text:
ANOTHER VIEW: On school food, the nanny state is right
Coming to a school near you: healthier food.
Moving forward on a 2010 law, the Agriculture Department last week said "it will make sure that all foods sold in the nation's 100,000 schools are healthier by expanding fat, calorie, sugar and sodium limits to almost everything sold during the school day," according to The Associated Press.
Among other things, this will mean no more candy bars and high-calorie sports drinks in vending machines and cafeterias. It will also spell the end of other foods that don't meet healthier standards.
As an example, AP reported, "elementary and middle schools could sell only water, carbonated water, 100 percent fruit or vegetable juice, and low fat and fat-free milk, including nonfat flavored milks." There also would be, among other items, low-fat pizzas and hamburgers.
Aside from the young people, for whom the new school diet will be like sipping castor oil, the regulations have prompted concerns regarding the cost of the program.
At a congressional hearing, Sandra Ford, president of the School Nutrition Association, said "healthier foods have been expensive and participation has declined since the standards went into effect," according to AP. Ford's Bradenton, Fla., school district faces an annual loss of $975,000 in sales of foods that will no longer be available, Ford claimed.
Also, "the new meal pattern requirements have significantly increased the expense of preparing school meals, at a time when food costs were already on the rise," Ford told the hearing.
Congress also heard from the Government Accountability Office, which said new food is being wasted because students don't want to eat it.
The concerns no doubt have validity. So, too, do the cries of those who bemoan yet another incursion of the "nanny state" -- that is to say, a government telling its citizens how to live their lives.
Also real, however, is the increase in childhood obesity and all that it implies, from bad health to increased medical bills.
It's tempting to glibly resort to the old Alka-Seltzer slogan, "try it, you'll like it", to convince students and administrators alike to embrace the new dietary regulations.
But there's nothing funny about childhood obesity.
Put another way, "nanny" often is right.
Remember, the idea is for Americans to enjoy healthier, longer lives.


text:
A Montana woman who has been claiming for years that Michael Lohan is the father of her 17-year-old daughter was proven correct this week, when the resuls of a DNA test were revealed on The Trisha Goddard Show.
Krista Horn Kaufmann and her daughter Ashley appeared on the show, with Ashley meeting her father Michael for the first time after the results were shown.
Photos: Everybody's posing nude! Check out Rihanna and other stars who've bared all
Ashley volunteered to open the envelope herself, but the teen seemed less than thrilled by the news that she is Lindsay Lohan's half-sister. She initially stayed quiet and, after Goddard announced the results to the audience, handed the envelope to Michael and said, "Just to prove it to you." Her mother began crying.
An awkward moment followed, with Lohan attempting to hug his long-lost daughter and Ashley shying away, telling him, "This is the first time I've met you."
Ashley is the product of an affair Lohan had with Horn while he was still married to Dina Lohan, the mother of Lindsay and his other three children. Lohan had previously denied being Ashley's father and had refused to pay child support, prompting Kaufmann to go public with her claims, according to the New York Daily News.
Watch the video:
When Lindsay Lohan was asked about the report on Good Morning America Friday, she responded, "I didn't even hear that, so thanks for the news. I don't pay attention to any of it."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Heirs Episode 7
The Heirs Episode 7 English Sub
Comments (790) ADD COMMENT
alsobitofanerdOh!! Thank you for that, you are so very right nerd! If anything, all that staring only kills whatever they were trying to accomplish in the different scenes. I only get bored with them for never really talking, just staring. The only relationship so far that has interesting chemestry is the first-second son drama. The rest of it, I've seen before, and, thruthfully it was done better..
DannschThose one thousand "Love is the momeeeeent" scenes are harder to bear. xD
About 3 years ago . Report
Why are so many people here so judgmental of the other viewers who do not particularly like this drama or point out flaws in the drama. People are allowed to have an opinion so just because someone says the lead character cries too much or this drama is just a cliche doesn't give reason for another to comment "then don't watch or why are you here then if you don't like the drama". Some of you people need to grow up and drop your childish attitude.
123abcYeah you got my point. Too many Die-hard Fan-boy/Fan-girl who defend their idol and give no room for critics..
lvoeWTF! if you are mature enough then maybe start to think like one , if you criticize something or someone, as a matured person you know that it is more good to just keep it on yourself rather to say it to other,,
idontknowmynameThen, Ivoe, we won't have any movie critique. We won't have an award-giving body, since we can't critique anyway. Remember, the audience is the ones that the drama needs to appeal to. It's part of making a drama. They will expect good or bad reviews on what they're making. Stop being a blind fangirl.
anacAgree with you 100% money doesn't make a person but their character is what matters. The young characters in this drama rely on their parents money not their own so who are they to judge they have no money.
lolisrightlmao XD
About 6 years ago . Report
i can relate to this drama, in a way. i mean, from an asian country where i live in, social class is apparent. i mean, my parents are not rich but due to their hardwork and they value education a lot, they were able to bring me to an educational institution with a 100,000 tuition fee per ten months. every time there's a parent-teacher events in that school, there's always a show-off-like party where parents will get to brag about their louie vuitton bags or jimmy choo shoes in a non-obvious way. i remember telling my mum to attend the event wearing the expensive wristwatch dad gave to her so she won't look any lesser, but she told me, "you're not studying there for me to brag about the blessings that we have. it's a good school. years from now, i'd rather brag about your diploma from that school." so, in a way, this drama is not a cliche. less the bullying to lower social classmen, it really do happen in real life...
susienice :)
Tangle000Please give your mom a hug for me. She's soooooo awesome, u lucky ba-- uhm.. uh, lucky person!!!! XD
ELFEXOticB2UTYi don't find it annoying, really. it adds up to the tension... ;)
tension-nowhat tension?! that is not tension, that is lack of lines in the script haha
XOXOgossipgirlyeah. Some movies has that too. I think it's normal. and I really agree that it adds tension.
UmNothe staring can last 3 seconds and still add to the tension. 10-15 is unnecessary for the most part rofl
About 2 years ago . Report
LeeminhoSo stop watching
XOXOgossipgirlYEAH.. nobody forced you to watch though.
ELFEXOticB2UTYi think, the hyung is indifferent because of the fact that kim tan's the son of his father and his mistress. kim tan's a constant reminder of a broken marriage, broken family, and complicated family tree...in a way, a disgrace...
kaykai thought the first wife died and then the CEO got the 2nd wife who can't bear a child, then there's the mistress...
NicoleActuaLly The reason Why the hyung hate kim tan bec of his excistance and he was scared that everything might taken away from him
Too much cliche, I know understand why many of the people got bored watching this...
6 years ago . Report .
yjtrthen u fucker just dnt watch this
_mezzy12_hahahaha omg u make me laugh (note the sarcasm) before you judge correct your grammar and spelling first
sunhwaseriously yjtr, get a life, just because you swear doesn't make you better than princess for having her own opinions, you like it she finds it boring so what, get over yourself and stop being such a rude and cliche fan girl, besides there's a high change of you only liking this drama because you have a bias which makes you an even bigger cliche. if you have nothing nice to say then don't say anything at all.
XOXOgossipgirlHow come everyone be so judgmental. The drama have flaws. So what? Everyone has flaws. So if you like the drama go watch it and if not then stop watching. That's it.
XOXOgossipgirlAnd P.S. I love the drama.
I know this is just a drama but I am rather disturbed by too much emphasis on social classes. This is a portrayal of how bad the rich people are. I live in America and I know many rich people who do not act like this. In fact, you won't even know they're rich until you get to know them. They don't flaunt their wealth. They don't act like jerks. I am talking about multi-millionaires and billionaires in $, not Korean won. One I know even changes the light bulb on his garden himself. Many of them richer than the families portrayed in Korean dramas yet they don't have butlers and maids.
a_tajimayes in asia they were on the status not like in america or canada , that's why people come to america bec. were all the same on status and sometimes wealth i n america is burden to them.
ukgcu can't say like that in califonia situation is same in this drama
kaykai don't know where you came from, but from my stand point, their culture is pretty keen on social status...or so i think. don't get so touchy, dramas are just a bit of an exaggeration with the real life situation...
Cheekzlol.. just because you have less money than rich people. doesn't mean you can't afford a phone. Didn't you see how many part-time jobs she had? Sure the money must have come from one, if not all, of them.
kaykaspot on Cheekz, the character even got savings to go to the US, come on...
Selenei mean by " park shin hye"
Park Shin Hye's character is so annoying and not properly "thought of" or developed. Seriously -___- She keeps whining about her issues in life yet she lets all the boys drag her around and control her. She can't even give out a proper answer whenever she's being talked down to. She just stares at the person with her teary eyes which makes me hate her character even more. Over-the-top damsel in distress. grrrrr.
AnnoyedThis is just a drama. Being too emotional doesnt change the story plot. Lol. =_____=
About 7 years ago . Report
foleur15I actually think she's a realistic portrayal. What, so you expect all the female leads to be like geum jan di in BOF? She may whine and cry but who doesn't? She's a teen who is unable to live like one. Although she complains, she still works hard to support her family, juggling between part time jobs and her studies.
PsychoticHatterI think it is the instrumental version of Moment by Lee Chang Min of 2AM
About 7 years ago . Report
Video Already Reported!
You have already reported this video.
Video Already Reported!
A guest has already reported this video using your current IP address ().
Download Already Reported!
You have already reported this download.
Download Already Reported!
A guest has already reported this download using your current IP address ().
Comment Already Reported!
You have already reported this comment.
Comment Already Reported!
A guest has already reported this comment using your current IP address ().


text:
Types of screws and bolts
There is a huge variety of types of screws and bolts available in the market that are available in different drive types, head styles, materials, sizes and thread pitch. They can be used with complementary nuts and washers to prevent loosening once in place. Some of our most popular fixing categories include:
- Socket screws – used with Allen keys to fasten them, therefore are also known as Allen head screws.
- Machine screws – designed to be used with a tapped hole or interior nut thread. Available with all common head types including pan, flat, countersunk and truss.
- Self tapping screws – have a pointed tapered end that allows them to be drilled into any surface. Available in both Pozidriv and cross drive types.
- Hex bolts – have a hexagonal shaped head and can have a full or partially threaded length, used with a tapped hole or interior nut thread.
- U-Bolts – commonly used with round surfaces such as pipes, theyre shaped like a letter U.
... Read more


text:
Welcome to Great Moments in Drunken Hookup Failure, where we showcase three heartwarming true stories of drunken love gone horribly awry. Off we go.
My junior year at Mizzou I had met this girl in my psych class, Jen. Jen was stunning; extremely good looking, had some womanly curves, down-to-earth, the whole package. I do need to mention that I have asthma, and at the time brought my inhaler with me everywhere. So one day after class Jen approaches me and asks if I'd like to get coffee with her. I said sure, and we went to Starbucks and talked for a few hours. She mentioned that her roommate's boyfriend (total hipster) was having a party that Thursday night and that I should come.
Thursday rolls by, and I meet up with her at the party. She kept mentioning how drunk she was but she didn't seem drunk at all. I got sucked into playing a game of beer pong with this hipster guy who didn't have a partner, all the while keeping an eye on Jen to make sure she didn't bounce. Of course, this guy and I end up winning 5 or 6 games in a row and my innate competitiveness made it extremely hard for me to leave the table. In the middle of the 7th game I catch Jen wandering off, so I quickly say I need to go to the bathroom. I run up to Jen and she begins furiously making out with me. She pulls me into a closet and shuts the door. Pitch black. Both shit-housed.
She starts kissing my neck with her hands on my shoulders. Then her hands start to go down to my jeans. Then she starts rubbing, except she wasn't rubbing my dick; she was rubbing my inhaler which was in my pocket. Before I could adjust slightly to move my dick in the spot where my inhaler was, she drops to her knees and puts her mouth up and down my inhaler as if she's nibbling at it, trying to be all sexy. Just as she grabs my belt buckle she stands up and says "I will be right back."
She never came back. I stood there in the closet by myself for what felt like an eternity. Turns out she yacked and passed out. Next class she apologized and said how embarrassed she was. After that semester I never spoke to her again. Every time I think of this story I get a bittersweet feeling, laughing to myself but also lamenting that the closest anyone/anything got to Jen's vagina was my albuterol prescription.
It was May 2007 and I had just graduated high school, and as such a lot of my friends were throwing graduation parties. One of these friends was a girl I knew from middle school named Ellen whose Mom had not only rented out a hotel ballroom for her party, but also bought us a hotel room for post-party festivities (good form!). Emily somehow got a hold of a duffle bag full of beer and a handle of rum for the after party, which was more than enough for a bunch of 17/18 year olds with low alcohol tolerance to have a grand old time. After the ballroom festivities had ended, we all ventured up the hotel room for some good old fashioned underage drinking. I didn't know anyone at the party except for Ellen, so I decided to liquor myself up to make some new friends. I had no intention of meeting any new ladyfriends at this shindig, and I had been consistently hooking up (re: making out and fondling my junk on the back of the bus to track meets) with my prom date, Sara, for the past few months. I was a virgin and figured Sara could get my virgin rocks off before I left for college, and although we never had any sort of exclusivity agreement, I didn't want to do anything to compromise that possibility.
As I was lounging on the hotel room sofa in a bathrobe, my friend Ellen comes up to me and informs me that one of her friends, Haley, a cute blonde, thought I was cute and wanted to talk to me. I saw no harm in talking to Haley, so I went over and made awkward small talk about the music that was playing. After a few more shots, Haley was getting closer and was clearly interested. The old me that decided I wasn't going to make any new ladyfriends at this party had been drowned out by Mickey's and Seagram's, and after about a half hour of dancing/making out, Haley and I are in the hotel bathroom, on the floor in our underwear going at it. Drunk me decided that there was no way Sara would ever find out about this, since I didn't know anyone at this party, so naturally neither would she. After some half-naked heavy petting, Haley tosses a condom on the floor and whispers "Whenever you're ready." Being that I was an drunk, awkward 17 year old, I let it slip to Haley that I was a virgin and had never done this before. She seemed shocked and a little weirded out, and decided that she didn't want to be someone's first, but offered to give me a blowjob instead. I of course obliged (I hadn't gotten head at that point, either), but as she was lowering her head to service me, she looks up and asks "Do you respect me? Like as a person?" I answered yes in an effort to get her to continue with the festivities, but she responded "Well I just don't think you respect me, since you're letting me blow you in a hotel bathroom." She decided not to give me head, got dressed, and left the hotel bathroom. After receiving lots of awkward stares from the party guests for taking up the bathroom for the better part of an hour, I decided to split, leaving with the bluest of the balls.
The icing on the cake is that a few weeks later, I received some very drunk/angry texts and phone calls from Sara about hooking up with Haley. She had somehow found out about my extracurricular activities that night, and decided to never see me again. I had grounded out into a self-cockblock double play, and my luck wouldn't get any better that summer. Thank the lord for college.
It was fall of my freshman year at a small PA state school called Bloomsburg University. As any freshman does I was going out every weekend with the mindset to bring a girl back to my bed. One night I went to a frat and I saw a girl from one my classes who never talked but once she had a little alcohol in her she did not shut up, her name was Anne.
As the night goes on this girl won't leave my side and shes talking my ear off so I asked her the question like every other college kid would do if she's trying to go to back to my dorm and of course she answered yes. 30 minutes and a five more shots of Bankers club, cheap vodka, we leave I can barely stand and this girl is helping me walk back to my dorm. As soon as we get into to my dorm we wasted no time and we got right into my bed, which was elevated. So getting into this bed was always a struggle. After a couple tries of getting into my bed I finally made into the damn thing and we start going at it. One thing leads to another and she's blowing me then all of the sudden all the shit starts to catch up to me and I get a serious case of the spins and at this point I feel like Im on one of those gravitron space ships that you see at county fairs that keep you pinned against the wall spinning around at high speeds .
So I'm laying there hold on to the sides of my bed trying to gain some sense of balance but as we all know this did not work and I could just feel my stomach rising. I knew this was a bad sign but I thought I could tough this one out and did I think wrong. One minute later I pushed the girl off of me hopped out of my bed and took off for the bathroom failing only to make it right out of my room and began blowing chunks in the hallway. After a little I finally made it to the bathroom and was able to clean my self up come back to the room and the girl, Anne, is just sitting there looking at me with "what the F**k" face. So I looked back at her asked her if she was going and she replied with a pissed off "what do you think".
After she left I sat down for a little to try and regain my composure and little did I know I ended up passing out in the chair I was sitting in. Later my roommate comes in and finds me passed out and laughs then a little later he hears a knock at the door and it was the girl, Anne, and one of her friends. Apparently she had lost her ID in my bed. As Anne and her friend searched for ID she looked at me passed out and just shook her head and after a good five minutes of tearing my room to shit she leaves. I wake up the next morning in this chair look around and she had taken all my sheets and my mattress off my bed and left them in the middle of the room. Later that day I ended up finding her ID and as payback for leaving my room a shit hole I treated my friend and I to lunch at the most expensive place on campus then gave her ID back to her. Later that day I called her to let her know I had found her ID and she came over and took it back. After that whole little debacle I never saw Anne again.


text:
Use Makeup Brushes For a Flawless Look
Getting yourself some good quality makeup in the proper formulas that match your skin type and tone is your first step. But how you apply them is yet another. Get yourself some good quality makeup brushes to add to your makeup bag to help you apply makeup as perfectly and flawlessly as possible. Of course, once you are armed with such brushes, it's important to know how to use them too! Here is a list of brushes you should have, and what to do with them once you've got them!
Choose the Right Brushes - There are literally countless brushes available for purchase on the market. Many times it can be overwhelming to decide which ones to buy and which ones to leave behind. Just like artists have their own specific arsenal of brushes, so should you. You don't have to own every type of brush on the market - just buy the ones that you'll actually use. The following 6 brushes are the general ones you should pick up:
• Foundation
• Blush
• Powder
• Contour
• Crease
• Angle
Gain an understanding of how your face is structured, and the type of skin that you have. This will help you decide what shape, size and length of the bristle you should consider buying.
Makeup brushes are really the magic wands of the cosmetic world because using them can create a look both enchanting and flawless. Brushes using real hair can be made from all sorts of animals like sable, badger, goat, pony and squirrel. Real hair has the unique ability to pick up dry makeup with ease as well as spread it evenly onto the surface of your skin. Natural hair is often much softer than synthetic causing less skin irritation, although people have often switched to synthetics because of allergies. Real hair is significantly more expensive than synthetic hair, but it's a great investment. When cared for properly, brushes made of natural hair can last a very long time.
1. Foundation
Its densely packed bristles distinguish the foundation brush from other face brushes. The denser the bristles, the less chance that streaking will occur. Badger hair is often used in these types of brushes which you can see in the two toned color. Another brush used in foundation application is the stipple brush or duo fibre brush. This brush can be used with either wet or dry makeup.
2. Concealer
This brush, also known as the camouflage brush, is similar in shape to the foundation brush only much smaller and with softer bristles. Use this brush to cover blemishes, uneven skin tone, dark circles and broken capillaries.
3. Powder
This brush is large and fluffy so it can blend large areas of the face quickly and easily. Use this to set powder on your face, allowing your makeup to last longer. Kabuki brushes have a short base so it's easy to carry around. Flat top buffing brushes are great for blending mineral foundations. Fan brushes, looking nothing like powder brushes whatsoever, are great for applying powder in a thin coverage and sweeping away loose eye shadow.
4. Contour
The angled face brush allows you to sweep color into the hollows of your cheeks, temple and jaw line contouring the face for a slimmer look. It can also double as a blush brush. Blush brushes look like a smaller version of the powder brush.
5. Eye Shadow
The soft dome brush is the perfect tool for blending eye shadows. Pack color onto the lid with a flat stiff brush and feather out the colors with a stiff dome brush. Pencil brushes can smudge eye shadows or liners for a smoky eye look or can be used to accentuate the crease.
6. Eyeliner
The bent liner brush is perfect for applying gel liners. It's the same thing as a fine point eyeliner brush only the metal tip just before the bristles is bent at an angle making it easier to control. Flat eyeliner brushes make it easier to wedge color into the lash line and also work great for coloring eyebrows.
Maintaining And Choosing Makeup Brushes
• Clean and Maintain Your Brushes - Imagine all the dirt, grease, oils and grime that your skin has on it after particles in the air settles on it. These are easily transferred onto your brushes, which can then be deposited right back onto your skin the next time you use the makeup brushes. Instead of continuously buying new brushes to ensure cleanliness, just regularly clean and maintain the ones you've already got. Just use soap and water for natural bristles, and a hand sanitizer for synthetic bristles. If you want to use the brush immediately afterwards, the hand sanitizer works best since it dries much faster. And make sure never to soak them in water for too long, which can damage the wooden handle and cause the glue to come loose.
For cleaning brushes is as follows:
Wet brushes in warm water, put a bit of soap/shampoo in the palm of your hand and swirl the brush around, work the cleanser through to the ends and rinse, repeat until the brushes are thoroughly clean.
Washing: Squirt some shampoo in the water or on the side of the dish. Wash the dense foundation directly in the soapy water, so the insides will also get cleaned easily. With less dense brushes and eye brushes, either clean the using the palm of your hand or the side of the dish. Tip: if you don't want to run to the bathroom every time to change the water, have a glass of clean water next to you. Soak the dirty water with tissue or towel and change the water when needed.
Avoid splaying the brushes while washing, because it will ruin the shape of your brushes eventually. Instead move them from side to side like you would when painting.
• Dip brushes in a deep bowl full of water. The water will reach inside the ferrule loosening the glue that holds the bristles. Use a plate or anything shallow instead.
• Pull at the bristles when your squeezing excess water.
• Use newspaper instead of paper towel to dry your brushes. Newspapers are not very clean, it's unhygienic.
• Dry the brushes in brush holders, with bristles pointing
• Choose the Right Width For Specific Functions - Obviously, a wider brush covers a wider area, and a narrower brush covers a smaller area. Depending on the type of makeup you are applying, the width of the brush will matter. For example, blush on the cheekbones is usually best applied using a wider brush for more full coverage. For finer application, such as eyeshadow, a thinner brush is best.
• Brush in Circular Motions - Applying makeup by going side to side with your makeup brush can create a harsh look that you probably aren't going for. Instead, stick to a more circular motion when applying makeup with a brush to create a much softer look. When using a pointed brush, use round sweeps instead of digging with it.
Apply Eyeliner With a Brush - Most women are probably used to applying eyeliner with the pencil that it comes in. But you may not realize that you can apply eyeliner with a brush too for a more refined look. Use soft, dabbing motions when applying eyeliner to either the top or bottom lash line. Make sure not to use a lot of motion as the particles can essentially go everywhere. Use the flat side of your makeup brush to apply the eyeliner to the lower lid for a more dramatic look.
Here are some general words to describe the characteristics of various brushes:
• Head Shape: Dome, Slant, Angled, Square, Point and Tapered.
• Handle Length: Long, Short and Travel Size.
• Head Size: Fine, Small, Medium, Large and Extra Large.
• Bristle Textures: Fine, Soft and Coarse (firm, stiff or dense).
Brushes are essential to creating amazing makeup looks. Some women may fear that having many makeup brushes automatically means you wear more makeup and that simply is not true. By using the correct makeup brushes you may take your collection from one to five brushes, but you are also allowing yourself to correctly apply each area of makeup. You can use these brushes to achieve a light daytime look or a smoky eyed night time look. The amount of brushes you have is not equivalent to amounts of makeup you use. Set yourself up for makeup success by equipping your makeup brush collection with these four brushes.
Myotcstore Related Products:
Black Radiance makeup pencil sharpener - 3 ea
Maybelline Expert Tools Blush Brush - 2 ea
New York Color Dual Pencil Sharpener - 3 ea
Olay total effects line and dark circle minimizing brush - 0.2 oz
Paris presents eco tools bamboo 5 piece brush set - 2 ea


text:
Tuesday, November 24, 2020
Reclaiming spaces: in conversation with Bashar And Sami Zarour of Art Siin (س) Gallery
Ayesha Khan
- May 27, 2017
Main News
] [
] [
] [
Send by email:
In the case of Bashar and Sami Zarour, comparisons to any predecessors or contemporaries would not do justice to their innovative efforts in cultivating an inclusive art community that recognizes upcoming talent in the city of Ramallah that bears both charm and challenge due to its socio-political circumstances. The dynamic duo are not a pair of typical upcoming artists. These brothers have managed to open their own gallery, Art Siin (س), in the heart of Ramallah. Rooting from the cultural ethos of rich poetry, dense history, and revered artistic self-expression that has been trivialized by a lack of resources, they have materialized their setbacks into opportunity.
Art Siin (س) gallery had its opening on May 20th with its first exhibition,
which will be on display till June 3rd. It showcased ten upcoming artists, whose work relates to the idea of figurative and physical
- whether it be through depicting emotions of nostalgia and grace, or even paintings of the streets of Nablus. The politicized styles of Basquiat and the colourful subtleties of Pollock, which have been foundational for contemporary art were apparent in the theme of the exhibition. For art critics, it is important to recognize the peculiar idea behind the exhibition of unapologetically reclaiming
within the subcontext of imaginative vulnerability.
While, Bashar, 28, has studied art in New York with a minor in political science and social studies, and Sami, 26, has studied visual arts and graphic design in Jordan, both have shared an interest towards making art an interactive experience. Hence, they set out to create their own medium to attract an artistically inclined community through establishing their own gallery that aims to give a spotlight to upcoming artists struggling to make a name for themselves. After attending their gallery opening, it was obvious that their objective has been fulfilled, as a diverse crowd of locals and internationals poured in, who seemingly belonged to all ages and professional backgrounds. You can see their work ethic has paid off in successfully expanding the so called 'art bubble' in Ramallah.
The following interview took place at their gallery that boasts a minimalist appeal. Over coffee, and with subtle hums of instrumental music ushering from the background, I got the opportunity to unearth the aspirations of the Zarour brothers.
Where did the idea for the name of the gallery, Art Siin (
), come from?
The letter siin is like the letter 'x' in English, it represents the unknown. We are exposing the art scene to these upcoming and unknown artists.
We chose from different names at first and did a logo for them, as well, but we ended up changing it to Art Siin (
). This is the third name over the two years.[laughs]
How did the idea of opening this gallery come about?
We first got the idea to start exhibiting our work to make a name for ourselves, but from that need we thought to set-up a gallery to help not only ourselves, but also upcoming artists.
What have been some challenges in opening the gallery?
The biggest challenge was money, because the gallery is a hundred percent self-funded, so it took a lot of time to prepare.
Plus, we had to do all the work ourselves to get the money.
Our family has a film production company. So, we have worked in advertising, graphic design, and freelance. Also, we have participated in working on a few feature and documentary films in the past, as well. It took us two years to put this together bit by bit.
Who and what has been your ideal model or a role model through the process of setting up the gallery?
I don't know if there is a specific ideal model, there has been a lot, but at the same time no models to look at either. In business, I take my father as a role model, who owns Collage Productions. In art, I take my friends and art teachers as an influence, who are now well established artists.
We have done research on galleries in Europe, the Arab world, and the United States. We then thought of the best model for a gallery that would serve our needs best.
What is your primary objective through establishing this gallery?
What we essentially want is to establish is a place where young, upcoming artists and talents can find a medium to connect with other artists, art collectors, and buyers.
Do you think the art scene is flourishing in Ramallah, specifically, right now?
The art scene is definitely flourishing as of recently, since there have been about two or three generations of internationally acclaimed Palestinian artists. With every generation they pave the way for the next one to come, making it easier for us than the previous generation.
What are some factors that you think have contributed to the recent development of arts in Ramallah?
I think the art scene in Palestine has been built entirely by Palestinians. It does not have the element of foreign funding much - I'm speaking about privately-owned galleries and art collectors. But, of course, foreign funding affects the organizations that give workshops and such.
Are there any collaborations you are looking forward to?
We hope to do collaborations with local organizations, and in the long run, we would like to do some form of an exchange exhibition with international galleries - to have Palestinian artists shown internationally and vice versa.
Does art have to be political in order for it to be considered art? Or is all art political theoretically speaking?
It definitely does not have to be political, but art reflects life. Our political situation here affects it. I actually find that for new artists it is difficult to come out of political issues and separate the two.
My last paintings had nothing to do with politics. It has to do with dance, movement, and memories. For me ideally, I do not consider that art has to be political in order for it to be considered art.
Do Palestinian artists bear the unfair burden of having their art always relate to life under Occupation?
I think it is not a burden for them, but for the audience. Especially, the international audience, because at some point we are getting tired of seeing the same topic over and over just presented differently. It is difficult for new artists to come out of this political sphere and do something else.
What is the dynamic between you two brothers throughout this whole process?
I think we have a really close relationship.
Since we graduated, we have been working on the same projects.
We are close in all walks of life.
Is there an ideology that inspires your artistic work?
There is a quote that I actually like by Leonardo da Vinci, "art is never finished, only abandoned." This quote shaped the way I think about art. Even if you do a piece of art and look at it a year after, you will find things to fix and add to it. At some point you just need to let it be and move on.
What medium of art do you personally partake in?
We paint. We draw.
We do street art like graffiti and murals.
Are any of your exhibitions coming up?
I'm having my first solo exhibition in Estonia at the beginning of September. It is going to be with a contemporary dancer, Karolin Poska, from Estonia who is the subject of my paintings. She is going to do a performance at the opening of the exhibition.
I have a show coming up at the end of June in France.
Is there a specific message you are trying to send to your audience through the work you are exhibiting at the gallery?
In Palestine, the audience for art is the same, it is a bubble that rarely finds new people, but by exposing new artists we are hoping to expand this bubble.
Naturally, when there are new art spaces there will be new audiences.
There are a lot of messages, but one specific one would be expression and critiquing life in our society, which is a very important issue. We want to spark interest in people for art and different styles of art.
Our gallery is an artist run gallery.
Exactly, there are two things that are unique about our gallery. First thing, it is the only gallery that focuses on new talent. Right now, we are only taking unknown, unestablished artists. Other thing is that we are artists ourselves.
Back to Top
Related Articles
Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat dies after contracting Covid-19
November 11, 2020
Saeb Erekat, a veteran peace negotiator and prominent international spokesman for
Israeli forces raze Palestinian village of Khirbet Humsa, leaving 41 children homeless
November 06, 2020
As the world's attention was fixed on the US elections, the Palestinian village
US passport changes for Jerusalem-born citizens an "attempt to erase Palestinians"
November 04, 2020
US citizens born in Jerusalem can now declare "Israel" as their country
Most Popular Articles
Israel's puppet war unmasks apartheid regime
The El-Hakawati theatre was colorfully adorned to host its annual International
Rushdi Tamimi becomes second victim of Israeli army in Nabi Saleh
On Tuesday November 21st, the body of 31 year old Rushdi Tamimi was
Israel Avoids Hard-Right Shift: No Benefit for Palestinians
With many commentators predicting big wins for the settler movement in
Designed & Developed by:


text:
Recent Posts
- Animals
- Annoyances
- Celebs
- Charity
- Childrens moods
- Competitons
- Current affairs
- Design
- Entertaining kids
- Food
- Funny stuff the kids have said
- General musings
- Growing up
- Grown up stuff
- Guest posts
- Health
- Infographics
- Kids stuff
- Mum stuff
- Music
- Online stuff
- Organic skincare
- Parenting
- Shopping
- Social Media
- Things what I like
- Women are better
- Yes I am normil
- Yorkshire!
Recent Comments
Tag Archives: independent organic skincare seller
As I said before, I'm useless at updating my blog at the moment. I think I'm a bit overwhelmed by Christmas and trying to do work and everyone being ill. I will add a few links to sites which I've … Continue reading
Posted in Annoyances, Online stuff, Organic skincare Tagged green people vita min fix moisturiser, independent organic skincare seller, lovely smelling fake tan, moisituriser for sensitive skin, natural boutique, natural fake tan, nice smelling fake tan, non smelling fake tan, organic anti-ageing moisturiser, organic fake tan, organic haircare, organic sensitive skin moisturiser, organic skincare, viat min fix green people, york based skincare company Comments Off


text:
Guests: Andrea Mitchell, Chris Cillizza, Chuck Todd, Steve Clemons, Joe Williams, Major Garrett, Jim Moran, Jim VandeHei
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Obama at the front.
Let`s play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I`m Chris Matthews up in Boston. Leading off tonight:
The president in Afghanistan. The news broke just before 3:00 o`clock
Eastern time President Obama had landed in Afghanistan to sign an agreement
on winding down the war.
The fact that Mr. Obama`s trip to Kabul landed on the one-year
anniversary of the bin Laden raid is lost on no one, least of all
Republicans like Mitt Romney, who had, until today, been accusing the
president of exploiting the anniversary.
At 7:30 Eastern time this evening, President Obama will address the
country, our country, on the future of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan.
Lost in all the fuss of who should get credit for the bin Laden raid
is the decimation of al Qaeda under President Obama. Why isn`t anyone,
including the Obama administration, talking about this?
Also, sometime in the next hour, we expect to hear President Obama
talking to U.S. troops in Afghanistan. We`ll bring you that live -- that
address live as it occurs.
And a program note. We will have a live edition of HARDBALL in two
hours tonight. That`s at 7:00 o`clock Eastern time, and we will carry the
president`s speech then in its entirety.
We begin with the President Obama surprise trip to Afghanistan. Chuck
Todd is political director and chief White House correspondent for NBC
News. And Major Garrett covers the White House for "National Journal."
Let`s go to Chuck on his White House duties. Why was it kept so
secret? Is it obviously the question of security?
CHUCK TODD, NBC POLITICAL DIR./WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well,
number one, it`s absolutely security. It`s always done this way. Let`s
remember what happened to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta not very long ago,
just a few weeks ago. So that`s number one.
Number two, there was a decision make to make this -- that this is
being signed in such a way, this agreement -- the timing was chosen because
the president did want to address the American and explain this agreement
because you know, you`re going to read parts of this agreement, which
indicates that the United States is going to have a -- both a military,
security, economic relationship with Afghanistan beyond 2014, to 2024.
Well, explaining what that means is going to take time. And the White
House made the decision that the best place for the president to do that
was from Afghanistan, to explain exactly what this agreement means, but
also to send a signal to the Afghanis because part of he whole negotiation
on this is this idea that somehow, as the combat troops are getting
withdrawn, that meant the United States was out and they weren`t going to
get much support after that.
So by having the president there, it sends the message that the U.S.
wants to send to the Afghani government and the Afghan people, that, Hey,
it`s a total cut and run. But this is going to be a delicate political
dance for him to walk, Chris, because as you know, there is war fatigue.
And how long -- what kind of troops are going to be in Afghanistan? We
don`t know the answer to that question an we won`t know the answer to that
question even after tonight.
MATTHEWS: Let me go to Major Garrett for more politics on that. It
seems to me -- maybe I`m -- mark me down as a Vietnam-era skeptic. Will
this look to the American left, who are squeamish about more war in
Afghanistan, like another 10-year extension of the American war in
MAJOR GARRETT, "NATIONAL JOURNAL": It might, Chris. And as Chuck
outlined, this agreement does commit the United States economically, to
some degree militarily, largely through a training and supervising role in
Afghanistan, for another 10 years.
And the agreement says -- it does not set a troop level and it does
not set an expectation of congressional funding. All that will be
negotiated. Well, look, presidents can propose future funding for
Afghanistan, but if Congress doesn`t want to provide it, it doesn`t get
This is going to be an ongoing conversation. And for those
Republicans -- and there haven`t been that many, at least so far on the
record today, at least in Congress, vociferously criticizing the president
-- there have been Republicans in the past who have said the president
simply has not talked about Afghanistan nearly often enough.
Well, in this one respect, the president`s saying, OK, I am now.
Complain about the bin Laden anniversary all you want, but this is an
agreement that`s going to fuse these two nations together for another 10
years past 2014, and now`s my opportunity to explain a little bit about the
TODD: Hey, Chris...
GARRETT: ... underneath that agreement.
TODD: I think that`s an important political...
MATTHEWS: Yes. Yes, Chuck.
TODD: ... point because, you know, in particular, you know, the trio
of the most hawkish guys on Afghanistan -- Graham, McCain, Lieberman -- all
three of them have been critical of the president for not selling
Afghanistan enough to the American people, essentially, not making -- in
fact, John McCain just -- just today sent out a release praising that --
this agreement, hasn`t look at the details.
And so I think that Major hit on something I think is spot on, which
is this idea -- some may criticize and say, Why is he using bin Laden
anniversary? I think the White House will push back and say, Hey, you say
I don`t use high-profile enough events. I`m using the highest-profile
anniversary that you can have to make the case for why there`s a long-term
strategic relationship with Afghanistan.
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about this question of the good war and the
bad war. I want to go back to Obama`s record here. All during the 2008
campaign, when he was known as an enemy of the Iraq war, he always said
that Afghanistan was the good war, as he saw it. Is this a continuation of
that belief by him that there`s a worthy cause to be fought for in
Afghanistan, Chuck?
TODD: Well, let`s look at the facts -- a residual force for Iraq
wasn`t negotiated. A residual force with Afghanistan was this -- by the
way, this agreement is an agreement to negotiate an agreement about having
a residual force and the size of it. So just -- just so you know.
This agreement today is a political document between two countries,
not yet a -- so it`s a commitment of commitment. But it`s still an
important step forward.
But I think it absolutely -- you -- this is the policy going forward.
The issue of a residual force is to be -- is on the table, and frankly, is
expected to be negotiated and happen post-2014 in some form or another.
Now, in this agreement they outline certain things. The United States
is pledging they will not use any troops that based in Afghanistan post-
2014 to launch attacks on other countries. I underline "countries." That
doesn`t mean they would use forces to launch attacks inside of a, say,
Pakistan compound in Abbottabad that might have some sort of al Qaeda
operatives in it. You know, they`re not taking that off of the table.
So I think you see in this commitment where the president`s basically
saying he`s going to do what it takes to negotiate having forces stick
around in Afghanistan, something he did not do in Iraq.
MATTHEWS: Back to you, Major. A war of necessity -- is this
something that Obama believes in as a person, as a citizen of the United
States, apart from all the other politics, he believes we have a military
role down the road and perhaps in perpetuity in Afghanistan? This is
something he believes in?
GARRETT: Well, remember...
MATTHEWS: Remember, he fought with Joe Biden about this. Joe Biden,
his vice president, said...
GARRETT: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... Let`s just stay there as a counterterrorist force. He
says, No, we got to stay in this counterinsurgency fight. We got to stay
in there to fight for that nation.
GARRETT: Right. There was a surge in Afghanistan authorized by this
president after a tremendous amount of deliberation. And the president
said during the campaign, dating all the way back to 2007, that he would
engage both Pakistan and Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban, defeat al Qaeda
and win the war where it started in the first place. That`s something that
then senator Obama talked about as early as 2007. And when you think about
bin Laden, he was criticized in 2007.
I have a piece at NationaelJournal.com sort of replaying all that.
Mitt Romney criticized him in 2007, saying that if he had actionable
intelligence, he would try to get bin Laden in Pakistan, even if then
President Musharraf objected. Hillary Clinton piled on in 2008. So did
John McCain.
So the president has a deep memory about this, a long memory, possibly
a short fuse when it comes to reminding people that he`s always been in
this one spot on Pakistan and Afghanistan. And think about it this way,
Chris. If he`s reelected, President Obama`s term will end in January of
2017. This agreement carries to January, or longer, 2024. So he`s
committing the next president and many, many congresses in the future to
economic, social and military arrangements with the Afghan government,
whoever is leading it.
MATTHEWS: Chuck...
TODD: Well, one of the things...
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about the politics.
TODD: Yes.
MATTHEWS: Go ahead -- John McCain, you brought up his name. He`s a
very important man because he has a combat record. He served in Vietnam
nobly. He suffered as a POW. He`s got cred in the way that Romney doesn`t
have and President Obama doesn`t have as a citizen. Now he`s out there
saying this president ought to endorse, underline, embroider his support
for this war, even advertise it and promote it.
Is this going to take them off the dime they were on as recently as
yesterday, where you had McCain and the others attacking the president for
exploiting the bin Laden killing? Is this going to change the tone now of
the discussion for a while?
TODD: Honestly, I think it does. And I -- absolutely does. You
know, there was one other thing. You brought up the, quote, "Biden plan."
Well, guess what`s about to be implemented once 2014? When you look at
essentially what the United States is agreeing to and what the Afghan
government is open to, is now a form of what was known shorthand around
here as the Biden plan for counterterrorism. And what`s what`s going to be
militarily what they`re going to negotiate the ability to do, which is to
have counterterrorism forces ready to go, special forces in place,
sometimes on a rented base that doesn`t -- isn`t a U.S. permanent base --
might be a base owned by the Afghans but leased by the United States to --
launch operations like that.
But you talk about politically, I do think that this sort of tables
this for a while. Ironically, where the president would be politically
vulnerable in this agreement is with folks that have war fatigue. Well,
most of that is, frankly, with the middle. I mean, we always say it`s just
the left. Frankly, it`s a small sliver...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
TODD: ... of folks -- it`s a small minority of the population that is
saying, Let`s keep going, let`s stick around in Afghanistan. It is a more
broad cross-section of folks...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
TODD: ... on the left and in the middle who have this war fatigue.
And frankly, the right is split in two on this. You have neoconservatives
in one place, but you have sort of the old -- the Tea Party wing of the
party is not necessarily pro-Afghanistan war.
MATTHEWS: Give us an essay on this, Major, as to how the public`s
going to like this idea of a vaguely continuing perhaps counterterrorism
regime on our part going forward in Afghanistan, perhaps projecting our
strength into Pakistan as part of that.
GARRETT: Yes. Well, the facts on the ground are going to determine
the politics of this, Chris. Remember, just last month, among the most
sophisticated, if not the most sophisticated, well organized and
coordinated Taliban attacks on the capital city of Afghanistan, Kabul, was
carried out. And it stunned and, to a certain degree, mortified both U.S.
and NATO commanders that the Taliban was, A, that well organized, that
audacious, and to a degree successful in carrying out this raid.
And we`ve also had fragging of NATO troops by Afghans aggrieved by the
burning, in inadvertent though it was, of the Korans, and all these other
things. That`s what is contributing and driving the sense of war fatigue
and war unease.
This agreement does lock these two nations together. Essentially,
we`re engaged to be engaged all the way to 2024. The country will take
that in stride, listen to the president tonight. But facts on the ground
and the trajectory of the success or lack thereof success for U.S. and NATO
forces I think is going to be more determinative than a 20 or 48-hour -- 24
or 48-hour assessment of this vague strategic agreement.
MATTHEWS: Well, let me throw that back to Chuck. One of the concerns
I`m going to raise at the end of this show tonight is not so much strategic
as day-to-day routine warfare fatigue.
When we see situations develop, like a couple GIs get involved in
urinating on dead soldiers from the other side, or we see the burning,
inadvertent or whatever, of the Koran, and these carry such symbolic --
obviously, symbolic and perhaps intended power -- what`s to stop those
incidents from occurring on an irregular basis for the next 10 years, at
every point offering the opportunity to light a detonator, if you will, for
a real East-West fight?
TODD: One word, footprint. Our footprint is going to be smaller in
Afghanistan, period. So we have a couple things that are still -- that
we`re still on a specific timeline. Number one, combat troops are going to
transition from U.S. lead to an Afghan lead in the beginning of 2014, and
then actually start coming home by the end of 2014 themselves.
So the footprint of the United States is going to be much smaller
militarily. And so -- let`s just go by the numbers. The types of forces
we`re going to have there are going to be counterterrorism, more of the
elite group of folks, number one.
And number two, you`re just not going to see this -- this case where
it`s, you know, hundreds of United States troops over there on -- on duty
patrolling. This is going to be more of an operation that`s supposed to be
At least, that`s -- that`s the goal as far as what this agreement`s
supposed to begin to outline.
MATTHEWS: Well said. Thank you very much for this hot report, and it
couldn`t be hotter news, Chuck Todd and Major Garrett, on the president`s
surprise visit -- for all of us, I suppose, outside the inside the White
House -- to Afghanistan.
He`ll be speaking tonight. He`ll be speaking right on this program,
actually. Around 5:30, perhaps, we`ll have the audio. We expect to have
it. Then, of course, the big broadcast to us, the American people, at 7:30
Eastern tonight on our second edition of HARDBALL, which will be live.
Coming up, by the way, how the Obama administration has systematically
and quietly destroyed the leadership of al Qaeda, the big untold story from
that part of the world.
Plus, the political fight over the anniversary of the killing of bin
Laden continues. That fuse is always lit, the Republican opportunity to
blast the president for getting credit where credit, I believe, is due.
Anyway, this is HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: We now have that audio of President Obama talking to U.S.
troops at Bagram airfield from just moments ago. Let`s listen to the
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We also have somebody
who is John`s partner on the civilian side and has made extraordinary
sacrifices first in Iraq, now in Afghanistan. Ambassador Ryan Crocker is
here. Please give him a big round of applause.
OBAMA: All right! Now, let me just see if I`ve got this right.
We`ve got the 1st Infantry Division in the house?
OBAMA: We got the 455th Air Expeditionary Wing?
OBAMA: We`ve got the Task Force Muleskinner!
OBAMA: We`ve got the 101st Army Field Sustainment Brigade!
We`ve got Task Force (INAUDIBLE) in the house.
OBAMA: And we`ve got Task Force Defender in the house. And we`ve got
me in the house.
OBAMA: 82nd! 82nd in the house! 82nd in the house!
OBAMA: You know, somebody`s is going to be in trouble that they
didn`t have 82nd on here. Anybody else I`m missing? There you go. All
right. I love all of you.
Now, listen, I`m not going to give a long speech. I`m going to have
the opportunity to address the nation from Bagram just in a little bit, and
it`s going to be broadcast back home during primetime.
So all I want to do is just say thank you. You know, the sacrifices
all of you have made, the sacrifices your families make every single day,
are what make America free and what make America secure.
And I know that sometimes out here, when you`re in theater, it`s not
clear whether folks back home fully appreciate what`s going on. And let`s
face it, a lot of times, it`s easier to get bad news on the news than good
But here`s the good news and here`s part of the reason that I`m here.
I just finished signing a strategic partnership agreement with Afghanistan
that signals the transition in which we are going to be turning over
responsibility for Afghan security to the Afghans.
We`re not going to do it overnight. We`re not going to do it
irresponsibly. We`re going to make sure that the gains, the hard-fought
OBAMA: I love all of you. Now, listen, I`m not going to give a long
speech. I`m going to have the opportunity to address the nation from
Bagram just in a little bit, and it`s going to be broadcast back home
during primetime.
So all I want to do is just say thank you. You know, the sacrifices
all of you have made, the sacrifices your families make every single day,
are what make America free and what make America secure.
And I know that sometimes out here, when you`re in theater, it`s not
clear whether folks back home fully appreciate what`s going on. And let`s
face it, a lot of times, it`s easier to get bad news on the news than good
But here`s the good news and here`s part of the reason that I`m here.
I just finished signing a strategic partnership agreement with Afghanistan
that signals the transition in which we are going to be turning over
responsibility for Afghan security to the Afghans.
We`re not going to do it overnight. We`re not going to do it
irresponsibly. We`re going to make sure that the gains, the hard-fought
gains that have been made are preserved.
But the reason we`re able to do that is because of you. The reason that
the Afghans have an opportunity for a new tomorrow is because of you. And
the reason America is safe is because of you.
We did not choose this war. This war came to us on 9/11. And there
are a whole bunch of folks here, I will bet, who signed up after 9/11.
OBAMA: We don`t go looking for a fight, but when we see our homeland
violated, when we see our fellow citizen killed, then we understand what we
have to do.
And because of the sacrifices now of a decade and a new greatest
generation, not only were we able to blunt the Taliban momentum. Not only
were we able to drive al Qaeda out of Afghanistan, but slowly and
systemically, we have been able to decimate the ranks of al Qaeda.
And a year ago, we were able to finally bring Osama bin Laden to
OBAMA: That could have only happened because each and every one of
you in your own way were doing your jobs.
Each and every one of you, without a lot of fanfare, without a lot of
fuss, you did your jobs. No matter how small or how big, you were faithful
to the oath that you took to protect this nation. And your families did
their job, supporting you and loving you and remembering you and being
there for you.
And so, together, you guys represent what is best in America. And
you`re part of a long line of those who have worn this uniform to make sure
that we are free and secure, to make sure that those of us at home have the
capacity to live our lives.
And when you`re missing a birthday, or you`re missing a soccer game,
or when you`re missing an anniversary, and those of us back home are able
to enjoy it, it`s because of you. And I`m here to tell you, everybody in
America knows that. And everybody in America appreciates it. And
everybody in America honors it.
When the final chapter of this war is written, historians will look
back and say, not only was this the greatest fighting force in the history
of the world, but all of you also represented the values of America in an
exemplary way.
I could not be prouder of you. And I want you to understand, I know
it`s still tough. I know the battle is not yet over. Some of your buddies
are going to get injured. And some of your buddies may get killed. And
there`s going to be heartbreak and pain and difficulty ahead.
But there`s a light on the horizon because of the sacrifices you have
made. And that`s the reason why, for Michelle and me, nothing is more
important than looking after your families while you`re here. And I want
everybody here to know that, when you get home, we are going to be there
for you when you`re in uniform, and we will stay there for you when you`re
out of uniform, because you have earned it.
You have earned a special place in our hearts, and I could not be
prouder to be your commander in chief.
God bless you. And God bless the United States of America.
OBAMA: Now I want to shake some hands.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Well, that`s great stuff.
I was so proud of the president there, I must say. This has nothing
to do with partisanship. This is a commander in chief meeting with the
troops, as it was right out of "Henry V," actually, a touch of Barry in
this case in the night for those soldiers risking their lives over there.
Congressman Jim Moran of course is a Democrat from Virginia, and Jim
VandeHei is executive editor of Politico.
Congressman Moran, I was so proud of him there, because I imagine
being a soldier over there, this is what you want to hear, that the troops
are backed up by the people at home, and there you had your commander in
chief there with you personally. It`s great stuff.
REP. JIM MORAN (D), VIRGINIA: He is. He is our commander in chief,
and not just by claiming to be, but by acting as a commander in chief
should act.
This was a commander in chief`s speech. It was not political. It was
motivational. It was just exactly what the troops need to hear, and, as
important, what their families need to hear back home.
I do think, from the perspective of hardball politics, Chris, this
takes national security and foreign policy off the table as a campaign
issue. You can`t accuse the Democratic candidate of being weak on defense.
President Obama is leading in the proper way. And instead of gloating
over the killing of bin Laden a year ago, this is exactly where he should
be and doing what he should be doing. Now, in terms of responding to the
concern about this war, I wouldn`t be surprised if he doesn`t accelerate a
troop withdrawal.
But it`s not going to happen before the election. And it`s going to
happen only as he can responsibly withdraw troops. So you`re not going to
hear much about this issue, because I don`t see where he`s left any room on
the left or the right for it to be a campaign issue , Chris.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
Jim VandeHei, here`s an example, I suppose, of a president, a
commander in chief`s ability to shift the backdrop rather dramatically from
a kerfuffle, a fuss over who gets credit or should get credit for the
killing of bin Laden to, hey, we`re still fighting a war over here and we
have got a commander in chief who is at post here.
JIM VANDEHEI, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, POLITICO: Right.
I mean, politically, there is no danger ever appearing with the
troops, and I think the one thing both parties could probably agree on is
that when the public is focused that we still have so many troops over
there and have such a big interest in what happens in that country, that is
a good thing.
For the most part, people have ignored the war in Afghanistan. And
most of the attention, at least politically, has been on domestic issues.
So it`s not a bad thing. Has the president politicized this? Well, sure.
I mean, presidents politicize everything. People drink in bars. People
gamble in casinos. People practice politics in politics.
And so this idea -- I saw the White House today was putting out that
it`s coincidence that it just happens to be on the anniversary that he`s in
Afghanistan. That strikes me as a little bit laughable. I don`t think
there`s any coincidences in -- in politics. It how you spin...
MATTHEWS: I think -- I think he acknowledged that, Jim, somewhere in
those comments with the troops, that this was a year later after we have
done what we have done.
VANDEHEI: Right.
MATTHEWS: Let me go back to Congressman Moran about this whole
political thing here.
You know, I have to tell you, I look at John McCain`s career, and I
have nothing but pride in it as an American. I think he did a great job as
a soldier, as a flyer, a combat pilot. He got shot down. He suffered as a
POW those seven years. He came back to America. He was elected to
Congress based on that wonderful service record.
He was elected to the Senate on that service record and was nominated
for president to a large extent on what he had done for his country. Why
is it wrong for then -- for this president to get some credit for his role
as commander in chief? I don`t get it. I don`t get it.
MORAN: Well, it certainly is...
MATTHEWS: It`s consistent.
MORAN: Yes, absolutely.
It`s not wrong. We all have roles to play. The vast majority of
Americans today have not served in uniform. They certainly support the
troops. But the question is, do we support them in a tangible way or just
by standing up and saluting them at ball games and so on?
I think President Obama is responding to the needs of the troops, just
as he should be doing. The fact is, with all of the fiscal constraints,
he`s put more money into helping out veterans getting jobs, traumatic brain
injury, helping their families.
This is what they need. And I think that you`re going to see -- you
can see on the face of the troops right now, you know, they`re happy this
guy is their leader. He`s responding to what`s in their mind. They are
concerned they`re going to lose their -- probably as concerned about losing
their buddies as losing their own life.
But he recognizes their sacrifice. I think he speaks for all of us.
So, you know, you can call it political. Everything he does is political,
but there are some political things that need to be done and need to be
done in the right way. This speech was perfect. He`s just where he ought
to be. And he`s the kind of commander in chief that the troops need.
MATTHEWS: Let`s come back to Jim VandeHei.
You edit Politico, so we`re talking politics, as well as national
security here. How will this play out, do you believe, although it`s very
early, the news to the American left, center and right that we`re in
Afghanistan, perhaps for the foreseeable future, in some role, we`re not
going to roll up our sleeves -- I mean, roll up the blankets and pull out
of the bunks and head home; we`re going to stay there in some capacity?
Is that going to rub a war-fatigued country the wrong way, Jim
VANDEHEI: I think it does. I just don`t think, to be blunt, that
it`s a top issue, if you talk to most voters.
Most of them are focused on the economy. I think where it does become
a big issue is the duration of the war, can we have success in the war, and
the cost of the war. So, politically, I think I agree with the
congressman, that if you think of national security and the liability that
national security has been for Democrats historically, it`s just not as big
of a liability for President Obama.
He gets pretty high grades, if you look at the polls, on his
stewardship of the foreign policy, of the wars, of the fight against
terrorism. And on many of these policies, he`s acted just like I think
George Bush would have, and in some areas maybe even been more aggressive.
If you think of the use of drones to assassinate terrorists or suspected
terrorists, he`s been extremely aggressive.
MORAN: And, Chris, if I could...
MATTHEWS: Yes. Well, let`s take a look at the politics of the bin
Laden anniversary. It played out again today.
Here`s what Mitt Romney said today in response to a question about the
raid that killed bin Laden. He`s changing his message generally every day
now. Let`s listen to the Republican presumed nominee.
MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Of course I would have
ordered taking out Osama bin Laden, of course. This is a person who had
done terrible harm to America and who represented a continuing threat to
civilized people throughout the world. And had I been president of the
United States, I would have made the same decision the president made,
which was to remove him.
And I acknowledged actually a year ago when this was announced that
the president deserved credit for the decision he made. I continue to
believe that and certainly would have taken that action myself.
MATTHEWS: Who teaches these candidates to say the phrase "of course"
when it`s obviously 180 from what they have been saying?
Back in 2007, the last time he was running, Mitt Romney was dismissive
of then candidate Obama`s comments that he would strike bin Laden even if
had actionable intelligence in Pakistan, even if it meant crossing into
border -- across the border.
Here`s Romney, the candidate, before today. Let`s listen.
ROMNEY: I do not concur, in the words of Barack Obama, in a plan
enter an ally of ours and their country in a manner complete with bombing
and so forth. I don`t think those kinds of comments help in this effort to
draw more friends to our effort,
QUESTION: You disagree with the suggestion of sending troops in to...
ROMNEY: I think his comments were ill-timed and ill-considered.
MATTHEWS: Well, here`s some more of this and so forth.
Also in 2007, at a debate, Romney disagreed with his opponent, by the
way, the same Rudy Giuliani standing next to him right there today, about
unilaterally going into Pakistan, the very thing that the president did.
Let`s watch this exchange.
RUDOLPH GIULIANI (R), FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: I would take that
action if I thought there was no other way to crush al Qaeda, no other way
to crush the Taliban, and no other way to be able to capture bin Laden.
I think Pakistan has, unfortunately, not been making the efforts that
they should be making.
QUESTION: Governor Romney?
ROMNEY: Yes, I think Barack Obama is confused as to who are our
friends and who are our enemies.
He wants to unilaterally go in and potentially bomb a nation which is
our friend. We`re trying to strengthen Musharraf.
MATTHEWS: Congressman Moran, I think when you and I were growing up
in those old cowboy and Indian movies, this guy was speaking with a forked
tongue. This is exactly the opposite of what he was saying before. Now
today, given the change in circumstances, he`s totally with the president.
MORAN: Well, he`s also made comments, Chris, that he wouldn`t go all
around the world after one single man.
Well, of course this was the guy that directed the bombing. So he has
changed his position. But the reality is that he supported a president
that for seven years was never able to get bin Laden. Now that President
Obama has done so and has -- and really has decimated al Qaeda as a major
threat certainly in South Asia, now it`s -- he`s got a different position
and he`s saying, well, me, too, I would have done the same thing.
I don`t know whether he would have not -- would have not -- and he
doesn`t know what he would have done under the circumstances. The point
is, what will he do in the future? President Obama is showing what he will
do in the future.
Now, I do think we`re going to have a much smaller military presence,
and the fact is, we`re engaged all over the world, Chris. There is no way
we`re going to leave South Asia, Afghanistan or Pakistan. We`re engaged
still in Korea. We have got thousands of troops in Germany.
I mean, we have a global presence. The question is, how many of our
troops should there in any particular place and with what kind of lethal
force? We`re going to be training Afghanistan. We`re going to try to help
them get in at least in the 20th century, if not the 21st.
We`re going to be doing the things that will stabilize that region.
We recognize that Pakistan, which Mitt Romney refers to as such an ally,
that`s where the real threat is. That`s where the real problem is.
They`re the ones with nuclear weapons.
They are the -- they have far more extremists and more al Qaeda
members. Bear in mind, that`s where al Qaeda -- where bin Laden was. So I
even take question -- take issue with Romney`s description of Pakistan as
this close ally. There are many allies in Pakistan.
MATTHEWS: Right.
MORAN: But Pakistan is still -- still a trouble spot.
So, again, he needs to take a -- I think a broader and deeper
perspective of foreign policy.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
MORAN: And until he does, he probably ought to keep his mouth shut.
MATTHEWS: Well, Congressman, I think you have given it a lot more
thought than he ever did. I don`t think he ever gave it a second thought,
except he happens to be running for president and has to be briefed on the
Anyway, thank you, U.S. Congressman Jim Moran or Virginia.
Thank you, Jim VandeHei...
VANDEHEI: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... one of the great leaders of Politico.
And a reminder: Join us at 7:00 Eastern tonight for a special live
edition of HARDBALL. We are going to have full coverage of President
Obama`s address to our country from Afghanistan, a very formal, important
address tonight.
You`re watching HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Remember the 2008 election, all that criticism and fear from the
right, that Barack Obama would be weak and indecisive on national security?
Well, certainly, it`s hard to argue that these days.
Last year`s raid to kill Osama bin Laden was the most profile action
he`s taken. But throughout his presidency, Obama has pursued an aggressive
counterterrorism approach, killing dozens of senior al Qaeda leaders and
increasing the use of drone strikes from his predecessor.
At a press conference in December, when asked about Republican
criticism that he has appeased our enemies, listen to what the president
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Ask Osama bin Laden
and the 22 out of 30 top al Qaeda leaders who have been taken off the field
whether I engage in appeasement or whoever is left out there. Ask them
about that.
MATTHEWS: Or has ever left out there. Wow.
And yesterday, a new Obama campaign web video touted some of his
major successes in national security. Let`s take a listen.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Over the last two years, we`ve seen a depletion
of the senior bench for al Qaeda.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Anwar al-Awlaki has been killed.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Another huge victory in the war on terror.
MATTHEWS: Andrea Mitchell, of course, NBC`s chief foreign affairs
correspondent, and Steve Clemons is Washington editor-at-large for "The
Atlantic" -- great two people to have on.
Andrea, thank you so much for this.
I think we do a good job at NBC News and at MSNBC covering this war
on terrorism. But there is sort of an accumulated story here perhaps we
haven`t given enough emphasis too. Ands that is what the president just
called a few moments ago in that audio and the videotape from Kabul, the
decimation of al Qaeda. Tell us how that proceeded.
ANDREA MITCHELL, NBC NEWS CHIEF FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well,
I think it`s very clear that there has been a real downgrading of the
ability of al Qaeda and certainly the intelligence that was gleaned from
Obama`s lair made that point. He had aspirations to assassinate President
Obama, to go after General Petraeus, the then leader of Afghan troops, the
commander of the troops there. But neither of those achievements, if you
will, those goals of al Qaeda could be accomplished. His own people were
telling him, according to the intelligence briefings that we all have, his
own people were telling, you know, leader, we cannot do that.
They really have been decimated by the drone attacks. And it was
very interesting that John Brennan decided, on the president`s orders,
yesterday to acknowledge what has been very well known, that the drone
attacks, that covert war is taking place.
MATTHEWS: Why don`t we take a look at Mr. Brennan right now, what he
had to say about this? Here he is. Take a look at what President Obama`s
counter-terrorism adviser should say, John Brennan said, in fact, just
yesterday, about the president`s record in going after al Qaeda. Let`s
JOHN BRENNAN, WHITE HOUSE COUNTER-TERRORISM ADVISER: Along with
allies and partners, we have been unrelenting. And when we assess that al
Qaeda of 2012, I think it is fair to say that as a result of our efforts,
the United States is more secure and the American people are safer. Today,
it is increasingly clear that compared to 9/11, the core of al Qaeda
leadership is a shadow of its former self. Al Qaeda has been left with
just a handful of capable leaders and operatives and, with continued
pressure, is on the path to its destruction.
MATTHEWS: Steve Clemons, tell us about that. It`s always a
dangerous thing to tell us we`re safer because, of course, anything can
happen. But give us your assessment.
STEVE CLEMONS, THE ATLANTIC: Well, I think what`s important to
understand is that John Brennan is one of six people who have been meeting
with the president of the United States every morning, keeping a very, very
laser focus on this question of what to do with the outstanding terrorists
that surrounded Osama bin Laden and what was the most symbolically
significant terror network that has challenged this United States. And
they have, since the raid on the Abbottabad compound, worked with the
intelligence they have and, as you said, gone one by one and knocked out
Had they not done that, the bin Laden raid would have ultimately been
a failure. What`s very unfortunate to look back now with hindsight is that
the last administration, the Bush-Cheney administration`s decision to
distract a lot of resources towards Iraq, and I mean -- I`ve talked to CIA
officials and FBI officials who at various times doubted bin Laden was
still around because he had so effectively sealed himself off.
And one of the decisions that I think President Obama and his team
made was to come back up and pump up those resources, and while they were
encouraging the surge in Afghanistan, something I wasn`t particularly
supportive of, they also doubled down on basically taking out the mother
ship of al Qaeda. During the time of that distraction, you had al Qaeda
metastasized around in other parts of the world, in the Maghreb, in Yemen,
down in Africa, of groups that have self-selected and were inspired by bin
Laden because he wasn`t taken out soon enough.
But you have o give them credit for basically taking out almost
entirely those folks that were the key commanders of al Qaeda, the plot
integrators of al Qaeda. Ayman al-Zawahiri is still at large. And so, we
need to remember that, that there are still significant players. But it is
nothing like it was before and it`s a real credit that every morning, these
group of people has, with the president of the United States directly
involved, has zeroed in on what the intelligence has led them to do.
And while the cameras haven`t been on it, they had really nailed
dozens of folks that were involved with attacking not only the United
States but its allies in Europe and also other places in the Middle East.
MITCHELL: But let me just pick up a quick thread to what Steve just
said -- which is that it has metastasized. And that`s the other shoe that
could always drop.
Al Qaeda has been, I think, pretty much decimated. There may be lone
actors or Zawahiri may be able to order something, but they are much less
operational. That is indeed true.
But you do have the threat in Yemen. You do have the threat in the
Maghreb. And you have the Haqqani network. You have threats to Americans,
to American troops, to contractors, to Afghans right in Afghanistan where
we still have so many troops. So you have --
MATTHEWS: Are they capable of big operations, Andrea?
MITCHELL: Well, they certainly, yes.
MATTHEWS: Are they capable of those macro operations like we saw in
9/11? Can they do the big ones?
MITCHELL: Not against the homeland. I think the homeland is much,
much safer. But they certainly are able to get American installations
abroad, and we`ve seen that even with getting to the heart and soul of
Kabul to our embassies, to our facilities, to our allies.
MATTHEWS: Let`s take a look, however, going after the main force
there in Pakistan. Drone strikes under President George W. Bush, began to
him, but President Obama sharply increased their use when he came into
office. Take a look at these figures compiled by the New American
Drone strikes jumped by a total of nine between 2004 and 2007, to 53
in President Obama`s first year in office, 2009. They peaked in 2010 last
year and there was a slight decrease due to the tension between Pakistan
and the U.S. over the bin Laden raid. However, we have seen a presence
here pretty story.
Steve, we`ll go back to Andrea on this very point, I want the same
point to close with. People around the president, and they have to very
careful, they`ll tell you, they`ll get the idea that this guy is some sort
of liberal on war, that he`s not quite an aggressive warrior, that he is a
warrior. Your sense of being able to calibrate that, Steve -- you and
CLEMONS: I think that he has demonstrated and really robbed from the
mantel of the GOP the notion that Americans used to feel safe only with
Republicans during times of crisis, in times of challenge. And I think
Barack Obama has shown that he can be very tough and smart.
At the same time, what we`re not talking about much in the media is
he`s also shown a lot of strategic restraint.
The only quick thing I would add about those drones since I was --
I`m very involved with the New America Foundation, is that there`s a double
story in those drone attacks. Many of those drone attacks have disrupted
active terror campaigns, no doubt. They have taken out a lot of the most
nefarious terrorists this world has seen.
But they have created -- there`s also been a lot of mistakes and a
lot of civilian casualties, which New America has also documented. And
that, I think, has caused a lot of the blowback of various countries that
we`ve been, you know, sort of implicitly cooperating with in the drones.
MITCHELL: And in fact that --
MATTHEWS: Andrea, the same question to you about -- I want to get
the same -- Andrea, I just want to get your sense because you`re so good at
both sides and knowing what`s going on. The sense that this guy is not
some dove.
MITCHELL: I think that he is really protected by the bin Laden raid
and by the increased tempo of the drone attacks, by -- initially by the
surge Afghanistan protected by those sort of Republican attacks. We`ve
seen today, in fact, that Mitt Romney and his surrogates have pulled back
from their initial decision to go after President Obama for allegedly
politicizing the bin Laden anniversary. They`ve really, really dialed that
down because I think they realize he`s pretty much, in the political sense,
bulletproof on that issue.
MATTHEWS: Boy, that was an abrupt change you caught there today. I
caught it too. Boy, that was one of the rare changes in politics where a
tune had been memorized and they stopped playing it right away.
Thank you so much, Andrea Mitchell. It`s always great to be on with
And Steve Clemons, sir, thank you for joining us.
Much more on President Obama`s surprise trip to Afghanistan when we
come back. This is HARDBALL.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
President Obama has made a stirring trip to Afghanistan. He spoke to
the troops at Bagram Airfield just a few moments ago. Let`s listen to
something of what he said.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I could not be any
prouder of you. I want you to understand, I know it`s still tough. I know
the battle`s not yet over. Some of your buddies are going to get injured.
And some of your buddies may get killed. And there`s going to be
heartbreak and pain and difficulty ahead. But there`s a light on the
horizon, because of the sacrifices you`ve made.
MATTHEWS: Chris Cillizza is an MSNBC political analyst. He`s also
managing editor of PostPolitics.com, and Joe Williams is White House
reporter for "Politico".
Gentlemen, thank you. I don`t know if you were as stirred as I was,
but there was a commander-in-chief meeting with the troops who were in the
terrible situation, some of them, on post. It`s scary situations every
night, and during the day. And there he is telling them the countries
behind them. Whether that`s true or not, I can only imagine, Chris, that`s
the one thing they want it hear.
CHRIS CILLIZZA, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Oh, I mean, look, you know,
Chris, the commander-in-chief role I think is often downplayed in election
times, particularly election times where the economy is so front and
center. But I would say it`s the most basic hurdle you have to clear.
Remember, Barack Obama, after becoming Democratic nominee in 2008,
went to Europe to show that on a world stage, he could be a commanding
presence and he had kind of the right experience to do so. I think if you
don`t get beyond that initial hurdle to be able to give those speeches, to
give remarks like you just heard with credibility, and with gravity, all
the other stuff doesn`t matter. It`s kind of a sine qua non. You know,
you have to check that box.
And Mitt Romney, someone who has not as much foreign policy
experience as some past Republican nominees, is going to have to check that
MATTHEWS: You know, it`s amazing, Joe, to me to see the president of
the United States with our troops, who do represent so much diversity in
our society. You know, the many faces of Benetton, if you will. I mean,
there he is moving these people, the smiles on the faces of these people,
it`s real. Look at it. It`s just -- I`m watching a picture of these guys
with their cameras. They`re just greedy for some face time with this
fella, who is their president and their commander-in-chief.
JOE WILLIAMS, POLITICO: Well, and it`s also interesting that a
commander-in-chief in war time, in a long, long war, that`s been drawn out
for such a long time that so many people have made such great sacrifices
that he talked about, is greeted warmly and not with the kind of resentment
you might expect from a group of soldiers, airmen and airwomen, who have
been over there for such a long time and seen such horrific things.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
WILLIAMS: And back to Chris` point, when you`re talking about
gravitas, and talking about being able to make a statement and being able
to inspire confidence on the world stage, remember, President Obama had to
answer that kind of criticism during the 2008 primary from Hillary Clinton.
We all remember the 3:00 a.m. phone call ad that resonated so much with
voters for Hillary Clinton. He`s answered that call and then some.
So this is another moment to burnish those credentials ahead of a
campaign and an opponent who attacks the very nature of that leadership.
MATTHEWS: Well, the wonderful thing you didn`t mention is that if
there`s a 3:00 a.m. phone call right now, they`d both be on the line, of
course. They are talking to each other at 3:00 in the morning on this kind
of stuff.
Chris, let`s get back to the politics for a minute --
CILLIZZA: Yes, sure.
MATTHEWS: -- because I think maybe there are Republicans who are --
they are certainly as smart as Democrats and never noticed an I.Q.
difference in my life, but they must not have anticipated the fact that at
any moment the president could simply revert to his role as commander-in-
chief, give up the arguments as to who`s responsible or who deserves credit
for catching and killing bin Laden and focus on the fact that he is
CILLIZZA: Well, yes.
MATTHEWS: He is the incumbent president, not just a dart board for
everything that goes wrong with the economy. But the vivid commander-in-
chief of our troops as well, that comes with the territory also.
CILLIZZA: Well, and I would say, and I`m not suggesting that the
president went over to Afghanistan to politicize it and -- but the point
is, everything that happens, particularly everything that happens in May of
an election year, fits into a political story to tell. Look, this is the
advantage of being an incumbent president of the United States. You can do
things like this.
And I would just say, just very quickly, Chris, on the criticism of
President Obama and politicizing it. Look, Republicans want this to be a
referendum on President Obama, this 2012 election. That works on their
favor, on the economy. You can argue it works on their favor on the
stimulus, it works on their favor on the healthcare.
You can`t take the good of a referendum and resist the politically
bad from the Republicans` perspective, which is the fact that President
Obama authorized a mission that led to the death of Osama bin Laden. If it
is a referendum, it`s a referendum. You take the good and bad of it. You
can`t argue. It will only take it when it works in our political favor.
WILLIAMS: Well, you can argue but it won`t be effective and people
won`t listen to it.
CILLIZZA: Right, right.
MATTHEWS: Joe, this is what we call in baseball a gopher pitch.
This is a high one down the middle for you.
WILLIAMS: Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: What do you think the Republicans would have said if the
9/11 had occurred on a Democrats` watch? Do you think the Republicans
would have blamed the Democrats of being weak and therefore inviting an
attack? You think they might have done that? Just asking you.
WILLIAMS: Maybe just a tiny bit they might have gone there. But we
all know that they are very generous and whole-hearted in their love of
country thing. I mean, in politics, we had a guest earlier that talked
about it`s a blood sport. You go for your opponent`s weaknesses.
In the Republicans` case, in the last several campaigns, they did a
political jujitsu, of turning their opponent`s weakness -- strength rather,
into a weakness and using that against them.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
WILLIAMS: And that tried to come to the fore here in President
Obama, and that he made decisions that did very well for the economy and
they are trying to maintain that that was -- those were decisions that in
fact wrecked the economy. This is one of the situations where the strength
of the opponent is nothing that can`t be countered. You have Air Force
One. Everywhere it goes, it creates a stir. He lands anywhere in the
world, and people will pay attention to that and that`s something that the
Republican Party can`t compete with.
MATTHEWS: We go to go.
Joe, I like the way you think. I like thinking about judo and those
kinds of things in politics, because these metaphors work brilliantly, the
way you describe them. I read (ph) a whole on this stuff. But thank you.
I want to hear more you from on this, about the theories of politics.
Thank you so much, Joe Williams, from "Politico."
WILLIAMS: My pleasure.
MATTHEWS: Where he belongs.
And thank you, Cillizza. You`re the best at what you do. We`ll talk
about that.
Join us again in one hour, at 7:00 a.m. Eastern, for a special live
edition of HARDBALL and President Obama`s address to our country from
Afghanistan at 7:30 Eastern.
"POLITICS NATION" with Al Sharpton starts right now.
Copyright 2012 CQ-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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
Guests: Andrea Mitchell, Chris Cillizza, Chuck Todd, Steve Clemons, Joe Williams, Major Garrett, Jim Moran, Jim VandeHei


text:
Researchers have found a way to project future habitat locations under climate change, identifying potential safe havens for threatened biodiversity.
Associate Professor Grant Wardell-Johnson and Dr Gunnar Keppel from the Curtin University Institute for Biodiversity and Climate, along with lead researcher and former Curtin scientist Dr Tom Schut, now at Wageningen University in the Netherlands, developed an approach to identify potential refugia in declining rainfall environments.
For the first time, their novel approach, recently published in PLOS One and involving Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) instruments, is able to translate a traditional plot observation to the entire landscape.
Dr Wardell-Johnson said this enabled the team to apply expected future changes in rainfall to landscape-scale vegetation and find potential refugial sites, essential for conservation efforts.
"Global warming is a particular issue in Mediterranean-climate regions. It is especially so in the flat landscapes of south-western Australia - home to a global biodiversity hotspot," Dr Wardell-Johnson said.
"South-western Australians have been living through the impacts of a drying climate for more than 40 years and are bracing for a continuing drier and warmer trend.
"Understanding where refugia will be is of particular importance in light of human-caused global warming, to offer the best chances for our precious flora and fauna in times of transformative change."
By using 4-metre x 4-metre plot-based data of vegetation profiles on and around granite outcrops across south-western Australia, the team were able to relate vegetation types to soil depth and rainfall. They found a very strong relationship between all three.
This finding meant the team could compare current climate and future climate under a continuing trend of reduced rainfall in the region.
Dr Wardell-Johnson said that very large shifts in vegetation structure were predicted and able to be mapped for future climates, with greatest changes expected to happen in the highest rainfall areas.
"We found it very likely that some refugia will be found in sites receiving greatest water run-off below granite outcrops, as well as areas where a reduction in rainfall is offset by deeper soil," Dr Wardell-Johnson said.
This research was funded by an Australian Research Council Grant and carried out in conjunction with the Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife, the private industry partner AAM, The University of Western Australia, the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and Trent University in Canada.
The paper, Rapid characterisation of vegetation structure to predict refugia and climate change impacts across a global biodiversity hotspot, can be found at http://www.


text:
It's like a time machine of embarrassingly debunked pro-socialist arguments. "It'd be nice if it worked that way, and sometimes it does, but sometimes it dosn't[sic]" is a textbook case. On the off chance you don't realize it, humans are imperfect beings. If they were perfect, any system would work. The difference between systems is what happens when humans make mistakes. In the above scenario, the guys who chew through workers in a capitalist system lose their best workers to bosses who lure them away with safe workplace rules and they lose money on high labor turnover costs. Marginally, they cannot expand as fast in the good times because of this and they will fail more surely and quicker in the bad times than their otherwise equivalent competitors. In socialism, none of this feedback occurs. There are no competitors, or no meaningful ones. Until someone with the power to change things is affected personally and creates a "crisis" the problem of poor safety just gets ignored as a cost of doing business and complaining about it is unpatriotic and economic sabotage.Lazerus wrote:It'd be nice if it worked that way, and sometimes it does, but sometimes it dosn't. The reason those policies were persued is because, for most factories back then, it took next to no training to make a factory workers. So if one gets injured, their out the door.It's not a matter of OK or not but of various levels of suck. When you go through the industrial revolution, you're not going to get everything right on the first iteration. Heck, a century from now, our current "enlightened" work practices will likely horrify the great grandkids. So you look to improve but you look to do it in a sustainable way. Socialism isn't sustainable.
If you run a factory and a finger gets mashed, you lose production, you lose money. Factory workers aren't productive on day 1. It can take a year of work before you really start making money on them so they have incentives to get things safer because they want to maximize profit. Those that do not do that eventually fall behind those that do. It's an education process all around and it took some time to get it right (work is ongoing). Unionism was one response and, in the private sector, has largely done its job. Companies work hard so their workers don't need an adversarial union to get a safe workplace with decent compensation because unions come with long-term costs that never go away (rigidity in work rules for instance). Socialism, unlike unionism, was never a sustainable response because it fails at job #1 of any economic system which is to set prices. If you can't do that, you'll wreck the economy.
To the extent that soft socialism allows a parallel private economy to exist, socialism can blindly imitate the private price setters and get away with it for a time. Eventually the system breaks down though, no matter how soft the socialism, because of the distortions introduced by the government portion of the economy and the constant temptation to turn more over to the government for political reasons.
So what your saying, in essense, is you do not have a moral problem with the idea of a job where you will regularly be abused, taken advantage of, and subjected to extreme physical danger, and should you be injured and rendered incapable of working, your only kickback will be your kick out the door?
Comparing real world capitalism with theoretical socialism is fundamentally unfair. You compare the theoretical with the theoretical and the real with the real. Capitalism wins on both counts.
Just to be absolutely clear, the difference in the two systems is what do you do when immoral jerks behave like immoral jerks. I do not morally condone either immorality or jerks. Showily throwing a few guys up against the wall may make you feel better but it just doesn't work. I'd like effective action to fix the problem.