Monday, February 21, 2011

Rush Limbaugh attacks Michelle Obama's diet

Rush Limbaugh turned Michelle Obama's anti-obesity campaign into fodder for a radio show diatribe today.

Limbaugh was reacting to a report from Colorado which mentioned that the first lady ate ribs at a restaurant during her skiing holiday there this Presidents Day weekend. He said this was evidence of Obama's hypocrisy around food.

"The problem is, and dare I say this, it doesn't look like Michelle Obama follows her own nutritionary, dietary advice. And then we hear that she's out eating ribs at 1,500 calories a serving with 141 grams of fat per serving."

According to the Vail Daily, Mrs. O went to Restaurant Kelly Liken in Vail Village on Saturday night, "dining on a pickled pumpkin salad with arugula and a braised ancho-chile short rib with hominy wild mushrooms and sauteed kale."

Limbaugh continued, "I'm trying to say that our first lady does not project the image of women that you might see on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue or of a woman Alex Rodriguez might date every six months or what have you."

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Even “Best Friends” Have Problems

“The Americans are our best friends,” one Canadian politician told the House of Commons early in the 1960s, “whether we like it or not.” Whether we like it or not. In other words, Canadians had no choice but to be close to the Americans, the economic, military and political superpower.

That comment may not have come out quite the way the politician intended, but he was right. Ever since World War II, Canada had come to depend on the United States for defence, for the strength of its economy, even for culture. Canada had shed most of its British past; now it was North American.

It was the war that made this clear. When Britain and France suffered defeat in Europe in May and June 1940, Canada suddenly found itself Britain’s major ally and, if Britain fell to Germany, exposed to German attack. The answer was obvious: a defence alliance with the still-neutral United States, and in August 1940, Prime Minister Mackenzie King and President Franklin Roosevelt created the Permanent Joint Board on Defence. This was the first ever defence agreement between the two countries, and it was permanent. Soon, with Japan in the war, the U.S. had troops stationed in Canada, building the highway to Alaska.

Then in 1941, Canada’s wartime economy was in peril. More goods had to be imported from the U.S. to produce weapons for Britain. But the British were broke and could not pay. Again King and Roosevelt met and struck an economic deal: the Americans would buy more from Canada, balancing Canada’s spending in the United States. This was great generosity, but now Canada’s economy, like its defence, was tied to the U.S.

Everyone recognized that the war had to be won, but many preferred a Canada that was less tied to the Americans and more involved with Britain. But by the time of the peace in 1945, Britain was weak from years of struggle and could not pay for Canadian goods. This time the U.S. created the Marshall Plan to help restore the European democracies and Britain, and Canada negotiated the right to get American dollars for goods it provided the allies. That saved the Canadian economy once more, but it tightened the bonds between Washington and Ottawa.

It was the same on defence. The 1940 agreement, renewed in 1947, became important once more when the Soviet Union turned from ally to enemy. Soon the U.S. and Canada were building radar lines across Canada to warn of a Soviet bomber attack; soon some American troops again took up position in Canada; and by 1957-58, the air defences of the two countries were coordinated in the North American Air Defence Agreement.

It all made sense, but many Canadians worried that Canada was being dragged along with Washington’s global ambitions. When Fidel Castro took power in Cuba in 1958 and turned the Caribbean nation into a Communist state, Canada’s government tried to keep open its lines to Havana. The Americans were unhappy and even more so when the Soviet Union put nuclear missiles on the island in 1962, and Canada did not lend immediate support. President John Kennedy, furious at Prime Minister John Diefenbaker who had refused to put the country’s air force on full alert, helped drive his Conservative government from power and bring Lester Pearson and the Liberal’s to power in a 1963 election.

But Pearson’s government, though it accepted nuclear weapons from the U.S., also had its worries about American influence. Canadian companies had been bought up in vast numbers by U.S. firms, and finance minister Walter Gordon brought down a budget in 1963 that announced curbs on U.S. investment. But the Canadian media and businesses objected strenuously, along with Washington, and within days, Gordon had to withdraw the budget measures.

Canada had gone down the American road so fast and so far that most Canadians could not even think of taking back their economy or regaining control of their own defence. There really was no choice. To defend Canada’s vast territory by themselves, Canadians would need to spend huge sums; by cooperating with the U.S., the costs were less, and moreover it made military sense to defend North America jointly.

The North American economy, like defence, was integrated, and Canada could sell its goods into the U.S., the world’s biggest, richest market, and one that spoke English, just like (most of) Canada. The Common Market was closing off much European trade to outsiders, and Asia had not yet developed its economic power. In truth, there was no economic option, and as a result Canadians shared in the bounty of North America while their economy boomed.

All they lost was their independence, something they had never really had. Canada had gone from being part of the British Empire and Commonwealth directly to being an American “colony.”

Monday, February 7, 2011

Will Obama Administration reject 'dot-gay' web domains?

The Obama Administration is trying to figure out how to control the creation of new web domains, as the internet moves beyond ".com" and ".org" to options like ".gay".

CNET reports that at least 115 new suffixes are under consideration, including "car, .health, .nyc, .movie, and .web." CNET said the application process to create new domains might be finalized in San Francisco in March.

New web addresses are managed by the California-based corporation Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), under a contract paid for by the United States government.

CNET said the Obama administration wants to put together a 100-nation advisory panel that could reject web domains members found objectionable.

There are two groups currently pushing for a "dot-gay" domain: the DotGayInitiative and the .GayAlliance.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Obama, Bingaman to talk energy

President Barack Obama has summoned Sen. Jeff Bingaman to the White House on Wednesday for a one-on-one talk about energy policy, including the legislative prospects for the “clean energy” standard that was a central part of last week’s State of the Union speech.

Bingaman (D-N.M.) is Obama’s first and most important target if the so-called CES has any chance of making it into law in 2011, before presidential politics consume Capitol Hill.
A White House spokesman said Tuesday that the meeting with Bingaman was a follow up to the State of the Union message and Obama’s call for “policies to promote clean energy and strengthen our security, decrease pollution, and create new jobs.

The Energy and Natural Resources Committee chairman has long been critical of the idea of including more traditional forms of energy like nuclear power and “clean coal” in a nationwide standard. Instead, he prefers an exclusive focus on renewables like wind, solar and geothermal power.

Monday, Bingaman pledged to work with the White House during a speech at the National Press Club. But he also held his ground when talking about what he thought should count toward clean energy.

“Obviously,” he said, “there are a lot of details to be worked out.”

Bingaman spokesman Bill Wicker said the senator expects to cover a lot of ground with Obama at their 4:30 p.m. meeting, from oil and gas drilling off the Outer Continental Shelf to the CES.

“It’s certainly very topical ever since the president gave it a very prominent mention in his State of the Union the other night,” Wicker said.

The Associated Press first reported Obama’s meeting with Bingaman earlier Tuesday.


Thursday, January 27, 2011

Disqualifications lead to discussions on rules

The disqualification of Padraig Harrington in last week's Abu Dhabi Championship prompted golf's two governing bodies — the USGA and the R&A — to discuss and re-examine certain rules. High-definition TVs are part of the deliberations.

Harrington was DQ'd the following day for signing an incorrect scorecard after the first round. The Irishman had failed to replace his ball after it had moved a fraction of an inch — as shown on super slow-mo HD-TVs around the world — when he picked up his marker.

Changing the rule so that a player won't be DQ'd for signing an incorrect scorecard will be discussed, but it's not that simple, according to the USGAs senior director of rules and competitions Mike Davis.

"It's very complicated to change a rule because it could have such a domino effect," said Davis, although he acknowledged the problem. "The USGA and R&A are bothered that Padraig did everything within the rules, but HD-TV showed a different set of facts.

"Here you have a high-definition television showing a new set of facts that the player, his caddie or the rules official could not have seen. The golf world needs to understand we don't have our heads in the sand. But this doesn't mean rules are going to change."

Earlier this year, Camilo Villegas was DQ'd for signing an incorrect scorecard after his first round of the Hyundai Tournament of Champions after he was assessed a two-stroke penalty for illegally swatting away grass near the ball while it was still in motion. Unaware of the penalty, Villegas learned about his infraction — and DQ — 18 hours after the fact.

Both violations occurred when TV viewers contacted the PGA Tour and European Tour about the infractions.

PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem, speaking at the Farmers Insurance Open at Torrey Pines, which begins Thursday, said he has talked with officials at the USGA and R&A.

"We ought to have an intelligent, thorough discussion of what we have today and what options might be available to us," Finchem said. "Somebody told me the other day they watched a replay of the Harrington incident, and in analog television you absolutely couldn't see the ball move. It takes takes HD television to tell you that. Now, if you can't see the ball move in that kind of setting, are you really going to let that go to disqualification? I mean, there needs to be some common sense here."

Monday, January 17, 2011

President Obama Does Fulfill King's Dream

The parallel couldn't have been more stunning. One was a mass march for justice and equality, the other was a mass memorial for tolerance and remembrance. The mass march was the March on Washington in 1963. Dr. Martin Luther King's landmark "I Have a Dream" speech was both a measured and moving call for black and white unity to end segregation and racial injustice. But in a bigger sense, it was a plea for tolerance and civility.

Race was not the immediate issue in Tucson, violence and intolerance was, and President Obama's pitch perfect focus on those themes one week before the King National Holiday captured the spirit and intent of King's Washington speech. The tragedy was that it took the Tucson massacre as the occasion for Obama to address the concerns of violence and intolerance that tormented King and plagued the civil rights movement.

The March on Washington and the Tucson memorial had another striking parallel. It brought thousands of persons together across gender, class and color lines in a vocal protest against intolerance and violence. This, of course, was a hope and promise of Obama's election. It showed that millions of whites could strap racial blinders around their eyes and punch the ticket for an African-American for the world's most powerful political post. King would almost certainly have glowed with approval at that. But for a time there were a couple of troubling caveats that marred America's great racial leap forward. Obama won in large part because he did what no other Democratic presidential candidate did, and that includes Bill Clinton. He turned his presidential campaign into a virtual holy crusade by African-Americans voters to get him in the White House. At the same time, McCain trounced Obama among North and South rural, and blue collar whites. Obama won in only 44 counties in the Appalachian belt, a stretch of more than 400 counties from New York to Mississippi. Overall, he got less than a third of Southern white votes. The racial fault lines were still tightly drawn within a wide segment of the electorate.

The first two years of Obama's administration it seemed that little had changed. The racially tinged and in some cases blatant racial vilification and ridicule of Obama by the pack of extreme Tea Party leaders, right wing talk show gabbers, and bloggers and websites were relentless. Polls showed that a significant percentage of whites still vehemently opposed Obama's policies on health care, and the economy, and bought into the slur that Obama was a closet Marxist and racial agitator. These were the exact same slurs that were repeatedly tossed at Dr. King.

That Obama had received more taunts and physical threats than any other president was another troubling indication that an untold number of Americans still can't stomach the thought of an African-American in the White House.

At the heart of King's March on Washington speech and his decade of activism for racial justice and tolerance was that in fact America could both be pushed rudely, or gently evolve, into a color blind society. By that he didn't mean the phony, deliberate, and self-serving distortion of his words by many conservatives to hammer affirmative action, special programs, and initiatives and increased spending on jobs, education, and health programs for African-Americans and minorities. King never lost sight of the fact that the legacy of segregation, bigotry and discrimination trapped thousands of poor blacks and that offered no easy resolution.

Nearly a half century after King's I Have a Dream words the black poor are still just as tightly trapped in the grip of poverty and discrimination that King warned about. On the eve of the King national holiday and Obama's second year in office, the Boston based research and economic justice advocacy group, United for a Fair Economy, released its eighth annual King Day report. It found that the gaping disparities in income, wealth, employment, quality and availability of housing, decent schools, and health care between blacks, minorities and whites has grown even wider. Countless government reports and studies, and the National Urban League's 2009 State of Black America report also found that discrimination and poverty are still major barriers for millions.

Obama has publicly bristled at the notion that the civil rights movement is outdated, or worse, that he somehow supplants the ongoing work of civil rights leaders. He has repeatedly praised past civil rights leaders for their heroic battle against racial injustice. This is a fitting tribute to the civil rights movement that challenged the nation to make King's dream of justice and equality a reality. Obama faced that challenge and defied the racial odds in winning the White House. This was a major step forward. King would have cheered that. He would have undoubtedly cheered just as loudly Obama's Tucson speech. As long as bigotry, violence and intolerance exist, and Tucson showed that, King and Obama understand that there's still much to overcome.

Sunday, January 9, 2011

No more passwords? Obama considers Internet ID for Americans in bid to boost web security

President Obama is spearheading a plan to boost web security by issuing American computer users with an Internet ID.

The President has put the U.S. Commerce Department in charge of the cybersecurity initiative.

The Obama administration is drafting a paper called the National Strategy for Trusted Identities, which investigates ways that web users can protect their online identities.

Security boost: President Obama, shown here at the White House yesterday, is planning to issue American computers with an Internet ID
Security boost: President Obama, shown here at the White House yesterday, is planning to issue American computers with an Internet ID

But Commerce Secretary Gary Locke was quick to reassure people that it wasn’t a guise for more big brother government.

‘We are not talking about a national ID card,’ he said at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
‘We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorise a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities,’ he added.

He said the Commerce Department is setting up a national programme to work on the project.

Possible methods of creating a ‘trusted identity’ could include issuing a ‘smart card’ or digital certificates that would prove that online users are who they say they are. They could then be used to buy goods and carry out financial transactions on the Internet.

White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said the move does not mean that anonymity will be compromised.

‘I don't have to get a credential if I don't want to,’ he said. 

There's no chance that ‘a centralised database will emerge,’ and ‘we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this,’ he added, according to CNET website.

The decision to put the Commerce Secretary in charge of the issue has reportedly left noses out of joint at the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security.

But it is likely to please privacy and civil liberties groups that have raised concerns over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.