Showing posts with label We're. Show all posts
Showing posts with label We're. Show all posts

Friday, April 4, 2014

Alexander challenger: "We"re friends"

Lamar Alexander is pictured. | AP Photo

Alexander appears likely to skate to reelection in November. | AP Photo





On paper, George Flinn is Sen. Lamar Alexander’s worst nightmare: A mega-rich self-funder willing to dump a huge amount of cash into the Tennessee Republican primary.


In reality, Flinn is all about a single issue: Health care.







Flinn, a Memphis radiologist and radio magnate, filed papers this week to run in the crowded primary against Alexander, the two-term senator, former Education secretary and ex-governor of Tennessee. Flinn, who ran for the House in 2010 and 2012, spent roughly $ 5 million of his own in those unsuccessful bids for Congress.


(Launching April 9 – Campaign Pro: Your guide to the permanent campaign)


This time against Alexander, Flinn is once again ready to pour big bucks in the Republican Senate primary — but not to attack Alexander. In fact, he said: “I like him, we’re friends.”


“I’m not running against him,” Flinn said in an interview. “I’m running for this plan.”


Flinn may spend millions promoting what he dubs the Patient Centered Health Plan that would overhaul the current health care system to implement a more free-market approach. Flinn said he hadn’t decided how much he’d be willing to spend of his own cash, but added: “I’m going to do whatever it takes to get this message out.”


(PHOTOS: Senators up for election in 2014)


But Flinn vowed that he wouldn’t attack Alexander in his sustained ad buys and would instead run a “very positive campaign.”


Such words may be a relief to Alexander given that Flinn’s networth is estimated to be between $ 30 million and $ 104 million, according to financial disclosure records.


Indeed, Alexander appears likely to skate to reelection in November despite amassing a bipartisan record in the Senate that tea party activists have seized upon. Even though his politics are conservative-leaning, Alexander has burnished a reputation for working with Democrats and has backed controversial measures and nominations, including Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court in 2009, the 2008 Wall Street bailout and the 2013 immigration bill.


But tea party forces have been unable to mobilize against him. Eight candidates filed against Alexander ahead of Thursday’s filing deadline, though it’s unclear how many will ultimately end up on the ballot for the August primary. State Rep. Joe Carr has been in the race against Alexander for months after dropping a bid for the House, but he has yet to gain traction in the polls or in fundraising.


The challenges that tea party groups are having in Tennessee are emblematic of their struggles nationwide. Even though a number of GOP incumbents are facing primary challenges in conservative states like South Carolina, Kentucky and Tennessee, they seem likely to easily survive in the intraparty contests.


Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican, skated to victory over a tea party challenger in his primary last month. Sen. Pat Roberts in Kansas also appears well-positioned against physician Milton Wolf. Sen. Thad Cochran, the six-term Mississippian, appears to be the most vulnerable Republican incumbent, as he faces a spirited push by state Sen. Chris McDaniel.


Alexander seems to be on safe ground as well. Before Flinn filed his papers this week, he called Alexander up as a courtesy because he has “the ultimate respect for the man.”


And when asked if Flinn believed Alexander was a good senator, he paused and said: “For the things that have come up for the time? Yes.”


In an interview at the Capitol this week, Alexander returned the compliment.


“I’ve known him a long time, he’s a friend of mine,” said Alexander, whose campaign has $ 3.1 million in cash.


Asked if Flinn should be considered a threat, Alexander would only say: “I’m doing my job as a United States senator and doing my best to continue to earn the respect of the people of Tennessee.”




POLITICO – Congress



Alexander challenger: "We"re friends"

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Monday, March 31, 2014

Carney: "We"re Talking About Private Insurance, This Is Not A Government Program"





JON KARL, ABC NEWS: How many of the 6 million who have signed up, how many of those who have signed up actually paid?


CARNEY: We don’t have those figures. When we do, we’ll give them to you. As you know, and I think it’s very important, and I look forward to everybody making this clear in their reports, we’re talking about private insurance. This is not a government program.


The contract that you sign if you get health insurance through Healthcare.gov or through a state marketplace is a private contract between you and an insurance company.




RealClearPolitics Video Log



Carney: "We"re Talking About Private Insurance, This Is Not A Government Program"

Friday, March 28, 2014

Hollywood Conservatives Claim IRS Harassment: Documents Show They Were Gaming the System

At A Political Statement, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by A Political Statement and how it is used.

Log Files

Like many other Web sites, A Political Statement makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.

Cookies and Web Beacons

A Political Statement does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.

DoubleClick DART Cookie

  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on A Political Statement.
  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to A Political Statement and other sites on the Internet.
  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on A Political Statement send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.

A Political Statement has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.

You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. A Political Statement"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.

If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.


Hollywood Conservatives Claim IRS Harassment: Documents Show They Were Gaming the System

Friday, March 21, 2014

Lee Camp: We’re In The Middle Of A War And Don’t Even Realize It

At The Daily News Source, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by The Daily News Source and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, The Daily News Source makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


The Daily News Source does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on The Daily News Source.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to The Daily News Source and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on The Daily News Source send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


The Daily News Source has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. The Daily News Source"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Lee Camp: We’re In The Middle Of A War And Don’t Even Realize It

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

We’re still not asking the right questions about HS2

At The Daily News Source, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by The Daily News Source and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, The Daily News Source makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


The Daily News Source does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on The Daily News Source.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to The Daily News Source and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on The Daily News Source send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


The Daily News Source has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. The Daily News Source"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



We’re still not asking the right questions about HS2

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Why We’re Addicted to Online Outrage

At The Daily News Source, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by The Daily News Source and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, The Daily News Source makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


The Daily News Source does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on The Daily News Source.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to The Daily News Source and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on The Daily News Source send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


The Daily News Source has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. The Daily News Source"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Why We’re Addicted to Online Outrage

Sunday, January 19, 2014

Gingrich on Hillary & Benghazi: "We"re Never Going To Beat Her On Nitpicking Smaller Issues"





NEWT GINGRICH: I think any Republican strategy which tries to nibble at Hillary Clinton is hopeless. I mean, she has been in public life for 40 years. She was named the government field person in 1972. I mean, the idea that suddenly we’re going to learn something new about Hillary Clinton.


ANDREA MITCHELL: She was on the Nixon Impeachment Committee staff.


NEWT GINGRICH: In fact, she’s a lot like Nixon in her capacity to survive forever. So, she’s a fact. She gets beaten. She’s going to get beaten because Obamacare keeps dictating. She’s going to get beaten because we’re losing the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.


She’s going to get beaten because there are big decisions and she’s caught between loyalty to a president whose base is still loyal and the country. Now, if that happens, she’ll lose. But we’re never going to beat her on nitpicking smaller issues.




RealClearPolitics Video Log



Gingrich on Hillary & Benghazi: "We"re Never Going To Beat Her On Nitpicking Smaller Issues"

Friday, December 27, 2013

Al Qaeda: Were sorry about Yemen hospital attack

(CNN) — Its something you dont often hear from the leaders of a terrorist group known for violence: Were sorry. But thats just what the head of al Qaeda in the Arabian…
AboveTopSecret.com New Topics In War On Terrorism



Al Qaeda: Were sorry about Yemen hospital attack

Friday, November 22, 2013

UK police: 3 women were slaves "in simple terms"








Aneeta Prem, founder of Freedom Charity, speaks during an interview in central London, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2013. Freedom Charity helped to rescue three women from a house in south London who were held as slaves for 30 years. London’s Metropolitan Police spoke about the rescues after two people were arrested early Thursday on suspicion of forced labor and domestic servitude. Those freed on Oct. 25, 2013 are a 69-year-old Malaysian woman, a 57-year-old Irish woman and a 30-year-old British woman, police said. (AP Photo/Sang Tan)





Aneeta Prem, founder of Freedom Charity, speaks during an interview in central London, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2013. Freedom Charity helped to rescue three women from a house in south London who were held as slaves for 30 years. London’s Metropolitan Police spoke about the rescues after two people were arrested early Thursday on suspicion of forced labor and domestic servitude. Those freed on Oct. 25, 2013 are a 69-year-old Malaysian woman, a 57-year-old Irish woman and a 30-year-old British woman, police said. (AP Photo/Sang Tan)





Kevin Hyland, head of the Metropolitan Police’s human trafficking unit speaks to the media outside New Scotland Yard’s headquarters in this image taken from TV Thursday Nov. 21, 2013. London police say three women were held for at least 30 years against their will in a south London home. Metropolitan Police revealed Thursday the women had been rescued and announced the arrests of two people as part of an investigation into slavery and domestic servitude. (AP Photo/ Sky TV, via Associated Press Television) UNITED KINGDOM OUT TV OUT





Aneeta Prem, founder of Freedom Charity, speaks during an interview in central London, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2013. Freedom Charity helped to rescue three women from a house in south London who were held as slaves for 30 years. London’s Metropolitan Police spoke about the rescues after two people were arrested early Thursday on suspicion of forced labor and domestic servitude. Those freed on Oct. 25, 2013 are a 69-year-old Malaysian woman, a 57-year-old Irish woman and a 30-year-old British woman, police said. (AP Photo/Sang Tan)





Aneeta Prem, founder of Freedom Charity, speaks to Associated Press in central London, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2013. Freedom Charity helped to rescue three women from a house in south London who were held as slaves for about 30-years. A Malaysian woman, 69, an Irish woman, 57, and a British woman, 30, were rescued from the house on Oct. 25, 2013. (AP Photo/Sang Tan)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — Three women who were freed from a London home after 30 years had been allowed outside in “carefully controlled circumstances” during their ordeal but were victims of “slavery, in simple terms,” a senior British police officer said Friday.


Commander Steve Rodhouse described a “complicated and disturbing picture of emotional control over many years” in the case of the women, declining to say how they wound up in the south London home. Two suspects, a man and a woman, were arrested early Thursday on suspicion of forced labor and domestic servitude.


He said investigators are trying to figure out “what were the invisible handcuffs that were used” to exert such control for the 30 years the women were allegedly held captive and subject to physical, mental and emotional abuse.


“It is not as brutally obvious as women being physically restrained inside an address and not being allowed to leave,” Rodhouse said. “This may have appeared to be a normal family.”


The disclosure Thursday that a 69-year-old Malaysian, a 57-year-old Irish woman and a 30-year-old Briton were freed after apparently spending 30 years in captivity prompted a flurry of speculation and questions about how such a tragedy escaped notice for so long.


The arrests were made after the Irish woman phoned a charity last month to say she was being held against her will along with two others. The charity engaged in a series of secretive conversations with the women and contacted police. Two of the women eventually left the house, and police rescued the third.


The case has sent shockwaves throughout Britain and around the world, but is the latest horrifying case of a broader phenomenon that officials warn is still happening — and on the rise.


“Cases of modern slavery are becoming more prevalent in Europe,” said Rob Wainwright, director of Europol, the European Union’s law enforcement agency. “Unfortunately, it remains a low priority for many national police authorities. Europol is committed to fostering stronger international police action in this area and to raising greater levels of public attention.”


Since the most recent expansions of the EU and the lifting of restrictions on employment in many countries, instances of situations which amount to forced labor have increased, Europol says.


Anti-slavery charity The Walk Free Foundation last month released a global index that estimated that more than 29 million people live in some form of modern slavery — which can take the form of domestic servitude, forced marriages, child trafficking and forced labor.


While the index found that Africa and Asia are home to the vast majority of modern slaves, it estimated that there are up to 4,600 slaves in the U.K. — a country which had the lowest estimated prevalence of slavery in a ranking of 162 countries.


Fiona David, of Walk Free, said Friday that the most recent case in London highlights that slavery can be perpetrated by “just people living in the neighborhood,” not necessarily “organized criminals.”


The suspects — both 67 — have also been questioned on suspicion of immigration offenses, police said. Regarding their identity, police would only say that the suspects were not British and had been in the country for “many years.” They would not elaborate on the pair’s nationalities, but did note that both had been arrested in the 1970s. Police did not say why.


Both suspects have been released on bail, having surrendered their passports and agreed not to return to their house as part of their bail conditions.


Police say they do not believe there are other victims in the case, and they are confident that they know the true identities of the three women. The relationships among the women — and between the women and the suspects — are under investigation, police said.


“Whilst we do not believe that they have been subjected to sexual abuse, we know that there has been physical abuse, described as beatings,” said Kevin Hyland, head of the Metropolitan Police’s human trafficking unit.


He and Rodhouse defended the lapse in time between Oct. 25 — when the women gained freedom — and the arrests, saying that the case is complicated and investigators must be careful to ensure they do not further traumatize the victims as they unravel the events of the past 30 years.


Hyland also urged patience as the case unfolds, noting that officers must sift through 55 bags of evidence seized in a search of the home, interview several people and follow up numerous strands.


Police noted that the case was “unique” not least because of the length of women’s ordeal, though the U.K. has seen a string of high-profile slavery cases in recent years.


Last month, an 84-year-old man was jailed for repeatedly raping a deaf and mute girl he trafficked into Britain from Pakistan and kept as a virtual slave.


Police in Wales have arrested at least seven people in recent months as part of a long-running investigation into a suspected slavery ring there.


___


Associated Press writers Paisley Dodds and Sylvia Hui in London contributed to this report.


___


Follow Cassandra Vinograd at http://twitter.com/CassVinograd


Associated Press




Top Headlines



UK police: 3 women were slaves "in simple terms"

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

ObamaCare saving more money than CBO projected! Dropped policies were also "Junk Policies."


The ObamaCare sideshows designed to scare and detract people from what is really working may have finally hit a wall. People are just too interested and responsible to let affordable health care pass them by.


From Ezra Klein comes the news that ObamaCare will end up saving the country even more money than once projected.

The White House’s biggest frustration right now is that Obamacare’s technical failures are obscuring its great success: Premiums are much lower than the Congressional Budget Office estimated when the law first passed. In a new report for the liberal Center for American Progress, Topher Spiro and Jonathan Gruber quantify exactly how much lower.

The Affordable Care Act’s insurance marketplaces was projected to be $ 4,700 in 2014. In fact, it’s more like $ 3,936 — $ 764, or 16 percent, lower than expected … the Affordable Care Act will cost $ 190 billion less than the CBO estimated over the next decade.  



That savings will make up for the lost Medicaid expansion savings the CBO assumed would happen in the original law that included every state.


Individual Market: It can’t be stressed enough about what ObamaCare is really dealing with here; 10 percent of the country. That’s not a lot of people, but it is the most costly area of the health care market.


“Individual market,” … So we’re talking about insurance premiums for a small minority of the population. But it’s still millions of people. 

Prior to the Affordable Care Act, insurance in the individual market kept costs down by turning the away the sick, raising prices on the likely-to-get-sick, and offering, in many cases, pretty stingy benefits. The Affordable Care Act makes individual market insurance both more accessible and more comprehensive. 



Get a load of this perfect example of one opponent of ObamaCare who just doesn’t get it.


A good example of the tradeoffs is the case of Dianne Barrette, a 56-year-old Florida woman who’s been featured in the media because her current plan will cost 10 times more under Obamacare. As Erik Wemple discovered, her old plan was health insurance in name only. It didn’t cover inpatient hospital care, it didn’t cover ambulance services, and so forth. Under Obamacare, all plans have to cover those benefits. So Barrette’s old plan was extremely affordable — $ 56 a month — because it covered basically nothing. Her new plan is much more expensive but also much more generous.

So the bottom line is that Obamacare makes insurance more accessible and more comprehensive, which raises average premiums, but it adds subsidies and competitive markets, which lower premiums. 



I thought this important note from Klein bares repeating:


One thing to note about the media coverage around this is that some of the old plans in the individual market are being canceled or moved onto the exchanges at a time when the exchanges aren’t really working. So we’re hearing from people losing something but we’re not hearing much yet from the people who’re gaining insurance, or lower-priced insurance, through the law. That’s another consequence of the web site’s failures, but it’s a temporary one. There will be some losers under Obamacare, but because of the subsidies, many more winners. 



Also at Wonkblog was this reason for inurers dropping their old policies:


From an insurance company’s vantage point, grandfathered plans are a bit of a dead end: They can’t enroll new subscribers and are really constrained in their ability to tweak the benefit package or cost-sharing structure. The whole idea of the insurance expansion isn’t to get Americans to purchase anything called “insurance.” It’s to get them to purchase a specific kind of insurance, a plan that is relatively comprehensive and helps protect against financial ruin. Of course, not everyone agrees with this; some contend that shoppers should be able to continue buying less robust insurance policies and have the option of taking on more financial risk.




Democurmudgeon



ObamaCare saving more money than CBO projected! Dropped policies were also "Junk Policies."

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Matthews On Syria: This Is A Road Americans Wish We Were Not On


Matthews On Syria: This Is A Road Americans Wish We Were Not On


Chris Matthews reflects on the road which the American people finds themselves on with the situation on Syria.




RealClearPolitics Video Log



Matthews On Syria: This Is A Road Americans Wish We Were Not On

Monday, September 9, 2013

The Wolves Were Never at Our Doors



To quell rumors that the destructive Rim Fire still raging in and around Yosemite National Park was started by marijuana growers, authorities revealed this week that the blaze was actually the fault of a careless hunter who set an illegal campfire.


That was tough to take. The fire, which is expected to burn another two weeks, has already charred some 400 square miles, destroyed 100 buildings, and cost taxpayers $ 75 million. But my thoughts are with another hunter, the coward who recently shot and killed a female Mexican gray wolf denning with her pups in southwestern New Mexico.


These animals roamed the American Southwest and Mexico before there was a border between our countries, long before Anglos or Spaniards ever set foot there, in fact. For many millennia they coexisted easily with native people, who not only eschewed killing them but emulated the way they stalked game.


A similar synergy took place with wolves all over North America. It’s not too much to say that wolves taught humans how to hunt—and, thus, how to survive. It’s why, unlike in Europe, where wolves were portrayed as fiendish predators—and a constant danger to man—native peoples in the New World tended to venerate them.


To the great detriment of wolves, Europeans brought their superstitions across the ocean with them. They persist to this day. Notwithstanding the idyllic image of the creatures in “Dances With Wolves,” Hollywood contributes to the ancient mythology. In the “The Bourne Legacy,” a malevolent pack tracks the protagonist for many miles. “You should have left me alone,” the man says before ensuring the alpha wolf is killed by a missile fired from a drone. In “Centurion,” a low-budget action movie, two wolves actually stalked two armed men—a scenario for which there is no precedent.


But killing wolves in the New World was never about protecting humans; it was about protecting domesticated animals. Wolves didn’t tend to discriminate between livestock and wildlife, and when the American frontier (originally all land west of the Allegany Mountains) was opened to farming and ranching, humans removed wolves from the land with no more emotion than when clearing trees. For the wolves, this systematic extirpation constituted a kind of holocaust.


I don’t use that word lightly. What eventually happened wasn’t merely the culling of offending predators. It was an organized campaign of eradication. And as the last wolves took refuge in federal parklands, most notably Yellowstone, it was a slaughter carried out by federal employees. From 1865 to 1935, when the last wild packs were wiped out in the American West, farmers, ranchers, bounty hunters, and U.S. park rangers employed any manner of gruesome methods to exterminate wolves.


They poisoned meat and left in on the prairie; caught wolves in steel traps before clubbing them to death; pulled them apart with ropes; shot them from airplanes; set hunting dogs on them; and strangled pups in their dens—even as they attempted to nuzzle the human hands reaching for them.


But as attitudes about wildlife management evolved in the 20th century, this grim legacy sat heavy on the consciences of many people, especially U.S. Park Service biologists. With no record of wolves killing humans in this country, where did such murderous impulses come from? Worse, it became clear almost immediately, wolves played an essential role in the ecosystems of the Yellowstone National Park and other places.


A century ago, when wolves still roamed California, Yosemite’s famed naturalist John Muir put it this way: “When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.”


In Yellowstone, without anything to stem their growth, elk herds became too large. This wasn’t to their benefit—or that of the park. Elk overgrazed Yellowstone’s valleys, leading to cycles of starvation for the large ungulates, and leading to erosion. Beavers were crowded out, according to one theory, causing the range to dry up. It might have contributed to conditions that cause forest fires.


Maybe that’s giving wolves too much credit, but one thing is sure: Eventually a consensus developed to reintroduce wolves into Yellowstone. And since wolves don’t recognize lines on human maps, this meant reintroducing wolves into the greater American West. Notice, I used the word “consensus,” not “unanimity.” There were always people who hated the idea of bringing wild wolves back into our lives—and there still are.


Yet, it’s clear that the debate has shifted. I first began writing about wolves in early 1993 when it became apparent that Bill Clinton’s election—and his appointment of Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt—would likely mean the implementation of longtime Park Service plans to restore wolves to Yellowstone.


Two decades ago, I covered a public hearing in Montana where a stockman’s wife carried a placard stating, “The wolf is the Saddam Hussein of the animal world.” Fifteen years later—after Saddam Hussein’s regime had been destroyed by the U.S. and he himself executed—a protester in Bozeman carried a sign reading simply: “I Love Wolves.”


So, yes, much has changed. The Wolf Recovery Project is a federal program that ran ahead of schedule and under budget, and is essentially being phased out. It also had local input, and crucial help from the private sector, most notably from a nonprofit called Defenders of Wildlife, which in the early years of the program recompensed ranchers for any livestock taken by wolves.


Today, some 6,100 wolves roam the continental U.S., 1,700 of them in the Rocky Mountain West. That’s a fraction of the populations that once tramped the forests and plains of this country, but it’s apparently sustainable: Following recommendations of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the Obama administration wants to “delist” the northern gray wolf (canis lupus), meaning it’s no longer on the Endangered Species List. Meanwhile, the government has largely turned management of the populations over to the states.


This week, Fish & Wildlife announced three final public hearings in Washington, D.C., Sacramento, and Albuquerque, N.M., on delisting wolves. It softened the blow by announcing that it wants to expand recovery efforts of the Mexican wolf (canis lupus baileyi). With only 75 of these smaller cousins of the northern wolves left in the wild, that’s clearly a necessary program.


I don’t know what the man who shot the female Mexican gray was thinking when he pulled the trigger, or if he had any remorse afterward. I do know what famous naturalist Aldo Leopold thought when he watched a wolf die by his own hand.


“We reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes,” he wrote. “I was young then, and full of trigger-itch; I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters’ paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view.” 




RealClearPolitics – Articles



The Wolves Were Never at Our Doors

The Wolves Were Never at Our Doors



To quell rumors that the destructive Rim Fire still raging in and around Yosemite National Park was started by marijuana growers, authorities revealed this week that the blaze was actually the fault of a careless hunter who set an illegal campfire.


That was tough to take. The fire, which is expected to burn another two weeks, has already charred some 400 square miles, destroyed 100 buildings, and cost taxpayers $ 75 million. But my thoughts are with another hunter, the coward who recently shot and killed a female Mexican gray wolf denning with her pups in southwestern New Mexico.


These animals roamed the American Southwest and Mexico before there was a border between our countries, long before Anglos or Spaniards ever set foot there, in fact. For many millennia they coexisted easily with native people, who not only eschewed killing them but emulated the way they stalked game.


A similar synergy took place with wolves all over North America. It’s not too much to say that wolves taught humans how to hunt—and, thus, how to survive. It’s why, unlike in Europe, where wolves were portrayed as fiendish predators—and a constant danger to man—native peoples in the New World tended to venerate them.


To the great detriment of wolves, Europeans brought their superstitions across the ocean with them. They persist to this day. Notwithstanding the idyllic image of the creatures in “Dances With Wolves,” Hollywood contributes to the ancient mythology. In the “The Bourne Legacy,” a malevolent pack tracks the protagonist for many miles. “You should have left me alone,” the man says before ensuring the alpha wolf is killed by a missile fired from a drone. In “Centurion,” a low-budget action movie, two wolves actually stalked two armed men—a scenario for which there is no precedent.


But killing wolves in the New World was never about protecting humans; it was about protecting domesticated animals. Wolves didn’t tend to discriminate between livestock and wildlife, and when the American frontier (originally all land west of the Allegany Mountains) was opened to farming and ranching, humans removed wolves from the land with no more emotion than when clearing trees. For the wolves, this systematic extirpation constituted a kind of holocaust.


I don’t use that word lightly. What eventually happened wasn’t merely the culling of offending predators. It was an organized campaign of eradication. And as the last wolves took refuge in federal parklands, most notably Yellowstone, it was a slaughter carried out by federal employees. From 1865 to 1935, when the last wild packs were wiped out in the American West, farmers, ranchers, bounty hunters, and U.S. park rangers employed any manner of gruesome methods to exterminate wolves.


They poisoned meat and left in on the prairie; caught wolves in steel traps before clubbing them to death; pulled them apart with ropes; shot them from airplanes; set hunting dogs on them; and strangled pups in their dens—even as they attempted to nuzzle the human hands reaching for them.


But as attitudes about wildlife management evolved in the 20th century, this grim legacy sat heavy on the consciences of many people, especially U.S. Park Service biologists. With no record of wolves killing humans in this country, where did such murderous impulses come from? Worse, it became clear almost immediately, wolves played an essential role in the ecosystems of the Yellowstone National Park and other places.


A century ago, when wolves still roamed California, Yosemite’s famed naturalist John Muir put it this way: “When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.”


In Yellowstone, without anything to stem their growth, elk herds became too large. This wasn’t to their benefit—or that of the park. Elk overgrazed Yellowstone’s valleys, leading to cycles of starvation for the large ungulates, and leading to erosion. Beavers were crowded out, according to one theory, causing the range to dry up. It might have contributed to conditions that cause forest fires.


Maybe that’s giving wolves too much credit, but one thing is sure: Eventually a consensus developed to reintroduce wolves into Yellowstone. And since wolves don’t recognize lines on human maps, this meant reintroducing wolves into the greater American West. Notice, I used the word “consensus,” not “unanimity.” There were always people who hated the idea of bringing wild wolves back into our lives—and there still are.


Yet, it’s clear that the debate has shifted. I first began writing about wolves in early 1993 when it became apparent that Bill Clinton’s election—and his appointment of Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt—would likely mean the implementation of longtime Park Service plans to restore wolves to Yellowstone.


Two decades ago, I covered a public hearing in Montana where a stockman’s wife carried a placard stating, “The wolf is the Saddam Hussein of the animal world.” Fifteen years later—after Saddam Hussein’s regime had been destroyed by the U.S. and he himself executed—a protester in Bozeman carried a sign reading simply: “I Love Wolves.”


So, yes, much has changed. The Wolf Recovery Project is a federal program that ran ahead of schedule and under budget, and is essentially being phased out. It also had local input, and crucial help from the private sector, most notably from a nonprofit called Defenders of Wildlife, which in the early years of the program recompensed ranchers for any livestock taken by wolves.


Today, some 6,100 wolves roam the continental U.S., 1,700 of them in the Rocky Mountain West. That’s a fraction of the populations that once tramped the forests and plains of this country, but it’s apparently sustainable: Following recommendations of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the Obama administration wants to “delist” the northern gray wolf (canis lupus), meaning it’s no longer on the Endangered Species List. Meanwhile, the government has largely turned management of the populations over to the states.


This week, Fish & Wildlife announced three final public hearings in Washington, D.C., Sacramento, and Albuquerque, N.M., on delisting wolves. It softened the blow by announcing that it wants to expand recovery efforts of the Mexican wolf (canis lupus baileyi). With only 75 of these smaller cousins of the northern wolves left in the wild, that’s clearly a necessary program.


I don’t know what the man who shot the female Mexican gray was thinking when he pulled the trigger, or if he had any remorse afterward. I do know what famous naturalist Aldo Leopold thought when he watched a wolf die by his own hand.


“We reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes,” he wrote. “I was young then, and full of trigger-itch; I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters’ paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view.” 




RealClearPolitics – Articles



The Wolves Were Never at Our Doors

Sunday, September 8, 2013

Global warming? No, actually we’re cooling, claim scientists


Hayley Dixon
London Telegraph
September 8, 2013


A cold Arctic summer has led to a record increase in the ice cap, leading experts to predict a period of global cooling.


There has been a 60 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, they equivalent of almost a million square miles.


In a rebound from 2012′s record low an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia’s northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.


The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year, forcing some ships to change their routes.


Full story here.


This article was posted: Sunday, September 8, 2013 at 5:29 am









Prison Planet.com



Global warming? No, actually we’re cooling, claim scientists

Friday, August 23, 2013

If only more pundits were like Sanjay Gupta

Whether it is the impeached Bill Clinton leaving office with solid approval ratings or the once-disgraced Eliot Spitzer now surging in New York City electoral polls, there is ample evidence that America forgives public figures for their transgressions. And yet, contrition is not exactly common on the public stage. Like the Fonz from “Happy Days,” today’s media stars, politicians and celebrities often have trouble saying the words “I was wrong” or “I am sorry” — even when they have made obvious mistakes and when apologies are clearly necessary.


Such a pervasive hostility to self-reproach is one of the big reasons that the recent mea culpa from CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta is so significant. Indeed, his apology for previously advocating marijuana prohibition is a critical reminder not just that the Drug War is misguided, but also that public figures bear a special responsibility to admit mistakes. Why? Because when they refuse to admit error, they allow destructive misperceptions to persist in the larger population.


Continue Reading…






    








Salon.com



If only more pundits were like Sanjay Gupta

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

My children were abused

Dear Cary,


I am writing with a problem that makes my heart physically ache.


Let me briefly lay the groundwork first, and then I will present the problem. I was married for almost 20 years to a man who had three children from his first marriage. We had three more ourselves, and I legally adopted my oldest stepdaughter when she turned 18. My stepchildren’s mother is extremely abusive, and all three of them were physically, emotionally and/or sexually abused by her or her relatives. While I understand that she herself was a victim of the same behavior from her own family members, I cannot condone the perpetuation of the cycle. My adopted child (now 34) has worked really hard to separate herself from the traumas of her youth, only now to find that her father, my ex-husband, has now replaced her mother as the perpetrator of abuse in her life.


This daughter has a nice husband, a steady job in a call center, and a lovely son from a previous relationship. She also suffers from a mysterious auto-immune disease and severe chronic pain that nothing alleviates. She has mental problems that show up as bipolar but are probably more like PTSD. The more I study about bodywork, the more I understand that these conditions are outward manifestations of everything she has suffered and continues to suffer at the hands of her natural parents.


Continue Reading…






    




Salon.com



My children were abused

Sunday, August 4, 2013

5 things we"re learning from Christie-Paul spat




  • War of words between Rand Paul and Chris Christie reflects division among Republicans

  • Paul represents conservative-libertarian wing of the party, Christie represents moderates

  • GOP strategist predicts Republican primaries will look ‘a lot like a cage match’

  • Was Paul’s ‘king of bacon’ comment about Christie’s weight?



Washington (CNN) — A very public squabble between two top Republican politicians who might be leading contenders for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination has grabbed clicks online and airtime on cable news.


The war of words between New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky over national security, civil liberties and federal spending is also a proxy for the bigger battle for the future of the Republican Party.


Here are five things we’re learning from their spat.


1. The fight for the 2016 GOP nomination is under way


It’s only the summer of 2013, but the intensity of the exchanges between Christie and Paul makes it feel like late 2015 in some ways, with the start of the caucus and primary season just weeks away.


The back and forth started last week when Christie, at a forum in Colorado with other GOP governors, slammed Paul for his criticism of government surveillance to battle terrorists.


“This strain of libertarianism that’s going through parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said.


Asked if Paul was one of the people he was pointing toward, Christie added: “You can name any number of people and he’s one of them.”





Fighting for the GOP’s heart and soul?





Republican family feud





Christie picks fight with Sen. Rand Paul


Paul pushed back.


“I’m the one trying to grow the party by talking about libertarian ideas of privacy and the Internet and attacking me isn’t helping the party. He’s hurting the party,” Paul said in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on “The Situation Room.”


Rep. Peter King of New York, who’s also considering a run for the White House, also jumped into the fray with comments critical of the libertarian-leaning senator.


“He wants to retreat from the world. He wants to isolate ourselves, go back to a fortress America,” King told Blitzer on Wednesday.


Senate rejects Rand Paul-backed plan to end aid to Egypt


2. This is far from over


While this round may be finished, others are sure to follow.


On Wednesday, Paul made a pitch for the two men to sit down and talk it out, hoping to ease tensions.


“I’m inviting him to a beer — anytime he would like to come down and sit down at the pub right around the corner from the Senate,” Paul said in an interview on Fox News, adding that proposed get-together didn’t have to be in the nation’s capital.


“We could always negotiate a middle ground like Philadelphia maybe,” said Paul.


That didn’t seem to fly with the tough-talking governor.


“I’m running for re-election in New Jersey, I don’t really have time for that at the moment. If I find myself in Washington, I’ll certainly look him up,” Christie said in a radio interview on New Jersey 101.5. “But I’ve got work to do here.”


Expect the action to pick up again in the future.


“This is just the beginning. This is not going to stop,” CNN Chief National Correspondent John King said.


GOP strategist and CNN contributor Ana Navarro agreed.


“I think we are going to end up with a Republican primary that looks a lot like a cage match,” she said.


3. War of words illustrates bigger battle


Sure, this is about 2016, but it’s also about a much bigger fight for the future of the GOP.


Most Republicans agree: Major changes are needed if the party wants to be competitive in future presidential elections. But a new poll of Republicans nationwide also indicates that there’s little agreement on the direction the GOP should take.


That’s playing out in the fireballs between Christie and Paul: The New Jersey governor represents the more traditional establishment wing of the party, with Paul the standard-bearer for the libertarian and grassroots conservative/tea party wing.


With losses in the last two presidential elections still stinging, two-thirds of Republicans questioned in the Pew Research Center poll say that the GOP needs to address major problems to do better in future presidential contests.


Three in 10 disagree, saying the party just needs to address minor problems. Along those lines, nearly six in 10 say the party needs to reconsider some positions, with 36% saying the GOP needs to make a stronger case for its current policies.


Rep. King: Rand Paul shouldn’t be face of GOP


But there’s less agreement on what the path the party should take.


By 54%-40% margin, Republican and Republican-leaning voters say party leaders should move in a more conservative direction, with four in 10 urging a more moderate direction.


“Not surprisingly, conservatives and those who agree with the tea party overwhelmingly favor moving in a more conservative direction, while moderates and liberals would like to see the party take more centrist positions. Yet the more moderate wing of the party is a minority generally, and makes up an even smaller share of the likely primary electorate,” Pew said in releasing the poll.


King said that ensures a “spirited debate” in the months ahead. “They have to deal with the immigration issue again. They have that ditch with Latino voters. Taxes and spending.”


McCain: Tough choice between Clinton and Rand Paul


4. Chris Christie doesn’t pull punches


Yes, we knew this. But this episode reminds us of how blunt Christie can be.


While Paul seemed on Wednesday to be trying to bring the scuffle to an end, Christie held his ground.


“At the end of the day, I didn’t call him any names, yet he called me names,” Christie said in his radio interview Wednesday. “I just have to assume from that that he’s just trying to get attention.”


Christie was talking about his initial comments that sparked the feud, adding: “It really had nothing to do with Senator Paul, but Senator Paul wanted to make it about Senator Paul,” Christie added.


Christie speaks his mind, which appeals to voters, and not just Republicans. While Paul has a higher favorable rating among Republicans than Christie, according to the Pew poll, Christie has crossover appeal with Independents and Democrats that Paul can’t match.


5. Did Paul go there?


Paul accused Christie of harming national security by hoarding federal relief money for Superstorm Sandy victims. Christie responded by calling on Paul to cut federal pork spending in Kentucky.


“But I doubt he would because most Washington politicians only care about bringing home the bacon so that they can get re-elected,” Christie charged on Tuesday.


Paul responded later in the day on “The Situation Room,” saying, “This is the king of bacon talking about bacon.”


Was there more to Paul’s “bacon” comment than just pork spending?


Paul advisers say it had nothing to do with Christie’s weight, which was an issue when he first ran for governor in 2009. While it’s not a problem for Christie as he appears to cruise towards re-election, it will most definitely come up again and again if he opts to run for the White House.




CNN.com – Politics



5 things we"re learning from Christie-Paul spat