Politics | View from the Center and Left


Previous 10 | Next 10 
From: koan4/22/2012 11:09:36 PM
of 224920
 
Who'd a thunk it.

Jellyfish have been exploited commercially by Chinese as an important food for more than a thousand years. Semi-dried jellyfish represent a multi-million dollar seafood business in Asia. Traditional processing methods involve a multi-phase processing procedure using a mixture of salt (NaCl) and alum (AlK[SO4]212 H2O) to reduce the water content, decrease the pH, and firm the texture. Processed jellyfish have a special crunchy and crispy texture. They are then desalted in water before preparing for consumption. Interest in utilizing Stomolophus meleagris L. Agassiz, cannonball jellyfish, from the U. S. as food has increased recently because of high consumer demand in Asia. Desalted ready-to-use (RTU) cannonball jellyfish consists of approximately 95% water and 4–5% protein, which provides a very low caloric value.


Cannonball jellyfish collagen has shown a suppressing effect on antigen-induced arthritis in laboratory rats.



With the great abundance of cannonball jellyfish in the U. S. coastal waters, turning this jellyfish into value-added products could have tremendous environmental and economic benefits.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Ron who wrote (187405)4/22/2012 11:39:42 PM
From: Sam of 224920
 
Jon Huntsman Criticizes Republican Party, Compares Actions To Communist China



Jon Huntsman leveled harsh criticism at his party on Sunday evening, BuzzFeed's Zeke Miller reported, comparing the Republican Party to communist China and questioning the strength of this year's presidential field.

During an event at the 92nd Street Y in New York City, Huntsman spoke candidly about his party's flaws, lamenting the Republican National Committee's decision to rescind an invitation to a major fundraising event after Huntsman called for a third-party candidate to enter the race.

"This is what they do in China on party matters if you talk off script," Huntsman said.

Huntsman, a former Utah governor who dropped out of the GOP primary in January, served as U.S. ambassador to China under President Barack Obama.

He also criticized the Republican candidates' foreign policy stances, particularly in regard to China.

"I don’t know what world these people are living in," Huntsman said.

Although Huntsman did not mention any specific candidates, he has criticized Mitt Romney in the past for his "wrong-headed" approach. Huntsman, who endorsed Romney after dropping out of the race, said in February that the former Massachusetts governor should take a more opportunity-minded view to relations with China.

Huntsman also spoke on Sunday about his presidential candidacy, revealing that he was less than impressed by his fellow candidates when he attended his first debate in August.

"Is this the best we could do?" Huntsman said he asked himself.

He also joked that his wife forbade him to pander to the party's far-right contingency ahead of Iowa's caucuses, which likely hurt him with conservative voters in the Hawkeye State.

“She said if you pandered, if you sign any of those damn pledges, I’ll leave you,” Huntsman said. "So I had to say I believe in science -- and people on stage look at you quizzically as though you're ... an oddball."

Huntsman, however, did not actively campaign in Iowa, telling CBS News in December that " they pick corn," not presidents, in that early caucus state.

Since dropping out of the race, Huntsman has remained critical of his former opponents and has remained lukewarm in his backing of Romney.

"Gone are the days when the Republican Party used to put forward big, bold, visionary stuff," Huntsman said during the February interview with MSNBC that got him disinvited from the RNC fundraiser. "I think we're going to have problems politically until we get some sort of third-party movement or some alternative voice out there that can put forward new ideas."

And unlike others in his party who have endorsed Romney, Huntsman has refrained from appearing at campaign events on behalf of his party's likely nominee. According to his daughter, Abby Livingston, he won't be joining Romney on the trail anytime soon.

“My dad is not a surrogate for Romney and will not be out stumping for him in the general,” she told ABC News earlier this month. "He is enjoying private life.”

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Win Smith who wrote (187477)4/23/2012 12:56:45 AM
From: Win Smith of 224920
 
Exposing ALEC: How Conservative-Backed State Laws Are All Connected theatlantic.com 

[ Ok, I still like the NYT, but they are sort of slow these days. From over a week ago, there was this nice story at the Atlantic web site that explains both what ALEC does and how the Trayvon Martin case lead to them finally getting some of the credit/notoriety they deserve. Good for them, I've got to start watching that site more closely too. In full. ]


By Nancy Scola
A shadowy organization uses corporate contributions to sell prepackaged conservative bills -- such as Florida's Stand Your Ground statute -- to legislatures across the country.


Reuters

The recent blowing up of the Invisible Children viral video might have some of us thinking that Malcolm Gladwell was onto something with his biting critique of online politics, the so-called "slacktivism" debate. But the attention to the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and, even more so, the connected debate over Stand Your Ground gun laws and the distancing of some of the country's biggest companies from ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, shows how online organizing actually can work. And that, reasonably, seems to be causing palpitations in the hearts of everyone from Coca-Cola to the Koch brothers.

That's why even if, as Politico reports, the gun debate isn't happening in Washington, the N.R.A. shouldn't be unconcerned.

To itself, ALEC is an organization dedicated to the advancement of free market and limited government principles through a unique "public-private partnership" between state legislators and the corporate sector. To its critics, it's a shadowy back-room arrangement where corporations pay good money to get friendly legislators to introduce pre-packaged bills in state houses across the country. Started in the mid-1970s, ALEC's existence has been long known but its practices, largely, have not; the group hasn't been eager to tie its bills in Wisconsin to those in Ohio to those in North Carolina.

Nine months ago, though, a website called ALEC Exposed went live, showcasing more than 800 so-called model bills contributed by, the site's creators say, a still-anonymous whistleblower. Beyond the bills themselves, the group built out a wide-ranging, sometimes confusing wiki aimed at documenting which legislators take part in the group, which corporations support it, and where the bills go once they leave ALEC.

Lisa Graves is executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy, the group that built ALEC Exposed. She's also a former Justice Department official in both the Clinton and Bush administrations. Said Graves on a call this week, "We built out the material using Google, the Internet Archive and the Wayback Machine, primary records that were previously on ALEC's website, old old Lexis news clips, and the tobacco library," as in the digital archive run by the University of California of San Francisco as part of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement of the late '90s. "There was a lot of material out there that was just not widely known."

Having the bills all in one place painted a certain picture. "If it's voter ID, it's ALEC," observed Doug Clopp, deputy director of programs at Common Cause. "If it's anti-immigration bills written hand-in-glove with private prison corporations, it's ALEC. If it's working with the N.R.A. on 'Shoot to Kill' laws, it's ALEC. When you start peeling back state efforts to opt out of the regional greenhouse gas initiative, it's ALEC." Adopted first in the states, by the time these laws bubble up to the national level, they're the conventional wisdom on policy.

For years, political types had vague notions of the state-to-state connections, but it was difficult to see the whole picture. ALEC Exposed launched with a series of companion articles in The Nation, detailing not only the bills themselves but the involvement of the Koch brothers, early ALEC funders. Graves said she was eager to avoid the fate of past interest group reports that focused on ALEC then sat on shelves, unread. "I know the only way that we could possibly tell the story of this corporate bill mill across 50 states was to use, in essence, crowdsourcing that engaged other journalists, citizens, researchers, and writers."

One group that decided to jump into the mix was ColorofChange.org. Created in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the organization is known for its mastery of online organizing. The ALEC Exposed research was eye-opening, said ColorofChange.org executive director Rashad Robinson. ColorofChange.org took particular offense at the spate of voter ID laws that had originated within ALEC. It focused its efforts at peeling off the corporations taking part in the group.

In early December, ColorofChange.org sent out an email to its membership list. "For years," it read, "the right wing has been trying to stop Black people, other people of color, young people, and the elderly from voting for partisan gain -- and now some of America's biggest companies are helping them do it." The missive introduced how ALEC works, detailing the spread of voter ID laws through dozens of states, including Rhode Island, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Kansas, and Texas. The lengthy email was footnoted, meant to be a teaching document.

ColorofChange.org came up with a strategy. It would start by meeting face-to-face with corporations to explain to them why their participation in ALEC was troublesome. Some companies made the case, said Robinson, that they were simply dedicated to making sure all viewpoints were represented in public debates. "There's no two sides to black people voting," Robinson said he and his organizers countered. But always present was the cudgel: the tremendous public attention that ColorofChange.org could bring to bear with a few clicks. The group claims a membership of some 900,000 people.

Robinson recalls one meeting with an executive from Kraft. "I told him there are a lot of ways we can elevate this issue," said Robinson, laughing. "Black people buy a lot of macaroni and cheese."

"As we got closer, we showed them the website that would go live if they didn't pull out. That helped them understand that we were escalating these conversations from, 'Let's have a conversation about ALEC because we think you should be making a different choice' to 'We're going to launch a public campaign if you don't make a different choice.'" Those not familiar with ColorofChange.org, sad Robinson, could Google the group and read all about its role in getting Glenn Beck off the air.

For months, things rolled along that way. Pepsi dropped out of ALEC. ColorofChange.org used that move to try to persuade Coca-Cola.

In January, the push against ALEC got a small bump when Republican Florida state legislator Rep. Rachel Burgin submitted a bill calling for the federal government to cut corporate tax rates. Burgin had forgotten to strip the ALEC boilerplate from its top. Whereas, it read, "it is the mission of the American Legislative Exchange Council," so on and so forth. Burgin yanked the bill back a day later, but it was too late. Common Cause researcher Nick Surgey posted about it on the organization's blog. It got picked up in social media and joked about on cable news.

Then, on February 26th, 17 year-old Trayvon Martin was shot.

As Matt Stempeck, a researcher at MIT's Center for Civic Media recently detailed, the work of getting attention for Martin's case has been multi-pronged. The Martin family attorney approached the task with savvy, bringing Al Sharpton down to Florida to talk about the lack of charges against Martin's shooter. Martin's parents became vocal advocates, pushing law enforcement to bring charges in the case. A petition also went up on Change.org, the social organizing platform. Started in 2007, Change.org has gone through many permutations, cycling through being a fundraising hub and editorial hub before landing on being a straightforward petition platform.

But, as Stempeck describes, Change.org also has a not-so-secret weapon: it has hired some (some sayall) of the best progressive online organizers in the business to help would-be petitioners figure out how to craft their petitions and who to target with them. Here, it was the Sanford chief of police, the state's attorney in Florida's 4th district, Florida's attorney general, and U.S. attorney general Eric Holder. Change.org also worked on Twitter to get celebrities engaged on Martin's behalf, prompting bold-faced names like Wyclef Jean, Spike Lee, and Mia Farrow to tweet about the case. Then the police tapes came out, revealing more about the encounter between Martin and George Zimmerman, driving even more social media and generating more traction for the petition.

As it grew to some two million signatures, the Change.org petition gave tweeters and Facebookers what they have been proven to crave: something active to link to. That online swell gave mainstream media a hook for a story of the death of one Florida teenager that was now weeks-old.

But this wasn't just about Trayvon Martin. It has proven difficult to pinpoint how, exactly, it happened, but at some point the discussion pulled back from just Martin to the "Stand Your Ground" law that seemed to have let Zimmerman go home that night. Upon examination, it turned out that this wasn't just Florida; Stand Your Ground had passed in recent years elsewhere. "There was a mystery that many people encountered," said Graves. "How did this bill become a law in so many states? How does a bill that seems to immunize a shooter from even getting before a jury end up introduced across the country?"

"As they connect the dots," she explained, "they see more and more dots." As it turned out the traditional 'Castle doctrine' under U.S. law had been expanded in Ohio, in North Carolina, in Texas -- all in all, more than two dozen states.

"Our members started asking what else could be done," said Robinson. It quickly became clear that these new guns laws had found their start in ALEC. Because of the work ColorofChange.org had done on voter ID laws, "our members were prepared. Our members knew who ALEC was." The angle into the issue changed, but the end result was the same: the corporations backing ALEC started rethinking their support.

As so it has gone since. Recent days have seen major companies like Coca-Cola, Kraft, McDonalds, and Intuit back away from the group. The Gates Foundation has said that a contribution to ALEC targeted at education policy would be its last. The trick, says those leading the ALEC campaigns, was making what once happened behind closed doors public, one way or another. Publicity quickly changed the calculation of ALEC's value.

"Legislators don't want it to seem like there's a Geppetto to their Pinocchio," said Robinson. "And companies would much rather run great commercials that make you cry about their products than have to do ads about changing tax law or against soda taxes. When ALEC and its relationships are no longer secret and private, is it still the vehicle that's most beneficial?"

Or, as Common Causes' Clopp put it, "for 40 years you couldn't get the kind of accountability we're seeing know because ALEC, its members, its legislators, its bills were secret."

ALEC, of course, says its critics are missing the whole point; it's just a forum for the discussion of free market principles dear to the private sector and to many elected officials. It's democracy in action. But nearly inarguable is that the recent attention on the group has pushed it to adapt. ALEC didn't respond to a request to talk for this piece, other than to pass along a statement. The simple fact, though, that the group is now making public statements is a sign that ALEC has been forced into rethinking the way it does business.

ALEC argues all this recent attention is nothing but a "campaign launched by a coalition of extreme liberal activists committed to silencing anyone who disagrees with their agenda." The statement goes on, "Now more than ever, America needs organizations like ALEC to foster the discussion and debate of policy differences in an open, transparent way and not fall back on bullying, intimidation, and threats." And yet, the campaign continues, say ALEC's foes. Next up: persuading State Farm and Johnson & Johnson to cut ties with the group. Then they'll go to work on the legislators.

Common Cause's Clopp imagines a future where bills are digitized and put up online as soon as they're introduced in state legislatures, making it easier to scan for "ALEC DNA" -- or the boilerplate of any group, for that matter -- even before bills become law.

That sort of vision has prompted its own political innovation. The Sunlight Foundation, a group at the forefront of making legislation digital and public, recently rolled out from their labs a tool called Superfastmatch. The software lets you do textual analysis of multiple bills, using the comparisons to track the replication of bills from state house to state house. It's version control of legislation that makes it possible to figure out where bills are coming from, even if their sponsors remember to strip off the header language on them.

For Clopp's part, the lesson learned from the last nine months is that matching the might of a group like ALEC takes a critical mass. "You learn to do ego disarmament and say, 'Huh, we're going to need a bigger army, or this is going to be a 30-year war.'" The coalitions created aren't always your traditional ones. ColorofChange.org's Robinson credited ALEC Exposed as a tremendous resource. Graves is quick to praise Robinson's group's work. But the pair had never met in person before a march outside ALEC's D.C. headquarters two weeks ago.

That it's a dispersed but networked coalition is meaningful.

Professional Democrats in Washington and in the states have long cowered in the face of the N.R.A. But there are millions of other people who aren't afraid of the gun lobby's fundraising might or ability to target elections -- especially when they're just normal folks, participating in online politics as part of their routine lives, even if it's only with a tweet or a signature on an online petition.

"Part of the Internet age," said Robinson of ColorofChange.org, "is that people want a chance to be activists on issues. They're not joiners in the same way of, 'Okay, I'm a card-carrying member of this organization and I'm going to be with it forever.'" People are looking for the vehicle to get done what they want done, no matter who's presenting them with the opportunity.

The story of ALEC's role in U.S. politics and government is a complicated one, making the response perhaps uniquely suited to online organizing. Research and story-telling, once done, can hang around online until needed. Databases stay at the ready. Dots are connected as more dots appear. Attention can get channeled and captured. It's hard, complex work. But it's the hard, complex work that online organizers have spent the last few years figuring out. That might not have a group like ALEC, designed to work on its own and on its own terms, scared yet. But it probably should.

This article available online at:


theatlantic.com 

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

From: Cautious_Optimist4/23/2012 1:09:31 AM
of 224920
 
IRS Complaint Against Catholic Church Long Overdue
By Donald Pennington | Yahoo! Contributor Network – 7 hrs ag

COMMENTARY | As is so often the case, it was ThinkProgress.org which caught my eye with the story of Bishop Daniel Jenky back-pedaling over a comment comparing President Obama to Hitler and Stalin. Oddly enough, both Hitler and Stalin tried to eradicate opposition of any and all groups which might oppose them, while Obama's efforts are in trying to guarantee equal access to birth control for all women, regardless of who their employers may be. So Jenky's mindless comments are specious at bet and dishonest at worst.

Fortunately for women all over America, the Catholic Church's recent statements objecting to birth control access for their employees might have been the proverbial straw which broke the camel's back this time. As a non-profit, IRS rules state clearly, they are to steer clear of politics. According to a Chicago Tribune report, Jenky's comments - as well as similar comments from other church leaders - have bought the church a formal complaint with the I.R.S. In effect, the Catholic Church appears to be campaigning against President Obama being re-elected. This news follows closely to a report from the Independent last February of the Vatican being ordered to pay taxes to Italy.

Before readers start griping about this complaint coming from "those dirty atheists," this complaint comes from one Reverend Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The complaint is simply this - If the Catholic Church wishes to get involved with politics, they no longer can be recognized as a charity. If the church wishes to partake in the political process, they should pay taxes just like everyone else. From my perspective, this has been a long time coming. Church leaders have interfered with too many aspects of life outside of their theology for far too long as it is.

For all church leaders might know, any given female employee of any church-ran institution might not even be Catholic. So who is stifling religious freedom for whom? Perhaps this complaint - which the Catholic Church has obviously brought upon themselves - might serve as a lesson to religious leaders everywhere. Church leaders are free to enjoy the American freedom to sell religious dogma to their voluntary membership, and that's fine. But outside of the walls of those churches, they have no say over the rest of life.

news.yahoo.com 

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Cautious_Optimist who wrote (187486)4/23/2012 1:46:33 AM
From: Win Smith of 224920
 
How things have changed. My first political memories are of Kennedy's election, and my recollection of the mother church at that time ( well, somewhat later, I was pretty young in 1960) was that it was extremely reticent about politics. They were officially against prayer in public schools, too. Wrong prayers, mainly.

But that was in the Vatican II era. The mother church seems to have the same high regard for what happened in the 60s as conservatives do. And the abortion war seems to have made politicization obligatory- there was some stupid Bishop who seemed to spend all of 2004 talking about excommunicating John Kerry. I have some lingering affection for the mother church, but I'm mostly an atheist now and I think the current leadership is just out-and-out offensive. On which topic, there was this story, from NPR on Thursday last. npr.org  .

MELISSA BLOCK, HOST:

The Vatican has clamped down on the largest group of Catholic nuns in the U.S., citing what it calls grave concerns about serious doctrinal problems. The Holy See says the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, or LCWR, has promoted radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith in some programs. And it has named an archbishop to oversee the nuns and approve their work. In a statement, the LCWR says it is stunned by the Vatican's conclusions and will prepare a response.

We reached Sister Simone Campbell for her reaction. She heads NETWORK, a Catholic social-justice lobby that works with the LCWR and is named in the Vatican's report.

SISTER SIMONE CAMPBELL: Quite frankly, it's very visceral. It's like a sock in the stomach. I wish I knew what was in their brains. I don't know. But it looks like from the outside that they are not used to strong women who took the urging of Pope Pius XII very seriously. Pope Pius XII urged women religious - way before I was in the community - to be educated in theology, to get educated in advanced degrees.

So we took him seriously, and we did it. The leadership doesn't know how to deal with strong women. And so their way is try to shape us into whatever they think it should be, not realizing that we've been faithful to the call this whole time.

BLOCK: Sister Campbell, the Vatican seems to be saying in this document that these strong women that you're talking about are at odds with the church on some very basic issues. It says that the women's group is silent on the right to life, from conception to natural death. It also mentions LCWR's positions on ministering to homosexuals, and the ordination of women - big issues for the church.

CAMPBELL: They are. They're big issues, but they aren't at the heart of faith. That's the problem. And what we do as women religious is, we minister to people everywhere who are suffering, who are being discriminated against, and we don't ask to see a baptismal certificate. We serve everyone we find, in keeping with the Gospel of Jesus. That's what we're doing.

The bishops have a different mandate and a different message. And they are trying to protect the institution and to worry mostly - apparently - about an orthodoxy that I can't quite understand. But our different missions still - serves one faith.

BLOCK: Do you think there is a fundamental gap between the Vatican and the nuns' group on those issues?

CAMPBELL: Oh, I don't know that there's a doctrinal difference. There's certainly an experience difference. We as Catholics believe our experience informs our faith and our faith informs our experience. It's - how can I say this? When you don't work every day with people who live on the margins of our society, it's much easier to make easy statements about who's right and who's wrong.

BLOCK: Sister Campbell, how do you respond to what the Vatican has done here - which is to appoint an archbishop who will basically be overseeing the women's group; will be deciding whether their conferences are OK, whether the speakers they've called in are OK - how will that be received?

CAMPBELL: My hunch is that it won't be received with a lot of joy, that's for sure. And it certainly doesn't appear necessary. But the other thing that we know as women is, the women were the first ones at the tomb on Sunday morning. Women get it first and then try to explain it to the guys who - I mean, as the women did to the Apostles. So, we will try to explain it to the guys. We'll keep up our roles from the Scriptures.

It's a challenge. It makes us mad. It makes us upset; may make us wonder about where in God's green earth all this is going and why, in God's green earth, might this be necessary. But we're faithful.

BLOCK: Sister Campbell, it's good to talk to you. Thanks so much.

CAMPBELL: Oh, you're welcome. Thank you. I'm honored to be with you.

BLOCK: That's Sister Simone Campbell. She's the executive director of the Catholic social-justice lobby NETWORK.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (187461)4/23/2012 2:03:06 AM
From: bentway of 224920
 
There used to be some Christian leaders that preached the prosperity gospel while fleecing their flock for all they were worth.

en.wikipedia.org 

They'd flaunt their riches as proof that God was with them, and YOU could have it all TOO. Very Republican.

Maybe their still around - I kind of lost interest as the novelty and amusement faded.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (187464)4/23/2012 2:05:44 AM
From: bentway of 224920
 
Perhaps Nugent will play the (R) convention?

youtube.com 

He seems appropriately mindless..

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: epicure who wrote (187475)4/23/2012 2:13:24 AM
From: bentway of 224920
 
But, seat belt laws infringe on my right as an American to be stupid!

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: Sam who wrote (187484)4/23/2012 2:20:34 AM
From: bentway of 224920
 
He should really just give up the (R) thing and become a (D). They have conservatives MORE conservative than he is.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: bentway who wrote (187488)4/23/2012 8:58:11 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water of 224920
 
They're definitely still around. An old game which periodically resurfaces--probably because it works.

Still, the majority of Christians, in my book, are sincere about it and seeking a value system by which to live better.

Share Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.