Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Saturday, October 02, 2010
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Monday, August 09, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
Apple: iPhone 4's Not Perfect -- Take a Free Case or Full Refund
Jul 16, 2010 10:40 am
Jared Newman, PC World
To alleviate iPhone 4 antenna problem , Apple will give free bumper cases to everyone who bought or will buy the phone through September 30.
For people who already bought a bumper case, Apple will refund the cost. Users who are still unsatisfied can return the phone, with or without a case, for a full refund within 30 days. Apple CEO Steve Jobs made the announcement at a hasily-called press conference this morning.
An application form will go live on Apple's website next week, where iPhone 4 owners will be able to choose a free bumper case from a variety of vendors.
Jobs stressed that the iPhone 4 reception issues are common among smartphones. On the iPhone 4, occur when the phone is held over its lower left-hand corner, blocking the external antenna. Nonetheless, Jobs said, he wants to keep customers happy, hence the free cases and full refund.
We'll have more details on Apple's iPhone 4 briefing shortly.
Jared Newman, PC World
To alleviate iPhone 4 antenna problem , Apple will give free bumper cases to everyone who bought or will buy the phone through September 30.
For people who already bought a bumper case, Apple will refund the cost. Users who are still unsatisfied can return the phone, with or without a case, for a full refund within 30 days. Apple CEO Steve Jobs made the announcement at a hasily-called press conference this morning.
An application form will go live on Apple's website next week, where iPhone 4 owners will be able to choose a free bumper case from a variety of vendors.
Jobs stressed that the iPhone 4 reception issues are common among smartphones. On the iPhone 4, occur when the phone is held over its lower left-hand corner, blocking the external antenna. Nonetheless, Jobs said, he wants to keep customers happy, hence the free cases and full refund.
We'll have more details on Apple's iPhone 4 briefing shortly.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Saturday, July 03, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Jobless aid measure dying in Senate
6-24-2010
By ANDREW TAYLOR (AP)
WASHINGTON — Republicans in the Senate appear likely to kill legislation to provide continued unemployment checks to millions of people and provide states with billions of dollars to avert layoffs.
It would be a bitter defeat for President Barack Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats, who have been trying to advance the measure for months as an insurance policy against a double-dip recession.
Despite another round of cuts to the measure aimed at pacifying GOP deficit concerns, the measure seems doomed to die by a filibuster in a vote expected as early as Thursday.
Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he would pull the measure from the floor if Democrats lose the vote. Democrats hope that political pressure from voters and business groups might eventually revive the measure.
The latest version of the measure contains a variety of provisions sought by lawmakers in both parties, blending jobless aid averaging about $300 a week with the renewal of dozens of tax cuts sought by business groups and a host of other legislation. It is considerably smaller than a version that passed with GOP help just three months ago.
"It adds new taxes and over $30 billion to an already staggering $13 trillion dollar national debt," said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
The catchall measure also includes $16 billion for state governments to avert layoffs, farm disaster aid, $1 billion for a youth summer jobs initiative and an extension of a bond program that subsidizes interest costs for state and local infrastructure projects. It would levy a new tax on investment fund managers but extend tax breaks such as lucrative credits that help businesses finance research and develop new products, and a sales tax deduction that mainly helps people in states without income taxes.
The death of the measure would mean that more than 200,000 people a week would lose their jobless benefits because they would be unable to reapply for additional tiers of benefits enacted since 2008. People seeking the popular homebuyer tax credit would be denied a paperwork extension approved by the Senate last week.
"This is a bill that would remedy serious challenges that American families face as a result of this Great Recession," said Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chief author of the bill. "This is a bill that works to build a stronger economy. This is a bill to put Americans back to work."
And doctors are livid about a 21 percent cut in their Medicare payments imposed last week; the bill would have afforded them a six-month reprieve from the cuts. Stand-alone legislation to address the problem has stalled in the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is insisting that it be part of the broader measure.
By the end of this week, about 1.2 million people will have lost their jobless benefits since a temporary extension expired at the beginning of the month, according to Labor Department estimates.
Crestfallen Democrats tried in vain to win support from moderate Republicans like Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, leaving them apparently two votes short of the 60 needed to defeat a filibuster. But talks collapsed Thursday, aides said, leading Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to offer a pared-back measure that would add $33 billion to the deficit over the upcoming decade.
The bill has long been considered a must-pass measure, but the political sands have shifted since it first passed in March. That vote came in the wake of a political scalding for Republicans after Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., blocked a short-term extension of jobless aid.
In the interim, however, the debt crisis in Europe and growing anxiety on deficits and debt among voters, has turned Republicans against the legislation, even though it's been cut considerably since passage of a March version that would have added about $100 billion to the debt.
Most of the measure — except for a six-month extension of jobless benefits for people who have been out of work for more than six months — is financed with offsetting tax increases or spending cuts, including more than $10 billion cut from last year's stimulus bill. Congress has always approved additional unemployment benefits as a deficit-financed emergency measure.
Democratic leaders said they bent over backwards to accommodate demands by Republicans for a smaller measure. Among the cuts revealed Wednesday was a more than $10 cut from last year's stimulus bill, mostly buy paring back food stamp benefits by about $11 a month per beneficiary.
"They asked to have it reduced, we did it. They asked to have it paid for, we did it," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.
A spokesman for Snowe confirmed she would vote to support the filibuster. She had unsuccessfully pressed for changes to a tax reform provision aimed at small businesses that shelter income as dividends exempt from payroll taxes.
By ANDREW TAYLOR (AP)
WASHINGTON — Republicans in the Senate appear likely to kill legislation to provide continued unemployment checks to millions of people and provide states with billions of dollars to avert layoffs.
It would be a bitter defeat for President Barack Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats, who have been trying to advance the measure for months as an insurance policy against a double-dip recession.
Despite another round of cuts to the measure aimed at pacifying GOP deficit concerns, the measure seems doomed to die by a filibuster in a vote expected as early as Thursday.
Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he would pull the measure from the floor if Democrats lose the vote. Democrats hope that political pressure from voters and business groups might eventually revive the measure.
The latest version of the measure contains a variety of provisions sought by lawmakers in both parties, blending jobless aid averaging about $300 a week with the renewal of dozens of tax cuts sought by business groups and a host of other legislation. It is considerably smaller than a version that passed with GOP help just three months ago.
"It adds new taxes and over $30 billion to an already staggering $13 trillion dollar national debt," said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
The catchall measure also includes $16 billion for state governments to avert layoffs, farm disaster aid, $1 billion for a youth summer jobs initiative and an extension of a bond program that subsidizes interest costs for state and local infrastructure projects. It would levy a new tax on investment fund managers but extend tax breaks such as lucrative credits that help businesses finance research and develop new products, and a sales tax deduction that mainly helps people in states without income taxes.
The death of the measure would mean that more than 200,000 people a week would lose their jobless benefits because they would be unable to reapply for additional tiers of benefits enacted since 2008. People seeking the popular homebuyer tax credit would be denied a paperwork extension approved by the Senate last week.
"This is a bill that would remedy serious challenges that American families face as a result of this Great Recession," said Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chief author of the bill. "This is a bill that works to build a stronger economy. This is a bill to put Americans back to work."
And doctors are livid about a 21 percent cut in their Medicare payments imposed last week; the bill would have afforded them a six-month reprieve from the cuts. Stand-alone legislation to address the problem has stalled in the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is insisting that it be part of the broader measure.
By the end of this week, about 1.2 million people will have lost their jobless benefits since a temporary extension expired at the beginning of the month, according to Labor Department estimates.
Crestfallen Democrats tried in vain to win support from moderate Republicans like Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, leaving them apparently two votes short of the 60 needed to defeat a filibuster. But talks collapsed Thursday, aides said, leading Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to offer a pared-back measure that would add $33 billion to the deficit over the upcoming decade.
The bill has long been considered a must-pass measure, but the political sands have shifted since it first passed in March. That vote came in the wake of a political scalding for Republicans after Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., blocked a short-term extension of jobless aid.
In the interim, however, the debt crisis in Europe and growing anxiety on deficits and debt among voters, has turned Republicans against the legislation, even though it's been cut considerably since passage of a March version that would have added about $100 billion to the debt.
Most of the measure — except for a six-month extension of jobless benefits for people who have been out of work for more than six months — is financed with offsetting tax increases or spending cuts, including more than $10 billion cut from last year's stimulus bill. Congress has always approved additional unemployment benefits as a deficit-financed emergency measure.
Democratic leaders said they bent over backwards to accommodate demands by Republicans for a smaller measure. Among the cuts revealed Wednesday was a more than $10 cut from last year's stimulus bill, mostly buy paring back food stamp benefits by about $11 a month per beneficiary.
"They asked to have it reduced, we did it. They asked to have it paid for, we did it," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.
A spokesman for Snowe confirmed she would vote to support the filibuster. She had unsuccessfully pressed for changes to a tax reform provision aimed at small businesses that shelter income as dividends exempt from payroll taxes.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Anti-homelessness strategy expands programs to assist veterans, families
By Henri E. Cauvin
Tuesday, June 22, 2010; 5:29 PM
The Obama administration released a strategy Tuesday to end homelessness that would expand programs to secure housing for veterans and families with young children, and build on efforts to help chronically homeless Americans.
With the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq highlighting the needs of veterans and the economic crisis straining more families, the administration's plan widens the role envisioned for the federal government in curbing -- and ending -- homelessness. But it does not provide a significant infusion of federal money to combat the problem.
Instead the 67-page strategy, drafted by the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness and unveiled Tuesday, details a host of smaller projects intended to spur collaboration among federal agencies and with local and state governments.
One project combines Section 8 housing vouchers with other anti-poverty assistance to help 6,000 families in communities with high concentrations of homeless families. Another project couples vouchers with health and social services funded by Medicaid and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration to assist 4,000 chronically homeless people move off the streets and out of shelters. Another initiative, similar to a program underway in the District, helps vulnerable veterans move swiftly into housing by linking local housing and social services with the Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program.
"No one should be without a safe, stable place to call home, and today we unveil a plan that will put our nation on the path toward ending all types of homelessness," HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, who leads the 19-agency council, said in a statement.
Nationwide, about 1.5 million people experienced homelessness last year, according to HUD. In the Washington region, more than 12,000 people were homeless last year, including more than 6,000 in the District, according to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
From adults with severe mental illness to adolescents aging out of the foster care system, homelessness has its roots in many societal problems. But the Obama administration's strategy emphasizes that only when people are back in a home can they be expected to really address underlying problems in their lives.
This Housing First philosophy has been embraced in the District and elsewhere. In D.C., it has helped place about 1,000 people in homes, said Linda Kaufman, the chief operating officer of Pathways to Housing, which works with several hundred mentally ill, chronically homeless people. "If you don't do housing, you can't address the issues of homelessness," Kaufman said.
Framed by 10 objectives, the new national strategy aims to end homelessness among veterans and the chronically homeless by 2015 and among children and families by 2020.
The Bush administration's anti-homelessness strategy focused on the chronically homeless and as a result, said Mary Cunningham, a senior researcher at the Urban Institute, tens of thousands of people are in supported housing today. To the Obama administration's credit, Cunningham said, that focus has been broadened to include veterans and families with children. "They didn't abandon the previous administration's initiative. They expanded it."
But even supporters of the strategy say a far larger financial commitment to housing assistance will be needed to accomplish the objectives.
"The administration does call for some added vouchers, which is terrific," said Elizabeth Lower-Basch, senior policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy. "But even if it's fully funded by Congress, it still would only reach a small fraction of those who are potentially eligible for housing subsidies."
Maria Foscarinis, executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, said the plan offers a compelling portrait of the causes of homelessness and ways to end it. But that's not enough, she said.
"Where it is short in my view," Foscarinis said, is it does not make specific commitments with resources that the administration will pursue to actually fund the plan.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010; 5:29 PM
The Obama administration released a strategy Tuesday to end homelessness that would expand programs to secure housing for veterans and families with young children, and build on efforts to help chronically homeless Americans.
With the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq highlighting the needs of veterans and the economic crisis straining more families, the administration's plan widens the role envisioned for the federal government in curbing -- and ending -- homelessness. But it does not provide a significant infusion of federal money to combat the problem.
Instead the 67-page strategy, drafted by the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness and unveiled Tuesday, details a host of smaller projects intended to spur collaboration among federal agencies and with local and state governments.
One project combines Section 8 housing vouchers with other anti-poverty assistance to help 6,000 families in communities with high concentrations of homeless families. Another project couples vouchers with health and social services funded by Medicaid and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration to assist 4,000 chronically homeless people move off the streets and out of shelters. Another initiative, similar to a program underway in the District, helps vulnerable veterans move swiftly into housing by linking local housing and social services with the Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program.
"No one should be without a safe, stable place to call home, and today we unveil a plan that will put our nation on the path toward ending all types of homelessness," HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, who leads the 19-agency council, said in a statement.
Nationwide, about 1.5 million people experienced homelessness last year, according to HUD. In the Washington region, more than 12,000 people were homeless last year, including more than 6,000 in the District, according to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
From adults with severe mental illness to adolescents aging out of the foster care system, homelessness has its roots in many societal problems. But the Obama administration's strategy emphasizes that only when people are back in a home can they be expected to really address underlying problems in their lives.
This Housing First philosophy has been embraced in the District and elsewhere. In D.C., it has helped place about 1,000 people in homes, said Linda Kaufman, the chief operating officer of Pathways to Housing, which works with several hundred mentally ill, chronically homeless people. "If you don't do housing, you can't address the issues of homelessness," Kaufman said.
Framed by 10 objectives, the new national strategy aims to end homelessness among veterans and the chronically homeless by 2015 and among children and families by 2020.
The Bush administration's anti-homelessness strategy focused on the chronically homeless and as a result, said Mary Cunningham, a senior researcher at the Urban Institute, tens of thousands of people are in supported housing today. To the Obama administration's credit, Cunningham said, that focus has been broadened to include veterans and families with children. "They didn't abandon the previous administration's initiative. They expanded it."
But even supporters of the strategy say a far larger financial commitment to housing assistance will be needed to accomplish the objectives.
"The administration does call for some added vouchers, which is terrific," said Elizabeth Lower-Basch, senior policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy. "But even if it's fully funded by Congress, it still would only reach a small fraction of those who are potentially eligible for housing subsidies."
Maria Foscarinis, executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, said the plan offers a compelling portrait of the causes of homelessness and ways to end it. But that's not enough, she said.
"Where it is short in my view," Foscarinis said, is it does not make specific commitments with resources that the administration will pursue to actually fund the plan.
Friday, June 18, 2010
In the end, Lakers beat Celtics at their own grinding game
In the end, Lakers beat Celtics at their own grinding game
June 17, 2010By Baxter Holmes
Ugly, brutish basketball favored the boys from Boston.
It had all series against the finesse Lakers, as the Celtics' East Coast style helped turn the 2010 NBA Finals into a grind-it-out affair in which the stars were mostly unable to tally high point totals, forced instead to trudge through collapsing defenses and foul trouble.
Fittingly, the games got uglier as the series progressed, and Thursday's Game 7, an 83-79 Lakers win, became the ugliest of all.
"It was exactly the type of game we wanted," Coach Doc Rivers said.
Heading into the fourth quarter, 12 minutes from their 18th title, the Celtics led, 57-53. The game had consisted of a five-for-20 night from Kobe Bryant, and a surprise nights from Ron Artest (14 points up to then) and Rasheed Wallace (eight points), who started in place of the injured Kendrick Perkins.
But the feeling inside of Staples Center was that the Celtics and their aging Big Three couldn't last much longer. And, as the quarter proved, they didn't.
As the Lakers piled up 30 points, the Celtics got only eight combined points from Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen scored only two until he hit two three-point jumpers inside of a minute that kept the game close.
Lakers' stars Bryant and Pau Gasol, on the other hand, poured in 19 of those 30 as the Lakers re-took the lead and built upon.
The Lakers' defense, to be sure, frustrated the Big Three late.
Ron Artest stuck to Pierce, who shot one for five in the quarter.
Allen struggled to get open looks and ran around screen after screen while the Lakers continually switched to not allow him the split second he is known to need for an open shot.
Garnett, whether inside or at the top of the free-throw stripe, pump-faked for shots several times, but looked for his teammates more than he looked for his own, shooting just three times all quarter.
Foul trouble, too, played a role. The Big Three were whistled seven times in the final quarter.
Still, the Celtics got double-digit scoring from all their starters, and the Lakers shot 32.5%. As has held true this series, though, the team (Lakers) that won the rebounding (53-40) won the game.
"I thought the lack of size, at the end of the day, was the difference in the game," Rivers said.
Thought it was close, Rivers credited two big plays late: Bryant's three made foul shots with 8:46 left that made it a one-point game, and Derek Fisher's three-point jumper that tied the score with 6:12 remaining.
"They were close – we always hoped they wouldn't go on a roll," Rivers said. "Neither team did, but they were close, and those two shots bailed them out."
This had seemed like the last run for these Celtics, considering the makeup of the team, which fought through a fourth-place finish in their conference.
"We're not going to be the same team next year," Rivers said. "Guys are not going to be there, so that was tough for me. But again, I was just proud."
baxter.holmes@latimes.com
davidradiotv2000@yahoo.com
June 17, 2010By Baxter Holmes
Ugly, brutish basketball favored the boys from Boston.
It had all series against the finesse Lakers, as the Celtics' East Coast style helped turn the 2010 NBA Finals into a grind-it-out affair in which the stars were mostly unable to tally high point totals, forced instead to trudge through collapsing defenses and foul trouble.
Fittingly, the games got uglier as the series progressed, and Thursday's Game 7, an 83-79 Lakers win, became the ugliest of all.
"It was exactly the type of game we wanted," Coach Doc Rivers said.
Heading into the fourth quarter, 12 minutes from their 18th title, the Celtics led, 57-53. The game had consisted of a five-for-20 night from Kobe Bryant, and a surprise nights from Ron Artest (14 points up to then) and Rasheed Wallace (eight points), who started in place of the injured Kendrick Perkins.
But the feeling inside of Staples Center was that the Celtics and their aging Big Three couldn't last much longer. And, as the quarter proved, they didn't.
As the Lakers piled up 30 points, the Celtics got only eight combined points from Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen scored only two until he hit two three-point jumpers inside of a minute that kept the game close.
Lakers' stars Bryant and Pau Gasol, on the other hand, poured in 19 of those 30 as the Lakers re-took the lead and built upon.
The Lakers' defense, to be sure, frustrated the Big Three late.
Ron Artest stuck to Pierce, who shot one for five in the quarter.
Allen struggled to get open looks and ran around screen after screen while the Lakers continually switched to not allow him the split second he is known to need for an open shot.
Garnett, whether inside or at the top of the free-throw stripe, pump-faked for shots several times, but looked for his teammates more than he looked for his own, shooting just three times all quarter.
Foul trouble, too, played a role. The Big Three were whistled seven times in the final quarter.
Still, the Celtics got double-digit scoring from all their starters, and the Lakers shot 32.5%. As has held true this series, though, the team (Lakers) that won the rebounding (53-40) won the game.
"I thought the lack of size, at the end of the day, was the difference in the game," Rivers said.
Thought it was close, Rivers credited two big plays late: Bryant's three made foul shots with 8:46 left that made it a one-point game, and Derek Fisher's three-point jumper that tied the score with 6:12 remaining.
"They were close – we always hoped they wouldn't go on a roll," Rivers said. "Neither team did, but they were close, and those two shots bailed them out."
This had seemed like the last run for these Celtics, considering the makeup of the team, which fought through a fourth-place finish in their conference.
"We're not going to be the same team next year," Rivers said. "Guys are not going to be there, so that was tough for me. But again, I was just proud."
baxter.holmes@latimes.com
davidradiotv2000@yahoo.com
Thursday, June 17, 2010
San Francisco Approves Cellphone Radiation Law
Jun 16, 2010 1:05 pm
David Zeiler, PC World
Graphic: Diego AguirrePreferring to err on the side of caution, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted 10-1 to require cell phone makers to post notices in their stores with details on the level of radiation each model emits.
The ordinance requires retailers to post information on what is called the "specific absorption rate" (SAR) of its products. The SAR rates measure the amount of radio wave radiation absorbed into the user's body tissue.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who supports the ordinance, is expected to sign it into law. It would take effect in February, with a $300 fine for those found in violation. Other jurisdictions, including Maine and California, have considered similar legislation, but it appears San Francisco would be the first to enact it.
(To watch a video recording of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors' vote click here)
Some worry that prolonged exposure to cell phone radiation may cause brain cancer, although scientific studies have proven inconclusive. The most recent and most comprehensive study, conducted by Interphone and published May 17, found no increased risk for the two most common types of brain cancer.
The lack of certainty one way or the other poses a conundrum. If the government issues warnings just to be safe, it may scare consumers needlessly. On the other hand, if a risk does indeed exist, the government is obligated to alert the public of the potential harm.
The Federal Communication Commission, which regulates cell phone safety along with the Food and Drug Administration, states on its Web site "there is no scientific evidence to date that proves that wireless phone usage can lead to cancer or a variety of other health effects," but goes on to note that "studies are ongoing."
The FCC has set a standard that no cell phone sold in the United States can have a SAR in excess of 1.6 watts per kilogram.
Enterprising consumers can find SAR information on the FCC Web site, but they need to have the product's FCC ID code. San Francisco's new law would put that hard-to-find data directly in front of consumers in stores.
Not surprisingly, representatives of the cell phone industry oppose the law, citing both the existing FCC standard and the lack of definitive scientific evidence linking cell phone use to brain cancer.
John Walls, a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, told the San Francisco Chronicle that the law "will potentially mislead consumers with point-of-sale requirements suggesting that some phones are safer than others, based on radio emissions."
That argument did not sway the lawmakers in city of San Francisco, who say it will serve the public.
"This is a modest and commonsense measure to provide greater transparency and information to consumer," Tony Winnicker, a spokesman for Mayor Newsom, told the Chronicle.
David Zeiler, PC World
Graphic: Diego AguirrePreferring to err on the side of caution, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted 10-1 to require cell phone makers to post notices in their stores with details on the level of radiation each model emits.
The ordinance requires retailers to post information on what is called the "specific absorption rate" (SAR) of its products. The SAR rates measure the amount of radio wave radiation absorbed into the user's body tissue.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who supports the ordinance, is expected to sign it into law. It would take effect in February, with a $300 fine for those found in violation. Other jurisdictions, including Maine and California, have considered similar legislation, but it appears San Francisco would be the first to enact it.
(To watch a video recording of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors' vote click here)
Some worry that prolonged exposure to cell phone radiation may cause brain cancer, although scientific studies have proven inconclusive. The most recent and most comprehensive study, conducted by Interphone and published May 17, found no increased risk for the two most common types of brain cancer.
The lack of certainty one way or the other poses a conundrum. If the government issues warnings just to be safe, it may scare consumers needlessly. On the other hand, if a risk does indeed exist, the government is obligated to alert the public of the potential harm.
The Federal Communication Commission, which regulates cell phone safety along with the Food and Drug Administration, states on its Web site "there is no scientific evidence to date that proves that wireless phone usage can lead to cancer or a variety of other health effects," but goes on to note that "studies are ongoing."
The FCC has set a standard that no cell phone sold in the United States can have a SAR in excess of 1.6 watts per kilogram.
Enterprising consumers can find SAR information on the FCC Web site, but they need to have the product's FCC ID code. San Francisco's new law would put that hard-to-find data directly in front of consumers in stores.
Not surprisingly, representatives of the cell phone industry oppose the law, citing both the existing FCC standard and the lack of definitive scientific evidence linking cell phone use to brain cancer.
John Walls, a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, told the San Francisco Chronicle that the law "will potentially mislead consumers with point-of-sale requirements suggesting that some phones are safer than others, based on radio emissions."
That argument did not sway the lawmakers in city of San Francisco, who say it will serve the public.
"This is a modest and commonsense measure to provide greater transparency and information to consumer," Tony Winnicker, a spokesman for Mayor Newsom, told the Chronicle.
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
The merits of iPhone moviemaking
Apple’s new app could change how people think about portable video
Posted on
Jun 8, 2010 10:57 am by Christopher Breen, Macworld.com
During Steve Jobs’s keynote speech Monday at the Worldwide Developers Conference, he introduced the $5 iMovie for iPhone. In a demo hosted by Apple’s chief architect of video applications, Randy Ubillos—the man responsible for 2008’s loved-it-or-hate-it iMovie makeover—we saw an iMovie that works very much like its fuller-featured sibling, iMovie ’09. Unlike iMovie ’08 and iMovie ’09, however, this mobile video editor may receive a far warmer reception from its intended audience.
What came before
The iPhone 3GS can shoot and edit standard-definition video, but its editing features are meager at best. The built-in editor acts as a way to trim the fat so you’re not uploading more video than you need to. Using a timeline, you can trim the beginning and end of a clip but you can’t split a video, combine clips, or add opening or closing titles or music. You can then send the resulting clip via e-mail, as an MMS message, or to your MobileMe Gallery or YouTube.
Coming soon
The iPhone 4 and iMovie for iPhone app changes that. To begin with, just like such pocket camcorders as Cisco’s popular Flip MinoHD (), the iPhone 4 can shoot 720p HD video at 30 frames per second from its rear-facing camera. Unlike the Flip MinoHD and other pocket camcorders, the iPhone 4 includes an LED flash, which works with video as well as stills. It also includes a tap-to-focus feature that lets you easily choose what you’d like the camera to focus on. Digital zooms generally produce unsatisfying results, as the process simply enlarges pixels rather than moves lens elements, but Apple gains bragging rights for offering a 5x digital zoom versus the 2x or 4x zoom offered by most pocket camcorders.
The big difference, though, is on-device editing. Today’s pocket camcorders demand that you export video to a computer before you can edit it. With the iMovie app you should be able to edit and deliver fairly polished videos without the iPhone ever touching your Mac or Windows PC.
What iMovie brings
When you see iMovie on the iPhone, iMovie ’08 and ’09 make more sense. It’s as if Apple originally designed them with a touchscreen interface in mind, as much of iMovie seems ideal for dragging and pinching rather than mousing, regardless of the platform it's running on.
The iMovie for iPhone app brings a workflow similar to what you find in iMovie ’09. You drag clips from a bin into your project or, if you like, add live video from the iPhone’s camera. Once in the project you can trim clips using drag handles and zoom in when you need to make finer edits. As with iMovie for Mac you can add transitions—a cross-fade or theme-base transition—between clips as well as titles. You can additionally apply up to five themes to your project.
You can also add music—canned music that comes with each project theme or music from your iTunes library. It appears that iMovie for iPhone has an auto-ducking feature that reduces the background music’s volume when there’s dialog in the video. And iMovie for iPhone can take advantage of the iPhone’s geolocation talents by displaying the location of the video in the movie’s title.
Additionally, you can add still images from the phone’s photo library to your project. By default, the Ken Burns pan-and-scan effect is applied to these images (hopefully the effect can also be switched off) and by pinching and dragging you can configure the direction and zoom level of the effect. The delivery options are no different than what we enjoy now—e-mail, MMS, MobileMe Gallery, and YouTube—though you can choose the resolution of the exported movie (360p, 540p, or 720p).
Peering into the future
What iMovie for iPhone eventually means depends on a variety of factors—the quality of the iPhone 4’s video, how much trouble it is to edit movies with the app, and how necessary slick-looking videos are to iPhone owners.
When the fifth-generation iPod nano () was released—that’s the version of the nano that shoots video—some people predicted the fall of the Flip pocket camcorder. It turned out that the nano shot pretty marginal video, so the Flip and its like lived on. If the iPhone 4 produces HD video that matches or exceeds the quality of the video produced by dedicated pocket camcorders (plus shoots better in low light because of its LED flash) and delivery of videos is as seamless as Apple suggests, Cisco, Kodak, Creative, and other pocket camcorder manufacturers may have to think long and hard about the future of some of their products.
iMovie for iPhone looks to be an easy-to-use application. But is it easy enough to use that iPhone owners will take the time to sit down and edit video on a small screen—particularly when a Mac, complete with a more feature-rich video editor, may be just a room or two away?
While some Mac users may opt to use iMovie for Mac rather than edit video on their phones, Windows users don’t have this luxury. Windows’ video editing application—Windows Movie Maker—is far more limited than iMovie for the Mac. Because it is, Windows iPhone users may find that they prefer editing video on their phones rather than doing the job on their PCs.
And finally there’s the question of whether most people shooting video with a phone care about using that material to create finished videos. Up to this point the typical pocket camcorder owner is someone within the 18-to-24 demographic interested solely in capturing their buddy doing something incredibly stupid (often involving alcohol and gravity) and, within minutes, posting the results on YouTube. For them, simple trim controls are enough. Shoot and post are their watchwords.
The iPhone and iMovie for iPhone, with its family-and-friends focus, is likely to change the way people think about portable video—how it’s shot as well as edited. It will be interesting to see if iPhone 4 owners continue to produce polished videos after the novelty of editing video on the iPhone wears off.
[Christopher Breen is a senior editor for Macworld.]
Posted on
Jun 8, 2010 10:57 am by Christopher Breen, Macworld.com
During Steve Jobs’s keynote speech Monday at the Worldwide Developers Conference, he introduced the $5 iMovie for iPhone. In a demo hosted by Apple’s chief architect of video applications, Randy Ubillos—the man responsible for 2008’s loved-it-or-hate-it iMovie makeover—we saw an iMovie that works very much like its fuller-featured sibling, iMovie ’09. Unlike iMovie ’08 and iMovie ’09, however, this mobile video editor may receive a far warmer reception from its intended audience.
What came before
The iPhone 3GS can shoot and edit standard-definition video, but its editing features are meager at best. The built-in editor acts as a way to trim the fat so you’re not uploading more video than you need to. Using a timeline, you can trim the beginning and end of a clip but you can’t split a video, combine clips, or add opening or closing titles or music. You can then send the resulting clip via e-mail, as an MMS message, or to your MobileMe Gallery or YouTube.
Coming soon
The iPhone 4 and iMovie for iPhone app changes that. To begin with, just like such pocket camcorders as Cisco’s popular Flip MinoHD (), the iPhone 4 can shoot 720p HD video at 30 frames per second from its rear-facing camera. Unlike the Flip MinoHD and other pocket camcorders, the iPhone 4 includes an LED flash, which works with video as well as stills. It also includes a tap-to-focus feature that lets you easily choose what you’d like the camera to focus on. Digital zooms generally produce unsatisfying results, as the process simply enlarges pixels rather than moves lens elements, but Apple gains bragging rights for offering a 5x digital zoom versus the 2x or 4x zoom offered by most pocket camcorders.
The big difference, though, is on-device editing. Today’s pocket camcorders demand that you export video to a computer before you can edit it. With the iMovie app you should be able to edit and deliver fairly polished videos without the iPhone ever touching your Mac or Windows PC.
What iMovie brings
When you see iMovie on the iPhone, iMovie ’08 and ’09 make more sense. It’s as if Apple originally designed them with a touchscreen interface in mind, as much of iMovie seems ideal for dragging and pinching rather than mousing, regardless of the platform it's running on.
The iMovie for iPhone app brings a workflow similar to what you find in iMovie ’09. You drag clips from a bin into your project or, if you like, add live video from the iPhone’s camera. Once in the project you can trim clips using drag handles and zoom in when you need to make finer edits. As with iMovie for Mac you can add transitions—a cross-fade or theme-base transition—between clips as well as titles. You can additionally apply up to five themes to your project.
You can also add music—canned music that comes with each project theme or music from your iTunes library. It appears that iMovie for iPhone has an auto-ducking feature that reduces the background music’s volume when there’s dialog in the video. And iMovie for iPhone can take advantage of the iPhone’s geolocation talents by displaying the location of the video in the movie’s title.
Additionally, you can add still images from the phone’s photo library to your project. By default, the Ken Burns pan-and-scan effect is applied to these images (hopefully the effect can also be switched off) and by pinching and dragging you can configure the direction and zoom level of the effect. The delivery options are no different than what we enjoy now—e-mail, MMS, MobileMe Gallery, and YouTube—though you can choose the resolution of the exported movie (360p, 540p, or 720p).
Peering into the future
What iMovie for iPhone eventually means depends on a variety of factors—the quality of the iPhone 4’s video, how much trouble it is to edit movies with the app, and how necessary slick-looking videos are to iPhone owners.
When the fifth-generation iPod nano () was released—that’s the version of the nano that shoots video—some people predicted the fall of the Flip pocket camcorder. It turned out that the nano shot pretty marginal video, so the Flip and its like lived on. If the iPhone 4 produces HD video that matches or exceeds the quality of the video produced by dedicated pocket camcorders (plus shoots better in low light because of its LED flash) and delivery of videos is as seamless as Apple suggests, Cisco, Kodak, Creative, and other pocket camcorder manufacturers may have to think long and hard about the future of some of their products.
iMovie for iPhone looks to be an easy-to-use application. But is it easy enough to use that iPhone owners will take the time to sit down and edit video on a small screen—particularly when a Mac, complete with a more feature-rich video editor, may be just a room or two away?
While some Mac users may opt to use iMovie for Mac rather than edit video on their phones, Windows users don’t have this luxury. Windows’ video editing application—Windows Movie Maker—is far more limited than iMovie for the Mac. Because it is, Windows iPhone users may find that they prefer editing video on their phones rather than doing the job on their PCs.
And finally there’s the question of whether most people shooting video with a phone care about using that material to create finished videos. Up to this point the typical pocket camcorder owner is someone within the 18-to-24 demographic interested solely in capturing their buddy doing something incredibly stupid (often involving alcohol and gravity) and, within minutes, posting the results on YouTube. For them, simple trim controls are enough. Shoot and post are their watchwords.
The iPhone and iMovie for iPhone, with its family-and-friends focus, is likely to change the way people think about portable video—how it’s shot as well as edited. It will be interesting to see if iPhone 4 owners continue to produce polished videos after the novelty of editing video on the iPhone wears off.
[Christopher Breen is a senior editor for Macworld.]
Monday, June 07, 2010
2 New Jersey Terror Suspects Appear in Court
Published June 07, 2010
FOXNews.com
Two American men arrested as they allegedly tried to fly to Somalia to join a terrorist group made their first appearance in federal court Monday.
Mohamed Mahmood Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte are accused of trying to join al-Shabab, which was designated by the U.S. as a terrorist group in 2008. They face charges of conspiring to kill, maim and kidnap persons outside the United States.
The 20-year-old Alessa and the 24-year-old Almonte appeared briefly Monday in U.S. District Court in Newark. Both had curly dark hair and bushy beards and had their feet and hands shackled.
They spoke only to say they understood the charge against them. Both remained in custody pending a bail hearing Thursday.
If convicted, the two men could face life in prison.
Though the alleged plot was arrested before the two men boarded separate Egypt-bound flights from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, federal officials said the two posed a threat to American citizens abroad.
"Sophistication is not necessarily a measure of danger, as we've learned in lots of other cases," U.S. attorney Paul Fishman said outside the courthouse Monday. "I think that we would be remiss if we didn't pay attention to anyone who has the intention to do what these folks are alleged to have done, which is to seek to join a violent jihad to commit acts of violence against people here or abroad."
New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters Sunday that the young men had traveled to Jordan in 2007. From there, they tried to get into Iraq but were turned back, he said.
"It's not unlike other cases that we've seen recently where individuals who express an interest to do 'jihad' go overseas and then are turned around" and "come back to attempt acts of violence in the United States," Kelly said, citing other high-profile cases, like Najibullah Zazi and Faisal Shahzad, both charged with plotting separate acts of terror inside the United States.
State and federal law enforcement agents have been investigating Alessa, of North Bergen, and Almonte, of Elmwood Park, since 2006, intercepting several conversations between the two about beheading Americans and committing acts of terror.
On Nov. 29, 2009, authorities recorded a conversation between Alessa and Almonte in which Alessa allegedly said: "They only fear you when you have a gun and when you -- when you start killing them, and when you -- when you take their head, and you go like this...and you behead it on camera."
"We'll start doing killing here. If I can't do it, over there," Alessa said, according to the U.S. District Attorney's office.
Speaking of Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, charged with killing 13 people and wounding scores of others in a Nov. 5, 2009, massacre, Alessa allegedly told an undercover agent: "He's not better than me. I'll do twice what he did."
Almonte reportedly told the undercover officer in April that there would soon be American troops in Somalia, which he allegedly said was good because it would not be as gratifying to kill only Africans.
"My soul cannot rest until I shed blood," Alessa said, according to court documents. "I wanna, like, be the world's known terrorist."
Alessa, a U.S. citizen of Palestinian descent, and Almonte, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in the Dominican Republican, are scheduled to appear Monday in federal court in Newark.
Alessa and Almonte had planned their trip to Somalia for several months, saving thousands of dollars, undergoing tactical training and test runs at paintball fields to condition themselves physically, and acquiring equipment and clothing they could use when they joined al-Shabab, officials said. Both had reportedly bragged about wanting to wage holy war against the United States both at home and internationally.
Officials said the two men were not planning an imminent attack in the New York-New Jersey area.
A neighbor of Alessa's, Helen Gonyou, said Alessa was attending school and lived with his parents but that she had not seen him in a while. They are good neighbors, she said, adding that she regularly exchanged pleasantries with Alessa's father.
She cautioned against prejudgment and called the charges an "unfortunate set of circumstances."
"I just have to hope that if the case is true, they caught them before they could do bodily harm to anyone," she said.
Fox News' David Lee Miller and the Associated Press contributed to this report
FOXNews.com
Two American men arrested as they allegedly tried to fly to Somalia to join a terrorist group made their first appearance in federal court Monday.
Mohamed Mahmood Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte are accused of trying to join al-Shabab, which was designated by the U.S. as a terrorist group in 2008. They face charges of conspiring to kill, maim and kidnap persons outside the United States.
The 20-year-old Alessa and the 24-year-old Almonte appeared briefly Monday in U.S. District Court in Newark. Both had curly dark hair and bushy beards and had their feet and hands shackled.
They spoke only to say they understood the charge against them. Both remained in custody pending a bail hearing Thursday.
If convicted, the two men could face life in prison.
Though the alleged plot was arrested before the two men boarded separate Egypt-bound flights from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, federal officials said the two posed a threat to American citizens abroad.
"Sophistication is not necessarily a measure of danger, as we've learned in lots of other cases," U.S. attorney Paul Fishman said outside the courthouse Monday. "I think that we would be remiss if we didn't pay attention to anyone who has the intention to do what these folks are alleged to have done, which is to seek to join a violent jihad to commit acts of violence against people here or abroad."
New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters Sunday that the young men had traveled to Jordan in 2007. From there, they tried to get into Iraq but were turned back, he said.
"It's not unlike other cases that we've seen recently where individuals who express an interest to do 'jihad' go overseas and then are turned around" and "come back to attempt acts of violence in the United States," Kelly said, citing other high-profile cases, like Najibullah Zazi and Faisal Shahzad, both charged with plotting separate acts of terror inside the United States.
State and federal law enforcement agents have been investigating Alessa, of North Bergen, and Almonte, of Elmwood Park, since 2006, intercepting several conversations between the two about beheading Americans and committing acts of terror.
On Nov. 29, 2009, authorities recorded a conversation between Alessa and Almonte in which Alessa allegedly said: "They only fear you when you have a gun and when you -- when you start killing them, and when you -- when you take their head, and you go like this...and you behead it on camera."
"We'll start doing killing here. If I can't do it, over there," Alessa said, according to the U.S. District Attorney's office.
Speaking of Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, charged with killing 13 people and wounding scores of others in a Nov. 5, 2009, massacre, Alessa allegedly told an undercover agent: "He's not better than me. I'll do twice what he did."
Almonte reportedly told the undercover officer in April that there would soon be American troops in Somalia, which he allegedly said was good because it would not be as gratifying to kill only Africans.
"My soul cannot rest until I shed blood," Alessa said, according to court documents. "I wanna, like, be the world's known terrorist."
Alessa, a U.S. citizen of Palestinian descent, and Almonte, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in the Dominican Republican, are scheduled to appear Monday in federal court in Newark.
Alessa and Almonte had planned their trip to Somalia for several months, saving thousands of dollars, undergoing tactical training and test runs at paintball fields to condition themselves physically, and acquiring equipment and clothing they could use when they joined al-Shabab, officials said. Both had reportedly bragged about wanting to wage holy war against the United States both at home and internationally.
Officials said the two men were not planning an imminent attack in the New York-New Jersey area.
A neighbor of Alessa's, Helen Gonyou, said Alessa was attending school and lived with his parents but that she had not seen him in a while. They are good neighbors, she said, adding that she regularly exchanged pleasantries with Alessa's father.
She cautioned against prejudgment and called the charges an "unfortunate set of circumstances."
"I just have to hope that if the case is true, they caught them before they could do bodily harm to anyone," she said.
Fox News' David Lee Miller and the Associated Press contributed to this report
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
Some oil spill events from Wednesday, June 2, 2010
By The Associated Press
6-2-2010
A summary of events on Wednesday, June 2, Day 43 of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill that began with the April 20 explosion and fire on the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, owned by Transocean Ltd. and leased by BP PLC, which is in charge of cleanup and containment. The blast killed 11 workers. Since then, oil has been pouring into the Gulf from a blown-out undersea well.
OVERVIEW
As the crude crept closer to Florida, the risky effort to contain the nation's worst oil spill hit a snag Wednesday.
PIPE CUTTING
A diamond-edged saw got stuck in a thick pipe on a blown-out well at the bottom of the Gulf. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said the goal was to free the saw and finish the cut later in the day. A mile underwater, robot subs wielded tools akin to oversized garden shears to break away part of the broken riser pipe so engineers can then position a cap over the well's opening. Even if it succeeds, it will temporarily increase the huge leak's flow by 20 percent — at least 100,000 gallons more a day. That's on top of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million gallons gushing out already. BP's best chance to actually plug the leak rests with a pair of relief wells. Those won't likely be completed until August.
OBAMA
President Barack Obama said it was time to roll back billions of dollars in tax breaks for oil companies and use the money for clean energy research and development. He said the catastrophic Gulf oil spill shows the country must move toward clean energy, tapping natural gas and nuclear power and eliminating tax breaks for big oil.
OIL SPREADS
Florida officials confirmed an oil sheen about seven miles from the famous white sands of Pensacola beach. Thunderstorms were making it difficult to track the slick. Crews shored up miles of boom and prepared for the mess to make landfall as early as Wednesday. Florida would be the fourth state hit. Crude has already been reported along barrier islands in Alabama and Mississippi, and it has mucked up some 125 miles of Louisiana coastline.
SHAREHOLDER DIVIDENDS
Two Democratic senators are pressing BP to delay plans to pay shareholder dividends worth an expected $10 billion or more until the full costs for cleaning up the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico are calculated. Senators Charles Schumer of New York and Ron Wyden of Oregon called it "unfathomable" that BP would pay out a dividend to shareholders before the total cost of the cleanup is known.
NEW WELL
Federal regulators on Wednesday approved the first new Gulf of Mexico oil well since President Barack Obama lifted a brief ban on drilling in shallow water. Deepwater projects remained frozen after the massive BP spill. The Minerals Management Service granted a new drilling permit sought by Bandon Oil and Gas for a site off the coast of Louisiana and 115 feet below the ocean's surface. It's south of Rockefeller State Wildlife Refuge and Game Preserve, far to the west of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that triggered the BP spill.
PR SPOOF
A spoof on BP's oil spill public relations has brought in $10,000 for a nonprofit conservation group for the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Restoration Network official Aaron Viles says the person who has been tweeting as "BPGlobalPR" put $10,000 into the organization's PayPal account Wednesday. And Viles says there's a promise of more if the tweeter's T-shirts satirizing BP keep selling.
HOW MANY GALLONS?
Since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, eventually collapsing into the Gulf of Mexico, an estimated 21 million to 45 million gallons of oil has spewed, eclipsing the 11 million that leaked from the Exxon Valdez disaster.
CONSERVATIVES
Ben Brooks, a lawyer and Republican state senator from coastal Alabama, says he's no fan of big government but he expects an aggressive federal response to the oil spill. "There's nothing inherently contradictory in saying we believe in smaller government and demanding that the government protect public safety," Brooks said. He's not alone. All along the Gulf Coast, where the tea party thrives and "socialism" is a common description for any government program, conservatives who usually denounce federal activism suddenly are clamoring for it.
CELEBRITIES
As oil continues to pour into the Gulf of Mexico, actress Victoria Principal has stepped up with a $200,000 donation to help clean things up. Oceana and the Natural Resources Defense Council say the former "Dallas" star wants the two nonprofits to work together to address the damage along the Gulf Coast and support a shift toward renewable energy. Other celebrities also have become involved. Ted Danson, who is on Oceana's board of directors, is an outspoken critic of offshore drilling. Director James Cameron met with officials to share his expertise on underwater filming and remote vehicle technologies. And Kevin Costner has invested more than $24 million to develop devices now under consideration to help clean up the spill.
6-2-2010
A summary of events on Wednesday, June 2, Day 43 of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill that began with the April 20 explosion and fire on the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, owned by Transocean Ltd. and leased by BP PLC, which is in charge of cleanup and containment. The blast killed 11 workers. Since then, oil has been pouring into the Gulf from a blown-out undersea well.
OVERVIEW
As the crude crept closer to Florida, the risky effort to contain the nation's worst oil spill hit a snag Wednesday.
PIPE CUTTING
A diamond-edged saw got stuck in a thick pipe on a blown-out well at the bottom of the Gulf. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said the goal was to free the saw and finish the cut later in the day. A mile underwater, robot subs wielded tools akin to oversized garden shears to break away part of the broken riser pipe so engineers can then position a cap over the well's opening. Even if it succeeds, it will temporarily increase the huge leak's flow by 20 percent — at least 100,000 gallons more a day. That's on top of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million gallons gushing out already. BP's best chance to actually plug the leak rests with a pair of relief wells. Those won't likely be completed until August.
OBAMA
President Barack Obama said it was time to roll back billions of dollars in tax breaks for oil companies and use the money for clean energy research and development. He said the catastrophic Gulf oil spill shows the country must move toward clean energy, tapping natural gas and nuclear power and eliminating tax breaks for big oil.
OIL SPREADS
Florida officials confirmed an oil sheen about seven miles from the famous white sands of Pensacola beach. Thunderstorms were making it difficult to track the slick. Crews shored up miles of boom and prepared for the mess to make landfall as early as Wednesday. Florida would be the fourth state hit. Crude has already been reported along barrier islands in Alabama and Mississippi, and it has mucked up some 125 miles of Louisiana coastline.
SHAREHOLDER DIVIDENDS
Two Democratic senators are pressing BP to delay plans to pay shareholder dividends worth an expected $10 billion or more until the full costs for cleaning up the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico are calculated. Senators Charles Schumer of New York and Ron Wyden of Oregon called it "unfathomable" that BP would pay out a dividend to shareholders before the total cost of the cleanup is known.
NEW WELL
Federal regulators on Wednesday approved the first new Gulf of Mexico oil well since President Barack Obama lifted a brief ban on drilling in shallow water. Deepwater projects remained frozen after the massive BP spill. The Minerals Management Service granted a new drilling permit sought by Bandon Oil and Gas for a site off the coast of Louisiana and 115 feet below the ocean's surface. It's south of Rockefeller State Wildlife Refuge and Game Preserve, far to the west of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that triggered the BP spill.
PR SPOOF
A spoof on BP's oil spill public relations has brought in $10,000 for a nonprofit conservation group for the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Restoration Network official Aaron Viles says the person who has been tweeting as "BPGlobalPR" put $10,000 into the organization's PayPal account Wednesday. And Viles says there's a promise of more if the tweeter's T-shirts satirizing BP keep selling.
HOW MANY GALLONS?
Since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, eventually collapsing into the Gulf of Mexico, an estimated 21 million to 45 million gallons of oil has spewed, eclipsing the 11 million that leaked from the Exxon Valdez disaster.
CONSERVATIVES
Ben Brooks, a lawyer and Republican state senator from coastal Alabama, says he's no fan of big government but he expects an aggressive federal response to the oil spill. "There's nothing inherently contradictory in saying we believe in smaller government and demanding that the government protect public safety," Brooks said. He's not alone. All along the Gulf Coast, where the tea party thrives and "socialism" is a common description for any government program, conservatives who usually denounce federal activism suddenly are clamoring for it.
CELEBRITIES
As oil continues to pour into the Gulf of Mexico, actress Victoria Principal has stepped up with a $200,000 donation to help clean things up. Oceana and the Natural Resources Defense Council say the former "Dallas" star wants the two nonprofits to work together to address the damage along the Gulf Coast and support a shift toward renewable energy. Other celebrities also have become involved. Ted Danson, who is on Oceana's board of directors, is an outspoken critic of offshore drilling. Director James Cameron met with officials to share his expertise on underwater filming and remote vehicle technologies. And Kevin Costner has invested more than $24 million to develop devices now under consideration to help clean up the spill.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
New King of Technology: Apple Overtakes Microsoft
Published: May 26, 2010
By MIGUEL HELFT and ASHLEE VANCE
SAN FRANCISCO — Apple, the maker of iPods, iPhones and iPads, overtook Microsoft, the computer software giant, on Wednesday to become the world’s most valuable technology company.
In intraday trading in the afternoon session, Apple shares rose 1.8 percent, which gave the company a value of $227.1 billion. Shares of Microsoft declined about 1 percent, giving the company a market capitalization of $226.3 billion.
The only American company valued higher is Exxon Mobil, with a market capitalization of $282 billion.
This changing of the guard caps one of the most stunning turnarounds in business history, as Apple had been given up for dead only a decade earlier. But the rapidly rising value attached to Apple by investors also heralds a cultural shift: Consumer tastes have overtaken the needs of business as the leading force shaping technology.
Microsoft, with its Windows and Office software franchises, has dominated the relationship most people had with their computers for almost two decades and that was reflected in its stock market capitalization. But the click-clack of the keyboard has ceded ground to the swoosh of a finger across a smartphone’s touch-screen.
“It is the single most important turnaround that I have seen in Silicon Valley,” said Jim Breyer, a venture capitalist who has invested in some of the most successful technology companies.
By MIGUEL HELFT and ASHLEE VANCE
SAN FRANCISCO — Apple, the maker of iPods, iPhones and iPads, overtook Microsoft, the computer software giant, on Wednesday to become the world’s most valuable technology company.
In intraday trading in the afternoon session, Apple shares rose 1.8 percent, which gave the company a value of $227.1 billion. Shares of Microsoft declined about 1 percent, giving the company a market capitalization of $226.3 billion.
The only American company valued higher is Exxon Mobil, with a market capitalization of $282 billion.
This changing of the guard caps one of the most stunning turnarounds in business history, as Apple had been given up for dead only a decade earlier. But the rapidly rising value attached to Apple by investors also heralds a cultural shift: Consumer tastes have overtaken the needs of business as the leading force shaping technology.
Microsoft, with its Windows and Office software franchises, has dominated the relationship most people had with their computers for almost two decades and that was reflected in its stock market capitalization. But the click-clack of the keyboard has ceded ground to the swoosh of a finger across a smartphone’s touch-screen.
“It is the single most important turnaround that I have seen in Silicon Valley,” said Jim Breyer, a venture capitalist who has invested in some of the most successful technology companies.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Supreme Court rules for black Chicago firefighters
10:50 a.m. CDT, May 24, 2010
Washington...Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking at the court Monday, said he and his colleagues were applying the civil rights laws as written by Congress, not necessarily as he and others think it should be written. Since 1991, federal law has made it illegal for employers to use an "employment practice" that had a "disparate impact on the basis of race."The Chicago case began in 1995 when 26,000 applicants took a written test to become a city firefighter. Faced with the large number applicants for only several hundred jobs, the city decided it would only consider those who scored 89 or above.This cut-off score excluded a high percentage of the minority applicants. And after a trial in 2005, U.S. District Judge Joan Gottschall ruled the test had an illegal "disparate impact" because the city had not justified the use of the cut-off score. Experts had testified that applicants who scored in the 70s or 80s were shown to be capable of succeeding as firefighters.The city did not contest that conclusion, but it won a reversal from the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on a procedural technicality. The appellate judges said the applicants had waited too long to sue. They had not sued during the year when the test results were released, but sued only after the scores were used to decide who would be hired.Civil-rights lawyers appealed on behalf of Arthur Lewis and the other black applicants. They were joined by the Obama administration, which said the federal civil rights law forbids the "use" of discriminatory tests. And by that standard, the suit was filed on time.The high court agreed Monday in Lewis v. Chicago. "Our charge is to give effect to the law Congress enacted," Scalia said. The class of black applicants had sued at the time the test was used, and it resulted in their not being hired, he concluded.The unanimous ruling stands in sharp contrast to the deep split within the Supreme Court last year over a case involving white firefighters from New Haven, Connecticut. They sued after they were denied promotions when the city scrapped a test because its impact on black applicants. They won a 5-4 ruling from the Supreme Court saying they were victims of illegal discrimination.Chicago's case involved the opposite situation. Where New Haven had backed away from using its test results, Chicago pressed ahead and was later sued for using a test that had a discriminatory impact on blacks.In Monday's opinion, Scalia acknowledged this law creates "practical problems for employers" and can "produce puzzling results." He concluded, however, "it is a problem for Congress, not one that federal courts can fix."David.savage@latimes.com
Washington...Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking at the court Monday, said he and his colleagues were applying the civil rights laws as written by Congress, not necessarily as he and others think it should be written. Since 1991, federal law has made it illegal for employers to use an "employment practice" that had a "disparate impact on the basis of race."The Chicago case began in 1995 when 26,000 applicants took a written test to become a city firefighter. Faced with the large number applicants for only several hundred jobs, the city decided it would only consider those who scored 89 or above.This cut-off score excluded a high percentage of the minority applicants. And after a trial in 2005, U.S. District Judge Joan Gottschall ruled the test had an illegal "disparate impact" because the city had not justified the use of the cut-off score. Experts had testified that applicants who scored in the 70s or 80s were shown to be capable of succeeding as firefighters.The city did not contest that conclusion, but it won a reversal from the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on a procedural technicality. The appellate judges said the applicants had waited too long to sue. They had not sued during the year when the test results were released, but sued only after the scores were used to decide who would be hired.Civil-rights lawyers appealed on behalf of Arthur Lewis and the other black applicants. They were joined by the Obama administration, which said the federal civil rights law forbids the "use" of discriminatory tests. And by that standard, the suit was filed on time.The high court agreed Monday in Lewis v. Chicago. "Our charge is to give effect to the law Congress enacted," Scalia said. The class of black applicants had sued at the time the test was used, and it resulted in their not being hired, he concluded.The unanimous ruling stands in sharp contrast to the deep split within the Supreme Court last year over a case involving white firefighters from New Haven, Connecticut. They sued after they were denied promotions when the city scrapped a test because its impact on black applicants. They won a 5-4 ruling from the Supreme Court saying they were victims of illegal discrimination.Chicago's case involved the opposite situation. Where New Haven had backed away from using its test results, Chicago pressed ahead and was later sued for using a test that had a discriminatory impact on blacks.In Monday's opinion, Scalia acknowledged this law creates "practical problems for employers" and can "produce puzzling results." He concluded, however, "it is a problem for Congress, not one that federal courts can fix."David.savage@latimes.com
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Greek PM Says US Banks Victimized Greece, Calls For Regulation
5-16-2010
ATHENS (Dow Jones)--The Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou said Sunday that he agrees that U.S. investments banks victimized Greece and wants more regulation of financial markets, but that deficit reduction plans are progressing well.
Asked whether Greece was a victim of American investment banks in an interview on CNN on the Fareed Zakaria GPS show, Papandreou said there were "negative practices that are currently being investigated...so there is responsibility there."
The prime minister didn't rule out taking legal recourse against the banks, but he wants to review the results of investigations before making a firm decision.
Papandreou said: "In 2008 we had governments bailing out the financial markets and the banks, and now the banks are funding hedge funds that are betting against the same governments that actually helped them.
"This is a paradox and I think this is where we need to also regulate markets.
"We are fully aware of our responsibilities and what we must do. And there is determination, and not just from me and the government, but also from the Greek people to turn things around and make structural changes."
Greece has promised to cut its budget deficit from 13.6% of gross domestic product in 2009 to below 3% of GDP in three to four years.
Papandreou said: "We are determined to do it and we already have results in the first quarter where we have cut the budget by 40% compared to last year."
The prime mister said a majority of Greek understand that the measures are for "the salvation of the country and the economy. It is easy scapegoat Greece and engage in Greek bashing but we are proud nation, give us a chance and we will show you."
By Nick Skrekas, +30 210 2830685; nskrekas@trk.forthnet.gr
ATHENS (Dow Jones)--The Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou said Sunday that he agrees that U.S. investments banks victimized Greece and wants more regulation of financial markets, but that deficit reduction plans are progressing well.
Asked whether Greece was a victim of American investment banks in an interview on CNN on the Fareed Zakaria GPS show, Papandreou said there were "negative practices that are currently being investigated...so there is responsibility there."
The prime minister didn't rule out taking legal recourse against the banks, but he wants to review the results of investigations before making a firm decision.
Papandreou said: "In 2008 we had governments bailing out the financial markets and the banks, and now the banks are funding hedge funds that are betting against the same governments that actually helped them.
"This is a paradox and I think this is where we need to also regulate markets.
"We are fully aware of our responsibilities and what we must do. And there is determination, and not just from me and the government, but also from the Greek people to turn things around and make structural changes."
Greece has promised to cut its budget deficit from 13.6% of gross domestic product in 2009 to below 3% of GDP in three to four years.
Papandreou said: "We are determined to do it and we already have results in the first quarter where we have cut the budget by 40% compared to last year."
The prime mister said a majority of Greek understand that the measures are for "the salvation of the country and the economy. It is easy scapegoat Greece and engage in Greek bashing but we are proud nation, give us a chance and we will show you."
By Nick Skrekas, +30 210 2830685; nskrekas@trk.forthnet.gr
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Gun Found in Bomb Suspect's Car, Sources Say
NEW YORK, May 4, 2010
CBS News Also Learns Components From Times Square Device Were Found in Conn. Apartment of Suspect
CBS) A Federal law enforcement source told CBS News that components from the incendiary device left in a smoking SUV in Times Square Saturday evening were found in the suspect's Connecticut apartment. A 9 mm handgun with extra clips was also discovered in Faisal Shahzad's car at New York's JFK International Airport, CBS News' Len Tepper reports. Shahzad, a naturalized American citizen of Pakistani descent, was taken into custody last night. Components from the device that were found in Shahzad's Bridgeport, Conn., apartment last night include the boxes for the clocks that were wired to the Nissan Pathfinder's explosive contents. His Connecticut apartment was still being searched by law enforcement agents early Tuesday morning. Photos: Times Square Car Bomb Suspect Officials also told CBS News that the plane Shahzad boarded for the United Arab Emirates was never going to leave JFK; law enforcement had already notified authorities that the plane was not to take off. Emirates Flight 201 had taxied from the gate but was returned, when Shahzad was arrested arrested by U.S. Customs and Border Enforcement officers. Sources also told CBS News that Shahzad had made a call to Emirates to either make the reservation or confirm his reservation while on route to the airport.
CBS News Also Learns Components From Times Square Device Were Found in Conn. Apartment of Suspect
CBS) A Federal law enforcement source told CBS News that components from the incendiary device left in a smoking SUV in Times Square Saturday evening were found in the suspect's Connecticut apartment. A 9 mm handgun with extra clips was also discovered in Faisal Shahzad's car at New York's JFK International Airport, CBS News' Len Tepper reports. Shahzad, a naturalized American citizen of Pakistani descent, was taken into custody last night. Components from the device that were found in Shahzad's Bridgeport, Conn., apartment last night include the boxes for the clocks that were wired to the Nissan Pathfinder's explosive contents. His Connecticut apartment was still being searched by law enforcement agents early Tuesday morning. Photos: Times Square Car Bomb Suspect Officials also told CBS News that the plane Shahzad boarded for the United Arab Emirates was never going to leave JFK; law enforcement had already notified authorities that the plane was not to take off. Emirates Flight 201 had taxied from the gate but was returned, when Shahzad was arrested arrested by U.S. Customs and Border Enforcement officers. Sources also told CBS News that Shahzad had made a call to Emirates to either make the reservation or confirm his reservation while on route to the airport.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
When Wall Street Deals Resemble Casino Wagers
By ANDREW ROSS SORKI
April 19, 2010
The government’s civil fraud case against Goldman Sachs raises so many provocative questions.
Did the firm deliberately mislead its clients who bought a mortgage-related investment without the knowledge that it was devised to fail? Was it fair that a bearish hedge fund manager helped to pick the parts of an investment marketed as bullish, so that he could bask in the winnings?
Who besides the vice president named in the lawsuit knew details of the deal in question? Were there other deals like this one?
But if there is a larger question, it is this: Why was Goldman, or any regulated bank, allowed to create and sell a product like the synthetic collateralized debt obligation at the center of this case? What purpose does a synthetic C.D.O., which contains no actual mortgage bonds, serve for the capital markets, and for society?
The blaring Goldman Sachs headlines of the last few days have given the public a crash course in synthetic C.D.O.’s. Many more people now know that synthetic C.D.O.’s are a simple wager.
In this case they were a bet on the value of a bundle of mortgages that the investors didn’t even own. (That’s why it is called a derivative.)
One side bets the value will rise, and the other side bets it will fall. It is no different than betting on the New York Yankees vs. the Oakland Athletics, except that if a sports bet goes bad, American taxpayers don’t pay the bookie.
“With a synthetic C.D.O., it’s a pure bet,” said Erik F. Gerding, a former securities lawyer at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton who is now a law professor at the University of New Mexico. “It is hard to see what the social value is — it’s hard to see why you’d want to encourage these bets.”
Social value is a timely question because regulating derivatives is the issue du jour in Washington as a set of proposed financial reforms moves though the Senate. The Obama administration’s plan includes a rule to require any banks that create a synthetic C.D.O. to keep a stake of at least 5 percent, in an effort to keep them accountable and eating their own cooking. But is that enough?
Because structuring derivatives like synthetic C.D.O.’s is so lucrative — $20 billion a year, by some estimates — it’s no surprise that Goldman Sachs is among the banks that oppose regulating them.
“The pushback on regulating derivatives is quite amazing,” said David Paul, president of the Fiscal Strategies Group, an advisory firm specializing in municipal and project finance. “It’s all just become a casino. They argue there is social utility — but you know intuitively this is wrong.”
Through their powerful lobbying arms, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and others have been trying to convince lawmakers that tough regulation on derivatives would stymie the capital markets.
“I believe that synthetic C.D.O.’s have a very useful purpose in facilitating the management of risk,” said Sean Egan, managing director of Egan-Jones Ratings, echoing the view of many in the industry. “Just as options have a valid position in the investment universe, so do synthetics. Such instruments facilitate the flow of capital.”
Unlike Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, Mr. Egan’s agency takes fees from investors, not issuers, for its research. Many critics of the big agencies say this approach presents fewer conflicts, presumably yielding a more honest assessment of an asset’s risk.
Still, Mr. Egan needs products to rate, so his position on derivatives is not that surprising. The core problem with the disputed C.D.O., and other structured finance transactions, was that “investors relied on flawed assessments of risk,” Mr. Egan said.
(By the way, we aren’t hearing lots of questions about the role the big agencies played in rating this Goldman C.D.O., but they clearly misrated it. If they had known that the hedge fund tycoon John A. Paulson had shaped the portfolio and was betting against it, would they have provided the same rating?)The Securities and Exchange Commission, in its suit, says that Mr. Paulson asked Goldman to help create a synthetic C.D.O. of lousy mortgage loans that he selected so he could bet that they would go down and then profit on their fall.
Of course, as with any bet of this sort, Goldman needed an investor to take the opposite position. Goldman found that in firms like IKB Deutsche Industriebank and ABN Amro. They weren’t told, however, that Mr. Paulson had heavily influenced which assets were included.
The case against Goldman could pivot on whether this omission was “material” to investors. Goldman says it wasn’t. It maintains that the investors got to see every mortgage in the basket, and that the manager of the deal, ACA Management, replaced some of Mr. Paulson’s picks with its own.
What’s more, Goldman has said over and over that it arranged these trades for sophisticated investors, not casual 401(k) savers. Goldman’s investors had the expertise and should have known better.
It’s an argument that, while true, makes some people cringe.
“It’s astonishing that they always say ‘sophisticated investors did this,’ ” said Mr. Paul, the financial adviser. “Look at the failure of Lehman and Bear. They were all sophisticated investors.”
This kind of high finance can numb the brain, and the legal questions are murky. But when you strip all of that away, this deal was nothing more than a roll of the dice.
Try this mental exercise: Imagine if, a few years ago, an influential investor like Warren Buffett, bullish on real estate, had asked Goldman to develop a synthetic C.D.O. made up of undervalued mortgages.
Now, imagine if Goldman had found John Paulson to take the opposite side of the trade and, lo and behold, a year later Mr. Buffett turned out to be right and Mr. Paulson lost his shirt. Would you call that fraud? Would you be very upset?
Maybe not, but Mr. Paulson sure would be. And he might be inclined to sue over it, especially if he found out that his bet had been rigged against him from the start. Which brings us back to the financial legislation being debated in Washington.
“Ultimately,” Mr. Gering, the securities lawyer, said, “litigation is a poor substitute for regulation.”
The latest news on mergers and acquisitions can be found at nytimes.com/dealbook.
A version of this article appeared in print on April 20, 2010, on page B1 of the New York edition.
April 19, 2010
The government’s civil fraud case against Goldman Sachs raises so many provocative questions.
Did the firm deliberately mislead its clients who bought a mortgage-related investment without the knowledge that it was devised to fail? Was it fair that a bearish hedge fund manager helped to pick the parts of an investment marketed as bullish, so that he could bask in the winnings?
Who besides the vice president named in the lawsuit knew details of the deal in question? Were there other deals like this one?
But if there is a larger question, it is this: Why was Goldman, or any regulated bank, allowed to create and sell a product like the synthetic collateralized debt obligation at the center of this case? What purpose does a synthetic C.D.O., which contains no actual mortgage bonds, serve for the capital markets, and for society?
The blaring Goldman Sachs headlines of the last few days have given the public a crash course in synthetic C.D.O.’s. Many more people now know that synthetic C.D.O.’s are a simple wager.
In this case they were a bet on the value of a bundle of mortgages that the investors didn’t even own. (That’s why it is called a derivative.)
One side bets the value will rise, and the other side bets it will fall. It is no different than betting on the New York Yankees vs. the Oakland Athletics, except that if a sports bet goes bad, American taxpayers don’t pay the bookie.
“With a synthetic C.D.O., it’s a pure bet,” said Erik F. Gerding, a former securities lawyer at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton who is now a law professor at the University of New Mexico. “It is hard to see what the social value is — it’s hard to see why you’d want to encourage these bets.”
Social value is a timely question because regulating derivatives is the issue du jour in Washington as a set of proposed financial reforms moves though the Senate. The Obama administration’s plan includes a rule to require any banks that create a synthetic C.D.O. to keep a stake of at least 5 percent, in an effort to keep them accountable and eating their own cooking. But is that enough?
Because structuring derivatives like synthetic C.D.O.’s is so lucrative — $20 billion a year, by some estimates — it’s no surprise that Goldman Sachs is among the banks that oppose regulating them.
“The pushback on regulating derivatives is quite amazing,” said David Paul, president of the Fiscal Strategies Group, an advisory firm specializing in municipal and project finance. “It’s all just become a casino. They argue there is social utility — but you know intuitively this is wrong.”
Through their powerful lobbying arms, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and others have been trying to convince lawmakers that tough regulation on derivatives would stymie the capital markets.
“I believe that synthetic C.D.O.’s have a very useful purpose in facilitating the management of risk,” said Sean Egan, managing director of Egan-Jones Ratings, echoing the view of many in the industry. “Just as options have a valid position in the investment universe, so do synthetics. Such instruments facilitate the flow of capital.”
Unlike Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, Mr. Egan’s agency takes fees from investors, not issuers, for its research. Many critics of the big agencies say this approach presents fewer conflicts, presumably yielding a more honest assessment of an asset’s risk.
Still, Mr. Egan needs products to rate, so his position on derivatives is not that surprising. The core problem with the disputed C.D.O., and other structured finance transactions, was that “investors relied on flawed assessments of risk,” Mr. Egan said.
(By the way, we aren’t hearing lots of questions about the role the big agencies played in rating this Goldman C.D.O., but they clearly misrated it. If they had known that the hedge fund tycoon John A. Paulson had shaped the portfolio and was betting against it, would they have provided the same rating?)The Securities and Exchange Commission, in its suit, says that Mr. Paulson asked Goldman to help create a synthetic C.D.O. of lousy mortgage loans that he selected so he could bet that they would go down and then profit on their fall.
Of course, as with any bet of this sort, Goldman needed an investor to take the opposite position. Goldman found that in firms like IKB Deutsche Industriebank and ABN Amro. They weren’t told, however, that Mr. Paulson had heavily influenced which assets were included.
The case against Goldman could pivot on whether this omission was “material” to investors. Goldman says it wasn’t. It maintains that the investors got to see every mortgage in the basket, and that the manager of the deal, ACA Management, replaced some of Mr. Paulson’s picks with its own.
What’s more, Goldman has said over and over that it arranged these trades for sophisticated investors, not casual 401(k) savers. Goldman’s investors had the expertise and should have known better.
It’s an argument that, while true, makes some people cringe.
“It’s astonishing that they always say ‘sophisticated investors did this,’ ” said Mr. Paul, the financial adviser. “Look at the failure of Lehman and Bear. They were all sophisticated investors.”
This kind of high finance can numb the brain, and the legal questions are murky. But when you strip all of that away, this deal was nothing more than a roll of the dice.
Try this mental exercise: Imagine if, a few years ago, an influential investor like Warren Buffett, bullish on real estate, had asked Goldman to develop a synthetic C.D.O. made up of undervalued mortgages.
Now, imagine if Goldman had found John Paulson to take the opposite side of the trade and, lo and behold, a year later Mr. Buffett turned out to be right and Mr. Paulson lost his shirt. Would you call that fraud? Would you be very upset?
Maybe not, but Mr. Paulson sure would be. And he might be inclined to sue over it, especially if he found out that his bet had been rigged against him from the start. Which brings us back to the financial legislation being debated in Washington.
“Ultimately,” Mr. Gering, the securities lawyer, said, “litigation is a poor substitute for regulation.”
The latest news on mergers and acquisitions can be found at nytimes.com/dealbook.
A version of this article appeared in print on April 20, 2010, on page B1 of the New York edition.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Did you mail your 2010 Census Form back ?
By David Samuels
-4-14-2010
-4-14-2010
- If we don't know how many school kids there are.
- How do we know how many classrooms we need ?
- When you answer 10 simple questions
- You can help our community for the next 10 years.
- ---It's in your hands
- We can't move forward until you mail it back .
- United States
- Census 2010
- It's in your hands
- 2010 Census.gov -------davidradiotv2000@yahoo.com
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
FCC loses Comcast's court challenge, a major setback for agency on Internet policies
Tuesday, April 6, 2010; 11:20 AM
By Cecilia Kang Washington Post
Comcast on Tuesday won its federal lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission, in a ruling that undermines the agency's ability to regulate Internet service providers just as it unrolls a sweeping broadband agenda.
The decision also sparks pressing questions on how the agency will respond, with public interest groups advocating that the FCC attempt to move those services into a regulatory regime clearly under the agency's control.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Distrit of Columbia, in a 3-0 decision, ruled that the FCC lacked the authority to require Comcast, the nation's biggest broadband services provider, to treat all Internet traffic equally on its network.
That decision -- based on a 2008 ruling under former FCC Chairman Kevin Martin -- addresses Comcast's argument that the agency didn't follow proper procedures and that it "failed to justify exercising jurisdiction" when it ruled Comcast violated broadband principles by blocking or slowing a peer-sharing Web site, Bit Torrent.
But it also unleashed a broader debate over the agency's ability to regulate broadband service providers such as AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon Communications.
The judges focused on whether the FCC has legal authority over broaband services, which are categorized separately from phone, cable television and wireless services. The agency currently has only "ancillary authority" over broadband services, a decision made by past agency leaders in an attempt to keep the fast moving Internet services market at an arms distance from the agency.
The Commission may exercise this 'ancillary' authority only if it demonstrates that its action . . . is "'reasonally ancillary to the .. effective performance of its stautorily mandated responsibilities." The Commission has failed to make that showing.
The court's decision comes just days before the agency accepts final comments on a separate open Internet regulatory effort this Thursday. And the agency will be faced with a steep legal challenge going forward as it attempts to convert itself from a broadcast- and phone-era agency into one that draws new rules for the Internet era.
Andrew Schwartzman, policy director for Media Access Project said the ruling, "represents a severe restriction on the FCC's powers."
Public interest group have urged the agency to reclassify broadband services so that they are more concretely under the agency's authority. The FCC has been reluctant to say if it would do so and a spokesperson didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Analysts said the agency may not be able to proceed on its net neutrality policy -- a rule that Internet service providers have fought against. And there is doubt the agency could reform an $8 billion federal phone subsidy to include money to bring broadband services to rural areas.
Bruce Mehlman, former Assistant Secretary of Commerce.for Technology Policy, however said the decision may help speed the development of faster, and more robust networks.
"It may drive greater investment in broadband networks by removing regulatory uncertainty and perceived disincentives to invest in infrastructure," Mehlman said.
By Cecilia Kang Washington Post
Comcast on Tuesday won its federal lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission, in a ruling that undermines the agency's ability to regulate Internet service providers just as it unrolls a sweeping broadband agenda.
The decision also sparks pressing questions on how the agency will respond, with public interest groups advocating that the FCC attempt to move those services into a regulatory regime clearly under the agency's control.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Distrit of Columbia, in a 3-0 decision, ruled that the FCC lacked the authority to require Comcast, the nation's biggest broadband services provider, to treat all Internet traffic equally on its network.
That decision -- based on a 2008 ruling under former FCC Chairman Kevin Martin -- addresses Comcast's argument that the agency didn't follow proper procedures and that it "failed to justify exercising jurisdiction" when it ruled Comcast violated broadband principles by blocking or slowing a peer-sharing Web site, Bit Torrent.
But it also unleashed a broader debate over the agency's ability to regulate broadband service providers such as AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon Communications.
The judges focused on whether the FCC has legal authority over broaband services, which are categorized separately from phone, cable television and wireless services. The agency currently has only "ancillary authority" over broadband services, a decision made by past agency leaders in an attempt to keep the fast moving Internet services market at an arms distance from the agency.
The Commission may exercise this 'ancillary' authority only if it demonstrates that its action . . . is "'reasonally ancillary to the .. effective performance of its stautorily mandated responsibilities." The Commission has failed to make that showing.
The court's decision comes just days before the agency accepts final comments on a separate open Internet regulatory effort this Thursday. And the agency will be faced with a steep legal challenge going forward as it attempts to convert itself from a broadcast- and phone-era agency into one that draws new rules for the Internet era.
Andrew Schwartzman, policy director for Media Access Project said the ruling, "represents a severe restriction on the FCC's powers."
Public interest group have urged the agency to reclassify broadband services so that they are more concretely under the agency's authority. The FCC has been reluctant to say if it would do so and a spokesperson didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Analysts said the agency may not be able to proceed on its net neutrality policy -- a rule that Internet service providers have fought against. And there is doubt the agency could reform an $8 billion federal phone subsidy to include money to bring broadband services to rural areas.
Bruce Mehlman, former Assistant Secretary of Commerce.for Technology Policy, however said the decision may help speed the development of faster, and more robust networks.
"It may drive greater investment in broadband networks by removing regulatory uncertainty and perceived disincentives to invest in infrastructure," Mehlman said.
Friday, March 12, 2010
A frustrated caucus keeps complaints quiet
By Michael Leahy Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, March 12, 2010
A year ago, members of the Congressional Black Caucus openly wept at Barack Obama's inauguration. Slowly, that euphoria has given way to frustration that his administration has not done more for black America. Questions about how to elect him have been replaced by questions about how to prod him.
For many, it is the surprise of a political lifetime that they find themselves wrestling with such quandaries. Alternately puzzled and disgruntled, CBC members say key people in the Obama administration have taken them for granted, in the belief that black members of Congress have no stomach for a fight with the country's first black president.
"We concluded they were just kind of listening to us and that then they would go back [to their offices] and conclude that we would do nothing," Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), the vice chairman of the CBC, said of one dispute. "Because they had concluded there's a black president in the White House and that, to some degree, the Black Caucus, you know, was constrained in expressing its desires. After a while, we said, 'Hey, we see what's going on and it's nothing.' "
On Thursday, CBC members participated in a rare one-hour policy meeting with Obama at the White House to discuss their concerns, most notably their disappointment over a jobs bill that they regard as largely a package of tax breaks for employers, noticeably bereft of job-training programs, new infrastructure projects and summer employment opportunities for youth. Such issues are vital to the CBC, many of whose members represent districts with high levels of unemployment.
In interviews with aides and members afterward, Obama was described as receptive to their message, even though he did not make any large-scale commitments. "He said he knew what unemployment looks like in 'my own neighborhood in Chicago,' " recounted Cleaver, who stressed that he was speaking only for himself. "He said he wanted to do things as quickly as possible."
"There was no contention at all," said Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D-N.Y.). "The president is very clearly focused on jobs and job creation."
A White House official issued a statement that ignored any tensions with CBC members and stressed the administration's goals: "President Obama is working to develop inclusive policies, whether in health care, education or the economy, that will have a broad impact on the American people, and Thursday's meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus was a productive effort toward reaching that goal."
Not withstanding Thursday's kind words, the CBC's list of complaints with the White House runs from policy to personal. Despite the caucus s entreaties, the administration has not provided targeted help to black communities and other struggling areas suffering from disproportionately high unemployment, members complain. Many caucus members say they feel largely ignored by key White House advisers. Their communication with Obama himself is minimal to nonexistent.
Lifting boats
Several CBC members and aides talk derisively of an oft-quoted Obama phrase: that a "rising tide" for America will "lift all boats." They see it as rhetoric intended to justify why the administration has not focused on their communities at a time when unemployment among African Americans has climbed to 16.5 percent. "I can't pass laws that say I'm just helping black folks," Obama told the American Urban Radio Networks. "I'm the president of the United States. What I can do is make sure I'm passing laws that help people, particularly those who are most vulnerable."
Many in the 42-member, all-Democratic CBC passionately disagree. African Americans and Latinos "bear the brunt of this economic recession," said Maxine Waters (Calif.). "We must not shy away from targeted public policy that seeks to address the specific and unique issues facing minority communities."
If Obama hears Waters's point, it is from a distance. Friends of hers say she has had no phone calls from the president and no consistent contact with other administration officials despite her position as a subcommittee chairman and a key player on the House Financial Services Committee. Before Thursday's meeting, neither she nor the CBC as a group had met with the president to discuss the jobs bill.
Several prominent caucus members have expressed doubts about the interest of administration officials in African American issues, referring to figures including Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and senior adviser David Axelrod. They "haven't had much involvement with minority communities in their careers, said Rep. Donald M. Payne (N.J.). "They've been in suites and boardrooms."
A year ago, members of the Congressional Black Caucus openly wept at Barack Obama's inauguration. Slowly, that euphoria has given way to frustration that his administration has not done more for black America. Questions about how to elect him have been replaced by questions about how to prod him.
For many, it is the surprise of a political lifetime that they find themselves wrestling with such quandaries. Alternately puzzled and disgruntled, CBC members say key people in the Obama administration have taken them for granted, in the belief that black members of Congress have no stomach for a fight with the country's first black president.
"We concluded they were just kind of listening to us and that then they would go back [to their offices] and conclude that we would do nothing," Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), the vice chairman of the CBC, said of one dispute. "Because they had concluded there's a black president in the White House and that, to some degree, the Black Caucus, you know, was constrained in expressing its desires. After a while, we said, 'Hey, we see what's going on and it's nothing.' "
On Thursday, CBC members participated in a rare one-hour policy meeting with Obama at the White House to discuss their concerns, most notably their disappointment over a jobs bill that they regard as largely a package of tax breaks for employers, noticeably bereft of job-training programs, new infrastructure projects and summer employment opportunities for youth. Such issues are vital to the CBC, many of whose members represent districts with high levels of unemployment.
In interviews with aides and members afterward, Obama was described as receptive to their message, even though he did not make any large-scale commitments. "He said he knew what unemployment looks like in 'my own neighborhood in Chicago,' " recounted Cleaver, who stressed that he was speaking only for himself. "He said he wanted to do things as quickly as possible."
"There was no contention at all," said Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D-N.Y.). "The president is very clearly focused on jobs and job creation."
A White House official issued a statement that ignored any tensions with CBC members and stressed the administration's goals: "President Obama is working to develop inclusive policies, whether in health care, education or the economy, that will have a broad impact on the American people, and Thursday's meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus was a productive effort toward reaching that goal."
Not withstanding Thursday's kind words, the CBC's list of complaints with the White House runs from policy to personal. Despite the caucus s entreaties, the administration has not provided targeted help to black communities and other struggling areas suffering from disproportionately high unemployment, members complain. Many caucus members say they feel largely ignored by key White House advisers. Their communication with Obama himself is minimal to nonexistent.
Lifting boats
Several CBC members and aides talk derisively of an oft-quoted Obama phrase: that a "rising tide" for America will "lift all boats." They see it as rhetoric intended to justify why the administration has not focused on their communities at a time when unemployment among African Americans has climbed to 16.5 percent. "I can't pass laws that say I'm just helping black folks," Obama told the American Urban Radio Networks. "I'm the president of the United States. What I can do is make sure I'm passing laws that help people, particularly those who are most vulnerable."
Many in the 42-member, all-Democratic CBC passionately disagree. African Americans and Latinos "bear the brunt of this economic recession," said Maxine Waters (Calif.). "We must not shy away from targeted public policy that seeks to address the specific and unique issues facing minority communities."
If Obama hears Waters's point, it is from a distance. Friends of hers say she has had no phone calls from the president and no consistent contact with other administration officials despite her position as a subcommittee chairman and a key player on the House Financial Services Committee. Before Thursday's meeting, neither she nor the CBC as a group had met with the president to discuss the jobs bill.
Several prominent caucus members have expressed doubts about the interest of administration officials in African American issues, referring to figures including Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and senior adviser David Axelrod. They "haven't had much involvement with minority communities in their careers, said Rep. Donald M. Payne (N.J.). "They've been in suites and boardrooms."
Friday, March 05, 2010
Poll: New Yorkers don't want Paterson to quit
Albany, New York - March 4, 2010
WCAX.COM Local Vermont News
A new poll shows a majority of New Yorkers don't want Gov. David Paterson to quit despite allegations he helped cover up a domestic abuse case and violated ethics rules.
It's alleged that either Paterson or members of his staff persuaded a woman to drop a domestic violence complaint against a top aide. Paterson denies the charges.
Several members of Paterson's administration have quit, including two of New York's top cops. Paterson is also accused of ethics violations for using his power to obtain free World Series tickets, and state reports show he may have lied under oath about the incident.
Despite the allegations, Paterson still has support from both men and women. The Quinnipiac University poll found that 61 percent of voters don't want him to resign, 31 percent do.
And 61 percent of voters prefer an investigation by an independent prosecutor rather than Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. Twenty-five percent want Cuomo to lead the investigation.
The Democrat was set to challenge Paterson in a primary before Paterson dropped his bid for re-election. Paterson himself has not called for Cuomo to remove himself from the case.
"I at all times upheld the oath of my office and never at any point attempted to influence or coerce anything they didn't want to do," said Paterson, D-New York. "I think it is best I stay in office. In terms of distractions, that is part of public service, that there is going to be distractions. These are difficult times, but I'm going to be tough too!"
"At the end of the day, if the allegations of the abuse of power are true, then the governor will be unable to govern and he will have to step down," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York.
National Democratic Party Chairman Tim Kaine is the latest party member to withdraw support for the embattled governor. But Kaine stopped short of calling for Paterson's resignation.
WCAX.COM Local Vermont News
A new poll shows a majority of New Yorkers don't want Gov. David Paterson to quit despite allegations he helped cover up a domestic abuse case and violated ethics rules.
It's alleged that either Paterson or members of his staff persuaded a woman to drop a domestic violence complaint against a top aide. Paterson denies the charges.
Several members of Paterson's administration have quit, including two of New York's top cops. Paterson is also accused of ethics violations for using his power to obtain free World Series tickets, and state reports show he may have lied under oath about the incident.
Despite the allegations, Paterson still has support from both men and women. The Quinnipiac University poll found that 61 percent of voters don't want him to resign, 31 percent do.
And 61 percent of voters prefer an investigation by an independent prosecutor rather than Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. Twenty-five percent want Cuomo to lead the investigation.
The Democrat was set to challenge Paterson in a primary before Paterson dropped his bid for re-election. Paterson himself has not called for Cuomo to remove himself from the case.
"I at all times upheld the oath of my office and never at any point attempted to influence or coerce anything they didn't want to do," said Paterson, D-New York. "I think it is best I stay in office. In terms of distractions, that is part of public service, that there is going to be distractions. These are difficult times, but I'm going to be tough too!"
"At the end of the day, if the allegations of the abuse of power are true, then the governor will be unable to govern and he will have to step down," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York.
National Democratic Party Chairman Tim Kaine is the latest party member to withdraw support for the embattled governor. But Kaine stopped short of calling for Paterson's resignation.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Census Scams: The Red Flags
FEBRUARY 28, 2010
By ANNA PRIOR
As the 2010 U.S. Census ramps up in March, you should be on the alert for potential scams. Con artists could use the event to acquire personal information that can lead to identity theft.
Most Census forms will arrive in the mail March 15 to 17. Census workers will then go door-to-door from the end of April to July to households that didn't return the questionnaire.
One thing to watch for is a form or person asking for a Social Security number and financial information, such as bank-account numbers.
Another red flag: email. The Census Bureau won't contact you by email. And the form can't be completed online, says Census Bureau spokesman Michael Cook.
Census takers will carry an ID badge with an expiration date and a Department of Commerce watermark. You also can request contact information for a supervisor or the local Census office for verification. Census takers are trained to do business outside the door, says Mr. Cook. So be wary of people trying to enter your home as well as anyone soliciting donations.
To report a scam, contact your regional Census center, and local law enforcement if necessary. ITSO.Fraud.Reporting@census.gov
Write to Anna Prior at anna.prior@wsj.com
By ANNA PRIOR
As the 2010 U.S. Census ramps up in March, you should be on the alert for potential scams. Con artists could use the event to acquire personal information that can lead to identity theft.
Most Census forms will arrive in the mail March 15 to 17. Census workers will then go door-to-door from the end of April to July to households that didn't return the questionnaire.
One thing to watch for is a form or person asking for a Social Security number and financial information, such as bank-account numbers.
Another red flag: email. The Census Bureau won't contact you by email. And the form can't be completed online, says Census Bureau spokesman Michael Cook.
Census takers will carry an ID badge with an expiration date and a Department of Commerce watermark. You also can request contact information for a supervisor or the local Census office for verification. Census takers are trained to do business outside the door, says Mr. Cook. So be wary of people trying to enter your home as well as anyone soliciting donations.
To report a scam, contact your regional Census center, and local law enforcement if necessary. ITSO.Fraud.Reporting@census.gov
Write to Anna Prior at anna.prior@wsj.com
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Tsunami Threatens Hawaiian Islands
By REUTERS
Published: February 27, 2010 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A tsunami was generated on Saturday that could cause damage along the coasts of all the Hawaiian islands, the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center said.
"Urgent action should be taken to protect lives and property," the center said in a bulletin. "All shores are at risk no matter which direction they face."
The center has issued a Pacific-wide tsunami warning that included Hawaii and stretched across the ocean from South America to the Pacific Rim.
Geophysicist Victor Sardina said the Hawaii-based center was urging all countries included the warning to take the threat very seriously.
"Everybody is under a warning because the wave, we know, is on its way. Everybody is at risk now," he said in a telephone interview.
The warning follows a massive earthquake in Chile that killed at least 78 people and triggered tsunamis up and down the coast of the earthquake-prone country.
The center estimates the first tsunami, which is a series of several waves in succession, will hit Hawaii at 11:19 a.m. Hawaii time (4 p.m. EST).
Sardina said the Hawaiian islands could expect waves of six feet (two meters) in some places. Other estimates have been higher but he could not confirm those were likely.
Sardina said the center was looking at Hilo Bay on Hawaii Island as a worst-case scenario right now.
"The shape of the bay favors the waves gaining in height," he said in a telephone interview.
He said California and Alaska could also be affected, but the impact on those coasts should be minimal.
(Writing by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Vicki Allen)
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Van Jones Returns to Spotlight With Posts at Princeton, Think Tank
Updated February 24, 2010
FOXNews.com
After a nearly six-month hiatus out of the public eye following his resignation from the White House last September, Van Jones has been appointed as a fellow with Princeton University and with the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank.
Van Jones is back.
After a nearly six-month hiatus out of the public eye following his resignation from the White House last September, Jones has been appointed to posts at Princeton University and with the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C.
The controversial former green jobs adviser is also receiving an award from the NAACP Friday and plans to attend a forum on jobs creation with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., next month in New York City.
The sudden flurry of activity appears to mark the end of Jones' retreat from public life after a short stint as adviser to the White House Council on Environmental Quality. He resigned under pressure in early September due to mounting criticism over controversial remarks and positions, including his calling Republicans "assholes," making racially charged statements and signing a petition in 2004 supporting the "9/11 truther" movement, which believes the Bush administration may have been involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The petition was the breaking point, and his resignation came shortly afterward.
But Jones, in an interview with The Washington Post, defended himself against the withering attacks he endured last year and distanced himself from the "truthers." Jones said he believes Al Qaeda and Usama bin Laden, and "nobody else," were behind the Sept. 11 attacks. He said his name showed up on the petition because he expressed verbal support for a group that came up to him six years ago and said they represented "911 families" without realizing what they represented.
"Unfortunately, I didn't know what their agenda was," Jones said. "So then they went and added my name, without my knowledge, to this awful, abhorrent language they had on their Web site."911Truth.org has disputed this explanation. 911Truth.org spokesman Mike Berger said last fall that Jones "did agree with that statement and he did sign on to it."
But Jones told The Washington Post that he made a "big mistake" in not doing his "homework" on the organization before offering "support of any kind."
He said he doesn't have "any bitterness or anger" about his past.
Princeton University announced Wednesday that Jones has been appointed as a visiting fellow at the Center for African American Studies and at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs' program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy. During the one-year appointment, Jones will teach a spring course on "environmental politics."
In a statement put out by Princeton University, Jones said he looks forward to using his term at the Ivy League university to explore "green solutions" to help America's economy.
"We're looking forward to a year of intense engagement with Van," Eddie Glaude, chairman of the Center for African American Studies, said in a statement.
The Center for American Progress announced Wednesday that Jones would be a senior fellow and leader with its Green Opportunity Initiative.
CEO John Podesta called Jones a "pioneer" in the movement to create a clean energy economy.Before Jones ran into the wall of controversy last year, he was considered somewhat of a wunderkind in environmental circles.
In addition to writing "The Green Collar Economy," he has co-founded and worked with several groups dedicated to helping low-income and minority communities -- often through green jobs and better environmental policy. He got his start as a San Francisco-area activist, and in 2009 was named as one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people.
But some of his past comments had given critics pause about his fitness for a White House-level office, pointing to his radical activities a decade ago as well as more recent controversial stances.
Jones was a self-described "communist" during the 1990s and previously worked with a group dedicated to Marxist and Leninist philosophies. His comments, even in recent years, were often racially charged. He's blamed "white polluters and white environmentalists" for "steering poison" to minority communities. In 2005, he drew a distinction between white and black youths involved in shooting incidents by referencing the 1999 Columbine High School massacre.
"You've never seen a Columbine done by a black child. Never," Jones said. "They always say, 'We can't believe it happened here. We can't believe it's these suburban white kids.' It's only them!" he said. "Now, a black kid might shoot another black kid. He's not going to shoot up the whole school."
Such statements did not draw widespread attention until after a February video surfaced showing him calling Republicans "assholes" during an address in Berkeley, Calif. Jones apologized, but faced down his past again when it was discovered that he signed the 2004 "truther" petition.
Now that he's returning to prominent positions, several high-profile organizations are backing him up.
Benjamin Todd Jealous, president and CEO of the NAACP, called Jones an "American treasure" in an online opinion piece. The NAACP plans to honor Jones with an Image Award Friday.
The Sierra Club also issued a statement congratulating Jones on his recent appointments.
FOXNews.com
After a nearly six-month hiatus out of the public eye following his resignation from the White House last September, Van Jones has been appointed as a fellow with Princeton University and with the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank.
Van Jones is back.
After a nearly six-month hiatus out of the public eye following his resignation from the White House last September, Jones has been appointed to posts at Princeton University and with the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C.
The controversial former green jobs adviser is also receiving an award from the NAACP Friday and plans to attend a forum on jobs creation with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., next month in New York City.
The sudden flurry of activity appears to mark the end of Jones' retreat from public life after a short stint as adviser to the White House Council on Environmental Quality. He resigned under pressure in early September due to mounting criticism over controversial remarks and positions, including his calling Republicans "assholes," making racially charged statements and signing a petition in 2004 supporting the "9/11 truther" movement, which believes the Bush administration may have been involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The petition was the breaking point, and his resignation came shortly afterward.
But Jones, in an interview with The Washington Post, defended himself against the withering attacks he endured last year and distanced himself from the "truthers." Jones said he believes Al Qaeda and Usama bin Laden, and "nobody else," were behind the Sept. 11 attacks. He said his name showed up on the petition because he expressed verbal support for a group that came up to him six years ago and said they represented "911 families" without realizing what they represented.
"Unfortunately, I didn't know what their agenda was," Jones said. "So then they went and added my name, without my knowledge, to this awful, abhorrent language they had on their Web site."911Truth.org has disputed this explanation. 911Truth.org spokesman Mike Berger said last fall that Jones "did agree with that statement and he did sign on to it."
But Jones told The Washington Post that he made a "big mistake" in not doing his "homework" on the organization before offering "support of any kind."
He said he doesn't have "any bitterness or anger" about his past.
Princeton University announced Wednesday that Jones has been appointed as a visiting fellow at the Center for African American Studies and at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs' program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy. During the one-year appointment, Jones will teach a spring course on "environmental politics."
In a statement put out by Princeton University, Jones said he looks forward to using his term at the Ivy League university to explore "green solutions" to help America's economy.
"We're looking forward to a year of intense engagement with Van," Eddie Glaude, chairman of the Center for African American Studies, said in a statement.
The Center for American Progress announced Wednesday that Jones would be a senior fellow and leader with its Green Opportunity Initiative.
CEO John Podesta called Jones a "pioneer" in the movement to create a clean energy economy.Before Jones ran into the wall of controversy last year, he was considered somewhat of a wunderkind in environmental circles.
In addition to writing "The Green Collar Economy," he has co-founded and worked with several groups dedicated to helping low-income and minority communities -- often through green jobs and better environmental policy. He got his start as a San Francisco-area activist, and in 2009 was named as one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people.
But some of his past comments had given critics pause about his fitness for a White House-level office, pointing to his radical activities a decade ago as well as more recent controversial stances.
Jones was a self-described "communist" during the 1990s and previously worked with a group dedicated to Marxist and Leninist philosophies. His comments, even in recent years, were often racially charged. He's blamed "white polluters and white environmentalists" for "steering poison" to minority communities. In 2005, he drew a distinction between white and black youths involved in shooting incidents by referencing the 1999 Columbine High School massacre.
"You've never seen a Columbine done by a black child. Never," Jones said. "They always say, 'We can't believe it happened here. We can't believe it's these suburban white kids.' It's only them!" he said. "Now, a black kid might shoot another black kid. He's not going to shoot up the whole school."
Such statements did not draw widespread attention until after a February video surfaced showing him calling Republicans "assholes" during an address in Berkeley, Calif. Jones apologized, but faced down his past again when it was discovered that he signed the 2004 "truther" petition.
Now that he's returning to prominent positions, several high-profile organizations are backing him up.
Benjamin Todd Jealous, president and CEO of the NAACP, called Jones an "American treasure" in an online opinion piece. The NAACP plans to honor Jones with an Image Award Friday.
The Sierra Club also issued a statement congratulating Jones on his recent appointments.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Glenn Beck to Republican Party: Repent
By Christi Parsons 2-21-2010 LAtimes
Reporting from Washington - Talk show host Glenn Beck poked and prodded the Republican hierarchy Saturday night in a raucous address to fellow conservatives, comparing the party to an alcoholic who hasn't hit bottom and to golfer Tiger Woods before his public repentance.Calling himself a recovering alcoholic in that context, Beck said he believes in the concept of redemption but that he doesn't think the GOP has taken the first step toward achieving it."I have not yet heard people in the Republican Party admit they have a problem," Beck told a packed ballroom in Washington. "I have not seen a come-to-Jesus meeting. . . . 'Hello, my name is the Republican Party and I've got a problem. I'm addicted to spending and big government.' . . . They need that moment."The irreverent speech drew cheers, laughter and several standing ovations from the majority of the crowd gathered for the keynote address of the Conservative Political Action Conference, which organizers say drew 10,000 people over three days before closing Saturday night.During that time some of the best-known figures of the Republican Party -- members of Congress, governors, presidential hopefuls -- trooped through to rail against the Obama administration and to woo conservatives. The political figures were greeted by the audiences mostly as kindred spirits.Still, when hosts announced the results of the conference's presidential straw poll late Saturday, the audience went wild to hear the name of the winner: Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, former GOP candidate for the White House and prominent leader of the grass-roots libertarian movement. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came in second, almost 10 percentage points behind.The poll was by no means scientific and only tested the temperature of about 2,400 of the conference's attendees.As a snapshot of those who traveled from the 50 states to attend the conference, though, organizers think it offers a hint about what's going on at the grass-roots level.More than half of respondents believe Republicans are within striking distance of taking back Congress, pollster Tony Fabrizio said, but participants are not necessarily happy with Republican Party leadership nor thrilled with the bench of presidential candidates.The crowd that came out for the Beck speech was clearly skeptical of the party establishment, exuberantly applauding the radio and Fox television talk show host throughout his address.According to Beck, the main villain is "progressivism," a word he wrote in big letters on a large chalkboard and labeled "a cancer" eating away at American ideals."Progressivism was designed to press past the Constitution," Beck said, charging that Republicans aren't giving Americans much of an alternative."Dick Cheney was here a couple of days ago," he said, "and he says it's going to be a good year for conservative ideas."That may be true, he said, but Republicans should know that it's not good enough to "not suck as much as the other side," Beck said.
Reporting from Washington - Talk show host Glenn Beck poked and prodded the Republican hierarchy Saturday night in a raucous address to fellow conservatives, comparing the party to an alcoholic who hasn't hit bottom and to golfer Tiger Woods before his public repentance.Calling himself a recovering alcoholic in that context, Beck said he believes in the concept of redemption but that he doesn't think the GOP has taken the first step toward achieving it."I have not yet heard people in the Republican Party admit they have a problem," Beck told a packed ballroom in Washington. "I have not seen a come-to-Jesus meeting. . . . 'Hello, my name is the Republican Party and I've got a problem. I'm addicted to spending and big government.' . . . They need that moment."The irreverent speech drew cheers, laughter and several standing ovations from the majority of the crowd gathered for the keynote address of the Conservative Political Action Conference, which organizers say drew 10,000 people over three days before closing Saturday night.During that time some of the best-known figures of the Republican Party -- members of Congress, governors, presidential hopefuls -- trooped through to rail against the Obama administration and to woo conservatives. The political figures were greeted by the audiences mostly as kindred spirits.Still, when hosts announced the results of the conference's presidential straw poll late Saturday, the audience went wild to hear the name of the winner: Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, former GOP candidate for the White House and prominent leader of the grass-roots libertarian movement. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came in second, almost 10 percentage points behind.The poll was by no means scientific and only tested the temperature of about 2,400 of the conference's attendees.As a snapshot of those who traveled from the 50 states to attend the conference, though, organizers think it offers a hint about what's going on at the grass-roots level.More than half of respondents believe Republicans are within striking distance of taking back Congress, pollster Tony Fabrizio said, but participants are not necessarily happy with Republican Party leadership nor thrilled with the bench of presidential candidates.The crowd that came out for the Beck speech was clearly skeptical of the party establishment, exuberantly applauding the radio and Fox television talk show host throughout his address.According to Beck, the main villain is "progressivism," a word he wrote in big letters on a large chalkboard and labeled "a cancer" eating away at American ideals."Progressivism was designed to press past the Constitution," Beck said, charging that Republicans aren't giving Americans much of an alternative."Dick Cheney was here a couple of days ago," he said, "and he says it's going to be a good year for conservative ideas."That may be true, he said, but Republicans should know that it's not good enough to "not suck as much as the other side," Beck said.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Judge upholds expulsion of convicted NY senator
The Associated Press Friday, February 19, 2010; 12:19 PM
NEW YORK -- A federal judge has rejected an attempt to temporarily block the expulsion of a New York state lawmaker.
Colleagues voted to remove Hiram Monserrate (MAHN'-sur-aht) because of a misdemeanor assault conviction.
Judge William Pauley refused Friday to block the Democrat's expulsion.
A civil rights suit filed last week asked Pauley to reverse the lawmaker's removal and stop a March 16 special election to replace him.
He's backed by the New York Civil Liberties Union. Monserrate says the state Senate denied him due process and his constituents their right to representation.
Washington Post
NEW YORK -- A federal judge has rejected an attempt to temporarily block the expulsion of a New York state lawmaker.
Colleagues voted to remove Hiram Monserrate (MAHN'-sur-aht) because of a misdemeanor assault conviction.
Judge William Pauley refused Friday to block the Democrat's expulsion.
A civil rights suit filed last week asked Pauley to reverse the lawmaker's removal and stop a March 16 special election to replace him.
He's backed by the New York Civil Liberties Union. Monserrate says the state Senate denied him due process and his constituents their right to representation.
Washington Post
Monday, February 15, 2010
Top Taliban commander captured in Pakistan: report
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top military commander of the Taliban, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, has been captured in Karachi, Pakistan, in a secret raid by Pakistani and U.S. intelligence forces, The New York Times reported on Monday.--2-15-2010
Citing U.S. government officials, the Times said Mullah Baradar, described as the most significant Taliban figure captured since the start of the Afghanistan war, had been in Pakistani custody for several days and was being interrogated by Pakistani and U.S. intelligence.
The White House and CIA declined comment on the report and the Pentagon also had no immediate comment.
The Times cited officials as saying the operation to capture Mullah Baradar was conducted by Pakistan's military spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, which was accompanied by CIA operatives.
The newspaper said U.S. officials described Mullah Baradar as ranking second in influence in the Taliban only to Mullah Muhammad Omar, and that he was a close associate of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden before the September 11 attacks.
The newspaper said it was not clear if he was talking, but it quoted the officials as saying his capture could lead to other senior Taliban officials. The officials voiced hope he would provide the location of Mullah Omar.
U.S. Marines are currently leading ---WORLD
Citing U.S. government officials, the Times said Mullah Baradar, described as the most significant Taliban figure captured since the start of the Afghanistan war, had been in Pakistani custody for several days and was being interrogated by Pakistani and U.S. intelligence.
The White House and CIA declined comment on the report and the Pentagon also had no immediate comment.
The Times cited officials as saying the operation to capture Mullah Baradar was conducted by Pakistan's military spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, which was accompanied by CIA operatives.
The newspaper said U.S. officials described Mullah Baradar as ranking second in influence in the Taliban only to Mullah Muhammad Omar, and that he was a close associate of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden before the September 11 attacks.
The newspaper said it was not clear if he was talking, but it quoted the officials as saying his capture could lead to other senior Taliban officials. The officials voiced hope he would provide the location of Mullah Omar.
U.S. Marines are currently leading ---WORLD
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Airborne Laser zaps in-flight missile
by Jonathan Skillings
February 12, 2010 8:48 AM PST
Score one for the Airborne Laser.
In a milestone for the ambitious directed-energy project, now dramatically downsized, the Pentagon's Airborne Laser prototype weapons system destroyed a ballistic missile that was in flight. The shootdown took place February 11 off the central coast of California.
"The Airborne Laser Testbed team has made history with this experiment," said Greg Hyslop, vice president and general manager of Boeing Missile Defense Systems, in a statement released Friday. Boeing is the prime contractor for the Defense Department project.
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency was equally enthusiastic about the results. "The revolutionary use of directed energy is very attractive for missile defense," the agency said in a statement, "with the potential to attack multiple targets at the speed of light, at a range of hundreds of kilometers, and at a low cost per intercept attempt compared to current technologies.
Unfortunately for proponents, the achievement is rather bittersweet. Where the Pentagon once had plans to build as many as seven of the one-of-a-kind Airborne Laser aircraft, a modified Boeing 747-400F, the high cost and technical uncertainties of the program prompted Defense Secretary Robert Gates last spring to cancel plans to build a second plane. The Pentagon kept the existing one around as an R&D platform.
But as a proof of concept, the Airborne Laser most certainly crossed a threshold when it KO'd the missile earlier this month.
On the evening of February 11, an "at-sea mobile launch platform"--the MDA didn't specify whether it was surface ship or submarine--fired a short-range "threat representative" liquid-fueled ballistic missile while the 747 was in the vicinity.
This sequence of infrared images shows a missile breaking up when zapped in flight by the Airborne Laser on February 11.(Credit: U.S. Missile Defense Agency)
Within seconds, the agency says, the aircraft detected the missile as it lifted off and used a low-energy laser (the Track Illuminator) to track it, followed by a second low-energy laser (the Beacon Illuminator) to assess and adjust for atmospheric disturbance. Then it engaged the powerhouse of the system, the megawatt-class High Energy Laser--Boeing calls it "the most powerful mobile laser device in the world"--which fires through a telescope located in the nose of the aircraft.
Within two minutes of the launch, while the missile's rocket motors were still firing, the chemical-derived High Energy Laser had heated a pressurized segment of the missile to "critical structural failure," the MDA said. The Track Illuminator and Beacon Illuminator are kilowatt-class solid-state lasers.
A short while later, a second, solid-fueled short-range missile took off from solid ground on San Nicolas Island, Calif., and the ABL likewise engaged it with the High Energy Laser, though it stopped firing the laser before destroying that missile. The MDA says that the ABL had met all test criteria, and besides, it had destroyed a similar missile in flight a week earlier.
Catching a missile during the boost phase has always been a central tenet of the ABL program--it's those first seconds and minutes, when the missile is moving most slowly and predictably, that make for the most vulnerable target. But that also was a significant argument against the system: How could the U.S. count on having a laser-laden aircraft in the right place at the right time to catch an enemy missile at take-off? Indeed, in canceling the second aircraft, Gates called the program's proposed operational role "highly questionable."
Last fall, the separate Airborne Tactical Laser aircraft, a modified C-130, hit a moving remote-controlled vehicle on the ground.
Jonathan Skillings is managing editor of CNET News, based in the Boston bureau. He's been with CNET since 2000, after a decade in tech journalism at the IDG News Service, PC Week, and an AS/400 magazine. He's also been a soldier and a schoolteacher. E-mail Jon.
February 12, 2010 8:48 AM PST
Score one for the Airborne Laser.
In a milestone for the ambitious directed-energy project, now dramatically downsized, the Pentagon's Airborne Laser prototype weapons system destroyed a ballistic missile that was in flight. The shootdown took place February 11 off the central coast of California.
"The Airborne Laser Testbed team has made history with this experiment," said Greg Hyslop, vice president and general manager of Boeing Missile Defense Systems, in a statement released Friday. Boeing is the prime contractor for the Defense Department project.
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency was equally enthusiastic about the results. "The revolutionary use of directed energy is very attractive for missile defense," the agency said in a statement, "with the potential to attack multiple targets at the speed of light, at a range of hundreds of kilometers, and at a low cost per intercept attempt compared to current technologies.
Unfortunately for proponents, the achievement is rather bittersweet. Where the Pentagon once had plans to build as many as seven of the one-of-a-kind Airborne Laser aircraft, a modified Boeing 747-400F, the high cost and technical uncertainties of the program prompted Defense Secretary Robert Gates last spring to cancel plans to build a second plane. The Pentagon kept the existing one around as an R&D platform.
But as a proof of concept, the Airborne Laser most certainly crossed a threshold when it KO'd the missile earlier this month.
On the evening of February 11, an "at-sea mobile launch platform"--the MDA didn't specify whether it was surface ship or submarine--fired a short-range "threat representative" liquid-fueled ballistic missile while the 747 was in the vicinity.
This sequence of infrared images shows a missile breaking up when zapped in flight by the Airborne Laser on February 11.(Credit: U.S. Missile Defense Agency)
Within seconds, the agency says, the aircraft detected the missile as it lifted off and used a low-energy laser (the Track Illuminator) to track it, followed by a second low-energy laser (the Beacon Illuminator) to assess and adjust for atmospheric disturbance. Then it engaged the powerhouse of the system, the megawatt-class High Energy Laser--Boeing calls it "the most powerful mobile laser device in the world"--which fires through a telescope located in the nose of the aircraft.
Within two minutes of the launch, while the missile's rocket motors were still firing, the chemical-derived High Energy Laser had heated a pressurized segment of the missile to "critical structural failure," the MDA said. The Track Illuminator and Beacon Illuminator are kilowatt-class solid-state lasers.
A short while later, a second, solid-fueled short-range missile took off from solid ground on San Nicolas Island, Calif., and the ABL likewise engaged it with the High Energy Laser, though it stopped firing the laser before destroying that missile. The MDA says that the ABL had met all test criteria, and besides, it had destroyed a similar missile in flight a week earlier.
Catching a missile during the boost phase has always been a central tenet of the ABL program--it's those first seconds and minutes, when the missile is moving most slowly and predictably, that make for the most vulnerable target. But that also was a significant argument against the system: How could the U.S. count on having a laser-laden aircraft in the right place at the right time to catch an enemy missile at take-off? Indeed, in canceling the second aircraft, Gates called the program's proposed operational role "highly questionable."
Last fall, the separate Airborne Tactical Laser aircraft, a modified C-130, hit a moving remote-controlled vehicle on the ground.
Jonathan Skillings is managing editor of CNET News, based in the Boston bureau. He's been with CNET since 2000, after a decade in tech journalism at the IDG News Service, PC Week, and an AS/400 magazine. He's also been a soldier and a schoolteacher. E-mail Jon.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Wall Street's Race to the Bottom
By ELIZABETH WARREN 2-9-10
Banking is based on trust. The banks get our paychecks and hold our savings; they know where we spend our money and they keep it private. If we don't trust them, the whole system breaks down. Yet for years, Wall Street CEOs have thrown away customer trust like so much worthless trash.
Banks and brokers have sold deceptive mortgages for more than a decade. Financial wizards made billions by packaging and repackaging those loans into securities. And federal regulators played the role of lookout at a bank robbery, holding back anyone who tried to stop the massive looting from middle-class families. When they weren't selling deceptive mortgages, Wall Street invented new credit card tricks and clever overdraft fees.
In October 2008, when all the risks accumulated and the economy went into a tailspin, Wall Street CEOs squandered what little trust was left when they accepted taxpayer bailouts. As the economy stabilized and it seemed like we would change the rules that got us into this crisis—including the rules that let big banks trick their customers for so many years—it looked like things might come out all right.
Now, a year later, President Obama's proposals for reform are bottled up in the Senate. The same Wall Street CEOs who brought the economy to its knees have spent more than a year and hundreds of millions of dollars furiously lobbying Washington to kill the president's proposal for a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA).
Within the thousands of pages of print in the "Restoring American Financial Stability Act" now before the Senate, the consumer agency is the only proposal that would help families directly. Even those most concerned about the role of personal responsibility concede that it is hard for families to make smart decisions and to compare products when the paperwork on mortgages, credit cards and even checking accounts has morphed into reams of incomprehensible legalese.
The consumer agency is a watchdog that would root out gimmicks and traps and slim down paperwork, giving families a fighting chance to hang on to some of their money. So far, Wall Street CEOs seem determined to stop any kind of watchdog. They seem to think that they can run their businesses forever without our trust. This is a bad calculation.
It's a bad calculation because shareholders suffer enormously from the long-term cost of the boom-and- bust cycles that accompany a poorly regulated market. J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon recently explained this brave new world, saying that crises should be expected "every five to seven years."
He is wrong. New laws that came out of the Great Depression ended 150 years of boom-and-bust cycles and gave us 50 years with virtually no financial meltdowns. The stability ended as we dismantled those laws and failed to replace them with new laws that reflected modern business practices.
The reputations of Wall Street's most storied institutions are evaporating as the lack of meaningful consumer rules has set off a race to the bottom to develop new ways to trick customers. Wall Street executives explain privately that they cannot get rid of fine print, deceptive pricing, and buried tricks unilaterally without losing market share.
Citigroup learned this the hard way in 2007, when it decided to clean up its credit card just a little bit by eliminating universal default—the trick that allowed it to raise rates retroactively, even for consumers that did nothing wrong. Citi's reform resulted in lower revenues and no new customers, triggering an embarrassing public reversal.
Citi explained sheepishly that credit cards were now so complicated that customers couldn't tell when a company offered something a little better. So Citi went back to something a little worse. Without a watchdog in place, the big banks just keep slinging out uglier and uglier products.
With their reputations in tatters, the CEOs have decided to go on the offensive in Washington. They might have had some thoughtful suggestions for how to better shape a consumer agency. Instead, they have unleashed lobbyists who are determined to do anything to kill the consumer agency.
The latest lie is that the CFPA is "big government." The CEOs all know that the current regulatory structure, which they support, is big government at its worst: bureaucratic, unaccountable and ineffective. The CFPA will consolidate seven separate bureaucracies, cut down on paperwork, and promote understandable consumer products. In the process, it will stabilize the industry, rebuild confidence in the securitization market, and leave more money in the pockets of families. Complaining about short, readable contracts and efforts to slim down bureaucracy only further diminishes the banks' credibility.
This generation of Wall Street CEOs could be the ones to forfeit America's trust. When the history of the Great Recession is written, they can be singled out as the bonus babies who were so short-sighted that they put the economy at risk and contributed to the destruction of their own companies. Or they can acknowledge how Americans' trust has been lost and take the first steps to earn it back.
Ms. Warren is a law professor at Harvard and is currently the chair of the TARP Congressional Oversight Panel.
Banking is based on trust. The banks get our paychecks and hold our savings; they know where we spend our money and they keep it private. If we don't trust them, the whole system breaks down. Yet for years, Wall Street CEOs have thrown away customer trust like so much worthless trash.
Banks and brokers have sold deceptive mortgages for more than a decade. Financial wizards made billions by packaging and repackaging those loans into securities. And federal regulators played the role of lookout at a bank robbery, holding back anyone who tried to stop the massive looting from middle-class families. When they weren't selling deceptive mortgages, Wall Street invented new credit card tricks and clever overdraft fees.
In October 2008, when all the risks accumulated and the economy went into a tailspin, Wall Street CEOs squandered what little trust was left when they accepted taxpayer bailouts. As the economy stabilized and it seemed like we would change the rules that got us into this crisis—including the rules that let big banks trick their customers for so many years—it looked like things might come out all right.
Now, a year later, President Obama's proposals for reform are bottled up in the Senate. The same Wall Street CEOs who brought the economy to its knees have spent more than a year and hundreds of millions of dollars furiously lobbying Washington to kill the president's proposal for a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA).
Within the thousands of pages of print in the "Restoring American Financial Stability Act" now before the Senate, the consumer agency is the only proposal that would help families directly. Even those most concerned about the role of personal responsibility concede that it is hard for families to make smart decisions and to compare products when the paperwork on mortgages, credit cards and even checking accounts has morphed into reams of incomprehensible legalese.
The consumer agency is a watchdog that would root out gimmicks and traps and slim down paperwork, giving families a fighting chance to hang on to some of their money. So far, Wall Street CEOs seem determined to stop any kind of watchdog. They seem to think that they can run their businesses forever without our trust. This is a bad calculation.
It's a bad calculation because shareholders suffer enormously from the long-term cost of the boom-and- bust cycles that accompany a poorly regulated market. J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon recently explained this brave new world, saying that crises should be expected "every five to seven years."
He is wrong. New laws that came out of the Great Depression ended 150 years of boom-and-bust cycles and gave us 50 years with virtually no financial meltdowns. The stability ended as we dismantled those laws and failed to replace them with new laws that reflected modern business practices.
The reputations of Wall Street's most storied institutions are evaporating as the lack of meaningful consumer rules has set off a race to the bottom to develop new ways to trick customers. Wall Street executives explain privately that they cannot get rid of fine print, deceptive pricing, and buried tricks unilaterally without losing market share.
Citigroup learned this the hard way in 2007, when it decided to clean up its credit card just a little bit by eliminating universal default—the trick that allowed it to raise rates retroactively, even for consumers that did nothing wrong. Citi's reform resulted in lower revenues and no new customers, triggering an embarrassing public reversal.
Citi explained sheepishly that credit cards were now so complicated that customers couldn't tell when a company offered something a little better. So Citi went back to something a little worse. Without a watchdog in place, the big banks just keep slinging out uglier and uglier products.
With their reputations in tatters, the CEOs have decided to go on the offensive in Washington. They might have had some thoughtful suggestions for how to better shape a consumer agency. Instead, they have unleashed lobbyists who are determined to do anything to kill the consumer agency.
The latest lie is that the CFPA is "big government." The CEOs all know that the current regulatory structure, which they support, is big government at its worst: bureaucratic, unaccountable and ineffective. The CFPA will consolidate seven separate bureaucracies, cut down on paperwork, and promote understandable consumer products. In the process, it will stabilize the industry, rebuild confidence in the securitization market, and leave more money in the pockets of families. Complaining about short, readable contracts and efforts to slim down bureaucracy only further diminishes the banks' credibility.
This generation of Wall Street CEOs could be the ones to forfeit America's trust. When the history of the Great Recession is written, they can be singled out as the bonus babies who were so short-sighted that they put the economy at risk and contributed to the destruction of their own companies. Or they can acknowledge how Americans' trust has been lost and take the first steps to earn it back.
Ms. Warren is a law professor at Harvard and is currently the chair of the TARP Congressional Oversight Panel.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Samsung Jumps Back to Profit in 4th Quarter
Published: January 29, 2010
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- Samsung Electronics Co. returned to profit in the fourth-quarter on strong sales of flat screen televisions and mobile phones as well as higher prices for computer memory chips following a rare loss the year before.
The company, a major global producer of consumer electronics products and components that make them work, earned 3.05 trillion won ($2.64 billion) in the three months ended Dec. 31 on a parent basis, it said in a statement.
Samsung had a net loss of 22 billion won in the same period the year before. That red ink -- Samsung's first since it began reporting results on a quarterly basis in the third quarter of 2000 -- sent shockwaves through the company and came as the global economic slump hit demand.
Samsung said its "strong performance" during the fourth-quarter last year was bolstered by improving prices for memory chips and a seasonal increase in sales of consumer electronics.
Samsung said it sold nearly 11 million flat screen TVs in the quarter and became the first manufacturer to exceed the 10 million mark.
The company sold 69 million mobile phone handsets in the quarter, up 16 percent from the same period the year before. Total 2009 sales reached 227 million.
Looking ahead, the company said it expects "positive growth across its businesses in 2010," citing stronger demand for flat screen TVs, mobile phones and laptop computers resulting from the ongoing economic recovery.
The Suwon, South Korea-based company is the world's largest manufacturer of computer memory chips, flat screen televisions and liquid crystal displays. It ranks No. 2 in cell phones behind Finland's Nokia Corp. (NYSE:NOK)
Samsung said sales in the fourth quarter reached 25.32 trillion won, which was 37 percent higher that the 18.45 trillion won reported a year earlier.
In a separate regulatory filing, the company said that it earned 9.65 trillion won in all of 2009. It reported a net profit of 5.53 trillion won in 2008. Samsung also said sales last year rose 23 percent to 89.77 trillion won from 72.95 trillion won the year before.
Shares in Samsung, which released its earnings results about 30 minutes after the stock market opened, fell 2 percent to 792,000 won in late morning trading. The company's stock price rose 77 percent in 2009.
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- Samsung Electronics Co. returned to profit in the fourth-quarter on strong sales of flat screen televisions and mobile phones as well as higher prices for computer memory chips following a rare loss the year before.
The company, a major global producer of consumer electronics products and components that make them work, earned 3.05 trillion won ($2.64 billion) in the three months ended Dec. 31 on a parent basis, it said in a statement.
Samsung had a net loss of 22 billion won in the same period the year before. That red ink -- Samsung's first since it began reporting results on a quarterly basis in the third quarter of 2000 -- sent shockwaves through the company and came as the global economic slump hit demand.
Samsung said its "strong performance" during the fourth-quarter last year was bolstered by improving prices for memory chips and a seasonal increase in sales of consumer electronics.
Samsung said it sold nearly 11 million flat screen TVs in the quarter and became the first manufacturer to exceed the 10 million mark.
The company sold 69 million mobile phone handsets in the quarter, up 16 percent from the same period the year before. Total 2009 sales reached 227 million.
Looking ahead, the company said it expects "positive growth across its businesses in 2010," citing stronger demand for flat screen TVs, mobile phones and laptop computers resulting from the ongoing economic recovery.
The Suwon, South Korea-based company is the world's largest manufacturer of computer memory chips, flat screen televisions and liquid crystal displays. It ranks No. 2 in cell phones behind Finland's Nokia Corp. (NYSE:NOK)
Samsung said sales in the fourth quarter reached 25.32 trillion won, which was 37 percent higher that the 18.45 trillion won reported a year earlier.
In a separate regulatory filing, the company said that it earned 9.65 trillion won in all of 2009. It reported a net profit of 5.53 trillion won in 2008. Samsung also said sales last year rose 23 percent to 89.77 trillion won from 72.95 trillion won the year before.
Shares in Samsung, which released its earnings results about 30 minutes after the stock market opened, fell 2 percent to 792,000 won in late morning trading. The company's stock price rose 77 percent in 2009.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Haiti Task Force Commander Notes Progress
By Judith SnydermanAmerican Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 19, 2010 – Humanitarian assistance efforts in Haiti are improving every day despite enormous challenges, the commander of Joint Task Force Haiti said.
"Today, we had 180 flights go through the airport with zero delays,” Army Lt. Gen. P.K. “Ken” Keen said yesterday during a “DoDLive” bloggers roundtable. “That's the first day since we started that we did not have a delay." For perspective, Keen noted that the single runway at the Port-au-Prince airport handled just 13 flights per day before the earthquake. U.S. airmen opened the airport less than 24 hours after the earthquake in response to a request for help from Haitian authorities. It then took several days to streamline the system for handling the crush of planes carrying supplies. Landing time slots now are now assigned based on priorities set by Haitian officials, he explained. As of yesterday, U.S. troops had distributed 400,000 bottles of water, 300,000 rations and 12,000 pounds of medical supplies, Keen said, adding that those figures count only U.S. contributions. Numerous nations and international aid groups also are delivering assistance, he said. But while the amount of aid is substantial, Keen said, it's just a drop in the bucket compared to the needs of some 3.5 million people who are suffering, so the size of U.S. military force in Haiti -- in an operation now dubbed “Unified Response” -- will continue to grow. "We have about 1,400 military on the ground right now,” he said. “We have another approximately 5,000 that are afloat on various ships supporting us. We will grow that force over the coming weeks to where we will have about 4,000 to 5,000 on Haiti and another 5,000 offshore supporting us." Among the assets moving toward Haiti are the hospital ship USNS Comfort, which can supply up to 1,000 hospital beds. The USS Bataan also has arrivedA arrived, and a Marine landing battalion from the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit is expected to go ashore today to one of the hardest-hit regions outside Port-au-Prince that has been beyond the reach of help until now. Keen clarified the boundaries of the role that U.S. troops will play. He stressed that their priority is to distribute aid in partnership with other agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development. "My mission is to provide humanitarian assistance, disaster relief and security in order to execute delivery of that [assistance and relief supplies]," he said. He added that the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti remains primarily in charge of security and that U.N. troops who had been successful in significantly reducing gang activity prior to the earthquake now are at work to contain pockets of violence that have cropped up in the disaster’s chaotic aftermath. Keen said he has not witnessed what some media reports characterize as a rising tide of violence. "All the places that U.S. forces have gone thus far have been very calm,” he said. “In fact, they've been overtly welcoming. People have been very orderly, and they’ve been very appreciative of all the aid that they've been given." Looking ahead, Keen said, he counts water purification units in the next group of priorities. Sixteen units had arrived yesterday, with five more due today. Opening the ports also is a critical need, he said. "We've got to have other means to get cargo in here and take pressure off the airport, " he explained. Assessment teams have determined that both the main port and a fuel pier are inoperable. Keen said he expects to have one of the ports operating with limited capacity by the end of the week, possibly using landing craft. Keen also told bloggers about another sign of progress in organizing the massive international relief effort: a new humanitarian coordination center that has been established using U.N. facilities. The idea, he said, is to have one place to funnel the immense outpouring of donation sto determine whether any given donation is needed and where should it be stacked if it is. Keen, who was in Haiti when the earthquake struck, said the response so far has been tremendous. "I am proud of what our nation and the international community has done," he said. (Judith Snyderman works in the Defense Media Activity’s emerging media directorate.)
WASHINGTON, Jan. 19, 2010 – Humanitarian assistance efforts in Haiti are improving every day despite enormous challenges, the commander of Joint Task Force Haiti said.
"Today, we had 180 flights go through the airport with zero delays,” Army Lt. Gen. P.K. “Ken” Keen said yesterday during a “DoDLive” bloggers roundtable. “That's the first day since we started that we did not have a delay." For perspective, Keen noted that the single runway at the Port-au-Prince airport handled just 13 flights per day before the earthquake. U.S. airmen opened the airport less than 24 hours after the earthquake in response to a request for help from Haitian authorities. It then took several days to streamline the system for handling the crush of planes carrying supplies. Landing time slots now are now assigned based on priorities set by Haitian officials, he explained. As of yesterday, U.S. troops had distributed 400,000 bottles of water, 300,000 rations and 12,000 pounds of medical supplies, Keen said, adding that those figures count only U.S. contributions. Numerous nations and international aid groups also are delivering assistance, he said. But while the amount of aid is substantial, Keen said, it's just a drop in the bucket compared to the needs of some 3.5 million people who are suffering, so the size of U.S. military force in Haiti -- in an operation now dubbed “Unified Response” -- will continue to grow. "We have about 1,400 military on the ground right now,” he said. “We have another approximately 5,000 that are afloat on various ships supporting us. We will grow that force over the coming weeks to where we will have about 4,000 to 5,000 on Haiti and another 5,000 offshore supporting us." Among the assets moving toward Haiti are the hospital ship USNS Comfort, which can supply up to 1,000 hospital beds. The USS Bataan also has arrivedA arrived, and a Marine landing battalion from the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit is expected to go ashore today to one of the hardest-hit regions outside Port-au-Prince that has been beyond the reach of help until now. Keen clarified the boundaries of the role that U.S. troops will play. He stressed that their priority is to distribute aid in partnership with other agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development. "My mission is to provide humanitarian assistance, disaster relief and security in order to execute delivery of that [assistance and relief supplies]," he said. He added that the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti remains primarily in charge of security and that U.N. troops who had been successful in significantly reducing gang activity prior to the earthquake now are at work to contain pockets of violence that have cropped up in the disaster’s chaotic aftermath. Keen said he has not witnessed what some media reports characterize as a rising tide of violence. "All the places that U.S. forces have gone thus far have been very calm,” he said. “In fact, they've been overtly welcoming. People have been very orderly, and they’ve been very appreciative of all the aid that they've been given." Looking ahead, Keen said, he counts water purification units in the next group of priorities. Sixteen units had arrived yesterday, with five more due today. Opening the ports also is a critical need, he said. "We've got to have other means to get cargo in here and take pressure off the airport, " he explained. Assessment teams have determined that both the main port and a fuel pier are inoperable. Keen said he expects to have one of the ports operating with limited capacity by the end of the week, possibly using landing craft. Keen also told bloggers about another sign of progress in organizing the massive international relief effort: a new humanitarian coordination center that has been established using U.N. facilities. The idea, he said, is to have one place to funnel the immense outpouring of donation sto determine whether any given donation is needed and where should it be stacked if it is. Keen, who was in Haiti when the earthquake struck, said the response so far has been tremendous. "I am proud of what our nation and the international community has done," he said. (Judith Snyderman works in the Defense Media Activity’s emerging media directorate.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)