The Huffington Post Full Blog Feed

Tara Stiles: Should Insurance Companies Pay For Preventive Care?

2009-11-21T12:00:00Z

Should government pay for preventive care? Should insurance companies? This topic has been coming up lately around the studio. We encourage people to come to class frequently to give them the best possible benefits. The once a week Strala class is fine for relaxation, or a fun social activity, but if you are interested in cultivating a healthy mind and body, more regular practice is necessary.

This brings many people to the problem of managing their already tight budgets. In New York City it tends to break down something like this: Rent, food, insurance, fun. Similar to the fundamental problem of the food diary, we forget to account for mindless spending as well as mindless calories. Clothing and drinks seem most always to get left off the list. I see people complaining on Facebook that they don't have enough money for yoga and in the same message planning to meet their friends out later for drinks.

I do understand what it's like to struggle and be concerned about money. I've been there. I think because of a variety of factors from my childhood leading up to now, I will always feel like I am struggling in some way. That's a whole other cause for stress that leads to sickness. We offer a free (bailout) class once a week at the studio open to anyone. We even offer full and partial scholarships, but in my experience, people don't appreciate what they don't pay for. I'd rather have someone hand the studio $200 cash and we give them back some of it every time they come to class until it's all back in their wallet, than hand out scholarships to someone who heads to the bar or Urban Outfitters after. We're all here together to get healthy and feel good, so we can live our best lives. We want to be surrounded by people cultivating the same for themselves.

It's all where your priorities are. You have to want it for yourself. A regular practice puts you back in touch with you. You don't need all the stuff to be happy.

The question has come up a few times in the studio if insurance companies would cover preventive care. Many companies do, which is fantastic, and smart. Rodale, the publisher of Men's and Women's Health magazines, also publisher of my first book, out Aug 31, 2010, Slim Calm Sexy (shameless self promotion in spirit of HuffPo blogging) reimburses their employees for yoga classes. Other companies have similar policies. A few people I've met at the studio have had strong recommendations by their doctors to practice yoga for specific cases like high blood pressure and vertigo, but as a general practice I really don't think insurance companies and government are there yet.

How would insurance companies make money from healthy people? They wouldn't. Hospitals would be ghost towns. Diabetes and heart disease would become an epidemic of the past. Pharmacies would become dusty and irrelevant. No more need to prescribe anything for anxiety, depression, insomnia or weight loss. Viagra would go out of business because people would be having the best sex of their lives, and if they are too old or not in the mood, they would realize that it's not appropriate to take a pill to get it up. People would make better choices, be happy from the inside out, and actually be nice to each other. People would choose careers that they actually wanted to do, rather than follow a path out of fear of failure, or desire to build protective piles of cash around themselves. People would care about things less and people more.

That reality will never be a decision of insurance companies, or government. That has to be a movement of the people. You have to want it for yourself. You have to be healthy because you want to. Waiting for an outside authority to shine the light for us - whether a doctor, insurance company, or whatever - will never work so well as taking back our responsibility and making our own choices. We all have to find our own way and there are people that can help you along the way to get there. Just look around.

Julia Moulden: Top 10 New Radical Gifts

2009-11-21T12:00:00Z

Are you like me -- suddenly realizing that the holidays are only weeks away? And are you totally and completely convinced that you don't want to give the same old, same old this year? Then my favourite New Radical gift ideas might just come in handy. Hopefully you'll find something for the hearts, minds, and souls of the ones you love. (New Radicals are people who are putting the skills they acquired in their careers to work on the world's greatest challenges. For more about the New Radicals, please see archived articles.)

JOY
Let's begin with toys. But not just any toys. The cute and clever ones made by Owi-Robots. Especially the easy-to-assemble 6-in-1 Educational Solar Kit that turns into options like a car, windmill, or puppy. And here's the best part -- because it's solar powered, no batteries are required. Oh, joy!

LOVE
Glove Love, to be specific. The folks at dothegreenthing.com -- a UK-based non-profit that inspires people to live greener lives -- have come up with a way to save the world from single, unwanted gloves. You know, the ones that have been separated from their original partners and end up stuffed in the back of the closet. Glove Love pairs these singles up with new partners, and sells them for a fiver. The video -- with narration by Emma Thompson -- is very funny in a distinctly British way.

PEACE
The pundits are full of woe, because everyone's convinced that the Mid-East peace process is doomed to failure yet again. Show your support for peace by buying a CD from the Middle East Peace Orchestra. It's a collaboration between musicians, all connected to the region, who are on tour playing concerts for peace. Their work is deeply moving, and a treasure trove of music from both Arab and Jewish traditions, created by musicians who are Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

LIGHT
Whoever said it first got it right, the best gifts are the ones that just keep on giving. BringLight.com is my choice for an organization that makes donating money smart and simple. First, 100% of donations go directly to charities. Second, rather than giving to a pool, you choose where your money goes (they have an ever-changing list of options). And you can create a Giving Group to multiply the impact of your contributions. So, if your sister really loves horses, you can donate to an equine rescue effort on her behalf. Marriage equality, prenatal care, young musicians, reptile conservation -- there's a cause for everyone on your list.

WISDOM
Award-winning photographer Michael Forsberg believes that we can save the Great Plains -- the grasslands that stretch across western North America, second only to the Serengeti in size. His new book, America's Lingering Wild, the most gorgeous coffee table book to come along in years, spells out what's wrong and what we can do. Many of the stories in the book were written by Dan O'Brien, author of a number of books about the region. Dan also raises buffalo in South Dakota, a sustainable (and healthier) alternative to beef, which he sells through his company, Wild Idea Buffalo. You can even order a combo -- buffalo steaks and an autographed copy of the book. A feast for all the senses!

COMPASSION
It's the new media equivalent of a book you just can't put down. Katerina Cizek was filmmaker-in-residence at an inner-city hospital and has created a powerful collection of multi-platform documentaries that use storytelling to help drive social change (winning every important international award in the process). Watch what happens when young, homeless mothers pick up the cameras. When film animation students and a suicide prevention group come together. What healthcare providers discover as they support community-based care in Africa. The National Film Board has created a box set of the filmmaker-in-residence project. Get one for your kid's school, for your local hospital, your boss, yourself. And then check out the next project Katerina and the NFB have up their sleeves: HighRise, a multi-platform, multi-year international project about the future of cities, as seen through the lens of the highrise tower.

KINDNESS
Nothing says holiday more than a meal together. I don't know about you, but I think more about my guests and what I'm serving than the table itself. Luckily, Mary Anne Davis of Davis Studio has set me straight -- she sees setting the table as an under-appreciated art form. She talks about the beauty of the table and the relationship between the pieces we choose. Mary Anne is an artist, a potter, and an idealist -- in addition to making gorgeous things, she's made a full commitment to environmental stewardship. Her tableware is durable and timeless. Materials are sourced locally. It's all made in upstate New York. And with the lowest possible footprint. Long been known for her colourful works, Mary Anne has branched into... white! Her new line carries a cheeky name: Naked Dishes. (Oprah's a big fan.)

COMFORT
Icebreaker garments are the Goldilocks of outdoor wear: not too hot, not too cold. I put a cami (the line is made from 100% pure New Zealand wool) through an urban challenge, wearing it under a wrap cotton shirt inside an over-heated office building and on my walk to and from. It performed beautifully, and felt soft and comfortable -- just right, in fact. Icebreaker does more than create great products -- check out their animal welfare policies, ethical manufacturing, design ethos, and corporate culture. And they're fun: every garment comes with a Baacode -- plug the number into Icebreaker's site, and you'll discover which sheep station the wool comes from, and meet the farmers, too. But here's the best part -- unlike synthetic outdoor wear, this stuff doesn't hold body odour. Maybe Saint Nick wears one of these under his suit on that long winter's night?

FAITH
Let's just say that I don't believe in sin. Pleasure, yes. Which is why this list has to include something deep, dark, and delicious from Dark Side Chocolates. These artisans, far from the madding crowd in British Columbia, offer a carefully selected range of tastes, like Lavender-Vanilla and Tequila-Lime. Should you desire, there are even some readings about why chocolate is good for us. But I ask you, does one even need to think about being chaste at this time of year?

HOPE
Social entrepreneurs have given us lots of reasons for hope. How? By creating new models for business that can be picked up by others around the world. Patty Johnson of the North South Project has done this brilliantly. Her company fuses northern design sensibilities with the craftsmanship and traditions of the southern hemisphere (like Botswana, Guyana, India, and Mexico). These are investment pieces or, as I like to think of them, heritage. As in, things you have for a lifetime and pass along to others. Check out the playful (and award-winning) lamp made by the Wai Wai weavers of Guyana. I'm looking for a spot in my home for one... "And one for the shopper" is my motto.

OK, so these are Julia's top 10 picks for the season. But no reason to go all Kanye West on me -- if there's something you think should be on this list, please share your favourites by commenting below. And let the festivities begin!

Julia Moulden is on tour, talking about the New Radicals. She'd be delighted to hear from you. JULIA (that familiar symbol) wearethenewradicals (dot) (COM).

Anne Naylor: 8 Gateways To Greater Happiness

2009-11-21T12:00:00Z

Are you as happy as you would like to be? Or could you be happier? These weeks leading up to the end of the year holidays can for many be an emotional roller coaster.

A gateway presents itself as a choice. You go up to it. Then you decide: Do I go through it?

My last 50 weeks of HuffPost articles have offered several themes relating to happiness. Happiness grows from a state of mind -- a perspective about life and your engagement with it, and the actions you take to support your happiness.

The following 8 Gateways include links to previous posts for a happier and more rewarding life.

1. Act gratefully ...
.... be thankful

Having a sense of gratitude is the foundation of a happy life. Being thankful has a way of communicating itself to others, sending a wave of happiness out into your world, which has a way of coming back to you.

10 Ways To Get More Energy By Being Thankful

Think of all the beauty that's still left in and around you and be happy!
Anne Frank

2. Do what you really love to do ...
... be true to yourself

Do you know what you do that makes you happy? Do more of it. Perhaps you have been a person who has tried to please others and conform to their notion of how to live a happy life.

You may march to the beat of another drummer. Fulfilment and happiness will come from honouring what is true for you. Your unique strengths are the aptitudes, gifts and talents with which you were born.

3 Tips To Awaken Your Life's Passion

The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness.
You have to catch it yourself.
Ben Franklin

3. Connect with today's opportunities for happiness ...
... be open for a new day to dawn with fresh hope and inspiration

Each day holds the possibility for joy. On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is low and 10 high, how do you rate your happiness now? If it is low, imagine turning the dial up and choose a higher level. What if when you start your day, you choose 9 on your dial. Try it and see what happens.

8 Ways To Connect For Greater Happiness

The really happy person is one who can enjoy the scenery when on a detour.
Unknown

4. Act on your agreements and commitments ...
... be complete

One of the keys in the post below has to do with clearing out deadwood, handling the agreements you have made so that they do not literally drag you down.

You know the kind of thing, you keep passing by the light bulb that needs changing. Or you keep meaning to clear out the garage. Or make an appointment with the optician. Or take the old clothes to the goodwill store.

Try dedicating half a day to completing some of those commitments. The chances are that you will feel very happy that you did.

3 Keys to Higher Love And Restoring Happiness

The essentials to happiness are something to love, something to do,
and something to hope for.
William Blake

5. Resolve old hurts, caused or received ...
... be forgiving

Holding on to old hurts you have either inflicted (guilt or shame) or received (anger or resentment) can create a cloud of unhappiness around you.

Reconcile yourself to past pain, let it go and move on. Forgiveness is a process. It does not necessarily happen overnight. But it is within your control to choose to forgive; to be someone who is for-giving, both to yourself and others

How To Forgive - And Be Happy Now

He is happiest, be he king or peasant, who finds peace in his home.
Johann von Goethe

6. Contribute your talents, time and energy ...
... be giving

Doing the most mundane tasks, such as stuffing envelopes, takes a weight off the organizer of a non-profit and can be a delightful time to hang out with others. No brain power required. Such activities can be therapeutic while they are useful.

What about a talent you love to use: painting and decorating, sewing or knitting, fundraising, acting, design, singing. To give freely what you love, while others benefit, expands your happiness.

How To Increase Your Joy Through Service

All who would win joy, must share it; happiness was born a twin.
Lord Byron

7. Have fun ...
... be creative with the gift of your life

When times are tough, it may not always seem like it, but imagine your life is truly a gift. Use your imagination to be playful, to create the best your life can be in every circumstance.

5 Creative Ways To Pursue Your Passion

To live happily is an inward power of the soul.
Aristotle

8. Get to know who you truly are ...
... be trusting

Your human spirit is remarkable beyond words. Who you are is indefinably connected with everyone else, and so is never abandoned. Our world is extraordinary, beautiful and blessed. Regular meditation can assist you to see it this way, and to trust in the process of life unfolding more perfectly than you could ever imagine. Be happy with just who you are.

12 Simple Steps To Meditate For Relaxation

There is no way to happiness, happiness is the way.
Buddha

Next week, I am taking a break. I look forward to being with you all again on 5th December. Happy Thanksgiving!

Please feel free to leave a comment below, or contact me at Anne@annenaylor.com

Please re-tweet or pass to friends who may benefit from this post.  For updates on The New Wealth Book, click here: The New Wealth Book Blog The latest: Grow Your Wealth With Health And Happiness.

For information on my future blogs, click on Become A Fan at the top.

Joe Vogel: Review: Adam Lambert's 'For Your Entertainment' An Instant Classic

2009-11-21T10:44:32Z

Adam Lambert "For Your Entertainment" (19/RCA)

Ten or twenty years from now, when people are reflecting on the defining albums of the current pop-synth-glam revival, For Your Entertainment will undoubtedly be at the top of many lists.

This, of course, doesn't mean it is a perfect album. The "glam" genre itself implicitly carries certain strengths and weaknesses and Lambert's debut will likely be assessed by the degree to which these matter to people. The album, for example, mostly lacks the emotional subtlety and range of some of the singer's best moments on American Idol ("Mad World," Tracks of My Tears," etc.; the stunningly haunting "Broken Open," co-written by Lambert, is a notable exception). It also refrains from some of the risks and experiments of artists like David Bowie or the social commentary of a Radiohead. What the album tends to lack in depth, however, it makes up for in sheer energy, playfulness and pleasure (this, indeed, was Lambert's intention). It is best viewed, then, not as a final statement, but as a starting point, a launch pad to what is certain to be a fascinating and diverse artistic odyssey. For Your Entertainment can be seen as Adam Lambert's Off the Wall, a coming out album that not only symbolizes a re-invigorated hybrid aesthetic and sound, but introduces the world to a transformational new pop superstar.

For Your Entertainment certainly isn't lacking in potential hits. "Music Again" is the sonic equivalent of the album cover art--a deliberately campy, effectively updated glam rock homage to several of Lambert's inspirations (Queen, David Bowie, T. Rex). The result is an invigorating, sing-along opener that will sound utterly fresh and unique next to most contemporary Top 40 material.

Lambert re-visits some of these retro themes in "Soaked," a flourishing Queen-like ballad contributed by Muse, in which Lambert is able to demonstrate his remarkable vocal range. The racing strings and piano add exotic drama to the song.

Generally an uptempo dance record, Lambert does slow it down occasionally. The singer's effortless falsetto is gorgeous on the spacey ballad, "A Loaded Smile." The radio-friendly "Whataya Want From Me," while deploying some tired pop cliches in the chorus, still makes one of the album's more poignant emotional statements, anticipating the heavy burden of expectations the singer is likely to carry while expressing vulnerable appreciation for the acceptance he has received. "I'm a freak," he sings, "but thanks for loving me/ 'Cause you're doing it perfectly."

For Your Entertainment, however, primarily operates from a disco/glam aesthetic of escapism and liberation via dance, dress-up, and desire. This intention is on full-display in club-ready hits like the title track, "Strut," "Fever" and "If I Had You," all of which fully accomplish what the singer had in mind for the album: songs that make you want to let loose, dance, work out, have fun.

The album's hidden gem, however, is the closer. An ethereal electro-soul ballad, "Broken Open" is a powerful expression of loneliness, vulnerability and yearning for connection. Sonically, it feels like it belongs alongside Thom Yorke, The Killers, and Grizzly Bear on the New Moon Soundtrack.

While eclectic, For Your Entertainment works surprisingly well as an album. Most listeners likely won't be skipping for the token three or four "singles" since it effectively maintains strength, variety, energy and catchy choruses throughout. "Aftermath" is the lone glaring weak track, hearkening regrettable Idol anthems like "No Boundaries." Yet this is a small quibble for an album so viscerally enjoyable.

As a whole, For Your Entertainment marks one of the most impressive mainstream pop album debuts in recent memory, surpassing its trailblazing sister-album, Lady Gaga's The Fame. While Lambert's work obviously covers some similar terrain (thematically and sonically), it showcases greater consistency, diversity and creativity. It also should have wider appeal, given its pop and rock attributes.

From its iconic cover, to its unique retro-contemporary fusion, to its memorable hooks, Lambert's appropriately labeled album contains all the elements of a massively successful--and influential--pop-rock classic. And fortunately for fans, it only seems to be scratching the surface of its creator's potential.

4.5 stars/5

Walter Iooss: Changing the Game

2009-11-21T08:58:10Z

Neil Leifer and I are both so impressed by what's happening at the Annenberg Space for Photography. If you love Sports in any way shape or form you are going to enjoy what you see here. To have a lady like Wallis Annenberg put two sports photographers together is quite unusual, to say the least. Neil and I are very fortunate that she loves sports because neither of us have ever had a show quite like this, either alone or together.

Sport is such a gigantic part of the fabric of this country. I think 70 percent of everyone born in this country have played some kind of sport and loved it. It's so beautiful to be emotionally involved in something you can escape to. Sport is an escape. You can follow these exceptional athletes and watch them move and accomplish things that are just superhuman - under extreme pressure - and it ends up being incredible whether they win or lose. We all follow teams and athletes, follow their achievements, and when they are hurt, sick... we follow them because to us they're special.

Neil and I go back to 1962. Neil was always a couple of years ahead of me. Neil was much more aggressive than I was. He's got the chutzpah from New York. I didn't have that. When my father and I were going to the games, I'd always see this little redhead on the field. And it was just driving me crazy that he was on the field; the only place I wanted to be, on the sidelines. And I wasn't. I wondered 'how does he do this?' I was too embarrassed to say anything. We were at an old American Football League game, the Titans versus somebody, and my father said- 'I'm going to call that kid over here. I'm going to set up an appointment for you two.' So he said- 'hey Red, come over here.' Maybe Neil was 17 at the time. And he said, 'You know my son is an aspiring photographer, I'd like for you to meet. Is there a place where you can meet?' And he says we could meet in the Time & Life building under the painting. Very romantic! So I met Neil with my portfolio under the painting in 1962 or 61? I was still in high school. He critiqued my portfolio. A 17 year old critiquing a 16 year old, or whatever the ages were. That was how it started, and we worked together for years and years after that.

The Photography Space is state of the art. I think this is going to redefine photography spaces. I love ICP in New York. But ICP is not like this. They are going to have to change; they are going to have to step up to the digital age. Because this footage is sensational, mesmerizing. I can't give it any higher grades. I look at all the pictures we've taken out here; yeah I've seen them all hundreds of times. The prints are perfect. Everything about it is sort of perfect. But the show is much bigger than that. It's timelessness.

Most photographers like solo shows, but I think in this case it was a much better show with Neil and I together. We are two different photographers, two different people, and we had different interests in sports and covered them in different ways. We each did baseball and football. I did more basketball. He did a lot of boxing. This exhibit is a culmination of our careers right here. The prints are amazing but that's just a small part of it to me. That digital video feature captures the heart and soul of Sport.

I think that people are going to see that sports photography is amazing viewed in a gallery setting. They always show something else in galleries: fashion, art, war photography...it's great to see sports photography getting its day.

-WALTER IOOSS, dictated at the Annenberg Space for Photography, Nov. 12, 2009

SPORT: Iooss & Leifer runs from November 14, 2009 - March 7, 2010
Annenberg Space for Photography
2000 Avenue of the Stars
http://www.annenbergspaceforphotography.org

David Horton: Dream of money-bags tonight

2009-11-21T05:06:22Z

All of us who concerned about the future of the planet have misunderestimated the opposition from those who are not. We thought that the flooding of web sites, talk back radio, television chat shows, letters columns in newspapers, blogs, with tens of thousands of mindless repetitions of a few talking points, was the main tactic. It had been modelled, perhaps, on the dropping of aluminum foil plates ("Window") by planes heading for Calais on 6 June 1944. The foil looked like massed planes and ships to German radar, making them believe, until too late, that the invasion force was heading in that direction, and not Normandy.

The mindless denialist chatter has had the same effect, masking the real science going on and preventing public, and politicians, understanding the very real threat of climate change. And this was bad enough - a very effective tactic which has prevented any serious action on greenhouse gases for ten long desperate years. A tactic which has let the big polluters slip under the radar, continue sucking trillions of dollars out of the Earth while carelessly pouring CO2 into the air.

But we thought that was it. That soon reality would appear like the D-Day invasion fleet suddenly appearing with the dawn off Normandy. That the combination of measurements and the now obvious effects of global warming on world climates was going to bring politicians kicking and screaming to the negotiating tables of Copenhagen. If that was the worst that the shadowy figures of the energy industry and other giant corporations could throw at us then we had, like Ali, roped a dope, and were about to bounce back with the knock-out blow.

Silly us. The invasion of Iraq and then the Health Care debate should have warned us that the Armies of the Right stop at nothing these days to impose their will and maintain their robber baron status, their dynasties. And so, like WMD and "Death Panels" now we have the "CRU email scandal", discussed earlier by Kevin Grandia. Just two weeks from Copenhagen the British Climate Research Unit computers are hacked, their emails downloaded and sent off into Deniaworld. There, just as in the lead up to the Iraq War, words are cherry picked, context removed, common sense abandoned, outrage simulated, war declared, counter views demonised. Vials of imaginary anthrax are displayed, trucks become mobile laboratories, aluminum tubes become nuclear bombs, rockets are ready to launch at New York in ten minutes.

And suddenly, it seems, temperatures are no longer rising, the Arctic is no longer melting, glaciers don't retreat, droughts don't happen, record temperatures are no longer set, marine acidity doesn't increase, sea levels don't rise, plants don't flower at different times, birds don't breed at different times, firestorms no longer erupt.

It was, apparently, all just a dream.

But I'm a wake up on The Watermelon Blog.

Marshall Fine: Oren Moverman delivers with The Messenger

2009-11-21T03:34:40Z

It's referred to as "development hell" - that period between when a script is optioned and when it gets a green light - an endless series of notes, meetings and rewrites when the original script falls prey to the whims of all the chefs involved with creating this particular soufflé.

Yet writer-director Oren Moverman says that, without that lengthy development, he wouldn't haven been able to uncover the heart of The Messenger and create the compelling film it became. Nor would he have made his directorial debut with the film.

"Along the way, we stripped it down to its essence," Moverman says.

The Messenger" which opened in limited release Nov. 13 and goes into wider release in the coming weeks, focuses on a young soldier, Will Montgomery (Ben Foster), wounded in the Iraq war and returned to duty stateside. He is assigned duty as a casualty notification officer, given the job of notifying the next-of-kin of those killed in the Iraq war and teamed with a veteran of the detail (played by Woody Harrelson).

The idea for the script originated with Moverman's cowriter, producer Alessandro Camon: "He brought up the idea of casualty notification as an unseen part of the war - one of the parts that they all but made illegal to show, like they wouldn't let the media show the returning bodies," Moverman, an Israeli native, says. "That's really when it started. We were off and running."

Running a marathon, as it turned out: The film went through three other directors before it got made. Sydney Pollack worked with the writers, trying to use the milieu as the backdrop for a love story: "We did a complete draft and eventually came to a mutual agreement that it was not that kind of movie," Moverman says.

The next director, Roger Michel, wanted to focus on the relationship between the two men. For a while, Ben Affleck was interested in directing. As they worked on the script with different directors, Moverman and Camon found it revealing itself as something they - not the directors - wanted to make.

"We took away the plot-driven thing and stayed with the emotional core," Moverman says.

Eventually, it became clear that Moverman was the logical choice to direct. But the writer (I'm Not There, Jesus' Son) had another film he was working on that he hoped to direct as his first film.

"I never lobbied to direct it," Moverman says. "I had another picture I was going to direct. My initial reaction was no. I was trying to be a responsible screenwriter. It felt wrong to say I'll take over and my writing partner's role would be diminished. But he gave his blessing. Now I'm unable to go back to that other script I was going to direct."

Continued...
For the rest of this interview, click HERE to reach my website: www.hollywoodandfine.com.

Huff Radio: Left, Right & Center: Obama-Geithner Revolt, Sarah Palin, Health Care Update

2009-11-21T03:06:23Z

There's a strong feeling that Congress is bucking Obama and isn't being called to task for it. For the first time, Obama's approval ratings are below 50 percent (Gallup poll says) and calls for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's resignation are growing louder.

Sarah Palin's managed to suck up a good deal of media oxygen. Bob calls her a "tarbaby for the Republican party, a monster they created," while Tony says he's pro-Palin and thinks people clamor for her because she speaks her mind and breaks through. He says her honesty is her virtue while Bob and Arianna fear that she is dangerous, stirring up scapegoats at a time when people need someone to blame.

And the health care debate - or vote about whether or not to bring it to debate - is where we stand this week. Should Obama punish the democrats who aren't toeing his line? Or is this just Congress acting institutionally and asserting its rights, party politics be damned?

Andy Plesser: Video: eBay is a Style Barometer: Plaids, Rocker-Chic and Leather Jackets are Hot, Says Constance White

2009-11-21T02:19:13Z

NEW YORK, NY-- eBay has the pulse of the fashion market because, "It's probably the only place that a person could come to and really see the breadth and depth of style at their fingertips," says Constance White, Style Director for eBay.

Yesterday, Andy met up with White, a former fashion writer for the New York Times, who explained that eBay is a reflection of real-time fashion trends. The top trend of the moment according to traffic on eBay plaid, leather jackets, and the rocker-chic look.

In addition, eBay has recently launched a line of mobile boutiques to appear in 13 cities this holiday season. The 5,500 square feet New York pop-up store will be open today until November 27th and has already been visited by the likes of Kim Kardashian, actress and avid eBay seller.

In the latter half of the video, White shows us some styles in Kim's eBay store, including some from her own collection. Some of the proceeds from Kim Kardashian's sales will go to charities, including the Dream Foundation.

Online or in store, eBay shoppers can donate to a charity of their choice at checkout and eBay will match the final donation up to $200,000. At the 57th Street location, it will match every purchase dollar-for-dollar, up to an additional $200,000.

Check here for White's interview with Narciso Rodriguez on his upcoming eBay collection.

You can also find our story on NBC Local Bay Area.

And please find our story on Beet.TV

Bella DePaulo: Sarah Palin and Her Lies (And Her Fans Who Attack Her Critics)

2009-11-21T01:58:32Z

I've been blogging since June of 2006 and have not avoided controversial issues or people. But something I recently posted at Psychology Today, "Sarah Palin's Lies" (now posted in full below), elicited more vitriolic comments and personal e-mails than anything else I've ever written. Here are a few examples:

"Why is it that fat, ugly sluts like you are always liberal democrats?"
"You will die, eventually, and take the evil with you. And that is as it should be. As such, you are clearly not a real American, but one of the obama type. There are plenty of places for you to live, but NOT in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!" [It got nastier after this.]

I realize that viciousness is part of the blogosphere, and that other bloggers experience much worse, so I'm not complaining. If I'm going to write about controversy and do it in a passionate way, then I have to be ready for whatever might come my way. It is interesting, though, that when Sarah Palin was asked recently about the people who have criticized her, she said, "These are probably some lonely people, some shallow people." So perhaps her defenders are simply following her lead. Or maybe they would have commented as they did even without Palin's example.

Here's my original post, in full, from Psychology Today:

Sarah Palin's Lies

Listen up, folks, I'm going rogue! Well, actually, just veering off-topic for today.

I always agree to do interviews relevant to single life, but when it comes to my other area of expertise - the psychology of lying - I have to be in the mood. Nothing puts me in the mood better than a really interesting question. So when Daily Beast reporter Michelle Goldberg asked me why Sarah Palin lies even when the truth is well established, she got me thinking.

You can read what I and another expert told Goldberg in her intriguing piece, "Palin's Ego Trip," here. I won't repeat that but just add a bit more.

I studied liars and their lies for decades. I found that the vast majority of liars do care about the truth in at least one fundamental way - they want to be able to assure themselves and others that there is something honest about what they are saying. They want to have some wisp of truth to hang onto.

What would you do if you hated a particular painting, only to have the artist who painted it approach you, point to it, and say, "That's one of my paintings. What do you think of it?" Along with my colleague and friend, Kathy Bell, I actually did research like this. (It is described in professional paper #4 in the book, The Lies We Tell and the Clues We Miss.) A completely truthful answer would have been, "I hate it." Unsurprisingly, that's not the answer our participants preferred. Instead, they tried in all sorts of ways to convey the impression that they liked the painting, while still including something that could be defended as truthful. For example, they might tell the artist that they liked the shape of the leaf in the plant in the background - without acknowledging that the shape of that one leaf was the ONLY thing they liked.

From my post as an outside observer, it seems to me that Sarah Palin doesn't care much about the truth. In that way, she is a very special liar. Instead, Palin seems to love the effect her disingenuous pronouncements have on her audiences and so she just runs with them. Her fans adore her claims about "death panels" and about Obama supposedly "palling around with terrorists" and all the rest. Look at how they roar with approval and fervor when she tosses that red, bloody moose meat to them - how can the mere (non) truth-value of what she is saying ever compete with that? Plus, the fact that her taunts drive her detractors over the edge - well, that just adds to the fun!

Sarah Palin seems to relish the reaction she gets to her claims and complaints. Among her core fan base, the theme that the mean media and the full-of-themselves campaign staffers were unfair to noble, authentic, small-town Sarah seems to be a winner. Whether it is really true is almost irrelevant.

I do love the irony of Palin flaunting her authenticity with lies.

[If you are interested in reading more about the serious lies that people have told me about, take a look at my short book, Behind the Door of Deceit: Understanding the Biggest Liars in Our Lives. It is available in paperback here or at Amazon, or as a Kindle version.]

Chris Weigant: Friday Talking Points [102] -- Harry Reid's Glacial Progress Grinds On

2009-11-21T01:31:53Z

Our illustrious (cough, cough) White House press corps showed it could get to the bottom of a story with impressively journalistic and probative skills this week. The story that so obviously required multiple questions to President Obama on his trip to Asia? Whether he's eating enough, and whether he's losing weight. Oh, and his gray hair.

Seriously, you can't make this stuff up. Somebody, obviously bored on the excruciatingly long plane ride, decided they'd float the rumor that Obama was skipping meals and getting dangerously thin. Because the reporters were all trapped in the same flying aluminum can, they all decided it was a big deal, patted themselves on the back for doing so, and then took lots of valuable interview time with the president to ask him about it. Over and over again (since they all wanted the "scoop"). Obama's response was that he was eating just fine, thank you, and he wasn't any skinnier than he's always been.

Whew! Good thing we have such an illustrious cadre of journalists, to reassure Americans that the president is not starving himself or anything! After all, it's not like there are any other issues to talk about, or ask the president about.

Such as Sarah Palin, for instance. Palin sure ate up a lot of "news" time last week, which must have overjoyed her publicist and publisher (oodles of free publicity, in other words).

Seriously, there are a few things going on in the world that are actually more important than what the president had for lunch, and what Palin's ghostwriter cobbled together in "her" book.

Such as healthcare reform legislation, to name but one. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid finally woke up from his weeks-long nap, and is moving a bill to the Senate floor for debate. It was reported this week that the bill would be introduced on Tuesday, then on Wednesday, then on Thursday, then on Friday, and (currently) on Saturday. Which pretty much sums up the last few months of waiting on Harry. But Harry will be discussed later in the program, so I'll just move on here.

I thought it was appropriate to review exactly what is left to do on the healthcare reform effort. There are a few hurdles left to clear, and it's going to be a long and drawn-out process. The media will trumpet each one of these hurdles as it happens, but will (my guess) fail to lay out exactly what to expect next at each stage of the process. So I thought I'd fill this lack. Matt Osborne at Huffington Post also has a good overview of the 11-dimensional chess game we're playing, if you'd like an alternate summation of where we are in the process.

The first step is Saturday's vote. Or, I should probably say, "the vote which is currently scheduled for Saturday." This vote will be held in the Senate and is a vote to "end debate about the debate," or to overcome a filibuster/closure attempt to block the bill before it gets to the floor for debate. The media will portray this as a "vote to move the bill to the floor," but this is technically inaccurate, as it is a vote against killing the bill's progress. It's confusing, but this is the Senate we're talking about.

Democrats need 60 votes to overcome the filibuster attempt. Harry Reid thinks he's got them, but then this is the reason why the vote keeps getting pushed back -- because he's obviously still scrambling for the final few votes before he moves ahead. But they can't push it back much further without eating into their own valuable vacation time, because they're all itching to fly back home for a leisurely week off for Thanksgiving.

Once Democrats get the 60 votes they need (throughout this whole explanation, I am assuming Democrats will succeed at each stage, although I should point out that any of these hurdles could derail the entire process and kill healthcare reform for the year), the Senate will start debating the bill. Amendments will be offered. It's a little unclear which amendments will require only a majority (50 votes plus the Vice President, or 51 votes), and which will require the supermajority of 60 votes. Look for lots of Republican amendments to fail during this stage, and lots and lots of grandstanding by senators who are hoping to see their face on the news.

So, assuming some amendments pass and others fail, eventually Reid will move to close debate and actually vote on the bill as a whole. This is when the second major filibuster will be attempted. And getting 60 votes to overcome it will be even harder, since some of the senators who have publicly committed to killing the first filibuster attempt have pointedly not committed to moving the bill to a final vote. But, probably with some wheeling and dealing, Reid rounds up the 60 votes he needs and defeats the filibuster once again.

Which brings us to the final vote. This vote only requires 50-plus-one, meaning Democrats who don't like the bill can vote against its passage, after voting with the Democrats to kill filibusters. This sort of thing, I should add, is common. John Kerry got lambasted in his bid for the White House, for expecting Americans to know how the Senate actually works, when he said he "was for the bill before he was against the bill" (or was it the other way around?). This is called "having your cake and eating it too," when it comes to explaining your votes to your constituents, and is common practice by both parties in Washington.

But ignoring all of that, a bill passes the Senate! Woo hoo! We're done, right?

Well, no.

This is the trickiest phase of the whole process -- the dreaded conference committee. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid name a limited number of negotiators (which names are on this list will be crucial) to a committee of both House and Senate members, and they get a chance to totally rewrite the bill. Their goal is to come up with a bill that can pass both houses in exactly the same form. This will be challenging indeed, since the vote margins are going to be pretty thin for both houses. A handful of Democrats from the left or the "center" could play the "I'm taking my bat and ball and going home" tantrum game at this point.

Many are the bills which die in conference committee, it needs emphasizing. It's a tightrope wire to walk that sees many, many ideas fall off the wire to perish below (no safety net down there). This will be the toughest part of the whole process.

Eventually, though (assuming success at every stage, as I said), a compromise bill emerges from conference committee. Then it goes to the House and the Senate, where individual senators and the Republican Party en masse will try to derail it by adding amendments willy-nilly. But sooner or later, the House and the Senate vote on the same bill. Over in the Senate, of course, this will mean more filibuster attempts to be dealt with, but in both houses the final vote requires just a simple majority to pass.

The bill, after achieving passage in both houses, then goes to the Oval Office for President Obama to sign.

If this all sounds like a very long and drawn-out process, well, it is. And the new "operative" deadline (as they say in D.C.) is now the State Of The Union address which President Obama will deliver to a joint session of Congress in late January. That is not a lot of time. With so many formidable hurdles left in place, the clock running out becomes more and more of a serious possibility.

In any case, while the news media will portray Saturday's vote (or Sunday's, or Monday's... sigh) as a gargantuan-sized Big Deal, please keep in mind that we've got a long way left to go.

A Democrat this week hit a most impressive milestone, as Senator Robert Byrd became the longest-serving member of Congress in history. This benchmark adds service in both chambers, meaning Byrd's six-year term as a member of the House is added to his impressive 50 years and ten-and-a-half months in the Senate. Byrd's Senate record is already the longest in history, passing Strom Thurmond's a few years ago. So now Robert Byrd is not only the longest-serving senator in American history, but also the longest-serving member of Congress in history as well. For this, he receives an Honorable Mention from us this week.

Representative Alan Grayson also gets an Honorable Mention as well (with special "strange bedfellows" oak leaf cluster), for joining with Ron Paul to win passage of language in a bill to mandate an audit of the Federal Reserve. Other Democrats wanted to water this down, but Grayson and Paul prevailed. For now. Their opponents shut down a vote on the bill after this happened, though, which the White House is reportedly not happy about.

Also annoying the White House is Representative John Conyers. Conyers, however, is on the right side of this issue. He's pressuring President Obama and Rahm Emanuel with some very blunt language: "You know, holding hands out and beer on Friday nights in the White House and bowing down to every nutty right-wing proposal about health care, and saying on occasion that public options aren't all that important is doing a disservice to the Barack Obama that I first met who was an ardent single-payer enthusiast himself." For pressuring Obama to stand up for the ideals he campaigned on, Conyers is also awarded an Honorable Mention this week.

But our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award goes to Attorney General Eric Holder. I have already written twice this week (in Tuesday's column and Wednesday's column, in case you missed them) about Holder's decision to hold the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators in a civilian federal court mere blocks from where the twin towers of the World Trade Center once stood.

Now, reasonable people can disagree about Holder's decision, but we are awarding him the MIDOTW award for how he has handled himself this week. It's a rare thing in Washington to see a government official make a strong decision, and then defend it as the right thing to do without either (a.) trying to blame everyone else for the idea's shortcomings, or (b.) immediately apologizing for the decision, or (c.) "walking back" or even overturning the decision at the slightest sign of political stormclouds on the horizon.

All in all, Holder admirably defended his decision and admirably faced his critics when dragged before a congressional committee. So, as I said, whether you agree with his decision or think it was wrong, Holder was still impressive in the way he strongly stood up for himself after announcing it -- a rare thing in Washington. And for that, we award him the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.

[Congratulate Attorney General Eric Holder on his Department of Justice contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

So, here we are on the healthcare reform front. A bill may make it to the floor of the Senate tomorrow. But you know what? We could have been here in July. Or September. Or October. This endless series of delays and time wasted can be laid at the feet of one man -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Because it is an inescapable fact that a stronger leader would have moved the legislation a lot further by now.

Now, in Reid's defense, the bill he came up with is a lot stronger than a lot of people thought it would be at this point. The number of times the public option has been declared dead by serious and important people inside the Beltway is staggeringly high. And yet, there it is in Reid's bill. No trigger (at least not yet) is in the bill either -- denying yet another piece of inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom for the past five months. Given what he had to work with, it's not a horrible effort by Reid. Fairness dictates we point this out here.

But Reid has shown over and over again that he simply does not know how to negotiate in a timely fashion. He usually begins negotiating by publicly stating he will be throwing away all his best leverage in the negotiations -- making it much easier for his opponents to defeat him. He has put up with so many delaying tactics on healthcare reform that we find ourselves only moving a bill to the floor right now -- just before Thanksgiving. Because the Senate is going to go home for a full week next week, it won't be until early December that the floor debate even begins. And after such debate, and after a vote on passage, there still remains the conference committee -- which is going to take a few weeks, at the very least. With the end-of-year break in there, it is already an extremely tough schedule to meet if Congress really wants to pass this by the State Of The Union speech in late January.

Meaning Reid has left everyone with very little elbow room. Which makes it all the easier for opponents to defeat the whole effort -- because now they don't need to absolutely shut it down, they just need to run out the clock for a few more weeks. While Max Baucus certainly deserves some of the scorn for this situation, the buck stops at Harry's desk, as the leader of the Senate Democrats.

As if all of this weren't enough, Reid just announced that he's no longer even considering reconciliation as a last resort. Once again, Reid takes the most powerful weapon at his disposal and, instead of wielding it forcefully, actually chucks it over the side of the boat instead. This seems to be Harry's standard operating procedure -- surrender before the fight begins.

But there's a way to change all of this. The Democratic caucus in the Senate traditionally chooses its leadership in December. Meaning that any Democrat could soon challenge Reid for his leadership role. If a movement started among Senate Democrats to rally behind a more forceful personality, this could put some serious pressure on Harry Reid to get things moving along. Democrats could let it be known privately that if healthcare reform isn't at least in conference committee by the time they choose next year's leadership, then they would be handing Harry his hat, and repainting his office for his successor.

There are many, many Democratic senators who could fill the void of leadership Harry Reid carries around with him. Pretty much anyone who knows how to negotiate and knows not to throw away their best leverage before the fight begins would get my support, at this point.

Oh, and while they're at it, Democratic senators could also strip Joe Lieberman of his committee chairmanship on the Homeland Security committee if he votes with Republicans to kill healthcare reform. Just a suggestion.

But for this week, Harry Reid wins his fourteenth Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award. That is twice as many as anyone else has won. Get a move on Harry, or else stand out of the way for someone who can. Please.

[Contact Senator Harry Reid on his Senate contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]

Volume 102 (11/20/09)

I'm going to remain optimistic at the end, here, and write my talking points this week for Democratic politicians (to use on the Sunday morning chat fests) while assuming that the Senate has managed to vote to bring the healthcare reform bill to the floor. That's right, I'm going to make a leap of faith and assume that Harry Reid manages to get his 60 votes tomorrow night. Because, really, if he doesn't, there won't be a whole lot for Democrats to talk about this Sunday morning.

Anyway, remaining cheerfully (some would say "blissfully," or perhaps "idiotically") optimistic, here is what Democrats should say on Sunday to bring all the pressure they can bear to their fellow Democrats in the Senate who may waver in future votes.

Rushing? Um, no.

The standard cry of the obstructionists in this debate is that we are somehow "rushing" healthcare reform. Attack this with the disdain it deserves.

"Excuse me, did you say rushing? You think we're rushing into healthcare reform? The effort to bring quality affordable healthcare to every American started seventy years ago. This effort has been going on currently ever since the 1960s. We've taken months -- sometimes years -- to come up with portions of this bill. We've debated them non-stop for the past six months. We've spent weeks and weeks putting together final legislation. How, exactly, is any of this 'rushing'?"

The wrong side of history

Republican Senator Olympia Snowe was actually the one to use this line the best so far in this debate.

"History is calling, in the form of healthcare reform. History will judge us on what we do in Congress in the next few weeks. We Democrats must make a simple choice: do we want to stand on the right side, or the wrong side of history? Do we want this vote to be a proud achievement for our party, and for all of America, or do we want to be shamed later by voting against such wide-sweeping reform? I know which side of history I want to be remembered on, and that is why I will be voting for healthcare reform."

Party unity

This is a phrase which got quite a bit of scorn in last year's campaign (see: PUMAs, or "Party Unity, My Ass" soreheads). But it needs to be picked up, dusted off, and given the proud placement it once had.

"The Democratic Party needs to show some unity, for once. Party unity means voting against Republican filibuster attempts in the Senate. I don't care whether Democratic senators vote for or against the bill on the final vote, but I think it is shameful for any Democrat to join the 'Party of Obstructionism' or the 'Party of No' in a procedural vote. It is the coward's way out. The courageous thing to do here is to keep party unity intact, and guarantee an up-or-down vote for the final bill on the Senate floor. Robbing the Senate of that vote, and robbing the people of seeing how you would have voted on the final bill is nothing short of shameful. Party unity used to mean something in Washington, and I hope it means something in the filibuster-killing votes in the Senate in the next few weeks."

Maybe we need new leadership

This one only really works if you are a Democratic senator. Although other Democrats could use it, prefaced with something like "well, you know the scuttlebutt I'm hearing is..." or language to that effect.

"The end of the year is traditionally the time we Democrats caucus to choose our leadership and committee chairmen for the upcoming year. If we can't manage to get a healthcare bill through a floor vote in the Senate, I and many of my colleagues are going to have to think long and hard about who will be the most effective leaders for the Senate next year. I'm not going to name any names, but there are quite a few of our leaders who seem more interested in causing unconscionable delays to the process rather than exhibiting true leadership. And we will be looking at that quite closely in December."

Want to get re-elected?

These last three are a direct appeal to those mugwumps sitting on a fence on the healthcare reform debate. Don't appeal to their better interests, appeal to their fear of losing power. It's the best leverage to use in Washington, when you get right down to it.

"Any Democrat thinking of voting against healthcare reforms should take a good hard look at the opinion polls coming out of their state or district. The American people want healthcare reform, they expect us to deliver healthcare reform, and if we are instrumental in blocking healthcare reform, then they are going to let us know about it. For all the so-called 'moderate' Democrats that I've heard about, when you look at the polls from their own constituents, time after time they show that people want not just healthcare reform, but actually stronger healthcare reform than is currently in the bill. These Democrats need to think long and hard about their own political future if they vote against the needs and wishes of their own constituents. Because voting with the Republicans is going to make it a lot harder for you to get re-elected."

Democrats are toast in 2010 without healthcare reform

In fact, expand this to the whole party.

"Democrats are going to be toast in the midterm 2010 congressional elections if we don't deliver on healthcare reform. With huge majorities in both houses of Congress, if we can't follow through on the biggest agenda item that got a Democrat elected to the White House, then voters are going to be disgusted with the Democratic Party as a whole come next election day. They are either going to stay home and not vote, or they are going to vote for anyone who isn't an incumbent. Our party's future in Congress hinges in a big way on whether we can pass healthcare reform or not. If we don't, President Obama is going to be a lot weaker next year, and Congress is going to be universally held in contempt by the voters. And a lot of Democrats who are now sitting in office are going to be looking for jobs this time next year."

Democrats deserve to be toast in 2010 without healthcare reform

This is "part 2" of the previous point.

"And you know what? We Democrats are going to deserve to be toast in the 2010 elections if we can't pass healthcare reform. We've got the biggest majorities in Congress we've had in a generation, and the voters sent us here for a reason -- to get something done. If we prove that we are incapable of delivering this to the voters who sent us here, then we will absolutely deserve to be stripped of our majorities and our power come next year. I wouldn't blame the voters in the least if they see us fighting amongst ourselves so much, and more worried about our own egos than in producing some legislation to improve people's lives. The voters would be entirely justified in 'throwing the bums out' if we can't manage to get something done. I say this as a warning to all my fellow Democrats, and I sincerely hope they will take it to heart."

Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com

NEW! Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground

Dennis Danziger: Every Day My Heart Gets Broken

2009-11-21T01:29:26Z

Every day my heart gets broken.

The hurt starts before I step foot onto my campus. I live six blocks from my work site in a diverse, middle-class neighborhood called Mar Vista where two bedroom homes sell for $700,000 and the gentrified two-story jobs go for over a million.

On my walk to work, I observe the morning rush to school. Kids, in uniforms, hurry toward waiting cars to be whisked away to private schools.

The kids who attend our local elementary school walk south from the apartment complexes that line Washington Boulevard holding their mothers' hands or riding skateboards or bikes alongside buddies. They are almost all Hispanic.

I usually stop at the halfway point, Rainbow Acres, an organic grocery store, where I wait behind women in workout gear knocking back shots of wheat grass as I wait for my morning smoothie.

I cross the boulevard and join a wave of teenagers disembarking from LA and Culver City buses and head toward the LAUSD high school where I teach English.

As I pass the student parking lot I note that there are a handful of late model VWs and Hondas, but most of these rides have little or no resale value.

And then I turn onto campus where every wall is newly painted typing paper white with royal blue trim. The vast lawn, almost the size of a football field, is a deep green and leaves have changed colors, giving us a mini-New England autumn.

I take in one last breath of ocean air then enter a long, narrow corridor. That's when the depression hits. The wall of bodies, the faded yellow walls, the natural light replaced by florescent bulbs.

It seems as if the school's dress code demand that students wear thrift shop t-shirts advertising bands that broke up years ago, alcoholic beverages and unpopular baseball teams. Most every male face lurks behind a black or gray hood. It's as if color has been banned. Were it not for liberal helpings of green eye liner and pink lipstick, I might think I had stepped into a black and white movie.

Then I read my students' essays. All are seniors. Most are smart. All are street smart. Many are shy. Most read and write below grade level. Of the 42 students on my Period 1 Expository Composition roster only three are applying to universities.

I read their personal essays which will be published this spring in an anthology of student writing thanks to a grant from PEN in the Classroom.

These are the stories my 17- and 18-year-old students have shared with me under the tutelage of PEN mentor, Amy Friedman:

A 3-year-old watches from his front porch as his uncle shoots himself in the head.

A mother dumps her 15-year-old son at a police station and tells the cops they can have him.

A father goes downstairs and is shot by a car thief. He leaves behind three daughters.

A four-year-old girl is fondled by her uncle while her father is out on the town, cheating on the girl's mother. The girl holds this secret inside for ten years.

A boy visits his father in jail.

A six-year-old receives a brutal, daily beating from his kindergarten teacher.

A dad walks in on his daughter as she kisses her girlfriend. He beats his daughter and kicks her out of the house.

Two of my students reveal that they were crack babies.

Another, with an addicted mother, goes home every day and takes care of her autistic brother.

An innocent teen is cuffed and interrogated by the LAPD because he looks like a gang banger though he is not one and has never been in trouble.

A 17-year-old girl buries her boyfriend who is shot in the back after leaving an art class at a local recreation center.

A brother gives mouth-to-mouth recessitation to his 16-year-old brother who overdosed and died.

What I love about my students' writing is its honesty. What I admire about most of my students is that despite the hurt they've felt, the fear that follows them, they keep showing up. They work hard in class. They know they're behind, but they continue to push, to struggle on. Most of my students hold after school and weekend jobs. They help pay the rent. They hang in. They write. They re-write. They listen. They do whatever is necessary to earn their credits, so that they will graduate and make themselves and their parents proud.

I keep hearing the politicians and the pundits talk about the problems in public education. About
Race to the Top. If we only could fire the lousy teachers. If we could only institute merit pay. If we could only establish more charter schools. Or give vouchers. Or break the teacher unions. That would solve it all.

And when I read these columns and hear their speeches, these people who have all the answers, I wonder what world they live in.

They certainly don't live in mine.

Robert D. Atkinson, Ph.D.: Whack-A-Mole Security: Bad Policy, Bad Legislation

2009-11-21T01:15:16Z

Guest post by Daniel Castro, Senior Analyst, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation

The recent disclosure of a confidential Congressional document has at least one congressman calling for a ban on peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing software, but a closer look at the problem reveals that this effort would merely be treating the symptoms, not the disease.

First some background. Last month the Washington Post revealed that more than thirty members of Congress and staffers were under investigation for possible ethics violations, including for "accepting contributions or other items of value... in exchange for an official act." While this revelation was shocking, perhaps even more shocking was the means by which this information was leaked -- the information was downloaded from the Internet. As detailed by the Washington Post and the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in the U.S. House of Representatives, a low-level committee staffer had saved a copy of a confidential House ethics committee report on her personal computer while working from home. Unfortunately, the staffer was also running a peer-to-peer file sharing program and inadvertently saved the file in a folder that was shared with other users. By saving the file in a shared folder, the staffer made the document available to all other users on the publicly accessible file sharing network. While only one report from July was reported by the Washington Post, the Standards Committee noted that the potential disclosure involved several confidential documents.

The initial reaction from House leaders was tempered. The Standards Committee issued a statement reminding House Members, Officers and employees to maintain good information security practices when handling sensitive materials and noted that "no matter how robust our cybersecurity systems are, they remain subject to individual error." The statement also emphasized that the disclosure took place on the staffer's personal computer, that the staffer was no longer employed by the committee, and that no House information systems were compromised.

Case closed? Not so fast. Some members of Congress are jumping on the media attention surrounding the ethics leak to enact a legislative ban on peer-to-peer file sharing software. Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY) has introduced the Secure Federal File Sharing Act which would prohibit the use of peer-to-peer software on all computer systems run by the Federal government or its contractors. In addition, the legislation directs the Office of the Management and Budget (OMB) to address the use of P2P software on the home computers of government employees used for work purposes. To be fair, this is not a completely reactionary move. Congress has held a number of hearings over the years detailing instances of sensitive and confidential information being revealed over peer-to-peer networks--including Social Security numbers, financial records, and even location information about a safe house for the first family. In fact, the latter incident spurred Rep. Towns to first announce his call for a ban on the use of peer-to-peer software on all government networks.

It is hard to fault the Congress for misunderstanding the problem when some of the press reports surrounding the incident have often been misleading or inaccurate. In fact, most of the press seems to blame the disclosure on the peer-to-peer software, rather than on human error or the bad policies and practices that led to the disclosure. And some reports are simply erroneous and reflect a poor understanding of the technology. For example, according to the Wall Street Journal, by using a peer-to-peer network the staffer "allowed someone to hack into her computer and obtain the document." That's like saying by publishing an article on its website, the Wall Street Journal allowed its readers to hack into their web server and read the news.

To be clear, using peer-to-peer file sharing software exposes users to a number of risks. First, P2P software is often used by Internet users to download and distribute copyrighted content, an illegal act for which individuals can and should be held responsible. Second, the files shared on P2P networks often contain malware -- viruses, spyware, and other malicious software that can steal the user's private data and turn an infected PC into part of a botnet. But peer-to-peer software, by itself, did not cause the confidential Congressional document to be leaked to the press.

Some have argued that peer-to-peer software presents a unique threat because users are often unaware that the software is sharing files on their personal computer. For this reason, Reps. Mary Bono Mack (R-CA), John Barrow (D-GA) and Joe Barton (R-TX) introduced the Informed P2P User Act (H.R. 1319) earlier this year which would require peer-to-peer software to give users conspicuous notice and obtain consent before sharing files from a user's PC. First, most file sharing software does not share your entire hard drive, but just a few select folders. In addition, P2P software is already evolving and responding to their users' demands for more control and notice over how files are shared and preventing accidental disclosure of private information. Finally, while more notice may reduce some accidental file disclosures, incidents such as the recent leak of Congressional documents stem from misconfigured settings or operator error, not a lack of notice.

But the legislative response from Rep. Towns is more troubling. The congressman has argued that "We can no longer ignore the threat to sensitive government information that insecure peer-to-peer networks pose. Voluntary self-regulations have failed so now is the time for Congress to act." However, the committee staffer revealed confidential information by mistakenly saving the document in a shared file folder. This mistake was human error. If the staffer had accidentally emailed those documents--say by inadvertently clicking on the wrong attachment--would members of Congress now be calling for a ban on email? Of course not. The underlying problem is not that the staffer was running a P2P program on her computer, but that the sensitive documents had virtually no access controls on them to prevent their unauthorized use. After the staffer was allowed to take the document home as an unsecured file, the confidential information could have been leaked in many different ways--from a lost USB drive to a stolen laptop to a snooping roommate. If the file would have even had basic password protections enabled, probably none of the ensuing drama would have happened. A properly encrypted file, even if lost or made publicly available, would remain secure and confidential.

Unfortunately, this type of response is typical when organizations face a data breach, as executives scramble to fix the immediate problem without taking time to understand the bigger issues. This whack-a-mole approach to information security problems is bad strategy for an organization and bad policy for the Congress. Good information security practices depend on IT leaders forming a solid understanding of risk and taking action to manage those risks. For example, in this case, the risk here is not peer-to-peer file sharing, but rather inappropriate disclosure of confidential information. A better approach would be to review the policies and procedures for access to confidential information. Questions to ask include:

Who should be given access to sensitive information?

Should employees be permitted to take sensitive documents out of the office?

If so, what controls are in place to ensure that the data stays secure?

If not, what controls are in place to ensure files remain in the office?

Are sufficient penalties in place to punish those who violate these policies?

Are the known risks acceptable, and if not, what else should be done?

Certainly people are not perfect and some data breaches will still occur even with better policies and technology. And prohibiting P2P software probably makes sense for most agencies, but it is only a small part of a bigger problem. Rather than narrowly focusing on P2P, policymakers should be promoting broad strategies for sound information security policies across government. For example, rather than legislate that government IT executives should have a full accounting of P2P use on their network, they would be better off mandating that these IT executives need to have information security programs in place that give them detailed network intelligence so they can inventory what applications are running on their computers and track suspicious outbound and inbound network connections. In addition, government-wide policies should be developed to promote secure teleworking. As teleworking becomes more common the perimeter for enterprise security becomes wider and the amount of control that IT administrators can exert over remote PCs becomes weaker, thus creating a new threat environment. Government best practices in this area would be helpful to small and large businesses in the private sector.

Policymakers should use this experience as an opportunity to push for substantial progress on information security practices, not merely small mandates banning a particular type of software.

Wes Anderson: Behind The Filming Of One Of My Favorite Fantastic Mr. Fox Performances

2009-11-21T01:08:17Z

When you're making an animated film, one of the big differences is that you can add scenes, change dialogue and re-write as you're going along because you only shoot a little bit of the movie each day.

Mr. and Mrs. Fox "on set" shooting a scene in the supermarket.

So, with Fantastic Mr. Fox, about half-way through the shoot, I had this idea for a scene between the two characters played by Jason Schwartzman and my brother, Eric Anderson. I thought one place to start was with something I grew up with: bunk beds.

My initial sketches for how the scene in Ash's (Jason Schwartzman's character) bedroom would be shot and acted

In this case, Jason Schwartzman's character does not allow the bunk beds to serve their usual purpose of sleeping two. So, his foreign cousin is forced to sleep underneath the train set. This train set is particularly miniature, because the puppets themselves are only probably about 7 inches high and the train set is very easily the smallest I have ever seen. Throughout the film we all traveled back and forth between France and England a lot. So, we thought it might be fitting that the electric train would actually be something in the vein of a Eurostar. It's actually labeled 'High Speed French Train'. One unusual fact is that the model train is actually the same train that we use for most of the full scale shots of the train.

I don't know, but this is probably an unusual alternative in the movies. The bunk beds themselves are based on the Gypsy Caravan after which Dahl named his house, and it's still there in Great Missenden.

Artist Turlo Griffin's concept artwork for Ash's bedroom, showing the use of the Gypsy Caravan motif

And also on the set, we have the white cape comics which are drawn by our story board artist Christian De Vita, and which are Ash's (Jason Schwartzman's character) sole reading material and the inspiration for his wardrobe. Jason and Eric give two of my favorite performances in the film, and this scene more or less encapsulates their entire relationship. I hope you'll enjoy watching it as much as I did making it.

/video/2/video/rplayer.swf" flashvars="videoid=1741&services=&extension=%2Fvideo%2F2&frontcolor=&backcolor=&skin=vplayer.swf&autostart=true&plugins=postrollmenu%2Cbug%2Canalyticsv2" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="462" height="390" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

Bob Dinneen: Reminding Al Gore: 5 'Encouraging Truths' About Ethanol

2009-11-21T00:39:41Z

Having an appreciation for Al Gore's commitment to science and advocacy of responsible policies on energy, the environment, and the economy, I was disappointed by his treatment of ethanol and other biofuels in his new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis.

During the late 1970s, Gore was an early supporter of grain-based ethanol and other efforts to promote biofuels. Now, as he writes in his new book, Our Choice, he has changed his mind.

Because of his devotion to science and the facts, I have sent him a detailed letter, filled with what I hope he'll consider encouraging, not inconvenient, truths:

Encouraging Truth #1: Ethanol has come of age.

Ethanol has come a long way since when Gore first championed it. With 10.5 billion gallons set to be produced and sold this year, ethanol is a major factor in America's motor fuel supply. Today's ethanol industry is helping support nearly 500,000 jobs, providing more than $20 billion in new household incomes. Last year alone, the use of ethanol reduced emissions by the equivalent of removing 2.1 million gallons from American highways.

Encouraging Truth #2: American agriculture and the US ethanol industry are improving their productivity without jeopardizing the environment.

The average corn yield this season is 163 bushels per acre - up from 101 bushels in 1978. Higher yields have been achieved through better technology and farming practices, not through increased use of fertilizers, pesticides and other inputs. In fact, there has been a 27% decrease in irrigation water use per bushel, a 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per bushel, a 37% decrease in the land required per bushel, a 37% decrease in energy required per bushel; and 69% reduction in soil loss per bushel.

Meanwhile, improvements in corn ethanol production efficiency are following a similar path, including a 27% decrease in consumptive water use, a 22% reduction in fossil energy use, and a 7% increase in the amount of ethanol produced per bushel of grain in just the past five years.

Encouraging Truth #3: 'Food vs. fuels' is a false choice.

Gore writes "...further diversion of cropland from food to fuel will put upward pressure on food prices at a time when many impoverished regions of the world are facing growing concerns about food security." But the increased use of grain for ethanol in the United States has not reduced the amount of grain available for livestock feed, food processing, or exports. Furthermore, cropland is not being "diverted" from food and feed production.

Instead, increased productivity per unit of land has ensured that adequate supplies of grain are available for all uses, including biofuels. The US achieved a new record for corn exports in 2007, amid a significant biofuels boom. Corn exports have topped 2 billion bushels in four of the last five years, the first time in history that such volumes have occurred in a five-year span.

None of this obscures the moral and practical urgency of world hunger. But, as Gore well knows, the problems are access to food and food security. Producing ethanol is not the cause of these crises, and curtailing the production of biofuels is not the cure. There cannot be food security without energy security

Encouraging Truth #4: Ethanol doesn't increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Gore also writes: "largely because modern agriculture is so petroleum intensive, net greenhouse gas emissions from corn-based ethanol turn out to be almost equal to the emissions from gasoline." But corn ethanol production is not a "petroleum intensive" process. In a 2006 analysis, a group of researchers at U.C. Berkeley found that producing one unit of ethanol energy requires 20 times less petroleum than producing one unit of gasoline energy.

Encouraging Truth #5: Today's ethanol builds the foundation for the next generation of biofuels.

While Gore writes, "The production of ethanol in first generation biorefineries has been a disappointment," he goes on to admit: "However, it has... led to the emergence of an infrastructure that will prove highly valuable when second generation technologies are available to produce ethanol from nonfood crops." This includes shipping ethanol via pipelines, which occurs today all across Brazil and in the state of Florida.

That is one reason why corn-based ethanol is not a mistake. Rather, it is providing a strong economic and environmentally sustainable foundation upon which the next generation of biofuels, including improvements in existing technologies, will be built. Therefore, utilizing what is available today, the US should expand the demand, distribution and transportation of ethanol so that we can build a strong foundation for the next generation of biofuels.

Mr. Vice President, an objective review of the facts as they exist today lead to one inevitable conclusion: biofuels must be part of "our choice."