Monday, March 23, 2015


News Clips For The Day


1 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-threat-to-bomb-nato-warships-over-missile-defense-draws-rebuke/

NATO leaders balk at Russia's threat to nuke warships
CBS/AP
March 23, 2015

Photograph – U.S. troops place a Patriot air and missile defense launching system at a test range in Sochaczew, Poland, March 21, 2015, as part of a joint exercise with Polish troops to demonstrate the U.S. Army's capacity to deploy Patriot systems rapidly within NATO territory.  GETTY

BUCHAREST, Romania -- Britain's defense secretary says NATO members Romania and Britain will not be intimidated by threats against members of the military alliance.

"Neither Romania nor Britain will be intimidated by threats to its alliance or its members," Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said Monday during a one-day visit.

His remarks came days after Russia's ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said in a published report that Danish warships could become targets for Russian nuclear missiles if the Danes join the alliance's missile defense system. Bases are planned in the southern Romanian town of Deveselu and in Poland.

"I do not think Danes fully understand the consequences of what happens if Denmark joins the U.S.-led missile defense. If this happens, Danish warships become targets for Russian nuclear missiles," Vanin was quoted as saying by the newspaper Jyllands-Posten on Saturday.

Should Danes join "we risk considering each other as enemies," he added.

Vanin's comments prompted an angry response from Danish Foreign Minister Martin Lidegaard, who said they were "unacceptable" and that Vanin had "crossed the line" by saying that "everyone who joins" the shield "in the future will be a target for Russian ballistic missiles."

However, Lidegaard added that "it is important that the tone between us doesn't escalate."

"It never has and never had anything to do with Russia," Lidegaard said about the missile shield, saying the defense system was aimed at protecting against rogue states or terrorist organizations, among others.

U.S. Ambassador to Denmark Rufus Gifford wrote on Twitter Saturday that Vanin's comments "do not inspire confidence" or contribute to peace and stability.

East-West relations have worsened dramatically in the past year amid bitter tensions over Ukraine.

In August, Denmark agreed to contribute to NATO's shield with at least one frigate with advanced radar capacity.

Fallon said Britain would send one of its newest destroyers to the Black Sea port of Constanta in the fall. "We share Romania's concern about threats to security on the Black Sea region."

NATO decided in January to set up command-and-control centers in Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria by the end of 2016 in response to challenges from Russia and Islamic extremists and to reassure eastern partners.

Romania will also host a multinational division headquarters for the southeast and Poland will have a similar one for the northeast. In an emergency, the centers would help speed up the arrival of the new quick-reaction force.




“His remarks came days after Russia's ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said in a published report that Danish warships could become targets for Russian nuclear missiles if the Danes join the alliance's missile defense system. Bases are planned in the southern Romanian town of Deveselu and in Poland. "I do not think Danes fully understand the consequences of what happens if Denmark joins the U.S.-led missile defense. If this happens, Danish warships become targets for Russian nuclear missiles," Vanin was quoted as saying by the newspaper Jyllands-Posten on Saturday. Should Danes join "we risk considering each other as enemies," he added.... ATO decided in January to set up command-and-control centers in Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria by the end of 2016 in response to challenges from Russia and Islamic extremists and to reassure eastern partners. Romania will also host a multinational division headquarters for the southeast and Poland will have a similar one for the northeast. In an emergency, the centers would help speed up the arrival of the new quick-reaction force.”

The planned array of anti-missile technology across the Black Sea and Eastern Europe is a clearcut preventative measure to discourage Russia, North Korea or others from launching attacks on Europe. Russia is taking it as a provocation instead. However, if we have equipment located in strategic areas we will be much more able to protect ourselves than is the current situation. Lowering our guard against Russia to the degree that we have done since the demolishing of the Berlin Wall is beginning to look to me like an error. Their invasive moves into Ukraine may be just the beginning. Personally, I thought Putin was intelligent enough not to run the risk of outright war, especially nuclear war, but maybe I was wrong.





http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/03/22/394660553/ashraf-ghani-u-s-critical-to-afghanistans-future

Ashraf Ghani: U.S. Critical To Afghanistan's Future
Scott Neuman
MARCH 22, 2015

Photograph – Afghan President Ashraf Ghani at the Blair House in Washington, D.C. Ghani will be meeting with President Obama this week.
Emily Jan/NPR

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani tells NPR that most people in his country want a continued U.S. troop presence and that his government is determined to make sure that the self-declared Islamic State does not gain a foothold.

Ghani, on an official visit to the United States, spoke in a wide-ranging interview with Morning Edition host Renee Montagne to be broadcast on Monday.

He says the perception that Afghans are eager for U.S. troops to leave the country is simply untrue. "They see the United States as critical to their future," he says.

Ghani, who came to power in September succeeding longtime President Hamid Karzai, is expected to spend Monday at Camp David, Md., for discussions with Secretary of State John Kerry and to meet with President Obama at the White House on Tuesday.

He is also scheduled for talks with Defense Secretary Ashton Carter to discuss security and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew to talk about the economic challenges faced by Afghanistan.

Asked about ISIS, Ghani expressed concern that "terrorism is morphing into a system. ... It's becoming sophisticated. And more than anything else, it's controlling immense resources."

In Afghanistan, the Islamic State, he says, is "posing a threat, but we are determined to make sure that they do not do the kind of atrocities that they've managed so well in Syria, Iraq, Libya or Yemen."

One of the biggest challenges faced by his six-month-old government is corruption.

"It's a bottomless pit," acknowledges Ghani, a former World Bank official who has lived in the U.S.

"The good news is that it can be overcome. The bad news is that it requires an enormous amount of effort, determination and focus. And there'll be a lot of resistance to it," he tells NPR.

Salaries are a main area of concern, as officials skim a take before paying employees. Technology may solve the problem. Paying salaries by phone would "clear the middleman," he says.

He's already gone after the Kabul Bank, "which was notorious," he says.

"It was a case of a fraud. From Day 1, it was established as a Ponzi scheme," Ghani says.

An Afghan Supreme Court ruling last week has cleared the way to begin going after corrupt politicians and politically connected people implicated in the scheme "to get the depositors' money and use it for their own," he says.

"[All] the books were fake. And we've tackled it," Ghani says.

Despite his reputation as a reformer, however, Ghani has not managed to avoid criticism. Some suggested that he's acting more like a dictator than a president — micromanaging the approval of contracts issued by the government.

"I'm not taking power. I'm catalyzing systemic change. First you need to gather it in order to give it away in a credible and effective way," Ghani says.

"I'm too busy thinking about the larger issues to micromanage. All of my colleagues who've worked with me in the ministry of finance or other, they know I delegate," he says.





“Afghan President Ashraf Ghani tells NPR that most people in his country want a continued U.S. troop presence and that his government is determined to make sure that the self-declared Islamic State does not gain a foothold. Ghani, on an official visit to the United States, spoke in a wide-ranging interview with Morning Edition host Renee Montagne to be broadcast on Monday. He says the perception that Afghans are eager for U.S. troops to leave the country is simply untrue. "They see the United States as critical to their future," he says.... He is also scheduled for talks with Defense Secretary Ashton Carter to discuss security and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew to talk about the economic challenges faced by Afghanistan. Asked about ISIS, Ghani expressed concern that "terrorism is morphing into a system. ... It's becoming sophisticated. And more than anything else, it's controlling immense resources." In Afghanistan, the Islamic State, he says, is "posing a threat, but we are determined to make sure that they do not do the kind of atrocities that they've managed so well in Syria, Iraq, Libya or Yemen."

Ghani is being criticized by some for being “more like a dictator than a president — micromanaging the approval of contracts issued by the government.” He says he is merely going after the corrupt people and systems in an aggressive way. Hopefully he will succeed in maintaining a strong government, because otherwise Afghanistan may be confronted by IS, which he says is already present there, but is not running rampant as they have in Iraq, Syria, etc. Hopefully our troops will stay there to back Ghani's government in that fight.





http://www.npr.org/2015/03/23/394308609/is-a-confederate-flag-license-plate-free-speech

Is A Confederate Flag License Plate Free Speech?
Nina Totenberg
March 23, 2015

Photograph – The design of a proposed Sons of Confederate Veterans license plate.
AP/Texas Department of Motor Vehicles

The U.S. Supreme Court is tackling a question of great interest to America's auto-loving public: Whose speech is that on your specialty license plate? Specifically, when the government issues specialty tags at the behest of private groups or individuals, can it veto messages deemed offensive to others?

The specialty plate at the center of Monday's case was proposed by the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Texas division. The tag design featured a square Confederate battle flag, along with the organization's name. Texas produces specialty plates for a fee, but the design must first be approved by the state Department of Motor Vehicles board.

The Confederate veterans plate generated considerable controversy.

"Why should we as Texas want to be reminded of a legalized system of involuntary servitude, dehumanization, rape, mass murder?" asked state Senator Royce West at a public hearing about the plates in 2011.

But Granvel Block, a former commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, defended the proposed plate, countering that expecting the Confederate veterans group to delete the flag image would be "as unreasonable" as expecting the University of Texas to remove its logo from a plate "because Texas A&M graduates didn't care for it."

After several votes, the motor vehicles board rejected the proposed plate, finding that "a significant portion of the public associate[s] the Confederate flag with organizations" that demean or express hatred for minorities.

The Sons of Confederate Veterans sued, contending that the state of Texas was violating their free speech rights. A federal appeals court agreed, and the state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which hears arguments in the case Monday.

The state of Texas maintains that private groups can't commandeer the machinery of government to convey a message that the government doesn't want to associate with.

"The plaintiffs have every right to festoon their cars with bumper stickers or other images that display the Confederate battle flag," says former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell. "But they can't compel the state of Texas to propagate the Confederate battle flag by displaying it on state-issued license plates."

The Sons of Confederate Veterans reply that Texas, by statute, has a policy of honoring their forebears. Specifically, there is a state holiday honoring Confederate veterans.

"The lawyers working on this case get Confederate Heroes Day off," says R. James George, Jr., the lawyer representing the Confederate veterans group.

And there's more, he notes. There are Confederate battle reenactments on the Capitol grounds, monuments honoring Confederate veterans and the Capitol gift shop sells Confederate memorabilia.

Therefore, he argues, "The Department of Motor Vehicles does not have the authority to second guess the Legislature on whether or not to honor Confederate veterans since the Legislature has already decided that the other way."

Beyond that, George contends that the Constitution does not allow the government to ban certain speech simply because it's offensive.

That's a proposition that former Texas Solicitor General Mitchell rejects when the speaker is the state.

"If the rule's going to be no viewpoint discrimination," we couldn't "turn down anyone." he says. "Everything would have to come in — swastikas, sacrilege, overt racism, you name it."

For governments large and small, drawing these lines is fairly common — whether the message is on a license plate, or on a proposed monument in a public park, or even on a brick purchased for a public pathway or memorial.

In a country that loves its cars, of course, license plates are enormously important. Nearly 40 years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the government may not require drivers to put license plates on their cars that carry an ideological message they disagree with — in that case, Jehovah's Witnesses in New Hampshire objected to license plates that bore the state motto, "Live Free or Die."

In Monday's case, the question is reversed, testing whether the government may reject some messages in a specialty plate program.




“Whose speech is that on your specialty license plate? Specifically, when the government issues specialty tags at the behest of private groups or individuals, can it veto messages deemed offensive to others?.... "Why should we as Texas want to be reminded of a legalized system of involuntary servitude, dehumanization, rape, mass murder?" asked state Senator Royce West at a public hearing about the plates in 2011. But Granvel Block, a former commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, defended the proposed plate, countering that expecting the Confederate veterans group to delete the flag image would be "as unreasonable" as expecting the University of Texas to remove its logo from a plate "because Texas A&M graduates didn't care for it." … The state of Texas maintains that private groups can't commandeer the machinery of government to convey a message that the government doesn't want to associate with.... "If the rule's going to be no viewpoint discrimination," we couldn't "turn down anyone." he says. "Everything would have to come in — swastikas, sacrilege, overt racism, you name it.".... Nearly 40 years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the government may not require drivers to put license plates on their cars that carry an ideological message they disagree with — in that case, Jehovah's Witnesses in New Hampshire objected to license plates that bore the state motto, "Live Free or Die."

I'm just glad that I don't live in Texas, or anywhere in the West. It has tended to be a rather lawless area from our country's beginnings. Too many of the citizens there are, in my opinion uncivilized, and this is one more example of that. I hate to see government bodies give in to fostering hate speech. The US is supposed to be a nation of peace and justice for all. Unfortunately we're still working to achieve that, with the haters fighting against that effort tooth and nail.





http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/03/08/3631184/selma-gop-lawmakers-explain-dont-support-john-lewis-bill-restore-voting-rights-act/

In Selma, GOP Lawmakers Explain Why They Don’t Support John Lewis’ Bill To Restore Voting Rights Act
BY ALICE OLLSTEIN 
POSTED ON MARCH 8, 2015

Photograph – Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) says hasn’t read the bill to restore the Voting Rights Act.
CREDIT: ALICE OLLSTEIN

SELMA, ALABAMA — Dozens of members of Congress, and many more Republicans than ever before, came to Selma this week to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the infamous attack on voting rights protesters known as Bloody Sunday.

Some lawmakers told ThinkProgress the event highlighted the urgency of passing a currently languishing bill that would restore the full powers of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Others showed little interest in doing so.

On his way to the commemoration ceremony, Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) said it’s been “powerful” to hear stories from Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who helped lead the Selma march 50 years ago and was severely beaten by police. But when ThinkProgress asked if he supports Lewis’ voting rights bill, he replied, “I haven’t looked at it. Is there a Senate version?”

A Senate version was introduced several weeks ago, and currently has zero Republican sponsors.

Portman, who has advocated for cuts to Ohio’s early voting period and voted against the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, added before walking away: “This day is about more than just tweaks to the Voting Rights Act. This is about ensuring equal justice and learning from the lessons of the past.”

This year’s congressional delegation also included Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) — a vocal supporterof voter ID laws in South Carolina — and Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN), who has tried to pass laws to require proof of citizenship for voting, a policy found to disenfranchise eligible voters in other states.

While walking to the VIP section of the Selma anniversary event, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) said of Lewis’ bill: “I haven’t studied it sufficiently to comment on it.” And while Lewis, President Obama and others emphasized Saturday how far the country still has to go to eradicate racism and voter suppression, Sessions told ThinkProgress: “I think we’ve had so much improved voting rights in Alabama that the Court was probably correct [to strike down part of the Voting Rights Act].”

Citing the recent surge in voter ID laws, cuts to early voting and gerrymandering, Alabama’s voters of color, civil rights groups and Democratic lawmakers say otherwise.

“We are witnessing a renewed assault on voting rights and civil rights, and we in Congress have work to do,” Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL) told ThinkProgress. “I’m not going to force my own views on my colleagues or question their motives, but I hope people come away with a renewed sense of their responsibility as lawmakers to further those ideals.”

Other Democrats on the delegation were much more pointed.

“It is a sin that we have not in the U.S. Congress re-invigorated the Voting Rights Act and gotten it back to the President for a signature. That’s what we ought to be talking about in Selma today,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).

Vermont Senator and rumored presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I) added, “What happened on that bridge that day was a huge step forward for democracy in America. But what is happening right now – not just in the South but all over this country – are efforts by Republican governors and Republican legislatures to make it harder for African-Americans, for low-income people and for senior citizens to vote.”

Some civil rights leaders, including Wade Henderson with the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, accused some of the visiting lawmakers from both parties of hypocrisy.

“Commemoration requires legislation. Selma isn’t just a photo op, it’s a solemn remembrance of the blood, sweat, tears, and lives that went into securing voting rights for racial minorities in this country,” he said. “The Bloody Sunday march is not a parade, and it is hypocritical for members to attend the event and then do nothing to advance a VRA restoration.”

Sewell, a native of Selma and granddaughter of sharecroppers, was born just two months before Bloody Sunday. Now, she’s the first African American woman to represent Alabama in Congress. When she returns to DC next week after being, in her words, the “hostess with the mostest” in Selma, she hopes to call on her colleagues to restore that law that has defined her life and career.

“I know that I get to walk the halls of Congress today because of the blood that was shed on that bridge and the courage of foot soldiers black and white who were willing to make that sacrifice,” she said. ”

But other lawmakers on the delegation said the most effective pressure won’t come from inside Congress, but from the grassroots. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) told ThinkProgress that just like 50 years ago, “It’s the young people and the peaceful protests that are going to force Congress to do the right thing.”



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/11/voting-rights-act-bipartisan-bill_n_6598062.html

Bill To Restore Voting Rights Act Gets Another Bipartisan Push
Jennifer Bendery
 02/18/2015 

“…. The bill, introduced Wednesday by Reps. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and John Conyers (D-Mich.), responds to the Supreme Court ruling that struck down Section 4 of the law in 2013. In a 5-4 vote, the court declared it was time to update the section, which determined which states and localities with a history of minority voter suppression had to clear changes to their voting laws with the Justice Department. The justices left it up to Congress to come up with a new formula for designating which regions of the country require special scrutiny.

The Sensenbrenner-Conyers bill, known as the Voting Rights Amendment Act, updates that formula by making it apply to all states and jurisdictions with voting violations in the past 15 years, and by creating uniform transparency requirements to keep communities informed about voting changes.

The legislation actually expands the Voting Rights Act, too, by giving more power to federal courts to stop discriminatory voting changes before they are implemented. Specifically, it would lower the bar for plaintiffs seeking a preliminary injunction of a law in any federal court.

“The VRA is one of the most important pieces of civil rights legislation ever passed," said Sensenbrenner. "Our legitimacy as elected officials relies on the integrity of the ballot box. I urge my colleagues to support the VRAA because it is vital to our commitment to never again allow racial prejudices in the electoral process."




“Dozens of members of Congress, and many more Republicans than ever before, came to Selma this week to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the infamous attack on voting rights protesters known as Bloody Sunday. Some lawmakers told ThinkProgress the event highlighted the urgency of passing a currently languishing bill that would restore the full powers of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Others showed little interest in doing so.... And while Lewis, President Obama and others emphasized Saturday how far the country still has to go to eradicate racism and voter suppression, Sessions told ThinkProgress: “I think we’ve had so much improved voting rights in Alabama that the Court was probably correct [to strike down part of the Voting Rights Act].” Citing the recent surge in voter ID laws, cuts to early voting and gerrymandering, Alabama’s voters of color, civil rights groups and Democratic lawmakers say otherwise.... “It is a sin that we have not in the U.S. Congress re-invigorated the Voting Rights Act and gotten it back to the President for a signature. That’s what we ought to be talking about in Selma today,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Vermont Senator and rumored presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I) added, “What happened on that bridge that day was a huge step forward for democracy in America. But what is happening right now – not just in the South but all over this country – are efforts by Republican governors and Republican legislatures to make it harder for African-Americans, for low-income people and for senior citizens to vote.”.... But other lawmakers on the delegation said the most effective pressure won’t come from inside Congress, but from the grassroots. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) told ThinkProgress that just like 50 years ago, “It’s the young people and the peaceful protests that are going to force Congress to do the right thing.”

The Voting Rights Amendment Act, now before the legislature, needs support from the grass roots, according to Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), so write your Congressional and Senate representatives and tell them to support it. You can get in touch with them via the Internet by entering your zip code. It only takes a few minutes.






http://www.cbsnews.com/news/marijuana-far-more-potent-than-it-used-to-be-tests-find/

Marijuana far more potent than it used to be, tests find
CBS NEWS
March 23, 2015

Photograph – Marijuana samples tested at a Colorado lab had an average THC content of 20 percent, far more potent than a generation ago.  ISTOCKPHOTO

This is not your parents' pot.

Today's marijuana is more potent by far than the weed sold a generation ago, according to new data being presented Monday at the national meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS).

The research comes from Charas Scientific, one of a handful of labs certified to test the potency of marijuana in Colorado, where recreational use of the drug became legal last year.

"We've seen a big increase in marijuana potency compared to where it was 20 or 30 years ago," lab founder and director of research Andy LaFrate, Ph.D., said in a video released by ACS. Based on testing in laboratory equipment, "I would say the average potency of marijuana has probably increased by a factor of at least three. We're looking at average potencies right now of around 20 percent THC."

THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, is the psychoactive compound in marijuana that acts on the brain to produce the feeling of being high.

"As far as potency goes, it's been surprising how strong a lot of the marijuana is," LaFrate said of the samples his lab has tested in recent months. "We've seen potency values close to 30 percent THC, which is huge."

The National Institute on Drug Abuse says the potency of marijuana has been steadily increasing over the past few decades, but a level of 20 or 30 percent THC is even greater than the institute has reported in the past. As of 2012, it said marijuana confiscated by police agencies nationwide had an average THC concentration of about 15 percent, up from about 4 percent in the 1980s.

According to the institute, higher concentrations of THC in marijuana could mean "a greater chance of an adverse or unpredictable reaction," especially in new users. And "for frequent users, it may mean a greater risk of addiction." Officials say more potent pot could also be one of the reasons behind a rise in emergency room visits involving marijuana use.

THC concentrations can be manipulated by marijuana growers who cross-breed strains for increased potency.

The process of cross-breeding may also be responsible for another change in the makeup of some of the marijuana tested by Charas Scientific. Many samples turned out to contain little or no cannabidiol, or CBD, a compound in pot believed to have a number of potential medicinal uses. Scientists are researching its possible role in treating neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's and Huntington's disease, as well as conditions like seizure disorders, anxiety andschizophrenia.

One other finding LaFrate reports from his lab is the presence of contaminants in many marijuana samples.

Testing for contamination is required in Washington state, which also has legalized marijuana, but not currently in Colorado, where regulators are still working on establishing standards. Charas Scientific says some Colorado producers submitted samples for voluntary testing -- and they may not like the results.

"It's pretty startling just how dirty a lot of this stuff is," LaFrate said. Some plants turned out to be harboring fungi or bacteria.

"It's a natural product," he said. "There's going to be microbial growth on it no matter what you do. So the questions become: What's a safe threshold? And which contaminants do we need to be concerned about?"

Previous testing at another Colorado lab, reported by CBS News last year, found mold, mildew, E. coli and salmonella in some marijuana.

The head of the state's Marijuana Enforcement Division has said rules governing testing for contamination were being written, but the agency has not said when they will be announced.





“The National Institute on Drug Abuse says the potency of marijuana has been steadily increasing over the past few decades, but a level of 20 or 30 percent THC is even greater than the institute has reported in the past. As of 2012, it said marijuana confiscated by police agencies nationwide had an average THC concentration of about 15 percent, up from about 4 percent in the 1980s. According to the institute, higher concentrations of THC in marijuana could mean "a greater chance of an adverse or unpredictable reaction," especially in new users. And "for frequent users, it may mean a greater risk of addiction." Officials say more potent pot could also be one of the reasons behind a rise in emergency room visits involving marijuana use.”

I have been concerned about everyone jumping on the band wagon of legalizing pot and using it for medicinal purposes. Last night on the news the report said that the chemical that is responsible for helping in various medicinal uses – which is not THC – has at the same time been bred out of many samples of marijuana. So this looks to me to be not only dangerous, but no longer valid as a medication. It is going to be a growing problem, I'm afraid, as more and more unregulated interbreeding for increasing the THC continues. The popularity of legalizing the new “weed” is probably due to the millions of dollars that can be made by growing and selling it. This is really a bad situation. There will be increasing health issues about the matter, and more addiction among users. This is very discouraging.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/americas-next-economic-crisis-is-already-here/

America's next economic crisis is already here
By AIMEE PICCHI MONEYWATCH
March 23, 2015

Video – Is America losing the war on poverty?

For Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam, growing up in the 1950s in Port Clinton, Ohio, was a time of opportunity, allowing classmates of all backgrounds to achieve the American dream. That's far from the reality today.

The ability to climb the socioeconomic ladder -- a hallmark of that dream -- has become much harder in recent decades, a pall of downward mobility Putnam notes is visible across his hometown when he returns to visit today. In his new book "Our Kids," Putnam describes how rich and poor are increasingly segregated by neighborhood, while many poor young people in Port Clinton not only fail to attend college, but also often stumble through life without guidance from family members or adult role models.

While "Our Kids" is peppered with statistics, the book is told through anecdotes and interviews of children of both poor and wealthy families, illustrating the different outcomes that kids from both sides of the track can now expect. David, an 18-year-old in Port Clinton, grew up as the son of drug-addled parents and has nine half-siblings. He attended seven different elementary schools, and after leaving school had temporary jobs in fast food and landscaping. He told the researchers he felt he had had no adults looking out for him when he was growing up.

When co-researcher Jennifer Silva "sent back these reports of these interviews with these young kids, at first the rest of the team was a little skeptical," Putnam told CBS MoneyWatch. "Where did Jen find these kids that were leading such awful lives? She had stumbled into an unbelievable change in this little town."

Port Clinton isn't an anomaly, Putnam added. His group's research into towns ranging from Austin, Texas, to Bend, Oregon, found the same trend: Impoverished children are increasingly separated from middle-class and upper-income students and given fewer opportunities for programs that enhance their education and enrich their lives, such as after-school activities and advanced placement classes. Family structures have also crumbled for many poor families, creating unstable social networks that leave impoverished children without guidance and role models.

"What we discovered is that Port Clinton's history over the last 50 years reflects in microcosm, like a little drop of water reflecting the world, the rest of America: the collapse of community, the growing isolation of poor kids and the growing income gap," said Putnam, who is also the author of the 2000 book "Bowling Alone," which examined the breakdown of American social organizations. "We saw this wasn't some peculiar Rust Belt story. It was a nationwide story."

While the problem has been exacerbated by long-term social trends, such as drug usage and single parenting, economic inequality is also striking at the roots of social mobility. Childhood poverty hit a 20-year high in 2010, while 1 in 5 American children now rely on food stamps. At the same time, the richest Americans now take home 20 percent of all pre-tax income, or more than double their share in 1980. By contrast, wages for working-class Americans have stagnated or fallen, while the manufacturing sector, which once supplied many jobs in towns like Port Clinton, have dried up.

Putnam examines how those trends are playing out in the day-to-day lives of poor children. Compared with a half century ago, for instance, it's now less likely that people of different socioeconomic classes will marry, increasing income segregation. That means poor children have fewer relatives with the means to help them advance in life.

Children from families in the top quarter as ranked by education and income were 17 times more likely to attend a selective college in 2014 than children in the bottom quarter. At the same time, poorer youths are increasingly concentrated in community colleges, where many fail to graduate.

What that means is that many poor American children today are suffering from both an inequality of outcome -- the ability to achieve a middle-class standard through hard work, for instance -- and inequality of opportunity, or starting life without the same advantages as wealthier children. In Putnam's view, poor children today are increasingly defined, and limited by, the income bracket they are born into.

Because America is increasingly segregated by class, with the "haves" living in wealthy enclaves and the "have-nots" living in their own neighborhoods with often underperforming schools, Putnam noted that the problem is out of view for many upper-income families.

"Lots of good people, because of growing economic segregation and economic separation, are just not as aware of what life on the other side of the tracks is like," he said. "There should be more outrage. I want people on the upside really to be face to face with those realities."

The problem, Putnam argues, doesn't only affect the poor. The issue of child poverty impacts all Americans and threatens the nation's economy, he said.

"The fact of the matter is that America's gross national product is about 4 percent lower than if we solved these problems," he said. "Poor kids are costly" because of lower productivity and higher criminal costs.

Too many people have "zero sum" thinking about the problem, he added, given that some cite concerns that increased spending on poor schools or children could mean fewer resources for the middle class. That kind of thinking is "not correct," he said.

"In the Progressive era, we invested through the public high school system," Putnam said, alluding to the tide of social and economic reform that reshaped America's politics in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. "You could have said, 'We're wasting money on high school,' but now we know the outcome: Everyone was a lot better because we invested in everybody's kids."

While the book offers suggestions for policy changes that could help alleviate the growing gap, some critics have taken Putnam to task for failing to hold anyone responsible for the surge in inequality and class segregation. After all, during America's first Gilded Age, "muck-raking" journalists and progressive politicians alike did not shy away from apportioning blame for the country's frequent economic spasms, while President Theodore Roosevelt famously inveighed against the "malefactors of great wealth" who he held responsible for the financial instability.

Responding to such critiques, Putnam said his goal with "Our Kids" was to persuade fellow Americans about the serious issues ahead, rather than to polarize.

"I've been told you need villains to win," he said. "The first person to tell me that was Ralph Reed, the far right evangelical. 'No villains, no success,' he said. I am surprised to find him echoed by people on the left."

He added, "You don't need yet another polemical book to talk about what's right and wrong about Obamacare or Reaganomics. I wanted to champion poorer kids. I wanted to widen the number of Americans who think we should do something about poor kids."

Among the economic remedies Putnam supports is expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit and protecting anti-poverty programs such as food stamps, which have come under fire from some conservative politicians and their supporters. Mixed-income housing could help bridge income segregation, while investing money in, and recruiting better teachers for, poor schools also could pay dividends.

"The idea that every American should start at the same place is one of our fundamental American values," Putnam said. "We'd all be richer if we fix the problem, and we would be living up to our basic national values."





“For Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam, growing up in the 1950s in Port Clinton, Ohio, was a time of opportunity, allowing classmates of all backgrounds to achieve the American dream. That's far from the reality today. The ability to climb the socioeconomic ladder -- a hallmark of that dream -- has become much harder in recent decades, a pall of downward mobility Putnam notes is visible across his hometown when he returns to visit today. In his new book "Our Kids," Putnam describes how rich and poor are increasingly segregated by neighborhood, while many poor young people in Port Clinton not only fail to attend college, but also often stumble through life without guidance from family members or adult role models.... Impoverished children are increasingly separated from middle-class and upper-income students and given fewer opportunities for programs that enhance their education and enrich their lives, such as after-school activities and advanced placement classes. Family structures have also crumbled for many poor families, creating unstable social networks that leave impoverished children without guidance and role models.... At the same time, the richest Americans now take home 20 percent of all pre-tax income, or more than double their share in 1980. By contrast, wages for working-class Americans have stagnated or fallen, while the manufacturing sector, which once supplied many jobs in towns like Port Clinton, have dried up.... Compared with a half century ago, for instance, it's now less likely that people of different socioeconomic classes will marry, increasing income segregation. … Too many people have "zero sum" thinking about the problem, he added, given that some cite concerns that increased spending on poor schools or children could mean fewer resources for the middle class. That kind of thinking is "not correct," he said.... Among the economic remedies Putnam supports is expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit and protecting anti-poverty programs such as food stamps, which have come under fire from some conservative politicians and their supporters. Mixed-income housing could help bridge income segregation, while investing money in, and recruiting better teachers for, poor schools also could pay dividends.”

"The idea that every American should start at the same place is one of our fundamental American values," Putnam said. "We'd all be richer if we fix the problem, and we would be living up to our basic national values," Putnam states. I think that is the opinion of most liberals, but not by any means of the conservatives. There is none of the good will toward “lower” classes that this statement assumes. The wealthy tend to be lacking in concern for real poverty, and assuming it is because those people are “lazy,” or “stupid,” and if they would simply work harder they would be okay.

Now I agree that many kids who aren't doing well in school are falling behind because they consider studying hard to be “thinking white,” or sometimes just too difficult for them to achieve, causing them to give up. There are those who are held back, however, by the poor educational level of their parents, even though they do try to study and learn. One of the most important differences between the poor and the rich is the elevated vocabulary level of wealthy parents, and their increased access to live theater, books, the ballet and concerts, tutoring, travel and the competition to achieve competitively among the upper class kids. Still most of that boils down to the effects of poverty. Such kids can also have a lack of food to eat and acceptable clothes to wear in too many cases. From an economic perspective, we can't keep giving more and more tax writeoffs to the wealthy and expect the situation to turn around.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chris-borland-retirement-the-best-decision-for-me/

Chris Borland on retirement: "The best decision for me"
By REBECCA KAPLAN FACE THE NATION
March 22, 2015

NFL rookie Chris Borland, the San Francisco 49ers player who announced his retirement after just one season, said on CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday that his choice to quit to avoid long-term consequences of frequent head trauma is "the best decision for me."

"The decision was simple after I had done a lot of research and it was personal," Borland said. "I was concerned about neurological diseases down the road if I continued to play football, so I did a lot of research and gathered a lot of information and to me the decision made sense."

The NFL and anyone connected to the sport of football have been struggling with rising concern over number of concussions that players can suffer while playing. After Borland announced his retirement, the league's senior vice president of health and safety policy, issued a statement saying, "by any measure, football has never been safer and we continue to make progress with rule changes, safer tackling techniques at all levels of football, and better equipment, protocols and medical care for players."

"We are seeing a growing culture of safety. Everyone involved in the game knows that there is more work to do and player safety will continue to be our top priority," he said.

While Borland said that may be true, "football is inherently dangerous and that will never change." In the midst of an intense play, he said, "talking about the culture of safety is really irrelevant."

He said he didn't want to send a message to people that they shouldn't play football at all, but he did urge young players not to play through concussions. He noted that such a small percentage of players make it to the college level - and an even smaller number go pro - that you shouldn't "do anything silly" at the age of 16 or 17. Borland himself said he has played through concussions, and that other players are likely to do so as well.

"I love the visceral feeling of the violence of the game; I think everyone that plays at a high level is passionate about that," he said. "However I don't think you shouldn't be informed and you should have every opportunity to know all you can about the dangers of that feeling that you love and the sport that you're passionate about."

He said he has no remorse about losing out on millions of dollars and answered critics who said he was making a cash grab by playing for just one year.

"I'm paying back three fourths of my signing bonus. I'm only taking the money I've earned," he said. "This to me this is just about health and nothing else. I never played the game for money and attention. I love football and I've had a blast. I don't regret the last 10 years of my life at all. I'd do it over the exact same way."




"I love the visceral feeling of the violence of the game; I think everyone that plays at a high level is passionate about that," he said.” As far as I'm concerned this alone is reason enough to ban football at all levels of play. We need less violence in our culture, not more. Setting that aside, however, I am glad to see a wise and intelligent young man deciding to quit a sport that would give him wealth and fame in order to save his brain from a slow but severe degredation with symptoms like Alzheimer's. He has certainly chosen the right path, and he is the second one in the last couple of months to do so. Sidney Rice recently retired from the Seahawks. I hope more will follow suit as they think of other ways to make money that aren't so dangerous. So what if they have to get a sales or construction job. Maybe they could go to Hollywood and become an actor like several have done.





http://news.yahoo.com/netanyahu-allies-blame-white-house-criticism-misunderstanding-142940021.html

Netanyahu allies blame White House criticism on misunderstanding
By Jeffrey Heller – Reuters
March 22, 2015

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Benjamin Netanyahu's allies acknowledged on Sunday that his election-eve disavowal of a Palestinian state had caused a rift with the White House, but blamed U.S. President Barack Obama's unprecedented criticism on a misunderstanding.

In the United States, where relations with Netanyahu have become a partisan issue after generations in which support for Israel was a point of bipartisan unity, Republican Senator John McCain said Obama should get over his "temper tantrum".

The Israeli prime minister pledged on the eve of his re-election victory last week that there would never be a Palestinian state while he is prime minister.

The remarks were widely interpreted as a rejection of the "two-state solution" that has been the basis of decades of talks to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, brokered by successive U.S. Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

Since winning re-election, Netanyahu has tried to row back, arguing that he was not rejecting Palestinian statehood in principle, but responding to a reality in which the Palestinian Authority has a political pact with the Islamist group Hamas, under which statehood would be unacceptable.

But Obama said on Friday Netanyahu's comments had made it "hard to find a path" back to serious peace negotiations. He told Netanyahu on Thursday that Washington would have to "reassess" its policies in the Middle East.

Israel's Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz, a close Netanyahu ally, acknowledged the problem but pointed the finger at Washington for failing to understand the prime minister's position.

"If the Americans are finding it difficult to understand or accept our clarifications (on Palestinian statehood), this is certainly worrying and requires tending to," he told Israel Radio. "He (Netanyahu) didn't say this (statehood) is 'unacceptable'. He said reality has changed."

Israel's close alliance with the United States has been a fundamental pillar of its security throughout its 67 year history, and Netanyahu's political foes have accused him of jeopardizing it.

Netanyahu has long had a difficult relationship with Obama, and made it worse two weeks before the election by addressing the U.S. Congress at the invitation of opposition Republicans to condemn the administration's nuclear negotiations with Iran.

Asked if U.S.-Israel relations were at a dangerous point, McCain, a leading voice on foreign affairs in the Republican-controlled Congress, said: "I think that's up to the president of the United States".

"Get over your temper tantrum, Mr. President," McCain said on CNN. "The least of your problems is what Bibi Netanyahu said during an election campaign. If every politician were held to everything they say in a political campaign, obviously that would be a topic of long discussion."

Amos Yadlin, a former chief of Israeli military intelligence aligned with the center-left Zionist Union which lost the vote to Netanyahu, said Israel would "pay a price" for Netanyahu's remarks on statehood, which had caused "fury" in Washington.

"I'm not among those who panic: I don't think the United States will impose sanctions on Israel. But I see places in which it will go much harder for us," said Yadlin, who returned a day earlier from a visit to the U.S. capital. "Firstly, they used a word that they haven't used since 1975 - 'reassessment', a reassessment of relations."

President Reuven Rivlin began the formal process on Sunday of consulting political parties to nominate a candidate to form a governing coalition, largely a foregone conclusion after Netanyahu's victory.

Netanyahu, leader of the right-wing Likud party, is likely to be given the nod as early as Wednesday to start what could be up to 42 days of negotiations with potential cabinet partners. He is expected to build a coalition with far-right, religious and centrist parties, on course to becoming Israel's longest-serving prime minister.

His comments on a Palestinian state were part of a hard rightward tack that helped deliver the election victory after polls predicted he would lose to the center-left Zionist Union.

Obama also took Netanyahu to task for an Internet post on the day of the election in which the prime minister urged right-wing supporters to vote because Arab Israelis were doing so in large numbers.

Netanyahu publicly embraced an independent state for Palestinians in a speech in 2009, but Palestinians have long questioned his sincerity, noting his expansion of Israeli settlements on occupied land. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called Netanyahu's latest comments "very worrying".

With no peace talks under way, the Palestinians have taken steps to seek international recognition of their independence unilaterally. So far most Western countries have held back from diplomatic recognition, arguing that a Palestinian state should emerge from negotiations with Israel.

Washington has long used its veto in the U.N. Security Council to prevent the United Nations from taking steps to recognize Palestinian independence. Some in Israel are concerned that Obama's "reassessment" could jeopardize that stance.

Silvan Shalom, a Likud cabinet minister, said Israel would have little incentive to seek a peace deal if the United States and other countries "lend a hand" to unilateral Palestinian moves. If that happens, he told Army Radio, "then what is the point of signing another (peace) accord?"

(Additional reporting by Dan Williams in Jerusalem and Bill Trott in Washington; Editing by Peter Graff nd Ralph Boulton)





“Benjamin Netanyahu's allies acknowledged on Sunday that his election-eve disavowal of a Palestinian state had caused a rift with the White House, but blamed U.S. President Barack Obama's unprecedented criticism on a misunderstanding.... The Israeli prime minister pledged on the eve of his re-election victory last week that there would never be a Palestinian state while he is prime minister. The remarks were widely interpreted as a rejection of the "two-state solution" that has been the basis of decades of talks to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, brokered by successive U.S. Republican and Democratic administrations alike. .... Amos Yadlin, a former chief of Israeli military intelligence aligned with the center-left Zionist Union which lost the vote to Netanyahu, said Israel would "pay a price" for Netanyahu's remarks on statehood, which had caused "fury" in Washington. "I'm not among those who panic: I don't think the United States will impose sanctions on Israel. But I see places in which it will go much harder for us," said Yadlin, who returned a day earlier from a visit to the U.S. capital. "Firstly, they used a word that they haven't used since 1975 - 'reassessment', a reassessment of relations."

“With no peace talks under way, the Palestinians have taken steps to seek international recognition of their independence unilaterally. So far most Western countries have held back from diplomatic recognition, arguing that a Palestinian state should emerge from negotiations with Israel. Washington has long used its veto in the U.N. Security Council to prevent the United Nations from taking steps to recognize Palestinian independence. Some in Israel are concerned that Obama's "reassessment" could jeopardize that stance.” It has been my opinion for a number of years now that Israel, like Palestine, have resisted making moves toward a peaceful solution. It would be interesting if the US were to stop their unconditional support of Israel and let the UN work. I particularly dislike Netanyahu. He has continued to engage in shelling the Palestinian territory and encouraged Israeli settlement there even though that land is supposed to be Palestine's. He has exhibited nothing but hostility and remorseless abuse. I'm really sorry to see that he was reelected. He's a genuine villain in my eyes. A pox upon him and his house! The bad news is that many Israelis apparently agree with him.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/for-colleges-fraternity-woes-can-cost-big-bucks/

For colleges, fraternity woes can cost big bucks
By ERIK SHERMAN MONEYWATCH
March 23, 2015

Video – Michigan fraternity, sorority trashes ski resort

Video – Former OU SAE fraternity house chef speaks out on racist video chant

It's been a bad month for the nation's university Greek fraternity system. The last few weeks saw allegations of racist slurs at a University of Oklahoma fraternity,suspension of a Penn State frat over a secret Facebook page with posted photos of nude women, and racist and sexist email from a University of Maryland fraternity member.

Whether the issue is sexual harassment and assault, racism, hazing and bullying, or even accidents from drinking, such incidents raise numerous moral, ethical and social issues for the public. Universities and colleges have an additional aspect they must consider: business.

These higher-education corporations try to balance educational demands, liability, reputation and regulatory compliance. The mix governs how they respond as well as try to anticipate problems with populations dominated by people in, or just past, adolescence. Even if students are legally adults, they're still not yet at the most responsible stage of development.

Campus problems aren't new

The result is relatively continuous dangerous or questionable behavior, rather than a rash of problems that have sprung from nowhere. "I don't think the numbers [of sexual misconduct cases on campuses] have increased," Leta Finch, practice leader for higher education at Aon Risk Solutions, told CBS MoneyWatch. "I think reporting has increased, and that's a result of awareness." Regulatory requirements have made education about the topic and official reporting mandatory.

To see how these serious problems aren't a recent development, just look at hazing, often associated with fraternities but also found in athletic teams and even school bands. According to Finch, usually one student on some campus in the U.S. dies each year from hazing. "It's tragic," she said.

For administrators and university lawyers, the problems have implications for the business aside from the moral or ethical ones. A school has to worry about potential liability and damage to its reputation and that of its employees. That's because any lawsuit will want to include the institution, given that it will have the deepest pockets for a judgment or settlement.

Questions of liability are complex and governed by two basic questions. One is whether the officials knew, or should have known, of any ongoing practices or behavior that could have warned of potential problems. The other is if the school did anything to prevent a problem or to deal with it after it became obvious.

If the answer to the first question is yes and the second is no, someone may "have a good lawsuit," according to Page Pate of Atlanta's Pate Law Firm. "From a liability standpoint, if the university becomes aware of any conduct like this, they have to take action."

Penn State's experience with the alleged sexual assaults by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is a perfect example. Reportedly, the institution had many complaints but did nothing. Ultimately, not only was there a massive scandal and lawsuits, but Penn State President Graham Spanier had to resign, and athletic director Tim Curley and legendary head football coach Joe Paterno were fired.

Fault is complicated

However simple the questions may seem, answering them is complicated. A fraternity that owns its own building off-campus can offer more legal distance to the school than one on-campus or on grounds monitored by university security or police. But the school still might have a fraternity council or advisors that suggest some degree of oversight and, therefore, responsibility.

"You look at the micro of any particular situation, and it's very hard to think of a situation in which a good lawyer can't find a hook to name the university," said John Myers, chair of the higher education group at Philadelphia law firm Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads.

The potential liability is one reason that university officials will react -- and possibly overreact -- to events. For example, the University of Oklahoma expelled two students identified in the video of racist chanting and shut down the local Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity chapter.

The action is an example of the peculiar combination of business and political pressures that come to bear on how schools react, said Stephen Trachtenberg, a partner of the law firm Rimon and president emeritus of George Washington University.

University of Oklahoma president David Boren "is thinking like a politician, and he has to position himself to the left of any potential critics, so he expels the students," Trachtenberg said. "He wants to anticipate his critics and protect himself." Boren covered his actions by saying the students and fraternity could make use of an appeals process. "Meanwhile, he takes dramatic action and so anticipates people saying the university isn't acting and [that] he's not doing what he should be doing."

If an appeal happens and is successful? "He now says, 'I have to do what the court tells me,'" said Trachtenberg.

As some have suggested, the University of Oklahoma could be accused of violating students' First Amendment free speech rights because it's a public institution. Should the students choose to sue the school and prevail, culminating in a judgment against the university, "that's a cost of doing business," Trachtenberg said. "It's not going to be a budget-breaking number, and it will be imposed on him [by a court]," allowing Boren to deflect criticism.

And yet, with the recent run of high-profile cases and long-standing history of periodic problems, some question whether the Greek system of fraternities and sororities has outlived its usefulness. Williams College in Massachusetts abolished them back in the 1960s.

Why keep frats?

"Why are we in the business of Greek life?" said Scott Schneider, head of the higher education practice group at law firm Fisher & Phillips and a former associate general counsel at Tulane University in New Orleans. "I'm asking myself two questions: Can I control this, as an institution, and, if I can't, why are we involved in this process?"

Aside from answers of tradition and the positive roles that fraternities and sororities can play in the lives of college students, there's another consideration: money. These organizations provide housing that the school would otherwise be required to supply. "That relieves them of [some] capital expenses," Trachtenberg said.

And then there's fundraising. "Fraternity and sorority members tend, interestingly enough, to be far more generous to their alma maters," he said. And so, in yet another way, dealing with these groups is another necessary cost of doing business for colleges and universities.





“These higher-education corporations try to balance educational demands, liability, reputation and regulatory compliance. The mix governs how they respond as well as try to anticipate problems with populations dominated by people in, or just past, adolescence. Even if students are legally adults, they're still not yet at the most responsible stage of development.... "I don't think the numbers [of sexual misconduct cases on campuses] have increased," Leta Finch, practice leader for higher education at Aon Risk Solutions, told CBS MoneyWatch. "I think reporting has increased, and that's a result of awareness." Regulatory requirements have made education about the topic and official reporting mandatory.... According to Finch, usually one student on some campus in the U.S. dies each year from hazing. "It's tragic," she said. For administrators and university lawyers, the problems have implications for the business aside from the moral or ethical ones. A school has to worry about potential liability and damage to its reputation and that of its employees. That's because any lawsuit will want to include the institution, given that it will have the deepest pockets for a judgment or settlement.... "From a liability standpoint, if the university becomes aware of any conduct like this, they have to take action." Penn State's experience with the alleged sexual assaults by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is a perfect example. Reportedly, the institution had many complaints but did nothing. … Why keep frats?”

“And yet, with the recent run of high-profile cases and long-standing history of periodic problems, some question whether the Greek system of fraternities and sororities has outlived its usefulness. Williams College in Massachusetts abolished them back in the 1960s.” I am against class based distinctions, and in that Fraternity and Sorority dues can be expensive, the poor are systematically excluded from them. Until recently blacks also were excluded. People who were not considered “posh” or well-dressed enough also were excluded in my day. They were introduced to the group, but then “black balled” by a secret vote. In addition to that, the Greek organizations are more known for wild drinking parties and sex than for exemplary scholarship. They are not, after all, environments that are quiet and studious – that's the library or even the student center on campus. What they do do is bring in a larger amount of income from alumni, the article said, and they provide a certain amount of housing which the university would otherwise have to construct. That can't be a very large amount, however. How much would one or two more dorms cost? It would be interesting if a large number of universities were to decide that these societies are simply more trouble in the form of lawsuits and lost reputations than they are worth. Students will get along fine without them. They will form friendships one by one, as the rest of us do, and I believe they will become better students.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/author-stephen-king-wants-maine-governor-to-man-up-and-apologize/

Stephen King wants Maine gov. to "man up and apologize"
CBS/AP
March 22, 2015

Photograph – American author Stephen King poses for photographers on November 13, 2013 in Paris, before a book signing event dedicated to the release of his new book "Doctor Sleep", the sequel to his 1977 novel "The Shining". KENZO TRIBOUILLARD/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Horror fiction writer Stephen King thinks Maine Gov. Paul LePage to "man up and apologize" after the Republican governor issued factually incorrect comments about the author's taxes.

"Governor Paul LePage implied that I don't pay my taxes. I do. Every cent. I think he needs to man up and apologize," King wrote on Twitter Thursday.

The best-selling novelist took to social media after LePage accused him of skipping out on Maine income taxes. The error, made during the governor's weekly radio address, prompted King to broadcast his own statement, saying "Governor LePage is full of the stuff that makes the grass grow green."

"Tabby (King's wife, Tabitha) and I pay every cent of our Maine state income taxes, and are glad to do it," the author said in his address.

"In 2013, my wife and I paid approximately 1.4 million (dollars) in state taxes," King also confirmed in a Friday night email to the Portland Press Herald. "As this is a matter of public record, I have no problem telling you that. I would imagine 2014 was about the same, but I do not have those figures."

The author was critical of LePage's recent tax proposal, which would reduce Maine's income tax and therefore attract a wealthier population to the state.

The chief executive had made the erroneous comment when pushing for his controversial plan, claiming that the successful novelist was driven to leave Maine for Florida because of tax hikes. Though the writer does own property in Florida and frequently visits during the winter, King is a Maine inhabitant.

"We feel, as Governor LePage apparently does not, that much is owed from those to whom much has been given," King, who is a staunch proponent of high taxes, said. "We see our taxes as a way of paying back the state that has given us so much. State taxes pay for state services. There's just no way around it."

LePage had yet to yield to King's demands for an apology as of Sunday morning, when the author tweeted that, "Some guys are a lot better at dishing it out than taking it back."

A revised version of LePage's address released Thursday no longer mentions King.




"Governor Paul LePage implied that I don't pay my taxes. I do. Every cent. I think he needs to man up and apologize," King wrote on Twitter Thursday. The best-selling novelist took to social media after LePage accused him of skipping out on Maine income taxes. The error, made during the governor's weekly radio address, prompted King to broadcast his own statement, saying "Governor LePage is full of the stuff that makes the grass grow green.".... "We feel, as Governor LePage apparently does not, that much is owed from those to whom much has been given," King, who is a staunch proponent of high taxes, said. "We see our taxes as a way of paying back the state that has given us so much. State taxes pay for state services. There's just no way around it." LePage had yet to yield to King's demands for an apology as of Sunday morning, when the author tweeted that, "Some guys are a lot better at dishing it out than taking it back.".... “A revised version of LePage's address released Thursday no longer mentions King.”

King definitely won this war. I can't imagine why LePage would make such a statement without doing any research on the subject. He can't be too swift, as we used to say in the 1960s.