Tag Archives: given

Who Got the Comey Headline Right?

Mother Jones

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

Here’s a question for you all to ponder. Last night I took snapshots of four newspapers after FBI director James Comey announced that the emails they had reviewed on Anthony Wiener’s computer didn’t show anything new. Here are the four headlines:

At the top left, the LA Times says the FBI has “cleared” Hillary Clinton. On the bottom left, the New York Times declines to say Clinton has been cleared, only that the new emails “don’t warrant action” against Clinton. Finally, on the right, we have the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. They use pretty loaded language, saying there are no grounds for “charges” against Clinton.

Who got it right? My take is that the word “charge” is inherently negative. It leaves readers with the impression that Clinton might be guilty after all, but has somehow managed to skate by. Given what we now know—that Clinton was careless but did nothing seriously wrong—it strikes me as putting a big thumb on the scale. If you’re going to use legalistic language, why not follow the lead of the LA Times and say that Clinton has been “cleared”? That’s what happened, after all, and it better gets the point across that this was basically good news for Clinton.

The New York Times is somewhere in between. Perhaps someone less partisan than me would find it the best compromise. For my part, I think the LA Times got it right, while the Journal and the Post screwed up. There’s nothing technically wrong with their headlines, but they leave a groundlessly sordid impression.

Continue at source:

Who Got the Comey Headline Right?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who Got the Comey Headline Right?

Comeygate Is Looking Worse and Worse

Mother Jones

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

We’re into single digits, people. There are only 9 days left until the hellscape of this year’s presidential campaign ends. In the meantime, let’s play a game! Can you guess who the mystery man is in this story?

In the fall of 1996, a charity called the Association to Benefit Children held a ribbon-cutting in Manhattan for a new nursery school serving children with AIDS. The bold-faced names took seats up front. There was then-Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) and former mayor David Dinkins (D). TV stars Frank and Kathie Lee Gifford, who were major donors. And there was a seat saved for Steven Fisher, a developer who had given generously to build the nursery.

Then, all of a sudden…“There’s this kind of ruckus at the door…He just gets up on the podium and sits down.”…“Frank Gifford turned to me and said, ‘Why is he here?’ ” Buchenholz recalled recently. By then, the ceremony had begun. There was nothing to do.

Once he was onstage, he played the part of a big donor convincingly. Photos from the event show him smiling, right behind Giuliani, as the mayor cut the ribbon. During the “celebratory dance” segment of the program, he mugged and did the macarena with Giuliani, Kathie Lee Gifford and a group of children.

“I am just heartsick,” Buchenholz, the executive director, wrote the next day to the donor whose seat had been taken. Buchenholz provided a copy of the email.

What’s that? You all guessed Donald Trump? Seriously? All of you? Damn. And here I thought I was being so clever. But click the link anyway to read David Fahrenthold’s latest reporting on the almost pathological aversion to actual charity that has marked Donald Trump’s life.

Meanwhile, in the breaking news department, Comeygate is getting fishier and fishier. It’s already unclear why FBI Director James Comey decided to ignite a firestorm over a set of emails that nobody had read yet and quite possibly have nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. It’s also unclear why the FBI hasn’t yet gotten a warrant to go ahead and read the emails, something that most likely could be done in a few hours. Now there’s this:

The FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server knew early this month that messages recovered in a separate probe might be germane to their case, but they waited weeks before briefing the FBI director, according to people familiar with the case….Given that the Clinton email team knew for weeks that it may have cause to resume its work, it is unclear why investigators did not tell Comey sooner.

This is now getting beyond a case of mere poor judgment on Comey’s part. If the FBI knew about these messages weeks ago, they could easily have gotten a warrant and begun looking at them. If they were harmless—which I’m willing to bet on—Comey could then have either said nothing, or else made it clear that the emails were nothing new.

Instead, the Bureau sat on this for weeks; failed to get a warrant; and informed Comey only at the very tail end of a presidential campaign, when there wouldn’t be enough time to release any exonerating information before Election Day. And if published reports are accurate, Comey went public with this within ten days of an election—something that contravenes longstanding policy at the Department of Justice—because he basically figured he was operating under a threat that it would be leaked with or without him.

If you had material that was literally meaningless because no one had yet looked at it, but you wanted to make it sound sinister, this is how you would play it. Is that just coincidence? Beats me. But something smells very, very rotten here.

POSTSCRIPT: Still, let’s stay clear on something. The behavior of Comey and the FBI is somewhere between clueless and scandalous, but the behavior of the media has been flatly outrageous. Given what we know, there is simply no reason for this to have been a 24/7 cable obsession—or to command the entire top half of the front page of the New York Times. This massive amount of attention has been in the service of literally nothing new. Once again, though, when the press hears the words “email” and “Hillary Clinton” anywhere near each other, they go completely out of their minds.

More:  

Comeygate Is Looking Worse and Worse

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Comeygate Is Looking Worse and Worse

Republicans Prepare for Armageddon

Mother Jones

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

With 13 days left until the end of the campaign, Donald Trump seems to have all but given up. He’s mostly promoting his hotels these days and has stopped all big-dollar fundraising. In fact, he seems as if he’d be pretty happy if Republicans lost in an epic wave election, which might make his own loss seem less of a personal humiliation and more a party failure. Given all this, I suppose this means that Republicans are resigned to losing and are probably putting their heads together to figure out how they can work with Hillary Clinton over the next four years in order to accomplish at least—

Eh? What’s that, Ilya Shapiro?

The Senate Should Refuse To Confirm All Of Hillary Clinton’s Judicial Nominees

Um, OK. That’s clear enough. Gonna be tough on the federal judiciary, though. Don’t big businesses need the courts to stay fully staffed so they can continue suing each other over dumb patent infractions? Maybe not. But anyway, Shapiro is just one guy. This is probably not a common opinion, right?

OK, fine: two guys. But surely wiser heads in Congress will prevail?

Jason Chaffetz, the Utah congressman wrapping up his first term atop the powerful House Oversight Committee, unendorsed Donald Trump weeks ago. That freed him up to prepare for something else: spending years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton.

“It’s a target-rich environment,” the Republican said in an interview in Salt Lake City’s suburbs. “Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”

Welp, it’s sure sounding like the Republican Party has learned nothing and forgotten nothing over the past eight years. If this is how things go, they’re planning to double down on total obstruction starting on Day One—or even before that for Chaffetz. Then in 2020 they’ll wonder yet again why they have such a hard time winning the presidency. I wonder if it will ever occur to them that getting nothing done just isn’t a winning argument for a majority of Americans?

Continue reading: 

Republicans Prepare for Armageddon

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, Jason, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans Prepare for Armageddon

A Closer Look Behind the "Obamacare Surprise"

Mother Jones

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

Helaine Olen writes in Slate that Democrats might be in for a nasty surprise just before the election:

A few weeks ago Politico warned of “Obamacare’s November surprise”: Many consumers enrolling in the health care marketplace on Nov. 1, just one week before the election, can expect increased rates.

Given the current disparity in the polls, it’s unlikely that alone could change the outcome of the election. But it is quite possible it will cause a bit of turmoil in the last week of the campaign. It’s beginning to look likely than many shoppers aren’t going to like what they find.

A report from the Kaiser Family Foundation released earlier this month estimated that the average weighted premium increase for the benchmark second lowest cost silver plan will come in at 10 percent. Last year? It was 5 percent.

This is quite possible. As the Obamacare market shakes out and insurers get a better handle on their actual costs, premiums were always bound to go up. But it’s worth pointing out what’s really happening here: insurers lowballed their premiums at first in order to win market share, coming in at rates far below the CBO’s initial estimates. So even if we do see a 10 percent increase in 2017, premiums will still be well under CBO’s initial projections1:

I’m under no illusion that this will change the politics of a premium increase, of course. Someone, somewhere, will have a 30 percent increase, and that’s undoubtedly what Donald Trump will blather on about. Nonetheless, it’s nice to at least be prepared with the truth. And the truth is that even if there’s a sizeable increase next year, premiums will still be about 15 percent less than CBO projected back when Obamacare was first passed.


1It was surprisingly hard to collect these numbers. You’d think CBO would have them all collected in one place somewhere, but if they do, I couldn’t find them. If anyone can point me to something better, let me know. In the meantime, here are my sources:

Projections:

2014: https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/76701/ib_premiums_update.pdf, p.6.
2015: Interpolation of 2014 and 2016 numbers.
2016: http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-premiums.pdf, p. 7.
2017: Projection based on CBO projection of 8 percent increases between 2016-18. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/51130-Health_Insurance_Premiums_OneCol.pdf, p. 12.

Actual:

2014: http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45231-ACA_Estimates.pdf, p. 6.
2015: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/49892/49892-breakout-AppendixB.pdf, p. 120.
2016: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/51130-Health_Insurance_Premiums_OneCol.pdf, p. 12.
2017: Estimate based on 10 percent increase from 2016.

Follow this link: 

A Closer Look Behind the "Obamacare Surprise"

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Closer Look Behind the "Obamacare Surprise"

"Sharks Are Pussies" and Other Survival Tips From Mary Roach

Mother Jones

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

Mary Roach’s latest book, Grunt, looks at the weird yet deadly serious science of keeping soldiers alive. In a globe-trotting tour of labs, training grounds, and a nuclear sub, Roach explores how fighting men and women sweat, sleep, and poop—as well as the Pentagon’s efforts to defeat threats from improvised explosive devices to explosive diarrhea.

“No one wins a medal” for this obscure, often gross, survival research, Roach writes. “And maybe someone should.” Like her previous books Gulp and Stiff, Grunt oozes bodily fluids, flippant footnotes, and weapons-grade wordplay. I caught Roach at ease at her home base.

Mother Jones: Given your past subject matter—dead bodies, Elvis’ megacolon, sex in space—what brought you to the military?

Mary Roach: I came about it a little indirectly. I was reporting in India on the world’s hottest chili pepper and a horrific eating contest where people eat these peppers. I learned that the Indian Defense Ministry had made a nonlethal weapon like tear gas out of the world’s hottest chili pepper. So I went over to this military defense lab and interviewed them, and while I was there, I got this idea: “Military science is kind of more esoteric than you might think.”

MJ: This military research spans a huge range of topics, from weird stuff like stink bombs to survival stuff that keeps people alive. You mention a Navy researcher who made a breakthrough on the use of rehydration fluids to fight diarrhea, which someone hailed as “perhaps the most important medical advance of this century.” Which discoveries made by the military have had wider benefits for all of us?

MR: A lot of the vaccine work and things that are used to combat tropical diseases and illnesses that we don’t really think about day to day, like dysentery and diarrhea. Also repellents like permethrin for mosquitos, because we had soldiers in Vietnam getting bitten by creatures they don’t normally get bitten by here.

MJ: What seemed like the biggest boondoggle or waste of money?

MR: How about red-orange underwear? At the turn of the last century, there was this idea that the color red would somehow mitigate heat stress and make you better able to cope in tropical environments. There was this bizarre project where hundreds of pairs of red underwear and hats were shipped over to some troops in the Philippines. They used this heavy sort of dungaree cotton to make the underwear, which was really hot and not going to cool you down. And the dye didn’t stay. Needless to say, the red underwear didn’t keep anyone healthier or cooler.

MJ: Have you picked up any personal survival tips—anything you do to keep from getting sick, or to stay cool or not getting eaten by sharks?

MR: Somebody did this delightful study where they put guys in life rafts off a dock in Florida. They were looking into simple ways to improve survival, like wetting your shirt and putting it back on. Just having a wet shirt conserved body fluids; you’re not sweating nearly as much. In terms of repelling sharks, it depends on the kind of shark. But the thing that is reassuring is that for the most part, sharks are pussies, and they want to go after injured or dead prey. There was one study where a swimming rat kicked one in the nose and the shark was like, “I’m out of here!” Also, always go to the bathroom before you go into a life-or-death situation—that’s something a Special Operations soldier shared.

MJ: One tip that surprised me was that taking your shirt off when it’s hot actually makes things worse.

MR: Please, men, don’t take your shirts off! It makes sense; you’re getting a direct hit of solar radiation. Wear a loose white shirt, don’t take it off. If you get infected with maggots, leave them in. If you’re on a sinking submarine…well, that’s not really practical.

MJ: Don’t hold your breath if you’re escaping a submarine!

MR: Don’t hold your breath—breathe out. If you’ve managed to get out of the submarine, and you don’t have an escape suit, as you go up, breathe out. It’s so counterintuitive; I would want to hold onto my breath. There’s a great demonstration they do in submarine school where they take a Mylar bag from a wine box, blow it up, and let it go at the bottom of the training tank. It gets to the surface and it bursts. It’s a very graphic and memorable demonstration of why you shouldn’t hold your breath.

MJ: Among all the military jobs you observed, was there one where you thought, “that’s not for me”?

MR: What’s a gig that would really suck? The person who has garbage duty on a submarine—it’s kind of treacherous. They turn everything into a slurry, and they put it into canisters that they then shoot down from the bottom of the submarine to make sure that it doesn’t get hit by the propellers.

MJ: Was there a job you’d really want to do?

MR: I kind of thought the job of the chef in the insect kitchen at the insectary at Walter Reed Hospital was cool—cooking for insects and their larvae. It’s more fun to tell people than to do it, because some of the recipes include things like rabbit turds.

MJ: Did hanging out with soldiers and researchers change any misconceptions you had about the US military?

MR: I didn’t have any conception of this world at all. I didn’t realize that almost any of this existed—the Naval Submarine Medical Research Lab, or NAMRU Three or the Walter Reed Entomology Branch. That was all a surprise to me. I had maybe a misconception that everyone in the military was sort of hawkish. But in fact, the people who deal with the aftermath of war, trying to repair people’s bodies and minds, they are understandably quite anti-war. They’re not big boosters of war, particularly the people I talked to at the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System. Pathologists, people who have a real, day-after-day, graphic presentation of what war does to the body. I wasn’t really expecting that.

MJ: One of the interesting things about your book is how much effort the military spends on keeping people alive.

MR: There’s a tremendous amount of effort. At the very highest levels, you have to think about,”Why we do want them alive?” So that they can keep going and finish the job. But the people who do the research are not doing it for that reason. They’re doing it because they actually care. They know a lot of these people. They were these people.

MJ: Which bodily fluid freaks you out the most?

MR: Let’s see, I’m going through all of them in my head, it’s lovely! I think saliva, particularly un-stimulated saliva, the mucous-y kind. I find that pretty gross. Then again, it doesn’t smell. There was a moment in this book where there was a power outage at a lab and in the freezer there were a lot of diarrhea samples that thawed. But taking away smell, I’m going to go with saliva.

MJ: The thing that surprised me the most about this book is that you went to Djibouti to research diarrhea and you didn’t make a “booty” joke.

MR: Because I’m so mature and sophisticated that it never even crossed my mind. Something in me just stopped me from going there. That’s rare for me. I don’t often have that internal gatekeeper.

Source article:  

"Sharks Are Pussies" and Other Survival Tips From Mary Roach

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Pines, Radius, Safer, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on "Sharks Are Pussies" and Other Survival Tips From Mary Roach

Romney on Trump’s Taxes: He’s Hiding Something

Mother Jones

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

Mitt Romney ripped into Donald Trump on Wednesday afternoon, claiming that Trump is unfit for the presidency if he doesn’t release his tax returns. Romney took to Facebook to share his message, saying that “it is disqualifying for a modern-day presidential nominee to refuse to release tax returns to the voters, especially one who has not been subject to public scrutiny in either military or public service.”

Romney’s attack comes a day after Trump swatted aside suggestions that he should release his tax returns before the election. “There’s nothing to learn from them,” Trump told the Associated Press on Tuesday.

Romney disagreed and played the role of armchair psychologist, speculating about Trump’s true motivations for refusing to make his records public. “There is only one logical explanation for Mr. Trump’s refusal to release his returns: there is a bombshell in them,” Romney wrote. “Given Mr. Trump’s equanimity with other flaws in his history, we can only assume it’s a bombshell of unusual size.”

Romney’s own 2012 presidential campaign was plagued by demands from Democrats that he release his tax returns. He finally caved and put out his 2010 and 2011 records, but not until late in the campaign.

Original article – 

Romney on Trump’s Taxes: He’s Hiding Something

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Romney on Trump’s Taxes: He’s Hiding Something

Why the People Picking California’s Tomatoes Can’t Afford to Eat Them

Mother Jones

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

Spring is upon us, which means the weather is finally nice enough to sit outside and munch on a grilled burger slathered with ketchup. Or, if you prefer, a crispy salad topped with strawberries and walnuts. Either way, chances are that at least a few of the ingredients in your meal were grown in California—the country’s cornucopia. The Golden State cultivates more than a third of all vegetables and two-thirds of all fruits and nuts sold domestically. California is also home to the largest number of farmers markets and, according to the most recent USDA Organic Survey, the highest number of 100 percent organic farms of any state.

But many of the people growing and picking this food would view a fresh spring picnic as a rare luxury. A high percentage of farmworkers in California’s agricultural counties struggle with hunger and diet-related health problems, according to a new report by the policy research group California Institute for Rural Studies. Nearly half of the workers interviewed in Yolo County, just east of the state’s capital, have trouble putting dinner on the table, a rate nearly three times higher than national and state averages.

“Ironically, the same agricultural workers who are responsible for producing an abundance of food find themselves at serious risk of hunger, diet-related chronic diseases, unsafe living and working conditions, and inadequate access to health care,” the report states.

Yolo County is just east of Sacramento and encompasses the headquarters of the Mariani Nut Company, one of the biggest privately-held walnut and almond producers in the world, and Rominger Brothers Farms, subject of this profile by former New York Times columnist Mark Bittman. Yolo is the state’s largest producer of safflower, used to make vegetable oil, and the state’s the third largest producer of grain.

The area is best known for its tomatoes. A whopping 96 percent of the United States’ processing tomatoes—which are used in pizza sauce, ketchup and soup—are grown in California, and Yolo is the second largest producer in the state. When asked what they would buy if money was no object, the workers surveyed listed tomatoes over any other fruit or vegetable. Yet, as the CIRS report notes, though tomatoes are a staple for many of the Latino farm workers employed there, those very same workers cannot always afford to buy them locally.

Almost one third of the farmworkers CIRS interviewed said they didn’t have enough food to eat a balanced and nutritious diet regularly, and 15 percent had to eat less or stop eating because there wasn’t enough money for food. Two previous surveys by the California Institute for Rural Studies have also shown that workers in Fresno County and Salinas, which are located south of Yolo, also face high rates of hunger. Fresno is known for its almonds and grapes, while the coastal region of Salinas much of the nation’s lettuce and strawberries.

Part of the reason farmworkers have trouble accessing nutritious food in these agricultural areas may have to do with geography. Rural Yolo County qualifies as a food desert, with vast stretches lacking any supermarkets. Yolo County Food Bank serves about 47,000 people per month and over a quarter of its stock is fresh produce, but there are still stretches in the county’s rural northwest where 40 percent of the farmworkers surveyed live that the food bank doesn’t serve, because the program tends to focus on more urban areas.

Access to healthy food is also deeply tied to low earnings and the undocumented status of many farmers. Farm workers nationwide make an average salary of just $13,000. And about half of California’s farmworkers are undocumented. Many don’t apply for food assistance programs, the study found, because they are afraid of getting detained or deported.

While California farm workers struggle to fill their pantries, their employers are busy stocking kitchens across the globe. California grows over 400 different types of foods, from berries and celery to milk and almonds, and exports them to many different countries, including the European Union, Canada, China, India, and Turkey. According to the latest US Department of Agriculture figures, in 2014, nearly 16 percent of total US agricultural exports abroad originated in California, the highest of any state. (Iowa came in second at just 7.5 percent.)

Given the success of the agricultural industry in California, says Gail Wadsworth, co-executive director of CIRS and one of the authors of the report, there’s no reason why farm workers should get the short end of the stick. CIRS has advised the Yolo Food Bank to encourage more farms to contribute fresh food to the food bank or directly to their workers. Says Wadsworth: “I don’t see any rational reason why farm workers, who are essential to every American’s well-being, should be so poorly paid.”

See the original post: 

Why the People Picking California’s Tomatoes Can’t Afford to Eat Them

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Monterey, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why the People Picking California’s Tomatoes Can’t Afford to Eat Them

After New York Win, Clinton Campaign Says Sanders’ Attacks Help Republicans

Mother Jones

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

After a decisive victory in New York on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton’s campaign called on Bernie Sanders to strike a more positive tone in the final two months of the primary contest, hinting that the senator from Vermont should ultimately leave the race gracefully without damaging the party’s chances of winning in the fall. As an example for how Sanders should conduct his campaign, a Clinton aide pointed to how the then-Sen. Clinton helped unite the party behind Barack Obama in 2008.

Speaking with reporters after Clinton’s victory rally in Manhattan Tuesday night, Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri called on Sanders to run a more positive, issue-based campaign. “He needs to decide as he closes out the Democratic primary, if he is going to continue on the destructive path that he started down in the New York primary where he is making personal character attacks against her that mimic the attacks that Republicans make and aid Republicans, or if he is going to end this primary the way that he promised to run—the kind of campaign he said he would run—that was focused on issues,” she said. “There’s no question that Sen. Sanders, that the behavior of him and his campaign has been destructive.”

Palmieri pointed to Sanders’ recent comment that Clinton is not qualified to be president—a remark Sanders quickly walked back—as well as his assertion in the last debate that he questioned her judgment. She also noted that the Sanders campaign on Monday accused the Clinton campaign of campaign finance violations.

Palmieri cited Clinton’s own example in the 2008 primary against Obama as a guide for Sanders. Because Clinton stayed in that race until June, she said the Clinton team respects Sanders’ decision to see the race through to the end. But, she noted, Clinton did not contest Obama’s win at the Democratic National Convention in Denver that year.

Palmieri did not note the nasty tone of the 2008 contest. “I think she set a gold standard for how people who don’t end up with the nomination, who lose in that effort, should come together and help the party,” she said. “Given the primary that they went through, where they both went all the way to the end, very hard fought, to come and ask to play that role and be the person to who says, ‘By acclamation, I say this party stands behind this nominee and he’s going to be our next president’…that’s what we have seen happen before. We think that can happen again.”

More:  

After New York Win, Clinton Campaign Says Sanders’ Attacks Help Republicans

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on After New York Win, Clinton Campaign Says Sanders’ Attacks Help Republicans

Harvard’s All-Male Club Says it Can’t Let in Women Because They’d Be Sexually Assaulted

Mother Jones

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

The elite gentlemen of the Porcellian Club, Harvard’s centuries-old social club that boasts the likes of Teddy Roosevelt and the Winklevoss twins among its alumni, emerged from years of silence on Tuesday to reject the university’s calls for clubs to join the 21st century and include women into its exclusive ranks.

“To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time an officer of the PC has granted an on-the-record statement to a newspaper since our founding in 1791,” Charles Storey, a graduate from the class of ’82 and the club’s graduate board president, wrote to Harvard’s student newspaper the Crimson. “This reflects both the PC’s abiding interest in privacy and the importance of the situation.”

Storey goes on to argue that by forcing clubs to invite female members, the change would “potentially increase, not decrease the potential for sexual misconduct”—essentially making the case that instead of broadening women’s access to the benefits of these social clubs, the university’s efforts could actually jeopardize a woman’s safety.

“Given our policies, we are mystified as to why the current administration feels that forcing our club to accept female members would reduce the incidence of sexual assault on campus,” Storey continued.

Storey isn’t alone in his staunch resolve to remain stuck on the wrong side of history. Another Porcellian Club member, who wished to remain anonymous, told the Washington Post that the university’s efforts would disrupt the club’s intention to develop “deep male friendships.”

“We don’t want to be involved in anyone else’s business, we just want to be left alone to carry on our 225-year traditions in peace,” he noted.

Last year, a similar conflict erupted when women fought to perform in Harvard’s Hasty Pudding theatrical group, which has been all-male since its founding in 1795. Despite their attempts, none of the 17 women who auditioned were accepted into the troupe.

“I want to say that it’s unsettling that there will be no women on stage tonight,’’ Amy Poehler said when accepting the group’s “Woman of the Year” award last January. “You know it’s time for a change when the Augusta National Golf Club has lapped you in terms of being progressive.”

Original article – 

Harvard’s All-Male Club Says it Can’t Let in Women Because They’d Be Sexually Assaulted

Posted in alo, Anchor, ATTRA, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Harvard’s All-Male Club Says it Can’t Let in Women Because They’d Be Sexually Assaulted

Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops

Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops

By on 26 Feb 2016commentsShare

Bees, butterflies, bats, and birds have three things in common: They all have names that start with ‘b’, they are all pollinators, and they are all in serious danger.

United Nations-sponsored study released Friday reports that the world’s pollinators — and the crops that depend on them — are experiencing a trend of deep decline toward mass extinctions, with 2 out of 5 invertebrate species on their way to being completely wiped out. A meeting of representatives from 124 nations approved the research after it was presented by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services this week in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The findings, drawn from over 3,000 scientific papers on pollinators, are dire: 40 percent of invertebrate pollinator species (bees, butterflies) and 16 percent of vertebrate pollinators (bats and birds) are threatened with extinction. The causes are multiple and varied: pesticide use, habitat loss associated with development, pathogens, and global warming are all major factors preventing pollinators from thriving.

Advertisement

A planet full of bee carcasses isn’t the only reason to worry about this news. The lives of birds and bees and bats are inextricably interwoven with the crops they pollinate — and with the food security of the people who depend on them. About 75 percent of the world’s staple crops, including coffee, cotton, almonds, and cacao, depend on pollination in some way.

“Pollinators are important contributors to world food production and nutritional security,” the co-chair of the UN assessment, Vera Lucia Imperatriz-Fonseca, said. “Their health is directly linked to our own well-being.”

The work done by these tiny insects, birds, and mammals can add up to a lot of money, too. According to the findings, the annual value of global crops directly affected by pollinators is estimated at as much as $577 billion — a figure higher than the GDP of the United Arab Emirates.

The report comes laden with the requisite catastrophe warnings, but there may be a way to reverse some of the damage. Practices like conducting sustainable agriculture in diverse habitats, utilizing indigenous knowledge, reducing or replacing pesticide use, and improving disease control can help attract pollinators and allow them to flourish.

“[W]e have more than enough evidence to act,” Imperatriz-Fonseca said. Given that we all like to eat food, maybe the stakes are high enough that we actually will.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Continue reading here: 

Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops

Posted in Anchor, ATTRA, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, oven, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops