SIMPSONVILLE, S.C.—On a recent Saturday, Edward Johnson hurried into Harvard’s Liquor & Wine and made a beeline toward a 4-foot-wide section of bourbon. There he bypassed the Old Crow and Jim Beam and reached up to grab one of four stubby bottles of Blanton’s, a rye bourbon. At the register, the cashier had a 10-year-old bottle of Henry McKenna Single Barrel waiting for him. It was set aside that morning.

 Mr. Johnson shelled out $107 for the bourbon and then headed to a nearby Sam’s Club, where he spent about $100 on... ||||| Take a seat and pour yourself a drink (no, no, a different one). You may need it to listen to this news.

 If bourbon is your drink of choice, you may have heard quiet rumblings the last few years of something unsettling afoot: a possible shortage coming down the pipeline. A bourbon shortage would be an interesting type because — unlike other possible food shortages (the coffee shortage, for instance) — it's not just a matter of not having enough of the ingredients. It's a matter of people 20 years ago making some bad drinks-buying decisions.

 Making bourbon is, in a sense, an attempt at trying to predict the future. What will the world be like 20 or so years from now, the whiskey maker must ask herself, and just how much bourbon might they want there? So to a large extent, our current shortfall is due to people in the 1990s underestimating how much bourbon we'd want to drink today — possibly because 1990s drinkers had worse taste in alcoholic beverages. (Curse you, Zima.)

 Advertisement

 The good news is, if bourbon-makers undershoot the mark with their production, they can always make more. The ingredients are not hard to come by. The bad news? Every new barrel starts its own new clock on the aging process. Is it possible to reset that clock, though?

 There's an interesting piece up in Nautilus today detailing some of the strange methods whiskey-makers are experimenting with to speed up the bourbon aging process, with everything from ultrasonic energy bursts to basically throwing in a whole bunch of oak chips and shaking. While the new methods certainly sound fun, this taste description sounds a little less fun:

 Sponsored

 Spirits aged for shorter amounts of time (four months instead of the two years minimum for federally approved straight bourbon, for example), have an edgy taste, often described as "hot," "raw," or "aggressive," with a "shorter finish."

 Of course, not every bourbon is required to mellow for decades before it's poured; plenty can and do take considerably less time. But, the longer it's allowed to mellow, the more likely that any jagged notes in the flavor will have had time to soften. So much so that if the whiskey you're selling is less than four years old, you're required by federal whiskey law (yes, it's a thing) to slap a label on the bottle alerting potential customers to that fact (let no one say they didn't try to warn you).

 The good news hidden in all this is that a bourbon shortage is by its very nature, a temporary thing. The bad news is that a solution, at least by traditional brewing methods, is always at least a decade or so away. But fear not! The future bourbon that will save us from a dispiriting future of offers of sad vodka-cranberries and weird little pickled onion martinis is already brewing. It's just not ready to arrive quite yet.

 Image: : Olga_Phoenix / Shutterstock ||||| In case you haven’t heard, doomsday is coming—more droughts, floods, famine, class warfare, entitled children, and, brace yourself: a bourbon shortage! Yes, traditional Kentucky distillers didn’t predict or prepare for this Mad Men-inspired mixology epoch. And if it continues on this trajectory, thousands of years from now geologists and archaeologists will be able to identify the bourbon-free era in the absence of fancy rectangular bottles in the remains of fallen civilizations.

 That is, unless scientists can build a whiskey time machine, a way to gracefully cheat the slow aging process that offers bourbon its rich oaky tones and sweet and smooth finish.

 The popularity of bourbon in the past decade has been a major high and hangover for American distillers. (The name “bourbon” is reserved for barrel-aged whiskeys made primarily of corn in the United States.) In 2002, the U.S. sold 13 million cases of bourbon; in 2014, 19 million cases, generating $2.7 billion in revenue. But the popularity and the time bourbon takes to mature, paired with a shortage of new American oak barrels that traditional whiskeys are aged in, means there simply isn’t enough of the good stuff to go around. Evidence of a shortage is generally delivered in anecdotes, but in an independent opinion survey taken this year by Fred Minnick, booze blogger and author of Whiskey Women: The Untold Story of How Women Saved Bourbon, Scotch & Irish Whiskey, 82 percent of 149 high-end bourbon drinkers said they have been unable to find bourbons they once found.

 Scientifically savvy distillers have already squeezed the slow aging process into months and weeks.

 It is the finest bourbons, those that are produced in limited supply and aged for 12, 18, or more years that have been the hardest to find in the past several years. Drinkers with deep pockets have bought up much of the limited release bourbons from well-established companies—Van Winkle, Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, Four Roses Limited Editions—explains Lew Bryson, the managing editor of Whisky Advocate magazine. “Having cleared them off the market, they’ve now started in on lesser-known bourbons, almost in a panic-buying mode, buying multiple bottles of whiskeys they feel sure will simply disappear.”

 Also in Chemistry Authenticity in the Age of the Fake By Philip Ball The announcement of synthetic diamonds in 1955 was met with the same kind of alarm and skepticism that greeted claims to have made alchemical gold in the Middle Ages. Could these “fake” gems, created by a team at the General...READ MORE

 It’s a frightening prospect.

 Enter entrepreneurs with start-up spirits and a potential solution. Through a variety of unconventional aging methods, drawing on chemistry, they have already squeezed a two- to more-than-20-year process into days, weeks, and months, much to the chagrin of whiskey connoisseurs, who will tell you the secret to a refined bourbon is time. While some companies have taken age labels off their bottles to get products to market sooner (bye-bye 12-year-old premium bourbon; hello ambiguously aged premium bourbon), new distilleries are experimenting with smaller barrels and rapid oxidation.

 The magic that turns harsh ethanol, the product of distillation, into a sophisticated sip of smooth bourbon with undertones of vanilla and caramel happens when young alcohol meets oak barrel. Whiskey aging traditionally starts when an oak barrel is charred, breaking down the lignin in the wood into organic compounds called aldehydes, explains Scott Spolverino, an industry consultant with a degree in brewing and distilling science from Heriot-Watt University, in Scotland. “These are the main building blocks of maturation.” When you add alcohol to the barrel, oxidation transforms the aldehydes into acids—syringic acid (from syringaldehyde), ferulic acid (from coniferaldehyde), and vanillic acid (from vanillin). During the aging process, changes in heat and pressure push and pull the alcohol in and out of the wood. There is a constant back-and-forth between aldehyde and acid, until the acids accumulate en masse and turn permanently into esters, adding complex character and deep flavors.

 “Time in the barrel is like sandpaper, smoothing out the rough edges,” says Liza Weisstuch, who writes regularly for Whisky Magazine and the Whisky Advocate.

 But a host of new distillers don’t want to wait years to start cashing in on their hefty investments. One entrepreneur trying to cheat Father Time is Tuthilltown Spirits in Gardiner, New York, makers of Hudson Baby Bourbon and Hudson Four Grain Bourbon. When it opened in 2003, Tuthilltown started experimenting with accelerating the maturation of single malt, rye, and bourbon whiskeys by letting the alcohol settle in 2- to 5-gallon oak barrels, instead of the industry-standard 53- to 55-gallon oak casks, increasing the alcohol-to-barrel-surface ratio.

 “The small barrels sped up aging significantly; we could get to market in months, instead of years,” says Tuthilltown co-owner Ralph Erenzo, a rock climber who originally wanted Tuthilltown to be a climbers’ ranch. Erenzo and his crew were able to get their whiskey to market in about four months, and they discovered they liked the more pronounced vanilla flavor they were getting by using small barrels. Ten years out, and with the luxury of time, they have grown into bigger barrels—using, for the most part, a mix of 10-, 26-, and 53-gallon casks. But they still have a reserve of 3- to 5-gallon whiskey that they blend with bigger batches so they can “get that character profile that people liked all along,” Erenzo says. In 2010 Tuthilltown sold its Hudson line to William Grant & Sons Distillers, makers of Glenfiddich single malt Scotch whiskies and Hendrick’s Gin.

 Spirits aged for short amounts have an edgy taste often described as “hot,” “raw” or “aggressive.”

 At Copper Fox Distillery in Sperryville, Virginia, makers of Wasmund’s Single Malt Whisky and Copper Fox Rye Whisky, head distiller and owner Rick Wasmund adds toasted oak chips to his 53-gallon barrels, agitating them to increase the alcohol-to-surface ratio and exposing them to heat and cold. You can try your hand at similar bourbon aging methods at home with something called Time & Oak—an oak stick with comb-like grooves that activates “accelerated transpiration through capillary action”—the same theory behind smaller barrels and oak chips.

 Terressentia, near Charleston, South Carolina, which specializes in bulk bourbon (sold in 6,000-gallon tankers), uses increased oxidation to mimic aging and take impurities out of young whiskeys, explains Terressentia CEO Earl Hewlette. Terressentia starts with undrinkable 4- to 6-month-old whiskey because they want their whiskey to be brown—something you can’t get without time in an oak barrel. They filter it in plastic tanks with a technology that expedites the aldehyde and acid dance, creating drinkable esters—chemical compounds—in just eight hours. According to Hewlette, the process has the added benefit of turning some of the fatty acids from the original fermented grains into glycerides, which act as a smoothing agent, taking the bite out of the final product. “When the bourbon shortage came along, it gave us a whole new market,” says Hewlette, noting that the same bigger companies who used to sell in bulk have been hoarding their own limited supplies.

 Tom Lix, owner of the Cleveland Whiskey Company, uses steel tanks with wood segments under pressure. “One of the reasons behind working on the technology we use and starting this business was an anticipation of this shortage well in advance of when other people started talking about it,” he says. Lix also boasts that his Cleveland Black Reserve 100-proof spirit, the company’s bourbon, holds its own in taste tests against established brand Knob Creek.

 Bourbon made in less than a year may be financially savvy, but most bourbon experts say it falls short on taste. “I don’t think new methods are producing whiskey that is comparable,” Bryson says. “Some accelerated whiskeys don’t feel right. They feel too thin; they don’t have the proper ‘roundness.’ ”

 Spolverino explains: “When you’re aging a spirit for a short amount of time, the aldehydes and acids don’t have time to come together.” Meaning those raw flavors in fast-tracked whiskeys often come from an overabundance of aldehydes. “Adding more wood to the situation just adds more of those beginning aldehydes, it doesn’t actually speed up the process,” he says. Spirits aged for shorter amounts of time (four months instead of the two years minimum for federally approved straight bourbon, for example), have an edgy taste, often described as “hot,” “raw,” or “aggressive,” with a “shorter finish.” Spolverino has done research into an ultrasonic-energy treatment. “It could physically push the spirit deeper into the barrel staves to draw out more aldehydes and provide catalytic energy for reactions,” he says. “But I’m not entirely sure it could speed up the esterification process.”

 Many of the big distillers stepped up production of high-end whiskey five years ago, when word of a shortage started to spread. And there has always been a plentiful supply of non-premium brands: Jim Beam White, Evan Williams Black, Knob Creek, Woodford Reserve, Maker’s Mark, 1792, explains Bryson. Most of the big companies dismiss accelerated aging. Mark Brown, CEO of Buffalo Trace, one of Kentucky’s larger bourbon distilling operations, says the company has spent $10 million on research and development on how to make quality whiskey, not on how to cheat time.

 “The work done by others over the past 50 years aimed at expediting the aging process does not appear to have resulted in the production of a superior whiskey, quite the opposite,” says the company’s Master Distiller, Harlen Wheatley. “We’re glad people are exploring these [new] techniques,” says Brown. “But generally it only reinforces the need for time in the barrel.”

 Tasha Eichenseher is a hot-toddy-sipping, freelance science and environment writer (and a senior editor at Yoga Journal) in Boulder, Colorado. |||||

Write a summary.

– It's been rumored for a few years now; Nautilus' take on the looming "bourbon shortage" is that it already has hit. Though we're awash with Knob Creek and Maker's Mark, high-end and small-batch bourbons are in short supply, spurring well-heeled drinkers to clear the next tier of bourbon from the shelves. As io9 explains, the reason we've arrived at this point can be distilled down to some poor predictions made as many as 20 years ago when the golden liquid filling today's premium bottles started being made. Basically, distillers didn't predict just how much demand would swell in this decade, and the Wall Street Journal reported in September that they've been burned before: They jacked up production in the 1970s, but demand plunged and prices followed. But Nautilus places us in a "Mad Men-inspired mixology epoch," stacking up the 19 million cases of bourbon sold last year to the 13 million sold in 2002. And while actual data detailing the shortage is hard to come by, one independent survey by writer Fred Minnick finds that 82% of 149 "high-end" bourbon drinkers report not being able to get their hands on certain bourbons right now. More on why: The aging process is what takes the edge off bourbon, so much so that anything aged less than 4 years must be labeled as such; many fine bourbons are aged 18 or more years. Nautilus takes a look at how some makers are attempting to hack down that timeline: by using oak barrels much smaller than the standard size or adding oak chips to regular-size ones in order to balloon the "alcohol-to-barrel-surface ratio," for instance. But for those who want the real, decade-aged deal, "there simply isn’t enough of the good stuff to go around," observes Nautilus. (As for whiskey, the world's best is no longer from Scotland.)


Summarize this article:

CHICAGO In a surprise result that showed the limits of a big-money campaign, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel failed to get more than 50 percent of the vote in Tuesday's election, and must face a run-off against second-place finisher Jesus "Chuy" Garcia in April.

 The setback for Emanuel, 55, came despite a visit to Chicago last week from President Barack Obama, whom Emanuel served as chief of staff.

 With $6 million in his war chest at year end even after spending $4.7 million in the fourth quarter, Emanuel hugely outspent four opponents in his race for a second term as head of the nation's third-largest city.

 The powerful Democrat got millions of dollars from campaign donors, including Hollywood directors and hedge fund executives, plus Obama's support.

 But it wasn't enough to fend off the mild-mannered Garcia, a Cook County commissioner and progressive Democrat with a paltry campaign fund. Garcia held a low public profile before he jumped into the race last October after the teacher's union president, Karen Lewis, backed away after being diagnosed with brain cancer.

 The run-off election against Garcia will be held on April 7.

 With 98 percent of precincts reporting, Emanuel had 45.4 percent of the vote, while Garcia had 33.9 percent. Polls before the election had shown Emanuel close to 50 percent, and Garcia at about 20 percent.

 Emanuel sounded hoarse and emotional as he told supporters to continue their fight.

 "Tomorrow morning I will be seeing you at the L stops," said Emanuel "We will get back out there talking to our friends and families and neighbors as they make a critical choice about who has the strength, who has the leadership, who has the ideas to move this great city forward."

 The former Illinois congressman won the mayoral seat outright when he first ran in 2011.

 But controversial decisions to close 50 public schools and continued high crime helped send the Chicago mayoral election into its first run-off since the city started holding nonpartisan elections in 1995.

 Garcia, 58, a former state senator and alderman, has argued that Emanuel paid more attention to the city's upper class and downtown than to the poor and communities outside the commercial center.

 In a television ad, he turned one of Emanuel's apparent strengths - an ability to lure corporations to Chicago - into a negative by casting the incentive packages as tax breaks that favored big companies while taking money away from spending on police.

 "We have something to say," said Garcia to his euphoric supporters Tuesday night. "We want change."

 Garcia had the support of the powerful Chicago Teachers Union and its president, Lewis, who gave Garcia an immediate boost by videotaping an endorsement of him the week he announced his bid for mayor.

 Suzy Broz, 26, a former Emanuel supporter, said she thought Garcia could win.

 "A lot of people are upset with a one percent mayor and people feel that there's a great chance for change," Broz said.

 Emanuel, known for his sometimes abrasive style, has argued that he had to make tough choices to rein in the city's budget deficit, which is expected to grow to $1.2 billion by next year due to an increase in payments to public pensions.

 As the election loomed, Emanuel turned more attention to lower income residents, passing a city ordinance to raise the minimum wage.

 (Editing by Kim Coghill) ||||| Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel speaks to the press after leaving a restaurant where he had lunch with U.S. Representative Luis Gutiérrez (D-IL), Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White and Chicago City Clerk Susana Mendoza on election day February 24, 2015 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo: Scott Olson, Getty Images)

 CHICAGO — Rahm Emanuel was dealt a tough political blow on Tuesday, after he was forced into a runoff election to hold onto his seat as mayor of the Windy City.

 Emanuel, who raised about $15 million for the campaign, finished first in the five candidate field, but fell far short of garnering the 50% plus one vote he needed to win outright and avoid a runoff election. He will now face the second place finisher, Cook County Commissioner, Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, on April 7.

 With 95.7% of precincts reporting, Emanuel had 45.3% of the vote and Garcia had 33.9%.

 "We came a long way, and we have a little bit further to go," Emanuel said.

 Chicago ceased holding partisan primaries in 1995, when it switched to the current election format. It marks the first time that the city will hold a runoff mayoral election.

 Emanuel, who raised more than his four rivals combined, buried his challengers in $7 million in campaign advertising in his unsuccessful attempt to avoid the runoff.

 .

 He even turned to President Obama, who Emanuel served as White House chief of staff from 2009 to 2010, as his chief surrogate.

 Obama recorded a radio advertisement in which he endorsed Emanuel last month. Last week, the president flew to Chicago last week to announce the designation of the Pullman historic district, which manufactured sleeper cars at the turn of the 20th Century and was at the center of the black labor movement.

 Emanuel's latest television advertisement featured a clip of Obama wrapping Emanuel in a hug at the Pullman event and a sound bite of the president touting the mayor as "making sure that every Chicagoan in every neighborhood gets the fair shot at success that they deserve."

 But the president's influence wasn't able to help Emanuel close the deal.

 "We need to upgrade our communities by building more and better schools," said Tracy McGrady, a college student and part-time construction worker. "Instead, Rahm is closing them."

 In Chicago's Bronzville neighborhood, a predominantly African-American neighborhood, Emanuel supporters appeared to be a rare breed.

 "I don't like Rahm," said Henry Ray, who said he voted for Wilson. "He is doing nothing for my people."

 The mayor, a former U.S. congressman who served a district on Chicago's Northwest Side, has faced scathing criticism for his decision to close 50 city schools with low enrollment and the scorn of Chicago teachers, who staged their first strike in 25 years early in Emanuel's term. The mayor's reputation also took a hit when the city recorded more than 500 murders in 2012.

 For his part, Emanuel has noted that he raised the minimum wage, expanded full-day kindergarten programs for children in the city, and made big improvements in Chicago's sprawling rapid transit system during his term.

 "I like what [Emanuel] is doing for the city," said Barb Boronski, who cast her ballot for the mayor at St. Wenceslaus Church on the city's Northwest Side. "He does what the other candidates are afraid to do."

 Cook County Commissioner John Daley sang Emanuel's praises not far from a polling station.

 "Rahm has been an effective mayor and a strong leader in difficult times," said Daley, whose brother and father spent a combined 43 years as mayors of Chicago. "He loves his job and he shows it."

 After it became clear on Tuesday evening that he'd forced a runoff, Garcia celebrated his second-place finish against the much-better funded Emanuel. He also continued his populist assault on Emanuel as "Mayor 1%."

 "We've got six weeks of hard work ahead of us," Garcia told supporters at a campaign celebration. "Believe me. These big money interests are going to throw everything they've got at us. They run this town and they're not going to give up easily. "

 .

 He didn't throw his hat into his race until after Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis and Cook County President Toni Preckwinkle opted not to launch bids to unseat Emanuel.

 Garcia, 58, was born in Durango, Mexico. His father was a farm laborer who worked fields in California, Kansas, and Texas. When Garcia was 10, the family gained permanent residency status and moved to Chicago. He later became a U.S. citizen.

 In addition to serving as a Cook County commissioner, Garcia previously was elected to Chicago city council and served in the Illinois General Assembly.

 Thom Serafin, Chicago-based political consultant, said he expects "an awfully entertaining horse-race" in the six weeks ahead.

 Garcia's campaign could become "a rallying cry for labor and a new focus against the 1%," Serafin said. "The cinders are there – all they need is a light. "

 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1BprLaC ||||| Rahm Emanuel failed to win a second term Tuesday, suffering a national political embarrassment as little-known, lesser-funded challenger Jesus “Chuy” Garcia forced the mayor into the uncharted waters of an April runoff election.

 It’s the first time Chicago has had a runoff campaign for mayor, which is what happens when none of the candidates eclipses the 50 percent benchmark in round one.

 With 98 percent of the city’s precincts counted, unofficial results showed Emanuel with 45.4 percent and Cook County commissioner Garcia at 33.9 percent. Businessman Willie Wilson had 10.6 percent, 2nd Ward Ald. Bob Fioretti had 7.4 percent and frequent candidate William “Dock” Walls was at 2.8 percent.

 Emanuel, who spent millions on TV ads to try to repair his image with voters following a difficult four years, attempted to portray optimism and patience despite the results.

 “We have come a long way and we have a little bit further to go. This is the first step in a real important journey in our city,” Emanuel told supporters. “For those who voted for someone else, I hope to earn your confidence and your support in the weeks to come.”

 Garcia sought to keep the pressure on by portraying himself as the populist progressive and attacking the mayor as a puppet of the large corporations and special interests he said filled Emanuel’s massive campaign fund. Garcia gleefully continued to embrace his role as Chicago’s underdog.

 Caption Mayor Rahm Emanuel speaks at election night Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel addresses supporters at Chicago Journeymen Plumbers Union Hall, 1340 W. Washington Blvd., Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, in Chicago. (John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune) Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel addresses supporters at Chicago Journeymen Plumbers Union Hall, 1340 W. Washington Blvd., Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, in Chicago. (John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune) Caption Mayor Rahm Emanuel speaks at election night Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel addresses supporters at Chicago Journeymen Plumbers Union Hall, 1340 W. Washington Blvd., Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, in Chicago. (John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune) Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel addresses supporters at Chicago Journeymen Plumbers Union Hall, 1340 W. Washington Blvd., Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2015, in Chicago. (John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune) Caption Garcia: 'We're still standing' Chicago Mayoral candidate Jesus "Chuy" Garcia addresses his crowd of supporters after a close race, ending in a runoff. (WGN News) Chicago Mayoral candidate Jesus "Chuy" Garcia addresses his crowd of supporters after a close race, ending in a runoff. (WGN News) Caption Fioretti: Chicago is a 'mosaic of neighborhoods' In Bob Fioretti's speech Tuesday evening, he thanked voters for their support and reminded everyone that he will not "stop fighting for a better Chicago." (WGN Chicago) In Bob Fioretti's speech Tuesday evening, he thanked voters for their support and reminded everyone that he will not "stop fighting for a better Chicago." (WGN Chicago) Caption Wilson: 'We made a difference' Chicago Mayor candidate Willie Wilson addresses his supporters Tuesday night, looking to thank those who helped the campaign, as well as those he met along the way. Chicago Mayor candidate Willie Wilson addresses his supporters Tuesday night, looking to thank those who helped the campaign, as well as those he met along the way. Caption Walls presser after election William "Dock" Walls met with the media and his supporters after the Chicago Mayoral election results started to filter in. William "Dock" Walls met with the media and his supporters after the Chicago Mayoral election results started to filter in.

 “Nobody thought we’d be here tonight. They wrote us off. They said we didn’t have a chance. They said we didn’t have any money while they spent millions attacking us,” Garcia said. “Well, well, we’re still standing. We’re still running, and we’re gonna win.”

 For Emanuel, the runoff represents a personal and political setback for a Washington-polished powerbroker long known on the national stage. His rivals consisted of lesser-funded and less-experienced candidates, and at times the mayor’s campaign carried an aura of inevitability, though it often lacked enthusiasm. That was reflected, in part, by the low voter turnout, which also came on a day with chilly temperatures and occasional snow.

 Chicago election officials estimated turnout would finish just above the record low for a mayoral race of 33 percent set in 2007 when former Richard M. Daley won his sixth and final term in office. Turnout this time around was expected to hit 34 percent, officials said.

 Unofficial results showed Garcia eclipsing Emanuel in 15 of the city’s 50 wards, including 11 of 12 overwhelmingly Latino wards on the Northwest and Southwest sides. The mayor won the city’s remaining 35 wards. Among Garcia’s victories was the 14th Ward, home of veteran Ald. Edward Burke, where the challenger unofficially topped 52 percent.

 The runoff sharply changes the political dynamics. Voters will now measure Emanuel against just Garcia instead of a field of four other candidates. And Garcia will try to get those who voted against Emanuel, but not for him, to line up in his camp.

 Emanuel’s aggressive fundraising and TV ad advantage are expected to continue. But the mayor also now faces more pressure to engage Garcia one-on-one, rather than largely dismissing his four opponents as Emanuel did during five debates.

 Emanuel thanked Chicagoans “for your vote of confidence.” But Tuesday’s results show that if the election was a referendum on Emanuel’s first term, he fell short of earning a passing grade. The main reasons: voter dissatisfaction with Emanuel’s decision to close 50 schools, his standoff with teachers during their 2012 strike and his struggles to tamp down violent crime, which spiked at times the last four years.

 The results also reflect that Garcia’s message gained traction as he slammed Emanuel for a spate of shootings, school closings and not creating enough jobs in the neighborhoods, which the challenger argued had been “left behind.”

 Garcia, a former alderman and state lawmaker, was a late entry into the race. He assumed the mantle of the Chicago Teachers Union after its president, Karen Lewis, ended a potential bid for mayor after being diagnosed with brain cancer.

 Emanuel amassed a campaign fund of more than $16 million, with nearly half of it dedicated to 16 different broadcast television ads in which the mayor sought to shave off the sharp edge of his persona and overcome criticisms that marked his first four years.

 But the advertising blitz, which included more than 4,600 TV spots that continued to churn Tuesday as the polls were open, was not enough to get to the 50-percent-plus-one-vote support Emanuel needed to prevent the city’s first mayoral runoff election since Chicago campaign law was changed 20 years ago.

 In a precursor to the April runoff, Emanuel’s campaign night party featured remarks from prominent supporter Democratic U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, who often spoke in Spanish. It was a direct acknowledgment of Garcia’s base in the Hispanic community.

 “We’re in first place tonight and we’re going to be in first place again in April!” Gutierrez said.

 Much like his race for mayor four years ago, Emanuel spent heavily to get his message before voters. But this time around, he placed less focus on his well-known political caricature as a fiery and often foul-mouthed politician. Instead, as a longtime political operative well-versed in campaign messaging, Emanuel made the calculation that his campaign should be less about him and more about what he has done.

 As a result, his campaign website’s home page focused on an interactive Chicago map of city improvements over photos of Emanuel. His campaign slogan was rebranded from “Chicago for Rahm” to “Chicago Together.” And almost all of his campaign ads did not include him talking, but instead featured supporters lauding his specific accomplishments. It was an effort to soften Emanuel’s image with voters.

 Emanuel had sought to paint his rivals as unable to articulate a cogent or comprehensive solution for dealing with the city’s financial problems, though he stopped short of providing solutions, including a potential property tax increase to deal with a looming $550 million police and fire pension payment.

 Opponents, particularly Garcia and Fioretti, sought to seize on the school closings and the city’s spike in shootings on Emanuel’s watch as reason for voters to replace the mayor. Garcia repeatedly slammed Emanuel for not fulfilling a campaign promise to hire an additional 1,000 police officers, while the mayor countered he reassigned hundreds of officers from desk jobs to street beats. Garcia vowed to hire 1,000 additional cops, but did not entirely accounted for how he’d pay for it. ||||| Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel fell short of an outright win in his reelection battle Tuesday — despite President Barack Obama putting his hometown political clout on the line to push his former top aide over the finish line — and will face the second-place finisher in an April runoff.

 Emanuel pulled in 45 percent of the vote — well short of the majority needed to avoid a runoff. Cook County Commissioner Jesus “Chuy” Garcia finished second at 34 percent, with 99 percent of precincts reporting.

 Story Continued Below

 There is nothing to suggest that Obama is at fault for Emanuel’s showing. The mayor has had a rocky first term highlighted by clashes with teachers, a wave of violent crime and backlash over his plan to increase taxes. The famously hot-tempered Emanuel, long known in Chicago and Washington as “Rahmbo,” also met criticism for his sometimes hard-headed style.

 But the result is also a disappointment for Obama, who put himself at the forefront during the final days of the campaign. He cut radio ads for Emanuel, his first White House chief of staff. And on Thursday, just five days before the election, the president flew into Chicago to give the mayor a boost. They appeared together at a stop in the Pullman neighborhood, where the president declared that he could not “be prouder of [Emanuel] and the extraordinary service he’s provided.”

 Obama and Emanuel then made a trek to one of the mayor’s campaign headquarters, where the president told volunteers that Emanuel was “somebody who cares deeply about this city.” Video of the president’s testimonial ended up in the mayor’s final television ad before Tuesday’s vote.

 Those appeals, however, were not enough to give Emanuel, who was facing a group of underfunded and less well-known opponents, a majority of the vote.

 Although Emanuel will start as the heavy favorite to retain his seat, Garcia, a Cook County commissioner, will have an opening to consolidate the mayor’s opposition. Garcia, businessman Willie Wilson (who won 11 percent of the vote on Tuesday) and Alderman Bob Fioretti (7 percent) and activist William “Dock” Walls (3 percent) portrayed Emanuel as beholden to wealthy special interests, hostile to teachers and ineffective at solving the city’s crime problems.

 Polls showed Emaunel closing in on a majority in recent weeks but never quite clearing the threshold. Emanuel vastly outraised his opponents, pulling in $13 million to Garcia’s $1 million. While Emanuel ran a slate of TV commercials, including one that featured Obama, Garcia was able to air only one TV ad.

 Aside from his financial disadvantages in the contest, Garcia will face obstacles to securing the voters who backed other hopefuls. While Garcia has appealed to progressives and Hispanics, Wilson earned support from black residents and Fioretti from white, working-class voters.

 The outcome is the latest personal political setback for Obama, who has recently watched several allies fall short at the ballot box: Incumbent Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie — a family friend — lost his own party primary in August despite Obama’s intervention, then Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn went down to a Republican in November.

 The president and his political team now must decide how — or whether — to engage in a runoff election that will put Emanuel’s controversial tenure under the national microscope. Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman, declined to comment on Obama’s plans to buttress Emanuel other than to say he is “supportive and will do what we can to help.”

 Behind the scenes, sources close to the mayor say, Emanuel and Obama have stayed in close contact throughout the contest. They have been talking by phone every few weeks, and in late November, during a visit to Washington, D.C., Emanuel stopped by the White House for a private meeting with the president.

 The planning for Obama’s trip to Chicago was nearly three weeks in the making, the sources said.

 In many ways, Obama was the ideal surrogate for Emanuel. While the president has seen his popularity ebb nationwide since taking office, he remains popular in his hometown.

 He is particularly popular among the group of voters who have complained most bitterly about Emanuel’s tenure: African-Americans. Many of them have been deeply unhappy about the mayor’s controversial 2013 decision to close 50 underperforming schools, most of them in hard-scrabble neighborhoods. In sending the children to schools elsewhere, Emanuel argued, he was ensuring they received a better education.

 During the closing days of the contest, polls showed a large percentage of black voters uncommitted. In praising Emanuel, Obama adopted a simple line of attack designed to appeal to those voters who were squeamish about supporting him: that he has been willing to make tough decisions, even if they didn’t make everyone happy.

 “If you want a mayor who does what’s right, not just what’s popular, who fights night and day for the city we love, then I hope you’ll join me,” Obama said in a radio ad for Emanuel.

 Edward-Isaac Dovere contributed to this report. |||||

– Chicago will hold its very first mayoral runoff election, because incumbent Rahm Emanuel failed to win the 50% of the vote that he needed in yesterday's election to secure a second term. He got just 45.4%, and Cook County Commissioner Jesus "Chuy" Garcia got 33.9%; they'll face off on April 7. How it's being framed: The Chicago Tribune notes that Emanuel suffered "a national political embarrassment," calling Garcia "little-known" and "lesser-funded." It notes Emanuel's problems with voters: his closure of 50 schools and "standoff" with teachers during a strike in 2012 (their first in a quarter-century, USA Today notes), plus his "struggles" to decrease violent crime. Reuters calls it a "surprise result," noting that Emanuel "hugely outspent" his four opponents and had support from VIPs involved in everything from Hollywood to hedge funds—the president even backed him, and visited the city last week. In fact, the result is "disappointing" for Obama, who recorded radio ads for his former chief of staff and even appeared in one of Emanuel's TV ads, Politico says, but notes that "there is nothing to suggest that Obama is at fault for Emanuel’s showing." Politico also says Emanuel will "start as the heavy favorite" in the runoff campaign.


Write an article based on this summary:

– The weekend brought photos of Tesla's first Model 3 sedan to roll off the production line, but it wasn't all positive news for the automaker. The Wall Street Journal on Sunday posted an analysis of data out of Hong Kong that suggests just how severe an effect the reduction of a significant tax break for electric vehicles has had on Tesla. The tax break had dropped the cost of a Model S 60 to a roughly $73,000 price tag; under the new tax rules, it costs about $118,000, per Quartz, which notes that elevated price is basically the same as buying a new Mercedes-Benz there. March was the last month where the electric vehicles were available at the lower effective price. Newly purchased Teslas registered by first-time electric vehicle owners that month: 2,939. And in April: zero. And then in May: five. Tesla said in a statement that its "business does not rely on" favorable government policies, though its securities filings note it is not immune to the effects of changing such incentives. The Journal notes Tesla is working to get its vehicles into China, citing one gloomy quote on the subject from an analyst: "Hong Kong is the fashionable China. It's not exactly painting a glowing picture for the future of Tesla in China."

Hong Kong has long been one of Tesla’s biggest markets, but it may not be for much longer—not a single newly purchased Tesla model was registered in April, according to data from Hong Kong’s transport department.

 The plunge in interest in Tesla cars came after the government eliminated tax breaks for electric-vehicle (EV) owners, a policy that went into effect on April 1 and is expected to last until March next year. Now, the city has capped the tax waiver at HK$97,500 ($12,500) on private EVs, and is only applicable to first-time owners. There were 2,939 first-time Tesla registrations in March just before the new tax rules kicked in, around five times that of the number in February.

 As a result, it now costs HK$925, 500 ($118,400) for a Tesla Model S 60, compared to HK$570,000 ($72,900) before the new tax policy—giving it little or no price advantage over a Mercedes-Benz.

 First-time registrations don’t exactly equal to sales, but is nevertheless a useful proxy as the car needs to be registered in order to run on the road in Hong Kong, said (paywall) the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the story. Hong Kong had 11,004 EVs in use as of May this year, including privately owned and public transport vehicles, according to Hong Kong’s Environmental Protection Department.

 A Tesla spokesperson wrote to Quartz that the company’s business did not “rely on” government policies and the company believed that Hong Kong market would continue to be “very strong”:

 Hong Kong remains a significant market for Tesla and we continue to sell cars there each quarter. When the Hong Kong Government reduced the tax exemption for electric vehicles and increased the cost of our cars by nearly 100%, it’s to be expected that demand will be impacted in the period immediately following the change, particularly because of the large number who bought just prior to the change being implemented.

 In 2015, new registrations for EVs in Hong Kong grew almost three times from 2014, Tesla said. Its Model S vehicles made up 70% of the city’s nearly 4,200 EVs in 2015. Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that the city’s tax waiver for EVs was “excellent.”

 As interest in Tesla starts to wane in Hong Kong, the company has set its sights firmly on mainland China, where it plans to establish a manufacturing facility which would allow Tesla to dodge import taxes that are as high as 50% of the vehicle’s price. In 2016, China registered as many as 352,000 new EVs, compared to America’s 159,000 in the same period, a number that is set to increase as the government continues its fight against air pollution.

 The piece has been updated with response from Tesla on July 10. ||||| Tesla Inc.’s sales in Hong Kong came to a standstill after authorities slashed a tax break for electric vehicles on April 1, demonstrating how sensitive the company’s performance can be to government incentive programs.

 Not a single newly purchased Tesla model was registered in Hong Kong in April, according to official data from the city’s... |||||


Summarize this article:

Remember that movie with Nic Cage where he had to steal 50 cars but only ended up with "49 and an 'alf?" Well it turns out real life isn't like the 2000 film Gone in 60 Seconds where exotic cars are the most stolen vehicles. In real life, it's more like sedans and pick-ups.

 According to a new report by worldwide tracking and recovery system company LoJack, the Honda Accord ranks as the most stolen and recovered vehicle for the fifth year in a row.

 Of the cars equipped with LoJack, $121 million in stolen vehicles were recovered in 2013. The most expensive vehicle recovered was a 2011 Porsche Panamera valued at $103,400.

 The 2013 LoJack Vehicle Theft Recovery Report is gathered from data provided by 27 states via The International Justice And Public Safety Network as well as California law enforcement, and is specific to stolen cars, trucks and SUVs equipped with the LoJack Stolen Vehicle Recovery System that were recovered between January and December 2013. ||||| Why is the Honda Accord the most stolen vehicle in the country, year after year?

 Interested in ? Add as an interest to stay up to date on the latest news, video, and analysis from ABC News. Add Interest

 According to tracking and recovery company LoJack and the National Insurance Crime Bureau, an organization supported by insurance companies, the Honda Accord has topped the list of most popular with thieves for the last several years.

 LoJack recently released a list of the top 10 most stolen and recovered LoJack-equipped vehicle models in 2013, which was topped by the Honda Accord for the fifth year in a row.

 The National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) released a similar report last August analyzing stolen cars, insured or not, in 2012 through the National Crime Information Center, the country's central database for reported crimes. That report also indicated the Honda Accord was the most stolen car for the fifth year in a row.

 In NICB's list, the 1996 Accord was the most stolen make and model, with 8,637 thefts.

 Frank Scafidi, director of public affairs for the NICB, said the organization's list and that of LoJack were like comparing "peaches and grapes," but he was not surprised at LoJack's stolen car rankings.

 Honda Accords "are very popular cars. Those things tend to be stolen anyway," Scafidi said, adding that it's unclear how many Honda Accords are on the road.

 Read More: GM Recalls 500 Pickups, SUVs for Air Bag Controls

 "Year after year, the Honda Accord continues to be a top seller at car dealerships throughout the United States for a variety of reasons, including their reliability," said Patrick Clancy, the vice president of law enforcement for LoJack Corporation. "That means year after year there are more Accords on the road, getting into car accidents or needing parts for repair."

 Because car parts are often interchangeable over multiple model years, thieves can get up to three times the value of the vehicle if they sell it for parts, Clancy said.

 "All of these factors result in an increased demand for parts to service Accords, which makes stealing this make and model a very lucrative business for the professional thief," he said.

 Read More: 3 Ways to Be a Better Car Buyer

 Chris Naughton, a spokesman for Honda, said in a statement, "While we cannot completely account for criminal behavior, it is important to note that the Accord has been one of the most popular vehicles in the U.S. for over 30 years, and in 2013 it was the best-selling new car to individual American buyers. Quality, reliability and durability are hallmarks of the Honda brand, and more Honda vehicles sold in the last 25 years are still on the road than any other brand."

 Naughton from Honda said it is not clear how many total units are on the road, but the company has built over 10 million Accords in Marysville, Ohio, over the last 30 years.

 In Photos: The Coolest, Most Expensive or Rare Cars

 Naughton added that the company continues to equip its new vehicles with the "latest security devices," including the Immobilizer Theft-Deterrent System, which prevents a car's engine from starting without a properly encoded key.

 Here's LoJack's list of most stolen cars that have its security system:

 1. Honda Accord

 2. Honda Civic

 3. Toyota Camry

 4. Toyota Corolla

 5. Chevy Silverado

 6. Acura Integra

 7. Cadillac Escalade

 8. Ford F350

 9. Nissan Altima

 10. Chevy Tahoe |||||

– Different types of cars rotate in and out of various best-of categories every year, except for one long-time champ: Honda Accord in the odd field of most-stolen vehicle. A new list by car-security company LoJack has the Accord at No. 1 for the fifth straight year, reports NBC News. And it's no statistical fluke on the part of the company: An annual list put out by the National Insurance Crime Bureau also has had the Accord in the top spot for five years' running. So is the Accord particularly vulnerable to break-ins? Not so much. As a LoJack VP explains to ABC News, this is more about supply and demand—for parts. The model has been a longtime favorite with buyers, and "that means year after year there are more Accords on the road, getting into car accidents or needing parts for repair." The upshot is that car thieves can steal an Accord, sell it for parts, and make three times the value of the vehicle, says Patrick Clancy. The top 10 most stolen: Honda Accord Honda Civic Toyota Camry Toyota Corolla Chevy Silverado Acura Integra Cadillac Escalade Ford F350 Nissan Altima Chevy Tahoe


Here is a news article: ‘It’s devastating’: Downstate official after nephew kills 5 BY ZACH BUCHHEIT Staff Reporter/zbuchheit@suntimes.com

 Updated:

 MANCHESTER, Ill. — Armed with a shotgun, a rifle and a hunting knife, the nephew of the village president of a small Downstate town burst into a home there Wednesday morning and began shooting at close range.

 By the time the early morning rampage had ended, Rick Odell Smith, 43, had killed a grandmother, a young couple and two small children and seriously wounded a 6-year-old girl.

 Then, in an equally inexplicable act, he carried the bleeding girl to a neighbor’s home and then sped off in his white Chevy Lumina. Police chased him on back roads to a nearby town and he was killed in a shootout, authorities said.

 The slayings rocked Manchester, about 50 miles southwest of Springfield in southwestern Illinois.

 The grisly tale laid out by police in this tiny town of 300 — a place where the mayor and residents couldn’t remember a murder in decades and that lacks even a stoplight — was missing one important detail: Why?

 “It’s devastating, simply devastating,” said Smith’s uncle, Manchester Village President Ron Drake.

 Drake said he wasn’t aware of any relations between his nephew, who was from Roodhouse, a few miles from Manchester, and the slain family. But authorities described Smith as an “acquaintance” of the victims. Police declined to offer any reasons for the slayings because the investigation was ongoing.

 Asked what could have prompted Smith to kill the family, Drake said, “I couldn’t tell you. I haven’t talked to Rick in two years.”

 Smith’s victims were identified as Joanne Sinclair, 67; her granddaughter, Brittany Luark, 23; Luark’s boyfriend, Roy Ralston, 29; 1-year-old Brantley Ralston, and a 5-year-old boy, whose name could not be confirmed, a law enforcement source said on condition of anonymity. The 6-year-old girl was shot several times but survived the attack and was listed in serious condition at St. John’s Hospital in Springfield. Two bodies were found in one bedroom, two in another bedroom and Ralston was found in a hallway, authorities said. Authorities would not publicly identify the family members Wednesday.

 When police caught up with Smith, he got out of his car, pointed a gun at them and began firing. Police returned fire, hitting Smith, who was taken into custody at 7:27 a.m., Illinois State Police Lt. Col. Todd Kilby said. He was taken to St. John’s Hospital in Springfield, where he was pronounced dead.

 A shotgun, a scoped rifle and a hunting knife, all of which appeared to belong to Smith, were recovered in the victims’ home, Kilby said. He wouldn’t say whether Smith had obtained the weapons legally.

 Smith had a criminal history that included a DUI-related reckless homicide conviction and convictions for writing bad checks and possessing drug paraphernalia, Scott County State’s Attorney Michael Hill said.

 Drake said he thought Smith was unemployed.

 Manchester Village Clerk Peggy Renner, 62, who lives down a block from the murder scene, said Brittany Luark, one of the victims, told her recently that she was pregnant but did not say who the father was.

 Renner said the family moved to the town during the past year to 18 months. They attended a back-to-school bash at the Manchester Baptist Church just before school started in 2012.

 “They seemed to be real nice, but they stayed to themselves,” Renner said. Brittany “didn’t say too much, but when you talked to her, she was quiet. They all just stayed to themselves.”

 Renner also said there had been police activity at the home on Sunday but she didn’t know the nature of the disturbance.

 Sandra Grubb, who has lived with her farm family in Manchester since 1966, said her children attended school with Smith and that he had shown flashes of violence before. She said her daughter, now a principal at a school south of Springfield, was struck in the head with a baseball bat by Smith when they were in grade school.

 Grubb said Smith and a brother were adopted and appeared to have been “severely neglected” before being taken in by his adoptive parents.

 “The one boy had a pair of shoes that were probably two sizes two small for him, and his toes were practically bent over. One or the other — I don’t remember which one it was — but they were very severely neglected before they got to Manchester,” Grubb said. “They were just part of the community, had a mom and dad that loved them and tried to do the best for them.”

 Roughly 250 miles southwest of Chicago, Manchester is a mostly rural, all-white town of about 300 people. The average annual income is about $24,000, with 7 percent of residents living below the poverty line. With no major establishments save a small general store, post office, city hall and two churches, Manchester maintains farming as its mainstay. Its residents travel to larger nearby towns for gas or groceries and to drop off their children at school.

 The magnitude of the violence on Wednesday was a jolt to the small town, where everyone seems to knows everyone else’s business, and guns have always been used to hunt and kill deer and other game — not people.

 “People that have lived in this community, they’ve never seen anything like this,” said the Rev. Robin Lyons, pastor of Manchester United Methodist Church, which Smith’s grandmother attends. “This is really a tragedy.”

 “You take hurt and disillusionment and anger and any kind of instability and mix them all together, it’s a perfect storm,” he said.

 Contributing: Dave McKinney ||||| After he shot his way into a home Wednesday in the small central Illinois town of Manchester, Rick Odell Smith gunned down a great-grandmother, a young couple and three young children, police said.

 Then he did something that puzzled authorities.

 Smith scooped up one of the children, a 6-year-old girl who was still alive, and carried her to a neighbor's home.

 Then he jumped into his white sedan and sped off. Police caught up with him hours later, and he died in a gunfight with officers, authorities said.

 State Police Lt. Col. Todd Kilby said he couldn't explain Smith's apparent concern for the girl. "All I have is that it was a neighbor" who took her in, he said.

 A source said the man told the neighbor to take her to a hospital. The neighbor called police.

 The girl, Kassidy Ralston, was in critical condition at a hospital in Springfield with facial injuries, family members said.

 The girl's great-grandmother, her parents and her younger brothers died in the rampage. Officials identified the victims this morning as JoAnn Sinclair, 66; Brittney Luark, 23; her boyfriend, James Roy Ralston, 29; Nolan James Ralston, 5; and Brantley Jack Ralston, 1.

 The Scott County Coroner said on Thursday that Luark was pregnant, according to state police.

 Smith, 43, approached the family's home southwest of Springfield about 4:30 a.m., police said, and used a shotgun to blast through a back door. He was also armed with a hunting rifle with a scope and a large hunting knife, police said.

 Smith shot the victims with the shotgun at close range, police said.

 Roy Ralston was found in a hallway of the home, the two boys in a bedroom and Sinclair and Luark in another bedroom, Kilby said.

 "The guy broke into the house," said Brad Teeter, Sinclair's son-in-law. "I couldn't tell you about the guy. Never met him, never seen him, never talked to him. He apparently broke into the home of my wife's mother and shot everybody inside.

 "I'm at a loss right now."

 State police would not comment on a possible motive. But a neighbor who asked not to be identified said Smith had been going through a custody battle with Sinclair's daughter over their 4-year-old child. Neither the girl nor her mother were in the home at the time of the shooting, authorities said.

 "He was under a lot of stress. ... There were a lot of problems with custody with the daughter," said a neighbor of Smith's in nearby Roodhouse.

 Smith had lived with the woman at his home until recently, said the neighbor, adding that the two had been together for about five years.

 Smith worked as a jack of all trades, the neighbor said. "He did odd jobs for people. He could fix anything. He was a really hard worker," the neighbor said.

 After the shootings, an all-points bulletin was issued for Smith, who was stopped by police about 7:30 a.m. after a brief chase, police said. When Smith got out of his car, he began shooting at police, who returned fire, hitting Smith, police said. He was taken in critical condition to a nearby hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 10:10 a.m., police said.

 Manchester Village President Ron Drake said he was alerted about 4:45 a.m. by an electronic page asking Scott County officials to respond to a multiple shooting. As he neared the scene, Drake was told the suspect was his nephew.

 Drake, 66, said Smith was the son of his wife's sister and that the shootings have devastated the family. Drake said he had not spoken to Smith in about two years and that Smith had not spoken to his mother since August.

 Smith was unemployed, but there were no signs that something like this would happen, Drake said.

 "The last time I talked to him, he was real decent and everything," Drake said. "It's devastating. People in the community I talked to just think it's a tragedy. We have to work together and bring it back to where it was before. We're just going to have to press on and ask the Lord to help us go on."

 Smith had been arrested in the past on charges of reckless homicide, but details were not available, police said. Drake said he was unaware of his nephew's criminal background.

 The last homicide reported in Scott County was in 1993, police said. These are the first slayings in Manchester, a town of 300, Drake said.

 "I've lived here for 43 years and my wife's lived here for all of her life — and there's never been a homicide."

 Tribune reporter Ray Long contributed.

 csadovi@tribune.com

 rguerrero@tribune.com |||||
A summary of this is?

– The man who police say killed five people in Manchester, Ill., yesterday turns out to have been the one who helped save the 6-year-old girl he shot, reports the Chicago Tribune. Officials don't know why Rick Odell Smith carried the bloodied girl to a neighbor's house after his shooting spree, but he reportedly told the neighbor to take her to a hospital. She had been shot several times and is now in critical condition with facial injuries. "It's devastating, simply devastating," says Manchester Mayor Ron Drake—who happens to be Smith's uncle. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Drake hasn't talked to Smith in two years, and notes the impact the murders are having on this tiny town, home to just 300 people—and not a single stoplight.


Article:
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Nearly a million jars of peanut butter are being dumped at a New Mexico landfill to expedite the sale of a bankrupt peanut-processing plant that was at the heart of a 2012 salmonella outbreak and nationwide recall.

 Bankruptcy trustee Clarke Coll said he had no other choice after Costco Wholesale refused to take shipment of the Sunland Inc. product and declined requests to let it be donated to food banks or repackaged or sold to brokers who provide food to institutions like prisons.

 "We considered all options," Coll said. "They didn't agree."

 Costco officials did not return telephone calls seeking comment. But court filings indicate the product was made with $2.8 million worth of Valencia peanuts owned by Costco and had been sitting in the warehouse since the company shut down and filed for bankruptcy last fall.

 After extensive testing, Costco agreed to a court order authorizing the trustee to sell it the peanut butter. But after getting eight loads, Costco rejected it as "not merchantable" because of leaky peanut oil.

 Coll said "all parties agreed there's nothing wrong with the peanut butter from a health and safety issue," but court records show that on a March 19 conference call Costco said "it would not agree to any disposition ... other than destruction."

 So instead of selling or donating the peanut butter, with a value estimated at $2.6 million, the estate is paying about $60,000 to haul the 950,000 jars of nut butter — or about 25 tons — to the Curry County landfill in Clovis, where public works director Clint Bunch says it "will go in with our regular waste and covered with dirt."

 The last of 58 truckloads was expected Friday, he said.

 Sunland made peanut butter under a number of different labels for retailers like Costco, Kroger and Trader Joe's, along with products under its own name. But the plant was shut down in September 2012 after its products were linked to 41 salmonella cases in 20 states.

 It later reopened for about five months, but shut down last October after the company's Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing.

 Sunland processed Valencia peanuts, a sweet variety of peanut that is unique to the region and preferred for natural butters because it is flavorful without additives.

 Sonya Warwick, spokeswoman for New Mexico's largest food bank, declined to comment directly on the situation, but she noted that rescued food accounted for 74 percent of what Roadrunner Food Bank distributed across New Mexico last year.

 "Our fleet picks up rescued food from hundreds of locations weekly and brings it back to the food bank," she said. "Before distributing it, volunteers help label, sort or repack it for distribution to partner agencies across the state.

 "Access to rescued food allows us to provide a more well-rounded and balanced meal to New Mexicans experiencing hunger." ||||| ........................................................................................................................................................................................

 A Canadian company’s last-minute offer to buy a shuttered Portales peanut butter factory for $25 million has been deemed to good to ignore.

 A bankruptcy court judge Tuesday ordered that bidding for Sunland Inc.’s assets be reopened, thus accommodating Golden Boy Foods’ late-to-the-game offer to pay $25 million — $5 million more than the high bidder at an auction last week.

 The auction will continue at 10 a.m. today in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Albuquerque. Golden Boy’s $25 million offer will serve as the opening bid.

 Judge David Thuma will consider final approval of the winning bid in a separate hearing set for 1 p.m.

 Thuma’s ruling to reopen bidding comes after several dramatic days in Sunland’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. North Carolina-based peanut processor Hampton Farms had outbid Calif.-based Ready Roast Nut Co. in a courtroom auction last Thursday with its price of $20.05 million. They were the sole bidders.

 But just minutes before the sale was to go before Thuma last Friday for final approval, a representative from Golden Boy Foods called trustee Clarke Coll with the $25 million offer. The British Columbia company wired the $25 million to a title company Monday.

 Both Hampton Farms and Golden Boy say they would resume manufacturing operations at the Portales plant.

 Coll and his attorney in the matter, Thomas Walker, say the additional $5 million offered by Golden Boy would help settle more of Sunland’s debt. Coll said Sunland has about $21 million in secured debt, plus another $2.5 million in administrative claims and an estimated $40 million in unsecured claims.

 Walker said Tuesday that the judge’s decision to reopen bidding will benefit the creditors.

 “The farmers, the people who are owed money by this bankrupt company are going to benefit because of this,” he said.

 Hampton Farms’ attorney did not return a Journal message Tuesday. But the company’s lawyers argued in a Monday hearing that the judge should honor Thursday’s auction results and that anything less would create uncertainty and deter bidding in future bankruptcy cases.

 As part of his Tuesday ruling, Thuma wrote that he was “loath to disturb the results of a judicial auction,” but that he couldn’t ignore the extra $5 million at stake.

 “Given Golden Boy’s $25 million upset bid, the Court cannot make a finding that the sale to Hampton (for $20,050,000) is in the best interests of the estate,” Thuma wrote.

 Golden Boy’s bid may have arrived late to the auction, but its interest in the Sunland plant was not new.

 Paul Henderson, president of the company’s nut butter division, said in court Monday that Golden Boy had contacted Coll last November and even sent representatives to tour the Sunland facility.

 But Golden Boy was in the process of being sold, and its parent company didn’t want to complicate that deal with the acquisition of Sunland’s assets, he said. Henderson told Coll that Golden Boy was withdrawing as a possible buyer.

 Golden Boy’s sale to Post Holdings was finalized Feb. 1. Henderson said he incorrectly believed that Sunland had been bought but learned on March 18 that, in fact, an auction was set for March 20. He said he and his boss scrambled to get corporate approval from Post to make an offer.

 Once they did, Henderson tried to reach Coll at his Roswell office Friday morning but only could leave a message. He ultimately tracked Coll down that afternoon with a phone call to the Albuquerque courthouse.

 Coll said he received Henderson’s call about 10 minutes before the hearing to approve the sale to Hampton Farms.

 “You can’t make this stuff up,” Coll testified Monday. “Life’s stranger than fiction. He offered me $25 million. I thought it was a joke.”

 Sunland filed for bankruptcy in 2013, a year after it was linked to a salmonella outbreak. Located in Valencia peanut growing country, Sunland had been the nation’s largest producer of organic peanut butter and had made products for retailers such as Trader Joe’s, Costco and Target.

 Sunland recalled hundreds of products in the wake of the outbreak and had its plant shut down for several months by federal regulators.

 The company resumed peanut butter production last May but cited “ongoing financial and liquidity challenges” when filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation last October.

 A Canadian company’s last-minute offer to buy a shuttered Portales peanut butter factory for $25 million has been deemed to good to ignore.

 A bankruptcy court judge Tuesday ordered that bidding for Sunland Inc.’s assets be reopened, thus accommodating Golden Boy Foods’ late-to-the-game offer to pay $25 million — $5 million more than the high bidder at an auction last week.

 The auction will continue at 10 a.m. today in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Albuquerque. Golden Boy’s $25 million offer will serve as the opening bid.

 Judge David Thuma will consider final approval of the winning bid in a separate hearing set for 1 p.m.

 Thuma’s ruling to reopen bidding comes after several dramatic days in Sunland’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. North Carolina-based peanut processor Hampton Farms had outbid Calif.-based Ready Roast Nut Co. in a courtroom auction last Thursday with its price of $20.05 million. They were the sole bidders.

 But just minutes before the sale was to go before Thuma last Friday for final approval, a representative from Golden Boy Foods called trustee Clarke Coll with the $25 million offer. The British Columbia company wired the $25 million to a title company Monday.

 Both Hampton Farms and Golden Boy say they would resume manufacturing operations at the Portales plant.

 Coll and his attorney in the matter, Thomas Walker, say the additional $5 million offered by Golden Boy would help settle more of Sunland’s debt. Coll said Sunland has about $21 million in secured debt, plus another $2.5 million in administrative claims and an estimated $40 million in unsecured claims.

 Walker said Tuesday that the judge’s decision to reopen bidding will benefit the creditors.

 “The farmers, the people who are owed money by this bankrupt company are going to benefit because of this,” he said.

 Hampton Farms’ attorney did not return a Journal message Tuesday. But the company’s lawyers argued in a Monday hearing that the judge should honor Thursday’s auction results and that anything less would create uncertainty and deter bidding in future bankruptcy cases.

 As part of his Tuesday ruling, Thuma wrote that he was “loath to disturb the results of a judicial auction,” but that he couldn’t ignore the extra $5 million at stake.

 “Given Golden Boy’s $25 million upset bid, the Court cannot make a finding that the sale to Hampton (for $20,050,000) is in the best interests of the estate,” Thuma wrote.

 Golden Boy’s bid may have arrived late to the auction, but its interest in the Sunland plant was not new.

 Paul Henderson, president of the company’s nut butter division, said in court Monday that Golden Boy had contacted Coll last November and even sent representatives to tour the Sunland facility.

 But Golden Boy was in the process of being sold, and its parent company didn’t want to complicate that deal with the acquisition of Sunland’s assets, he said. Henderson told Coll that Golden Boy was withdrawing as a possible buyer.

 Golden Boy’s sale to Post Holdings was finalized Feb. 1. Henderson said he incorrectly believed that Sunland had been bought but learned on March 18 that, in fact, an auction was set for March 20. He said he and his boss scrambled to get corporate approval from Post to make an offer.

 Once they did, Henderson tried to reach Coll at his Roswell office Friday morning but only could leave a message. He ultimately tracked Coll down that afternoon with a phone call to the Albuquerque courthouse.

 Coll said he received Henderson’s call about 10 minutes before the hearing to approve the sale to Hampton Farms.

 “You can’t make this stuff up,” Coll testified Monday. “Life’s stranger than fiction. He offered me $25 million. I thought it was a joke.”

 Sunland filed for bankruptcy in 2013, a year after it was linked to a salmonella outbreak. Located in Valencia peanut growing country, Sunland had been the nation’s largest producer of organic peanut butter and had made products for retailers such as Trader Joe’s, Costco and Target.

 Sunland recalled hundreds of products in the wake of the outbreak and had its plant shut down for several months by federal regulators.

 The company resumed peanut butter production last May but cited “ongoing financial and liquidity challenges” when filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation last October. |||||Summary:

– Almost a million jars of peanut butter are being trucked to a New Mexico landfill after Costco refused to either accept them or allow them to be donated to food banks. The peanut butter—made from $2.8 million worth of Valencia peanuts owned by Costco—is being dumped as part of the sale of a bankrupt plant linked to a huge peanut butter recall in 2012, reports the AP. Sunland, once the nation's largest producer of organic peanut butter, went bankrupt last year following the much publicized salmonella outbreak, and a Canadian company has snapped up the plant for $25 million, the Albuquerque Journal reports. The jars had been sitting in a warehouse since last fall, and while court filings say "all parties agreed there's nothing wrong with the peanut butter from a health and safety issue," Costco on March 19 said it had to be destroyed; the company previously determined the jars were "not merchantable" because of leaky peanut oil. The last of 58 truckloads of peanut butter is due to arrive at a landfill in Clovis today, where it will be covered in dirt. A spokeswoman for New Mexico's largest food bank declined to comment on the peanut butter dump, but noted that "rescued food" accounts for 74% of what it distributes. And the drama doesn't end there: The AP notes that a North Carolina company had won the first round of bidding for Sunland with a $20 million offer, only to be outbid by Golden Boy Foods just minutes before the court hearing that would have approved Hampton Farms' purchase; Hampton Farms is prepping for an appeal. (New Mexico landfills have been in the news lately.)


News article:

He shoots, he scores! Putin takes to the ice rink to show off his hockey skills (but it doesn't look like there was much opposition)

 Russian president took to the ice at All-Russia Festival of Night Hockey League in Sochi wearing number 11 shirt

 He missed several goals - and sporting celebrities nudged in the puck for him instead - until he finally scored

 Putin often does macho publicity stunts and has shot a whale, hugged a polar bear and ridden a horse topless

 He's the president who has ridden a horse topless, hugged a polar bear and 'found' (fake) Greek vases while scuba-diving.

 Now Vladimir Putin is at it again - playing ice hockey with sporting legends in front of thousands of apparently adoring fans.

 But the Russian premier, 61, was not without a little help - he missed several goals by a whisker, leaving his celebrity teammates to give the puck a gentle nudge in the right direction, before finally hitting home on his own.

 Scroll down for video

 Sports star: Vladimir Putin triumphed in a game of ice hockey in Sochi

 First attempt: The Russian president takes a shot at the goal (left) – but it bounces away. A team-mate to the left of the net (right), catches the rebounding puck and taps it into the goal. Putin is said to have scored five assists

 Bold attempt: On his next attack (left), Putin flicks the puck towards the net… but he puck clatters against the crossbar of the goal (right) without going in

 Deadly approach: Putin flies down the middle of the rink (left), and takes another shot at goal - and scores when the puck smashes into the back of the net (right)

 Sporting the number 11 jersey, Putin returned to the Winter Olympics host city of Sochi today for the All-Russia Festival of Night Hockey League.

 Joining the 'NHL Stars' team, the premier took a break from crisis talks with the West about his annexing of Crimea to play alongside retired former Soviet hockey legends, including Vyacheslav Fetisov and Pavel Bure.

 At least two of his team-mates were Olympic medal winners, including Aleksey Kasatonov, who won two golds for the Soviet Union in 1984 and 1988, and Valery Kamensky, who also took gold in 1988.

 His opponents, meanwhile, were reportedly amateurs.

 Even so, the 62-year-old premier's teammates were apparently eager to help him. In at least two attempts, Putin just missed the goal, but the puck went in after a gentle tap from another player.

 And in one sequence, shown on the state-linked English-language channel RT, the premier eventually scored, to the delight of the crowd.

 Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu and the head of Tatarstan Republic, Rustam Minnikhanov, were both at the festival for the league, which was created in December 2011.

 It began as a casual event for over-40s but has grown and this year was attended by 108 teams including from 11 other countries.

 Putin took part in a gala match between amateur hockey players in a successful games for the Russians - who topped the table ahead of Norway, Canada and the USA with 33 medals.

 Sadly for Putin, however, his side was knocked out by Finland at the quarter-final stage.

 But the upbeat president reportedly told the crowd: 'There are no winners or losers here. This is a friendly game.

 'It’s a show and everyone enjoyed it. All this [the Night Hockey League] was invented to give an additional boost to the development of sports and physical culture.'

 Victorious: A proud-looking Putin bumps fists with his amateur rivals

 Adoration: He was also seen shaking hands with ecstatic members of the crowd

 According to state broadcaster The Voice of Russia, the President 'netted six goals and five assists'.

 The bold claims are, as yet, not fully confirmed.

 It is the latest in a long line of macho publicity stunts by the Russian president, who last took to the ice in January, shortly before the Winter Olympics in Sochi.

 On a horse: The Russian president was pictured in this macho pose while travelling the Siberian mountains in 2007

 Stunts: Putin has also been seen plucking (fake) ancient vases from the deeps (left in 2011) and presiding over a tranquilised polar bear (right in 2010)

 He has previously cuddled a tame snow leopard and a tranquilised polar bear, and shot harmless crossbow darts at a whale as part of scientific research.

 One more bizarre report last year suggested he was inviting the boy band Boyz II Men to a Moscow gig - to boost the country's birth rate.

 And in 2011, a spokesman was forced to admit that a scuba-diving exhibition in which he 'found' the remarkably intact remains of two 1,500-year-old Greek vases was staged. ||||| Most Popular Speed Reads

 About Speed Reads

 Speed Reads is TheWeek.com's continuously updated collection of the most interesting, important, and trending things on the internet – delivered with concision, intelligence, and wit. Contact us at speedreads@theweek.com. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– What's a newly divorced Russian strongman to do when most of the world wants to throttle him and he's getting no respect from his own supporters? Play a little hockey, that's what. And pretty badly, reports the Week in a look at Vladimir Putin's foray onto the ice yesterday at something called the "All-Russia Festival of Amateur Teams of the Night Hockey League" in Sochi. Even with a less-than-motivated opposition goalie and near-assists from NHL players, Putin choked several times. Yet somehow, reports the Daily Mail via the Voice of Russia, Putin managed to score six times and had five assists. Despite his, er, heroics, Putin's team eventually lost, but no hard feelings, says the president: "There are no winners or losers here. This is a friendly game." Click for the Week's GIF of Putin attempting to put his helmet on—backward.


GOP Madness

 They’re threatening an economic shutdown that will cause financial hardship and even ruin for millions of Americans. So let’s call these House Republicans what they are, says Jon Favreau.

 The most terrifying speech I ever wrote for President Obama was one he never gave. On July 30, 2011, I began drafting an address to the nation about what would happen if Congress refused to raise the debt limit within 48 hours, thus denying the United States Treasury the ability to pay our country’s bills for the first time in 235 years.

 Suddenly, all of the administration’s warnings from the prior few weeks became real. Without enough cash on hand, the government would be forced to delay indefinitely Social Security checks, the ones our grandparents depend on to put food in their mouths and a roof over their heads. Veterans who served this country would stop receiving the benefits they earned, and the men and women in uniform risking their lives for us wouldn’t get paychecks.

 Every company in America that does business with the federal government, of which there are hundreds of thousands, would not see their contracts paid on schedule, an effect that would ripple down to their employees and their families. With each passing day, making our debt payments to businesses and governments around the world would become more and more difficult. When the world stopped seeing the United States as a safe and reliable place to invest, the cost of borrowing money would skyrocket for every single American—whether it’s a home mortgage or a personal credit card. And those high borrowing costs, coupled with billions in delayed income for seniors, soldiers, small-business owners, and their employees, almost surely would send our economy and the world’s into a crisis even deeper and more dramatic than the Great Recession of 2009.

 Fortunately, the draft speech never left my computer screen. The next day, at the last possible moment, the House of Representatives voted to provide the Treasury with the ability to pay our bills. But their decision to negotiate at the brink, under a dark cloud of uncertainty, still led to real economic damage: the stock market had the worst single day since the 2008 financial crisis, plunging 635 points. Billions in higher borrowing costs were added to the national debt. Economic growth slowed. Job growth slowed. And for the very first time, the United States lost its triple-A credit rating.

 The obvious lesson from this entirely self-inflicted fiasco is never, ever to treat America’s bill-paying authority as a bargaining chip in political negotiations. The president has learned this lesson. House Republicans have not. And so, incredibly—insanely—we find ourselves a few weeks away from the same self-inflicted fiasco just two years later.

 Why?

 Part of the reason, I think, has to do with the dull and confusing language we use to talk about this issue. Who the hell knows what raising the debt limit really means, anyway? While not in any way true, a higher debt ceiling sounds like a green light to pile up more debt. It suggests the authority to engage in more spending and borrowing. So when a pollster asks people whether raising the debt limit should accompany a negotiation over more spending cuts, of course they’ll say yes! If the pollster adds “even if it risks default,” many people will still say yes, because what the hell does “default” mean? It may sound vaguely threatening, but certainly not as frightening as the scenario I described in the draft 2011 speech.

 Contrast all that confusion with the phrase “government shutdown.” People generally know what a government shutdown looks like. We have historical context, as it’s happened before. We can visualize closed buildings and offices; services halted and benefits withheld. And by a healthy majority, the American people do not support the House Republicans’ latest attempt to put us through a government shutdown just so they can deny affordable health insurance to the sick and poor for one more year.

 Well, a failure to raise the debt limit would inflict far more pain on far more people than a government shutdown. Breaching the debt limit would trigger an economic shutdown of epic proportions. The president used that phrase, “economic shutdown,” in a speech last week. He should keep using it. The White House should say it every day, as should everyone who wants to avoid such a calamity. Because it happens to be true.

 A vote to raise the debt limit will not cost taxpayers a single dime. A vote to raise the debt limit will not grow our deficit by a single dime. A vote to raise the debt limit will not give the president or Congress the ability to spend any new money whatsoever. These are incontrovertible facts. A failure to raise the debt limit, however, will lead to an economic shutdown that will cause financial hardship and even ruin for millions of Americans. This, too, is an incontrovertible fact.

 Republicans are still whining about Dan Pfeiffer’s analogy that compared their list of debt-ceiling demands to someone negotiating with a bomb strapped to their chest. Perhaps they prefer Mitch McConnell’s 2011 declaration that the global economy is a “hostage that’s worth ransoming.” Either way, the Republicans should help us more aptly describe a situation where they demand we accept their ideological agenda in exchange for not wreaking havoc on our lives.

 “The president must negotiate!” Really? Because in most negotiations, both sides stand to gain something. In this negotiation, the House Republicans get to pass policies on which Mitt Romney ran and lost, while the president gets to live in a country that isn’t suffering from yet another economic calamity, a country that isn’t seen as the world’s superpower turned deadbeat nation. How wonderful for him. What a shining example of bipartisan cooperation to be celebrated by the Washington media.

 What a joke.

 From budgets and taxes to Syria and Iran, this president has shown that he will negotiate on almost any issue, with anyone, at any time. But he will not—he cannot—negotiate with a roving band of anarchists who say, “Build our oil pipeline or the troops don’t get paid. Give us tax cuts for the rich or seniors don’t get their Social Security checks. Let insurance companies do as they please or the economy gets it.” ||||| This may be the way the world ends — not with a bang but with a temper tantrum.

 O.K., a temporary government shutdown — which became almost inevitable after Sunday’s House vote to provide government funding only on unacceptable conditions — wouldn’t be the end of the world. But a U.S. government default, which will happen unless Congress raises the debt ceiling soon, might cause financial catastrophe. Unfortunately, many Republicans either don’t understand this or don’t care.

 Let’s talk first about the economics.

 After the government shutdowns of 1995 and 1996 many observers concluded that such events, while clearly bad, aren’t catastrophes: essential services continue, and the result is a major nuisance but no lasting harm. That’s still partly true, but it’s important to note that the Clinton-era shutdowns took place against the background of a booming economy. Today we have a weak economy, with falling government spending one main cause of that weakness. A shutdown would amount to a further economic hit, which could become a big deal if the shutdown went on for a long time.

 Photo

 Still, a government shutdown looks benign compared with the possibility that Congress might refuse to raise the debt ceiling.

 First of all, hitting the ceiling would force a huge, immediate spending cut, almost surely pushing America back into recession. Beyond that, failure to raise the ceiling would mean missed payments on existing U.S. government debt. And that might have terrifying consequences.

 Why? Financial markets have long treated U.S. bonds as the ultimate safe asset; the assumption that America will always honor its debts is the bedrock on which the world financial system rests. In particular, Treasury bills — short-term U.S. bonds — are what investors demand when they want absolutely solid collateral against loans. Treasury bills are so essential for this role that in times of severe stress they sometimes pay slightly negative interest rates — that is, they’re treated as being better than cash.

 Now suppose it became clear that U.S. bonds weren’t safe, that America couldn’t be counted on to honor its debts after all. Suddenly, the whole system would be disrupted. Maybe, if we were lucky, financial institutions would quickly cobble together alternative arrangements. But it looks quite possible that default would create a huge financial crisis, dwarfing the crisis set off by the failure of Lehman Brothers five years ago.

 No sane political system would run this kind of risk. But we don’t have a sane political system; we have a system in which a substantial number of Republicans believe that they can force President Obama to cancel health reform by threatening a government shutdown, a debt default, or both, and in which Republican leaders who know better are afraid to level with the party’s delusional wing. For they are delusional, about both the economics and the politics.

 On the economics: Republican radicals generally reject the scientific consensus on climate change; many of them reject the theory of evolution, too. So why expect them to believe expert warnings about the dangers of default? Sure enough, they don’t: the G.O.P. caucus contains a significant number of “default deniers,” who simply dismiss warnings about the dangers of failing to honor our debts.

 Meanwhile, on the politics, reasonable people know that Mr. Obama can’t and won’t let himself be blackmailed in this way, and not just because health reform is his key policy legacy. After all, once he starts making concessions to people who threaten to blow up the world economy unless they get what they want, he might as well tear up the Constitution. But Republican radicals — and even some leaders — still insist that Mr. Obama will cave in to their demands.

 So how does this end? The votes to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling are there, and always have been: every Democrat in the House would vote for the necessary measures, and so would enough Republicans. The problem is that G.O.P. leaders, fearing the wrath of the radicals, haven’t been willing to allow such votes. What would change their minds?

 Ironically, considering who got us into our economic mess, the most plausible answer is that Wall Street will come to the rescue — that the big money will tell Republican leaders that they have to put an end to the nonsense.

 But what if even the plutocrats lack the power to rein in the radicals? In that case, Mr. Obama will either let default happen or find some way of defying the blackmailers, trading a financial crisis for a constitutional crisis.

 This all sounds crazy, because it is. But the craziness, ultimately, resides not in the situation but in the minds of our politicians and the people who vote for them. Default is not in our stars, but in ourselves. |||||

Write a summary.

– In 2011, White House speechwriter Jon Favreau penned some ominous words predicting the disastrous effects of a failure to raise the debt limit, including indefinite delays on Social Security checks and halted troop pay and veterans' benefits. President Obama never had to give the speech, because the debt ceiling was raised "at the last possible moment," Favreau recounts in the Daily Beast—but the showdown still caused serious issues like the downgrading of the US credit rating. "The obvious lesson from this entirely self-inflicted fiasco is never, ever to treat America’s bill-paying authority as a bargaining chip in political negotiations," Favreau writes. But House Republicans haven't learned the lesson, and once again they're holding the economy hostage to their demands. Because of the language we use to discuss it, many people think that raising the ceiling is "a green light to pile up more debt," while "breaching the debt limit would trigger an economic shutdown of epic proportions." So let's call Republicans what they are, says Favreau: "Hostage takers, unrepresentative of the once-proud Republican Party, and unfit to govern the greatest nation on Earth." Click for his full column. Meanwhile, in the New York Times, Paul Krugman agrees: Failure to hike the limit would be a "financial catastrophe," not only returning us to a likely recession but also shaking faith in US bonds—the "bedrock on which the world financial system rests."