Tag Archives: united-states

US Heat Waves Causing Trees to Change Colors (Video)

Photo via Nature in the Ozarks Man, it’s hot out there. How hot is it? Don’t worry, I’m not going to talk about climate change. I’m just trotting out some ideas for a Bob Hope-style comedy routine. And climate change would’ve probably been too edgy for Hope, anyway. So how hot is it? So hot that trees can’t decide what season it is. Okay, needs some work. But it’s true. CNN has this video about how the heat has confuse… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read more:
US Heat Waves Causing Trees to Change Colors (Video)

Tony Blankley Destroys Ed Schultz in Debate About Clinton and Gingrich

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

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Returns ADL Award in Protest to Position on Ground Zero Mosque

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

Obesity, Chemical Exposure Causing Some Girls to Hit Puberty at Age 7, Study Finds

Photo via WLS Channel An eye-opening study profiled in the New York Times reveals that some girls in the United States are hitting puberty at abnormally early ages — sometimes at 7 or 8 years old. There are a number of suspected causes for this potentially dangerous trend, chief among them childhood obesity and exposure to chemicals. This gives us yet another reason to e… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read the original post:
Obesity, Chemical Exposure Causing Some Girls to Hit Puberty at Age 7, Study Finds

Tell Google: Don’t be evil.

“Google's motto is 'Don't be evil,' but Google is about to cut a deal with Verizon that would end the Internet as we know it. According to a front-page New York Times story, the deal would allow 'Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content's creators are willing to pay for the privilege.' It would create fast Internet lanes for the largest corporations and slow lanes for the rest of us.” Please, sign the petition and don't let these corporations monopolize the information. Most news media are already biased and controlled by big corporations (link below). Internet is the only door left open to everyone, rich and poor, to voice a story, without discrimination, offering freedom of expression, diversity, and at times, the opportunity to leak important truths. http://www.change.org/credoaction/petitions/view/tell_google_dont_be_evil Here is a great link showing who owns the media: http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart/main “Select a chart: The Big Six – Cable – TV – Print – Telecom – Radio ” “GENERAL ELECTRIC: 2009 revenues: $157 billion General Electric media-related holdings include television networks NBC and Telemundo, Universal Pictures, Focus Features, 26 television stations in the United States and cable networks MSNBC, Bravo and the Sci Fi Channel. GE also owns 80 percent of NBC Universal.” “WALT DISNEY: 2009 revenues: $36.1 billion The Walt Disney Company owns the ABC Television Network, cable networks including ESPN, the Disney Channel, SOAPnet, A&E and Lifetime, 277 radio stations, music and book publishing companies, production companies Touchstone, Miramax and Walt Disney Pictures, Pixar Animation Studios, the cellular service Disney Mobile, and theme parks around the world.” “NEWS CORP: 2009 revenues: $30.4 billion News Corporation’s media holdings include: the Fox Broadcasting Company; television and cable networks such as Fox, Fox Business Channel, National Geographic and FX; print publications including the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and TVGuide; the magazines Barron’s and SmartMoney; book publisher HarperCollins; film production companies 20th Century Fox, Fox Searchlight Pictures and Blue Sky Studios; numerous websites including MarketWatch.com; and non-media holdings including the National Rugby League.” and much more at the link. WE, THE PEOPLE, HAVE A SAY IN SHAPING THE INFORMATION! Join the Organic Movement: http://current.com/groups/organicgreen/ added by: lookatmypix

Weekday Vegetarian: Using Up Eggplant from the Garden

Photo: Kelly Rossiter I wrote last week about how well the eggplant is doing in my garden and the eggplant stack I made, and this week my daughter brought a whole bunch more to the cottage. There are so many things you can do with eggplant and so many different flavours it works with. Although I love Asian-style eggplant dishes with soy sauce and hot chilies, I was feeling like making something more Mediterranean. I had some beaut… Read the full story on TreeHugger

See the original post here:
Weekday Vegetarian: Using Up Eggplant from the Garden

Full-Sized Urban Bicycle Folds Flat, Nearly Disappears: The ThinBike (Interview, Slideshow)

All images courtesy Graham Hill. Graham Hill, founder of TreeHugger.com, is an insatiable tinkerer/designer who strives for elegant design solutions. His latest foray into problem-solving, a collaboration with bike manufacturer Schindelhauer bikes , has resulted in what he calls the ThinBike — a full-sized urban bicycle that all but disappears when brought indoors. Graham shares with us some of the thinking behind his idea. Love it? Pick up your own via special order through Schindelhauer. TreeHugger: What is about that living in inner city apartments that has focuse… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read more:
Full-Sized Urban Bicycle Folds Flat, Nearly Disappears: The ThinBike (Interview, Slideshow)

Exclusive: 3OH!3 Announce North American Fall Tour

The Colorado electro-party-rap duo will hit the road beginning on October 14 in San Antonio. By James Dinh 3OH!3 Photo: MTV News Everyone’s favorite area-code-named electro-party-rap duo are hitting the road again. 3OH!3 have announced a six-week trek across the United States and Canada this October and November. The VMA nominees sent MTV News a video to break the news about their next set of “rad shows,” which will kick off on October 14 in San Antonio. They aim to hit the cities that they missed on their Too Fast For Love tour which they co-headlined with Cobra Starship and Travie McCoy. “We’re doing about five or six weeks on the road,” Nathaniel Motte said. Sean Foreman chimed in, saying, “We’ve got some awesome bands; we’re playing with hellogoodbye and Down With Webster and a very special guest, depending what city you are in.” In light of the difficult economy, the duo pledged to keep their ticket prices down. “I know it’s a hard. I know a lot of times concerts are really expensive and ticketing fees are really, really expensive, so it’s shame,” Motte said. “We’re doing everything we can to keep it low. We work with a lot of independent promoters. “We’re going to find cool, creative ways for you guys to avoid ticketing fees, keep ticket prices low and give you guys the best show for your mind,” Motte continued. Foreman even joked that they’d adjust their own diet to cut costs. “We’re eating SpaghettiOs, which is totally fine, because we prefer eating SpaghettiOs.” Much like they did on Too Fast for Love, 3OH!3 plan to make this tour as much of a party as ever. “It’s going to be huge party,” Foreman said. “All the acts are so stoked to come on this tour, and we’re all going to have a good time so come out and have a good time with us.” The upcoming tour will serve as a perfect venue to showcase new material off their recently released third album, Streets of Gold, which they said was “inspired by gold.” “Some of it’s really fun and just about kind of our life on the road and parties. There’s some heavier songs [too],” Foreman told MTV News earlier this summer. 3OH!3’s U.S. tour dates, according to their label:

‘Bhang’ to trigger new patent war?

An ancient Indian high could soon get 'bhang-alored' to the United States if the efforts of an American confectioner prove successful. Scott J Van Rixel, a New Mexico chocalatier, has applied to trademark a product called “Bhang: The Original Cannabis Chocolate.” Rixel's highly-anticipated confection, coming amid a rousing debate about legalizing marijuana in the US, is laced with a form of cannabis. If he gets his first creation through the system, Rixel says he plans to start selling at least two more types of 'Bhang' chocolates in the US and may even consider expanding the line to India. He has already incorporated a company named 'Bhang Chocolate Company Inc' for this new venture, according to the Wall Street Journal. While “Bangalored” has become part of the new-age tech lexicon to describe flight of American jobs to Bangalore, Bhang is the latest Indian product that is coming up for a patent and trademark spat between India and the west, following items such as neem, turmeric and basmati rice. Pundits believe Rixel's chances of getting his application through are low because the Indian government has moved quickly in recent years to build a database of traditional Indian biological and medical practices. The now 250,000-strong database, available to international patent offices for reference to stymie trademark infringement, lists “Bhang.” In fact, long before the US debate over medical marijuana erupted, India has a history of recognizing flower power, with the cannabis-based bhang renowned for its medicinal properties and even religious significance. Marijuana-based drinks such as “bhang ki thandai” and confections such as bhang burfi are commonly consumed during festivals such as Holi in north India. Read more: 'Bhang' to trigger new patent war? – US – World – The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Bhang-to-trigger-new-patent-war/arti… added by: JackHerer

Patricia Neal Passes Away at 84

Oscar-winning actress Patricia Neal, whose life was marred by both success and tragedy, has died at the age of 84 of cancer, according to media reports. Neal won an Academy Award for her role in the 1963 film Hud alongside Paul Newman and boasted a long list of stage, film and TV credits over decades. She once had an affair with actor Gary Cooper with whom she starred in The Fountainhead and Bright Leaf but it ended in disaster after his wife found out. She was married to the British writer Roald Dahl for 30 years with whom she had five children. Their son suffered severe injuries after being hit by a taxi when he just four months old and their oldest child, daughter Olivia, died from the measles. R.I.P. Patricia Neal (1926-2010). Many years later, Neal’s marriage to Dahl ended after 30 years in 1983 after the writer had an affair with one of her friends and she moved from England to the United States where she split her time between New York and Martha’s Vineyard. When Neal was pregnant with their fifth child in 1965 she suffered three massive strokes and was in a coma for three weeks, but eventually recovered. “I think I was born stubborn, that’s all,” Neal said in a biography on the website of the Patricia Neal Rehabilitation Center that was dedicated in her honor in 1978 by the Fort Sanders Regional Medical Center in Knoxville, Tennessee. Among her memorable performances are those in in 1950’s A Face in the Crowd , 1951’s The Day the Earth Stood Still , and 1960’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s. More recently, she appeared with Glenn Close in Cookie’s Fortune in 1999 and was featured in Lifetime’s movie Flying By with Billy Ray Cyrus in 2009.

The rest is here:
Patricia Neal Passes Away at 84