Tag Archives: alexander

Harriet Tubman to Replace Andrew Jackson on the $20

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew will reportedly announce on Wednesday the decision to replace the image of former President Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill with an image of Harriet Tubman.

Politico reports Lew will also announce that the image of Alexander Hamilton will remain on the $10 bill, but that the back of that bill will feature members of the suffragist movement. Last month, Lin-Manuel Miranda, the creator and star of the Broadway musical Hamilton, met with Lew to discuss keeping the former president on the $10 bill.

The movement to replace Jackson’s image with Tubman’s image started with the “Women on 20’s” group, which advocated featuring a woman on the $20 bill because of Jackson’s controversial support of the Indian Removal Act.

This is a breaking news post. We will update once the announcement is made.

Source – 

Harriet Tubman to Replace Andrew Jackson on the $20

Posted in Anchor, Broadway, cannabis, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Harriet Tubman to Replace Andrew Jackson on the $20

Attention Sunday Shows: Here Are 5 Republicans Who Won’t Lie to Your Viewers About Climate Change

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Wednesday, I wrote about a new Media Matters for America study that shines a light on a big problem with how TV news shows cover climate change. Scientists overwhelmingly agree that humans are warming the planet, but Media Matters found that the highly influential Sunday morning talk shows often feature misleading talking points from global warming skeptics. Frequently, these segments turn into bizarre debates between those who accept science and those who reject it.

On NBC’s Meet the Press, for example, almost two-thirds of the climate coverage last year included “false balance,” according to Media Matters. Fox News Sunday and ABC’s This Week had similar problems:

The Media Matters study drew the attention of Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). In a press release, he slammed the news networks for misleading viewers “by framing the facts of climate change as a ‘debate.'” He urged them “to stop creating a false debate about the reality of climate change and engage in the real debate about how we can solve it.”

This presents something of a dilemma for the Sunday shows. Interviewing elected officials from both sides of the aisle is a big part of the reason these programs exist in the first place; they can’t host a debate about climate policy and invite only Democrats. At the same time, however, global warming denial is so ingrained on the right that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find Republicans who can talk about the issue without misinforming viewers. The Media Matters report cites a couple examples of this: Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) saying on Meet the Press that there’s no scientific consensus on climate change, and North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) saying on This Week that “the big debate is how much of it is manmade and how much it will just naturally happen as Earth evolves.”

Fortunately—thanks to Schatz—TV bookers now have a handy list of GOP senators who acknowledge the scientific facts surrounding climate change and who, presumably, can participate in an intelligent discussion of what should actually be done about the problem. Last week, Schatz introduced legislation declaring it the “sense of Congress” that climate change is real and that human activity contributes significantly to it. Five Republicans voted in favor of Schatz’s amendment: Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Susan Collins (Maine), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), and Mark Kirk (Ill.). The other 49 voted no.

There’s plenty of room for disagreement on policy matters, of course. Alexander and Graham, for example, have called on the Obama administration to withdraw its proposed greenhouse gas emissions rules, the centerpiece of the president’s climate plan. But if the networks are looking for Republicans who can speak accurately about the science, at least now they know where to find them.

(Disclosure: I used to work at Media Matters.)

More here: 

Attention Sunday Shows: Here Are 5 Republicans Who Won’t Lie to Your Viewers About Climate Change

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Attention Sunday Shows: Here Are 5 Republicans Who Won’t Lie to Your Viewers About Climate Change

If You’re Born Poor, You’ll Probably Stay That Way

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In 1997, before The Wire made him a household name, then-Baltimore Sun reporter David Simon published The Corner: A Year in the Life of an Inner-City Neighborhood, a book about an open-air drug market at West Fayette and Monroe Streets in Baltimore. The book painted a grim portrait of the urban ghetto and the people trapped there. It was hailed as a landmark work of immersion journalism.

But Simon can’t hold a candle to Karl Alexander, a Johns Hopkins sociologist who followed nearly 800 people from the neighborhoods surrounding Simon’s corner since they started first grade in 1982. Alexander and his Hopkins colleagues are now publishing the final results of that 30-year study, their own version of The Corner, called The Long Shadow: Family Background, Disadvantaged Urban Youth And the Transition to Adulthood. What they’ve found isn’t quite as grim as what Simon described, but it’s not much more encouraging.

Alexander set out to look at how family influences the trajectory of a low-income child’s life. Thirty years later, he’s decided that family determines almost everything, and that a child’s fate is essentially fixed by how well off her parents were when she was born.

Alexander’s findings conflict with the sort of Horatio Alger stories of American mythology, but not with other social science research on upward mobility. His are especially dispiriting. Of the nearly 800 school kids he’s been following for 30 years, those who got a better start—because their parents were working or married—tended to stay better off, while the more disadvantaged stayed poor.

Out of the original 800 public school children he started with, 33 moved from low-income birth family to a high-income bracket by the time they neared 30. Alexander found that education, rather than giving kids a fighting chance at a better life, simply preserved privilege across generations. Only 4 percent of the low-income kids he met in 1982 had college degrees when he interviewed them at age 28, whereas 45 percent of the kids from higher-income backgrounds did.

Perhaps more striking in his findings was the role of race in upward mobility. Alexander found that among men who drop out of high school, the employment differences between white and black men was truly staggering. At age 22, 89 percent of the white subjects who’d dropped of high school were working, compared with 40 percent of the black dropouts.

These differences came despite the fact that it was the better-off white men who reported the highest rates of drug abuse and binge drinking. White men from disadvantaged families came in second in that department. White men also had high rates of encounters with the criminal justice system. At age 28, 41 percent of the white men born into low-income families had criminal convictions, compared with 49 percent of the black men from similar backgrounds, an indication that it is indeed race, not a criminal record, that’s keeping a lot of black men out of the workforce.

Alexander doesn’t call it white privilege, but it’s basically what he describes. His data suggests that the difference in employment rates between white and black men with similar drug problems and arrest records stems from better social networks among white men, who have more friends and family members who can help them overcome many of their obvious impediments to employment.

He does find some silver linings in the data and in the interviews with people he’s been talking to since they were six years old. Included in one random sample from a single, very poor public school close to Simon’s corner were 22 African-American men. Alexander was able to stay in touch with 18 of them through 2005, when they were adults. Of that 18, 17 had been arrested and convicted of a crime at some time in their lives. (Seven of the interviews in 2005 were done in prisons.) But a fair number of that group had also gone on to get post-secondary education of some sort, and nine were also working full time—two making more than $50,000 a year, indications that not everyone from the ‘hood was doomed to a life of poverty and crime. “These are young black men from The Corner working steadily and drawing a decent paycheck,” Alexander writes.

Even so, he admits that his substantial data trove proves pretty conclusively that social status in the inner city is relatively immobile.

“The implication is where you start in life is where you end up in life,” Alexander said in a press release. “It’s very sobering to see how this all unfolds.”

More here – 

If You’re Born Poor, You’ll Probably Stay That Way

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on If You’re Born Poor, You’ll Probably Stay That Way

The Sugar Smart Diet – Anne Alexander & Julia VanTine

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

The Sugar Smart Diet

Stop Cravings and Lose Weight While Still Enjoying the Sweets You Love

Anne Alexander & Julia VanTine

Genre: Health & Fitness

Price: $9.99

Publish Date: December 24, 2013

Publisher: Rodale

Seller: Rodale Inc.


Shrink your sugar belly and find your path to optimum health! Sugar—public health enemy #1 or an innocent indulgence? The Sugar Smart Diet, from Prevention —the leading healthy lifestyle brand in the US—has the answer. The powerful, proven 32-day plan helps you conquer cravings, gain energy, slash your risk of heart disease and diabetes, and drop pounds like never before—all while reclaiming the pure pleasure of sugar. You will: • Lose up to 16 pounds and 16 inches in just 32 days • Lower cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood pressure • Never feel hungry • Discover surprising sugar bombs along with healthy sugar swaps • Indulge in 50 delicious sugar-smart recipes • Learn how to enjoy sugar without triggering fatigue or weight gain or increasing the risk of diabetes, heart disease, and other ailments Discover how all this and more is possible when you get smart about sugar!

Link: 

The Sugar Smart Diet – Anne Alexander & Julia VanTine

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Sugar Smart Diet – Anne Alexander & Julia VanTine