The far right still won’t give up on Benghazi and they are still promoting paranoia and bigotry. Just read what Dana Milbank has to say about this sad excuse for a panel of “experts” put together by the Heritage Foundation.
Representatives of prominent conservative groups converged on the Heritage Foundation on Monday afternoon for the umpteenth in a series of gatherings to draw attention to the Benghazi controversy.
But this one took an unexpected turn.
What began as a session purportedly about “unanswered questions” surrounding the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Libya deteriorated into the ugly taunting of a woman in the room who wore an Islamic head covering.
The session, as usual, quickly moved beyond the specifics of the assaults that left four Americans dead to accusations about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating the Obama administration, President Obama funding jihadists in their quest to destroy the United States, Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton attempting to impose Sharia blasphemy laws on Americans and Al Jazeera America being an organ of “enemy propaganda.”
Petula Dvorak has posted an excellent commentary on the Washington Post’s website about Pamela Geller’s recent anti Muslim bus ad campaign featuring the monster. This is also a pretty good commentary on Godwins in general.
I would like my D6 bus without a side of Hitler, please.
Twenty Metro buses are crisscrossing the nation’s capital with Der Führer on their sides for the next month, thanks to an incendiary, anti-Muslim ad campaign by the American Freedom Defense Initiative.
The westbound D6 featured a PNC Bank ad early Monday. Whew. But Shanna Dick is ready for Hitler’s face if it ever appears on that route.
“I just want to draw a big crucifix over his face, so I don’t have to look at it,” said Dick, 44. “Two wrongs don’t make a right. Hell isn’t big enough for him. And the side of a city bus isn’t the right place for that kind of evil, either.”
Adolf Hitler is a little too present these days.
1. Women were the first author on 34% of the articles. This is a little higher than the WMC got with their A-section analysis, which is not surprising given the distribution of writers across sections.
2. Women wrote the majority of stories in five out of 21 major sections, from Fashion (52% women ), to Dining, Home, Travel, and Health (76% women). Those five sections account for 11% of the total.
3. Men wrote the majority of stories in the seven largest sections. Two sections were more than three-fourths male (Sports, 89%; and Opinion, 76%). U.S., World, and Business were between 66% and 73% male.
What does it mean?
It’s just one newspaper but it matters a lot. According to Alexa, nytimes.com is the 34th most popular website in the U.S., and the 119th most popular in the world — and the most popular website of a printed newspaper in the U.S. In the JSTOR database of academic scholarship, “New York Times” appeared almost four-times more frequently than the next most-commonly mentioned newspaper, the Washington Post.
Research (including this paper I wrote with Matt Huffman and Jessica Pearlman) shows that women in charge, on average, produce better outcomes for women below them in the organizational hierarchy. Jill Abramson, the NYTimes’ executive editor, is the 19th most powerful woman in the world, behind only Sheryl Sandberg and Oprah Winfrey among media executives on that list. She is aware of this issue, and proudly told the Women’s Media Center that she had reached the “significant milestone” of having a half-female news masthead (which is significant). So why are women underrepresented in such prominent sections? That’s not a rhetorical question; I’m really wondering how this happens. The NYTimes doesn’t even do as well as the national average: 41% of the 55,000 “News Analysts, Reporters and Correspondents” working full-time, year-round in 2012 were women.
Its really sad when a gesture like this causes outrage.
By William Booth, Published: April 12
JERUSALEM — Professor Mohammed S. Dajani took 27 Palestinian college students to visit the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland a few weeks ago as part of a project designed to teach empathy and tolerance. Upon his return, his university disowned the trip, his fellow Palestinians branded him a traitor and friends advised a quick vacation abroad.
Dajani said he expected criticism. “I believe a trip like this, for an organized group of Palestinian youth going to visit Auschwitz, is not only rare, but a first,” he said. “I thought there would be some complaints, then it would be forgotten.”
But the trip was explosive news to some, perhaps more so because it took place as U.S.-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians were in danger of collapse, and emotion surrounding the decades-old conflict is high.
Controversy was also heightened by rumors — untrue — that the trip was paid for by Jewish organizations. It was paid for by the German government.
This is not going to be good at all. These pastors probably couldn’t tell if they actually healed someone to save their own lives. I’m not really completely anti religion, however some of these poor, ignorant, and probably desperate people may die much sooner now thanks to these “faith healers,” who have convinced them that they’ve been cured, when they really haven’t.
NAIROBI, Kenya — At prayer healing services in some Pentecostal churches, pastors invite people infected with HIV to come forward for a public healing, after which they burn the person’s anti-retroviral medications and declare the person cured.
The “cure” is not free, and some people say they shell out their life savings to receive a miracle blessing and quit taking the drugs.
“I believe people can be healed of all kinds of sickness, including HIV, through prayers,” said Pastor Joseph Maina of Agmo Prayer Mountain, a Pentecostal church on the outskirts of Nairobi. “We usually guide them. We don’t ask for money, but we ask them to leave some seed money that they please.”
And just as I would have expected, unfortunately,
But the controversial ceremonies are raising red flags as believers’ conditions worsen, and a debate has opened over whether science or religion should take the lead in the fight against the AIDS epidemic.
They had a better picture, but the file size was too big so I used that one instead
Halloween is a controversial day in Australia. The holiday is not traditionally observed there widely, but kids are still aware of it from TV and movies. So, every year, an increasing number of Australian children dress up in costume and go door-to-door for candy, as the grown-ups debate whether they should continue to resist the foreign cultural imposition.
“If any children approach my building, I’m just going to silently admire them from the intercom screen and pretend that I’m not home. I won’t be the only one,” Australian writer Van Badham declared in Wednesday’s Guardian, as part of the annual Australian tradition of refusing to enjoy Halloween. “For people like my mother, it’s a deliberate rejection of the kind of U.S. imperialism that suckered her generation not into witches hats and candy, but Australian participation in the Vietnam war.”
According to the Washington Post, the GOP is continuing to reach out to Latino groups by suggesting the House will take up immigration reform this year. This. Year.
If, like me, you’re a little skeptical that (a) the GOP, especially its Tea Party House division, wants to do comprehensive immigration reform and (b) even if it did so want, when would such efforts take place amidst the budgetary squabbles and Obamacare ‘defund’ crusades.
The “this year” claim seems especially problematic. Only three months remain in the calendar year. And 2014, being an election year, could make any comprehensive legislation doubtful.
But be that as it may, you ask, just what sort of immigration reform will the GOP House consider? Will it take up the comprehensive, bi-partisan Senate bill?
Well, basically border control stuff.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) said Thursday that his panel is working on four new pieces of legislation dealing with border-control laws. He did not disclose details but emphasized the need to resolve the status of people living in the country illegally.
And what about those here illegally?
Alfonso Aguilar, the executive director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles and the moderator of the GOP’s roundtable last week, said he believes that House Republicans are sincere in their pledge to move forward.
“I just hope that if Democrats want to get this done, they wouldn’t kill a bill that provides legal status just because they have to have a ‘special path’ to citizenship,” Aguilar said. “That would show they are playing politics.”
I see. So the GOP “vow” to do immigration reform amounts to a couple of bills to beef up border security. And anything about providing a path to citizenship, special or otherwise, would just be “playing politics”.
But that Washington Post headline on Page 3 sure was a tease.
Is that really “not down by much”? Given that some growth is required every year merely to keep pace with higher costs and a growing population, a cut in unadjusted dollar terms over three years is actually a lot. Government spending has actually dropped by 2 percentage points of gross domestic product since 2010. That’s a very fast drop, especially given the backdrop of an economy coping with the vast fallout from the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Indeed, the consensus of the macroeconomic forecasting field is that rapid government cutbacks are hampering the recovery, and thus prolonging the enormous human misery of high unemployment, though that consensus does not appear anywhere in the story.
The story proceeds to report that the federal workforce is not shrinking by much:
Measured another way — not in dollars, but in people — the government has about 4.1 million employees today, military and civilian. That’s more than the populations of 24 states.
Back in 2010, it had 4.3 million employees. More than the populations of 24 states.
Another way to put that fact would be that the federal workforce has declined by 4.65 percent over three years. Still another way to put it would be that, over the last several years, the federal workforce as a percentage of the population has continued its historic decline: