Check out the great second paragraph of this article: The “angry populism”
Edwards bows out of the race, altering Democratic campaign
By Marcella Bombardieri, Globe Staff | January 31, 2008
Former senator John Edwards ended his quest for the presidency yesterday where it began, in a hurricane-ravaged neighborhood in New Orleans, declaring that he had secured commitments from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that they would continue his fight against poverty.
Although his angry populism enthralled crowds, and he had at times seemed on the verge of catching fire, Edwards failed to win any of the early state contests and had been written off by most political observers weeks ago. He came in second in Iowa, narrowly beating Clinton, but his distant third-place finish Saturday in South Carolina, where he was born and where he won the 2004 primary, was crushing.
Still, Edwards’s announcement came as a surprise because he had declared this week that he would stay in the race through the Democratic convention. Not only did he seem to have the stomach for a long fight, but he had the potential to play kingmaker if Clinton and Obama remain neck-and-neck in the race for delegates.
“It’s time for me to step aside so that history can – so that history can blaze its path,” he said in front of a Habitat for Humanity worksite in the Ninth Ward, with his wife and children by his side. He added later, however, that the passion of his supporters had almost made him change his mind.
Edwards did not endorse either of his rivals yesterday. In the absence of a signal from him, his supporters are expected to divide up between Obama, whose critiques of politics-as-usual are similar to Edwards’s, and Clinton, who tends to poll better among the blue-collar and white voters who made up much of Edwards’s base.
In his speech, Edwards struck an optimistic note, saying, “America’s hour of transformation is upon us.” And yet, he made it clear that his approval for the two remaining candidates was conditional.
“With our convictions and a little backbone, we will take back the White House in November and we’ll create hope and opportunity for this country,” he said.
The former North Carolina senator, his party’s nominee for vice president in 2004, had been laying the groundwork for this run virtually since the last election. He moved leftward and focused his rhetoric on the harm he said corporate America and special interests in Washington do to average people.
Edwards constantly highlighted his decision not to take money from lobbyists, tried to raise the profile of poverty in America, railed against the impact of free trade on US workers, vowed to complete a full withdrawal from Iraq, and called for universal healthcare.
Joe Trippi, Edwards’s senior adviser, said yesterday that the candidate influenced his rivals to take more progressive stances.
“He’s led on everything, from global warming – he was the first one with an economic stimulus package, he was the first to offer universal healthcare,” Trippi said. “I think he pushed both of them to move their agendas.”
But Edwards was beset by woes along the way. The first was the news last March that his wife Elizabeth’s cancer had returned and was incurable. The couple, however, vowed to fight on, and Elizabeth Edwards remained a frequent presence on the campaign trail until a few weeks ago.
With his populist rhetoric, John Edwards was called hypocritical for having worked for a hedge fund and for paying $400 for a haircut. Critics said there was little in his Senate record to back up his platform. And he struggled to raise money against his rivals, deciding in September to accept public campaign financing.
His advisers have blamed the media for ignoring him in favor of two celebrity, potentially history-making candidates – Clinton trying to become the first female commander in chief and Obama seeking to become the first black president.
“What is a white male to do running against these historic candidacies?” one news anchor asked Edwards at the debate in Las Vegas two weeks ago. Edwards said he was proud of his party’s candidates, but also pointed out that he is the son of a mill worker and the first in his family to go to college.
Edwards noted yesterday that he had spoken to both Obama and Clinton to win their promise to fight poverty, but it wasn’t clear whether he was considering lending his support to either one of them. He has been more consistently critical of Clinton than of Obama, and two months ago, he refused to say if he would support her if she became the party’s nominee.
Officials in both campaigns said they will be reaching out to the politicians, party leaders, and fund-raisers who have backed Edwards to try to win them over. Both campaigns sought to claim his mantle.
Clinton “has a lifelong history of having worked on issues of poverty,” said her chief strategist, Mark Penn.
Steve Hildebrand, Obama’s deputy campaign manager, touted the “similarity of their messages and their desire to change Washington.”
Clinton and Obama themselves effusively praised John and Elizabeth Edwards yesterday for their advocacy for the poor.
“While his campaign may have ended, this cause lives on for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America,” Obama told supporters at a rally in Denver.
“He has made poverty a centerpiece of his candidacy and it needs to be on top of the list of American priorities,” Clinton told reporters in Arkansas.
Los Angeles Police officers physically removed pop star Britney Spears from her home early today, placing the troubled celebrity on a “mental health evaluation hold,” authorites said.
More than a dozen motorcycle officers and a Los Angeles Fire Department ambulance swept through the front gates of Spears hilltop Studio City residence shortly before 1 a.m., as a police helicopter hovered overheard. At 1:08 a.m., officers inside the home radioed to commanders that “the package is on the way out.”
Spears was rushed from a side entrance of her home into an ambulance. As she was driven down Coldwater Canyon Boulevard, her vehicle was escorted by more than a dozen motorcycle officers, two cruisers and two police helicopters. Her final destination was the UCLA Medical Center, authorities said.
This is the second time in a month that Spears has been placed on a 72-hour welfare hold. The first occurred on Jan. 3, when Spears declined to give up custody of her children to ex-husband Kevin Federline.
The Summit, the winding street on which Spears lives in Studio City, was jammed with the vehicles of journalists and photographers for several hours prior to the police operation.
Authorities said the welfare hold was prompted by a telephone call they received from Spear’s psychiatrist. It was unclear exactly when they had received the call, but it was apparent that the operation had been carefully planned over a period of time. Unlike the first welfare hold — in which Spears’ ambulance was closely pursued by a throng of photographers — vehicles today were blocked from following the same route. The motorcade that whisked Spears to the hospital also showed a large investment in resources. The line of emergency vehicles stretched longer than a football field.
America’s Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating senior banking executives for insider dealing and fraud as part of a criminal inquiry into the sub-prime crisis, the agent leading the inquiry said yesterday.
Neil Power, the head of the FBI’s economic crimes unit, is heading the most far-reaching criminal investigation into the practices of the mortgage industry since it began to melt down last year, after years of increasingly lax lending finally fed through into an increase in defaults on home loans.
The FBI is investigating every level of the conspiracy that it believes perpetuated the housing boom and ultimately resulted in millions of Americans losing their houses, investment banks losing billions of dollars and the chief executives of Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and UBS resigning.
Mr Power said: “We’re looking at the accounting fraud that goes through the securitisation of these loans. We’re dealing with the people who securitise them and then the people who hold them, such as the investment banks.”
He said he was also concerned that some banking executives might be guilty of insider trading, offloading collatoralised debt obligations (CDOs), pools of bonds and other securities backed by mortgages, before their true valuations came to light in the wake of the home loan meltdown.
The FBI suspects that the house price boom, once seemingly endless, encouraged mortgage lenders to take increasingly large risks, making loans to people with weaker and weaker credit histories as they sought new customers. These lenders, and the brokers that arranged the mortgages, often encouraged borrowers to lie about their income. They told borrowers that if they could not meet their repayments they could always refinance their property and use the proceeds.
The FBI also suspects that the Wall Street banks may have been complicit in the process, ignoring the risks posed by these home loans because they were making huge fees from packaging them into bonds and other securities and selling them on to investors.
Finally, the FBI is investigating whether the Wall Street firms, which kept many of the mortgage bonds they packaged on their own balance sheets, may have failed to warn their investors of the risks they posed.
The FBI is the main investigative arm of the US Department of Justice, working with the US Attorney General and sometimes state attorneys general to bring criminal cases to the courts. The Bureau will also share some of the information it uncovers during the course of its investigation with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which brings civil cases against alleged corporate criminals.
Adam Compton, an analyst at RCM Global Investors in San Francisco, said: “The fact that the FBI is conducting such a wide-ranging investigation shows just how seriously the is being taken. There are so many angles to pursue.”
Robert Mintz, a former federal prosecutor specialising in white collar crime, added: “Given the level of the losses associated with the sub-prime mortgage crisis, this investigation could turn out to be very significant.”
The FBI launched a mortgage task force in December as it sought to step up its investigation into the home loan industry.
In addition to the sub-prime inquiry covering 14 companies, the Bureau is investigating 1,200 separate cases of mortgage fraud. Many of these involve the sale of a house by one person, for an inflated price, to a “straw” buyer, who disappears from the scene, leaving the bank with a house worth less than the mortgage. The two people then split the proceeds.
In 2003, the FBI investigated 436 mortgage fraud cases, rising to 818 in 2006. Meanwhile, the number of so-called suspicious-activity reports the FBI receives from the banks grew from 35,000 in 2006 to 48,000 last year. The FBI expects the number to rise to about 60,000 this year.
The FBI investigation may be the most significant but it is only the latest in dozens of civil and criminal cases being prepared by the SEC, the attorneys general of various states, and class action law firms such as Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins and Brower Piven.
Many of these cover the same ground as the FBI investigation. Others are investigating the role played by the credit ratings agencies, which frequently granted the top AAA rating to CDOs.
Bond insurers are among the other targets of litigation. These firms, which guarantee the payment of interest and principal of the bonds they underwrite in the event of a default, stand accused of failing to inform their investors of the true extent of the dangers posed by the sub-prime securities they insured.
Sub-plots
— The City of Cleveland is suing 21 Wall Street firms, including Goldman Sachs and
Morgan Stanley, claiming they encouraged mortgage lenders to keep making loans to people who could not afford them by buying even the most suspect and packaging them into bonds. As a result, the number of foreclosures in the city jumped from 120 in 2002 to 7,500 last year
— Andrew Cuomo, New York’s Attorney-General, has issued subpoenas to big banks as he seeks to determine whether they knew more than they let on about the risks posed by the mortgage bonds they underwrote
CHANDLER, Ariz. — Giants defensive end Michael Strahan arrived at the first of many Super Bowl news conferences dressed in all black. Five teammates and his coach appropriately followed suit.
Linebacker Antonio Pierce said none other than Coach Tom Coughlin put him in charge of the team attire for the Giants’ first public appearance after arriving in Arizona on Monday. Pierce told all participants to wear black suits as a sign of unity.
The fact that Coughlin allowed Pierce to make that decision fit perfectly with the Super Bowl theme of the kinder, gentler Giants coach. That sure-to-be-told story line, along with a few others, kicked off Monday, as the Giants met the national news media here for the first time at their team hotel.
“He opened up to everybody,” Pierce said of Coughlin this season. “He’s showing us his teeth. He’s letting us know he has cheekbones and everything.”
The kinder Coughlin emerged as a favorite topic Monday. Pierce and his teammates described bowling nights and casino nights introduced this season by Coughlin. They spoke of the leadership council he formed.
Pierce said players who rarely dealt with Coughlin did not know who their coach really was. That changed this season, according to the Giants.
The new Coughlin stood at the podium Monday, wearing the requisite dark suit and a red tie, hair parted just so underneath two bright lights pointing toward his head. The new Coughlin turned his opening news conference into a stand-up comedy routine, cracking a couple jokes.
Of the crowd of reporters gathered around him, along with dozens of TV cameras lining the back wall, Coughlin quipped, “This is like a normal day in New York, media-wise.”
Of the Giants’ 10 victories on the road this season, Coughlin joked, “We have a lot of secrets we can’t share with you.”
The Monday session was basically a preview of what this week will be like for the Giants. Surrounded by a small army of reporters, cameramen and radio hosts, they answered the same questions dozens of times, even in this first setting. There was no trash talk, at least not Monday.
The Patriots arrived in Arizona on Sunday night, but the Giants elected to land Monday afternoon. Most players described a subdued flight. Several Giants even slept. Others watched the movie “Michael Clayton.” The buzz picked up as the plane neared landing, with Coughlin describing the feeling of “anticipation and excitement.”
The Giants went straight to the team hotel, the Sheraton Wild Horse Pass. If they were looking for seclusion, the hotel provided it. Located outside of Phoenix, the hotel sits in the Sonoran Desert, surrounded by mountains and cactuses, instead of fans and bars. The hotel complex includes two 18-hole golf courses and a spa that measures 17,500 square feet.
The six Giants selected to participate in the news conference talked of savoring the experience of the week. Strahan and receiver Amani Toomer recalled what it felt like to lose a Super Bowl, the fireworks exploding for the team that beat them, the newspaper the next morning announcing their loss.
“If you lose,” Strahan said. “What is there to remember?”
As if playing the undefeated Patriots did not serve as enough of a challenge, the Giants also came down with a flu bug this week. Coughlin said the bug surfaced in the past day or two, and that three players missed practices with high temperatures. Coughlin said he hoped the sickness “will not be an issue.”
And with that, attention turned back to the story lines sure to dominate the week. Coughlin said the Giants were familiar with the underdog role. He repeated that he never considered not playing his full roster when the Giants faced the Patriots in the regular-season finale.
Across the ballroom, punter Jeff Feagles talked of remembering the experience. A 20-year veteran, Feagles has never been in a Super Bowl before, same as Coughlin, his kinder, gentler head coach. Feagles talked of how fast the plane ride went by, of how giddy his teammates were.
At the airport, he pulled out a camera and started taking pictures. And with that, Super Bowl week was under way for the Giants.
“This is special,” Feagles said. “I’ve been to that airport I can’t tell you how many times. But this felt different. This felt good.”
Updated, 2:35 p.m. | An autopsy of the actor Heath Ledger was performed on Wednesday morning, but the results are inconclusive, according to Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for New York City’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Charles S. Hirsch.
Additional blood and tissue testing needs to be performed before the manner and cause of death can be determined, Ms. Borakove said in a phone interview, estimating that the process could take 10 days to two weeks. “If you have no apparent cause, you have to do further testing,” she said.
No cause of death has been ruled out, she added. The autopsy, at the medical examiner’s headquarters at 520 First Avenue, near 30th Street on the East Side of Manhattan, began around 8:30 a.m. and lasted about two hours, she said.
The two types of tests that still have to be performed include toxicology, which examines the adverse effects of chemicals in the bloodstream, and histology, in which thin slices of tissue are analyzed by pathologists.
Ms. Borakove said the body was ready to be released to Mr. Ledger’s family for burial. “We don’t need to keep the body once the family is ready,” she said.
Mr. Ledger, 28, the Australian-born actor whose breakthrough role as a gay cowboy in the 2005 movie “Brokeback Mountain” earned him a nomination for an Academy Award, was found dead on Tuesday afternoon in an apartment at 421 Broome Street, between Crosby and Lafayette Streets, in SoHo. Prescription sleeping pills were found near his body, but it is not known if the medication played a role in his death.
WCBS-TV reported today that “along with the prescription drugs that were found in the apartment, police also recovered a rolled up $20 bill with narcotic residue on it” and that police “also found several drug packets containing an unknown substance.”
Asked about the CBS news report, Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman, said it was largely inaccurate.
Mr. Browne said that investigators found a “rolled-up $20 bill” in the apartment where Mr. Ledger’s body was found, but he said that the police “never said residue was found on it.”
He said the bill had not yet undergone forensic tests. “We have a rolled-up $20 bill and we never said it had residue on it or was tested,” Mr. Browne said. “It will be tested, because it was rolled up.”
Mr. Browne said no other narcotics were found in the apartment. He speculated that WCBS — in reporting that several drug packets were found — might have been confusing it with some “blister pack” of prescription drugs. He said some prescription drugs were in bottles and some in blister packs.
“There was no narcotics found in the apartment, period,” Mr. Browne said.
Mr. Browne declined to identify the name of any physicians listed on the prescription drugs.
NEW YORK — New Yorkers clustered outside the Soho loft apartment building where Heath Ledger was found dead on Tuesday said they were “devastated” and “anguished” to learn of the tragedy.
Tamba Mossa, the superintendent of 421 Broome Street — where Ledger had lived for the past four or five months — called the “Brokeback Mountain” actor a “very great man” but said he was blindsided by the news.
“I wasn’t prepared to hear about his death at that moment,” Mossa told a crush of reporters at the scene. “I’m very, very sad.”
But Ledger had seemed depressed recently, according to the superintendent.
“He looked sad,” said Mossa.
New York City Police officers guarded the entrance of the white apartment building, which sits on a cobblestone street in the swanky SoHo section of New York City next to a Nanette Lepore boutique. Swarms of paparazzi, fans and passersby milled about on the sidewalk. One woman came carrying flowers.
The Australian-born Ledger, 28, was found dead by his housekeeper Tuesday afternoon, naked and at the foot of the bed. Sleeping pills and other medications that had been prescribed to him were discovered in the apartment, according to police.
“I’m devastated,” said a young woman who lives in the neighborhood and identified herself only as Jen. “There was never any news of him being involved in anything other than his acting. I’m definitely a fan of his. This is shocking.”
She said she had spotted Ledger in the area a few times while he was still with his former fiancée, actress Michelle Williams, whom he met on the set of “Brokeback Mountain” and with whom he had a 2-year-old daughter named Matilda.
The couple, who lived together with the baby in Brooklyn, broke up last year. In recent months, Ledger had been renting the SoHo apartment.
One passerby on his way home was stunned to learn of the actor’s death.
“I wasn’t familiar with his work, but I just feel anguished,” said David M. Rheingold, 35, who works for a nonprofit. “I feel terrible for his daughter. It’s horrible, just horrible.”
One SoHo resident marveled at the throngs of people who had descended on the scene of Ledger’s death.
“In life, he would not have drawn any kind of crowd like this,” said Roark Dunn, 50, who produces photo shoots. “He’s comparatively obscure.”
Many of those who stopped in front of Ledger’s apartment building said they admired the actor’s work.
“I was moved by the movie ‘Brokeback Mountain,’” said Paul Khor, 40, a fashion buyer visiting from Singapore.
Three Fordham University freshmen and self-professed Ledger fans said they came to SoHo as soon as they heard the news.
“We’re sad,” said Daria Tavana, 19, a playwright major. “He’s somebody who recently had begun to take on really hard roles. It’s totally unbelievable.”
Another onlooker said he appreciated Ledger’s acting and called his performance in “I’m Not There,” the recent Bob Dylan film, “tortured.”
“I respect him very much. He seemed like a legitimate artist,” said the 28-year-old journalist, who declined to give his name but said he works in the neighborhood. “In this day in age, it’s hard to get shocked about any celebrity passing, but he was a really talented actor. It’s sad he’s not going to be around anymore.”
Update, 3:25 p.m.: Paolo Dayao, 26, attended Stadium High School in Tacoma and was an extra in “10 Things I Hate About You.” In an e-mail we asked what he remembered of Ledger. He responded:
I remember him being really nice and down to earth. I guess since he was unknown at the time we did that movie, he didn’t have that Hollywood snobbiness that some of the other actors had. He hung out with the extras in between takes and I remember that he didn’t always go back to his trailer like some of the others would when they were setting up the next scenes. I did get a chance to hang out with him and play hacky sack in between some of the scenes that we shot. He was a pretty nice guy.
Hacky sack with Heath Ledger. Wow.
**********
Two years ago this month, actor Heath Ledger learned that his breakthrough performance in Ang Lee’s “Brokeback Mountain” earned him an Academy Award nomination. Today, hours after a new slate of actors heard about their Oscar hopes, Ledger was found dead.
Ledger was not a Seattleite. He was a not a Northwesterner. But for anyone who remembers the filming of “10 Things I Hate About You,” he was — at least for a short time — a presence in the region.
At Gasworks Park, he tamed Julia Stiles over a game of paintball. At Stadium High School in Tacoma, he frolicked over the bleachers, singing to Stiles during soccer practice and delighting dozens and dozens of student extras. The film also featured location shots at Seattle’s Fremont Troll and the Buckaroo Tavern. (See our 1999 review and the Seattle Film Office map for more.)
SPARTANBURG, S.C. — As the JetBlue charter from Michigan touched down in South Carolina, I strolled up to John McCain’s front-row seat — none of his aides batted an eye — and asked if he would continue to chat with reporters around the clock if he won the Republican nomination.
Most candidates, after all, grow more cautious around the media mob as the stakes get higher.
McCain said he couldn’t stop, because “that destroys credibility.” And besides, he said, “I enjoy it a lot. It keeps me intellectually stimulated, it keeps me thinking about issues, and it keeps me associated with a lower level of human being than I otherwise would be.”
There he goes again.
McCain’s ability to charm the press wasn’t responsible for his big win in Saturday’s South Carolina primary, but it didn’t hurt. After the slimy, rumor-filled campaign run against him in that state in 2000, media outlets yesterday embraced the notion that his triumph was “poetic justice” (Chicago Tribune), “exorcising the ghosts” of South Carolina (New York Times) and a “spiritual victory” (Slate).
Every presidential campaign is constantly calculating whether journalists are potential allies or incorrigible foes. The media are a great — and dirt-cheap — vehicle for carrying a candidate’s message, but submitting to questioning also carries the risk of being thrown on the defensive, as Mitt Romney learned in a tense exchange with Associated Press veteran Glen Johnson last week over the role of lobbyists in his campaign. Read the rest of this entry »
In Broadcatch on Monday, January 21, 2008 at 3:54 am
….his surge talk is just pure nonsense though; NONE of the bench marks have even been given a sniff.
2006 was the bloodiest year of them all and these numbers appear to me to be about comparisons, only in Baghdad and environs, of the casualty rates to 2007.
Again,-no political process at all and Shiite death squads cleaning up with our resources.
McCain: “Folks, this surge is working-don’t let those pesky facts get in the way of this shiny new groupthink meme”
That said, he is indeed the least unpalatable….by far
In Broadcatch on Friday, January 18, 2008 at 9:31 pm
BEST PICTURE:No Country for Old Men (Miramax); Atonement (Focus Features); The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (Miramax); There Will Be Blood (Paramount Vantage); Juno (Fox Searchlight).
BEST DIRECTOR: Joel and Ethan Coen (No Country for Old Men); Julian Schnabel (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly); Joe Wright (Atonement); Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood).
BEST ACTOR: Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood); Benicio Del Toro (Things We Lost in the Fire); Tommy Lee Jones (In The Valley of Elah); Tom Hanks (Charlie Wilson’s War); Denzel Washington (American Gangster); Phillip Seymour Hoffman (Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead); Josh Brolin (No Country for Old Men); James McAvoy (Atonement). BEST ACTRESS: Marion Cotillard (La Vie En Rose); Julie Christie (Away from Her); Angelina Jolie (A Mighty Heart); Ellen Page (Juno); Amy Adams (Enchanted); Halle Berry (Things We Lost in the Fire).
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Javier Bardem, Tommy Lee Jones (No Country for Old Men); Phillip Seymour Hoffman (Charlie Wilson’s War); Paul Dano (There Will Be Blood); Ethan Hawke (Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead)’ Tom Wilkinson (Michael Clayton). BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Amy Ryan (Gone Baby Gone); Cate Blanchett (I’m Not There), Vanessa Redgrave (Atonement); Marisa Tomei (Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead); Saoirse Ronan, Vanessa Redgrave (Atonement), Kelly Macdonald (No Country For Old Men); Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton).
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Paul Haggis (In the Valley of Elah); Diablo Cody (Juno); Tamara Jenkins (The Savages); John Carney (Once).
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: David Benioff (The Kite Runner); Ethan Coen & Joel Coen (No Country for Old Men); Christopher Hampton (Atonement); Ronald Harwood (Love in the Time of Cholera); Aaron Sorkin (Charlie Wilson’s War); Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood); Steven Zaillian (American Gangster).BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: Charles Ferguson (No End in Sight); David Sington (In the Shadow of the Moon); Tony Kaye (Lake of Fire); Asger Leth (Ghosts of Cite Soleil); Bill Guttentag and Dan Sturman (Nanking); Michael Moore (Sicko); Sean Fine and Andrea Nix Fine (War/Dance).
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE: Bee Movie (DreamWorks); Ratatouille (Pixar); Shrek the Third (DreamWorks); The Simpsons Movie (20th Century Fox).
BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN: Guy Dyas (The Golden Age); Wolf Kroeger (Love in the Time of Cholera); Dante Ferretti (Sweeney Todd); Victor Kempster (Charlie Wilson’s War).
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: Roger Deakins (No Country for Old Men, The Asassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, In The Valley of Elah); Remi Adefarasin (Elizabeth: The Golden Age); Affonso Beato (Love in the Time of Cholera); Stephen Goldblatt (Charlie Wilson’s War); Gyula Pados (Evening); Harris Savides (American Gangster); Roberto Schaefer (The Kite Runner); Marcel Zyskind (A Mighty Heart).
BEST COSTUME DESIGN: Marit Allen (Love in the Time of Cholera); Colleen Atwood (Sweeney Todd); Alexandra Byme (Elizabeth: The Golden Age); Albert Wolsky (Charlie Wilson’s War); Janty Yates (American Gangster).
BEST FILM EDITING: John Bloom (Charlie Wilson’s War); Matt Chesse (The Kite Runner); Peter Christelis (A Mighty Heart); Naomi Geraughty (Reservation Road); Joe Hutshing (Lions for Lambs); Chris Lebenzon (Sweeney Todd); Pietro Scalia (American Gangster).
BEST MAKEUP: Luisa Abel (Charlie Wilson’s War); Whomever (American Gangster); Claire Green, Colin Shulver & Tristan Versluis (Sweeney Todd); Joe Hopker (Elizabeth: The Golden Age); Marese Langan (A Mighty Heart); Whomever (Love in the Time of Cholera).
On the January 17 edition of MSNBC’s Hardball, host Chris Matthews addressed the firestorm sparked by his comment about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) that “the reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around. That’s how she got to be senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn’t win there on her merit.”
From the January 17 edition of MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: Good evening, I’m Chris Matthews. Welcome to Hardball. Well, we’re in a time of a lot of frustration in this country — Iraq, of course; the lack of health care for people who work every day; gas prices going up; the weakening economy that scares us every day — and I come on here every night and try to wrestle with these frustrations, and also the changes in our country. We might soon have the first woman president, the first African-American president, or a man older than we’ve ever elected before. And of course, we always treat things here with hope — our uniquely American hope that we can actually make things better, that we can make the greatest of countries, not only survive, but as [author] William Faulkner once said, “prevail.”
In the midst of talking about all of this — almost always without a script, and almost always on tricky subjects of gender and race, and right and left, and what’s in our country’s interest, and who I think is telling the truth, and who I think isn’t — I know I’m dealing with sensitive feelings. I’ve accepted all of this as part of the business I have chosen. This program, I am proud to say, is tough, fearless, and yes, blunt. I want people to react when I say something. I don’t like saying things so carefully, so politically correctly, that no one thinks they even said anything.
What I’ve always counted on in all the wild, speeded-up conversations on Hardball, and elsewhere on television, is my good heart. I’ve always felt that no matter how tough I got, how direct, how provocative — how purposely provocative — people out there watching would know I was not out against them, that it was them I was rooting for, that while I was tough on individuals who sought to lead the country, I was not against the hopes we all have for a fair shake, in fact, a better deal for people who have been held back before we came along.
Some people whom I respect, politically concerned people like you who watch this show so faithfully every night, people like me who care about this country, think I’ve been disrespectful to Hillary Clinton, not as a candidate, but as a woman. They point to something I said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe the morning after the New Hampshire primary, that her election to the U.S. Senate, and all that’s come since, was a result of her toughness, but also the sympathy for her because her husband embarrassed her by the conduct that led to his impeachment, because he, in the words I used, “messed around.”
The truth of course is finer, smarter, larger than that. Yes, Hillary Clinton won tremendous respect from the country for the way she handled those difficult months in 1998. Her public approval numbers spiked from the mid-40s up to the 70s in one poll I looked at.
Why? Because she stuck to her duty; she performed strongly as first lady. She did such a wow of a job campaigning for Senate candidates, especially Chuck Schumer of New York, that she was urged to run for a Senate seat there herself. She might have well gotten that far by another route and through different circumstances, but this is how it happened.
The rest is history: how Hillary went up to New York, listened to peoples’ concerns, and beat the odds, as well as the Republicans, to become a respected member of the U.S. Senate. So, did I say it right? Was it fair to say that Hillary Clinton, like any great politician, took advantage of a crisis to prove herself? Was her conduct in 1998 a key to starting her independent electoral career the following year? Yes.
Was it fair to imply that Hillary’s whole career depended on being a victim of an unfaithful husband? No. And that’s what it sounded like I was saying and it hurt people I’d like to think normally like what I say, in fact, normally like me. As I said, I rely on my heart to guide me in the heated, fast-paced talk we have here on Hardball — a heart that bears only goodwill toward people trying to make it out there, especially those who haven’t before.
If my heart has not always controlled my words, on those occasions when I have not taken the time to say things right, or have simply said the inappropriate thing, I’ll try to be clearer, smarter, more obviously in support of the right of women — of all people — the full equality and respect for their ambitions. So, I get it.
On the particular point, if I had said that the only reason [Sen.] John McCain [R-AZ] has come so far is that he got shot down over North Vietnamese — by North Vietnam, and captured by the enemy, I’d be brutally ignoring the courage and guts he showed in bearing up under his captivity. Saying that Senator Clinton got where she’s got simply because her husband did what he did to her is just as callous, and I can see now, it comes across just as nasty, worse yet, just as dismissive.
Finally — as if anyone doesn’t know this — I love politics. I love politicians. I like and respect people with the guts to put their name, their very being out there for public approval so that they can lead our country. And that goes for Hillary and [Sen.] Barack [Obama (D-IL)] and John and all the rest who are willing to fight to take on the toughest job in the world.
In Broadcatch on Thursday, January 17, 2008 at 5:33 am
Days before the first presidential caucuses in a medical marijuana state, the Marijuana Policy Project today doubled its offer to presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney to back up their statements opposing medical marijuana with scientific evidence.
If any of the candidates can prove his statements are true, MPP will donate the legal maximum of $10,000 to his campaign ($5,000 for the primaries, $5,000 for the general election), plus an additional $10,000 donation to the candidate’s favorite charity.
MPP’s original offer of $10,000 for the campaigns was made Dec. 6 in Manchester, New Hampshire.”In responding to questions from patients who have benefited from medical marijuana, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have all made claims that are patently false,” said Rob Kampia, executive director of the arijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C.
“When appeals to science, compassion and common sense didn’t work, we offered $10,000 to the campaign that could back up the claim that medical marijuana isn’t needed or is too dangerous.
The fact that not one of these candidates has yet to offer any proof indicates they know they’re lying. Patients in Nevada and the 11 other medical marijuana states deserve a real ’straight talk express,’ not political flimflam.”
“I’m living proof that marijuana works when conventional medicines fail,” said David McDonough of Henderson, a registered medical arijuana patient who suffers from chronic pain that limits his ability to walk.
“Any candidate who’s willing to use the guns and power of the federal government to raid and arrest me for using marijuana legally under state law and with my doctor’s approval had better be able to explain why.”
Any responses from the campaigns will be evaluated by an independent panel of medical experts.
Full details of the challenge and relevant scientific data are posted at www.MedicalMarijuanaWorks.org
In response to voters’ questions at campaign events in New Hampshire and elsewhere, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have claimed that marijuana is either too dangerous for medical use or not needed because adequate substitutes exist — claims that are contradicted by published scientific data.
In letters sent this week to each of the three candidates, Kampia cited their specific statements and challenged them to supply proof.
In his letter to McCain, Kampia wrote:
“We are struck by the fact that you consider marijuana to be too ‘damaging to one’s health’ for use even under medical supervision, considering that the Arizona Republic has reported that at least half of your family’s wealth comes from an Anheuser-Busch beer distributorship”.
“The CDC reports that excessive drinking was responsible for 75,000 U.S. deaths in 2001. Marijuana has never been proven to increase death rates or to have caused even one fatal overdose.”
Medical marijuana states loom large in upcoming presidential primaries and caucuses.
Maine holds Republican caucuses on Feb. 1 and 2, and four more medical marijuana states hold primaries or caucuses on “Tsunami Tuesday,” Feb. 5 — Alaska, California, Colorado and Montana.
Copies of the letters to the three Republican candidates are available from MPP director of communications Bruce Mirken at 415-668-6403 or 202-215-4205.
With more than 23,000 members and 180,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States.
MPP believes that the best way to minimize the harm associated with marijuana is to regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol.
For more information, please visit http://MarijuanaPolicy.org.
EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. – New York Giants coach Tom Coughlin tried to set the tone this morning with regard to the weather.
“Our team is not going to entertain a whole lot of questions or spend a lot of time talking about the weather,” Coughlin said.
That didn’t work.
With temperatures for Sunday’s NFC championship game at Lambeau Field expected to reach no more than 4 degrees and lows expected below zero, the Giants were barraged with questions about how they plan to deal with the elements.
Coughlin took his team outside to practice at 11:40 a.m., although the mid-day temperate here was near 40 degrees, so it’s debatable how much that could have helped the Giants prepare for the cold.
Coughlin’s approach was in contract to Packers coach Mike McCarthy’s philosophy of practicing indoors late in the season. Coughlin wouldn’t say whether he planned to practice outside the rest of the week, but the Giants have practiced inside their bubble almost exclusively late in the season.
The Giants’ offensive linemen have made a pact not to wear anything under their jerseys, so expect to see them in short sleeves on Sunday.
“You can’t wear sleeves,” said former Packers offensive lineman Grey Ruegamer, who is in his second season with the Giants. “That’s for skill-(position) people.”
Giants left guard Rich Seubert, a Marshfield native, believes it’s possible to put even extremely cold temperatures out of his mind during a game.
“The benches are heated, and they’ve got heaters on the sidelines,” Seubert said. “When you’re playing, you don’t care. I grew up there. I know how cold it gets. I heard them saying it’s going to be 7 degrees. That’s pretty warm. I went home last year (in February), and it was like minus-20 for a week straight.”
Giants kicker Lawrence Tynes said he heard Seahawks kicker Josh Brown wore heated pants during Saturday’s snow-filled NFC divisional playoff game at Lambeau Field but had no plans to do the same.
“I’m not a big hunter, so I don’t have that kind of apparel,” Tynes said. “It was a smart idea though. I think with the heated benches, I’ll be fine. I may put on an extra undershirt but on my legs, I’ll wear what I would normally wear if it was 85 degrees.”
Tynes admitted that today’s practice outdoors probably won’t help much come Sunday, especially considering he worked out comfortably in shorts.
A homecoming of sorts
Seubert grew up 140 miles from Green Bay, regularly attended games at Lambeau Field and knows many of his family and friends are Packers fans.
However, he believes all of them will be rooting for the Giants on Sunday.
“Family is a lot thicker than where you live,” Seubert said. “They’ll be supporting the Giants.”
It will be the first game at Lambeau in his seven-year NFL career. He did not play in the Giants’ 14-7 win in Green Bay on Oct. 3, 2004. Seubert missed the entire 2004 season to recover from the broken leg he sustained in 2003.
“It will be fun to have some of my family there – parents, uncles, sisters and stuff,” Seubert said. “It’s going to be fun, but it’s going to be a tough game.”
The 6-foot-3, 310-pound Seubert, who played at Western Illinois, has started all 16 games this season.
Injury report
The Giants’ secondary looks like it will be in better shape this week than it was at the end of Sunday’s divisional playoff game at Dallas.
Cornerback Aaron Ross, a rookie first-round draft pick, returned to practice on a limited basis and said he expects to play on Sunday but will have to wear a brace. He left the Cowboys’ game twice after his right shoulder popped out of place.
“I really don’t know (if it will pop out again),” Ross said after practice. “All I’m going to do is go out there and play the same way I’ve been playing. If a tackle comes up where I have to hit him with my right shoulder, I’m going to do it.”
Cornerback Sam Madison (abdominal strain) was expected to take part in individual drills, but the Giants listed as a non-participant. Kevin Dockery, the Giants’ top nickel corner, also didn’t practice due to a hip flexor.
Receiver Plaxico Burress (ankle) and tackle Kareem McKenzie (ankle) were limited.
Looking back
Coughlin was the Packers receivers coach in 1986 and 1987 under Forrest Gregg, but his career was in limbo after Gregg left to become the coach at SMU in 1987.
Coughlin confirmed that Gregg left the Packers without even telling his own coaching staff that he was taking the SMU job.
“He just left,” Coughlin said. “(That conversation) is for another time. The way it ended in Green Bay, that’s a pretty boring story really. The great thing about it is that I ended up here (as an assistant coach).”
Odds and ends
Ruegamer had this to say when asked whether there’s any insight into Favre that he could give to the defense that nobody else would know: “He’s got a tattoo on his (butt). That’s about it. Everything else is on film.”
Giants running back Brandon Jacobs grew up with Packers cornerback Tramon Williams in Louisiana, and the two played together at Assumption High School.
Of Williams, Jacobs said: “That’s one guy who I can say I’m really happy for. He didn’t get a scholarship coming out of high school, and it took him until this year to really get an opportunity to play. I wish him a lot of luck from here on out.”
LOS ANGELES (AP)
– Actor Brad Renfro, whose career began promisingly with a childhood
role in “The Client” but rapidly faded as he struggled with drugs and
alcohol, was found dead Tuesday in his home. He was 25.
Actor Brad Renfro served 10 days in jail in 2006 after pleading guilty to attempted possession of heroin.
Paramedics pronounced him dead at 9 a.m., said Craig Harvey, chief
investigator for the Los Angeles County coroner’s office. The cause of
death was not immediately determined, Harvey said, but an autopsy could
be conducted as early as Wednesday.
Renfro had reportedly been drinking with friends the evening before his death, Harvey said.
Renfro’s lawyer, Richard Kaplan, said he did not know whether the death was connected to any problems with addiction.
“He was working hard on his sobriety,” Kaplan said. “He was doing well. He was a nice person.”
The actor served 10 days in jail in May 2006 after pleading no contest
to driving while intoxicated and guilty to attempted possession of
heroin.
The latter charge stemmed from his arrest in Los
Angeles’ Skid Row area, when he attempted to buy heroin from an
undercover officer in 2005.
For several years he was better known for that drug bust and the resulting criminal case than for acting.
After one court appearance, he talked to reporters about drug
rehabilitation, saying he was “tired of paying the consequences” for
drinking and drug use and eager to get clean.
A native of
Knoxville, Tennessee, Renfro’s film career began when he was 12, acting
opposite Susan Sarandon and Tommy Lee Jones in “The Client.” His other
credits include “Sleepers,” “Deuces Wild,” “Apt Pupil” and “The Jacket.”
(01-15) 13:57 PST SAN FRANCISCO -
–
San Francisco – In his frantic call to 911, Kulbir Dhaliwal repeatedly
pleads for police and medical crews to help his brother after a tiger
attack at the San Francisco Zoo, saying the situation was “life and
death” and asking that a helicopter be brought in to rescue him.
“How long does it take?” Dhaliwal, 23, said to the 911 dispatcher
after the escaped tiger attacked his 19-year-old, Paul, on Christmas
Day, and killed their friend, Carlos Sousa Jr.
“Man, it does not take this long to get an ambulance out here,”
Kulbir Dhaliwal said, suggesting he has waited a total of more than 20
minutes, making two phone calls over the cell phone before the line
went dead, about the time the loose tiger attacked him at 5:23 p.m.
Tapes of some of the 911 calls from that attack were released this morning.
During the cell call, the 911 dispatcher repeatedly orders the older
brother to calm down and tries to explain that an ambulance is waiting
outside the zoo because of fears that paramedics may also be hurt by
the loose tiger. She also gives instructions on how to control bleeding.
The call is cut off about the time that the tiger makes its way from
the grotto exhibit to the Terrace Cafe and attacks Kulbir Dhaliwal.
In the 5:16 p.m. call to 911, Dhaliwal does not make reference to any attack on Sousa.
The dispatcher apparently believes the brothers are inside a zoo
building at the time, an apparent miscommunication, but is aware that a
tiger had attacked in the zoo.
Dhaliwal’s cell phone call came 12 minutes after a zoo security
official made the initial report to 911, a call that is also recorded
in tapes released today. It also came as fire crews awaited permission
to enter the zoo, blocked because of an emergency lockdown.
In addition to Dhaliwal’s call, the city released a separate 911
recording of the initial emergency call made at 5:04 p.m. on Dec. 25.
In that first call, zoo radio transmissions are recorded. They
included the initial downplaying of the incident and then the moment
when a zoo official realizes the animal is on the loose and calls for
an emergency lock down at the zoo. “I’ve got a tiger out. Code One.”
A started zoo official replies “What?”
Dhaliwal, who was defenseless at the zoo’s Terrace Cafe when he made
his 5:16 p.m. cell call, is apparently told by the dispatcher how to
control the bleeding. However, specific references to bleeding were
redacted by officials who released the tapes today.
He complies, but repeatedly suggests the situation is urgent.
Dhaliwal asks, at one point, “Can you check up on them and see where they at?”
The dispatcher responds that “They are on scene right now, but they have to stage until they are given permission to go inside.”
A frantic Kulbir proclaims: “It’s a matter of life and death! How can they wait for permission to go in?”
“I understand that,” replied the dispatcher, “but at the same time,
we have to make sure the paramedics don’t get chewed out…because, if
the paramedics get hurt, then nobody is going to help you…”
Then Kulbir says, “What do you mean? …my brother’s on the ground out here….”
“OK, calm down, all right,” the dispatcher replies.
“It’s a matter of life and death…I’m not going to let him die like that.”
“I’ll stay on the line with you,” the dispatcher said. “If the
paramedics get hurt they cannot help your brother, so you need to calm
down and…”
“Send more paramedics then!”
The dispatcher replies: “You are going to be the best help for your
brother right now, so you need to calm down and help him until we can
get there, sir, all right? So I’m going to stay on the line with you. “
“Can you fly a helicopter right here? Because I don’t see no f- ambulance here
Dispatcher: “OK, Stay calm! You have to stay calm for your brother, all right?”
While Kulbir waited for help outside the cafe, the line went dead at
5:23 p.m. around the same time as the animal attacked him. The tiger
was soon shot and killed by San Francisco police officers who were
allowed on zoo grounds.
In Broadcatch on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 6:40 pm
January 15, 2008
Team Obama: Michigan’s Meaningless
Emailed a few minutes ago from Bill Burton to reporters with the subject line, “Something to think about as returns come in from Michigan” …
TO: Interested Parties
FR: The Obama Campaign
RE: Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary
Because Michigan violated DNC rules by placing its Presidential
Primary on January15th, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee ruled that
the Michigan Democratic Party could not use the results of the January
15 Presidential Primary to allocate delegates to the 2008 Democratic
National Convention. In other words, no delegates are at stake today in
the Michigan Democratic Primary.
All of the Democratic presidential candidates publicly pledged not
to campaign in Michigan, none have visited the state, opened offices,
hired staff or communicated with voters through television, mail,
phones or otherwise. In addition, four Democratic presidential
candidates, Obama, Edwards, Richardson and Biden withdrew their names
from the Primary ballot in order to avoid participating in the Michigan
Primary. Clinton did not withdraw her name even though she publicly
committed to not participate in the Primary. Clinton, Dodd, Gravel and
Kucinich are the only candidates on the ballot today. The Obama
Campaign is not participating in the Primary and has not instructed
supporters in Michigan whether or how to vote.
Therefore the results of the primary tonight have no bearing on the Democratic nomination contest.
Florida, whose primary was scheduled for January 29th, is just like
Michigan – the DNC applied full sanctions for setting an early
primary date and there are no delegates are at stake. As with Michigan,
all of the Democratic presidential candidates signed a pledge to not
campaign in Florida. Although Senator Obama did not remove his name
from the Florida Primary ballot because Florida law did not allow him
to do so, Senator Obama is firm in his commitment to neither
participate nor campaign in the Florida Primary and its outcome has no
bearing on the nomination contest. We raise Florida today because
Senator Clinton has scheduled a fundraiser in Florida on Jan. 27th, and
there are signs – despite Senator Clinton’s public pledge
to the contrary – that she may be planning to campaign in the
state – inquiring about large venues and increased organizing
activity – ahead of the Florida primary.
Our position and the position of the DNC is clear – neither
the Florida nor Michigan primaries are playing any role in deciding the
Democratic nominee and we are not campaigning in either state.
[[[ Here’s a LATE-NIGHT UPDATE on the cynical politics of the “hope”-panderer: The Obama campaign has repudiated these flyers. But, reportsTime’s Mark Halperin (the italics are his), “Obama, in Reno Monday, makes explicit appeal for independents and Republicans to caucus for him.” So, the flyer’s out but the message is still on. ]]]
“Here in Nevada Barack Obama has put out a flyer reading, in part, “You Can Be A Democrat for A Day,” reports Taylor Marsh. who lives and broadcasts in Las Vegas. [UPDATE:Obama’s campaign is doing this nationwide. Here’s an official Florida Obama campaign release on how to be a “Democrat for a Day.”] Then there’s the manipulation by Obama-ite leaders of the Culinary Workers Local 226 in Nevada that forced Obama on union members (more below). (Let’s not forget that Obama dissed unions as “special interests” — that is, when they supported his rivals John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.)
So THIS is Chicago-style politics! Barack Obama, stung by his New Hampshire loss, promised a “Chicago-style smackdown,” and he’s delivered. Beyond this shocking invitation to let Republicans invade Democratic caucuses, there’s the disturbing prospect that Republicans — knowing that Obama will be the easiest Democratic nominee to defeat in the general election — will do just that. Gleefully! God almighty. Is Karl Rove advising the Obama campaign now, beyond the pages of the Wall Street Journal? Don’t forget Larry Johnson’s warnings in “Why Are the Rightwing Republicans Hyping Obama?” — which should be re-read by every true Democrat.
Above is a brief segment from Senator Hillary Clinton’s vote for the Iraq War resolution. The complete speech can be seen in its entirety here (part 1) and here (part 2).
This morning on Meet the Presssparks flew as Russert brought up Senator Clinton’s vote yet again. Transcript is here.
Tim Russert contrasts what she said at the time with what Barack Obama said in 2002 (then an Illinois state senator):
“I know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors. … I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that” “invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale” “without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than the best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.“
RUSSERT: Who had the better judgment at that time?
Senator Clinton briefly outlined why she voted as she did, that her vote was not one for preemptive war but for further UN weapons inspections, and that she had President Bush’s personal assurances that all avenues would be taken to prevent war, war as an option only of last resort.
Then a curious thing takes place. Rather than debate Senator Obama’s judgment with her own, there is a long, rather tortured argument over the consistency of Obama’s statements on the Iraq War, voting patterns over funding, and even questions about his political motivations. It was all rather perplexing to watch, seemingly taken from the Karl Rove playbook of attacking your opponent’s strength.
I have to point out that instead of telling the American people about her positive vision for America, Senator Clinton spent an hour talking about me and my record in a way that was flat out wrong. She suggested that I didn’t clearly and unambiguously oppose the war in Iraq when it is absolutely clear and anyone who has followed this knows that I did. I stood up against the war when she was voting for it, at a time when she didn’t read the intelligence reports or give diplomacy a chance. …I have to say that she started this campaign saying that she wanted to make history and lately she has been spending a lot of time rewriting it. I know that in Washington it is acceptable to say or do anything it takes to get elected but I really don’t think that is the kind of politics that is good for our party and I don’t think it is good for our country and I think that the American people will reject it in this election.
Since New Hampshire this election seems to have entered a new, decidedly more personal phase. One which incidentally does not include John Edwards as he was barely mentioned, either by Mrs Clinton or by Russert.
The WGA has failed in a bid to have the city refuse film-location permits to struck production companies.
The guild pleaded its case to the city in a Friday hearing before the Los Angeles Board of Public Works. The WGA sought to have struck companies denied the permits necessary to close city streets for location shoots.
A spokesman for FilmLA, the private organization that helps facilitate industry permit requests, said the board ultimately nixed the guild’s request after consultation with the city attorney.
But the board did issue an opinion — with no binding force of law — that production companies obtaining permits provide guild representatives 20 minutes on location during film shoots to state their views on the WGA’s current negotiations impasse.
The WGA has been on strike since Nov. 5, and its last film and TV contract with the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers expired Oct. 31.
“The Public Works commission did make a recommendation that the production companies hear the writers out, on location, for a period of 20 minutes,” FilmLA spokesman Todd Lindgren said. “It’s a recommendation. It’s not anything that was binding, and if the city attorney advises us in a formal letter advises us to do that, we will. But until they we don’t have the power to do that, and we’re out of it.”
Lindgren said FilmLA took no position on the matter during the board hearing.
The WGA said Friday that it is “committed to bringing this strike to a successful conclusion as quickly as possible. The big media companies that walked away from the bargaining table and continue to refuse to negotiate shoulder the responsibility for damaging the entertainment industry and the Los Angeles economy.”
The AMPTP criticized the guild’s attempt to prevent location shoots.
“The WGA this morning engaged in a failed effort to stop the city of Los Angeles from issuing four separate permits for film production,” the AMPTP said. “Although the WGA was rebuffed by the L.A. Board of Public Works, the WGA’s attempt to derail production on films with completed scripts — and thus to throw hundreds and hundreds more people out of work — shows that the WGA’s organizers are continuing to do whatever they can to make good on their boast to ‘wreak havoc’ on our industry.”
Jane Platten gestured, bleary-eyed, into the secure room filled with voting machines. It was 3 a.m. on Nov. 7, and she had been working for 22 hours straight. “I guess we’ve seen how technology can affect an election,” she said. The electronic voting machines in Cleveland were causing trouble again.
For a while, it had looked as if things would go smoothly for the Board of Elections office in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. About 200,000 voters had trooped out on the first Tuesday in November for the lightly attended local elections, tapping their choices onto the county’s 5,729 touch-screen voting machines. The elections staff had collected electronic copies of the votes on memory cards and taken them to the main office, where dozens of workers inside a secure, glass-encased room fed them into the “GEMS server,” a gleaming silver Dell desktop computer that tallies the votes.
Then at 10 p.m., the server suddenly froze up and stopped counting votes. Cuyahoga County technicians clustered around the computer, debating what to do. A young, business-suited employee from Diebold — the company that makes the voting machines used in Cuyahoga — peered into the screen and pecked at the keyboard. No one could figure out what was wrong. So, like anyone faced with a misbehaving computer, they simply turned it off and on again. Voilà: It started working — until an hour later, when it crashed a second time. Again, they rebooted. By the wee hours, the server mystery still hadn’t been solved.
Worse was yet to come. When the votes were finally tallied the next day, 10 races were so close that they needed to be recounted. But when Platten went to retrieve paper copies of each vote — generated by the Diebold machines as they worked — she discovered that so many printers had jammed that 20 percent of the machines involved in the recounted races lacked paper copies of some of the votes. They weren’t lost, technically speaking; Platten could hit “print” and a machine would generate a replacement copy. But she had no way of proving that these replacements were, indeed, what the voters had voted. She could only hope the machines had worked correctly. Read the rest of this entry »
Anyone who has picked the wrong running or walking shoes for their feet knows that it’s not an experience you want to repeat. eHow has a good article on how pick the right shoe for your unique foot and running style.
It’s not enough to just choose the one that looks the coolest; your entire body is affected by how good or bad your shoes are. This doesn’t necessarily mean that you need to get the most expensive pair, either. What’s your best tip for picking out the best running or walking shoes for your feet? Please share in the comments.
In Broadcatch on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 9:16 pm
GREG BISHOP
THE NY TIMES
Every time the Packers and the Seahawks meet it is like a small family reunion. For starters, Seahawks Coach Mike Holmgren once led the Packers to the Super Bowl, and lest anyone forget the impression he left on the city, he will cruise to the game down Holmgren Way. Matt Hasselbeck, the Seahawks’ quarterback, started his career in Green Bay. His mentor? The Packers’ ageless quarterback Brett Favre, he of the 4,155 passing yards and 28 passing touchdowns this season. The last time these teams met in the playoffs, in January 2004, Hasselbeck famously shouted during the overtime coin toss: “We want the ball. And we’re going to score!”
He threw an interception that the Packers returned for the winning touchdown.
Since then, both teams went to work renovating their defenses. The Packers have one of the best cornerback tandems in the N.F.L. in Al Harris, who intercepted the pass from Hasselbeck, and Charles Woodson, along with an active linebacker in A.J. Hawk. The architect of that improved defense is General Manager Ted Thompson, formerly of the Seahawks.
This game could hinge on which revamped defense plays better. The Seahawks’ defense features four Pro Bowl starters in defensive end Patrick Kerney, linebackers Lofa Tatupu and Julian Peterson and cornerback Marcus Trufant. But that same defense allowed 44 points to Atlanta and has played only three playoff teams this season.
Another observation: At this stage of the game, and this may not be relevant statistically due to demographic differences in reporting locations (which are nowhere identified as far as I can tell)…
The voting machine results coming in for the Democratic candidates do not match the exit polls for the top two. Obama was the clear winner, according to reports I heard based on the exit polls. Hillary has a commanding lead from the incoming voting machine reports.
There are two stages to the projections: Exit polling, which is what people said they voted for, and voting machine results, which is what the computers report. Early projections come from exit polls, and as the evening progresses, what’s coming in comes from voting machines.
We saw exit polls award the race to Gore in 2000, and then voting machines award it to Bush (and then, when the minus 16,022 votes were pulled out of the Diebold optical scan — the same make, model and version as New Hampshire’s machines), they put the candidates at a tie. A statewide hand count later showed Gore won.
In 2002, the same pattern appeared, but was more pronounced: The exit polls went one way, but when the voting machine results came in it flipped.
Watch the Dem race very carefully to see if the front runners remain flipped from the exit polls as the machine results come in.
The two areas identified as most likely to be dirty in NH are Manchester and Nashua, according to my sources on the ground there.
In New Hampshire, I expect to see the first hour’s results to be mostly machine results, with some machine results withheld for the very end. The hand counts will take a little longer to come in, but since I like to make bets, I’m betting that some voting machine locations will be withheld until after the hand count places.
New Hampshire is not identifying which locations are in, unless I’m missing something at the Sec. State web site.
France is tops, and the United States dead last, in providing timely and effective healthcare to its citizens, according to a survey Tuesday of preventable deaths in 19 industrialized countries.
The study by the Commonwealth Fund and published in the January/February issue of the journal Health Affairs measured developed countries” effectiveness at providing timely and effective healthcare.
The study, entitled “Measuring the Health of Nations: Updating an Earlier Analysis,” was written by researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. It looked at death rates in subjects younger than 75 that could have been prevented by timely and effective medical care.
The researchers found that while most countries surveyed saw preventable deaths decline by an average of 16 percent, the United States saw only a four percent dip.
The non-profit Commonwealth Fund, which financed the study, expressed alarm at the findings.
“It is startling to see the US falling even farther behind on this crucial indicator of health system performance,” said Commonwealth Fund Senior Vice President Cathy Schoen, who noted that “other countries are reducing these preventable deaths more rapidly, yet spending far less.”
The 19 countries, in order of best to worst, were: France, Japan, Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Some countries showed dramatic improvement in the periods studied ” 1997 and 1998 and again between 2002 and 2003 ” outpacing the United States, which showed only slight improvement.
White the United States ranked 15th of 19 between 1997-98, by 2002-03 it had fallen to last place.
“It is notable that all countries have improved substantially except the US,” said Ellen Nolte, lead author of the study.
Had the United States performed as well as any of the top three industrialized countries, there would have been 101,000 fewer deaths per year, the researchers said.
In Broadcatch on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 5:03 am
NotesI was listening to Thom Hartmann talking to various people in NH and Ted Olsen was telling him how great Rudy was for New York. Grrr.
Carolyn Kay has her usual collection of media links, including:
“Clear Channel could win FCC approval shortly. The scuttlebutt on Wall Street and in Washington is the FCC will sign-off on the $19.5 billion buyout by Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners soon – possibly by the end of the week. Only Democrat Michael Copps is expected to vote against the deal.” Caro notes that Mitt Romney, a founder of the company, still owns interest in Bain.
Dean Baker finds Yet Another Protectionist Cry for “Free Trade” in the NYT that clearly is only about forcing low-skilled or low-paid workers to compete with Chinese slaves, but still protects high-earning professional jobs: “If the NYT ever let a real free trader write a column, they would probably also report on the enormous costs imposed on both the economies of the United States and developing countries through copyright protection and patent protection on prescription drugs. The latter raises drug prices in the United States by close to $200 billion a year (@ $670 per person) over their competitive market price. Free traders would be concerned about such costs. This sum is one or two orders of magnitude greater than the amount of money at stake in trade agreements like CAFTA.“
Oops! Did Barack Obama’s campaign run slightly illegal robo-calls in New Hampshire?
I see some else has gone plural, and it’s now We Love America More Than Anyone. And some videos of Americans in the Spanish Civil War. Sort of the opposite of Jonah Goldberg.
As many of you know, I’m no fan of Tim Russert’s. I’m sure most Democratic candidates would rather eat dirt than go on his show but the simple fact of the matter is that candidates like Hillary, John & Barack suffer through Russert’s ego and BS for the exposure they get to the tens of thousands of voters who might be watching on any given Sunday morning. They know to expect Russert’s form of gotcha journalism and hopefully – they go on the show prepared to do battle.Most of the time, they get through it unscathed and come out the stronger for having entered the lion’s den and not tripped their way through it.Sadly, this was not the case for Barack Obama on Veterans Day yesterday. Russert & Obama talked about Iraq at one point, and Russert asked him about something he said in 2004…
There’s not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage
Like many of you, I’ve gotten pretty hooked on those Sunday talk shows – I want to see what the candidates have to say to us so I tuned in to Meet the Press to hear what Senator Obama had to say in the aftermath of his speech at the Jefferson Jackson dinner in Iowa Saturday night. I have to admit I jumped around from one show to the other during the commercials, so I missed some of Obama’s session with Russert. So today I went looking for the Transcript to get a fuller, more complete picture of what went down. I have to say I was surprised at some of the things he had to say.
Let’s take a look, shall we?
MR. RUSSERT: You were not in the Senate in October of 2002. You did give a speech opposing the war. But Senator Clinton’s campaign will say since you’ve been a senator there’s been no difference in your record. And other critics will say that you’ve not been a leader against the war, and they point to this: In July of `04, Barack Obama, “I’m not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don’t know,” in terms of how you would have voted on the war. And then this: “There’s not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage.” That was July of `04. And this: “I think” there’s “some room for disagreement in that initial decision to vote for authorization of the war.” It doesn’t seem that you are firmly wedded against the war, and that you left some wiggle room that, if you had been in the Senate, you may have voted for it.SEN. OBAMA: Now, Tim, that first quote was made with an interview with a guy named Tim Russert on MEET THE PRESS during the convention when we had a nominee for the presidency and a vice president, both of whom had voted for the war. And so it, it probably was the wrong time for me to be making a strong case against our party’s nominees’ decisions when it came to Iraq.
I’m sorry, but did he just say the only reason he refused to stand by his principles (opposing the war) was because his party’s nominees had voted for the war resolution???? They got a pass because they were our nominees, but now that he’s running against Hillary its full steam ahead with the attacks on her vote?
WTF?
So what happened in the last three years since he gave Kerry & Edwards a pass?
And speaking of John Edwards… why is it we never hear Obama go after John Edwards for his vote for the war?
OR for Edwards’ cosponsorship of that war resolution?
OR for going on one Sunday show after another to beat the drum for going after Saddam?
We hear plenty about Hillary’s vote for the resolution but when it comes to Edwards’ active support for that same resolution…
CRICKETS
Ok back to the interview…
MR. RUSSERT: Some involved in the anti-movement have said that in 2004, 2005, 2006 Barack Obama voted to fund the war. Every time there was a proposal to have a fixed date withdrawal you said no, it would be a slap in the face to the American troops, it may create bloodshed and more division, that American credibility was at stake, that you were not a leader in trying to stop the war until you ran for president and got to Iowa and got to New Hampshire and had a sense of the anti-war, war fervor in the Democratic base.SEN. OBAMA: No.
MR. RUSSERT: Where was the leadership?
SEN. OBAMA: I, I, I disagree with that.
snip
MR. RUSSERT: But you have changed in your support now of withdrawal. You have changed now in your support of cutting off funding.
SEN. OBAMA: But I haven’t changed in my opposition to the war. Look, you know, at the time when we were trying to convene a government in Iraq that would work, it was important, I think, for me and others who opposed the war to hope for the best possible outcome in Iraq.
(emphasis mine)
That bolded bit up there…? If that sounds familiar it’s because it’s the same position Hillary’s held on this issue all along. And that link above showing his voting record as compared to Hillary proves that out.
MR. RUSSERT: I had asked you in one of the debates whether you’d make a commitment to have all American troops out of Iraq by the end of your first term, and you said you couldn’t do that. You said you had to fight al-Qaeda, had to make sure there was not genocide, try to secure the country. How, how many troops do you envision would have to remain in Iraq for some time to come?SEN. OBAMA: Here’s what I’d do as president: We can get one to two brigades out per month safely. At that pace, we would have all our combat troops out in about 16 months from the time we initiate it. I would like to see it start now. It is not clear that that’s possible, given George Bush’s posture. But 16 months from the time we initiate it, we could have our combat troops out.
The only troops I would have in Iraq would have a very limited mission. Number one, to protect our embassy and our civilian, diplomatic corps. I don’t want Blackwater to be providing that security; I want our U.S. military to providing–to provide that security. I’m very skeptical about the use of private contractors when it comes to our national security. The only other mission, and this is a very narrow one, would be to engage in counterterrorism activity. If al-Qaeda in Iraq is reforming bases there, we should have the capacity to strike them. That would be it. Those would be the only troops that we would deploy.
Ok hang on here… he’s claiming he’d bring out all combat troops BUT he’s going to task our folks left behind in that hell hole with the job of striking at al-Queada? If the combat troops are going is he going to go after AQ with military police?
Embassy guards?
Won’t that take oh I don’t know… COMBAT TROOPS?!
MR. RUSSERT: How many would that be?SEN. OBAMA: Well, you know, I’m going to leave that up to the, the commanders on the ground, because my job is to set a clear mission for them. Their job is to then tell me, “This is what we need to achieve that mission.”
MR. RUSSERT: But, but–yeah, but we have 165,000 there now. Are we talking 150,000?
SEN. OBAMA: There, there–here’s what I’ll say, Tim. We will have the vast majority of the troops who are there gone. This war will be over; there will be no permanent bases. So when I hear, for example, others say, “I will have all troops out,” well, the fact of the matter is who’s going to protect our embassy? Who’s going to protect our civilian forces? Are these folks suggesting that we’re just going to leave them to wander around the streets and rely on the Iraqi military to do that? Obviously not.
And in–there is a difference, though, between myself and Senator Clinton on a couple of these issues. Number one, she hasn’t given a firm timetable in terms of executing the withdrawal, and I think that’s a problem. I think we have to provide certainty to the Iraqi leadership, so that they know that we are serious about changing course. She’s also suggested that the mission on the ground would be more expansive than the one that I’ve envisioned. And that includes, by the way, at least in an article that she–an interview that she gave in March, that, for example, dealing with Iran and making sure they don’t have influence in Iraq would be one of the missions of our military. I think that is a mistake, and so–because what, what happens is that then presents the possibility of a mission creep, an expansion that would involve more troops than I think is necessary.
Sigh… ahh what the hell – see above.
This interview seems to be a hot topic on the net today. As Taylor Marsh points out, Obama’s criticism of Hillary for including troops to keep Iran’s influence in Iraq out is just silly. She asks (and rightly so!) what Obama will do to contain that influence… sprinkle fairy dust on them? I’ll let her wrap this thing up with something from her website today…
Obama stated the “primary difference” between Clinton and himself on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards is that she wants troops in Iraq to prevent Iran from having an influence inside of Iraq, which Mr. Obama thinks “is a mistake.”According to Mr. Obama, the issue of terrorism must stay on the table, with “incursions into Iraq that are affecting the safety of our troops” needing to be — say it with me — “on the table.” So what is he going to do about those “incursions” if Iran refuses to do anything about them? Will he need U.S. troops to deal with them? If not, how’s he going to stop Iran’s incursion that is affecting our troops, fairy dust?
Oh yeah – one more thing… Can you imagine the shit-storm around here if another candidate had admitted to that their views on Iraq were no different that Bush’s? If they’d gone on Meet the Press, been presented with that statement and failed to deny or correct it????
In Broadcatch on Tuesday, January 8, 2008 at 5:28 am
Sling Media is the company best known for its Slingbox, whioh allows users to watoh video from their home cable conneotion or digital video reoorder while they’re on the road.
Sling, now a part of the same oompany as Dish Network, is taking its technology another step or two, it announoed at the Consumer Electronics Show today. Most notably is a new devioe called a SlingCatcher, whioh works hand-in-hand with a Slingbox.
The Slingbox allows oonsumers to watoh video on their oomputers. The SlingCatcher allows them to watch it on another TV in their house. Working with Sling’s new Slingbox Pro-HD, the Catcher will transmit high-definition signals.
By itself, that wouldn’t be super exciting. Many
companies are coming out with ways to send video from one set-top box to multiple TVs in a home.
But the SlingCatcher also connects to users’ computers and computer networks. With that connection, consumers can send stored video files from their network to their TVs. And, using something the company calls “Projector,” users can draw a box around anything on their computer screen - think a YouTube video or a Web page - and display it via the SlingCatcher on their big screens.
”We’ve had enough of … triangulation and poll-driven politics,” he said. ”That’s not what we need right now.’
Obama is rising in the polls because he’s expressing FEELINGS that people WANT to hear. People are worn down by the last seven years, and they want to believe what they’re hearing from a hopeful, fresh candidate. The problem is, it’s just talk. Here are some pithy examples of (1) Obama as the triangulator extraordinaire, and (2) Obama as a do-nothing — yes, a do-nothing.
A do-nothing?You can’t even find it listed at his Senate Web site, but Sen. Obama is the chairman of the Subcommittee on European Affairs for the Senate Foreign Relations committee. That subcommittee oversees “U.S. involvement with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), relations with the European Union (EU), and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Matters relating to Greenland and the northern polar region are also the responsibility of this subcommittee.”
Shockingly — although his campaign has tried to beef up his thin international experience by citing his chairmanship of the subcommittee on European affairs — according to Congressional Quarterly,Sen. Obama has not held a single hearing since he assumed the chairmanship nearly a year ago. It’s little wonder, then, that Sen. Obama’s Senate site doesn’t list his chairmanship.
Then there’s IRAQ, and Obama’s (and Oprah’s) incessant claim– as Oprah told the Des Moines crowd on Saturday, “long before it was the popular thing to do, he stood with clarity and conviction against this war in Iraq.”
In July of `04, Barack Obama, “I’m not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don’t know,” in terms of how you would have voted on the war. And then this: “There’s not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage.” That was July of `04. And this: “I think” there’s “some room for disagreement in that initial decision to vote for authorization of the war.” It doesn’t seem that you are firmly wedded against the war, and that you left some wiggle room that, if you had been in the Senate, you may have voted for it. (”Meet the Press,” 2004, via MyDD, Nov. 11, 2007)
“What would I have done? I don’t know” … “There’s not much of a difference” between him and George W. Bush … “some room for disagreement in that initial decision. …” If that’s not triangulation, I don’t know what is.
What about Obama’s speeches on Iraq in the U.S. Senate? “[H]e did not give a speech devoted to Iraq for 11 months, and waited 16 months to give his first floor speech dedicated to Iraq, which happened to express his opposition to Senator John Kerry’s troop withdrawal plan. …”
What about Obama’s voting record in the U.S. Senate on Iraq? TPM Election Central painstakingly compared every single vote on Iraq by Sens. Clinton and Obama, since Obama entered the Senate. Senators Clinton and Obama voted identically, except once: On the confirmation of “General George Casey to be Chief of Staff for the Army, held just this past February. Hillary voted against confirmation, while Obama voted to confirm.” Why did Sen. Clinton vote against Gen. Casey’s confirmation?
During his nomination hearing to be Army Chief of Staff, I questioned General Casey about recent reports, both by the Department of Defense Inspector General and press accounts, that units and personnel lacked the necessary equipment. General Casey responded that was not aware of the problems cited in these reports and actually quite surprised at the reported shortcomings. In the Inspector General report’s summary, the equipment shortages were attributed to basic management failures among military commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan. General Casey was not aware of this investigation or its recommendations that oversight must immediately improve to ensure proper distribution of equipment; as a result units and personnel are not able to perform assign missions. — From “Statement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on the Vote on Confirmation of General George W. Casey to be Army Chief of Staff,” Feb. 8, 2007
“It is a bit unseemly that General Casey is being made the scapegoat for a war that never should have been fought and for a failed strategy dictated by the civilian leadership in the White House. The President, Vice President and other civilian officials set forth an unworkable strategy with inadequate resources and did not listen to the advice of generals on the ground. They are the ones ultimately responsible for the current situation in Iraq. I hope General Casey will get more support for his new mission, which is so important to the country. I want to see General Casey use his experience in Iraq to ensure that the civilian leadership in Washington understands the challenges faced and resources needed by today’s Army.”
That’s it. That’s the entire press release. Not a word about Gen. Casey’s failure to know about the crisis in equipment shortages or the “basic management failures” during Gen. Casey’s own time in Iraq or the Inspector General’s shocking report.
What about the senators’ trips to Iraq? In his three years in the U.S. Senate, Obama has visited Iraq once. Sen. Clinton has visited Iraq and Afghanistan three times.
We Americans all love good orators. We yearn to feel our hearts soar with optimism. We flock to the “sunny” candidates like Ronald Reagan. We want to feel better about our country but — when we’re sober and reflective — don’t we really want the candidate who’s walked the walk.
Sen. Clinton has stuck her neck out — by voting against Gen. Casey’s confirmation, by voting against the attack-dog resolution against MoveOn.org and by voting on the Iran resolution. (Yes, the last was controversial, but remember that she was the first senator to warn Pres. Bush against taking military action against Iran and that she partnered with Sen. Jim Webb’s resolution to require Congressional authorization before any military action against Iran.)
Sen. Obama failed to show up for the MoveOn or Iran votes, and in effect lied when he lamely told Wolf Blitzer that he didn’t know the Iran vote was coming up and didn’t have time to get back from campaigning in New Hampshire. (In fact, all senators were informed the day before that the Iran resolution vote was to come up the next day.)
In an attempt to deflect attention from the fact that Senator Obama served in the Illinois state senate just three years ago and would have less experience than any president since World War II, Senator Obama and his advisors have gone on the attack. They have criticized the role Senator Clinton has played in promoting American interests during her eight years as First Lady, seven years in the Senate, and four years as a member of the Senator Armed Services Committee.
Senator Clinton as First Lady was “America’s finest ambassador abroad,” Madeleine Albright’s office said at the time. Hillary Clinton did much more than “get picked up at the airport by a state convoy and security detail . . . . and get lunch” with an ambassador, as Senator Obama implied recently. As Newsweek reported about Senator Clinton’s diplomatic missions as First Lady, “She often travels to remote regions where no presidential motorcade would venture and where no secretary of state would have time to go.” Her 1995 speech at the UN World Conference on Women in Beijing, where she famously proclaimed “women’s rights are human rights,” remains an inspiration to leaders of the fight for women’s equality around the world. Long before others, she visited countries stricken by HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria throughout the world, urging better prevention and treatment strategies, and returned to Washington to push for greater action within the US government. Her 1995 trip to India helped open the door to the transformation in relations between the world’s two largest democracies. She raised awareness on mine issues in the Balkans and led humanitarian efforts on behalf of Kosovar refugees.
As Senator, Hillary has fought to ensure our troops have the body armor they need while in combat, and she has passed laws so that returning soldiers are treated with dignity when they return home. She has placed education at the center of U.S. international assistance. She has been a leader in combating nuclear proliferation and the threat of nuclear terrorism. She has championed efforts to end the genocide in Darfur and been a leading voice in calling for action to end global warming. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, she has visited our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan three times.
By contrast Senator Obama has been in the U.S. Senate under three years. His campaign has touted his experience as chairman of a subcommittee on European affairs, which, according to Congressional Quarterly, has not held a hearing since he assumed the chairmanship nearly a year ago. Senator Obama has traveled to Iraq once, 23 months ago.
We respect Senator Obama’s opposition to the war as a state senator in Illinois. But when he was actually in a position to influence policy from the U.S. Senate, he did not give a speech devoted to Iraq for 11 months, and waited 16 months to give his first floor speech dedicated to Iraq, which happened to express his opposition to Senator John Kerry’s troop withdrawal plan. … READ ALL.
People want change. But change from Obama? It’s illusory. Hillary Clinton has brought change for decades, fighting for women’s rights in the 1960s and 1970s when it was far, far tougher than it is these days. Fighting for children’s rights long before it was a common practice.
Obama is infamous for voting “present” on too many tough votes when he was in the Illinois state senate. He has skipped tough votes in the U.S. Senate. How can he possibly be that “the-buck-stops-here” tough leader we’ll need in the White House?
B R O A D C A T C H I N G
Be Sure To Visit Larry Johnson’s (ex CIA) Blog: No Quarter
In Broadcatch on Tuesday, January 8, 2008 at 1:56 am
Viewers Await Return of Stewart, Colbert
By FRAZIER MOORE – 4 hours ago
NEW YORK (AP) — Fans of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert
awaited their return to the air Monday night with eagerness enhanced by
curiosity: How would these funnymen deliver topical satire while
stripped of their writers?That, of course, is the challenge
facing “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” and “The Colbert Report,”
which have been out of production since the writers strike began nine
weeks ago, and are now resuming with their writers still off the job.
While
both Comedy Cental late-night series have always largely been scripted,
that would now violate strike rules of the Writers Guild of America.
Even Stewart and Colbert, as guild members, are apparently barred from
writing anything.
But helping fill each half-hour, as usual, will be interview segments.
Monday,
the scheduled “Daily Show” guest was Ronald Seeber, a Cornell
University professor and expert on conflict resolution. The announced
guests on “Colbert” were New York Times columnist Paul Krugman and The
Atlantic magazine’s Andrew Sullivan. GOP presidential hopeful Mike
Huckabee was expected to appear on “Colbert” Wednesday.
Waiting
in line to see Monday’s taping of “The Daily Show,” New Jersey teacher
Scott Gamble called himself “a huge fan of Jon Stewart’s. He generally
has the best election coverage on the air.”
Meanwhile, Michael
Winship, president of the Writers Guild of America East, was among
about 15 picketers gathered outside the Manhattan studio of “The Daily
Show.”
Winship said the union’s complaint wasn’t with Stewart or
Colbert, but “that Viacom and Comedy Central will not yet make a fair
and responsible contract” allowing the hosts “to get back their
writers.”
Also picketing, Adam Brooks — who wrote and
directed the upcoming feature “Definitely, Maybe” — said: “We’re
trying to send a message that ‘The Daily Show’ and ‘Stephen Colbert’
are better shows with writers than without writers.”
Even though
barred from writing for his own show, Colbert was returning to the air
a leading author: His humor book, “I Am America (And So Can You!)”
currently holds the No. 1 slot on The New York Times best-selling
nonfiction list.
The strike, which hinges on Internet revenue among other issues, began Nov. 5.
___
Associated Press writer Clare Trapasso contributed to this report.
Actor Brad Renfro served 10 days in jail in 2006 after pleading guilty to attempted possession of heroin.
Excel file of NH 2008 Primary Analysis
