![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
happy thanksgiving from Gov. Palin
Nov. 21st, 2008 | 12:27 pm
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
excited about the new Obama administration? this will make your blood boil...
Nov. 18th, 2008 | 12:01 pm
Administration Moves to Protect Key Appointees
Political Positions Shifted To Career Civil Service Jobs
By Juliet Eilperin and Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, November 18, 2008; A01
Just weeks before leaving office, the Interior Department's top lawyer has shifted half a dozen key deputies -- including two former political appointees who have been involved in controversial environmental decisions -- into senior civil service posts.
The transfer of political appointees into permanent federal positions, called "burrowing" by career officials, creates security for those employees, and at least initially will deprive the incoming Obama administration of the chance to install its preferred appointees in some key jobs.
Similar efforts are taking place at other agencies. Two political hires at the Labor Department have already secured career posts there, and one at the Department of Housing and Urban Development is trying to make the switch.
Between March 1 and Nov. 3, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management, the Bush administration allowed 20 political appointees to become career civil servants. Six political appointees to the Senior Executive Service, the government's most prestigious and highly paid employees, have received approval to take career jobs at the same level. Fourteen other political, or "Schedule C," appointees have also been approved to take career jobs. One candidate was turned down by OPM and two were withdrawn by the submitting agency.
The personnel moves come as Bush administration officials are scrambling to cement in place policy and regulatory initiatives that touch on issues such as federal drinking-water standards, air quality at national parks, mountaintop mining and fisheries limits.
The practice of placing political appointees into permanent civil service posts before an administration ends is not new. In its last 12 months, the Clinton administration approved 47 such moves, including seven at the senior executive level. Federal employees with civil service status receive job protections that make it very difficult for managers to remove them.
Most of the personnel shifts have been done on a case-by-case basis, but Interior Solicitor David L. Bernhardt moved to place six deputies in senior agency positions with one stroke, including two who have repeatedly attracted controversy. Robert D. Comer, who was Rocky Mountain regional solicitor, was named to the civil service post of associate solicitor for mineral resources. Matthew McKeown, who served as deputy associate solicitor for mineral resources, will take Comer's place in what is also a career post. Both had been converted from political appointees to civil service status.
In a report dated Oct. 13, 2004, Interior's inspector general singled out Comer in criticizing a grazing agreement that the Bureau of Land Management had struck with a Wyoming rancher, saying Comer used "pressure and intimidation" to produce the settlement and pushed it through "with total disregard for the concerns raised by career field personnel." McKeown -- who as Idaho's deputy attorney general had sued to overturn a Clinton administration rule barring road-building in certain national forests -- has been criticized by environmentalists for promoting the cause of private property owners over the public interest on issues such as grazing and logging.
One career Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize his position, said McKeown will "have a huge impact on a broad swath of the West" in his new position, advising the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service on "all the programs they implement." Comer, the official added, will help shape mining policy in his new assignment.
"It is an attempt by the outgoing administration to limit as much as possible [the incoming administration's] ability to put its policy imprint on the Department of Interior," the official said.
In a Nov. 13 memo obtained by The Washington Post, Bernhardt wrote that he was reorganizing his division because the associate solicitors' original status as political appointees undermined the division's effectiveness.
"This has resulted in frequent turnover in those positions, often with an attendant loss in productivity and management continuity in these Divisions, despite the best efforts of the newly-appointed Associate Solicitors," he wrote.
But environmental advocates, and some rank-and-file Interior officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting their careers, said the reassignments represent the Bush administration's effort to leave a lasting imprint on environmental policy.
"What's clear is they could have done this during the eight years they were in office. Why are they doing it now?" said Robert Irvin, senior vice president for conservation programs at Defenders of Wildlife, an advocacy group. "It's pretty obvious they're trying to leave in place some of their loyal foot soldiers in their efforts to reduce environmental protection."
In an interview yesterday, Bernhardt reiterated that he thinks the move is in the government's long-term interest.
"I believe these management decisions will strengthen the professionalism of the Office of the Solicitor and result in greater service to the Department of the Interior," he said. "However, the next solicitor and the department's management team are free to walk a different path."
One senior Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters, said an incoming interior secretary or solicitor could create new political positions upon taking office and could shift Senior Executive Service officials to comparable jobs within a few months. As a general rule, career SES employees may be reassigned involuntarily within their current commuting area within 15 days, and beyond their commuting area within 60 days, but they retain their lucrative and permanent government posts. When a new agency head is appointed, he or she must wait 120 days before reassigning career SES officials.
Outside groups are trying to monitor these moves but are powerless to reverse them. Alex Bastani, a representative at the Labor Department for the American Federation of Government Employees, said it took months for that agency even to acknowledge that two of its Bush appointees, Carrie Snidar and Brad Mantel, had gotten civil service posts.
"They're trying to burrow into these career jobs, and we're very upset," Bastani said. "Everyone should have an opportunity to apply for these positions. And certainly career people who don't have partisan bent and have 10 or 15 years in their respective fields should have a shot at these positions."
Kerry Weems, acting chief of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said he discourages political staff from moving into career slots. "It typically doesn't work out for either party," he said. Even though Weems is a career staffer, he expects to leave the administration when the Obama team takes over.
Alphonso Jackson, who was HUD secretary under President Bush, warned his political appointees not to try to burrow in when the administration changed. But one of his regional directors objected to that flat-out prohibition, according to union leaders at HUD, and has told his colleagues that he has been promised first crack at a career position.
Staff writers Ceci Connolly and Spencer S. Hsu contributed to this report.
Political Positions Shifted To Career Civil Service Jobs
By Juliet Eilperin and Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, November 18, 2008; A01
Just weeks before leaving office, the Interior Department's top lawyer has shifted half a dozen key deputies -- including two former political appointees who have been involved in controversial environmental decisions -- into senior civil service posts.
The transfer of political appointees into permanent federal positions, called "burrowing" by career officials, creates security for those employees, and at least initially will deprive the incoming Obama administration of the chance to install its preferred appointees in some key jobs.
Similar efforts are taking place at other agencies. Two political hires at the Labor Department have already secured career posts there, and one at the Department of Housing and Urban Development is trying to make the switch.
Between March 1 and Nov. 3, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management, the Bush administration allowed 20 political appointees to become career civil servants. Six political appointees to the Senior Executive Service, the government's most prestigious and highly paid employees, have received approval to take career jobs at the same level. Fourteen other political, or "Schedule C," appointees have also been approved to take career jobs. One candidate was turned down by OPM and two were withdrawn by the submitting agency.
The personnel moves come as Bush administration officials are scrambling to cement in place policy and regulatory initiatives that touch on issues such as federal drinking-water standards, air quality at national parks, mountaintop mining and fisheries limits.
The practice of placing political appointees into permanent civil service posts before an administration ends is not new. In its last 12 months, the Clinton administration approved 47 such moves, including seven at the senior executive level. Federal employees with civil service status receive job protections that make it very difficult for managers to remove them.
Most of the personnel shifts have been done on a case-by-case basis, but Interior Solicitor David L. Bernhardt moved to place six deputies in senior agency positions with one stroke, including two who have repeatedly attracted controversy. Robert D. Comer, who was Rocky Mountain regional solicitor, was named to the civil service post of associate solicitor for mineral resources. Matthew McKeown, who served as deputy associate solicitor for mineral resources, will take Comer's place in what is also a career post. Both had been converted from political appointees to civil service status.
In a report dated Oct. 13, 2004, Interior's inspector general singled out Comer in criticizing a grazing agreement that the Bureau of Land Management had struck with a Wyoming rancher, saying Comer used "pressure and intimidation" to produce the settlement and pushed it through "with total disregard for the concerns raised by career field personnel." McKeown -- who as Idaho's deputy attorney general had sued to overturn a Clinton administration rule barring road-building in certain national forests -- has been criticized by environmentalists for promoting the cause of private property owners over the public interest on issues such as grazing and logging.
One career Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize his position, said McKeown will "have a huge impact on a broad swath of the West" in his new position, advising the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service on "all the programs they implement." Comer, the official added, will help shape mining policy in his new assignment.
"It is an attempt by the outgoing administration to limit as much as possible [the incoming administration's] ability to put its policy imprint on the Department of Interior," the official said.
In a Nov. 13 memo obtained by The Washington Post, Bernhardt wrote that he was reorganizing his division because the associate solicitors' original status as political appointees undermined the division's effectiveness.
"This has resulted in frequent turnover in those positions, often with an attendant loss in productivity and management continuity in these Divisions, despite the best efforts of the newly-appointed Associate Solicitors," he wrote.
But environmental advocates, and some rank-and-file Interior officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of hurting their careers, said the reassignments represent the Bush administration's effort to leave a lasting imprint on environmental policy.
"What's clear is they could have done this during the eight years they were in office. Why are they doing it now?" said Robert Irvin, senior vice president for conservation programs at Defenders of Wildlife, an advocacy group. "It's pretty obvious they're trying to leave in place some of their loyal foot soldiers in their efforts to reduce environmental protection."
In an interview yesterday, Bernhardt reiterated that he thinks the move is in the government's long-term interest.
"I believe these management decisions will strengthen the professionalism of the Office of the Solicitor and result in greater service to the Department of the Interior," he said. "However, the next solicitor and the department's management team are free to walk a different path."
One senior Interior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters, said an incoming interior secretary or solicitor could create new political positions upon taking office and could shift Senior Executive Service officials to comparable jobs within a few months. As a general rule, career SES employees may be reassigned involuntarily within their current commuting area within 15 days, and beyond their commuting area within 60 days, but they retain their lucrative and permanent government posts. When a new agency head is appointed, he or she must wait 120 days before reassigning career SES officials.
Outside groups are trying to monitor these moves but are powerless to reverse them. Alex Bastani, a representative at the Labor Department for the American Federation of Government Employees, said it took months for that agency even to acknowledge that two of its Bush appointees, Carrie Snidar and Brad Mantel, had gotten civil service posts.
"They're trying to burrow into these career jobs, and we're very upset," Bastani said. "Everyone should have an opportunity to apply for these positions. And certainly career people who don't have partisan bent and have 10 or 15 years in their respective fields should have a shot at these positions."
Kerry Weems, acting chief of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said he discourages political staff from moving into career slots. "It typically doesn't work out for either party," he said. Even though Weems is a career staffer, he expects to leave the administration when the Obama team takes over.
Alphonso Jackson, who was HUD secretary under President Bush, warned his political appointees not to try to burrow in when the administration changed. But one of his regional directors objected to that flat-out prohibition, according to union leaders at HUD, and has told his colleagues that he has been promised first crack at a career position.
Staff writers Ceci Connolly and Spencer S. Hsu contributed to this report.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Holy cow, indeed.
Nov. 17th, 2008 | 10:53 am
Monday, November 17, 2008
Agencies at Odds Over 'Fire Sale'
By Paul Foy
Associated Press
SALT LAKE CITY — The view of Delicate Arch — an unspoiled landmark so iconic it's on Utah's license plates — could one day include a drilling platform under a proposal that environmentalists call a Bush administration "fire sale" for the oil and gas industry.
Late on Election Day, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management announced a Dec. 19 auction of more than 50,000 acres of oil and gas parcels alongside or within view of Arches National Park and two other red rock national parks in Utah: Dinosaur and Canyonlands.
The National Park Service's top official in the state calls it "shocking and disturbing" and says his agency wasn't properly notified. Environmentalists call it a "fire sale" for the oil and gas industry by a departing administration.
Officials of the BLM, which oversees millions of acres of public land in the West, say the sale is nothing unusual, and one is "puzzled" that the Park Service is upset.
"We find it shocking and disturbing," said Cordell Roy, the chief Park Service administrator in Utah. "They added 51,000 acres of tracts near Arches, Dinosaur and Canyonlands without telling us about it. That's 40 tracts within four miles of these parks."
Top aides to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne stepped into the fray, ordering the sister agencies to make amends. His press secretary, Shane Wolfe, told The Associated Press that deputy Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett "resolved the dispute within 24 hours" last week.
A compromise ordered by the Interior Department requires the BLM to "take quite seriously" the Park Service's objections, said Wolfe.
However, the BLM didn't promise to pull any parcels from the sale, and, in an interview after the supposed truce, BLM state director Selma Sierra was defiant, saying she saw nothing wrong with drilling near national parks.
"I'm puzzled the Park Service has been as upset as they are," said Sierra.
"There are already many parcels leased around the parks. It's not like they've never been leased," she said. "I don't see it as something we are doing to undermine the Park Service."
Roy and conservation groups dispute that, saying never before has the bureau bunched drilling parcels on the fence lines of national parks.
"This is the fire sale, the Bush administration's last great gift to the oil and gas industry," said Stephen Bloch, a staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.
"The tracts of land offered here, next to Arches National Park or above Desolation Canyon, these are the crown jewels of America's lands that the BLM is offering to the highest bidder," he said.
An examination of the parcels, superimposing low-resolution government graphics onto Google Earth maps, shows that in one case drilling parcels bordering Arches National Park are just 1.3 miles from Delicate Arch.
"If you're standing at Delicate Arch, like thousands of people do every year, and you're looking through the arch, you could see drill pads on the hillside behind it. That's how ridiculous this proposed lease sale is," said Franklin Seal, a spokesman for the environmental group Wildland CPR.
In all, the BLM is moving to open 359,000 more acres in Utah to drilling.
Other Utah leases that are certain to draw objections from conservation groups include high cliffs along whitewater sections of Desolation Canyon, which is little changed since explorer John Wesley Powell remarked in 1896 on "a region of wildest desolation" while boating down the Green and Colorado rivers.
Others extend to plateaus populated by big game atop Nine Mile Canyon, site of thousands of ancient rock art panels, Moab's famous Slick Rock Trail and a campground popular with thousands of mountain bikers.
Sierra, the BLM's director for Utah, said the Park Service was consulted on the broad management plans that made the sale of parcels next to national parks permissible, even if it was not given notice on which specific leases were being offered. She apologized for that omission but said notice wasn't legally required.
She said national parks want to keep oil and gas wells five to 10 miles away, "but that policy doesn't exist."
Roy said the standard for an eyesore visible from a national park turns on what a "casual" observer might see.
The hostility carried over into an e-mail exchange between Sierra and Mike Snyder, the Denver-based regional Park Service director, who noted his agency's demand that BLM pull 40 to 45 drill parcels from the auction list. "You stated that you were not willing to do this," Snyder wrote Nov. 6.
Within hours, Sierra responded "These decisions and the lands available for leasing should come to no one's surprise," according to copies of the e-mails obtained from her office.
Sierra said she instructed her district and field managers to educate the park superintendents on why drilling is OK "adjacent to and near the park boundaries."
In the e-mail, Sierra boasted of having "a very good working relationship" with Roy, the federal coordinator in Utah for the Park Service, but in an interview he said he had "no idea this sale was coming down the pike."
Roy said that when he asked Sierra what was going on, she replied: "We added some tracts, sorry we didn't notify you. We can take up these concerns when we issue" drilling permits. He said his response was: "Holy cow."
Sierra didn't dispute this account, but said "I don't think I was in a mood that dismissed his concerns lightly." She said she had promised only to review the objections, parcel by parcel, before the auction is held Dec. 19.
Agencies at Odds Over 'Fire Sale'
By Paul Foy
Associated Press
SALT LAKE CITY — The view of Delicate Arch — an unspoiled landmark so iconic it's on Utah's license plates — could one day include a drilling platform under a proposal that environmentalists call a Bush administration "fire sale" for the oil and gas industry.
Late on Election Day, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management announced a Dec. 19 auction of more than 50,000 acres of oil and gas parcels alongside or within view of Arches National Park and two other red rock national parks in Utah: Dinosaur and Canyonlands.
The National Park Service's top official in the state calls it "shocking and disturbing" and says his agency wasn't properly notified. Environmentalists call it a "fire sale" for the oil and gas industry by a departing administration.
Officials of the BLM, which oversees millions of acres of public land in the West, say the sale is nothing unusual, and one is "puzzled" that the Park Service is upset.
"We find it shocking and disturbing," said Cordell Roy, the chief Park Service administrator in Utah. "They added 51,000 acres of tracts near Arches, Dinosaur and Canyonlands without telling us about it. That's 40 tracts within four miles of these parks."
Top aides to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne stepped into the fray, ordering the sister agencies to make amends. His press secretary, Shane Wolfe, told The Associated Press that deputy Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett "resolved the dispute within 24 hours" last week.
A compromise ordered by the Interior Department requires the BLM to "take quite seriously" the Park Service's objections, said Wolfe.
However, the BLM didn't promise to pull any parcels from the sale, and, in an interview after the supposed truce, BLM state director Selma Sierra was defiant, saying she saw nothing wrong with drilling near national parks.
"I'm puzzled the Park Service has been as upset as they are," said Sierra.
"There are already many parcels leased around the parks. It's not like they've never been leased," she said. "I don't see it as something we are doing to undermine the Park Service."
Roy and conservation groups dispute that, saying never before has the bureau bunched drilling parcels on the fence lines of national parks.
"This is the fire sale, the Bush administration's last great gift to the oil and gas industry," said Stephen Bloch, a staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.
"The tracts of land offered here, next to Arches National Park or above Desolation Canyon, these are the crown jewels of America's lands that the BLM is offering to the highest bidder," he said.
An examination of the parcels, superimposing low-resolution government graphics onto Google Earth maps, shows that in one case drilling parcels bordering Arches National Park are just 1.3 miles from Delicate Arch.
"If you're standing at Delicate Arch, like thousands of people do every year, and you're looking through the arch, you could see drill pads on the hillside behind it. That's how ridiculous this proposed lease sale is," said Franklin Seal, a spokesman for the environmental group Wildland CPR.
In all, the BLM is moving to open 359,000 more acres in Utah to drilling.
Other Utah leases that are certain to draw objections from conservation groups include high cliffs along whitewater sections of Desolation Canyon, which is little changed since explorer John Wesley Powell remarked in 1896 on "a region of wildest desolation" while boating down the Green and Colorado rivers.
Others extend to plateaus populated by big game atop Nine Mile Canyon, site of thousands of ancient rock art panels, Moab's famous Slick Rock Trail and a campground popular with thousands of mountain bikers.
Sierra, the BLM's director for Utah, said the Park Service was consulted on the broad management plans that made the sale of parcels next to national parks permissible, even if it was not given notice on which specific leases were being offered. She apologized for that omission but said notice wasn't legally required.
She said national parks want to keep oil and gas wells five to 10 miles away, "but that policy doesn't exist."
Roy said the standard for an eyesore visible from a national park turns on what a "casual" observer might see.
The hostility carried over into an e-mail exchange between Sierra and Mike Snyder, the Denver-based regional Park Service director, who noted his agency's demand that BLM pull 40 to 45 drill parcels from the auction list. "You stated that you were not willing to do this," Snyder wrote Nov. 6.
Within hours, Sierra responded "These decisions and the lands available for leasing should come to no one's surprise," according to copies of the e-mails obtained from her office.
Sierra said she instructed her district and field managers to educate the park superintendents on why drilling is OK "adjacent to and near the park boundaries."
In the e-mail, Sierra boasted of having "a very good working relationship" with Roy, the federal coordinator in Utah for the Park Service, but in an interview he said he had "no idea this sale was coming down the pike."
Roy said that when he asked Sierra what was going on, she replied: "We added some tracts, sorry we didn't notify you. We can take up these concerns when we issue" drilling permits. He said his response was: "Holy cow."
Sierra didn't dispute this account, but said "I don't think I was in a mood that dismissed his concerns lightly." She said she had promised only to review the objections, parcel by parcel, before the auction is held Dec. 19.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Sarah Palin sticks to the script, regardless
Oct. 30th, 2008 | 08:07 am
You want out of touch? How about Sarah Palin starting the "drill, baby, drill" chant at a solar technology startup?
excerpted from a story at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_
Palin delivered a policy address in which she called for a "clean break" from the Bush administration's energy policies. She said the White House plans rely too much on importing foreign oil. {T]he Alaska governor said the recent drop in gas and oil prices shouldn't deter consumers and lawmakers from seeking alternative energy sources. She cast energy independence as a national security issue and said dependence on Middle East oil leaves the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorists.
"We not only provide wealth to the sponsors of terror, we provide high-value targets to the terrorists themselves," Palin said. "Across the world are pipelines, refineries, transit routes and terminals for the oil we rely on. And al-Qaida terrorists know where they are."
Despite Palin's attempt to distance McCain's energy policies from those of the Bush administration, the Arizona senator's energy plan largely mirrors the priorities President Bush has pushed for eight years, especially more domestic production.
Palin spoke after touring Xunlight Corp., one of a handful of solar technology startup companies in Toledo, a struggling industrial city in this swing state. The city's leaders are hoping the solar companies will create jobs to replace some of those lost by downsizing in the auto industry.
But she made only a passing reference to solar power in her speech and instead renewed her call for more drilling in U.S. coastal waters. She repeated her signature anthem, "Drill, baby, drill," which seemed to fall a bit flat on the audience even as it's become a popular chant at her rallies.
excerpted from a story at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_
Palin delivered a policy address in which she called for a "clean break" from the Bush administration's energy policies. She said the White House plans rely too much on importing foreign oil. {T]he Alaska governor said the recent drop in gas and oil prices shouldn't deter consumers and lawmakers from seeking alternative energy sources. She cast energy independence as a national security issue and said dependence on Middle East oil leaves the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorists.
"We not only provide wealth to the sponsors of terror, we provide high-value targets to the terrorists themselves," Palin said. "Across the world are pipelines, refineries, transit routes and terminals for the oil we rely on. And al-Qaida terrorists know where they are."
Despite Palin's attempt to distance McCain's energy policies from those of the Bush administration, the Arizona senator's energy plan largely mirrors the priorities President Bush has pushed for eight years, especially more domestic production.
Palin spoke after touring Xunlight Corp., one of a handful of solar technology startup companies in Toledo, a struggling industrial city in this swing state. The city's leaders are hoping the solar companies will create jobs to replace some of those lost by downsizing in the auto industry.
But she made only a passing reference to solar power in her speech and instead renewed her call for more drilling in U.S. coastal waters. She repeated her signature anthem, "Drill, baby, drill," which seemed to fall a bit flat on the audience even as it's become a popular chant at her rallies.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Rural voters beging to embrace the Obama/Biden ticket
Oct. 23rd, 2008 | 11:51 am
One thing I've always liked about rural voters...their bullshit detector is pretty sensitive. It seems they've figured out Sarah Palin. Too bad it took them so long to turn sour on W--we wouldn't be in the mess we currently find ourselves in.
Posted on Yahoo News:
Obama, McCain neck-and-neck for rural vote: poll
By Charles Abbott Charles Abbott
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – After trailing by 10 points in U.S. rural areas, Democrat Barack Obama is neck-and-neck with Republican John McCain among rural voters in 13 swing states, a potentially key group for winning the White House, according to a poll released on Thursday.
Obama was supported by 46 percent and McCain by 45 percent of 841 likely voters surveyed from October 5-21, as U.S. financial turmoil deepened, according to the poll commissioned by the nonpartisan Center for Rural Strategies in Whitesburg, Kentucky.
A month ago, the poll showed McCain led 51-41. This time, respondents said Obama would do better than McCain on the economy, taxes and "the financial crisis in the country."
Nearly 20 percent of Americans live in rural areas. They tend to be social and fiscal conservatives. President George W. Bush won rural districts nationwide by 19 points in 2004.
The poll showed rural voters have cooled from their initial enthusiasm for Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president. Forty percent view her favorably and 42 percent unfavorably, compared to a 48-33 split in September. Obama, McCain and Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee for vice president, had higher ratings than Palin in the new poll.
McCain led Obama 53-43 on the question of who would do better in handling the war in Iraq. In the earlier poll, he held a 56-37 advantage as well as a lopsided lead on who would do the best job on taxes and a 3-point lead on the economy.
The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percent. It interviewed likely voters in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.
Posted on Yahoo News:
Obama, McCain neck-and-neck for rural vote: poll
By Charles Abbott Charles Abbott
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – After trailing by 10 points in U.S. rural areas, Democrat Barack Obama is neck-and-neck with Republican John McCain among rural voters in 13 swing states, a potentially key group for winning the White House, according to a poll released on Thursday.
Obama was supported by 46 percent and McCain by 45 percent of 841 likely voters surveyed from October 5-21, as U.S. financial turmoil deepened, according to the poll commissioned by the nonpartisan Center for Rural Strategies in Whitesburg, Kentucky.
A month ago, the poll showed McCain led 51-41. This time, respondents said Obama would do better than McCain on the economy, taxes and "the financial crisis in the country."
Nearly 20 percent of Americans live in rural areas. They tend to be social and fiscal conservatives. President George W. Bush won rural districts nationwide by 19 points in 2004.
The poll showed rural voters have cooled from their initial enthusiasm for Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president. Forty percent view her favorably and 42 percent unfavorably, compared to a 48-33 split in September. Obama, McCain and Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee for vice president, had higher ratings than Palin in the new poll.
McCain led Obama 53-43 on the question of who would do better in handling the war in Iraq. In the earlier poll, he held a 56-37 advantage as well as a lopsided lead on who would do the best job on taxes and a 3-point lead on the economy.
The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percent. It interviewed likely voters in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Denver cops = no class
Oct. 2nd, 2008 | 12:11 pm
Police Union Shirt Pokes Fun At DNC Protesters
Denver Officers Given T-Shirt To Commemorate Event
POSTED: 6:35 am MDT September 26, 2008
DENVER -- The Denver police union is selling T-shirts that poke fun at protesters at last month's Democratic National Convention, but the main target isn't laughing.
The back of the shirts reads, "We get up early to beat the crowds" and "2008 DNC," and has a caricature of a police officer holding a baton.
The front has the number 68 with a slash through it, a reference to the Recreate 68 Coalition, which organized several demonstrations during the convention.
Recreate 68 organizer Glenn Spagnuolo called the shirt appalling and tasteless.
Spagnuolo released a written statement Thursday saying members of the police union "clearly have no respect for the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution."
Detective Nick Rogers, a member of the Police Protective Association board, said police often issue T-shirts to commemorate big events.
Rogers said each Denver officer was given one of the shirts free and others are on sale for $10 each at police union offices.
He said the union expects to sell about 2,000 of them.
Rogers said he hadn't received any previous complaints about the shirts.
Police arrested 154 people before and during the Democratic convention. There were few reports of violence.
In once incident, an officer was videotaped pushing a protester to the ground with his baton and telling her, "Back up, b----."
The district attorney declined to prosecute the officer, saying the woman had disobeyed warnings to back away and had grabbed the officer's baton.
We called this riot cop "Mini Me"
A protester being dragged off...some were released into the crowd, others were booked at a mobile processing station set up on a side street away from the chaos
Link | Leave a comment {1} | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
this one's a gem
Sep. 30th, 2008 | 09:18 am
An AFL promotional ad from the early 90s directed at the US and UK:
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
This is pure genius
Sep. 23rd, 2008 | 02:48 pm
Dear American:
I need to ask you to support an urgent secret business relationship with a
transfer of funds of great magnitude.
I am Ministry of the Treasury of the Republic of America. My country has
had crisis that has caused the need for large transfer of funds of 800
billion dollars US. If you would assist me in this transfer, it would be
most profitable to you.
I am working with Mr. Phil Gram, lobbyist for UBS, who will be my
replacement as Ministry of the Treasury in January. As a Senator, you may
know him as the leader of the American banking deregulation movement in
the 1990s. This transactin is 100% safe.
This is a matter of great urgency. We need a blank check. We need the
funds as quickly as possible. We cannot directly transfer these funds in
the names of our close friends because we are constantly under
surveillance. My family lawyer advised me that I should look for a
reliable and trustworthy person who will act as a next of kin so the funds
can be transferred.
Please reply with all of your bank account, IRA and college fund account
numbers and those of your children and grandchildren to
wallstreetbailout@treasury.gov so that we may transfer your commission for
this transaction. After I receive that information, I will respond with
detailed information about safeguards that will be used to protect the
funds.
Yours Faithfully Minister of Treasury Paulson
I need to ask you to support an urgent secret business relationship with a
transfer of funds of great magnitude.
I am Ministry of the Treasury of the Republic of America. My country has
had crisis that has caused the need for large transfer of funds of 800
billion dollars US. If you would assist me in this transfer, it would be
most profitable to you.
I am working with Mr. Phil Gram, lobbyist for UBS, who will be my
replacement as Ministry of the Treasury in January. As a Senator, you may
know him as the leader of the American banking deregulation movement in
the 1990s. This transactin is 100% safe.
This is a matter of great urgency. We need a blank check. We need the
funds as quickly as possible. We cannot directly transfer these funds in
the names of our close friends because we are constantly under
surveillance. My family lawyer advised me that I should look for a
reliable and trustworthy person who will act as a next of kin so the funds
can be transferred.
Please reply with all of your bank account, IRA and college fund account
numbers and those of your children and grandchildren to
wallstreetbailout@treasury.gov so that we may transfer your commission for
this transaction. After I receive that information, I will respond with
detailed information about safeguards that will be used to protect the
funds.
Yours Faithfully Minister of Treasury Paulson
Link | Leave a comment {3} | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
No
Sep. 15th, 2008 | 09:59 am
Author David Foster Wallace found dead
Sun Sep 14, 7:12 PM ET
David Foster Wallace, the writer best known for his critically acclaimed 1996 novel "Infinite Jest," was found dead at his home in Claremont, California, police said.
The Claremont Police Department said Wallace's wife had called them on Friday night, saying she returned home to find her 46-year-old husband had hanged himself.
Wallace, who taught creative writing at Pomona College, gained national prominence with "Infinite Jest," named by Time magazine as one of the 100 best English-language novels published since 1923.
The novel, which runs to 1,000-plus pages and takes place in a drug rehabilitation center and an elite tennis academy, won acclaim from Time for its "painfully funny dialogue and Wallace's endlessly rich ruminations and speculations on addiction, entertainment, art, life and, of course, tennis."
Wallace's other works include the short story collections "Girl With Curious Hair" and "Brief Interviews with Hideous Men," as well as a collection of essays, "A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again."
"David was, of course, a great figure in American letters," Gary Kates, dean of Pomona College, said in a statement.
"We knew when we hired him what an accomplished writer he was, but what we had no right to expect was what a brilliant teacher he would turn out to be ... that's what was so unusual about David, and that's what marks the extent of our loss."
Sun Sep 14, 7:12 PM ET
David Foster Wallace, the writer best known for his critically acclaimed 1996 novel "Infinite Jest," was found dead at his home in Claremont, California, police said.
The Claremont Police Department said Wallace's wife had called them on Friday night, saying she returned home to find her 46-year-old husband had hanged himself.
Wallace, who taught creative writing at Pomona College, gained national prominence with "Infinite Jest," named by Time magazine as one of the 100 best English-language novels published since 1923.
The novel, which runs to 1,000-plus pages and takes place in a drug rehabilitation center and an elite tennis academy, won acclaim from Time for its "painfully funny dialogue and Wallace's endlessly rich ruminations and speculations on addiction, entertainment, art, life and, of course, tennis."
Wallace's other works include the short story collections "Girl With Curious Hair" and "Brief Interviews with Hideous Men," as well as a collection of essays, "A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again."
"David was, of course, a great figure in American letters," Gary Kates, dean of Pomona College, said in a statement.
"We knew when we hired him what an accomplished writer he was, but what we had no right to expect was what a brilliant teacher he would turn out to be ... that's what was so unusual about David, and that's what marks the extent of our loss."
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
the media vetting has begun
Sep. 14th, 2008 | 08:53 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/po
Hope you enjoyed your 15 minutes of fame, Sarah Palin.
Hope you enjoyed your 15 minutes of fame, Sarah Palin.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
a sad day for us tall, slow ruckmen...our inspiration has called it quits
Sep. 13th, 2008 | 08:00 am
In the past few years of following the AFL closely, I've always had a particular interest in Peter Everitt, because he plays my position, wears my jersey number, and sort of looks like me both on and off the field (granted, he's got me in the tattoo department). After friday's game he hung up his footy boots, too old and slow at 34, eight years my junior.
Game speeds past old Spida
By Jenny McAsey
September 13, 2008
AFTER 16 seasons and 291 games, Peter Everitt found footy had finally passed him by. The former St Kilda and Hawthorn player, one of the AFL's most colourful characters, ended his career a shattered man after Sydney Swans were trounced by Western Bulldogs.
Everitt knew better than anyone the game was up and after the game he announced his retirement.
It was all summed up in the space of five minutes at the start of the third quarter. First Everitt was stuck to the spot as Bulldogs ruckman Will Minson, 11 years his junior, wiggled out of his attempted tackle, bounced the ball and ran away like a bratty kid stealing the ball in the playground.
A minute later Everitt, 34, was outpointed and beaten in a marking contest by skinny 19-year-old Josh Hill, who has played 270 fewer games.
It was the beginning of a nightmare third term for the Swans, as the Bulldogs kicked five goals to Sydney's six behinds to turn a four-point half-time lead into an unassailable 32-point break heading into the final term.
It is unfair to single out Everitt after the Swans were blown away by the Dogs' band of rampant runners, but his departure will put an exclamation mark on a regeneration that has already begun with Kieren Jack, Jarred Moore and Patrick Veszpremi this year, but must gather speed if Sydney is to be a force in 2009.
The Bulldogs had run away from Sydney in the second term in their two previous meetings this season, and remarkably the game followed the same pattern, albeit it was a third term blow-out.
Three weeks ago Sydney coach Paul Roos, after a dismal showing against Collingwood, said his players had been to the well so often that it had run dry. The Swans' era of success was declared over as they limped towards the finals.
But in a tribute to his extraordinary man management and the leadership of evergreen players such as Brett Kirk and Leo Barry, over the next two weeks, during wins against Brisbane and the Kangaroos, Sydney was able to defy the doomsayers and spend a couple of weeks in the sun.
But on Friday night, their weaknesses were exposed. The Bulldogs matched the Swans in the hard-ball department and then showed that speed and swift ball movement matter too.
Game speeds past old Spida
By Jenny McAsey
September 13, 2008
AFTER 16 seasons and 291 games, Peter Everitt found footy had finally passed him by. The former St Kilda and Hawthorn player, one of the AFL's most colourful characters, ended his career a shattered man after Sydney Swans were trounced by Western Bulldogs.
Everitt knew better than anyone the game was up and after the game he announced his retirement.
It was all summed up in the space of five minutes at the start of the third quarter. First Everitt was stuck to the spot as Bulldogs ruckman Will Minson, 11 years his junior, wiggled out of his attempted tackle, bounced the ball and ran away like a bratty kid stealing the ball in the playground.
A minute later Everitt, 34, was outpointed and beaten in a marking contest by skinny 19-year-old Josh Hill, who has played 270 fewer games.
It was the beginning of a nightmare third term for the Swans, as the Bulldogs kicked five goals to Sydney's six behinds to turn a four-point half-time lead into an unassailable 32-point break heading into the final term.
It is unfair to single out Everitt after the Swans were blown away by the Dogs' band of rampant runners, but his departure will put an exclamation mark on a regeneration that has already begun with Kieren Jack, Jarred Moore and Patrick Veszpremi this year, but must gather speed if Sydney is to be a force in 2009.
The Bulldogs had run away from Sydney in the second term in their two previous meetings this season, and remarkably the game followed the same pattern, albeit it was a third term blow-out.
Three weeks ago Sydney coach Paul Roos, after a dismal showing against Collingwood, said his players had been to the well so often that it had run dry. The Swans' era of success was declared over as they limped towards the finals.
But in a tribute to his extraordinary man management and the leadership of evergreen players such as Brett Kirk and Leo Barry, over the next two weeks, during wins against Brisbane and the Kangaroos, Sydney was able to defy the doomsayers and spend a couple of weeks in the sun.
But on Friday night, their weaknesses were exposed. The Bulldogs matched the Swans in the hard-ball department and then showed that speed and swift ball movement matter too.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
McCain up, for the moment
Sep. 8th, 2008 | 03:10 pm
Reading today's polls has been depressing, so I figured it's the right time to bring back this gem for another run:
Link | Leave a comment {1} | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
I just couldn't bear to see this drop of my blog's front page
Aug. 7th, 2008 | 10:10 am
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
make amends
Aug. 7th, 2008 | 10:02 am
no need for an intro--this speaks for itself...
Vote for Bush? Pay up
Did you help put America's worst prez into power? Time to make amends
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Sure, you could start with an open-palmed apology, a profoundly contrite on-your-knees sort of thing, maybe an open letter in your local paper or a heartfelt speech at your next dinner party whereby you stumble though some sort of "I don't know what the hell I was thinking" or "I must've been blind" or "Wow, that mescaline sure was potent" type of defense for your unfortunate and reprehensible choices.
But the fact is, that's not really gonna cut it.
Of course, you could do the obvious thing and cast your vote in November for Barack Obama, but even I know that's probably asking too much — and besides, all signs indicate a potential landslide for Obama anyway, given the unprecedented worldwide rush of positive energy, the tremendous cosmic craving for intelligent and new and ingenuous, coupled with a deep undercurrent of karmic revulsion toward the wonky, bloodthirsty agenda of grandpa McCain.
So then, what can you do, all you increasingly humiliated, disillusioned, deeply mistaken Bush voters? How can you, having hopefully realized by now the violent error of your ways, take steps both small and large to try and make amends for shoving Dubya down the throat of the world, for your tiny but oh so poisonous contribution to the worst and most demeaning eight years in modern American politics?
First, let's be clear: As tempting as it is, I do not suggest some grand humiliating gesture, some sweetly demeaning spectacle whereby you must dye your hair blue and run naked through the streets of rural Alabama waving a rainbow flag and carrying a bottle of fresh stem cells as you suddenly claim to care deeply about blue fin tuna and Brazilian rain forests and honest sex ed for teens. Unless you really want to.
Nor do I suggest, say, an immediate "Bush tax," whereby everything you ever purchase from now until you die will cost 10 percent more than it does for liberals, and every cent of it will go to the arts, and schools, and women's rights, and alternative fuels, and GLAAD, et al and so on. Don't get me wrong, it's a damn fine idea, just a bit unrealistic.
Let's keep it simple. The next time, say, gay marriage comes up in conversation, perhaps you say, well, you know, I don't really get the gay thing at all and certainly my anxiety about it is rooted somewhere too deep and sad to explore right now, but I've been doing a bit of actual homework (!), and it turns out that homosexuality is simply all over the animal kingdom, across all sorts of species, and animals seem to enjoy it for both survival and pleasure. Who knew?
In other words, nature seems to approve. And isn't nature merely God in a nice grass suit?
As your baffled pals pick their jaws up off the floor, you can add: Hell, science is pretty much proving homosexuality is biological anyway, not a "lifestyle" choice at all. And gays in the military? Hell, if the badass Israeli army can handle it, the United States sure as hell can, am I right? Now, pass me a stogie and let's go blast some canned pheasant with a shotgun.
See? It doesn't have to all be liberal tofu gobbledygook. I know that waking up to the contemptible wrongheadedness that was your support of the BushCo neocon agenda must be painful. Baby steps, honey. Baby steps.
Speaking of the military, maybe it's time you openly acknowledge that you actually can support our troops, enjoy your righteous sense of patriotism, think America is the world's greatest kick-ass whateveryoulike, and yet not think it's OK that a secretive and bloodthirsty cadre of inept leaders has wasted trillions of dollars and thousands of young American lives in a failed grab for power and petroleum and megalomania. You think?
Which brings up another point: It's also perfectly OK to make whatever you do sound like something you thought up, all by yourself. Yes, progressives have been urging you to raise your awareness of things humane and open-minded for eons. No matter. You can take all the credit. We're generous that way.
Let's say you do something as simple as trade in your massive American gas hog for a Mini Cooper. And now you find you really love your little German-engineered wonder, its handling and efficiency and joyous kick. Perfectly fine to hide your newfound refinement and tell your macho friends that you did it because you hate giving all that oil dough to those greedy Saudi sheiks — and what's more, now you can take corners at 50 mph without rolling over and bursting into flame. Cool, no?
While you're at it, mention to your buds that the steaks they're eating are actually locally raised and grass-fed, not because you give a good goddamn about humane animal treatment or toxic industrial feedlots (though you really should), but because the meat tastes better and costs less and you wanna save some dough to, you know, buy more guns and porn. Hey, whatever works.
But don't stop there. Might as well tell your homies to throw their food scraps in your new compost bin, too, not because you care about garbage, but because you learned how to cultivate some great topsoil in which to grow your heirloom tomatoes for your famous spaghetti sauce for NASCAR night. Look at you! Actually caring about the health and the environment, but pretending not to! Hey, it's a start.
How about secretly beginning to note the overarching brilliance of, say, Dan Savage as well as the nauseating rancidity of Ann Coulter? Or stick a Cabela's catalog cover over an issue of Mother Jones or the Nation, and read it with an open mind and a bottle of premium chilled sake? Or realize, with increasing sense of shame, that across just about every social and environmental issue, the hippies were pretty much right about everything, no matter what you thought of the clothes and the music and the hair? Now you're getting it.
Don't forget the money. Feel free to make a series of large, anonymous donations to the Sierra Club, or a local battered women's shelter, or even Planned Parenthood. Trust me when I say, the odds are shockingly good your own daughter/son/wife will be incredibly grateful for their wise and informed counsel someday soon, if she or he hasn't been already.
You get the idea? Really, compared with the disgusting levels of damage wrought by your support of the dark armies of Bush, these suggestions are nothing. You actually owe quite a bit more. OK, a lot more. Incalculable, really.
But for now, let's be reasonable. After all, the sooner you realize that the world is, in fact, not America's bitch, that it's actually a living, humming organism, interconnected and interdependent in ways and on levels no organized religion or fear-based neocon political agenda can possibly comprehend, much less bomb into submission, well, the sooner we can get our collective s— together and move the human experiment forward once again.
And after what you've put us all through, it's the very least you could do.
Vote for Bush? Pay up
Did you help put America's worst prez into power? Time to make amends
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Sure, you could start with an open-palmed apology, a profoundly contrite on-your-knees sort of thing, maybe an open letter in your local paper or a heartfelt speech at your next dinner party whereby you stumble though some sort of "I don't know what the hell I was thinking" or "I must've been blind" or "Wow, that mescaline sure was potent" type of defense for your unfortunate and reprehensible choices.
But the fact is, that's not really gonna cut it.
Of course, you could do the obvious thing and cast your vote in November for Barack Obama, but even I know that's probably asking too much — and besides, all signs indicate a potential landslide for Obama anyway, given the unprecedented worldwide rush of positive energy, the tremendous cosmic craving for intelligent and new and ingenuous, coupled with a deep undercurrent of karmic revulsion toward the wonky, bloodthirsty agenda of grandpa McCain.
So then, what can you do, all you increasingly humiliated, disillusioned, deeply mistaken Bush voters? How can you, having hopefully realized by now the violent error of your ways, take steps both small and large to try and make amends for shoving Dubya down the throat of the world, for your tiny but oh so poisonous contribution to the worst and most demeaning eight years in modern American politics?
First, let's be clear: As tempting as it is, I do not suggest some grand humiliating gesture, some sweetly demeaning spectacle whereby you must dye your hair blue and run naked through the streets of rural Alabama waving a rainbow flag and carrying a bottle of fresh stem cells as you suddenly claim to care deeply about blue fin tuna and Brazilian rain forests and honest sex ed for teens. Unless you really want to.
Nor do I suggest, say, an immediate "Bush tax," whereby everything you ever purchase from now until you die will cost 10 percent more than it does for liberals, and every cent of it will go to the arts, and schools, and women's rights, and alternative fuels, and GLAAD, et al and so on. Don't get me wrong, it's a damn fine idea, just a bit unrealistic.
Let's keep it simple. The next time, say, gay marriage comes up in conversation, perhaps you say, well, you know, I don't really get the gay thing at all and certainly my anxiety about it is rooted somewhere too deep and sad to explore right now, but I've been doing a bit of actual homework (!), and it turns out that homosexuality is simply all over the animal kingdom, across all sorts of species, and animals seem to enjoy it for both survival and pleasure. Who knew?
In other words, nature seems to approve. And isn't nature merely God in a nice grass suit?
As your baffled pals pick their jaws up off the floor, you can add: Hell, science is pretty much proving homosexuality is biological anyway, not a "lifestyle" choice at all. And gays in the military? Hell, if the badass Israeli army can handle it, the United States sure as hell can, am I right? Now, pass me a stogie and let's go blast some canned pheasant with a shotgun.
See? It doesn't have to all be liberal tofu gobbledygook. I know that waking up to the contemptible wrongheadedness that was your support of the BushCo neocon agenda must be painful. Baby steps, honey. Baby steps.
Speaking of the military, maybe it's time you openly acknowledge that you actually can support our troops, enjoy your righteous sense of patriotism, think America is the world's greatest kick-ass whateveryoulike, and yet not think it's OK that a secretive and bloodthirsty cadre of inept leaders has wasted trillions of dollars and thousands of young American lives in a failed grab for power and petroleum and megalomania. You think?
Which brings up another point: It's also perfectly OK to make whatever you do sound like something you thought up, all by yourself. Yes, progressives have been urging you to raise your awareness of things humane and open-minded for eons. No matter. You can take all the credit. We're generous that way.
Let's say you do something as simple as trade in your massive American gas hog for a Mini Cooper. And now you find you really love your little German-engineered wonder, its handling and efficiency and joyous kick. Perfectly fine to hide your newfound refinement and tell your macho friends that you did it because you hate giving all that oil dough to those greedy Saudi sheiks — and what's more, now you can take corners at 50 mph without rolling over and bursting into flame. Cool, no?
While you're at it, mention to your buds that the steaks they're eating are actually locally raised and grass-fed, not because you give a good goddamn about humane animal treatment or toxic industrial feedlots (though you really should), but because the meat tastes better and costs less and you wanna save some dough to, you know, buy more guns and porn. Hey, whatever works.
But don't stop there. Might as well tell your homies to throw their food scraps in your new compost bin, too, not because you care about garbage, but because you learned how to cultivate some great topsoil in which to grow your heirloom tomatoes for your famous spaghetti sauce for NASCAR night. Look at you! Actually caring about the health and the environment, but pretending not to! Hey, it's a start.
How about secretly beginning to note the overarching brilliance of, say, Dan Savage as well as the nauseating rancidity of Ann Coulter? Or stick a Cabela's catalog cover over an issue of Mother Jones or the Nation, and read it with an open mind and a bottle of premium chilled sake? Or realize, with increasing sense of shame, that across just about every social and environmental issue, the hippies were pretty much right about everything, no matter what you thought of the clothes and the music and the hair? Now you're getting it.
Don't forget the money. Feel free to make a series of large, anonymous donations to the Sierra Club, or a local battered women's shelter, or even Planned Parenthood. Trust me when I say, the odds are shockingly good your own daughter/son/wife will be incredibly grateful for their wise and informed counsel someday soon, if she or he hasn't been already.
You get the idea? Really, compared with the disgusting levels of damage wrought by your support of the dark armies of Bush, these suggestions are nothing. You actually owe quite a bit more. OK, a lot more. Incalculable, really.
But for now, let's be reasonable. After all, the sooner you realize that the world is, in fact, not America's bitch, that it's actually a living, humming organism, interconnected and interdependent in ways and on levels no organized religion or fear-based neocon political agenda can possibly comprehend, much less bomb into submission, well, the sooner we can get our collective s— together and move the human experiment forward once again.
And after what you've put us all through, it's the very least you could do.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
the olympics are nearly here!
Aug. 5th, 2008 | 10:35 am
Here are a few things we can expect to see...
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
sheesh...
Aug. 1st, 2008 | 04:05 pm
Dude had access to shit-tons of anthrax.
Dude had a history of making death threats.
Dude had a history of taking a deadly agent outside a containment zone.
It took 7 years to (almost) nab this guy?
No wonder we haven't caught Bin Laden yet.
----------
Suspect in anthrax-letter deaths kills himself
By MATT APUZZO and LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writers 13 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Anthrax-laced letters that killed five people and severely rattled the post-9/11 nation may have been part of an Army scientist's warped plan to test his cure for the deadly toxin, officials said Friday. The brilliant but troubled scientist committed suicide this week, knowing prosecutors were closing in.
The sudden naming of scientist Bruce E. Ivins as the top — and perhaps only — suspect in the anthrax attacks marks the latest bizarre twist in a case that has confounded the FBI for nearly seven years. Last month, the Justice Department cleared Ivins' colleague, Steven Hatfill, who had been wrongly suspected in the case, and paid him $5.8 million.
Ivins worked at the Army's biological warfare labs at Fort Detrick, Md., for 18 years until his death on Tuesday. He was one of the government's leading scientists researching vaccines and cures for anthrax exposure. But he also had a long history of homicidal threats, according to papers filed last week in local court by a social worker.
The letters contained anthrax powder were sent on the heels of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and turned up at congressional offices, newsrooms and elsewhere, leaving a deadly trail through post offices on the way. The powder killed five and sent numerous victims to hospitals and caused near panic in many locations.
Workers in protective garb that made them look like space men decontaminated U.S. Capitol buildings after anthrax letters were discovered there. Major postal substations were closed for years. Newsrooms were checked all over after anthrax letters were mailed to offices in Florida and New York.
The Justice Department said Friday only that "substantial progress has been made in the investigation." The statement did not identify Ivins.
However, several U.S. officials said prosecutors were focusing on the 62-year-old Ivins and planned to seek a murder indictment and the death penalty. Authorities were investigating whether Ivins, who had complained about the limits of testing anthrax drugs on animals, had released the toxin to test the treatment on humans.
The officials all discussed the continuing investigation on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
The Justice Department is expected to decide within days whether to close the "Amerithrax" investigation now that its main target is dead. If the case remains open, that could indicate there still are other suspects.
Ivins' attorney asserted the scientist's innocence and said he had cooperated with investigators for more than a year.
"We are saddened by his death, and disappointed that we will not have the opportunity to defend his good name and reputation in a court of law," said Paul F. Kemp.
Ivins died Tuesday at Frederick Memorial Hospital in Maryland. Relatives told The Associated Press that he killed himself. Kemp said his client's death was the result of the government's "relentless pressure of accusation and innuendo."
For more than a decade, Ivins had worked to develop an anthrax vaccine that was effective even in cases where different strains of anthrax were mixed — a situation that made vaccines ineffective — according to federal documents reviewed by the AP. In 2003, he shared the Decoration for Exceptional Civilian Service for his work on the anthrax vaccine. The award is the highest honor given to Defense Department civilian employees.
Ivins conducted numerous anthrax studies, including one that complained about the limited supply of monkeys available for testing. The study also said animal testing couldn't accurately show how humans would respond to anthrax treatment.
The Fort Detrick laboratory and its specialized scientists for years have been at the center of the FBI's investigation of the anthrax mailings. In late June, the government exonerated Hatfill, whose name has for years had been associated with the attacks. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft called him a "person of interest" in 2002.
Investigators also had noticed Ivins' unusual behavior at Fort Detrick in the six months following the anthrax mailings. He conducted unauthorized testing for anthrax spores outside containment areas at the infectious disease research unit where he worked, according to an internal report. But the focus stayed on Hatfill.
Ivins' friends, colleagues and court documents paint a picture of a flourishing scientist with an emotionally unstable side. Maryland court documents show he recently received psychiatric treatment and was ordered to stay away from a woman he was accused of stalking and threatening to kill.
Social worker Jean C. Duley filed handwritten court documents last week saying she was preparing to testify before a grand jury. She said Ivins would be charged with five capital murders.
"Client has a history dating to his graduate days of homicidal threats, plans and actions towards therapists," Duley said, adding that his psychiatrist had described him as homicidal and sociopathic.
Authorities have been watching Ivins for some time. His brother, Tom Ivins, said federal agents questioned the scientist about a year and a half ago. Neighbors said FBI agents in cars with tinted windows conducted surveillance on his home. A colleague, Henry S. Heine, said that over the past year, he and others on their team had testified before a federal grand jury in Washington that has been investigating the anthrax mailings.
On July 10, police responded to Fort Detrick to speak with Ivins. He was ultimately removed from his job and taken to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation because of concern he had become a danger to himself or others.
Dude had a history of making death threats.
Dude had a history of taking a deadly agent outside a containment zone.
It took 7 years to (almost) nab this guy?
No wonder we haven't caught Bin Laden yet.
----------
Suspect in anthrax-letter deaths kills himself
By MATT APUZZO and LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writers 13 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Anthrax-laced letters that killed five people and severely rattled the post-9/11 nation may have been part of an Army scientist's warped plan to test his cure for the deadly toxin, officials said Friday. The brilliant but troubled scientist committed suicide this week, knowing prosecutors were closing in.
The sudden naming of scientist Bruce E. Ivins as the top — and perhaps only — suspect in the anthrax attacks marks the latest bizarre twist in a case that has confounded the FBI for nearly seven years. Last month, the Justice Department cleared Ivins' colleague, Steven Hatfill, who had been wrongly suspected in the case, and paid him $5.8 million.
Ivins worked at the Army's biological warfare labs at Fort Detrick, Md., for 18 years until his death on Tuesday. He was one of the government's leading scientists researching vaccines and cures for anthrax exposure. But he also had a long history of homicidal threats, according to papers filed last week in local court by a social worker.
The letters contained anthrax powder were sent on the heels of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and turned up at congressional offices, newsrooms and elsewhere, leaving a deadly trail through post offices on the way. The powder killed five and sent numerous victims to hospitals and caused near panic in many locations.
Workers in protective garb that made them look like space men decontaminated U.S. Capitol buildings after anthrax letters were discovered there. Major postal substations were closed for years. Newsrooms were checked all over after anthrax letters were mailed to offices in Florida and New York.
The Justice Department said Friday only that "substantial progress has been made in the investigation." The statement did not identify Ivins.
However, several U.S. officials said prosecutors were focusing on the 62-year-old Ivins and planned to seek a murder indictment and the death penalty. Authorities were investigating whether Ivins, who had complained about the limits of testing anthrax drugs on animals, had released the toxin to test the treatment on humans.
The officials all discussed the continuing investigation on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
The Justice Department is expected to decide within days whether to close the "Amerithrax" investigation now that its main target is dead. If the case remains open, that could indicate there still are other suspects.
Ivins' attorney asserted the scientist's innocence and said he had cooperated with investigators for more than a year.
"We are saddened by his death, and disappointed that we will not have the opportunity to defend his good name and reputation in a court of law," said Paul F. Kemp.
Ivins died Tuesday at Frederick Memorial Hospital in Maryland. Relatives told The Associated Press that he killed himself. Kemp said his client's death was the result of the government's "relentless pressure of accusation and innuendo."
For more than a decade, Ivins had worked to develop an anthrax vaccine that was effective even in cases where different strains of anthrax were mixed — a situation that made vaccines ineffective — according to federal documents reviewed by the AP. In 2003, he shared the Decoration for Exceptional Civilian Service for his work on the anthrax vaccine. The award is the highest honor given to Defense Department civilian employees.
Ivins conducted numerous anthrax studies, including one that complained about the limited supply of monkeys available for testing. The study also said animal testing couldn't accurately show how humans would respond to anthrax treatment.
The Fort Detrick laboratory and its specialized scientists for years have been at the center of the FBI's investigation of the anthrax mailings. In late June, the government exonerated Hatfill, whose name has for years had been associated with the attacks. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft called him a "person of interest" in 2002.
Investigators also had noticed Ivins' unusual behavior at Fort Detrick in the six months following the anthrax mailings. He conducted unauthorized testing for anthrax spores outside containment areas at the infectious disease research unit where he worked, according to an internal report. But the focus stayed on Hatfill.
Ivins' friends, colleagues and court documents paint a picture of a flourishing scientist with an emotionally unstable side. Maryland court documents show he recently received psychiatric treatment and was ordered to stay away from a woman he was accused of stalking and threatening to kill.
Social worker Jean C. Duley filed handwritten court documents last week saying she was preparing to testify before a grand jury. She said Ivins would be charged with five capital murders.
"Client has a history dating to his graduate days of homicidal threats, plans and actions towards therapists," Duley said, adding that his psychiatrist had described him as homicidal and sociopathic.
Authorities have been watching Ivins for some time. His brother, Tom Ivins, said federal agents questioned the scientist about a year and a half ago. Neighbors said FBI agents in cars with tinted windows conducted surveillance on his home. A colleague, Henry S. Heine, said that over the past year, he and others on their team had testified before a federal grand jury in Washington that has been investigating the anthrax mailings.
On July 10, police responded to Fort Detrick to speak with Ivins. He was ultimately removed from his job and taken to a hospital for psychiatric evaluation because of concern he had become a danger to himself or others.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Darkwoods
Jul. 25th, 2008 | 10:29 am
This article upped the ante on a number of my personal fantasies:
-I want to be a duke
-I want to be a guy who owns a 550 square mile estate, regardless of any royal titles I might possess
-I want to be the guy whose job it is to manage an estate like this
-I want to work on conservation purchase projects like this someday
-I want to go to Darkwoods and hang out with the lichen-chewing caribou.
Biodiverse estate bought by conservation group
David Hogben
Vancouver Sun
Friday, July 25, 2008
A German duke's Cold War refuge has been turned into the largest single private conservation project ever undertaken by a non-profit organization in Canada.
The Nature Conservancy of Canada announced in Vancouver Thursday that a 550-square-mile (1,425-square-km) property in southeastern B.C.'s South Selkirk Mountains has been purchased as a conservation area.
NCC president and CEO John Lounds told reporters he had taken an aerial survey of the property and "it was breathtaking."
The property, named Darkwoods by the Duke of Wuerttemberg, features old-growth forests, subalpine meadows, placid valley bottoms, creeks and shoreline along Kootenay Lake and is home to a thriving herd of caribou.
Lounds said the biodiversity on the property is spectacular.
He described one spot where it is possible to reach out and touch a Western red cedar with one hand and a Ponderosa pine with the other. The western red cedar grows best in cool, moist climates while the Ponderosa pine thrives in dry, hot locations.
"Darkwoods is a living laboratory the size of some small countries," Lounds said.
About half the property still has its old-growth forests while parts of the other half have been sustainably logged.
Christian Schadendorf, a forest economist who managed the property for the duke, explained how the property was bought to relieve Cold War anxieties -- the duke could have moved to B.C. if Germany became dangerous for aristocrats -- and then was logged according to German sustainability principles and practices.
He said the duke, now in his 70s, had not visited the property for years.
"The problem is, he quit flying long-distance flights when smoking was banned on aircraft."
Recently, logging has been restricted to trees infected with mountain pine beetle. Areas logged were promptly reforested and unimproved seeds were planted.
Biologist Trevor Kinley said in an interview from his home in Invermere that he was elated by the news of the purchase.
"With this purchase it looks like there is some real hope for this herd of caribou."
He said the herd is one of only a few in B.C. that has seen an increase in numbers. It has increased in size from around 20 to about 46 mountain caribou.
Kinley said the animals in the Darkwoods area are a unique eco-group that depends on old-growth forests for survival.
Unlike other caribou, during winter they feed exclusively on arboreal lichen or Old Man's Beard, which hangs from tree branches. Most other caribou feed by eating vegetation underneath snow.
The Nature Conservancy said the purchase price and the endowment fund necessary to maintain the area require $125 million. The federal government put $25 million toward the cost of the project, but Lounds said another $35 million is needed.
The group is looking for contributions from people who want to support the project.
The property is valued at about $100 million, but the Nature Conservancy would not reveal the purchase price.
-I want to be a duke
-I want to be a guy who owns a 550 square mile estate, regardless of any royal titles I might possess
-I want to be the guy whose job it is to manage an estate like this
-I want to work on conservation purchase projects like this someday
-I want to go to Darkwoods and hang out with the lichen-chewing caribou.
Biodiverse estate bought by conservation group
David Hogben
Vancouver Sun
Friday, July 25, 2008
A German duke's Cold War refuge has been turned into the largest single private conservation project ever undertaken by a non-profit organization in Canada.
The Nature Conservancy of Canada announced in Vancouver Thursday that a 550-square-mile (1,425-square-km) property in southeastern B.C.'s South Selkirk Mountains has been purchased as a conservation area.
NCC president and CEO John Lounds told reporters he had taken an aerial survey of the property and "it was breathtaking."
The property, named Darkwoods by the Duke of Wuerttemberg, features old-growth forests, subalpine meadows, placid valley bottoms, creeks and shoreline along Kootenay Lake and is home to a thriving herd of caribou.
Lounds said the biodiversity on the property is spectacular.
He described one spot where it is possible to reach out and touch a Western red cedar with one hand and a Ponderosa pine with the other. The western red cedar grows best in cool, moist climates while the Ponderosa pine thrives in dry, hot locations.
"Darkwoods is a living laboratory the size of some small countries," Lounds said.
About half the property still has its old-growth forests while parts of the other half have been sustainably logged.
Christian Schadendorf, a forest economist who managed the property for the duke, explained how the property was bought to relieve Cold War anxieties -- the duke could have moved to B.C. if Germany became dangerous for aristocrats -- and then was logged according to German sustainability principles and practices.
He said the duke, now in his 70s, had not visited the property for years.
"The problem is, he quit flying long-distance flights when smoking was banned on aircraft."
Recently, logging has been restricted to trees infected with mountain pine beetle. Areas logged were promptly reforested and unimproved seeds were planted.
Biologist Trevor Kinley said in an interview from his home in Invermere that he was elated by the news of the purchase.
"With this purchase it looks like there is some real hope for this herd of caribou."
He said the herd is one of only a few in B.C. that has seen an increase in numbers. It has increased in size from around 20 to about 46 mountain caribou.
Kinley said the animals in the Darkwoods area are a unique eco-group that depends on old-growth forests for survival.
Unlike other caribou, during winter they feed exclusively on arboreal lichen or Old Man's Beard, which hangs from tree branches. Most other caribou feed by eating vegetation underneath snow.
The Nature Conservancy said the purchase price and the endowment fund necessary to maintain the area require $125 million. The federal government put $25 million toward the cost of the project, but Lounds said another $35 million is needed.
The group is looking for contributions from people who want to support the project.
The property is valued at about $100 million, but the Nature Conservancy would not reveal the purchase price.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Here come the Euro-cars
Jul. 24th, 2008 | 11:08 am
About freaking time...
Stung by $8.7B loss, Ford unveils plan for reshaping fleet (07/24/2008)
Josh Voorhees, Greenwire reporter
Ford Motor Co. announced plans today to reshape its fleet in a bid to lure customers shunning gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs in favor of smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles.
Three of the company's North American truck plants will begin shifting to car production before the end of the year and by 2012 will begin selling six small European models in the United States, Ford executives said in a conference call with investors and reporters.
Ford said it posted an $8.7 billion second-quarter loss, $1.3 billion of that in North America. Ford's June sales fell 27.8 percent for its U.S. fleet and 35.4 percent for trucks. On the year, domestic sales have fallen 14 percent, worse than the 10.1 percent industry average.
"Conditions in North America have changed drastically in a very short amount of time," said Mark Fields, president of Ford's Americas division. So, he said, Ford's future offerings must match or exceed the fuel efficiency of its competitors.
The company said it will also look to merge its European and U.S. platforms in an attempt to offset losses from the falling sales of trucks and SUVs.
Ford's shift, which was not unexpected, signifies a stark transformation for an automaker whose profits have long been driven by truck sales. Led by the F-150 -- capable of towing 11,000 pounds but getting just 14 miles a gallon in the city -- the automaker's signature F-series has been an exemplar of a class of automobiles that once routinely turned large profits for their makers.
The F-series topped the nation's best-seller list for more than two decades before being surpassed this May by the Honda Civic and its 40 mpg fuel efficiency. The pickup fell to fifth, behind the Civic and three other passenger cars. Earlier this year, Ford announced it would delay the launch of the new F-150 by two months to give dealers more time to clear unsold models.
Stung by $8.7B loss, Ford unveils plan for reshaping fleet (07/24/2008)
Josh Voorhees, Greenwire reporter
Ford Motor Co. announced plans today to reshape its fleet in a bid to lure customers shunning gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs in favor of smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles.
Three of the company's North American truck plants will begin shifting to car production before the end of the year and by 2012 will begin selling six small European models in the United States, Ford executives said in a conference call with investors and reporters.
Ford said it posted an $8.7 billion second-quarter loss, $1.3 billion of that in North America. Ford's June sales fell 27.8 percent for its U.S. fleet and 35.4 percent for trucks. On the year, domestic sales have fallen 14 percent, worse than the 10.1 percent industry average.
"Conditions in North America have changed drastically in a very short amount of time," said Mark Fields, president of Ford's Americas division. So, he said, Ford's future offerings must match or exceed the fuel efficiency of its competitors.
The company said it will also look to merge its European and U.S. platforms in an attempt to offset losses from the falling sales of trucks and SUVs.
Ford's shift, which was not unexpected, signifies a stark transformation for an automaker whose profits have long been driven by truck sales. Led by the F-150 -- capable of towing 11,000 pounds but getting just 14 miles a gallon in the city -- the automaker's signature F-series has been an exemplar of a class of automobiles that once routinely turned large profits for their makers.
The F-series topped the nation's best-seller list for more than two decades before being surpassed this May by the Honda Civic and its 40 mpg fuel efficiency. The pickup fell to fifth, behind the Civic and three other passenger cars. Earlier this year, Ford announced it would delay the launch of the new F-150 by two months to give dealers more time to clear unsold models.
Link | Leave a comment {1} | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
Idaho Statesman article on wildfires
Jul. 22nd, 2008 | 11:52 am
July 20, 2008
Are we wasting billions fighting wildfires?
We spend billions attacking almost every wildfire, but scientists say that's bad for the forest, can put firefighters in unnecessary danger and doesn't protect communities as well- or as cheaply - as we now know how to do.
A wall of fire barreled through the forest with a jet-engine roar near Secesh Meadows last August, and local fire chief Cris Bent knew his work was about to be tested.
Flames danced atop lodgepole pines, smoke darkened the sky, and residents of the tiny mountain hamlet north of McCall prepared for the worst. Just a month earlier, a forest fire had burned 254 homes near Lake Tahoe and the 2007 fire season appeared ready to claim its next community.
But as the raging East Zone Complex fire reached the cluster of loosely-spaced homes, the flames dropped to the ground, crackling and smoldering. The fire crept right up to doorsteps. But without the intense flames that spurred the fire just moments before, no homes burned - a feat fire managers attributed largely to Bent's push to clear flammable brush from around houses in the community.
"It just blew through the area," Bent said. "We were well prepared."
The town's ability to withstand a frontal assault by a major wildfire demonstrates what fire behavior experts have been saying for more than a decade. Clearing brush and other flammables and requiring fireproof roofs will protect houses even in an intense wildfire - without risking firefighters' lives.
More provocatively, the research suggests that fighting fires on public lands to protect homes is ineffective and, in the long run, counter-productive.
It is also far more expensive.
Federal agencies still put out nearly every fire that starts - of the around 80,000 blazes each year, just 327 are generally allowed to burn. Out of the 9.8 million acres that burned across the country last year, only about 430,000 acres burned without suppression, in what managers call "wildland fire use" blazes.
Fire suppression costs have risen 6.5 times in a decade to $1.86 billion last year. At the same time, funding to make private homes and communities safer has dropped by more than 30 percent since 2001 - to less than $80 million in 2008 - and more cuts are proposed for 2009.
This is the paradox of wildland fire management in America: Most scientists and fire managers agree that fire is a healthy and necessary part of the forest, and that fighting these blazes serves only to build up fuels and boost the size and frequency of catastrophic fires.
But federal agencies keep attacking almost every wildfire, many deep in the woods, and the rising cost of suppression diverts money from protecting homes and communities - which can be saved with the right, and often inexpensive, measures.
The result: Billions of taxpayer dollars are spent on what most experts agree is the wrong approach. The lives of firefighters are put in danger on fires that don't need to be fought. And homes are left vulnerable, their fate often decided by wind direction and the availability of federal firefighters to protect private property.
A TALE OF TWO TOWNS
Down the road from Secesh Meadows in Warren, thick black smoke had blotted out the intense midsummer sun, leaving the historic mining town in a premature dusk.
The choking clouds seemed to burst, but instead of rain, blackened pine needles and glowing embers fell from the sky, hurled by the raging wildfire's 300-foot flames. Unlike Secesh, Warren had no program to clear brush from around the log cabins that dot the town.
And last August, embers ignited three homes and sparked fires that destroyed them.
Like many Warren residents, Butch Cooper, who owns the Winter Inn, blames the Forest Service and what he sees as the agency's unwillingness to put out fires. Cooper, who has lived in Warren on and off for more than 20 years, would like to see more logging in the forest and faster fire suppression.
"There is no management of the forest - it's just: destroy it," he said.
He reflects the long-held conventional wisdom in much of the West: The federal government turned its back on good forest management when it started to phase out public lands logging, and that's what is creating more large fires.
Michael Dubrasich, a Lebanon, Ore., consulting forester, is critical of forest policy, too. The federal government is wasting timber and backing away from its historic role of protecting private property.
"The fires that start on unkempt federal land and spread to private property are irresponsible spillovers perpetrated upon American citizens by their own government," Dubrasich said.
But Bent didn't leave the responsibility to protect his community to others.
In 2006, he used a $60,000 federal grant to remove brush and trees from around Secesh Meadows houses - a tactic known in the wildfire management community as firewise.
He was able to convince only 37 percent of the residents to participate in the program, though some who declined already had cleared their property. His effort, along with federal firefighters and volunteers, was enough to save the town.
But firefighters had to devote extra effort - meaning increased danger and taxpayer cost - to protecting homes that had not been prepared, Bent said.
"That really personally annoyed me a great deal," Bent said. "We're risking the lives of young men and women to protect a home the homeowner could have treated at their leisure."
THE SCIENCE OF FIRE BEHAVIOR
The fires in Secesh Meadows and Warren didn't surprise Jack Cohen, the U.S. Forest Service's top expert on how fires burn homes.
Most of the public and even many firefighters and fire managers think of the fire racing through the canopy of the forest -the intense "crown fire" - as the main threat to homes.
But the reality is that most crown fires lose their intensity when they reach the edge of a community. Trees are spread more thinly in residential areas, intersected by roads and driveways and lawns, so the fires tend to drop to the ground, where they burn with less intensity and are easier to manage than the blazing crown fires.
Cohen has studied dozens of fires across the nation since the 1990s, and he sees the same behavior every time.
Most homes are ignited by flying embers, thrown as far as a mile and a half ahead of the crown fire. Or they catch fire when the ground fire reaches brush and trees within 100 feet of the buildings.
The homes themselves burn especially hot - and can send off their own embers to start new fires - but often the trees around the burned homes are left with their green canopies intact.
That tells Cohen that there is no "wall of fire" blazing through a community and consuming everything in its path.
Instead, he says, it shows the fires can be fought within the communities - and that raging fires on public lands don't need to be stopped in the wilderness to protect private property.
Cohen's research demonstrates that requiring forest homeowners to have a fireproof roof, to clear their gutters of pine needles and to remove bushes and trees within 100 feet of a home is far less expensive and more effective for protecting homes than fighting fires on public lands.
Cutting trees to thin the forest around communities - the preferred method of treating federal lands to protect homes - reduces airborne embers that ignite many house fires. But that tactic is still more expensive and less effective than clearing directly around homes.
"We have the ability to be compatible with fire," Cohen said. "But we mostly choose not to be. ... Our expectations, desires, and perceptions are inconsistent with the natural reality."
LITTLE INCENTIVE TO CHANGE
Cohen's conclusions are sound, said David Olson, a Boise National Forest official who has more than 30 years of experience fighting and managing wildfires. But to rely solely on firewise preparation assumes that every homeowner in a fire-prone community will follow all of Cohen's instructions and not cut corners.
It is human nature, Olson said, to not prepare ahead of time.
"We will do nothing until a crisis occurs," he said.
The responsibility for taking preventive steps lies with local fire departments like Bent's and the homeowners themselves.
But federal firefighters have made protecting homes on private property one of their their highest priorities, below only keeping firefighters and residents safe.
In 2004, $535 million of the federal agencies' $1 billion firefighting budget went to protecting homes and property, according to a 2006 audit by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's office of inspector general.
The federal program, the inspector general said, "removes incentives for landowners to take responsibility for their own protection and ensure their homes are constructed and landscaped in ways that reduce wildfire risks."
Bent said that goes against Americans' traditional view of personal responsibility.
"As homeowners I think we have an obligation to take care of our places and ourselves," Bent said.
Are we wasting billions fighting wildfires?
We spend billions attacking almost every wildfire, but scientists say that's bad for the forest, can put firefighters in unnecessary danger and doesn't protect communities as well- or as cheaply - as we now know how to do.
A wall of fire barreled through the forest with a jet-engine roar near Secesh Meadows last August, and local fire chief Cris Bent knew his work was about to be tested.
Flames danced atop lodgepole pines, smoke darkened the sky, and residents of the tiny mountain hamlet north of McCall prepared for the worst. Just a month earlier, a forest fire had burned 254 homes near Lake Tahoe and the 2007 fire season appeared ready to claim its next community.
But as the raging East Zone Complex fire reached the cluster of loosely-spaced homes, the flames dropped to the ground, crackling and smoldering. The fire crept right up to doorsteps. But without the intense flames that spurred the fire just moments before, no homes burned - a feat fire managers attributed largely to Bent's push to clear flammable brush from around houses in the community.
"It just blew through the area," Bent said. "We were well prepared."
The town's ability to withstand a frontal assault by a major wildfire demonstrates what fire behavior experts have been saying for more than a decade. Clearing brush and other flammables and requiring fireproof roofs will protect houses even in an intense wildfire - without risking firefighters' lives.
More provocatively, the research suggests that fighting fires on public lands to protect homes is ineffective and, in the long run, counter-productive.
It is also far more expensive.
Federal agencies still put out nearly every fire that starts - of the around 80,000 blazes each year, just 327 are generally allowed to burn. Out of the 9.8 million acres that burned across the country last year, only about 430,000 acres burned without suppression, in what managers call "wildland fire use" blazes.
Fire suppression costs have risen 6.5 times in a decade to $1.86 billion last year. At the same time, funding to make private homes and communities safer has dropped by more than 30 percent since 2001 - to less than $80 million in 2008 - and more cuts are proposed for 2009.
This is the paradox of wildland fire management in America: Most scientists and fire managers agree that fire is a healthy and necessary part of the forest, and that fighting these blazes serves only to build up fuels and boost the size and frequency of catastrophic fires.
But federal agencies keep attacking almost every wildfire, many deep in the woods, and the rising cost of suppression diverts money from protecting homes and communities - which can be saved with the right, and often inexpensive, measures.
The result: Billions of taxpayer dollars are spent on what most experts agree is the wrong approach. The lives of firefighters are put in danger on fires that don't need to be fought. And homes are left vulnerable, their fate often decided by wind direction and the availability of federal firefighters to protect private property.
A TALE OF TWO TOWNS
Down the road from Secesh Meadows in Warren, thick black smoke had blotted out the intense midsummer sun, leaving the historic mining town in a premature dusk.
The choking clouds seemed to burst, but instead of rain, blackened pine needles and glowing embers fell from the sky, hurled by the raging wildfire's 300-foot flames. Unlike Secesh, Warren had no program to clear brush from around the log cabins that dot the town.
And last August, embers ignited three homes and sparked fires that destroyed them.
Like many Warren residents, Butch Cooper, who owns the Winter Inn, blames the Forest Service and what he sees as the agency's unwillingness to put out fires. Cooper, who has lived in Warren on and off for more than 20 years, would like to see more logging in the forest and faster fire suppression.
"There is no management of the forest - it's just: destroy it," he said.
He reflects the long-held conventional wisdom in much of the West: The federal government turned its back on good forest management when it started to phase out public lands logging, and that's what is creating more large fires.
Michael Dubrasich, a Lebanon, Ore., consulting forester, is critical of forest policy, too. The federal government is wasting timber and backing away from its historic role of protecting private property.
"The fires that start on unkempt federal land and spread to private property are irresponsible spillovers perpetrated upon American citizens by their own government," Dubrasich said.
But Bent didn't leave the responsibility to protect his community to others.
In 2006, he used a $60,000 federal grant to remove brush and trees from around Secesh Meadows houses - a tactic known in the wildfire management community as firewise.
He was able to convince only 37 percent of the residents to participate in the program, though some who declined already had cleared their property. His effort, along with federal firefighters and volunteers, was enough to save the town.
But firefighters had to devote extra effort - meaning increased danger and taxpayer cost - to protecting homes that had not been prepared, Bent said.
"That really personally annoyed me a great deal," Bent said. "We're risking the lives of young men and women to protect a home the homeowner could have treated at their leisure."
THE SCIENCE OF FIRE BEHAVIOR
The fires in Secesh Meadows and Warren didn't surprise Jack Cohen, the U.S. Forest Service's top expert on how fires burn homes.
Most of the public and even many firefighters and fire managers think of the fire racing through the canopy of the forest -the intense "crown fire" - as the main threat to homes.
But the reality is that most crown fires lose their intensity when they reach the edge of a community. Trees are spread more thinly in residential areas, intersected by roads and driveways and lawns, so the fires tend to drop to the ground, where they burn with less intensity and are easier to manage than the blazing crown fires.
Cohen has studied dozens of fires across the nation since the 1990s, and he sees the same behavior every time.
Most homes are ignited by flying embers, thrown as far as a mile and a half ahead of the crown fire. Or they catch fire when the ground fire reaches brush and trees within 100 feet of the buildings.
The homes themselves burn especially hot - and can send off their own embers to start new fires - but often the trees around the burned homes are left with their green canopies intact.
That tells Cohen that there is no "wall of fire" blazing through a community and consuming everything in its path.
Instead, he says, it shows the fires can be fought within the communities - and that raging fires on public lands don't need to be stopped in the wilderness to protect private property.
Cohen's research demonstrates that requiring forest homeowners to have a fireproof roof, to clear their gutters of pine needles and to remove bushes and trees within 100 feet of a home is far less expensive and more effective for protecting homes than fighting fires on public lands.
Cutting trees to thin the forest around communities - the preferred method of treating federal lands to protect homes - reduces airborne embers that ignite many house fires. But that tactic is still more expensive and less effective than clearing directly around homes.
"We have the ability to be compatible with fire," Cohen said. "But we mostly choose not to be. ... Our expectations, desires, and perceptions are inconsistent with the natural reality."
LITTLE INCENTIVE TO CHANGE
Cohen's conclusions are sound, said David Olson, a Boise National Forest official who has more than 30 years of experience fighting and managing wildfires. But to rely solely on firewise preparation assumes that every homeowner in a fire-prone community will follow all of Cohen's instructions and not cut corners.
It is human nature, Olson said, to not prepare ahead of time.
"We will do nothing until a crisis occurs," he said.
The responsibility for taking preventive steps lies with local fire departments like Bent's and the homeowners themselves.
But federal firefighters have made protecting homes on private property one of their their highest priorities, below only keeping firefighters and residents safe.
In 2004, $535 million of the federal agencies' $1 billion firefighting budget went to protecting homes and property, according to a 2006 audit by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's office of inspector general.
The federal program, the inspector general said, "removes incentives for landowners to take responsibility for their own protection and ensure their homes are constructed and landscaped in ways that reduce wildfire risks."
Bent said that goes against Americans' traditional view of personal responsibility.
"As homeowners I think we have an obligation to take care of our places and ourselves," Bent said.