Posted on Wednesday 13 January 2010
As for yesterday’s earthquakes, they were in the cards. The Caribbean is laced with seismic faults. Port-au-Prince lies on the Enriquillo-Plantain Garden fault zone. The last cataclysmic earthquake there was in 1751, just after the golden age of the Caribbean Pirates. In the science of plate techtonics, there’s an axiom, in a given region, the magnitude of earthquakes is inversely proportional to their frequency. What that means is that if you live on a fault but don’t have many earthquakes, it’s just a matter of time before you have a big one. An example in the U.S. is Memphis Tennessee where the clock is ticking. And Haiti is such a place. This article was easily located on the Internet and is a testimony to the advances of the earth sciences:
ENRIQUILLO-PLANTAIN GARDEN STRIKE-SLIP FAULT ZONE:
A MAJOR SEISMIC HAZARD
AFFECTING DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, HAITI AND JAMAICA
18th Caribbean Geological Conference
March 24-28, 2008
The Enriquillo-Plantain Garden fault zone (EPGFZ) extends from south-central Hispaniola to Jamaica and defines the southern edge of the Gonave microplate. The EPGFZ forms a continuous and prominent geomorphic lineament from the Enriquillo Valley of the Dominican Republic , through the southern peninsula of Haiti , across the Jamaica Passage between Jamaica and Haiti and along the Plantain Garden fault zone bounding the southern edge of the Blue Mountains of eastern Jamaica . The linearity of the fault and its association with en echelon folds, pull-apart basins, and restraining bends indicates that motion is left-lateral and late Quaternary in age. Historical earthquakes indicate that the last major ruptures of the fault occurred in an east to west time-space progression that began in 1751 in south-central Hispaniola and perhaps culminated in the Kingston, Jamaica , event in 1907. Recorded seismicity over the past 40 years is sparse as expected from a fully locked fault plane. GPS-constrained block models with elastic strain accumulation give ~8 mm/year of slip rate on the fault. Since the last major event in south-central Dominican Republic was in 1751, that yields ~2 meters of accumulated strain deficit, or a Mw=7.2 earthquake if all is released in a single event today. The two largest cities within 30 km of the fault zone are Port-au-Prince , Haiti , and Kingston , Jamaica , with a combined population of 3.65 million inhabitants. We present initial results from a paleoseismic study of the Jamaica segment of the EGPGFZ conducted in January, 2008, to determine the chronology of its historic and prehistoric ruptures. Such studies should be considered high priority in Jamaica, Haiti and the Dominican Republic given the seismic hazards posed by the fault.
Port-au-Prince appears to be destroyed from the pictures coming in thus far. The buildings don’t look "damaged." They look "totaled." Right now, the world seems to be responding appropriately with aid streaming towards Haiti from many directions. But after the emergency subsides, there’s going to be a question of rebuilding. Given that Port-au-Prince is mainly a collection of shanty-towns, the world has the opportunity to do something smart. Even though the frequency of earthquakes along that fault is in the range of "rare," does it make sense to rebuild in the same spot? I don’t think so. It looks to me like there are plenty of places in Haiti that do not share the kind of seismic vulnerability as the present location.
Wouldn’t it be a wonderful lesson for the world community to use what we know about earthquakes and help rebuild Port-au-Prince in a more sensible spot? in a more sensible way? The interventions in the AIDS epidemic in Haiti were remarkably successful. Here’s an opportunity to do it again, and further help "Haiti, one of the poorest countries in the world" escape her tragic destiny…
Posted on Wednesday 13 January 2010
Peter Robinson seems a person of integrity, even with the dire circumstances created by the scandal. In this interview, it hasn’t yet dawned on him that he’s not going to be able to finish his life’s work. It really is a tragedy… |
BBC Spotlight Program on the Iris Robinson Affair |
Part 1 |
Part 2 |
Part 3 |
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
One of the most tragic legacies of the Bush administration was its endorsement of harsh and inhumane treatment of terrorism suspects. One of the chief advocates for these policies was former Justice Department official John Yoo, who authored legal memos that authorized the use of torture on suspects.
Last night, Yoo appeared on the Daily Show and faced questioning by host Jon Stewart over his views on the limits of presidential power during wartime. During a testy exchange between the two — which did not air on TV but which can be found on the extended interview online — Yoo admitted to Stewart that he didn’t think the Bush administration “made a mistake” in going beyond “the law enforcement paradigm” in dealing with terrorism with a new radical legal paradigm that would allow for the brutal mistreatment of terrorist suspects because the effort to combat Al Qaeda and similar groups involved an “unprecedented type of war.” When Stewart rightly pointed out that terrorism is far from unprecedented and that it has frequently occurred in the past, Yoo responded that the Bush administration’s approach was justified because of the number of people terrorists killed on 9/11:
YOO: I don’t think they made the mistake in deciding to go beyond the law enforcement paradigm. Because it was an unconventional, unprecedented type of war.STEWART: How is terrorism unprecedented? In the 1930’s we had anarchists bomb government buildings.YOO: They didn’t blow up and kill 3,000 people in NYC either. They didn’t destroy the world trade center and try to decapitate the government, either.STEWART:What? So it’s all based on how many? So if you kill 100 you can torture?[crosstalk]STEWART: I’m not understanding why it’s unprecedented, terrorism has been around as long as people have been around … we all came to the conclusion that we would not treat prisoners inhumanely.
Defending Liberty in a Global Economy
Delivered at the Collateral Damage Conference
Cato Institute
June 23, 1998
by Richard B. CheneyI believe that economic forces have driven much of the change in the last 20 years, and I would be prepared to argue that, in many cases, that economic progress has been a prerequisite to political change. The power of ideas, concepts of freedom and liberty and of how best to organize economic activity, have been an essential, positive ingredient in the developments in the last part of the 20th century. At the heart of that process has been the U.S. business community. Our capital, our technology, our entrepreneurship has been a vital part of those forces that have, in fact, transformed the world. Our economic capabilities need to be viewed, I believe, as a strategic asset in a world that is increasingly focused on economic growth and the development of market economies.
I think it is a false dichotomy to be told that we have to choose between "commercial" interests and other interests that the United States might have in a particular country or region around the world. Oftentimes the absolute best way to advance human rights and the cause of freedom or the development of democratic institutions is through the active involvement of American businesses. Investment and trade can oftentimes do more to open up a society and to create opportunity for a society’s citizens than reams of diplomatic cables from our State Department.
I think it’s important for us to look on U.S. businesses as a valuable national asset, not just as an activity we tolerate, or a practice that we do not want to get too close to because it involves money. Far better for us to understand that the drive of American firms to be involved in and shape and direct the global economy is a strategic asset that serves the national interest of the United States…
So John Yoo writes a book Crisis and Command. Who cares? I doubt anybody will read or defend what he has to say. It’s hard to work up much energy about looking into all the abuses of power during those years. Obama asked us to "look forward." We didn’t want to, but that’s what is happening, whether we like it or not. I’m sure that it’s not the best thing, but it’s sure the reality. We don’t have a truth commission. We don’t even have much in the way of hearings. The British have a commission studying the Iraq War, but it’s rarely mentioned in our Press.
Will we ever address the fact that the campaign for the Iraq War was all conscious lies? Will we directly deal with Yoo’s Torture Memos or suspending the Geneva Conventions? How about the maceration of the Constitution, the misuse of the National Guard, outing a C.I.A. Agent, Cheney’s Energy Conference, etc.? I always wondered what it was like to be a German after World War II- what it would be like to look what they had done in the face. I expect it was easiest to just not think about it. That seems to be what we’re doing…
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
Ian Paisley is a fundamentalist Protestant Minister who founded the Democratic Unionist Party in 1971 [when we lived there]. Every night, the news had something about Ian Paisley’s Party – was he a paramilitary fanatic, a theologian, a lunatic, a savior? No one knew. And the bombs blew up the pubs, and the British soldiers couldn’t do anything right, and the I.R.A. remained shrouded in mystery. It was so like the Middle East of today that comparisons are eerie.
Paisley ‘beyond fury’ over Robinson sleaze
Iris had affairs with father of 19-year-old and another DUP member
Suzanne Breen, Northern Editor
January 10, 2010The Rev Ian Paisley is "beyond fury" following revelations about the behavior of Peter and Iris Robinson, sources have told the Sunday Tribune. The former DUP leader is deeply saddened by fears that the party he founded, and led for 37 years, could face heavy electoral losses if urgent action isn’t taken. It is understood that Paisley, as a family man, is appalled that Iris Robinson had an affair with a teenager she had known from the age of nine and who was in an emotionally vulnerable position following his father’s death.
Meanwhile, it emerged this weekend that Iris Robinson also had an affair with 19-year-old Kirk McCambley’s father, a butcher who died from cancer. She had another affair with a fellow DUP member in the 1980s which was witnessed by the security forces.
Paisley is understood to share the feelings of many people across Northern Ireland that the DUP vote could collapse in May’s Westminster election. While the majority of DUP MPs still publicly support Peter Robinson, a growing number of senior colleagues have grave doubts about his future.
Willie Frazer of Fair, a group representing thousands of IRA victims, is also demanding Robinson resign. North Belfast MP Nigel Dodds is favourite to take over with East Derry MP Gregory Campbell as his deputy. However, it is unclear if Dodds wants the job. "Peter must go and go as quickly as possible. He is damaging us all," a party officer said. One prominent politician stated: "The danger is that we will all be punished at the polls for the Robinsons’ behaviour"…
It’s inconceivable to me that Peter Robinson can carry on in the politics of Northern Ireland. It’s hard to even imagine Iris returning home to have any kind of reasonable life in Northern Ireland at all. This is a "Scarlet A" that will haunt her for the rest of her life. Ireland can tolerate and venerate the alcoholic, philandering poets – but this kind of thing is not their cup of tea. Like the title says – "beyond fury."
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
‘The Aughts’: The worst decade ever?
Will "the decade from hell" still feel that way 10 years from now?
The Week [subscription]
January 7, 2010“Good riddance to the Zeros!” said Mark Morford in the San Francisco Chronicle. “The decade from hell,” as it has been aptly dubbed, brought us the horrific 9/11 attacks, the anthrax scare, Hurricane Katrina and its scandalously tragic aftermath, the stock market collapse, and two protracted and painful wars—all capped off with a debilitating, two-year recession and 10 percent unemployment. “It was easily one of the worst periods in recent American history, upwards of 3,600 days drenched in fear and bitter divisiveness.” The biggest losers were average American families, said Neil Irwin in The Washington Post. Middle-income households were earning less at the decade’s end, adjusted for inflation, than they did in 1999—the first decline in income over a decade since World War II. After decades of double-digit job growth, “the Aughts” saw zero net job creation. For American workers, this was “a lost decade.”
It wasn’t only millions of jobs that were lost, said Marc Cooper in the Los Angeles Times. We also lost “our guiding principles as a nation.” After the twin towers fell, “we were stampeded” into an unnecessary war “by an administration that cynically manipulated our deepest but unfounded fears.” Executive power was expanded in a manner that would make “Dick Nixon blush and Thomas Jefferson roll over in his grave,” and our global standing “was drowned in the CIA’s waterboard torture pits and in the horror dungeons of Abu Ghraib.” And let’s not forget how it all began—with the “charade” of an unelected, blatantly partisan Supreme Court picking our president.
Ah, that’s what these “overwrought” denunciations of the decade are truly about, said Jim Geraghty in National Review Online. For the Left, any decade largely defined by George W. Bush’s presidency must be a “nonstop cavalcade of disasters and misfortune.” But some historical perspective is in order. “Compared to the Great Depression and Dust Bowl of the 1930s, the massive worldwide casualties of World War II and Holocaust of the 1940s, the Cold War tensions, Vietnam, domestic unrest and violence of the 1960s, etc., this decade was mild by almost every indicator.” And it’s not as if nothing good happened, said Reihan Salam in The DailyBeast.com. It was a decade of incredible technological innovation, with the Web, online social networks, texting, and tweeting providing mankind with “constant connectivity” and the foundation for a new, 21st-century economy.
Let’s also not forget that—whatever you may think of Barack Obama—this was the decade when America elected a black president, said Karen Heller in The Philadelphia Inquirer. Did anyone over 40 think we’d see this “thrilling” breakthrough happen in our lifetimes? The biggest breakthroughs, though, happened abroad, said Tyler Cowen in The New York Times. It was a “remarkably good” decade for the four most populous nations besides the U.S.—China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil—which all experienced huge economic advances, as hundreds of millions of people climbed from poverty into the middle class. In the short run, Americans lost jobs overseas, but in the long run, we will benefit from this fast-developing global economy, with more entrepreneurs building companies, more people engaged in creating green technologies, and more consumers buying. “It may not feel that way right now, but the last 10 years may go down in world history as a big success.”
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — With a book written by one of Osama bin Laden’s sons, and with news of a daughter sheltering in the Saudi Embassy in Iran, some of the blanks are being filled in on the life of the 9/11 mastermind’s large family, including lurid details of his parenting style. Two weeks ago, the son, Omar bin Laden, revealed that many of the children who had been with their father in Afghanistan escaped to Iran following the 2001 U.S.-led invasion, and were still together in a walled compound under Iranian guard. Confirmation came with the news that a daughter, Eman bin Laden, had taken refuge in the Saudi Embassy in Tehran. Saudi officials are negotiating with the Iranians to allow Eman to return to Saudi Arabia, where she was born, and on Tuesday Omar bin Laden told The Associated Press that he, as well as his wife and mother, had applied for visas to go to Tehran and help speed Eman’s case…
Bin Laden’s family was already under the spotlight in "Growing Up Bin Laden," written by Omar and his mother, Najwa bin Laden, and published in late October. The book describes a brood of children – up to 20 from different wives – who were raised from an early age by an authoritarian father who shunned the luxury his inherited wealth could buy. The mother and son write that the kids grew up in Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Afghanistan without laughter or toys, were routinely beaten, and lost their pets to painful death from poison gas experiments by their father’s fighters.
When they became young adults, their father asked them to volunteer for suicide missions. When Omar protested, bin Laden was quoted as replying: "You hold no more a place in my heart than any man or boy in the entire country. This is true for all my sons." It was then, Omar recounted, that he "finally knew exactly where I stood. My father hated his enemies more than he loved his sons."
Speaking to AP, Omar recalled visiting his father’s training camps in Afghanistan and being sent to the front lines of the civil war that tore Afghanistan in the 1990s. "I nearly lost my life so many times," he said. "People may ask why I left my father. I left because I did not want anyone to chose my destiny. … And I believe I chose correctly, for I chose life. I chose peace." Osama bin Laden was 17 when he married his Syrian first cousin, Najwa, then 15. The couple lived in the western port city of Jiddah, where bin Laden took three more wives. In Jiddah’s suffocating heat, the family was denied the use of refrigerators and air conditioners. When Omar’s asthma got bad, his father ordered him to treat it with honeycombs and onions.
In the early 1990s, bin Laden fell out with the Saudi royal family over the presence of U.S.-led troops on Saudi soil and moved his wives and children to Sudan. There he owned farms, grew sunflowers and set up several businesses. On a nighttime camping trip outside Khartoum, the Sudanese capital, bin Laden told his oldest sons to dig ditches in the desert and then ordered his wives and children to each lie in one of them, according to the book. When someone complained of the desert cold, bin Laden said they should cover themselves with dirt or grass. "Do not think about foxes or snakes," the book quoted him as saying. "Challenging trials are coming to us."
In 1994, the Saudi government stripped bin Laden of his citizenship. The next year five Americans were killed by a car bomb outside a U.S. military training center in Riyadh. It was the first attack on Saudi soil that the government blamed on bin Laden followers. Bin Laden was forced to leave Sudan in 1996. He moved his family — minus his second wife and her children, who had left him — to stone huts without electricity or running water high on a mountain in Tora Bora in Afghanistan.
There he took a fifth wife, believed to be a Yemeni; sent his children to the front lines of the Afghan civil war; and made them attend hours of jihadist indoctrination. In the book, Omar described how one day, while sitting with his father on the mountain, bin Laden told him about his plan is to destroy the U.S. from within. "I sat mute, feeling not one jolt of passion for my father’s life," Omar wrote. "I only wanted him to be like other fathers, concerned with his work and his family"…
In responding to the attempted bombing of an airliner on Christmas Day, Sen. Dianne Feinstein voiced the feelings of many when she said that to prevent such situations, "I’d rather overreact than underreact." This appears to be the consensus view in Washington, but it is quite wrong. The purpose of terrorism is to provoke an overreaction. Its real aim is not to kill the hundreds of people directly targeted but to sow fear in the rest of the population. Terrorism is an unusual military tactic in that it depends on the response of the onlookers. If we are not terrorized, then the attack didn’t work. Alas, this one worked very well.
The attempted bombing says more about al-Qaeda’s weakened state than its strength. In the eight years before Sept. 11, al-Qaeda was able to launch large-scale terrorist attacks on several continents. It targeted important symbols of American power – embassies in Africa; a naval destroyer, the USS Cole; and, of course, the World Trade Center. The operations were complex – a simultaneous bombing of two embassies in different countries – and involved dozens of people of different nationalities who trained around the world, moved significant sums of money and coordinated their efforts over months, sometimes years.
On Christmas an al-Qaeda affiliate launched an operation using one person, with no special target, and a failed technique tried eight years ago by "shoe bomber" Richard Reid. The plot seems to have been an opportunity that the group seized rather than the result of a well-considered strategic plan. A Nigerian fanatic with [what appeared to be] a clean background volunteered for service; he was wired up with a makeshift explosive and put on a plane. His mission failed entirely, killing not a single person. The suicide bomber was not even able to commit suicide. But al-Qaeda succeeded in its real aim, which was to throw the American system into turmoil. That’s why the terror group proudly boasted about the success of its mission…
In contrast to its plan on Sept. 11, which was to deliver a knock-out blow to the United States, al-Qaeda’s leadership has now adopted a "death by a thousand cuts" approach. There are five core elements to this strategy.
—First, al-Qaeda is increasingly focused on overwhelming, distracting and exhausting us. To this end, it seeks to flood our already information-overloaded national intelligence systems with myriad threats and background noise. Al-Qaeda hopes we will be so distracted and consumed by all this data that we will overlook key clues, such as those before Christmas that linked Abdulmutallab to an al-Qaeda airline-bombing plot.—Second, in the wake of the global financial crisis, al-Qaeda has stepped up a strategy of economic warfare. "We will bury you," Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev promised Americans 50 years ago. Today, al-Qaeda threatens: "We will bankrupt you." Over the past year, the group has issued statements, videos, audio messages and letters online trumpeting its actions against Western financial systems, even taking credit for the economic crisis. However divorced from reality these claims may be, propaganda doesn’t have to be true to be believed, and the assertions resonate with al-Qaeda’s target audiences.—Third, al-Qaeda is still trying to create divisions within the global alliance arrayed against it by targeting key coalition partners. Terrorist attacks on mass-transit systems in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005 were intended to punish Spain and Britain for participating in the war in Iraq and in the U.S.-led war on terrorism, and al-Qaeda continues this approach today. During the past two years, serious terrorist plots orchestrated by al-Qaeda’s allies in Pakistan, meant to punish Spain and the Netherlands for participating in the war on terrorism, were thwarted in Barcelona and Amsterdam.—Fourth, al-Qaeda is aggressively seeking out, destabilizing and exploiting failed states and other areas of lawlessness. While the United States remains preoccupied with trying to secure yesterday’s failed state – Afghanistan – al-Qaeda is busy staking out new terrain…—Fifth and finally, al-Qaeda is covetously seeking recruits from non-Muslim countries who can be easily deployed for attacks in the West. The group’s leaders see people like these – especially converts to Islam whose appearances and names would not arouse the same scrutiny that persons from Islamic countries might – as the ultimate fifth column…Al-Qaeda has become increasingly adept at using the Internet to locate these would-be terrorists and to feed them propaganda… But while al-Qaeda is finding new ways to exploit our weaknesses, we are stuck in a pattern of belated responses, rather than anticipating its moves and developing preemptive strategies. The "systemic failure" of intelligence analysis and airport security that Obama recently described was not just the product of a compartmentalized bureaucracy or analytical inattention, but a failure to recognize al-Qaeda’s new strategy. The national security architecture built in the aftermath of Sept. 11 addresses yesterday’s threats – but not today’s and certainly not tomorrow’s. It is superb at reacting and responding, but not at outsmarting. With our military overcommitted in Iraq and Afghanistan and our intelligence community overstretched by multiplying threats, a new approach to counterterrorism is essential.
"In the never-ending race to protect our country, we have to stay one step ahead of a nimble adversary," Obama said Thursday. He spoke of the need for intelligence and airport security reform, but he could have, and should have, been talking about the need for a new strategy to match al-Qaeda’s… This will be accomplished not just by killing and capturing terrorists – as we must continue to do – but by breaking the cycle of radicalization and recruitment that sustains the movement.
Some years back, when suicide bombers were young Palestinians blowing themselves up in the streets of Israel, I read several articles in the New Yorker that chronicled the details of the young bombers with case studies [An Arsenal of Believers]. They were treated as royalty with posters and tapes detailing their missions. It was chilling. The movie Syriana showed us the same thing – the recruitment of out of work adolescents into the suicide bomber trade. But in the recent attacks, it appears that the bombers are educated volunteers from a different class of people – Doctor [Major] Nidal Malik Hasan at Fort Hood, Doctor Humam al-Balawi in Afghanistan, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in Detroit. In each case, a seeming motivator was some version of Islamic piety.
But how, one wonders, does Bruce Hoffman suggest we interrupt the "the cycle of radicalization and recruitment that sustains the movement" when the volunteers are educated people who sought out the jihadists themselves? How can we stop recruitment if the recruits actually believe that America is at war with Islam itself and they are doing God’s biding? And how can we convince them that we are not at war with Islam when we actually are – we are at war with two Islamic countries in the Middle East, one of whom did absolutely nothing to us to provoke our invasion.
"One day, while sitting with his father on the mountain, [Osama] bin Laden told him about his plan is to destroy the U.S. from within," said son Omar bin Laden. Thus far, he seems to have succeeded in that plan. When there’s an attack, we blame our Army, or airport security, or Obama. It’s as if we’ve accepted Osama bin Laden as a given. Wonder why? Do we feel guilty?
In my mind, there are some things we can do to deal with our situation with the Terrorists over and above what we are doing. We can resolve that we are not at war with Islam, and prove it by opening an active and intense dialogue with Islamic leaders – not the leaders of Islamic countries, but the religious leaders themselves. Islam is a powerful force to be reckoned with, and we haven’t engaged it. I expect reasonable Muslims are themselves suspicious that we are in fact at war with them. I don’t blame them, because we actually were – at least our last leaders were. We have to show them that isn’t true [anymore]. The second thing we can do is make our goals known. They are: Israel stays, Iran cannot go nuclear, we are still after al Qaeda. That’s it. Otherwise, the fate of the Middle East is in their hands. There’s still nothing right to do.
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
For want of a nail the shoe was lost. For want of a shoe the horse was lost. For want of a horse the rider was lost. For want of a rider the battle was lost. For want of a battle the kingdom was lost. And all for the want of a horseshoe nail. |
It is unclear whether Northern Ireland’s First Minister Peter Robinson will return to office following a break which could last up to six weeks, or whether he is being eased out in stages. He remains leader of the Democratic Unionist Party, which faces a difficult Westminster election, probably in May. But the political atmosphere is filled with high drama and uncertainty, and his position looks precarious.
His party has suffered considerable damage in the extraordinary political firestorm which followed his wife Iris’s admission of an affair with a teenager. The move is the latest in a series intended to distance the party from the misbehaviour of Iris Robinson, whom it expelled at the weekend. She is said to be receiving "acute psychiatric treatment".
A whirlwind day at Stormont, Belfast, appeared to start well for Mr Robinson, when his party’s Assembly members passed a unanimous motion pledging "wholehearted support" for him. But this was followed by news that an Assembly minister, Arlene Foster, had been drafted in for a period of up to six weeks as acting First Minister. Mr Robinson said: "As a father and a husband, I need to devote time to deal with family matters. I continue to contend I have acted ethically and it is particularly painful at this time of great personal trauma that I have to defend myself from an unfounded and mischievous allegation"…
Iris lover feigned illness to end affair
New revelations as her husband stands aside
Irish Independent
By Sam Smyth
January 12, 2010
YOUNG businessman Kirk McCambley had to feign serious illness to end his affair with MP Iris Robinson after she bombarded him with emails, texts and love letters. Mr McCambley told Mrs Robinson that he had a form of cancer that threatened his life and affected his sexual performance, the Irish Independent has learned…
Clinton barely survived his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. It’s doubtful that Mr. Robinson will survive his wife’s walk on the wild side. That’s probably as it should be. Mrs. Robinson appears to be a pretty sick cookie and an amoral predator. It’s inconceivable that such things haven’t happened before in their lives. And Mr. Robinson has been taken off his game by the whole business. I expect 40 years with his seemingly unstable wife has taken it’s toll. The young [Vulcan-looking] Prince, Kirk McCambley, seems to be in better shape than the other two, shyly working in his Pub – now a "destination" in Belfast.
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
Wall Street firms aren’t the only banks that had a banner year. The Federal Reserve made record profits in 2009, as its unconventional efforts to prop up the economy created a windfall for the government.
The Fed will return about $45 billion to the U.S. Treasury for 2009, according to calculations by The Washington Post based on public documents. That reflects the highest earnings in the 96-year history of the central bank. The Fed, unlike most government agencies, funds itself from its own operations and returns its profits to the Treasury.
The numbers are good news for the federal budget and a sign that the Fed has been successful, at least so far, in protecting taxpayers as it intervenes in the economy — though there remains a risk of significant losses in the future if the Fed sells some of its investments or loses money on its stakes in bailed-out firms.
This turn of events comes as the banks that benefited from the Fed’s actions are under the microscope. Starting at the end of the week, major banks are expected to announce significant earnings and employee bonuses. Anger in Washington is at such a high boil that the Obama administration will probably propose a fee on financial firms to recoup the cost of their bailout, officials confirmed Monday…
In his first year in office, President Obama did better even than legendary arm-twister Lyndon Johnson in winning congressional votes on issues where he took a position, a Congressional Quarterly study finds. The new CQ study gives Obama a higher mark than any other president since it began scoring presidential success rates in Congress more than five decades ago. And that was in a year where Obama tackled how to deal with Afghanistan, Iraq, an expanding terrorist threat, the economic crisis and battles over health care.
Unprecedented Success Rate
Obama has been no different from his predecessors in that he’s always ready to send a firm message to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue as he "urges members of Congress" to come together and act. All presidents demand specific action by Congress — or at least they ask for it. But when you look at the votes of 2009 in which Obama made his preference clear, his success rate was unprecedented, according to John Cranford of Congressional Quarterly."His success was 96.7 percent on all the votes where we said he had a clear position in both the House and the Senate. That’s an extraordinary number," Cranford says.
The previous high scores were held by Lyndon Johnson in 1965, with 93 percent, and Dwight Eisenhower, who scored 89 percent in 1953. Cranford notes that George W. Bush’s score hit the high 80s in 2001, the year of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. But Obama surpassed them all, Cranford says…
Posted on Tuesday 12 January 2010
He did it all in one afternoon, starting with a statement that was distributed widely to the news media, and that came across the Associated Press wire at 3 p.m. The A.P. followed quickly with a story that featured an interview with McGwire, who subsequently spoke to numerous other news media outlets — including USA Today and The St. Louis Post-Dispatch; Tim Kurkjian and John Kruk of ESPN [both by telephone, not on the air]; KTRS Radio in St. Louis; and The New York Times, before talking to Bob Costas live at 7 p.m. Eastern on MLB Network. The one-day plan — coordinated over the past month by Ari Fleischer, a former White House press secretary who runs a crisis-communications company, and the St. Louis Cardinals, who recently hired McGwire as their batting coach — contrasts with last year’s roll-out of Alex Rodriguez’s steroid admission…
In his repeated confessions Monday, he had no defiance or anger, just sadness and tears. “I like the door-to-door strategy, in that he is telling his story in long form and in less confrontational settings,” said Kevin Sullivan, a former White House communications director who runs a strategic-communications company. “He needed to rip the Band-Aid off before heading to spring training.”Sullivan added: “I suspect McGwire will soon have some form of a press availability where he takes questions. He won’t be able to completely turn the page until he satisfies the pent-up demand and takes some questions.” The McGwire interview was a coup for the year-old MLB Network and justifies what the channel is paying Costas. It provided McGwire with a stage for acceptance on a channel that is majority-owned by the league that has, after a long goodbye, welcomed him back to his old team. MLB has a little more than half the subscribers ESPN has. But MLB had an edge in Costas if, indeed, McGwire wanted to be interviewed at length by a smart interrogator.
[A corporate connection should be noted: Costas is represented by IMG, which owns half of Fleischer’s company.]
Palin signs on as Fox News Channel Commentator
LA Times
By Matea Gold and Mark Z. Barabak
January 12, 2010When Sarah Palin abruptly stepped down as Alaska governor in July before the end of her first term, many questioned how she could maintain a national presence without the platform of elected office.
That hasn’t proven a problem for the onetime Republican vice presidential nominee, who has kept herself at the center of political debate with a bestselling book, an appearance on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" and controversial Facebook postings. Now Palin has found another way to stay in the spotlight: by signing on as a contributor for the top-rated Fox News Channel.
Palin, who will make her debut tonight on "The O’Reilly Factor," will appear regularly as a commentator on the network. She’ll also be one of the hosts of an occasional series called "Real American Stories," about how everyday Americans cope with challenges…