Almost enough to get me to move back to New York City, even though there are people.
This is just some quick low-hanging fruit. In comparison, Juan Cole -- often the first to go off the Israel-bashing deep end -- seems downright reasonable in his analysis that there may have been an overreaction by both sides.What don't these fools understand about the fact that they are being used, and using themselves, to support the Iranian backed Islamist movements which want only to destroy Israel.
Turkey has recalled its ambassador to Israel. Good. It's time to stop the bluff that Turkey has anything but warlike intentions toward us.
Bottom line: These people committed an act of war - arguably on behalf of the Turkish government.
This is the start of Peterson’s campaign ad. He rides into the screen on a horse that looks increasingly worried as things progress. Brandishing a rifle, the 64-year-old farmer barks at the camera about his opponent (“a dummy”), somebody stealing his yard signs and immigrants being “bused in by the thousands.” The overall effect is like being cornered at a party by an eccentric neighbor who thinks the garbage man is spying on him for the federal government. It’s extremely popular.But Collins didn't quote the video correctly. Peterson actually said "illegals bused in by the thousands." [Added: Actually, I'm not sure he says "bused in" but rather "bust in." Anyone out there who speaks Southern and can clarify that for me?]
I don't have an account that allows me to post comments so here is the answer to your question.
Your question: Actually, I'm not sure he says "bused in" but rather "bust in." Anyone out there who speaks Southern and can clarify that for me?
Here is what he said: "...illegals bust in by the thousands..."
Here is the translation to Yankee-speak: "...illegals are breaking into the country by the thousands..."
With salt under attack for its ill effects on the nation’s health, the food giant Cargill kicked off a campaign last November to spread its own message.But read on, and it become clear that it's really an easy sell.
Needless to say, the food police want the government to force food companies to cut back salt in food, as I've mentioned before.
Now, the industry is blaming consumers for resisting efforts to reduce salt in all foods, pointing to, as Kellogg put it in a letter to a federal nutrition advisory committee, “the virtually intractable nature of the appetite for salt.” ....
In recent months, food companies, including Kellogg, have said they were redoubling efforts to reduce salt. But they say they can go only so far, so fast without compromising tastes consumers have come to relish or salt’s ability to preserve food. “We have to earn the consumer’s trust every day,” said George Dowdie, a senior vice president of Campbell Soup. “And if you disappoint the consumer, there is no guarantee they will come back.”
But watch the video (below), and it is clear that there was no racial motive or intent. The two were joking around with each other. The post title, and the entire thrust of the post, was to paint O'Reilly as being a racist without supporting facts.
Marc Lamont Hill is the black Liberal Columbia professor who for some reason is always on The O'Reilly Factor. Tonight's episode made Hill's presence even more puzzling, because Bill O'Reilly told him that he looks like someone who sells drugs.
The two were happily discussing Obama's dumb plan to send 1200 troops who will secure the entire Mexican border against illegal immigrants. Then O'Reilly joked: Say you're a cocaine dealer—and you kind of look like one a little bit." To which Hill replied, gamely: "As do you... you know, you actually look like a cocaine user."
Dang, O'Reilly, having black commentators is supposed to make you look less racist. Unless O'Reilly was talking about Hill's spiffy pinstripe suit. Like, how could you afford such a nice suit unless you were selling drugs? That's probably it.
The real numbers, as usual, are fuzzy:
Education Secretary Arne Duncan says President Obama "absolutely supports" a congressional proposal for $23 billion in emergency education spending in order to stave off teacher layoffs and cancellation of summer classes.
Duncan told CNN Wednesday that the emergency spending request is needed to head off "an education catastrophe, "in which as many as 300-thousand teachers across the country could be laid off.
Duncan also said that without the extra spending, some school districts will be forced to eliminate summer school and after-school programs.
How many of the estimated 3.3 million public school teachers nationwide will lose their jobs remains unknown. Duncan often says 100,000 to 300,000 education jobs are at risk, including support staff.Notice how quickly "100,000 to 300,000" became 300,000? Notice how "support staff" became "teachers"? Notice how possible layoffs became definite layoffs?
We have seen this movie before:
Its sponsors on Capitol Hill have labeled it "emergency" legislation, worthy of exemption from President Obama's anti-deficit pay-as-you-go rules. But it's certainly not a uniquely effective way to stimulate the economy. [Chrisina] Romer [chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers] suggests on the opposite page today that keeping teachers at work will enable them to maintain their spending, thus supporting economic growth -- and saving on unemployment benefits and the like. The real question is whether this bill promotes more growth than other possible uses of $23 billion. Ms. Romer did not explain why retaining teachers stimulates the economy better than retaining, say, construction workers. Nor does she weigh the costs and benefits of not borrowing another $23 billion from China....
Officials have issued more than 100,000 layoff notices, according to data compiled by teachers unions. The unions predict layoffs could go as high as 300,000. It's hard to imagine losing that many teachers without some damage to learning.
But that many teachers almost certainly are not going to lose their jobs. For technical reasons, school districts must send notices in the spring to more teachers than they actually expect to let go in the fall. What's more, the unions' 300,000 estimate includes not only classroom teachers in kindergarten through 12th grade but also support staff and college professors. The bill would distribute money to states according to their population, not expected layoffs; states where no layoffs are imminent would get checks anyway, and the majority of states would receive more than they could possibly need to avoid layoffs. The Senate version of the bill permits them to spend the excess on other things.
Spending more without serious reforms to teacher union contracts, particularly pension and other benefits, will not solve anything:
Republicans and some Democrats say the government can't afford an extension of last year's economic stimulus that would add to the federal deficit. The stimulus law kept many school budgets afloat with $49 billion in direct aid to states and billions of dollars more for various programs. But the stimulus funding is trailing off before state and local tax revenue can recover from the recession.
Skeptics of a new education jobs fund point out that the teaching force in recent years has grown faster than enrollment, with schools adding instructional coaches and reducing class sizes.
In Rhode Island, most locals of the National Education Association of Rhode Island (NEARI), one of the main teachers' unions, refused to support the State of Rhode Island's application for federal Race to the Top funding because it would have required reforms.
Some leaders of local teachers unions continue to earn credit in the state pension system — boosting their payout at retirement — even though they haven't taught students in years.
The heads of the Bergen County Education Association, Passaic County Education Associations and Paterson Education Association, for example, have all taken extended leaves from school duties, but state records show each is still paid at least $97,000 by his district. The unions reimburse the districts for their salaries, a legal maneuver that allows them to build up time — and cash — in the pension system.
In one unusual arrangement, James L. Joyner, a vice president for the Paterson local, said he has worked full time for the union for the past seven years, but the union does not reimburse the district for his pay. State pension records put his 2009 salary at $97,269.
I'll have more. For sure.--------------------------------------------
While the U.N. has not taken the position yet that such attacks constitute war crimes, the U.S. government is concerned with where this process may lead:
A senior United Nations official is expected to call on the United States next week to stop Central Intelligence Agency drone strikes against people suspected of belonging to Al Qaeda, complicating the Obama administration’s growing reliance on that tactic in Pakistan.
Philip Alston, the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said Thursday that he would deliver a report on June 3 to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva declaring that the “life and death power” of drones should be entrusted to regular armed forces, not intelligence agencies. He contrasted how the military and the C.I.A. responded to allegations that strikes had killed civilians by mistake.
I warned about this previously in Drone Strikes Put Obama Admin Officials At Risk, noting how the same Mr. Alston previously raised the issue of drone strikes constituting human rights violations:
In recent months, top lawyers for the State Department and the Defense Department have tried to square the idea that the C.I.A.’s drone program is lawful with the United States’ efforts to prosecute Guantánamo Bay detainees accused of killing American soldiers in combat, according to interviews and a review of military documents....
Mr. Alston, the United Nations official, said he agreed with the Obama legal team that “it is not per se illegal” under the laws of war for C.I.A. operatives to fire drone missiles “because anyone can stand up and start to act as a belligerent.” Still, he emphasized, they would not be entitled to battlefield immunity like soldiers.
"My concern is that drones/Predators are being operated in a framework which may well violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law," he said.The use of human rights laws against democracies defending themselves against terrorists is a favorite tactic, and Israel is the usual target. The goal is to tie the hands of civil societies through false moral equivalencies, in which the terrorist trying to kill civilians is equated to the people trying to stop the terrorist.
I hope The Atlantic has learned a lesson all victims of fraud must learn: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Somewhere, Bill Clinton is smiling. One-time special prosecutor who uncovered the dirty details of the former President's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky has been engaged in some bad behavior of his own, according to the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission.
Correction (~3:18pm): Apparently there are two famous Kenneth Starrs. The one charged is an investment advisor to the stars, but not the former special prosecutor. Apologies to Bill Clinton if we got his hopes up -- and to the other Kenneth Starr.
Friends tell The Daily Beast that the departing senator, injured by Obama's failure to show last-minute support, may well shift right on key votes from Kagan to financial reform.Except to those of us who are attuned to the human condition:
Military superiority is not enough to maintain U.S. strength and influence in the world, and the United States must build global institutions and expand international partnerships beyond its traditional allies, according to a new national security strategy prepared by the Obama administration.Why didn't anyone try this before?
In the world’s collective consciousness, the word “Nazi” is synonymous with evil. It is widely understood that the Nazis’ ideology—nationalism, anti-Semitism, the autarkic ethnic state, the Führer principle—led directly to the furnaces of Auschwitz. It is not nearly as well understood that Communism led just as inexorably, everywhere on the globe where it was applied, to starvation, torture, and slave-labor camps. Nor is it widely acknowledged that Communism was responsible for the deaths of some 150 million human beings during the twentieth century. The world remains inexplicably indifferent and uncurious about the deadliest ideology in history.Berlinksi points to two treasure troves of documentation which no major newspaper or publisher will touch (although kudos to The NY Times for linking to Berlinski's article):
Soviet history teaches us so much about human nature, and how flowery left-wing language about the working class inevitably turns repressive. Sometimes the repression is relatively mild, as in the West European socialist model, in which exhaustive regulation is the means of control; but in its most "successful" form, socialism turns into East European-style brutality.
Pavel Stroilov, a Russian exile in London, has on his computer 50,000 unpublished, untranslated, top-secret Kremlin documents, mostly dating from the close of the Cold War. He stole them in 2003 and fled Russia. Within living memory, they would have been worth millions to the CIA; they surely tell a story about Communism and its collapse that the world needs to know. Yet he can’t get anyone to house them in a reputable library, publish them, or fund their translation. In fact, he can’t get anyone to take much interest in them at all.
Then there’s Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky [my note, see my prior post], who once spent 12 years in the USSR’s prisons, labor camps, and psikhushkas—political psychiatric hospitals—after being convicted of copying anti-Soviet literature. He, too, possesses a massive collection of stolen and smuggled papers from the archives of the Central Committee of the Communist Party.... “I offer them free of charge to the most influential newspapers and journals in the world, but nobody wants to print them,” Bukovsky writes. “Editors shrug indifferently: So what? Who cares?”
"And I believe Joe heard what he wanted to hear because, you know, he's a former admiral. And you know, when they said something like, This is something in your background or your experience level, he must have interpreted -- I guess the position at that time was open and it hadn't been filled."Rendell, who seems to be the designated Democratic point man on Fox News, did not claim to have inside knowledge of what was said. But Rendell repeated that line of attack on Sestak several times during the interview, a clear talking point.
Yesterday Palin launched a bizarre and rambling attack on a journalist that by any standard should make us seriously pause. Her target was award-winning journalist Joe McGinniss, who has rented the house next door to her to research a book. The short version is that she suggested he might be peeping at her kids.Considering the severity with which Palin's kids have been mocked by the media (see my various posts on the disgusting attacks on Trig Palin), why is this not a legitimate concern. Whatever happened to leaving the kids of politicians alone?
Whoever pays or offers or promises any money or thing of value,to any person, firm, or corporation in consideration of the use or promise to use any influence to procure any appointive office or place under the United States for any person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.18 U.S.C. section 211 provides:
Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution,or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, inconsideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both....Is Sestak refusing to talk on advice of counsel so that there is no waiver of his 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination? Or is Sestak refusing to talk just because Admirals don't talk?
Will Democrats once again give a standing ovation? And will the Obama administration obey?
Regarding the Administration’s decision to send 1,200 National Guard servicemen to the US Southern border, the Government of Mexico trusts that this decision will help to channel additional US resources to enhance efforts to prevent the illegal flows of weapons and bulk cash into Mexico, which provide organized crime with its firepower and its ability to corrupt.
Additionally, the Government of Mexico expects that National Guard personnel will strengthen US operations in the fight against transnational organized crime that operates on both sides of our common border and that it will not, in accordance to its legal obligations, conduct activities directly linked to the enforcement of immigration laws.
Mexico is determined to continue working on its side of the border to enhance the security and well-being of border communities, and to deter and dismantle organized crime and its links to drug trafficking and human smuggling.
As part of our joint strategy in the fight against transnational organized crime, there are actions that our two governments have undertaken together, and there are other measures taken independently by Mexico and by the US within their respective territories. In this regard, the Mexican Government fully respects the sovereign decisions of the US Government, but underscores that joint responsibility must continue to underpin our joint efforts in rolling-back transnational organized crime operating on both sides of the border.
Surprise, surprise, it appears that the City overpaid for the properties it acquired using federal money, and there is a question of whether the purchases were intended to help friends of the Mayor:
One of the most financially troubled cities in Rhode Island—Central Falls—has been spending money to buy up foreclosed properties.
This story came to light when a real estate agent found out Central Falls was buying property. Bruce Gagnon said he offered his services for free to save the city the brokers’ fee.
But then he said he found himself bidding against the city for a property he wanted to save but that the city wanted to tear down.
Hundreds of homes in Central Falls have been foreclosed and boarded up.
Last year, five sellers got rid of their foreclosed properties by selling them to the city. The money to buy the homes came from federal taxpayers. It was part of a program to improve housing by tearing down foreclosed homes and rebuilding affordable units on the empty lots.
Central Falls is a disaster at so many levels. The wasting of federal money is just the tip of the iceberg.
The five properties sold for a total of $223,100, most within several thousands dollars of the asking price—a level that Gagnon said was unusual a year ago when the purchases were made and when he bought a foreclosed property for much less than the listed price....
Each of the properties was supposed to be bulldozed, but they are still standing. The city planner said demolition will take time.
But as soon as the houses were purchased, the city paid board-up fees of more than $29,000 to Mike Bouthillette, a friend of Mayor Charles Moreau.
Bouthillette had liens on each of the properties bought by the city, a total of more than $84,000 and none of the houses have been demolished.
They will also undermine Israel's attempts to suggest that, if it has nuclear weapons, it is a "responsible" power that would not misuse them, whereas countries such as Iran cannot be trusted.And this political point really is the point.
The larger issue is obviously this: Evidence that a chief proxy of the United States offered to sell actual, functioning nuclear warheads on actual, functioning ballistic missiles to an autocratic, unstable state somewhat undermines US “moral authority” to undertake anti-proliferation efforts in nuclear and ballistic missile technology. Iran is enriching uranium? Well, Israel offered to sell nukes to apartheid South Africa. North Korea is selling ballistic missile parts and know how? Well, Israel offered to sell Jericho missiles, complete with nuclear warheads, to South Africa. In short, a US proxy offered to engage in behavior that was by several degrees worse than any behavior that Pakistan, North Korea, Syria, Libya, or Iran have ever been credibly accused of engaging in.This is the pathetic, but typical, moral equivalency argument put forth by left-wing academics who view Israel as the primary source of problems in the Middle East, and who obsess over the "Israel lobby" (which includes a substantial majority of Americans).
Israel (allegedly) offered to sell nukes, but did not do so, so Iran can obtain nukes to use against Israel and we have no right to complain about it. Indeed, we dropped a nuke on two Japanese cities, so we should completely abandon non-proliferation efforts because who are we to tell others not to obtain nukes. Actually, who are we to tell Iran not to drop a nuke on Tel Aviv, because we dropped one on Hiroshima. So bombs away, Mahmoud, now you can be just like us.Inaction really is what the argument is about.
Psychedelic Mushroom Clouds at the Guardian
Misquotes and Lies Guardian Style Part I
Misquotes and Lies Guardian Style Part II
House Speaker Gordon D. Fox decided Monday that Rep. Peter Palumbo’s controversial Arizona-style bill on immigration will not be heard this session.The bill previously had met with protests, including a disruption of the House chamber:
“The speaker opposes this and feels it’s better addressed federally. We’re not going to hear it this year,” said Larry Berman, spokesman for the House of Representatives. Palumbo could not be reached for comment....
Terry Gorman, president of Rhode Islanders for Immigration Law Enforcement, said he believed that Palumbo had been promised a hearing Thursday afternoon.
“And now here comes Gordon Fox, which is exactly what everyone anticipated, to use his power and cancel it … It’s just unfair. It’s getting to be more and more of a charade then you can ever imagine.”
At least 100 protesters chanted: “This is what democracy looks like!” and ¡Si se puede! (Yes we can) and “Hey-hey, ho-ho, Peter Palumbo’s got to go!”
The protest started quietly as demonstrators wearing banners that said, “Do I Look Illegal?” milled about the House floor. It gathered steam and decibel levels as the bell rang and legislators convened at 4 p.m.
Speaker Gordon D. Fox banged his gavel, and Capitol Police began telling the protesters it was time to go. The demonstrators left the chamber, but continued their chants and foot-stomping on the marble steps just outside the door.
About one-third of employers subject to major requirements of the new health care law may face tax penalties because they offer health insurance that could be considered unaffordable to some employees, a new study says.... It suggests that a little-noticed provision of the law could affect far more employers than Congress had assumed.That term, "little-noticed," sure sounded familiar. It seems that we hear that term a lot.