Image via New Scientist The use of biomimicry has become increasingly helpful in robotics, but it’s mainly been helpful in devising better ways for robots to move, whether swimming like a fish , flying like a butterfly , or
See the article here:
Artificial Bee Eye Helps Mini Flying Robots See Better
Posted in Gossip, Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged alternative energy, artificial-bee, become-increasingly, celeb news, clothes-drying, country, electronics, eye-image, Flying, helps-mini, Hollywood, insects, scientist
Image credit: Munts Family I once very publicly confessed my laziness in putting up a clothes line , and the battles over clothes lines and property values are well publicized by now. But whether you are an avid outdoor drier, or you wouldn’t be seen dead hanging your undies up in public, all too often the issue of clothes drying is presented as either the line, or the dryer. But there are other options. The trouble is, some of them … Read the full story on TreeHugger
Read this article:
Drying Clothes Indoors: What’s the Greenest Method?
The Sloth Sanctuary in Costa Rica is a rescue facility and advocate organization for the country’s two sloth species. Home to around 135 sloths, the group cares for many infants who have lost their mothers through human-caused incidents like felled trees, power line electrocution, traffic accidents, and hunting or sport killing. By rescuing and caring for adorable infants, the group is able to not only save the lives of animals but also educate communities about the importance of appreciating and caring for ecosystems. And the babies are definitely something that grabs and holds attention. Check out this ultra cute video of the infant sloths… Read the full story on TreeHugger
See the article here:
Costa Rican Sanctuary Cares for Cutest Baby Sloths (Video)
Posted in Gossip, Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged costa-rica, country, drives-product, green news, healthy, Hollywood, stars, travel & nature, year-toaster
It’s one thing to read about individual Taliban attacks in WikiLeaks’ trove of war logs. It’s something quite different to see the bombings and the shootings mount, and watch the insurgency metastasize. NYU political science grad student (and occasional Danger Room contributor) Drew Conway has done just that, using an open source statistical programming language called R and a graphical plotting software tool. The results are unnerving, like stop-motion photography of a freeway wreck. Above is the latest example: a graph showing the spread of combat from 2004 to 2009. It’s exactly what you wouldn’t want to see as a war drags on. “The sheer volume of observations [in the WikiLeaks database] inhibit the majority of consumers from being able to gain knowledge from it. By providing graphical summaries of the data people can draw inferences quickly, which would have been very difficult to do by serially reading through the files,” Conway e-mails Danger Room. “For instance, in the most recent graph I posted [see above], many people were noticing the increasing number of attacks around Afghanistan’s ‘ring road,’ over time, and seeing that as an indication of the Taliban’s attempt to undermine the Afghanistan government by cutting off villages from one another.” Conway’s work largely mirrors what the U.S. military’s internal teams of intelligence analysts found. But Conway and Columbia University post-doc Mike Dewar did all this work themselves, relying solely on free tools and the WikiLeaked logs. Applying statistical analysis, they found little evidence of tampering in the reports. Next month, Conway hopes, a group of New York-based R users will be able to tease out more insights from the data. Obviously, the logs don’t tell the whole story of the war, as Danger Room has noted before. And the stats may be unduly influenced by the spread of NATO forces into different parts of the country. But for now, the most striking point to Conway was how bad things turned in 2006 and 2007. In Afghanistan’s south, for instance, there was only minimal fighting in the start of ‘06. By the end of the next year… well, see for yourself. UPDATE: Conway’s work is just one of dozens of international efforts to turn the WikiLeaks war logs into something graphic. Visualising Data has links to some of the best, including this one: ******************LINKS http://www.visualisingdata.com/index.php/2010/07/visualising-the-wikileaks-war-l… . http://pollen.nymphormation.org/afgwar/_design/afgwardiary/index.html http://pollen.nymphormation.org/afgwar/_design/afgwardiary/timeline.html added by: toyotabedzrock
Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff
Tagged backyard, celeb news, conway, country, crappy-roller, current, data, Hollywood, increasing, samsung-galaxy, TMZ, wikileaked, wikileaks
MSNBC’s Ed Schultz on Monday absolutely got his head handed to him in a debate with syndicated columnist Tony Blankley. Clearly underestimating his opponent, Schultz rudely introduced the subject of a Republican proposal to not have the Congress come back for a lame duck session after November’s elections by saying, “No one knows better about shutting down Congress than someone who was right there working for Newt Gingrich when it happened before.” Not letting this stand, Blankley gave the “Ed Show” host a much-needed history lesson (video follows with transcript and commentary): ED SCHULTZ, HOST: The GOP wants to work three weeks in four months. Got that? While railing about wasteful government spending with a straight face. I don’t know how they do it. It’s absolutely stunning. No one knows better about shutting down Congress than someone who was right there working for Newt Gingrich when it happened before. Tony Blankley was press secretary to the Speaker and he’s now a syndicated columnist. Tony, do you think, good to have you with us tonight. TONY BLANKLEY: Good to be here. SCHULTZ: You bet. Do you think it plays to the sensibilities of Americans to suggest a plan that, gosh, the Congress would only be in session to do something for the American people several weeks out of the next four months? BLANKLEY: Well, first of all, I’ve got to correct the record as I expected I would. Newt did not close down the government in ’95. The Republican Congress passed two bills and the President Clinton decided to veto them because he didn’t like what was in the bill, which was funding plus requiring to balance the budget in seven years. And by the way, if you dispute it, I do have in my hot little hands the transcript from Nightline of the night the government closed down with Cokie Roberts and President Clinton agreeing that he vetoed the bill. So, putting that aside, we didn’t want to close down the government. We wanted to balance the budget. For the record, here is that ABC “Nightline” transcript from November 13, 1995: COKIE ROBERTS, HOST: [voice-over] A political impasse over the budget- Pres. BILL CLINTON: I would be wrong to permit these kind of pressure tactics. Rep. NEWT GINGRICH: It’s very sad to see the President choose this political game. COKIE ROBERTS: [voice-over] -and federal services hang in the balance. Tonight, as the clock strikes 12:00, the government shuts down. ANNOUNCER: This is ABC News Nightline. Substituting for Ted Koppel and reporting from Washington, Cokie Roberts. COKIE ROBERTS: It’s after midnight in Washington, so the government must be closed, right? Well, technically right, but this is Washington, after all, and nothing is quite that simple. After casting his threatened vetoes, President Clinton and congressional leaders met tonight, trying to fix the mess they had made, but the meeting broke up not long ago, with only the promise to meet again tomorrow. Each side is trying to score political points in this budget drama without getting blamed for chaos. ‘Protector of Medicare’ is President Clinton’s chosen role, and he refused to sign the bill to keep the government going because it required Medicare recipients to pay more for some premiums than they currently expect to. Republicans playing ‘protectors of the purse,’ but both sides are worried that voters will see them as game-playing politicians, and an ABC News/Washington Post poll released tonight shows that’s exactly what voters do think. Nine times in the past 14 years, the government’s officially run out of money. Four times it’s actually shut down. This is becoming a well-worn script. But the poll also shows that Republicans get more of the blame for a possible shutdown; 46 percent say they’re at fault, 27 percent blame the President. Those numbers serve as a backdrop to the events of this very long day. Nightline correspondent Michel McQueen has our report. RADIO ANNOUNCER: Federal shutdown, will it happen? Stay tuned for instant updates. MICHEL McQUEEN, ABC News: [voice-over] As the sun rose, so did the volume in a divided Washington. Vice Pres. AL GORE: [NBC] They have not done their job. Now they’re trying to make an end run around the Constitution, around the normal procedures. Rep. ROBERT LIVINGSTON, (R), Chairman, Appropriations Committee: We’ve done a lot to work our way toward the President. He has not done thing toward coming toward us. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] Eight-thirty A.M., President Clinton vetoed the first of two bills at issue in the budget crisis, one that would raise the federal debt limit and require a balanced budget in seven years. Pres. BILL CLINTON: It would allow the United States to pay its debts for another month, but only at a price too high for the American people to pay. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] And as federal workers headed to the office, the confrontation over the other bill – providing money to keep the government operating temporarily – cast a shadow over the workday. 1st FEDERAL WORKER: I think it’s nonsense. I’m involved in personnel, so I’m the one who’s going to be going to my office to type up furlough letters, including to myself. 2nd FEDERAL WORKER: Reality is that the Congress and the President have to get together and come to terms on exactly, you know, what needs to be done to ensure that there isn’t a shutdown. Pres. BILL CLINTON: Thank you. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] Mid-morning. In a duel to seize the moral high ground, the President and House Speaker Newt Gingrich delivered speeches to friendly audiences. Pres. BILL CLINTON: As long as they insist on plunging ahead with a budget that violates our values, in a process that is characterized more by pressure than constitutional practice, I will fight it. I am fighting it today, I will fight it tomorrow, I will fight it next week, and next month. Rep. NEWT GINGRICH: We can balance the budget, we can save the Medicare trust fund, we can reform the welfare system if we can have an honest dialogue among ourselves as a people. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] At the Senate, the first sign of movement. Republican budget leader Pete Domenici offered a compromise to freeze Medicare premiums at their current level. Sen. PETE DOMENICI: Now, of late, and I don’t know whether this is acceptable across the board, but I’ve at least discussed, after talking with my staff, I’ve discussed with the Republican leader here and with others that perhaps the solution is to freeze that at $46.10. MICHEL McQUEEN: But at noon, despite the glimmer of progress, all signs still point to a government shutdown, with no clue about how long it will last, or what the long-term impact might be. And although Washington has seen these shutdowns before, nearly everyone agrees that this one is different. NORMAN ORNSTEIN, American Enterprise Institute: It has the potential of a serious disruption, and an historic change. You have a Republican Congress, especially a Republican House, bound and determined not to compromise and to push its vision of the budget and of the role of the federal government down the throat of the President of the United States, and you have a president saying, ‘I draw the line in the dust, and I won’t let this happen.’ HELEN THOMAS, United Press International: You always had the sense that it was very- it would be resolved very soon. There seems to be a different mood this time around, a real- there’s a real division of philosophy, I think, of government. It’s- it’s, I think, a real crisis. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] The real crisis for federal workers, like these in a Social Security office in Kansas City, was the fear of losing a paycheck. 3rd FEDERAL WORKER: When we go on furlough, then that means immediately we have no income, and even if it was just us, it would be one thing, but we have a child to take care of. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] And at this national park in Ventura County, California, rangers were preparing for limited operation. NATIONAL PARK RANGER: The areas will be closed off to the public, but we will maintain patrols of the area and maintain a patrol staff for emergency medical services, protection of the resource, and search and rescue operations. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] Back in Washington, twice as many people as usual showed up at the passport office, fearing the office would soon close. Two-thirty P.M. Presidential spokesman Mike McCurry threw cold water on a proposed compromise on Medicare and on the Congress’s overall approach to funding. MIKE McCURRY: The President is very concerned about 60 percent funding level. He has made that clear repeatedly in the statements he’s made the last two days, and that just is an unacceptable [crosstalk]. REPORTER: So that’s a veto. That means a veto, correct? MIKE McCURRY: It’s unacceptable. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] And with the White House unwilling to compromise, senators said they also were not interested, and that they would send the President their original funding bill. They pointedly noted they would remain on the job. Sen. BOB DOLE: We’re prepared to act up until midnight, or after, if necessary, to prevent a shutdown of the federal government. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] And the blame game continued. Rep. NEWT GINGRICH: We want the country to understand that the only way the government will close tomorrow is, it is President Clinton is determined to close it. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] And shortly before 9:00 P.M., congressional leaders reached out. Rep. NEWT GINGRICH: We want to go down and talk with the President about how to keep the government open, and to try to have a discussion about how we will get to a balanced budget and keep the government open, and the- he said no preconditions, and we said no preconditions. MICHEL McQUEEN: [voice-over] It was the Republicans who asked the President for the meeting, and while the phone call got them an invitation to the White House, it could not save their funding bill. Within the hour, the President issued a veto, his second of the day, guaranteeing a government shutdown at midnight. Got that? Just as Blankley said, the shutdown was indeed caused by Clinton’s vetoes. Not surprisingly, the facts weren’t getting in the way of Schultz’s point: SCHULTZ: Well, let me, so you don’t have history revisionism going on here, Tony, the fact is is that it was Newt Gingrich who made the decision based on the action of President Clinton that okay, that’s it, we’re just going to shut her down. The President was not advocating shutting down the Congress. Is that correct? BLANKLEY: That is not, that is not true. Newt passed, we passed, we passed the bill with the money and the debt limit raise which is what was required. By the way, I have a Congressional Research Service study that says the same thing. Republicans passed the bill. The President vetoed it. For the record, here’s what that CRS study said: The most recent shutdowns occurred in FY1996. There were two during the early part of the fiscal year. The first, November 14-19, 1995, resulted in the furlough of an estimated 800,000 federal employees. It was caused by the expiration of a continuing funding resolution (P.L. 104-31) agreed to on September 30, 1995, and by President Clinton’s veto of a second continuing resolution and a debt limit extension bill. Schultz still wasn’t giving up: SCHULTZ: Was, was… BLANKLEY: That’s the record! SCHULTZ: I don’t want to spend too much time on history… BLANKLEY: I know! SCHULTZ: …but the fact is President Clinton was not advocating shutting down the Congress… BLANKLEY: And neither, and neither were the Republicans. SCHULTZ: …nor does he have the power to do that. BLANKLEY: He did by, by vetoing the bill. SCHULTZ: Oh, okay, Because he didn’t play ball the way you guys wanted to… BLANKLEY: Exactly. SCHULTZ: …that’s how you interpret it. BLANKLEY: There was a real argument to be had and you could haggle over it. We wanted cuts in medicare spending, he didn’t. But the fact is we, we passed the legislation that would keep the government open. He vetoed it because he didn’t like the other provisions that were in it. Indeed, and no matter how much folks like Schultz want to blame that government shutdown on Gingrich and the Republican Congress, it was in fact Clinton that forced it with his vetoes. Not accepting defeat graciously, Schultz foolishly came back for more, and once again got destroyed by the astonishingly more knowledgable Blankley: SCHULTZ: Okay, so the next point is this. How did the next election go for the Republicans after that? BLANKLEY: We held onto the House for another ten years. SCHULTZ: And how many seats did you lose? BLANKLEY: ’95 to 2006 before we lost it. Talk about walking into a gunfight with a knife. For the record, despite Clinton’s re-election in 1996, he had absolutely no coat-tail that year as the Republicans did surprisingly well in the Congressional balloting losing only six seats in the House while gaining two in the Senate. As such, on this subject, Schultz was once again all wet. Of course, there’s a much larger issue here. The media are realizing that this November is going to be very bad for the Democrats they support, and they’re pulling out all the stops to lessen the damage. This of includes revising history much as Schultz attempted here to blame everything that has gone wrong in this country – even a government shutdown fifteen years ago – on the GOP. Beyond this, as Gingrich is rumored to be a presidential candidate in 2012, there’s a new movement by so-called journalists to tarnish his record irrespective of the facts. In this instance, the paltry number of people watching fortunately had Blankley there to correct the record. Sadly, on this shill network, that is rarely the case. Bravo, Tony! Bravo!
More:
Tony Blankley Destroys Ed Schultz in Debate About Clinton and Gingrich
In a report on Arizona’s immigration law for CBS’s Sunday Morning, correspondent John Blackstone declared: “In the heat of the Arizona summer, America’s long-simmering immigration debate is boiling over.” He portrayed it as the latest wave of anti-immigrant sentiment: “The often-angry debate….whether yet another influx of outsiders can be accepted into a nation of immigrants.” At the top of the program, the Early Show’s Harry Smith, filling in for host Charles Osgood, teased Blackstone’s report this way: “‘The New Colossus’ is the name of the Emma Lazarus poem about the Statue of Liberty, the poem that speaks of a ‘golden door’ for immigrants to America. S.B.1070 is the name of the Arizona law that critics say betrays that promise , but which supporters say is necessitated by a tide of illegal immigration.” As Blackstone introduced his report later, a series of newspaper headlines flashed on screen: “Ariz. immigration law creates rift; Obama Blasts Arizona Law; Arizona Enacts Stringent Law on Immigration.” He then profiled one illegal immigrant: “…the immigration debate…means everything to 23-year-old Hermann. He’s an undocumented immigrant we met at a church gathering….The current atmosphere leaves Hermann nervous but eager to tell his story.” A clip was played of Hermann fretting: “For eight years, I’ve been in the shadows, you know. It’s been to a point where you’re almost paranoid, walking around.” Blackstone touted Hermann’s accomplishments: “He went to high school and then college…The day of his college graduation, he was awarded not one degree, but two…And the speaker that day was President Obama.” Blackstone added: “It’s often said illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes. Hermann does pay taxes and showed me his returns.” Later in the story, after describing the “often-angry debate” over the issue, Blackstone observed: “In Arizona, fears that the state is being overrun by those who won’t wait and that the border is out of control don’t match reality, says Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano.” A clip was played of Napolitano: “There are more than twice as many border patrol agents at the border than just a few years ago. There’s more technology. There’s more infrastructure. There’s more air cover and there’s more every day on the way.” As she listed each border security effort, CBS was helpful enough to provide corresponding video footage to bolster her case. Blackstone continued: “Despite a perception that illegal immigrants are causing a crime wave, the FBI says violent crime near the border has actually fallen in the past decade….The Department of Homeland Security estimates the number of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. dropped from 11.6 million in January 2008, to 10.8 million in January 2009.” Napolitano claimed: “…the numbers are all going in the right direction.” Nearing the end of his report, Blackstone did some lobbying for a particular piece of immigration legislation: “Many young undocumented immigrants, like Hermann, have their hopes pinned on the Dream Act – legislation first introduced in 2001 that has stalled in Congress. It would award residency to many brought here as children, younger than 16, who have graduated from high school. Hermann sees the Dream Act as his chance to make a life in the country where he studied, works, and pays taxes.” Here is a full transcript of the August 8 segment: 9:00AM TEASE HARRY SMITH: ‘The New Colossus’ is the name of the Emma Lazarus poem about the Statue of Liberty, the poem that speaks of a ‘golden door’ for immigrants to America. S.B.1070 is the name of the Arizona law that critics say betrays that promise, but which supporters say is necessitated by a tide of illegal immigration. The heated debate is almost certain to end up before the Supreme Court. John Blackstone will report our cover story. JOHN BLACKSTONE: Each year, some 700,000 people from around the world are sworn in as American citizens. The controversy in Arizona and elsewhere is about the 500,000 or so who come in illegally each year. Hermann is one of them. Just you being here, you’re breaking the law. HERMANN: Absolutely. And – and the thing is that it’s an outdated law. JOHN BLACKSTONE: The immigration debate in Arizona and across the country, later on Sunday Morning. 9:09AM SEGMENT HARRY SMITH: S.B.1070 is the controversial Arizona immigration law that a federal judge found partially unconstitutional last month. As the appeal of that decision works its way toward the Supreme Court, the argument in the court of public opinion goes on as well. Our cover story is reported by John Blackstone. JOHN BLACKSTONE: In the heat of the Arizona summer, America’s long-simmering immigration debate is boiling over. CROWD PROTESTING IMMIGRATION LAW: Si se puede! Si se puede! [ON-SCREEN GRAPHIC OF NEWSPAPER HEADLINE: Ariz. immigration law creates rift] BLACKSTONE: While protestors take to the streets, the state and federal governments are fighting in court over who can write and enforce immigration law. [ON-SCREEN GRAPHIC OF NEWSPAPER HEADLINE: Obama Blasts Arizona Law] UNIDENTIFIED MAN A: We will not comply. UNIDENTIFIED MAN B: We will enforce the law. BLACKSTONE: When Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer signed the state’s tough new immigration law in April, she said it was needed because of Washington’s failures. [ON-SCREEN GRAPHIC OF NEWSPAPER HEADLINE: Arizona Enacts Stringent Law on Immigration] She was angered by the court decision, that temporarily at least, blocked major parts of the measure. JAN BREWER: Now they’ve got this temporary injunction, they need to step up, the feds do, and do the job that they have the responsibility to do for the people of America, and for the people of Arizona. JANET NAPOLITANO: All allegiance and fidelity. BLACKSTONE: Former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano now has responsibility for securing the border as secretary of Homeland Security. NAPOLITANO: There’s frustration out there. I think there’s a misconception that securing the border means sealing the border and anyone who’s been on the border knows that that’s just a physical impossibility among other things. You don’t seal the border but you secure the border. BLACKSTONE: Securing the border was Harold Beasley’s job for more than three decades. Now retired in Arizona, the current battle has him talking about putting on his uniform again. HAROLD BEASLEY: Why don’t you give it a try? Bring me out of retirement and give me 200 Border Patrol agents and I’ll show you how many people I can deport in a couple of months. You know, it’s – it’s – it’s – it’s a hard job, but you can do it. [CROWD PROTESTING IMMIGRATION LAW] BLACKSTONE: If the immigration debate means a lot to Harold Beasley, it means everything to 23-year-old Hermann. He’s an undocumented immigrant we met at a church gathering. He was brought here by his family when he was 15. HERMANN: And I completely fell in love with the country. I – I felt, you know, there’s so many opportunities. There’s so many things you can do here. I want to stay. I want to, you know, be someone. I want to go to school, be the best I can be. BEASLEY: I see people in my hometown of Phoenix, Arizona now demonstrating, carrying signs, saying that I owe them something. I owe them rights. I owe them, you know, welfare. I owe them this and I owe them that. BLACKSTONE: The estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona cost the state about $900 million dollars a year for education, health care, and incarceration, according to Arizona officials. And at a time when unemployment in Arizona is 9.6%, there are fears undocumented workers are taking jobs Americans should have. UNIDENTIFIED MAN C: We are America! Get over it! [SPLIT SCREEN: On Left: Protestor sign reading ‘Land of the Free! Really?’; On Right: Police officer in riot gear] BLACKSTONE: The current atmosphere leaves Hermann nervous but eager to tell his story. HERMANN: For eight years, I’ve been in the shadows, you know. It’s been to a point where you’re almost paranoid, walking around. But I think this is – it’s now or never, you know. You got to say what you got to say. BLACKSTONE: Hermann’s family came from Venezuela on tourist visas but never left. He went to high school and then college. HERMANN: And I worked full time while I was at school, almost 40 hours. Actually, my senior year, all throughout the – the year, I worked at nights, delivering newspapers. BLACKSTONE: The day of his college graduation, he was awarded not one degree, but two. HERMANN: Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Magna Cum Laude. And that’s my Bachelor of Arts in Psychology, Magna Cum Laude as well. BLACKSTONE: And the speaker that day was President Obama. BARACK OBAMA: We need young people like you to step up. We need your daring. We need your enthusiasm. We need your energy. We need your imagination. HERMANN: If there was a pathway for me to become legalized even right now, I would do it, I would do it. BLACKSTONE: It’s often said illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes. Hermann does pay taxes and showed me his returns. He doesn’t have a Social Security number; but the IRS gives undocumented workers a special taxpayer number, information that is not shared with immigration authorities. HERMANN: It’s funny how the system works. You know, they – they won’t give you that chance to work but they do want you to pay those taxes. BLACKSTONE: The often-angry debate here in Arizona reflects a discussion that’s been going on through much of America’s history. The country’s dilemma is whether yet another influx of outsiders can be accepted into a nation of immigrants. Each year, about 700,000 people raise their hands to be sworn in as American citizens. Getting into America legally isn’t quick or easy. Mumtaz Shamsee, from Pakistan, became an American citizen last month. MUMTAZ SHAMSEE: The whole process, since the day I arrived till the day I took my oath, is almost 19 years. BLACKSTONE: He came here first on a student visa. Then, after graduating as a computer engineer, he got a temporary work visa, and eventually citizenship. SHAMSEE: I feel like I earned my citizenship because the rule is if you are on work visa, H1, and you get laid off, you have to find another job or you are illegal, your status is illegal. You’re supposed to leave the country. BLACKSTONE: Fortunately for him, his skills were in demand in Silicon Valley so he could stay. Many other prospective immigrants have to wait patiently in their home countries. SUSAN CURDA: There has to be a visa number available, and sometimes that actually can take several years. BLACKSTONE: Susan Curda of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services says to come here legally most immigrants need either a job offer or an immediate family member already living here. Then get in line. CURDA: The countries that have the most people wanting to come to the United States, the wait’s going to be longer. BLACKSTONE: In Arizona, fears that the state is being overrun by those who won’t wait and that the border is out of control don’t match reality, says Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano. NAPOLITANO: There are more than twice as many border patrol agents at the border than just a few years ago. There’s more technology. There’s more infrastructure. There’s more air cover and there’s more every day on the way. [ON-SCREEN: Footage of Border Patrol efforts as Napolitano lists them] BLACKSTONE: Despite a perception that illegal immigrants are causing a crime wave, the FBI says violent crime near the border has actually fallen in the past decade: in Phoenix down 10%, in San Diego down 17%, in El Paso, Texas, down 36%. In fact, illegal immigration as a whole is actually declining, although the poor economy may have as much to do with that as improved border security. The Department of Homeland Security estimates the number of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. dropped from 11.6 million in January 2008, to 10.8 million in January 2009. NAPOLITANO: Even as that has been going on and the numbers are all going in the right direction and – and all the rest, I think there’s a realization, particularly in border states, that the underlying immigration law needs to be updated, needs to be reformed. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN A: It’s a fight for the Dream Act- BLACKSTONE: Many young undocumented immigrants, like Hermann, have their hopes pinned on the Dream Act – legislation first introduced in 2001 that has stalled in Congress. It would award residency to many brought here as children, younger than 16, who have graduated from high school. Hermann sees the Dream Act as his chance to make a life in the country where he studied, works, and pays taxes. HERMANN: This is my home. I – I do feel like I’m an American. You know, I have a great love, a great respect for this country. I’ve always had it. BLACKSTONE: But Hermann’s wish to live here legally is one shared by millions around the world. CROWD: And to the Republic for which it stands- BLACKSTONE: Many immigrants think coming to America is like winning a lottery. And that’s exactly how Paras and Davita Upadhyay from Nepal got here. They were winners of the State Department’s Diversity Visa Lottery, which awards 55,000 visas a year to people in countries that send few immigrants to America. DAVITA UPADHYAY: He was all excited, yeah. It was exciting. We were not expecting that. PARAS UPDHYAY: Yeah, we were not expecting that. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN B: Raise your right hands. BLACKSTONE: More people want to come to the United States than to anywhere else and that is a challenge of immigration reform. Among all those who dream of becoming American, how do we choose who to accept?
Follow this link:
CBS’s Blackstone: Immigration Debate ‘Boiling Over,’ ‘Often-Angry’
At the top of his eponymous program yesterday, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria took drastic action to protest the Anti-Defamation League’s opposition to the proposed Ground Zero mosque. Zakaria, who was honored by the ADL in 2005 with the Hubert H. Humphrey First Amendment Freedoms Prize, gave back his award because he was “deeply saddened” by the group’s respect for the families of 9/11 victims who oppose the construction of a mosque just two blocks from Ground Zero. “Given the position that they have taken on a core issue of religious freedom in America, I cannot in good conscience keep that award,” lamented Zakaria, who hoped that distancing himself from the ADL would compel the organization to realize its “mistake” and reverse its position. In his lengthy monologue, Zakaria vigorously defended Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s constitutional right to erect the mosque: “If this community center were being built anywhere else in the world, chances are the U.S. government would be funding it.” While Zakaria was correct to point out that strengthening ties between moderate Muslims and non-Muslims is a central focus of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he failed to realize the reason so many Americans oppose the construction of a mosque so close to Ground Zero is precisely because of its proximity to the 9/11 attacks committed by Islamic radicals. Displaying stock footage of former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich speaking at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference earlier in the year, Zakaria condemned “politicians who have shamelessly and shamefully capitalized on the public’s wariness” about the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero. Zakaria, eager to omit the most controversial details of the proposed construction project, uttered the word “mosque” only once is his screed, preferring the innocuous term “community center.” The Newsweek columnist proceeded to paradoxically bemoan the “disinformation about this center.” A full transcript of “Fareed’s Take” on the August 8 “Fareed Zakaria GPS” can be found below: You know that ever since 9/11, the United States has been trying to engage in a battle of ideas against radical Islam. Now, America can’t really get involved in a debate within Islam, so that means finding and supporting moderate Muslims. This is a cultural struggle that has been warmly supported by liberals and conservatives. In fact, many conservatives have argued that we should be engaged in a much more extensive and expensive effort to fund moderates and de-legitimize radical and violent Islam. Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, there have been active efforts worldwide to support Muslims who are trying to rescue their religion from extremists, fundamentalists, and jihadists. And this has meant funding mosques, Islamic centers, imams, and community leaders who share a peaceful and pluralistic vision of Islam, except, it turns out, if they are in our own back yard. The debate over the proposed community center to be built a few blocks away from the World Trade Center has missed this fundamentally important point. If this community center were being built anywhere else in the world, chances are the U.S. government would be funding it. The man behind it, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has spent years trying to offer a liberal interpretation of Islam. His most recent book, “What’s Right With Islam is What’s Right With America,” argues that America is actually what an ideal Islamic society would look like because it is peaceful, tolerant, and pluralistic. His vision for Islam, in other words, is Osama bin Laden’s nightmare – we should be encouraging such an Islamic center, not demonizing it. Now, there is of course the much more fundamental issue, freedom of religion in America, which is a founding principle of this country. The most eloquent and intelligent defense of that principle came last week from New York’s mayor, Michael Bloomberg, in an address that should be required reading in every civics class in America. There have, on the other hand, been politicians who have shamelessly and shamefully capitalized on the public’s wariness. The public is wary understandably because there has been so much disinformation about this center. But perhaps the most puzzling stand was taken by the Anti- Defamation League, which was founded to support the freedom of religion. The director of the ADL, Abraham Foxman, explained that the victims of 9/11 had feelings on this matter that should be respected even if they were irrational. First of all, there were many dozens of victims of 9/11 who were Muslim. Do their feelings count? More important, are irrational feelings, prejudices, hatreds OK because those expressing them are victims or see themselves as victims? Will the ADL defend the rights of Palestinian “victims” to be anti-Semites? I have to say I was personally deeply saddened by the ADL’s stand, because five years ago the organization honored me with its Hubert Humphrey Award for First Amendment freedoms. Given the position that they have taken on a core issue of religious freedom in America, I cannot in good conscience keep that award. So this week I’m going to return to the ADL the handsome medal and the generous honorarium that came with it. I hope this might spur them to see that they have made a mistake, and to return to their historic, robust defense of freedom of religion in America, something they have subscribed to for decades and which I honor them for.
See more here:
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Returns ADL Award in Protest to Position on Ground Zero Mosque
For the media, “Mission Accomplished” represents everything that was wrong with the George W. Bush administration and its war policy. The image of Bush declaring unequivocal victory mere weeks after the invasion of Iraq has been ballyhooed as a visual representation of Bush’s arrogance, naivete, even dishonesty (the media contrived most of this meme – more on that below). Will Barack Obama have a “Mission Accomplished” moment? That is, will the media seize on something he or his administration has said as evidence of the large gap between his rhetoric and the effects of his policies? In fact, the gap already exists. The White House’s ” Recovery Summer ” initiative and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s statement, ” welcome to the recovery ” are completely divorced from economic reality. The only question is whether the media will seize on the catchy and baseless slogans (the two criteria of the “Mission Accomplished” media standard) coming from the White House to illustrate the sizable gap between this administration’s rhetoric, and the facts on ground, so to speak. First, it should be noted that the “Mission Accomplished” meme, as trumpeted by the media since May, 2003, is largely a myth. Bush never delivered those words in the context portrayed by many media liberals. The phrase was never actually uttered on the USS Abraham Lincoln, where Bush spoke in front of a banner displaying the infamous phrase. In fact, the banner was draped from the ship with little involvement or input from the White House. And Bush, during the speech on May 1, 2003, made sure to note that “Our mission continues” and that “We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide.” In other words, Bush plainly stated that the overarching mission was not accomplished. Granted, he did say the following to a group of troops a month later: “America sent you on a mission to remove a grave threat and to liberate an oppressed people, and that mission has been accomplished.” But in the context of the time – when the search for weapons of mass destruction was still ongoing and Saddam Hussein had just been deposed – that statement was true. A grave threat in the Iraqi dictator had been removed, and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that bore the brunt of his dictatorial rule had been liberated. The lesson: truth matters less than perception and a coherent narrative in the creation of iconic images that promote or dog entire presidencies. The media’s “Mission Accomplished” meme abandoned truth in favor of a pithy and memorable way to get across a point they were already trying to make: the war effort was a bad idea. The Chicago Tribune channeled the media’s less flustered critics of the “Mission Impossible” statement, calling it ” dramatically premature .” The New York Times, on the other hand, labeled it a product of the president’s ” Never Never Land ” mentality on Iraq. “Welcome to the recovery” is certainly no less deserving – more so, in fact – of the iconic status afforded “Mission Accomplished” and the media’s disdain. Short, catchy, and lacking any real basis in reality, the phrase perfectly captures the Obama administration’s fingers-in-the-ears attitude towards their own economic policies. Three days after Geithner made his “welcome to the recovery” proclamation in the op-ed pages of the New York Times, the economy shed 131,000 jobs. The administration and its left-wing media cheerleaders touted the 71,000 private sector jobs created, not mentioning of course that about double that number would need to materialize for the economy to keep pace with new entrants in the job market. Ed Morrissey explains the numbers in more detail: This isn’t a Recovery Summer. It’s a slow slide, certainly better than the rapid disintegration of 2009, but we haven’t replaced those jobs yet, either. Job losses are cumulative. In a normal recovery with proper economic policies of lower barriers to investor entry, we would see a rapid replacement of jobs in this time frame that would take us back to somewhere around 80% of what was lost, with the remaining 20% being the most difficult to recover. We have not yet even begun that ascent. I’ll update this with a couple of slides later this morning to demonstrate the problem. Expect the White House to hail the best private-sector job creation numbers since March, but economists won’t get fooled. We’re still descending, and will until we get job creation solidly above 100,000 new additions per month. That Geithner’s “welcome to the recovery” statement was “dramatically premature” seems an understatement. is Tim Geithner stuck in Never Never Land? The Treasury Secretary’s declaration of the non-recovery recovery came in the middle of what the White House has formally dubbed its “Recovery Summer” campaign. The effort aims to promote “the surge in Recovery Act infrastructure projects that will be underway across the country in the coming months – and the jobs they’ll create well into the fall and through the end of the year,” according to a release. “Summer 2010 is actually poised to be the most active Recovery Act season yet,” the White House claimed in June. Total job losses during “Recovery Summer” have totaled 352,000 so far. The unemployment rate, meanwhile, has declined slightly, indicating that thousands of Americans have given up on their searches for jobs. Meanwhile, only a fifth of Americans believe the economy is improving, while three quarters believe the stimulus either had no effect on the economy, or has actually made things worse. In short, the “Recovery Summer” label is a joke, even given the modest (and that’s putting it generously) private-sector job creation so far this year. But will the media treat it with the disdain they did Bush’s “Mission Accomplished”? Will they call out Geithner for welcoming Americans to a non-existent recovery? If the economy doesn’t start gaining some steam, media neutrality will truly be put to the test.
See the rest here:
‘Recovery Summer’ vs. ‘Mission Accomplished’: Will MSM Immortalize Obama’s Laughable Proclamations?
The 2010 Teen Choice Awards, held at the Gibson Amphitheater on Sunday in Universal City, Calif., and airing tonight on Fox, were filled with big names. Sandra Bullock, for one. She didn’t walk the blue carpet, but accepted the award for choice movie actress for her Oscar-winning role in The Blind Side . “I don’t know if you should bring attention to this. Some things are better left unsaid. It’s been awhile since I was a teen,” she said. “I’m so blessed and lucky.” She then danced to Lil Jon’s “Get Low” with Betty White. Seriously. Sandra Bullock shows Betty White how to shake dat THANG . Among the other stars to walk away with prized surfboards included Selena Gomez, Channing Tatum, Taylor Lautner, Megan Fox and the cast of Glee . Katy Perry, who hosted the event, kicked off the night on a colorful and flashy stage with a stirring performance of her latest song, “Teenage Dream.” Teen pop sensation Justin Bieber accepted an award and sang “U Smile” via satellite. Who else took home awards for music, TV, movies and more? You can find out tonight at 8 p.m. on FOX … or you can just follow the jump for the full list of Teen Choice Awards winners right here, right now … MOVIES Choice Movie: Action Adventure: Sherlock Holmes Choice Movie Actor: Action Adventure: Channing Tatum, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra Choice Movie Actress: Action Adventure: Rachel McAdams, Sherlock Holmes Choice Movie: Sci-Fi: Avatar Choice Movie: Liplock: Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart, The Twilight Saga: New Moon Choice Movie: Fight: Mia Wasikowska vs. The Jabberwocky, Alice in Wonderland Choice Movie: Hissy Fit: Miley Cyrus, The Last Song Choice Movie: Chemistry: Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson, The Twilight Saga: New Moon Choice Movie: Male Breakout: Liam Hemsworth, The Last Song Choice Movie: Female Breakout: Taylor Swift, Valentine’s Day Choice Movie: Male Scene Stealer: Kellan Lutz, The Twilight Saga: New Moon Choice Movie: Female Scene Stealer: Ashley Greene, The Twilight Saga: New Moon Choice Movie Actor: Sci-Fi: Sam Worthington, Avatar Choice Movie Actress: Sci-Fi: Zo
Posted in Celebrities, Gossip
Tagged actor, blue, Celebrity, celebrity fashion, chemistry, Comedy, country, florida, glee, Gossip, kim kardashian, news update, teen choice awards
Written by Johnathan Silver, The Shorthorn Saad Nabeel could be back home by February 2011, if friends and friends of friends have something to say about it. Nabeel, a former UTA electrical engineering student, was deported to his home country of Bangladesh November 2009. His friends and supporters congregated on campus Friday to come up with a plan for his return to the states. Now, they’re eying U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to remove a 10-year ban Nabeel has from the U.S. His family lived in the United States illegally after petitions to stay failed, even though they entered the country with the government’s knowledge more than 15 years ago. When deported, the family’s green cards were in the process of being delivered. Nabeel and his mother pursued political asylum in Canada last year, but following misunderstandings, they were subjected to interrogations and eventually separated and imprisoned. Many people became aware of Nabeel’s story through national and international media. The stories may not have come to light though, if it weren’t for the existence of a Facebook page dedicated to getting Nabeel home. But don’t call the group of people a group, said organizer and UTA political science senior Priscylla Bento. Putting a name on these “individuals” would implement unnecessary protocol that groups endure, she said. “We’re just individuals, with different opinions, coming together to help Saad,” she said. Toward the end of the meeting, attendees contacted Nabeel via text message, and asked him to log on to Skype. Once he was online, meeting attendees asked Nabeel questions concerning his health. He said at first he was sick, but now he’s fine. His only challenge, he said, is dealing with not being able to leave his home since he’s unaccustomed to the foreign culture of his homeland. Beside Nabeel himself, Shawna McNary, a former classmate of Nabeel, has much institutional knowledge of Nabeel’s case. She said Nabeel is American at heart. “His favorite singer is Taylor Swift,” she said. “That says it all.” McNary, who jumped on board Nabeel’s case in the early stages, thought it was unfair for Nabeel to be put in the situation he’s in. Most people don’t think everything in their life could change one day, she said. But that will change soon, she said. “I want them to think your name when they go to sleep,” McNary told Nabeel. While the students are focusing on the U.S. Department of Justice, Nabeel’s immigration adviser Ralph Isenberg is linking Nabeel to the controversial DREAM Act. The DREAM Act is a piece of legislation under review by Congress that would create a path to legal residency for undocumented students. The amendment Isenberg suggested to senior members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, would grant the same path to students who were deported three years prior to the signing of the act. Isenberg said he considered helping Nabeel tackle the 10-year ban, but thought it just would be lost in the court system. “Is there anything that could work that could get this kid here earlier,” he said. “That’s when I thought about the DREAM Act.” Isenberg said Nabeel meets the other requirements for the benefits of the DREAM Act, but the amendment, which he’s considering having named “The Saad Amendment,” would serve Nabeel well. “I thought 'this guy [Nabeel] is a shoo-in,'” he said. “But it’s not just for Saad.” http://www.theshorthorn.com/content/view/19868/265/ added by: Jdharden
Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff
Tagged amendment, bangladesh, controversial, country, dream, Family, lost, nabeel, News, united-states
Breaking Sports Video
Pac-12 NCAA Sports
Justin Bieber Fan Site Breaking News
