Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
marmar
marmar's Journal
marmar's Journal
December 19, 2013
from Dissent magazine:
A Hesitant Landslide: The Return of Chile’s Bachelet
By Diego Salvatierra - December 18, 2013
Former Chilean president Michelle Bachelet’s return to power with 62 percent of the vote on Sunday was the chronicle of a victory foretold. She had left office in 2010 (Chile’s constitution bars consecutive re-election) with 80 percent approval ratings. Her new program embraces popular reforms put forward by the student protesters of the last few years, including free higher education, higher taxes on big companies, and a new constitution to replace the one enacted during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. She led every poll, and her campaign ads made her victory seem inevitable.
Yet her December 15 landslide election returns—she won by twenty-five points, the widest margin of victory since Chile’s return to democracy—are somewhat misleading. In the first-round vote on November 17, 54 percent of voters chose someone other than Bachelet, forcing Sunday’s runoff vote between her and conservative runner-up Evelyn Matthei. Only four in ten Chileans bothered to show up to the runoff, fewer than in any presidential election since 1970. This was a hesitant landslide.
The quiet at the polls paradoxically follows the most significant political awakening since the 1988 plebiscite that ousted Pinochet. The 2011–12 student protests, which rallied hundreds of thousands to the streets, had cast into doubt the party-dominated politics and market-friendly consensus that characterized Chile in the two decades between Pinochet and Bachelet’s first administration. At one point in 2011, 80 percent of Chileans supported the students, while conservative President Sebastián Piñera’s approval ratings were in the mid-20s.
This unrest baffled many foreign observers: the protesters represented the most prosperous generation in Chilean history, most of them first-generation college students, living in a country with low unemployment and high growth rates. But although my post-Pinochet generation had eagerly marched through downtown Santiago, singing songs and wearing Guy Fawkes masks, it did not march to the voting booths. Save for four student leaders elected to Congress, the romance and idealism of the protests were not represented in electoral politics. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.dissentmagazine.org/blog/a-hesitant-landslide-the-return-of-chiles-bachelet
A Hesitant Landslide: The Return of Chile’s Bachelet
from Dissent magazine:
A Hesitant Landslide: The Return of Chile’s Bachelet
By Diego Salvatierra - December 18, 2013
Former Chilean president Michelle Bachelet’s return to power with 62 percent of the vote on Sunday was the chronicle of a victory foretold. She had left office in 2010 (Chile’s constitution bars consecutive re-election) with 80 percent approval ratings. Her new program embraces popular reforms put forward by the student protesters of the last few years, including free higher education, higher taxes on big companies, and a new constitution to replace the one enacted during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. She led every poll, and her campaign ads made her victory seem inevitable.
Yet her December 15 landslide election returns—she won by twenty-five points, the widest margin of victory since Chile’s return to democracy—are somewhat misleading. In the first-round vote on November 17, 54 percent of voters chose someone other than Bachelet, forcing Sunday’s runoff vote between her and conservative runner-up Evelyn Matthei. Only four in ten Chileans bothered to show up to the runoff, fewer than in any presidential election since 1970. This was a hesitant landslide.
The quiet at the polls paradoxically follows the most significant political awakening since the 1988 plebiscite that ousted Pinochet. The 2011–12 student protests, which rallied hundreds of thousands to the streets, had cast into doubt the party-dominated politics and market-friendly consensus that characterized Chile in the two decades between Pinochet and Bachelet’s first administration. At one point in 2011, 80 percent of Chileans supported the students, while conservative President Sebastián Piñera’s approval ratings were in the mid-20s.
This unrest baffled many foreign observers: the protesters represented the most prosperous generation in Chilean history, most of them first-generation college students, living in a country with low unemployment and high growth rates. But although my post-Pinochet generation had eagerly marched through downtown Santiago, singing songs and wearing Guy Fawkes masks, it did not march to the voting booths. Save for four student leaders elected to Congress, the romance and idealism of the protests were not represented in electoral politics. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.dissentmagazine.org/blog/a-hesitant-landslide-the-return-of-chiles-bachelet
December 19, 2013
WASHINGTON -- New Jersey traffic jams have hit the nation's capital. On Monday, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) asked the Department of Transportation to look into why officials in New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's (R) administration abruptly shut down access lanes to the busiest U.S. bridge in September and caused massive traffic jams, a move that some Democrats have characterized as political retribution.
Between Sept. 9-13, drivers attempting to cross the George Washington Bridge by the three access lanes in Fort Lee, N.J., found two of the lanes closed. As a result, vehicles backed up into Fort Lee's local roads, creating a mess for both bridge and local traffic.
The closures were ordered by David Wildstein, a high-ranking Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official and an ally of Christie's. They came just weeks after Fort Lee's Democratic mayor, Mark Sokolich, refused to endorse Christie's reelection bid. On Sept. 12, Sokolich said he believed the closures were "punitive," although he later backed off that accusation.
Wildstein and his boss, former state Sen. Bill Baroni, have since resigned. Christie sought to quell the growing controversy last week by holding a press conference, but many Democrats have not been satisfied with his answers. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/chris-christie-bridge_n_4459389.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
Hey Chris Christie, nowhere to run, nowhere to hide a**hole......
WASHINGTON -- New Jersey traffic jams have hit the nation's capital. On Monday, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) asked the Department of Transportation to look into why officials in New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's (R) administration abruptly shut down access lanes to the busiest U.S. bridge in September and caused massive traffic jams, a move that some Democrats have characterized as political retribution.
Between Sept. 9-13, drivers attempting to cross the George Washington Bridge by the three access lanes in Fort Lee, N.J., found two of the lanes closed. As a result, vehicles backed up into Fort Lee's local roads, creating a mess for both bridge and local traffic.
The closures were ordered by David Wildstein, a high-ranking Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official and an ally of Christie's. They came just weeks after Fort Lee's Democratic mayor, Mark Sokolich, refused to endorse Christie's reelection bid. On Sept. 12, Sokolich said he believed the closures were "punitive," although he later backed off that accusation.
Wildstein and his boss, former state Sen. Bill Baroni, have since resigned. Christie sought to quell the growing controversy last week by holding a press conference, but many Democrats have not been satisfied with his answers. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/chris-christie-bridge_n_4459389.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
December 19, 2013
from the Next City blog:
To Vote or Not to Vote? Metro Vancouver Ponders Transit Referendum
Vancouver | 12/18/2013 2:14pm |
Stephen J. Smith | Next City
Canadian cities, like those in the U.S., have traditionally been run as representative democracies, in which voters elect politicians who then carry out their mandates. But sometimes, politicians either don’t know the wishes of their constituents or don’t want to take a stance on a controversial issue. So they’ll throw the issue back to the citizenry in the form of a referendum.
In Vancouver and its surrounding cities, transit has apparently become one of those let-the-voters-decide issues. British Columbia Premier Christy Clark, of the center-right BC Liberals (Canada has a somewhat confusing, though perhaps more efficient, system of political parties whereby those at the municipal, provincial and national levels don’t always align), has called for a referendum on transit spending, with two new projects taking center stage.
A $3 billion expansion of SkyTrain, an elevated driverless metro system, would serve Vancouver’s Broadway corridor, anchored by the University of British Columbia and home to North America’s busiest bus route. (It carries 110,000 rides per day, besting buses on Manhattan’s First and Second avenues.) If transit were doled out by merit, the Broadway-UBC corridor would have gotten a SkyTrain line before the Evergreen Line in nearby Burnaby, Port Moody and Coquitlam.
Just southeast of Vancouver, the city of Surrey is looking for approximately $2 billion for a three-line light rail system. TransLink, the regional transit coordinating body, wanted to build a SkyTrain line in Surrey, but the city of about 468,000 said that it would prefer three light rail lines to one metro line. .............................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://nextcity.org/theworks/entry/to-vote-or-not-to-vote-metro-vancouver-ponders-transit-referendum
To Vote or Not to Vote? Metro Vancouver Ponders Transit Referendum
from the Next City blog:
To Vote or Not to Vote? Metro Vancouver Ponders Transit Referendum
Vancouver | 12/18/2013 2:14pm |
Stephen J. Smith | Next City
Canadian cities, like those in the U.S., have traditionally been run as representative democracies, in which voters elect politicians who then carry out their mandates. But sometimes, politicians either don’t know the wishes of their constituents or don’t want to take a stance on a controversial issue. So they’ll throw the issue back to the citizenry in the form of a referendum.
In Vancouver and its surrounding cities, transit has apparently become one of those let-the-voters-decide issues. British Columbia Premier Christy Clark, of the center-right BC Liberals (Canada has a somewhat confusing, though perhaps more efficient, system of political parties whereby those at the municipal, provincial and national levels don’t always align), has called for a referendum on transit spending, with two new projects taking center stage.
A $3 billion expansion of SkyTrain, an elevated driverless metro system, would serve Vancouver’s Broadway corridor, anchored by the University of British Columbia and home to North America’s busiest bus route. (It carries 110,000 rides per day, besting buses on Manhattan’s First and Second avenues.) If transit were doled out by merit, the Broadway-UBC corridor would have gotten a SkyTrain line before the Evergreen Line in nearby Burnaby, Port Moody and Coquitlam.
Just southeast of Vancouver, the city of Surrey is looking for approximately $2 billion for a three-line light rail system. TransLink, the regional transit coordinating body, wanted to build a SkyTrain line in Surrey, but the city of about 468,000 said that it would prefer three light rail lines to one metro line. .............................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://nextcity.org/theworks/entry/to-vote-or-not-to-vote-metro-vancouver-ponders-transit-referendum
December 19, 2013
from Consortium News:
No War Over Rocks
December 18, 2013
By Ivan Eland
One of the most dangerous international disputes that the United States could get dragged into has little importance to U.S. security — the disputes nations have over small islands (some really rocks rising out of the sea) in East Asia.
Although any war over these islands would rank right up there with the absurd Falkland Islands war of 1982 between Britain and Argentina over remote, windswept sheep pastures near Antarctica, any conflict in East Asia always has the potential to escalate to nuclear war. And unlike the Falklands war, the United States might be right in the atomic crosshairs.
Of the two antagonists in the Falklands War, only Britain had nuclear weapons, thus limiting the possibility of nuclear escalation. And although it is true that of the more numerous East Asian contenders, only China has such weapons, the United States has formal alliance commitments to defend three of the countries in competition with China over the islands — the Philippines, Japan, and South Korea — and an informal alliance with Taiwan.
[font size="1"]Islands at the center of the territorial dispute between China and Japan. (Image credit: Jackopoid)[/font]
Unbeknownst to most Americans, those outdated alliances left over from the Cold War implicitly still commit the United States to sacrifice Seattle or Los Angeles to save Manila, Tokyo, Seoul, or Taipei, should one of these countries get into a shooting war with China. Though a questionable tradeoff even during the Cold War, it is even less so today. .............(more)
The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/12/18/no-war-over-rocks/
No War Over Rocks
from Consortium News:
No War Over Rocks
December 18, 2013
U.S. foreign policy remains captive to unipolar hubris, enforced by neocon pundits who demand military interventions to solve the world’s problems. But this kneejerk response is particularly crazy when applied to Asian disputes over rocks far at sea, says Independent Institute’s Ivan Eland.
By Ivan Eland
One of the most dangerous international disputes that the United States could get dragged into has little importance to U.S. security — the disputes nations have over small islands (some really rocks rising out of the sea) in East Asia.
Although any war over these islands would rank right up there with the absurd Falkland Islands war of 1982 between Britain and Argentina over remote, windswept sheep pastures near Antarctica, any conflict in East Asia always has the potential to escalate to nuclear war. And unlike the Falklands war, the United States might be right in the atomic crosshairs.
Of the two antagonists in the Falklands War, only Britain had nuclear weapons, thus limiting the possibility of nuclear escalation. And although it is true that of the more numerous East Asian contenders, only China has such weapons, the United States has formal alliance commitments to defend three of the countries in competition with China over the islands — the Philippines, Japan, and South Korea — and an informal alliance with Taiwan.
[font size="1"]Islands at the center of the territorial dispute between China and Japan. (Image credit: Jackopoid)[/font]
Unbeknownst to most Americans, those outdated alliances left over from the Cold War implicitly still commit the United States to sacrifice Seattle or Los Angeles to save Manila, Tokyo, Seoul, or Taipei, should one of these countries get into a shooting war with China. Though a questionable tradeoff even during the Cold War, it is even less so today. .............(more)
The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/12/18/no-war-over-rocks/
December 18, 2013
MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT
Last week, the Guardian UK reported that 500 authors, including five Noble Prize winners, signed a manifesto calling for a curtailing of the emergence of surveillance states, led by the US:
What could be a more fundamental right than the ability to think and express oneself freely, without the state gathering a digital mountain of our private lives?
It's no coincidence that the Guardian UK broke the Edward Snowden revelations about he NSA, which confirmed the worst fears about the extent to which the US government has been spying without any significant restrictions -- and casting an extremely wide net that went way beyond what might be needed for national security interests.
A British author, Jeanette Winterson, signed the author's declaration, stating:
In fact, the UK has a special role to play in the US surveillance state, due to its longterm cooperation with America in electronic communication and data program extending back to the Cold War ECHELON project (which still exists in an expanded role). The touting of ECHELON as a national security necessity was severely tarnished when it was revealed that it was often used for high-level industrial espionage that would favor US companies. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18372-a-society-under-surveillance-is-no-longer-a-democracy
"A Society Under Surveillance Is No Longer a Democracy"
MARK KARLIN, EDITOR OF BUZZFLASH AT TRUTHOUT
Last week, the Guardian UK reported that 500 authors, including five Noble Prize winners, signed a manifesto calling for a curtailing of the emergence of surveillance states, led by the US:
A person under surveillance is no longer free; a society under surveillance is no longer a democracy. To maintain any validity, our democratic rights must apply in virtual as in real space.
What could be a more fundamental right than the ability to think and express oneself freely, without the state gathering a digital mountain of our private lives?
It's no coincidence that the Guardian UK broke the Edward Snowden revelations about he NSA, which confirmed the worst fears about the extent to which the US government has been spying without any significant restrictions -- and casting an extremely wide net that went way beyond what might be needed for national security interests.
A British author, Jeanette Winterson, signed the author's declaration, stating:
We have had no debate, no vote, no say, hardly any information about how our data is used and for what purpose. Our mobile phones have become tracking devices. Social networking is data profiling. We can't shop, spend, browse, email, without being monitored. We might as well be tagged prisoners. Privacy is an illusion. Do you mind about that? I do.
In fact, the UK has a special role to play in the US surveillance state, due to its longterm cooperation with America in electronic communication and data program extending back to the Cold War ECHELON project (which still exists in an expanded role). The touting of ECHELON as a national security necessity was severely tarnished when it was revealed that it was often used for high-level industrial espionage that would favor US companies. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18372-a-society-under-surveillance-is-no-longer-a-democracy
December 18, 2013
SEATTLE (AP) — Figuring out how much marijuana people use has been one of the trickiest, and most important, questions facing the bureaucrats who are setting up Washington state's new legal pot system.
Underestimate demand, and marijuana fans might stick with their black market dealers. Overestimate it, and the surplus legal production could wind up being diverted out of state, or to kids.
Now, researchers working with the state's official pot consultant think they have their best look yet at cannabis consumption in Washington — aided by a novel survey aimed at figuring out how much the heaviest users of marijuana burn on a typical day. In a study released Wednesday, a RAND Corp. team figured that Washington's roughly 750,000 marijuana users will have consumed between 135 to 225 metric tons of the drug in 2013.
The median figure they came up with, 175 metric tons, is more than twice what the state estimated before voters approved Washington's legal weed law last year. But officials have been aware since June that RAND's researchers were headed toward the higher number, and they say the new study won't require any sudden changes to the rollout of the state system. ...............(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/18/washington-marijuana-use_n_4467244.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
Washingtonians (state, not the district) smoked a lot of fat ones......
SEATTLE (AP) — Figuring out how much marijuana people use has been one of the trickiest, and most important, questions facing the bureaucrats who are setting up Washington state's new legal pot system.
Underestimate demand, and marijuana fans might stick with their black market dealers. Overestimate it, and the surplus legal production could wind up being diverted out of state, or to kids.
Now, researchers working with the state's official pot consultant think they have their best look yet at cannabis consumption in Washington — aided by a novel survey aimed at figuring out how much the heaviest users of marijuana burn on a typical day. In a study released Wednesday, a RAND Corp. team figured that Washington's roughly 750,000 marijuana users will have consumed between 135 to 225 metric tons of the drug in 2013.
The median figure they came up with, 175 metric tons, is more than twice what the state estimated before voters approved Washington's legal weed law last year. But officials have been aware since June that RAND's researchers were headed toward the higher number, and they say the new study won't require any sudden changes to the rollout of the state system. ...............(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/18/washington-marijuana-use_n_4467244.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
December 18, 2013
Capitalism and Democracy: Year-End Lessons
Wednesday, 18 December 2013 09:12
By Richard D Wolff, Truthout | News
2013 drove home a basic lesson: US capitalism's economic leaders and their politicians now regularly ignore majority opinions and preferences. For example, polls showed overwhelming popular support for higher taxes on the rich with lower taxes on the rest of us and for reversing the nation's deepening economic inequalities. Yet Republicans and Democrats, including President Obama, raised payroll taxes sharply on January 1, 2013. Those taxes are regressive; they take a smaller percentage of your income the higher your income is above $113,700 per year. Raising the payroll tax increased economic inequality across 2013.
For another example, many American cities and towns want to use eminent domain laws to help residents keep their homes and avoid foreclosure. Eminent domain is a hallmark democratic right as well as US law. It enables municipal governments to buy individual properties (at market prices) when doing so benefits the community as a whole. Using eminent domain, local leaders want to compel lenders (e.g., banks, etc.) to sell them homes whose market prices have fallen below the mortgage debts of their occupants. They would then resell those homes at their market prices to their occupants. With their mortgages thus reduced to their homes' actual prices, occupants could stay in them. They still suffer their homes' fallen values but avoid homelessness. Communities benefit because decreased homelessness reduces the fall of other property values, reduces the number of abandoned homes (and thus risks of fire, crime, etc.), reduces the number of customers lost to local stores, sustains property tax flows to local governments and so on.
Used this way, eminent domain forces lenders - chiefly banks - to share more of the pains produced by capitalism's crisis. Most Americans support that, believing it will help reverse income and wealth inequalities and also that banks bear major responsibility for the economic crisis.
Yet the country's biggest banks are using "their" money and laws (that they often wrote) to block municipalities' use of eminent domain. "Their" money includes the massive bailouts Washington provided to them since 2007. Big bank directors and major shareholders - a tiny minority - fund the politicians, parties and think-tanks that oppose municipalities' use of eminent domain. In these ways, capitalism systematically undermines democratic decision-making about economic affairs. ........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20550-capitalism-and-democracy-year-end-lessons
Professor Richard Wolff: Capitalism and Democracy: Year-End Lessons
Capitalism and Democracy: Year-End Lessons
Wednesday, 18 December 2013 09:12
By Richard D Wolff, Truthout | News
2013 drove home a basic lesson: US capitalism's economic leaders and their politicians now regularly ignore majority opinions and preferences. For example, polls showed overwhelming popular support for higher taxes on the rich with lower taxes on the rest of us and for reversing the nation's deepening economic inequalities. Yet Republicans and Democrats, including President Obama, raised payroll taxes sharply on January 1, 2013. Those taxes are regressive; they take a smaller percentage of your income the higher your income is above $113,700 per year. Raising the payroll tax increased economic inequality across 2013.
For another example, many American cities and towns want to use eminent domain laws to help residents keep their homes and avoid foreclosure. Eminent domain is a hallmark democratic right as well as US law. It enables municipal governments to buy individual properties (at market prices) when doing so benefits the community as a whole. Using eminent domain, local leaders want to compel lenders (e.g., banks, etc.) to sell them homes whose market prices have fallen below the mortgage debts of their occupants. They would then resell those homes at their market prices to their occupants. With their mortgages thus reduced to their homes' actual prices, occupants could stay in them. They still suffer their homes' fallen values but avoid homelessness. Communities benefit because decreased homelessness reduces the fall of other property values, reduces the number of abandoned homes (and thus risks of fire, crime, etc.), reduces the number of customers lost to local stores, sustains property tax flows to local governments and so on.
Used this way, eminent domain forces lenders - chiefly banks - to share more of the pains produced by capitalism's crisis. Most Americans support that, believing it will help reverse income and wealth inequalities and also that banks bear major responsibility for the economic crisis.
Yet the country's biggest banks are using "their" money and laws (that they often wrote) to block municipalities' use of eminent domain. "Their" money includes the massive bailouts Washington provided to them since 2007. Big bank directors and major shareholders - a tiny minority - fund the politicians, parties and think-tanks that oppose municipalities' use of eminent domain. In these ways, capitalism systematically undermines democratic decision-making about economic affairs. ........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20550-capitalism-and-democracy-year-end-lessons
December 18, 2013
AP, via the Detroit Free Press:
Just in time for a new movie about the making of "Mary Poppins," the 1964 Disney classic starring Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke has been selected for preservation at the Library of Congress so future generations of Americans can see it.
Original prints of even newer movies, such as Michael Moore's "Roger and Me" from 1989, have become endangered. In a statement to the library, Moore said he learned last year that there were no more usable prints left of his film about the hemorrhaging of jobs at General Motors in Flint.
"Over the years, this movie has received many acknowledgements, but this is certainly the one I cherish the most," Moore said of the movie's selection for preservation. "The true regret I have is that the cities of Flint and Detroit, which are at the center of my film, are now in much worse shape — as is the American middle class in general."
On Wednesday, the library is inducting 25 films into the National Film Registry to be preserved for their cultural, historical or cinematic significance. This year's selections include Quentin Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction" and the space race film "The Right Stuff.” ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.freep.com/article/20131218/ENT01/312180089/Michael-Moore-s-auto-industry-doc-Roger-and-Me-among-25-U-S-films-to-be-preserved
Michael Moore's auto industry doc 'Roger and Me' among 25 U.S. films to be preserved
AP, via the Detroit Free Press:
Just in time for a new movie about the making of "Mary Poppins," the 1964 Disney classic starring Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke has been selected for preservation at the Library of Congress so future generations of Americans can see it.
Original prints of even newer movies, such as Michael Moore's "Roger and Me" from 1989, have become endangered. In a statement to the library, Moore said he learned last year that there were no more usable prints left of his film about the hemorrhaging of jobs at General Motors in Flint.
"Over the years, this movie has received many acknowledgements, but this is certainly the one I cherish the most," Moore said of the movie's selection for preservation. "The true regret I have is that the cities of Flint and Detroit, which are at the center of my film, are now in much worse shape — as is the American middle class in general."
On Wednesday, the library is inducting 25 films into the National Film Registry to be preserved for their cultural, historical or cinematic significance. This year's selections include Quentin Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction" and the space race film "The Right Stuff.” ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.freep.com/article/20131218/ENT01/312180089/Michael-Moore-s-auto-industry-doc-Roger-and-Me-among-25-U-S-films-to-be-preserved
December 18, 2013
SYDNEY (AP) — A tourist in Australia had to be rescued by police after plunging off a pier while browsing Facebook on her phone, officials said Wednesday.
The woman was walking along a bay in Melbourne on Monday night when she became distracted by her Facebook feed and plummeted off the pier into the chilly water, Victoria state police said.
A witness called for help and police rushed to the woman's aid. They found her flailing around in the water, about 20 meters (65 feet) from the pier.
"She was still out in the water lying on her back in a floating position because she told us later that she couldn't swim," Senior Constable Dean Kelly of the state water police told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. "She still had her mobile phone in her hand and initially she apologized and said sorry." ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20131218/as--travel-brief-australia-facebook-fall/?utm_hp_ref=homepage&ir=homepage
Tourist distracted by Facebook falls off pier
SYDNEY (AP) — A tourist in Australia had to be rescued by police after plunging off a pier while browsing Facebook on her phone, officials said Wednesday.
The woman was walking along a bay in Melbourne on Monday night when she became distracted by her Facebook feed and plummeted off the pier into the chilly water, Victoria state police said.
A witness called for help and police rushed to the woman's aid. They found her flailing around in the water, about 20 meters (65 feet) from the pier.
"She was still out in the water lying on her back in a floating position because she told us later that she couldn't swim," Senior Constable Dean Kelly of the state water police told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. "She still had her mobile phone in her hand and initially she apologized and said sorry." ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20131218/as--travel-brief-australia-facebook-fall/?utm_hp_ref=homepage&ir=homepage
December 18, 2013
from Civil Eats:
Monsanto Supersizes Farmers’ Weed Problem
By Karen Stillerman on December 17, 2013
So now the Monsanto Company thinks its bad reputation with the public is primarily an air time problem. As the agribusiness giant’s Chief Technology Officer (and recent World Food Prize winner) Robert Fraley told Politico recently, Monsanto has been “absolutely riveted and focused on giving technology and tools to farmers to improve their productivity and yield and we haven’t spent nearly the time we have needed to on talking to consumers and talking to social media.”
Seriously?
This is a company that spends, on average, $100 million per year on advertising. The past few years, it seems I can’t go to an airport (see cover photo) or ride the subway without seeing larger-than-life farmers smiling down at me from Monsanto’s ads. In 2011, the Business Marketing Association named Monsanto “Business Marketer of the Year.”
.....(snip).....
A new policy brief from the Union of Concerned Scientists, The Rise of Superweeds—And What to Do About It, tells the story of how Monsanto’s wildly popular “Roundup Ready” system of engineered corn, soybean, and cotton seeds and herbicide has accelerated the predictable tendency of weeds to develop immunity to weed-killers, causing major headaches for farmers. A recent survey found that more than 60 million acres of U.S. farmland are infested with Monsanto’s superweeds—that’s an area roughly the size of the state of Michigan. .......................(more)
The complete pie: http://civileats.com/2013/12/17/monsanto-supersizes-farmers-weed-problem/#sthash.0Vyf1YTa.dpuf
Monsanto Supersizes Farmers’ Weed Problem
from Civil Eats:
Monsanto Supersizes Farmers’ Weed Problem
By Karen Stillerman on December 17, 2013
So now the Monsanto Company thinks its bad reputation with the public is primarily an air time problem. As the agribusiness giant’s Chief Technology Officer (and recent World Food Prize winner) Robert Fraley told Politico recently, Monsanto has been “absolutely riveted and focused on giving technology and tools to farmers to improve their productivity and yield and we haven’t spent nearly the time we have needed to on talking to consumers and talking to social media.”
Seriously?
This is a company that spends, on average, $100 million per year on advertising. The past few years, it seems I can’t go to an airport (see cover photo) or ride the subway without seeing larger-than-life farmers smiling down at me from Monsanto’s ads. In 2011, the Business Marketing Association named Monsanto “Business Marketer of the Year.”
.....(snip).....
A new policy brief from the Union of Concerned Scientists, The Rise of Superweeds—And What to Do About It, tells the story of how Monsanto’s wildly popular “Roundup Ready” system of engineered corn, soybean, and cotton seeds and herbicide has accelerated the predictable tendency of weeds to develop immunity to weed-killers, causing major headaches for farmers. A recent survey found that more than 60 million acres of U.S. farmland are infested with Monsanto’s superweeds—that’s an area roughly the size of the state of Michigan. .......................(more)
The complete pie: http://civileats.com/2013/12/17/monsanto-supersizes-farmers-weed-problem/#sthash.0Vyf1YTa.dpuf
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Detroit, MI
Member since: Fri Oct 29, 2004, 12:18 AM
Number of posts: 77,080
