February 12, 2016


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mount-saint-mary-college-maryland-turmoil-after-professors-fired-over-controversy/

Maryland college in turmoil after professors fired over student newspaper report
By CHIP REID CBS NEWS
February 11, 2016, 7:13 PM

Photograph -- President Simon Newman. CBS NEWS
Photograph -- professor.jpg, Professor Ed Egan. CBS NEWS
Photograph -- president.jpg, President Simon Newman. CBS NEWS


EMMITSBURG, MD. -- A small Catholic college in Maryland is in turmoil after a report that its president wanted to weed out struggling students quickly to improve the school's standing. Now some teachers have been sent packing.

Ed Egan was a professor at Mount Saint Mary's University in Maryland.

On a day like today, he would normally be on campus.

"Today I'd be teaching my class on the First Amendment," he said.

But on Monday he was fired. In a letter a school official said he is "persona non grata" and "not welcome to visit the university's campus," because he violated his "duty of loyalty" to the school.

It all began last month when the student newspaper reported that school President Simon Newman wanted professors to identify struggling students in the first few weeks of school so they could be encouraged to drop out.

Some faculty members resisted and the school paper The Moutain Echo reported that Newman told them: "This is hard for you because you think of the students as cuddly bunnies. But you can't. You just have to drown the bunnies ... put a Glock to their heads."

Many students and faculty were outraged.

"It's not just the words, but it's the plan the words described," Egan said. "Weeding out students because we think they might not do well in order to make the numbers look better? That's not Mount Saint Mary's."

Egan was the faculty adviser to the school paper and said he's being punished for accurate, but embarrassing reporting by the students.

But he said he did not tell them what to write.

"I did not ... no. Anybody on campus who knows the students knows that nobody would manipulate these students," Egan said. "They are independent, strong, bright people."

A petition protesting the firing of Egan and another professor has been signed by about 7,500 professors across the country.

The university declined CBS News' repeated request for an interview, but in a written statement, said the two professors were fired for violating the University's Code of Conduct.




http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/mount-st-marys-university-2086

Summary

Mount St. Mary's University is a private institution that was founded in 1808. It has a total undergraduate enrollment of 1,810, its setting is rural, and the campus size is 1,400 acres. It utilizes a semester-based academic calendar. Mount St. Mary's University's ranking in the 2016 edition of Best Colleges is Regional Universities (North), 22. Its tuition and fees are $37,500 (2015-16).

Mount St. Mary's University is a Catholic school in Emmitsburg, Maryland, where about 70 percent of students are Catholic. All undergraduates complete the Veritas Program, a group of core courses that give students a broad knowledge of liberal arts, Catholic theology, ethics, math and more. For students who want to graduate early, the university offers a three-year degree option.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankings_of_universities_in_the_United_States

Rankings of universities in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

College and university rankings in the United States are rankings of US colleges and universities ordered by various combinations of various contributing factors which vary greatly depending on the organization performing the ranking. Rankings have most often been conducted by magazines, newspapers, websites, or academics. In addition to ranking entire institutions, organizations perform rankings of specific programs, departments, and schools. Various rankings consider combinations of measures of wealth, research excellence and/or influence, selectivity, student options, eventual success, demographics, and other criteria. There is much debate about rankings' interpretation, accuracy, usefulness, and appropriateness. The expanding diversity in rating methodologies and accompanying criticisms of each indicate the lack of consensus in the field.

Acceptance rate (selectivity)[edit]

Selectivity—the percentage of applicants admitted (the lower the percentage, the more selective the college)—reflects both desirability (increasing the number of applicants), and competitiveness (how difficult it is to be accepted), although competitiveness also depends on the strength of fellow applicants instead of the number of people to be accepted alone. For the third year in a row, Stanford has been the most selective undergraduate institution.[1] . . . .

Business Insider[edit]

Business Insider asks professionals which college they believe best prepares its students for success in life. The top three colleges in the 2014 survey were Stanford, MIT, and Caltech.[14]

The Daily Beast's Guide to the Best Colleges[edit]

The Daily Beast's college rankings take into account nine factors, with academics, future earnings, and affordability weighted most heavily. The other criteria include graduation rates, diversity, athletics, nightlife, activities, and campus quality. Data comes from The National Center for Education Statistics, as well as private organizations like PayScale, for salary data, and Niche, for student opinions. The Daily Beast's college rankings report the top 250 scoring schools, with Stanford University at the top, followed by Harvard University, Yale University, MIT, and Columbia University.[16]

. . . .

Forbes college rankings[edit]

In 2008, Forbes.com began publishing an annual list, prepared by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity[19] of "America's Best Colleges". Student satisfaction (evaluations from RateMyProfessors.com, retention rates and targeted student satisfaction surveys on Facebook) constitutes 75% of the score. Post-graduate success (self-reported salaries of alumni from PayScale, alumni appearing on the CCAP's America’s Leaders List) constitutes 32.5% of the score. Student debt loads constitute 25% of the score. The graduation rate (the proportion of students who complete four-year degrees in four years) constitutes 7.5% of the score. Academic success (the proportion of students receiving nationally competitive awards) constitutes 10% of the score. Public reputation is not considered, which causes some colleges to score lower than in other lists. A three-year moving average is used to smooth out the scoring. The 2015 ranking puts Pomona College at the top, followed by Williams, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, Harvard, and Swarthmore.

Niche rankings[edit]

Niche provides rankings and reviews of colleges in the U.S. Their Best Colleges ranking focuses on academics, diversity, affordability, and student satisfaction. Their most recent ranking places Stanford at the top, followed by MIT, Harvard, Yale, and Rice.[21]

Social Mobility Index (SMI) rankings[edit]

The SMI rankings are a collaborative publication from CollegeNet and PayScale. The rankings aim to provide a measure of the extent to which colleges provide upward economic mobility to those that attend. The rankings were created in response to the finding in Science magazine which showed that among developed nations, the United States now provides the least economic opportunity and mobility for its citizens. The rankings were also created to combat the rising costs of tuition, much of which is attributed to the efforts of some colleges to increase their own fame and wealth in ways that increase their rank in media periodicals that put an emphasis on such measures. In 2014, according to the SMI, the top five colleges are Montana Tech, Rowan University, Florida A&M, Cal Poly Pomona, and Cal State Northridge.[27]

U.S. News & World Report College and University rankings

The magazine U.S. News & World Report's rankings are based upon information they collect from educational institutions via an annual survey and school websites. It also considers opinion surveys of university faculty and administrators outside the school.[33] Their college rankings were first published in 1983 and have been published in all years thereafter, except 1984.

The US News listings have gained such influence that some Universities have made it a specific goal to reach a particular level in the US News rankings.

Criticisms[edit]

Main article: Criticism of college and university rankings (North America)

American college and university ranking systems have drawn criticism from within and outside higher education in Canada and the United States. Institutions that have objected include Reed College, Alma College, Mount Holyoke College, St. John's College, Earlham College, MIT, Stanford University, University of Western Ontario, and Queen's University.

Critics charged that U.S. News intentionally changed its methodology every year so that the rankings change and they can sell more magazines. A San Francisco Chronicle article argues that "almost all of US News factors are redundant and can be boiled down to one characteristic: the size of the college or university's endowment."[65]



US NEWS RANKINGS of Mount St. Mary's University -- “It has a total undergraduate enrollment of 1,810, its setting is rural, and the campus size is 1,400 acres. It utilizes a semester-based academic calendar. Mount St. Mary's University's ranking in the 2016 edition of Best Colleges is Regional Universities (North), 22. Its tuition and fees are $37,500 (2015-16). Mount St. Mary's University is a Catholic school in Emmitsburg, Maryland, where about 70 percent of students are Catholic. … All undergraduates complete the Veritas Program, a group of core courses that give students a broad knowledge of liberal arts, Catholic theology, ethics, math and more.”

WIKIPEDIA on various college rating groups – The following evaluation characteristics of a given college are listed in Wikipedia as being most highly weighted in college rankings listings such as the Forbes, US News and some dozen more: “Acceptance rate (selectivity), academics, future earnings, and affordability, graduation rates, diversity, athletics, nightlife, activities, and campus quality, (evaluations from RateMyProfessors.com, retention rates and targeted student satisfaction surveys on Facebook) constitutes 75% of the score. Post-graduate success (self-reported salaries of alumni from PayScale, alumni appearing on the CCAP's America’s Leaders List) constitutes 32.5% of the score. Student debt loads constitute 25% of the score. The graduation rate (the proportion of students who complete four-year degrees in four years) constitutes 7.5% of the score.”


CBS NEWS -- “A small Catholic college in Maryland is in turmoil after a report that its president wanted to weed out struggling students quickly to improve the school's standing. Now some teachers have been sent packing. …. "Today I'd be teaching my class on the First Amendment," he said. But on Monday he was fired. In a letter a school official said he is "persona non grata" and "not welcome to visit the university's campus," because he violated his "duty of loyalty" to the school. …. Some faculty members resisted and the school paper The Moutain Echo reported that Newman told them: "This is hard for you because you think of the students as cuddly bunnies. But you can't. You just have to drown the bunnies ... put a Glock to their heads." Many students and faculty were outraged. "It's not just the words, but it's the plan the words described," Egan said. "Weeding out students because we think they might not do well in order to make the numbers look better? That's not Mount Saint Mary's." …. A petition protesting the firing of Egan and another professor has been signed by about 7,500 professors across the country. The university declined CBS News' repeated request for an interview, but in a written statement, said the two professors were fired for violating the University's Code of Conduct.”


If a college has a low rating it is for more than one reason, usually including a lack of selectivity, inferior courses and professors, poor campus life, lack of diversity, less than promising rating among prospective employers and exorbitantly high fees. What is presumably a low graduation rate has been given by some other colleges for the policy of refusing minority or scholarship students entry, but this is the first time I have seen a college “encouraging” a student to drop out early because they MAY NOT do well. I wonder if some of those students who are expected to do poor work are minorities? Or are they those whose parents can’t pay $37,000 a year for courses like mandatory Catholic religious teaching? Personally I would prefer diversity, interesting and pertinent courses and professors, a liberal cultural attitude and campus atmosphere, relatively low tuition and fees, helpful scholarships and loans, no mandatory religious activity of any kind, and a fighting chance to achieve acceptable grades.

I am delighted to see that the move by Mount St. Mary's University to silence a professor for allowing the student paper to exercise free speech has been widely criticized by other 7,500 professors around the country. The basis on which the administration’s decision against some conveniently unnamed group of kids who have been determined unlikely to thrive – and by what measure – is not given here. I really want to know that. But perhaps they thought that making it public would negatively affect their popularity among parents and would be students. The lack of information on how those students are to be weeded out just makes me curiouser and curiouser. If I see more about it later I will clip the article, and meanwhile I would encourage parents, teachers and guidance counselors to avoid recommending a college that stifles such information. It really isn’t worth such a high tuition.

“You just have to drown the bunnies ... put a Glock to their heads." This is not unlike some of the things that Donald Trump says. The statement can only drive away students rather than drawing them, probably including some who are already attending the college. I expect they will lose students within the next year as a result. In addition, these professors who were booted out so unceremoniously for the crime of "lack of loyalty" will probably sue, or at least they should. I think this president has made much more trouble for himself rather than less.



BERNIE SANDERS TODAY TWO ARTICLES


https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-secret-service-code-name-is-180555067.html

Bernie Sanders’ Secret Service code name revealed
February 11, 2016

Photograph -- A Secret Service agent warms his hands prior to a meeting between Sanders and the Rev. Al Sharpton in Harlem on Wednesday. (Photo: Andrew Renneisen/Getty Images)
Photograph -- Secret Service agents flank President Obama as he crosses the tarmac in Portland, Ore., last year. (Photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)


When Bernie Sanders was granted Secret Service protection earlier this month, Twitter users speculated what code name the Vermont senator and Democratic presidential hopeful would be given.

“Larry,” as in Sanders’ chief impersonator Larry David, was a popular choice.

But according to the liberal talk-show host Bill Press, Sanders’ Secret Service code name is “Intrepid.”

The Sanders campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

According to Press, the name “Intrepid” was chosen for the self-described democratic socialist because of his resolute stand against Wall Street banks.

Sanders is one of four presidential candidates currently receiving Secret Service protection. Hillary Clinton — who has received protection ever since her time as first lady — is referred to as “Evergreen.” (Former President Bill Clinton has too. His code name? “Eagle.”)

Republican hopefuls Donald Trump and Ben Carson were both granted Secret Service protection in the fall.

The billionaire businessman’s code name is “Mogul,” while the retired neurosurgeon goes by “Eli,” a reference to the biblical prophet.

Any presidential candidate can request Secret Service protection, but it must be approved by a congressional advisory committee that includes House Speaker Paul Ryan, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

According to CBS News, the criteria to receive protection developed by committee require that a candidate have “some degree of prominence in opinion polls, be actively campaigning in at least 10 state primaries and have received contributions totaling at least $10 million.”

Ryan, who received Secret Service protection in 2012 after being picked as Mitt Romney’s running mate, was called “Bowhunter,” a nod to the Wisconsin congressman’s well-documented hunting skills. (Romney was known as “Javelin” — a handle thought to refer to a vintage muscle car manufactured by American Motors Corp., where Romney’s father, George, was once chairman.)

The code name tradition dates back to when communications between the Secret Service and White House Military Office were not encrypted. Given modern encryption technology, there is no longer a need to keep the Secret Service code names a secret.

The Secret Service doesn’t formally reveal the code names it gives those under its protection, but “protectee call signs” are often leaked by staffers or the candidates themselves.

image
Secret Service agents flank President Obama as he crosses the tarmac in Portland, Ore., last year. (Photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

President Obama’s Secret Service code name, chosen during his 2008 presidential campaign, is “Renegade.” Michelle Obama’s code name is “Renaissance,” while first daughters Malia and Sasha go by “Radiance” and “Rosebud,” respectively.

Obama’s opponent in the 2008 election, Sen. John McCain, was “Phoenix,” a nod to his home state. McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, was “Denali.”



“But according to the liberal talk-show host Bill Press, Sanders’ Secret Service code name is “Intrepid.” The Sanders campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment. According to Press, the name “Intrepid” was chosen for the self-described democratic socialist because of his resolute stand against Wall Street banks.” That sounds like a compliment to me. You’re a winner, Bernie!


ON HENRY KISSINGER CONNECTIONS


https://www.yahoo.com/politics/kissinger-is-not-my-friend-042515642.html

‘Kissinger is not my friend’
February 12, 2016

Photograph -- Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger during an interview in New York in the summer of 2015. (Photo: Richard Drew/AP)


MILWAUKEE — On foreign policy, Bernie Sanders does not go after Hillary Clinton with policy precision; he attacks her credibility with red-meat heaves attractive to the liberal base.

In Thursday night’s Democratic debate, Sanders repeated one of his trademark attacks — and one that worked for Barack Obama in 2008 against Clinton — that he opposed the Iraq War and she did not. But he went further in drawing a binary and philosophical contrast by reminding viewers of Clinton’s comments from last week’s debate, that she was “very flattered” to get praise from former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Kissinger, who served under President Richard Nixon and President Gerald Ford, is maligned especially among Democrats for his handling of the Vietnam War and for leading a foreign policy that his critics believed undermined democratic governments around the world, while supporting dictatorships that promoted human rights violations.

And while the reference might not have resonated with the under-30 demographic that Sanders dominated in Iowa and New Hampshire, it was a reductive, symbolically potent bit for baby boomers who may be undecided or unsure of Clinton’s overall worldview. It echoed criticism that emerged on liberal-leaning websites last week at the time of her original remarks.

“I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend, and I will not take advice from him on foreign policy,“ Sanders said, calling him the “most destructive” secretary of state in American history.

Sanders’ team may have felt it missed an opportunity to hit Clinton on Kissinger when she brought up the controversial diplomat at last week’s debate. But this time they were ready. In fact, the campaign issued a press release within seconds of the exchange, listing 13 “egregious acts” he committed in his tenure, including allegations of launching an illegal war in Cambodia and supporting apartheid in South Africa (later in the debate Clinton name-dropped the late South African president Nelson Mandela as one of the figures in politics she respected the most).

Clinton defended her interactions and comments on Kissinger by saying that as secretary of state she listened to a variety of voices and opinions, weighing some more than others. She also questioned whether Sanders takes foreign policy issues seriously, citing recent media reports that said the one aide he referred to as an adviser only had briefed him once.

"I don’t know who you get your foreign policy advice from,” Clinton quipped.

“Well, it ain’t Henry Kissinger,” Sanders replied.

It’s unclear whether re-litigating American foreign policy from 40 years ago will resonate with voters, but Clinton and her campaign obviously believe foreign policy is her strength and any quick move toward that advantage is likely to frustrate the candidate and team who have prioritized showcasing her nuanced and broad grasp of issues she tackled as secretary of state.



http://gawker.com/hillary-clinton-has-a-henry-kissinger-problem-1757313187

Hillary Clinton Has a Henry Kissinger Problem
Alex Pareene
2/05/16 11:46am Filed to: ELECTION 2016

Video – Democratic Candidates Debate


At last night’s Democratic debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton invoked an unexpected figure: Henry Kissinger. “I was very flattered when Henry Kissinger said I ran the State Department better than anybody had run it in a long time,” she said, in an off-hand aside. It wasn’t an endorsement of Kissinger, or really much of anything. It was just a little brag that would have played well in a different room.

The sort of room it would have played well in, really, is the sort of room in which the worst people in the country congregate. The fact that Clinton lapsed into speaking as if she were in that room is more or less why she’s having trouble, once again, convincing the Democratic electorate to nominate her for the presidency.

Henry Kissinger, for the record, is a bad man, who waged a terrible and illegal war in Cambodia, supported a horrific right-wing strongman in Chile, and generally ran America’s foreign policy apparatus in the most amoral way possible, as a point of pride. However, in the bubble of elite American society, the bipartisan consensus, shared by politicians and members of the media alike, is that he’s simply a respected elder statesman.

The point I’m making here is not, [Glenn Greenwald voice] HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTS A WAR CRIMINAL. (Trust me, I know Kissinger isn’t moving many votes in New Hampshire.) It’s that Hillary Clinton exists in a world where “Henry Kissinger is a war criminal” is a silly opinion held by unserious people. Her problem? Lots of those silly and unserious people want to wrest control of the Democratic Party away from its current leadership, which is exemplified by people like Hillary Clinton.

Bernie Sanders’ critique of Clinton is not that she’s cartoonishly corrupt in the Tammany Hall style, capable of being fully bought with a couple well-compensated speeches, but that she’s a creature of a fundamentally corrupt system, who comfortably operates within that system and accepts it as legitimate. Clinton has had trouble countering that critique because, well, it’s true. It’s not that she’s been bought, it’s that she bought in.

This isn’t some damning revelation of the secret “true” Clinton beneath the surface. Hillary Clinton is a liberal. (One problem afflicting our online discourse is that many of her dimmer fellow liberals in the press keep being baffled at Clinton opposition from leftists who extensively criticize the institutions of American liberalism. This is also why the Sanders-started semantic argument over the term “progressive” was so deeply stupid.) But she’s also plainly a member of a Democratic Party establishment that a large—and, I think, growing—number of would-be Democratic voters reject as unrepresentative of the principles and interests of non-wealthy Americans.

These people may indeed be “unserious,” in the sense that Clinton’s theory of “progressive change” is more realistic—that is, it has a better chance of leading to policy changes that have tangible positive outcomes for large groups of people—than Sanders’ theory of bottom-up “revolution,” at least in our current political climate. But no one is satisfied with the current political climate, and lots of people are looking for leaders who seek to fundamentally reshape it, not work within it.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gawker

Gawker
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“Gawker is an American blog founded by Nick Denton and Elizabeth Spiers and based in New York City.[2] It promotes itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip." It focuses on celebrities and the media industry. According to third-party web analytics provider SimilarWeb, the site has over 23 million visits per month, as of 2015.[3] Founded in 2003, Gawker is the flagship blog for Denton's Gawker Media. Gawker has created other blogs, including Defamer and Deadspin, which covers sports.

The site's editor-in-chief and executive editor resigned in July 2015 when Denton removed a controversial post from the site without their support. In October 2015, Alex Pareene was announced as the new editor-in-chief. …. In 2012, the website changed its focus away from editorial content and toward what its new editor-in-chief A. J. Daulerio called "traffic whoring" and "SEO bomb throws".[15][16]

In March 2014, Max Read became the Gawker's editor-in-chief.[20] In April 2014, using internet slang was banned per new writing style guidelines.[21][22][23][24][25][26]

In June 2015, Gawker editorial staff voted to unionize.[27][28] Employees joined the Writers Guild of America. Approximately three-fourths of employees eligible to vote voted in favor of the decision. Gawker staff announced the vote on May 28, 2015.[29]

Following the decision to delete a controversial story in July 2015, (See § Condé Nast CFO escort outing, below.) Read and Gawker Media executive editor Tommy Craggs resigned in protest. Leah Beckmann, the site’s then deputy editor, took over as interim editor in chief.[30] She was replaced in October 2015 by Alex Pareene.
. . . .
Gawker usually publishes more than 20 posts daily during the week, sometimes reaching 30 posts a day, with limited publishing on the weekends. The site also publishes content from its sister sites. Gawker's content consists of celebrity and media industry gossip, critiques of mainstream news outlets, and New York-centric stories. The stories generally come from anonymous tips from media employees, found mistakes and faux pas in news stories caught by readers and other blogs, and original reporting.”



YAHOO -- “…. I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend, and I will not take advice from him on foreign policy,“ Sanders said, calling him the “most destructive” secretary of state in American history. …. Clinton defended her interactions and comments on Kissinger by saying that as secretary of state she listened to a variety of voices and opinions, weighing some more than others. She also questioned whether Sanders takes foreign policy issues seriously, citing recent media reports that said the one aide he referred to as an adviser only had briefed him once. "I don’t know who you get your foreign policy advice from,” Clinton quipped. “Well, it ain’t Henry Kissinger,” Sanders replied.”

GAWKER -- “Hillary Clinton invoked an unexpected figure: Henry Kissinger. “I was very flattered when Henry Kissinger said I ran the State Department better than anybody had run it in a long time,” she said, in an off-hand aside. It wasn’t an endorsement of Kissinger, or really much of anything. It was just a little brag that would have played well in a different room. …. The fact that Clinton lapsed into speaking as if she were in that room is more or less why she’s having trouble, once again, convincing the Democratic electorate to nominate her for the presidency.” …. However, in the bubble of elite American society, the bipartisan consensus, shared by politicians and members of the media alike, is that he’s simply a respected elder statesman. …. It’s that Hillary Clinton exists in a world where “Henry Kissinger is a war criminal” is a silly opinion held by unserious people. …. Bernie Sanders’ critique of Clinton is not that she’s cartoonishly corrupt in the Tammany Hall style, capable of being fully bought with a couple well-compensated speeches, but that she’s a creature of a fundamentally corrupt system, who comfortably operates within that system and accepts it as legitimate. …. But she’s also plainly a member of a Democratic Party establishment that a large—and, I think, growing—number of would-be Democratic voters reject as unrepresentative of the principles and interests of non-wealthy Americans. …. . But no one is satisfied with the current political climate, and lots of people are looking for leaders who seek to fundamentally reshape it, not work within it.”

WIKIPEDIA -- “Gawker is an American blog founded by Nick Denton and Elizabeth Spiers and based in New York City.[2] It promotes itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip." It focuses on celebrities and the media industry. According to third-party web analytics provider SimilarWeb, the site has over 23 million visits per month, as of 2015.[3] Founded in 2003, Gawker is the flagship blog for Denton's Gawker Media. Gawker has created other blogs, including Defamer and Deadspin, which covers sports. …. Gawker usually publishes more than 20 posts daily during the week, sometimes reaching 30 posts a day, with limited publishing on the weekends. The site also publishes content from its sister sites. Gawker's content consists of celebrity and media industry gossip, critiques of mainstream news outlets, and New York-centric stories. The stories generally come from anonymous tips from media employees, found mistakes and faux pas in news stories caught by readers and other blogs, and original reporting.”


Wow, this turned out to be a productive set of stories. I love Yahoo. Despite the negative slant of Wikipedia comments about Gawker, the Gawker blog above is very interesting and I think it does tell why some of us, who are left of center Democrats, feel that the party has migrated too far to the right and for very cynical reasons, and that Hillary went along with the flow. Or, more problematic, maybe she is one of them in her heart. I also think she is a rather manipulative politician whose main aim is winning the Presidency at any cost. I will say, however, that if she does get the Party’s nomination for 2016 elections, I would certainly vote for her over any Republican or most Independents. A middle of the road Democrat is better than either of those.

I want the party to go back to its’ FDR influenced views and activities, and shamelessly work for a meaningful level of equalization of our citizens’ personal worth. No more 1% rule over 90% of “the masses!!” I do not advocate a complete leveling of the great divide, in which it is impossible or illegal for a citizen to become personally wealthy. This is not Russia. I think the wealthy should be more heavily and effectively taxed than they now are, however, and for their charity gifts to work for the poor and not for rightwing political groups. No more not-for-profits which are actually lobbyists, carbon polluters or fascists. Finally, I do want the class system to stop elevating money and race to the top of the list of personal characteristics required for upper class membership. That’s just anti-American.

I do think there is a “natural” basis on which to evaluate the classes, but it is based on educational attainment – which to me means the personal pursuit of information and wisdom in ones’ life, and not necessarily a college degree -- and on true personal behavior. Poverty doesn’t make peddling drugs or armed robbery an acceptable way of making money, but that doesn’t mean that a black kid who is caught with a little marijuana should be penalized heavily and slotted for the “underclass.”

He should be required by the court to get mental health treatment and/or join AA or NA. A 12 Step program is for life training and interpersonal support, and as such it is amazingly effective. Those organizations are free except for a small personally determined donation per meeting. If a member has no spare money at all – not even a quarter – then he doesn’t need to give anything. No one is watched or shamed about what they give. That’s one of the many reasons why AA and NA are so useful to addicts.

We do need to stand up together and fight the “vast rightwing conspiracy” which Hillary referenced years ago. At the time she said it, I thought she was just trying to get herself out of a jam, but as of the emergence of Tea Party far rightists in recent years, I do agree with her on that. It is a conspiracy (if you don’t believe it, go to Google and look up ALEX) and it is dangerous to our democracy/republic. I fear, however, that key elements of the centrist Democratic Party are more in line with the right in their views than I am comfortable with, and that they have for some 30 years now failed to produce deep level change in the economic, educational and racial divides in this country. Granted, the Republicans even before the Tea Party have fought the hated “Liberals” tooth and nail in the lawmaking process, so it isn’t as though the Dems haven’t tried.

We need the kind of grass roots push that succeeds rather than merely trying, however, and I think Sanders is more likely to do that than Hillary. I do believe that Sanders, though he hasn’t made black/white issues the center of his message, is in favor of change along those lines and of a true “revolution” of civic thought and much greater financial fairness. From a much higher minimum wage and a free college education to making the fat cats pay their share of a higher tax burden, these things can bring forth these changes. A minimum wage of $15.00 an hour is not outrageous in an economic environment in which rent is $600.00 and more a month for a small apartment.

We also need, absolutely, to root White Supremacists out of civic life, particular in the courts, the police and city planning (why are there still ghettoes rather than racially blended neighborhoods with decent housing). We also need to change the atmosphere of negative thinking that pervades many black groups, unfortunately. Cynicism never brought about any helpful changes in community life and educational attainment, which require personal work on the individual level. Kids have to attend school regularly, behave themselves while they’re there and study hard in order to learn what they need to. Don’t call a kid mentally slow until you see what he can do when he does all his assignments and studies for his tests. You can bet that those scary achievement tests under No Child Left Behind will improve drastically if that happens. I remember when parents enforced such rules in their homes, and most kids did well enough that they didn’t flunk the grade. When a child does need help, get him a tutor.

Martin Luther King was not cynical, and as a result he rallied a mainly silent and fearful underclass into a powerful and profound source of societal change. He took us from “Blacks to the back of the bus” to the Civil
Rights Act. I lived through all of that and I remember. It was an exciting time to live. He concentrated on changing laws rather than random and useless violence, and with the aid of key Liberal Democrats, he opened up society to minorities in general to a really significant degree. I personally believe that the group BLM is similar to King in that they aren’t an organization that is advocating violence, but rather “demonstrating” the potential power of the black people of America. Lyndon Johnson pushed the Civil Rights legislation through the legislature, but hundreds of thousands of black and white marchers made his case more forcefully. I suggest all readers go to the official BLM website and read their goals and beliefs. It’s positive and creative, but forceful. Have a look at it.




FROM MY EMAILS --


FTC@100 Banner
Tech Support Operators Settle FTC, State of Florida Charges They Misled Consumers
Defendants Will Surrender Assets, Be Prohibited From Making Misrepresentations Involving Tech Support
February 12, 2016

The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Florida have obtained settlements with a group of defendants who participated in a tech support scheme that allegedly defrauded thousands of consumers out of millions of dollars.

The defendants who have agreed to settle the action against them are Amit Mehta; Boost Software Inc.; Success Capital, LLC and Elliot Loewenstern; and Jon Paul Holdings, LLC and Jon-Paul Vasta. The settlement orders include several provisions barring future misconduct by the defendants. For instance, one order bans Loewenstern and Success Capital from the tech support industry and other orders prohibit Mehta and Boost Software from upselling or selling leads related to tech support.

“These defendants deceived consumers and used high-pressure sales tactics to convince them that their computers required tech support products,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “I’m pleased these settlements will keep the defendants out of the tech support scam business.”

The FTC’s complaint, filed in 2014 as part of a group of actions against Florida-based tech support schemes, alleges that the defendants used software designed to trick consumers into thinking there were problems with their computers, and then directed them to telemarketers who subjected those consumers to high-pressure deceptive sales pitches for tech support products and services. The FTC and State of Florida charged that the defendants violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule and the FTC Act, along with the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The settlement orders include judgments against the defendants totaling more than $37 million, which will be suspended after they pay a total of approximately $236,000 and surrender the corporate assets. The judgments are suspended due to the defendants’ inability to pay and will be lifted with the full amounts due if any of the defendants’ financial disclosures were incorrect or incomplete.

Litigation continues against co-defendants Mark Donohue, Vast Tech Support, LLC, and OMG Tech Support, LLC.

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final orders was 4-0. The final orders were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition, and protect and educate consumers. You can learn more about consumer topics and file a consumer complaint online or by calling 1-877-FTC-HELP (382-4357). Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, read our blogs and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Contact Information

MEDIA CONTACT:
Jay Mayfield
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2181

STAFF CONTACT:
J. Ronald Brooke, Jr.
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3484

Russell Deitch
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-1144
Related Case

Boost Software, Inc.
For Consumers

Blog: FTC cracks down on tech support scams
Tech Support Scams
Malware
Identity Theft



https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/11/ftc-pennsylvania-connecticut-sue-tech-support-scammers-took-more

FTC, Pennsylvania and Connecticut Sue Tech Support Scammers That Took More Than $17 Million From Consumers
Defendants Used Search Engine Results and Popups to Lure Consumers to Deceptive Scheme

FOR RELEASE
November 13, 2015

A federal court has granted a request by the Federal Trade Commission to shut down a tech support scam that allegedly bilked consumers out of more than $17 million by pretending to represent Microsoft, Apple and other major tech companies.

“We’re pleased the court shut down these scammers, who defrauded consumers out of millions of dollars by preying on their lack of technical expertise,” said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Our goal is now to get money back for the victims in this case, and keep the defendants out of the scam tech support business.”

According to a complaint filed by the FTC, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General and State of Connecticut Office of Attorney General, the defendants in the case used internet advertisements and popups that appeared to be from well-known technology companies to lure consumers into calling them. When consumers called the defendants’ phone numbers, they were further misled into thinking their computers were riddled with viruses, malware, or security breaches, and were given a high-pressure sales pitch for unnecessary tech support services.

As alleged in the complaint, consumers who responded to the phony ads were routed to a call center operated by the defendants, where telemarketers would frequently misrepresent that they were “a Microsoft agent,” “Google support,” or “work with AT&T,” among other affiliation claims. The telemarketers would then convince consumers to give them remote access to their computers, navigate to harmless portions of the computer, such as the Windows Event Viewer, and mislead consumers into thinking their computer was infected with viruses and malware.

At that point, defendants would pressure consumers to sign up for technical support plans and repair services often costing hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars. In some cases, the alleged technical support consisted of deleting harmless files, but in other cases, defendants “technicians” would make changes that could potentially harm the performance of the computer, according to the complaint.

Under the terms of the preliminary injunction order issued by the court, the defendants must stop their deceptive and unfair practices and are subject to an asset freeze while the case against them progresses. The defendants in the case are Click4Support, LLC; iSourceUSA LLC, also doing business as Click4Support and UBERTECHSUPPORT; Innovazion, Inc., also doing business as Click4Support Tech Services; Spanning Source LLC, also doing business as Click4Support; Bruce Bartolotta, also known as Bruce Bart; George Saab; Chetan Bhikhubhai Patel; and Niraj Patel.

The complaint in the case alleges that the defendants violated the FTC Act, the Telemarketing Sales Rule, the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, and the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

The FTC thanks the Better Business Bureaus serving Connecticut and Eastern Pennsylvania for their assistance in this investigation.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 4-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook (link is external), follow us on Twitter (link is external), and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

CONTACT INFORMATION
MEDIA CONTACT:
Jay Mayfield
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2181

STAFF CONTACT:
Fil de Banate
FTC East Central Region
216-263-3413



There are some others in the same general category as these scammers who operate by telephone instead of on the Internet. I have been contacted twice down through the years by those. Though the sales pitch was slightly different, the gist was the same. I don’t have a high pitched whistle or an air horn to blow into the telephone receiver, so I just tell them in no uncertain terms to get off my telephone line and don’t call back. The government No Call ban just covers creditors, I think, but I have since seen to it that I am on their list. My main tool for dealing with scammers and charities soliciting me is to leave the phone on the hook until my nice answering machine records the voice of the caller. If it’s someone I know personally, I will immediately pick up the phone. That kind of money begging caller generally will not leave me a message because they don’t want to be identified. The only unfortunate thing about this FTC lawsuit is that it only covers some of the scammers. Of course there’s a new scam hatched up every day.

Some people just don’t want to do an honest job to get their money. It is a painful truth, of course, that the phone bank callers are themselves mainly poor working stiffs who are out of a job, so they take one of those. It’s the owners who are making megabucks, and if the caller doesn’t bring in enough income he will be fired. The callers don’t see what they’re doing as criminal activity in many cases. They’re trying to feed their family. In so many ways life on this earth is sad, even in the USA.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/machete-attack-nazareth-restaurant-columbus-ohio-stabbing/

Cops kill man after machete attack at Ohio deli
CBS/AP
February 12, 2016, 1:05 AM


COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Police shot and killed a man who stormed into a central Ohio restaurant wielding a machete and randomly attacking people as they sat unsuspectingly at their dinner tables, authorities said.

Four people were injured in the brutal attack Thursday evening at Nazareth Restaurant and Deli, a Mediterranean restaurant in Columbus. The victims were taken to an area hospital and were expected to recover.

CBS News has learned that investigators have identified the suspected attacker as Mohammad Barry. CBS News homeland security correspondent Jeff Pegues reports that investigators were running down leads to try to determine if the attack was somehow tied to terrorist organizations.

"There was no rhyme or reason as to who he was going after," said Columbus police Sgt. Rich Weiner.

Police said the man walked into the restaurant, had a conversation with an employee and then left. He returned about a half hour later. That's when police said he approached a man and a woman who were sitting just inside the door at a booth and started the attack.

Pegues reports the suspected attacker has a Somali background, and officials believe he may have traveled to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates in 2012. Pegues reports that law enforcement is concerned that this incident has the hallmarks of the type of so-called "lone wolf" terrorist attack that they have been working to stop.

Police said employees and patrons tried to get the man to stop.

"Some of the patrons there started throwing chairs at him just trying to get him out of there," Weiner said.

The man eventually fled the scene in a white car and led police on a short chase. Officers forced the man off the road a few miles away and when he got out of his car police said they tried unsuccessfully to use a stun gun on him.

Weiner said, "At that point he had a machete and another knife in his hand and he lunged across the hood at the officers."

That's when police said an officer shot and killed the man.

It remained unclear what sparked the attacks.

"Right now there's nothing that leads us to believe that this is anything but a random attack," said Weiner.

Karen Bass, who told CBS affiliate WBNS-10TV that she had only been in the restaurant for about half an hour when the attack occurred, described a scene of chaos.

"He came to each table and just started hitting them," she told WBNS. "There were tables and chairs overturned, there was a man on the floor bleeding, there was blood on the floor."

"I fell like five times. My legs felt like jelly. I just thought he was going to come behind me and slash me up," she said, describing her frantic escape.



“Pegues reports the suspected attacker has a Somali background, and officials believe he may have traveled to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates in 2012. …. "Some of the patrons there started throwing chairs at him just trying to get him out of there," Weiner said. The man eventually fled the scene in a white car and led police on a short chase. Officers forced the man off the road a few miles away and when he got out of his car police said they tried unsuccessfully to use a stun gun on him. Weiner said, "At that point he had a machete and another knife in his hand and he lunged across the hood at the officers." That's when police said an officer shot and killed the man. …. "Right now there's nothing that leads us to believe that this is anything but a random attack," said Weiner. …. "I fell like five times. My legs felt like jelly. I just thought he was going to come behind me and slash me up," she said, describing her frantic escape.”


There are “justified” police killings, of course, and this is clearly one of those. That kind of criminal really does bear a close resemblance to a mad dog, and has to be stopped at all costs. Rather than being what I consider to be “religious,” they are simply insane.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/reince-priebus-weve-got-some-drama-and-intrigue-in-the-gop/

Reince Priebus: "We've got some drama and intrigue" in the GOP
By REENA FLORES CBS NEWS
February 12, 2016, 9:00 AM

Play VIDEO -- Trump echoes rally-goer's insult of Cruz


Ahead of Saturday's GOP primary debate in South Carolina, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus weighed in on the state of the presidential race, saying on "CBS This Morning" that the party would be ready to compete against the Democratic nominee come November.

"We've got some drama and intrigue going on in the Republican Party," Priebus said in an interview Friday. "But if you look at what's happening in the Democrat party, it is a complete and total trainwreck."

While some GOP contenders may "claw and fight" their way to the top, Priebus believes any one of the remaining candidates would fare well against a Democrat in the general election.

And when pressed about a charge from Donald Trump that the Republican establishment feared a Trump victory, the party chair shot back: "I'm not afraid of any one of these folks running for president."

"I think all of them could beat Hillary Clinton... or a socialist from Vermont," he said. He added that his party was "offering the American people a varsity squad of choices."

Priebus declined to comment on specific criticisms of the candidates' behavior, including Trump's recent profanity-laced speeches on the campaign trail. He said he wasn't in the business of "calling balls and strikes."

Of the race generally, he deemed the GOP to be "in a pretty darn good place."

Priebus said that the Republican Party was "going to unite behind whoever the delegates on the floor in Cleveland unite behind."

Still, he cautioned that it was still too early to crown a nominee.

"The stage on Saturday is going to be a lot smaller than it used to be," Priebus said, referencing the candidates who have withdrawn from the race after the results in Iowa and New Hampshire. "So I think things are starting to come into shape."

But February's nominating contests, he added, only "represents about 5 percent of the delegates." March, in contrast, represents "about 60 percent."



“And when pressed about a charge from Donald Trump that the Republican establishment feared a Trump victory, the party chair shot back: "I'm not afraid of any one of these folks running for president." "I think all of them could beat Hillary Clinton... or a socialist from Vermont," he said. He added that his party was "offering the American people a varsity squad of choices." …. Priebus said that the Republican Party was "going to unite behind whoever the delegates on the floor in Cleveland unite behind." Still, he cautioned that it was still too early to crown a nominee.”


“Priebus said that the Republican Party was "going to unite behind whoever the delegates on the floor in Cleveland unite behind." In the words of Lieutenant Columbo and a bazillion others, “Well, we shall see what we shall see.” I think true and honest Americans will vote against mindless group hatred and the generally undisciplined self-expression of Mr. Trump. He’s like Joan Rivers, he just can’t resist what he considers to be a good quip. He has yet to voice more than a few real policies and theories that appear to have some thought behind them. He does sound better when he is in a longer sit-down interview when he’s actually trying to think and look presidential rather than just saying shocking things. He reminds me, mentally, of those 12 to 18 year old boys who take their belt off so they can show their ever so colorful undershorts. The comment that he is “not a serious person” is very true. The reason for that may be that the interviewers have often provided him with a list of questions as a condition of his taking the interview, so that he can study up on those subjects. They do sometimes do that.