Fred Astaire - World-of-Newave.info http://answers.world-of-newave.info/fred-astaire.htm Latest news and articles about Fred Astaire en-us Copyright (c)2004-2008.§/Newave SARL. All rights reserved. webmaster@world-of-newave.com (Webmaster) Sun, 23 Nov 2008 18:50:24 GMT Sun, 23 Nov 2008 18:50:24 GMT Newave Lisa XML Engine v1.0 - http://www.world-of-newave.info/about.htm 60 http://www.world-of-newave.info/images/wi8831.gif World-of-Newave.info - Knowledge and Informational Database http://www.world-of-newave.info/ 88 31 {LITERATURE > CYBERPUNK} - Jonathan Carroll's The Ghost in Love: magical and wonderful fantasy novel about ghosts and love and nostalgia http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/cyberpunk/jonathan-carroll-s-the-ghost-in-love-magical-and-20081052535.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/cyberpunk/jonathan-carroll-s-the-ghost-in-love-magical-and-20081052535.htm Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:19:27 GMT Jonathan Carroll's latest novel, The Ghost in Love is the latest of thirteen genuinely magical fantasy novels in which the author makes magic the way Fred Astaire danced: effortless, simple, wondrous. In the Ghost in Love, Ben and his girlfriend German have just broken up a long-term relationship that seems to have been as wonderful as love can be (Carroll has a special gift for bringing happy family relations to life). Now they are on the outs, and sharing custody of Pilot, their shelter-dog, and every time they meet to swap the dog, their hearts break anew. Ben should have died the day he got the dog, when he slipped on ice and broke his head. But he didn't. So the Angel of Death sent Ben's ghost, Ling, to earth, to investigate why the universe has stopped obeying its divine destiny. Ling is hopelessly in love with German, and the ghost is also a fantastic cook (as is Ben), so whenever German is due to come over, Ling spends the whole day cooking elaborate, invisible meals for her, while chatting morosely with the dog (all ghosts speak Dog). That's all in the first few pages. Then it gets weird. Carroll's standard formula for his novels is to introduce us to wonderful people living magical blessed lives, lives so achingly rendered that you want to crawl into the page and snuggle under the covers with them. Then he smashes their lives like sand-castles, and his wonderful people fall apart while magic unmakes them, rewriting the rules of their world to reveal hidden truths about love, family, self-regard, self-loathing, and other emotionally charged subjects. In Ghost in Love, Carroll does this again, but even moreso, using a kind of dreamlike fluidity to constantly rewrite the rules of his world and its magic as evil and good tear apart the lives of Ben, German, Pilot and Ling and the people around them. The story grows ever-more existential, allegorical and weird as the pages fly past. But it's all handled so gracefully that the dream-logic never falters. Carroll is the omnipotent god of his characters and situations, and he is totally in control of every variable, so that we trust him throughout, even though he never plays fair. And the message, the conclusion in the end? Without spoiling things, I'll say this: The Ghost in Love contains genuinely profound and illuminating truths about the way that we love others and ourselves, and about the power of owning up to your bad deeds, and about the danger and wonder of nostalgia for our simpler pasts. I've read and enjoyed all thirteen of Carroll's novels, and this one is going right on the shelf with the others, and will occupy the same oft-visited part of my mental landscape wherein dwell his other magical books. The Ghost in Love on Amazon, The Ghost in Love, author's site with free first chapter... Boingboing.Net Jonathan Carroll's The Ghost in Love: magical and wonderful fantasy novel about ghosts and love and nostalgia {new window}   Www.Boingboing.Net - Jonathan Carroll's latest novel, The Ghost in Love is the latest of thirteen genuinely magical fantasy novels in which the author makes magic the way Fred Astaire danced: effortless, simple, wondrous. In the Ghost in Love, Ben and his girlfriend German have just broken up a long-term relationship that seems to have been as wonderful as love can be (Carroll has a special gift for bringing happy family relations to life). Now they are on the outs, and sharing custody of Pilot, their shelter-dog, and every time they meet to swap the dog, their hearts break anew. Ben should have died the day he got the dog, when he slipped on ice and broke his head. But he didn't. So the Angel of Death sent Ben's ghost, Ling, to earth, to investigate why the universe has stopped obeying its divine destiny. Ling is hopelessly in love with German, and the ghost is also a fantastic cook (as is Ben), so whenever German is due to come over, Ling spends the whole day cooking elaborate, invisible meals for her, while chatting morosely with the dog (all ghosts speak Dog). That's all in the first few pages. Then it gets weird. Carroll's standard formula for his novels is to introduce us to wonderful people living magical blessed lives, lives so achingly rendered that you want to crawl into the page and snuggle under the covers with them. Then he smashes their lives like sand-castles, and his wonderful people fall apart while magic unmakes them, rewriting the rules of their world to reveal hidden truths about love, family, self-regard, self-loathing, and other emotionally charged subjects. In Ghost in Love, Carroll does this again, but even moreso, using a kind of dreamlike fluidity to constantly rewrite the rules of his world and its magic as evil and good tear apart the lives of Ben, German, Pilot and Ling and the people around them. The story grows ever-more existential, allegorical and weird as the pages fly past. But it's all handled so gracefully that the dream-logic never falters. Carroll is the omnipotent god of his characters and situations, and he is totally in control of every variable, so that we trust him throughout, even though he never plays fair. And the message, the conclusion in the end? Without spoiling things, I'll say this: The Ghost in Love contains genuinely profound and illuminating truths about the way that we love others and ourselves, and about the power of owning up to your bad deeds, and about the danger and wonder of nostalgia for our simpler pasts. I've read and enjoyed all thirteen of Carroll's novels, and this one is going right on the shelf with the others, and will occupy the same oft-visited part of my mental landscape wherein dwell his other magical books. The Ghost in Love on Amazon, The Ghost in Love, author's site with free first chapter...
Jonathan Carroll's The Ghost in Love: magical and wonderful fantasy novel about ghosts and love and nostalgia - Boing Boing {...}
Published: October 31, 2008, 2:19 pm - Indexed: November 3, 2008, 10:11 am - Page Size: 48KB
Category: Arts > Literature > Genres > Cyberpunk

]]> Arts > Literature > Genres > Cyberpunk {NEWSPAPERS > UNITED STATES} - Rafael Nadal moves relentlessly toward dethroning tennis's reigning king http://articles.world-of-newave.info/news/newspapers/regional/united-states/rafael-nadal-moves-relentlessly-toward-dethroning-20080935812.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/news/newspapers/regional/united-states/rafael-nadal-moves-relentlessly-toward-dethroning-20080935812.htm Fri, 05 Sep 2008 07:00:00 GMT This week will tell whether Roger Federer, the Fred Astaire of tennis, can regain his footing after losing the No. 1 ranking to the hustling Spaniard, or whether a once-in-a-generation shift is under way. Features.Csmonitor.Com Rafael Nadal moves relentlessly toward dethroning tennis's reigning king {new window}   Features.Csmonitor.Com - This week will tell whether Roger Federer, the Fred Astaire of tennis, can regain his footing after losing the No. 1 ranking to the hustling Spaniard, or whether a once-in-a-generation shift is under way.
Rafael Nadal moves relentlessly toward dethroning tennis?s reigning king | csmonitor.com {...}
Published: September 5, 2008, 7:00 am - Indexed: September 4, 2008, 9:18 pm - Page Size: 35KB
Category: News > Newspapers > Regional > United States

]]> News > Newspapers > Regional > United States {EUROPE > NEWS AND MEDIA} - RBS bosses apologise to shareholders http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/rbs-bosses-apologise-to-shareholders-20081147527.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/rbs-bosses-apologise-to-shareholders-20081147527.htm Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:25:03 GMT The bosses of Royal Bank of Scotland yesterday told shareholders for the first time that they were "sorry" for the plight of the Edinburgh-based bank which is likely to be 60%-owned by the government after a £20bn bail-out was endorsed by investors.Addressing shareholders at a hastily convened meeting in Edinburgh, out-going chairman Sir Tom McKillop took personal responsibility as he said he was "profoundly sorry" for the situation that had forced the bank to accept the government rescue package.In a candid address, McKillop, who will leave at next year's annual meeting, made it clear that the "buck stops with me as chairman". Until yesterday Sir Fred Goodwin, the chief executive, had refused to utter the word sorry. On his last day in the job which will be taken over today by Stephen Hester, Goodwin responded to a question from a former employee who is also a shareholder by saying that he was "extremely sorry"."Accountability has been allocated and fully accepted," said McKillop.Shareholders overwhelmingly backed the fund-raising package under which the government will underwrite a £15bn share issue at 65p a share and buy £5bn of preference shares. The shares closed yesterday at 46p, up 3.7p indicating that the government could end up with a 58% stake in the bank unless the share price rises through 65p which might encourage existing investors to participate in the cash call.In his address to investors, McKillop refused to admit that the acquisition of parts of Dutch bank ABN Amro at the height the credit crunch last year had caused the bank's problems. But he admitted that the deal - the biggest financial services takeover of all time - had "added to our difficulties"."In retrospect that higher exposure to assets, which later became very difficult to trade ... increased the short-term vulnerability of the group to the financial crisis as it intensified this year," McKillop said.He also admitted that the bank had been run on too low a capital base - what he called an "efficient balance sheet" - for too long. "Had we known the severe market dislocation and economic deterioration we would face, we would, of course, have built up larger capital reserves earlier," said McKillop.This was a point picked up by shareholder Alan Jack who said a prudent bank should have build up a "buffer of capital". He accused the bank of adopting a "gung-ho attitude".The bank had been forced into a record-breaking £12bn rights issue in April to shore up its balance sheet, but the deterioration in markets after that forced the government to devise its bank bail-out plan which will now involve a further £20bn being raised. The bank's shares have collapsed. Worth £60bn at its peak, RBS is now valued at a tenth of that.McKillop was at pains to apologise to employees and customers. "I am sorry about the very real financial and therefore human cost that those who have invested in us now feel and recognise how seriously this has impacted shareholder confidence in RBS," he said. A former chief executive of AstraZeneca, McKillop said: "In over 40 years of my working life I have had many difficult working experiences but none like this."The challenges we must now address as an institution, as a country and indeed as part of the world's financial system, are unprecedented," said McKillop.Royal Bank of ScotlandUK banking sectorguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds Guardian.Co.Uk RBS bosses apologise to shareholders {new window}   Www.Guardian.Co.Uk - The bosses of Royal Bank of Scotland yesterday told shareholders for the first time that they were "sorry" for the plight of the Edinburgh-based bank which is likely to be 60%-owned by the government after a £20bn bail-out was endorsed by investors.Addressing shareholders at a hastily convened meeting in Edinburgh, out-going chairman Sir Tom McKillop took personal responsibility as he said he was "profoundly sorry" for the situation that had forced the bank to accept the government rescue package.In a candid address, McKillop, who will leave at next year's annual meeting, made it clear that the "buck stops with me as chairman". Until yesterday Sir Fred Goodwin, the chief executive, had refused to utter the word sorry. On his last day in the job which will be taken over today by Stephen Hester, Goodwin responded to a question from a former employee who is also a shareholder by saying that he was "extremely sorry"."Accountability has been allocated and fully accepted," said McKillop.Shareholders overwhelmingly backed the fund-raising package under which the government will underwrite a £15bn share issue at 65p a share and buy £5bn of preference shares. The shares closed yesterday at 46p, up 3.7p indicating that the government could end up with a 58% stake in the bank unless the share price rises through 65p which might encourage existing investors to participate in the cash call.In his address to investors, McKillop refused to admit that the acquisition of parts of Dutch bank ABN Amro at the height the credit crunch last year had caused the bank's problems. But he admitted that the deal - the biggest financial services takeover of all time - had "added to our difficulties"."In retrospect that higher exposure to assets, which later became very difficult to trade ... increased the short-term vulnerability of the group to the financial crisis as it intensified this year," McKillop said.He also admitted that the bank had been run on too low a capital base - what he called an "efficient balance sheet" - for too long. "Had we known the severe market dislocation and economic deterioration we would face, we would, of course, have built up larger capital reserves earlier," said McKillop.This was a point picked up by shareholder Alan Jack who said a prudent bank should have build up a "buffer of capital". He accused the bank of adopting a "gung-ho attitude".The bank had been forced into a record-breaking £12bn rights issue in April to shore up its balance sheet, but the deterioration in markets after that forced the government to devise its bank bail-out plan which will now involve a further £20bn being raised. The bank's shares have collapsed. Worth £60bn at its peak, RBS is now valued at a tenth of that.McKillop was at pains to apologise to employees and customers. "I am sorry about the very real financial and therefore human cost that those who have invested in us now feel and recognise how seriously this has impacted shareholder confidence in RBS," he said. A former chief executive of AstraZeneca, McKillop said: "In over 40 years of my working life I have had many difficult working experiences but none like this."The challenges we must now address as an institution, as a country and indeed as part of the world's financial system, are unprecedented," said McKillop.Royal Bank of ScotlandUK banking sectorguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
RBS bosses apologise to shareholders | Business | The Guardian {...} Outgoing chairman Sir Tom McKillop takes personal responsibility for bank collapse at Edinburgh meeting {...}
Published: November 21, 2008, 12:25 am - Indexed: November 21, 2008, 1:39 pm - Page Size: 87KB
Category: Regional > Europe > United Kingdom > News and Media

]]> Regional > Europe > United Kingdom > News and Media {AUTOS > MAGAZINES AND E-ZINES} - Toyota Demands Site Remove Fan-Submitted Photos http://articles.world-of-newave.info/recreation/autos/magazines-and-e_zines/toyota-demands-site-remove-fan-submitted-photos-20081174924.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/recreation/autos/magazines-and-e_zines/toyota-demands-site-remove-fan-submitted-photos-20081174924.htm Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:14:15 GMT To the owner of DesktopNexus.com?a site dedicated to sharing user-submitted desktop wallpaper?it sounded as if the attorney from the Toyota Motor Corporation on the phone was reading from a script. He was basically repeating the same demand that Toyota had made over the course of six months in several emails: The car giant wanted Harry Maugans to remove all images on his site containing a Toyota, Lexus and Scion gallery.  What wasn?t clear?because Toyota did not submit a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notification?was whether Toyota was claiming ownership of any image containing one of their cars. That radical claim would be enough to shivers down the spine of any gearhead. ?I asked them for all the information that would be included in a DMCA request, including who owned the image,? Maugans told Wired.com. The attorney, who identified himself as Garrett Biggs, told Maugans that if he wanted that specific information, he would have to pay for it to be gathered. No such payment has been made, and Maugans hasn?t budged. ?I haven't deleted a single Toyota, Lexus, or Scion image since any of this started.? Maugans? stand seems ballsy when you consider the size and legal power of a massive conglomerate like Toyota. Yet Fred von Lohmann, Senior Intellectual Property Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, feels Maugans' refusal to take down the images is justified.?He doesn?t have to respond,? von Lohmann told Wired.com. ?Toyota is on shaky ground here.? Since Toyota is not in the business of selling desktop wallpapers, von Lohmann sees that Toyota has no grounds to request that the images be removed unless they were created or owned by the company itself. ?Toyota is selling cars, not car designs. It?s a very thin copyright.? As a site filled with user submissions, von Lohmann feels that DesktopNexus definitely fits into the class of sites?like YouTube?protected by the DMCA, which allows for a safe harbor for site owners as long as they comply with proper takedown requests from copyright owners. And ownership of the images is definitely the key issue in this controversy. ?I showed him a couple of images that were definitely not Toyota promotional photos, and the attorney wouldn?t say Toyota owned them,? Maugans said. Claiming copyright ownership is serious business. If Toyota or anyone who makes a takedown request claims ownership of any image or media that isn?t truly theirs, they can be liable for perjury. ?The message here is we can make your life very difficult,? von Lohmann told us. He feels that attempts like this to monitor fan activity are part of a larger effort by car companies. While carmakers love to stir up ?viral? conversation about their models, they?re also very worried that the discussion can get out of hand. Von Lohmann points to the attempt by Ford a few years ago to force sites with Mustang in their name to find new urls as an example of overreaching by automakers. ?MacWorld has a right to have Mac in its name,? von Lohmann said, and MustangHeaven.com has the right to use Mustang in its name And things aren?t going well for Toyota?and not just when it comes to sales. Since news about Toyota?s requests came out, users have been submitting some less than flattering images of Toyotas that no one would claim were official promotional images. Maugans' reluctance to bend immediately to a request from the lawyer of a multi-billion dollar corporation shows some insulation against the chilling effects of potentially unwarranted rights claims. Yet other site owners who aren?t aware of the ins-and-outs of DMCA notifications may have taken down the content immediately, shuddering the kind of hardcore fandom that?s at the core of using a Scion or a Lexus as your desktop wallpaper. ?These wallpapers are great advertisements for Toyota,? said Maugans who insists that he?s definitely willing to follow the law. ?I want to make sure this is done correctly,? he said. So the ball is in your court, Toyota. Submit a complete DMCA takedown notification, or let the poor guy be. Photo by DesktopNexus user armindillo. Blog.Wired.Com Toyota Demands Site Remove Fan-Submitted Photos {new window}   Blog.Wired.Com - To the owner of DesktopNexus.com?a site dedicated to sharing user-submitted desktop wallpaper?it sounded as if the attorney from the Toyota Motor Corporation on the phone was reading from a script. He was basically repeating the same demand that Toyota had made over the course of six months in several emails: The car giant wanted Harry Maugans to remove all images on his site containing a Toyota, Lexus and Scion gallery.  What wasn?t clear?because Toyota did not submit a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notification?was whether Toyota was claiming ownership of any image containing one of their cars. That radical claim would be enough to shivers down the spine of any gearhead. ?I asked them for all the information that would be included in a DMCA request, including who owned the image,? Maugans told Wired.com. The attorney, who identified himself as Garrett Biggs, told Maugans that if he wanted that specific information, he would have to pay for it to be gathered. No such payment has been made, and Maugans hasn?t budged. ?I haven't deleted a single Toyota, Lexus, or Scion image since any of this started.? Maugans? stand seems ballsy when you consider the size and legal power of a massive conglomerate like Toyota. Yet Fred von Lohmann, Senior Intellectual Property Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, feels Maugans' refusal to take down the images is justified.?He doesn?t have to respond,? von Lohmann told Wired.com. ?Toyota is on shaky ground here.? Since Toyota is not in the business of selling desktop wallpapers, von Lohmann sees that Toyota has no grounds to request that the images be removed unless they were created or owned by the company itself. ?Toyota is selling cars, not car designs. It?s a very thin copyright.? As a site filled with user submissions, von Lohmann feels that DesktopNexus definitely fits into the class of sites?like YouTube?protected by the DMCA, which allows for a safe harbor for site owners as long as they comply with proper takedown requests from copyright owners. And ownership of the images is definitely the key issue in this controversy. ?I showed him a couple of images that were definitely not Toyota promotional photos, and the attorney wouldn?t say Toyota owned them,? Maugans said. Claiming copyright ownership is serious business. If Toyota or anyone who makes a takedown request claims ownership of any image or media that isn?t truly theirs, they can be liable for perjury. ?The message here is we can make your life very difficult,? von Lohmann told us. He feels that attempts like this to monitor fan activity are part of a larger effort by car companies. While carmakers love to stir up ?viral? conversation about their models, they?re also very worried that the discussion can get out of hand. Von Lohmann points to the attempt by Ford a few years ago to force sites with Mustang in their name to find new urls as an example of overreaching by automakers. ?MacWorld has a right to have Mac in its name,? von Lohmann said, and MustangHeaven.com has the right to use Mustang in its name And things aren?t going well for Toyota?and not just when it comes to sales. Since news about Toyota?s requests came out, users have been submitting some less than flattering images of Toyotas that no one would claim were official promotional images. Maugans' reluctance to bend immediately to a request from the lawyer of a multi-billion dollar corporation shows some insulation against the chilling effects of potentially unwarranted rights claims. Yet other site owners who aren?t aware of the ins-and-outs of DMCA notifications may have taken down the content immediately, shuddering the kind of hardcore fandom that?s at the core of using a Scion or a Lexus as your desktop wallpaper. ?These wallpapers are great advertisements for Toyota,? said Maugans who insists that he?s definitely willing to follow the law. ?I want to make sure this is done correctly,? he said. So the ball is in your court, Toyota. Submit a complete DMCA takedown notification, or let the poor guy be. Photo by DesktopNexus user armindillo.
Toyota Demands Site Remove Fan-Submitted Photos | Autopia from Wired.com {...} To the owner of DesktopNexus.com?a site dedicated to sharing user-submitted desktop wallpaper?it sounded as if the attorney from the Toyota Motor Corporation on the phone was reading from a script. {...}
Indexed: November 19, 2008, 9:14 am - Page Size: 71KB
Category: Recreation > Autos > Magazines and E-zines

]]> Recreation > Autos > Magazines and E-zines {AUTOS > MAGAZINES AND E-ZINES} - Study Shows Drivers Feel Free to Ignore Speed Limits http://articles.world-of-newave.info/recreation/autos/magazines-and-e_zines/study-shows-drivers-feel-free-to-ignore-speed-limits-20081116119.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/recreation/autos/magazines-and-e_zines/study-shows-drivers-feel-free-to-ignore-speed-limits-20081116119.htm Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:34:42 GMT From the Autopia Unintended Consequences Department comes this dispatch from Tippecanoe County, Indiana, where researchers at Purdue University say the majority of drivers have no problem going 5, 10 or even 20 mph over the speed limit and see no risk in doing so. The study of 988 drivers in that county, where Purdue is located, found few people have any respect for speed limits, which they consider nothing more than vague guidelines they can ignore. Civil engineering and economics professor Fred Mannering says that means highway officials set artificially low speed limits because they know people will ignore it. He attributes our blatant disregard for the rule of the road to the much-maligned Emergency Highway Conservation Act of 1974 that established the 55-mph speed limit for political, not safety, reasons. "It decoupled the speed-safety association," Mannering told Wired.com. "Now, there are some roads where the speed limit should be posted as 45 but they end up getting posted at 35 because they expect people to go faster," he said. Congress adopted the nationwide 55-mph speed limitduring the oil embargo era and threatened to withhold highway funding from any state that didn't comply. It repealed the law 13 years ago, when oil was cheap and gas plentiful. Mounting concern about global warming and the summer's spike in gas prices brought renewed calls to roll the limit back to 55. Mannering's study suggests it won't change anything. His study of 988 drivers, published in next month's Transportation Research Part F(subscription), found 21 percent of them think it's perfectly safe to exceed the speed limit by 5 mph. Forty-three percent saw no risk in going 10 mph over and 36 percent say there's no harm driving 20 mph over the speed limit. What makes that especially dangerous, Mannering said, is when the speed limit actually reflects the safest traveling speed and people stillexceed it. That, he said, creates a dangerous situation where some people are following the speed limit and others are zipping past them when they absolutely shouldn't be. As anyone who has ever watched a cement truck merge in front of a speeding sports car can tell you, having two vehicles traveling at wildly different speeds on the same road can be quite risky. The study found that people will, not surprisingly, obey the speed limit if they feel there is a risk they'd get caught breaking it. But they'll also speed up if they think there's little risk of getting busted. The phrase "speed limit" is something of a misnomer. Before 1974, the rule of thumb was to set speed limits at the 85th percentile: 85 percent of the cars should be traveling at or below the limit, while 15 percent of cars could be exceeding it. Speed limits could be used to accurately judge how safe it was to travel on any particular roadway. Now, that black-and-white sign rarely tells you the maximum speed you can safely travel without wrapping your car around a tree or unintentionally modifying a guardrail. It factors in fuel efficiency, pedestrian safety and the concerns of those who live in the area. Drivers who get used to these artificially low speed limits begin to ignore them and end up routinely driving 5 to 10 mph faster than the number on the sign. Drivers also disregard speed limits when the police fail to enforce them. Mannering thinks there are safer ways of encouraging fuel efficiency than setting speed limits at 55 mph, such as raising fuel prices. "If you want to save fuel ? and I'm wearing my economics hat ? do it with price," he said. "You could go to 25 or 35 mph and save fuel, but people would die of boredom." For straightaway roads that beg for a lead foot but cut through busy residential neighborhoods, Mannering recommends stricter policing. "If you have a road that's designed for 50 mph and you have kids playing in the street, put up signs and enforce it," he said. POST UPDATED 11:25 a.m. PST. Photo by Vlastula/Flickr Blog.Wired.Com Study Shows Drivers Feel Free to Ignore Speed Limits {new window}   Blog.Wired.Com - From the Autopia Unintended Consequences Department comes this dispatch from Tippecanoe County, Indiana, where researchers at Purdue University say the majority of drivers have no problem going 5, 10 or even 20 mph over the speed limit and see no risk in doing so. The study of 988 drivers in that county, where Purdue is located, found few people have any respect for speed limits, which they consider nothing more than vague guidelines they can ignore. Civil engineering and economics professor Fred Mannering says that means highway officials set artificially low speed limits because they know people will ignore it. He attributes our blatant disregard for the rule of the road to the much-maligned Emergency Highway Conservation Act of 1974 that established the 55-mph speed limit for political, not safety, reasons. "It decoupled the speed-safety association," Mannering told Wired.com. "Now, there are some roads where the speed limit should be posted as 45 but they end up getting posted at 35 because they expect people to go faster," he said. Congress adopted the nationwide 55-mph speed limitduring the oil embargo era and threatened to withhold highway funding from any state that didn't comply. It repealed the law 13 years ago, when oil was cheap and gas plentiful. Mounting concern about global warming and the summer's spike in gas prices brought renewed calls to roll the limit back to 55. Mannering's study suggests it won't change anything. His study of 988 drivers, published in next month's Transportation Research Part F(subscription), found 21 percent of them think it's perfectly safe to exceed the speed limit by 5 mph. Forty-three percent saw no risk in going 10 mph over and 36 percent say there's no harm driving 20 mph over the speed limit. What makes that especially dangerous, Mannering said, is when the speed limit actually reflects the safest traveling speed and people stillexceed it. That, he said, creates a dangerous situation where some people are following the speed limit and others are zipping past them when they absolutely shouldn't be. As anyone who has ever watched a cement truck merge in front of a speeding sports car can tell you, having two vehicles traveling at wildly different speeds on the same road can be quite risky. The study found that people will, not surprisingly, obey the speed limit if they feel there is a risk they'd get caught breaking it. But they'll also speed up if they think there's little risk of getting busted. The phrase "speed limit" is something of a misnomer. Before 1974, the rule of thumb was to set speed limits at the 85th percentile: 85 percent of the cars should be traveling at or below the limit, while 15 percent of cars could be exceeding it. Speed limits could be used to accurately judge how safe it was to travel on any particular roadway. Now, that black-and-white sign rarely tells you the maximum speed you can safely travel without wrapping your car around a tree or unintentionally modifying a guardrail. It factors in fuel efficiency, pedestrian safety and the concerns of those who live in the area. Drivers who get used to these artificially low speed limits begin to ignore them and end up routinely driving 5 to 10 mph faster than the number on the sign. Drivers also disregard speed limits when the police fail to enforce them. Mannering thinks there are safer ways of encouraging fuel efficiency than setting speed limits at 55 mph, such as raising fuel prices. "If you want to save fuel ? and I'm wearing my economics hat ? do it with price," he said. "You could go to 25 or 35 mph and save fuel, but people would die of boredom." For straightaway roads that beg for a lead foot but cut through busy residential neighborhoods, Mannering recommends stricter policing. "If you have a road that's designed for 50 mph and you have kids playing in the street, put up signs and enforce it," he said. POST UPDATED 11:25 a.m. PST. Photo by Vlastula/Flickr
Study Shows Drivers Feel Free to Ignore Speed Limits | Autopia from Wired.com {...} From the Autopia Unintended Consequences Department comes this dispatch from Tippecanoe County, Indiana, where researchers at Purdue University say the majority of drivers have no problem going 5, 10 or {...}
Indexed: November 18, 2008, 9:34 am - Page Size: 136KB
Category: Recreation > Autos > Magazines and E-zines

]]> Recreation > Autos > Magazines and E-zines {ISSUES > BIAS AND BALANCE} - Fox News' Barnes latest media figure to reference discredited Minnesota car ballot story http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/fox-news-barnes-latest-media-figure-to-reference-20081196517.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/fox-news-barnes-latest-media-figure-to-reference-20081196517.htm Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:33:09 GMT During the November 15 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys, while discussing the Minnesota Senate race, co-host Fred Barnes forwarded the discredited rumor that 32 ballots from Minneapolis were mishandled. Barnes said: "We've seen, under some questionable circumstances, [Democratic candidate Al] Franken gaining, you know, 32 ballots from the trunk of somebody's car that had been sitting there for a few days. I mean, I find that a bit suspicious." However, a lawyer for Sen. Norm Coleman's campaign, who initially raised questions about those ballots on November 8, reportedly said that same day that he had been assured the ballots were handled properly -- an assertion he reportedly repeated two days later. Indeed, on November 16, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) -- who initially forwarded the car ballot rumor himself -- said that "there's a news report in Minnesota that the ballot-in-the-trunk story has now been retracted, that it wasn't accurate." Additionally, Barnes said that "what drives Republicans the most crazy is the guy in charge of the whole recount, and that's the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie [D] ... Republicans just regard it as someone who will do anything to get a Democrat elected, and that -- and that's Franken." However, Barnes did not acknowledge, as Media Matters for America has documented, that Pawlenty approved of the composition of the canvassing board Ritchie named to certify the vote and oversee the recount, or that a lawyer for Coleman's campaign reportedly said that the "state should feel good about who's on the panel." As Media Matters noted, while Fritz Knaak, a lawyer for Coleman, reportedly said on November 8, "We were actually told [ballots] had been riding around in [Minneapolis director of elections Cynthia Reichert's] car for several days, which raised all kinds of integrity questions," The Associated Press reported that same day that Knaak "said a Minneapolis attorney reassured Coleman's campaign that no one but an elected official had access to the 32 ballots and there was no tampering." On November 10, Knaak further reportedly said of the purported incident, "It does not appear that there was any ballot-tampering, and that was our concern." During the November 16 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Pawlenty stated: PAWLENTY: There's a news report in Minnesota that the ballot-in-the-trunk story has now been retracted, that it wasn't accurate. There are concerning patterns about the changes before the recount starting favoring Al Franken, and some concerns that were raised. But we have to be clear on this. As of this moment, there is no actual evidence of wrongdoing or fraud in the process. If there is, it'll get rooted out and identified aggressively. Additionally, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported on November 15: Earlier this week, Gov. Tim Pawlenty added fuel to the debate when he raised concerns of his own about ballot security, speaking on Fox News about an allegation, now documented as inaccurate, that a Minneapolis election official drove around with 32 absentee ballots in the trunk of her car. Ritchie declined to be critical of Pawlenty, but said he sent a note to Pawlenty thanking him for his support for the overall integrity of the state's election process and providing him with his cell phone number if the governor had any further questions. Asked if Pawlenty wanted to modify his comments, Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung said: "Based on ballot security issues reported in news accounts, the governor expressed his concerns. He's glad some of these matters have been clarified." As Media Matters has documented, in addition to Barnes, numerous media figures and outlets have advanced the discredited rumor that the ballots were mishandled, including The Wall Street Journal, NBC correspondent Lee Cowan, MSNBC host Chris Matthews, and Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Brit Hume, and Bill O'Reilly. From the November 15 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys: JEFF BIRNBAUM (guest co-host): Down, Minnesota. The Senate race between incumbent Norm Coleman and funnyman Al Franken couldn't be closer -- enough to trigger an automatic recount. But that hasn't had -- kept either side from questioning the legitimacy of the outcome. It's really -- this is really no good for anybody, basically, this extended problem. There are already new accusations, or renewed accusations, about Norm Coleman perhaps getting too close to a former fundraiser of his. Calls for investigations into whether money was channeled from the fundraiser's company to Norm Coleman and his wife -- charges that are -- are denied by the Colemans. But, nonetheless, this is getting very nasty, and a lot is at stake, of course, in the outcome. But if Norm -- if Coleman wins, it could really be a problem for him even if he does win. BARNES: I'm not worried. I don't think those lawsuits are going to amount to much. But it's clear now who -- which of the parties, whether the Coleman campaign or the Franken campaign, thinks the process is working on their side. We've seen, under some questionable circumstances, Franken gaining, you know, 32 ballots from the trunk of somebody's car that had been sitting there for a few days. I mean, I find that a bit suspicious. And some other things, too, you know, where he gains. There are all these more Franken votes in certain districts, but no votes for other offices that weren't affected. But what drives Republicans the most crazy is the guy in charge of the whole recount, and that's the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, who's an ally of ACORN, and I don't need to describe them. And Republicans just regard it as someone who will do anything to get a Democrat elected, and that -- and that's Franken. I mean, every Republican I know thinks they're going to "discover" more ballots. And, of course, they'll favor Franken. All right. Up, Howard Dean. From the November 16 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday: CHRIS WALLACE (host): All right, I want to ask you both about specific issues involving you. Governor Pawlenty, you've got a dead-even Senate race in Minnesota. And we'll put up the results, which are really quite extraordinary, just a couple of hundred votes out of almost two and a half million. There have been allegations from some Republicans that Democrats are trying to steal this election for Al Franken. Do you have full confidence in the secretary of state, who is a Democrat, and also in the canvassing board, to which -- a five-member board to which you appointed two members? PAWLENTY: Chris, in Minnesota we have a history of clear, transparent, accurate, and fair and legal elections. That's going to happen again here. The canvassing board is five people. They are invited by the secretary of state, not appointed by me. The governor doesn't have a role. But it's four judges -- all of which have good reputations -- and the secretary of state. The canvassing board in the state of Minnesota will render a result. This process will be fair and appropriate. I can assure you of that. WALLACE: Do you -- because there has been some talk in some Republican circles about ballots that were found in -- PAWLENTY: Sure. WALLACE: -- people's trunks. I mean, is -- is there any sign that there has been any fraud? And two, if there is any fraud, will that be sorted out by the canvassing board? PAWLENTY: There's a news report in Minnesota that the ballot-in-the-trunk story has now been retracted, that it wasn't accurate. There are concerning patterns about the changes before the recount starting favoring Al Franken, and some concerns that were raised. But we have to be clear on this. As of this moment, there is no actual evidence of wrongdoing or fraud in the process. If there is, it'll get rooted out and identified aggressively. But at the moment, there is no actual evidence of that occurring. Mediamatters.Org Fox News' Barnes latest media figure to reference discredited Minnesota car ballot story {new window}   Mediamatters.Org - During the November 15 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys, while discussing the Minnesota Senate race, co-host Fred Barnes forwarded the discredited rumor that 32 ballots from Minneapolis were mishandled. Barnes said: "We've seen, under some questionable circumstances, [Democratic candidate Al] Franken gaining, you know, 32 ballots from the trunk of somebody's car that had been sitting there for a few days. I mean, I find that a bit suspicious." However, a lawyer for Sen. Norm Coleman's campaign, who initially raised questions about those ballots on November 8, reportedly said that same day that he had been assured the ballots were handled properly -- an assertion he reportedly repeated two days later. Indeed, on November 16, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) -- who initially forwarded the car ballot rumor himself -- said that "there's a news report in Minnesota that the ballot-in-the-trunk story has now been retracted, that it wasn't accurate." Additionally, Barnes said that "what drives Republicans the most crazy is the guy in charge of the whole recount, and that's the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie [D] ... Republicans just regard it as someone who will do anything to get a Democrat elected, and that -- and that's Franken." However, Barnes did not acknowledge, as Media Matters for America has documented, that Pawlenty approved of the composition of the canvassing board Ritchie named to certify the vote and oversee the recount, or that a lawyer for Coleman's campaign reportedly said that the "state should feel good about who's on the panel." As Media Matters noted, while Fritz Knaak, a lawyer for Coleman, reportedly said on November 8, "We were actually told [ballots] had been riding around in [Minneapolis director of elections Cynthia Reichert's] car for several days, which raised all kinds of integrity questions," The Associated Press reported that same day that Knaak "said a Minneapolis attorney reassured Coleman's campaign that no one but an elected official had access to the 32 ballots and there was no tampering." On November 10, Knaak further reportedly said of the purported incident, "It does not appear that there was any ballot-tampering, and that was our concern." During the November 16 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Pawlenty stated: PAWLENTY: There's a news report in Minnesota that the ballot-in-the-trunk story has now been retracted, that it wasn't accurate. There are concerning patterns about the changes before the recount starting favoring Al Franken, and some concerns that were raised. But we have to be clear on this. As of this moment, there is no actual evidence of wrongdoing or fraud in the process. If there is, it'll get rooted out and identified aggressively. Additionally, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported on November 15: Earlier this week, Gov. Tim Pawlenty added fuel to the debate when he raised concerns of his own about ballot security, speaking on Fox News about an allegation, now documented as inaccurate, that a Minneapolis election official drove around with 32 absentee ballots in the trunk of her car. Ritchie declined to be critical of Pawlenty, but said he sent a note to Pawlenty thanking him for his support for the overall integrity of the state's election process and providing him with his cell phone number if the governor had any further questions. Asked if Pawlenty wanted to modify his comments, Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung said: "Based on ballot security issues reported in news accounts, the governor expressed his concerns. He's glad some of these matters have been clarified." As Media Matters has documented, in addition to Barnes, numerous media figures and outlets have advanced the discredited rumor that the ballots were mishandled, including The Wall Street Journal, NBC correspondent Lee Cowan, MSNBC host Chris Matthews, and Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Brit Hume, and Bill O'Reilly. From the November 15 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys: JEFF BIRNBAUM (guest co-host): Down, Minnesota. The Senate race between incumbent Norm Coleman and funnyman Al Franken couldn't be closer -- enough to trigger an automatic recount. But that hasn't had -- kept either side from questioning the legitimacy of the outcome. It's really -- this is really no good for anybody, basically, this extended problem. There are already new accusations, or renewed accusations, about Norm Coleman perhaps getting too close to a former fundraiser of his. Calls for investigations into whether money was channeled from the fundraiser's company to Norm Coleman and his wife -- charges that are -- are denied by the Colemans. But, nonetheless, this is getting very nasty, and a lot is at stake, of course, in the outcome. But if Norm -- if Coleman wins, it could really be a problem for him even if he does win. BARNES: I'm not worried. I don't think those lawsuits are going to amount to much. But it's clear now who -- which of the parties, whether the Coleman campaign or the Franken campaign, thinks the process is working on their side. We've seen, under some questionable circumstances, Franken gaining, you know, 32 ballots from the trunk of somebody's car that had been sitting there for a few days. I mean, I find that a bit suspicious. And some other things, too, you know, where he gains. There are all these more Franken votes in certain districts, but no votes for other offices that weren't affected. But what drives Republicans the most crazy is the guy in charge of the whole recount, and that's the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, who's an ally of ACORN, and I don't need to describe them. And Republicans just regard it as someone who will do anything to get a Democrat elected, and that -- and that's Franken. I mean, every Republican I know thinks they're going to "discover" more ballots. And, of course, they'll favor Franken. All right. Up, Howard Dean. From the November 16 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday: CHRIS WALLACE (host): All right, I want to ask you both about specific issues involving you. Governor Pawlenty, you've got a dead-even Senate race in Minnesota. And we'll put up the results, which are really quite extraordinary, just a couple of hundred votes out of almost two and a half million. There have been allegations from some Republicans that Democrats are trying to steal this election for Al Franken. Do you have full confidence in the secretary of state, who is a Democrat, and also in the canvassing board, to which -- a five-member board to which you appointed two members? PAWLENTY: Chris, in Minnesota we have a history of clear, transparent, accurate, and fair and legal elections. That's going to happen again here. The canvassing board is five people. They are invited by the secretary of state, not appointed by me. The governor doesn't have a role. But it's four judges -- all of which have good reputations -- and the secretary of state. The canvassing board in the state of Minnesota will render a result. This process will be fair and appropriate. I can assure you of that. WALLACE: Do you -- because there has been some talk in some Republican circles about ballots that were found in -- PAWLENTY: Sure. WALLACE: -- people's trunks. I mean, is -- is there any sign that there has been any fraud? And two, if there is any fraud, will that be sorted out by the canvassing board? PAWLENTY: There's a news report in Minnesota that the ballot-in-the-trunk story has now been retracted, that it wasn't accurate. There are concerning patterns about the changes before the recount starting favoring Al Franken, and some concerns that were raised. But we have to be clear on this. As of this moment, there is no actual evidence of wrongdoing or fraud in the process. If there is, it'll get rooted out and identified aggressively. But at the moment, there is no actual evidence of that occurring.
Media Matters - Fox News' Barnes latest media figure to reference discredited Minnesota car ballot story {...} On Fox News' The Beltway Boys, co-host Fred Barnes echoed the discredited rumor that ballots in the Minnesota Senate race were mishandled, stating: "We've seen, under some questionable circumstances, Franken gaining, you know, 32 ballots from the trunk of somebody's car that had been sitting there for a few days. I mean, I find that a bit suspicious." In fact, state officials have refuted rumors that the ballots were handled improperly, and a lawyer for Sen. Norm Coleman's campaign, who initially raised questions about those ballots, reportedly said afterward that he had been assured the ballots were not tampered with. {...}
Published: November 17, 2008, 4:33 pm - Indexed: November 18, 2008, 10:30 am - Page Size: 25KB
Category: Society > Issues > Business > Media > Bias and Balance

]]> Society > Issues > Business > Media > Bias and Balance {ISSUES > BIAS AND BALANCE} - Media react to sec. of state rumors with suggestions of a rogue Clinton agenda, Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/media-react-to-sec-of-state-rumors-with-suggestions-20081136128.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/media-react-to-sec-of-state-rumors-with-suggestions-20081136128.htm Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:20:56 GMT Discussing reports that President-elect Barack Obama is considering naming Sen. Hillary Clinton secretary of state, several media figures have responded with smears, including 1) speculation that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama's, with at least one pundit speculating that she would attempt to set up a "parallel government" and another suggesting she might use the job to position herself to deny Obama the Democratic nomination in 2012; 2) references to Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" with invocations of the adage from The Godfather: Part II that Obama is considering the nomination out of a desire to "keep[] his friends close and his enemies closer"; and 3) speculation that Obama is considering the nomination because if Clinton remains in the Senate, she poses a threat of challenging him for the nomination in 2012 and can "mak[e] trouble" for him in the Senate. Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama's During the November 14 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, MSNBC contributor Michelle Bernard asserted that Clinton "will run a parallel government" as secretary of state and "could give him [Obama] some cover, and she could also walk -- go around the world acting as if she is not the secretary of state but the United States -- the president of the United States. That's a huge danger for him. It's a very, very high-level job." Host Chris Matthews then asked Jennifer Donahue, political director of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, "[W]ould you trust her to be a loyal subordinate, or believe she would be a bit too aggressive as a colleague?" Donahue responded: DONAHUE: Well, let's take past as prologue. I mean, how did she handle herself during the nominating fight? How did she handle it when Obama was coming up upon her and then lapped her? She didn't handle it very kindly. She didn't allow him to have his piece. She went negative. She tried to bury him. And I think that he should take a lesson from that. I mean, I understand this idea of hug your friends tight, hug your enemies tighter. I think that's often true. If you look at it, you and I were talking about [Nicolò] Machiavelli and The Prince. Absolutely true stuff in there. And I think it's smart to do it. But what will she do overseas? Will she be laying out the groundwork should Obama have only one term? Will she be, in fact, trying to create only one term for Barack Obama? Fox News host Greta Van Susteren suggested that if Clinton is named secretary of state, both she and Bill Clinton pose a threat of "freelancing." During the November 14 edition of her show On the Record, Congressional Quarterly reporter Jonathan Allen asserted that the appointment "would also give Barack Obama complete control over Hillary Clinton's political future because she would be serving at his pleasure." Van Susteren responded: "Except for the fact that you've got her potentially -- any Cabinet candidate member freelancing, and you've got her husband out there freelancing." James Taranto, editor of The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com, suggested during the November 14 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight that Clinton was interested in the secretary of state position because "[i]t would also put her in the line of succession." Examples of media figures referring to Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" Media figures and political analysts also asserted that Obama might be following the strategy of Michael Corleone from The Godfather: Part II -- that Obama might name Clinton secretary of state to "keep[] his friends close and his enemies closer." Such figures include Donahue, Fox News chief White House correspondent Bret Baier, Fox News political contributor and managing editor of The Washington Times' digital media operations Jeff Birnbaum, CNN anchor Rick Sanchez, and CBS sports commentator Boomer Esiason (during an appearance on the November 14 edition of Fox & Friends Weekend). Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton might cause trouble for Obama if he does not include her in the administration Media figures also asserted that Obama might name Clinton secretary of state because she might otherwise challenge him for the presidency in 2012 or cause "heartache" for him in the Senate. Such figures include the following: On the November 14 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle said, "President-elect Obama, of course, would have every reason to consider her for secretary of state, because having her serve in his administration would neutralize his chief Democratic rival." Also on the November 14 edition of Special Report, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer stated, "I would agree with Fred [Barnes, fellow panelist] -- she's a reasonably good choice. But what's so sort of cynically brilliant and impressive about this is that with her out of the way, Obama is not going to have to show up in Iowa or New Hampshire in 2012. He has now cinched the renomination." NBC News political director Chuck Todd said on the November 15 edition of MSNBC Live that if Obama names Clinton secretary of state, "there is a lot of upside politically for Senator Obama. You bring -- you get one of your chief rivals, somebody who could cause you a lot of heartache in the Senate, Senator Clinton, and you get her inside your administration. You take somebody that could be a potential rival to you in 2012 out of the picture as well." During the November 14 edition of CNN Newsroom, Sanchez asked Patricia Murphy of CitizenJanePolitics.com, "Is there something to do with wanting to have Hillary Clinton as your secretary of state if you're Barack Obama here?" Murphy responded: MURPHY: Well, there could be. Certainly, the question is, do you want the Clintons inside your tent or outside your tent? Do you want your rival outside making trouble for you or do you want to bring them in? You must have 100 percent trust with your secretary of state. You cannot have somebody out there advocating for themselves and not for you. From the November 14 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews: MATTHEWS: Well, here's the question. Because of the very reason that Jennifer mentioned -- she is a notch or two to the right of this guy Barack Obama. She did vote for the war resolution. She did oppose -- or support naming the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. She has spoken positively of keeping permanent bases in Iraq. She's a bit of a hawk on the Middle East. She could give him some cover on any Middle East deal that is struck with Israel and Middle Eastern countries. BERNARD: She could give him some cover, and she could also walk -- go around the world acting as if she is not the secretary of state but the United States -- the president of the United States. That's a huge danger for him. It's a very, very high-level job. MATTHEWS: Jennifer, would you trust her to be a loyal subordinate, or believe she would be a bit too aggressive as a colleague? DONAHUE: Well, let's take past as prologue. I mean, how did she handle herself during the nominating fight? How did she handle it when Obama was coming up upon her and then lapped her? She didn't handle it very kindly. She didn't allow him to have his piece. She went negative. She tried to bury him. And I think that he should take a lesson from that. I mean, I understand this idea of hug your friends tight, hug your enemies tighter. I think that's often true. If you look at it, you and I were talking about Machiavelli and The Prince. Absolutely true stuff in there. And I think it's smart to do it. But what will she do overseas? Will she be laying out the groundwork should Obama have only one term? Will she be, in fact, trying to create only one term for Barack Obama? MATTHEWS: [unintelligible] You guys are so suspicious. Look, I think that since she lost the fight for the nomination, Michelle and Jennifer, she has been not just a good soldier, she has sang the tune of this guy. She's been illustrious, she's been admirable. She -- her spirit seems to be with him. Bill's a little more troubled, obviously, by what happened. But she's been totally with him, and that's why he's obviously thrown her name out. Why would he even be thinking of her if he thought she might be insubordinate? BERNARD: Well -- well -- MATTHEWS: Why would he think of it? BERNARD: -- because there are a lot of people out there, particularly women, who are saying, "We've had Madeleine Albright, we've had Condoleezza Rice, let's have another woman in the -- you know, in the top post at the State Department." There will be people also, I will tell you, who will be saying, "Why not Susan Rice?" She was one of his chief foreign policy people -- MATTHEWS: OK -- OK -- this is so hot -- BERNARD: -- throughout the campaign. [...] MATTHEWS: We're back with Michelle Bernard and Jennifer Donahue for more of the "Politics Fix." Jennifer, you're up there in New Hampshire, we're down here. I have to tell you, it's amazing to watch how these things develop. First of all, the word comes out tonight -- here we are on Friday night -- that Hillary Clinton has been offered the job if she wants it. That's the word that's floating around. And then she's coming back, the senator from New York, and saying, "Well, I want to look at a couple things like, is Joe Biden gonna get in my way as vice president?" I would assume that among her other concerns are, which are stressed here in the news reporting, is who's gonna get Defense, who's gonna get CIA, who's gonna get NSC, the national security adviser. In other words, she's sort of dictating terms here in what looks to be a proffer of a job. Jennifer, it's an extraordinary position of power she's in, in what normally would be considered one of the great prizes in the world she's being given. DONAHUE: Yes, and I think this reflects how she behaved in the idea of who was gonna be the vice-presidential candidate that Barack Obama picked, so she's got a competition going on with Biden. Biden's the vice president. Her strength: HHS, Supreme Court -- there's plenty of places -- education, children. These are things that are near and dear to her. I just don't see where she's a foreign policy expert to the extent of Chuck Hagel. Team of rivals? Chuck Hagel. Colin Powell. Both sides of the aisle. Sam Nunn. MATTHEWS: Right. Well, Jennifer, do you think -- do you think there's an ingenious Machiavellian streak in Barack Obama, who wanted her to hang herself with these public demands, the fact that they're being leaked -- DONAHUE: Ah -- I think -- MATTHEWS: -- and therefore he tried to bring her aboard, but she set too many standards, too many conditions. He just couldn't do it. He couldn't give away his presidency. DONAHUE: Yeah, I think that's a really good point. I mean, this man can think two steps ahead of any opponent, and that's what we've seen. We see it with him meeting with McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Rahm Emanuel, sort of brokering this big meeting. This guy thinks way ahead of anybody else. That's how he got here; he'll continue to do that. He picked Rahm Emanuel not to be someone who could bring people in every party together but to keep his own party in line. That's what Rahm Emanuel knows how to do. Are they going to keep Hillary Clinton in line? Yes. Are they going to keep watch on her? Yes. BERNARD: No, they're not going to keep her in line if she's secretary of state. If she's secretary of state -- DONAHUE: Well, that's why she's not gonna get it. BERNARD: -- she will run a parallel government. It will be a huge problem. DONAHUE: I don't believe she'll get it. MATTHEWS: If he hires her, he cannot fire her. DONAHUE: She's not gonna get it. [crosstalk] BERNARD: Well, he could fire her, but it would look horrible. He can't do it. DONAHUE: He can't do it. MATTHEWS: That's the prob -- well, we'll decide -- DONAHUE: Michelle, you're right. MATTHEWS: -- I think you two are probably the toughest people in the world who are on it. From the November 14 edition of Fox News' On the Record with Greta Van Susteren: ALLEN: Well, I think, obviously, there's only one person that makes this decision, and it's President-elect Obama. And he'll choose who he thinks is best for that job regardless of who he thinks owes him or who he believes he may owe. VAN SUSTEREN: Do you believe that? I mean, is that how these decisions are always made? ALLEN: I certainly hope so. VAN SUSTEREN: I mean -- anyway, I mean -- ALLEN: It's not how these decisions -- VAN SUSTEREN: That's how the decision -- we all say that's how the decision should be made -- ALLEN: It's not -- VAN SUSTEREN: -- but sometimes you make political decisions. ALLEN: Well, but the political decision may, in fact, be Hillary Clinton for a number of reasons. One is that, obviously, the Clintons are well-known around the world and well-respected around the world. It would send a message about how Barack Obama wants to do business in a sort of team of rivals kind of way. And it would also give Barack Obama complete control over Hillary Clinton's political future because she would be serving at his pleasure. VAN SUSTEREN: Except for the fact that you've got her potentially -- any Cabinet candidate member freelancing, and you've got her husband out there freelancing, as well, so you could -- From the 3 p.m. ET hour of the November 14 edition of CNN Newsroom: SANCHEZ: Is there a little Machiavellianism going on with this, because look, think about it. MURPHY: Who would accuse somebody of that? SANCHEZ: Well, you know the expression, keep your friends close, but you want to keep your enemies closer? MURPHY: Yes. SANCHEZ: Is there something to do with wanting to have Hillary Clinton as your secretary of state if you're Barack Obama here? MURPHY: Well, there could be. Certainly, the question is, do you want the Clintons inside your tent or outside your tent? Do you want your rival outside making trouble for you or do you want to bring them in? You must have 100 percent trust with your secretary of state. You cannot have somebody out there advocating for themselves and not for you. SANCHEZ: And then there's the Bill Clinton effect, which we don't get a chance to talk about. MURPHY: The effect, yeah. SANCHEZ: Boy, that would have been good. It's great having you on. MURPHY: Thank you. SANCHEZ: You're fabulous. It's fabulous. Thank you so much. From the November 14 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight: TARANTO: Well, Mrs. Clinton pretty much can't run for president till 2016 anyway, because it's unlikely she will take on President Obama in 2012, and it's unlikely that he'll -- that he will not seek re-election. So this may actually be the most sensible course for her, assuming that he's interested in giving her the job, and if she wants a high-profile position. I would also note -- Michael mentioned that it would get her out of the country. It would also put her in the line of succession. From the November 14 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume: BAIER: Coming up next, is President-elect Obama operating under the idea of keeping his friends close and his enemies closer? What's behind the meetings with Hillary Clinton and John McCain? Some breaking news about that after the break. [...] BAIER: Jeff, politically smart move? BIRNBAUM: I think it's a very smart move. As you pointed out, as the old adage goes, you want to keep your friends close and your enemies closer, and by bringing in Hillary Clinton, he keeps an eye on Hillary Clinton. In fact, she has to work with him. This is very much like another president from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln, who filled his cabinet with rivals. [...] KRAUTHAMMER: If she is secretary of state, he [Vice President-elect Joe Biden] won't be. That's how the Clintons operate, and I'm sure if she accepts the job, it's going to be under those terms. She is not going to split the job with the Sage of Wilmington. What's really ironic here is that, if you remember, for about half a year, she was touting her credentials in foreign affairs and Obama was ridiculing them. And you remember, there was this little episode about her being shot at in Tuzla? But I guess change has come to America, and now all of that is behind us. I would agree with Fred -- she's a reasonably good choice. But what's so sort of cynically brilliant and impressive about this is that with her out of the way, Obama is not going to have to show up in Iowa or New Hampshire in 2012. He has now cinched the renomination. In the Carter administration, [Sen. Ted] Kennedy [D-MA] challenged him as his presidency weakened. The Clintons have owned the party for 16 years; it's now Obama's. He knows that if he weakens and if he ever has a challenge, it would be her. And now, if she accepts, it won't be her. From the November 15 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends Weekend: ALISYN CAMEROTA (co-host): Let's look at another top story that we're covering and that is, what's going to happen with Hillary Clinton? Has President-elect Barack Obama offered her the secretary of state job, and if so -- ESIASON: Yes. CAMEROTA: -- would she take it? ESIASON: Is my neighbor Bill O'Reilly around here somewhere now that we're getting down into this? I like it. CAMEROTA: No, you were telling us that you have some thoughts on this. ESIASON: You know what? I think she should take it. You know what? She's 61 years old. And just think: Bill and Hillary traveling the world. And now, all of a sudden -- CLAYTON MORRIS (co-host): Wait, you think Bill's going to go? He has the house all to himself. ESIASON: Well, he can go one way, she can go the other. That'd be fine. But, you know, I think that she's -- DAVE BRIGGS (co-host): When the cat's away. ESIASON: -- intimately qualified to become secretary of state, and I guess it goes back to the old adage, if you're Barack Obama, you know, keep your friends closer, but your enemies even closer than your friends. So I think this is going to be an interesting thing, and it would be -- I think it would be good for her. You know, they'll name a bridge after her around here for some of the stuff she's done in the Senate, as a state senator of New York. MORRIS: And now, you're known as a tough guy, obviously, NFL legend. Now, she's a tough woman, OK? ESIASON: She is. MORRIS: And former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton saying, "Look" -- I don't know, he predicted this -- but saying, "Bringing her into the White House" -- ESIASON: Right. MORRIS: -- "don't ever hire someone you can't fire." Is she too un-fireable? Is she too tough? ESIASON: That's a good point. You know, and I think you've got to be really careful. But I think, also -- I would imagine that Barack Obama is extending an olive branch and showing people that he's trying to be a uniter, especially within their Democratic Party. And listen, I'm a McCain guy. I'm an independent. I voted for John McCain. But you know what? Barack Obama is our president right now, and I think he deserves our respect, of the office, and we have to see what he does before we can start really criticizing all the decisions he's making. From the 8 a.m. ET hour of MSNBC Live on November 15: ALEX WITT (anchor): And for a bit more on today's top political stories, we're joined by NBC's political director, Chuck Todd. Yay hey. Nice. On a Saturday, some OT for Chuck. Hello. TODD: Good morning, Alex. WITT: How likely is it, Chuck, that we're going to see Hillary Clinton as secretary of state? What do you think are the potential pluses and the pitfalls to it? TODD: Well, I think the likelihood is fairly high. I mean, the -- this wouldn't get floated out there this seriously if she weren't going to be seriously considered, because the last thing Obama wants to do is alienate the Clintons and somehow embarrass her, have her considered and then say, "Oh, we're not going to appoint you. We're going to appoint Bill Richardson." So, I think it is very serious at this point. And there is a lot of upside politically for Senator Obama. You bring -- you get one of your chief rivals, somebody who could cause you a lot of heartache in the Senate, Senator Clinton, and you get her inside your administration. You take somebody that could be a potential rival to you in 2012 out of the picture as well. Senator Clinton wouldn't be able to get involved in Democratic politics very actively at all from secretary of state. It's just not kosher these days to practice politics when you're at a position like State, attorney general, or the Pentagon. So, there are a lot of political upsides for him. The question is, what are the upsides for her? And I think there are more there than people realize. The biggest: She really doesn't have a big portfolio in the Senate. She would like one, but I think she is struggling to get it. There's a lot of people in her way, seniority-wise, and going over to the State Department would, I think, give her -- would raise her profile in a way that maybe she won't be able to do in the Senate. From the November 14 edition of Special Report with Brit Hume: ANGLE: President-elect Obama, of course, would have every reason to consider her for secretary of state, because having her serve in his administration would neutralize his chief Democratic rival. DOUG SCHOEN (Democratic strategist): He would ensure the loyalty of somebody who got close to 18 million votes against him in the Democratic primary and has made it clear that she was going to speak up for her constituency and the issues that she cares about, were she to stay in the Senate. [...] ANGLE: But why would Senator Clinton want to serve in the administration of the man she ran against and may want to succeed? For one thing, she is still the junior senator from New York with no prospect of even chairing a committee, while the alternative is pretty attractive. [...] ANGLE: So, if the job is officially offered and she takes it, many Democrats think both would benefit. He removes his chief rival from Congress while gaining an experienced hand at his side. And she gets a great and challenging job and yet another credential, if she decides to run again. Mediamatters.Org Media react to sec. of state rumors with suggestions of a rogue Clinton agenda, Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" {new window}   Mediamatters.Org - Discussing reports that President-elect Barack Obama is considering naming Sen. Hillary Clinton secretary of state, several media figures have responded with smears, including 1) speculation that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama's, with at least one pundit speculating that she would attempt to set up a "parallel government" and another suggesting she might use the job to position herself to deny Obama the Democratic nomination in 2012; 2) references to Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" with invocations of the adage from The Godfather: Part II that Obama is considering the nomination out of a desire to "keep[] his friends close and his enemies closer"; and 3) speculation that Obama is considering the nomination because if Clinton remains in the Senate, she poses a threat of challenging him for the nomination in 2012 and can "mak[e] trouble" for him in the Senate. Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama's During the November 14 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, MSNBC contributor Michelle Bernard asserted that Clinton "will run a parallel government" as secretary of state and "could give him [Obama] some cover, and she could also walk -- go around the world acting as if she is not the secretary of state but the United States -- the president of the United States. That's a huge danger for him. It's a very, very high-level job." Host Chris Matthews then asked Jennifer Donahue, political director of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, "[W]ould you trust her to be a loyal subordinate, or believe she would be a bit too aggressive as a colleague?" Donahue responded: DONAHUE: Well, let's take past as prologue. I mean, how did she handle herself during the nominating fight? How did she handle it when Obama was coming up upon her and then lapped her? She didn't handle it very kindly. She didn't allow him to have his piece. She went negative. She tried to bury him. And I think that he should take a lesson from that. I mean, I understand this idea of hug your friends tight, hug your enemies tighter. I think that's often true. If you look at it, you and I were talking about [Nicolò] Machiavelli and The Prince. Absolutely true stuff in there. And I think it's smart to do it. But what will she do overseas? Will she be laying out the groundwork should Obama have only one term? Will she be, in fact, trying to create only one term for Barack Obama? Fox News host Greta Van Susteren suggested that if Clinton is named secretary of state, both she and Bill Clinton pose a threat of "freelancing." During the November 14 edition of her show On the Record, Congressional Quarterly reporter Jonathan Allen asserted that the appointment "would also give Barack Obama complete control over Hillary Clinton's political future because she would be serving at his pleasure." Van Susteren responded: "Except for the fact that you've got her potentially -- any Cabinet candidate member freelancing, and you've got her husband out there freelancing." James Taranto, editor of The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com, suggested during the November 14 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight that Clinton was interested in the secretary of state position because "[i]t would also put her in the line of succession." Examples of media figures referring to Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" Media figures and political analysts also asserted that Obama might be following the strategy of Michael Corleone from The Godfather: Part II -- that Obama might name Clinton secretary of state to "keep[] his friends close and his enemies closer." Such figures include Donahue, Fox News chief White House correspondent Bret Baier, Fox News political contributor and managing editor of The Washington Times' digital media operations Jeff Birnbaum, CNN anchor Rick Sanchez, and CBS sports commentator Boomer Esiason (during an appearance on the November 14 edition of Fox & Friends Weekend). Examples of media figures suggesting that Clinton might cause trouble for Obama if he does not include her in the administration Media figures also asserted that Obama might name Clinton secretary of state because she might otherwise challenge him for the presidency in 2012 or cause "heartache" for him in the Senate. Such figures include the following: On the November 14 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume, chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle said, "President-elect Obama, of course, would have every reason to consider her for secretary of state, because having her serve in his administration would neutralize his chief Democratic rival." Also on the November 14 edition of Special Report, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer stated, "I would agree with Fred [Barnes, fellow panelist] -- she's a reasonably good choice. But what's so sort of cynically brilliant and impressive about this is that with her out of the way, Obama is not going to have to show up in Iowa or New Hampshire in 2012. He has now cinched the renomination." NBC News political director Chuck Todd said on the November 15 edition of MSNBC Live that if Obama names Clinton secretary of state, "there is a lot of upside politically for Senator Obama. You bring -- you get one of your chief rivals, somebody who could cause you a lot of heartache in the Senate, Senator Clinton, and you get her inside your administration. You take somebody that could be a potential rival to you in 2012 out of the picture as well." During the November 14 edition of CNN Newsroom, Sanchez asked Patricia Murphy of CitizenJanePolitics.com, "Is there something to do with wanting to have Hillary Clinton as your secretary of state if you're Barack Obama here?" Murphy responded: MURPHY: Well, there could be. Certainly, the question is, do you want the Clintons inside your tent or outside your tent? Do you want your rival outside making trouble for you or do you want to bring them in? You must have 100 percent trust with your secretary of state. You cannot have somebody out there advocating for themselves and not for you. From the November 14 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews: MATTHEWS: Well, here's the question. Because of the very reason that Jennifer mentioned -- she is a notch or two to the right of this guy Barack Obama. She did vote for the war resolution. She did oppose -- or support naming the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. She has spoken positively of keeping permanent bases in Iraq. She's a bit of a hawk on the Middle East. She could give him some cover on any Middle East deal that is struck with Israel and Middle Eastern countries. BERNARD: She could give him some cover, and she could also walk -- go around the world acting as if she is not the secretary of state but the United States -- the president of the United States. That's a huge danger for him. It's a very, very high-level job. MATTHEWS: Jennifer, would you trust her to be a loyal subordinate, or believe she would be a bit too aggressive as a colleague? DONAHUE: Well, let's take past as prologue. I mean, how did she handle herself during the nominating fight? How did she handle it when Obama was coming up upon her and then lapped her? She didn't handle it very kindly. She didn't allow him to have his piece. She went negative. She tried to bury him. And I think that he should take a lesson from that. I mean, I understand this idea of hug your friends tight, hug your enemies tighter. I think that's often true. If you look at it, you and I were talking about Machiavelli and The Prince. Absolutely true stuff in there. And I think it's smart to do it. But what will she do overseas? Will she be laying out the groundwork should Obama have only one term? Will she be, in fact, trying to create only one term for Barack Obama? MATTHEWS: [unintelligible] You guys are so suspicious. Look, I think that since she lost the fight for the nomination, Michelle and Jennifer, she has been not just a good soldier, she has sang the tune of this guy. She's been illustrious, she's been admirable. She -- her spirit seems to be with him. Bill's a little more troubled, obviously, by what happened. But she's been totally with him, and that's why he's obviously thrown her name out. Why would he even be thinking of her if he thought she might be insubordinate? BERNARD: Well -- well -- MATTHEWS: Why would he think of it? BERNARD: -- because there are a lot of people out there, particularly women, who are saying, "We've had Madeleine Albright, we've had Condoleezza Rice, let's have another woman in the -- you know, in the top post at the State Department." There will be people also, I will tell you, who will be saying, "Why not Susan Rice?" She was one of his chief foreign policy people -- MATTHEWS: OK -- OK -- this is so hot -- BERNARD: -- throughout the campaign. [...] MATTHEWS: We're back with Michelle Bernard and Jennifer Donahue for more of the "Politics Fix." Jennifer, you're up there in New Hampshire, we're down here. I have to tell you, it's amazing to watch how these things develop. First of all, the word comes out tonight -- here we are on Friday night -- that Hillary Clinton has been offered the job if she wants it. That's the word that's floating around. And then she's coming back, the senator from New York, and saying, "Well, I want to look at a couple things like, is Joe Biden gonna get in my way as vice president?" I would assume that among her other concerns are, which are stressed here in the news reporting, is who's gonna get Defense, who's gonna get CIA, who's gonna get NSC, the national security adviser. In other words, she's sort of dictating terms here in what looks to be a proffer of a job. Jennifer, it's an extraordinary position of power she's in, in what normally would be considered one of the great prizes in the world she's being given. DONAHUE: Yes, and I think this reflects how she behaved in the idea of who was gonna be the vice-presidential candidate that Barack Obama picked, so she's got a competition going on with Biden. Biden's the vice president. Her strength: HHS, Supreme Court -- there's plenty of places -- education, children. These are things that are near and dear to her. I just don't see where she's a foreign policy expert to the extent of Chuck Hagel. Team of rivals? Chuck Hagel. Colin Powell. Both sides of the aisle. Sam Nunn. MATTHEWS: Right. Well, Jennifer, do you think -- do you think there's an ingenious Machiavellian streak in Barack Obama, who wanted her to hang herself with these public demands, the fact that they're being leaked -- DONAHUE: Ah -- I think -- MATTHEWS: -- and therefore he tried to bring her aboard, but she set too many standards, too many conditions. He just couldn't do it. He couldn't give away his presidency. DONAHUE: Yeah, I think that's a really good point. I mean, this man can think two steps ahead of any opponent, and that's what we've seen. We see it with him meeting with McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Rahm Emanuel, sort of brokering this big meeting. This guy thinks way ahead of anybody else. That's how he got here; he'll continue to do that. He picked Rahm Emanuel not to be someone who could bring people in every party together but to keep his own party in line. That's what Rahm Emanuel knows how to do. Are they going to keep Hillary Clinton in line? Yes. Are they going to keep watch on her? Yes. BERNARD: No, they're not going to keep her in line if she's secretary of state. If she's secretary of state -- DONAHUE: Well, that's why she's not gonna get it. BERNARD: -- she will run a parallel government. It will be a huge problem. DONAHUE: I don't believe she'll get it. MATTHEWS: If he hires her, he cannot fire her. DONAHUE: She's not gonna get it. [crosstalk] BERNARD: Well, he could fire her, but it would look horrible. He can't do it. DONAHUE: He can't do it. MATTHEWS: That's the prob -- well, we'll decide -- DONAHUE: Michelle, you're right. MATTHEWS: -- I think you two are probably the toughest people in the world who are on it. From the November 14 edition of Fox News' On the Record with Greta Van Susteren: ALLEN: Well, I think, obviously, there's only one person that makes this decision, and it's President-elect Obama. And he'll choose who he thinks is best for that job regardless of who he thinks owes him or who he believes he may owe. VAN SUSTEREN: Do you believe that? I mean, is that how these decisions are always made? ALLEN: I certainly hope so. VAN SUSTEREN: I mean -- anyway, I mean -- ALLEN: It's not how these decisions -- VAN SUSTEREN: That's how the decision -- we all say that's how the decision should be made -- ALLEN: It's not -- VAN SUSTEREN: -- but sometimes you make political decisions. ALLEN: Well, but the political decision may, in fact, be Hillary Clinton for a number of reasons. One is that, obviously, the Clintons are well-known around the world and well-respected around the world. It would send a message about how Barack Obama wants to do business in a sort of team of rivals kind of way. And it would also give Barack Obama complete control over Hillary Clinton's political future because she would be serving at his pleasure. VAN SUSTEREN: Except for the fact that you've got her potentially -- any Cabinet candidate member freelancing, and you've got her husband out there freelancing, as well, so you could -- From the 3 p.m. ET hour of the November 14 edition of CNN Newsroom: SANCHEZ: Is there a little Machiavellianism going on with this, because look, think about it. MURPHY: Who would accuse somebody of that? SANCHEZ: Well, you know the expression, keep your friends close, but you want to keep your enemies closer? MURPHY: Yes. SANCHEZ: Is there something to do with wanting to have Hillary Clinton as your secretary of state if you're Barack Obama here? MURPHY: Well, there could be. Certainly, the question is, do you want the Clintons inside your tent or outside your tent? Do you want your rival outside making trouble for you or do you want to bring them in? You must have 100 percent trust with your secretary of state. You cannot have somebody out there advocating for themselves and not for you. SANCHEZ: And then there's the Bill Clinton effect, which we don't get a chance to talk about. MURPHY: The effect, yeah. SANCHEZ: Boy, that would have been good. It's great having you on. MURPHY: Thank you. SANCHEZ: You're fabulous. It's fabulous. Thank you so much. From the November 14 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight: TARANTO: Well, Mrs. Clinton pretty much can't run for president till 2016 anyway, because it's unlikely she will take on President Obama in 2012, and it's unlikely that he'll -- that he will not seek re-election. So this may actually be the most sensible course for her, assuming that he's interested in giving her the job, and if she wants a high-profile position. I would also note -- Michael mentioned that it would get her out of the country. It would also put her in the line of succession. From the November 14 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume: BAIER: Coming up next, is President-elect Obama operating under the idea of keeping his friends close and his enemies closer? What's behind the meetings with Hillary Clinton and John McCain? Some breaking news about that after the break. [...] BAIER: Jeff, politically smart move? BIRNBAUM: I think it's a very smart move. As you pointed out, as the old adage goes, you want to keep your friends close and your enemies closer, and by bringing in Hillary Clinton, he keeps an eye on Hillary Clinton. In fact, she has to work with him. This is very much like another president from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln, who filled his cabinet with rivals. [...] KRAUTHAMMER: If she is secretary of state, he [Vice President-elect Joe Biden] won't be. That's how the Clintons operate, and I'm sure if she accepts the job, it's going to be under those terms. She is not going to split the job with the Sage of Wilmington. What's really ironic here is that, if you remember, for about half a year, she was touting her credentials in foreign affairs and Obama was ridiculing them. And you remember, there was this little episode about her being shot at in Tuzla? But I guess change has come to America, and now all of that is behind us. I would agree with Fred -- she's a reasonably good choice. But what's so sort of cynically brilliant and impressive about this is that with her out of the way, Obama is not going to have to show up in Iowa or New Hampshire in 2012. He has now cinched the renomination. In the Carter administration, [Sen. Ted] Kennedy [D-MA] challenged him as his presidency weakened. The Clintons have owned the party for 16 years; it's now Obama's. He knows that if he weakens and if he ever has a challenge, it would be her. And now, if she accepts, it won't be her. From the November 15 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends Weekend: ALISYN CAMEROTA (co-host): Let's look at another top story that we're covering and that is, what's going to happen with Hillary Clinton? Has President-elect Barack Obama offered her the secretary of state job, and if so -- ESIASON: Yes. CAMEROTA: -- would she take it? ESIASON: Is my neighbor Bill O'Reilly around here somewhere now that we're getting down into this? I like it. CAMEROTA: No, you were telling us that you have some thoughts on this. ESIASON: You know what? I think she should take it. You know what? She's 61 years old. And just think: Bill and Hillary traveling the world. And now, all of a sudden -- CLAYTON MORRIS (co-host): Wait, you think Bill's going to go? He has the house all to himself. ESIASON: Well, he can go one way, she can go the other. That'd be fine. But, you know, I think that she's -- DAVE BRIGGS (co-host): When the cat's away. ESIASON: -- intimately qualified to become secretary of state, and I guess it goes back to the old adage, if you're Barack Obama, you know, keep your friends closer, but your enemies even closer than your friends. So I think this is going to be an interesting thing, and it would be -- I think it would be good for her. You know, they'll name a bridge after her around here for some of the stuff she's done in the Senate, as a state senator of New York. MORRIS: And now, you're known as a tough guy, obviously, NFL legend. Now, she's a tough woman, OK? ESIASON: She is. MORRIS: And former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton saying, "Look" -- I don't know, he predicted this -- but saying, "Bringing her into the White House" -- ESIASON: Right. MORRIS: -- "don't ever hire someone you can't fire." Is she too un-fireable? Is she too tough? ESIASON: That's a good point. You know, and I think you've got to be really careful. But I think, also -- I would imagine that Barack Obama is extending an olive branch and showing people that he's trying to be a uniter, especially within their Democratic Party. And listen, I'm a McCain guy. I'm an independent. I voted for John McCain. But you know what? Barack Obama is our president right now, and I think he deserves our respect, of the office, and we have to see what he does before we can start really criticizing all the decisions he's making. From the 8 a.m. ET hour of MSNBC Live on November 15: ALEX WITT (anchor): And for a bit more on today's top political stories, we're joined by NBC's political director, Chuck Todd. Yay hey. Nice. On a Saturday, some OT for Chuck. Hello. TODD: Good morning, Alex. WITT: How likely is it, Chuck, that we're going to see Hillary Clinton as secretary of state? What do you think are the potential pluses and the pitfalls to it? TODD: Well, I think the likelihood is fairly high. I mean, the -- this wouldn't get floated out there this seriously if she weren't going to be seriously considered, because the last thing Obama wants to do is alienate the Clintons and somehow embarrass her, have her considered and then say, "Oh, we're not going to appoint you. We're going to appoint Bill Richardson." So, I think it is very serious at this point. And there is a lot of upside politically for Senator Obama. You bring -- you get one of your chief rivals, somebody who could cause you a lot of heartache in the Senate, Senator Clinton, and you get her inside your administration. You take somebody that could be a potential rival to you in 2012 out of the picture as well. Senator Clinton wouldn't be able to get involved in Democratic politics very actively at all from secretary of state. It's just not kosher these days to practice politics when you're at a position like State, attorney general, or the Pentagon. So, there are a lot of political upsides for him. The question is, what are the upsides for her? And I think there are more there than people realize. The biggest: She really doesn't have a big portfolio in the Senate. She would like one, but I think she is struggling to get it. There's a lot of people in her way, seniority-wise, and going over to the State Department would, I think, give her -- would raise her profile in a way that maybe she won't be able to do in the Senate. From the November 14 edition of Special Report with Brit Hume: ANGLE: President-elect Obama, of course, would have every reason to consider her for secretary of state, because having her serve in his administration would neutralize his chief Democratic rival. DOUG SCHOEN (Democratic strategist): He would ensure the loyalty of somebody who got close to 18 million votes against him in the Democratic primary and has made it clear that she was going to speak up for her constituency and the issues that she cares about, were she to stay in the Senate. [...] ANGLE: But why would Senator Clinton want to serve in the administration of the man she ran against and may want to succeed? For one thing, she is still the junior senator from New York with no prospect of even chairing a committee, while the alternative is pretty attractive. [...] ANGLE: So, if the job is officially offered and she takes it, many Democrats think both would benefit. He removes his chief rival from Congress while gaining an experienced hand at his side. And she gets a great and challenging job and yet another credential, if she decides to run again.
Media Matters - Media react to sec. of state rumors with suggestions of a rogue Clinton agenda, Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]" {...} Discussing reports that President-elect Barack Obama is considering naming Sen. Hillary Clinton secretary of state, several media figures have responded with smears, including speculation that Clinton would pursue her own agenda as secretary of state and not Obama's, references to Clinton as Obama's "enem[y]," and speculation that Obama is considering the nomination because if Clinton remains in the Senate, she poses a threat of challenging him for the Democratic nomination in 2012 and can "mak[e] trouble" for him in the Senate. {...}
Published: November 16, 2008, 1:20 am - Indexed: November 16, 2008, 12:04 pm - Page Size: 44KB
Category: Society > Issues > Business > Media > Bias and Balance

]]> Society > Issues > Business > Media > Bias and Balance {COMPUTERS > INTERNET} - 'Fred' creator, the Tiger Woods of user-generated video? http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/fred-creator-the-tiger-woods-of-user-generated-video-20081118210.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/fred-creator-the-tiger-woods-of-user-generated-video-20081118210.htm Fri, 14 Nov 2008 18:09:00 GMT A 15-year-old from Nebraska produces the most popular series on YouTube and is in discussions about a possible movie deal. Is this user-gen's version of a Hollywood player? News.Cnet.Com 'Fred' creator, the Tiger Woods of user-generated video? {new window}   News.Cnet.Com - A 15-year-old from Nebraska produces the most popular series on YouTube and is in discussions about a possible movie deal. Is this user-gen's version of a Hollywood player?
'Fred' creator, the Tiger Woods of user-generated video? | Digital Media - CNET News {...} A 15-year-old from Nebraska produces the most popular series on YouTube and is in discussions about a possible movie deal. Is this user-gen's version of a Hollywood player? Read this blog post by Greg Sandoval on Digital Media. {...}
Published: November 14, 2008, 6:09 pm - Indexed: November 15, 2008, 1:23 pm - Page Size: 70KB
Category: Computers > Internet

]]> Computers > Internet {EUROPE > NEWS AND MEDIA} - RBS prepares to cut 3,000 jobs http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/rbs-prepares-to-cut-3-000-jobs-20081137715.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/rbs-prepares-to-cut-3-000-jobs-20081137715.htm Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:38:47 GMT Royal Bank of Scotland is finalising plans to cut 3,000 jobs in its investment banking businesses as it tries to survive the economic downturn.The bank, which is receiving a £20bn handout from the UK government, expects to brief staff about the cutbacks in the next couple of weeks.It is understood that the axe will fall on staff in its global banking and markets division, which had been badly hit by the slowdown in trading in derivatives and severe writedowns on assets following the credit crunch. It is known that many of the businesses remain profitable, but the slowdown in trading has forced the bank - along with rivals such as Citigroup which is reportedly cutting 10,000 jobs - to shrink itself.Bank insiders indicated today that cutbacks are imminent as new chief executive Stephen Hester gets to grips with RBS's problems. Reports of the plan have alarmed politicians and union leaders in Scotland.One insider said it was a case of "hunkering down, not shutting down" to help the businesses survive the turmoil in wholesale financial markets.RBS would not officially confirm or deny that 3,000 jobs are being cut. "We constantly review our operating model to make sure it is appropriate to the market condition, and take action accordingly," said a spokesperson.The move is the first stage of Hester's plan to restructure the troubled bank, which expanded heavily under his ousted predecessor Sir Fred Goodwin.Hester warned last week that parts of the RBS business that were underperforming could be sold off.The 3,000 job cuts will only make a small dent in RBS's total headcount of 170,000 employees globally, with 104,000 based in Britain. But it would reinforce fears that UK unemployment will soar as the recession takes hold. Already this week, UK firms had announced almost 20,000 job cuts, many of them in the UK - with telecoms giant BT planning to reduce its global workforce by 10,000 people by April 2009.The UK jobless total rose to 1.85 million by the end of September, the highest level since 1997.John McFall, the West Dunbartonshire MP and chairman of the Treasury select committee, urged RBS to protect its headquarters from the cutbacks."The headquarters of RBS in Scotland are a symbol of the investment that the company has made in Gogarburn. This must be illustrated by their decision," he said.Other job losses this weekThe big onesBT: 10,000Taylor Wimpey: 1,000Virgin: 2,200Yell: 1,300Brick companies: 1,200Psion: 220Glaxo: 620Friends Provident: 280Leyland: 250Swiss Life: 400JCB: 398The restNottingham building society: 20Babcock Marine: 300Cemex, Barrington cement plant: 90First Milk: 93Geith International: 47Aberdeen city council: 400Springfield Properties: 70Precision Antenna: 345ALUnna Tubes: 80Total: 19,313Royal Bank of ScotlandUK banking sectorRecessionCredit crunchBanks and building societiesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds Guardian.Co.Uk RBS prepares to cut 3,000 jobs {new window}   Www.Guardian.Co.Uk - Royal Bank of Scotland is finalising plans to cut 3,000 jobs in its investment banking businesses as it tries to survive the economic downturn.The bank, which is receiving a £20bn handout from the UK government, expects to brief staff about the cutbacks in the next couple of weeks.It is understood that the axe will fall on staff in its global banking and markets division, which had been badly hit by the slowdown in trading in derivatives and severe writedowns on assets following the credit crunch. It is known that many of the businesses remain profitable, but the slowdown in trading has forced the bank - along with rivals such as Citigroup which is reportedly cutting 10,000 jobs - to shrink itself.Bank insiders indicated today that cutbacks are imminent as new chief executive Stephen Hester gets to grips with RBS's problems. Reports of the plan have alarmed politicians and union leaders in Scotland.One insider said it was a case of "hunkering down, not shutting down" to help the businesses survive the turmoil in wholesale financial markets.RBS would not officially confirm or deny that 3,000 jobs are being cut. "We constantly review our operating model to make sure it is appropriate to the market condition, and take action accordingly," said a spokesperson.The move is the first stage of Hester's plan to restructure the troubled bank, which expanded heavily under his ousted predecessor Sir Fred Goodwin.Hester warned last week that parts of the RBS business that were underperforming could be sold off.The 3,000 job cuts will only make a small dent in RBS's total headcount of 170,000 employees globally, with 104,000 based in Britain. But it would reinforce fears that UK unemployment will soar as the recession takes hold. Already this week, UK firms had announced almost 20,000 job cuts, many of them in the UK - with telecoms giant BT planning to reduce its global workforce by 10,000 people by April 2009.The UK jobless total rose to 1.85 million by the end of September, the highest level since 1997.John McFall, the West Dunbartonshire MP and chairman of the Treasury select committee, urged RBS to protect its headquarters from the cutbacks."The headquarters of RBS in Scotland are a symbol of the investment that the company has made in Gogarburn. This must be illustrated by their decision," he said.Other job losses this weekThe big onesBT: 10,000Taylor Wimpey: 1,000Virgin: 2,200Yell: 1,300Brick companies: 1,200Psion: 220Glaxo: 620Friends Provident: 280Leyland: 250Swiss Life: 400JCB: 398The restNottingham building society: 20Babcock Marine: 300Cemex, Barrington cement plant: 90First Milk: 93Geith International: 47Aberdeen city council: 400Springfield Properties: 70Precision Antenna: 345ALUnna Tubes: 80Total: 19,313Royal Bank of ScotlandUK banking sectorRecessionCredit crunchBanks and building societiesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
RBS prepares to cut 3,000 jobs | Business | guardian.co.uk {...} The axe is expected to fall on its global banking and markets division {...}
Published: November 14, 2008, 9:38 am - Indexed: November 14, 2008, 12:57 pm - Page Size: 104KB
Category: Regional > Europe > United Kingdom > News and Media

]]> Regional > Europe > United Kingdom > News and Media {EUROPE > NEWS AND MEDIA} - Michael Tomasky on the key moments of the US election http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/michael-tomasky-on-the-key-moments-of-the-us-election-20081160010.htm http://articles.world-of-newave.info/regional/europe/united-kingdom/news-and-media/michael-tomasky-on-the-key-moments-of-the-us-election-20081160010.htm Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:04:57 GMT One of the most famous New Yorker cartoons of all time shows two men in 19th-century garb, one sitting behind a desk and clearly a boss of some sort, the other in the boss's guest chair leaning anxiously forward. The boss is speaking. Caption: "I wish you would make up your mind, Mr Dickens. Was it the best of times or was it the worst of times? It could scarcely have been both."The cartoon is memorable because it skewers the pedantry behind the demand for neat categories. Life, as Dickens suggested, is always both. And so is politics. Without further ado then, some nominees for the best and worst of the campaign just concluded.Best speechOthers may be better known, but Barack Obama's thunderous oration at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner on November 10 2007 was a turning point. He was stuck in neutral, and Hillary Clinton looked inevitable. Then he tore the roof off the place. Remember, if he'd lost the Iowa caucuses, he may well have been forced out of the contest. The momentum that led to his Iowa victory began that night.Worst pre-campaign political decision with the benefit of hindsightHillary Clinton's vote for the Iraq war. She couldn't have known how badly the war would go of course. But if she'd voted against it, it's entirely possible that Obama never even would have run in the first place. Being the only top-level candidate against the war was his chief selling point to Democratic primary voters. Worst candidate Many conservatives predicted that Republican Fred Thompson would unite the party and be the answer to their prayers when he entered the race in mid-2007. Instead he always looked like he was wondering "God, when will this be over?" He once even refused to don a firefighter's hat for a photo-op, saying "I've got a silly hat rule." Earth to Fred: hats that people wear when saving little children from fiery deaths aren't "silly".Worst campaignEasy. Rudy Giuliani's (pictured left), specifically his decision to skip the first four GOP primary contests. You know - the ones that mattered. Best Clinton moment Hillary's New Hampshire comeback. Not only the famous crying episode, but the moment when she "found my own voice". Worst Clinton moment Hillary's gaffe when she said she had come under sniper fire when arriving in the Bosnian city of Tuzla? Nah. Hillary saying she and McCain had commander-in-chief credentials while Obama had "a speech he made in 2002"? Getting warmer. But I choose Bill's comparison of Obama's South Carolina win to Jesse Jackson's wins in the state in the 1980s. Both Clintons did their part against John McCain, but the Big Dog's primary season comportment isn't completely forgiven or forgotten.Worst Obama momentIn a New Hampshire debate, saying snidely to Hillary: "You're likeable enough." Cringe-inducing. He'd better keep that arrogant streak bottled up for four years.Worst press conference The controversial preacher Jeremiah Wright's preening appearance at the National Press Club, April 28 2008. The lowlight: the head of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, "is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century". Thanks a lot, Jer.Best "Man, thank God that guy didn't win the primary" momentAugust 8, when John Edwards finally acknowledged his extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter - conducted while his wife had cancer. His career is over. Silver lining: not everyone has a 29,000 sq ft house (2,700 m2) to go home to.Worst McCain lieAmid stiff competition, the nod goes to the television spot in which he accused Obama of cancelling a visit to American troops in Germany because he couldn't take cameras in to capture the moment. Completely false, as he almost had to know at the time, and a particularly toxic allegation.Best Sarah Palin moment Her convention speech. Like her or not, it was a rip-snorter. Remember when Democrats were nervous that she might actually be an asset to the Republican ticket?Worst Sarah Palin moment Well ... golly, let's see. The shopping spree? Not quite, because the damage had largely already been done by then. Clearly, the winner here is the interview with Katie Couric. It killed her. And as for the worst Palin micro-moment within the worst Palin moment, I'd have to go with the fact that she couldn't name a single supreme court decision in the entire history of the country besides the abortion decision Roe v Wade. This was of course before we learned that she didn't know what countries constitute North America.Best classic Joe Biden moment His remark in late October that Obama would be "tested" in his first six months in office by hostile world leaders was clearly his most off-message remark of the campaign. But Biden showed pretty good discipline - for Biden - through most of the campaign. And he probably did help in Pennsylvania, where Obama rolled.Best debate momentObama's wins in the debates weren't so much about moments as they were steadiness and consistency. But forced to choose one parry I'll take this one, from the first debate: "John, you like to pretend the war started in 2007 ... The war started in 2003. And at the time, when the war started, you said it was going to be quick and easy."Worst debate momentEasy. Second debate. McCain. "That one!" Nuff said. Worst strategic decision McCain's suspension of his campaign after the financial crisis hit. It was a bid to look serious, but it looked gimmicky. Obama's more sure-footed response to the meltdown is probably what won him the election more than any other single factor.Best John McCain momentHis speech at the Al Smith Dinner in New York, October 17, where he was both funnier and more gracious than Obama was in his remarks. "Whatever the outcome next month," McCain said, "Senator Obama has achieved a great thing for himself and for his country and I congratulate him." Where was this guy the rest of the time?Worst Joe the Plumber moment His attempt in an interview to defend his belief that Obama's election would mean the death of Israel. The television anchor was aghast and said: "Man. Some things - it just gets frightening sometimes." And this was on Fox News, folks!Best moment for America and the worldElection night. Best upcoming airplane ride to look forward to Next January 20, when George W Bush takes his last trip on Air Force One, back to Texas.US elections 2008Barack ObamaJohn McCainSarah PalinJoe BidenUnited Statesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds Guardian.Co.Uk Michael Tomasky on the key moments of the US election {new window}   Www.Guardian.Co.Uk - One of the most famous New Yorker cartoons of all time shows two men in 19th-century garb, one sitting behind a desk and clearly a boss of som