beneficiaries in some areas and to provide emergency funds to others to avoid disruptions. The insurance industry still contends the majority of Advantage enrollees remain in danger. "Seniors are going to lose many of the benefits that seniors like and rely on today," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, an industry group. "And in some parts of the country, seniors will lose access to their Medicare Advantage plan altogether." Private plans have existed under Medicare since the 1970s and many have persisted through previous cuts. Plans shuttered after reductions in funding during the Clinton administration. And changes approved by the Obama administration earlier this year are at least in partly responsible for the 18 percent fewer plans operating in 2010 and higher premiums systemwide. Neal Bulla, a 70-year-old retiree from a marketing job in Fort Wright, Ky., belongs to an Advantage plan through United Healthcare and receives a gym membership, vision and hearing coverage, and is immune to the prescription drug "doughnut hole" that plagues many seniors. He is so upset at AARP's support of Democrats' health care bills that he tore up his AARP membership card. "It's the best insurance plan that I've ever had," he said. "They're going to ruin the best medical system in the world." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091227/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_medicare_advantage

Medi-gap insurance (which pays the 20% that Medicare doesn't pay)is expensive for seniors on fixed,limited incomes that rank above the poverty level. The latter get a Medicaid allowance. Hey, the gov't cuts Medicare $830 B and you don't expect benefits to be cut? Puhleeze.

I have no problem with $$ for Medicare Advantage being cut. I'm not a particular fan of that concept. Or perhaps it's the execution...M.O.....method of delivery (or mechanism of action as we used to say in the pharma biz) that I'm not fond of.

Here we have Medicare Advantage called "Community Care", an HMO. Yes, it had limitations but every subscriber I know is happy with it. I don't know anything about the "execution" or providers; just the members who are contented with the medical services available. Saves them a bunch of $$$$$ .

Yes, it had limitations but every subscriber I know is happy with it. How many of those had catastrophic illnesses or have chronic conditions? If they need hospital/rehab/long term placement....do those plans measure up to straight M'care in terms of options available. Of course, some plans are better than others. But it's the type of things people need to think about depending on their own situations. Not just how many pairs of eyeglasses and other things they provide. If the rx plans work well costwise with their regimen (ie, can take generic vs. needing brand drugs), that's, of course, an added bonus. the members who are contented with the medical services available. Saves them a bunch of $$$$$ . I have nothing against that and I am glad the plans can provide other things that straight Medicare doesn't cover such as glasses, hearing aids, etc.....BUT, at what cost in other areas. After they skim their administrative costs off and then provide (or deny) other services, how much profit margin are those companies making that could be going to providing more services to make denials or restrictions on services less likely like with regular Medicare. I've always said, managed care is great for the healthy.

And another reason Medicare (and Medicaid) are in such trouble...fraud. We (and every home care agency) are going through a tremendous audit mandated by the federal govt on dually eligible patients (Medicare/Medicaid). It boggles the mind how much $$ and manpower the company must've spent so far to get the information together to send to CMS (Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services). I mean the literal forests of paper we must've used for copies to send out to CMS first, then make copies to be sent to Univ of Mass, the entity who deals with claims after they've been denied (and no one doubts there will be denials) and finally copies to keep on record so we know exactly what was sent to one, if not both of them. There are rumors the govt has hired a ton of people to review the info we send them and have incentives for the number of claims they find in error. To top it off, the state OMIG (Office of Medicaid Inspector General) is expected inhouse in Feb.

This is the article that reminded me to mention the fraud aspect, too. I've heard stories of this from people myself, though with smaller ticket items. Senior-citizen volunteers fight Medicare fraud AP By MATT SEDENSKY, Associated Press Writer � Tue Dec 29, 4:25 pm ET MIAMI � The first box that arrived at Shirley Shupp's door was filled with braces to help with her arthritis. Then came a motorized scooter, just like the one the 69-year-old already owned. She hadn't asked for any of it � but Medicare was apparently footing the bill. "There was just something that wasn't right about it," the Houston woman said. So Shupp contacted her local Senior Medicare Patrol, which did its own research and then referred the matter to investigators. The equipment, worth thousands of dollars, was returned, the case was handed over to prosecutors and the perpetrators were charged with Medicare fraud. The Senior Medicare Patrol is one of the least-known forces in the government's effort to eliminate such fraud, which drains billions of dollars a year. But it is seen as a valuable part of the Obama administration's bid to overhaul health care and bring down costs. The 4,700 senior citizen volunteers who serve as the government's eyes and ears have been credited with saving taxpayers more than $100 million since 1997. The program relies on elderly people to apply a lifetime's worth of common sense and skepticism. "They can tell when something just doesn't feel right to them," said Anne Gray, who works on the SMP program in Santa Ana, Calif. The patrol, which evolved from another program founded in 1995, now has at least one unit in every state. SMP sends its volunteers to senior centers, retirement communities and elsewhere to encourage Medicare beneficiaries to guard their personal information, beware of too-good-to-be-true offers on medical equipment and carefully review their benefit statements. The patrol also collects tips on potential scams and fields calls from senior citizens who believe their Medicare accounts have been fraudulently billed. When all they have is a whiff of something fishy, SMP participants often keep probing until they have enough information to send on to the FBI and investigators with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. "It really is detective work," said Barbara McGinity, director of the SMP in Houston. Patrol volunteers have witnessed all kinds of schemes. There are fly-by-night clinics where patients endure multiple tests at the hands of staff members with dubious credentials. Patients may be followed home from the hospital by companies selling home health services, scooters, glucose monitors or psychotherapy. Often, senior citizens are persuaded to give up their personal information with an offer of something they need, such as transportation to kidney dialysis appointments. "They get their number and they pass it around," Gray said. "They have a ring where they're selling it." Beneficiaries may have no idea their identities have been wrongly used unless their accounts are frozen for unusual activity or they try to obtain something the government already bought for them, such as a pricey hospital bed or wheelchair. The Obama administration says eliminating Medicare fraud is key to overhauling the health care system. But agents and prosecutors tackling the issue are relatively sparse. The patrol helps fill in the gaps. "There is no substitute for beneficiaries and on-the-ground resources to help us know where fraud is occurring and where problems are arising," said Kimberly Brandt, who oversees Medicare anti-fraud efforts at CMS. All told, scam artists are believed to have stolen about $47 billion from Medicare in the 2009 fiscal year, nearly triple the toll a year earlier. Medicare spokesman Peter Ashkanaz said that since the Justice Department and Health and Human Services formed a task force after President Barack Obama took office, charges have been filed against 103 defendants in cases involving more than $100 million in Medicare fraud. For every Medicare thief the senior citizen volunteers successfully pursue, McGinity said, it seems there are dozens more. "Sometimes we feel like we're really beating our heads against the wall," she said. ___ Associated Press writer Jennifer Kay in Miami contributed to this report. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091229/ap_on_bi_ge/us_medicare_patrol

(Me) How many of those had catastrophic illnesses or have chronic conditions? If any do, they may be in this type program. We have a Medicaid long term/chronic illness program. But then again, Medicaid pays for almost anything and everything in NY state. That will be changing, too, from what I understand. http://healthplans.hcpro.com/content/HEP-229212/Mr-President-Use-the-Scalpel However, by using a chainsaw on Medicare Advantage, the president is also slashing payments to a subset of plans called special needs plans (SNPs). SNPs were created under the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 as a way to bring managed care to seriously chronically ill beneficiaries who are institutionalized, dually eligible, and suffer from severe and disabling chronic conditions. Congress has since established specific chronic condition SNPs that focus on such high-cost ailments as end-stage renal disease, chronic heart failure, dementia, cancer, HIV/AIDS, stroke, and chronic lung diseases. SNPs are under the Medicare Advantage umbrella because the plans feature private entities (health insurers and disease management companies) that provide care coordination for chronically ill Medicare beneficiaries. One of the largest providers of SNPs is XLHealth, a disease management company based in Baltimore. XLHealth's Care Improvement Plus offers SNPs to chronically ill beneficiaries with diabetes, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and end-stage renal disease.

FYI Most old folks have chronic conditions ...different varieties and on different levels. I don't have statistics of the country at large, I'm just telling you what I know *first hand*. They like their local Medical Advantage. No one is too excited about its demise however... Hey, that law doesn't go into effect til 2014. There could be changes in Congress by then and that component could be revoked. I tried to report a fraud (to me) once to the state Medicare office; they could have cared less.

FYI Most old folks have chronic conditions ...different varieties and on different levels. Sorry, too blanket. And perhaps I was almost "jargoning" you. By chronic, I mean conditions that require chronic treatment, that has at least moderate impact on activities of daily living/ambulation. Even if it's diabetes (esp those with amputations), renal disease (likely on dialysis), significant spinal issues, cardiac or pulmonary issues (esp those that require O2 or frequent rest periods), etc. I wasn't necessarily thinking of someone with chronic orthopedic (back/hip/knee) issues or the like, unless they are such that the person is somewhat debilitated. I don't have statistics of the country at large, I'm just telling you what I know *first hand*. I wasn't asking about the country at large. I copied your statement and was asking you in direct relation to your statement, which was....of the people you know that you mentioned. Are they relatively healthy? Or do you not know them that well? I tried to report a fraud (to me) once to the state Medicare office; they could have cared less. Really?? What did they say? Or not say? Though, in a way not totally surprising. It's gone on forever with no one much caring until it's an election year or a big budget issue. ;-) They have cracked way down on DME companies, but they still find loopholes or are just very aggressive until they get caught.

DME= Durable Medical Equipment.

My dear little friend;-)....when one gets to a Medicare "certain age", no one is completely healthy. Only my Jazzcercise/Aerobic crowd can boast of that. And some of them have back/knee issues. What did they say? Courteously: "Thank you." Dorine, I'm done with Medical Advantage. I'm just telling you what I hear from my Starbuck's Senior coffee crowd. Let's pick another topic

Only my Jazzcercise/Aerobic crowd can boast of that. And some of them have back/knee issues. You've managed to answer my question. In a roundabout way. ;-) It's a discussion everyone should be having at this point. :-) How 'bout them......???? I don't know. Who's in the playoffs? Probably not the Steelers and definitely not the Dolphins, so I'm not paying a whit of attention to it all. ;-)

It's a discussion everyone should be having at this point. :-) *snort* Not me;-) (I 've told you everything I know)

Scary.....From Bumberg News: Mayo Clinic in Arizona to Stop Treating Some Medicare Patients "The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Barack Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little. ...." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aHoYSI84VdL0 Maybe they should switch to Medicare Advantage;-D

oh crap. Too much champ....

It's not that new of a concept. I can only speak for here, but that kind of action has happened for years, whether at clinics or individual/group offices. But then overhead here is generally very high here compared to other areas. Now I haven't noticed specifically that there's a change in Medicare reimbursement payments scheduled for Jan 1 or anytime soon, but when they have come up before, Congress has at times in the past put a hold on the cuts as MD's threatened to do just that, stop seeing Medicare pts. And some did anyway. Here I tend to find more that MD's/clinics will cut out people with mananged care plans. Not just because of the size of reimbursement, but the significant time it takes administratively to get that money in the end (through repeated denials, appeals, etc). It depends what kind of services the office/business has really. Certain companies we deal with to concurrently treat patients only want managed care because the cost of the IV drugs they provide services with are either not at all or just minimally covered by Medicare/Medicaid. In that case (with Medicare/Medicaid), the patient generally has a giant co-pay. This is all in home health care. At times they have the option to go to a skilled nursing facility for 2-3 weeks to have the treatment, but most people don't want to do that. I'd need to know more info about the clinic itself to understand a bit better their reasoning. Maybe it is simply because of the rates and increasing costs, but it's possible they had a grant(s) that they used to help run the place that's no longer available to provide certain services that was utilized by Medicare pts more, but for whatever reason they feel they need to continue to provide them. Or not. It's quite different in my job. I'm told to market primarily for business involving Medicare/Medicaid pts as our total of pts with managed care is too high to maintain a certain level of revenue (we are a non-profit, too). Skilled nursing facilities also generally want M/M pts, though we're expecting some big Medicaid cuts at some point, so we will probably be scrutinizing them more closely soon, too.

This is an interesting article highlighting attempts at Medicare reform historically. It's kind of long. I'll just link. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/November/03/medicare-pilot-projects.aspx A quick blurb: "Vladeck included the program in President Bill Clinton's attempt at a sweeping Medicare overhaul in 1997 as part of the Balanced Budget Act. " And on a trivial note, Medicare changes can and have affected me personally and professionally, after the above BBA that took effect in 1999. It's how I ended up in NY, the only place I could get a job quick. I was doing travel staffing in CT at the time and NY was the only place that had anything. It was in an area I hadn't worked in before (and only studied in school), but I took it or I was about to be literally jobless and homeless as they provided the housing and the job. NY was a demonstration state, so they'd started the program a year to 18 mos earlier and providers had some kinks worked out and systems in place to maximize reimbursement in the new structure. So Happy Anniversary to me. Moved to NYC 11 yrs yesterday. Moved here out of necessity, but since I'd wanted to live here anyway and thought I never would, it worked out. :-)

At least the people in Arizona can easily cross the border, move (establishing residency) and get cheap (and apparently quite good) health care in Mexico. I can't beleive how many news segments I've seen about retirees moving to Mexico for health care. I think Colbert or Stewart had a segment too. Boy, what does that say about this "great" country? :-(

(Karen) I've seen about retirees moving to Mexico for health care. Interesting. I've never seen about them moving there. Just people going there for medicines and treatments.

Lots of meds , dental and cosmetic. Methinks I would scrub floors to have treatment here. Though I know medics who won't take generics. But that's another topic. I think Colbert or Stewart had a segment too. Authorities on the subject.....

Canadian patients give Detroit hospitals a boost. http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/31791887/Canadian-patients-give-Detroit-hospitals-a-boost Written in 2008. Probably has changed this past year. After looking at Stewart and Colbert...they are no doubt going on down to Mexico.

Here's the CBS Nightly News report: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5993096n&tag=contentMain;contentBody Something from PBS this month: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec09/mexico_12-28.html This isn't the old go-down-to Mexico for some treatment. This is retirees buying oceanside homes for cheap and getting excellent health care at little cost. In the meantime, some retirees are taking advantage of the insurance offered by the Mexican government's social security system, called IMSS, or IMSS. For only $300 a year, Americans who can establish residency are offered an array of medical services with no deductible. And the Daily Show video: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-november-30-2009/american-refugees-seek-health-care-in-mexico San Miguel Allende has always held an allure for me....

Scrub floors? Presumes that (1) you can find enough floors to scrub to pay for health care services in this country and (2) you knew years in advance to scrub those extra floors, as no hospital is going to provide the service without cash upfront. Sad, putting the onus on the people. Like it's their fault they can't afford. :-( Anyway, it seems appropriate that we're outsourcing health care, as just another example of things Americans can't provide or make.

I'll check out those videos tomorrow. I'm shocked Mexico lets people do that. (Evelyn) Methinks I would scrub floors to have treatment here. These people aren't doing that, but are getting in line in the middle of the night for help. I saw a story somewhere once where events like this happen in fairgrounds (including in stables). This is a long article and rather depressing to think this happens in the US. I am curious what people in rural areas in other countries do about getting these services, if they get them. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wirestory?id=9465113&page=1 Of course people need good access and a way to pay for it, but perhaps so many wouldn't need it so badly if as I continue to say, healthcare reform in any from will have extreme difficulty working if many people don't change some things as is said in the article. "It's changing beliefs," Graham says. "It's educating people about what is health." ���

I am so glad to live in a country that offers single payer health care. I really hope that the US can manage to make the necessary changes to provide an acceptable level of health care to all of its citizens, regardless of income level.

Just for the record: There are many components in the current health care bill that are worthy: I'm in favor health care for people who fall through the cracks. And subsides for those who truly can't afford it. The ones below poverty level have Medicaid . Massachusetts seems to be a workable program. My friends there like it. Sadly some cost-cutting measures were not addressed: Buying insurance across state lines Mal-practice reform. I am willing to pay more income taxes instead of cutting benefits on fixed-income seniors (Like home health, home physio-therapy ...) Cutting payments to physicians who might deny care/quota to seniors I'm glad you are happy with single payer, Sarah. I know many who aren't. Right now we have a deficit problem...which probably you don't in Canada. Those are my opinions; I respect yours;-)

I love when people only "know" people who support their own opinions. *snort* Frankly, I'm more with the original Howard Dean position on what's supposed to be health-care reform. Bunch of sniveling sellouts! No public option. Fines on people who don't have health insurance. All I see is benefits to insurance companies so that they can pay their executives billions of dollars. That's my opinion.

(Evelyn) Sadly some cost-cutting measures were not addressed: Or killed...public option!! (Sarah) I am so glad to live in a country that offers single payer health care. Unfortunately that's beyond DOA here. The insurance industry (among others) made sure of that. They made sure the public option wasn't any option, too. They're batting 1000. Haha Karen. I didn't read the comments again before I posted this and now just before hitting submit I see you and I are on the same wavelength. Sniveling sellouts is being kind.

Sniveling sellouts Harry Reid...we're glaring at you!! (among others)

(Evelyn) Right now we have a deficit problem...which probably you don't in Canada. She's in Australia (and is American!! ;-))). But then again, practically the whole world has some sort of universal health care but us. Massachusetts seems to be a workable program. My friends there like it. They may like it, but from what I understand cost containment is a big problem. It's been going broke if I understand correctly.

(Dorine) But then again, practically the whole world has some sort of universal health care but us. No kidding. Bet that would garner a stadiumwide chant of "U-S-A! U-S-A!" ;-) So much to be proud of.

(Evelyn) Right now we have a deficit problem...which probably you don't in Canada. Canada has serious financial issues with our health care system too. And we often have long waits for tests like MRI's and for elective surgery like joint replacements. Our system is not perfect but I wouldn't trade it for the US system either. I was talking with a young woman when I was in Idaho this past summer and she was caught in a real dilemna. She knew she had a health problem but she couldn't afford health insurance. But if she saw a doctor about it without insurance, she would never be able to get insurance in future to cover the problem. So she chose not to see a doctor. I thought that was so sad.

I love when people only "know" people who support their own opinions. *snort* I get your point. :-((((((

(Sandy) She knew she had a health problem but she couldn't afford health insurance. But if she saw a doctor about it without insurance, she would never be able to get insurance in future to cover the problem. So she chose not to see a doctor. I thought that was so sad. Incredibly so and you have no idea of the first-hand (no friends) knowledge I have of predicament and how prevalent it is.

Poor woman. Definitely a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario.

Sandy) She knew she had a health problem but she couldn't afford health insurance. But if she saw a doctor about it without insurance, she would never be able to get insurance in future to cover the problem. Pre-existing condition will no longer be a determent from getting insurance. That will go into effect immediately. Not like the rest of the bill which goes into effect in 2014 My city has "Neighbor for Neighbor" & OU University which treats anyone w/o insurance. Doesn't Idaho?

(Evelyn) Pre-existing condition will no longer be a determent from getting insurance. That will go into effect immediately. The demise of the pre-existing condition is one good thing about the bill's proposal, though who knows if it will make the final cut of the bill. There's still haggling to be done by the House and Senate together. Also, who knows when it will actually pass let alone go into effect. My city has "Neighbor for Neighbor" & OU University which treats anyone w/o insurance. Doesn't Idaho? Maybe it depends on where she lives (rural vs. more urban-by Idaho standards). Did you read at least some of that AP (through ABC News) article I posted a link to? I can't see why people who would have access to facilities anywhere that treat people who have no insurance would wait in line from literally the middle of the night to see someone if that was an option anywhere. Granted most of those people didn't want to see MD's (even though some seriously needed to) and specialists are less likely to see people without insurance. What is Neighbor for Neighbor? (Karen) Fines on people who don't have health insurance If this was in effect today, I'd be eligible for that fine starting next month. It's unlikely I can afford COBRA with my current plan. As it is, I've had to downgrade my plan twice in the last 2 yrs to keep my contribution down. (Sandy) Canada has serious financial issues with our health care system too. Is anything being considered to rectify that?

(Sandy) Canada has serious financial issues with our health care system too. (Dorine) Is anything being considered to rectify that? We've had study after study done about reforming the system but so far nothing much has happened other than some contracting out e.g. hospital housekeeping and food services. And the long waits are due to rationing of services. There has been steady pressure to allow for-profit clinics and doctors but it really hasn't taken hold yet. There are a few in operation now and fighting through the courts. One of the odd things about Canada's system is that we allow some organizations to pay for health care services. For example, Workers' Compensation, insurance companies and hockey teams can pay to get priority for specialist's appoinments, MRI's, and surgery for injured workers to get them back on the job sooner. But, if you're self-employed and get injured, you are out of luck. What it does mean though is that there is already a for-profit aspect of our system. The government also pays for-profit firms set fees to perform lab tests, x-rays etc. and that works very well. But, any thought of increasing the for-profit component of the system has people clamouring that they don't want a "U.S. style system" which is the great bogeyman to those of us north of the border. The two are anything but synymous. I think there has to be a better way than either of our two systems and I would really like to know more about those in other countries that provide universal coverage.

Australia's system has its problems, of course (any system does), but it really is head and shoulders above the US in terms of providing health care for everyone. We also have the for-profit component (in that there is supplementary health care available, offering "more" and "better" health care for those who can afford it in private hospitals). If you make more than (I think it's) $65k per year, you must sign up for private health care, or you pay a premium on your taxes towards Medicare. If you do sign up for private coverage, you don't have to pay the premium, and the price of the private health care is offset by the government. It's a bit complex, but it does seem to work.

Neighbor for Neighbors: my favorite charity. http://www.neighborforneighbor.org Every city has one. Of course it's tough if you live in a rural area...but municipal hospitals do treat the poor gratis. In poor areas nurse-practioners and PAs are utilized. I see them when I can't get in to see a MD and they are great. PAs can prescribe. Like i said, there are many components of this bill that are necessary. But some, no one even knows about. What it does mean though is that there is already a for-profit aspect of our system That is my hope, anyway. Blue Cross is not going to go away. Besides, they remove some of the burden of too many patients on the NHS.

(Dorine) The demise of the pre-existing condition is one good thing about the bill's proposal, though who knows if it will make the final cut of the bill. And can you imagine how high a premium the insurance companies will charge? Boogles the mind. (Dorine) If this [fines] was in effect today, I'd be eligible for that fine starting next month. The whole aspect of fining the uninsured reminds me of the Medicare Part D sweetheart deal made with the pharmaceutical companies. No ability to negotiate discounts. Here, they've added new enrollees with punitive measures. This is not like auto insurance, which is elective. You can't choose not to live but you can choose not to drive. Which does bring up the niggling point... If everyone is required to have car insurance, why do I still need (forced by state law) to buy "uninsured motorist" coverage? Thanks, Sarah and Sandy, for the details on your country's system. Always interesting to me.

Ugh. Wish to respond more, but too much for blackberry. Did almost include comment re increased cost potential for pre-existing condition as that occurred to me, too. Can't accuse the insurance industry of doing something extra for nothing, or even just a little. Don't get me started again on that no negotiating clause for Medicare for drugs. WHAT a gimme to the pharma industry. Evelyn, you're concerned re Medicare cuts...well, Medicare would have more $$ if the govt was allowed to get cheaper prices for drugs. You might want to point that out to your Congressmen when you implore them not to cut services and ask them to change that policy in this healthcare "reform" process. More later...

(Dorine)WHAT a gimme to the pharma industry. Evelyn, you're concerned re Medicare cuts...well, Medicare would have more $$ if the govt was allowed to get cheaper prices for drugs. I really don't want to get you started... But..... From LA Times: Senate health debate hits snag over imported drugs http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-health-senate11-2009dec11,0,1002684.story "Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) temporarily halted consideration of the healthcare bill after three days of inconclusive debate on an amendment by Sens. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.). The provision would allow pharmacies and wholesalers to import drugs from countries with safety standards comparable to America's" Unsavory deal with pharma " Pharma offered to give up $80 billion in revenue in exchange for an understanding that the government would not push for deeper concessions. " http://www.examiner.com/x-30890-Sarah-Palin-Examiner~y2010m1d4-An-unsavory-deal-with-pharma I think the AMA got a deal too, but I can't find it. I remember when they were all invited to the WH. AARP too, if they would support the healthcare bill. Yeah, sure like Seniors are going to say: "Medicare cuts: Being them on"

Going back to another subject, I watched the HBO dcoumentary on Roman Polanski. While I understand that one man interviewed has recanted, said he lied about having advised the judge, the fact that the guy who actually was to prosecute the case, Roger Gunson, has stood behind the defense attorney, says a lot to me. Sure looks like judicial misconduct to me. A shame how this whole thing was handled. :-(

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T-bXFApaXI He even got Stephen Schwartz's authorization to use the music.

Change your surname name, Ruthie.

(Sarah) We also have the for-profit component (in that there is supplementary health care available, offering "more" and "better" health care. This sort of basic concept is what I was leaning toward for quite a while (when it was clear single payer would never be an option).....a govt provided system of basic care for all along with a private component for more complex issues. I hadn't really contemplated whether it would be using "for profit" facilities or not. But there'd have to be a mechanism in place where premiums couldn't go so high as to price people (or most) out of the program entirely. And thanks, Sandy, for your input. Have you seen the PBS Frontline show on healthcare systems around the world? I think I linked to it on this topic some time ago. Here it is: Five Capitalist Democracies and How They Do It http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/ You can watch the whole show online from a link on the home page: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/�sickaroundtheworld/

Thanks Dorine for the links to what other countries provide. I'm in the midst of de-Christmasing and preparing for a trip to Maui so I won't have time to look at it until I get back. More about the for-profit component of Canada's system: Most provinces do not cover such things as physiotherapy, massage, natuaropathis doctors and durable medical supplies. There is also limited coverage for prescription drugs except for the poor and elderly. These are typically covered by employers' Extended Health Care plans or private coverage purchased through insurance companies or Blue Cross.

Re importation of drugs. That's been a non-starter for quite a while. If they ever do seriously pass anything related to it, it'll probably only include drugs hardly anyone uses (said with a healthy dose of cynicism). If Medicare was allowed to negotiate bulk rates like any other entity (drug wholesalers, etc), then reimportation would be unnecessary. The whole scenario is utterly ridiculous. Re Roman Polanski, I didn't realize there was someone on the prosecutor's side who was supportive of the defense. Thanks for the reminder about the film. I believe it's been in my Netflix queue. Have a fun trip, Sandy!

There is an AP update that says they did ask for sentencing in absentia. Polanski hearing could bring new defense strategy By Jill Serjeant � Tue Jan 5, 5:02 pm ET LOS ANGELES (Reuters) � Lawyers for fugitive director Roman Polanski return to a Los Angeles court on Wednesday and are expected to detail their next steps in a bid to resolve a 30-year-old sex charge against the Oscar-winning maker of "The Pianist". The Los Angeles-based lawyers for Polanski declined on Tuesday to discuss their intentions, but the hearing, which was scheduled unexpectedly, follows a suggestion by a California appeals court last month that Polanski could ask to be sentenced in absentia on a 1977 charge of having unlawful sex with a 13 year-old. Polanski, 76, is under house arrest in Switzerland fighting extradition to the United States. He fled the United States before sentencing in 1978, but after pleading guilty, and spent most of the past 30 years living and working in France. A California appeals court in December denied Polanski's bid to have the unlawful sex case dismissed due to alleged judicial misconduct. But the court said the misconduct claims were "extremely serious" and an "in absentia" sentencing could help resolve what it called "one of the longest-running sagas" in the state's criminal justice history. The Los Angeles District Attorney's office said Wednesday's hearing was requested by Polanski's lawyers, who first asked for a closed-door conference on an "undisclosed topic". "We told the judge that we believed that any conference should be in open court. The judge agreed and scheduled the conference" for Wednesday, said district attorney's office spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons. Loyola Law professor Laurie Levenson, who has closely followed the Polanski case, said the director's lawyers may be pondering a change in strategy. "They may make a request for him to be sentenced in absentia. They may want to feel out the court to see what would happen if he came back. They may plan to petition the California Supreme Court," she said. "This is a great game of chess with neither side knowing what the other side's next move is." Levenson said the appeal court's suggestion of a sentencing hearing in Polanski's absence "is not the perfect solution for either side, but I think the court at least wants it to be something that is considered." Judicial sources said such a request would likely have to come from Polanski himself and would result in a full-scale formal sentencing hearing in open court at a later date. Swiss officials have said they will make a decision on extradition in early 2010. Under current California law, Polanski faces a maximum two years behind bars on his guilty plea, but his lawyers may likely argue for a lesser sentence. Polanski is married and has two children. His other movies include "Rosemary's Baby" and "Chinatown", and his latest film "The Ghost Writer" will get its premiere at the Berlin Film Festival in February. (Editing by Mohammad Zargham)

A California appeals court in December...said the misconduct claims were "extremely serious" See! The prosecutor backs up all Polanski's attorney's charges. In fact, they filed a joint complaint about the judge to a state commssion. What both of these guys say in the documentary is amazing. "They may make a request for him to be sentenced in absentia. They may want to feel out the court to see what would happen if he came back. Ha! See if you like or can live with the sentence before you return. If not, tie up the courts in Europe so you don't have to come back.

Here are the two segments from Dave's show last night: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/13/leno-victims-unit-letterm_n_421600.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/12/letterman-mocks-leno-reca_n_421002.html

Am moving this discussion here: (Dorine) Interesting legal discussion re: Conan vs. NBC at THR. Yes, it was plus the comments section, of which only one or two persons sounded like they knew how a contract dispute would be adjudicated. I don't think that's right for Letterman to bring Jay's wife into the jokes. Dave would use her name when mimicking Jay. In a high pitched voice, he'd say, "Mavis, bring me a can of 10-40 weight oil" or similar. Maybe Dave just likes to say her name. Thinks it has a funny ring to it. Who knows? He doesn't say anything bad about her. But Dave is really only jabbing at Jay and the suits at NBC. Last night's Top 10 list was messages left on Jeff Zucker's phone and he kept putting up a pic of Zucker, talking about how he knew the guy when he was in his 20s, working on the Today Show. Last night was really no different (except for the segment with Kiefer Sutherland in a dress). It is so focused on the NBC mess. Far more entertaining than anything at NBC. I didnt' even check to see what Conan said, as he wasn't funny the other nights. BTW, epic fail on the Make Conan Look Bad scenario (thus far). Epic? You're juding something like a suggested scenario as an epic fail. Have I said they're doing it? I said it could be done. But maybe they're not smart enough to figure out how.

Epic fail is a commonly used slang phrase for failure. Once Conan put out that letter, NBC lost their chance to make Conan look bad if they wanted to. I'm simply commenting on the scenario u posted on what u would do and what NBC should do (or maybe would do - can't remember exact phrase). I saw a Letterman bit Nikki Finkke posted last night but nothing about what u said above. Am sure it's around somewhere. I thought Conan was amusing about it for what I saw last night. Update is Zucker madder than wet hen, wants to "ice" Conan, keep him off air for several years and give Jay back The Tonight Show completely.

Oh and that's good that Dave isn't making Mavis the object of the jokes.

Once Conan put out that letter, NBC lost their chance to make Conan look bad if they wanted to. Has the fat lady sung? I read the Late Show Wars link you posted from NYU or whatever it was. I didn't see anything about Leno forcing Johnny off. That he negotiated a deal, while permanent guest host, before Letterman did, isn't exactly sneaky or underhanded. Quite smart actually. In the movie, who came off worse? Or as the bad guy(s)? The network execs, who think they can have it all, seem delusional. The situation hasn't changed one iota. Dave told his side of the story and how NBC offered him a prime time show, but that Johnny Carson advised him to walk. So, in essence, Dave is telling Conan to walk. But he is gleefully waiting to see what NBC tries next. You've got to watch Letterman. He's having the best time. And it goes on and on and on...

I know that link didn't have anything about that hence why I said I thought I remembered getting that impression from the movie, but would have to go back and watch it. At this point, the only person who's going to make Conan look bad is Conan, and it would b a stretch to have that happen. It's been tried in the court of public opinion to this point and Conan is the clear winner up til now. Unfortunately they wanted their cake...and pie...and cupcake and to eat them all, too. I know. Letterman hates NBC so much (forget the names he just called them aside from twits). and to see them obviously F-up is quite the high for him. Schaudenfrade (sp?) is quite the drug, esp in entertainment business. I'm waiting for him to say "Karma's a bitch." In the movie, who came out worse?? Jay (and his mgr) and NBC. I'm sure they're checking all closets in the rooms when anyone network people meet to discuss it now. ;-)

I really like her podcast, The Business. I listen to it weekly. I learn a lot about the entertainment business and supplements other stuff I read very well. Judging by this and what I'd been saying based on what I read anywhere, I think I had a firm grasp on the scenario as it evolved. I've seen the # anywhere from 25-40 million in the last 24 hrs. Tallying the NBC Damage by Kim Masters With a deal nearly done for Conan O�Brien to leave NBC, Kim Masters assesses the cost to the network�both in dollars and in the reputations of those who remain. From the start, there was only one logical outcome: NBC was going to have to pay Conan O�Brien a lot of money to leave. Now the company is said to be coughing up about $30 million, putting an end to what may well be the greatest march of folly in television history. NBC has had its own freaky and very expensive version of a Shakespearean drama. The king (of late night) was pushed prematurely off his throne, the order of the television universe was disturbed and a great deal of extravagant drama (and comedy) ensued. Now that the king is returning to his throne, the total cost, counting everything, could run more than a couple of hundred million dollars. One studio executive says there can be no doubt of the damage done to Jay Leno�s reputation: �You can�t be the butt of so many jokes and not pay a price.� That�s the estimate made by a former NBC Universal executive who is including everything from the cost of building Conan O�Brien�s new Tonight Show studio in Los Angeles to the cost of paying him off Adding the damage to primetime ratings, and to revenue from affiliates and NBC-owned local stations, . �It�s easily over $200 million,� he says. Despite NBC Universal sports chief Dick Ebersol�s too little, too late counterattack on O�Brien in the New York Times, O�Brien waged an enormously successful public relations war. Meanwhile, Leno has been getting shellacked, not just on everyone else�s late-night show but even on his own show, in a paddling administered by Jimmy Kimmel on Thursday night. �I�m getting beat up in the press,� he lamented in his monologue Friday. �You know it�s bad when Tiger Woods calls to offer you PR advice.� As a result of this fracas, O�Brien�s ratings have soared�past his timeslot rival David Letterman�s, and past Leno�s in primetime. It�s only temporary, of course, but it punctuates this episode nicely. NBC has damaged Leno in all of this, raising the possibility that once he returns to The Tonight Show, he will not be able to beat Letterman and whatever other competition happens to materialize. One studio executive says there can be no doubt: �You can�t be the butt of so many jokes and not pay a price.� The price might be that Leno, who has always enjoyed a nice-guy reputation, also seems to be exposing a different side of himself. He came out fighting during his monologue on Friday�"Even Letterman is taking shots at me. Usually he's just taking shots at interns." But jokes like that may not serve him well in the long run. Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times speculates that Jimmy Fallon could emerge as the victor who will succeed Leno when (if) he finally retires. Perhaps that prospect is pleasing to Saturday Night Live producer Lorne Michaels. You might think Michaels would have been piqued to see his former prot�g� O�Brien knocked from his perch (Michaels proposed O�Brien for the post-Tonight Show slot in 1993). But he�s remained silent and in the shadows during this episode, perhaps because he is said to have been miffed because he was not made an executive producer when O�Brien got The Tonight Show. (Michaels does produce Fallon�s show.) Leno isn�t the only member of the NBC Universal family to be damaged in this process. CEO Jeff Zucker has been mercilessly mocked�even in Maureen Dowd�s column. With Universal chief Ron Meyer emerging as the hero in the saga and Jeff Gaspin having proved that he is capable of running those profitable NBC Universal cable channels very handily, the question asked�and asked, and asked again�is what purpose Zucker serves. Even if they weren�t already planning to be rid of Zucker, what can the owners-in-waiting at Comcast make of him now? �If I were those guys I�d be simply appalled,� says one former studio chairman. We always figured Zucker would finally be done once the Comcast deal closes (though that will take months). All they can do is hope that the Zucker-inflicted damage will be contained until then. As for Zucker, he�ll walk away with a much bigger check than Conan. And he is seemingly impervious to shame. My colleague Jacob Bernstein heard from a source that Zucker is likely to appear in the audience Sunday night when NBC broadcasts the Golden Globe awards. Regardless of whether Zucker attends, Ricky Gervais, the comedian who's hosting the show, is likely to have a laugh with this one. "Ricky loves Conan," says a person with business ties to the British funnyman. "All the comedians love Conan, they all hate Jay, and they all hate Jeff. Ricky will say anything he wants." Yet another reason why the Globes are more fun than the Oscars. http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-15/tallying-the-nbc-damage/2/ Kim Masters covers the entertainment business for The Daily Beast. She is also the host of The Business, public radio's weekly program about the business of show business. She is also the author of The Keys to the Kingdom: The Rise of Michael Eisner and the Fall of Everybody Else.

"One studio executive says there can be no doubt of the damage done to Jay Leno�s reputation: �You can�t be the butt of so many jokes and not pay a price.� Not if you don't like Conan O'Brien in the first place. Go Jay!

I think he'll do better than at 10, but I do question, if Jay has so many fans, why did his ratings tank so? I can speak personally to say that I was excited to see Jay move to 10, to an hour where I could really watch it. But I couldn't stick with it after 2 or 3 shows that first week. It, and he, was awful. I am apparently not the only one who thought that. Maybe enough people will come back with getting back to the late night format, though unless it's someone I really want to see as a guest on, it won't be me. Though I'd still rather see him than Conan. And I'll imagine his ratings will be really high right after he comes back, at least for a time. Time will tell if he holds it, though I suspect even lower ratings for him historically in that slot will still be better than whatever Conan's show did.

Late Night Wars: What Price Will NBC, Leno and Zucker Pay? You don�t have a mess like the Late Night Wars without fallout. Winners and losers are inevitable. Winners: pugnacious Jimmy Kimmel; NBC Universal consigliere Ron Meyer, who helped to broker the settlement; and Conan O�Brien, who may have lost The Tonight Show, but walks away with his dignity intact, public support and $30 million. Losers: Jay Leno, who wins a Pyrrhic victory as he takes back his old job, but may lose ratings and popularity in this messy slag-fest; and NBC, which lost hundreds of millions in the long run. As for NBC Universal chief Jeff Zucker, who plans to attend the Golden Globes Sunday, many wonder how long new NBC Universal owner Comcast will hang onto him. Kim Masters surveys the NBC damage. [Ed. Note - links to article I posted above} by Anne Thompson, posted to TV on January 15, 2010 at 6:53pm PST | Permalink | Comments (3) http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/2010/01/15/late_night_wars_what_price_will_nbc_leno_and_zucker_pay/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_content=Twitter

A little more "detail"..... [.....] Instead of a prolonged and ugly battle, NBC has given in to Team Conan who've insisted their guy exits only with a lot of cash and freedom. How much cash? "Zucker's NBC spin puts it at $25 million. But it's a lot closer to $40 million than $25 million," my insider says. "And Conan was adamant that NBC take care of the people close to him -- [executive producer] Jeff Ross and the staff who moved out to Los Angeles." According to the pact, Conan leaves The Tonight Show on January 22nd, and The Jay Leno Show ends its 10 PM primetime run on February 12th when NBC starts its coverage of the Vancouver Winter Olympics through February 28th. That Monday, Leno commences his Tonight Show do-over. Conan, meanwhile, is free to go anywhere and compete with Jay. This is that Ron Meyer-negotiated deal (which I first reported yesterday at 3 PM). The Universal Studios president/COO was asked to step in secretly by WME agents Ari Emanuel when Team Conan and NBC were so far apart they weren't even on speaking terms. "They [NB Universal] were lucky to have Ron." I'm told the deal might close as soon as Saturday. And NBC's PR nightmare will end. Or will it? In his Friday night monologue, Conan defended himself against NBC sports czar Dick Ebersole's very public (and inappropriate) takedown: "In the press this week, NBC has been calling me every name in the book. In fact, they think I�m such an idiot, they now want me to run the network." [......] http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/jeff-zucker-threatens-to-ice-conan-ill-keep-you-off-the-air-for-3-12-years/

Actually, Dorine, from the stats I saw yesterday (and I didn't bookmark them, so not linking them here, but I'll look and see if I can find them later), Conan's numbers were better than those for Leno's 10pm show. As I've said several times, I think Leno at the helm of the Tonight Show will sink, slowly but surely, into obscurity. I'm quite sure there are a number of people who, although they didn't particularly love Conan (or perhaps even watch his show) will refuse to watch Leno now, in light of this stuff up. It's far less likely to boost Leno's numbers than to hurt them, imo.

I love Leno, hate Conan. I did watch both shows a few times when they first changed time slots but that was it. But, I'll go back to watching Leno once he's back on The Tonight Show. As I understand it, Leno had about 5 million viewers on both the Tonight Show and his prime time show. The problem is that other shows in the 10 pm slot were doing much better. Conan lost viewers for the Tonight Show and consistently trailed Letterman while Leno had consistently beat Letterman. To me, it is all about the numbers and I couldn't care less who looks good and who doesn't.

(Sarah) Conan's numbers were better than those for Leno's 10pm show. Yes. I wasn't comparing the 10pm show to Conan. I was saying (or trying to) that even if Leno's #'s drop when he goes back to 11:30 lower than what he was used to in that slot historically, it is still probably going to be higher than Conan's over the past 7 months. He may need another interview of Hugh Grantian proportions to catapult him to where he was again, but I don't know by how much he was beating Letterman. Or maybe he'll do just fine out of the box ad infinitum. Time will tell. As I've said several times, I think Leno at the helm of the Tonight Show will sink, With which I don't think I disagreed and I believe agreed with. (Sandy) As I understand it, Leno had about 5 million viewers on both the Tonight Show and his prime time show. Yeah, I saw that, too, but only once and I don't remember where, so I wasn't sure how accurate it was. I was surprised as I didn't know other types of shows at 10pm had even bigger audiences. I saw a stat that Leno's 10 pm show lost up to 48% of the previous audience in some markets, but overall was in the 25-40% range. Talk about epic fail if that's so. I could see why the affiliates were so hot and bothered. They lost a fortune.

@Sandy: Not true. Conan's numbers recently are better than Leno's were before he retired, according the the chart I saw yesterday. I just wish I could remember where I saw it so I could post it here... Leno's numbers on his prime time show were low, which is the reason this whole mess started. The affiliates were threatening to drop the NBC feed because it was costing them ad revenue for their news programs, which they rely on heavily

Conan's numbers recently are better You mean since the debacle or before all that started? I did read his ratings have ballooned since all this mess. And regarding ratings, part of Conan's argument is that he didn't have enough time to get ratings up to speed (only 7 months) and that Jay wasn't an instant success out of the box when he took over. I forget now how long it took for Jay to show some good results. "And Conan was adamant that NBC take care of the people close to him -- [executive producer] Jeff Ross and the staff who moved out to Los Angeles." Found a Page Six item in the NY Post today that says the complete opposite... http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/conan_stiffed_us_staffers_say_09HWtZQc2Jc4BYmw7dg2hK

I popped in to post this and got distracted. I didn't see it, but will have to look on NBC.com or Hulu or You Tube. Did anyone see this? `SNL' lampoons late-night mess with sketch NEW YORK � "Saturday Night Live" has entered the late-night fray, lampooning the mess involving Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien. "SNL" opened Saturday's show with a sketch featuring cast member Bill Hader as O'Brien and Darrell Hammond as Leno, brought together on CNN's "Larry King Live." O'Brien was portrayed as somewhat humorless, while Leno needed to be cut off from automatically going into a monologue routine. Jason Sudeikis made a cameo as a giggling David Letterman, perpetually throwing pencils at the camera. "SNL" is close to the late-night shuffle and not just because it shares NBC as a network. "SNL" creator Lorne Michaels was executive producer of "Late Night with Conan O'Brien" before O'Brien took over the "Tonight" show. Michaels also produces O'Brien's replacement: "Late Night with Jimmy Fallon." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100117/ap_en_tv/us_tv_leno_o_brien_snl;_ylt=ArsHNtq7O_VHxmIdci6HZxCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFranRwOWJmBHBvcwMxNjYEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9lbnRlcnRhaW5tZW50BHNsawNzbmxsYW1wb29uc2w-

Here it is! This is where I got the impression that Carson was pushed out. This was in the film. And I found this quite by accident following a link on Chris Chibnall's (UK TV writer/playwright) on Twitter. I knew I didn't make it up in my head, coupled with the fact that many comments I've read after some of the Jay/Conan stories referenced the same thing. "Leno�s manager gets impatient and schemes to push Johnny Carson out of his own show. According to Bill Carter of The New York Times � the Journalist Of Record in the late-night wars � NBC was in no rush to push Johnny Carson towards retirement. Despite their concerns about his aging audience, competition from younger hosts, and the fact that CBS and others were actively courting Leno to host his own competing 11:30 show, they were apparently confident that he�d make that choice on his own before long. So Leno�s manager, Helen Kushnick, planted an embarrassing unsourced front-page screaming-headline story in the New York Post about the network�s frustrations with Carson and their desire to hand The Tonight Show to Leno, his obvious successor, as soon as possible. Carson was so steamed about the headline that he didn�t even want to stick around for his 30th anniversary with the show, nor did he bother to inform NBC in advance that he�d be using a routine presentation in front of an auditorium of NBC affiliat s to announce his speedy departure. Carter reported that Leno had asked his manager point-blank if she�d been involved in the Post story, and that she�d lied to him. He also says that their relationship was a deeply complicated one, and suggests that Jay had long-since lost interest in digging too deeply into how she got things done." [.....] The rest of the link is some interesting analysis of the Jay/Conan war. http://ihnatko.com/2010/01/14/jay-leno-the-self-styled-forrest-gump-of-late-night/

NBC: Conan O'Brien reaches $45M exit deal By FRAZIER MOORE, Ap Television Writer � 16 mins ago NEW YORK � Conan O'Brien told NBC good riddance Thursday in a $45 million deal for his exit from "The Tonight Show," allowing Jay Leno to return to the late-night program he hosted for 17 years. Under the deal, which came less than eight months after O'Brien took the reins from Leno, O'Brien will get more than $33 million, NBC said. The rest will go to his 200-strong staff in severance. Compensation for O'Brien's staff and crew was the final hurdle in negotiations. O'Brien was said to have been "dug in" on the issue out of concern for the workers, while NBC said this week that it had already agreed to pay "millions of dollars to compensate every one of them" and deemed it a public relations "ploy." On Wednesday night's show, speaking of a push to get a severance deal for his staff from NBC, O'Brien joked, "At first they thought I was gullible. They said the staff would be taken to a big farm, where they'd be allowed to run free forever." O'Brien's final show will be Friday, with Tom Hanks scheduled to appear as well as Will Ferrell � his first guest as "Tonight" host last June. Reruns of "Tonight" with O'Brien had already been scheduled for next week. It was unclear how NBC will fill the two-week gap after that, before beginning its Olympics coverage. Leno will return to "Tonight" on March 1. "In the end, Conan was appreciative of the steps NBC made to take care of his staff and crew, and decided to supplement the severance they were getting out of his own pocket," his manager, Gavin Polone, told The Wall Street Journal. "Now he just wants to get back on the air as quickly as possible." O'Brien will be free to start another TV job after Sept. 1, NBC said in its statement, released Thursday, which confirmed that "under terms of an agreement that was signed earlier today, NBC and O'Brien will settle their contractual obligations and the network will release O'Brien from his contract." There has been much speculation on where he might go next. ABC (which airs "Nightline" and "Jimmy Kimmel Live!") has said it wasn't interested, while Fox, which lacks a network late-night show, expressed appreciation for his show � but nothing more. Comedy Central has also been mentioned. A spokesman for O'Brien said he would be unavailable for comment. O'Brien landed the "Tonight" show after successfully hosting "Late Night," which airs an hour later, since 1993. But he quickly stumbled in the ratings race against his CBS rival, David Letterman. Under Leno, the "Tonight" show was the ratings champ at 11:35 p.m. Eastern, but he proved an instant flop with his experiment in prime time. Last week NBC announced that the five-hour vacancy in prime time left by Leno will be filled by scripted and reality fare calculated to bring NBC affiliates a more robust lead-in audience for their local news than Leno had been delivering. A provisional slate of shows will include new and veteran NBC dramas, a comedy panel series produced by Jerry Seinfeld and "Dateline NBC." It had been no secret that the 46-year-old O'Brien was scoring puny ratings numbers on "Tonight," averaging 2.5 million nightly viewers, compared with 4.2 million for Letterman's "Late Show," according to Nielsen figures. It was even more obvious that "The Jay Leno Show," airing weeknights at 10 p.m. Eastern, was a disaster. Mostly justified by the network for its bargain-basement production budget, it not only was critically slammed, but also found a disappointing popular reaction. It has averaged 5.3 million nightly viewers since its fall debut � about the same number that watched Leno's final "Tonight" season, in a time slot when far fewer viewers are available. By comparison, the season's top-rated 10 p.m. network drama, CBS' "The Mentalist," has an average audience of 17 million. But few observers expected the abrupt upheaval that erupted publicly just two weeks ago, when two Web sites posted unsourced stories that the 59-year-old Leno's show would soon be canceled or moved into O'Brien's late-night domain. Days later, NBC executives unveiled a plan to restore Leno to 11:35 p.m. with a half-hour program, then slide O'Brien's "Tonight Show" to 12:05 a.m., followed by "Late Night With Jimmy Fallon," also pushed back a half-hour. Disgruntled affiliate stations, which have lost viewers and advertising revenue for their late local newscasts since "The Jay Leno Show" premiered, appeared to spur NBC's sudden changes. The 210 local NBC stations saw their late news audience drop, on average, by 25 percent in November compared with the previous year among desirable 25- to 54-year-old viewers, with the Leno experiment costing the stations collectively $22 million over a three-month period, according to the research firm Harmelin Media. In a clear vote of no confidence, some rebellious stations were threatening to drop "The Jay Leno Show" and air their own programming. The network had been counting on O'Brien's cooperation, and wanted an answer quickly, so it could have the configured lineup ready to launch after the Winter Olympics, which will dominate NBC's schedule from Feb. 12-28. But O'Brien threw a wrench into NBC's plans, and triggered a public relations firestorm for the network, when he issued a statement rejecting the offer to delay his show to make room for Leno's return. O'Brien said that shifting "Tonight" would "seriously damage what I consider to be the greatest franchise in the history of broadcasting," and he declared his disappointment that NBC had given him less than a year to establish himself as host at 11:35 p.m. The escalating mess furnished plenty of material for jokes by competitors of Leno and O'Brien, as well as the two NBC hosts at its center, who bashed each other and their network. As recently as Wednesday's monologue, Leno said the rainy weather in California "couldn't have come at a worse possible time. Today was the day NBC was supposed to burn down the studio for the insurance money." Online, many have leaped to O'Brien's defense in recent days and applauded his stand against NBC. "Team Conan" became a popular Twitter topic for viewers who pledged their allegiance to O'Brien. An O'Brien portrait also circulated as a badge of support. Referring to the "Tonight" show host's playful nickname, it read, "I'm With Coco," and featured a black-and-white picture of a regal-looking O'Brien standing in front of an American flag. The only color: his shock of orange hair. For many observers, this clash of talk-show hosts recalled the late-night follies played out by NBC in the early 1990s as the network wavered confoundingly over who � Letterman or Leno � should inherit "The Tonight Show" from Johnny Carson. The current revival of the late-night follies was set in motion nearly six years ago, in what was hatched by NBC executives as a farsighted strategy to ensure an orderly transition. In the fall of 2004, the network announced that O'Brien would take over for Leno in 2009. That move by NBC � and endorsed by Leno, despite his clear aversion to leaving "Tonight" � was designed to keep O'Brien from jumping ship when his contract expired. "Tonight" was the prize O'Brien felt he had earned. He joked that he was looking forward to being on an hour earlier, "at a time when people can see me." As years passed and Leno strengthened his grip as the late-night ratings champ, NBC anguished over how to keep him usefully occupied on the network somewhere other than "Tonight," and safely out of reach of rival networks who were courting him. In late 2008, the network caught the public and the industry by surprise with its virtually unprecedented scheme: a new Leno hour "stripped" in prime time from Monday through Friday. "A lot of people were shocked," Leno joked to reporters when the plan was announced. "They didn't know NBC still had a prime time." ___ AP Television Writers Lynn Elber in Los Angeles and David Bauder in New York contributed to this report. ___

He'll probably join the other comedians at Comedy Central.

I think Conan is a class act for wanting to help his staff who followed his move to the West Coast. They were the ones who really got the short end of the stick. That being said, I really don't enjoy Conan very much...and I can't stand Leno. I remember when Jay was a decent comedian, prior to subbing for Johnny Carson. What happened to the funny Leno? He lost me with the dancing Itos and the Jay Walking.

I have to admit I'm both appalled and amused at the Jay Walkers. You know the saying about car wrecks....

I loved that final sendoff skit with Will Farrell and his pregnant wife (she gave birth later that night) doing the Freebird riff, cowbell and all.

People kid on Obama for using teleprompters (which he didn't need in his clearly knowledgeable off the cuff grasp of the issues in the Q&A session with House Republicans a couple of weeks ago, but Sarah was using a tried and true method for giving herself a bit of a help with answers that were pre-screened. I watched 10 or 15 min of her speech and that was all I could take. She was practically reading her speech and not at all well at that. I feel bad for the people who paid almost $500 to hear that. Well, maybe not so much. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stefan-sirucek/did-palin-use-crib-notes_b_452458.html

Auction #3: Stephen's Portrait from The Colbert Report is nearly at $17K now. BTW, there's a matching donation from AT&T and each auction has benefited different charities: http://cgi.ebay.com/Stephens-Portrait-from-The-Colbert-Report_W0QQitemZ200433782898QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item2eaac8d072

If anybody is thinking about bidding, there's free shipping. ;-)

I feel bad for the people who paid almost $500 to hear that. Well, maybe not so much. Noble of you to feel badly;-)...but they interviewed folks who were there and they were glad they had attended. Perhaps it was only the people from the Huffy -Puffy blog who weren't.

Perhaps it was only the people from the Huffy -Puffy blog who weren't. I don't think they went. they interviewed folks who were there and they were glad they had attended. Glad they felt it worth it, but it says a lot about them.

LOL. Dorine, I like your tolerance for other people's views.*shaking head*

I tolerate a person's right to have those views. I don't have to (nor do I) tolerate actual viewpoints especially those born of fear, ignorance, racism, lack of common sense and introspection, laziness, etc. I am proud to say that I do not tolerate viewpoints that illustrate and continue to perpetuate the continued dumbing down of America.

Or continual dumbing down of America.

This is an excellent illustration of such viewpoints I do not tolerate. And from a US Representative, too! "The *cult* of multiculturalism?" Are you kidding me?? My favorite is still the viewpoint espoused in the paragraph before the last line. http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/blog-1177-tea-party-speaker-revive-jim-crow.html

LOL You're so funny.

Good. I was worried there for a minute you might take me too seriously. ;-)

That Colbert painting is up to 17, 500 on 62 bids with 5 hrs left. The $ is going to a good cause IMO.

Holy cow! Official tells US health insurer to justify 39 pct rate hike AFP Mon Feb 8, 4:53 pm ET WASHINGTON (AFP) � US Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on Monday called on a health insurance company to publicly explain why it raised premiums for some customers by 39 percent. "With so many families already affected by rising costs, I was very disturbed to learn through media accounts that Anthem Blue Cross plans to raise premiums for its California customers by as much as 39 percent," or 15 times faster than inflation, Sebelius said in a letter that was faxed to the insurer. The rate hikes were "even more difficult to understand" in the light of soaring profits at Anthem Blue Cross's parent company, WellPoint Incorporated, Sebelius said. Wellpoint earned 2.7 billion dollars in the last quarter of 2009, she said, calling on the insurance company to "provide a detailed justification" for the increase. "As we continue the health insurance reform debate in Washington, this announcement reminds us that too many Americans can be left with unaffordable insurance each time the rates or rules change in the private market," Sebelius said. Last month, plans to reform the US health care system hit a wall when the election of a Republican to the Senate Massachusetts seat long held by Ted Kennedy robbed the Democrats of their 60-vote supermajority in the Senate. President Barack Obama vowed during his campaign for the White House to reform health care and make coverage accessible to the 47 million Americans who currently do not have any, and to make coverage less of a financial drain on US workers. Last year, the insurance industry issued a report saying that health care reforms would lead to significantly higher insurance premiums. Obama dismissed the report as "bogus". http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/healthusinsuranceeconomy;_ylt=AoYSih3z74Jx9q6gBJu0y7qs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTN0dHVmYzVoBGFzc2V0A2FmcC8yMDEwMDIwOC9oZWFsdGh1c2luc3VyYW5jZWVjb25vbXkEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwM0BHBvcwMxBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDb2ZmaWNpYWx0ZWxs

And this woman is a fool to take him back. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100208/en_nm/us_sheen

My attorney friends always collect those fees beforehand. Happens everyday.

Yes, unfortunately it does and it doesn't surprise me much. From that legal section in THR I posted an article from before, an update on what Conan had in his contract for leverage for his pay-to-go-away day. February 09, 2010 Conan's 'Tonight Show' contract revealed By Matthew Belloni If there was one big mystery in the Great Late-Night Fiasco of 2010, it was whether NBC actually specified in Conan O'Brien's contract that �The Tonight Show� had to begin at 11:35 p.m. This seemingly small detail was of crucial importance to O�Brien, who ended up exiting the network rather than accepting NBC�s offer to move him and �Tonight� to 12:05 a.m. -- a potential violation of his deal, which was never made public. But we've finally tracked down a copy of the O�Brien contract, and -- lo and behold -- NBC did define �Tonight� as the series that airs at 11:35 as far back as 2002. However, what may have emboldened NBC to move the program anyway was the absence of that key language from later amendments to the deal. Here's the backstory: http://www.thresq.com/2010/02/conan-contract-revealed.html

And on the topic of dumbing down America. This is on a billboard in MN: What a scary thought.

Hahaha. I read about that. I wonder who put it up.

Something for those concerned about Medicare cuts to ponder: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/10/having-it-both-ways-on-medicare/

That being said, something has to be done. It can't go on like it is.

That picture has been circulating around since the Christmas Day bombing attempt over Detroit,Moon. A scary day that was. We were lucky...thanks to a brave alert Dutch passenger. (Not to John Brennan and his team:-((( Not just Medicare...but Medicaid need a fix. As well as *all* the social programs out there. Incl SS, and all those community give-a-ways.

Right you are Evelyn. There is much to fix and I just wish the opposition (ahem), would sit down to work together with the administration. Of course, this is an election year and the political BS game goes on. :-(

The opposition is miniscule, m'dear. Remember, we're the minority party. The Dems (ahem)control both the legislative and excutive branch of the gov't. POTUS can pass this if he marshalls his *own* party behind him. There is much common ground ; Senator Judd Gregg (NH)was on Chris Matthews tonight and clearly stated each one. Let's just pass each component one bill at a time with tranparency instead of incorporating them in that 2000 page legislative proposal that no one apparently has read. This way the American electorate would know how their legislator voted on *each* item.

This was actually the second part of a two-part report by John Oliver. Must watch TV: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-february-11-2010/the-apparent-trap

OMG, I can't get past Jon's stuff for laughing so hard!...and I've been sick all week so it's making me cough, too (though good for getting the gunk out of my lungs). Must go back later.

Or this one: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/264134/february-11-2010/the-word---political-suicide

Thanks for those, Karen, though the Colbert site isn't loading for me at the moment. But LOL!!! at the other one. And you know, that bit with Dog the Bounty Hunter describing his experience at the hospital sounds almost verbatim to what my friend's sister told me a couple of weeks ago about her very recent experience in Canada when she fell and broke her arm (w/ cast from mid-humerus to fingers). She said they didn't once ask her about payment or insurance. Just fixed her up in a reasonable amount of time and sent her on her way. The hospital got their address from her husband and sent a bill later, which apparently wasn't enough to break the bank.

This is taking bad sportsmanship to new levels: http://blog.zap2it.com/thedishrag/2010/02/olympian-evgeni-plushenko-awards-himself-platinum-medal.html All those years of bloc voting and rigged results in skating and he now has some nerve.

A friend of mine is a fan of his and we were going back and forth about it where I told her he was clearly a sore loser. Even on the medal stand. He stood there with such indignation. She kept insisting that he did a quad and he other guy made a mistake. I did mention the virtually constant bobbling he did on his landings, but she wasn't having it. Thanks for that article. I wanted to explain how the 2 programs were different and judged accordingly, but it was a bit much to go into on FB. I'll send this blog post to her.

I am completely amazed how an earthquake that far south and so far away could affect not just Hawaii (which may not be quite as surprising), but the coastline of the continental US and Canada, which is so NE of Chile. And maybe Japan, so far away! Nature is wonderous, isn't it? Granted it just may be high surf at the US/Canada, but still. I have a friend in San Diego. I'll have to see if he'll be able to see the effects. I used to know people in HI, but no idea if they're still there. If I still lived in WA state, I'd be heading out to the coast. This will make a great word problem in physics classes. West coast of U.S., Canada in tsunami advisory AP � Motorists line up near a gasoline station early Saturday, Feb. 27, 2010, in Ewa Beach, Hawaii. Hawaii � EWA BEACH, Hawaii � A tsunami advisory has been extended to include the states of Oregon and Washington and parts of Alaska, as well as coastal British Colombia. The Pacific Tsunami center had earlier included the coast of Californa and some Alaskan islands in its advisory after a tsunami was generated by a powerful earthquake off Chile. An advisory is the lowest level alert. The West Coast Alaska Tsunami Warning Center says that a tsunami advisory means there is a possibility of strong localized currents but no significant inundation is expected. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. EWA BEACH, Hawaii (AP) � A tsunami threatened the Pacific Rim on Saturday, with an 8.8-magnitude earthquake off Chile sending potentially deadly waves across the ocean at the speed of a jetliner. Hawaii woke residents with sirens, alerting them to the waves. A tsunami warning � the highest alert level � was issued earlier for the island chain. Boats and people near the coast were being evacuated. Hilo International Airport, located along the coast, was closed. Residents lined up at supermarkets to stock up on water, canned food and batteries. Cars lined up 15 long at several gas stations. The first waves were expected at 11:19 a.m. Saturday (4:19 p.m. EST; 2119 GMT). Most Pacific Rim nations, awaiting further data, did not order evacuations but advised people in low-lying areas to be on the lookout. In Tonga, however, police and defense forces have begun a mass evacuation from low-lying coastal areas as they warned residents that tsunami waves about three feet (one meter) high could wash ashore within three hours. "I can hear the church bells ringing to alert the people," National Disaster Office deputy director Mali'u Takai told The Associated Press. "We will move up to 50,000 people to the interior and away from the coasts." Waves 6 feet (1.8 meter) above normal hit near Concepcion, Chile shortly after the quake. Unlike other tsunamis in recent years, emergency officials along the Pacific have hours to prepare and possibly evacuate residents. "We've got a lot of things going for us," said Charles McCreery, the director of the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, which issues warnings to almost every country around the Pacific Rim and to most of the Pacific island states. "We have a reasonable lead time. "We should be able to alert everyone in harm's way to move out of the evacuation zones," he said. A warning was also in effect for Guam, American Samoa, Samoa and dozens of other Pacific islands. American Samoa Lt. Gov. Aitofele Sunia activated emergency services and called on residents of shoreline villages to move to higher ground. Police in Samoa issued a nationwide alert to begin coastal evacuations. The tsunami is expected to reach the islands Saturday morning. Meanwhile, disaster management officials in Fiji said they have been warned to expect waves of as high as 7.5 feet (2.3 meters) to hit the northern and eastern islands of the archipelago and the nearby Tonga islands. A lower-grade tsunami advisory was in effect for the coast of California and an Alaskan coastal area from Kodiak to Attu islands. Tsunami Center officials said they did not expect the advisory would be upgraded to a warning. Waves were likely to hit Asian, Australian and New Zealand shores within 24 hours of Saturday's quake. A tsunami wave can travel at up to 600 mph, said Jenifer Rhoades, tsunami program manager at the National Weather Service in Washington, DC. After the sirens are sounded in Hawaii, people in coastal areas, such as tourist-filled Waikiki, would then be instructed on a possible evacuation. The sirens will also be sounded again three hours prior to the estimated arrival time. McCreery said he didn't know how big the waves will be, but expected them to be the largest to hit Hawaii since 1964. "If you're in an evacuation zone, police or civil defense volunteers would instruct you to evacuate, or instructions will come out over the radio and TV," said Shelly Ichishita, spokeswoman for the state's civil defense. If coastal areas are evacuated, visitors in Waikiki would be moved to higher floors in their hotels, rather than moved out of the tourist district, which could cause gridlock. Some Pacific nations in the warning area were heavily damaged by a tsunami last year. On Sept. 29, a tsunami spawned by a magnitude-8.3 earthquake killed 34 people in American Samoa, 183 in Samoa and nine in Tonga. Scientists later said that wave was 46 feet (14 meters) high. Past South American earthquakes have had deadly effects across the Pacific. A tsunami after a magnitude-9.5 quake that struck Chile in 1960, the largest earthquake ever recorded, killed about 140 people in Japan, 61 in Hawaii and 32 in the Philippines. That tsunami was about 3.3 to 13 feet (one to four meters) in height, Japan's Meteorological Agency said. Japanese public broadcaster NHK quoted earthquake experts as saying the tsunami would likely be tens of centimeters (inches) high and reach Japan in about 22 hours. A tsunami of 28 centimeters (11 inches) was recorded after a magnitude-8.4 earthquake near Chile in 2001. The Meteorological Agency said it was still investigating the likelihood of a tsunami in Japan and did not issue a formal coastal warning. Australia, meanwhile, was put on a tsunami watch. The Joint Australian Tsunami Warning Center issued a tsunami warning Saturday night for a "potential tsunami threat" to New South Wales state, Queensland state, Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Island. Any potential wave would not hit Australia until Sunday morning local time, it said. The Philippine Institute of Vulcanology and Seismology issued a low-level alert saying people should await further notice of a possible tsunami. It did not recommend evacuations. Seismologist Fumihiko Imamura, of Japan's Tohoku University, told NHK that residents near ocean shores should not underestimate the power of a tsunami even though they may be generated by quakes on the other side of the ocean. "There is the possibility that it could reach Japan without losing its strength," he said. ___ Associated Press writers Mark Niesse in Honolulu, Kristen Gelineau in Sydney, Chris Havlik in Phoenix, Ray Lilley in Auckland, New Zealand, and Eric Talmadge in Tokyo contributed to this report. http://tinyurl.com/yz845ho

I'd love someone to take a picture of a tsunami as it approaches land. I mean does it just look like a surfer's wave, but maybe longer?

(Dorine) If I still lived in WA state, I'd be heading out to the coast. I understand the curiosity. Problem is, how close to the coast would be 'close enough'? (evacuation and all that goes with it)

I know that coastline well and where to get above the fray. One of the campgrounds I stayed at there is on a 50 ft bluff, which should be plenty high (the waves in HI, a more direct route, are supposed to reach only 8 ft I read - or maybe that's what hit French Polynesia). Also, Ruby Beach has a long curvy walkway to the beach from the parking lot that runs on a decline and has views of the beach through the trees on the way without having to get right down to the beach. And Cape Flattery (most northwestern point of the continental US) is high above the sea, too. I wouldn't want to be right on the beach there anyway this time of year as they have big storms that blow giant dead trees up on shore (though it's highly picturesque after the storm). Matter of fact they have signs at various public beaches saying "Beach Logs Kill" with a picture of a girl running from a big log, LOL. I have pics of all of that stored away, not scanned, otherwise I'd post.

Here's an idea of Ruby Beach with the logs and seeing through the trees on the way down. http://www.visitusa.com/washington/images/olympic-nationalpark/ruby-beach.jpg http://www.portangelesbb.com/images/SecondBeach.jpg This is the view I spoke of. http://www.psbl.com/terry/images/ruby_beach.jpg http://ibelievedandspoke.com/images/IMG_0628%20Ruby%20Beach%20at%20Olympic.jpg Not the greatest pics of Kalaloch, but you get the idea. http://farm1.static.flickr.com/203/519126631_ee69944f4b.jpg?v=0 http://www.lowfares.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Olympic-National-Park.jpg Cape Flattery. http://www.virginmedia.com/images/cape-flattery-washington-state_paul-gayler.jpg This has all my favorite spots to visit there, including Cape Flattery. http://www.blankinship-web.com/oly-penn/index.htm Thus ends the WA travelogue for today.

Ooh! Sorry, one more. One of the Beach Logs Kill! signs. They remind me of a B-movie horror film poster. LOL. http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1045/1143414938_42aea9e288.jpg

Some great pics. The place looks serene - almost as though nothing can challenge its existance.

I just had an email from a friend in Waipahu,Oahu ; she lives on a hill and said she expected some friends who live on the beachfront to evacuate to her place. She's supposed to call me this afternoon. Worrying situation.

Thank goodness they have somewhere friendly to go. Wonder what it's like to evacuate from those areas. Wonder if it gets bogged down in traffic like South Florida with hurricane warnings. Turns the 2 major highways out of that area (and through much of the state) into parking lots. Hope they get there ok.

POTUS has warned all Americans to heed the tsunami warning of local officials. I assume the west coast. But American Samoa and Guam aint got no hills. On Yahoo. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_us_chile_earthquake/print

Was watching CNN and MSNBC at the gym. They were both showing feeds from the HI tv stations with cameras trained at various points. Interesting to see all the people parked on both sides of the road on a mountainside to wait it out. Some were at some lookout point that people usually watch surfers from. It was at Diamond Head now that I think of it. It was like a giant tailgate party minus the grills. ;-) I just walked in. Maybe I'll go turn on the tv to see what's up now since I looked 45 mins ago. The waters were just noticeably receding then. Funny though that many reports of the greater changes were taking place in Hilo, yet none of the cameras were there unfortunately.

Hawaii dodged the bullet From Yahoo: Tsunami expert: `We dodged a bullet' 4 mins ago HILO, Hawaii � A official at the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center says Hawaii "dodged a bullet" after a major earthquake sent powerful waves roiling around the Pacific. It still will be about an hour before officials will be willing to give an all-clear in Hawaii, but there were no immediate reports of major damage around the Pacific rim. just tidal surges that reached up to about seven feet in some island chains. Gerard Fryer, a geophysist for the tsunami center, defended the decision to urge evacuations of coastal areas, saying "better safe than sorry." THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. HONOLULU (AP) � A tsunami triggered by an earthquake in Chile swept ashore in Hawaii on Saturday, but the initial waves did not appear to cause significant damage. The first waves looked more like an extreme fluctuation in the tide than the giant tsunami that Hawaii and the rest of the Pacific Ocean were bracing for after the magnitude-8.8 quake devastated Chile. The wave began affecting Hilo Bay on the Big Island just before noon local time. Water began pulling away from shore, exposing reefs and sending dark streaks of muddy, sandy water offshore. Water later washed over Coconut Island, a small park off the coast of Hilo. The tsunami was causing a series of surges that were about 20 minutes apart, and the waves arrived later and smaller than originally predicted. The highest wave at Hilo measured 5.5 feet high, while Maui saw some as high as 6 feet. No major damage was immediately reported, but scientists cautioned the waves would continue into the afternoon. The tsunami raced across the Pacific Ocean in terrifying force after the quake hit Chile hours earlier, giving Hawaii officials had ample time to get people out of the potential disaster area. Sirens blared in Hawaii to alert residents to the potential waves. As the waves expected arrival drew near, roads into tourist-heavy Waikiki were closed off. Police patrolled main roads, telling tourists to get off the streets. Authorities even flew overhead in Cessna blaring warnings to people to get out of the potential danger zone, and residents in Honolulu lined up at supermarkets to stock up on food and batteries. Cars lined up 15 long at several gas stations. The tsunami fear was not unique to Hawaii. The waves hit California, but barely registered a notice amid stormy weather. No injuries or property damage are reported. Authorities reported unusual tidal surges to the south of Santa Monica, in San Diego. A tsunami warning � the highest alert level � was in effect for Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Samoa and dozens of other Pacific islands. An advisory � the lowest level � includes California, Oregon, Washington state, parts of Alaska, and coastal British Colombia. The Navy was moving more than a half dozen vessels Saturday to try to avoid damage from the tsunami. A frigate, three destroyers and two smaller vessels were being sent out of Pearl Harbor and a cruiser out of Naval Base San Diego, the Navy said. In Tonga, where nine people died in a Sept. 29 tsunami, police and defense forces began evacuating tens of thousands of people from low-lying coastal areas as they warned residents that waves about three feet (one meter) high could wash ashore. "I can hear the church bells ringing to alert the people," National Disaster Office deputy director Mali'u Takai said.

Seems like it ended up a non-event in HI as I watch now on CNN/MSNBC. Good thing.

LOL! Didn't see your post before I did mine.

And here I thought I was the only one who scrolled through long posts;-)

Ha, I didn't even scroll. I just started typing when the box came up. I thought it was a post I already read until I saw it wasn't after mine posted. I *never* scroll through yours. :-D

You know what's amazing so far, that for as huge as that earthquake was in Chile, relatively few lives have been lost compared to big earthquakes of recent years in China and Haiti. Only around 250 so far in Chile.

Everybody and their brother that I follow at Twitter tweeted or retweeted about this today. I really enjoyed seeing all the old ones come back again (well, except for Jim Carrey who I think is new to this group). Unfortunately, they all show how horrible of an Obama impression Fred Arminsen does (and Maya Rudolph as Michelle). Advocacy group gathers SNL all-stars to turn financial regulation push into laughs http://tinyurl.com/y858umj And the direct link to the video. There's a short behind the scenes video at this link also. http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f5a57185bd/funny-or-die-s-presidential-reunion

Par for the course for them. Not the first time. Leaked documents reveal GOP plan to use scare tactics to raise money 1 hr 3 mins ago National GOP leaders are doing damage control today after a Politico scoop lifted the curtain on the party's plan to tap voters' "fear" in the coming campaign season. The PR problem started when an absent-minded attendee at the Republican National Committee (RNC) confab on February 18 in Boca Grande, Florida, left a 72-page document from its 2010 strategizing session in a hotel room. Today, Politico reporter Ben Smith's expose is making headlines. The memo tracks the fundraising presentation that RNC Finance Director Rob Bickhart delivered to the RNC's $2,500-a-head annual retreat. The best path to victory in 2010, the document advises, is for Republican candidates to depict themselves as the best hope for resisting the "trending toward socialism" taking shape in a Democrat-dominated Washington. And the document doesn't shy from making its points graphically. MSNBC showed the images this morning on "Morning Joe": The presentation portrays the Obama administration as "The Evil Empire," including the now-infamous image of President Obama made over in the makeup Heath Ledger used in his performance as the Joker in the 2008 Batman movie "The Dark Knight." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears as Cruella De Vil from "101 Dalmatians," and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is the witless cartoon dog Scooby-Doo. The memo candidly confirms that the aim of such caricature is to amp up "fear" among the GOP's conservative base. The memo also makes fun of major RNC donors, categorizing some as "ego-driven" and easily pacified with "tchochkes" (a Slavic word for toys). The embrace of harsh rhetoric and the swipes at the large donor set seem to signal the GOP establishment's growing comfort with employing tactics associated with the activist Tea Party movement�and with plying Tea Party sympathizers for cash. Of course, it isn't unusual for parties out of power to court controversy and play with fire to rile up donors and grass-roots activists. The RNC has caught heat for fundraising tactics in the past, most recently when it was caught sending out fake census forms to raise money. And Democrats have shown a demagogic streak in the past, depicting George W. Bush and Dick Cheney as Bond-like supervillains and playing up alleged GOP plans to kill Social Security to rally voters behind a popular entitlement program. When asked by Yahoo! News if the leaked presentation reflects a coordinated effort to appeal more to the Tea Party movement, RNC spokesman Doug Heye replied that the group's chairman, Michael Steele, "was recently invited by Tea Party activists to a meeting, which he was happy to do. Following the meeting, it was clear those in the meeting shared a common goal: stopping the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda." As for plans to further that alliance with the inflammatory material in the memo, Heye reiterated what he'd told Politico earlier: "The language and the imagery will not be used in any capacity in the future." There's no question that the Obama-as-Joker image�long a familiar icon at Tea Party rallies�is a toxic association for the GOP establishment. Oddly enough, though, that image's origins can be traced to the activist left. As revealed by the Los Angeles Times last year, the image was created by a supporter of Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a University of Illinois student named Firas Alkhateeb, who told the Times that he uploaded the photo onto his Flickr page, and a conservative activist promptly snatched it up. Such are the odd convergences of movement politics. However, the RNC may have more trouble distancing itself from the equation of Democratic policy with socialism, however, since Michael Steele is credited with originating that meme in the health care debate. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100304/ts_ynews/ynews_ts1217;_ylt=ApeRTBqgwOS8sdpY0OoKJuys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFpcHM2bzFvBHBvcwMzNwRzZWMDYWNjb3JkaW9uX21vc3RfcG9wdWxhcgRzbGsDbGVha2VkZG9jdW1l

Oh c'mon Dorine...is this the best you can come up with ? I've been exceedingly polite not to bring up any of the current Dem faux pas. Really....*rolling eyes*

Hey, bring 'em on. I'm thick skinned. I don't staunchly defend candidates in my party when it's clear they have done something illegal/immoral/unethical, etc. (If you saw what I post to my FB page, you'd know that ;-)). I'm thrilled that Rangel has finally relented his silly idea of keeping his post. And it's been clear for quite some time that that Gov of mine has been clearly over his head to say the least and I can't believe he and people in his admin were so stupid to do anything even close to illegal coming on the heels of that Spitzer debacle and the State House Speaker's issues as well. And thank God the Federal judge didn't hold up getting rid of that state Rep (mine! from Queens!) when his colleagues pushed him out after he was convicted of beating up his girlfriend. And I probably voted for him! Ugh. You won't catch me defending elected officials if they've clearly done something wrong. I'm not a 25-percenter. ;-)

Oooh, just saw this right after I posted above. Another person has quit the Paterson administration. If the Spokesman quit, it's literally a matter of time (days?) before Paterson's toast. http://www.aolnews.com/politics/article/ny-governor-david-patersons-top-spokesman-quits-amid-scandal/19383832?icid=main|main|dl1|link4|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Farticle%2Fny-governor-david-patersons-top-spokesman-quits-amid-scandal%2F19383832

LOL. Sorry, I don't have the time to be your daily sparring partner. Besides, that's not my style. You know that. XXXXXXXXXXX;-)

So what is going on with the Health care vote? They keep moving the date. Keeping fingers crossed for a speedy pass. Kara DioGuardi's father is running for office in NY. She's been on the talk shows announcing it.

Moon, I was just on a conference call with Hewitt re: health care. They could vote as early as Sunday.

Thanks, Mari. Kuchinich (sp?) announced he was supporting HC reform! He gave a very articulate explanation too. It is a must for the consevative Republicans to hear. Click and scroll down: http://www.aolnews.com/healthcare/article/house-democrats-on-track-for-vote-on-940-billion-health-care-bill/19404776

Two must reads. How health care will reduce deficit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/18/AR2010031801153.html?hpid=topnews And, student loans too: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/18/AR2010031802289.html?hpid=topnews

So now it looks like the reform will pass in the House, but not the Senate and it might be up to the Supreme Court. Heaven Forbid!!! Just found out that Scalia will be the speaker at my son's high school graduation in June. And I sat next to Sonia Sotomayor at a pizzeria in DC a couple of weeks ago. My future lawyer son snuck a pic on his phone and immediately texted it to hia law school friends, lol.

Ok, my (Republican) friend just posted this link a little while ago on her FB page with this comment.... http://www.sullivan-county.com/wcva/lilley_obamacare.htm "Mr. Obama, his family, our senators, their families and our congressmen and their families are exempt from the very Health Care Plan they are fighting desperately to shove down our throats. If it is so good for the American people, why are they choosing to exempt themselves?" "Some very troubling provisions in this bill.......such as rationing cancer treatment based on age, and on, and on." What's wrong with what she posted in relation to the vote tomorrow?? Anyone? Bueller?

I should clarify to say what's wrong with the info at the link she posted in relation to tomorrow's vote?

Wy post this nonsense? It's not true, I can tell you that just by glancing down the list. It even talks about the public option--which has been out of the bill for eons. Desperate scare tactics.

I know, right? And she does the same job I do (matter of fact was my boss for a very short time several years ago). Besides that, that is addressing the bill HR 3200 from last year, not the ones being voted on today. There are some elements I believe from 3200 into the one for today, but still. I had told her that this guy seemed like he was a bit too close to the fringe and I couldn't take 99% of it seriously, but she didn't agree with that of course. The multiple references to ACORN is what tipped me off that this guy wasn't to be taken seriously. I wrote that and a couple of other things to her, but then decided to erase it as it gets difficult to get into more lengthy discussions about various points on FB vs. a forum like this.

Just for reference, here's the text to the bill (HR 4872) http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h4872/text And a summary of each section: http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/1738-Summary-of-the-HCR-Reconiliation-Bill-

First and foremost every American should know that Mr. Obama, his family, our senators, their families and our congressmen and their families are exempt from the very Health Care Plan they are fighting desperately to shove down our throats. Seems this misrepresentation can be traced to someone at the WSJ: http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/congress-exempt-from-health-bill/

Thanks! I'll post that to her. I was again rereading that link she sent originally and it just riles me up! The ignorance of it! Or misrepresentation of the items at the very least. And she just said this: "And, even the Chief Actuary at HHS cannot provide a cost analysis before the vote. The CBO did predict savings, but that was before the change made regarding Medicare. The vote will be today anyway... and we are supposed to think one of the main objective's is to cut the deficit? They believe the American people are stupid, which admittedly, is not so far-fetched. " While I don't totally disagree about the stupid Americans part, posting that original link didn't do her any favors in that argument.

And, even the Chief Actuary at HHS cannot provide a cost analysis before the vote. Did she have the same concerns with all the legislation proposed by the Bush administration? Running up deficits didn't bother jer a couple of years ago, why now? we are supposed to think one of the main objective's is to cut the deficit? No, we are supposed to think it will provide health care reform, not pave roads or subsidize farmers or pardon Wall Street crooks.

My DH writes for one of Italy's leading daily paper. He wrote an article about healthcare in today's paper and he's been getting emails non-stop. In Italy people don't understand why Americans would be against this very needed reform. But as he has explained it has also to do ignorance. And the "socialist" threat. The Republicans are also saying that if it passes, those who vote in favor will be out of office come election time. Here we go again with the scare tactics. Obama has stated that he would like everyone to have the same heath coverage as they do in Congress. I'm sure that it is a lot better than the one I pay for now. So what's wrong with that? Why don't Republicans want us to have the their same coverage? I'm sick of the political game, and I can opnly hope that the reform passes, and the people vote those selfish AH out of office.

(Moon) The Republicans are also saying that if it passes, those who vote in favor will be out of office come election time. Here we go again with the scare tactics. Funny you say that, she said the same thing... "Another thing I like- many, not all, of the bozo's who do vote for the bill, may be sealing their fate to lose re-election come November." Needless to say, she gave up finally. Funnily, I asked for the specifics regarding that cancer provision she was upset about, said she found it but had to go take a shower (conveniently) and never came back to it, all the while telling me I hadn't given her specifics about what I liked in the bill (which I did list verbatim from the bill summary I linked to) other than saying some things good were better than nothing. Too bad I can't link to it for you to read for yourselves. Would be much easier to see how the conversation went.

HuffPo reports Nancy Pelosi reportedly making her way to Capital Hill carrying the same gavel used in 1965 to pass Medicare.

Good luck charm. May it work.

How they voted. See who you must vote out of office for voting no: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/votes/house/healthcare/

Uh oh...lots to read. Just popping in to say :"Hello" Hope you all bought Big Pharma and Hospital stocks. They led the Dow yesterday. Thanks to Mr Obama's deal with Big Pharma ...there are no caps on prices, and provisions that favored generic drug makers also got cut out. All good news for Pfizer , Merck ,Eli Lilly . (Who also give fat dividends). The reform plan will cost dug companies $85 B over 10 yrs, but offset by money from all those new customers. Hospitals will provide more preventice and less emergency care..Health Magangement Ass., Tenet and Community Health Services will get more patients who have insurance. Just like Christmas...and just think...it won't cost anyone a dime;-D\ Whooooopeeeeee! Don't know if people can buy insurance across state lines in this bill..you know, competition.

(Evelyn)Hope you all bought Big Pharma and Hospital stocks. They led the Dow yesterday. LOL, we did! Good thing I didn't listen to Cramer on CNBC who was shouting the sky is falling last week and to sell, sell, sell. Jeez, 32 million new customers . . . it ain't rocket science.;-) Don't know if people can buy insurance across state lines in this bill..you know, competition. Was just on a conference call with some Congressional liasons and this was brought up. The answer is yes, the law requires that at least two multi-state qualified health plans will be offered.

You mean now you can buy AARP? Have been thinking all day of other companies that will gain... GE makes hospital equipment....CT Scans etc Stryker and Medtronic make implants, stents, knee and hip replacements. Might as well cash in on this bill. Might help for the rise in dividend and capital gains tax you'll have to pay. Now if they only would have included litigation reform. That might have helped keep health costs down. But no such luck. Lawyers have a lock on such.

"What does health insurance reform actually mean for me?" To help, we've put together some of the key benefits from health insurance reform. Let's start with how health insurance reform will expand and strengthen coverage: This year, children with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied health insurance coverage. Once the new health insurance exchanges begin in the coming years, pre-existing condition discrimination will become a thing of the past for everyone. This year, health care plans will allow young people to remain on their parents' insurance policy up until their 26th birthday. This year, insurance companies will be banned from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, and they will be banned from implementing lifetime caps on coverage. This year, restrictive annual limits on coverage will be banned for certain plans. Under health insurance reform, Americans will be ensured access to the care they need. This year, adults who are uninsured because of pre-existing conditions will have access to affordable insurance through a temporary subsidized high-risk pool. In the next fiscal year, the bill increases funding for community health centers, so they can treat nearly double the number of patients over the next five years. This year, we'll also establish an independent commission to advise on how best to build the health care workforce and increase the number of nurses, doctors and other professionals to meet our country's needs. Going forward, we will provide $1.5 billion in funding to support the next generation of doctors, nurses and other primary care practitioners -- on top of a $500 million investment from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Health insurance reform will also curb some of the worst insurance industry practices and strengthen consumer protections: This year, this bill creates a new, independent appeals process that ensures consumers in new private plans have access to an effective process to appeal decisions made by their insurer. This year, discrimination based on salary will be outlawed. New group health plans will be prohibited from establishing any eligibility rules for health care coverage that discriminate in favor of higher-wage employees. Beginning this fiscal year, this bill provides funding to states to help establish offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order to help individuals in the process of filing complaints or appeals against insurance companies. Starting January 1, 2011, insurers in the individual and small group market will be required to spend 80 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Insurers in the large group market will be required to spend 85 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Any insurers who don't meet those thresholds will be required to provide rebates to their policyholders. Starting in 2011, this bill helps states require insurance companies to submit justification for requested premium increases. Any company with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to participate in the new health insurance exchanges. Reform immediately begins to lower health care costs for American families and small businesses: This year, small businesses that choose to offer coverage will begin to receive tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help make employee coverage more affordable. This year, new private plans will be required to provide free preventive care: no co-payments and no deductibles for preventive services. And beginning January 1, 2011, Medicare will do the same. This year, this bill will provide help for early retirees by creating a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of expensive premiums for employers and retirees age 55-64. This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a 50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole.' Nancy-Ann DeParle Director, White House Office of Health Reform

This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a 50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole Thank you, Mr Obama. Buy Big Pharma! What a windfall! You can't lose:-)))))))

Why would that b any different for phrma than now other than govt paying for donut hole drugs partially rather than people out of pocket? And btw, we have ur friend Mr Bush to thank for the initial big gimme to phrma....no govt discounts. And his rx drug discount cards plan served to have drug companies jack up prices by cost of discount.

I thought this was kind of cool...Obama's healthcare speech with handwritten corrections. http://www.flickr.com/photos/61139623@N00/4456618289/sizes/o/

discount cards plan served to have drug companies jack up prices by cost of discount Your opinion? Fact? Blogs?;-) Besides. All I said was: "Buy Pharma"....I want you to make $$$$ on this bill, Dorine;-D Hold the health insurance companies though. Watch this space.....

For me, it's a moral issue. It's the right thing to do. I was so proud of the Catholic nuns (representing 60 orders and 60,000 nuns nationwiwide) who broke with the bishops over the weekend in backing the bill, saying, and I quote, "This the REAL pro-life stance, and we as Catholics are all for it." That got a lot of press, and provided some political cover for those who needed it. And, as Evelyn pointed out, I think this will be good for many sectors of the economy. And if I have to pay more in taxes on investment income, so be it--at least I *have* investment income, at least I *have* capital gains, both of which mean that the economy is moving forward and I'm still ahead financially even with the taxes. What a happy problem that is. We are our brothers keepers.

Oh I agree with you....as you well know. I understand this new bill will allow illegals to *buy* health insurance. A must. Keep them out of the ER which means everyone's premiums get raised. In fact, my socialist son tells me that the four components of the bill originally were in the Republican plan in answer to Hillarycare. There are some good components...sadly nothing to contain healthcare costs. It's just the MO in which it was passed that galls me. Sleazy payolas. Backroom deals. Moving figues around. This is transparency? This is change? My f riends, this is "business as usual". The American people aren't stupid. And that is not the Republican spin. There are Dems and Independents that are having "buyer's remorse" I was just reading that it was John McCain that wanted to import drugs. But nooooooo. Hey, if you give those Congressmen enough goodies, they'd sell the Capitol to the Iranians. Anyone can pass a bill that way; let alone sign it.

The old adage holds true: "Laws are like sausages: if you like them, don't watch them being made." To believe anything else is to be naive. The legislative process ain't pretty, but yes, this is how things get done. The simple fact is that every President has had to do some "horse trading" to get legislation passed. I look at "what's the greater good?" And in this law's instance, the answer to me is clear. Reportedly, many of the the worst gimmies will be eliminated via the Reconciliation bill that they hope to sign by end of week.

It's a start, at least. Socialised medicine is a *good* thing - I can tell you from experience. Congratulations to the US on joining the 20th century (it's only 10 years into the 21st now). Let's hope things continue to progress - one big step would be in kicking some of those damned so-called "health insurance" companies to the kerb. Because a "for profit" company isn't going to be all that interested in doing its best to ensure people receive the best possible medical care, let's face it. Seriously though - congratulations!

(Me) discount cards plan served to have drug companies jack up prices by cost of discount (Evelyn) Your opinion? Fact? Blogs?;-) I was a drug rep for a drug company when it was passed/enacted. I tended to follow what was going on in relation to it.

Yes, it is a start. Not perfect by a long shot, but a start. It gives us a framework and something to build on. I salute the Prez for a)taking it on, and b)getting it done. At considerable political risk.

Anything other than a "smoking gun" (the memo from mamagement to jack up prices) surely won't accepted as fact. ;-)

Blue Cross ain't going to go away. I am confident there will always be deals;like there was this time. And then of course, it doesn't take effect immediately ....and who knows there might be a change in government by then. Even in "socialized medicine" countries, one can always subscribe to private plans that will give a person choice. And not be dependent on the government healthcare.

In Australia, Evelyn, you can get private insurance coverage -- but it's based on the assumption that you are entitled to medicare. There's no such thing as "not being dependent on government healthcare". To the best of my knowledge, if you don't have medicare, you can't get private healthcare here.

I've had Blue Cross/ Blue Shield and any little excuse they could come up with not to pay they did, and my premiums went up every year, that was ridiculous and wrong. Other insurance companies did the same. This reform is a step in the right direction. Plus, it does not cover abortions. If you want to drive a car you must have car insurance, if you have a mortgage, you must have house insurance. Americans accept that, so what's the problem with paying health insurance?

so what's the problem with paying health insurance? I concur. But the opposition thinking is that one has a choice in the first two instances (one doesn't have to drive a car or own a home etc)but the gov't isn't giving people a choice on health insurance. 16 K IRS agents will make sure you do. However, listening to NPR this aft one caller said that in Mass. the healthy/young would rather pay the fine and take insurance once they get sick.

The govt isnt making sure u get health insurance. Pay the fine and don't get it. Simple as that. Just like I'm choosing not to for the moment (bcause of cost of it). I just have no fine at the moment, which frankly would be cheaper per yr.

And one has to have a car if there is no available mass transit.

It's not a fine, Evelyn, it's a tax. A health tax. And it's paid by every single citizen in every single developed country except the US, practically, and you know what? Our health costs, per capita, are lower than yours. And our infant mortality rate is lower and our life expectancy is higher. So a change is in order, whether it's the "perfect system" or not - it's highly likely to be better than the present system.

(Moon) Americans accept that, so what's the problem with paying health insurance? Well, car insurance paid is generally considerably less a percentage of income than health insurance when paid out of pocket and not through work coverage. I went to a slightly longer than 90 min meeting last night to explain details in the new law. It was an overload of information and we barely scratched the surface IMO. Hopefully I'll get to information we discussed by the end of the weekend. I didn't even take notes on it all, so honestly I'll miss a lot I'm sure. They say they plan to have a series of informational meetings that I hope I can get to.

Actually, Sarah, with the new mandate, we do call it a fine. At least that's how we referred to it last night and no one corrected us.

Ah yes - my bad. I didn't realize what she was referring to - seems that people who opt out of paying for insurance are fined. Here in Oz you get insurance (medicare) regardless, and if you earn more than a certain amount you either get private health care (which is more of a "gap coverage"), or pay an extra amount in taxes. But your "base" health care is covered, no matter what. It's an entitlement. I prefer the approach that every citizen is entitled to basic health care. And I don't mind the fact that some of what I pay goes to subsidize those who can't afford to pay.

Hey, I'm the only Republican here (a centrist one at that..with a foot in each camp.Those who know me will attest to that ) and I really don't have as much time as you have online....so I can't answer everybody. Sorry. Sarah, I forget where you are currently living & ...but here we have to call it a fine,something about the Constitution can't force people by such a tax. (Sarah, I think) And I don't mind the fact that some of what I pay goes to subsidize those who can't afford to pay. Actually, in the US that occurs as well. Higher insurance premiums , and US fed funds do go to pay for ER visits from those who don't have insurance. Which, BTW , aren't the indigent. They have Medicaid. Often, they are illegals, or the pariahs who choose not to pay for insurance. I won't even go into the car insurance vs. health. Ludicrous. Let's see now....who else.

car insurance vs. health. Ludicrous. It's accepted, period. Basic health care for everyone in the long term will cost the Gov less for obvious reasons. What we need now is for the AMA to open up to more doctors. Back to the old supply and demand. More doctors would make their fees go down. Of course, that opens up to debate the extreme high cost of Medical School with their closed numbers. That should all go hand in hand with the reform.

We in Canada have had the "pleasure" of hosting Ann Coulter recently and I just have to ask - Do people really take her seriously? Is she a thought leader in the U.S.?

Just had a longer answer that I accidentally erased on the phone. Short answer, more fringe Republicans I wager, but probably some less than that far right. Thought that appearance was cancelled at last minute for security reasons.

Ann Coulter has a following in the US on the right just as some far -Left Wing members favor some of their more liberal members. Every country has extremes....including Israel which I just left 5 days ago. That's called "democracy", Sandy.

(Moon) What we need now is for the AMA to open up to more doctors. Back to the old supply and demand. More doctors would make their fees go down. Of course, that opens up to debate the extreme high cost of Medical School with their closed numbers. That should all go hand in hand with the reform. Actually, more of the problem is that not enough MD's are choosing primary care instead of other specialties like radiology, GI, cardiology, etc. They choose those to pay off the massive school loans. There is talk of creating incentives to choose primary care instead.

Glad to hear it, Dorine. A talented primary care MD is very hard to come by. Coulter was boycotted in Ottawa, Canada. Student protesters made it all happen.

I don't know if I'm right putting this here...but feel a NEED to share...for the benefit of others. It's RE: these internet romeos that scam lonely hearts. This week, I caused a very dear friends world to fall apart and heart be broken when I exposed her internet love of 2 mths to be one of those romance scammers. This one in particular is of the Nigerian scams that are going around. To try and be brief, she met him on a dating site. His photo was stolen from a Hawaiian models site. Claimed he was living in Australia but was in UK caring for sick mother, in need of surgery. The romance 'blossomed' with cards and long phone calls and hints of marriage, when he got back home. His homecoming was postponed many times...next week, next week.... then the inevitable story - I need to pay my mothers medical bills, but I can't access my Australian funds...if I could only pay the bills, I could come home to you darling...and have that wonderful rosy future we had planned together. Her friends had growing suspicions but didnt want to hurt her or cause a rift. But finally this week, I'd had enuf, found out enough details from her to scour the net and search for him. Took me most of the night but found him on romancescam.com ...with a scamming history going back 5 yrs....and many victims So I guess my motivation for writing this, is, ladies & gents, beware...and to all friends of these people, don't be afraid to be honest to your friends if you suspect they are getting into that sort of situation...I felt terrible at the time...but it very nearly cost my friends thousands of dollars....so it is worth the risk... I hope Im not out of place writing this here?? cheers

Thanks. That's good information. If someone had said something sooner, she'd most likely not have listened and even run faster toward him.

Exactly right Dorine...she did react negatively to one person who suggested it was a scam....so I quietly found out names and details from her, thru conversation, then did my homework on the net before hand...then the proof was undeniable. Underhanded and sneaky...I felt awful doing it...but in hindsight ... it's worked out well, fortunately....and it was thanks to the other victims who have posted their experiences to prevent others from doing the same.

Thanks, for the information, Linda. I have a UK friend whom may consider internet dating. Are there 'safe' sites or is it all a bit of a lottery?

You are to be applauded, Linda, for being a great friend and putting in all the time and effort on her behalf. It's always sad to hear such stories. But lonely women have fallen victim to such schemes for ages. This is just another variation of an old con. :-(

You are a true friend indeed, Linda. I hope she appreciates all your efforts. Someone less caring would have just ignored the whole saga.

It's the worry of confronting your friend and losing your friend in the process...that made it such an uncomfortable thing to do...felt like such betrayal. I think Sue, most dating sites are a bit of a lottery... Even found the guy on Facebook, under a different name - one of many...and warned all his friends - all ladies, of course...and reported him. It's scary that if you don't take precaution with your privacy settings on things like Facebook, these guys can 'watch' you and figure you out...then hook you in...my friend kept talking about her soul mate and love on FB...and he could see she was falling hook line & sinker... On investigation, it seems her had dozens of women 'on-the-go' at one time... Sounds too organised to be just one person IMO. Thanks for your thoughts ladies...

BTW Sue, another friend found her husband on RSVP.com...and they are expecting their first child now...he is a wonderful guy...so it can work for many...but my friend was VERY private and VERY careful & select before she actually went on a date with anyone...good luck to your friend...

Thanks, Linda. I know of a person whom found her second husband quite late in life (after her family grew up) through internet dating. She is now happily married. Her experience was a success, but it's good to be aware of the dangers. I will pass on the information.

Obama is really not thrilling me today. Between the ridiculous energy policy and several other things, he'd better get his act together or I'll be ready for .....who's the next in line Dem expected to run for POTUS??

I'm sure POTUS is worried;-D

Whatever.

Too funny... A doctor in Orlando posted this sign on his door.... http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-mount-dora-doctor-tells-patients-go-aw20100401,0,6040296,full.story Hope you doctor doesn't ask you;-)

I sincerely hope ALL of his patients voted for Obama. :-) What an idiot.

Oh Sarah...Im sure no one took it seriously. But a lot of these medics are pretty incensed. They have been accustomed to ordering tests and procedures that they think would benefit the patient in the correct diagnosis. Now there will be panels that will utlimately approve such.

(Evelyn) They have been accustomed to ordering tests and procedures that they think would benefit the patient in the correct diagnosis. And many of them are instead practicing defensive medicine in case of a lawsuit. Of course there are already "panels" (usually of one) at any private insurance company approving such. And sometimes I think the right hand doesn't know what the left is doing. Saw a denial for treatment letter today, dated yesterday denying the patient's stay and treatment and an authorization letter written a few days before authorizing his treatment through April 4th. The April 1st letter is clearly written as if the other one with auth didn't already exist. I did find that sign pretty amusing to be honest, regardless if he meant it or not. Don't like the sentiment at all, and as the ethics guy in the article said, could be quite ethically sticky a position to publicly proclaim, but I was amused how he said it. So rude almost, so blunt. And if I told you how it works in my line of work to maximize reimbursement (including creative notewriting - which believe me they don't teach you in school), it might make your head spin.

Now there will be panels that will utlimately approve such. There's nothing in the new law that expands this beyond where it already is today. Like Sarah Palin's "death panels." LOL.

Re: "Death Panels: Just a eupehmism ,for they still do have "end of life counseling sessions". The VA has had them for yrs, I am told. Not my cuppa' ;-) Panels that approve or dis have been around for a long time; HMO's/PPo's have them. Actually, Medicare often refuses to pay for a procedure/treatment. That's why one has to sign a form that says in the event your provider doesn't pay the patient has to. But it has never been extended to private practices.

Don't you think the term "death panels" is demagoguery? Sounds like if you have a sniffle, they're going to take you out back and start shooting.;-) That's not what this is, at all. And you're right, it's not new. That's why one has to sign a form that says in the event your provider doesn't pay the patient has to. Evelyn, I've had to routinely sign such forms with private insurance, for pretty much everything other than doctors office visits and presciptions. They want to make sure they'll get paid in case your insurance doesn't cover it, or cover it in full.

(Mari)"death panels" is demagoguery? Sounds like if you have a sniffle, they're going to take you out back and start shooting.;-) LOL. I never took it that lightly. "Death Panels"always applied to Seniors who were ill. Gaaaaagh;-) Yes, patients formerly had to sign forms, but in the new bureauocracy (AKA "New World Order";-) doctors would have to first get approval from "Big Brother";-).

(Evelyn) Re: "Death Panels: Just a eupehmism ,for they still do have "end of life counseling sessions". The VA has had them for yrs, I am told. Not my cuppa' ;-) But oh so needed. So much wasted $$ on treatments for clearly terminal patients (including multiple rehospitalizations). May sound cruel, but I'm telling you, had to deal with many such cases at the hospital my company dealt with who clearly should've gone on hospice instead trying to be saved. Hospice is a dirty word at that place. The doctors and social workers rarely bring it up. They have a palliative care program that while it did grow some, was still criminally underused, mainly because there was not enough support (or maybe even awareness) of it. Though I think the program suffered a setback when the director died of recurring cancer. So much wasted resources in such cases. (Evelyn) Panels that approve or dis have been around for a long time; HMO's/PPo's have them. Exactly my point from above....Of course there are already "panels" (usually of one) at any private insurance company approving such. "Death Panels"always applied to Seniors who were ill. Why just seniors? Under 65'ers die everyday, too. doctors would have to first get approval from "Big Brother";-). Could you please cite where this is spelled out? Don't tell me you don't have time.

but in the new bureauocracy (AKA "New World Order";-) doctors would have to first get approval from "Big Brother";-). Hate to tell you, that's what HMO's/private insurance/managed Medicare-Medicaid have always done. It's called pre-authorization (note the example I gave above with the denial/approval letters). Again, nothing new.

Yes, far better to rely on individuals/panels at insurance companies who are pressured or incentivized to deny doctor-recommended care to preserve the company's bottom line. For-profit health care and patient interest are usually at odds.

LOL at your name!!

LOL at your name!! For-profit health care and patient interest are usually at odds. I just said basically exactly that to a (Candian) coworker last week when talking about the healthcare reform law. She's been working here just 18 mos. Reform also won't work (as I've said numerous times) without individuals changing lifestyles and expectations regarding their health and healthcare as well.

May sound cruel,... It is. Between my family and a clergy member, yes. Government. No. Sorry.

doctors would have to first get approval from "Big Brother";-). Could you please cite where this is spelled out? Don't tell me you don't have time. "I read it someplace" ;-)

(Evelyn) It is. Between my family and a clergy member, yes. Of course. But not your doctor??? The one who's working with you on your health?? I'm not sure you actually know what you're talking about re: end of life counseling and death panels. Or rather what it all really means. I'm seeing a skewed view of this that really makes no sense.

May sound cruel,... It is. Between my family and a clergy member, yes. Actually, no, it's not cruel. If someone's in the hospital for the third time in a month, or been in for weeks and even days, etc, and clearly is terminal, the doctor damn well better be talking to you about options, it's his job....with family of course if there is any....and clergy if so desired. It's no different than them stating all the options for any treatment as well as possible side effects/repercussions. It's cruel to prolong suffering by not stating all options. It's cruel to give someone hope when there's none. And should the patient be over 65 on that socialistic program called Medicare, it drains the coiffers of that unnecessarily, which the last time I checked, added costs to the government which is something you and my other Republican friends complain about.

Per your favorite, WSJ: "The cost of caring for patients who are near death accounts for a big piece of the government's medical spending. [Ed. note - As I alluded to above] But a furor over a provision for government-paid counseling to plan for end-of-life care is steering lawmakers away from the issue. Tucked inside a sweeping House bill to overhaul the health system is a provision that would require Medicare to pay physicians to counsel patients once every five years. During those sessions, doctors could discuss how patients can plan for such end-of-life decisions as setting up a living will, obtaining hospice care or establishing a proxy to make their health decisions when they are unable to do so. [Ed note - What is wrong with this concept?? There isn't any legal adult in the US of sound mind (or anywhere else that has such types of provision), who shouldn't be doing this.] The end-of-life counseling provision in the House bill is expected to cost a few billion dollars over the next decade. But health policy experts say it could lower medical spending by reducing end-of-life medical care that patients don't want. Opponents say the provision shows that architects of the health-care overhaul want to ration seniors' care. Democratic lawmakers say no part of the House bill calls for rationing care. Physician counseling would be voluntary." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125012322203627701.html If you're not sick, there's no need to consult your doctor about it, unless you need an explanation of what extraordinary measures means and the implication of having them administered (such as the legal issues having to do with a respirator turned off). But surely, if you're chronically ill, stable or not, you'd want to discuss some things with your doctor. Or not, whatever, but no one is telling you you have to.

"I read it someplace" ;-) I always give you links. ;-)

Too long , Dorine. Cut it shorter.

*sighs*

Actually, I was thinking about the doctor joining in on my "end of life couseling session"... ...if it's Jeremy Northam, bring him on;-)

LOL! Too right.

Nice

Forgot to say this is the official First Family photo

Beautiful pic. Thanks, Evelyn.

Makes sense Dorine.

They are a most photogenic family, aren't they? And now for something completely different... Doctor shortage? 28 states may expand nurses' role AP By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Ap Medical Writer � 45 mins ago CHICAGO � A nurse may soon be your doctor. With a looming shortage of primary care doctors, 28 states are considering expanding the authority of nurse practitioners. These nurses with advanced degrees want the right to practice without a doctor's watchful eye and to prescribe narcotics. And if they hold a doctorate, they want to be called "Doctor." For years, nurse practitioners have been playing a bigger role in the nation's health care, especially in regions with few doctors. With 32 million more Americans gaining health insurance within a few years, the health care overhaul is putting more money into nurse-managed clinics. Those newly insured patients will be looking for doctors and may find nurses instead. The medical establishment is fighting to protect turf. In some statehouses, doctors have shown up in white coats to testify against nurse practitioner bills. The American Medical Association, which supported the national health care overhaul, says a doctor shortage is no reason to put nurses in charge and endanger patients. Nurse practitioners argue there's no danger. They say they're highly trained and as skilled as doctors at diagnosing illness during office visits. They know when to refer the sickest patients to doctor specialists. Plus, they spend more time with patients and charge less. "We're constantly having to prove ourselves," said Chicago nurse practitioner Amanda Cockrell, 32, who tells patients she's just like a doctor "except for the pay." On top of four years in nursing school, Cockrell spent another three years in a nurse practitioner program, much of it working with patients. Doctors generally spend four years in undergraduate school, four years in medical school and an additional three in primary care residency training. Medicare, which sets the pace for payments by private insurance, pays nurse practitioners 85 percent of what it pays doctors. An office visit for a Medicare patient in Chicago, for example, pays a doctor about $70 and a nurse practitioner about $60. The health care overhaul law gave nurse midwives, a type of advanced practice nurse, a Medicare raise to 100 percent of what obstetrician-gynecologists make � and that may be just the beginning. States regulate nurse practitioners and laws vary on what they are permitted to do: � In Florida and Alabama, for instance, nurse practitioners are barred from prescribing controlled substances. � In Washington, nurse practitioners can recommend medical marijuana to their patients when a new law takes effect in June. � In Montana, nurse practitioners don't need a doctor involved with their practice in any way. � Many other states put doctors in charge of nurse practitioners or require collaborative agreements signed by a doctor. � In some states, nurse practitioners with a doctorate in nursing practice can't use the title "Dr." Most states allow it. The AMA argues the title "Dr." creates confusion. Nurse practitioners say patients aren't confused by veterinarians calling themselves "Dr." Or chiropractors. Or dentists. So why, they ask, would patients be confused by a nurse using the title? The feud over "Dr." is no joke. By 2015, most new nurse practitioners will hold doctorates, or a DNP, in nursing practice, according to a goal set by nursing educators. By then, the doctorate will be the standard for all graduating nurse practitioners, said Polly Bednash, executive director of the American Association of Colleges of Nursing. Many with the title use it with pride. "I don't think patients are ever confused. People are not stupid," said Linda Roemer, a nurse practitioner in Sedona, Ariz., who uses "Dr. Roemer" as part of her e-mail address. What's the evidence on the quality of care given by nurse practitioners? The best U.S. study comparing nurse practitioners and doctors randomly assigned more than 1,300 patients to either a nurse practitioner or a doctor. After six months, overall health, diabetes tests, asthma tests and use of medical services like specialists were essentially the same in the two groups. "The argument that patients' health is put in jeopardy by nurse practitioners? There's no evidence to support that," said Jack Needleman, a health policy expert at the University of California Los Angeles School of Public Health. Other studies have shown that nurse practitioners are better at listening to patients, Needleman said. And they make good decisions about when to refer patients to doctors for more specialized care. The nonpartisan Macy Foundation, a New York-based charity that focuses on the education of health professionals, recently called for nurse practitioners to be among the leaders of primary care teams. The foundation also urged the removal of state and federal barriers preventing nurse practitioners from providing primary care. The American Medical Association is fighting proposals in about 28 states that are considering steps to expand what nurse practitioners can do. "A shortage of one type of professional is not a reason to change the standards of medical care," said AMA president-elect Dr. Cecil Wilson. "We need to train more physicians." In Florida, a bill to allow nurse practitioners to prescribe controlled substances is stalled in committee. One patient, Karen Reid of Balrico, Fla., said she was left in pain over a holiday weekend because her nurse practitioner couldn't prescribe a powerful enough medication and the doctor couldn't be found. Dying hospice patients have been denied morphine in their final hours because a doctor couldn't be reached in the middle of the night, nurses told The Associated Press. Massachusetts, the model for the federal health care overhaul, passed its law in 2006 expanding health insurance to nearly all residents and creating long waits for primary care. In 2008, the state passed a law requiring health plans to recognize and reimburse nurse practitioners as primary care providers. That means insurers now list nurse practitioners along with doctors as primary care choices, said Mary Ann Hart, a nurse and public policy expert at Regis College in Weston, Mass. "That greatly opens up the supply of primary care providers," Hart said. But it hasn't helped much so far. A study last year by the Massachusetts Medical Society found the percentage of primary care practices closed to new patients was higher than ever. And despite the swelling demand, the medical society still believes nurse practitioners should be under doctor supervision. The group supports more training and incentives for primary care doctors and a team approach to medicine that includes nurse practitioners and physician assistants, whose training is comparable. "We do not believe, however, that nurse practitioners have the qualifications to be independent primary care practitioners," said Dr. Mario Motta, president of the state medical society. The new U.S. health care law expands the role of nurses with: � $50 million to nurse-managed health clinics that offer primary care to low-income patients. � $50 million annually from 2012-15 for hospitals to train nurses with advanced degrees to care for Medicare patients. � 10 percent bonuses from Medicare from 2011-16 to primary care providers, including nurse practitioners, who work in areas where doctors are scarce. � A boost in the Medicare reimbursement rate for certified nurse midwives to bring their pay to the same level as a doctor's. The American Nurses Association hopes the 100 percent Medicare parity for nurse midwives will be extended to other nurses with advanced degrees. "We know we need to get to 100 percent for everybody. This is a crack in the door," said Michelle Artz of ANA. "We're hopeful this sets the tone." In Chicago, only a few patients balk at seeing a nurse practitioner instead of a doctor, Cockrell said. She gladly sends those patients to her doctor partners. She believes patients get real advantages by letting her manage their care. Nurse practitioners' uphill battle for respect makes them precise, accurate and careful, she said. She schedules 40 minutes for a physical exam; the doctors in her office book 30 minutes for same appointment. Joseline Nunez, 26, is a patient of Cockrell's and happy with her care. "I feel that we get more time with the nurse practitioner," Nunez said. "The doctor always seems to be rushing off somewhere." ___ On the Net: American Nurses Association, http://www.nursingworld.org/ American Medical Association, http://www.ama-assn.org/

"I feel that we get more time with the nurse practitioner," Nunez said. "The doctor always seems to be rushing off somewhere." That's for sure. For ordinary medical issues, I prefer so see a NP.

Interesting article, Do. My sister is in the Masters program at Penn and will receive her nurse practitioner certification later this year. (She's been a nurse for 25+ years.) I saw a nurse practitioner at my last GYN check-up and was very satisfied with her care and with the amount of time spent with me. There's a 2-month wait to see the docs in that practice, but I was able to get an appt. with her in less than 2 weeks. They will be increasingly prevalent as time goes on and as the shortage of primary care docs worsens. The pay level for primary care is so much lower than for specialists; no wonder young docs don't want to go into it. Was just reading an article that said out of the average Penn MD graduating class of 160, only 3 to 5 go into primary care.

(Mari)There's a 2-month wait to see the docs in that practice, but I was able to get an appt. with her in less than 2 weeks. Two weeks! I can usually get one same day for NPs if I request it. PAs take a little longer. I predict that there will only be NPs for family practice in the nr future. Not even PAs want to do that one.

(Evelyn)Two weeks! I can usually get one same day for NPs if I request it. For primary care, yes, but for GYN/specialty care, there's still a wait here.

So does the patient pay a reduced wait with the nurse vs the doctor? My kids' babysitter in Miami decided to become to a nurse, all I can say is... I would not want her to be my nurse! Yikes. I have no problems with PhD's and MD's certification, but it should be stated upfront. Obviously the preface doctor is not the same. We need more MDs in the US, so the AMA should let some EU and South/Central America MDs in to do the equivalency.

That should be reduced rate. Freudian slip, lol.

I don't know if there is a difference in what is billed from within a given practice if you see the nurse practitioner vs. a doctor. Dorine would probaby kow. I'd guess that they bill from a diagnosis code (e.g., "office visit, illness") without regard to who rendered the service. Obviously the cost of services vary greatly by venue; an ER visit can easily run 10X the cost of the same services provided by an urgent care center. Just read an aritcle on this yesterday about someone who was treated for a finger sprain: $1,500 from the ER, vs. about $150 from urgent care. (Moon)We need more MDs in the US The greatest need is for more primary care docs.

(Mari) I'd guess that they bill from a diagnosis code (e.g., "office visit, illness") without regard to who rendered the service. From a cost accounting/billing standpoint, the person rendering the service can most certainly be built into the system. At a law firm, partners bill out at different rates than associates. At my old place of employ, programmers from different divisions billed out at different rates. On the receipt from one of my doctors, there are various levels of office visit to check off from limited to comprehensive to emergency. I don't see why unique codes identifying the provider couldn't be included, with their own rate.

I agree with you, Karen. But will they do it? (Mari), The greatest need is for more primary care docs. Let those in. There are plenty in EU, and South/Central America. Last summer in Mexico, my son saw the GP doctor which makes calls at the hotels. His bad case of poison ivy was treated and cured. He had been under a doctor's care in the US that did not cure him. His friend was driving him home and got into a car accident. My son was told to sit on the grass by the responding police officer because he was in pain. He sat on poison ivy. He didn't know, until a mother that has stopped her car to offer help told him to stand up. He went to the ER and after 5 hours and two cat scans was released with a $9000.00 bill. He went back after a few days for poison ivy treatment. It did nothing for him, and he was in pain until that blessed GP in Mexico gave him the right cure.

Apparently under Medicare, the NP can bill under the physician's number (and rate) if certain conditions are met (e.g., the doc is in the immediate area and can be called upon quickly if needed). If not, Medicare pays 85% of the physician rate. I have a call into a friend in our benefits office to see if it's the same under private insurance (i.e., non-Medicare, non-socialized medicine;-) I'm just curious.

I saw a PA in Dermatology and the Medicare statement gave her name under the doctor's supervision (not!) at a reduced rate. PS she was also worthless ...didn't know the diagnosis of the rash and when I asked if she could consult the doctor (down the hall), she said I would have to make an appt with him (2 months away) But she billed anyway and Medicare paid....go figure.

There are physician's assistants and nurse practioners (who go to nursing school and then get their master's and/or Ph.D.'s). Completely different.

After doing some googling, this is one of the most succinct answers I found of the differences/similarities. "The job tasks are identical, each can perform those procedures they have been educated to perform, and which meet the physicians protocols. Salaries are essentially the same in most areas. In some areas of the country where they are more familiar with NPs they seem to pay NPs slightly more, but in areas where they are more familiar with PAs the opposite is true. The most significant difference is that NPs in some states can work independently from physicians, where PAs work under the authority of a physician in all US states and territories. There are many states in the US where an NP must also be in a collaborative relationship with a physician."

My aunt is a retired NP (and nurse midwife). She was a big help to me over a number of years, writing me rxs (or giving me samples) if I needed them and saving me trips to the MD office (and $$). I was seriously looking into PA programs about 13 yrs ago, but decided against it for mostly financial reasons (of being in school full time).

Heard back on my NP reimbursement question. Most private insurance is following the Medicare schedules--reimbursement at 85% of the doc's rate, although some are still paying at 100%.

I know nothing about British politics, but after reading the posts on the "Colin Firth *News*" topic re: this subject (ahem)..... I say :"Go Conservatives"! ;-D

The 'Squatter' (according to Colin's friend, Nick, has left the house.End or an era

Great ariel views of Buck House. I hope Lizzie has a recorder, she'll be missing Corrie ;-)

An emotional and strong resignation speech from Gordon. Thought his wife looks relieved.

Sky News just reported Cameron is now officially the new PM. Feel sad for Gordon Brown.

Yahoo reported : "Conservative David Cameron became Britain's new prime minister on Tuesday after he accepted the invitation from Queen Elizabeth to form a new government" http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_britain_election;_ylt=AjoyGOAW0Se03l4eqjxsLSWs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNqdG9rMTlmBGFzc2V0A25tLzIwMTAwNTExL3VzX2JyaXRhaW5fZWxlY3Rpb24EY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMzBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNmdWxsbmJzcHN0b3I- Question: Does that mean the Queen made the decision? He's v. handsome:-)))

(Evelyn)He's v. handsome:-))) LOL, Evelyn (Evelyn)Question: Does that mean the Queen made the decision? Not exactly. Gordon Brown visited the Queen to resign and he recommends she sends for the leader of the other party (Conservative) David Cameron to form a Government. Cameron hot foots it to the Palace, theoretically kisses the Queen's hand and Voila! we have a new PM.

Should have began with, after much negotiation Cameron got the backing of the Lib Dems to form a coalition Government. Gordon Brown admitted defeat, visits the Queen to resign...............

Best wishes to our UK friends. Does the Duputy PM (I take it Clegg gets that position) actually have any pull?

Sorry for the repeat. Was just trying to spell Deputy correctly.;-)

(Mari)Does the Duputy PM (I take it Clegg gets that position) actually have any pull? Not confirmed just yet, as far as I know.

Nick Clegg confirmed as Deputy PM (hey, I called it over an hour ago!). Gordon Brown did not have a Deputy, so it's a post that can be downgraded or upgraded. But Clegg would be in charge of the country when the PM goes on his hols, or takes paternity leave.

So Deputy PM functions as our Vice President? He doesn't make policy; supports the president's and is in charge when the Pres leaves the country. Thank you Bethan and Sue.I'm learning a lot. All v. exciting, methinks. I join Mari....congrats.

The cabinet makes policy and only the Prime Minister has power of veto if there is disagreement(well that's how I read it). Deputy PM is historically given the role to satisfy members of the Party in power whose views may differ,or if you like, to redress the balance. eg: Tony Blair(New Labour) John Prescott(Old Labour). They can, in alot of cases, be rather ineffectual as they are without any specific Department. It was the only position Clegg could have taken in the Cabinet. Anyway..it has been so engrossing and very frustrating..I can imagine Peter Morgan is writing the screenplay now. That twist with Brown announcing he will stand down as leader of the Labour Party and the Lib Dems negotiating with the machiavellian Peter Mandleson etc behind the Tories backs. William Hague going from affable negotiator to a steely,'This is our final offer'. All the while the leaders of the respective parties sit in rooms at various locations in Westminster phoning or meeting each other. Extraordinary. now for the hard stuff....

Re: the role off the Deputy PM,this should explain, Evelyn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Prime_Minister_of_the_United_Kingdom It is exciting and also, perhaps a little daunting (depends on one's Political leanings) as there hasn't been a Hung Parliament and/or Coalition Government for (I believe) over 30 years. Question is, can the Tories and Lib Dems make it work. Only time will tell.

LOL, Felicity. You beat me to it.

(Felicity)Anyway..it has been so engrossing and very frustrating..I can imagine Peter Morgan is writing the screenplay now LOL, yeah and place your bets for whom might play Nick Clegg ;-D

Hot off the press and just waiting for Nick(ers) to show up at No 10(traffic V bad)Cammo already there..probably had outriders.. 'As part of the deal the Lib Dems have agreed to accept Conservative plans to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system, something they'd vehemently opposed until now. They've also agreed to the Tory cap on immigrants coming to the UK from outside the EU, and shelved their own plans for an amnesty for some illegal immigrants already here.'

"Nick(ers)", too funny, love it.

(Evelyn)He's v. handsome:-))) I might not agree with all their policies, but I gotta say, the Tory/Lib Dems lot are on the whole better looking than the Labour bunch ;-)

(Felicity)Anyway..it has been so engrossing and very frustrating..I can imagine Peter Morgan is writing the screenplay now (Sue) yeah and place your bets for whom might play Nick Clegg ;-D Except if he's now so disillusioned by their apparent caving on the only issue that meant anything to him. Did he not just state:Colin Firth said: 'As a once-committed Labour voter I, like so many, have been appalled by the abandonment of the values they advocated while in opposition. 'For me, their conduct on asylum alone is reason enough never to be able to contemplate voting for them again.'As Felicity has posted above, the Lib Dems have given in on the immigration/asylum issues for a seat at the table.

Thank you gals, for all the info and links. I found this interesting: "Given that there is no constitutional office of Deputy Prime Minister, with the position being recreated on a case by case basis, the person who holds the post has no official residence. As a cabinet minister however they may have the use of a grace and favour London residence and country house. " That residence is owned by the Crown! I will say, if any country can make this work, you can.

Karen)Except if he's now so disillusioned by their apparent caving on the only issue that meant anything to him. Did he not just state: LOL, yes. I wasn't aware of those details when making little quip ;-) Both Nick(ers) and Cameron looked relaxed together during their first joint press conf in Downing Street garden. Nice location. Early days, and I am a natural sceptic, but if their body language is anything to go by, then it looks promising.

Coalition governments always involve the strangest of bedfellows. As I recall, the Lib Dems won like 56 seats, compared to the 300ish of the two major parties. Each needed those 56 seats to have a majority, but as is typical, any fringe group is likely to hold antithetical views to the major parties.

(Evelyn)I will say, if any country can make this work, you can. Here's this afternoon's press conf I referred to earlier. Would love to know Colin's thoughts re: Lib Dems compromise on immigration. The compromiise gets my vote. I will come out and say, their original policy on immigration was one of the reasons I didn't mark an X on their spot. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8676607.stm

More from the press conf under editors choice on RH side. Check out the video where Cameron squirmed when a Jurno pointed out to both Cameron called Clegg a 'joke' (before he knew he needed Clegg on his side before their Coalition was formed) ;-)

Third in a row, but the Beeb vids might not be available overseas. Here is the full conf from U Tube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu0BNXhW8fE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqqq45mFOSo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEMFJalLl7E

"After it became clear Labour could not reach an agreement with the Lib Dems that would have allowed them to remain in power" Interesting, since I would think Labor and Lib Dems would have more in common. Youtubes came through fine. PM Cameron sounds v. convincing that they will work together. But I've not hear a word from Mr Clegg:-((( I wish them luck. Thanks for the links.

sorry

(Evelyn)But I've not hear a word from Mr Clegg:-((( First U tube video, Nick speaks speaks 9 mins 48 in.

Thank you ladies for all the info. Congrats on the change. 'As part of the deal the Lib Dems have agreed to accept Conservative plans to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system, something they'd vehemently opposed until now. They've also agreed to the Tory cap on immigrants coming to the UK from outside the EU, and shelved their own plans for an amnesty for some illegal immigrants already here.' Blew Colin away, poor baby. ;-) In any case, the Lib Dems can now hold either party hostage since they need their coalition to govern, an ideal place to be for them. That said, they accepted those key issues of the Tories, which are IMO, important to the Nat'l security of the country. I quite like Cameron. This is fascinating Cameron appears to be related to the Queen: Cameron is a direct descendant of George I, George II, George III, and King William IV (great � 5 grandfather) and his mistress Dorothea Jordan (and thus fifth cousin, twice removed of Queen Elizabeth II). As an illegitimate descendant of William IV, Cameron is not in the line of succession to the British throne. He is the nephew of Sir William Dugdale, once the chairman of Aston Villa Football Club, and Birmingham-born documentary film-maker Joshua Dugdale is his cousin. In May 2009, tabloid newspaper The Sun published a discovery by amateur genealogist Tony Andrews that Labour politician Harriet Harman is related to David Cameron through her aunt's marriage to his great uncle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_cameron#Personal_life

(Moon)That said, they accepted those key issues of the Tories, which are IMO, important to the Nat'l security of the country. I quite like Cameron. I agree. I am liking Cameron more than I did before, but this is their honeymoon period. Will be interesting to see how they handle things in the coming months. It's gonna be tough. But I do feel re-energised by the change and I was Labour before.

(Moon) Blew Colin away, poor baby. ;-) No, he threw him under the bus. LOL! Bet Colin is rueing the coffee klatch photo op now. ;-) Interesting, since I would think Labor and Lib Dems would have more in common. True, but Labour received what amounts to a vote of no confidence. Nobody was going to join forces with them. Too unpopular.

Interesting find, Moon, on the genealogy of Mr Cameron. So perhaps Lizzie allowed him to kiss her hand for real ;-)

(Moon) Blew Colin away, poor baby. ;-) No, he threw him under the bus. LOL! Bet Colin is rueing the coffee klatch photo op now. ;-) Play with fire........;-D

(Karen)Bet Colin is rueing the coffee klatch photo op now. ;-) You're not kidding. And the lesson is: stick to acting.

The Lib Dems have given up on their immigration policy (the idea of a general amnesty to illegal immigrants was a vote loser, anyway) but their policy on asylum is a separate issue and they may not have conceded this (we're only getting broad-brush reports at the moment re. the level of agreement between Lib and Con). http://www.libdems.org.uk/immigration_and_asylum.aspx Lib Dem's policy statement Allow asylum seekers to work. Asylum seekers are not allowed to work (apart from exceptional circumstances after a year) while their claim is being processed, despite the fact it can take years. They are forced to live on state handouts, even though many are skilled people. It also fuels anger among some sections of the public. We would allow asylum seekers to work two months after making an application and benefits would only be paid if they could not find work. This would reduce spending on benefits, increase tax revenue, help integration, lower community tensions and greatly reduce dependence on welfare and social housing. Give responsibility to an independent agency. It is time to take the politics out of asylum. The Liberal Democrats would take responsibility away from the Home Office and give it to a Canadian-style independent agency, making decisions free from political considerations. Currently, a quarter of decisions are overturned on appeal. In Canada, it is less than 1%. We would fast-track asylum claims which are obviously well-founded and front load resources into making high quality initial decisions. Increase European cooperation. We would push for EU-wide cooperation on asylum to help share the burden proportionally between member states. End deportation of homosexual asylum seekers. The Liberal Democrats will end the deportation of asylum seekers to countries where they face imprisonment, torture or execution because of their sexual orientation or gender identification.

"End deportation of homosexual asylum seekers" Is that true...or just political rehetoric. (Karen)but Labour received what amounts to a vote of no confidence. Nobody was going to join forces with them. Too unpopular "Throw the incumbents out"....seems to be the hue and cry. I sorta felt sorry for Brown when he announced his resignation: "No one knows what it's like to be a Prime Minister" Of course no one puts a gun to their heads to take the job either.

(Bethan) but their policy on asylum is a separate issue and they may not have conceded this The information Felicity posted talked about two separate issues on which the Lib Dems caved: a cap on immigrants coming from non-EU countries and the amnesty for illegals. I would assume that they'd drop the "asylum seeker" description and just call them immigrants for purposes of the press releases to make it more palatable. But I have no time for reading at your link so they may still be different.

(Evelyn) Of course no one puts a gun to their heads to take the job either. He made a deal with Blair and waited a loooonnng time for that job, only now to see it vanish a relatively short time later. I, too, await the movie version of the latest developments from Peter Morgan. ;-) And speaking of whom, will be seeing his 3rd in the Blair trilogy films, The Special Relationship, about Blair and Clinton at HBO tomorrow night. It's on HBO weekend after next or Memorial Day weekend I think. "End deportation of homosexual asylum seekers" (Evelyn) Is that true...or just political rehetoric. I did a double take on that, too. More than troubling if true. The simple thought of it is troubling. Sounds like Iranian, or the like, policy.

Maybe this will be helpful as research for the script. ;-) http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2010/05/the-conservative-libdem-agreement-reading-between-the-lines.html?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=pbs

Sorry, hit the link above and posted this on O&E. Can you erase the other, Karen, please? Thnx. I have a question regarding placing cameras in public places. Our mayor has gone over to London to check out their camera system. http://wcbstv.com/cbs2crew/mayor.bloomberg.london.2.1686910.html I honestly don't consider having a system of cameras in public places a bad thing on the face of it. Your thoughts?? Also you all in the UK? Was it considered popular, unpopular, a wave of indifference?? A friend on FB posted the link and her friend made a remark that included .."POLICE STATE!" As I said, it doesn't inherently bother me (especially in the subways now that they're closing token booths). They most likely wouldn't stop crime anywhere unless someone was watching the feeds and on their toes, but at least maybe there's a chance it could help solve the crime afterward.

Some interesting pics of Brown's last hurrah basically. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/gallery/2010/may/12/gordon-brown-labourleadership?picture=362535527 I will say I almost fell off the bike at the gym after work yesterday when I saw the news on CNN (am mostly deprived of internet during the day now). Didn't see this coming, but I hadn't been following closely. The last that was on my radar was that at some point, Brown was stepping down, but didn't see it coming so soon.

They are forced to live on state handouts, even though many are skilled people. Whoever thinks that the immigrants who have work skills can not find a job are delusional. They are not the ones who live on state handouts. Dorine, I have nothing to hide from those street monitoring cameras, nothing to lose but everything to gain. The world has changed because of the Muslim fanatics whose sole purpose in life is to convert or kill.

Before I forgot, you have to watch this clip from the Daily Show: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-12-2010/back-in-black---glenn-beck-s-nazi-tourette-s I've never laughed so hard watching anything on TV. Sue, I can't recall if you can view any vids from the Comedy Channel, but they've been features on your elections for the past several nights called Clustershag to 10 Downing. You might get a chuckle out of them. Either do a search or go back through the last few days.

Well, while I agree with the nothing to lose and everything to gain, I wasn't thinking in terms of Muslims or anyone like that. I was thinking of everyday street crime. We've had numerous crimes that were caught on cameras which helped sometimes (and sometimes didn't if the angle or focus was bad) with regards to solving them. There was a big story in the papers a few weeks ago when it was confirmed that several hundred booth operators were getting laid off and quite a number of booths in many stations were closing about all the cameras that are installed in the subways that don't work for various reasons. While they may or may not do anything to stop a crime in progress, they may help ID someone who committed one. Unfortunately having MTA workers in the booths didn't do much of anything as a crime deterrent, as one poor woman who was raped in a subway station can attest to. The operator saw she was in trouble and she pleaded with him to help, but he apparently was not allowed to go out of the booth to help her (or anyone in trouble like that). He was supposed to call/buzz the police, but by the time they got there it was too late.

The link has an Error 404 msg, Karen.

(Bethan)we're only getting broad-brush reports at the moment re. the level of agreement between Lib and Con That's true. And I'm sure there will be much to dismay both sides when the details emerge. But I think the general lumping together of Immigrants and Asylum seekers is the norm. Jeremy Paxman,Chief Rottweiller TV interviewer, brushed off Caroline Lucas' attempts to explain the difference in one I saw. It may still be on the menu..but I wouldn't be surprised if it was fobbed off with them setting up a small commitee to look into the problem. Maybe Nick(ers) could do it. He can't go everywhere with Dave can he? The Dave and Nick show is certainly being relished by the cynical hacks over here. They were quite off balance while the negotiations were going on...now they are really going for it. Anyway..it's nice that you over there are interested and chipping in with comments. Thanks. CCTV mania with cameras everywhere was so 15 years ago! But there was enormous outcry at the time and people covering them up,disconnecting them, vandalising them etc etc. But they are everywhere,or at least there are notices they are everywhere and sometimes there is no actual camera. Sort of an Alarm box with nothing in it. They can be useful to catch criminals in the act but don't know what the stats are re their effectiveness as a deterrent. Of course it's the cameras you don't know about that are the worrying ones.But they are a way of life now.

(Dorine) The link has an Error 404 msg, Karen. I just checked it and it worked for me. If not, go to http://www.thedailyshow.com/ and click on the second vid, which is Lewis Black. If you do it after today's show then you'll need to search. (Felicity) But I think the general lumping together of Immigrants and Asylum seekers is the norm. One is a subset of the other. (Felciity) CCTV mania with cameras everywhere was so 15 years ago! Totally different issue but the big outrage here is red light cameras. Groups are taking municipalities to court to get them removed. ;-)

Thanks, ladies, for answering so many questions on the election and the process. I've learned a lot. It may seem like it dragged on, but honestly, as an outsider, I am impressed that they got it done so quickly. As I said before, wishing you the best of everything--you deserve it. I watched Mr. Brown's speech on TV and couldn't help but feel a bit sorry for him, although my DH said, the next time you see him he'll look 10 years younger. So true. Check out before and after pics of Clinton, Bush, even Mr. O is looking a lot grayer already. I often marvel that people want these extremely difficult jobs. (Moon)I have nothing to hide from those street monitoring cameras, nothing to lose but everything to gain. What Moon said!

I just watched the fist part of the link, Pariah;-)...who is this man...is he a comedian? Did he take over from John Stewart? Is he auditioning for Keith O.'s job;-) (Felicity)But they are a way of life now. Bingo!How true! I say:"Get over it". I'm sick of this "privacy" crap.

That is Lewis Black, he's a standup comedian. He used to be on the Daily Show as a regular and now only appears sporadically.

Glen Beck is out of control. LOL. thanks, Karen. Increase European cooperation. We would push for EU-wide cooperation on asylum to help share the burden proportionally between member states. Why would that happen when the other European nations are having the same problems with illegal immigrants? In Italy they arrive from Africa in every port. It is a huge political problem.

Glen Beck is out of control. LOL But why doesn't anybody ever say the same about Keith Olbermann .... Chris Matthews...or Ed Schulz ,and the rest of the MSNBC crowd. Is MSNBC sacrosanct? Why pick on FOX...just because they're beating the pants off the ratings of all other stations on cable? Absurd.

Glen Beck is out of control. LOL (Evelyn) But why doesn't anybody ever say the same about Keith Olbermann .... Chris Matthews...or Ed Schulz ,and the rest of the MSNBC crowd. Glen Beck is so not even on the same plane as those others. You have watched and listened to him, right? Why pick on FOX...just because they're beating the pants off the ratings of all other stations on cable? Absurd. See my question above. Yeah, sure FOX may be picked on... for I'd say more reasons than ratings.

(Evelyn) Why pick on FOX... Did you even listen to the absurdities coming out of Glen Beck's mouth in this video clip? Besides being absurd and categorically false and misleading, they're meant to inflame and incite. That is what is abhorrent about Fox.

Ever look at MSNBC? Try it; with a barf -bag.

I asked, did you even watch the clip?

(Bethan) they look alike (apparently), have European wives, speak another language and both have 3 sons. Apparently Clegg speaks five languages! And Moon will be quite interested in his family background, i.e., Russian nobility. Not as impressive as Cameron being an illegitimate descendent of King George I, but not too shabby. Reading his bio made me feel so inferior. He had done more by age 20 than...oh, never mind. ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Clegg

Interesing link. Karen. Psst, Peggy, he's a sea goat ;-)

Should perhaps explain my last comment. Meaning he's a Capricorn like Peggy, Me and my DH as it happens ;-)

I like Clegg too. In 2008 it was reported that while at university, Clegg had joined the Cambridge University Conservative Association between 1986 and 1987, with contemporary membership records citing an "N. Clegg" of Robinson College. (At the time, Clegg was the only person of that name at Robinson.) However, Clegg himself later maintained he had "no recollection of that whatsoever." Evelyn, Fox News were the only ones that gave Hillary a fair coverage during the primaries. I don't forget it. I don't watch the news, I get my news from the papers or online.

I like Clegg too. In 2008 it was reported that while at university, Clegg had joined the Cambridge University Conservative Association between 1986 and 1987, with contemporary membership records citing an "N. Clegg" of Robinson College. (At the time, Clegg was the only person of that name at Robinson.) However, Clegg himself later maintained he had "no recollection of that whatsoever." LOL, good try. ;-) Evelyn, Fox News were the only ones that gave Hillary a fair coverage during the primaries. I don't forget it. I don't watch the news, I get my news from the papers or online.

I went back to check, but I had closed the quotation. sorry

(Pariah)I asked, did you even watch the clip? Of course ;I would have admitted it if I hadn't. But, for starters, I don't watch GB. He comes on at 4 PM here and I don't look at daytime TV til 5; when I do watch Fox Evening News with Bret Baier and BRit Hume, at times.. I Tivo The Jim Lehrer News Hour on PBS and watch it til 7PM. When I Tivo Kudlow Financial Report. Had enough of my TV viewing? ;-) As far as the tape goes. I have heard from a Lurker that the GB clip on the Comedy Hour was grossly ,surgically edited. They took bits and pieces of what he said and strung it together. Why am I not surprised? Really, I would think one would get information from a source other than a clip from a comedy show ...which is like SNL.

Evelyn, Fox News were the only ones that gave Hillary a fair coverage during the primaries. I don't forget it. And on more than one occasion she commended Fox for being the only network that had been "fair and balanced" during the primaries and election. Mr Obama had a good interview with Bill, and recently with Bret Baier. They asked pertinent questions but were courteous and respectful. But didn't do the Katie Couric cutesy frothing bit. I get news from several sources, but in depth from the WSJ.

You gotta watch this....I'm telling ya' New Jersey really has a winner for a governor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsdqfVA3fqk No obfuscation there.....

I'm told that the URL I posted last night is no longer available on Youtube due to copyright claim of the NJ "Star Ledger". But here it is on the S-L videos archive... http://videos.nj.com/star-ledger/2010/05/gov_christie_calls_s-l_columni.html The comments are priceless.

(Evelyn) As far as the tape goes. I have heard from a Lurker that the GB clip on the Comedy Hour was grossly ,surgically edited. I don't read lurkers' comments. They took bits and pieces of what he said and strung it together. Nothing was "strung together." Each instance of an inappropriate Nazi reference stood on its own and was ridiculed. Puhleez!

Each instance of an inappropriate Nazi reference stood on its own and was ridiculed. Puhleez! By a blogger....or "Comments";-) Still , it was re-played on a Comedy Show for their agenda. You take the clips on SNL historically serious???

(Evelyn) Still , it was re-played on a Comedy Show for their agenda. You take the clips on SNL historically serious??? I'm not sure how this equates as a comparison. What clips do they show on SNL? (which I found funnier than I've found it in who knows how many years with Betty White on, as an aside. ;-)). I had to LOL at Christie. I know nothing of him as a governor, but I enjoyed the snarkiness in the reply. Glenn Beck needs no editing from Comedy Central or anywhere else to make him come off as a nutjob. Personally, I think it's an act, but again, he needs no editing to make him look/sound bad.

In style, I will give you that GB is somewhat over dramatic (Jim Cramer-ish). As he said in an interview :"Who looks at CR";-) But in the times I have watched GB, in substance he is spot on. You would agree if you weren't a liberal. Now, Howard Dean...there's a trip. One can only look at the contortions of his face when he pontificates and flashing eyes to observe that this man is certifiably insane. Should not be allowed to circulate in public; I notice that the current admninistration has kept him under wraps. Smart move, Mr President.

(Evelyn) By a blogger....or "Comments";-) Huh? By the satiric commentary of the comedian Lewis Black. (Evelyn) You take the clips on SNL historically serious??? What clips? Huh? It's a sketch comedy show. No clips. (Dorine) I'm not sure how this equates as a comparison. Probably in the same way Al Gore's cause could be likened to Joseph Goebbels. (Dorine) Glenn Beck needs no editing from Comedy Central or anywhere else to make him come off as a nutjob. Agreed. Jon himself started off one of his shows a month or so ago, doing a parody of Glenn's own show. It was ultra bizarro.

But does JS do Keith O/Rachel , Chris or any other loon-liberal- showman.

(Evelyn) But does JS do Keith O/Rachel , Chris or any other loon-liberal- showman. By "do," do you mean does Jon Stewart engage in sexual activities with the aforementioned trio? I don't know. The Daily Show does include MSNBC people (and a lot of CNN) when it examines coverage of various news stores. Just recently, I remember JS showing Rachel Maddow and his disappointment in how she followed the pack with some ridiculous or trivial story angle. Wish I could recall which news story was on the block.

Not everyone is enamored with Al Gore the way you all are. Personally , I think he is a nice man...but, also a hypocrite and opportunist. He has just purhased a $9 Million dollar house (mansion?) in Montecito, Ca. *next door* to Dennis Miller....who did a hilarious sketch on Bill O's the other night on how he was going to welcome him to the neighborhood. On Fox and Friends the next morning Trace Adkins , AG's former neighbor in Nashville, talked about his pick-up's Big Carbon bumper sticker. BTW "do" in my part of the heartland doesn't have the same vulgar connotation that it obviously has in Chicago;-)

I only used Al Gore as an example of something GB had said. Just because some people don't like AG or his policies, likening him to Joseph Goebbels is wrong.

Lighten up. Some comparisons are made as a hyperbole. I thought it was funny. Hey, they called George Bush a lot worse. Actually, I watched GB this afternoon. Good program. He had a panel of Dads reviewing a new book on the importance of a father in a child's life. The fathers had all undergone chemotherapy. They related stories of how their children had given them strength and brought the family closer together. There is some dad's organization that focuses on this.

(Karen), By "do," do you mean does Jon Stewart engage in sexual activities with the aforementioned trio? I don't know. LOL, now it's getting interesting. ;-)

For our UK friends... I know that the UK can't always access NY Times articles...so I am copying one of my favorite columnists from the NY Times... Glimmers of Hope By DAVID BROOKS If you�re elected president or prime minister in pretty much any country in the developed world today, you�re faced with the same set of challenges: to reduce national deficits without choking off a fragile recovery; to trim the welfare state and raise taxes while still funding the things that lead to long-term growth; to try to enact brutally painful measures at a time when voters don�t trust their leaders; to do it at a time when politics are polarized and a hundred different interest groups have the ability to block change. The chances that the world�s leaders are going to be able to do these things successfully are between slim and none. It�s hard enough to figure out the right mix of spending cuts and tax increases. It�s nearly impossible to build a political majority willing to enact them. Sometime over the next decade or so, the world will probably suffer from another series of crushing fiscal crises with significant economic pain and maximum political turmoil. But, occasionally, there�s a ray of hope. Occasionally, a country stumbles into a political arrangement that may help it avert a crisis. And that�s what�s happened in Britain. Britain has all the fiscal problems that plague most developed nations. British households are carrying more debt than those in any other rich country: 170 percent of annual income. British general government debt is surging � not at Greek levels yet, but getting there. The political culture is brutally adversarial. The political extremes are strong. The Conservative Party didn�t win this month�s election outright because 5 percent of voters preferred the anti-immigrant parties. Moreover, the election produced no clear-cut result. That would seem to make it harder to undertake the sort of necessary painful changes. Yet over the past few days, many British analysts are coming to the wary conclusion that something good may have happened. David Cameron, the Conservative leader, was forced to confront the fact that even in the best possible circumstances, the Conservatives could get only 36 percent of the vote. He was faced with the possibility that the two other parties might form a permanent anti-right coalition. But as Daniel Finkelstein of The Times of London has pointed out, Cameron seized the problem and made it an opportunity. By cutting a deal with the Liberal Democrats, he has built a center-right coalition. In so doing, he has changed the nature of his own party, and the nature of the Liberal Democrats, his coalition partner. If he had a small majority, he would have been hostage to his most ideological members. As it is, he has potentially weakened the strong partisans in both parties, empowered the pragmatists who are better-suited to coalition politics and created a less polarized political climate. Matthew Parris, also of The Times of London, writes that watching Cameron and Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrats� leader, �was like witnessing a coup. Millions of viewers will have shared my impression almost of watching two men staging a putsch against their own parties, against the entire British political system, and against the ingrained assumptions of more than a century of parliamentary government.� Parris sees the potential for a softening of the normal adversarial culture, a strengthening of the sort of leader who likes compromise and a weakening of the sort that detests it. The two parties are now in an economically conservative, socially liberal embrace that they hope will last for five years. The parties disagree on many things (immigration, Europe, electoral reform), but they tend to agree on the need for fiscal restraint. The efforts to control debt will be strengthened by having a broad coalition behind them. The political pain will be shared. Cameron has the opportunity to look less like a party leader and more like a national leader. Today�s coalition will compel the Tories to formulate policies in new ways, and lodge them closer to the center of the electorate. It helps that the Conservative government has already moved to a more communitarian �Big Society� governing philosophy. No longer purely free market, the Tories emphasize rebuilding social bonds. That means they speak less about slashing government as a matter of principle and more about improving it and decentralizing power. This little platoons approach has left- and right-wing variants and has the potential to break down the old ideologies. Of course, it all could fail. The parties could reject the implant. In U.S. terms, it�s like a marriage between Marco Rubio (The Tory base) and the accumulated wisdom of the Ivy League (the Liberal Democrats). But Cameron and Clegg are nothing if not flexible. The entire political class understands what needs to be done. The financial markets will insist on some serious budgetary restraint. Without any planning but by sheer good luck, the British may have stumbled into an arrangement that will be a model for all the other countries in the same desperate straits. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Just call us optimists...LOL evelyn

Get the F outta here!! The people who would spend money on one of these speeches are indeed the very people P.T. Barnum spoke of. Bristol Palin to hit speakers' circuit AP By BECKY BOHRER, Associated Press Writer � Tue May 18, 8:27 am ET JUNEAU, Alaska � Bristol Palin is hitting the speakers' circuit and will command between $15,000 and $30,000 for each appearance, Palin family attorney Thomas Van Flein said Monday. Van Flein confirmed a report by celebrity news website RadarOnline that the daughter of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has signed with Single Source Speakers. He added her exact fees will depend on factors such as which group she's addressing and what she must to do prepare. Bristol Palin, 19, is listed on the speaking group's website as available for conferences, fundraisers, special events and holidays, as well as women's, youth, abstinence and "pro-life" programs. Her fee is denoted by four question marks, meaning "Call to discuss!" The same designation is given to New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees. A message left late Monday for Ron Miller, with Single Source Speakers, was not immediately returned. Bristol Palin was thrust into the spotlight as a pregnant teen during her mother's unsuccessful campaign for vice president in 2008. She had son Tripp that year and has since spoken about abstinence and the challenges of life as a young single mother. Van Flein said Bristol Palin will be selective in the speeches she gives. He said he believes she's interested in expanding her message beyond teen pregnancy to include her experiences on the campaign trail and in the media spotlight; her parenting approach; and her outlook on life. Bristol Palin lives in Anchorage and works in a physician's office, Van Flein said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100518/ap_on_en_ot/us_people_bristol_palin

Forgot to comment on this the other day... (Evelyn) Just call us optimists...LOL You mean you and conservative NYT columnists? ;-) I have no opinion about Cameron or the new govt set up at this point as I'm not familiar enough with the platforms and policies espouse.

Evelyn) Just call us optimists...LOL You mean you and conservative NYT columnists? ;-) You mean, one has to be a "conservative" to hope the Cameron/ Clegg administration will work?

No, but I have no idea if what he's saying is accurate or representative of what may come with that administration, since as I said I know nothing about them. I was merely observing that it was conservatives being optimistic about other conservatives, which isn't surprising. Like sticks with like. What I do know, is that apparently there were enough voters who have reservations about at least Cameron as he did not get a decisive victory. I have no opinion otherwise.

Looks like Arlen Spector's Lieberman like party shift didn't work out so well for him.

(Dorine) Looks like Arlen Spector's Lieberman like party shift didn't work out so well for him. The state's Republicans didn't wnnt him, now the state's Democrats have also shown they don't want him. The guy's pathetic.

He's too old. What is pathetic, is that he should have retired a long time ago when he was at the top of his political career. Dorine, so a conservative gov't doesn't get a chance to fix the problems in a country....even with a Lib Dem co-hort?

Dorine, so a conservative gov't doesn't get a chance to fix the problems in a country....even with a Lib Dem co-hort? Of course they do. I don't believe I've implied otherwise. I was just commenting on the "us" while sort of implying I was curious who "us" is.

Don't know that I love the dress itself (it looks a bit stiff - like it's holding her up in a way), but adore the color. http://tinyurl.com/36sct5l

The question is what is the first lady of Mexico wearing? A horror! I like Michelle's dress, the glittery look is in. Her hair looks great too.

FLOTUS looks v. elegant. But dress cut too high under the arms. The little bubble spilling over distracts the overall look. I would have sent it back for alterations.

State dinner chef tweets about 'day of creation' By DARLENE SUPERVILLE and NANCY BENAC (AP) � 16 hours ago WASHINGTON � "Got my fingers crossed there are no hitches." And with that tweet, Rick Bayless, a Chicago chef adored by President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama for his way with Mexican food, dashed to the White House to finish preparations for Wednesday's state dinner for Mexican President Felipe Calderon and his wife, Margarita Zavala. The same could be said for the entire White House staff � anxious to pull off a flawless event after Obama's first state dinner six months ago was overshadowed by an uninvited husband-and-wife couple who somehow slipped through security. As guests streamed in, Mrs. Obama and the president greeted the Mexican first couple on the North Portico of the White House. Mrs. Obama wore a one-shoulder, shimmery, royal blue floor-length gown, with a wide silver belt and dangling silvery earrings, while Margarita Zavala arrived in a plum-colored gown with a squarish neckline bordered in blue. About 200 guests had coveted invitations for the four-course dinner in the East Room, complete with a celebrity contingent that included Whoopi Goldberg, Eva Longoria Parker, George Lopez and Olympic speedskater Shani Davis. Goldberg said it felt like she was "coming home after a long drought." She explained she'd been a frequent visitor during the Clinton years, but during the eight years of George W. Bush's presidency, "I wasn't here." Lopez proudly announced he'd been told he was sitting with the president. "They didn't tell me which one," he joked. Longoria Parker talked policy, saying it was an important time to be holding such a dinner with Mexican leaders, given the hot temperatures over immigration right now. "You can't have these states doing their own punitive laws," she insisted, referring to the tough immigration law approved in Arizona. A larger group of guests was arriving later in the evening for dessert and after-dinner entertainment inside a big white tent on the South Lawn, where Grammy Award winner Beyonce and the Mexican singing duo of Rodrigo y Gabriela were set to perform. The dinner was a coming-out party of sorts for new White House social secretary Julianna Smoot, who gave a quick wave and sprinted away when reporters called out for her to stop and chat. Smoot's predecessor, Desiree Rogers, resigned earlier this year; she'd been criticized for her high-profile approach to the job. After the gate-crashing incident, the White House promised tighter security this time around � and they delivered. One woman was turned away because she didn't have proper ID, but she and her husband returned about an hour later and got in. Kathryne Mudge said her husband, Arturo Valenzuela, an assistant secretary of state, was supposed to bring the necessary identification. "We tried to be extra careful, but my husband is the absent-minded professor," she said. Bayless, guest chef for the dinner at the invitation of Mrs. Obama, arrived in Washington two days early to start getting ready. Dinner opened with a salad of jicama with oranges, grapefruit and pineapple, followed by herb green seviche of Hawaiian opah. The main course of Oregon wagyu beef came with a Oaxacan black mole sauce that Bayless says uses more than 20 ingredients and takes days to come together. Grilled green beans and black bean tamalon will accompany the main course. Chocolate cajeta tart with toasted homemade marshmallows was on the dessert menu, along with a graham cracker crumble made with honey from the White House beehive and goat cheese ice cream. Herbs, radishes and lettuces from Mrs. Obama's garden on the South Lawn were used for the meal. The two presidents and their wives were sitting at a rectangular head table, with guests at a mix of rectangular and round tables draped in three shades of Mayan blue to simulate rippling water. Bouquets of fuchsia flowers, including roses and orchids, and prickly pear cactus were made into centerpieces. Guests will eat off from the Clinton china. Another 104 guests were joining the party for after-dinner entertainment in a tent decked out with tiered seating and a dance floor. Guests walking into the room will get the feel of Monarch butterflies in flight. The White House said that decor was chosen to honor Calderon's birthplace of Michoacan, Mexico, where the butterfly's annual migration from Canada ends each spring. "GR8 cooking w WH staff yesterday," Bayless tweeted early Wednesday. "Remarkable their organization, knowledge of protocol." That protocol, by the way, includes no tweets from the White House kitchen. The duo of Rodrigo Sanchez and Gabriela Quintero formed in Mexico City but moved to Dublin after becoming frustrated with the late '90s Mexican music scene. They are known for dueling acoustic guitar instrumentals that blend heavy metal sounds with Latin rhythms. The Obamas' first state dinner, for India's prime minister last November, was notable for its size � more than 300 guests dining underneath a large tent on the South Lawn � and Mrs. Obama's shimmery strapless evening gown. But it's also remembered for the security breach that allowed a northern Virginia couple who weren't on the guest list to slip into the White House and shake hands with the president. The White House reviewed its procedures afterward and decided to position White House staff at security checkpoints along with the Secret Service to help resolve any questions about the guest list for future dinners. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iC_elJ9H-i3kcjESzk2ZZMwhWXiAD9FQ7GI83

Zero menu, IMO I don't like Black Mole sauce, Black Beans ,marshmallows,honey or chocolate.

You don't like marshmallows? Or chocolate??? Oh my.

Except for toffee or with a cup of tea. But never at the end of a heavy meal. The whole menu sounded like a "Tagamet" fest anyway.

After 40 years??? Who does that? (Reuters) - Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have decided to separate after 40 years of marriage, they announced on Tuesday. The Gores, in an e-mail message confirmed by their office, said the decision was made "after a great deal of thought and discussion." "This is very much a mutual and mutually supportive decision that we have made together following a process of long and careful consideration," they said. "We ask for respect for our privacy and that of our family, and we do not intend to comment further." Al Gore, a Democrat, who was Bill Clinton's vice president for eight years, narrowly lost the presidency to Republican George W. Bush in 2000 and won a Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for his work against global climate change. During the Democratic National Convention in 2000, the Gores exchanged a long, passionate kiss on stage that became famous.

Anyone going to watch Fergie on Oprah tonight? (is it tonight)? Apparently she blames her wheeler dealing of access to her Ex, on the booze. Yeah, right. I have no sympathy.

make that booze.

After 40 years??? Who does that? And they just bought that gazillion dollar house in Santa Barbara? Maybe she got tired of "yawning";-) The guy is borrrring. I've always liked Tipper. Poor Fergie.The tabloids will crucify her.

(Evelyn)Poor Fergie.The tabloids will crucify her. Yeah, but she brought it upon herself, what ever possessed her, desperation I guess. I can't feel sorry for her.

(Evelyn) Poor Fergie.The tabloids will crucify her. "Poor" being the operative word, eh? In a bit of a money crunch I guess. But my first thought to your tabloids comment was Sue's exactly, she's done it to herself. And I agree, the Booze Defense is laughable. I don't have anything at all against her, but it was a ridiculously stupid move.

It *was* stupid....but I repeat: Poor Fergie. For thinking she could get away with such esp since she's a celebrity. And the press seems to salivate for anything derogatory they can write about her;she never had a chance. I am sure people get away with this all the time. Perhaps not for cash, but for football tickets to the Superball, resort vacations, blah, blah. And they don't get caught. It's not like she stole the money. I won't join the madding crowd hurling stones at her. Embarassiing for her girls though.

(Evelyn) Embarassiing for her girls though. I completely agree with this. And the press seems to salivate for anything derogatory they can write about her;she never had a chance. I don't see why she deserves one after doing something so stupid, esp as you say, she's a celebrity. A massive lapse in judgement (and apparently desperation) that I see no reason to get a pass from anyone (tabloids or otherswise) for. The best she can do is own up and move on.

Fergie, should have been a good little wife to the prince and not incite princess Di to party in discos, etc. She should be ashamed of herself. I say lock her up. And after 40 years they break up? I bet Al met some blond in CA. Stinks of midlife crisis to me.

Im telling ya', this is a tough crowd;-))))

Fergie, should have been a good little wife to the prince and not incite princess Di to party in discos, etc. She should be ashamed of herself. I say lock her up. Well now, Moon, LOL!! They were very young and thrown into very highly warped lifestyle from what they were used to. I can't fault either one of them there for the most part. They had a serious learning curve to overcome. It's a different story now, though locking her up might be a tad harsh. ;-) I actually was wondering which of them (Al or Tipper) was having the "crisis", though in a rather sexist way I was leaning toward Al.

And that story that the $$ was for a friend....pfft!!

(Evelyn)And the press seems to salivate for anything derogatory they can write about her;she never had a chance. But no one forced a gun to her head. She has always been known to live life to the excess, at last that's her public persona. As Dorine said,her Celebrity status is all the more reason to keep her nose clean. There must have been other ways to raise the cash. She is not alone with being cash strapped during these difficult times, and a lot of people do not have her advantageous connections. I'm saving my pity for her girls. I'm not a Royalist devotee, Fergie obviously didn't give it a second thought as to how her actions would impact on Andrew's role as Special Trade Ambassador. It might not just be those close to her she has damaged. I do agree though, the Royal's perhaps should have paid her off better in a divorce settlement, if nothing else, to keep her quiet. (Evelyn)Im telling ya', this is a tough crowd;-)))) LOL, ;-)

I agree Fergie was stupid and reckless beyond belief, but I don't like the fact that she was entrapped. Why did this tabloid have to run a sting operation on her, and lure her into it? Re: the Gores. I feel sad for them, as I like them both. They were together since they were 16. Once the kids are grown and on their own, some long-term couples find they no longer have much in common.

(Mari)Why did this tabloid have to run a sting operation on her, and lure her into it? That's the 'Screws of the world' for ya ;-)

Horrifying, shocking news from Cumbria today. I hope no one here is caught up in this. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10216589.stm

There's no safe place anymore...Cumbria isn't exactly an inner city. Once the kids are grown and on their own, some long-term couples find they no longer have much in common. Like starting all over again. Takes work. Some people aren't willing to do that. We're a disposable society; marriage included.

(Mari) Once the kids are grown and on their own, some long-term couples find they no longer have much in common. It could be they wanted to split many years ago, but stayed together for the politics and the kids.

Sickening news from Cumbria. The death toll has now risen to 12.

and 3 critical. I have heard some of the eye witness accounts, absolutely awful. What with the bad coach crash the other week and now this, Cumbria can't cut a break.

Re: Cumbria, terrible tragedy, was the gunman a local or foreigner? (Dorine), They were very young and thrown into very highly warped lifestyle from what they were used to. I can't fault either one of them there for the most part. Di was young not Fergie. Di knew her place, she was the future Queen, she had been put through training before her marriage, she grew up in the beautiful Spencer estate, she knew what was at stake. Fergie's father worked for the Queen, Fergie was not new to that world. Who can forget those photos of her getting her toes licked, and she was topless too. She had no respect for her husband and her daughters then, she gets no pity from me. Rabble is as rabble does.

A local cab driver, Moon. According to press reports he was a loner. After his shooting spree he returned home and shot his Mother.