Going public and getting picked up by The Wash Post hurts Clinton's campaign, for sure.
Garry Thomas counted himself a Hillary Clinton supporter -- even signing up to be one of her 25 co-chairs in Iowa alongside with former Iowa First Lady Christie Vilsack.
But Thomas now says he felt obliged to switch sides in recent weeks. "I think the Clinton campaign went negative," Thomas said in a telephone interview on Thursday. He attributed his defection to the new tone Clinton took last weekend, describing it as divisive. Obama officials said Thomas committed to them this week.
Clinton officials said they lost touch with Thomas in October, and are skeptical of his claim that he left them because of her tone (she did not launch her offensive until this past Sunday).
But either way, Thomas is now with Sen. Barack Obama, putting him on a growing list of Iowans who have switched from one candidate to another heading toward the caucuses. ... More.
Friday, December 07, 2007
Microsoft's Santa Has A Dirty Mouth!
This is too funny!
Turns out Santa himself is naughty and nice.
An artificial-intelligence Santa bot operated by Microsoft to talk to children wavered off topic saying: “It’s fun to talk about oral sex, but I want to chat about something else....”
Microsoft Tuesday confirmed the bot’s potty mouth and snipped Santa’s Web connection.
Read the rest, here.
Turns out Santa himself is naughty and nice.
An artificial-intelligence Santa bot operated by Microsoft to talk to children wavered off topic saying: “It’s fun to talk about oral sex, but I want to chat about something else....”
Microsoft Tuesday confirmed the bot’s potty mouth and snipped Santa’s Web connection.
Read the rest, here.
Shootin Lucy | Punk Rock Band | Stork Club Oakland
This is a music video shot impromptu at a place called The Stork Club on 2330 Telegraph Ave. I just happened to have my camera and they were cool with it. Here's the result!
Keith Olbermann Picks Lou Dobbs "Worst Person In The World" For Immigration Rants - Video
This is simply one of the most "spot-on" monologues I've ever seen MSNBC's Keith Olbermann do. He gets after CNN's Lou Dobbs for Dobbs' really terrible and just plain racist rants about immigration. Check this out:
Donald Trump Leaves $10,000 Tip!
Yep. That's right! According to Derober, A Santa Monica-based Buffalo Club waiter who had a "tough month" got a nice gift from Donald Trump, a $10,000 tip!
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Debra Lafave Arrested On Probation Violation For Talking to 17-Year-Old Girl
Wow. Apparently ex-teacher Debra Lafave was arrested for violating a probation edict that she was not to talk to minors because she was talking to a 17-year-old girl.
Now in Lafave's defense, she probably believed the block applied to teenage boys, not girls, and so didn't do anything wrong. Personally, I hope the judge elects to avoid punishing Lafave this time around. Someone may have set her up to do this just for malicious reasons. According to the account below, they work together:
According to a Department of Corrections report, Debra Lafave discussed her personal life and other subjects with a teenage waitress at a restaurant where they both worked. One of the terms of her probation had been that she was not allowed to have unsupervised contact with any minors without permission.
So all this is just another reason for bloggers to post nice photos of her.
Let's hope the Judge agrees to drop this, for her sake. I think it's a waste of time and the person who turned her in is a real loser.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Teen births up for first time in 15 years
ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- In a troubling reversal, the nation's teen birth rate rose for the first time in 15 years, surprising government health officials and reviving the bitter debate about abstinence-only sex education.
The birth rate had been dropping since its peak in 1991, although the decline had slowed in recent years. On Wednesday, government statisticians said it rose 3 percent from 2005 to 2006.
The reason for the increase is not clear, and federal health officials said it might be a one-year statistical blip, not the beginning of a new upward trend.
However, some experts said they have been expecting a jump. They attributed it to increased federal funding for abstinence-only health education that doesn't teach teens how to use condoms and other contraception.
Some key sexually transmitted disease rates have been rising, including syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia. The rising teen pregnancy rate is part of the same phenomenon, said Dr. Carol Hogue, an Emory University professor of maternal and child health.
"It's not rocket science," she said.
At the same time, some research suggests teens are using condoms far more often than they did 15 years ago.
The new teen birth numbers are based on the 15-19 age group of women, which accounted for most of the 440,000 births to teens in 2006. The rate rose to nearly 42 births per 1,000 in that group, up from 40.5 in 2005. That translates to an extra 20,000 births to teen mothers.
In 1991, the peak year for teen births, there were nearly 62 births per 1,000.
The new report is based on a review of more than 99 percent of the birth certificates from last year by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The report, released Wednesday, quickly took on political implications.
Opponents of abstinence-based programs seized on the data as evidence of wrong-headed government policy.
"Congress needs to stop knee-jerk approving abstinence-only funding when it's clear it's not working," said U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colorado, who is pushing for more comprehensive sex education.
The new report offers a state-by-state breakdown of birth rates overall. Many of those with the highest birth rates teach abstinence instead of comprehensive sex education, according to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
And research has concluded that abstinence-only programs do not cause a decrease in teenage sexual activity, Planned Parenthood officials added.
"In the last decade, more than $1 billion has been wasted on abstinence-only programs," said Cecile Richards, the organization's president, in a prepared statement.
Decreased condom use and increased sexual activity are two likely explanations for the higher teen birth rate. But not all data supports those theories, said John Santelli, a professor of population and family health at Columbia University's school of public health.
For example, a biannual government survey of high school students found that the percentage of those who said they used a condom the last time they had sex rose to 63 percent in 2005, up from 46 percent in 1991.
Contraceptive-focused sex education is still common, and the new teen birth numbers reflect it's failing, argued Moira Gaul of the Family Research Council, a conservative advocacy organization in Washington, D.C.
The CDC also reported that births to unwed mothers reached an all-time high in 2006, but that is part of a continuing upward trend and was expected.
Health officials cautioned that the rise in teen births is not the chief cause of births to unwed mothers, however. Women in their 20s and 30s represent the largest proportion, with teens accounting for fewer than a quarter, said Stephanie Ventura, head of the CDC's reproductive statistics branch.
About thirty years ago, more than half of unwed mothers were teenagers, she said.
The report on births also showed:
• That the U.S. fertility rate is at the highest level since 1971, at 2.1 children. That is an increase of 2 percent from 2005 to 2006.
• Total births rose 3 percent to nearly 4.3 million in 2006.
• Rate of Caesarean section deliveries also rose 3 percent, setting a new record of 31 percent of all births. Health officials say the rate, which has risen by about half since 1996, is higher than is medically necessary.
The high C-section rate is believed to at least partly explain why rates of preterm and low-weight births also rose in 2006. Planned deliveries, including those involving C-sections, are often done before a pregnancy comes to full term, health experts said.
The birth rate had been dropping since its peak in 1991, although the decline had slowed in recent years. On Wednesday, government statisticians said it rose 3 percent from 2005 to 2006.
The reason for the increase is not clear, and federal health officials said it might be a one-year statistical blip, not the beginning of a new upward trend.
However, some experts said they have been expecting a jump. They attributed it to increased federal funding for abstinence-only health education that doesn't teach teens how to use condoms and other contraception.
Some key sexually transmitted disease rates have been rising, including syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia. The rising teen pregnancy rate is part of the same phenomenon, said Dr. Carol Hogue, an Emory University professor of maternal and child health.
"It's not rocket science," she said.
At the same time, some research suggests teens are using condoms far more often than they did 15 years ago.
The new teen birth numbers are based on the 15-19 age group of women, which accounted for most of the 440,000 births to teens in 2006. The rate rose to nearly 42 births per 1,000 in that group, up from 40.5 in 2005. That translates to an extra 20,000 births to teen mothers.
In 1991, the peak year for teen births, there were nearly 62 births per 1,000.
The new report is based on a review of more than 99 percent of the birth certificates from last year by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The report, released Wednesday, quickly took on political implications.
Opponents of abstinence-based programs seized on the data as evidence of wrong-headed government policy.
"Congress needs to stop knee-jerk approving abstinence-only funding when it's clear it's not working," said U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colorado, who is pushing for more comprehensive sex education.
The new report offers a state-by-state breakdown of birth rates overall. Many of those with the highest birth rates teach abstinence instead of comprehensive sex education, according to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
And research has concluded that abstinence-only programs do not cause a decrease in teenage sexual activity, Planned Parenthood officials added.
"In the last decade, more than $1 billion has been wasted on abstinence-only programs," said Cecile Richards, the organization's president, in a prepared statement.
Decreased condom use and increased sexual activity are two likely explanations for the higher teen birth rate. But not all data supports those theories, said John Santelli, a professor of population and family health at Columbia University's school of public health.
For example, a biannual government survey of high school students found that the percentage of those who said they used a condom the last time they had sex rose to 63 percent in 2005, up from 46 percent in 1991.
Contraceptive-focused sex education is still common, and the new teen birth numbers reflect it's failing, argued Moira Gaul of the Family Research Council, a conservative advocacy organization in Washington, D.C.
The CDC also reported that births to unwed mothers reached an all-time high in 2006, but that is part of a continuing upward trend and was expected.
Health officials cautioned that the rise in teen births is not the chief cause of births to unwed mothers, however. Women in their 20s and 30s represent the largest proportion, with teens accounting for fewer than a quarter, said Stephanie Ventura, head of the CDC's reproductive statistics branch.
About thirty years ago, more than half of unwed mothers were teenagers, she said.
The report on births also showed:
• That the U.S. fertility rate is at the highest level since 1971, at 2.1 children. That is an increase of 2 percent from 2005 to 2006.
• Total births rose 3 percent to nearly 4.3 million in 2006.
• Rate of Caesarean section deliveries also rose 3 percent, setting a new record of 31 percent of all births. Health officials say the rate, which has risen by about half since 1996, is higher than is medically necessary.
The high C-section rate is believed to at least partly explain why rates of preterm and low-weight births also rose in 2006. Planned deliveries, including those involving C-sections, are often done before a pregnancy comes to full term, health experts said.
Clinton Backer Sending "Obama Muslim" Smear Emails
Gary Hart of Jones County, Iowa was the person responsible for outing the sender of the "Obama is Muslim" smear e-mails that people have been complaining about.
TRM reports:
Guy Who Received Obama Muslim Smear Email From Hillary County Chair Speaks
By Greg Sargent - December 5, 2007, 2:32PM
Christopher Hayes of The Nation has identified the guy who received the Obama "madrassa" smear email from a Hillary-supporting county chair in Iowa: He's Gary Hart of Jones County, Iowa.
I just got off the phone with Hart, and he confirmed receiving the email. He said he'd heard from the Hillary campaign about it and as a result wouldn't reveal who the county chair was who sent it to him.
"The Clinton campaign has been in touch with me, and I'm satisfied with their response," he told me.
Asked whether he would share the email and why he wouldn't identify the sender, he hung up.
Wow. A Clinton backer! Why am I not surprised!?
TRM reports:
Guy Who Received Obama Muslim Smear Email From Hillary County Chair Speaks
By Greg Sargent - December 5, 2007, 2:32PM
Christopher Hayes of The Nation has identified the guy who received the Obama "madrassa" smear email from a Hillary-supporting county chair in Iowa: He's Gary Hart of Jones County, Iowa.
I just got off the phone with Hart, and he confirmed receiving the email. He said he'd heard from the Hillary campaign about it and as a result wouldn't reveal who the county chair was who sent it to him.
"The Clinton campaign has been in touch with me, and I'm satisfied with their response," he told me.
Asked whether he would share the email and why he wouldn't identify the sender, he hung up.
Wow. A Clinton backer! Why am I not surprised!?
Hillary Clinton and Staff Dislike Barack Obama and Smart African Americans?
This video was insprired, if that's the right term, by a blog written by Dave Corn over at CQPolitics, and from which I discovered while reading Sam Stein's blog at the Huff Post. The title of the blog by Corn is "Hillary on Obama: Fear and Hatred on the Campaign Trail" and has these statements:
"When talking to Clintonites in recent days, I've noticed that they've come to despise Obama."...." They're not spinning for strategic purposes. They truly believe it. And other Democrats in Washington report encountering the same when speaking with Clinton campaign people. "They really, really hate Obama," one Democratic operative unaffiliated with any campaign, tells me. "They can't stand him. They talk about him as if he's worse than Bush." What do they hate about him? After all, there aren't a lot of deep policy differences between the two, and he hasn't gone for the jugular during the campaign. "It's his presumptuousness," this operative says. "That he thinks he can deny her the nomination. Who is he to try to do that?" You mean, he's, uh, uppity? "Yes." A senior House Democratic aide notes, "The Clinton people are going nuts in how much they hate him. But the problem is their narrative has gone beyond the plausible."
And I think the Clinton people have gone a little too nuts. It seems like they and the candidate herself has an issue with bright, smart African Americans as represented by Senator Obama. The campaign's mounting a series of words that point to this, from Bill Clinton describing Obama as "articulate" to these terms captured by Corn, particularly the term "uppity."
Now the term "uppity" is commonly and stupidly combine with "negro" in American Culture. According to The YBP Wiki , it means
"Uppity Negro, 1. A fearless black person who by social definition is “not in their place”. Unapologetic. 2. A black person who knows his or her American legacy, his or her actualized social status, and his or her social and emotional plights with still the identical high regard to self as an equally entitled American due the same privileges, attitudes, concessions, and respectability of the entitled.
A fair, just, and loyal person. Historically, a Black person who has been reprimanded or persecuted for voicing his/her dissatisfaction with or rejection of the sub-standard treatment of himself or other Black people. A Black person who holds others fully accountable for their actions and demands adequate treatment from everyone including family members. A Black person who was never or is no longer willing to rearrange himself or conform her behaviors simply to ensure the comfort of White people. A Black person who requires and demands respect, fair treatment, and regard. A Black person who is committed to reversing the crimes of self-refusal, self-denial, and self-hatred that are endemic to the Black community and detrimental to the Black psyche. One who is not in his or her place; furthermore, an Uppity Negro is one who has no concept of “place” definable by factors such as race or class. An Uppity Negro’s place is wherever he or she chooses it to be. www.uppitynegro.com"
By that defintion, and looking at the statements of the Clinton Campaign it would seem that they think Senator Obama does not know his place as a Black person. There's no other way to interpret their statements and any other definition without evidence would be a stretch at best.
This, then, is the a view at what the cultural glass ceiling look like and why we must break it. Senator Obama's a great example of the American ideal: that anyone can make it in their chosen profession in this country. Senator Clinton and her staff don't seem to get this, and it may be that in their anger over losing the lead in Iowa, their real prejudices have come to the surface.
If that's so, and I think it is, the campaign owes African Americans an appology, especially the "uppity" ones, like me.
Monday, December 03, 2007
White House Obstructing Valery Plame Investigation
This is reveaed by Huff Post writer Sam Stein , who writes..
"The Bush Administration is actively blocking Congress' investigation into the outing of once-covert CIA agent Valerie Plame, according to House Oversight Committee chairman Henry Waxman.
In a letter sent today to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Waxman notes that "White House objections are preventing Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald from disclosing key information to investigating officials." Among the documents being withheld are interviews taken from White House officers during Fitzgerald's investigation into the leak of Plame's identity."
Wonder what they're hiding?
"The Bush Administration is actively blocking Congress' investigation into the outing of once-covert CIA agent Valerie Plame, according to House Oversight Committee chairman Henry Waxman.
In a letter sent today to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Waxman notes that "White House objections are preventing Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald from disclosing key information to investigating officials." Among the documents being withheld are interviews taken from White House officers during Fitzgerald's investigation into the leak of Plame's identity."
Wonder what they're hiding?
Robert Reich Attacks Hillary Clinton for Her Attacks On Barack Obama
In his blog, Robert Reich , a former Labor Secretary of President Clinton's, came after Senator Hillary Clinton for attacking Barack Obama. The full blog post is below and here.
Why is HRC stooping So Low?
I’m becoming increasingly concerned about the stridency and inaccuracy of charges in Iowa -- especially coming from my old friend. While I’m as hard-boiled as they come about what’s said in campaigns, I just don’t think Dems should stoop to this. First, HRC attacked O's plan for keep Social Security solvent. Social Security doesn’t need a whole lot to keep it going – it’s in far better shape than Medicare – but everyone who’s looked at it agrees it will need bolstering (I was a trustee of the Social Security Trust Fund ten years ago, and I can vouch for this). Obama wants to do it by lifting the cap on the percent of income subject to Social Security payroll taxes, which strikes me as sensible. That cap is now close to $98,000 (it’s indexed), and the result is highly regressive. (Bill Gates satisfies his yearly Social Security obligations a few minutes past midnight on January 1 every year.) The cap doesn’t have to be lifted all that much to keep Social Security solvent – maybe to $115,00. That’s a progressive solution to the problem. HRC wants to refer Social Security to a commission. That's avoiding the issue, and it's irresponsible: A commission will likely call either for raising the retirement age (that’s what Greenspan’s Social Security commission came up with in the 1980s) or increasing the payroll tax on all Americans. So when HRC charges that Obama’s plan would “raise taxes” and her plan wouldn’t, she’s simply not telling the truth.
I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s. That’s because Obama’s puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who’s likely to need help – including all children and young adults up to 25 years old. Hers requires that everyone insure themselves. Yet we know from experience with mandated auto insurance – and we’re learning from what’s happening in Massachusetts where health insurance is now being mandated – that mandates still leave out a lot of people at the lower end who can’t afford to insure themselves even when they’re required to do so. HRC doesn’t indicate how she’d enforce her mandate, and I can’t find enough money in HRC’s plan to help all those who won’t be able to afford to buy it. I’m also impressed by the up-front investments in information technology in O’s plan, and the reinsurance mechanism for coping with the costs of catastrophic illness. HRC is far less specific on both counts. In short: They’re both advances, but O’s is the better of the two. HRC has no grounds for alleging that O’s would leave out 15 million people.
Yesterday, HRC suggested O lacks courage. "There's a big difference between our courage and our convictions, what we believe and what we're willing to fight for," she told reporters in Iowa, saying Iowa voters will have a choice "between someone who talks the talk, and somebody who's walked the walk." Then asked whether she intended to raise questions about O’s character, she said: "It's beginning to look a lot like that."
I just don’t get it. If there’s anyone in the race whose history shows unique courage and character, it's Barack Obama. HRC’s campaign, by contrast, is singularly lacking in conviction about anything. Her pollster, Mark Penn, has advised her to take no bold positions and continuously seek the political center, which is exactly what she’s been doing.
All is fair in love, war, and politics. But this series of slurs doesn't serve HRC well. It will turn off voters in Iowa, as in the rest of the country. If she's worried her polls are dropping, this is not the way to build them back up.
CNN Listening? - Jesse Jackson Jr. Publically Tells Jackson Sr. He's Wrong About Barack Obama
When the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. openly criticized the Democratic Candidates for forgetting about African Americans, it was taken as a slam against Senator Barack Obama by CNN and others, including me. In fact, CNN did not waste time reporting this.
Now, one week later, Jackson's son, Jesse Jr. comes out publically to tell the World that his father's wrong about Obama. He did this in the Monday Chicago Sun Times. Read below and let's see if CNN is quick to report this. If so, they're being fair. If not, it's another sign that they're trying to help Senator Clinton.
Jesse Jr. to Jesse Sr.: You're wrong on Obama, dad
December 3, 2007
During his historic run for the presidency in 1984, the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. was dubbed ''Thunder'' by the Secret Service agents assigned to protect him. It was a fitting name for Jackson, whose electrifying oratory, energy and intellect shed light on critical issues as he took the country by storm.
In his column on Tuesday, ''Thunder'' struck again, criticizing Democratic presidential candidates for having ''virtually ignored the plight of African Americans in this country.'' While causing quite a stir, Jackson's comments unfortunately dimmed -- rather than directed -- light on the facts. But, they should be clear.
» Click to enlarge image
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (left) defended his close friend Barack Obama (D-Ill.) from criticism by Jesse Jackson Sr. (right). Jesse Jr. responds to his dad's column in an open letter to the Sun-Times.
(AP)
RELATED STORIES
• Jesse Jackson Sr.'s column
• Jackson Jr.'s relatively critical
• Campaign splits Jacksons
• Sweet blog: Jesse Jackson Jr. rebuts Dad
As a national co-chairman of Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign, I've been a witness to Obama's powerful, consistent and effective advocacy for African Americans. He is deeply rooted in the black community, having fought for social justice and economic inclusion throughout his life. On the campaign trail -- as he's done in the U.S. Senate and the state Legislature before that -- Obama has addressed many of the issues facing African Americans out of personal conviction, rather than political calculation.
It is a testament to his deep commitment and new vision that Obama is poised to become the first black man to make it all the way to the White House. Taking him there will be the character, the judgment and the principles that are propelling his rise.
So often, the place where a candidate begins a campaign points to the direction where he intends to take the country. It is a hint of things to come.
Obama launched his presidential campaign at the Old State Capitol in Springfield, where Abraham Lincoln delivered his famous speech calling on a divided nation to come together. Arguing that slavery was morally wrong, Lincoln professed this: ''I believe that this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.''
Lincoln's words were not just poignant, they were prophetic. His campaign defined the challenge and changed the country, setting in motion an immortal, inevitable clash of armies and ideas. In the clamor and convulsion of the Civil War, President Lincoln rallied the nation, freed the slaves and saved our Union, ushering in ''a new birth of freedom.''
Almost a century and half later, Obama stood only steps away from where Lincoln warned of a ''house divided.'' Like Lincoln, Obama called on us to come together and ''to face the challenges of this millennium together, as one people -- as Americans.'' He called on us to join with him to conclude a war without end, to solve the health care crisis, to build better schools, to create better jobs and to provide greater opportunity and justice for all. He said, "I want us to take up the unfinished business of perfecting our union, and building a better America."
Clearly, African Americans -- as all Americans -- are listening and responding. On the same day that Jackson's column appeared, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies released the results of its latest national survey of likely black presidential primary voters. The study found that many African Americans were paying close attention, with nearly 75 percent having a favorable view of Obama.
They see the light.
Now, one week later, Jackson's son, Jesse Jr. comes out publically to tell the World that his father's wrong about Obama. He did this in the Monday Chicago Sun Times. Read below and let's see if CNN is quick to report this. If so, they're being fair. If not, it's another sign that they're trying to help Senator Clinton.
Jesse Jr. to Jesse Sr.: You're wrong on Obama, dad
December 3, 2007
During his historic run for the presidency in 1984, the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. was dubbed ''Thunder'' by the Secret Service agents assigned to protect him. It was a fitting name for Jackson, whose electrifying oratory, energy and intellect shed light on critical issues as he took the country by storm.
In his column on Tuesday, ''Thunder'' struck again, criticizing Democratic presidential candidates for having ''virtually ignored the plight of African Americans in this country.'' While causing quite a stir, Jackson's comments unfortunately dimmed -- rather than directed -- light on the facts. But, they should be clear.
» Click to enlarge image
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (left) defended his close friend Barack Obama (D-Ill.) from criticism by Jesse Jackson Sr. (right). Jesse Jr. responds to his dad's column in an open letter to the Sun-Times.
(AP)
RELATED STORIES
• Jesse Jackson Sr.'s column
• Jackson Jr.'s relatively critical
• Campaign splits Jacksons
• Sweet blog: Jesse Jackson Jr. rebuts Dad
As a national co-chairman of Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign, I've been a witness to Obama's powerful, consistent and effective advocacy for African Americans. He is deeply rooted in the black community, having fought for social justice and economic inclusion throughout his life. On the campaign trail -- as he's done in the U.S. Senate and the state Legislature before that -- Obama has addressed many of the issues facing African Americans out of personal conviction, rather than political calculation.
It is a testament to his deep commitment and new vision that Obama is poised to become the first black man to make it all the way to the White House. Taking him there will be the character, the judgment and the principles that are propelling his rise.
So often, the place where a candidate begins a campaign points to the direction where he intends to take the country. It is a hint of things to come.
Obama launched his presidential campaign at the Old State Capitol in Springfield, where Abraham Lincoln delivered his famous speech calling on a divided nation to come together. Arguing that slavery was morally wrong, Lincoln professed this: ''I believe that this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.''
Lincoln's words were not just poignant, they were prophetic. His campaign defined the challenge and changed the country, setting in motion an immortal, inevitable clash of armies and ideas. In the clamor and convulsion of the Civil War, President Lincoln rallied the nation, freed the slaves and saved our Union, ushering in ''a new birth of freedom.''
Almost a century and half later, Obama stood only steps away from where Lincoln warned of a ''house divided.'' Like Lincoln, Obama called on us to come together and ''to face the challenges of this millennium together, as one people -- as Americans.'' He called on us to join with him to conclude a war without end, to solve the health care crisis, to build better schools, to create better jobs and to provide greater opportunity and justice for all. He said, "I want us to take up the unfinished business of perfecting our union, and building a better America."
Clearly, African Americans -- as all Americans -- are listening and responding. On the same day that Jackson's column appeared, the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies released the results of its latest national survey of likely black presidential primary voters. The study found that many African Americans were paying close attention, with nearly 75 percent having a favorable view of Obama.
They see the light.
Julia Allison and Meghan Asha Search For White Tech Guys at TechCrunch
Ok. You're wondering what's up with the title's smarky angle "Julia Allison and Meghan Asha Search For White Tech Guys at TechCrunch"? Well, it's simple. It's true.
If you've ever been to an SF Bay Area tech event as a Black male, you discover five things:
1) The party's mostly white
2) The men are cool to talk with
3) The women there act like they're afraid to talk with you if you're Black.
And establish these rules...
1) You have a better time if you just hang with one group and don't mingle much.
2) You have a fantastic time if you don't wait for people to talk to you, and totally avoid anyone
-- including some women -- who seem to have an issue with your presence.
I'm serious about this.
As the video reveals, of all of the people at these parties, it's generally non-tech White Women that generally act like they're looking only for White and at times Asian tech guys, as opposed to just plain networking. (And by "non-tech" I mean those who are not in tech positions. There are some exceptions if you read on, but that's my general experience. Julia, for example, is not herself a programmer or videoblogger or game developer, or web designer.) And their focus is so hard on this type of guy that they most of them will not do the normal act of simple networking with manners. By contrast, the guys act, well, normal. I've got to be honest about this. Hey, when you're one of , say, three Black men out of 300 people you see a different side of society at these events.
And before you go there, I didn't learn this by trying to establish a conversation, but more by simply noticing patterns -- where people went to at these parties and mostly who they took the time to strike up a conversation with, and also seeing how other Black men were treated, and quickly establishing the set of ground rules you see above and moving forward.
Hey, someone's got to point this out; might as well be me because the rules you see above have become habit for me. It's hilarious. For example, I remember the founder of a certain "scrapping" website app that ryhmes with "Scrabble" just pass and brush against me ( and with her chest, folks. Her chest!) without even saying so much as "excuse me" or "how's it going?" -- terrible behavior which I took as a weird form of passive-agresssive flirting or a rude "I don't want to see you" brush off and said nothing to her.
Folks like her are what makes the World a little less cool and a lot more hurtful. I just wish they'd realize how inappropriate they're being, but that may be asking too much. A simple "Hello" will do in the future.
I can report there was one woman at these events that was really cool and normal, and she knows who she is. Maybe there will be more like her, and less like the Julia Allisons.
Not that I've met Julia Allison. I may be wrong about her, but my experience tells me otherwise. I'd bet the ranch I'm right. But I can't lose. If I'm right, then my World is easier for noting the problem, if I'm wrong, then she's not what is the norm and that's good, and if I'm right and she's sensitive to this, she'll change, and we'll all be better.
I just want to attend one Tech party where everyone's cool. I know that party's out there, somewhere.
(Oh. And if you're one of those who's going to stupidly remark about this and claim that -- for example -- I'm racist for pointing out racism, be smart enough to realize that if people stopped behaving in the patterns I identify, I'd have to reason to complain or dish. Think about it. What I'm sharing with you is conversation that Blacks generally reserve for Black-on-Black environments. I dont' do that. I'll let you know what's on my mind, period. Also, stating that a person's racist for identifying racism is like saying one person's a robber for identiying a robbery.)
CNN / YouTube Debates - My Message To Steve Grove and Dave Bohrman
This video and post present my message to Steve Grove, the News and Politics editor for CNN, and to Dave Bohrman, the Executive Producer of the CNN / YouTube Debates for CNN.
My take is that CNN/YouTube was lucky to realize the ratings record that was set for the debate, and this was achieved for two reasons: 1) the time of year -- it's the fall holiday season, and 2) the fact that all of the Republican Presidential Candidates were there, which is no small feat.
Still, CNN/YouTube handled this debate differently than the Democratic Debate. First, the level of promotion of the event was dramatically scaled back compared to the first. Second, there were fewer questions picked out of the 5,200 that were submitted : 34 questions versus 43 for the first debate. Third, there was an annoying tendency to pick Blacks who submitted questions about Black issues, when there were videos from people who were not Black, but did ask questions about Blacks and the Republican Party.
(As a momentary aside, I think that practice shows an America that does not exist. It shows an America where only Blacks care about Black or minority issues, and not the real America, where a diverse set of people care about all Americans, and will ask questions regarding how Blacks are treated. To not show this -- the real America -- is criminal and paints America as far more racist than it really is. This country has come a long way and is better than it's ever been.)
CNN/YouTube also didn't handle its video talent properly. In the video I present myself as an example. In the begining I was -- and still am -- part of the sample video for the CNN/YouTube Debates. I'm also on the YTDebates channel, at least as of this writing and you can see my photo on the channel here in this blog post. So when I learned that YouTubers were being flown out by Google to the debates, I thought -- rightfully -- that somone would call.
Nope. Didn't happen.
I also sent an inquiry to determine if this was the case, and didn't get an answer from Steve Grove.
So it makes one wonder -- in this case, me -- what's going on over at CNN / YouTube and why they treat people in this way - or at least me. But given the thousands of people who have made and submitted videos, and the other talent that was promoted, I can't believe it's just me that had the problem.
CNN itself showed little regard for my time when they contact me for the first debate. Three show producers contacted me separately and in one case I thought I was to get on a flight. Then didn't get a call back. Then was essentially made to wait for a few days, then got a call saying I wasn't being flown out, only to get a call from another show flying me to New York.
Nuts.
What bothered me this time around was not that I was not called, but Steve didn't answer my emails attempting to learn what he and YouTube were going to do. If they'd said "Zennie, we don't need you this time", or "Hey CNN thinks you're an Obama supporter, and they've got a problem with that" then I'd be fine. I just wanted communication. I didn't get it.
As for the debate itself there were a lot of problems in addtion to the ones I discussed above. Not a single video question on Health Care was presented, leaving one to think the Republican Party doens't care about it. Is that CNN's call or the Republican Party? One has to assume they were working together. But in eliminating that series of questions, CNN / YouTube and the Republican Party pissed off a country.
Plus, CNN / YouTube did't tell video submitters they were going to do this, and the video makers -- given the Democratic Debate with YouTube, had full reason to think they would do so. Moreover, CNN / YouTube didn't tell anyone what they were going to do -- I learned it from CNN's David Bohrman being quoted in the New York Times.
That's not good.
In closing, I think CNN / YouTube owes YouTubers an appology and I'm also disappointed with how Steve Grove handled things this time around. I have high standards for him and I expect that -- givent the historic nature of what he's doing with YouTube and CNN that he will reach and maintain them. It's not personal -- I like Steve -- just professional.
I don't know Dave Bohrman, but I expect that he's a fine and upstanding person who will take these crticisms to heart and act on them. I think all of us want to see the CNN / YouTube system reach its potential.
My take is that CNN/YouTube was lucky to realize the ratings record that was set for the debate, and this was achieved for two reasons: 1) the time of year -- it's the fall holiday season, and 2) the fact that all of the Republican Presidential Candidates were there, which is no small feat.
Still, CNN/YouTube handled this debate differently than the Democratic Debate. First, the level of promotion of the event was dramatically scaled back compared to the first. Second, there were fewer questions picked out of the 5,200 that were submitted : 34 questions versus 43 for the first debate. Third, there was an annoying tendency to pick Blacks who submitted questions about Black issues, when there were videos from people who were not Black, but did ask questions about Blacks and the Republican Party.
(As a momentary aside, I think that practice shows an America that does not exist. It shows an America where only Blacks care about Black or minority issues, and not the real America, where a diverse set of people care about all Americans, and will ask questions regarding how Blacks are treated. To not show this -- the real America -- is criminal and paints America as far more racist than it really is. This country has come a long way and is better than it's ever been.)
CNN/YouTube also didn't handle its video talent properly. In the video I present myself as an example. In the begining I was -- and still am -- part of the sample video for the CNN/YouTube Debates. I'm also on the YTDebates channel, at least as of this writing and you can see my photo on the channel here in this blog post. So when I learned that YouTubers were being flown out by Google to the debates, I thought -- rightfully -- that somone would call.
Nope. Didn't happen.
I also sent an inquiry to determine if this was the case, and didn't get an answer from Steve Grove.
So it makes one wonder -- in this case, me -- what's going on over at CNN / YouTube and why they treat people in this way - or at least me. But given the thousands of people who have made and submitted videos, and the other talent that was promoted, I can't believe it's just me that had the problem.
CNN itself showed little regard for my time when they contact me for the first debate. Three show producers contacted me separately and in one case I thought I was to get on a flight. Then didn't get a call back. Then was essentially made to wait for a few days, then got a call saying I wasn't being flown out, only to get a call from another show flying me to New York.
Nuts.
What bothered me this time around was not that I was not called, but Steve didn't answer my emails attempting to learn what he and YouTube were going to do. If they'd said "Zennie, we don't need you this time", or "Hey CNN thinks you're an Obama supporter, and they've got a problem with that" then I'd be fine. I just wanted communication. I didn't get it.
As for the debate itself there were a lot of problems in addtion to the ones I discussed above. Not a single video question on Health Care was presented, leaving one to think the Republican Party doens't care about it. Is that CNN's call or the Republican Party? One has to assume they were working together. But in eliminating that series of questions, CNN / YouTube and the Republican Party pissed off a country.
Plus, CNN / YouTube did't tell video submitters they were going to do this, and the video makers -- given the Democratic Debate with YouTube, had full reason to think they would do so. Moreover, CNN / YouTube didn't tell anyone what they were going to do -- I learned it from CNN's David Bohrman being quoted in the New York Times.
That's not good.
In closing, I think CNN / YouTube owes YouTubers an appology and I'm also disappointed with how Steve Grove handled things this time around. I have high standards for him and I expect that -- givent the historic nature of what he's doing with YouTube and CNN that he will reach and maintain them. It's not personal -- I like Steve -- just professional.
I don't know Dave Bohrman, but I expect that he's a fine and upstanding person who will take these crticisms to heart and act on them. I think all of us want to see the CNN / YouTube system reach its potential.
Senator Larry Craig's Public Sexual Insult To His Wife Continues
Yep. That's how I feel about the whole sorry deal. Senator Craig -- if all of these charges are true that he's had sexual encounters with eight men-- has not been kind to his wife. I feel sorry for her almost to to the point of tears.
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Like ASIMO? Here's LAND WALKER - Like The Imperial Walker In Star Wars
Ok. If you thought ASIMO was a cool advance in human-like mechanics, or Mecha, then check out this device called The Land Walker. It's 11 feet tall, weighs about a ton, costs $315,000. and has side machine guns. The only problem I can see is that it moves slow and seems to be movable on a flat surface, rather than an uneven one.
ASIMO - Honda's Robot Experiment Has Evolved Into Running Entity
What you're about to see is ASIMO -- Honda Corporations 20-year old experimental robot project which is at the point where the latest version can run up to four miles per hour. The video below shows the ASIMO robot in running action, and there are no wires.
Reportedly Honda's designed this robot to be used to help people, and the ASIMO website seems to imply this. But as ASIMO has reached this stage of development, the question of what would happen if ASIMO got into the wrong hands must be asked. Could this robot be used to deliver explosive devices for terrorists? How can one protect the technology from getting into the wrong hands?
Scary stuff, where we're aheaded.
Dave Colarusso On "How Social Media Can Help Shape Society"
Dave Colarusso who created the Community Counts / CNN / YouTube Debates website and is a co-creator of 10Questions, was interviewed by Jean Yung of the USC Annenberg School of Business. The article's called "How Social Media Can Help Shape Society" and is here below and linked to in the title of this post.
How social media can help shape society
OJR speaks with a co-creator of 10Questions.com about how the site is helping empower popular discussion about the U.S. Presidential campaign.
By Jean Yung
Posted: 2007-11-12
Building on July's YouTube/CNN presidential debate, 10Questions.com has opened a new channel of communication between the public and the presidential hopefuls.
Welcome to the agora of the 21st century: 10 Questions is a people-powered platform for presidential politics created by Andrew Rasiej and Micah L. Sifry of techPresident and high school physics teacher David Colarusso, who also runs a site called Community Counts. Anyone can upload a video question for the candidates. The public votes on the questions it wants to see answered, and the candidates respond to the top 10 questions.
Will such a forum bring the democracy of the Internet to politics? OJR spoke on the phone with 10 Questions co-creator and self-described "technical guy" for the site, David Colarusso. An edited transcript follows.
OJR: 10 Questions is based on the technology of your site, Community Counts. How did Community Counts get its start?
Colarusso: Back in the beginning of this year, YouTube began spotlighting individual candidates on its page by posting a video of the candidate asking the community a question. YouTube users were then invited to submit video responses. Lastly, the candidate responded to these responses. For example, the first question was by Mitt Romney: "What do you believe is America's single greatest challenge?". I submitted a response, and luckily, the first two candidates replied to my videos.
It became obvious to us users after a while that there wasn't a good mechanism for the candidates to understand what the community valued. We thought the community should have some say as to what they wanted to see the candidate respond to. So we said, why don't we just survey everyone? That turned into Community Counts.
When the YouTube/CNN debate came along, I had the tools necessary for people to vote on those questions. We got a good deal of press coverage. We had a lot of users: 30,000 votes by 6,000 voters. That got the attention of the people of techPresident.
After the debate was over, we thought about what we wanted to see happen, and that turned into 10 Questions.
OJR: How is 10 Questions different from the YouTube/CNN debates?
Colarusso: There are some rather profound differences. The primary one is that we're doing this as a people-powered forum, not a debate. It's a discussion with the candidates. The YouTube debate allowed people to ask questions, but CNN had the ultimate say in choosing the final videos. YouTube also took away the features that let users see their peers' most popular videos. Community Counts allowed the users to vote on the questions themselves, to prioritize them. We pose the question: Do you think this should be asked of the candidates? Community Counts shows that when you ask that you get serious stuff.
Another difference is that we offer the ability for the community to comment on the candidates' replies and to rate whether the question was answered.
OJR: As of this morning, 10 Questions had about 76,000 votes and 160 videos. What is the traffic like? How do you add traffic to the site? What do you expect in the final week?
Colarusso: We'll probably get about 100,000 votes by November 14. The videos come in spurts as different groups get interested.
The idea of leveraging the wisdom of the crowds – that a group of people together can make better decisions – works when the crowd is diverse. The two ways we try to get diversity is to make the audience very large and to reach out to different populations. We have a collection of 40 cross-partisan "sponsors," such as the Huffington Post, Hugh Hewitt, DailyKos, BET. There is no financial relationship. The sponsors let their readers and viewers know what's going on over here. We have a nice mix of left and right voters.
OJR: How can you tell the political leaning of your visitors?
Colarusso: We can only say where they're coming from – our main referring sites (our sponsors) have a nice mix.
As for traffic, there are different drivers. Up to today, we've seen three major spikes. (We can tell by looking at the history for each of the videos – the top two videos would show these spikes.)
The first spike was our initial launch. In terms of unique individual visitors to the site, we had about 5,000. There was a peak of 7,000 visitors per day during the launch period.
The second spike in traffic, with a peak of about 11,000 individual visitors to the site, was on October 29, during Barack Obama's MySpace/MTV dialogue. We had worked it out so that the top ten questions on our site at the time would be asked. MoveOn.org sent an e-mail to their users telling them to vote on videos. It generated a lot of attention and traffic. The result was that a question on net neutrality shot up to number one, and it's still currently the top video. The following week there were discussions on the legitimacy of MoveOn.org. They were accused of "astroturfing". We don't think it's the right characterization. Sending out an e-mail asking people to vote doesn't guarantee that everyone will vote.
We do have safeguards on our site – only one vote per IP address allowed. At the end of round one [on November 14, when the top ten questions will be submitted to the candidates], we'll start an auditing process to further refine those safeguards.
This last weekend, there was another spike of about 6,400 unique visitors, resulting in the question, "Is America unofficially a theocracy?" climbing into the current number two spot. A blogger had posted an entry asking his readers to vote on two questions on religion and politics. It took off like crazy after someone dugg the blog entry. It got a couple thousand diggs, and generated a lot of traffic. So in the course of the weekend, it pushed these questions right up to the top 10. Certainly this is not astroturfing. This is not an organized e-mail list. People came and stayed around to vote on other questions.
We're big on being transparent. We've been blogging each day about the traffic. As of today, we've had about 65,000 unique visitors total since the site started. We're pretty happy that these individual people came to vote, and then stayed around to vote on other videos. On average people voted on about three videos. That's promising.
In the last peak, there were fewer unique voters but more voting. It's interesting to see how these numbers are correlated. This is the mystery of the Web – how people participate.
OJR: Have you any idea which campaign is more Web-organized than others, in terms of submitting videos to the site or getting their supporters to vote?
Colarusso: It's a tricky question. You see, you might have a small group that's good at mobilizing its members – but it has few members. I can tell you that over the life of the site, we've got in the top ten list of referring sites (in rough order): digg, blogspot [both from last week's spike], Crooks&Liars, MSNBC, Hugh Hewitt at Townhall, TalkingPointsMemo, HotAir, and Conservative Grapevine.
OJR: One of the hot topics surrounding the democracy of Internet-based forums is: Are the questions better? Smarter? More original? More relevant? What are your thoughts?
Colarusso: I think they're definitely diverse, and that's one of the main things we're trying to get at – a sense of what our community, our visitors think are questions that should be asked. So it's hard not to succeed with that rubric [laughs].
It's interesting to note that these questions are different from the normal questions. I think that means they're adding something. Policy-specific questions, such as net neutrality, or questions about whether America is unofficially a theocracy are obviously what this community feels strongly about.
OJR: What can journalists learn from this public forum?
Colarusso: An interesting question, but hard to answer at the moment. This is something that has to run its course. There could be another spike tomorrow and everything could change. This will work best when we have the most number of users participating. That's when we'll have the most diverse sample. The lesson might just be that there is a desire on people's part to have this access to candidates. We see a lot of student voices, students asking questions. We see the participation of people who might not normally feel like they have access. It's entirely egalitarian. We're not promoting any one viewpoint. We're just letting people decide. I think people very much appreciate that feeling that what you get is the will of the community.
OJR: Will the informal style of Internet home videos put an end to the sound-bite-driven style of politics on TV?
Colarusso: One of our goals is to provide a forum to allow politicians to move away from sound bites. It has to do with what we're looking for. With all these debates on TV, candidates say they don't get the chance to give nuanced answers. We're giving them a month to submit answers. They'll actually have to live up to that.
Additionally, having the community rate their answers lets the candidate know that they have an engaged community. And we hope that that will also provide an impetus for a more substantive answer.
As far as the informality of the questions, I think the main benefit is to put a human face on people who ask the questions, to make people feel more engaged when they are watching someone that looks more like them.
OJR: Is anyone analyzing or tabulating all the questions you've gotten?
Colarusso: We're keeping tabs on it – trying to give commentary as we go. We're providing data on votes and history. I'm definitely interested in seeing what the final tally looks like. There's a lot to glean there.
How social media can help shape society
OJR speaks with a co-creator of 10Questions.com about how the site is helping empower popular discussion about the U.S. Presidential campaign.
By Jean Yung
Posted: 2007-11-12
Building on July's YouTube/CNN presidential debate, 10Questions.com has opened a new channel of communication between the public and the presidential hopefuls.
Welcome to the agora of the 21st century: 10 Questions is a people-powered platform for presidential politics created by Andrew Rasiej and Micah L. Sifry of techPresident and high school physics teacher David Colarusso, who also runs a site called Community Counts. Anyone can upload a video question for the candidates. The public votes on the questions it wants to see answered, and the candidates respond to the top 10 questions.
Will such a forum bring the democracy of the Internet to politics? OJR spoke on the phone with 10 Questions co-creator and self-described "technical guy" for the site, David Colarusso. An edited transcript follows.
OJR: 10 Questions is based on the technology of your site, Community Counts. How did Community Counts get its start?
Colarusso: Back in the beginning of this year, YouTube began spotlighting individual candidates on its page by posting a video of the candidate asking the community a question. YouTube users were then invited to submit video responses. Lastly, the candidate responded to these responses. For example, the first question was by Mitt Romney: "What do you believe is America's single greatest challenge?". I submitted a response, and luckily, the first two candidates replied to my videos.
It became obvious to us users after a while that there wasn't a good mechanism for the candidates to understand what the community valued. We thought the community should have some say as to what they wanted to see the candidate respond to. So we said, why don't we just survey everyone? That turned into Community Counts.
When the YouTube/CNN debate came along, I had the tools necessary for people to vote on those questions. We got a good deal of press coverage. We had a lot of users: 30,000 votes by 6,000 voters. That got the attention of the people of techPresident.
After the debate was over, we thought about what we wanted to see happen, and that turned into 10 Questions.
OJR: How is 10 Questions different from the YouTube/CNN debates?
Colarusso: There are some rather profound differences. The primary one is that we're doing this as a people-powered forum, not a debate. It's a discussion with the candidates. The YouTube debate allowed people to ask questions, but CNN had the ultimate say in choosing the final videos. YouTube also took away the features that let users see their peers' most popular videos. Community Counts allowed the users to vote on the questions themselves, to prioritize them. We pose the question: Do you think this should be asked of the candidates? Community Counts shows that when you ask that you get serious stuff.
Another difference is that we offer the ability for the community to comment on the candidates' replies and to rate whether the question was answered.
OJR: As of this morning, 10 Questions had about 76,000 votes and 160 videos. What is the traffic like? How do you add traffic to the site? What do you expect in the final week?
Colarusso: We'll probably get about 100,000 votes by November 14. The videos come in spurts as different groups get interested.
The idea of leveraging the wisdom of the crowds – that a group of people together can make better decisions – works when the crowd is diverse. The two ways we try to get diversity is to make the audience very large and to reach out to different populations. We have a collection of 40 cross-partisan "sponsors," such as the Huffington Post, Hugh Hewitt, DailyKos, BET. There is no financial relationship. The sponsors let their readers and viewers know what's going on over here. We have a nice mix of left and right voters.
OJR: How can you tell the political leaning of your visitors?
Colarusso: We can only say where they're coming from – our main referring sites (our sponsors) have a nice mix.
As for traffic, there are different drivers. Up to today, we've seen three major spikes. (We can tell by looking at the history for each of the videos – the top two videos would show these spikes.)
The first spike was our initial launch. In terms of unique individual visitors to the site, we had about 5,000. There was a peak of 7,000 visitors per day during the launch period.
The second spike in traffic, with a peak of about 11,000 individual visitors to the site, was on October 29, during Barack Obama's MySpace/MTV dialogue. We had worked it out so that the top ten questions on our site at the time would be asked. MoveOn.org sent an e-mail to their users telling them to vote on videos. It generated a lot of attention and traffic. The result was that a question on net neutrality shot up to number one, and it's still currently the top video. The following week there were discussions on the legitimacy of MoveOn.org. They were accused of "astroturfing". We don't think it's the right characterization. Sending out an e-mail asking people to vote doesn't guarantee that everyone will vote.
We do have safeguards on our site – only one vote per IP address allowed. At the end of round one [on November 14, when the top ten questions will be submitted to the candidates], we'll start an auditing process to further refine those safeguards.
This last weekend, there was another spike of about 6,400 unique visitors, resulting in the question, "Is America unofficially a theocracy?" climbing into the current number two spot. A blogger had posted an entry asking his readers to vote on two questions on religion and politics. It took off like crazy after someone dugg the blog entry. It got a couple thousand diggs, and generated a lot of traffic. So in the course of the weekend, it pushed these questions right up to the top 10. Certainly this is not astroturfing. This is not an organized e-mail list. People came and stayed around to vote on other questions.
We're big on being transparent. We've been blogging each day about the traffic. As of today, we've had about 65,000 unique visitors total since the site started. We're pretty happy that these individual people came to vote, and then stayed around to vote on other videos. On average people voted on about three videos. That's promising.
In the last peak, there were fewer unique voters but more voting. It's interesting to see how these numbers are correlated. This is the mystery of the Web – how people participate.
OJR: Have you any idea which campaign is more Web-organized than others, in terms of submitting videos to the site or getting their supporters to vote?
Colarusso: It's a tricky question. You see, you might have a small group that's good at mobilizing its members – but it has few members. I can tell you that over the life of the site, we've got in the top ten list of referring sites (in rough order): digg, blogspot [both from last week's spike], Crooks&Liars, MSNBC, Hugh Hewitt at Townhall, TalkingPointsMemo, HotAir, and Conservative Grapevine.
OJR: One of the hot topics surrounding the democracy of Internet-based forums is: Are the questions better? Smarter? More original? More relevant? What are your thoughts?
Colarusso: I think they're definitely diverse, and that's one of the main things we're trying to get at – a sense of what our community, our visitors think are questions that should be asked. So it's hard not to succeed with that rubric [laughs].
It's interesting to note that these questions are different from the normal questions. I think that means they're adding something. Policy-specific questions, such as net neutrality, or questions about whether America is unofficially a theocracy are obviously what this community feels strongly about.
OJR: What can journalists learn from this public forum?
Colarusso: An interesting question, but hard to answer at the moment. This is something that has to run its course. There could be another spike tomorrow and everything could change. This will work best when we have the most number of users participating. That's when we'll have the most diverse sample. The lesson might just be that there is a desire on people's part to have this access to candidates. We see a lot of student voices, students asking questions. We see the participation of people who might not normally feel like they have access. It's entirely egalitarian. We're not promoting any one viewpoint. We're just letting people decide. I think people very much appreciate that feeling that what you get is the will of the community.
OJR: Will the informal style of Internet home videos put an end to the sound-bite-driven style of politics on TV?
Colarusso: One of our goals is to provide a forum to allow politicians to move away from sound bites. It has to do with what we're looking for. With all these debates on TV, candidates say they don't get the chance to give nuanced answers. We're giving them a month to submit answers. They'll actually have to live up to that.
Additionally, having the community rate their answers lets the candidate know that they have an engaged community. And we hope that that will also provide an impetus for a more substantive answer.
As far as the informality of the questions, I think the main benefit is to put a human face on people who ask the questions, to make people feel more engaged when they are watching someone that looks more like them.
OJR: Is anyone analyzing or tabulating all the questions you've gotten?
Colarusso: We're keeping tabs on it – trying to give commentary as we go. We're providing data on votes and history. I'm definitely interested in seeing what the final tally looks like. There's a lot to glean there.
Hugo Chavez Loses Crucial Constitutional Vote
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) ― President Hugo Chavez suffered a stinging defeat Monday in a vote on constitutional changes that would have let him run for re-election indefinitely and solidify his bid to transform this major U.S. oil provider into a socialist state.
Voters defeated the sweeping measures by a vote of 51 percent to 49 percent, said Tibisay Lucena, chief of the National Electoral Council, with voter turnout just 56 percent.
She said that with 88 percent of the votes counted, the trend was irreversible.
"This was a photo finish," Chavez said immediately after the vote, adding that unlike past Venezuelan governments, his respects the people's will.
It was the first victory for an emboldened opposition against Chavez after nine years of electoral defeats.
"Don't feel sad," he urged his supporters, saying there were "microscopic differences" between the "yes" and "no" options in a referendum that Chavez's opponents feared could have meant a plunge toward dictatorship.
Chavez's supporters had faith he would use the reforms to deepen grass-roots democracy and more equitably spread Venezuela's oil wealth.
The changes would have created new forms of communal property, let Chavez handpick local leaders under a redrawn political map, permit civil liberties to be suspended under extended states of emergency and allow Chavez to seek re-election indefinitely. Now, Chavez will be barred from running again in 2012.
Other changes would have shortened the workday from eight hours to six, created a social security fund for millions of informal laborers and promoted communal councils where residents decide how to spend government funds. The reforms also would have granted Chavez control over the Central Bank and extended presidential terms from six to seven years.
Chavez had warned opponents ahead of the vote he would not tolerate attempts to incite violence, and threatened to cut off oil exports to the U.S. if Washington interfered.
The loss was unfamiliar territory for a leader who easily won re-election last year with 63 percent of the vote.
All was reported calm during voting but 45 people were detained, most for committing ballot-related crimes like "destroying electoral materials," said Gen. Jesus Gonzalez, chief of a military command overseeing security.
At a polling station in one politically divided Caracas neighborhood, Chavez supporters shouted "Get out of here!" to opposition backers who stood nearby aiming to monitor the vote count. A few dozen Chavistas rode by on motorcycles with bandanas and hats covering their faces, some throwing firecrackers.
Opponents -- including Roman Catholic leaders, press freedom groups, human rights groups and prominent business leaders -- feared the reforms would have granted Chavez unchecked power and threatened basic rights.
Cecilia Goldberger, a 56-year-old voting in affluent eastern Caracas, said Sunday that Venezuelans did not really understand how Chavez's power grab would affect them. She resented pre-dawn, get-out-the-vote tactics by Chavistas, including fireworks and reveille blaring from speakers mounted on cruising trucks.
"I refuse to be treated like cattle and I refuse to be part of a communist regime," the Israeli-born Goldberger said, adding that she and her businessman husband hope to leave the country.
Chavez sought to capitalize on his personal popularity ahead of Sunday's vote.
He is seen by many as a champion of the poor who has redistributed more oil wealth than any other leader in memory.
Tensions have surged in recent weeks as university students led protests and occasionally clashed with police and Chavista groups.
Lucena called the vote "the calmest we've had in the last 10 years."
Voters defeated the sweeping measures by a vote of 51 percent to 49 percent, said Tibisay Lucena, chief of the National Electoral Council, with voter turnout just 56 percent.
She said that with 88 percent of the votes counted, the trend was irreversible.
"This was a photo finish," Chavez said immediately after the vote, adding that unlike past Venezuelan governments, his respects the people's will.
It was the first victory for an emboldened opposition against Chavez after nine years of electoral defeats.
"Don't feel sad," he urged his supporters, saying there were "microscopic differences" between the "yes" and "no" options in a referendum that Chavez's opponents feared could have meant a plunge toward dictatorship.
Chavez's supporters had faith he would use the reforms to deepen grass-roots democracy and more equitably spread Venezuela's oil wealth.
The changes would have created new forms of communal property, let Chavez handpick local leaders under a redrawn political map, permit civil liberties to be suspended under extended states of emergency and allow Chavez to seek re-election indefinitely. Now, Chavez will be barred from running again in 2012.
Other changes would have shortened the workday from eight hours to six, created a social security fund for millions of informal laborers and promoted communal councils where residents decide how to spend government funds. The reforms also would have granted Chavez control over the Central Bank and extended presidential terms from six to seven years.
Chavez had warned opponents ahead of the vote he would not tolerate attempts to incite violence, and threatened to cut off oil exports to the U.S. if Washington interfered.
The loss was unfamiliar territory for a leader who easily won re-election last year with 63 percent of the vote.
All was reported calm during voting but 45 people were detained, most for committing ballot-related crimes like "destroying electoral materials," said Gen. Jesus Gonzalez, chief of a military command overseeing security.
At a polling station in one politically divided Caracas neighborhood, Chavez supporters shouted "Get out of here!" to opposition backers who stood nearby aiming to monitor the vote count. A few dozen Chavistas rode by on motorcycles with bandanas and hats covering their faces, some throwing firecrackers.
Opponents -- including Roman Catholic leaders, press freedom groups, human rights groups and prominent business leaders -- feared the reforms would have granted Chavez unchecked power and threatened basic rights.
Cecilia Goldberger, a 56-year-old voting in affluent eastern Caracas, said Sunday that Venezuelans did not really understand how Chavez's power grab would affect them. She resented pre-dawn, get-out-the-vote tactics by Chavistas, including fireworks and reveille blaring from speakers mounted on cruising trucks.
"I refuse to be treated like cattle and I refuse to be part of a communist regime," the Israeli-born Goldberger said, adding that she and her businessman husband hope to leave the country.
Chavez sought to capitalize on his personal popularity ahead of Sunday's vote.
He is seen by many as a champion of the poor who has redistributed more oil wealth than any other leader in memory.
Tensions have surged in recent weeks as university students led protests and occasionally clashed with police and Chavista groups.
Lucena called the vote "the calmest we've had in the last 10 years."
DesMoines Register Reports Barack Obama Ahead in Poll
Yet another poll is reporting that Senator Barack Obama's ahead in Iowa; this one by The DesMoines Register in Iowa. What it may mean is that -- assuming the poll focuses on older voters -- that the Iowa older voter is seeing Obama as the candidate of choice. If that's the case then Clinton's in big trouble, as Obama's growing beyond his base of young supporters.
Bionic Woman On Hulu - Best Episode Yet - Do Not Disturb
Ok, you now know I'm hooked on the new show "Bionic Woman" and for reasons I've stated already. But the show's writing -- before the strike -- kept getting better and better. Here's an example which can be seen on Hulu, or here if you don't have a Hulu account.
Ron Paul Fielding Questions After The CNN YouTube Debate
Congressman Ron Paul has a one-trick-pony approach to his candidacy that is based on classic conservative ideology. In this video made after the CNN / YouTube Republican Debate, we see how Ron Paul adresses questions.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Hate Crimes in U.S. Increase by Nearly 8%- Extremely Disappointing
Associated Press
November 19, 2007 10:34 a.m.
WASHINGTON -- Hate crime incidents in the U.S. rose last year by nearly 8%, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported Monday, as racial prejudice continued to account for more than half the reported instances.
Police across the nation reported 7,722 criminal incidents in 2006 targeting victims or property as a result of bias against a particular race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnic or national origin or physical or mental disability. That was up 7.8% from the 7,163 incidents reported in 2005.
Although the noose incidents and beatings among students at Jena, La., high school occurred in the last half of 2006, they were not included in the report. Only 12,600 of the nation's more than 17,000 local, county, state and federal police agencies participated in the hate-crime reporting program in 2006 and neither Jena nor LaSalle Parish, in which the town is located, were among the agencies reporting.
Nevertheless, the Jena incidents, and a rash of subsequent noose incidents around the country, have spawned civil-rights protests in Louisiana and last week at Justice Department headquarters here. The department said it investigated the incident but decided not to prosecute because the federal government does not typically bring hate crime charges against juveniles.
November 19, 2007 10:34 a.m.
WASHINGTON -- Hate crime incidents in the U.S. rose last year by nearly 8%, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported Monday, as racial prejudice continued to account for more than half the reported instances.
Police across the nation reported 7,722 criminal incidents in 2006 targeting victims or property as a result of bias against a particular race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnic or national origin or physical or mental disability. That was up 7.8% from the 7,163 incidents reported in 2005.
Although the noose incidents and beatings among students at Jena, La., high school occurred in the last half of 2006, they were not included in the report. Only 12,600 of the nation's more than 17,000 local, county, state and federal police agencies participated in the hate-crime reporting program in 2006 and neither Jena nor LaSalle Parish, in which the town is located, were among the agencies reporting.
Nevertheless, the Jena incidents, and a rash of subsequent noose incidents around the country, have spawned civil-rights protests in Louisiana and last week at Justice Department headquarters here. The department said it investigated the incident but decided not to prosecute because the federal government does not typically bring hate crime charges against juveniles.
CNN / YouTube Debates - My Message To Steve Grove and Dave Bohrman
This video and post present my message to Steve Grove, the News and Politics editor for CNN, and to Dave Bohrman, the Executive Producer of the CNN / YouTube Debates for CNN.
My take is that CNN/YouTube was lucky to realize the ratings record that was set for the debate, and this was achieved for two reasons: 1) the time of year -- it's the fall holiday season, and 2) the fact that all of the Republican Presidential Candidates were there, which is no small feat.
Still, CNN/YouTube handled this debate differently than the Democratic Debate. First, the level of promotion of the event was dramatically scaled back compared to the first. Second, there were fewer questions picked out of the 5,200 that were submitted : 34 questions versus 43 for the first debate. Third, there was an annoying tendency to pick Blacks who submitted questions about Black issues, when there were videos from people who were not Black, but did ask questions about Blacks and the Republican Party.
(As a momentary aside, I think that practice shows an America that does not exist. It shows an America where only Blacks care about Black or minority issues, and not the real America, where a diverse set of people care about all Americans, and will ask questions regarding how Blacks are treated. To not show this -- the real America -- is criminal and paints America as far more racist than it really is. This country has come a long way and is better than it's ever been.)
CNN/YouTube also didn't handle its video talent properly. In the video I present myself as an example. In the begining I was -- and still am -- part of the sample video for the CNN/YouTube Debates. I'm also on the YTDebates channel, at least as of this writing and you can see my photo on the channel here in this blog post. So when I learned that YouTubers were being flown out by Google to the debates, I thought -- rightfully -- that somone would call.
Nope. Didn't happen.
I also sent an inquiry to determine if this was the case, and didn't get an answer from Steve Grove.
So it makes one wonder -- in this case, me -- what's going on over at CNN / YouTube and why they treat people in this way - or at least me. But given the thousands of people who have made and submitted videos, and the other talent that was promoted, I can't believe it's just me that had the problem.
CNN itself showed little regard for my time when they contact me for the first debate. Three show producers contacted me separately and in one case I thought I was to get on a flight. Then didn't get a call back. Then was essentially made to wait for a few days, then got a call saying I wasn't being flown out, only to get a call from another show flying me to New York.
Nuts.
What bothered me this time around was not that I was not called, but Steve didn't answer my emails attempting to learn what he and YouTube were going to do. If they'd said "Zennie, we don't need you this time", or "Hey CNN thinks you're an Obama supporter, and they've got a problem with that" then I'd be fine. I just wanted communication. I didn't get it.
As for the debate itself there were a lot of problems in addtion to the ones I discussed above. Not a single video question on Health Care was presented, leaving one to think the Republican Party doens't care about it. Is that CNN's call or the Republican Party? One has to assume they were working together. But in eliminating that series of questions, CNN / YouTube and the Republican Party pissed off a country.
Plus, CNN / YouTube did't tell video submitters they were going to do this, and the video makers -- given the Democratic Debate with YouTube, had full reason to think they would do so. Moreover, CNN / YouTube didn't tell anyone what they were going to do -- I learned it from CNN's David Bohrman being quoted in the New York Times.
That's not good.
In closing, I think CNN / YouTube owes YouTubers an appology and I'm also disappointed with how Steve Grove handled things this time around. I have high standards for him and I expect that -- givent the historic nature of what he's doing with YouTube and CNN that he will reach and maintain them. It's not personal -- I like Steve -- just professional.
I don't know Dave Bohrman, but I expect that he's a fine and upstanding person who will take these crticisms to heart and act on them. I think all of us want to see the CNN / YouTube system reach its potential.
My take is that CNN/YouTube was lucky to realize the ratings record that was set for the debate, and this was achieved for two reasons: 1) the time of year -- it's the fall holiday season, and 2) the fact that all of the Republican Presidential Candidates were there, which is no small feat.
Still, CNN/YouTube handled this debate differently than the Democratic Debate. First, the level of promotion of the event was dramatically scaled back compared to the first. Second, there were fewer questions picked out of the 5,200 that were submitted : 34 questions versus 43 for the first debate. Third, there was an annoying tendency to pick Blacks who submitted questions about Black issues, when there were videos from people who were not Black, but did ask questions about Blacks and the Republican Party.
(As a momentary aside, I think that practice shows an America that does not exist. It shows an America where only Blacks care about Black or minority issues, and not the real America, where a diverse set of people care about all Americans, and will ask questions regarding how Blacks are treated. To not show this -- the real America -- is criminal and paints America as far more racist than it really is. This country has come a long way and is better than it's ever been.)
CNN/YouTube also didn't handle its video talent properly. In the video I present myself as an example. In the begining I was -- and still am -- part of the sample video for the CNN/YouTube Debates. I'm also on the YTDebates channel, at least as of this writing and you can see my photo on the channel here in this blog post. So when I learned that YouTubers were being flown out by Google to the debates, I thought -- rightfully -- that somone would call.
Nope. Didn't happen.
I also sent an inquiry to determine if this was the case, and didn't get an answer from Steve Grove.
So it makes one wonder -- in this case, me -- what's going on over at CNN / YouTube and why they treat people in this way - or at least me. But given the thousands of people who have made and submitted videos, and the other talent that was promoted, I can't believe it's just me that had the problem.
CNN itself showed little regard for my time when they contact me for the first debate. Three show producers contacted me separately and in one case I thought I was to get on a flight. Then didn't get a call back. Then was essentially made to wait for a few days, then got a call saying I wasn't being flown out, only to get a call from another show flying me to New York.
Nuts.
What bothered me this time around was not that I was not called, but Steve didn't answer my emails attempting to learn what he and YouTube were going to do. If they'd said "Zennie, we don't need you this time", or "Hey CNN thinks you're an Obama supporter, and they've got a problem with that" then I'd be fine. I just wanted communication. I didn't get it.
As for the debate itself there were a lot of problems in addtion to the ones I discussed above. Not a single video question on Health Care was presented, leaving one to think the Republican Party doens't care about it. Is that CNN's call or the Republican Party? One has to assume they were working together. But in eliminating that series of questions, CNN / YouTube and the Republican Party pissed off a country.
Plus, CNN / YouTube did't tell video submitters they were going to do this, and the video makers -- given the Democratic Debate with YouTube, had full reason to think they would do so. Moreover, CNN / YouTube didn't tell anyone what they were going to do -- I learned it from CNN's David Bohrman being quoted in the New York Times.
That's not good.
In closing, I think CNN / YouTube owes YouTubers an appology and I'm also disappointed with how Steve Grove handled things this time around. I have high standards for him and I expect that -- givent the historic nature of what he's doing with YouTube and CNN that he will reach and maintain them. It's not personal -- I like Steve -- just professional.
I don't know Dave Bohrman, but I expect that he's a fine and upstanding person who will take these crticisms to heart and act on them. I think all of us want to see the CNN / YouTube system reach its potential.
Four Arrested In Redskins Sean Taylor Killing
The Miami-Dade Police Department arrested four individuals Friday in connection to the horrific slaying of Washington Redskins Pro Bowl safety Sean Taylor.
All four men, ranging in age from 17 to 20, are facing possible charges of murder and robbery in lieu of the break in at Taylor's lavish Miami home early Monday morning.
Contrary to the sentiments expressed by many that this was a planned attack by the four suspects, police director Robert Parker said that this was an attempted burglary and the four incarcerated men ''were certainly not looking to go there and kill anyone.''
All four men, ranging in age from 17 to 20, are facing possible charges of murder and robbery in lieu of the break in at Taylor's lavish Miami home early Monday morning.
Contrary to the sentiments expressed by many that this was a planned attack by the four suspects, police director Robert Parker said that this was an attempted burglary and the four incarcerated men ''were certainly not looking to go there and kill anyone.''
Source: Nathan's Friends, Family Used NYPD Service
This is a very sticky situation and one that is garnering tremendous attention in the Tri State Area.
It's imperative to point out that contrary to the belief of Guiliani's press secretary who thinks Rudy is the Republican front-runner, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney will receive the party's nomination.
Cops Chauffeured Relatives Around Without Her In Car
NEW YORK (CBS) ― The revelations continue in the case of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the security detail for Judith Nathan, his one-time mistress who is now his wife.
Did Nathan misuse the city police detail that Giuliani assigned to protect her?
At the dawn of 2001, Nathan was Giuliani's good friend and was receiving a blanket of police protection.
It was an unusual circumstance. His wife, first lady Donna Hanover, was still living at Gracie Mansion with their children.
But the mayor was unapologetic, citing security concerns.
"If you had any concern for people's safety, you'd have the decency to leave it alone. You should be ashamed of yourselves," the former mayor said back in 2001.
Six years later, presidential candidate Giuliani is facing questions about that security. A source involved with the mayor's operations at the time tells CBS 2 HD that Nathan took flagrant advantage of that police car and driver.
The source says Nathan forced police to chauffeur her friends and family around the city -- even when she wasn't in the car.
That set off alarms with ethics watchdogs.
"The rules are clear, you can't use city resources for private reasons," said Gene Russianoff of the New York Public Interest Research Group. "And if you're using a city car, a police driven car to chauffeur around relatives, unless they're explicitly protected and their deemed to be the subject of potential security threats, it's just wrong."
Nathan's detail was approved by the NYPD after a stranger made an unspecified threat to her. The commissioner at the time was Bernard Kerik, who was recently indicted on tax fraud charges in an unrelated matter.
"It wasn't about her being the mayor's girlfriend," Kerik said. "The person spoke to her by name and made comments to her."
On Friday, Giuliani avoided reporters' questions about the security for Nathan back then. He told reporters off camera "we've explained it."
Giuliani's press secretary, Maria Comella, angrily denounced the use of an unnamed source in this story.
But she did not deny the assertion that Nathan used her police detail to ferry around friends and family.
And she repeated what Giuliani has said about reports questioning how his security detail was financed, saying, "This is nothing more than partisan politics aimed at the Republican front-runner."
It's imperative to point out that contrary to the belief of Guiliani's press secretary who thinks Rudy is the Republican front-runner, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney will receive the party's nomination.
Cops Chauffeured Relatives Around Without Her In Car
NEW YORK (CBS) ― The revelations continue in the case of former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the security detail for Judith Nathan, his one-time mistress who is now his wife.
Did Nathan misuse the city police detail that Giuliani assigned to protect her?
At the dawn of 2001, Nathan was Giuliani's good friend and was receiving a blanket of police protection.
It was an unusual circumstance. His wife, first lady Donna Hanover, was still living at Gracie Mansion with their children.
But the mayor was unapologetic, citing security concerns.
"If you had any concern for people's safety, you'd have the decency to leave it alone. You should be ashamed of yourselves," the former mayor said back in 2001.
Six years later, presidential candidate Giuliani is facing questions about that security. A source involved with the mayor's operations at the time tells CBS 2 HD that Nathan took flagrant advantage of that police car and driver.
The source says Nathan forced police to chauffeur her friends and family around the city -- even when she wasn't in the car.
That set off alarms with ethics watchdogs.
"The rules are clear, you can't use city resources for private reasons," said Gene Russianoff of the New York Public Interest Research Group. "And if you're using a city car, a police driven car to chauffeur around relatives, unless they're explicitly protected and their deemed to be the subject of potential security threats, it's just wrong."
Nathan's detail was approved by the NYPD after a stranger made an unspecified threat to her. The commissioner at the time was Bernard Kerik, who was recently indicted on tax fraud charges in an unrelated matter.
"It wasn't about her being the mayor's girlfriend," Kerik said. "The person spoke to her by name and made comments to her."
On Friday, Giuliani avoided reporters' questions about the security for Nathan back then. He told reporters off camera "we've explained it."
Giuliani's press secretary, Maria Comella, angrily denounced the use of an unnamed source in this story.
But she did not deny the assertion that Nathan used her police detail to ferry around friends and family.
And she repeated what Giuliani has said about reports questioning how his security detail was financed, saying, "This is nothing more than partisan politics aimed at the Republican front-runner."
Friday, November 30, 2007
Clinton NH Headquarters Terrorized By Troy Stanley - Hostages Taken, Three Released
In other updates, apparently Mr. Stanley went to a hardware store and got flares which he then used as fake explosive devices.
Hostages Released From Clinton Office
BEVERLEY WANG - AP | November 30, 2007 04:33 PM EST |
ROCHESTER, N.H. — A deranged man wearing what appeared to be a bomb strapped to his chest walked into a Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign office Friday, took several hostages and demanded to speak to the candidate during a nearly four-hour standoff, authorities said.
The man released the last of the hostages as the afternoon wore on, but he remained in the office and was not immediately taken into custody.
Clinton was in the Washington area at the time, and extra security precautions were taken to protect the former first lady, who still has a Secret Service detail, said a law-enforcement official, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the situation.
The man entered the simple storefront office along the town's main street around 1 p.m., ordered people onto the floor and then let a mother and her baby leave, said State Police Maj. Michael Hambrook.
About two hours later, a woman in a green sweater was led away from the building by a SWAT team member. Authorities, some carrying shields and guns, had the building surrounded, and laid wiring up to the building's entrance before the woman was released. It was unclear if the wiring helped authorities communicate with the suspect.
The office is one of many Clinton has around New Hampshire.
The suspect was an older man known around the town to be mentally unstable, the law enforcement official told the AP. He walked into the campaign office and opened his jacket, revealing what appeared to be a pipe bomb.
The law enforcement official said the man also demanded to speak with Clinton.
Witness Lettie Tzizik told television station WMUR of Manchester that she spoke to the woman who was released first and that she was crying, holding the infant.
"She said, 'You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape," Tzizik said.
Clinton was scheduled to give an address at the Democratic National Committee meeting in Vienna, Va., Friday afternoon, but DNC Chairman Howard Dean announced from the podium that Clinton would not speak.
"We are in close contact with state and local authorities and are acting at their direction," Clinton said in a statement. "We will release additional details as appropriate."
Authorities sent a tactical bomb unit to assist local police, and the area was evacuated, Hambrook said. A nearby school was in lockdown.
The small Clinton office is located in the New England community's downtown area in a strip of several storefronts, and has large glass windows with a campaign sign out front. Police with guns drawn crouched behind cruisers across the street from the office.
Workers for Sen. Barack Obama's campaign office also evacuated, a campaign spokesman said. The office is four doors away from Clinton's. Staffers in John Edwards' office, a few buildings away, evacuated as well.
___
Associated Press writer Lara Jakes Jordan in Washington contributed to this report.
Hostages Released From Clinton Office
BEVERLEY WANG - AP | November 30, 2007 04:33 PM EST |
ROCHESTER, N.H. — A deranged man wearing what appeared to be a bomb strapped to his chest walked into a Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign office Friday, took several hostages and demanded to speak to the candidate during a nearly four-hour standoff, authorities said.
The man released the last of the hostages as the afternoon wore on, but he remained in the office and was not immediately taken into custody.
Clinton was in the Washington area at the time, and extra security precautions were taken to protect the former first lady, who still has a Secret Service detail, said a law-enforcement official, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the situation.
The man entered the simple storefront office along the town's main street around 1 p.m., ordered people onto the floor and then let a mother and her baby leave, said State Police Maj. Michael Hambrook.
About two hours later, a woman in a green sweater was led away from the building by a SWAT team member. Authorities, some carrying shields and guns, had the building surrounded, and laid wiring up to the building's entrance before the woman was released. It was unclear if the wiring helped authorities communicate with the suspect.
The office is one of many Clinton has around New Hampshire.
The suspect was an older man known around the town to be mentally unstable, the law enforcement official told the AP. He walked into the campaign office and opened his jacket, revealing what appeared to be a pipe bomb.
The law enforcement official said the man also demanded to speak with Clinton.
Witness Lettie Tzizik told television station WMUR of Manchester that she spoke to the woman who was released first and that she was crying, holding the infant.
"She said, 'You need to call 911. A man has just walked into the Clinton office, opened his coat and showed us a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape," Tzizik said.
Clinton was scheduled to give an address at the Democratic National Committee meeting in Vienna, Va., Friday afternoon, but DNC Chairman Howard Dean announced from the podium that Clinton would not speak.
"We are in close contact with state and local authorities and are acting at their direction," Clinton said in a statement. "We will release additional details as appropriate."
Authorities sent a tactical bomb unit to assist local police, and the area was evacuated, Hambrook said. A nearby school was in lockdown.
The small Clinton office is located in the New England community's downtown area in a strip of several storefronts, and has large glass windows with a campaign sign out front. Police with guns drawn crouched behind cruisers across the street from the office.
Workers for Sen. Barack Obama's campaign office also evacuated, a campaign spokesman said. The office is four doors away from Clinton's. Staffers in John Edwards' office, a few buildings away, evacuated as well.
___
Associated Press writer Lara Jakes Jordan in Washington contributed to this report.
Le Web 3's Cathy Brooks, Part Two - What Is Le Web 3?
Cathy Brooks is my friend and the organizer of Le Web 3, December 11th - 12th in Paris France. We talked at Harry's on Fillmore in San Francisco in a two part video series. Part Two is above and Part One is here.
What is Le Web 3? Watch the video and visit the site here. For more information on the conference and questions for speakers, contact Cathy at cathy@leweb3.com
Le Web 3's Cathy Brooks, Part One - The Web and Blogging
Cathy Brooks is my friend and the organizer of Le Web 3, December 11th - 12th in Paris France. We talked at Harry's on Fillmore in San Francisco in a two part video series. Part One is above and Part two will appear in a separate post.
What is Le Web 3? Watch the video and visit the site here. For more information on the conference and questions for speakers, contact Cathy at cathy@leweb3.com
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Strong Day For The Dow Jones Industrial
After opening at 12,958.04, the Dow Jones skyrocketed by 331.01 points to finish at a respectful 13,289.45. When the state of the volatile market is considered, this is a positive step forward.
Bush Economic Adviser Hubbard Resigns
The unrelenting saga continues to mount for the embattled Bush administration.
Economic Council Deputy Nominated As Replacement
WASHINGTON (CBS) ― President Bush announced on Wednesday that Keith Hennessey is his pick to be chairman of the National Economic Council, replacing Al Hubbard, who is joining a growing line of top presidential advisers exiting the White House as the Bush administration heads into its final year.
Hennessey, who came to the White House in 2002, is Hubbard's deputy and also has been deputy to two previous directors of the council. He served as a top budget aide to Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., and worked for the Senate Budget Committee.
"Keith has been an important member of my White House team for more than five years," Bush said in a statement. "He has served as the deputy to three directors of the National Economic Council, and has worked on a broad range of economic policy issues."
Hubbard's departure comes as Bush faces one of the biggest economic challenges of his presidency, a severe slump in housing and a credit crisis that have roiled financial markets and triggered fears of a recession.
In a letter to the president, Hubbard said he was leaving the White House with mixed emotions. "Were it not for my strong desire to spend more time with my kids, I would not have considered departing," said Hubbard, the father of three.
Hubbard has helped direct White House policy on entitlement reform, energy security, climate change, housing and trade investment policy. Among other issues, Hubbard has been deeply involved in the debate over the State Children's Health Insurance Program and Bush's proposal for a major shift in tax policy to, for the first time, treat health insurance costs as taxable income.
"Al contributed his own ideas and also worked to ensure that all views were brought to the table and given fair analysis and debate," Bush said. "While many of the policies Al worked to develop are in place today, other policy initiatives, including Social Security reform and health care reform, have laid the foundation for policies I believe will be adopted in the future."
Hubbard's departure, by the end of the year, continues an exodus of key Bush aides and confidants. Earlier this month, Fran Townsend, Bush's terrorism adviser, announced she was stepping down after 4 1/2 years. Top aide Karl Rove, along with press secretary Tony Snow, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and senior presidential adviser Dan Bartlett, have already left.
Hubbard, of Indiana, was a low-profile economic adviser to the president whose strength came from his closeness to Bush. The two both attended Harvard University together. Hubbard also has close ties with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Hubbard accompanied Paulson on some of his trips to China to lend White House support to efforts to get China to reform its economy and narrow the huge trade imbalance between the two nations.
The National Economic Council was created in the Clinton administration to coordinate economic policy. The first NEC director was Robert Rubin, who went on to become Clinton's Treasury secretary.
Hubbard took the post at the beginning of Bush's second term, when the administration had high hopes for achieving success on a number of major issues such as addressing Social Security's funding problems and overhauling the tax code. However, as Bush became mired in problems involving the Iraq war, his domestic initiatives failed to make headway in Congress.
"Al brought to this job more than the creativity that he's known for," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "He has a great booming laugh, but he also is a very honest broker when he works with everybody at the White House. Part of his role is to incorporate all of the thoughts and concerns and proactive ideas that members of the administration have."
Hubbard first met Bush when they were both attending Harvard's business school in the 1970s, getting MBA degrees. Hubbard, who later became president of E&A Industries, an Indianapolis investment firm, has owned and operated several businesses and served in the Bush-Quayle administration as executive director of a council on competitiveness. He has not yet announced his future plans.
Economic Council Deputy Nominated As Replacement
WASHINGTON (CBS) ― President Bush announced on Wednesday that Keith Hennessey is his pick to be chairman of the National Economic Council, replacing Al Hubbard, who is joining a growing line of top presidential advisers exiting the White House as the Bush administration heads into its final year.
Hennessey, who came to the White House in 2002, is Hubbard's deputy and also has been deputy to two previous directors of the council. He served as a top budget aide to Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., and worked for the Senate Budget Committee.
"Keith has been an important member of my White House team for more than five years," Bush said in a statement. "He has served as the deputy to three directors of the National Economic Council, and has worked on a broad range of economic policy issues."
Hubbard's departure comes as Bush faces one of the biggest economic challenges of his presidency, a severe slump in housing and a credit crisis that have roiled financial markets and triggered fears of a recession.
In a letter to the president, Hubbard said he was leaving the White House with mixed emotions. "Were it not for my strong desire to spend more time with my kids, I would not have considered departing," said Hubbard, the father of three.
Hubbard has helped direct White House policy on entitlement reform, energy security, climate change, housing and trade investment policy. Among other issues, Hubbard has been deeply involved in the debate over the State Children's Health Insurance Program and Bush's proposal for a major shift in tax policy to, for the first time, treat health insurance costs as taxable income.
"Al contributed his own ideas and also worked to ensure that all views were brought to the table and given fair analysis and debate," Bush said. "While many of the policies Al worked to develop are in place today, other policy initiatives, including Social Security reform and health care reform, have laid the foundation for policies I believe will be adopted in the future."
Hubbard's departure, by the end of the year, continues an exodus of key Bush aides and confidants. Earlier this month, Fran Townsend, Bush's terrorism adviser, announced she was stepping down after 4 1/2 years. Top aide Karl Rove, along with press secretary Tony Snow, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and senior presidential adviser Dan Bartlett, have already left.
Hubbard, of Indiana, was a low-profile economic adviser to the president whose strength came from his closeness to Bush. The two both attended Harvard University together. Hubbard also has close ties with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Hubbard accompanied Paulson on some of his trips to China to lend White House support to efforts to get China to reform its economy and narrow the huge trade imbalance between the two nations.
The National Economic Council was created in the Clinton administration to coordinate economic policy. The first NEC director was Robert Rubin, who went on to become Clinton's Treasury secretary.
Hubbard took the post at the beginning of Bush's second term, when the administration had high hopes for achieving success on a number of major issues such as addressing Social Security's funding problems and overhauling the tax code. However, as Bush became mired in problems involving the Iraq war, his domestic initiatives failed to make headway in Congress.
"Al brought to this job more than the creativity that he's known for," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "He has a great booming laugh, but he also is a very honest broker when he works with everybody at the White House. Part of his role is to incorporate all of the thoughts and concerns and proactive ideas that members of the administration have."
Hubbard first met Bush when they were both attending Harvard's business school in the 1970s, getting MBA degrees. Hubbard, who later became president of E&A Industries, an Indianapolis investment firm, has owned and operated several businesses and served in the Bush-Quayle administration as executive director of a council on competitiveness. He has not yet announced his future plans.
CNN's Dave Bohrman Under Attack For CNN / YouTube "Iron Fist" Content Control
Some publications are attacking CNN's Washington Bureau Chief Dave Bohrman regarding his "iron fist" control over what videos are selected for the CNN / YouTube Republican Debate. Personally, I'm glad he's doing this, and my reason points to an issue highlighted by Mark Cuban about 10 days ago.
People are just plain mean.
Yep. Mean.
They use the Internet to take their issues out on people at a distance and the CNN / YouTube debates are no exception to this. If Bohrman were to let the people speak, the result would be totally imbalanced and absolutely insane. It would also render the Republican Party toast for this election cycle.
So Borhman's got a hard job. I'm personally confident he will pull through.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Frank Rich - Keith Olbermann - Bernie Kerik's Affair With Judith Regan | Could Wreck Rudy Giuliani's Presidential Campaign
This is shaping up to be a hot story. Frank Rich of the New York Times has a great discussion of the details-to-date below, and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann has an equally informative video segment -- that too is here.
November 18, 2007
Op-Ed Columnist
What 'That Regan Woman' Knows
By FRANK RICH
NEW Yorkers who remember Rudy Giuliani as the bullying New York mayor, not as the terminally cheerful "America's Mayor" cooing to babies in New Hampshire, have always banked on one certainty: his presidential candidacy was so preposterous it would implode before he got anywhere near the White House.
Surely, we reassured ourselves, the all-powerful Republican values enforcers were so highly principled that they would excommunicate him because of his liberal social views, three wives and estranged children. Or a firewall would be erected by the firefighters who are enraged by his self-aggrandizing rewrite of 9/11 history. Or Judith Giuliani, with her long-hidden first marriage and Louis Vuitton 'tude, would send red-state voters screaming into the night.
Wrong, wrong and wrong. But how quickly and stupidly we forgot about the other Judith in the Rudy orbit. That would be Judith Regan, who disappeared last December after she was unceremoniously fired from Rupert Murdoch's publishing house, HarperCollins. Last week Ms. Regan came roaring back into the fray , a silver bullet aimed squarely at the heart of the Giuliani campaign.
Ms. Regan filed a $100 million lawsuit against her former employer, claiming she was unjustly made a scapegoat for the O. J. Simpson "If I Did It" fiasco that (briefly) embarrassed Mr. Murdoch and his News Corporation. But for those of us not caught up in the Simpson circus, what's most riveting about the suit are two at best tangential sentences in its 70 pages: "In fact, a senior executive in the News Corporation organization told Regan that he believed she had information about Kerik that, if disclosed, would harm Giuliani's presidential campaign. This executive advised Regan to lie to, and to withhold information from, investigators concerning Kerik."
Kerik, of course, is Bernard Kerik, the former Giuliani chauffeur and police commissioner, as well as the candidate he pushed to be President Bush's short-lived nominee to run the Department of Homeland Security. Having pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors last year, Mr. Kerik was indicted on 16 other counts by a federal grand jury 10 days ago, just before Ms. Regan let loose with her lawsuit. Whether Ms. Regan's charge about that unnamed Murdoch "senior executive" is true
or not — her lawyers have yet to reveal the evidence — her overall message is plain. She knows a lot about Mr. Kerik, Mr. Giuliani and the Murdoch empire. And she could talk.
Boy, could she! As New Yorkers who have crossed her path or followed her in the tabloids know, Ms. Regan has an epic temper. My first encounter with her came more than a decade ago when she left me a record-breaking (in vitriol and decibel level) voice mail message about a column I'd written on one of her authors. It was a relief to encounter a more mellow Regan at a Midtown restaurant some years later. She cordially introduced me to her dinner companion, Mr. Kerik, whose post-9/11 autobiography, "The Lost Son: A Life in Pursuit of Justice," was under contract at her HarperCollins imprint, ReganBooks.
What I didn't know then was that this married author and single editor were in pursuit of not just justice, but sex, too. Their love nest, we'd later learn, was an apartment adjacent to ground zero that had been initially set aside for rescue workers. Mr. Kerik believed his lover had every moral right to be there. As he tenderly explained in his acknowledgments in "The Lost Son" — published before the revelation of their relationship — there was "one hero who is missing" from his book's tribute to "courage and honor" and "her name is Judith Regan."
Few know more about Rudy than his perennial boon companion, Mr. Kerik. Perhaps during his romance with Ms. Regan he talked only of the finer points of memoir writing or about his theories of crime prevention or about his ideas for training the police in the Muslim world (an assignment he later received in Iraq and botched). But it is also plausible that this couple discussed everything Mr. Kerik witnessed at Mr. Giuliani's side before, during and after 9/11. Perhaps he even explained to her why the mayor insisted, disastrously, that his city's $61 million emergency command center be located in the World Trade Center despite the terrorist attack on the towers in 1993.
Perhaps, too, they talked about the business ventures the mayor established after leaving office. Mr. Kerik worked at Giuliani
Partners and used its address as a mail drop for some $75,000 that turns up in the tax-fraud charges in his federal indictment. That money was Mr. Kerik's pay for an 11-sentence introduction to another Regan-published book about 9/11, "In the Line of Duty." Though that project's profits were otherwise donated to the families of dead rescue workers, Mr. Kerik's royalties were mailed to Giuliani Partners in the name of a corporate entity Mr. Kerik set up in Delaware. He would later claim that he made comparable donations to charity, but the federal indictment charges that $80,000 he took in charitable
deductions were bogus.
Amazingly, given that he seeks the highest office in the land, Mr. Giuliani will not reveal the clients of Giuliani Partners. Perhaps he has trouble remembering them all. He testified in court last year that he has no memory of a mayoral briefing in which he was told of Mr. Kerik's association with a company suspected of ties to organized crime.
Ms. Regan's knowledge of Mr. Giuliani isn't limited to whatever she learned from Mr. Kerik. She used to work for another longtime Giuliani pal, Roger Ailes, the media consultant for the first Giuliani campaign in 1989 and the impresario who created Fox News for Mr. Murdoch in 1996. A full-service mayor to his cronies, Mr. Giuliani lobbied hard to get the Fox News Channel on the city's cable boxes and presided over Mr. Ailes's wedding. Enter Ms. Regan, who was given her own program on Fox's early lineup. Mr. Ailes came up with its rather inspired first title, "That Regan Woman."
Who at the News Corporation supposedly asked Ms. Regan to lie to protect Rudy's secrets? Her complaint does not say. But thanks to the political journal The Hotline, we do know that as of the summer Mr. Giuliani had received more air time from Fox News than any other G.O.P. candidate, much of it on the high-rated "Hannity & Colmes." That show's co-host, Sean Hannity, appeared at a Giuliani campaign fund-raiser this year.
Fox News coverage of Ms. Regan's lawsuit last week was minimal. After all, Mr. Giuliani dismissed the whole episode as "a gossip column story," and we know Fox would never stoop so low as to trade in gossip. The coverage was scarcely more intense at The Wall Street Journal, whose print edition included no mention of the suit's reference to that "senior executive" at the News Corporation. (After bloggers noticed, the article was amended online.) The Journal is not quite yet a Murdoch property, but its editorial board has had its own show on Fox News since 2006.
During the 1990s, the Journal editorial board published so much dirt about the Clintons that it put the paper's brand on an encyclopedic six-volume anthology titled "A Journal Briefing — Whitewater." You'd think the controversies surrounding "America's Mayor" are at least as sexy as the carnal scandals and alleged drug deals The Journal investigated back then. This month a Journal reporter not on its editorial board added the government of Qatar to the small list of known Giuliani Partners clients, among them the manufacturer of OxyContin. We'll see if such journalism flourishes in the paper's Murdoch era.
But beyond New York's dailies and The Village Voice, the national news media, conspicuously the big three television networks, have rarely covered Mr. Giuliani much more aggressively than Mr. Murdoch's Fox News has. They are more likely to focus on Mr. Giuliani's checkered family history than the questions raised by his record in government and business. It's astounding how many are willing to look the other way while recycling those old 9/11 videos.
One exception is The Chicago Tribune, which last month on its front page revisited the story of how, after Mr. Giuliani left office, his mayoral papers were temporarily transferred to a private, tax-exempt foundation run by his supporters and financed with $1.5 million from mostly undisclosed donors. The foundation, which shares the same address as Giuliani Partners, copied and archived the records before sending them back to New York's municipal archives. Historians told
The Tribune there's no way to verify that the papers were returned to government custody intact. Mayor Bloomberg has since signed a law that will prevent this unprecedented deal from being repeated.
Journalists, like generals, love to refight the last war, so the unavailability of millions of Hillary Clinton's papers has received
all the coverage the Giuliani campaign has been spared. But while the release of those first lady records should indeed be accelerated, it's hard to imagine many more scandals will turn up after six volumes of "Whitewater," an impeachment trial and the avalanche of other investigative reportage on the Clintons then and now.
The Giuliani story, by contrast, is relatively virgin territory. And with the filing of a lawsuit by a vengeful eyewitness who was fired from her job, it may just have gained its own reincarnation of Linda Tripp.
Emailed Letter To Reverend Jesse Jackson On Barack Obama
Greetings Rev. Jackson,
I've grown up in Chicago -- first at 7427 Wentworth and then 7908 Kimbark -- and now live in Oakland, CA.
I have long been an admirers of yours, but I'm confused and dismayed by your column in the SunTimes.
Here:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/668053,CST-EDT-JESSE27.article
Why do you continue to make statements that publications like The Huffington Post use against Senator Barack Obama?
Also, you know Barack's the first African American cadidate who can win. He's ahead in Iowa in many polls and since many polls are rigged has a bigger advantage than you've seen. Thus your column, though I doubt it has much impact, seems timed to hurt him. Why? Why are you trying to wreck our first real chance to -- by having an African American candidate as President -- end racism as we know it?
Why do you work to deny young African Americans the chance to see someone who looks like them in the position of Commander in Chief? What's the deal? Why do you seem to want to stop the rise of a person uniquely positioned to bring America together?
Barack's a lot like me, and I'm Black. He was born one year earlier than I and on the same day. He's an inspiration to me regarding what I can achieve in my field of life. I want him to win, just as I wanted you to win in 1984.
Please stop what you're doing and join us. Please don't be what some call a "crabbarrel" dweller -- pulling someone else down just because you don't want to see them excel.
Why not help Barack, openly and without asking for a favor in return. Just help. We do need you.
I believe we will win because there are too many people like myself who are working to WILL a Win.
Join us. Join us, please.
With respect....
--
Zennie Abraham, Jr.
Chairman and CEO
http://www.sbs-world.com
Sports Business Simulations
Sean Taylor | ESPN's Jeffri Chadiha On Sean Taylor
Jeffri Chadiha wrote what I consider to be a classic article on this massive trajedy, the murder of Sean Taylor.
Birth of daughter gave new meaning to Taylor's life
By Jeffri Chadiha
There are many details to be sorted out in the shooting death of Washington Redskins safety Sean Taylor, but this much we do know: This was a man whose life appeared to be changing for the better.
That's the only thought that kept going through my mind after hearing Taylor had died early Tuesday morning, a day after being shot by an intruder in his South Florida home. This wasn't the same immature kid who spent his first two seasons baffling Redskins management with poor decision making. This was a young father, a hard-hitting defender fresh off a Pro Bowl season, a maturing 24-year-old who finally understood what it took to be a professional.
Now there certainly are plenty of people who will say that Taylor's death is about more than just football, and there is no question about that. But what can't be dismissed is that most of what we know about Sean Taylor relates to football. Taylor rarely talked to reporters and most of our insight into his life came from his on-field performance and off-field issues. It's apparent that the playing part was never much of a problem for him. The off-field stuff was another issue, especially during Taylor's first two seasons.
But the feeling from the Redskins was that Taylor had put the problems that plagued him early in his career behind him -- including the seven fines he'd received for late hits and other infractions, and the $25,000 fine he incurred for skipping a mandatory rookie symposium after the Redskins selected him fifth overall in the 2004 draft. He was no longer the same man who had been accused of brandishing a gun during a fight in 2005. In that case, Taylor accepted a plea agreement of two misdemeanors and received 18 months' probation.
Yet somehow, through all those issues, he had started the valuable process of growing up. The most obvious sign was the relationship he had with his 1-year-old daughter, Jackie.
"It's hard to expect a man to grow up overnight, but ever since he had his child, it was like a new Sean, and everybody around here knew it," Redskins running back Clinton Portis told reporters. "He was always smiling, always happy, always talking about his child."
Teammates always claimed that Taylor had more common sense than he displayed early in his career. It's much easier to believe that when observing his behavior since Jackie was born in May 2006.
Not only had Taylor avoided trouble, but he had become even better on the field. A few weeks ago, Redskins defensive coordinator Gregg Williams gushed about how Taylor had become the best safety in the league, a defender whose intimidating combination of size (6-foot-2, 212 pounds) and speed allowed him to excel in coverage and against the run. The more you listened to people talk about Taylor, the more you sensed he had turned an important corner in his life and his career.
But now we must reflect.
Taylor apparently had lost so much blood from an arterial wound in his leg that he wound up in a coma shortly after reaching Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami. There had been some signs of hope -- Redskins vice president of football operations Vinny Cerrato told the media Monday that doctors were encouraged by Taylor's ability to squeeze a physician's hand on request and show facial expressions. But Taylor's injuries were too severe. Now his family and friends and the Redskins are left wondering how to make sense of this tragedy.
Taylor's teammates clearly struggled to find the words to convey those feelings. On Monday, Portis talked about how it was impossible for a teammate and friend to turn back time and step in front of the bullet that pierced Taylor's leg. Safety Pierson Prioleau said Taylor was more than just a member of the Redskins; he was a father, a brother and a dear friend to many in that locker room. Redskins coach Joe Gibbs said there's no easy way to deal with a tragedy like this. It's just too far outside the scope of what most people face.
In may take some time to sort out exactly what happened the day Taylor was shot. Even when we do find out, it may not make much sense. After all, Taylor had seen the value in growing up long before somebody broke into his home and shot him. He saw it in his daughter, in his growth as a player.
Hopefully, people will remember that about his character as they mourn him today.
Jeffri Chadiha is a senior writer for ESPN.com.
Barack Obama Holds Foreign Policy Town Hall Meeting In Iowa - Video
Senator and Presidential Candidate Barack Obama held a town hall meeting on foreign policy in New Hampshire this morning. This video is a highlight of what the Senator said before the close of the event
Panelists included:
Richard Danzig – Former secretary of the Navy under President Clinton
Tony Lake – National Security Advisor to President Clinton
Adm. John Hutson (USN Ret.) – Bow, NH resident; Dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center; former U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General and nationally-known expert on detention and interrogation
Samantha Power – Pulitzer Prize-winning author and renowned professor of human rights and foreign policy
Susan Rice – Former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs
Senator Barack Obama
Panelists included:
Richard Danzig – Former secretary of the Navy under President Clinton
Tony Lake – National Security Advisor to President Clinton
Adm. John Hutson (USN Ret.) – Bow, NH resident; Dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center; former U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General and nationally-known expert on detention and interrogation
Samantha Power – Pulitzer Prize-winning author and renowned professor of human rights and foreign policy
Susan Rice – Former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs
Senator Barack Obama
Redskins Safety Sean Taylor Passes at 24 From Senseless Attack
There are some things you believe will not happen. As you may know, Washingon Redskins Safety Sean Taylor was in a hospital fighting for his life. But what you may not know is that he lost that battle , having simply not enough blood to continue.
In all of my years with the NFL family I can think of only one incident so painful and that's the murder of my cousin, Colts and Panthers Running Back Fred Lane.
My thoughts and prayers to all of the Redskins players and staff and the friends and family of Sean Taylor.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)