Why 'GQ' Doesn't Want Russians To Read Its Story

by David Folkenflik

For war journalist Scott Anderson, the most confounding part of his recent assignment for GQ magazine to explore the root of terrorist acts in Russia a decade ago wasn't the suggestion of treachery and subterfuge he found.

It was the reception his story ultimately received in the United States.

"It was quite mysterious to me," Anderson says. "All of a sudden, it became clear that they were going to run the article but they were going to try to bury it under a rock as much as they possibly could."

Anderson, 50, is an accomplished reporter and novelist who has written previously for Harper's Magazine, The New York Times Magazine, and Vanity Fair.

His investigative piece, published in the September American edition of GQ, challenges the official line on a series of bombings that killed hundreds of people in 1999 in Russia. It profiles a former KGB agent who spoke in great detail and on the record, at no small risk to himself. But instead of trumpeting his reporting, GQ's corporate owners went to extraordinary lengths to try to ensure no Russians will ever see it.

A Management Memo

Conde Nast owns Vanity Fair and GQ as well as other publications, including Russian versions of GQ, Glamour, Tatler and Vogue. On July 23, Jerry S. Birenz, one of the company's top lawyers, sent an e-mail memo to more than a dozen corporate executives and GQ editors.

"Conde Nast management has decided that the September issue of U.S. GQ magazine containing Scott Anderson's article 'Vladimir Putin's Dark Rise to Power' should not be distributed in Russia," Birenz wrote.

He ordered that the article could not be posted to the magazine's Web site. No copies of the American edition of the magazine could be sent to Russia or shown in any country to Russian government officials, journalists or advertisers. Additionally, the piece could not be published in other Conde Nast magazines abroad, nor publicized in any way.

It wasn't just that there was no reference to Anderson's piece on the cover of this month's GQ, which featured a picture of Michael Jackson, a reference to tennis star Andy Roddick's wife and a ranking of obnoxious colleges and top drinking cities. At this writing, I cannot find any reference to Anderson's piece on the Internet.

The idea that information can be sequestered at a time when people can communicate instantly across oceans and continents may seem quaint. But in this instance, Conde Nast sought, against technology, logic and the thrust of its own article, to show deference in the presence of power.

Lawyers, executives and editors at Conde Nast and GQ did not respond to repeated requests for comment this week, and a spokesman ultimately declined on their behalf. But NPR has spoken to several people knowledgeable about the handling of Anderson's piece. No issues have been raised to date about the article's accuracy.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112530364

Sphere: Related Content

For Teens, Has Texting Replaced Talking?

By Sue Shellenbarger

Getty Images

I've always known my kids use digital communications gear a lot. But my cellphone bill last month really grabbed my attention.

My son had racked up nearly 2,000 incoming text messages, and had sent nearly as many. That means he was having more than 60 two-way communications via text message every day. Of course, he was out of school for the summer and communicating more with friends from a distance. Nevertheless, I had to wonder how he found time to hold down a summer job and complete a college course in between all that typing with his thumb.

I was even more surprised to learn that my son is normal. Teenagers with cellphones each send and receive 2,272 text messages a month on average, Nielsen Mobile says.

Some experts lament that all that keyboard jabber is making our kids stupid – unable to read nonverbal cues such as facial expressions, gestures, posture and other silent signals of mood and attitude. Unlike phones, text messaging doesn't even allow transmission of tone of voice or pauses, says Mark Bauerlein, author of a book called "The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future."

States are cracking down on drivers who text, and rightly so. My son doesn't text while driving, and we have discussed the dangers. (This graphic public service announcement, which has recently gone viral on YouTube, highlights just how dangerous texting while driving can be.)

Beyond that, though, I'm not sure I see as much harm as critics of this trend. I've posted before on how I initially tried to curb my kids' texting. But over time, I have seen my son suffer no apparent ill effects (except a sore thumb now and then), and he reaps a big benefit, of easy, continuing contact with many friends. Also, the time he spends texting replaces the hours teens used to spend on the phone; both my kids dislike talking on the phone, and say they really don't need to do so to stay in touch with friends and family.

Does texting make kids stupid? I don't think so. It may make them annoying, when they try to text and talk to you at the same time. And it may make them distracted, when buzzing text messages interrupt efforts to noodle out a calculus problem or finish reading for school.

But I don't see texting harming teens' ability to communicate. My son is as attuned to nonverbal cues as any older members of our family. If anything, I have found him more engaged and easier to communicate with from afar, because he is constantly available via text message and responds with a faithfulness and speed that any mother would find reassuring.

http://blogs.wsj.com/juggle/2009/09/03/for-teens-has-texting-replaced-talking/

Sphere: Related Content

Could Texas' Gingrich-Based High School History Curriculum Go National?

by Justin Elliott

While Republicans are busy gnashing their teeth over President Obama's imminent indoctrination of the nation's schoolchildren, there's an education story bubbling up in Texas that could have considerably more far-reaching consequences.

The GOP-controlled State Board of Education is working on a new set of statewide textbook standards for, among other subjects, U.S. History Studies Since Reconstruction. And it turns out what the board decides may end up having implications far beyond the Lone Star State.

The first draft of the standards, released at the end of July, is a doozy. It lays out a kind of Human Events version of U.S. history.

Approved textbooks, the standards say, must teach the Texan student to "identify significant conservative advocacy organizations and individuals, such as Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly, and the Moral Majority." No analogous liberal figures or groups are required, prompting protests from some legislators and committee members. (Read an excerpt here.)

The standards on Nixon: "describe Richard M. Nixon's role in the normalization of relations with China and the policy of detente."

On Reagan: "describe Ronald Reagan's role in restoring national confidence, such as Reaganomics and Peace with Strength." (That's it.)

The Cold War section is rendered as "U.S. responses to Soviet aggression after World War II ... "

The state board of education, made up of 10 Republicans and five Democrats, has to vote on the standards twice in the coming months before they would go into effect.

Comments in the margin of the draft explain the proposed changes. And a persistent, tendentious conservative voice comes through throughout. Next to the section listing key names and groups from the civil rights movement and 60s activism, including Martin Luther King, Betty Friedan, and the American Indian Movement, it's noted that a committee member demanded parity ... for late 20th century conservative groups:

MV[Multiple Views]: One person: inclusion of 7 names and organizations disproportionate compared to only 3 in conservative section.

Next to a noncontroversial seeming item requiring students to "describe how McCarthyism, the arms race, and the space race increased Cold War tensions" is the note:

"MV[Multiple Views]: One member thinks that if McCarthyism is noted, then the Venona papers need to be explained that exonerates him."

A bullet point on "women and minority employment" as an economic effect of World II caused "one member" to gripe "there is too much emphasis on multiculturalism."

And "one member" deemed a section on "effective leadership" a perfect place to bring to students' attention Charlton Heston's celebrated (among right-wingers) culture war speech.

Here's what makes this a national story: what happens in Texas doesn't stay in Texas, says Diane Ravitch, professor of education at NYU.

That's because Texas is one of the two states with the largest student enrollments, along with California. "The publishers vie to get their books adopted for them, and the changes that are inserted to please Texas and California are then part of the textbooks made available to every other state," says Ravitch, who wrote a book about the politics of textbooks.

Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute explains it as a simple economic calculation by the big textbook publishers. "Publishers are generally reticent to run two different versions of a textbook," he says. "You can imagine the headache the expense the logistics, the storage, all of it."

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/could_texas_gingrich_based_curriculum_go_national.php?ref=fpa

Sphere: Related Content

ALL THE WINE THAT'S FIT TO DRINK

by Jim Hightower

Newspapers are dead, we're told. Dinosaurs in a twittering world.

Well, try telling that to The New York Times. The Brontosaurus of American journalism, the largest newspaper in all the land, is not only alive – it intends to thrive!

Never mind that the paper's ad revenues have plummeted, that it has put some of its prime assets up for sale, and that its cash-flow situation is so dire that it sold a big chunk of itself this year to a Mexican billionaire known for shady dealings. Times are tough, even for the Times, but the company's innovative, forward-looking corporate leaders have come up with a business plan that they say will return the financial luster to gem of journalism. To make ends meet, the Times is going into wine.

Wine? You might presume that the executives have taken to guzzling wine in an effort to give the paper's future a rosy look – but, come on, these are serious business people. They have announced a new, revenue-enhancing venture called The New York Times Wine Club. For about $180 a month, the club will ship wine to your door.

At first blush, journalism and wine might seem an odd pairing. But the Times is already in the home-delivery business, so.... The head of "strategic planning" explains that a wine club is a way for the paper to "delve further into our audience and bring them products and services that basically enhance the bond with The New York Times." Whatever the hell that means.

Well, maybe it'll take odd jobs to keep the presses running. Actually, I think they're onto something with that home-delivery theme. Why not add The New York Times Maid Service to the mix? This would make the Times a company that could do it all for you in one stop – deliver your paper, clean your house, and leave a nice bottle of wine for you. See, there is a future in journalism!

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=134332325317&ref=nf

Sphere: Related Content

Newspapers Fire Young People Most

by Nicholas Carlson

Common sense would suggest that during this whole "death of print" era, newspapers would desperately cling to their young, idealistic and Internet-savvy employees who are willing to work for low entry-level wages.

But no.

According to a survey of newspaper editors, "workers between 18 and 35 years old represented the largest age group affected by [newspaper] layoffs, buyouts and attrition."

Reports the AP:

By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Business Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Cost-cutting newspapers are losing many of their youngest reporters, editors and photographers at the same time publishers are trying to break some of their old habits and learn new tricks on the Internet.

The findings emerged in a recent survey conducted by the Associated Press Managing Editors, an industry group. The report suggests the massive staff cuts at newspapers across the United States will make it even more difficult for the industry to adapt and remain relevant in the age of digital media.

Most of the 95 editors responding to the August survey said their newsroom staffs had shrunk by more than 10 percent during the past year. And workers between 18 and 35 years old represented the largest age group affected by the layoffs, buyouts and attrition, the survey found.

Retaining younger workers may be more important than ever as the Internet reshapes the way stories and photographs are assembled and presented. While many older journalists are adapting, the adjustment presumably isn't as difficult for younger workers who have grown up with the Internet and may have honed their digital skills in college. Having the viewpoints of younger workers also helps newspapers identify trends and issues affecting younger generations.

http://www.businessinsider.com/apme-survey-newspaper-cuts-clip-younger-workers-2009-8

Sphere: Related Content

Marvel/Disney Hybrids

When cartoon worlds collide.

 

I'm not taking the Mickey...

Spider-Mouse by HIDDEN AUTHOR

 

Captain Donald by HIDDEN AUTHOR

 

 

http://www.worth1000.com/contest.asp?contest_id=23840&display=photoshop&page=5000

Sphere: Related Content

Never lose hope

Sphere: Related Content

Wall Street To Securitize People’s Deaths?

 

Source: CBFE Economics

The New York Times published a pretty creepy article on Saturday (September 5th). The article focuses on Wall Street's new plan to make money. What's so bad about Wall Street making money?

Well, their new plan is to buy life insurance plans from elderly and sick people for cash. The example that the New York Times gives is someone selling a million dollar policy for a $400,000 payout, but the payout amount would all depend on the seller's life expectancy. These "life settlements" would then be bundled together to form bonds that can be sold to investors. The investors would start paying for the person's policy from then on. When the person dies, the investors collect on the policy. Apparently, the faster the person dies, the more money the investors make. However, regardless of whether you die sooner or later, Wall Street firms will profit off of fees collected from creating the bonds and facilitating transactions. You could say that Wall Street is planning to "securitize" people's lives (or deaths, as it may be) into a kind of CDO. And we all know how great that whole CDO adventure played out for Wall Street, right? What could be dangerous about creating a similar class of financial products with sick people's life expectancy as the focus?

Apparently, these type of "life settlement" investments aren't new for banks. They already exist in a lot of portfolios. What's new is the plan to securitize these "life settlements" and market them as a big-time asset class of their own. Keep in mind, this isn't something banks are just talking about potentially doing. The Times states that Credit Suisse is "building a financial assembly line to buy large numbers of life insurance policies, package and resell them — just as Wall Street firms did with subprime securities." Estimates are putting the market for this class of investment product at $500 Billion, according to the article. I don't doubt it one bit. Considering how many people are losing their jobs or facing pay cuts and how high medical bills are these days, does anyone really doubt that there are a whole lot of elderly and sick people out there who would be eager to sell their life insurance policies for an immediate cash payout? Especially if they foresee a future inability to pay their premiums?

So what's the upside? Right now a lot of people just let their life insurance policies lapse. If they're lucky they'll still get a small payout but its usually not much compared to the premiums they've paid up to that point. Under this "life settlement" proposal, policy sellers get a bigger payout and eventually investors get their payout too. So insurance companies end up paying out on their policies more often than they do now. But, insurance companies could end up just raising rates and premiums to make up for the difference, which could end up leaving the average policyholder worse off. Wall Street profits. Insurance companies profit. The consumer pays up.

Still, its hard to really get that angry over a proposal like this. As I pointed out, these type of "life settlements" are already held in a lot of investment bank portfolios. And, who am I to say what kind of financial relationships elderly and sick people should or shouldn't engage in?

But there are so many disturbing ramifications that come out of this proposal that I can't help but be worried. The article mentions that investors lost out on these type of investments in the '80s when people with AIDS ended up living longer thanks to new medications. It also mentions that risk managers are planning on diversifying these bonds based on illness type. If one bond happens to represent too many people who all have one type of illness, then that bond could prove to be unprofitable if a cure for that illness is ever discovered. Am I the only one who finds it disturbing that it'll now be in the interest of some Wall Street investors for sick and old to people to die faster and for certain medications or medical procedures to be suppressed or kept inaccessible to the public if they're too successful at actually making people live longer? I mean, don't some of these major banks also have large stakes in pharmaceutical and healthcare companies? Couldn't that present a very serious and disturbing conflict of interest? The article doesn't address these questions.

Then there's this:

Goldman Sachs has developed a tradable index of life settlements, enabling investors to bet on whether people will live longer than expected or die sooner than planned. The index is similar to tradable stock market indices that allow investors to bet on the overall direction of the market without buying stocks.

So, not only will investors be making money when some people die but some investors will also be making money by simply placing bets on life expectancy in a kind of virtual market. Great. Thank God we bailed out these banks, otherwise they wouldn't have been able to come up with these great investment products that will surely work to make America more economically competitive with the rest of the globe.

http://waronyou.com/topics/wall-street-to-securitize-peoples-deaths/

Sphere: Related Content

Death Panels: We've already got 'em

Sphere: Related Content

Poor people will never die

Sphere: Related Content

The fate of Obama's presidency

It hinges on the economy, which is slowly recovering, and Afghanistan, which is fatefully resembling Vietnam.

By Ted Van Dyk

Two issues in national politics determine the fate of presidencies: the state of the national economy and the status of overseas wars. Thus, although media attention presently centers on President Obama's scheduled speech next week to the Congress regarding his endangered health-care initiative, his administration's future — and that of congressional candidates, in both parties, running in 2010 elections — will depend far more greatly on the economic and foreign-policy fundamentals.

First, a brief word about the health-care issue. Obama, quite late in the game, seems to have realized that he can no longer remain a spectator in the formulation of a final health-reform plan, leaving it to Democratic congressional chairs to shape. He is reported to be preparing a definitive statement for his congressional appearance in which he will spell out exactly those provisions he wants enacted in 2009.

Turmoil will follow. Congressional Democrats, in particular, will be enraged if Obama drops the so-called "public option," which would create a public health-insurance plan to compete with private plans. But, in the end, some kind of legislation can be passed this year labeled "health-care reform." It probably will involve marginal insurance-market changes.

Now to the Big Two issues.

Despite the recent upward surge in the Dow index, the outlook for financial and economic recovery remains cloudy. Some indices point upward. But medium-sized and small banks keep going under, including in this region — not because of exotic derivatives but because bread-and-butter construction and business loans have gone bad in regions hard hit by the recession.

Meantime, public debt keeps mounting as a result of the financial and auto-industry bailouts, the stimulus package, and the cost of continuing interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Federal Reserve, not wanting to quash recovery, will continue its present easy monetary policy. But, down the road, the accumulating debt will lead to inflation and the Fed will have to tighten.

The consensus view among economists, which seems the correct one at this point, is that financial/economic recovery will come gradually over the remainder of this year and in 2010. Unemployment rates will remain high, however, and probably not begin to come noticeably down until late next year (when, coincidentally, off-year elections will be held). Fed tightening is unlikely to take place until sometime in 2011.

Now, about those offshore wars. Former University of Washington President Bill Gerberding circulated to friends last week a memorandum questioning whether the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan was beginning to resemble that in Vietnam. The Seattle Times, living on the financial edge, decided to spend money to send reporter Hal Bernton to Afghanistan for two months to give local readers first-hand coverage of the war there. These are local expressions of growing national concern about Afghanistan.

A broad national poll at the beginning of this week showed that most Democrats already have turned against the Afghanistan commitment, which Obama has said was necessary, while independent voters are trending that way. Only Republicans continue to give strong majority support to the U.S. effort there. (This creates an irony. Obama draws Democrats-only support for his health-reform legislation, while he draws mainly GOP support for his commitment to Afghanistan.) Even while national media coverage focuses on health-care reform and the economy, Afghanistan coverage is beginning to equal it — especially in the wake of the disputed and chaotic recent national election there.

Reportedly, a debate is taking place within the Obama administration about Afghanistan policy from this point forward. Vice President Joe Biden is said to be arguing for an exit strategy tied to a deal with the Taliban. At this point, State and Defense remain committed to staying the course toward the creation of a stable Afghanistan in which the Taliban and Al Qaida cannot regain an important foothold. Meantime, ground commanders keep requesting increased troop levels.

As Gerberding's memo pointed out, this is about where we were in Vietnam policy when President Johnson kept increasing U.S. troop levels in response to Pentagon requests for same.

http://crosscut.com/2009/09/04/politics-government/19212/

Sphere: Related Content

Being smart really is sexy

Brainy men really are the sexiest, claim scientists who have discovered a link between intelligence and virility.

By Richard Alleyne

Psychologists have found that men with the highest IQ also have the healthiest sperm.

The findings could explain why some of the world's most intelligent men have so many female admirers no matter their physical attractiveness.

They also suggest that being smart and funny might have developed as a signal to women looking for a mate with healthy genes.

The research, by the evolutionary psychologist Professor Geoffrey Miller of the University of New Mexico, centred around a study of 400 Vietnam War veterans who were put through extensive mental tests and were also asked to provide sperm samples.

According to the test results, it was found that men who scored high on a battery of intelligence tests boasted high counts of healthy sperm.

Whereas, low scorers tended to have fewer and more sickly sperm.

Professor Miller, who is speaking at a conference of the Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour at Oxford University, believes that sperm quality was directly related to brain quality.

The two traits could have evolved together as a way to advertise good genes, he said.

He believes a number of human traits – including language, intelligence, humour and selflessness – may have evolved because they are attractive to the opposite sex.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6126492/Being-smart-really-is-sexy.html

Sphere: Related Content

DUI attorney challenges laws prohibiting driving while stoned

By Stephen C. Webster

Is driving while under the influence of THC, one of marijuana's active ingredients, actually dangerous? One prominent California DUI attorney believes it is not nearly as dangerous as driving drunk and has issued a challenge to laws that punish marijuana users who get behind the wheel.

San Diego defense attorney Lawrence Taylor, considered "The Dean of DUI Attorneys," according to a release by his firm, is apparently arguing that DUI laws are unfair because they do not allow consideration for the varying degrees of inebriation caused by drugs of abuse.

Drivers convicted of marijuana intoxication are usually sentenced only after authorities have taken a blood sample. However that blood sample, he notes, only measures the body's metabolism of marijuana's compounds, not the actual level of impairment.

Evidence of marijuana use can remain in the human body for weeks or or longer, as it has been shown to latch on to fat cells, causing some inactive users to fail drug tests after a period of weight loss. For drivers accused of operating a vehicle while stoned, the presence of blood test results showing recent marijuana consumption can become a tricky legal hurdle.

In an advisory circulated through PRNewswire, Taylor cites two recent federal studies which concluded driving stoned is less dangerous than driving drunk, particular for more experienced marijuana users.

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/03/dui-attorney-challenges-laws-prohibiting-driving-while-stoned/

Sphere: Related Content

No thumbprint, no money, bank tells armless man

MIAMI (Reuters) – A bank in Florida refused to cash a check for an armless man because he could not provide a thumbprint.

"They looked at my prosthetic hands and the teller said, 'Well, obviously you can't give us a thumbprint'," Steve Valdez told CNN on Wednesday.

But he said the Bank of America Corp branch in downtown Tampa, Florida, still insisted on a thumbprint identification for him to cash a check drawn on his wife's account at the bank, even though he showed them two photo IDs.

In the incident last week, a bank supervisor told Valdez he could only cash the check without a thumbprint if he brought his wife in with him or he opened an account with them.

"I told them I neither wanted an account with them and couldn't bring my wife in because she was nowhere close by," Valdez told CNN.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090903/us_nm/us_bank_thumbprint

Sphere: Related Content

Gus Porter, American Legend with Thomas Haden Church

Gus Porter gets mauled by a bear, but he won't let the socialist Canadian health care fix him up, so he'll hike back to America.

 

Gus Porter, American Legend with Thomas Haden Church from Thomas Haden Church

Sphere: Related Content

A Look At The Labor Movement in Iran

By Faramarz Dadvar

In Iran, a corrupt and theocratic regime has made life extremely difficult for workers, the poor, and for the great majority of the country's citizens. Almost 50 percent of the population lives below the poverty line; the unemployment rate is about 20 percent, more than 1,500 factories have closed, and inflation runs around 30 percent, in part due to mismanagement of the budget by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government. At the same time, the country has undergone increased privatization in which state firms are sold—underpriced—to those with connections to the regime's insiders, among them the rich and powerful. As a result, the country's wealth is being redistributed, mainly in favor of a tiny minority. The richest 10 percent of the population has 21 times more income than those in the lowest 10 percent.

In the last 30 years, the clerical rulers and their economic partners in the traditional commerce centers (bazaars) have brutally suppressed the legitimate emancipatory and economic demands of the people, particularly the poor, the working class, women, and youth. These oppressors have been joined by security/military members whose organizations either own major financial firms or exert control on the basis of "friendly" privatization of previously state-run economic institutions.

In the recent mass demonstrations against the presidential election results (apparently rigged in favor of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, with the support of Ali Khamenei, the religious supreme leader), the Revolutionary Guards and Paramilitary Basiji participated in the violent attacks against the protestors. In fact, in the past 30 years, the regime has been able to suppress dissidents and periodic uprisings by consistently playing the "anti-imperialist," nationalist card and using populist-religious propaganda. As a last resort, it does not hesitate to violently repress any mass resistance.

In the meantime, the Iranian people have never stopped their resistance, striving for freedom, democracy, social justice, and the right of social self-determination. The labor movement has long fought for its rights. In the first months of the 1979 revolution, workers organized labor councils and seized some factories and institutions. Soon, however, political repression began and these labor activists, along with progressive and socialist individuals and groups, were violently suppressed. Thereafter, regime-sponsored labor centers and institutions, such as the Worker's House and Islamic Labor Councils (ILCs), were installed to control workers. Under Iranian labor law, these councils can be set up in companies with more than 50 workers. Their objectives are to "propagate and spread Islamic culture and defend the achievement of the Islamic Revolution."

In the past few years, labor activists have organized independent unions. Their efforts have been a response to privatization, in which new owners, searching for quick profits, closed down many companies. That, in turn, caused a dramatic increase in layoffs and difficult conditions for workers, who endured longer periods of pay delays and forced temporary employment at lower wages.

http://www.zcommunications.org/zmag/viewArticle/22392

Sphere: Related Content

Six lobbyists per lawmaker enough on health care?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Want to know why they're having trouble getting health care reform passed in Washington? Consider this: There are six…. count 'em — six, lobbyists for each of the 535 members of Congress.

This translates to 3,300 lobbyists working on health care — or three times the number who lobby on defense. These groups reportedly spent more than $263 million on lobbying during the first six months of this year — with drug makers alone spending more than $134 million.

One expert tells Bloomberg news: "The sheer quantity of money that's sloshed around Washington is drowning out the voices of citizens and the groups that speak up for them."

And let's talk about that money for a minute. According to The Center for Responsive Politics, health-related companies gave almost $170 million to federal lawmakers in 2007 and 2008.

Max Baucus — chairman of the Senate Finance Committee — got $3 million from the health and insurance industries from 2003 – 2008.

The ranking Republican on that committee, Sen. Chuck Grassley, took in more than $2 million since 2003.

Over in the House — Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel received $1.6 million from the health sector and its employees in the last two years. And ranking Republican Dave Camp received almost $1 million in that time.

And this is just a few of them.

Here's my question to you: When it comes to health care reform, are six lobbyists for each member of Congress enough?

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/03/six-lobbyists-per-lawmaker-enough-on-health-care/

Sphere: Related Content

Al Franken Talks Down Angry Mob

Sphere: Related Content

Diebold sells Premiere Election Solutions to competitor ES&S

By Stephen C. Webster

Diebold, maker of touch-screen voting systems that have brought controversy after controversy upon the company, said Thursday that it will sell off most of it's elections-related business, calling it a losing investment and a persistent "distraction."

The Ohio-based company said it told Texas-based Premiere Election Solutions to former rival vote machine manufacturer Election Systems & Software for just $5 million. Diebold purchased the company for $31 million in 2001, noted Ohio newspaper The Canton Rep. The company said its sale will force a pretax loss between $45 and $55 million.

"For the last couple of years the elections business has been a distraction," a spokeswoman told the Rep.

"Diebold retains certain existing liabilities, including an ongoing lawsuit involving the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections, and shares with ES&S other liabilities in connection with the elections systems business," added The Cleveland Plain Dealer.

"Diebold was the industry's biggest maker of electronic voting machines heading into the 2004 elections," noted The Wall Street Journal. "Security concerns have dogged electronic voting. The company in early 2006 decided to seek options for the U.S. elections business, including a potential sale. Diebold essentially separated the company from the rest of Diebold in August 2007, having no direct operational involvement in the business."

Included in the deal, Diebold said it would also collect 70 percent of Premiere's accounts payable, added Reuters.

The sale concludes Diebold's involvement in North American elections, either in the U.S. or Canada. It does not, however, affect its operations in Brazil, where its ATM's are growing in popularity with the nation's largest bank.

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/03/diebold-sells-premiere-election-solutions-to-competitor-ess/

Sphere: Related Content

Geoengineering May Be Mandatory, Royal Society Says

by Jeff St. John

The Royal Society says grand-scale geoengineering schemes, like massive tree-planting campaigns or shooting sulfur into the atmosphere to block sunlight, may be needed to stop global warming.

Geoengineering may not be a last resort to fight global warming any longer – that is, if us humans can't get our act together to reduce the carbon dioxide we're pumping into the atmosphere.

That's the warning that emerged from a Royal Society report published Tuesday. Grand, expensive and uncertain engineering projects – think installing carbon-scrubbing devices across continents or shooting aerosols into the atmosphere to block sunlight – may be humankind's only shot at slowing man-made global warming, the report's authors warn.

That's because current efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions aren't going far enough, the report's authors contend.

The world needs to cut atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to half of what they were in 1990 by 2050, but right now, "Global efforts to reduce emissions have not yet been sufficiently successful to provide confidence that the reductions needed to avoid dangerous climate change will be achieved," the report states.

"It is hoped that post-2012 emission reduction targets will stimulate greater action through more effective mechanisms," the report went on, referring to the upcoming United Nations talks in Copenhagen to craft a carbon-reduction agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol (see The Copenhagen Call: Biz Leaders Back GHG Reduction Efforts).

"But there is a serious risk that sufficient mitigation actions will not be introduced in time, despite the fact that the technologies required are both available and affordable," the report stated.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/geoengineering-may-be-mandatory-royal-society-says/

Sphere: Related Content

Crosswalk Sign Hacks

by jason eppink

Make sure you read the instructions carefully next time you're about to press the button at a crosswalk. Total Crisis Panic Button was installed all over Los Angeles by Jason Eppink. That project inspired the second two, put up by Ryan Laughlin in New Haven, CT.

http://urbanprankster.com/2009/08/crosswalk-sign-hacks/

Sphere: Related Content

First Genetic Link Between Reptile And Human Heart Evolution Found

Scientists at the Gladstone Institute of Cardiovascular Disease (GICD) have traced the evolution of the four-chambered human heart to a common genetic factor linked to the development of hearts in turtles and other reptiles.

The research, published in the September 3 issue of the journal Nature, shows how a specific protein that turns on genes is involved in heart formation in turtles, lizards and humans.

"This is the first genetic link to the evolution of two, rather than one, pumping chamber in the heart, which is a key event in the evolution of becoming warm-blooded," said Gladstone investigator Benoit Bruneau, PhD, who led the study. "The gene involved, Tbx5, is also implicated in human congenital heart disease, so our results also bring insight into human disease."

From an evolutionary standpoint, the reptiles occupy a critical point in heart evolution.

While bird and mammalian hearts have four chambers, frogs and other amphibians have three. "How did hearts evolve from three to four chambers?" Bruneau said. "The different reptiles offer a sort of continuum from three to four chambers. By examining them, we learned a lot about how the human heart chambers normally form."

He explained that with four chambers—two atria and two ventricles—humans and all other mammals have completely separate blood flows to the lungs and to the rest of the body, which is essential for us to be warm-blooded.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090902133629.htm

Sphere: Related Content

A raw deal on Darwin in the NY Times

by Simon Maloy

The New York Times featured an op-ed yesterday by Robert Wright of the New America Foundation proposing "A Grand Bargain Over Evolution," whereby two warring groups -- the "intensely religious" and the "militantly atheistic" -- might find a scrap of common ground concerning Darwin's theories and "learn to get along." The proposal is wrapped in scientific jargon and relies heavily on intellectual history and high-minded philosophizing. There's just one problem.

The "bargain" stinks.

Here's how Wright sees things -- the atheists "insist that any form of god-talk, any notion of higher purpose, is incompatible with a scientific worldview," whereas the religious refuse to believe that natural selection is capable of producing creatures as complex and morally attuned as Homo sapiens, which means God "had to step in and provide special ingredients at some point." Both these viewpoints are "wrong," according to Wright, and are in need of some tweaking. For the religious, Wright proposes that they accept that God "initiat[ed] natural selection with some confidence that it would lead to a morally rich and reflective species." For the atheists, Wright prescribes that they accept that "any god whose creative role ends with the beginning of natural selection is, strictly speaking, logically compatible with Darwinism," and that "natural selection's intrinsic creative power ... adds at least an iota of plausibility to this remotely creative god." Voila -- amity achieved.

But this doesn't seem like much of a "bargain." He's asking believers in God to continue believing in God, but to also believe in natural selection as one of God's works. But for the atheists, he's essentially asking that they toss out their beliefs. Being an atheist in predicated upon one principle idea -- that there is no "higher power" at work in the universe. To ask an atheist to acknowledge, in Wright's words, "at least an iota of plausibility to this remotely creative god" is to ask that atheist to stop being an atheist. He's asking one group to merely alter their belief structure, and another group to completely undermine the basic tenet of theirs. Some "bargain" ...

And as you might expect, the "militant atheist" scientists are mightily unimpressed with Wright's teleological wheeling and dealing.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200908240130

Sphere: Related Content

I want my country back, too!

Sphere: Related Content

Idiot in Idaho

 

Sphere: Related Content

GOP gubernatorial candidate talks of "hunting" Obama

by Yobie Benjamin

America elected an African-American president and an Idaho Republican gubernatorial candidate "joked" about issuing $11.50 tags to hunt down the president.

GOP gubernatorial candidate Rex Rammell's repeated "jokes" about hunting President Barack Obama has received national play in the mainstream media and on the Web that included praises in right wing and racist blogs.

Rammell a Rexburg, Idaho resident, made the sick comment Tuesday at a Republican barbecue in Twin Falls during talk about Idaho selling its first $11.50 hunting tags for wolves this fall. Someone shouted "Obama tags," and Rammell said, "The Obama tags? We'd buy some of those."

Not content with one sick jab at the president, Rammell repeated yesterday in a news release and on Twitter: "Anyone who understands the law, knows I was just joking, because Idaho has no jurisdiction to issue hunting tags in Washington, D.C." He has refused to apologize but said he doesn't advocate assassinating Obama.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ybenjamin/detail??blogid=150&entry_id=46481#ixzz0Q4AFP4N9

Sphere: Related Content

Auto-Tune the News #8: dragons. geese. Michael Vick. (ft. T-Pain)

Sphere: Related Content

Don't let Murdoch smash this jewel. The BBC must act to save itself

Rupert's son is bent on continuing the war his father started. But he'll find Auntie matches the NHS in public affection

 

by Jonathan Freedland

Credit where it's due: the free-market right is nothing if not brave. Fainter-hearted souls would have spotted the imminent first anniversary of the collapse of Lehman brothers that started the global financial crisis and decided that now was not the moment to trumpet the case for unfettered private enterprise, free of meddling regulation. But the evangelists for turbo-charged capitalism are made of sterner stuff. With the American conservative assault on Britain's "Nazi" and "Orwellian" National Health Service still fresh in the memory, a leading US free marketeer has trained his sights on another British institution: the BBC.

He is James Murdoch whose weekend MacTaggart lecture was a 39-minute plea for comprehensive deregulation, warning of the dangers of state interference in the "natural diversity" of the media industry. Of the recent history of deregulation, with its catastrophic consequences for the world's economy, there was not a mention.

Nor did he detain his audience at the Edinburgh television festival, sponsored by the Guardian, with a declaration of his own interest in the subject. He spoke as if he were a mere policy wonk, rather than the heir to a broadcasting empire that would make billions if he had his way and the BBC were cut down to size. This was like a fox arguing that the henhouse doors be thrown wide open – not for his own sake, you understand, but for the good of society.

So Murdoch showed some brass neck. But he made some sharp points, too. He is probably right that Ofcom is bloated, poking its nose too often into areas where it's not needed. Right, too, to note that the old distinction between the press (where no rules on impartiality apply) and the broadcasters (obliged to be neutral) makes less sense when the two are rapidly converging, forming "an all-media market" where, say, the Guardian and the BBC both run websites that include text, audio and video. These days, we're a bit like a broadcaster and they're a bit like a newspaper, and the rules probably ought to reflect that. (Though if that means dropping the impartiality obligation on the TV networks there are two words to give us pause: Fox News.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/01/bbc-james-murdoch-new-media

Sphere: Related Content

Earth is the place to be

http://www.sptnk.org/#/transmission/9/

Sphere: Related Content

Sibel Edmonds' Deposition Disclosures: Congressional Bribery, Blackmail and Espionage

By Brad Friedman

 

Breaking down the formerly-gagged FBI whistleblower's sworn testimony...

It has now been over a week since the video tape and transcript from the remarkable 8/8/09 deposition of former FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds was publicly released. Previously, the Bush Administration invoked the so-called "state secrets privilege" in order to gag Edmonds, in attempting to keep such information from becoming public.

The under-oath, detailed allegations include bribery, blackmail, espionage and infiltration of the U.S. government of, and by current and former members of the U.S. Congress, high-ranking State and Defense Department officials and agents of the government of Turkey. The broad criminal conspiracy is said to have resulted in, among other things, the sale of nuclear weapons technology to black market interests including Pakistan, Iran, North Korea, Libya and others.

Even as many of these allegations had been previously corroborated to varying extents, by a number of official government reports, documents and independent media outlets (largely overseas), not a single major mainstream media outlet in the U.S. has picked up on Edmonds' startling claims since her deposition has been made fully available.

Granted, last week was a busy news week, with the death of Ted Kennedy, the release of the CIA Inspector General's report on torture, and the announcement that Michael Jackson's death was ruled a homicide. And, it's true, a 4-hour deposition and/or 241-page transcript [PDF] is a lot of material to review, particularly given the wide scope of the charges being made here. Still, given the serious national security issues at stake, said to have the been among the most important matters of the past 8 years, one would think someone in the corporate MSM might have taken the time to go through the material, and report on it. Particularly as Edmonds' claims have previously been found "credible" "serious" and "warrant[ing] a thorough and careful review," by the DoJ Inspector General, and confirmed as such, on several occasions, by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and many many others.

So for the benefit of the U.S. media, and other readers, who may find it helpful for this large body of newly-available information to be culled down into more digestible pieces, I will attempt to break down the deposition, a bit, into some of its subject matter-based component parts. I will try to go through the major disclosures from the deposition, one-by-one, in a series of pieces which might help others to further report and/or investigate these breathtaking disclosures from a former FBI official who, following 9/11, listened to and translated wiretap recordings made from 1996 through 2002, in the FBI's counterintelligence and counterterrorism departments, under top-secret clearance.

In this first break-down article, we'll look at the answers given by Edmonds during her deposition in regard to bribery and blackmail of current and former members of the U.S. Congress, including Dennis Hastert (R-IL), Bob Livingston (R-LA), Dan Burton (R-IN), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Stephen Solarz (D-NY), Tom Lantos (D-CA, deceased) and an unnamed, currently-serving, married Democratic Congresswoman said to have been video-taped in a Lesbian affair by Turkish agents for blackmail purposes.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7387

Sphere: Related Content

The life lessons of Burning Man

Is there anything you *can't* learn from the insane desert art festival?

By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist

As I've been lured back to the sweltering, dusty sexed-up madness that is Burning Man again this year -- my sixth time -- by a gaggle of delicious friends, I am hereby reminded of a few hundred truths, half-truths, outright lies and astonishing epiphanies offered up by the world-famous, Christian-feared, beautifully debauched, sensory overloaded, impossible-to-describe art-survivalist-camping-rave megaspectacle now underway in the remote Nevada desert.

If you've ever wondered at the appeal, the urge, the drive to attend such a thing, if you've heard wisps of the mythology and the mystery and the epic weirdness or even seen a few pictures and wondered, you know, WTF, maybe these tidbits can help.

Then again, maybe not. With something like Burning Man, there really is only one way to know for sure.

You are not who you thought you were

Countless are the tales and numerous are the personal friends who were once to be found hovering near the far end of the overly anxious, tightly wound, frenetic Type-A personality scale, who attended BM for the first time and wandered out on the playa at sundown and just so happened to stumble upon, say, Serpent Mother, or the giant goddesses, or one of David Best's breathtaking temples or any of a thousand other unearthly spectacles and suddenly felt their skull crack open and their eyes spin around in their sockets and their brain fold back in on itself.

Right there and forevermore, their worldview shifted. Their id swallowed its own tongue. Possibility opened its legs wide and went, ahhh. In short, they lightened the hell up. It's rather astonishing how often this happens, and not just to the uptight and the pushy. This is one of the most powerful aspects of the event: It almost matters not from which angle you approach it -- Burning Man is an equal opportunity soul exploder.

You are not alone

In your wild dissatisfaction with how things are. In your frustration with socially and politically imposed limitations. In your conviction that there simply must be more to this tertiary experience than work and traffic and hostility, grind and paunch and slump. In your need to fly your freak flag high, cut more loose than you thought possible, test your limits. In your admiration for boy shorts and leather vests and body paint and oral sex in public places.

In short, BM reminds you that you are far from alone in your understanding that this is one hugely painful, incredibly difficult, unbearably gorgeous, terrifying, excruciatingly short life experience and sometimes the best you can hope for is to dress in fake fur and mount the dragon and scream from atop the roof of a dusty RV of your ravenous desire to lick the moon.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2009/08/28/notes082809.DTL

Sphere: Related Content

You Didn’t Plagiarize, Your Unconscious Did

Is cryptomnesia—copying the work of others without being aware of it—to blame for journalism's ultimate sin? Um, maybe not.

By Russ Juskalian

The charge of plagiarism carries a special sort of shame. Take the case of Kaavya Viswanathan, the young writer whose 2006 debut novel, How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life, contained so many passages lifted from other books that her writing career was over by her junior year at Harvard. For those whose literary taste is at the opposite end of the spectrum from chick lit, consider Dante: he put the fraudulent in an even deeper circle of hell than the violent.

But could some alleged plagiarists—like Maureen Dowd, Chris Anderson, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, and even Viswanathan, who all either deny the charge, or blame their copying on unconscious mistakes—be guilty of psychological sloppiness rather than fraud? Could the real offense be disregard for the mind's subliminal kleptomania? And if it is real, is unconscious copying (or "cryptomnesia" to those who study the phenomenon) preventable? Or, seeing as Nietzsche ripped off a passage of Thus Spoke Zarathustra from something he'd read as a child, and former Beatle George Harrison was found guilty, in court, of unconsciously copying the music for his hit song, "My Sweet Lord"—is cryptomnesia both unavoidable, and the perfect excuse?

"Clearly all of us, referring to journalists, probably appropriate phrases or ideas, on occasion, without realizing it," said Howard Schneider, dean of the School of Journalism at New York's Stony Brook University, and former Newsday editor. But intent and degree count, he said, and journalists should be held to a particularly high standard when it comes to plagiarism. Schneider, who helped set up the News Literacy Center at Stony Brook, teaches his students about the brain's susceptibility to certain psychological pitfalls, such as: seeing a political commercial between TV newscasts, and then a week later attributing the information in the commercial to the newscast itself. He believes that journalists are susceptible to similar influences.

According to Richard L. Marsh, a professor of cognitive psychology at the University of Georgia and a leading cryptomnesia researcher, Schneider is on the right track. "When people engage in creative activity, they are so involved in generating or coming up with something new or novel that they fail to protect against what they previously experienced," said Marsh. Over the last 20 years, Marsh has designed numerous models for studying cryptomnesia in the lab. An early study involved asking subjects to work with an unseen "partner" (actually a computer) to find unique words in a square array of letters, similar to the game Boggle. A short while after completing this task, the researchers asked each participant to recall the words they had personally found, and to generate new words neither the participant nor the participant's partner had previously been able to find.

The subjects plagiarized their partners roughly 32 percent of the time when trying to recall their own words, and up to 28 percent of the time when attempting to find previously unidentified words in the puzzle. Not only was plagiarism rampant, many subjects who plagiarized also checked a box indicating they were "positive" their answers had not previously been given by their partners.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/205560/output/print

Sphere: Related Content

Free Torture Trading Cards!

By Michael Mechanic

It was only a matter of time. Remember those Operation Enduring Freedom trading cards that Topps put out in 2001? And who could forget those Iraq's Most Wanted trading cards released by the Pentagon back in the halcyon days of 2003. There's a card for everything nowadays. During the Clinton years, I even wrote a little piece for Mother Jones on colorful infectious disease trading cards the CDC was handing out to children—ebola, plague, meningitis and all of that fun stuff. (Sorry, it's not online.) So it comes as little surprise that the Center for Constitutional Rights has come up with its own Torture Team collectibles.

You can order up hard copies of the Torture Team cards—10 for free; all 20 for $5—but if you're just browsing, CCR has created a neat Flash widget to display them online. Check out George W. and Condi, along with Cheney and his evil sidekick David "the Shadow" Addington, arguably the most ruthless driver of Bush-era torture policies and, according to a media quote on the card, "the most powerful man you've never heard of." Don't forget White House legal pariahs like John Yoo and Jay Bybee. Or the brass—former Pentagon top dogs like Don Rumsfeld, Guantanamo CO Geoffrey Miller (who helped involve doctors in torture) and the Iraq-bungling Douglas Feith. You can click to flip the cards and reveal each player's basic stats, along with fun tidbits and quotes in their own words. (Feith: "Removal of clothing doesn't mean naked.")

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/hey-kids-free-torture-trading-cards

Sphere: Related Content

Offbeat Traveler: Ithaa Undersea restaurant at Conrad Maldives Rangali Island

Ithaa Undersea restaurant at the Conrad Maldives Rangali Island in the Maldives

 

Ithaa Undersea restaurant sits 16 feet below sea level at the Conrad Maldives Rangali Island, a hotel resort in Hilton's luxury brand that occupies two islands. Maldives is a country of almost 1,200 islands about 300 miles from the southernmost points of India and Sri Lanka.

 

http://www.latimes.com/travel/la-trw-offbeattraveler7-pg,0,6549249.photogallery

Sphere: Related Content

"Penn and Teller: Bullsh!t" take On The Vatican over gay issues

by Ed Kennedy

11th Commandment: Beware of editors bearing story ideas.

I admit to not being a regular viewer of Showtime's Penn & Teller: Bullsh!t, so when the boss asked for a volunteer to write up the season finale, I raised my hand like someone who hadn't been in the military (I was, and so should know better). I thought Penn & Teller did magic tricks, not attack what is arguably the most powerful person on earth who doesn't have access to nuclear weapons.

As the opening credits show, the irascible duo don't just go after conservatives, but take on sacred cows of the liberals as well: taxes, stress, video games and organic foods have all been targets of their commentary. I won't call what they do comedy exactly, because they're really too angry to be funny. Think Lewis Black without the facial expressions.

"If your morality is governed by anything personal, ethical, rational, or humanitarian, then The Vatican is bullsh!t!"

That's the basic principle the show starts with, and then goes on to rationally build the case that the Vatican and the Pope are responsible for much of the suffering in the world, as well as gross abuses of power — especially when it comes to gay people. And that the church actively covers up their sins. To quote Penn's rather pointed translation of policy:

"That's Vatican for 'Shut your fu**king mouth, or go to hell!'"

Which things do they lay at the feet of the church throughout history? The Crusades, the Inquisition, condoning slavery, denying the Holocaust, as well as the oppression or outright persecution of Muslims, Jews, gays, women, Africans, children, the poor, and nonbelievers. No punches are pulled, and little hyperbole is used.

A brief history of the oppressed. 

A lot of time is given to subjects such as birth control, sexual abuse by the clergy, and wealth hoarding. But the two things that stood out for us though were the current pope's opposition to condom distribution in Africa to fight the spread of HIV/AIDS, and his decision to oppose decriminalization of homosexuality at the United Nations last year.

Condoms are from the Dark Side. Sex should only make babies.

That issue came up when the French introduced a U.N. resolution making homosexuality legal worldwide since we're still illegal in 81 countries, and punishable by death in seven of those. Even many who dislike the Pope were surprised when the Vatican — which espouses treating gays with "respect and dignity" — opposed the resolution because it might somehow lead to gay marriage.

Better we let countries lock up gays for being gay than risk some countries letting them get married!

http://www.afterelton.com/TV/2009/8/penn-teller-vatican-bullshit

Sphere: Related Content

42% Say People Randomly Selected from Phone Book Better Than Current Congress

Forty-two percent (42%) of U.S. voters say a group of people randomly selected from the phone book would do a better job than the current Congress. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that an identical number (42%) disagree, but 16% are not sure.

Last fall, just 33% thought the random group could do as good a job.

Today, Republicans by a two-to-one margin believe that the phone book sample would be better than the current Democratic-controlled Congress. Democrats, by a similar margin, have the opposite view. A slight plurality of those not affiliated with either major party say the randomly selected group would do a better job.

http://mikechamberslive.com/?p=535

Sphere: Related Content

Deleting the Bush Personality Cult from history

by Glenn Greenwald

National Review's Jay Nordlinger -- and others at that magazine -- are upset that a school is showing a year-old video in which various celebrities spout feel-good platitudes about public service, and -- for a fleeting second -- Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher vow to "be of service to the President."  This sentiment -- a desire to serve the President -- is something conservatives would never adopt, apparently:

When I read about that celebrity video where they say, "I pledge to be of service to Barack Obama," I thought that the people do not deserve to be American citizens, because they have no idea what America or a liberal republic is. . . . Also, it strikes me that "I pledge to be of service to Barack Obama" is the product of a thoroughly secular mind, which is another marker of contemporary America. . . . Did conservatives ever say "I pledge to be of service to Ronald Reagan"? I never heard it -- and the notion is preposterous.

I'm always amazed -- even though I know I shouldn't be -- at people's capacity simply to block out events, literally refuse to acknowledge them, when they are inconsistent with their desire to believe things.  Do Nordlinger and the other National Review political experts really not know about this episode, obviously much more consequential than some admittedly creepy though entirely trivial moment in a celebrity "pledge" video:

According to the [Justice Department] OIG report released today, Angela Williamson, a deputy to Monica Goodling at the [Bush] DOJ, was intimately involved in her bosses' scurrilous hiring practices, attending interviews and often conducting interviews herself.  Here's a sampling of the same questions that Goodling:

After Goodling resigned, Williamson typed from memory the list of questions Goodling asked as a guide for future interviews. Among other questions, the list included the following:

Tell us about your political philosophy. There are different groups of conservatives, by way of example: Social Conservative, Fiscal Conservative, Law & Order Republican.

[W]hat is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?

Aside from the President, give us an example of someone currently or recently in public service who you admire.

Prior to Goodling herself testifying before the House Judiciary Committee about her screening of prospective DOJ hires to make certain they were sufficiently devoted to serving George Bush, she shared with a Justice Department official this vow:  "All I ever wanted to do was serve this president."  And she didn't have a "secular mind."  Even as Attorney General, Alberto Gonazles actually thought his "client" was the President.  The entire DOJ was structured to ensure that its employees, including prosecutors required to act with apolitical independence, were what they called "loyal Bushies."  Pledging "to be of service to George W. Bush" was the prime mandate of the Justice Department, which is why it was headed for his second term by Bush's most loyal servant.

Beyond the DOJ, huge swaths of the right-wing movement were devoted to an unprecedented veneration of George Bush.  A whole industry on the Right was created to convert him into a warrior-deity, including truly creepy reverence books by National Review writers (see here for various illustrations).  Some on the Right actually speculated that God intervened in our elections because he had hand-picked Bush to be our leader.  Even Bill Kristol admitted that the GOP had turned into little more than a Bush-centered personality cult, telling the New York Times:  "Bush was the movement and the cause."  More than any single, discrete issue, what motivated me to begin writing about political issues was the warped climate of hero worship constructed -- by the Right and the media -- around George Bush as a "War President."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/09/02/bush/index.html

Sphere: Related Content

Ahmadinejad's Imam: Islam Allows Raping, Torturing Prisoners

by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz

(IsraelNN.com) A highly influential Shi'a religious leader, with whom Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly consults, apparently told followers last month that coercion by means of rape, torture and drugs is acceptable against all opponents of the Islamic regime.
The gathered crowd heard from Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi and Ahmadinejad.

Warning: The imam's question-and-answer session, partially reproduced here, contains disturbing descriptions of the sanctioned brutality.

In the wake of a series of publications worldwide regarding the rape and torture of dissident prisoners in Iran's jails, supporters of Ahmadinejad gathered with him in Jamkaran, a popular pilgrimage site for Shi'ite Muslims on the outskirts of Qom, on August 11, 2009. According to Iranian pro-democracy sources, the gathered crowd heard from Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi and Ahmadinejad himself regarding the issue.

According to the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC), an independent Israeli intelligence analysis organization, Mesbah-Yazdi is considered Ahmadinejad's personal spiritual guide. A radical totalitarian even in Iranian terms, he holds messianic views, supports increasing Islamization, calls for violent suppression of domestic political opponents, and, according to the ITIC, "declared that obeying a president supported by the Supreme Leader was tantamount to obeying God."

At the Jamkaran gathering, Mesbah-Yazdi and Ahmadinejad answered questions about the rape and torture charges. The following text is from a transcript alleged by Iranian dissidents to be a series of questions and answers exchanged between the ayatollah and some of his supporters.

Asked if a confession obtained "by applying psychological, emotional and physical pressure" was "valid and considered credible according to Islam," Mesbah-Yazdi replied: "Getting a confession from any person who is against the Velayat-e Faqih ("Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists", or the regime of Iran's mullahs) is permissible under any condition." The ayatollah gave the identical answer when asked about confessions obtained through drugging the prisoner with opiates or addictive substances.

"Can an interrogator rape the prisoner in order to obtain a confession?" was the follow-up question posed to the Islamic cleric.

Mesbah-Yazdi answered: "The necessary precaution is for the interrogator to perform a ritual washing first and say prayers while raping the prisoner. If the prisoner is female, it is permissible to rape through the vagina or anus. It is better not to have a witness present. If it is a male prisoner, then it's acceptable for someone else to watch while the rape is committed."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/133214

Sphere: Related Content

Registered Republican

Sphere: Related Content