Clinton Is Said to Opt for Secretary of State Position - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

Hillary Rodham Clinton has decided to give up her Senate seat and accept the position of secretary of state, making her the public face around the world for the administration of the man who beat her for the Democratic presidential nomination, two confidants said Friday.

Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation. Mr. Obama’s office told reporters Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but Clinton associates only confirmed Friday afternoon that she has decided.

“She’s ready,” said the confidant. Mrs. Clinton was reassured after talking again with Mr. Obama because their first meeting in Chicago last week “was so general,” the confidant said. The purpose of the follow-up talk, he added, was not to extract particular concessions but “just getting comfortable” with the idea of working together.

A second Clinton associate confirmed that her camp believes they have a done deal. Senior Obama advisers said Friday morning that the offer had not been formally accepted and no announcement will be made until after Thanksgiving. But they said they were convinced that the nascent alliance was now ready to be sealed.

The apparent accord between perhaps the two leading figures in the Democratic Party climaxed a week-long drama that riveted the nation’s capital. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton fought the most competitive Democratic nomination battle in modern times, one that polarized their party for months and left bitterness in both camps. But in asking Mrs. Clinton to join his Cabinet, Mr. Obama signaled that he wants to turn a rival into a partner and she concluded that she could have the most influence by saying yes.

The decision followed days of intense vetting and negotiations intended to clear any potential obstacles to her taking the job due to her husband’s global business and philanthropic activities. Lawyers for Mr. Obama and former President Bill Clinton combed through his finances and crafted a set of guidelines for his future activities intended to avoid any appearances of conflict of interest should she take the job.

People close to the vetting said Mr. Clinton turned over the names of 208,000 donors to his foundation and library and agreed to all of the conditions requested by Mr. Obama’s transition team, including restrictions on his future paid speeches and role at his international foundation.

As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton will have had a powerful platform to travel the world and help repair relations with other countries strained after eight years of President Bush’s policies. But at the same time, she will now have to subordinate her own agenda and ambitions to Mr. Obama’s and sacrifice the independence that comes with a Senate seat and the 18 million votes she collected during their arduous primary battle.

Nov. 21, 1968: Love Canal Calamity Surfaces

Courtesy University of Buffalo Archives&imageCredit=','1092','827')" title="">

Courtesy University of Buffalo Archives&imageCredit=','1092','827')" title="">

Homes near Love Canal were demolished in June 1982.
Courtesy University of Buffalo Archives

1968: Karen Schroeder, a second-generation resident of the Love Canal neighborhood of Buffalo, New York, gives birth to an infant girl with multiple birth defects. The enormity of the neighborhood's affliction will take a few more years to come to light.

Love Canal was a never-used, late 19th-century hydroelectric channel that was sold to the Hooker Chemical company in 1942. Between then and 1953, Hooker used the site to bury 22,000 tons of chemical wastes in barrels.

Hooker sold the site to the Niagara Falls School Board for $1, and the board built an elementary school there in 1955. A blue-collar suburban neighborhood flourished around the disused industrial site.

Flourished is probably the wrong word. Schroeder's parents found black sludge seeping through the walls of their basement starting in the late 1950s. A woman who ran a beauty parlor in her basement developed a debilitating weakness and had to give up working. Trees and shrubs died. Noxious chemical smells hung over the neighborhood.

Schoolchildren developed strange rashes and vague, unexplained allergies. Sometimes, they played with phosphorus-laden dirt that exploded with a crackle when lumps of it were thrown to the ground.

Baby Sheri Schroeder was born with an irregular heart beat and a hole in the heart wall, nasal bone blockages, partial deafness, deformed ears and a cleft palate. As she grew, her family realized she was mentally retarded. Her teeth arrived in a double row on her lower jaw, and she suffered from an enlarged liver.

Heavy rains in the mid-1970s caused groundwater levels to rise. Swimming pools lifted up out of the ground. The buried waste rose closer to the surface.

The Niagara Gazette began reporting in October 1976 about chemicals seeping into basements in the Love Canal neighborhood, with stories of harm to humans, pets and plant life. Chemical analyses showed 15 organic chemicals, including three toxic chlorinated hydrocarbons.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the state and county health departments began to take notice, testing the neighborhood's soil, water and air, as well as blood samples from residents. Still, it was August 1978 before the state health commissioner declared a state of emergency, closed the school and ordered an evacuation ... but only of pregnant women and children under age 2.

Soon it was learned that Hooker had buried 200 tons of dioxin at Love Canal, that residents suffered a high rate of miscarriages, birth defects and chromosomal damage, and that 10 percent could develop cancer.

U.S. Rep. Al Gore (D-Tennessee) charged in 1979 that the tragedy had been avoidable. He publicized a 1958 internal Hooker Chemical memo, describing three or four kids burned by materials at the Love Canal waste site. The first lawsuits were filed in 1979.

Early amelioration work released noxious smells in the neighborhood, and the evacuation area was widened. More schools were shut down. Government programs bought condemned homes and tore them down. Hundreds of families evacuated, but 60 families remained behind. Cleanup costs have been estimated at $250 million.

A federal judge eventually found Hooker Chemical negligent but not reckless, and parent company Occidental Petroleum settled with the EPA for $129 million.

An EPA regional administrator called Love Canal "one of the most appalling environmental tragedies in American history."

The core area around the dump is still off-limits, but new buildings have been built nearby. The neighborhood is now called Black Creek Village.

Florida Teen Live-Streams His Own Suicide

Abraham Biggs, 19, Was Egged On by Fellow Bloggers, Cops Say

By EMILY FRIEDMAN

Nov. 21, 2008 —

A Florida teenager who used a webcam to live-stream his suicide Wednesday was reportedly encouraged by other people on the Web site, authorities told ABCNews.com.

"People were egging him on and saying things like 'go ahead and do it, faggot,' said Wendy Crane, an investigator at the Broward County Medical Examiner's office.

Abraham Biggs, 19, of Pembroke Pines, Fla., had been blogging on an online body-building message board and had linked to his page on Justin.tv, a live video streaming Web site, where the camera rolled as he overdosed on prescription pills, according to Crane.

Biggs, who had reportedly been discussing his suicide on the forums, also posted a suicide note on a body-building forum, which has since been taken down, in which he wrote, "I hate myself and I hate living."

"I have let everyone down and I feel as though I will never change or never improve," Biggs wrote in the posting. "I am in love with a girl and I know that I am not good enough for her. I have come to believe that my life has all been meaningless. I keep trying and I keep failing. I have thought about and attempted suicide many times in the past."

The video and blog postings have since been removed from the sites, but Crane, who has seen both, said that at first viewers thought the suicide was a hoax.

"The bloggers said that Biggs had threatened to kill himself before and had faked it, so at first they didn't believe him," said Crane. "Gradually, as you read the blog further into the day the bloggers start commenting on how Biggs isn't moving."

Crane said comments on the thread included an exchange about whether the image of Biggs' motionless body was a still photograph or a video, and eventually resulted in one of the site's visitors calling the police, who tracked down the teen through his computer IP address.

According to Wired magazine, online viewers watching the video ranged from "OMG" -- Internet slang for oh my god -- and LOL -- an abbreviation for laughing out loud.

On a blog where Biggs wrote about his suicidal thoughts, which has since been removed, commenters wrote, "hahaha hahahahha hahahahahah ahhaha." Wired reported that someone else wrote: "Instant Darwinism ..." to which a fellow commenter wrote: "f**king a nicely put." Others called the teen a "coward," "faggot" and a "dick."

In the Web stream, Crane said viewers saw a piece of a door frame -- which had splintered from the police kicking in the teen's bedroom door -- hit Biggs, who is curled up on his bed and facing away from the camera.

"Then you see a police officer go in and check on him, and then the EMS pronounced him dead," said Crane.

Biggs was pronounced dead at 3:30 p.m. Nov. 19 -- about 12 hours after he had begun blogging about his suicide.

The official cause of death was suicide combined with drug toxicity. Crane said that benzodiazepines and opiates were found near the body, but a blood toxicology to quantify just how much Biggs consumed is still under way.

Crane said that at least one of the prescription drugs was in Biggs' name.

Michael Seibel, the CEO of Justin.tv, posted a blog entry on the site titled "A Moment of Silence."

"Justin.tv staff would like to take a moment to recognize and reflect upon the tragedy that occurred within our community today," wrote Seibel. "We respect the privacy of the broadcaster and his family during this challenging time."

Reached by telephone, Biggs' father, Abraham Biggs Sr., told ABCNews.com that he was shocked to learn of his son's death.

"He was a good kid. Everyone knows him," said Biggs. "We live together and everything was fine -- I'm so surprised."

Biggs' father was not home at the time of his son's suicide, and the father told ABCNews.com that he was not aware that his son used Justin.tv.

Biggs had struggled with depression, according to his father, and had been prescribed medication for bipolar disorder. Benzodiazepine is commonly prescribed as a sleep aid or an anti-anxiety medication.

Even so, Biggs had been "doing better," according to his father and had been attending daily classes at Broward College, where he was pursing a career as a paramedic.

Internet Provides Outlet to Suffer in Public

"I am upset that Justin.tv streamed this live," said Biggs. "I have not seen it, and I do not intend to look at it.

"There seems to be a lack of control as to what people put out on the Internet," he said. "There's a lot of garbage out there that should not be, and unfortunately, this was allowed to happen."

David Griner, a social media strategist for Luckie & Company, said that while public killings are not new, online chatrooms provide an especially accessible forum for those debating suicide.

"The social Web tends to create a sideshow atmosphere, like public executions in the 1700s," said Griner. "The anonymity and lack of personal connection bring out the worst in people."

Griner points out that there have been several other online suicides, and some have been faked as well.

In February 2008 a girl who identified herself only as "90 Day Jane" wrote an anonymous blog chronicling the days leading up to her death. The blog turned out to be a hoax, and "Jane" later described it as an "art project."

The United Kingdom had an online suicide in March 2007, when 42-year-old Kevin Whitrick hanged himself while others watched. According to the BBC, some onlookers tried to stop him while others urged him on.

"The explosion of high-speed Internet access in the past few years has made it so that almost anyone can broadcast a live video in front of a global audience," said Griner. "It's impossible for sites like Justin.tv to monitor everything that's going on, so that puts the burden on the community to help stop bad things from happening."

Griner believes that those who encourage suicidal people are simply a sad reality of an unrestricted World Wide Web. Even so, some potential suicides are prevented on the Internet as well.

"You'll always have the morbid jerks who yell 'Jump!' when someone's on a rooftop, and you'll always have people threatening suicide in a public venue," said Griner. "And while it's easy to focus on the abundance of bloodthirsty trolls online, the bright side is that the Internet also gives more decent people the opportunity to intervene and try to save a life."

"Most times, they just need someone to talk to, and the Internet is the only forum they have."

Makes Clarence Thomas seem pretty tame!!

H-2-Oh No! - November 20, 2008

California Supreme Court to hear challenges to gay-marriage ban | csmonitor.com

If the majority of voters were to vote to bring back slavery - this would mean that they could. A minority is a minority,

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oakland, Calif. - The California Supreme Court will revisit the issue of same-sex marriage, this time to decide between the democratic will of the majority versus the rights of a minority.

The court agreed Wednesday to hear legal challenges to Proposition 8, the voter-approved ballot initiative that amends the constitution to end same-sex marriage. Oral arguments aren't expected until March. For the time being, gay couples will not be able to get married in California as the court refused to grant a stay.

The lawsuits, filed by a coalition of gay-rights groups and cities, argue that Proposition 8 represents a major change to the constitution – a revision rather than a commonplace amendment. Revisions require two-thirds support from the legislature before heading to the ballot, a standard that almost certainly could not be met.

Attempts to throw out initiatives on these grounds are rare, and have almost always failed. The petitioners, however, say that what happened at the polls earlier this month was truly unprecedented.

"The fact that [Proposition 8] is such an extraordinary attempt to take this precious right away from a vulnerable group means there is not a lot of precedent," says Jenny Pizer, senior counsel for Lambda Legal, one of the gay-rights groups behind the suits.

While many Californians may not believe that same-sex couples have a "right" to marry, the Californian Supreme Court said they do in its landmark marriage case in May. Voters then passed Prop 8 to explicitly define marriage as "only between a man and a woman."

Courts have an obligation under the equal protection principle to safeguard the rights of minorities against infringement by a majority. This is particularly true in cases involving groups like gays and lesbians who have traditionally faced discrimination.

Since Proposition 8 makes it impossible for courts to step in and enforce equal protection of marriage rights, the measure is a "change to the fundamental government structure," argues Ms. Pizer. Those magic words represent the definition of a constitutional revision, as opposed to a simple amendment.

Defenders of Proposition 8, however, argue that the measure only deals with the structure of marriage – not government.

"Since the amendment is silent as to the judiciary, or any other branch of government, there cannot be any effect on the role and constitutional responsibilities of the respective branches," reads a court brief submitted by the Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit legal group opposed to same-sex marriage.

Furthermore, the brief argues, overturning Proposition 8 would trample the "people's right to amend the Constitution."

The court over the years has found a number of major ballot initiatives to be mere amendments rather than revisions. One such case: Proposition 13, which capped property taxes and wound up dramatically shifting the budgetary landscape of California. Another is an initiative that reinstated the death penalty.

The one case where the court did nix an initiative as a "revision" involved major changes to the state's Bill of Rights, says Gerald Uelmen, a law professor at Santa Clara University. Since it's so rare for these cases to succeed, he doubts the challengers will prevail.

If the court does consider Proposition 8 to be a revision, they would have to admit that their original ruling in the marriage case was also a revision of the constitution, adds Mr. Uelmen. That would put the justices in the awkward position of, in effect, telling voters: "We can revise it, and you can't." Those justices would face a serious challenge when they come up for confirmation, he says.

He acknowledges that there's outrage in the gay community and elsewhere that a minority's rights can be taken away by a simple majority vote. However, same-sex marriage "is not a right that has been enshrined in our Constitution for 200 years, it's a right that's only existed for three or four months since the decision of the California Supreme Court."

Pizer, with Lambda Legal, retorts that there was a time in history when women's right to vote was also of recent vintage. "We're not talking about wine here, we are talking about constitutional rights," she says.

Remember The Spitzer Whore? What Does She Think About Stuff?

Remember The Spitzer Whore? What Does She Think About Stuff?

http://www.hecklerspray.com/remember-the-spitzer-whore-what-does-she-think-about-stuff/200817333.php

November 20th, 2008 at 17:00 by Stuart Heritage

Kids, if you ever want to be famous, don’t forget the importance of having sex with high-ranking government officials for cash.

That’s what Ashley Dupré did, and it’s been the making of her. Since being named as the prostitute who led to the downfall of former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Ashley Dupré has become a megastar.

She can’t even leave her house anymore without people recognising her and shouting encouraging messages like “I know you! You’re that whore!” and “Hey Little Miss Grubbyknickers! Here’s some money! Eat this!”

In fact Ashley Dupré is now so famous that she’s got her own episode of 20/20 coming up where she gets to reveal that she doesn’t feel responsible for Eliot Spitzer’s resignation, the emotions she experienced as the scandal unfolded and the way that she feels ‘connected’ to Eliot Spitzer’s wife - which we think might be code for crabs or syphilis or something, though we couldn’t say for certain.

We have to tip our hat to ABC at the moment. We don’t know how it’s doing it, but somehow it’s managing to find all the stories that everybody cared about half a year ago but don’t any more and give them all super-long documentaries for no apparent reason whatsoever. ABC, you deserve a medal.

Seriously, thanks to you we’ve learnt all about Peter Cook’s divorce from Christie Brinkley several months after it stopped being interesting, and we’ve learnt all about the pregnant man long after he stopped being even vaguely controversial - so what now? Oh, that whole ‘Eliot Spitzer banging a whore’ thing! Nobody’s thought about that since about April, so it must be time to drag it all out back into the open again, right?

Apparently so. Despite doing her best to lay low since being implicated in the vice ring that brought down New York Governor Eliot Spitzer by only being endlessly discussed by Donald Trump and appearing on a low-rent soft pornography DVD and almost getting her own TV show, Ashley Dupré has finally decided to break the silence that we’re told she’s apparently been keeping on a special edition of 20/20.

Perfect. This Ashley Dupré interview will have something for everyone, provided that a) you’re into the human interest side of political scandals, b) you’ve been in a coma since April and all of this still seems like news to you and c) prostitutes! Woo!

So what shocking and still completely newsworthy nuggets of fact does Ashley Dupré reveal in her 20/20 interview? ABC has more. And remember Ashley, extra points if you can phrase your answer in an unfortunate way:

Dupré told ABC News’ Diane Sawyer that she does not feel responsible for Spitzer’s downfall. “If it wasn’t me, it would have been someone else,” she said. “I was doing my job. I don’t feel that I brought him down.”

Very good. That was an impressively unfortunate way for a prostitute to discuss one of her clients. Full marks, Ashley.

But what of the future? Well, even though she’s so famous that she could probably live quite comfortably on a handful of blowjobs a year now, in the interview Ashley Dupré reveals that she has actually quit whoring to concentrate on establishing her singing career full-time.

It’s foolish for Ashley Dupré to want to switch from being a prostitute to being a pop star - the two professions are so far apart. After all, being a pop star involves brutal, near-constant degredation that saps your will to live and often leads to habitual drug use and grotty bunk-ups with middle-aged men who promise that they’ll help your career and… oh, wait.

Ashley Dupré’s going to be a brilliant pop star.

2009 Hummer H4 Review and Prices

2009 Hummer H4 Review and Prices

If GM builds H4, it'll slot below the midsize H3 in Hummer's lineup.

Consumer Guide's Impressions of the 2009 Hummer H4

General Motors wants to do a compact Hummer, but can't figure out a cost-effective plan. But if GM has the will, we think we have a way.

What We Know About the 2009 Hummer H4

Hummer is one of the most antisocial names in motoring, synonymous with gas-guzzling SUVs that many people love to hate. That might explain why parent General Motors is mulling a first-ever compact Hummer to slot below the midsize H3 and the burly full-size H2. Another motivation is the likelihood of much tougher corporate average fuel-economy standards and how an "H4" would help GM comply. Then too, crossover SUVs, especially compacts, are hot sellers now. And GM needs to expand the Hummer line to realize greater profits than it can with just two basic models.

Though GM admits it's considering an H4, some say the company has no suitable platform for such a vehicle. Moreover, GM can't afford a from-scratch design, because even a compact Hummer would likely draw only modest sales and probably couldn't be re-purposed for other vehicles, thus limiting return on investment.

GM may ultimately find a way around these issues. Meantime, we have a suggestion. It stems from revelations in GM's new contract with the United Auto Workers Union, especially the pact's broad-brush outline of company product plans for the next five years. Notably absent from GM "commitments" to 16 U.S. plants--and the UAW jobs they provide--is the Moraine, Ohio facility that builds the aging GMT360 midsize SUVs like the Chevrolet TrailBlazer.

The rumor mill already put these trucks on death watch, due a steep drop in sales; the leaked product plan makes the execution official. But wait a minute, GM. Why not adapt the 360 platform for a Hummer H4? After all, it's a body-on-frame truck design, not one of your car-style unibody "crossover" constructions that likely wouldn't provide the off-road macho mojo needed to maintain Hummer's brand credibility. Moreover, you love wringing the most possible mileage from every component you use, so why not give these old bones a second life for the smallest Hummer in history? If nothing else, you'd be a hero to the good people of Moraine.

It's easy. Slice six inches from wheelbase and overall length, expand axle width by at least four inches, slap on some boxy Hummer body panels, and you got it. Forget the H3's wimpy 3.7-liter five-cylinder base engine. Hummer is supposed to be an "aspirational" brand, so start with the TrailBlazer's 4.2 inline six and offer an H4 Alpha with your 5.3 V8--and your Active Fuel Management cylinder deactivation, of course. Just think: You'll be politically correct with the biggest, brawniest rig in the segment. The heaviest, too, but Hummers have never been about efficiency, right? If you feel guilty about that, make the hood or front fenders or tailgate out of aluminum, composites, or some other weight-saving material. Hey, you can afford it, what with all you're saving on development costs. And the H4 should still get better real-world mileage than an H3. Keep the old four-speed automatic transmission if you must, but include Hummer-worthy four-wheel drive with a two-speed transfer case. Don't forget jumbo tires and jumbo wheel travel for military-grade looks and off-road crawling ability.

You shouldn't skimp on other features either. After all, we're talking premium compact SUV, which means going up against the Acura RDX, BMW X3, Infiniti EX, and expected newbies from Lexus and Mercedes. So shoot for the works. Include standard H3 items like antilock brakes, stability/traction control, a full load of airbags and the always helpful OnStar assistance. Then dazzle 'em with options like leather upholstery, navigation system, chrome package, an Indiana Jones Edition, whatever moves people to lay their money down.

Are we making sense here, GM? Yeah, we know the rumor mill has you introducing an H4 as a 2009 model, but that's very optimistic timing if you're still trying to decide how to build the thing, as some reports indicate. So how about 2010? By that time, you might even be able to offer an H4 with a version of your new Two-Mode gasoline/electric hybrid system, thus creating a socially acceptable Hummer. You're busy transforming all your other brands. Why not this one?

A Notable Feature of the 2009 Hummer H4

The most notable thing about a 2009 Hummer H4 would be that GM actually builds it. There's a real question about how small the Hummer style and image can go before becoming a caricature of itself, and GM has lots of other projects with higher priority in terms of potential sales and profits--the 2008 Chevrolet Malibu sedan, for a start.

Buying Advice for the 2009 Hummer H4

From what we know now, a 2009 Hummer H4 is a long shot. A 2010-model debut seems more realistic, assuming the project even gets the green light. In the meantime, the ranks of premium compact SUVs are swelling fast, so we see no reason to wait.

2009 Hummer H4 Release Date: The upcoming 2007-2008 auto-show season may tell a tale. If GM shows a production-ready concept this winter, the 2009 Hummer H4 could be in showrooms by fall of '08. Otherwise, we'd probably have to wait another six months to a year at least.

First Test Drive: If there is a 2009 Hummer H4, media previews would presumably happen in the summer or fall of 2008. But this is more likely a 2010 introduction, which initial seat time won't be offered until at least early 2009, and probably later.

2009 Hummer H4 Prices: We wouldn't be surprised if Hummer makes room for the H4 by dropping the base five-cylinder H3, which starts at around $31,000. That would allow the compact to start at a competitive $28,000 or so with a six-cylinder engine and range up into the low $30,000s with a V8.

Reference:

Poole, Chris. "2009 Hummer H4 Review and Prices." 15 October 2007. HowStuffWorks.com. 19 November 2008.

Should we bail out US automakers?

Should we bail out US automakers?

A possible bailout for the American automotive industry may be under way and people in cities such as Detroit, Auburn and Dearborn may be crossing their fingers in hopes of government assistance.

The troubles faced by the American automotive industry were magnified by last month's bailout. For years foreign automotive manufacturers have been gaining ground in the United States and with the current state of the economy, combined with banks being less willing to give out loans, the already sluggish economy may be headed even further into recession.

"I would like to see federal assistance for domestic automotive manufacturers," said Bill Hatfield, owner of Hatfield Buick in Redlands.

"Our problem is not a lack of product available, it's the money available to loan consumers. We are definitely in a recession and customers do not feel able to buy right now," Hatfield said.

The Daily Facts asked people in Redlands if they think the automotive industry should receive government assistance.

Evan Schultz, 21, Redlands

"The possible bailout of General Motors and the automotive industry absolutely terrifies me. That we're going from a capitalistic society into a socialist society doesn't seem to be good, and from my understanding of economics, a free market is the best way to have a free nation of free people, and if a company suffers due to its management and its decisions, it should fail regardless of if foreign competitors are going to come in and take over the market.

"If you look at GM, they had an electric car that they made in the mid-'90s and they got very close to making it a viable and affordable alternative. They canceled that project and made the Hummer, that no one can afford, so a company that makes a decision like that deserves to go under."

Francisco Ramos, 20, West Covina

"Anybody who makes a car here is probably supplied by a U.S supplier, so if we let them go down, they're going to drag down those suppliers with them. So whoever has the most cash at the end will survive the economy. Right now Toyota is the only one that has cash in hand and will survive. Even Honda is hurting. The crossovers and the SUVs are down; the only thing that is up right now is the Honda Civic.

"No one else has the money to supply their future product plans; it's really important that they get the product out in time. Customers are seeing GM as an antiquated company, while competitors have already allocated funds and moved ahead with their projects."

Robert Head, 27, Redlands

"I hope it goes through because I work in the automotive industry and it will help us because we're taking a big hit right now, everybody. I'm in used cars, but I've been in service, parts, I've been involved in all the different aspects of it. Just to get money flowing back, just because it's the major companies, it will get banks lending again. We're having to do a lot to get people into loans and the bank's charging us a fee from every deal and that comes out of our commission. So me personally, I hope it goes through because of the hit we're taking."

Jenna Kimball, 21, Redlands

"I don't like the idea of it, actually I am really opposed to it. I've been reading a lot on it and a lot of people that are against it are saying that it was just bad management. I just read today that Chrysler's asking to be bailed out and yet they still gave $30 million in bonuses to their executives. I'm not exactly sure if that's the correct amount, but that's the gist of it.

"I don't like the idea, especially in today's economy. You have to make sound ethical choices and if your company is tanking, then make some adjustment. Have some contingency plans in place and have your own bailout plan. Of course, there's the chance that other companies will say, `Hey, bail me out, please.' "

Meghan Molin, 21, Redlands

"It's a good idea; I just don't know where the money is going to come from. I think it would promote the advancing of technology for the environment and would be good because of the increasing globalization of the economy."

Jennifer Contant, 21, Redlands

"It would save a lot of jobs, and if they don't bail them out, then it's going to be a lot easier to outsource the industry."

Andre Nainggolan, 30, Loma Linda

"I really don't care about the topic, I don't feel that it affects me directly and I really don't have too much knowledge about the bailout. I'm eco-friendly and I really don't care about the automotive industry."

BUSH SAYS: "OK TO SAVE WHITE COLLAR JOBS………..FORGET BLUE COLLAR"

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/81568

As has been properly stated by the President-Elect Barack Obama, "In America, there is only one president at a time."

Obama has been very clear about this and he continues to go out of his way to stay out of the public eye. This should allow President Bush and company, the freedom to properly deal with the US financial crisis until it is officially the responsibility of the Obama administration on January 21st, 2009

Unfortunately, my current question, along with millions of other Americans is, "Who the hell is in charge of this mess today?"

More than a month has past and with nearly $300 billion committed in the initial bail-out effort, and many of the nation´s financial arteries still seem nearly as clogged as they were before. Some of them, in fact, appear to be getting worse.

Loans are still scarce, and for many people, getting scarcer.

Home mortgage rates have barely eased. While solid corporations can now borrow money again for those crucial short-term, day-to-day bills, the other trickier forms of financing remain elusive. Hard-pressed companies are still virtually shut out of the capital markets.

The financial blockages, real and feared, were on display during the recent spasmodic weeks on Wall Street. After one week, with three days of losses, each worse than the one before, stocks tumbled to their lowest level since 2003, and then bolted higher in the final hours.

During this period, President Bush showed little or no interest in dealing with these issues while in the final hours of his last watch.

BAIL-OUT FIASCO:

At first, the White House had referred to this "bailout thing" as a "credit market issue". Then it became the "banking crisis issue", and now it has morphed into the "economic crisis issue".

The only thing that has started to become clear is that regarding a possible auto industry bail-out that would keep 3 million Americans working, the Democrats are pushing hard for it while the White House is pushing back.

President Bush has made it very clear that he and his administration are only concerned about "white-collar" workers, not "blue-collar" workers.

The incompetence that has been shown for the past eight years of Bush politics just continues to rear up its ugly head in Bush´s final days and his "supposedly dealing with the worst economic crisis in US history".

Bush´s Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson is currently not willing to consider helping the auto industry with a bail-out loan that will save 3 million jobs that are attached to that industry. Not to mention the effect that letting the US auto industry die would have on the loss of those tax revenues and the effect and tax-payer cost of having 3 million people receiving unemployment benefits and on food stamps. (FYI: The taxable wages for those 3 million jobs is valued at $150 Billion dollars per year. That´s a lot of tax dollars, not to mention what it´s worth to America´s economy.)

Secretary Paulson "is" willing however, to stretch the meaning of the term "bank" by extending bail-out protection to entities such as American Express Corporation.

Fundamentally, he and the Bush Administration see government as only saving; "The institutions that deal in money, but nothing that might keep the middle-class worker out of the unemployment lines or from being put on food stamps".

As expected and as an example, conservative opinion writers such as Charles Krauthammer, of the Washington Post, say that the auto manufacturers problems are their own fault and giving them a bail-out would mean "nationalizing" the US auto industry and taking them over. (And of course, it wasn´t the fault of the Financial, Banking and Mortgage Industries for "their" problems....yeah right!)

Krauthammer´s statement is a major misstatement, but he also says that if the taxpayers bail out Detroit, "Liberals have always wanted the auto companies to produce the kind of cars they insist everyone "should drive": i.e: small, light, green and cute. [and by nationalizing] They would have the power to do it.

He goes on to say: "In World War II, government had the auto companies turning out tanks. Now they would be made to turn out hybrids. The difference is that, in the middle of a world war, tanks have a buyer. Who will hybrids? One of the reasons Detroit is in such difficulty is that consumers have been resisting the smaller, less powerful, less safe cars forced on the industry by fuel-efficiency mandates. Now Detroit would be forced to make even more of them."

Comments like this really make me wonder how these people can still make a living putting out garbage like this.

Yes, Detroit was late in producing their hybrids, but: "Who will buy the hybrids?????"

Just ask Toyota and Honda why they currently can´t make enough hybrids.......

It´s because, "They sell so fast, that they can´t keep them on the sales lots".

Yes, we could all stand around, waging our fingers and saying; "shame on you" to all of the; auto, financial, bank, credit and mortgage industries for getting themselves into trouble, but what good would that accomplish?

Instead, it is appropriate that the requirements for receiving any tax-payer bail-outs should have stipulations attached, but not corporate "nationalization"!

One should probably be to stipulate that all of the companies in the bail-outs must replace their top management that had made the decisions that caused the problems.

It should also require that many of the auto manufacturer´s Union agreements would need to be reviewed and brought up to 21st century standards.

But saving the major financial, credit and mortgage market players, while ignoring the few large US manufactures, including autos, that are still left in the country, is not the answer. The US auto industry and all of these other organizations, and their workers, are "all very critical" to the US economy.

The issues between the conservatives and those of us to the "left of center" is very clear, and yet we are still very far apart.

Philosophically, the conservative Bush administration sees the $700 billion rescue as an emergency measure to save the financial sector on the grounds that finance is a "needed utility". No responsible government would let the America´s electric companies go under and leave the country without power. By the same token, government must save the financial sector lest credit will dry up and strangle the rest of the economy.

On the other side, the Democrats see that both the financial sector and the manufacturing / working-class sector need to be dealt with, in order for the economy to come to a reasonable balance. Basic economics dictate that if there is no manufacturing, having credit to offer the market place or the consumers is virtually irrelevant.

In other words: "If you close a factory that is building a product, then there are no workers being paid. Therefore, there is not only a lack of product to sell, but there is no factory or working consumers that need any loan credit or the need to borrow money from the financial community."

(I seem to have remembered this concept from my Econ 101 Class, from years ago, while attending College. Perhaps Mr. Krauthammer needs an economics refresher course….?)

THE FINAL GOAL?

Is the current administration´s final goal to put millions of Americans out of work, to lose those auto-industry tax revenues and for the United States to step away from manufacturing automobiles? If so, they should apparently continue heading in their current direction.

However, I would suggest that being that this was an industry that was invented in America and employs millions of Americans, the appropriate approach would be, during this crisis, to support both the financial and the manufacturing sides of the equation.

"Now is not the time to throw the baby out with the bath water."

If only January 21 could get here sooner.

Self inflicted is very true

Big 3 carmakers beg for $25B, warn of catastrophe - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON – Detroit's Big Three automakers pleaded with Congress on Tuesday for a $25 billion lifeline to save the once-proud titans of U.S. industry, warning of a national economic catastrophe should they collapse.

Millions of layoffs would follow their demise, they said, as damaging effects rippled across an already-faltering economy.

But the new rescue plan appeared stalled on Capitol Hill, opposed by the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress who don't want to dip into the Treasury Department's $700 billion financial bailout program to come up with the $25 billion in loans.

"Our industry ... needs a bridge to span the financial chasm that has opened up before us," General Motors Corp. CEO Rick Wagoner told the Senate Banking Committee. He blamed the industry's predicament not on failures by management but on the deepening global financial crisis.

And Robert Nardelli, CEO of Chrysler LLC, told the panel the bailout would be "the least costly alternative" when compared with damage from bankruptcy.

Sympathy for the industry was sparse.

Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., told the leaders of GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. that the industry was "seeking treatments for wounds that I believe to a large extent were self-inflicted."

Still, he said, "At a time like this, when our economic future is so tenuous, we must do all we can to ensure stability."

Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., complained that the larger financial crisis "is not the only reason why the domestic auto industry is in trouble."

He cited "inefficient production" and "costly labor agreements" that put the U.S. automakers at a disadvantage to foreign companies.

Ford CEO Alan Mulally told senators the auto industry was "a pillar of our economy. We look forward to working with you to be part of the solution" to the financial crisis. "We at Ford are well on our way to transforming our country and building a new Ford," he said.

GM's Wagoner said that despite some public perceptions that his company was not keeping pace with the times and technological changes, "we've moved aggressively in recent years to position GM for long-term success. And we were well on the road to turning our North American business around."

"What exposes us to failure now is the global financial crisis, which has severely restricted credit availability and reduced industry sales to the lowest per-capita level since World War II."

Failure of the auto industry "would be catastrophic," he said, resulting in three million jobs lost within the first year and "economic devastation (that) would far exceed the government support that our industry needs to weather the current crisis."

Chrysler's Nardelli sought to respond to critics who suggest the automakers seek Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, as have some airlines that later emerged restructured and leaner.

"We just cannot be confident that we will be able to successfully emerge from bankruptcy," Nardelli said.

Chrysler was bailed out by the federal government once before, in 1979, with $1.2 billion in loan guarantees. The company repaid the loan, plus interest, ahead of schedule.

Joining the Big Three CEOs, Ron Gettelfinger, president of the United Auto Workers union, said the emergency loans were important for the survival of the industry and union jobs. He said the UAW recognized that "in order for these companies to be competitive, we had to make tough calls" in labor concessions.

Congressional leaders worked behind the scenes in an effort to hammer out a compromise that could speed some aid to the automakers before year's end. But the outlook seemed poor.

"My sense is that nothing's going to happen this week," Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said at the opening of the hearing.

Earlier, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Congress might have to return in December — rather than adjourning for the year this week, as expected — to push through an auto bailout.

"Dealing with the automobile crisis is a pressing need. We are talking about a lot of people ... and a great consequence to our economy," said Hoyer, D-Md.

The financial situation for the automakers grows more precarious by the day. Cash-strapped GM said it will delay reimbursing its dealers for rebates and other sales incentives and could run out of cash by year's end without government aid.

In the Senate, Democrats discussed but rejected the option favored by the White House and GOP lawmakers to let the auto industry use a $25 billion loan program created by Congress in September — designed to help the companies develop more fuel-efficient vehicles — to tide them over financially until President-elect Barack Obama takes office.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other senior Democrats, who count environmental groups among their strongest supporters, have vehemently opposed that approach because it would divert federal money that was supposed to go toward the development of vehicles that use less gasoline.

Instead, they want to draw the $25 billion directly from the $700 billion Wall Street bailout — bringing the government's total aid to the car companies to $50 billion.

A Senate vote on that plan, which would also extend jobless benefits, could come as early as Thursday, but aides in both parties and lobbyists tracking the effort privately acknowledge it doesn't have the support to advance. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson renewed the administration's opposition on Tuesday.

Even the car companies' strongest supporters conceded Tuesday that changing the terms of the fuel-efficiency loan program might be the only way to secure funding for them with Congress set to depart for the year and the firms in tough financial shape.

"While I believe we have to have retooling going into next year, if in the short run the only way we have to be able to get some immediate help is to take a portion of that, I would very reluctantly do that — but only because I believe President-elect Obama is going to be focused on retooling and on a manufacturing strategy next year," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich.

The White House said the government shouldn't send any more money to the struggling auto industry on top of the already-approved loans.

"We don't think that taxpayers should be asked to throw money at a company that can't prove that it has a long-term path for success," said White House Press Secretary Dana Perino.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader, said that redirecting the existing loans was "a sound way to go forward," and that he was working with Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada to set a vote on such a plan.

Don't use bailout money for automakers

The automakers have known for many years that they needed to retool for more fuel efficient automobiles. Since they did not invest in the technology then, they need to accept responsibility and either sink or swim. There are many companies in basically the same financial boat and they are going out of business left and right. I do not see the Feds jumping in to save them!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WASHINGTON – Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told Congress on Tuesday that the administration remains firmly opposed to dipping into the government's $700 billion financial bailout fund for a $25 billion rescue package for Detroit's Big Three automakers, no matter how badly they need the help.

"There are other ways" to help them, Paulson told the House Financial Services Committee as the bailout bill clung to life support on Capitol Hill.

Committee members grilled Paulson on the administration's stance that the $25 billion must come from separate legislation passed in September that Congress designed specifically to help auto manufacturers retool their factories so they can make more fuel-efficient vehicles.

The $700 billion bailout plan enacted by Congress in October and signed into law by President George W. Bush did not envision that the program would be used to help rescue nonfinancial companies, Paulson said. "I believe the auto companies fall outside of that purpose."

At the same time, he testified, "I think it would be not a good thing, it would be something to be avoided, having one of the auto companies fail, particularly during this period of time."

Paulson said that solving the financial problems of the automakers should be done in a way "that leads to long-term sustainable viability" for the industry.

Auto executives, backed by leading Democrats, insist they need another $25 billion in emergency bridge loans — on top of the $25 billion already approved and being administered by the Energy Department — to avert a collapse of one or more of their companies. That would bring the total federal help for the industry to $50 billion this year.

Paulson cited this Energy Department program several times. "I urge you to modify that" to help automakers, he said.

But Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., told Paulson, "It seems to me when you're treating a disease, you don't decide where the disease came from. You decide when is the prognosis, the likely prognosis. And then you take action."

Kanjorski said there was "a lack of confidence both in this body and in the general population" over the government's handling of the crisis. "They want some idea, do we have a plan? Where are we going? To say turning a corner, really, is not terribly significant."

The auto executives, along with the head of the United Auto Workers union, were making their case at a hearing before the Senate Banking Committee as auto bailout backers hunted the votes necessary to pass the plan in a postelection session. Aides in both parties and lobbyists tracking the plan privately acknowledge they are far short.

Karen Majewski, mayor of Hamtramck, Mich., said police, fire and public works departments would face major cuts if they lost tax revenues from GM and American Axle plants in her city. "We're talking about the lifeblood of our city," she said.

She was among local officials from cities with auto plants making the rounds on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, lobbying for the $25 billion in auto-industry bridge loans.

The debate comes as the financial situation for General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC grows more precarious.

General Motors, Chrysler and Tesla Motors Inc. have already applied for loans under the existing $25 billion Energy Department program and Ford CEO Alan Mulally said the automaker plans to apply on Tuesday. GM, Chrysler and Ford have not disclosed the amount of aid they're seeking or for what purposes. Tesla said it was seeking about $400 million in loans for two projects.

Cash-strapped GM said it will delay reimbursing its dealers for rebates and other sales incentives and that it could run out of cash by year's end without government aid.

Mulally argued Tuesday in advance of the hearing that his company already been laboring to "transform our business" into a more profitable one that meets 21st century demands for fuel-efficient vehicles.

Interviewed on ABC's "Good Morning America," Mulally denied that automakers resisted restructuring their companies or that it has been badly managed.

Sen. Carl M. Levin, D-Mich., an architect of the auto bailout, said that auto executives need to address the perception by some lawmakers "that there's still some quality issues with the Big Three, and they haven't begun to do the necessary restructuring — because they have."

Levin's bill would provide loans with initial interest rates of 5 percent to the U.S. automakers and suppliers in exchange for a federal stake in the companies or warrants that would let the government profit from future gains. Loan applicants would have to give the government a plan for "long-term financial viability."

But it stops short of giving the government a say over the firms' operations through an oversight board or hard limits on executive compensation. While taking advantage of the program, the companies could not pay dividends, award bonuses to executives making more than $250,000 a year, or give golden parachute payments to top people departing from the firms.

A vote on the measure — which includes an extension of jobless benefits — could come as early as Thursday. But Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also laid the groundwork for a straight up-or-down vote on the more widely supported unemployment measure, which is probably all that can pass this week.

It's all about the Ice Cream

It's all about the Ice Cream .....

The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade in 2000. The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.

To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.

The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother. The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best. Everyone applauded.

He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down. The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream." She surely would say more. She did not have to.

A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was ice cream. Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a land slide.

Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered ice cream, and fifty percent of America reacted like nine-year-olds. They wanted ice cream. The other fifty percent now know they're going to have to "feed the cow".

Trooper cites pair for DUI in single traffic stop

BILLINGS, Mont. – A Montana Highway Patrol trooper cited two men with drunken driving in one traffic stop. Trooper Darvin Mees stopped a suspected drunk driver Wednesday afternoon. While he had the driver out performing a field sobriety test, the passenger slid behind the wheel, started the truck and began to drive off.

Mees said he ran after the pickup and yelled at the driver to stop. He did.

Mees said the driver, a 24-year-old man and his passenger 22-year-old man, both failed field sobriety tests and were cited for drunken driving.

The traffic stop began with a bus driver's report of a suspected drunken driver.

Americans uneasy over bailout for automakers - Yahoo! News

Maybe if they spend less money lobbying the government they would have more money to pay their bills.

ATLANTA (Reuters) – As Congress debates legislation to help struggling automakers on Monday, many Americans said they were uneasy with the plan, arguing that while it may save jobs, it would reward companies for pursuing bad business practices.

In interviews from New York to Los Angeles, everyday Americans said the proposed $25 billion rescue plan was unfair and said it would make it harder to reform U.S. automakers.

"They need to restructure. If they get bailed out they are not going to do it," said Eric Smith, a paint contractor interviewed in Chamblee, Georgia, on the outskirts of Atlanta.

Democrats crafted the plan to help General Motors Corp, Ford Motor Co and Chrysler LLC, and hope to pass it during a post-election session of Congress starting on Monday.

The three companies, whose gas-guzzling vehicles have been losing market share to Japanese rivals for years, are lobbying for the money to help them restructure and survive the economic downturn.

The stakes rose on Friday, when Goldman Sachs suspended its rating on GM and said the automaker needs at least $22 billion in aid. Goldman also said it would be difficult for Chrysler to survive without help.

All three companies said Chapter 11 bankruptcy restructuring was not an option.

In interviews, many people said all of the options facing the automakers had drawbacks, including the proposed bailout.

"If they don't do it, a lot of people are going to lose their jobs," said Kevin Austin, 36, while fixing a car in a mechanic shop in Atlanta.

"But every big company is getting a bailout and the little people don't," he said.

The automakers are a symbol of industrial muscle in the world's richest country and their financial straits are seen as a sign of the trouble facing the U.S. economy as a whole.

Even so, the bailout is unpopular with many conservatives and others who say in a capitalist society businesses must stand or fall with a minimum of government interference. On Sunday, Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl told Fox News American taxpayers should not be burdened with bailing out the auto industry.

"It's like nature's law: Only the fit survive," said John Berrotto, 50, a security director in New York who drives a Lexus and said he does not support the idea of a bailout. "Sometimes companies just don't make it," he said.

DOUBTS

In Los Angeles, which hosts the Los Angeles Auto Show this week, many people said they doubted a bailout was the best course of action. Some said it might be better for the companies to go bankrupt. Others said the industry could not survive long-term and that the bailout would be throwing good money after bad.

"I'm not sure they (the automakers) can be salvaged. Part of me says that if Honda and Toyota can make better cars in the U.S. with American workers, so be it," said Tom Reiter, who was interviewed in Los Angeles and drives a 2001 Jaguar XJ he said was a "big gas guzzler."

Scott Porter, a 34-year-old attorney, drives a 1996 Honda Accord, which he said he chose for its reliability. He said he opposed the bailout but might be willing to consider it if it was done the right way.

"Everybody is trying to claim they're poor. Everybody wants a handout. This (financial trouble) is something that's been a long time coming," Porter said in downtown Los Angeles.

"I don't see why it's a massive emergency all of a sudden," Porter said, adding that many other sectors were also in trouble.

Asked about claims by U.S. automakers that they could not make a profit manufacturing small cars, he said: "If you can't make a profit then you are going to go bankrupt."

Heart defects found in five Russian hockey players, official says

Sounds like something in the water

MOSCOW - Heart defects have been found in five players from Russia's Continental Hockey League since the death of rising star Alexei Cherepanov, an official said Wednesday.

The league ordered the tests after the 19-year-old Cherepanov collapsed and died last month from a heart condition while playing for his club Avangard.

Cherepanov was a New York Rangers draft pick.

Russian league spokesman Marat Safin said 49 players have undergone testing with their clubs, and five turned out to have problems.

He said that figure could rise because 18 players are still to be checked. Results from the total sample of 67 players are expected Friday.

Safin said there was no reason to suspect any form of drug abuse or doping among the players.

Fat kids found to have arteries of 45-year-olds - Yahoo! News

NEW ORLEANS – Obese children as young as 10 had the arteries of 45-year-olds and other heart abnormalities that greatly raise their risk of heart disease, say doctors who used ultrasound tests to take a peek inside.

"As the old saying goes, you're as old as your arteries are," said Dr. Geetha Raghuveer of Children's Hospital in Kansas City, who led one of the studies. "This is a wake-up call."

The studies were reported Tuesday at an American Heart Association conference.

About a third of American children are overweight and one-fifth are obese. Many parents think that "baby fat" will melt away as kids get older. But research increasingly shows that fat kids become fat adults, with higher risks for many health problems.

"Obesity is not benign in children and adolescents," said Dr. Robert Eckel, a former heart association president and cardiologist at the University of Colorado-Denver. It is why the American Academy of Pediatrics recently recommended cholesterol-lowering drugs for some kids, he noted.

Raghuveer wanted to see if early signs of damage could be documented. She and colleagues used painless ultrasound tests to measure the thickness of the wall of a major neck artery in 70 children, ages 10 to 16. Almost all had abnormal cholesterol and many were obese.

No one knows how thick a 10-year-old's artery should be, since they're not regularly checked for signs of heart disease, so researchers used tables for 45-year-olds, who often do get such exams.

The kids' "vascular age" was about 30 years older than their actual age, she found.

A separate study tied childhood obesity to abnormal enlargement of the left atrium, one of the chambers of the heart. Enlargement is a known risk factor for heart disease, stroke and heart rhythm problems.

Julian Ayer, a researcher at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Sydney Australia, did ultrasound exams on 991 seemingly healthy children ages 5 to 15. He saw a clear link between rising weight and size of the left atrium.

A third study by Dr. Walter Abhayaratna of Australian National University in Canberra, Australia, also used ultrasound tests and found impairment in the heart's ability to relax between beats in children who were overweight or obese.

The study involved the first 150 children participating in a larger community-based study.

Earlier research he helped conduct found more rigid arteries in such children — a possible sign of plaque deposits starting to form.

"Even at this young age of 10, you can have children who have got arterial stiffness who are comparable to 30- and 40-year-olds," he said.

Dr. Michael Schloss, a New York University heart disease prevention specialist, said the evidence shows obesity is more than a cosmetic issue for children.

"If you've seen what's on the menu for most school lunches, these findings are no surprise," he said. "The time has come to seriously deal with the issue of childhood obesity and physical inactivity on a governmental and parental level."

Pelosi calls for emergency aid for auto industry - Yahoo! News

Let's just bail everyone out for bad management!

WASHINGTON – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for "emergency and limited financial assistance" for the battered auto industry on Tuesday and urged the outgoing Bush administration to join lawmakers in reaching a quick compromise.

Four days after dismal financial reports from General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co., Pelosi backed legislation to make the automakers eligible for help under the $700 billion bailout measure that cleared Congress in October.

In a written statement, the California Democrat said the aid was needed "in order to prevent the failure of one or more of the major American automobile manufacturers, which would have a devastating impact on our economy, particularly on the men and women who work in that industry."

"Congress and the Bush administration must take immediate action," she added. Administration officials have concluded that the bailout bill that passed earlier does not permit loans to the auto industry, but lawmakers are expected to return to the Capitol for a brief postelection session beginning next week.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also supports help for the industry, and he issued a statement saying Democrats were "determined to pass legislation that will save the jobs of millions" as part of a postelection session.

"This will only get done if President Bush and Senate Republicans work with us in a bipartisan fashion, and I am confident they will do what is right for our economy," he said.

The plight of the industry has drawn attention from the White House and the incoming Obama administration in recent days, as well as among lawmakers.

Last week, President-elect Obama prodded the Bush administration to do more to help the industry, and on Monday, aides said he raised the issue with President Bush in an Oval Office conversation meant to underscore a smooth transition of power.

Officials familiar with the conversation said the president replied he was open to the idea.

Before adjourning for the elections, Congress passed legislation providing for $25 billion in government-backed loans to the automakers to prod them to retool their factories to make more efficient vehicles.

Since then, executives from GM, Ford and Chrysler LLC and officials in the United Autoworkers union have called for more than that to avert a possible collapse of one of the nation's most basic industries, including a $25 billion loan to help keep the companies afloat and $25 billion more to help cover future health care payments for about 780,000 retirees and their dependents.

GM and Ford reported last week that they spent down their cash reserves by a combined $14.6 billion in the past three months. Ford said it would slash more than 2,000 white collar jobs.

Pelosi's statement did not specify how large an aid package she prefers.

Instead, she said she had asked Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, to draft legislation.

A companion effort is under way in the Senate.

The Senate is scheduled to meet next week in a postelection session, but until Pelosi issued her statement, it was not clear the House would follow suit.

The House already has passed legislation to provide additional unemployment insurance benefits for some of the growing ranks of the nation's jobless, as well as a separate measure to stimulate the economy.

That meant the Senate could have passed either or both bills and sent them to the White House for Bush's signature without further action by the House.

Pelosi's announcement changed that, and raised the possibility of a postelection session that covers more areas.

The Bush administration, for example, has said that enactment of a free trade agreement with Colombia is its top priority in Congress.

Many Democrats oppose the proposed agreement as written. But it is unclear what, if any, compromise might be possible that would allow auto assistance and a trade agreement to be the last major measures signed into law by the outgoing president.

In her statement, Pelosi said any assistance to the industry should include limits on executive compensation, rigorous government review authority and other taxpayer protections

Hockey In The Inland Empire? It Could Work

By Russell Ingold
Fontana Herald News

ONTARIO, Calif. - Ice hockey. The Inland Empire. Do they belong together?

According to thousands of fans of the Ontario Reign, the answer is a resounding yes.

The Reign (the new ECHL team owned by the Los Angeles Kings) established its kingdom at Citizens Business Bank Arena last month, and the team has sold almost 3,000 season tickets, according to Dayna Cashion, director of public relations.

“We're close to the top of the league in that department,” Cashion said. “The community has been outstanding. They have definitely treated the team like family already.”

But, honestly, I still had my doubts about pro hockey's chances of succeeding in San Bernardino County. Hockey is a good game, but wouldn't it be better to have a pro soccer team here? (Is there any chance of getting Chivas USA to move to the Inland Empire? Probably not.)

But when I asked Herald News correspondent Shel Segal what he thought about the Reign dropping into our area, he was quite enthralled, so we both decided to make the short trip over to Ontario to see the team's first-ever home game on Oct. 25.

As it turned out, it was a quite entertaining adventure, thanks in part to the Reign's 4-1 victory over Las Vegas in front of nearly 9,000 fans.

But many people (including Shel and I) were just as impressed with the arena as they were with the game.

“It's really a nice facility; very impressive,” said David Pulido, the president/CEO of the Fontana Area Chamber of Commerce. “It's going to help the region a lot.”

Tim Kaiser, a truck driver from Tennessee, is a hardcore hockey fan who goes to games all over the country as part of his travels. Kaiser was proud to wear an Ontario Reign “Opening Night” shirt, and he said he has been to most of the ECHL arenas and declared the Ontario facility to be “by far the nicest.”

Laura Bobryk of Riverside is another fan who is hooked on hockey.

“It's nice to have it in the Inland Empire,” she said. “The price where I'm sitting is $23, which is a lot cheaper than my season tickets to the (Anaheim) Ducks.”

The Reign players were delighted with their home and with the response of the fans.

“The facilities here are second to none, and we're treated like kings (no pun intended) in the city,” said goalie Jeff Zatkoff.

Todd Jackson, a player who is originally from New York, said: “This is an NHL rink and they're treating us like an NHL team. It's been amazing so far.”

The coach of the Reign, Karl Taylor, said he thought hockey will indeed succeed in the Inland Empire.

“There are lots of Canadians down here, and lots of Californians who love hockey,” he said. “We've got a great market here.”

If you're part of that hockey market, I would recommend checking out the Reign. Visit the website at www.OntarioReign.com for tickets and more information.

Boy, 8, to face murder charges as father is mourned - CNN.com

An 8-year-old boy is scheduled to appear in court Monday in St. Johns, Arizona, on charges he murdered his father and another man.

Vincent Romero and Tim Romans were found dead last week in Romero's home in St. Johns, Arizona.

More than 600 mourners attended services for the father, Vincent Romero, 29, Monday morning, CNN affiliate KPHO-TV reported.

Tim Romans, 39, also was found dead Wednesday afternoon in Romero's home, where he rented a room, KPHO said.

Police said Thursday that the boy had confessed to shooting the two men with a .22-caliber weapon. No motive was given.

"We solved the crime," St. Johns Police Chief Roy Melnick told KPHO. "Now we have to solve the mystery of why."

A judge issued a gag order Monday, preventing police, prosecutors or defense attorneys from talking any further about the case.

A status hearing was scheduled for 3 p.m.

Ron Wood, one of the boy's public defenders, said before the gag order was issued that the defense is treating the boy's case "like any other first-degree murder case."

The boy's other attorney, Ben Brewer, told KPHO he questions whether police acted properly in their interviews with the boy.

"It's evident that he's shaken up, and he's scared," Brewer said. "He was yanked out of the comfortable situation, a situation he knew about, and put into a situation that he has no knowledge about. He's hurting.

"He's a scared little kid," Brewer said.

The boy's lawyers said they plan to file a motion to request experts to help with the investigation and will ask for access to the crime scene.

The funeral for Romans is scheduled for 10 a.m. Saturday in his hometown of San Carlos, Arizona, KPHO said. A wake will be held at 3 p.m. Friday.

St. Louis Blues contest pays mortgage or rent for their fans

The St. Louis Blues are responding to tight economic times with a fan bailout plan.

The team announced Monday that at every remaining Saturday home game beginning Nov. 29, the organization will call the seat number of a fan and pay that person's mortgage or rent for four months, up to US$4,000 total.

The team also is offering discounted tickets, with 500 plaza-level seats available for $25 a ticket and another 500 in the mezzanine for $11.20 a ticket for each game this season.

The team will also continue its Free Food game, where fans can receive some free food when they attend the March 15 game against Minnesota."

Florida man busted after stealing 15 Holy Communion wafers

NOVEMBER 10--Meet Jonathan Ricci. The Florida man was arrested Saturday morning after he allegedly tried to steal "a handful of communion wafers" from a priest at a Catholic church in Jensen Beach. Ricci, 33, sought to swipe 15 wafers valued at $1, according to a Martin County Sheriff's Office report, a copy of which you'll find here. During mass at around 9 AM, Ricci accepted a wafer on the Communion line, but "walked away without taking the communion into his mouth." After refusing a priest's requests to "accept" the wafer, Ricci "turned to the priest and grabbed a handful of the wafers from the plate and attempted to leave" St. Martin de Porres Church, according to the report. "Due to the religious significance of theholy communion, the parishioners were very upset at his callous treatment of their holy ritual" and sought to detain him. An "enraged" Ricci then began to act "crazy" and scuffled with parishioners, two of whom (men aged 82 and 66) sustained minor injuries. Ricci, pictured in the below mug shot, was charged with theft, battery, and disrupting a religious assembly.

Pocket Taser Stun Gun- A Great Gift for the Wife?

This was submitted by a guy who purchased his lovely wife a "pocket Taser" for their anniversary.

Last weekend I saw something at the Pawn Shop that sparked my interest. The occasion was our 22nd anniversary, and I was looking for a little something extra for my wife. What I came across was a 100,000-volt, pocket/purse-sized Taser. The consequences of the Taser were supposed to be short lived, with no long-term adverse effects on her assailant, allowing her adequate time to retreat to safety.... WAY TOO COOL!

Long story short, I bought the device and brought it home. I loaded two triple-A batteries in the darn thing and pushed the button. Nothing! I was disappointed. I learned, however, that if I pushed the button AND pressed it against a metal surface at the same time, I'd get the blue arch of electricity darting back and forth between the prongs. Awesome!!!

Unfortunately, I have yet to explain to wife what that burn spot is on the face of her microwave.

Okay, so I was home alone with this new toy, thinking to myself that it couldn't be all that bad with only two triple-A batteries, right?!!!

There I sat in my recliner, my cat Gracie looking on intently (trusting little soul) while I was reading the directions and thinking that I really needed to try this thing out on a flesh & blood moving target. I must admit I thought about zapping Gracie (for a fraction of a second) and thought better of it. She is such a sweet cat. But, if I was going to give this thing to my wife to protect herself against a mugger, I did want some assurance that it would work as advertised. Am I wrong?

So, there I sat in a pair of shorts and a tank top with my reading glasses perched delicately on the bridge of my nose, directions in one hand, Taser in another. The directions said that a one-second burst would shock and disorient your assailant; a two-second burst was supposed to cause muscle spasms and a major loss of bodily control; a three-second burst would purportedly make your assailant flop on the ground like a fish out of water.

Any burst longer than three seconds would be wasting the batteries.

All the while I'm looking at this little device measuring about 5 inches long, less than 3/4 inch in circumference -- pretty cute, really -- and loaded with two itsy, bitsy triple-A batteries, thinking to myself, "No possible way!"

What happened next is almost beyond description, but I'll do my best.....

I'm sitting there alone, Gracie looking on with her head cocked to one side as if to say, "Don't do it, master," reasoning that a one-second burst from such a tiny little ole thing couldn't hurt all that bad.... I decided to give myself a one-second burst just for the heck of it. I touched the prongs to my naked thigh, pushed the button, and HOLY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!

I'm pretty sure Jessie Ventura ran in through the side door, picked me up in the recliner, and then body slammed us both on the carpet, over and over and over again. I vaguely recall waking up on my side in the fetal position, with tears in my eyes, body soaking wet, both nipples on fire, my left arm tucked under my body in the oddest position, and tingling in my legs. The cat was standing over me making meowing sounds I had never heard before, licking my face.

Note: If you ever feel compelled to "mug" yourself with a Taser, one note of caution: there is no such thing as a one-second burst when you zap yourself. You will not let go of that thing until it is dislodged from your hand by a violent thrashing about on the floor. A three-second burst would be considered conservative.

A minute or so later (I can't be sure, as time was a relative thing at that point), I collected my wits (what little I had left), sat up, and surveyed the landscape. My bent reading glasses were on the mantel of the fireplace. How did they get up there???

My triceps, right thigh, were still burning and twitching. My face felt as if it had been shot up with Novocain and my bottom lip weighed 88 lbs.

Still in shock