http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/2zoZkSNnSI0/-Murdoch:-Im-still-an-Australian-at-heart

Given Fox's promotion of birther conspiracy theories (for example, here and here), you gotta' love the fact that Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of News Corp., FNC's parent company, not only was born outside the U.S., but still considers himself an Australian at heart.

Transcript:

   QUESTION: Was it difficult to give up your Australian citizenship?

   MURDOCH: Yeah, very.

   QUESTION: Do you still think of yourself as an Australian?

   MURDOCH: Since then, it’s become possible to have dual citizenship here.

   QUESTION: But not in the U.S.

   MURDOCH: But not in the U.S., although millions of people do. But I don’t want to go before a congressional committee and be reminded of what I swore, and admit that I’ve got two or three passports.

   QUESTION: Do you still feel at heart an Australian?

   MURDOCH: Yeah. Yeah, very largely.

It's just delicious that the "news" network of choice for the birther loons is run by a guy who still considers himself to be citizen of another nation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wayne-besen/voting-on-equal-rights-is_b_353979.html

Last week, I pointed out that the GLBT movement might be the first where a majority gets to vote on the rights of a minority. If the basic freedoms of women, immigrants and African Americans were subject to the whims of voters, there is no doubt that this nation would be decades behind. Yet, we continue to blindly accept that these degrading and un-American referendums are tolerable, when they are not.

Ironically, ballot initiatives were once helpful in gaining visibility. The 1977 anti-gay vote in Miami, led by beauty queen Anita Bryant, put our issues on the national radar. Even though we lost, we were given a rare forum to introduce ourselves to the American people.

In 1978, California voters defeated the Briggs Initiative, which would have banned gay schoolteachers, showing that victory was attainable. But whether it is a loss in Miami and a win in California in 1977-78, or a defeat in Maine and the victory on domestic partnerships in Washington State last week, success or failure is beside the point. All Americans are losers by virtue of participating in a disgraceful process that is an affront to human dignity.

Unfortunately, we have never had the luxury to stop, take a deep breath and consider if these grotesque referendums are the best use of our time and limited resources. With a record of 0-31 in marriage initiatives, now may be a good opportunity to review our complicity in a process that doles out or strips away basic rights by majority vote.

We must first recognize that a virtual campaign-industrial-complex has been built and financed around these fights. There is an army of field staff, media consultants, signature gatherers, advertising experts and fundraisers who work (and in some cases thrive) on these ballot initiatives.

In California, both sides spent as much as $73 million. Even in the small media market of Maine, several million dollars were spent on campaign staff and advertisements. The financial burden for these wars repeatedly falls on the same besieged philanthropists and everyday people who care enough to open their wallets. The four key questions we must ask ourselves before we continue down this road:

1) Are referendums the best use of our human resources?
2) Are they the best use of our finite capital?
3) Are these votes legitimizing the un-American concept of mob rule?
4) Are these quixotic and narrowly focused battles the best way to educate and create lasting progress?

Perhaps, these campaigns are unavoidable and we must soldier on and slog through the muddy terrain of lies and fear-based thirty-second ads. I won't pretend to know the answer, but there is no doubt that our traditional tactics must be looked at with fresh eyes and vigorously debated.

There has been much disagreement as to whether our ads in these campaigns are too "soft". I think this misses the larger point that campaigns are not conducive to education. "Vote No on Prop 8" may be a good campaign slogan, but it is hardly a compelling message for changing hearts and minds.

Campaigns by their very nature go for the short term fix, when we may be in need of more enduring strategies. Repeatedly investing in such hand-to-hand combat has potentially precluded deeper discussion with the American people, so they fully understand how our families are harmed, the damage caused by discrimination and the inequality we face, from taxation to immigration law.

It is also clear that our opponents are trying to bleed us to death financially. We can never outspend the combined forces of the Mormon, Catholic and Evangelical churches, which can afford referendums in every burg in the nation. To put the monetary imbalance in perspective, the annual budget for the largest GLBT organization is only $30 million. Meanwhile, in 2007 the Archdiocese of Los Angeles paid a $660 million settlement to 508 victims of sexual abuse by clergy.

Instead of investing millions on referendums, what if we used the money to send our field experts into communities to educate, without asking people to take sides on a divisive measure? What if we built powerful outreach programs geared towards minority communities? How about training talk radio hosts and buying airtime in small, conservative media markets like Lewiston, Maine or Bakersfield, California?

By turning away from such votes, we strengthen our position by increasing our moral authority. At the very least, it forces our foes out of campaign mode and into an ongoing, intelligent discussion, where it is more difficult to twist the truth and manipulate emotions.

Winning in California and Maine would have been exhilarating. But, would you have felt less dirty and exploited by the referendum process in victory?

I didn't think so.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nelson-montana/we-finally-have-health-re_b_351503.html

Congratulations are in order -- to the Republicans. They got the health care bill they wanted.

What?

Yep. The strategy was ingenious. They forced the administration to concede and compromise, got much of what they demanded and they still get to complain when it fails. Brilliant.

But wait a minute; liberals are celebrating! They say it's a first step. They say these things take time. They're calling it a monumental achievement. That's a stroke of genius on the part of the Democrats. They have the base so conditioned to defeat that any lip service motion will come off as a victory. In fact, I believe the Dems have a new victory motto. "It's better than nothing."

Hip! Hip! ...aah, the hell with it.

We've been thrown a bone with no meat, been asked to pay for it, and are expected to say "thank you."

So what do we have in regard to health reform? I'll break it down in 5 simple terms.

#1: The bill is estimated to cost over a trillion dollars. That means higher taxes. Okay, so far so good because taxes for a good cause is money well spent. Right? Well, let's see.

#2: Health cost is yet undetermined but to many people, the estimates are still too much. Of course, the poor will need subsidies. So we're right back to instilling Medicaid in one form or another.

#3: The insurance companies hold the cards and their job is not to provide care; it's to prevent us from cashing in on getting care since it costs them money, and this is a business after all. They will decide what you can get and how much it will cost.

#4: Since payment is not contingent on income it won't matter if you make $150,000 a year or $50,000 a year. The cost will be the same. Again, the lower middle class, (i.e. those who need health care the most) will take the hardest hit.

#5: More small businesses will not provide health care, mainly since they won't be able to afford it. Besides, they're sure to realize that people will be mandated to get it anyway, so why bother?

Dennis Kucinich is the only one who got it right. He realized that what we needed was a government run system that would provide for those who can't afford to deal with the insurance companies. He voted against the bill and rightly so. Health care never has been, and never should be a "scored point" for one side or the other. It must be a program that cares for the people.

In a word, what the people got was defeat.

And the crowd cheers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-edsall/the-case-against-dan-snyd_b_354786.html

For a lot of guys - I make no claim to speak for women - there is a test to determine when they really begin to feel at home in a new city: the moment they start to root for the local team. In Washington, there is really only one team, the Redskins. And when you become a Redskins fan - not the phony lobbyist or big shot lawyer who buys season tickets to impress clients - Sundays in the Fall acquire new meaning, raising spirits or destroying all reason to live. On those days, it is painful to be more than 15 feet from a television set.

After moving to the nation's capital from Boston in the 1970s, with my loyalty for the Celtics and Red Sox cemented, I found myself slowly slipping into Redskin mode -- a process accelerating with every John Riggins run, with every pass by Joe Theisman, Doug Williams or Mark Rypien, and with every reception by Art Monk or Gary Clark.

Then something terrible happened in April, 1999: Dan Snyder bought the team, and there has been no relief since.

Snyder -- professional football's answer to Donald Rumsfeld -- set out to destroy the Redskins, buying the wrong coaches and players, milking every source of revenue, and submitting one of the most loyal fan bases in the nation to torture.

Most grating about Snyder's tenure is that he is piling up millions despite his gross incompetence. The team is the most profitable of the National Football League, and Snyder's take continues to grow no matter what the win loss record.

This is not the market at work, rewarding the victorious and punishing the defeated -- just the reverse.

In a delightful article titled "Patriots vs. Redskins: Who has it right, and who has it wrong" in the American Enterprise Institute's magazine, The American, economist Kevin Hassett goes to the heart of the issue:

The Washington Redskins are perhaps the leading exemplar of [the] tendency toward irrationality. Last spring, for example, the Redskins gave up key draft picks for high-priced veteran players. An especially silly trade gave the Jets three Redskins' picks: in the second and sixth rounds this year and in the second round next year. The trade left the Redskins with only one pick in the first three rounds this year.

To compound this error, the Redskins filled their roster with mediocre, high-priced veterans, dropping $35 million on safety Adam Archuleta, $32.5 million on defensive lineman Andre Carter, $31 million on wide receiver Antwaan Randle El, and $25 million on wide receiver Brandon Lloyd--none of whom has ever been in the Pro Bowl.

Of course, under capitalist theory, the money is Snyder's to waste. But it is coming out of the pocketbooks of Redskins fans for whom the team has a higher, spiritual value, if not a divine value. Tolerating the waste of fans' hard-earned cash on a bunch of losers is akin to the Catholic Church tolerating pedophilia in the priesthood.

Snyder is immune to the unsatisfied hunger of millions of Washingtonians for team that makes the Superbowl - the almost naked lust for a team that doesn't let the ups and downs of the season end in December with a thud, but keeps hope alive into February, long enough to make it possible to get through the next six months until the process begin all over again.

I know I am not alone in my views, even though Snyder has shown great success finding new suckers to buy tickets, so I ran my concerns by a handful of colleagues. Here some results:

Jules Witcover, famed political columnist and Union City, N.J. native, who is perhaps the most intensely loyal Redskins fan in the press corps, if not in the entire metropolitan region:

Dan Snyder has probably made himself the most unpopular figure in the Washington sports world with his disregard and contempt for the fans, in his seemingly unquenchable quest to turn the Redskins franchise into an even bigger cash cow than it was when he bought the team. In addition to the inflated ticket prices, there's hardly a space in Fed Ex Field that isn't used for advertising, including the rotating signs that give him four shots at the fan's wallet, the food and drink prices, the bus shuttle costs, etc. At the same time, he has let some outstanding players, such as Antonio Pierce, go elsewhere while lavishing ludicrous contracts on has-beens like Deion Sanders and others. He has ruined the radio broadcasts of the game by switching them to his own stations with weak signals that furthermore are out of sync with the progress of the game on the field. Dumping Frank Herzog from the excellent radio team with Jurgenson and Huff, and letting an employee of the station, the arrogant and know-nothing Larry Michael, have Herzog's place was unforgivable. Finally, with some proven coaches available, he took the pathetic Steve Spurrier who ran the team like a Florida alumni reunion with a bunch of losers. He sits up in his luxury box in his suit and white shirt, flashing his cufflinks and in general acts like the rich kid you knew in school nobody liked. Outside of that, he's been great.

Jack Germond, Witcover's renowned co-columnist, TV pundit, raconteur and poker player extraordinaire:

The problem I have with Snyder is the common one -- that he keeps making change after change without letting us understand what's going on. One day Greg Williams is the greatest defensive coach since Lombardi, the next day he is given a bus ticket out of town. Snyder's attitude seems to be that since he owns the team, the fans are not necessarily entitled to explanations. What he fails to understand is that the Redskin franchise is essentially a public institution in this community, no matter who owns it. Peter Angelos has the same problem with the Orioles in Baltimore. So the real trouble may be -- dazzling insight here -- that both of them are short.

Jim Manley, communications mastermind first behind Edward M. Kennedy and now Harry Reid: "[I'm] not a fan at all. Ticket prices are ridiculous and parking is a pain. He has hired lousy front office staff and suffers from a Napoleon complex. But when he started charging for preseason practice, that was the final straw for me. He has been a disaster for the Redskins."

On the other side of the aisle, Ben Ginsberg, Mitt Romney strategist and legal counsel to Bush '04 and to the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, was more succinct: "They don't win. The stadium is a pain to get to and antiseptic when you do. The rest is detail."

Finally, Bob Borosage, co-chair of the Campaign for America's Future, declared: "It's the Redskins, so you've got to win. He hasn't. Too many coaches, too many high priced free agents that are a bust, too much confusion about who the Redskins are. As an owner, if you can't win with [Joe] Gibbs as your coach, then you're doing something wrong. And then he gets rid of the best defensive coach in football who was, no doubt, a tad too arrogant for Snyder to put up with. Snyder's Redskins have been mediocre and are about to get worse."

How, then, does Snyder get away with this? The best answer, for better or worse, can be found in the dismal and amoral science of economics. Hassett again:

The Redskins are not driven out of business because there is a high demand for football in Washington, and the NFL has a monopoly. A wisely run team cannot enter Washington and compete for Redskins fans.

Perhaps, then, the only choice is to move the nation's capital to another city -- say, Boston.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-smith/you-think-youre-having-a_b_354774.html

More and more lately, people are reaching out to me with stories of difficulty and despair. Their boss is a screamer. Their work doesn't leverage their strengths or their passions. 10% are unemployed, and another 7% are working below their normal wage levels. There is frustration nearly everywhere you turn.

But, no matter how bleak, no matter how disappointing, no matter how generally crappy your day is going, just remember that somewhere out there, someone is having a worse day at work...

Other Popular Posts:
- Take Your Career From Good to Great
- How to Start a Business with No Money
- What's do Paris Hilton and Twitter Have in Common?

Order your copy of the Wall Street Journal and Amazon national bestseller The Leap: How 3 Simple Changes can Propel Your Career from Good to Great, today!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lloyd-chapman/details-of-next-weeks-oba_b_354773.html

On October 21, President Barack Obama announced he would convene a small business conference to address increasing access to capital for small businesses. Yet less than a week before the conference is set to convene on Wednesday, November 18, the Administration has refused to release any information regarding the event's location, time, agenda or attendees.

The American Small Business League (ASBL) is concerned that the administration is withholding details on the conference as a means of preventing legitimate small business concerns, small business advocates and the media from attending.

This is a clear indication that President Obama has no intention of adopting any policies that will actually benefit legitimate small businesses. My guess is that this is going to be a love-fest for his venture capitalist buddies and the Fortune 500 firms he is giving small business contracts to every day.

The ASBL is predicting that the meeting could actually propose creating a loophole that would divert federal small business contracts away from legitimate small businesses and into the hands of wealthy venture capitalists under the guise of "increasing access to capital" for small businesses. The ASBL is concerned that in a worst-case scenario President Obama may even try to wind down federal small business contracting programs under the guise of bolstering the SBA by combining it with the U.S. Department of Commerce.

The ASBL questions the motives of President Obama and the legitimacy of the conference as a whole.

Obviously they don't want media coverage of their sham small business conference and they clearly don't want any input from legitimate small business advocates. The administration's strategy may be to prevent input from small business groups that have complained about the Obama Administration awarding millions of dollars a day in federal small business contracts to Fortune 500 corporations, including stimulus dollars.

The ASBL points to the fact that the Administration has allocated less than 1 percent of stimulus funds to small businesses.

In a recent post, blogger Arianna Huffington criticized President's Obama's plan to hold a small business conference and took aim at his priorities by stating, "If this [small business lending] were really a high-priority for the administration, it could, you know, actually do something about it."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/barack-obama-is-doing-my_b_334631.html

If President Obama really wanted to help small businesses he would have honored his February 2008 campaign promise to, 'end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants,' but he hasn't done that has he?

--

Please click here to watch a short clip about the ASBL's concerns regarding the Obama Administration's small business conference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXAg0XRROIs

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-francis/american-doctors-will-lov_b_354265.html

The business case for a national health plan in the US of some kind has been overlooked; but the numbers are conclusive. There are two reforms needed: universal coverage and cost controls.

You cannot control costs as long as you have a private-sector dominated medical system based on profitability, conflicts of interest (doctors ordering services from hospitals or clinics they own pieces of) and medical-lobby-protectionist and featherbedding legislation. This ranges from criminalizing volume discounts from pharmaceutical companies to ensure obscene profits all the way to not licensing midwives or others to do procedures overpaid American doctors do exclusively.

That aside, the doctors went crazy in Canada in the late 1960s when our universal medical coverage was imposed for the benefit of Canadians. What happened was a nasty, lengthy doctors' strike in Saskatchewan -- causing people to die for lack of care (so much for the Hippocrates' oath when money's involved -- which turned the public tide against the gouging profession finally.

Now two generations of physicians later, doctors in Canada know what's best for them and here's the business/ethical case in favor of the medical profession:

1. The Canadian (and European) systems allowed them as physicians to take on all patients, not just the ones that could afford diagnosis and treatment.
2. They no longer had to chase down bills, argue with insurers or worry about payment. They now had guaranteed payment from the government.
3. They were also exempt from frivolous lawsuits over medical bills and, conversely, did not have to sue to pay people, sometimes putting them into bankruptcy or hardship.
4. American physicians must pay exorbitant malpractice insurance premiums, and face de-licensing if successfully or often sued. This can amount to US$100,000 or more annually. Canadians pay a fraction of that amount for coverage.

Next, Canada's hospitals -- all run by the provincial governments -- are administratively more efficient than US hospitals by far for two reasons:

1. They bear no expensive marketing department to draw patients into their facility, instead of the competition.
2. They do not have a large accounting firm, processing insurance claims and chasing down Accounts Receivable.
3. They do not have to spend millions on legal fees defending themselves and medical staffs against people who are suing because they cannot pay bills or, conversely, who must be sued for collection purposes.

C'mon America. You can figure this out. You're better at most things than most countries but not on this file. Washington is thoroughly corrupted by special-interest lobbies who deprive Americans of the health care rights that the rest of the rich world enjoys.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yoani-sanchez/tell-yoani-to-shut-up_b_354768.html

Orlando Luis Pardo and Yoani Sanchez in Havana, 4 days after they were kidnapped and beaten by plain clothes security agents.

Yoani's shirt says, "Don't hit me, I'm just a blogger"
Photo: Fotos Desde Cuba

Note: This prose-poem guest column was written by Orlando Luis Pardo who was kidnapped and beaten together with me on the evening of November 6.

I never told her to shut up
by Orlando Luis Pardo
Havana, Cuba

Look at my neck.
It was nothing.
A belt of red spots from too much force by a teenage officer and a case of my bad coagulation.

Look at my neck in the jpg.
According to how you interpret it, it is insulting or interesting to tell.
In the beginning there was no Verbum, only Barbariem. Non-verbal violence pulse.

After today, walking in the Vedado neighbohood will be an extreme experience.
The Avenue of the Presidents will refer, now, to a post-princely prison.

Within seconds, Yoani and I had our arms twisted in a car imported from our Stepmother Country: China 
My head against the car's carpet, and Yoani with her feet in the air.
 I couldn't see her, identifying her only because she would not be quiet.


In seconds, I heard her scream with the vehemence of a being who is the freest person on the planet.


She had a Cuban man's knee nailed against her chest, and still she rebuked him.


From that energy I borrowed the strength to revive a bit my own voice.


They told me to tell Yoani to be quiet.
 That phrase, pronounced by three unknowns in the name of the Cuban State, sums up the obsolescence and obscenity of this country.


"Tell Yoani to shut up."
"Tell Yoani to shut up."
"Tell Yoani to shut up."

Despotically, they deposited us in a corner that I confused with the patio of a barracks.
 I was dizzy.
 I felt disgusted, I wanted to vomit. 
I could not move my neck.


I embraced Yoani (which I'd never done before).
 She began to sob. 
The greatest woman in Cuba seemed like tiny girl of zero years.
 Because Yoani is that: the future of Cuba crystallized in a fragile and irrepressible body. 
I kissed her head. Her hair, pulled with such hate, smelled like freedom. 


Once. 
Twice. 
Ten. Uncountable times I kissed her ageless head.


But I never told her to shut up.

But I never told her to shut up.

But I never told her to shut up.

Orlando's neck Friday evening just after the kidnapping.

Orlando Luis Pardo's blog, Boring Home Utopics, won the prize for the Best Photography Blog in the recent Virtual Island blog contest.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sexual-justice/conservative-catholic-col_b_353917.html

Despite the fact that Belmont Abbey College argued in court that it was a secular institution in order to receive state funds, it recently removed birth control from its employee health care plan. Their reason? The Catholic Church is opposed to contraception. In that case, why does Belmont Abbey College lease land to a Walmart that sells Plan B (aka "the morning after pill"), which is a known abortifacient?

Employees of the college are afraid they'll lose their jobs if they protest the sudden change in health care policy. Yet eight professors appealed to the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with a claim of discrimination. And the federal commission agreed that the college had discriminated against women. Now the Catholic school claims it will close its doors before returning birth control to the health care plan. The college is using the controversy as evidence of a liberal conspiracy to restrict religious freedom in America.

Video report from Belmont NC, by Hunter Stuart and STV Productions

One of the eight professors who protested the removal of birth control from the health care plan shares his experience:

I do not see this as a religious issue but rather one of gender discrimination. The college prescription plan covers the health problems that men have, such as prostate trouble and, to be fair, it should also cover those unique to women, among them birth control pills. That is required by the civil rights act which requires that we treat all races, genders, religions, etc. in the same manner. That is what we are trying to promote. We are not in conflict with the anti-abortion movement: good contraception means fewer abortions.

A small minority of Catholics, (by all polls less than 10 %), have a problem with contraception.

The college advertised itself as an equal opportunity employer and freely accepted funding that was not available to religious institutions. In fact, the college actually went to the federal court of appeals arguing that it was not religious in order to obtain state funding. You can read the case yourself in any law library or lawyer's office at 429 F. Supp 871. Does a truly religious institution deny that it is religious to obtain money?

The appropriate committees formed ideas regarding how the benefits could be restored without offending Catholic sensibilities but found that the administration would not discuss the matter with them. In the exact words of the college president: "consultation was not an option." The college's position was basically that they would not ever change their mind but you could come at any time so they could tell you why you were wrong.

Nobody questions the right of the college to promote its religious beliefs, only its practices which affect others. The law makes a distinction between religious beliefs which are absolutely protected and religious practices which are often regulated when they affect others, as the college's practice does here. The regulation of practices is necessary: there are people who believe in human sacrifice or ritual child abuse.

Forcing us to abide by a Catholic approved health plan makes no more sense than prohibiting a Catholic plumber from eating a pork sandwich for lunch if he works at a Jewish hospital. It would be an ugly world if an employer is allowed to impose religious practices on employees who do not share the employer's views. A business owned by a Jehovah's witness might not allow blood transfusions in the health plan. A business owned by a Muslim might require the employees to face Mecca at prayer time. I could go on, but you can see that it is best to let each employee decide for himself or herself, freely and without coercion, how to practice religion. If the law requires that an employer offer contraceptive benefits, that law should apply to all employers. Of course Orthodox Catholics may decline to use the contraception benefit, but that is the true application of religious freedom.

The college's position would be more credible if it were consistent. I note that Belmont Abbey has upon its premises, and collects rent from, two pharmacies which sell contraceptive products including emergency contraception. Why didn't they put a clause in the lease that these activities were forbidden? If one makes money from the event, it's right, but if one has to help pay for the event it's wrong?

If health issues unique to men were not covered and health issue unique to women were not covered the college would not be discriminating and I would have no complaint. The problem is picking and choosing among them.

I have had bosses who are Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Orthodox Christian, Protestant, Wankan Tanka, and even some with the strange name "Presbyterian" in countries ranging from the Baltics, Balkans, Central Europe, Latin America, and Asia as well as several in the USA. Nobody ever tried to force me to accept their practices before Belmont Abbey. Not once. Not in any place. Not any religion. This action is the very face of intolerance. They are saying: "If you won't adopt our religious practices you are not welcome here, period." Being unwelcome I left, the first time in a long career that I did not leave an employer on cordial terms.

President Thierfelder believes that the college's Catholic identity depends on its being allowed to deny the standard of care to women. Apparently a curriculum based on the best that the Catholic intellectual tradition has to offer and a relentless pursuit to "find God in all things" counts for little or nothing in this regard. What a sad commentary that is on the state of Catholic higher education!

By David Neipert, author, attorney, senior Fulbright scholar in law, and former associate professor of international business at Belmont Abbey College.

Originally published on rhrealitycheck.org.

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/Tfhjkbsj3R4/-President-Obama-Speaks-at-Arlington

An excerpt:

There are many honors and responsibilities that come with this job.  But none is more profound than serving as Commander-in-Chief.  Yesterday, I visited the troops at Fort Hood.  We gathered in remembrance of those we recently lost.  We paid tribute to the lives they led.  And there was something that I saw in them; something that I see in the eyes of every soldier and sailor, airman, Marine and Coast Guardsman that I have had the privilege to meet in this country and around the world -- and that thing is determination.

In this time of war, we gather here mindful that the generation serving today already deserves a place alongside previous generations for the courage they have shown and the sacrifices that they have made.  In an era where so many acted only in pursuit of narrow self-interest, they've chosen the opposite.  They chose to serve the cause that is greater than self; many even after they knew they'd be sent into harm's way.  And for the better part of a decade, they have endured tour after tour in distant and difficult places; they have protected us from danger; and they have given others the opportunity for a better life.

So to all of them -- to our veterans, to the fallen, and to their families -- there is no tribute, no commemoration, no praise that can truly match the magnitude of your service and your sacrifice.

This is a place where it is impossible not to be moved by that sacrifice.  But even as we gather here this morning, people are gathering all across America, not only to express thanks of a grateful nation, but to tell stories that demand to be told.  They're stories of wars whose names have come to define eras; battles that echo throughout history.  They're stories of patriots who sacrificed in pursuit of a more perfect union:  of a grandfather who marched across Europe; of a friend who fought in Vietnam; of a sister who served in Iraq.  They're the stories of generations of Americans who left home barely more than boys and girls, became men and women, and returned home heroes.

[...]

We call this a holiday.  But for many veterans, it's another day of memories that drive them to live their lives each day as best as they possibly can.  For our troops, it is another day in harm's way.  For their families, it is another day to feel the absence of a loved one, and the concern for their safety.  For our wounded warriors, it is another day of slow and arduous recovery.  And in this national cemetery, it is another day when grief remains fresh.  So while it is important and proper that we mark this day, it is far more important we spend all our days determined to keep the promises that we've made to all who answer this country's call.

Carved into the marble behind me are the words of our first Commander-in-Chief:  "When we assumed the soldier, we did not lay aside the citizen."  Just as the contributions that our servicemen and women make to this nation don't end when they take off their uniform, neither do our obligations to them.  And when we fulfill those obligations, we aren't just keeping faith with our veterans; we are keeping faith with the ideals of service and sacrifice upon which this republic was founded.

If we're honest with ourselves, we'll admit that there have been times where we as a nation have betrayed that sacred trust.  Our Vietnam veterans served with great honor.  They often came home greeted not with gratitude or support, but with condemnation and neglect.  That's something that will never happen again.  To them and to all who have served, in every battle, in every war, we say that it's never too late to say thank you.  We honor your service.  We are forever grateful.  And just as you have not forgotten your missing comrades, neither, ever, will we.  Our servicemen and women have been doing right by America for generations.  And as long as I am Commander-in-Chief, America's going to do right by them.

That is my message to all veterans today.  That is my message to all who serve in harm's way.  To the husbands and wives back home doing the parenting of two.  To the parents who watch their sons and daughters go off to war, and the children who wonder when mom and dad is coming home.  To all our wounded warriors, and to the families who laid a loved one to rest.  America will not let you down.  We will take care of our own.

And to those who are serving in far-flung places today, when your tour ends, when you see our flag, when you touch our soil, you will be home in an America that is forever here for you just as you've been there for us.  That is my promise -- our nation's promise -- to you.

http://rss.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/z_rwo9xIcII/-2,226-Uninsured-Vets-Died-in-2008

While Tom Coburn plays his procedural games, veterans are dying at the rate of six per day, according to a research team from Harvard Medical School.

[A]n estimated 2,266 veterans under the age of 65 died last year because they did not have health insurance. That "translates to six preventable deaths per day" and more than twice the number killed in Afghanistan since the war began in 2001.

</p>

Being uninsured raises a person’s odds of dying prematurely by 40 percent. The researchers found that 1.46 million veterans between the ages of 18 and 64 lacked insurance in 2008. While most veterans are eligible to receive excellent care from the Veterans Administration, those who were not injured in combat and whose income is above a certain threshold are often ineligible. Others are assigned low priorities, providing them with less consistent and more expensive access to care:

"Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people – too poor to afford private coverage but not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or means-tested VA care," said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a professor at Harvard Medical School. [...]

Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the analysis and associate professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, "On this Veterans Day we should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who were killed by our broken health insurance system. That’s six preventable deaths a day."

The bill Coburn is blocking, the Caregiver and Veterans Services Act, only goes part of the way toward helping, but it's critical help for those who need it most, focusing "on caregivers of veterans injured in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It would provide caregivers with health care, counseling, support and a stipend. The legislation would also expand services in rural areas and ensure that veterans who are catastrophically disabled or who need emergency care in the community are not charged for those services."

Of course, comprehensive healthcare reform would also help, and it's also being held up by the Republicans and those ConservaDems who had no problem at all sending all these now-disabled veterans off to fight, and telling the rest of us that if we didn't support the war and wanted to end funding for it, we "didn't support the troops." So their "fiscal concerns" when it comes to the measely $3 billion in this bill rings pretty fucking hollow now.

It's bad enough that in this country 45,000 people die every year because they are uninsured. It's criminal that 2,266 of them are veterans, the men and women who sacrificed so much.

As one of the study's authors pointed out, the current healthcare reform efforts will fall short.

Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the analysis and associate professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, "On this Veterans Day we should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who were killed by our broken health insurance system. That’s six preventable deaths a day."

He continued: "These unnecessary deaths will continue under the legislation now before the House and Senate. Those bills would do virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013, and leave at least 17 million uninsured over the long run. We need a solution that works for all veterans - and for all Americans - single-payer national health insurance."

A public option, however, is a start. And the House bill that creates a high risk pool immediately would help a large number of those veterans right away. But the Senate ConservaDems and Republicans are still dragging their feet, proud that they "supported the troops," but giving them the back of their hand now that they're home.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/neil-zevnik/mayan-treasure-the-deligh_b_354726.html

Imagine you are a Mayan Indian, living at dizzying heights in the Andes Mountains more than 6000 years ago. Your entire culture is built around "The Mother Grain", a life-giving seed delivered from the heavens by a sacred bird. Your God-King uses a golden staff to plant the first seed every spring, and your warriors consume it to increase their endurance and spiritual awareness. It is your primary food, the linchpin of your entire society, and your connection to the Gods - you offer annual ritual sacrifices for the success of this all-important harvest.

And then, the Spaniards descend upon your civilization and eradicate all trace of this wondrous seed, instead forcing you to grow corn. Your crops are destroyed, your Gods disavowed, your world crumbles. And quinoa, that fabled foodstuff, tragically disappears from view for many millennia.

Fast-forward to the 1980's, high in the Colorado Rockies, where a pair of Americans who studied spirituality in the Bolivian Andes once more initiated the significant cultivation of quinoa, for the first time since the Incas were wiped from the face of the earth. Subsequently, the United Nations declared this obscure plant to be a Super-food with a protein value equal to that of milk, and NASA placed it high on its list of possible foods for long-duration manned spaceflights.

What's the Fuss?

Historically, quinoa had a multitude of uses beyond its culinary status. It was employed as a compress for bruises and as a diuretic, as well as to induce vomiting. The Indians used it to treat liver and urinary tract problems, tuberculosis, appendicitis, and altitude and motion sickness.

But the true overwhelming value of this ancient pseudo-grain lies in the fact that it is a complete protein. Unlike "true" grains like wheat and oats, this seed of a leafy plant related to spinach and tumbleweed contains all nine essential amino acids for protein utilization, thus making it a unique non-animal protein source. Vegans everywhere should rejoice at the re-discovery of this amazing food!

Quinoa offers an especially generous dose of the amino acid lysine, which is essential for tissue growth and repair. And significant amounts of magnesium and riboflavin make quinoa particularly valuable to sufferers of migraines and atherosclerosis, as they help relax blood vessels and improve energy production within cells. Like all whole-grain high-fiber foods it provides a wide array of health benefits, such as reducing the risk of high blood pressure and heart attacks, protecting against various forms of cancer, and preventing gallstones. And those of you who are parents will be especially interested in a recent Dutch study, which indicated that a diet rich in whole grains combined with fish resulted in a 50% reduction in childhood asthma.

A superb source of complete protein and a treasure-trove of additional nutrients, quinoa is indeed a "Food of the Gods", and one that may well prove an enormous boon to mankind in these times of burgeoning populations and diminishing food resources. And you'll find it will make a delicious and healthy addition to any meal!

Getting and Enjoying It

Quinoa is becoming more widely available, but will mostly be found at your local health food store. In bulk or prepackaged, select it the way you would any grain - make sure there's good turnover and that it's fresh, and that there are no signs of moisture. Store it in a sealed container in the fridge - it'll last for months.

Most commercially-available quinoa has been processed to remove a bitter coating called saponin, which in nature protects the seeds from birds and heat. However, it is best to thoroughly rinse your quinoa in a fine mesh sieve under running water for a minute or two before using, to remove all traces of residue. And for a richer flavor, toast your quinoa in a dry skillet over medium-low heat, stirring constantly for about 4-5 minutes. This will give it a nice nutty flavor.

Mayan Quinoa Stuffing

Okay, so the Mayans didn't have Thanksgiving - but I bet they would have loved this scrumptious vegetarian dish for their harvest celebration!

1 1/2 cups quinoa seeds, thoroughly rinsed
1 cup organic vegetable broth + 2 cups water
1/4 cup organic olive oil
1 medium red onion, chopped
1 small red bell pepper, chopped
1 large fennel bulb, chopped
3 cloves garlic, minced
2 teaspoons dried thyme
1 1/2 cups frozen organic corn kernels
1 cup frozen organic shelled soybeans
1/3 cup organic roasted unsalted sunflower seeds
2 ripe pears, peeled, cored & chopped
1 cup chopped fresh Italian parsley
Salt & pepper to taste

In a medium saucepan, combine quinoa with broth & water and bring to a boil. Reduce heat, simmer covered for 15 minutes, until all broth is absorbed. Remove from heat, fluff with a fork and set aside.

In a large saucepan, heat olive oil over medium heat. Add onion, red pepper & fennel, sauté until soft, about 8 minutes. Add garlic and thyme, cook for two minutes, stirring frequently. Add corn & soybeans, cook for a few minutes more until they're well-heated.

Add cooked quinoa to the vegetable mix; cook over medium heat, stirring often, until just warmed through. Fold in the sunflower seeds, pears and parsley, with salt & pepper to taste. Serve warm or at room temperature.

Serves 8-10 as side dish, 4-6 as main course.

Quinoa Breakfast Delight

Perfect on a cold Autumn morning...

1/3 cup quinoa seeds, rinsed
2/3 cup water
1 tablespoon organic honey
Pinch of cinnamon
1/4 cup blueberries
1 banana, sliced
2/3 cup low-fat organic milk

In a small saucepan, combine quinoa and water, bring to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer covered for about 12 minutes. Remove from heat, stir in honey and cinnamon. Divide between two bowls, top with blueberries and bananas and milk.

Serves two.

[NOTE: A version of this post appears in my "Eat Smart" column in the November issue of Better NutritionMagazine.]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-gibbons/on-veterans-day-and-every_b_354714.html

A salute to the tens of thousands of our nation's veterans. Thank you for your service.

Veterans Day is a particularly special day. It provides an opportunity for Americans to step back, reflect and thank all of the soldiers, air men, sailors, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen who have served and protected our country.

I often wonder if I would have served when I graduated from high school or after finishing college. I like to think I would have, but because I started to lose my vision in the third grade and was totally blind by the time I was a sophomore in college, I never had the opportunity to serve. I suppose I will never know what might have happened. I'd like to think I would have enlisted. My father was a Naval Aviator during World War II. He flew SB2c hell bombers, and I recall his years of service in the Navy were some of his fondest memories. The camaraderie, the patriotism and the opportunity to grow all stood out as benefits to him as a young man. I guess that experience seemed to be a key component, as his generation is often viewed as "The Greatest Generation."

As an adult, I've had the opportunity to at least serve those who have served during my work with National Industries for the Blind and Goodwill Industries International. I've been fortunate to provide services and lead efforts that provide products to our military and, probably most meaningful, I've had the opportunity to be a part of teams that have served veterans who have lost their eyesight, who have received traumatic brain injuries, and who have been put in harm's way, resulting in both physical and physiological disabilities. Serving these men and women is a part of what Goodwill Industries® does every day, whether it's for those who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam, or those who have served right here in our homeland but have always stood ready to give everything they've got for our country.

Thanks to all of the men and women who have served, but especially to those who have been served by Goodwill®, like Sam, who was wounded by a roadside bomb while he was stationed in Iraq. This injury, combined with his diagnosis of leukemia and need to provide for his seventh-grade daughter, gave him many challenges. It wasn't until he learned of Goodwill's opportunities for people facing challenges to employment that he was able to begin supporting himself and his family. Or Henry, a Gulf War veteran who was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Kuwait Liberation Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal with two Bronze Stars, Navy Unit Commendation, Army Service Ribbon, and the Sea Service Deployment Ribbon. Upon returning home, Brown battled health issues, depression and substance abuse. It wasn't until he enrolled in a Goodwill program that he was able to get back on the right track through a substance abuse program, a job skills program and other support services. Today, he is enrolled in Southern Wesleyan University and gives back by serving as a chef to vets who are homeless.

Goodwill plays a vital role in helping veterans learn the skills they need to find meaningful employment and find the support they need to access health care, tax assistance, housing or housing referrals, and other rehabilitation services. Goodwill fills a special need because it serves veterans who may feel shunned or misunderstood by other employment programs. From untreated mental illness and addiction to homelessness and chronic unemployment, the issues are complex, and Goodwill provides a holistic approach that addresses the needs of veterans' families as well.

This Veterans Day, remember to be thankful to the veterans you know for their bravery and service, and remind those veterans that there is always a place where they can find and keep good jobs, and fully participate in their communities.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-walden/when-washington-dc-fails_b_354189.html

I expect the Obama-Congress health care legislation to either fail to pass or be so attenuated that it will not remotely cover the nation's 47 million medically uninsured; to be offensive to many in its prosciptions on reproductive health services; to not dramatically curb health insurance or actual health care delivery costs; to not include a meaningful public insurance option; and, to have at most a negligible effect on the quality and availability of this nation's health care services.

A friend of 4 decades on the White House staff advises to "get your lefty friends on board because the alternatives are scary". She believes a health bill will pass and can be improved over the next several years (decades?) as it is tweaked by each new Congress. (In her world, perhaps health industry lobbyists don't exist or have no influence).

I was one of Gov. Jerry Brown's Commissioners on the California Health Facilities Commission from 1977-1982. We oversaw financial reporting and collected patient data from 646 hospitals and 1220 nursing homes. That was all of them except 7 state hospitals. (Health industry lobbyists and a Republican Governor eventually killed off the Commission in the late 1980s as it's cost data portraying an out of control health care system became increasingly embarrassing).

At one point, in 1978, a small group of state officials and consumer advocates tried to raise the $1 million it would take to have a public health insurance system put on the ballot in California. We failed to raise enough funds to hire an election firm to gather the signatures necessary to qualify such an initiative. The Governor wasn't supportive at that time but not because of any philosophical or political problem--he just didn't think it would pass in the Proposition 13 "era of limits".

Now may be the time to try again.

The spectacle of the Rep. Bart Stupak, Sens. Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Charles Grassley and 39 small state Democratic Congresspersons of Washington DC holding 37 million Californians hostage should give us ample cause to "opt out" of that world. California is large enough and diverse enough to provide for its own as do many industrialized nations of similar size and much less wealth than we have.

Citizenship in this country should be a two-way street. We should all pay our fair share of taxes but in return should expect our security to be protected from enemies foreign and domestic, our children to be educated to compete in a global economy, the inevitable natural disasters overcome, and our legitimate medical needs met or guaranteed so we can be healthy enough to contribute to our family and society.

That's the social contract that we should expect. Any takers?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-pettifor/investors-beware-the-quac_b_354638.html

In William Hogarth's famous engraving of 1721, the world of finance, corrupted by the phantom of the South Sea Bubble, is cruelly satirised. To represent market cheerleaders, a goat sits astride a spinning carousel and asks: 'who will ride?" Lured by this charlatan, investors crowd on to the shaky, but thrilling merry-go-round. In another corner a winged devil with a scythe throws chunks of Fortune's body to a greedy crowd. And in the right hand corner - 'trade lies dead'.

Today - as global trade lies dead, as unemployment rises, as wages and incomes plummet, as US consumption (70% of US GDP) and investment falls - share prices zoom upwards and commodity prices rock. According to Fortune magazine, the stock market climb of these last few months is the fastest on record. By November, the S&P 500 had surged by 62 percent to 1,093.08 after sinking to a 12-year low in March.

A trade that remains in the shadows - 'the carry trade' - roars ahead. (For the uninitiated: it's just another version of 'buying cheap and selling high'. Traders in money borrow e.g. dollars, at the Federal Funds rate of 0.25%- and then lend in countries (and currencies) where rates (or yields) are higher.

Nice work if you can get it - especially as a banker, with the competition wiped out, the Fed keeping interest rates low, and the risk of gambling with your own capital replaced by taxpayer-backed money.

It's especially nice work if, while playing away, you can short the dollar and so ensure that on returning home to pay your dollar debts, the rate is lower. Fine and dandy of course, until either the dollar or the Fed rate rises. Then all hell will break loose, as traders scramble to repay debts at climbing rates. But until then, the unregulated 'carry trade' carousel will keep spinning round the globe.)

In another corner of the financial forest, and partly financed by the carry trade, the global bubble in equities, commodities and other risky assets is expanding into what Nouriel Roubini calls a 'monster'.

Many economists are helping to pump it up further. Some, like Abby Joseph Cohen at Goldman Sachs gave the bubble a puff by declaring the recession at an end in August. Jim O'Neill, chief economist at Goldman Sachs is a perma-optimist. He told me in an August 2008 BBC radio interview that this recession was 'just another periodic crisis - I have already lived through five', he remarked.

When a British economist Danny Gabay of Fathom Financial Consulting argued that poor GDP numbers could be explained by the fact that "the UK has some formidable headwinds, not least of which is the over-burdened consumer which is having to cope with a broken banking system, rising unemployment, and falling income growth," his view was dismissed as "baloney" by Kevin Daly at Goldman Sachs, who, according to the FT, put greater weight on more optimistic recent surveys of companies.

These happy (and well-compensated) souls are joined by PhD-trained academic economists who cheered the recent 3.5% growth in US GDP, even though wiser heads declared this analysis a whitewash, and noted that 'cash for clunkers accounted for 1.7%, i.e. half of the increase and the lower liquidation of goods in stock accounted for another 1%. In other words, 80% of this "growth" came from a temporary government boost that is already gone or was essentially technical in nature.'

But the cheerleader that investors should most beware of is one Prof. Frederick Mishkin.

In May, 2006, this American economist and one-time Federal Reserve governor, wrote a report called "Financial Stability in Iceland" commissioned by the Icelandic Chamber of Commerce. (See 'Iceland as Icarus' by Prof. Robert Wade.) In this report he and his Icelandic partner opined thus: "Although Iceland's economy does have imbalances that will eventually be reversed, financial fragility is not high and the likelihood of a financial meltdown is very low". We know that Fred Mishkin (now of Columbia University) was not the only academic economist to act as cheerleader for Iceland's reckless bankers. Prof. Richard Portes, President of Britain's Royal Economic Society, played a similar role. (For more about Professor Portes's role in the Icelandic saga, go here.)

Mishkin's report was published in the same month that the IMF mission to Iceland came to very different conclusions. According to Prof. Wade, Mishkin "pocketed $135,000 for his contribution to the modest report." A modest fee, we might add, for puffing up massive capital gains on behalf of reckless Icelandic bankers.

In the autumn of 2009 Iceland's economy 'debtonated' and the country was quickly bankrupted. Bank failures, unemployment, political upheaval and massive destruction of value followed.

The disastrous bursting of the bubble created by Iceland's bankers, has not punctured the Professor's confidence, nor deterred his sponsors at the Financial Times or in the banking sector. On Tuesday, 10th November, 2009, Mishkin was given a column in the FT. The apparent purpose of the piece is to debate the risk of bubbles. Instead emphatically puffs up the 'monster bubble' in risky assets. He does so by posing a rhetorical question: "if bubbles are a possibility now, does it look like they are of the dangerous, credit boom variety?"

"The answer" writes this academic purveyor of advice and encouragement to the carousel set, "at least in the US and Europe, is clearly no."

To paraphrase Wordsworth: William Hogarth, thou shouldst be living at this hour: Economics hath need of thee: she is a fen of stagnant waters.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/lou-dobbs-leaving-cnn

DOWNLOADS: (253)

PLAYS: (502)

So what's the next move for Lou Dobbs? Fox News? Dobbs announced tonight on his show that he has been released from his contract at CNN. From the NY Times--Update: Lou Dobbs to Quit CNN:

Lou Dobbs, the longtime CNN anchor whose anti-immigration views have made him a TV lightning rod, said Wednesday that he is leaving the cable news channel effective immediately.

“Some leaders in the media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond my role here at CNN and engage in constructive problem-solving,” Mr. Dobbs said just after 7 p.m., suggesting that he would remain involved in the civic discourse, but perhaps not on television.

“I’m considering a number of options and directions,” Mr. Dobbs added.

Wednesday’s program will be his last on CNN, one of his employees said earlier in the evening.

Mr. Dobbs’ contract was not set to expire until the end of 2011. He told viewers that CNN had agreed to release him from his contract early.

Mr. Dobbs informed his staff members of his intentions in a meeting Wednesday afternoon, catching some of the staffers off-guard.

Well known for his political positions, Mr. Dobbs is an outlier at CNN, which has sought to position itself as a middle ground of sorts in the fractious cable news arena. The CNN employees said Wednesday that they did not know if Mr. Dobbs was moving to another network.

Continue reading...

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Truthdig/~3/IxiCKNnGnv8/

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20091111_lou_dobbs_leaves_cnn/

We may not have seen the last of him on TV, but Lou Dobbs is done at CNN, having struck a deal to leave his anchor post at the cable channel immediately. In regard to what he’s doing next, Dobbs played coy while announcing his departure on camera Wednesday, saying only that he was “considering a number of options and directions.” —KA

The New York Times:

“Some leaders in the media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond my role here at CNN and engage in constructive problem-solving,” Mr. Dobbs said just after 7 p.m., suggesting that he would remain involved in the civic discourse, but perhaps not on television.

“I’m considering a number of options and directions,” Mr. Dobbs added.

Wednesday’s program will be his last on CNN, one of his employees said earlier in the evening.

Mr. Dobbs’ contract was not set to expire until the end of 2011. He told viewers that CNN had agreed to release him from his contract early.

Read more

READ THE WHOLE ITEM

Related Entries

• November 11, 2009 ‘Daily Show’: Cold Busted, Sean Hannity
• November 9, 2009 Rupert Murdoch vs. Google (and Reality)
• November 6, 2009 ‘Daily Show’ Insta-Classic: What Lurks Within Glenn Beck?
• November 5, 2009 Keep the Government Out of the News Business
• November 4, 2009 Glenn Beck Gets a (Satirical) Drubbing From The Onion