text:
Guests: Eric Bates, Chris Cillizza, Steve Kornacki, David Corn, Steve
Scalise, Steve Scalise, Bart Stupak
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: No one's ever late for an execution.
Let's play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews from Washington. Leading off tonight: Insubordinate. It may not amount to Truman versus MacArthur, but make no mistake, the loose-lipped criticism by General Stanley McChrystal and his staff of President Obama and senior members of his administration is a matter of major import. McChrystal has been ordered back home to Washington to explain the comments he made to "Rolling Stone" magazine.
As a somewhat different journal, "Stars and Stripes," puts it, President Barack Obama faces two grim choices on Wednesday, fire General Stanley McChrystal and risk looking like he's lost control of the war in Afghanistan, or keep him and risk looking like he's lost control of his generals.
Here's another issue. Do the comments by McChrystal and his aides reflect the feeling on the ground in Afghanistan towards President Obama? Is anyone surprised over there by what the general and his aides got caught saying, or is that the general scuttlebutt? We'll ask NBC's Richard Engel.
Also, a federal judge in New Orleans today blocked the federal government's six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. The judge said jobs were at stake. What's more important, jobs or conserving the continent? We'll take that one up.
Plus, those falling poll numbers. President Obama's approval ratings are in retreat. Btu one HARDBALL regular says not only isn't that a surprise—or that isn't a surprise, it was expected, and that it could all turn around if just one thing happens.
"Let Me Finish" tonight with the difference between being elected president and being truly and dramatically accepted as one.
First, "Rolling Stone" magazine executive editor Eric Bates. The article, "Runaway General," is in the magazine's latest issue. Well, I have to say as a journalist, congratulations. This is an amazing scoop. And I have to ask you about the particulars. Here they are, as we've been able to get them from your article. Tell us if this isn't the heart of your report.
A McChrystal aide in your article is described as saying—well, he describes the general's first one-on-one meeting with President Obama this way. Quote, "It was a 10-minute photo op. Obama clearly didn't know anything about him"—that's the general—"who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run this F-ing thing, F-ing war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The boss was pretty disappointed." That's one quote.
Let's go on further. Let's look at other quotes. The article has
McChrystal and an aide joking about how they'll respond to any questions
about Vice President Biden following a speech he's about to give. It
reads, quote, "He and his staff imagine the general dismissing the vice
president with a good one-liner. Are you asking about Vice President
Biden? McChrystal says with a laugh, 'Who's that, Biden? Who's that,
Biden?' Suggests a top adviser also in the room, 'Did you say, Bite me?'"
Also in the article, a McChrystal aide calls national security adviser Jim Jones "a clown"—that's a direct quote—"who remains stuck in 1985." That's another direct quote. Here's another quote. Here's part of the "Rolling Stone" article on McChrystal about how the general pushes the envelope. Quote, "McChrystal relied on the skills he had learned as a trouble-making kid at West Point, knowing precisely how far he could go in a rigid military hierarchy without getting tossed out."
Well, there you've laid it out, Eric. You've laid out basically the conundrum President Obama faces tomorrow morning when he meets General McChrystal, who he's called back from Afghanistan. The guy has said things, he's allowed staff around him to say things which seem like insubordination to me, a civilian. What's your estimate of the importance of this piece?
ERIC BATES, "ROLLING STONE": Well, I think it's very important that you see, as a fly on the wall, the general and his top team talking very openly and very frankly about how they view the White House, the White House's team, the diplomats, and the state of the war.
What's equally alarming in the story is one of McChrystal's team says to us that this isn't going to end with a win. What it ends with isn't going to look like a win or smell like a win or feel like a win. And then they also go on later to say they plan to ask for more troops next summer. So it's a very disturbing look inside the war room of the top commanders.
MATTHEWS: Why would a general of McChrystal's capability, apparent—well, obvious capability, and experience—and we have to presume street smarts—trust these thoughts and words to a magazine known for its counter-culture attitude?
BATES: Well, that's an excellent question. I mean, I think this is a general who—this isn't the first time he's been called out like this. This is the second or maybe third time where he's leaked something or said something that got him called on the carpet, and here he's done it again. And as you pointed out in that quote about West Point, he's really done it his whole career. And maybe this time, it's just one bridge or one flip comment too far.
MATTHEWS: Well, when he sort of is shooting the whatever with a bunch of staffers around him, having a few yuck-yucks, did he know that "Rolling Stone" was in the room? Did he know it?
BATES: Absolutely. Everything in the story, we were in the room. He was very clear that there was a "Rolling Stone" reporter in the room. Whenever an aide said something to us when he wasn't around, we made sure to check and make sure that that reflected his position and his feelings. So there's nothing in this article that we aren't confident fully reflects the general's take on the war and on the administration.
MATTHEWS: When your reporter came back with the first filing, was your impression, My God, this can't be true? What did you think when you heard that General McChrystal and his top people in his company were basically dumping on the leadership of this country?
BATES: Michael Hastings, an experienced war reporter, who did the story for us, called me from the road as he was getting some of these comments. And I should say that Biden comment, for example, came within the first 24 hours that he spent with the general. This wasn't a case where they'd gotten so used to him being in the room that they forgot he was there. And he was calling me up and telling me some of what he was getting and we were both dumbfounded because it's clear to anyone who reads these comments how explosive they were going to be.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you a couple of questions. First of all, as a journalist—these comments made were on the record, all of them that were in the magazine. Everything was on the record. You didn't break any ground rules.
BATES: Absolutely not. Everything was on the record that we used, or not for attribution, meaning we didn't name who said it, if that's something we agreed to in advance. But it was all clear, very straightforward journalistic practice. And it's not a case of one comment off the cuff. This was a case of over days and weeks of time this kind of barrage of this sort of comments that you quoted.
MATTHEWS: Is your report that the president (SIC) knew when he was on and when he was off? Did he explain and had explained to him a knowledge of the ground rules so that he—the general, so that he didn't get confused here about when he was on and when he was off?
BATES: Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: He always knew it?
BATES: Absolutely. The understanding was, as it always is in this kind of case, that you're on the record at all times unless you make an explicit agreement otherwise in advance that both parties agree to. So there's no question, no confusion about that at all.
MATTHEWS: And just to nail it down for journalists and editors listening, the general made a point of saying some things were off the record. So he knew how to do it with this reporter.
BATES: Absolutely. And I think what's interesting is we've been getting asked about this all day by journalists. The Pentagon and McChrystal's team has not raised this at all once, as far as I know. So there's no question that this story is an accurate and complete and fair picture that was done according to the rules.
MATTHEWS: Well, let's take it as far as your article wrote. You were very good at backgrounding this article. You point out twice before, as you said, that last June, McChrystal got caught or he certainly was blamed for leaking a report that said he needed more troops. He then came out publicly at a press conference in Europe and basically dashed the idea the vice president had of a much leaner operation over there, aimed particularly at getting al Qaeda, but otherwise staying out of the country. He trashed that idea publicly. He was brought in—his top people were—the top Pentagon people were put on the carpet for that.
And also, you point out, this guy always pushes the envelope. He learned it at West Point. Push it as far as you can. It must be—somewhere in your editorial thinking, you must know where you've taken this story in terms of his career.
BATES: Oh, absolutely. I mean, what's astounding about the opening scene you quoted with the Joe Biden "bite me" quote is that the time that McChrystal got in trouble before was for answering a question after his speech in London about the vice president, in which he sort of mocked the vice president's strategy. And here he is again in a room preparing for a speech in Paris, wondering what kinds of questions he might get about Biden and joking in front of a reporter about how he's going to laugh off the vice president. So that's—that was—that was one of the most astounding things to me.
MATTHEWS: There's an old trick of journalism. People don't like to hear it, but it goes on. Joe McGinnis, one of the best ever, used to do it years ago. He would hold an interview with somebody with the tape recorder on, taking notes or whatever. And at the end of the interview, the person he was interviewing would think, Well, that's over with. Let's just chat for a while. That's when the real interview begins.
Was this one of those cases where General McChrystal thought he was giving this reporter a whole interview with lots of facts and figures about the war, and it was only afterwards or during breaks in those interviews that this reporter got the real story?
BATES: No.
MATTHEWS: In other words—OK, go ahead. Your reaction.
BATES: You read the story, and you see that this is a fly on the wall story. It's not a single interview in which somebody made a comment after the fact or forgot themselves. This is over days and days, the general and his top team telling us all sorts of things, I think very honestly, about how they feel and how they see the war effort and the White House and the president's team.
So it wasn't a case of one trick. As I said, they were making these comments within the first five hours of our reporter arriving.
MATTHEWS: Well, Eric Bates of "Rolling Stone," you're in the history books. Thank you for coming on HARDBALL tonight.
BATES: Thanks for having me.
MATTHEWS: Let's bring in the Washingtonpost.com's Chris Cillizza.
Chris, thank you for joining us.
CHRIS CILLIZZA, WASHINGTONPOST.COM: Sure.
MATTHEWS: We want to now one thing. How's this look? I know you at "The Post" are going to write a late story at midnight tonight with the latest developments. What can you—I know you're chuckling because—just don't hold back. What have you got now?
CILLIZZA: Well, look, Chris, let's do the facts first because there's a lot of stuff flying around. There are going to be two meetings tomorrow. This much we know. One, 11:00 o'clock in the morning. This is the planned monthly meeting of the Afghanistan team. This is the very high-level people. We're talking about President Obama, Vice President Biden, chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, James Jones, who you mentioned earlier, CIA director Leon Panetta, Stanley E. McChrystal normally on a secure connection. He will be in person.
Now, what we don't know—there will be a second meeting. I've got this confirmed through the White House. There will be a second meeting. It will be a one-on-one with President Obama and Stanley McChrystal. Is it before the Afghanistan monthly meeting? Is it after? We don't know, but there will be that meeting.
And Chris, I made a round of calls, sent out a round of e-mails before I came on to see if I could get anything from the White House about what do we expect going in. Basically, what they gave me was the line that Robert Gibbs said, all options are on the table. They're under strict orders not to say anything about what might happen until it does happen.
But certainly, if you read between the lines, or even if you don't really read between the lines of Robert Gibbs's press conference today, he said things like "All options are on the table" in response to, Does—what's the next step here for Stanley McChrystal? If you're Stanley McChrystal, you can't feel terribly good about that.
MATTHEWS: Hasn't he already—just on the background here, hasn't he already gotten his warnings? Isn't this the third strike?
CILLIZZA: Yes. Yes. And normally, at this level of politics, you only really get one strike. You know, we talk about three strikes in baseball, but really, if you miss it once, that's about it. And yes, clearly, last year, answering that question in London—you referenced this, where he took a shot at—well, a veiled shot, though not that veiled shot, at Joe Biden and the idea that we need less troops not more troops in Afghanistan. He was talked to on the president's flight to Copenhagen. So yes, a very stern warning.
I just—Chris, just to go back to what Eric was saying about—I am stunned as a journalist that this much came out on the record from someone who, though he has a little bit of a press aversion, apparently, has gotten to a high enough level in the military that he understands how reporting and journalism works. It's just astounding, is the only word that I can think of...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
CILLIZZA: ... for that piece, when you read it.
MATTHEWS: I just have to believe there was some piece of this we're going to get in a couple days, like this was part of a military effort to reach out to young people, to hip people. You know how you and I go to the movies and there'll be an ad for the military, some way to reach that younger demo. And if you go to "Rolling Stone," you're going to reach kids who normally don't hear about the military life and you might be able to advance recruitment a bit.
CILLIZZA: Well, Chris, you know...
MATTHEWS: Why else would he do the interview?
CILLIZZA: The sources I talked to—and these are folks who are kind of watching from the outside. These are not—I don't want to—don't want to pretend these are the deep Pentagon sources. But the thing that they said first and foremost was, Why would he—to your question, Why would he not only do the interview, but do such an in-depth—you know, the guy was with him for a month! Why would you do that, knowing kind of the tack that "Rolling Stone" typically takes to articles, a little bit snarkier, you know, a little kind of tongue in cheek? Why, if you are the head of the American effort in Afghanistan, would some press person say, You know what? I think this is a good idea. That to me is the one that I can't get over.
MATTHEWS: OK. I'm thinking of the president's advisers. You know my favorite question to you guys is, Who's in the room when you make a decision? It's true of everybody. You go—there's certain people you call, your lifeline. The president's got Jim Jones in the room with him as he make this decision, the director of national security. This fellow, this general has been quoted as calling him—well, somebody on his team has been calling that guy a clown.
CILLIZZA: Yes.
MATTHEWS: You can't do worse than that in the military than call a top general a clown.
CILLIZZA: And how about the—how about the Biden comment? I mean, after the history there, the Biden comment—granted, it came from a staffer, but you know, I just—it's to your point that you started the segment with, Chris. He's in a somewhat untenable position. Don't forget there's going to be an offensive in Kandahar coming up. And yet—and don't forget, of course, July 2011 is when we're going to allegedly be drawing down these troops. And yet How can you keep someone in a job who has taken direct shots—and we haven't even visited all the people he took direct shots at...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
CILLIZZA: ... but somebody who's taking direct shots at the people who, with him and the president...
CILLIZZA: ... and the vice president, are in charge of putting this all together?
MATTHEWS: OK, last word from "The Washington Post." You don't know what's going to happen.
CILLIZZA: I certainly don't.
MATTHEWS: OK, thank, Chris Cillizza. I take you at your word!
MATTHEWS: Thank you very much.
CILLIZZA: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: I know. I do think we don't know yet. The president's keeping this very close.
Coming up: General McChrystal's comments bring up a bigger question, and I mean it. Is what he said and the men said around him a sign of a general contempt by uniformed people toward President Obama? Was he just the one that spoke out? We're going to get a realty check on that very sensitive question with the best guy we can bring on, NBC's Richard Engel, who's with the troops in the field over there.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: How toxic will that TARP bail-out vote be for Republicans? Two South Carolina Republicans who voted for the 2008 TARP bill are facing defeat tonight. Congressman Bob Inglis is the underdog in his runoff race. His opponent made the TARP vote a big issue during their campaign. And U.S. congressman Gresham Barrett made it a runoff—made it to the runoff in the governor's race, but Nikki Haley may be the prohibitive favorite. For Republicans, voting yes on TARP could be a career killer.
HARDBALL returns after this.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: As we recover from this recession, the transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of jobs, but only if we accelerate that transition, only if we seize the moment, and only if we rally together and act as one nation.
MATTHEWS: Wow. Back to HARDBALL. That was President Obama just last week calling upon Americans to seize the moment in that Oval Office address. The president's poll numbers, however, have been falling steadily since that oil rig blew up in the Gulf of Mexico two months ago. Is this just a blip on the screen for him, or has the president lost his political touch?
By the way, that's the line being pushed by "The New York Times," that he has. Columnist Charles Blow wrote this weekend of the president, quote, "It is becoming increasingly apparent that the magic has drained away. Even among his most ardent supporters, there now exists a certain frustration and disillusionment not necessarily in the execution of his duties but in his inability to seize moments, chart a course and navigate the choppy waters of public opinion."
Joining me now is Salon's Steve Kornacki, who wrote a rebuttal to Blow's column, and David Corn of "Mother Jones" magazine. Let me go to Steve. Do you think he still has the ability to seize the moment politically, just to challenge Charles Blow in "The New York Times"?
STEVE KORNACKI, SALON.COM: Well, absolutely.
I mean, my problem with the column that Charles Blow wrote and my problem with the column that many others have written along the same lines is that it could have been written as soon as Obama was elected in November 2008.
I mean, this is what happens when a president walks into office with the expectations that Obama had, with the economy heading in the direction it was heading, and with his party in complete control of the House and the Senate. There's no one else to blame.
And public opinion being what it is, it sort of just always plods ahead. There's no collective memory. There's no collective foresight. So, when the economy—when the unemployment stagnates at or near 10 percent, they're going to blame the president, whose party controls Congress and who was elected to fix it.
And so the real question to me has always been not what happens a year, a year-and-a-half into his administration, it's what happens to the economy in years three or four. If the economy is back then, then all of his magic we talked about in 2008 will be back.
It's the same thing that happened with Ronald Reagan in his first term. He's the last president who dealt with double-digit unemployment. And at this very point in his presidency, Ronald Reagan's political obituary was being written. Democrats were dancing on his political grave. They thought the Reagan Revolution was a fluke.
The economy came back in 1983 and 1984. Ronald Reagan was reelected in a 49-state landslide. I don't know if Obama can do quite that. But it's far too early to be making all of these sweeping judgments that we're hearing.
MATTHEWS: Well, generally, I accept that Marxist view of history, meaning not that I agree with the Marxist ideology, nor do you, but that sense that economics drives politics.
Your theory, David Corn. Is economics driving this man's numbers down and all the good talk or leadership or swank wouldn't stop it?
DAVID CORN, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, "MOTHER JONES": I think there's a large degree of truth to that.
Now, Obama ran as a transformative—transformative—transformative candidate in that he would change the way we did business in Washington and across the nation. Now, of course, that is a pretty high bar to clear. And then when you come to office and you have to deal with the terrible economy and you're doing bailouts and stimulus spending, which is very controversial, not always very fun, and then the tough slog of the legislative business with health care reform, the public doesn't see an inspiring character.
What they—what I—I think one mistake that they did make—I take all of Steve's points. One mistake I think they did do was when they came into office, they charted a very conventional course in politics. All the grassroots organizing, with Organizing for Obama, which turned into Organizing for America, sort of dropped dead.
And they didn't do anything to keep people, their people engaged. And so all these big factors that Steve referred to were allowed to do their—the work that you would expect them to do on the general body politic. And Obama's troops were sort of left to the side.
I also think the war in Afghanistan has truly demobilized a lot of liberals and a lot of the progressive parts of the base. So, a lot of energy has been lost due to that.
MATTHEWS: He didn't ask people to do anything.
Let's take a look at the president's poll numbers in the Pollster.com trend line. These are a combination of all the polls. They show his disapproval ratings well above his approval ratings.
Let me go to another question before we—we don't have much time
here tonight. Since you have raised this Kornacki defense of the president
I will call it the Kornacki defense.
MATTHEWS: There's a different question. You're going to poll numbers as some sort of test of worth. I don't buy that either. I don't like poll numbers as a test of worth, because Churchill was nothing in the '30s, and he was dead right.
Lincoln was—probably had terrible poll numbers and he was dead right. So, that's not it. It's a question of, do you think that Barack Obama has measured up to your own expectations of his ability to lead the country, forthrightly and courageously, on issues?
For example, I will ask, where is the immigration policy? Where is the bill? Everybody knows what it will involve. Why isn't he putting it forth. Energy, everybody knows what needs to be done to transit us into another form of energy over time. Why doesn't he have a bill, and why is he not pushing for it?
Those are my questions. Leadership issues, not popularity questions, aren't they different? We only have a little time, Steve.
KORNACKI: Well, has he measured up to my expectations? The answer is yes. But my expectations were probably not the same as the expectations of a lot of the people who were part of his base in 2008.
I expected he would be an incrementalist. I expected he would be very pragmatic in his approach. So, I'm not surprised. A lot of people who voted for him and a lot of people who supported him in 2008 made the same mistake that is always made when a leader like Obama emerges on the scene. They expected too much.
KORNACKI: That is the exact same thing—I brought up the Reagan comparison. That's what Reagan supporters were saying in 1981 and '82.
CORN: But I do think a lot of those people took Obama at his word.
He did run as a candidate who would do bold things.
MATTHEWS: He wasn't going to be Clinton. He wasn't going to be incremental.
CORN: That's exactly right, Chris.
And you mentioned the energy bill. I think climate change is one area that he talked about talking bold action in. And there was a not—a not-bad bill passed the House. And I think Obama has not done what he needs to do to get it through the Senate, even during the whole oil spill crisis. So, that's one area where I think he's been kind of a bit cheap with whatever capital a president can rally in times of crisis.
So, I think, in a lot of ways, if you measure Obama against his own expectations that he gave people to believe in, that may be where he falls a little short.
MATTHEWS: You know, you really can't steer a boat with the engine off, Steve. And my question to you is, you suggest a drift is part of life. You just go with the unemployment number. As it goes up or down, so does your popularity.
KORNACKI: Well...
MATTHEWS: Is that what you're saying?
KORNACKI: Well, no. And I think when you start looking at—when we start making these judgments about, well, his poll numbers wouldn't be here if he did, the people would be with him if he did that, I think that stuff is largely bunk.
That doesn't mean what he does as a matter of policy isn't consequential, doesn't matter to history.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
KORNACKI: The example I always draw is, I think one of the most underrated modern presidents is George Bush Sr. If you look at the substance of what he actually did in his administration in terms of going after the budget deficit, in terms of his management of foreign policy, in terms of getting us through the banking crisis, if you look at the substance, I think that was a very sound presidency.
But he was measured in 1992, and, largely, he will be measured in history by the fact that the economy went into the tank and he was drummed out of office with a lower vote total than any president since William Howard Taft. It's unfair, but I think that's how those broad judgments get made.
MATTHEWS: Well, let's see how history looks at the decision to take us into the Gulf War. I'm not sure it's going to look as good years from now, because it took us into the second Gulf War. It's led to the situation we're in now, to get us to replace the British as the neocolonial protectors of oil.
KORNACKI: Or did he set the course that his son ignored by not going into Baghdad?
MATTHEWS: Once we're going in, we're going to keep going in.
CORN: But, at some point, Barack Obama has to do something, just from a political perspective—you know this, Chris—to get people riled up on his side of the aisle.
CORN: And the question is, what does he have to do?
MATTHEWS: More coming. You guys are great. We have got to go.
Thank you, Steve Kornacki. Great. I like the way you defend the president against all matter of folk.
MATTHEWS: Up next—that's part of the British oath.
Anyway, up next: A pair of Republican Senate candidates is literally running away from the press, literally, like Joe Louis' old opponents, running. Will they hide?
MATTHEWS: You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. Now to the "Sideshow."
Some high-profile Republicans are on the run, on the run from us, that is. Number one on the press' most wanted list, Nevada Republican Senate nominee Sharron Angle.
Angle is so media-shy, that our NBC affiliate out in Reno went on the air yesterday outright begging for an interview.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You, the viewers, had a number of questions for Sharron Angle. And she's not provided full and clear answers on several issues.
We have made numerous attempts to schedule an interview with her. Her office did not return many of our calls. And when they did, they never made the candidate available for an interview.
So, we would once again and publicly now ask Sharron Angle for an interview to discuss the issues she's running on and why she believes that she would make the best senator for Nevada, so that you, the voters, can make a more educated decision when you go to cast your vote.
MATTHEWS: Well, that's forthright.
Maybe she would prefer not to answer those questions right now. Ever think of that?
Another Republican on the media's most wanted list, Illinois's Mark Kirk, the guy who has gotten caught inflating his resume, everything from military record to his teaching history at a nursery school.
Here's how "Chicago Business" covered kirk's campaign yesterday—quote—"Mr. Kirk literally ran out the hotel door, rather than answer questions about a host of recent reports that he repeatedly has exaggerated his experience and credentials"—close quote.
Lesson to the candidates: You can run, but you can't hide, not from here all the way to November.
Moving out west to Arizona, a blast from the past for J.D. Hayworth. John McCain's campaign this week is circulating a 2007 infomercial in which his rival, Hayworth, touts free-money grants from the federal government and your opportunity to take advantage of them, you know, ways to grab some federal grant money for yourselves.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hundreds of billions of dollars. Wow. Forgive me if I sound like a skeptic, because that's a lot of money. It sounds too good to be true.
Congressman, is it for real?
J.D. HAYWORTH ®, ARIZONA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: It is for real. The money is out there. The opportunities are out there.
And, by the way, it's not something where it's the government's money. It's really your money. You surrendered it in the form of taxation. Now is the time to take advantage of a situation where the government can invest in you.
MATTHEWS: That's Meredith Baxter Birney and Victoria Jackson talking about perfumes.
Anyway, amazing. Not exactly in tune with today's worries about the deficit, is it? More in tune with the anything-goes-spending of the Bush era that Hayworth knew all about.
Time now for tonight's "Big Number."
The White House has been saying for months that the Obama team was ready on day one to deal with the oil spill in the Gulf. So, is the American public buying that argument? Apparently not. How many say the president's response to the oil spill has been too slow? Well, in the new CBS poll, 61 percent, a solid majority, three in five, say President Obama personally was slow on the take in dealing with the crisis, 61 percent, a numerical fact the Obama command will have to deal with and tonight's very "Big Number."
Up next: A federal judge blocks the federal Obama administration's moratorium on offshore deep drilling, saying jobs are at stake. What's more important here, protecting jobs or protecting the environment?
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
JULIA BOORSTIN, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Julia Boorstin with your CNBC "Market Wrap."
Things went south on Wall Street after some bad news on housing, the Dow Jones industrials losing about 149 points, to close at 10293. The S&P 500 slipped eight points to 1095, and the Nasdaq ended 27 points lower to about 2262.
Shares of homebuilders fell after the National Association of Realtors today reported an unexpected 2.2 percent decline last month in sales of existing homes. Many analysts expected increased sales as a result of the government's tax credit.
Apple shares rose almost $3 on news that it has sold three million iPads since they hit the market in April. And the White House is promising a quick appeal to a federal judge's ruling striking down the administration's six-month ban on deepwater oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
That's it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—now back to
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Today, as we reported, a federal judge blocked President Obama's six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling.
Joining me right now is Congressman Steve Scalise, a Republican from Louisiana.
Congressman, I have to ask you this. Here's Rush Limbaugh on the Joe Barton comment today.
RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: It was a shakedown, pure and simple. And somebody had the audacity to call it what it was, and now everybody is running for the hills.
MATTHEWS: Well, that was yesterday, actually, but it's been 42 days now since we have been asking Republican members of Congress to stand up and say Rush Limbaugh doesn't speak for the Republican Party.
Congressman Scalise, here's your chance. Is it Rush Limbaugh or your leadership that is right on Joe Barton?
REP. STEVE SCALISE ®, LOUISIANA: Well, first of all, Joe Barton has apologized. I spoke with him the other day. And I accept his apology.
What frustrates me is that you still don't see the sense of urgency from this administration. And they have got the legal responsibility to direct the efforts on the ground. And they're just not doing it. That is what angers people back home in South Louisiana, where I just came back from over just earlier today.
MATTHEWS: Well, my job is to ask these questions. Do you think that Rush Limbaugh is right, it was a shakedown? Is he and Barton right? Or is the leadership right in saying it was wrong to apologize on the part of the Republican Party to BP?
SCALISE: Well, unfortunately, I didn't get the opportunity to listen to his show. I like his show. I think he offers a lot of good, interesting commentary.
But the bottom line is, when you look at what's not happening on the ground—and our local leaders will tell you, just the other day, we had vacuum barges that were sent back to the docks by the Coast Guard, and they gave absolutely no reason why those barges, which would have been sucking up oil, that would have prevented oil from getting into our marsh, were sent back to the docks.
It—spent over a day where the Coast Guard gave absolutely no explanation. And the federal government, still to this day, won't tell us who is in charge when problems go on the ground like they're doing just two, three days ago. I mean, this is inexcusable. We cannot afford these kinds of delays.
MATTHEWS: Well, what about the big news that the federal government has asked BP to set aside a $20 billion escrow account? Some Republicans like Joe Barton have said that that's a shakedown, that that is wrong, it's a slush fund.
Rush Limbaugh agrees with that point of view. Your party leadership doesn't. Who speaks for you, your party leadership on that point or Rush Limbaugh on that point? Who is your leader?
SCALISE: Well, Chris, I speak for myself. And John Boehner is the Republican leader. But if you look at what's going on out there, we haven't been given any details on how this money is going to be spent. I sure hope it doesn't become some kind of a slush fund where Washington bureaucrats spend the money on things that aren't related to people on the ground.
My main concern is that the money gets into the hands of those people who are affected.
MATTHEWS: How is that, wait a minute. What is that—what is that attack you're making here? First of all, will you answer the question? Is Rush Limbaugh right here or wrong?
SCALISE: Well, again, I didn't listen to his comments earlier, Chris. But what I've said is, I want real transparency and accountability with the money.
MATTHEWS: He called it a shakedown. Is it a shakedown?
SCALISE: I wasn't in the meetings, Chris. But, I mean, again, where is the money going to be spent?
MATTHEWS: Why are you guys—why is everybody in the Republican Party afraid of Limbaugh, a radio talk show host? When he says something totally contradictive to your party leadership, can't you say, "I'm with the party leadership"?
SCALISE: Of course, I speak for myself. I told you who I speak for, and that's myself. Nobody else speaks for me. And ultimately, I'm trying to solve problems on the ground and they're still not getting fixed.
MATTHEWS: OK. OK. Just to make it simple. Rush Limbaugh does not speak for you on the issue whether BP was shaken down or not?
SCALISE: No, he doesn't speak for me. I speak for myself.
SCALISE: But ultimately, I'm going to continue fighting to try to make sure that the money gets into the hands of those people who are affected, and many of them still have not gotten help. But ultimately, that our leaders get the help they need on the ground, to get the oil out of our marsh. And they're not going a good enough job at that right now.
MATTHEWS: What don't you like about the decisions of an escrow account? You're accusing the administration of taking the money and putting it into some sort of political patronage fund. What makes you believe that the administration will decide where that money goes? Where did you get that idea?
SCALISE: Well, Chris, first, I've never made that accusation. What I've said is—
MATTHEWS: Well, you're saying it.
SCALISE: I've asked to find out where that money is going to go, how it's going to be spent. I think even the guy running the fund over the weekend wouldn't really tell anybody how it's going to be set up. So, ultimately, when you're talking about $20 billion that's supposed to go for people in the Gulf Coast who are affected by this oil spill, I think we all want to make sure that it's spent helping those people whose way of life right now is destroyed.
I don't think people want to see that wasted on government bureaucracy here in Washington. It needs to get to the hands of people on the ground.
MATTHEWS: Well, whose—who said 1 cent of it is going to a bureaucracy in Washington? Who says that? Where do you get that idea from that you're concerned about?
SCALISE: I've never said—well, I never said I've got the idea.
I said I want to make sure that doesn't happen because no one will tell us.
MATTHEWS: Well, what makes you think it would happen? Why are you going after a straw man—a red herring here?
SCALISE: -- because it's happened before.
MATTHEWS: Where has it happened before?
SCALISE: -- to Social Security trust fund—
MATTHEWS: Oh, here we go. This is—
SCALISE: -- everyday on things that have nothing to do with Social Security. I want to make sure that fund gets in the hands of people who deserve it. And no one told us what that money is going to be used for yet. I think we deserved that answer.
MATTHEWS: In other words, you are using—this is just—this is just pure, pure partisan politics, what you're doing here.
SCALISE: You know, Chris, I don't know why you're not concerned where the $20 billion is going to go.
MATTHEWS: Because you're attacking something that's never happened. It's never happened with this. You think BP is going to make some checks out, to what, welfare recipients, or are they going to make checks out to people who have legal claims against them?
SCALISE: Do you know? Because right now, we're not seeing the stuff getting down—
MATTHEWS: Because the only way they're going to spend a nickel is if their own fiduciary responsibility allows them to make payments which could only be the people with legal claims against them.
SCALISE: So, you're telling me that BP is going to run this fund?
Who's going to run the fund, Chris?
MATTHEWS: Apparently, it's going to be run—
SCALISE: I don't know if you know that. I sure don't. I'd like to know. I think the people on the Gulf Coast have a right to know.
MATTHEWS: OK. So, you're accusation—
MATTHEWS: OK. Right. Well, that's fair enough. It's just—it's just pure politics. Thank you, Congressman Steve Scalise for joining us now.
Let's go—let's bring Bart Stupak.
I don't know where that charge came from right there. Nobody out there believes this is going to—and this thing about the Social Security fund is classic partisan nonsense. OK? Absolute nonsense.
The Social Security fund is challenged because there's more old people now than compared to the number of young people there are now in a pay-as-you-go system. And anybody understands that who pays any attention to Social Security.
Anyway, let's go to Bart Stupak.
There was a straw man, a classic way to get some right wing votes. Let's go now to Joe Barton. What do you make, Congressman Stupak, of Joe Barton and these people basically saying it's the federal government that's the bad guy here, they're the guys who are basically setting up themselves as bagmen or something here, when in fact everybody knows it was BP that did this thing?
REP. BART STUPAK (D), MICHIGAN: Well, Joe Barton on the energy and commerce committee is a leading Republican, and he's been very cooperative in the Deepwater Horizon investigation. I was quite surprised that Joe made the comments he did during our last hearing of the oversight investigation subcommittee, which I chair.
But then again, if you look at the Republican Party and their coziness with big oil, I guess I wasn't all that surprised because less than 24 hours before Joe Barton comments, the Republican Study Group was basically making the same accusations along with Michele Bachmann, Steve King and others. Joe just happened to say it verbally out, and caught all the attention, but they've been saying this for the last 24 hours. It shows how cozy the Republican Party is with big oil.
MATTHEWS: What is your confidence level on us being able to find out: A, what happened with BP, the management decisions that led to this the catastrophe, et cetera? How good are we going to be able to get in digging in to what we're looking at right now and who did it?
STUPAK: Well, as you know, Chris, energy and commerce committee has held five hearings. Three of my oversight investigation subcommittee, and we've really put out reports, one around May 25th, and another one on June 14th, in which even Tony Hayward when he did testify, he did admit last week that the five areas we focused in on how BP sacrificed our environment and the lives of 11 men by cutting corners, to save money, and they accepted the risk and the whole thing blew up. They were trying to save money by cutting corners and look at the disaster we have.
Tony Hayward admitted that the June 14th letter we sent him with those five points, he agreed with. They were legitimate concerns. Those were legitimate points we raised.
I think we'll get to the bottom of this sooner or later. And—
MATTHEWS: Are there—without saying whether anybody is guilty or not—are there applicable federal statutes here, criminal statutes in this area?
STUPAK: Yes, there is.
MATTHEWS: OK. So, potentially, somebody could be charged with something here as a crime—as a crime.
STUPAK: Yes, and I'm glad to see the attorney general down there looking at it from not only a criminal point of view, but also from environmental restoration, because you can do more under criminal law for restoration for environment than you can under civil penalties. Civil penalties to big oil and other big companies is just a cost of doing business. It doesn't hurt them. You really have to dig in to this from the Department of Justice's point of view.
MATTHEWS: What do you—what do you make of the—what do you make of the decision by the fifth district court down there, Judge Feldman, Martin Feldman. He's a Reagan appointee. I don't know if that's relevant or not. But it seems like it is, basically saying he doesn't want this moratorium. He's just adjourned (ph) it.
So, what do you think of that? Is this something that is going to go on and is going to be litigated? We're going to actually have a chance to stop this deepwater drilling or not?
STUPAK: Well, I'm sure the Obama administration will appeal it.
And I encourage them to do so.
Remember, the five big oil companies raised their hands last week, and what did they say? We had an oil spill like this, we can't prevent it. We can't contain it. We can't control it. But for the grace of God, there goes I. It's a BP this time, where tomorrow it might be Exxon Mobil.
Look, these guys with these blowout preventers—they can't even make sure the batteries are working before they put them down. What are the testing they're doing? Why don't we have redundancy? Why don't we have a backup acoustic blowout preventer like some countries require?
We can drill, but we have to do it safely. Until we get answers, there should be a moratorium. And it's not just jobs and the environment. It's those 11 people who also lost their lives on that rig.
It's more than just the environment and jobs. It's also safety for our workers who work very hard to bring energy for our country. You—they need some protection.
MATTHEWS: You're so out front on this issue and so passionate about it, Congressman Stupak. Do you wish you would stay—decided to stay in Congress rather than retiring?
STUPAK: No. I made the right decision. I look forward to finishing up this investigation and moving on.
MATTHEWS: OK. Are we going to get the bad guys? Is that your hunch in the end on this oil thing?
STUPAK: Yes, we will. I think. Yes.
MATTHEWS: And—OK. Second question which has been bothering me:
Do you believe—I know you're a Democrat—do you believe this Democratic administration has reached out and explored all the possibilities for dealing with stopping the spill we're looking at live right now? Or have they focused too much on the capabilities and the integrity of the BP Corporation?
STUPAK: No. I think the administration and the unified command has brought forth the best minds we can find in the university setting, our national labs, and via national labs, even all the best minds we can find. How do you stop this?
I predicted a long time ago the only way to stop this oil gushing is drill those relief wells. Unfortunately, that's all we have.
MATTHEWS: Rahm Emanuel came out this week and he doesn't do many TV appearances. But he showed this week on Sunday television and said that what we're seeing here in the country is a choice between points of view about regulation, that the Republican point of view is: basically deregulate, allow energy self-regulation, trust that basically. In fact, you're hearing that from people like Gordon (ph) and the rest of them. Is that a difference that the voter can rely on?
STUPAK: Yes. That is a difference. I mean, if you take a look at this, they want less regulation—Republicans want less regulation. It's this lack of regulation or lack of enforcement of regulation that led to this terrible tragedy in the Gulf Coast. And we have loss of human life and the environmental havoc being wrecked on the Gulf States.
Look, you got to have rules, and you got to enforce them. If you don't, people are going to cut corners, and we're going to have another blowup just like we had here.
STUPAK: Let's have rules of regulations and enforce them for once.
MATTHEWS: Thanks very much, U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak.
And a reminder to other Republican office holders out there, if you think Rush Limbaugh is wrong about Joe Barton or anything else, or if you think he's not the leader of the Republican Party, come on the show. We made the challenge 42 days ago. We want to hear from you.
This is HARDBALL only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: The first top level member of the Obama administration is stepping down. White House budget director, Peter Orszag, will be leaving the White House next month. Orszag, who's getting married in September never planned to stay more than two years on the job, despite President Obama's urging that he stay on. Orszag's departure leaves a major hole in Obama's economic team.
HARDBALL will be right back.
MATTHEWS: Tomorrow, President Obama will meet with General Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan who was critical of the president and his top advisors in a new profile in "Rolling Stone" magazine.
Here's President Obama late today talking about General McChrystal.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, General McChrystal is on his way here, and I am going to meet with him. Secretary Gates will be meeting with him as well. I think it's clear that the article in which he and his team appeared showed a poor—showed poor judgment, and—but I also want to make sure that I talk to him directly before I make any final decision.
MATTHEWS: When we return, let me finish with some thoughts about civilian control of the U.S. military.
You're watching HARDBALL only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with this problem President Obama is having. It's not about the general, not entirely. It's not about insubordination, not entirely. It's about becoming president, not just by election or inauguration but in fact.
Jack Kennedy did it with the Bay of Pigs, not by agreeing to the operation but by accepting full personal blame for its failure. That's when the country knew it had a leader. His job approval shot through the roof.
Ronald Reagan became president when he came through that assassination attempt and, of course, the way he did it. "Honey, I forgot to duck." It made us happy to see such good strong manners in our president. Too old to be a soldier, he was not too old to take a bullet, yet not once faltered in his command.
Now it's time for President Obama. I've been critical for weeks about the failure to lay down a clear chain of command at the White House.
I want to know who we're dealing with when it comes to getting things done
not explaining the present, not spinning the latest problem, not back-and-forthing it with Republicans, not flacking it. I want to see the power of this country in action. I want to se the self-government of ours running the show.
Nobody reasonable thinks President Obama shouldn't go to baseball games with his daughter. That's partisan stuff from the Republican National Committee. He didn't cause this oil mess in the Gulf of Mexico. BP did. They are the bad guys in this piece.
But tomorrow morning, the president's got to show—well, he's got to do some business. If our general in Afghanistan has been insubordinate, he's got to can the guy, just as Harry Truman did to Douglas MacArthur. It might not be the most popular thing that Truman ever did, it may not be the best thing he did, I put the Marshall Plan up on that pedestal, but it sure was the most necessary things he ever did and it's one of the reasons we remember Harry Truman with such bipartisan reverence.
Whatever the thing is that makes you a great president, we knew Harry Truman had it.
That's HARDBALL for now.
Right now, it's time for "THE ED SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text:
General Motors technology is dead, Opel seems to say, and long live Peugeot IT. The next-gen Corsa, Opel's top-seller, that is scheduled to be launched in... read more
Last viewed Opel cars
Opel Movano
Here we have tried to collect the pictures and information about all the model years of Opel Movano. You can choose any of these to view more detailed specifications and photos about it! We have accurately collected this data for you, but nobody's perfect! We could put something out of account. If you don't find the required model here – please, contact us and we will fix it as soon as possible.
Opel Articles
May 1, 2017
March 8, 2016
This fabulous model is well-known as a Holden in Australia and a Vauxhall in the UK. Chinese customers usually get to call it the Buick Verano hatchback, and... read more
December 23, 2015
Featuring on a completely new lightweight architecture basis, the new Opel Astra is equipped with the latest generation of engine and offers such technical... read more

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Wow … no sooner does Hurriyet mention it and the Dallas MoFA returns it … from the Star-Telegram:
The Dallas Museum of Art has returned an ancient mosaic to Turkish officials after discovering it was stolen.
The mosaic was returned to Turkish officials at a ceremony Monday in Dallas. Museum officials also launched an international cultural exchange that will include loaning works of art and sharing expertise. The first initiative will be with Turkey.
The museum bought the roughly 5-foot-by-5-foot Orpheus Mosaic at a public auction in 1999. It originally decorated the floor of a Roman building. But the museum discovered evidence earlier this year that it was possibly stolen from an archaeological site. Museum officials then consulted Turkish officials, who provided photographic evidence documenting the looting.
- via: Dallas museum returns antiquity to Turkey (Star-Telegram)
For more detailed reports, see also:
- Dallas Museum returns Orpheus Mosaic to Turkey at DMX signing ceremony (Art Daily … nice pic)
- Dallas Museum Volunteers to Return Mosaic to Turkey (New York Times)


text:
Bridgewater boom: Friday night explosion to highlight filming of Cruise, Diaz film
Any Curve Street residents able to sleep knowing Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz are just a few hundred yards away might get woken up late Friday night by the sound of a large explosion.
"It's big. It's dramatic, but it's controlled," said Anthony Sinonaitis, the lead pyrotechnician for the 20th Century Fox movie with the working title "Wichita" shooting scenes Thursday and Friday in a cornfield off Curve Street.
Sinonaitis told dozens of residents at a public information session for abutters last Thursday at the senior center he'd be overseeing the detonation of pyrotechnics as part of the scenes being shot in Bridgewater.
The scenes to be shot in Bridgewater depict the aftermath of an airplane crash in a cornfield.
Representatives from the film company declined to give out much information about the plot but did say they will not be blowing up the actual plane, which was trucked into the cornfield in pieces.
"They don't want to let out of the bag what they're doing. You're going to have to come and see the movie. The fun of it is it's going to happen in Bridgewater," said Selectmen Chairman Stanley Kravitz, who has been working closely with the movie company.
The explosion, which will likely occur between midnight and 4 a.m. early Saturday, Sept. 26, will cause a fireball about 200 feet high, Sinonaitis said. He said it will be noisy and might rattle some windows, but otherwise residents shouldn't feel it.
Bridgewater-Raynham Regional High School senior Erin Pochay of Curve Street said she's not worried about the noise. She's planning a "sleepover" for her friends on the nights of the shooting, but she said they won't be getting much sleep. She doesn't want to miss any of the excitement just in case they can see anything from her house.
"I'll be up the whole time," said Pochay, who turned out for the information session with several friends eager to ask the production crew about the movie business.
Jennifer Elias, also a B-R student and a budding actress, asked Assistant Location Manager Hyunsoo Moon after the meeting who is the most famous person he's ever met.
Moon said the production side of the business isn't as glamorous as most people think. Probably the most famous person he's ever actually talked to is Christopher Walken, Moon said.
The conversation went something like this, Moon said, "I asked him, 'How's the heater?' and he said, 'Yeah, it's fine.'"
Moon said the warm reception the crew has received from the people of Bridgewater has been "pretty exciting."
He said he picked Bridgewater by driving around looking for a cornfield. He then talked to the owner of the land and one thing lead to another, he said.
His boss, Supervising Location Manager Kokayi Ampah, said Bridgewater residents should be proud of their town.
"This is what we're always trying to duplicate. This really is hometown U.S.A. I'm talking about the architecture. I'm talking about the streets, the clapboard homes. It's a full-scale back lot," Ampah said.
Deputy Fire Chief Thomas Levy said he has a lot of confidence in the movie crew's ability to handle the pyrotechnics safely and responsibly.
"Just rest assured these guys are professionals. They know what they're doing. They've done it numerous times," Levy said.
He said the movie company pulled all the correct permits. Water will be brought in by tanker truck since there's no hydrant on the site. No explosives will be left behind. At first light, the fire department will do a site walk for unexploded ordnance.
"As far as some of you, it's once in a lifetime to tell people what happened in your neighborhood, but to us it's work," Levy said.
Bridgewater Independent


text:
Washington (CNN) – Sen. Ted Cruz got a lot of pushback from Republican colleagues during a closed-door meeting questioning his relentless effort to tie government funding to derailing Obamacare.
"Cruz was completely unapologetic about the ads that he is featured in on the Senate Conservatives Fund website that attack other Republicans. He sees himself as the only truly pure Republican. His colleagues are furious. He has no successful strategy but has managed to generate grass roots support for his position," one senior Republican source at Wednesday's meeting told CNN Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger.
Cruz has urged Republicans in the House to stand firm and continue pushing any plan to fund the government to proposals aimed at curtailing the Affordable Care Act.
This summer, he appeared in ads produced by the Senate Conservatives Fund urging Republicans to push Congress to defund Obamacare.
This strategy has upset Senate Republicans and some House GOP members because some privately blame the freshman Texas lawmaker for causing the shutdown and boxing House Speaker John Boehner into a corner.
Cruz's spokesman did not have a response to reports of pushback during the Wednesday meeting. Cruz told Politico the media loves to cover internal Republican disagreements and "apparently some senators are content to fuel those stories with anonymous quotes."
Cruz also was unapologetic talking to conservative talk radio host Laura Ingraham earlier Wednesday.
"We've had now three times, the House has endeavored to pass compromise bills that would keep the government funded, but at the same time would start to address the enormous harms that Obamacare is inflicting on the American people. And three times, Harry Reid has said 'no, absolutely not, I will not talk, I will not compromise, I will not do anything – no.' And as long as he maintains that absolutist position, both Reid and President Obama have said they won't even sit down to talk. They want a shutdown," he said.
At a previous meeting of Senate Republicans, Sen. Susan Collins spoke about some of the ads in Maine that said she was not conservative enough, blaming Cruz for helping to divide the party.
During the Wednesday session, many senators spoke out and aimed their comments directly at Cruz, the GOP source told Borger.
While Cruz initially drew the anger of some Republicans weeks ago when the House passed the first bill to keep the government operating only if Obamacare was defunded because Democrats controlled the Senate, he then staged a 21-hour talkathon last week trying to prevent the Obamacare provision from being removed. He lost that effort but helped cement his stature with the Republican base.
That caused some Republicans to go public with their consternation.
Asked why Boehner can't bring up for consideration any bill he wants, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-California, told CNN Wednesday night that the "leadership made a decision to take the position that we are going to take the Ted Cruz strategy, and we are not going to fund the government until we get rid of Obamacare."
Nunes blames Cruz for causing the GOP not to have a choice and causing a shutdown.
"John Boehner said we'll take this Ted Cruz strategy. You guys went out for two months, made these commitments. We'll take it. We'll implement it. And now, here we are, it's fully implemented. ... I think Ted Cruz is one of the best politicians that's come around in a long time. He's able to rally the base, he's got a lot of money … There's a lot of consultants making money off this and lots of TV ads going on. The problem with it is, it's one thing to be good at politics. It's another thing to be not good at strategy."
Rep. Peter King, R-New York, has previously called Cruz "a fraud" for his promises of defunding Obamacare. But other Republicans are not backing away from Cruz, including Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli, who is scheduled to hold an event with the senator on Saturday.
For Democrats, there is little question of who is in fact leading the anti-Obamacare effort and are eager to highlight Cruz's efforts.
"Senator Cruz is now a joint speaker," Reid said Thursday on the Senate floor. "He lectures the House on occasion as he does people over here."
Mo Elleithee, communications director for the Democratic National Committee, said in a statement regarding Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus: "I think he probably has Speaker Cruz Boehner's number somewhere."
- CNN's Kevin Bohn and Bryan Koenig contributed to this story.
Cruz and his buddies are waging economic war on most of the united states middle class, it will come back at him, hes just too stupid to realize it.
TeaParty Caucus is only a handful of GOP; What Harry & Barry really fear is what they represent: an earthquake of civil discontent with the progressive, statist agenda. A tsunami of traditional American voices for smaller government & balanced budgets will soon flush away the DC sewage. Ted Cruz has a handle on the plunger.
Ted Cruz should be sent back to Cuba where he can live with his friend, Fidel Castro without worrying about obamacare.
Some people are going to make fortunes on the government shutdown .
Follow the money !
I agree Rosslaw – the whole world is laughing. US politicians appear to have the Easter Island syndrome.
As soon as the republicans realize taht cruz is a member of the cruz party, in it only for self promotion and the belief that he will be president (he will not) they will be better off. boehner needs to read Tip O'Neill's book and become a leader not a follower.
Well, at least we know that Ted Cruz will never be President of US
and neither will Rand Paul, Marco Rubio or any other Tea Party Thug
That is great for America and great for the world
Ted Cruz ! What a joke! During his fake filibuster he quoted Green Eggs and Ham. He clearly hasn't read or doesn't understand the story. It is a story about a guy who opposes something purely out of his own IGNORANCE until he finally tries it and realizes that it wasn't so bad..was actually good !!!
Oh ! The Irony !!!!


text:
Federal cuts lower Calif. budget outlook
Despite surging state tax revenue, Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday announced a spending plan for the coming fiscal year that is $1.2 billion lower than he projected in January.
Actions by the federal government are at least partly responsible.
The forecast for growth of personal income is lower because the federal government did not extend a 2 percent payroll tax reduction. That reduced the projections for personal income growth for the coming year in half, to 2.2 percent.
The governor's budget document says the federal government spending cuts - the so-called sequester - also helped erode the budget projections for the fiscal year that starts July 1.
Brown said the proposed budget he released in January did not anticipate the lower growth forecast or the depth of the federal government cutbacks, which he said are affecting the state's overall economy just as it was gaining strength after years of recession.
His general fund budget of $96.4 billion still invests heavily in education, thanks to a big haul of state tax revenue.
Voters approved Brown's Proposition 30 last fall to increase the state's sales and income taxes. Personal income tax receipts have been running $4.5 billion ahead of projections, but the governor's finance department expects the state to collect just $2.8 billion more than anticipated in the current fiscal year because of the effect the federal cutbacks will have in May and June, the last two months of the fiscal year.
The state's education funding formula will send most of the extra money to public schools.
K-12 spending is projected to rise from $47.3 billion in the 2011-12 fiscal year, Brown's first budget since reclaiming the governor's office, to $66.5 billion in the 2016-17 fiscal year. His budget provides $1,046 more per student in the coming fiscal year.
The governor also is setting aside $1.9 billion to modify the state's K-12 funding formula by giving proportionately more money to schools with high numbers of lower-income students, English-learners and foster children. Brown's plan has been criticized even by lawmakers in his own party because some of the school districts they represent are wealthier and would not see as much extra money.
Yet the governor has said that spending more on disadvantaged children is the right thing to do.
"Everybody's going to do better, but some are going to do considerably better," he said.
He also proposed an additional $1 billion to help public schools implement more rigorous academic standards.
Brown, who faced a $25 billion deficit when he took office in January 2011, is maintaining a $1.1 billion reserve fund for unanticipated expenses and is on track to reduce California's debt to $4.7 billion by 2017, down from the $35 billion Brown inherited. He warned that future federal government actions, economic uncertainty and soaring costs to operate state prisons because of a federal court takeover underscore a need for fiscal discipline.
"We have climbed out of a hole with the Proposition 30 tax, but this is not the time to break out the champagne," Brown said. "It's a call for prudence, not exuberance."
Republican lawmakers generally liked that message.
"Overall, a cautionary tone was a proper way to proceed when you have a recovering economy that's still fluctuating in revenues," said Senate Minority Leader Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar.
Democrats, however, were more muted. Many of them want to spend the incoming tax revenue on safety net programs that were eliminated or greatly reduced during the recession, such as adult dental care for the poor and mental health care.
"With many Californians still out of work, this budget is not just about paying down debt and saving money for a rainy day. It is also about growing our economy and broadening opportunities for Californians to succeed through education and a better environment for small business," Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield, D-Woodland Hills, said in a statement.
He is chairman of the Assembly Budget Committee.
Other highlights of Brown's revised budget plan include:
- Accepting the Medicaid expansion under President Barack Obama's health care reforms, which is expected to be paid fully by the federal government for the first few years.
- $48 million more for job training and subsidized employment opportunities under CalWORKs, the state's welfare-to-work program.
- Increases of $500 million each to the University of California and California State University systems, with additional increases in each of the next four years to make higher education more affordable and efficient.
California's general fund spending hit a high of $103 billion before the recession and dropped to a low of $87 billion during the 2011-12 fiscal year, creating a multibillion gap between revenue and spending commitments that required lawmakers to enact deep cuts.
Brown's budget proposal now goes to the Legislature, which has a June 15 deadline to pass a spending plan.


text:
Chelsea 3 Newcastle 0
Eden Hazard's stunning season continued as he fired Chelsea to the top of the Barclays Premier League with a hat-trick in a 3-0 defeat of Newcastle at Stamford Bridge.
The tactical brilliance of Jose Mourinho was lauded following Monday's 1-0 win at Manchester City and Hazard's excellence was the difference against the Magpies as the Blues made light of the absence for the first time this season of captain John Terry.
Hazard netted his 10th and 11th Premier League goals of the season within eight first-half minutes before converting a second-half penalty after Samuel Eto'o had been wrestled to the ground by Magpies substitute Mapou Yanga-Mbiwa at a corner.
For all Mourinho's protestations that his side are third favourites behind Manchester City and Arsenal this season, their challenge appears strong and they moved to the summit as their rivals dropped points on Saturday.
Chelsea have lost just once since losing at Newcastle in early November and in Hazard have a player who can cut through any team.
Hazard, more than most, has embraced the work ethic demanded by Mourinho, but the team mindset has only served to improve the all-round game of the Belgian.
The latest victory came without Terry, who missed his first Premier League minutes of the season as a precaution due to a muscular strain but could be back for Tuesday's match at West Brom.
It was the Baggies who came closest to ending Mourinho's unbeaten home record in the Premier League, which now stands at 73 games, but now there is a steel about Chelsea and their unbeaten run stands at 10 matches, eight of them featuring clean sheets.
Mourinho accused his side of complacency following the loss at St James' Park and the hosts switched off to allow Luuk de Jong a half-chance seconds into his first Newcastle start, only for Nemanja Matic to snuff out the opportunity.
Shots from Hazard and twice from Frank Lampard peppered Tim Krul's goal, but the visitors had chances, too, and Moussa Sissoko shot over and Hatem Ben Arfa shot at Petr Cech.
Ben Arfa fancied himself up against his ex-Marseille team-mate Cesar Azpilicueta and ran at the Spaniard before firing another effort which Cech gathered at the second attempt.
Mathieu Debuchy was struggling with an apparent calf problem after landing awkwardly, making his task of taming Hazard all the more difficult.
Yanga-Mbiwa replaced him after 40 minutes, but the Belgian had done the damage by then.
The first goal came when Hazard roamed in field before spreading the ball wide to rampaging right-back Branislav Ivanovic.
Ivanovic played a return pass which Hazard swept into the bottom corner with a first-time shot.
Newcastle had a chance to equalise when Sissoko breached the Chelsea rearguard, but a heavy first touch, combined with an alert Cech, denied the Magpies midfielder a shot on goal.
The missed opportunity proved all the more costly when Chelsea broke quickly and to devastating effect.
Willian found the overlapping Hazard, who cut in and on to his favoured right foot before slipping a pass to Eto'o.
Eto'o had his back to goal but improvised to return the pass with a neat backheel which allowed Hazard to pass the ball into the far corner without breaking stride. It was a stylish finish to a breathtaking move.
De Jong had a header at the back post from Sissoko's cross saved by Cech before Hazard shot over as he tried to claim his first Chelsea hat-trick inside the first half.
Luiz's long ball forward early in the second half flummoxed Krul, who slipped outside his area and was relieved to see the ball outrun Oscar and go out.
Mike Williamson did enough to put off Eto'o as the striker met Ivanovic's cross before Hazard was felled by Yanga-Mbiwa wide on Chelsea's left.
The substitute was booked and Lampard's free-kick was palmed over by Krul, with Chelsea's third coming from the resulting corner.
Yanga-Mbiwa rugby tackled Eto'o at the back post and referee Howard Webb pointed to the spot.
Hazard sent Krul the wrong way to complete his hat-trick.
Mourinho introduced Demba Ba against his former side and Mohamed Salah came on for his debut before Hazard made way for Andre Schurrle to a rousing ovation.
Salah shot wide and then was denied by Krul and Newcastle substitute Sylvain Marveaux fluffed a late chance.


text:
Next: Arguments, Previous: Continuation Lines, Up: Basic
Here are commands to get information about the size and position of parts of the buffer, and to count words and lines.
count-words-region). See Mark, for information
about the region.
M-x what-line displays the current line number in the echo
area. This command is usually redundant because the current line
number is shown in the mode line (see Mode Line). However, if you
narrow the buffer, the mode line shows the line number relative to
the accessible portion (see Narrowing). By contrast,
what-line displays both the line number relative to the
narrowed region and the line number relative to the whole buffer.
count-words-region) displays a message reporting
the number of lines, words, and characters in the region
(see Mark, for an explanation of the region). With a prefix
argument, C-u M-=, the command displays a count for the entire
The command M-x count-words does the same job, but with a different calling convention. It displays a count for the region if the region is active, and for the buffer otherwise.
The command C-x = (
what-cursor-position) shows
information about the current cursor position and the buffer contents
at that position. It displays a line in the echo area that looks like
Char: c (99, #o143, #x63) point=28062 of 36168 (78%) column=53
After 'Char:', this shows the character in the buffer at point. The text inside the parenthesis shows the corresponding decimal, octal and hex character codes; for more information about how C-x = displays character information, see International Chars. After 'point=' is the position of point as a character count (the first character in the buffer is position 1, the second character is position 2, and so on). The number after that is the total number of characters in the buffer, and the number in parenthesis expresses the position as a percentage of the total. After 'column=' is the horizontal position of point, in columns counting from the left edge of the window.
If the buffer has been narrowed, making some of the text at the beginning and the end temporarily inaccessible, C-x = displays additional text describing the currently accessible range. For example, it might display this:
Char: C (67, #o103, #x43) point=252 of 889 (28%) <231-599> column=0
where the two extra numbers give the smallest and largest character position that point is allowed to assume. The characters between those two positions are the accessible ones. See Narrowing.
Related, but different feature is
(see Display Custom).


text:
As of now there is no official update from the brands end. So, we would request you to wait for official announcement.
Get Answers from Experts & Owners
Thanks for reporting this. The reported answer will be shortly removed from Zigwheels &
will be sent for moderation.
It's a nice ev bike i love it i hope i have a bike for me


text:
Tracy Hickman
About the Author
Tracy Hickman has been writing and exploring fantasy and science fiction since the 1970s. Tracy eventually became a New York Times bestselling author (with Margaret Weis) of numerous series such as Dragonlance, the Death Gate Cycle, Darksword, and Rose of the Prophet. Together with his wife Laura, Tracy co-created the Dragonlance and Ravenloft games and, more recently, their own fantasy series, The Bronze Canticles. Tracy and Laura live in the Salt Lake Valley of Utah and have four children.


text:
Cabot Circuit Court Judge Philip Whiteaker announced last month that he will be a candidate for District 1, Position 2 of the Arkansas Court of Appeals. That seat is currently held by Judge Raymond Abramson, who was appointed to that position last year by Governor Mike Bebee.
Because Judge Abramson is serving by appointment, he is unable to run for the seat in the upcoming election. Earlier this year, Abramson announced his candidacy for the Arkansas Supreme Court seat that is currently held by Justice Jim Gunter. Justice Gunter announced in May of this year that he will not seek re-election for that position when his term ends in 2012.


text:
I wanted to say sorry that I haven't been posting much lately or posted many outfit photos. Again I haven't been feeling too great and the outfit posts are the biggest posts that go on my blog.
Anyway, did you all have a nice weekend? My boyfriend and I sort of made plans to go to Disneyland Paris in the middle of next year! I generally don't like holidays or staying away and I haven't been abroad yet as you know, but we can take the Eurostar train straight to Disneyland and I think just being there will override any hesitant thoughts of being away really, I'm just so excited about it!
I'm wearing my Paige Lou Lou flared jeans, a Pins & Needles berry lace top, an ASOS colour block floppy hat and gold tree necklace, a Topshop rainbow ring, a Talullah Tu Tassle String Bracelet and my Urban Outfitters wedges.
I've always had a liking for floppy hats but I haven't really ever been able to find one that suits me. They always end up covering my face or being too big or just not fitting right. I fell in love with this one though since it combines two colours and looks really cute! What do you think?
(Follow me on Twitter, Bloglovin and Facebook)


text:
Laneway Presents D.D Dumbo
D.D Dumbo, aka Castlemaine's own Oliver Hugh Perry, is excited to announce a national tour in support of his excellent debut album. The tour takes in shows in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth along with a handful of regional dates. This tour will be his first headline run with a full band.
D.D Dumbo released his long-awaited debut LP Utopia Defeated in October last year (via 4AD/Liberation locally). Praise rolled in from here and abroad: feature albums on triple j, RRR, FBi and RTR; A-listings on BBC 6 Music's for singles 'Satan' and 'Walrus'; support from NPR, KCRW and KEXP; Rough Trade Album of the Month; a double page feature in the UK Guardian Guide; 4 and 5 star reviews from the likes of Rolling Stone, Line of Best Fit, Mojo and many others. He finished 2016 by taking out triple j's J Award for Australian Album of the Year.
In the new year, the accolades continued; two placings in the Hottest 100 (#44 and #47 for 'Satan' and 'Walrus' respectively); a nomination for the prestigious Australian Music Prize; a spot on the shortlist for the APRA Song of The Year; and a series of killer performances at the national Laneway Festival, drawing some of the biggest crowds of the day. Last week, the band sold out two headline shows in his hometown of Castlemaine and wowed a huge audience at the weekend's Womad festival.
Catch D.D Dumbo at these special headline shows this June.
Supported by triple j & Laneway Presents
Tickets from dddumbo.com
Sat 10 June - The Triffid, Brisbane
Fri 16 June - The Metro, Sydney
Sat 17 June - Anita's Theatre, Thirroul
Wed 21 June - Karova Lounge, Ballarat
Sat 24 June - Corner Hotel, Melbourne
Thurs 29 - June Astor Theatre, Perth


text:
27.5'', Alloy 6069, triple butted tubes, T4, T6. Enduro bearings
230 x 65 mm, LSC, rebound, 2-position adjustment
27.5", Charger 2.1 damper, Debonair, LSC, HSC, rebound, Boost (15x110mm), 38mm offset
Alloy cups, sealed bearings
40 mm extension, 31.8 mm
31.8 mm, 780 mm width, 27 mm rise, Alloy 7050
Rotor: HAYES D-Series 203 mm, 6-bolt
12 sp
Chainring: SRAM GX Eagle, 34t, Narrow-Wide
12 sp, 10-52t
27.5'', 32h, 28 mm inner width, Tubeless Ready
Rear: 32h, 2 sealed bearings, 12 x 148 mm, XD, black - Front: 32h, 2 sealed bearings, 15 x 110 mm, black
J-Bend, tripple butted 2.2/1.8/2.0, stainless, with Nylok, black
Rear: 27.5"x2.4", Addix Soft, Super Trail, Tubeless Ready - Front: 27.5"x2.4", Addix Soft, Super Trail, Tubeless Ready
34.9 mm, travel: 125 mm on S, 150 mm on M, 175 mm on L, 200 mm on XL, SouthPaw alloy remote
Cr-Mo rails
Average weight for S size, without pedals. Weight may differ slightly due to manufacturing tolerances.


text:
Gavin Jordan-Smith Joins Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A.
RAMSEY, NJ—April 2, 2012—Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A., a leading provider of advanced imaging and networking technologies for the desktop to the print shop, today announced Gavin Jordan-Smith has joined the company as vice president solutions and production planning, Business Intelligence Services.
"I look forward to helping the existing experts and executive team at Konica Minolta to further expand the company's industry-leading technologies, solutions and services portfolio in the years to come," said Jordan-Smith. "Konica Minolta has become a brand from which customers expect innovative document management solutions and we aim to continue delivering on this promise at a time when the industry is growing more than ever before."
Jordan-Smith, who will have oversight of software planning, vertical market strategy, the Solutions Engineering Center, and production print business planning and software development, joins Konica Minolta from Xerox Corp. where he was vice president, Production Workflow and Solutions, Enterprise Business Group (EBG). He was responsible for end-to-end software commercialization, solutions deployment and business strategies to serve the needs of quick print/CRD and graphic communications/inplant customers.
Jordan-Smith led a diverse software management team and worked cross-functionally throughout Xerox worldwide. In his new role, he will report directly to Sam Errigo, senior vice president business intelligence services, Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A.
"The addition of Gavin to our management team is consistent with our strategic direction to grow our production print and solutions business, and his expertise will be an integral part of this growth strategy" said Errigo. "As Konica Minolta looks to continue growing market share, Gavin will lead this charge and help ensure that customers can count on Konica Minolta for leading products and solutions that meet all their business needs."
Jordan-Smith is a 15-year veteran of the graphic communications industry in the United States and United Kingdom. He has bachelor's degrees from Mid-Glamorgan University, Wales, United Kingdom in accounting and an international business law and an accredited US degree, in management information and IT Systems technology.


text:
View of Royal Monastery of San Lorenzo de El Escorial. Madrid © Turespaña
Casita del Infante (Infante's House) or Casita de Arriba (Upper House) in San Lorenzo de El Escorial. Madrid © Turespaña
Casita del Príncipe (Prince's House) or the Casita de Abajo (Lower House). San Lorenzo in El Escorial, Madrid © Turespaña
In the heart of the Guadarrama mountain range, only 50 kilometres from Madrid, stands the town of San Lorenzo de El Escorial. Mount Abantos, its pine forests and the Herrería estate form the natural surroundings of this place, which has its focal point in the Monastery of El Escorial. Its urban layout is composed of a harmonious collection of ancestral homes in the Herrera style, with rationalist avenues and small squares in an earlier style. Nestling in the Madrid mountains, it offers a great many leisure opportunities and cultural routes, such as those which take the visitor to Ávila, Segovia, Toledo or Madrid.
The Madrid-region town of San Lorenzo del Escorial, a Historic-Artistic Site, grew up around the Monastery of El Escorial. This architectural gem, declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO, was ordered to be built by Felipe II in the 16th century to commemorate the Battle of San Quintín. An urban layout slowly developed around it, since the aristocrats and middle classes from the capital had their summer residences erected here. It is, in short, an elegant town rich in architectural heritage and surrounded by mountains and forests.
The Monastery
The Royal Monastery is a complex structure designed by Juan Bautista de Toledo and built by Juan de Herrera. The simplicity of its lines focus all the attention on the harmony of its courtyards, fountains, cloisters and towers. More than 4,000 rooms are distributed among the principal areas. The Courtyard of the Kings of Judea gives way to the Basilica, which has a dome base measuring 95 metres and paintings by Lucas Jordán among its major features.
San Lorenzo was also built to house the Royal Pantheon and the Spanish monarchs from the houses of Habsburg and Bourbon are buried here. The princes, infantes and queens who died without leaving royal descendents rest in the Pantheon of the Infantes.
In the Museum of Architecture there are documents concerning the work carried out to build the Monastery, which state that grand masters came from all over Europe to participate in its construction. Also outstanding are the great many manuscripts (in Arab, Greek and Latin) in its Library and the invaluable collection of paintings in the Chapter Houses. El Greco, Ribera, Tiziano, Velázquez or Bosch are just some of the artists whose work is on display. Tiziano, Veronés, Zurbarán and Tintoretto await the visitor in the Painting Museum.
San Lorenzo de El Escorial
Between the Exchange, an enormous square surrounding this architectural site, and the street of Floridablanca is the sober structure of the Servants' and Guest Quarters. Designed to house the palace outbuildings, they are remarkable for their ashlar stones and slate rooves. Meanwhile, the current University of Santa Cristina was built to house the ovens, kitchens, stables, the blacksmiths and other monastery outbuildings, the so-called Servants' Quarters.
Forming part of the urban design of this town, we well also find the House of the Infantes and the Queen, the Coliseum of Carlos III and other exceptional buildings. Houses and Small Palaces yield to the rationalist urban development which the symmetry of the Monastery sustains. The Palace of the Marquis of Campo Villar, the house of the Duke of Medinaceli or the House of the Columns are some wonderful examples.
The current Euroforum, a place where the Summer Courses of the Madrid Complutense University are held, was in its day the house of the Families of the Infantes. Remodelled on several occasions over the centuries, it boasts the title of Historic--Artistic Monument.
In the Herrería estate, with marvellous views over San Lorenzo, is theCottage of the Infante, or Higher Cottage. This small palace was ordered to be built by Infante Don Gabriel de Bourbon, son of Carlos III, to distance himself from palace protocol. Its layout and its gardens are the work of Juan de Villanueva.
Gastronomy and surrounding area
In San Lorenzo de El Escorial the visitor can also sample genuine Madrid and mountain cuisine. Snails, potato omelette and cold meats will serve as appetizers. Madrid stew (chickpeas, meat and vegetables), tripe and garlic soup are steeped in the purest Castilian tradition. Among the main courses, Guadarrama mountain beef is cooked on the grill, while lamb and suckling pig are prepared in the oven. Sea bream and cod are the preferred fish in the central region. And for dessert, aniseed "rosquillas", custard "canutitos" or almond "mantecados".
Ávila, Segovia, Toledo and Madrid are cities worth visiting during a stay in San Lorenzo de El Escorial. The first three have been declared World Heritage Sites by UNESCO and possess historic quarters of unquestionable historic-artistic value. The walls and churches of Ávila; the aqueduct, Fortress and Cathedral of Segovia; and the cultural blend of Toledo are some of the principal charms. Madrid, meanwhile, has old quarters, such as Habsburg and Bourbon Madrid, where the visitor can take a quiet stroll and stop at the many monuments. The Prado, the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum and the Reina Sofía National Art Centre, along with National Archaeological Museum, are some of the musts. A cosmopolitan city which has a number of shopping areas, green spaces and leisure spots, where the cultural programme allows for the most varied artistic expression.
What to see in the destination See more
More information
Very interesting
Discover the surroundings


text:
Higher Education Flipbook 2022
Why is higher education so important? Consider these potential benefits: • College offers students the opportunity to broaden their horizons with new people, ideas, and experiences. • College graduates earn more, on average, than those with only a high school diploma. • College-educated adults are more likely to be employed, even during hard economic times. • College can foster lifelong learning and civic participation, enhancing personal and professional growth. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021 For many Americans, college is a dream, a goal, and a family responsibility.
Made with FlippingBook
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTEyOTYzNw==


text:
Lying Plagiarist Jonah Lehrer Got Paid $20,000 to Talk Onstage About Being a Lying Plagiarist
Jonah Lehrer, the disgraced New Yorker writer, does not know how to do journalism. We have established this, repeatedly: he "plagiarizes" from himself. He actually plagiarizes from others. He fabricates quotes. He lies. This is why he was fired from The New Yorker, and why he is not currently employed as a journalist.
So why did the Knight Foundation—dedicated to "quality journalism"—pay him $20,000 to give a keynote speech at one of their events?
In what world is this, remotely, acceptable? That Lehrer was invited to give a speech at an event about journalism in the first place is stupid enough. But that he was paid to do so goes beyond stupid. It's offensive. The guy has broken the simplest and most fundamental rules of journalism. He has nothing to teach anyone. His failures weren't failures of process or system, from which writers and editors might learn. They were failures of Jonah Lehrer.
So what did Jonah Lehrer get paid a little less than half of the U.S. median household income to say?
"I could stop here, but there's a reason I want to talk today about my failures. I am convinced that unless I talk openly about what I've learned so far, unless I hold myself accountable in public, then the lessons will not last. I will lose the only consolation of my failure, which is the promise that I will not fail like this again, that I might one day find a way to fail better."
The speech was billed as an apology, but it wasn't. It's was gross, public self-absolution, a glib reframing of his fraud and plagiarism as procedural errors—"mistakes," like the mistakes made by great scientists in their search for the truth. We should all work together to learn from Jonah Lehrer's mistakes. (The lesson of Jonah Lehrer's mistakes: Do not trust Jonah Lehrer, ever.)
Lehrer treated the audience not as people from whom he should seek forgiveness but as witnesses to his own newfound accountability. It should go without saying that I have no desire to help Jonah Lehrer hold himself accountable and resent being implicated in his therapeutic process. I'm not his therapist. I'm not his AA sponsor. If Lehrer needs my help, if he needs the help of a public audience, to ensure that he will remember to follow the most basic rules of journalism, he should not be a journalist.
Anyway, no one should be surprised that Lehrer's big "public apology" is about Lehrer. Plagiarists and fabricators are narcissists. They don't seem to understand that other people exist, and therefore find it OK to steal or invent their words, to suit their own purposes.
And the Knight Foundation is giving him 20,000 reasons to think that way. In a world where journalistic standards mean anything, Lehrer should be toxic and unemployable, and anyone who tries to hire him should lose their own jobs. But there was the Knight Foundation, unashamed, inviting him to stand onstage and demand that we all participate in his own self-betterment program, that we all bear witness to his ritual self-abuse, that we all help him become a better writer. The world is what Jonah Lehrer believes it is.


text:
The Archdiocese of Colombo's declared the 2013-2014 academic year as a "Year of Mary."
Need an idea for Lenten almsgiving?
Help us spread faith on the internet. Would you consider donating just $10, so we can continue creating free, uplifting content?
The Archdiocese of Colombo celebrated its recent "children's day" with the performance of a newly-created musical recounting the period in Mary's life from the Annunciation until the birth of Christ.
"It pictures a kind of moral dilemma, and thoughts that may have passed in the mind of Mary from the time of her consent (at the Annunciation), with the consequences seeming to contradict the law of Moses," Fr. Cyril Gamini Fernando, the writer and director of the musical, told CNA March 18.
Fr. Fernando serves as episcopal vicar for the Colombo archdiocese, and called the presentation "a theological, musical drama."
"Mahoththamawi," or "Greatest Mother" in Sinhalese, premiered March 1 outside on the grounds of Tewatta Basilica, the national shrine of Our Lady of Lanka, located in the Colombo suburb of Ramaga.
The performance followed a Mass, and more than 3,000 students and faithful attended the premier of the 45-minute musical which features choreography, singing, and dancing.
It was performed by an acting troupe led by Rajini Selvanayagam.
Fr. Fernando said it reflects the "quandary and fear" that may have been in Mary's mind, presented with Mariological reflections, taking into account her meditative, prayerful background and her knowledge of the Pentateuch and the prophets of the Jewish Bible.
"She was very well aware of the law, the consequences in society, and the Law of Moses, but she trusted in the Word of God," Fr. Fernando stated.
He produced the musical as part of the Archdiocese of Colombo's designation of the 2013-2014 academic year as a "Year of Mary."
"We are taking this opportunity to explore her importance and role in the salvation and redemption of mankind," the priest said.
The archdiocese's annual children's day gives students the opportunity to attend an exhibition on religious vocations, where they get to know the history of the Church in Sri Lanka and its various religious congregations.
In addition, they toured the basilica, learning about historic engravings established by Archbishop Oswald Gomis, who led the archdiocese from 2002 to 2009, as well as an exhibit on Bl. Joseph Vaz, a 17th century Oratorian known at the "Apostle of Sri Lanka."
The day was presided over by Cardinal Malcom Ranjith, Archbishop of Colombo, and the homily at the Mass was preached in dialogue by four priests, in both Sinhalese and Tamil.
Cardinal Ranjith told the children that he had visited Rome last month and that "when I met the Holy Father Pope Francis in February, I told him about the Children's Day and then the Holy Father conveyed his loving greetings and blessings to you all."


text:
In case you hadn't noticed, Keith Olbermann is a preening douchebag.
Sure enough Gramatica's name was brought up by ESPN's Keith Olbermann on Monday night when he decided to make Mitchell one of the night's "worse" persons in the sports world for not learning from the mistakes of others.
Seriously, Malcolm Mitchell accidentally hurting himself while celebrating a team highlight in a big game makes him an asshole?
Olbermann earned a spot for himself on his own list.


text:
BEMIDJI, Minn. (April 10, 2012) — The Phoenix gay-straight alliance and the women's studies/gender studies program at Bemidji State University are sponsoring a series of events this week related to understanding and awareness of issues related to gender and sexual identity.
• Robyn Ochs presentation
On Wednesday, April 11, BSU will host Robyn Ochs for a presentation entitled "Beyond Binaries: Identity and Sexuality."
Ochs' presentation will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the Beaux Arts Ballroom in Bemidji State's upper Hobson Memorial Union. There is no charge, and the event is open to anyone who wishes to attend.
Ochs is an educator, speaker, workshop leader and award-winning activist. She is the editor of the anthology, "Getting Bi: Voices of Bisexuals Around the World," which features contributions from authors in 42 nations. Her own writing has been published in numerous outlets, and she has taught courses on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender history and politics in the United States, on the politics of sexual orientation, and the experiences of persons who do not fit into binary categories such as male/female, gay/straight, masculine/feminine or black/white.
Ochs describes herself as an advocate for the rights of people of all orientations and genders to live safely and openly and with full legal equality. Her work focuses on increasing awareness and understanding of complex identities, and on mobilizing people to be powerful allies to one another.
• 515 – The Tour!
On Sunday, April 15, BSU will host the 515 Players for "515 – The Tour!" in the main theatre of the Bangsberg Fine Arts Complex. Admission is free.
"515" is a theatrical representation of the real-life discrimination faced by same-sex couples in Minnesota. Minnesota law defines marriage as between one man and one woman, and the "515" indicates the group's view of the number of state laws designed to exclude same-sex couples from rights and benefits that it feels should be open to everyone. "515" presents a vision of a world of equality where all families are valued equally and respected under the law in their homes, neighborhoods, communities and workplaces.
"515" is written by Matthew A. Everett and is directed and produced by Bryan Garber. The 515 Players include Jessica Dougherty, Bryan Gerber, Shannon Troy Jones, Claire Lloyd, Adam Moore and Kelsey Strong. The actors will be available following the performance for a question and answer session.
The performance is sponsored by The Phoenix, Bemidji State's Student Activity Fee Allocation Committee, the Respect Awareness Project of Servant Hearts, the Minnesota chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, and by Greater Minnesota Racial Justice Project North.
For more information about the events, contact Dr. Angela Fournier, assistant professor of psychology, at (218) 755-2530.
• Robyn Ochs: Official Website; Twitter