story
stringlengths 117
4.55k
| questions
sequence | answers
sequence | summary
stringlengths 65
465
|
|---|---|---|---|
Editor's note: Joy Behar's new nightly show debuts Tuesday, September 29 on HLN at 9 PM ET. Joy Behar says Ukranian officials are wrong to try to block Elton John from adopting a 14-month-old boy. NEW YORK (CNN) -- On a recent tour of a Ukrainian orphanage, Elton John and his partner met Lev, a 14-month old HIV-positive boy. They immediately fell in love with the child, but their possible bid to adopt the adorable tiny dancer was rejected by Yuriy Pavlenko, Ukraine's Family, Youth and Sports Minister. Mr. Pavlenko, here are some tips about family, youth and sports. Family doesn't mean a huddle of orphans sharing a few soiled mattresses, it's not youth if you die of AIDS before you reach kindergarten, and wrestling over dinner scraps is not a sport. But that could be Lev's fate now, because the Ukrainian government said Elton and his beau David Furnish are too old to adopt the boy. It sounds like the real reason is they're too gay. John and Furnish tied the knot in 2005, becoming one of Britain's first gay civil unions, but Ukraine doesn't recognize gay unions. Ukrainian Orthodox Church spokesman Father Georgy Gulyaev called Elton John a sinner and said, "thank God it's impossible under Ukrainian law for [him] to adopt a child." Apparently in the Ukraine, God's No. 1 priority is preventing gay couples from giving sick kids a better life. God would never want something like that to happen. Father Gulyaev said homosexuality "represents the dead end of human development." That's odd, I thought the dead end of human development was represented by 14th century thinking like his. This guy's head is stuck in the Dark Ages. He hasn't even progressed to the Middle Ages yet. Some conservative religious leaders like to harp about the "damage" to families done by gay marriage, as if traditional marriage is so perfect. Since many of them have taken vows of celibacy, they've never witnessed firsthand the damage dinner with the in-laws can cause (one of the few advantages of the celibate life, I guess). There are even a few married Bible-thumpers spending their time trying to keep sex out of our lives -- yet they talk about sex more than anyone! Sex is usually the first and only factor they consider when judging -- I mean, when "dispensing enlightenment upon" -- others. Watch Joy Behar speak about adoption » Sure, Elton John may be gay, but he's also a renowned musician, a celebrated humanitarian, and has been knighted by the Queen of England. In fact, for some people he is the Queen of England. Plus, there's no downside to gay adoption. In the United States, organizations like the National Adoption Center, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics all agree that having homosexual parents does not negatively affect children. But you know what does negatively affect children? Growing up with no parents. So now 14-month-old Lev is stuck in some depressing orphanage that makes Guantanamo Bay look like the presidential suite at the Waldorf. He'll likely end up in foster homes and -- if he lives long enough -- maybe he can turn into a bitter, vodka-swilling drunk. All because the Ukrainian government won't let him be adopted by two loving gay parents who are fabulously rich and want to give him a home with the best healthcare available, dressed in Versace jammies and cashmere Huggies. Not to mention all the play dates with Brangelina's kids. Let's hope Sir Elton finds a different, more tolerant country willing to let him be a poor child's loving father. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Joy Behar. | [
"what is elton john thinking about?",
"who rejected the idea ofadoption?",
"do experts say there is a downside to gay adoption?",
"Who is Elton John's partner?",
"Who thought about adopitng a 14-month-old boy?",
"Who rejected the idea of adoption?",
"What was the objection to the adoption?"
] | [
[
"adopting a 14-month-old boy."
],
[
"Yuriy Pavlenko,"
],
[
"no"
],
[
"David Furnish"
],
[
"Elton John"
],
[
"Yuriy Pavlenko, Ukraine's Family, Youth and Sports Minister."
],
[
"Elton and his beau David Furnish are too old"
]
] | Joy Behar: Elton John, partner mulled adopting 14-month-old boy .
She says Ukrainian officials were wrong to reject idea of adoption .
She says their real objection seemed to be to a gay couple adopting a child .
Behar: Experts say there's no downside to gay adoption . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. He is completing a book on the history of national security politics since World War II, to be published by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely on current events.
Julian Zelizer says it's not enough for Republicans to oppose Obama's plans, they must offer their own ideas.
PRINCETON, New Jersey (CNN) -- One of the best Marx Brothers movies, "Horse Feathers," played in movie theaters at the height of the Great Depression in 1932.
In the film, the comedian Groucho Marx played the new president of Huxley College, Quincy Adams Wagstaff.
During one of the most memorable scenes, Groucho introduces himself to faculty and students by singing about his philosophy of governance: "Your proposition may be good/But let's have one thing understood/ Whatever it is, I'm against it!/And even when you've changed it or condensed it, I'm against it/ I'm opposed to it/On general principle. I'm opposed to it."
If Republicans want to rebuild their party after the calamity of 2008, the party leadership needs to avoid the Quincy Adams Wagstaff approach to politics.
When Obama proposed his economic recovery bill last week, the first words to come out of House Minority Leader's John Boehner's mouth sounded a bit like Wagstaff.
With the economy imploding and the international economic crisis worsening, Boehner said: "Right now, given the concerns that we have over the size of the package and all of the spending in this package, we don't think it's going to work. And so if it's the plan that I see today, put me down in the 'no' column."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has been more restrained in his response, leaving open the door to compromise.
If Boehner is simply acting as Dr. No to get a better deal, Republicans can come out of the negotiations over the economic recovery bill as partners, planting the seeds for a new Republican approach toward dealing with economic matters.
But if Boehner's plan is for his party to act as an oppositional force -- trying to block, delay and prevent legislative action -- then the GOP could find itself in big trouble.
If the Republicans don't agree with Obama's approach, given the severity of the crisis, they need to offer an alternative rather than just sitting still.
To be sure, there is the possibility that if the economy continues to deteriorate after a bill has passed and the public loses faith in Obama, the House GOP could reap the benefit from their opposition. They could say "we told you so." But even that would be a high-risk maneuver, particularly given the state of public opinion about the Republican Party.
Even if a bill passes and the economy continues to struggle, voters would be looking at a Republican Party that didn't have anything better to offer. The public likes hard-working politicians.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal ideas didn't always work -- some like the National Recovery Act were downright failures -- but voters valued a president who tried to offer arguments about how to end the crisis and who rolled up his sleeves to make the nation better.
The election of 2008 revealed that the Republican Party lacks the kind of big ideas that Ronald Reagan used in 1980 to bring the conservative movement into power. The various factions of the conservative movement came together around the themes of anti-communism, deregulation and tax cuts.
Reagan didn't just sell tax cuts for the wealthy as good in themselves, but connected them to supply-side economics, which claimed that cuts would stimulate investment, generate economic growth and ultimately bring more revenue into the coffers of Treasury.
Even after the Soviet Union collapsed, Republican leaders found ideas to sell their movement to the public. Newt Gingrich and a cohort of young Republicans focused on sharp attacks about the dangers of government intervention and corruption of government.
For a short time it seemed that under George W. Bush, the war on terrorism would | [
"what did zelizer say",
"who is in trouble",
"What did Zelizer say GOP should do if it opposes the stimulus plan?",
"what happens if gop opposes",
"who says republicans are in trouble?",
"what are house republicans doing?"
] | [
[
"it's not enough for Republicans to oppose Obama's plans, they must offer their own ideas."
],
[
"GOP"
],
[
"they must offer their own ideas."
],
[
"could find itself in big trouble."
],
[
"Julian Zelizer"
],
[
"want to rebuild their party"
]
] | Julian Zelizer: House Republicans are signaling they will oppose stimulus plan .
He says Republicans are in trouble if they simply act as an opposition force .
Democrats gained sway for decades by seeking to improve the economy, he says .
Zelizer: If GOP opposes stimulus plan, it should offer alternatives of its own . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. He is the co-editor of "Rightward Bound: Making America Conservative in the 1970s" and is completing a book on the history of national-security politics since World War II, to be published by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely on current events. Julian Zelizer says Obama and Congress must decide whether to rein in presidential power. PRINCETON, New Jersey (CNN) -- Executive power has been one of the defining characteristics of President George W. Bush's administration. President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and many members of the White House pushed to expand executive power -- as much as any specific domestic or foreign policy -- from the beginning of the administration. The Bush administration formed in a direct conversation with the presidential politics of the 1970s. Several members of the Bush administration came of professional age working in the Nixon and Ford administrations. They watched an assertive Congress respond to the Watergate scandal by revitalizing legislative power through the War Powers Act of 1973, the Budget Reform of 1974, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the Independent Counsel Act in 1978. The Bush administration thought vesting Congress with so much power was dangerous, because it saw the legislative branch as inefficient. Building on efforts since President Ronald Reagan to reverse the congressional reforms of the 1970s, the current White House spent enormous political energy, before and after 9/11, trying to reclaim power for the executive branch. The expansion of presidential power is not unique to the Bush administration. It began early in the 20th century and, despite some exceptional periods such as the 1970s, continued steadily throughout. But in several respects, this expansion was bigger in scale and scope than under previous presidents. For example, as a way to agree to legislation without agreeing to follow the intention of Congress, Bush issued statements when he signed bills -- doing so far more frequently than preceding presidents. When Congress passed a bill banning the use of torture in December 2005, Bush added a signing statement allowing him to bypass the law in his role as Commander-in-Chief. Bush also used executive orders to achieve policy objectives without obtaining congressional consent. Most of the president's national security programs were also conducted under high levels of secrecy and sometimes ignored rules such as those spelled out by FISA. Even when Republicans controlled Congress between 2002 and 2006, the president barely consulted with the leadership. After the 2000 elections, many Republican moderates were optimistic they would have more power than ever because the White House would be forced to court their vote in the evenly divided Senate. But they were wrong. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island said he was disillusioned early in the Bush administration when Cheney met with a group of Republican moderates. Cheney simply listed the bills the administration would pursue -- such as canceling U.S. support for the International Criminal Court and cutting taxes -- and informed them the president expected their vote. The chances for restoring a better balance of power remain unclear. There was a notable silence on the issue during the 2008 presidential campaign. Congressional Democrats and President-elect Barack Obama have been extremely critical of Bush's muscular approach to the executive branch. But though Obama has promised to reverse a number of executive decisions made by Bush, it is hard to tell how far he will go. Most important, it is extremely rare in the postwar period for presidents to voluntarily relinquish power. Democrats in Congress might not be willing to do to Obama what they did to Richard Nixon or even Jimmy Carter in the 1970s. After decades of Republican rule, Democrats now believe they have an opportunity to build a new majority. In addition, in a time of true crisis there will be less incentive to challenge the institutional prerogatives of their president. But Congress and the White House must do something to reverse the trends of the past eight years. We need an executive branch that is accountable and a Congress that is active. So what can be done? The first solution is informal. The White House must alter the dynamic | [
"who must decide whether to strengthen legislative role?",
"What did julian zelizer say?",
"whose role was diminished during the bush administration?"
] | [
[
"Obama and Congress"
],
[
"Obama and Congress must decide whether to rein in presidential power."
],
[
"Lincoln Chafee"
]
] | Julian Zelizer: Bush administration sought to rebuild presidential power .
He says they wanted to reverse Watergate-inspired reforms from the 1970s .
Zelizer says Congress' role was diminished during the Bush administration .
He says Obama, Congress must decide whether to strengthen legislative role . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. His new book, "Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security -- From World War II to the War on Terrorism," will be published in December by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely about current events.
President Obama is taking a huge step in his presidency. After weeks of careful deliberation, the president has sided with military officials who have been pushing for an escalation of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Explaining his objectives and exit strategy, Obama is expected to announce that he will be sending 30,000 troops, and possibly more, into the region.
With this decision, Obama inches closer to becoming a wartime president. Even though the White House insists that they will continue to work hard on their domestic agenda, historically, presidents who become involved in protracted ground wars find that their presidencies are defined by their military conflicts. The politics that surround a military operation play an enormous role in the political success or failure of an administration.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi and many congressional Democrats realize the human and political risks that come from this war. As news broke of President Obama's decision, Pelosi said: "the American people believe that if something is in our national security interest, we have to be able to afford it. That doesn't mean that we hold everything else" stagnant because of those operations.
But war sucks the political oxygen out of almost any presidency. There have been several modern presidents who started their term with an ambitious domestic vision and who ended up with their presidencies totally consumed by war.
President Harry Truman, who served from 1945 to 1953, pulled off a historic upset in his reelection bid against Thomas Dewey in 1948. In the campaign, Truman castigated a "do-nothing" Congress.
When he returned to the White House after the election, Truman fought for an ambitious domestic agenda in 1949 and 1950, which he called the Fair Deal, which included national health care, civil rights, fair housing and more.
While a conservative coalition of southern Democrats and Republicans in Congress defeated most of his proposals, it was the Korean War, which began in the summer of 1950, that brought down his presidency.
When the military operations against North Korea bogged down into a stalemate by 1951, Republicans ripped into the administration for refusing to use enough air power against the communists.
Truman, whose approval ratings plummeted to 23 percent by 1952, decided that he should not run for reelection. "If we had been less trusting, if we had been less soft and weak, there would probably have been no war in Korea!" Republican candidate and military hero Gen. Dwight Eisenhower said on the campaign trail.
Republicans focused their campaign on Korea, Communism and corruption. The Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson, lost; Republicans gained control of Congress.
President Lyndon Johnson was on the verge of becoming a transformative president in the winter of 1965. Since taking office, Johnson had presided over the passage of a sweeping body of domestic measures unequaled by almost any president in American history other than Franklin Roosevelt. His accomplishments included Medicare and Medicaid, federal education assistance, civil rights and voting rights, environmental regulations, immigration reform and much more.
Yet all those accomplishments seemed to disappear in the political psyche after the "Americanization" of the war in the spring of 1965, when Johnson authorized a vast increase of ground troops to Vietnam. By 1968, public opinion had turned against the war, with anti-war protesters organizing against "Johnson's War."
In the history books, Vietnam has swamped our memory of Johnson's presidency and eclipsed much of what he accomplished in those early years. "That bitch of a war," Johnson lamented toward the end of his life, "killed the lady I really loved -- the Great Society."
Most recently, there was the experience of President George W. Bush. During the 2000 campaign and in the early months of his presidency, Bush pushed for a type of "compassionate conservatism" that sought to extend | [
"Who became a wartime president?",
"What is Zelizer's job?",
"Who becomes a wartime president?",
"What do wars tend to swallow up?",
"Which other presidents were weakened by war?",
"Who was weakened by war?"
] | [
[
"Obama"
],
[
"Woodrow Wilson School."
],
[
"Obama"
],
[
"the political oxygen out of almost any presidency."
],
[
"Harry Truman,"
],
[
"Truman"
]
] | Julian E. Zelizer: The Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson .
Zelizer says both aimed high and worked skillfully with congressional leaders .
A president can shape legislation without dictating the details, professor says .
Zelizer: Obama has gotten big results from Congress by keeping leaders on his side . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. His new book, "Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security -- From World War II to the War on Terrorism," will be published this fall by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely about current events. Julian E. Zelizer says it's vital that new media provide support for journalism that strives for objectivity. (CNN) -- Last week, Sen. John Kerry convened a discussion of the troubled state of journalism in America by way of a hearing by the Senate Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet. In Kerry's home state of Massachusetts, the Boston Globe is barely surviving. Several major metro papers have closed down, and there are indications that many more could soon follow. Experts have been warning in recent months that much of the newspaper industry may not survive. While the end of the metro newspaper would constitute a huge blow to journalism and the political system, realistically there might be nothing that we can do. The popularity of news on the Web and the potential of mobile devices such as the Kindle makes it difficult to see how we can sustain news in print -- unless electronic delivery can produce enough revenue to support the cost of newspaper staffs. Sometimes technological innovations and consumer preferences cause changes that are irreversible. The industry has seen other important shifts in the way that Americans receive their news, such as the advent of television news in the 1950s and 1960s. But the real issue is not whether we can save the newspapers, but how we can create the best Internet news system possible. As Kerry said in his opening statement: "There also is the important question of whether online journalism will sustain the values of professional journalism, the way the newspaper industry has." The first challenge we must address has to do with editorial control. A great danger of blog-based news is that information disseminates instantly with very little editorial supervision. On too many sites, information goes right from writer to reader. In the heyday of daily newspapers and network news, the news cycle was slow, lasting over the course of a day. There was a considerable amount of time for reporters, editors, and producers to check and verify information before it reached the public eye. Those days are gone. The result is too often that incorrect information circulates quickly. It will be crucial that television news networks continue to maintain Web sites which have the financial capital to support an editorial and production staff and that the newspapers which do survive find ways to expand their online operations, turning them into commercially lucrative ventures. Only they can finance the kind of infrastructure that good journalism requires. The second challenge we face has to do with polarization. Most studies of politics show that polarization has increased significantly throughout American politics. The media are both a product and cause of this political phenomenon. In Congress, there are fewer centrists in either party who are willing to compromise. Unfortunately, we have seen a similar phenomenon in the news business. During the 1990s, FOX News promoted a style of journalism framed within a clear conservative perspective. In recent years, liberals have mimicked these efforts. The nightly broadcasts of MSNBC have offered a counterpoint on the left, with television shows offering news from a liberal perspective. Bloggers on the Web follow this model as well. Not believing that the norm of objectivity is attainable, they prefer to present their political views openly and tend to be much more partisan in how they interpret world events. Moreover, readers and viewers tend to go for their information to sites and channels where they can see their own perspectives confirmed. It will be difficult to counteract these kinds of trends since they are so deep-rooted in American politics. But at a minimum, someone needs to fund reporters who keep covering the story and who at least strive to achieve as much objectivity as possible. There are many Web sites that do undertake this mission, but it will be essential that there is continued and expanded support for reporting as the metro newspapers slowly vanish | [
"What is endangered by rise of new media?",
"What did Sen. John Kerry hold a hearing on?",
"What did Zelizser say about newspapers?",
"What does john kerry say?",
"What does Zelizer say?"
] | [
[
"objectivity."
],
[
"a discussion of the troubled state of journalism in America"
],
[
"it's vital that new media provide support for journalism that strives for objectivity."
],
[
"\"There also is the important question of whether online journalism will sustain the values of professional journalism, the way the newspaper industry has.\""
],
[
"it's vital that new media provide support for journalism that strives for objectivity."
]
] | Julian E. Zelizer: The Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson .
Zelizer says both aimed high and worked skillfully with congressional leaders .
A president can shape legislation without dictating the details, professor says .
Zelizer: Obama has gotten big results from Congress by keeping leaders on his side . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. His new book, "Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security -- From World War II to the War on Terrorism," will be published this fall by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely about current events. Julian Zelizer says some of President Obama's political vulnerabilities have started to emerge. PRINCETON, New Jersey (CNN) -- June has been rough for President Obama. After experiencing enormous success during his first months in office, some of his political vulnerabilities have started to emerge. As Republicans begin to think about the 2010 midterm elections and moderate Democrats decide how they should vote on Obama's most ambitious initiative, health care, the White House must prevent these weaknesses from becoming debilitating. The first vulnerability is the tension between the left and center of the Democratic Party. Since his election, President Obama has struggled to navigate the divisions that exist between the liberal base of the party, who were the core of his early support, and moderate Democrats, who were also instrumental to his victory. At first, the administration relied on good will and political capital from the election to overcome conflicts, such as when Obama agreed to reductions in the size of the economic stimulus package to placate the conservative Democrats and some Republicans despite the objection of progressives. But the tensions are becoming more pronounced and more difficult to resolve. The president has disappointed gay rights activists for not fulfilling promises they thought he had made on the issue of gay rights. Last week, they expressed their frustration with the Department of Justice's legal brief supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, a law that prohibits same-sex partners from receiving marriage benefits and protects states that don't recognize same-sex marriages. Obama failed to calm the storm even when he extended some employment benefits to the same-sex partners of federal workers. He came under fire for having declined to provide health care and retirement benefits on the grounds that such a move would violate the Defense of Marriage Act. These kinds of left-center tensions will intensify when Congress delves into the final negotiations over health care this summer. Progressive Democrats insist that without a public insurance option health care reform will fail in the long run. Several Democratic moderates have been pushing alternatives that fall far short of that goal. The second vulnerability is the deficit. When Republicans have turned away from cultural issues and toward economics, they have been finding more success at attracting the interest of independents and moderates. Recent polls have shown that the public is concerned about the growing size of the deficit and Republicans have finally gained a bit of political traction by linking Obama's policies to the government's red ink. To be sure, this is not a home run issue for the GOP. Many commentators have pointed to the hypocrisy of Republicans making anti-deficit arguments following the tax-cutting and spending spree that took place under President Bush. Moreover, deficits have a poor track record in terms of being a winning campaign issue. There have not been any presidential candidates or major midterm elections in recent history that hinged on anti-deficit arguments. Many presidents, including Franklin D. Roosevelt, survived while growing the deficit. Polls have shown the public is also notoriously fickle about how much weight it gives to the deficit as an issue, and is often misinformed about the actual size of the deficit. Nonetheless, warning about rising deficits has been an effective tool for weakening the political strength of an incumbent administration. Regardless of the economics of the issue, with some respected economists saying short-term deficits don't matter, many Americans perceive the budget deficit as a symbol for whether a president is keeping federal spending under control. While Republicans might not take back Congress by focusing on the deficit, they can erode Obama's political standing and make it more difficult for him to pass legislation. Finally, there is the economy. The irony for Obama is that as the economy has stabilized, it has become a greater source of political danger. Without an immediate crisis, | [
"concern is growing about what?",
"which month has been difficult for obama?",
"Which month has been difficult for President Obama"
] | [
[
"size of the deficit"
],
[
"June"
],
[
"June"
]
] | Julian E. Zelizer: The Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson .
Zelizer says both aimed high and worked skillfully with congressional leaders .
A president can shape legislation without dictating the details, professor says .
Zelizer: Obama has gotten big results from Congress by keeping leaders on his side . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. His new book, "Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security -- From World War II to the War on Terrorism," will be published this fall by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely on current events.
Julian E. Zelizer says so far the Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson.
PRINCETON, New Jersey (CNN) -- While pundits have compared President Obama to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, less attention has been paid to another, perhaps more apt parallel -- Lyndon Baines Johnson.
Sometimes the similarities are striking. Both aimed high, seeking major legislation to reshape America -- Johnson with civil rights and Medicare, Obama with health care and energy legislation. Both Johnson and Obama understood that Congress was a credit-claiming institution whose members did not like to have proposals rammed down their throats.
Johnson's style of political leadership was famous. A creature of the Senate, Johnson loved to lean on legislators and intimidate them into supporting his agenda.
As Senate majority leader from 1955 to 1961, Johnson had been famous for subjecting colleagues to the "Treatment" whereby the hulking Texan cornered a legislator in the hallway, stood eye to eye and made his arguments about a bill until he received assurances of support for particular legislation. Although Johnson slightly changed his posture once he was president, he still relied on this kind of interaction to build support.
As president from November 1963 until January 1969, Johnson worked closely with the Southern committee chairmen and ranking Republicans who dominated the House and Senate. Johnson sought to achieve a delicate mix of maintaining control over deliberations -- thinking of ways to obtain what he wanted without giving the appearance of it being a presidential-led idea -- all while responding to the concerns of the chairmen.
The back-and-forth deliberations with House Ways and Means Chairman Wilbur Mills over the creation of Medicare in 1965 have become the classic example of how a president can work the chamber while allowing a congressional leader into the room to shape a bill in ways with which he'll be comfortable. Johnson agreed to redesign the particulars of the legislation so that the final program would protect the fiscal integrity of Social Security (under which it was included) and contain long-run costs.
Thus far, Obama has taken a similar approach with the economic stimulus and, more recently, with his budget proposal. The president outlined to Congress the basic ideas he wanted in the final product but then left to lawmakers the work of designing the details.
While the downside has been that Obama relinquished control over the structure of the legislation, House and Senate Democrats have felt invested and empowered to produce what Obama's team viewed as successful results.
The second similarity is that Johnson, like Obama, distanced himself from the arguments of liberals who said that conservatives did not need to be feared. Johnson was consumed by his fears of a right-wing resurgence, even after trouncing Republican Barry Goldwater in the 1964 election.
Johnson constantly warned advisers that the most dangerous political force in the country as far as he was concerned was not the left on college campuses but what he called the "reactionary element" within the GOP, and he took this into consideration when shaping legislative proposals.
With domestic policy, Johnson avoided programs that could be tagged as "socialistic," and on foreign policy he worked hard to demonstrate a tough stance against communism. Recently released telephone conversations have revealed that Johnson was obsessed with the 1966 midterm elections after the 1964 election was over, realizing that historically those results were not likely to be good for the White House.
Obama has been reluctant to embrace liberal arguments about an end to the Age of Reagan, courting conservative journalists such as David Brooks instead of liberal pundits such as Paul Krugman. He accepted compromises on legislation in response to moderates in both parties and agreed to a financial bailout that pleased Wall Street, not Main Street. And his administration has steered clear of explicitly nationalizing banks, a step that could be called socialist | [
"What did Zelizer say about Obama and Lyndon Johnson?",
"What did Julian Zelizer compare the Obama presidency with?",
"What did the professor say about a president?",
"whome does The Obama presidency resembles?"
] | [
[
"presidency resembles that of"
],
[
"Lyndon B. Johnson."
],
[
"so far the Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson."
],
[
"Lyndon B. Johnson."
]
] | Julian E. Zelizer: The Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson .
Zelizer says both aimed high and worked skillfully with congressional leaders .
A president can shape legislation without dictating the details, professor says .
Zelizer: Obama has gotten big results from Congress by keeping leaders on his side . |
Editor's note: Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. His new book, "Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security -- From World War II to the War on Terrorism," will be published this fall by Basic Books. Zelizer writes widely on current events. Julian E. Zelizer says Democrats should be questioning themselves on several key points. PRINCETON, New Jersey (CNN) -- This week, Jews will conclude the eight-day celebration of Passover, a holiday that has often found its way into the political realm. Civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. frequently invoked the story of the liberation of the Jewish people from the Egyptians in his struggle against white oppression. President Obama made headlines last week when he hosted a Passover Seder in the White House. Today, Democrats can draw an important lesson from Passover, this time not so much from the story that is retold during the holiday but through the rituals that are the focus of the week. Last Wednesday and Thursday evenings, Jews gathered with families, friends and other groups to have a Seder. These meals are not just about eating and talking, but also about learning and debating the stories of the holiday contained in a book called the Haggadah. There is no right answer to many of the questions that are raised, and discussions change over time as the life experiences of the participants bring new perspectives to the table. The highlight of the Seder is when the youngest child asks the Four Questions, asking the adults what makes these nights different from the others and then offering some possible answers. Politicians could learn a lot from the Seder, particularly when one party controls both the executive and the legislative branch, and the temptation is to act in lock-step. Republicans did not have enough moments of questioning and reflection between 2002 and 2006, which many observers agree was not just damaging to the country but to the party as well. While there was strong private, internal disagreement among Republicans over how to conduct the war on terror, over whether the war in Iraq was a wise move and over the basic contours of economic policy, most Republicans stayed silent in public. Even when they gathered in the private corridors of the White House, according to memoirs that have been published by former officials such as Scott McClellan, Republicans tended to remain deferential to President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Historically, vigorous internal party debate has had the ability to strengthen a party politically. The fight that took place between Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford in the 1976 Republican primaries, where Reagan pushed President Ford to be more responsive to the growing conservative movement and avoid making all his decisions from inside the beltway, created a GOP that in the 1980s was a formidable political force. Bill Clinton's insistence that Democrats needed to rethink some of their conventional wisdom from the New Deal and Great Society periods, with his preference being to move toward the center, opened up a healthy debate about what Democrats should stand for that helped result in Barack Obama's victory in 2008. Thus far, Democrats have been more comfortable openly criticizing each other. Princeton economist Paul Krugman has emerged as the leading liberal critic of the administration by arguing that President Obama is not spending enough to stimulate the economy and that his financial bailout plan will only provide Band-Aid solutions that place all the risk on taxpayers. But Democrats will feel less comfortable having internal debates as the elections of 2010 and 2012 get closer, as the pressures of re-election intensify and as Republicans become more aggressive and more coherent in their attacks. To get the conversation started, it would be worth thinking about the four questions that Democrats should keep asking when they get together in the next few years. The first is: What are the issues on which Democrats are willing to compromise with Republicans, if any? The compromises will not be easy given that Republicans have refused to endorse Democratic proposals in the first few months of Obama's presidency. However, if the popularity of the GOP continues to erode and Obama's stays | [
"What four questions did Julian Zelizer say Democrats should ask themselves?",
"who asks the questions",
"what did zelizer say",
"How many key questions should Democrats ask themselves?",
"Who says Democrats need to be asking themselves questions?"
] | [
[
"are willing to compromise with Republicans, if any?"
],
[
"the youngest child"
],
[
"Democrats should be questioning themselves on several key points."
],
[
"several"
],
[
"Julian E. Zelizer"
]
] | Julian E. Zelizer: The Obama presidency resembles that of Lyndon B. Johnson .
Zelizer says both aimed high and worked skillfully with congressional leaders .
A president can shape legislation without dictating the details, professor says .
Zelizer: Obama has gotten big results from Congress by keeping leaders on his side . |
Editor's note: Kathleen Sebelius is secretary of Health and Human Services in the Obama administration. Kathleen Sebelius says health care costs are a huge and growing burden on the economy. (CNN) -- Today in Washington, some politicians like to suggest that the many challenges we face as a nation mean we shouldn't tackle health care reform. Nothing could be further from the truth. With more and more of America's families, businesses, and local, state and federal governments struggling with the crushing costs of health care, health care reform has never been more important. As President Obama has often said, you can't fix the economy without fixing health care. Unless we fix what is broken in our current system, everyone's health care will be in jeopardy. Health care reform is not a luxury. It is a necessity. It's important to look at the size of the problem we face and where we stand. Today, we have by far the most expensive health system in the world. We spend 50 percent more per person on health care than the average developed country, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. We spend more on health care than housing or food, the McKinsey Global Institute reported. Nearly 46 million Americans are uninsured, millions more are underinsured, and they aren't the only ones who are suffering. The high cost of care is hurting all of us. A recent study by Families USA estimates that insured families pay a hidden health tax of more than $1,000 every year. The hidden tax is the amount businesses and families with insurance have to pay in insurance premiums, taxes and donations to help cover the cost of treating uninsured Americans. Health insurance premiums for families that are covered through a job at a small business have increased 85 percent since 2000, and more small businesses are thinking about dropping health insurance benefits. Nationwide, health care costs consume 18 percent of our gross domestic product. If we continue on our current path, health care costs will consume 34 percent of our GDP by 2040, and the number of uninsured Americans will rise to 72 million, according to the Council of Economic Advisers. Even though we spend more than any other nation on health care, we aren't healthier. Only three developed countries have higher infant mortality rates. Our nation ranks 24th in life expectancy among developed countries. More than one-third of Americans are obese. These statistics are the signs of a system that is both unacceptable and unsustainable. They also show us the high cost of doing nothing. If we choose the status quo, more Americans will be uninsured, costs will continue to rise, and every American's health care will be at risk. Inaction is not an option, and reform is long overdue. The Obama administration is working to enact reform that will reduce costs for families, businesses and government; protect people's choice of doctors, hospitals and health plans; and assure affordable, quality health care for all Americans. We are guided by a simple principle: Protect what works about health care and fix what's broken, and do it in a way that does not add to the deficit. The president has already introduced proposals that will provide $950 billion over 10 years in savings to finance health care reform. Much of these resources come from wringing waste out of the current system and aggressively prosecuting fraud and abuse. We will continue to work with Congress as it explores other financing options, and the president is open to ideas about how we finance health care reform. But we are not open to deficit spending. Health care reform will be paid for, and it will be deficit-neutral over 10 years. Working together, we can pass real health care reform that gives Americans the choices they deserve and the affordable, quality coverage they need. And we know they do not want us to wait. Too many people have suffered without basic medical care or paid too much for it. For years, the American people have called on Washington to meet this challenge. They have waited long enough. The time for reform | [
"What did Kathleen Sebelius say?",
"Who pays more than other countries?",
"What represents growing burden on economy?",
"What does she say?"
] | [
[
"health care costs are a huge and growing burden on the economy."
],
[
"Americans"
],
[
"health care costs"
],
[
"health care costs are a huge and growing burden on the economy."
]
] | Kathleen Sebelius: Health care represents growing burden on economy .
She says that because of rising cost, existing system is unsustainable .
She says U.S. pays more, but citizens aren't healthier than in other countries . |
Editor's note: Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow: the Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism. Amjad Atallah co-directs the Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation, a think tank that promotes ideas across the ideological spectrum. Kenneth Ballen says Iranians overwhelmingly favor better relations with the United States. (CNN) -- In a new public opinion poll before Iran's critical June 12 presidential election, by large margins, most Iranians said they support an American-Iranian rapprochement for bringing a new era of peace to the Middle East. Surveyed on a wide range of issues, Iranians overwhelmingly favor better relations with the United States and greater democracy for Iran. The poll shows that the Iranian public remains far removed from the stereotypes of apocalyptic fanatics commonly asserted in some circles in the United States. The survey suggests that Iranians instead are a people with self-confidence and hope in a more democratic future. It also reveals a population with a strong awareness that the United States is as much a potential ally as it is now seen as a current threat. This holds much promise for U.S. national security interests in the region. These are some of the many findings from a new nationwide public opinion survey of Iran, to be released Monday. Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, pre-elections polls in Iran are either conducted or monitored by the Iranian government and other affiliated interest groups. Consequently, they are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, our poll -- the third in a series over the past two years -- was conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, uncensored, with time-tested methodology. Funding for the survey was provided by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The poll was led by Terror Free Tomorrow: the Center for Public Opinion and the New America Foundation, with fieldwork by KA Europe SPRL. The full results and methodology are available at terrorfreetomorrow.org. The survey was conducted from May 11 to 20, with 1,001 random interviews proportionally distributed covering all 30 provinces of Iran, and a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points. Though our poll results show President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the lead, it appears that that none of the presidential candidates will pass the 50 percent threshold needed to automatically win; a second-round runoff between the two highest finishers -- as things stand, Ahmadinejad and Mir Hussein Moussavi -- is likely. Regardless of whom they may vote for, the No. 1 priority Iranians have for their government is improving the Iranian economy, very closely followed by ensuring free elections, a free press and better trade and relations with the West. It is in this context that the Iranian people strongly support a fundamental change in American-Iranian relations. Right now, Iranians consider the United States and Israel as the greatest -- and only -- threats to Iran. As a result, more than six out of every 10 Iranians oppose any peace deal with Israel and are in favor of the government of Iran providing military and financial assistance to Palestinian groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well as providing military and financial assistance to Iraqi Shiite militias. A majority of Iranians also favor Iran developing nuclear weapons. These "hard-line" attitudes dramatically change, however, as part of a potential deal with the United States. More than 70 percent of Iranians favor providing full access to inspectors and a guarantee not to develop or possess nuclear weapons, in return for outside aid and investment. In another consistent trend over the past two years, 77 percent of Iranians also back normal relations and trade with the United States. Indeed, as part of a deal with the United States, 54 percent of Iranians would endorse the Iranian government ending support for Iraqi militias instead of providing military assistance. Rather than supporting the destruction of the state of Israel, as they do now, as part of a deal with the United States, a majority of Iranians would even favor recognizing the state of Israel. Greater democracy, economic progress and good relations with the United States are the ultimate goals for most Iranians. In another indication of | [
"According to Ballen, Atallah, what do most Iranians favor?",
"What did the poll find?",
"What do they say about the poll?",
"What do polls show?",
"Do Iranians support a deal regardless of whether Ahmadinejad is re-elected?"
] | [
[
"better relations with the United States."
],
[
"that the Iranian public remains far removed from the stereotypes of apocalyptic fanatics commonly asserted in some circles in the United States."
],
[
"support an American-Iranian rapprochement for bringing a new era of peace to the Middle East."
],
[
"Iranian public remains far removed from the stereotypes of apocalyptic fanatics"
],
[
"overwhelmingly favor better"
]
] | Ballen, Atallah: Most Iranians are not extremists; they favor peace with U.S.
They say poll shows overwhelming support for negotiations .
Poll finds Iranian support for a deal regardless of whether Ahmadinejad is re-elected . |
Editor's note: Kevin Fenton is director of the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fenton has written for journals including The Lancet, AIDS, the British Medical Journal and the Journal of Infectious Diseases. After graduating from medical school, Fenton earned his Masters in Public Health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and his Ph.D. in Epidemiology from University College London. Dr. Kevin Fenton urges Americans to get tested for HIV. ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Every 9½ minutes someone's brother, mother, sister, father, or neighbor becomes infected with HIV in the United States. That's 56,000 people every year. But there's something we can all do to help protect ourselves and our partners from this disease -- get tested for HIV. In the fight against HIV, I can tell you that few things are more important than testing. It's an essential step in reducing the number of new HIV infections and extending the lives of those who are infected. Put simply, HIV testing saves lives. As a CDC official, I've spoken with hundreds of people who have made the decision to get tested. Many described the relief they felt when they found out they were HIV-negative. Thanks to the HIV test, they could take steps to make sure they and their partners stay that way. I've also met people who found out they were HIV-positive. Although initially worried about their diagnosis and their future, they were thankful they had their infection diagnosed early, and were able to live long, healthy and productive lives with HIV. They had the knowledge and will to protect their partners from infection, or to prevent their infants from becoming HIV infected. I recently met one young woman who learned about her HIV infection after being diagnosed during routine HIV testing in pregnancy. By getting tested early, and having access to effective treatment, her child was born without HIV, and she now has two healthy children. She is a living testament that life does not stop with this disease. Instead, knowledge of her HIV status along with effective treatment and care has given her the freedom, resolve and respect to make choices to protect her life and the lives of those she loves. Yet today, not everyone has benefited from knowing their HIV status. Far too many individuals with HIV don't know that they're infected. CDC estimates that one in five people with HIV in the United States is unaware of being infected. That's more than 200,000 Americans who may be transmitting the virus to others without knowing it, and who can't take advantage of HIV treatments that could prolong and improve the quality of their lives. As we mark National HIV Testing Day on Saturday, I strongly encourage all Americans to get tested for HIV. At CDC, our goal is to make HIV testing as routine as a blood pressure check. HIV testing has never been quicker, easier or more accessible. In fact, with rapid HIV tests, results can be available in as little as 20 minutes, and tests can be given in your doctor's office or other locations in your community, such as churches and college campuses. To ensure that all Americans know their HIV status, CDC recommends that everyone between the ages of 13 and 64 get tested for HIV as part of routine medical care -- regardless of their perceived risk for infection. CDC also recommends that those at increased risk, such as sexually active gay and bisexual men, get tested at least annually. We are also working with our partners to bring HIV testing services directly to communities across the nation. Increased HIV testing will make it possible to significantly reduce the number of new infections. Research indicates the majority of new sexually transmitted HIV infections are transmitted by people who do not know they are HIV-infected. Studies also show that most people who test HIV-positive take steps to protect their partners from infection. Nearly 30 years after the start of the epidemic, far too many people continue to be diagnosed late in the course of their | [
"What is essential in reducing number of new HIV infections?",
"what can those who are positive do",
"What can the positive tested do?",
"when are they relieved",
"Many who are tested are what when they find out they are negative after all?",
"What is essential to reducing the number of infections?"
] | [
[
"testing"
],
[
"take steps to protect their partners from infection."
],
[
"infection diagnosed early, and were able to live long, healthy and productive lives with HIV."
],
[
"were HIV-negative."
],
[
"relief"
],
[
"testing."
]
] | Fenton: Testing is essential to reducing the number of new HIV infections .
Many who get tested are relieved when they find out they are negative after all .
Those who are positive can prolong their lives and ensure the health of loved ones . |
Editor's note: Leonard Pitts Jr., a columnist for The Miami Herald, won the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for commentary and is the author of a new novel, "Before I Forget" and "Becoming Dad: Black Men and the Journey to Fatherhood." Leonard Pitts says we know what it takes to improve the performance of African-American students. (CNN) -- Back in 1972, on an episode of "All in the Family," Gloria posed the following riddle to Archie and Meathead. Father and son go driving. There's an accident. The father is killed instantly, the son is rushed to the hospital for emergency surgery. The surgeon walks in, takes one look at the patient and says, "I can't operate on this boy. He's my son." The answer to the apparent paradox eluded Archie, Meathead and the guys down at Kelsey's bar for the balance of the half hour. They floated theories involving stepfathers, sons-in-law, priests, adoptions and returns from the dead. All of which Archie apparently found more believable than the true answer which was, of course, that the surgeon was the boy's mother. "If that's the answer," he spouted, "that's the dumbest riddle I ever hoid!" Thirty-seven years later it is, perhaps, difficult to appreciate why this riddle ever was a riddle, how so apparent an answer could have stymied Archie, Meathead and, I would wager, the vast majority of the viewing audience. The riddle speaks volumes not just about how the world has changed in four decades, but also about how unconscious expectations can blind us to the obvious. In 1972, one expected a man when one heard the word "surgeon." Much as, in 2009, one expects a white kid when one hears the word "scholar." People will deny this, will say all the right and politic things. But the disclaimers will be as thin and transparent as Saran Wrap. Black, white and otherwise, we are all socialized by the same forces and all carry, by and large, the same unconscious assumptions. One of which is that a certain level of achievement is black and another is white. This is what you are hearing when a black kid speaks standard English and another black kid chides him for "talking white." This is what George W. Bush was alluding to when he decried "the soft bigotry of low expectations." And this is what we need to address forthrightly if we ever hope to close the so-called achievement gap that looms between black kids and white ones. In 2007 and 2008, I traveled the country for a series of columns called "What Works," aimed at profiling programs that addressed that gap. I traveled between big programs and small ones, from the Harlem Children's Zone, which encompasses 90 square blocks of holistic education, family counseling, medical care and tutoring in New York City, to the Freedom Project in Sunflower County, Mississippi, which offers field trips, martial arts and academic enrichment in a rural county where the median income is $25,000 a year and the teen pregnancy rate is said to be 25 percent. I toured Self Enhancement Inc. in Portland, Oregon, a KIPP (Knowledge is Power Program) School in Gaston, North Carolina, the East Lake Foundation in Atlanta, Georgia, and many others. In all these places, I saw black kids -- well-spoken, clean-cut and noon-sun bright -- making a lie out of other peoples' expectations. Over the course of 13 months, common themes began to emerge whenever I would ask why kids such as these were doing such wondrous work in these places and substandard work elsewhere. We have more power to fire bad teachers and reward good ones, they said. We require parental involvement. We have a longer school day and a longer school year. We mentor children that need it. We counsel children and families that need it. We are invested in them and make sure they know it. | [
"what did he say?",
"who says that many people expect black students to perform more poorly?",
"Which race seems to not perform well?"
] | [
[
"we know"
],
[
"Leonard Pitts"
],
[
"African-American students."
]
] | Leonard Pitts Jr.: Unconscious expectations can blind us to the obvious .
He says many people expect black students to perform more poorly .
Programs have demonstrated that investing in children's education pays off .
Pitts: We already know secret to improve performance, but do we have will to do it? |
Editor's note: Leslie Morgan Steiner is the author of "Crazy Love," a new memoir about domestic violence, and the anthology "Mommy Wars," which explores the polarization between stay-at-home and career moms.
Leslie Morgan Steiner says domestic violence afflicts the well-to-do as well as the poor.
(CNN) -- For two days, news reports called her "the 20-year old victim" allegedly attacked by R&B singer and dancer Chris Brown in his car early February 8 in Los Angeles, California.
We all now have good reason to believe that the alleged victim was pop singer Rihanna, Brown's girlfriend.
The story has dominated the general media with good reason. Both singers are young, apple-cheek gorgeous, immensely talented and squeaky clean -- the last couple you'd imagine as domestic violence headliners.
Perhaps the only good that will come from the Rihanna/Brown publicity is destruction of our culture's misconception that abusers and their victims can only be universally poor, uneducated and powerless.
Brown, whose first song debuted at No. 1 and whose first album topped the Billboard Hot 100, appeared on a Disney sitcom and in Sesame Street, Got Milk? and Wrigley's Doublemint Gum commercials. Barbados-born Rihanna has been big-brothered by music industry legends like Jay-Z and Kanye West and is signed to the Def Jam Recordings label.
She has been astonishingly successful in the short time she has been on the music scene, attaining five Billboard Hot 100 No. 1's with "SOS," "Umbrella," "Take a Bow," "Disturbia" and T.I.'s "Live Your Life."
Like Rihanna, I had a bright future in my early 20s. I met my abusive lover at 22. I'd just graduated from Harvard and had a job at Seventeen Magazine in New York.
My husband worked on Wall Street and was an Ivy League graduate as well. In our world, we were the last couple you'd imagine enmeshed in domestic violence.
Many of my ex-husband's attacks also took place in our car. For reasons I never understood, the enclosed, soundproof space brought out his worst violence. He punched me so fiercely that my face had bruises from his fist on one side and from hitting the window on the other.
As trapped in the car as I was in our marriage, it was there that I endured tirades about how controlling I was with money, how flirtatious and naïve I was with other men, how defiant and disrespectful I was of my husband's authority.
So, I suppose I have more understanding than most about the shame, fury, confusion and disappointment Rihanna may be experiencing. What's hardest for outsiders to fathom is how lethal a cocktail love, hope and sympathy can be. I first fell for my husband the night he confided how he, like Chris Brown, had been traumatized as a young boy by domestic violence in his home.
"He used to hit my mom ... He made me terrified all the time, terrified like I had to pee on myself," Brown said during a 2007 interview with Giant magazine.
Brown hasn't explained what happened in the recent incident, but this week he released a statement saying that he's sorry and saddened by it.
Our culture encourages women to nurture men, making it predictable that many experience a seductive empathy for abusive men, as well as the misguided hope that love can obliterate an ugly past.
In my case, it took four years, myriad terrifying attacks, and the intervention of the police and family court before I understood how little I could help my ex get over his abusive childhood.
I certainly felt alone during my abusive relationship, but unfortunately I was in good company. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that between 1 million and 3 million women in America are physically abused by their husband or boyfriend each year.
Every day, on average, three women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends. At some point in our lives, 25 percent of American women will report | [
"what was Leslie Steiner?",
"Who is Leslie Steiner?",
"what does Leslie Steiner say?"
] | [
[
"author"
],
[
"author of \"Crazy Love,\""
],
[
"domestic violence afflicts the well-to-do as well as the poor."
]
] | Leslie Steiner: I was victim of domestic violence many years ago .
She says such abuse is prevalent and cuts across all demographic groups .
Our culture encourages women to nurture even abusive men, she says .
Steiner: Exposing children to such violence perpetuates cycle in next generation . |
Editor's note: Madeleine K. Albright is former U.S. secretary of state. William S. Cohen is former U.S. secretary of defense. They are co-chairs of the Genocide Prevention Task Force. Madeleine K. Albright served as secretary of state under President Bill Clinton. (CNN) -- In this age of electronic media communications, Americans are increasingly confronted in their living rooms -- and even on their cell phones -- with information about and images of genocide and mass atrocities virtually anywhere they occur. This instantaneous media communication has sensitized many Americans to the suffering of people in all corners of the globe. The Internet has proved to be a powerful tool for organizing broad-based responses to genocide and mass atrocities, as we have seen in response to the crisis in Darfur. With all of this information written and broadcast about the horrors of genocide and mass atrocities around the world, why do they continue? And as public citizens, public officials and policymakers, how can we prevent this horrendous crime that assaults our humanitarian values and threatens our national security? Last year, we agreed to co-chair the Genocide Prevention Task Force, which was jointly convened by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, The American Academy of Diplomacy and the United States Institute of Peace. (The final report is to be released next week.) The idea for the task force arose out of a desire by each of these institutions to reach beyond their individual capabilities and build a practical framework that could help the U.S. government better respond to threats of genocide and mass atrocities. Our challenge was to match words to deeds and stop allowing the unacceptable. That task is in fact one of the most persistent puzzles of our times. Many people ask: Why do genocides and mass atrocities happen? There is no consensus as to the causes of genocide and mass atrocities, nor is there one commonly agreed-upon theory that explains the key catalysts, motivations or mechanisms that lead to them. History has shown that genocide and mass atrocities manifest themselves in highly variable ways, and we should not assume that future perpetrators will follow old patterns. However, there are warning signs. Genocide is not the inevitable result of "ancient hatreds" or irrational leaders. It requires planning and is carried out systematically. But that fact also means that there are ways to recognize its signs and symptoms, and viable options to prevent it at every turn, if we are committed and prepared. Our report recommends a number of distinct but interrelated areas where the United States government can develop and deploy more effective strategies to identify and pursue opportunities for prevention of genocide and mass atrocities: First, we believe that leadership is an indispensable ingredient. Nothing is more central to preventing genocide than leadership -- from the president, Congress and the American people. Making progress requires leaders to summon political will not only after a crisis strikes, but also before one emerges. Second is the importance of early warning. It is critical for policymakers to have good analysis of areas where there is a high risk of genocide or organized violence in order to design effective strategies and spur action. By improving the accuracy of warnings, we will find greater opportunities for preventive action. Early prevention can avert a crisis. Many countries are vulnerable to extreme violence. By engaging leaders, institutions and civil society at an early stage, the United States can help countries steer clear of these dangers. Preventive diplomacy is critical to halt and reverse escalation. Even when signs of preparation for genocide are apparent, there are opportunities to alter leaders' decisions and interrupt their plans. By improving our crisis response system, we will be better prepared to mount coherent, carefully calibrated and timely preventive diplomatic strategies. A willingness to utilize military options to stop ongoing atrocities when prevention efforts have failed is crucial. U.S. military assets can also play an important role in supporting and providing credibility to options short of the use of force, including by deterring violence through military presence or threat. Lastly, we cite the power of international action. The United States has an interest in promoting a system of international norms and institutions that averts potential genocide and | [
"Who leads the Genocide Prevention Task Force?",
"When will the panel's final report be released?",
"What are the thoughts of Albright and Cohen?",
"Who is Madeleine Albright?",
"What do Madeleine Albright and William Cohen co-chair?"
] | [
[
"Madeleine K. Albright"
],
[
"next week.)"
],
[
"we believe that leadership is an indispensable ingredient."
],
[
"former U.S. secretary of state."
],
[
"Genocide Prevention Task Force."
]
] | Madeleine Albright, William Cohen co-chair Genocide Prevention Task Force .
The panel's final report will be released next week after a year of work .
Leadership indispensable in preventing genocide, Albright and Cohen say .
Also key: early warning, preventive diplomacy, military, international action, they say . |
Editor's note: Malaak Compton-Rock is founder and director of The Angelrock Project, "an online e-village promoting volunteerism, social responsibility, and sustainable change." One of her initiatives, "Journey for Change: Empowering Youth Through Global Service," will be seen as part of CNN's "Black in America 2." Her first book is being published by Broadway Books in May, 2010, titled, "If It Takes a Village, Build One: How I Found Meaning Through a Life of Service to Others and 100+ Ways You Can Too." Malaak Compton-Rock says focusing on problems facing African-Americans is difficult but necessary. (CNN) -- In the words of my mentor and America's foremost child advocate Marian Wright Edelman, founder and president of The Children's Defense Fund, it's time to "raise a ruckus people, it is time to raise a ruckus!" CNN's "Black in America" raised many critical issues facing African-American people in this great country of ours. It was not pretty, it was not flattering, but it was very, very frank. The show delved into the negative issues that have plagued the African-American community for generations, i.e., crime, education, single parent families, drug abuse and the like. People got mad. People sent many e-mails and letters to Soledad O'Brien and CNN and cried foul. People said "Black in America" was not consistent with the lives of many African-American people and was one-sided. Blogs and Web sites popped up all over the place where people "raised a ruckus" about the content of the show. I read a lot of these comments. As a matter of fact, I was obsessed with people's views for many weeks after the documentary aired. And the more I read, the more I got angry. The more I read, the more I wanted to "raise my own ruckus." But I was frustrated and upset for a very different reason than most. I was almost apoplectic with the amount of criticism for "Black in America" without critical, thought provoking commentary about how each person can do their part to make a difference to change the very startling and distressing issues facing most African-American children and adults in America. On a typical day in the lives of black American children: And on a typical school day for black children in America: And consider that in America, [Statistics are from the Children's Defense Fund's Child Research Data.] This is serious stuff people. And it is the cold-hearted truth. So, it is okay to comment that the documentary did not represent your life. It is okay to comment that it was upsetting to see images of black men in jail, children dropping out of school, and unwed mothers. It is okay because the truth hurts, especially when it is seen by 16 million people. In fact, most of the images shown in "Black in America" do not represent my personal life or the lives of my children. But because these issues face my brothers and sisters in my collective African-American family, they concern me, they hurt me, they belong to me, and I will own them. We know that as African-Americans we have come a long way. We know that we are doctors, lawyers, CEOs, philanthropists, politicians, and even the president of the United States of America. And yes, it would do our children a lot of good if these images were portrayed more frequently in the media. But this does not change the very real issues facing African-American people portrayed in "Black in America." And frankly, with so many of our people struggling, we can't just celebrate our achievements -- we must make it a priority to work on the most critical and urgent matters in our community. As I always say, "The blessed and the best of us, must take care of the rest of us." So why did the criticism make | [
"What does she suggest naysayers to to improve conditions?",
"Who does Malaak Compton-Rock believe have particular challenges to overcome within the community?"
] | [
[
"change the very startling and distressing issues facing most African-American children and adults in America."
],
[
"African-American"
]
] | Malaak Compton-Rock: Some critical of "Black in America" focus on problems .
She says community has serious challenges to overcome, particularly for children .
Compton-Rock: "Black in America 2" will show solutions .
She says naysayers must join the fight to improve conditions . |
Editor's note: Maria (Maki) Haberfeld is a professor of Police Science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City. She has served in the Israeli Defense Forces and the Israel National Police, and worked for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration as a special consultant. From 1997 through 2001, she was a member of a research team, sponsored by the National Institute of Justice, studying police integrity in three major police departments in the United States. She is the author of "Critical Issues in Police Training" (2002) and co-author of "Enhancing Police Integrity" (2006). Maria Haberfeld says police officers make decisions based on their awareness of potential danger. NEW YORK (CNN) -- We teach our children to think about what others feel before they act, but as grown-ups we frequently assume we understand what others do without ever having walked in their shoes. President Obama expressed his opinion about a police officer's interaction with Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates. "The Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home," the president said. Was it stupid behavior or was it an understandable result of police procedure -- the culture, or rather sub-culture, of this profession. People depend on police in a time of trouble but are quicker than lightning to judge harshly when things go wrong. But the most important question in this case is: Did they go wrong? One needs to understand that the interaction between a police officer and a suspect is just part of a larger context. When a neighbor calls the police to report a burglary in progress and a police officer is dispatched to respond, a decision-making process begins for the officer. Police work is about sub-cultural contexts, about war stories, about suspicion, about unpredictability, about danger and fear for one's life. Police officers make their decisions based not just on a given situation but also based on their prior experience, the experience of those they have worked with and the stories they have heard about incidents that happened in the past. A call to respond to a burglary in progress generates a series of images that prepare a police officer for an encounter -- a dangerous encounter that can possibly end with a loss of life. Not long ago one of my students, an officer in the New York Police Department, was killed trying to stop a robbery in progress. Police officers hear about these stories and unlike the members of the public who forget a story, no matter how sensational within a day or two, police officers carry these stories as their secret weapons. This is part of their armor. An officer responding to a burglary in progress arrives at a scene with a heightened sense of danger, anxious and ready to go into fighting mode. Yes, the professor identified himself as a legitimate occupant of the premises. However, he was not arrested for trespassing. He was arrested for disorderly conduct. Police officers arriving at the scene of a suspected burglary in progress do not put down their armor of suspicion just because somebody proved to them that they are the legitimate occupants of the dwelling. Police encounters can become deadly when officers assume that, on the surface, everything appears to be in order. It is their sixth sense of suspicion that helps them assess the situation in a way that members of the public would not consider reasonable. It is this precise quality of suspicion that goes beyond a reasonable doubt that sets them apart from the larger public and can be understood only by the members of the force. A person usually does not break into his own house -- it is true that it can happen, and it apparently did in this case -- but this is not a standard behavior that, once explained to the officer, should mandate an automatic approach to put down your guard. The officers look at the scene of the event they were called to as their domain, their turf, their territory, where some order has been disturbed and they were called to restore it. A famous police scholar, Egon Bittner, | [
"Could the act be viewed as a result of the officer's awareness of danger?"
] | [
[
"police"
]
] | Maria Haberfeld: President Obama said police acted stupidly in arresting professor .
She says act could be viewed as result of officers' awareness of potential danger .
She says officers arrive at such scenes with heightened sense of danger . |
Editor's note: Maria Hinojosa, an award-winning journalist and author, joined NOW on PBS as senior correspondent in 2005. Hinojosa, who formerly covered urban affairs for CNN, also serves as anchor and managing editor of National Public Radio's "Latino USA," a weekly national program reporting on news and culture in the Latino community. Maria Hinojosa says Sonia Sotomayor's success has helped boost self-confidence for many. NEW YORK (CNN) -- It's a question I never thought I would ask my daughter. But I loved being able to ask it. "Yurema?" "Yes, Mom," my 11-year-old daughter said. "Tell me what T-shirt you would most like to wear: one that says 'I am a Wise Latina,' 'My Mother is a Wise Latina' or 'Sonia is a Wise Latina'?" She cocked her head slightly and then quickly said, "I am a Wise Latina." Eleven years old, and this is the vision she already has of herself. It's a pretty wonderful thing to watch that certain something blossom in a girl ... one of those often fleeting moments when a girl owns her own power. For me, the decision to wear my own "Wise Latina" T-shirt raises all kinds of issues. It makes me confront a past that I have known for decades. Deep down inside, I, like many other Latinas, struggle with my own very deep insecurities in relation to my white male colleagues. I think after witnessing history on television for the past two weeks, those insecurities have pretty much dissipated. Sonia Sotomayor has blazed the trail. I can't go back to thinking that way, anymore, ever. Before, when I told people that I was a Latina, I never knew what, if any, image they might have in their mind. Everyone carries stereotypes and preconceived notions. But now when I say to people that I am a Latina, might they immediately think, "A wise Latina"? My daughter is learning all of these lessons from Sotomayor, a Puerto Rican woman. When I was Yurema's age, back in the '70s, the only Puerto Rican woman I knew of was Maria (played by Natalie Wood) from "West Side Story." I grew up on the South Side of Chicago after being born in Mexico. My Puerto Rican Maria from West Side Story taught me that love and commitment could transcend borders and divisions. Sonia is teaching Yurema, and all of us, that intelligence and compassion (and an honest way with words) can also cross all borders: political ones, those of gender or ethnicity. And I have learned that my own challenge now is to reach this very high bar that Sotomayor has set. I must "own" that I am, indeed, a wise Latina. Later on the day of the T-shirt decision, my daughter hears my reaction when I read that Sen. John McCain, whom my daughter knows well because we followed the election, is going to vote against Sotomayor's confirmation. "What a big jerk!" was her age-appropriate response. Then, after a pause, Yurema said, "So that means John McCain thinks Sarah Palin is a wise woman? But not Sonia? Harrumph." "Harrumph" is also an age-appropriate response. But the lasting impact of McCain's decision will be much more profound than upsetting an 11-year-old wise Latina girl. In fact, I would venture to say that, politically, there are many in the Republican Party who are convinced this was a politically unwise choice by McCain. It's just not that complicated. Look at the changing demographics in the United States. Then think about what happens when you vote against the first Latina Supreme Court nominee. Maybe McCain isn't wise enough to see that reality, so I will tell him a story about a Dominican-born, U.S. citizen cabby from my Harlem neighborhood. While he drove down Broadway, I | [
"Whose nomination did McCain oppose?",
"What was a mistake according to her?",
"What did she say Sonia Sotomayor did?",
"What T-shirts does Hinojosa say she and her daughter are wearing?",
"What was Maria wearing on her shirt?",
"Who has helped erase insecurity for many?"
] | [
[
"Sonia Sotomayor"
],
[
"McCain's decision"
],
[
"has helped boost self-confidence for many."
],
[
"\"I am a Wise Latina.\""
],
[
"\"I am a Wise Latina.\""
],
[
"Sonia Sotomayor"
]
] | Maria Hinojosa: My daughter and I are wearing "wise Latina" T-shirts .
She says Sonia Sotomayor has helped erase insecurity for many .
She says McCain's opposition to Sotomayor's nomination was a mistake .
Hinojosa: Political impact of Latino population is likely to grow . |
Editor's note: Marian Salzman is chief marketing officer and a partner at Porter Novelli Worldwide and is co-author of "The Future of Men" and "Next Now." She was named among the "top five trendspotters" by VNU in 2004 and has been credited with popularizing the term "metrosexuality." She blogs at www.pnintelligentdialogue.com. See Salzman on American Morning and CNN.com Live Monday, December 29. Marian Salzman says "cuspers" are staking out a separate identity from the baby boomer generation. NEW YORK (CNN) -- Rarely has there been a year when so many things went out of style in such a short time: not just investment bankers, gas-guzzling vehicles, corporate jets, conspicuous consumption and political polarization, but also a whole generation. After strutting and tub-thumping and preening their way across the high ground of politics, media, culture and finance for 30 years, baby boomers have gone from top dogs to scapegoats in barely a year. As baby boomers lose their authority and appeal, generational power is shifting one notch down: to cuspers (born roughly 1954-1965), who arrived in style in 2008 with their first truly major figure, Barack Obama (born 1961). George W. Bush, born in 1946 at the start of the postwar baby boom for which his generation is named, will leave office with the lowest approval ratings since Richard Nixon was president. As Thomas Friedman has written, Bush epitomizes what's now seen as "The Greediest Generation." Who's to blame for the economy going into serious decline? The short and easy answer is greedy boomers. This is the generation that knew better than their cautious, fuddy-duddy parents, the generation that protested, that had ideals and marched to the beat of defiant music: "Street Fighting Man," "We Want the World and We Want It Now," "Hope I Die Before I Get Old." It's the generation that pursued pleasure, proclaimed "I can have it all" and refused to grow old -- "50 is the new 30," etc. And now, after years of taking credit for changing the world, baby boomers are taking the rap for the reversal of fortune that's shaking the world. Whatever history may decide, today's commentators and pundits of all ages have decided that boomers, the dominant cohort in many developed countries, are guilty. And whether they're really to blame, what counts is that they look like they are. Their profile fits. Like a big-name Hollywood director who's lived on the edge too long, caused one too many scandals and made one too many turkeys, suddenly the boomers are the generation no one wants to be associated with. Cuspers, the age cohort that have been living in the shadow of the boomers, now have even more reasons to stake out their own separate identity and values. It's taken a long time for this rising demographic to be recognized as a distinct generation in its own right. They've been called "late boomers" because they missed the formative boomer experiences of the '60s, such as civil rights and anti-war protests. They've been called tweeners or cuspers because they straddle the divide between Boomers and Gen X. American social commentator Jonathan Pontell has worked hard to establish their identity as Generation Jones. There's still debate about whether cuspers are even a generation apart from boomers and where the generational boundaries lie. But those arguments miss the key point, which is that Americans want change. In Obama, they see the hopeful prospect of a new generation taking over. And in these dark days, they're hoping against hope that his generation can usher in new, better values to guide the nation. His victory has been portrayed as the end of Vietnam War politics and the 1960s "culture wars." About half those Obama named to major posts in the new administration are also cuspers including the proposed energy czar, education secretary, treasury secretary and U.N. ambassador. Cuspers may have another poster child if Caroline Kennedy, born in 1957 | [
"What to say about the next of cuspers?",
"how long have baby boomers dominated politics?",
"What are \"cuspers\"?",
"who are known as the \"greediest generation\"?",
"Which generation is unlikely to repeat the mistaked of boomers?",
"what are the next generation known as?",
"Which generation has earned the title of the \"greediest generation\"?"
] | [
[
"\"cuspers\" are staking out a separate identity from the baby boomer generation."
],
[
"30 years,"
],
[
"Cuspers, the age cohort that have been living in the shadow of the boomers,"
],
[
"baby boom"
],
[
"Gen X."
],
[
"\"The Greediest Generation.\""
],
[
"baby boomers"
]
] | Marian Salzman: For 30 years, baby boomers dominated politics, culture .
She says they've earned the title of the "greediest generation"
Salzman says next generation of "cuspers" is taking over with Obama .
The cuspers are different and unlikely to repeat boomers' mistakes, she says . |
Editor's note: Mark Gendreau, MD, is senior staff physician and vice chairman of emergency medicine at Lahey Clinic, Burlington, Massachusetts, and assistant professor of emergency medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. His interests include health issues associated with commercial air travel, including transmission of infectious diseases.
Dr. Mark Gendreau says swine flu is focusing attention on how to avoid getting a disease while traveling by air.
(CNN) -- The novel swine flu is showing the world just how interconnected we are and how commercial aircraft can serve as vehicles of rapid disease spread.
I am frequently asked: What is the risk of catching an illness while flying?
In a nutshell, the risk of getting an infection while you're in an enclosed space such as an airplane depends upon three factors: The infectiousness of the contagious person spreading the illness; the degree of your exposure (how close you are to the contagious person and for how long); and the ventilation of the space or passenger cabin.
We really have no control over the infectiousness of our fellow passengers, and usually, you really don't have much of a choice about your seating partners. So the exposure is pure chance.
But this doesn't mean that you are doomed. Most respiratory viral infectious diseases -- like influenza and the common cold -- transmit via droplets contaminated with the offending microorganism when the infectious person coughs or sneezes.
These droplets are propelled no farther than 3 feet and can land on an inanimate object -- such as a seat, overhead bin or seat tray -- or on your body. This is why hand hygiene is so critical and is the single most significant thing you can do to protect yourself and your family when you are traveling or out in public.
Study after study shows marked reductions in transmission in public spaces when hand hygiene is practiced, and a recent study found nearly undetectable influenza particle levels after hands contaminated with influenza were washed with either soap and water or an over-the-counter gel containing at least 50 percent alcohol.
Sanitize your hands before eating, drinking and after retrieving something from the overhead bin or returning from the restroom, and you have just cut your chances of getting infected by at least 40 percent. One of my disappointments with the airline industry is its lack of providing alcohol-based hand sanitizers to passengers. Such a service would go a long way in eliminating infection spread within aircraft. iReport.com: Have swine flu fears altered your travel plans?
Ventilation is the final crucial element to consider in minimizing infection spread. Ventilation dilutes the concentration of infectious particles within any confined space, thereby reducing the probability of infection.
Experience shows us that transmission becomes widespread within the passenger cabin involving all sections when the ventilation system is not working -- as evidenced by an influenza outbreak in 1979 involving passengers being kept aboard grounded aircraft with an inoperative ventilation system.
Air circulation patterns aboard standard commercial aircraft are side-to-side (laminar), with air entering the cabin from overhead, circulating across the aircraft and exiting the cabin near the floor. Little to no front-to -back (longitudinal) airflow takes place.
This air circulation pattern "compartmentalizes" the air flow into sections, thereby limiting the spread of airborne particles throughout the passenger cabin. Ventilation can involve either 100 percent fresh air in which outside air enters and leaves the cabin in a single pass or a system in which various fractions of air are recirculated from the aircraft cabin and mixed with fresh air.
Most commercial aircraft in service recirculate 50 percent of the air delivered to the passenger cabin for improved control of cabin circulation, humidity and fuel efficiency. The recirculated air usually passes through high-efficiency particulate (HEPA) filters before delivery into the cabin.
HEPA filtering of recirculated cabin air to minimize exposure to infectious particles is established within scientific literature, practiced daily in health care facilities and is strongly endorsed by the medical community and cabin health experts.
However, oddly enough, the Federal Aviation Administration, its British counterpart, the Civil Aviation Authority, and Europe's Joint Aviation Authorities do not require the use of these filters on | [
"How many things affect the likelihood of getting sick from a plane trip?",
"What could help prevent spread?",
"What is Swine flu focusing attention on?",
"What is the swine flu focusing attention on?"
] | [
[
"three"
],
[
"alcohol-based hand sanitizers"
],
[
"how to avoid getting a disease while traveling by air."
],
[
"how to avoid getting a disease while traveling by air."
]
] | Mark Gendreau: Swine flu is focusing attention on illness and air travel .
He says three things affect the likelihood of your getting sick from a plane trip .
Gendreau: Sick passengers, your exposure and ventilation are key factors .
He says using hand sanitizers on planes would help prevent spread . |
Editor's note: Maury Klein is professor emeritus of history at the University of Rhode Island. He is the author of 15 books, including "Rainbow's End: The Crash of 1929" and most recently "The Power Makers: Steam, Electricity, and the Men Who Made Modern America." Historian Maury Klein says it's important to remember that psychology plays a huge role in financial markets. (CNN) -- Friday marks the 79th anniversary of the day that launched the stock market crash of 1929. As an unprecedented wave of selling threw the floor of the New York Stock Exchange into pandemonium on a day that became known as Black Thursday, a show of organized support by a coterie of leading bankers halted the panic. But on the following Monday, the market collapsed in a tsunami of selling. Every intense convulsion of the stock market raises primal fears spawned by the Great Crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression, which dragged on for a full decade and has haunted Americans ever since. The Panic of 2008 is no exception. In the past year, the market's fall has at times rivaled that of 1929. Are there connections or similarities between those earlier national traumas and our current crisis? First some facts about that earlier experience. The Great Crash and the Great Depression were two separate events. The Crash was a financial panic, the Depression an economic downturn. The one does not necessarily lead to the other; the market has collapsed several times in American history without bringing on a depression. Great Depression holds lessons for surviving a tough economy The Crash began in October 1929, and the worst of it was over in three weeks; the Depression did not fasten itself on the nation for another year. To this day, the connection between them remains unclear, which makes it difficult to draw lessons or analogies from them. The Dow plunged 39 percent between October 23 and November 13, 1929, but it regained 74 percent of that loss by March 1930. Only when the economy failed to gain momentum in the spring did the market slip back. By fall the country had slipped into a depression, and the market resumed a downward course that did not touch bottom until July 1932. It did not again return to the levels of 1929 until 1954. The Depression did not end until increased military spending revived the economy in the spring of 1940. The bull market of the 1920s was unique in that it marked the first time large numbers of ordinary people participated. The market moved from Wall Street to Main Street and aroused intense interest even among people who were not active in it. The new investors, or "fish" as the pros called them, were prone to panic when the market fell sharply. Could it happen again? History never repeats itself, but historical patterns do -- though always in a new context. Here are just a few of the similarities and differences between the earlier crisis and its modern version. During the 1920s, the financial industry underwent a great expansion, bringing into the business many inexperienced people and new investment vehicles -- most notably the investment trust, the forerunner of the modern mutual fund. Nobody knew what impact they would have on the market with their buying and selling on a large scale. The business world hailed the 1920s as the "New Era," one with new rules in which the old pattern of cyclical depressions would no longer occur and prosperity would be continuous. Compare this delusion with the "New Economy" of the 1990s. The 1920s marked the beginning of the consumer economy, and with it a broad expansion of credit. Installment buying made its debut on a large scale. Credit also was used to buy stocks on margin, greatly increasing the market's volume and volatility. The banking system was shaky throughout the 1920s, and failures escalated steadily after 1929. The Crash exposed many cases of fraud that led to investigations and passage of the most significant banking reform in American history. The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., or FDIC, gave rise to the Securities and Exchange Commission, | [
"What is the opinion of Maury Klein?",
"what eventually faded?",
"What does Klein say about the crisis?",
"what were two separate events?"
] | [
[
"it's important to remember that psychology plays a huge role in financial markets."
],
[
"failures"
],
[
"it's important to remember that psychology plays a huge role in financial markets."
],
[
"the Great Crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression,"
]
] | Maury Klein: The 1929 market crash and the Depression were separate events .
Many financial panics have not led to depressions, Klein says .
Before 1933, the government wasn't active in trying to save banks, he says .
After crisis, people demanded regulation, which eventually faded, Klein says . |
Editor's note: Michael A. Olivas is the William B. Bates Distinguished Chair in Law at the University of Houston Law Center and director of the university's Institute for Higher Education Law and Governance. He is the editor of "Colored Men And Hombres Aquí: Hernandez V. Texas and the Emergence of Mexican American Lawyering," and is a member of the board of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Michael Olivas says Sonia Sotomayor's nomination affirms that Latinos matter in America. (CNN) -- I recently saw an old episode of "West Wing," where Edward James Olmos, playing a fictional Puerto Rican federal judge, was nominated to become the first Latino on the U.S. Supreme Court. I cried, thinking how remote this possibility seemed, yet how close. Now that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has been nominated by President Barack Obama to the Court, that episode finally rings true. When I heard the news, I wept, for the long-overdue acknowledgement that Latinos matter. Judge Sotomayor's life and legal career are arcs possible only in this country: a hardscrabble life in a south Bronx housing project, educational opportunities made possible by her own intelligence and hard work, and a legal career devoted to public service. When she assumes her position on the bench in October, no other justice will have had the depth of legal experience she holds, and none will have served as a trial judge. The sum of her life is exactly what we should look for on this court: excellent academic credentials, an accomplished legal career in private and government practice, and appointments to federal benches by Republican and Democrat presidents. Her decisions have been well-reasoned and well-written, and she will ably take her place on the Supreme Court bench. The search for a justice with "empathy" is no less coded than is the traditional search for "judicial temperament" and a person who will "judge, not legislate." All nominees have the requisite merit badges, as does Judge Sotomayor. And to make their way to such a short list, all have the combination of personal and professional lives that warrant their consideration. What Sonia Sotomayor will have, as few other candidates, is the additional weight of historical expectations and the hopes of Latinos. In today's culture, Latinos are marginalized and demonized and feared. In Judge Sotomayor's New York, roving gangs of thugs go "beaner hunting," looking to harm undocumented Mexicans. Such racial hatred knows no nuance, as one such mob killed a permanent resident Ecuadorian, thinking him to be Mexican. Vigilantes along the Mexican border have taken the law of enforcement into their own hands. In cultural programming, this community is described as either lazy and shiftless, or stealing jobs from real Americans. They are typecast as drogeros or maids, long characterized as banditos or greasers. The racial rhetoric against Latinos has been tolerated for too long on cable television news and in political and polite discourse. I will be carefully watching the confirmation hearings for the coded political messages, knowing that Justice-elect Sotomayor's many merits will ultimately win her confirmation. But also watching will be little girls in a south Bronx housing project, in the valley of South Texas, and in rural New Mexico. Her service on our country's highest court will be the evidence that they, too, have reason to hope and to achieve. All of this country's citizens should realize that it is not just Latinos' dreams being realized, but our collective accomplishment. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Michael Olivas. | [
"In the present American culture, Latinos are what?",
"Who is Judge Sonia Sotomayor?",
"The name of the Judge is what?",
"What does the nomination send?",
"In what light are Latinos seen in American culture?",
"What is a historic moment?"
] | [
[
"marginalized and demonized and feared."
],
[
"has been nominated by President Barack Obama to the Court,"
],
[
"Sonia Sotomayor"
],
[
"affirms that Latinos matter in America."
],
[
"marginalized and demonized and feared."
],
[
"Sonia Sotomayor's nomination"
]
] | Michael Olivas: Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination is a historic moment .
He says she has the personal and professional qualificiations to be confirmed .
Olivas: In American culture, Latinos are marginalized and feared .
He says Sotomayor's nomination sends an important message of hope . |
Editor's note: Michael Eric Dyson is a professor of sociology at Georgetown University and the author of 16 books, including the New York Times bestseller, "April 4, 1968: Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Death and How it Changed America". Michael Eric Dyson says the arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr. shows that the U.S. is not "a post-racial paradise." (CNN) -- Last Thursday, President Obama, in his fiery speech before the NAACP Convention, admitted that "an African-American child is roughly five times as likely as a white child to see the inside of a prison." But he surely couldn't have imagined that only a couple of hours before his oration, one of America's most prominent scholars -- and a distinguished professor at Obama's alma mater, Harvard University -- would breathe cruel and ironic life into that sad statistic. Henry Louis "Skip" Gates Jr. is simply the most powerful and influential black scholar in our nation's history. He received a doctorate at Cambridge University long before the culture wars became au courant; he was among the first group of figures to receive a MacArthur "Genius Award" Fellowship; he wrote the finest work of literary criticism in a generation with "Signifying Monkey"; he was named by Time magazine as one of the "25 Most Influential Americans"; he has a boatload of honorary degrees; and he has been a ubiquitous media presence and thoughtful interpreter of race and culture for a quarter-century. But none of that made a bit of difference when Gates returned from a research trip to China to find the front door to his Harvard-owned house jammed and enlisted the assistance of his driver to muscle the door loose. By the time Gates was on the phone with his leasing company, a white policeman had arrived, summoned by a neighbor who spotted two black men looking as if they were unlawfully breaking into the house. Their stories diverge from here; the policeman says he asked Gates to step outside, Gates refused, the officer entered the home and requested Gates' ID, which he didn't initially produce, and finally had Gates arrested when he followed the officer outside, as Gates was "exhibiting loud and tumultuous behavior." Gates allegedly shouted, "Is this how you treat a black man in America?" and "You don't know who you're messing with." Gates says he showed the officer his ID, demanded that the officer identify himself, which he didn't, and then the professor followed the officer outside to get the policeman's name and badge number when he was arrested by the gaggle of police who had gathered. Several features of the story scream the presence of lingering bias and racism. A black man in a tony neighborhood simply seems out of place, even to his neighbors. Had Gates been a white professor trying to get inside his home, and called on his driver to help him jar his door open, he probably wouldn't have as readily aroused the suspicion of neighbors. And when police arrived to check out the premises, they probably wouldn't have been nearly as ready to believe the worst about the occupant of a home who clearly wasn't engaged in a criminal act. Whatever one believes about what happened, Gates clearly wasn't the beneficiary of the benefit of the doubt, a reasonable expectation since he posed no visible threat. It is also striking that Gates seems to be the victim of a police mentality that chafes at a challenge of its implicit authority. While that may be true for folk of all races, it seems especially galling to cops to be questioned by a person of color. How dare black folk believe that, regardless of their station or privilege, they have permission to speak back -- or speak black -- to state-enforced authority, one that, not a decade ago, routinely ravaged black communities in blatant displays of wanton aggression. It is for good reason that police brutality is a constant concern for black folk; the stakes are often high and harmful. The link between black vulnerability and racial profiling -- of | [
"What are police sensitive to?",
"What shows that U.S. still grapples with racism?",
"What does Dyson say about Gates?"
] | [
[
"questioned by a person of color."
],
[
"arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr."
],
[
"shows that the U.S. is not \"a post-racial paradise.\""
]
] | Michael Eric Dyson: Gates is an eminent intellectual and Harvard professor .
He says Gates' arrest in Cambridge shows that U.S. still grapples with racism .
He says police are particularly sensitive to questioning from people of color .
Dyson: Obama must renew his pledge to eliminate racial profiling . |
Editor's note: Michael Steele is chairman of the Republican National Committee. Michael Steele says it's becoming clear that the Obama administration is spending money recklessly. (CNN) -- Friday marks President Obama's 200th day in office, and in most respects, his second hundred days as president have been worse than the first 100. Obama campaigned on bringing "change" to America, and during his first 200 days as president, his real definition of change is becoming absolutely clear to Americans. Obama and congressional Democrats are determined to conduct their reckless and costly liberal experiments on the American people without any regard to the consequences. Whether a $787 billion stimulus bill, a "cap-and-trade" scheme that is nothing more than a huge national energy tax on every American family and business, or a $1.6 trillion government-run health care plan, more and more Americans are rightfully concerned about Obama's change for this country. Since Obama and Democrats rushed through Congress a $787 billion stimulus package, unemployment in America has risen close to 9.5 percent, and every indication is that it will climb even higher when July's unemployment report is released Friday. In total, more than 2.6 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office. But what has the president's stimulus bill brought us, if not the jobs he promised? Wasteful spending, such as $18 million to redesign Recovery.gov, the very government Web site used to monitor stimulus spending, or $3.4 million for an "eco tunnel" in Florida designed to provide safe passage for turtles looking to cross the street. This is not the economic stimulus that the American people expected. The second of Obama's grand experiments on America was his massive so-called cap-and-trade bill that was rammed through the House of Representatives this past June so fast that congressmen weren't given the chance to read it. This bill is nothing more than a national energy tax, plain and simple. Its sole purpose is to increase the cost of energy so that Americans might use less. The Heritage Foundation estimated that it would end up costing the average American family up to $1,870 per year and decrease the national GDP by $161 billion in the year 2020. The foundation also determined that during the 2012-2035 timeline, job losses would average more than 1.1 million. Add in the fact that it would do almost nothing to prevent "climate change," and all that is left is a national energy tax on environmentally friendly clothing. Obama's third and final experiment of his first 200 days as president -- and arguably his most dangerous -- is the fundamental transformation of our health care system. Obama is correct about one thing: Our health care system needs reform. Health care today costs too much for families and small businesses, preventing too many Americans from accessing the affordable quality care they need, when they need it. However, the president's prescription to rein in these costs has little to do with real-world dollars and cents and everything to do with the complete government takeover and control of one-sixth of the U.S. economy. The president claims that more government involvement in health care will promote competition. However, creating such a government-run entity would result in a massive government health care monopoly. Private insurers would soon be put out of business, unable to compete with the subsidized government-run plan the president and liberals want. More than 88 million Americans could be forced out of their current private insurance plans and into the government-run plan, according to a study by the Lewin Group. Obama claims that if you like your current health care, you can keep it, but this is simply not true. Then there is the issue of cost. Despite what the president says, his government-run plan won't make health care more affordable. Quite the opposite. Nothing ever becomes cheaper by being more expensive, and the Democrats' plan would cost at least $1.6 trillion, according to an analysis by Roll Call. The Congressional Budget Office determined one of the House Democrats' | [
"Who said health care reform would be costly?",
"What would the health care reform lead to?",
"Cap and trade bill is disguised as what?",
"What would need government control?",
"Which days were worst?",
"What did Steele say about the programs?"
] | [
[
"The Heritage Foundation"
],
[
"result in a massive government"
],
[
"national energy tax,"
],
[
"Our health care system"
],
[
"his second hundred"
],
[
"it's becoming clear that the Obama administration is spending money recklessly."
]
] | Michael Steele: The second hundred days have been worse than the first .
He says Obama's programs call for massive spending on liberal priorities .
Cap-and-trade bill is a disguised energy tax on average Americans, he says .
He says health care reform would be costly and lead to government control . |
Editor's note: Mike Galanos hosts "Prime News" from 5-7 p.m. ET Mondays through Fridays on HLN. "Prime News" uses the day's most powerful headlines as a starting point for diverse perspectives, spirited debate and your points of view.
Mike Galanos says child pornography charges are too harsh for teens caught "sexting."
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- "Sexting."
Have parents out there ever even heard of this term?
Whether you want to admit it or not, teenagers are sending sexual messages and naked pictures of themselves to their boyfriends and girlfriends. In most cases it's the girl sending a picture or message to the guy.
If you're thinking to yourself right now, "What's the big deal?" then you should think again. This practice can ruin our teenagers' lives.
Six teens in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, were charged as juveniles with possessing child pornography after three girls sent nude or semi-nude pictures of themselves to three boys.
It gets even worse.
A 13-year-old boy in Middletown, Ohio, is facing felony pandering obscenities charges after taping a sex act and showing it to friends at a skating party. A felony? Yes this kid needs to be punished but we don't need our 13 or 14-year-olds charged with child porn and lumped in with adult pedophiles and labeled as sex offenders.
I've spoken with several attorneys on our show and it seems there is no one reason prosecutors are opting to charge teens with child porn instead of lesser charges. Some may be doing it to "send a message."
Some may feel they have an obligation to charge these teens with the most serious offense possible and, according to the law, naked pictures of underage kids are usually considered child porn. And others may feel they are left with no options since there aren't really any laws that apply specifically to sexting.
In any case, it's clear we need to change our laws to catch up with technology.
A great illustration of why change is needed now is the story of Phillip Alpert, of Orlando, Florida. He didn't ask, but his girlfriend sexted him naked pictures of herself, according to the Orlando Sentinel. When they broke up, he mass e-mailed the photos to get back at her. Alpert, 18, was convicted of transmission of child porn and he will carry the label of "sex offender" until he is 43. He lost friends, was kicked out of school, he can't even move in with his dad because his dad lives near a school.
Should Phillip be punished? Yes. Should the six teens in Pennsylvania face consequences? Yes. But let's kick them off cheerleading squads and sports teams. Make them do community service and take classes on sex crimes. Educate other teens on the dangers of sexting. Pay a price, yes, but these young people shouldn't pay for this for the rest of their lives.
And if you think this couldn't happen to your kid, think again. Sexting is more prevalent than you think.
The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy teamed up with CosmoGirl.com and asked over 1,200 teens about their sexual behaviors in cyberspace.
According to their study, 39 percent of teens (that's ages 13-19) are sending or posting sexually suggestive messages over IM, text or e-mail and around the same number of teens are receiving such messages. Half of those teens, 20 percent, are sending or posting nude or semi-nude pictures of themselves. That's frightening.
Why are our kids doing this?
On our show, psychotherapist Stacy Kaiser said, "What I'm finding is a lot of girls are doing this because they're hoping it will help them get or keep a boyfriend." The numbers agree with Stacy.
According to the study, 51 percent of girls say it's "pressure from guys" that's making them send sexual messages and pictures of themselves. So guys are expecting this and our girls are saying "OK. | [
"what happened to him",
"who should be aware of what's happening?",
"who are are sending explicit photos of themselves?",
"what should be punished?"
] | [
[
"is facing felony"
],
[
"parents"
],
[
"teenagers"
],
[
"Phillip"
]
] | Mike Galanos: Teens are sending explicit photos of themselves to other kids .
He says parents should be aware of what's happening and educate children .
Galanos: Sexting should be punished but not treated as child pornography . |
Editor's note: Myron Lowery is mayor of Memphis, Tennessee. Memphis Mayor Myron Lowery fist bumps the Dalai Lama on his arrival in the Tennessee city. MEMPHIS, Tennessee (CNN) -- "Hello Dalai, Well, hello ... Dalai!" It seemed like a good idea at the time. And with hindsight being 20/20; it still does. How often do you get to meet an international figure as captivating as the Dalai Lama? I wanted to make an impression, and break the ice, in my Southern hospitality sort of way. So enter the lyric from the song and the fist bump now heard round the world. I had been told by his representatives that the Dalai Lama had a wonderful sense of humor, and would enjoy the exchange. Indeed, he did. His Holiness laughed, returned the gesture, and gave me his blessings. And in our brief time together, I saw in his eyes the sparkle of kindness, love and good humor. It's unfortunate that not everyone could allow themselves to enjoy the moment, as we did. Barely an hour passed before reporters began calling to say my fist bump with the Dalai Lama was "disrespectful," unusual and perhaps inappropriate. Why would I do that, they asked? Well to answer that, I would have to go back a couple of weeks or so. One of my assistants in the mayor's office began feeling ill. After a couple of days off work, she was diagnosed with the H1N1 flu. She sits 10 feet away from me. The swine flu story was hitting close to home in a major way. As the leader of a major city, I had to step forward and deal with fears about a virus that has never been known to man. Watch the Dalai Lama's fist bump » So I rolled up my sleeves and took a shot for the seasonal flu. I encouraged everyone to get the H1N1 vaccine as soon as it becomes available. I urged people to cough politely into a napkin or their sleeve. I had hand sanitizer installed in the common areas at city hall. I greeted the Chairman of the City Council with a fist bump and it made the local news. It became a running theme in City Hall. The mayor would greet you with a fist bump. A day before His Holiness came to the city, I spoke to the Dalai Lama's protocol team and they said he would not be upset or offended being greeted this way. In fact it has happened in the past. So, armed with this information I decided to greet him when he arrived Tuesday in a similar fashion. Not because of any concern about H1N1. I greeted him this way because I'm a down to earth guy, who was raised by a single mother with four sons in public housing. I still tell everyone to call me Myron. I am now living a dream as the mayor of Memphis. And Wednesday, as I sat and watched His Holiness accept an award from the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis, the gravity of the moment was in no way lost on me. An international crusader for peace was here on the hallowed ground where the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. took his last breath. He offered his blessings, walked into the crowd, touched people. He carried himself humbly, not as one to be feared, but as a man, sharing his humanity, making us all better for it. So in the final analysis, I know His Holiness is always happy to participate in local customs, however obscure. He is about peace and harmony, and a fist bump is just another expression of warm friendship that he again returned to me before he left. And the "Hello, Dalai?" Well, that was just a bonus. He knew it was coming and we all laughed together. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Myron Lowery. | [
"who is myron lowery?",
"Who greeted the dalai lama with a fist bump?"
] | [
[
"mayor of Memphis, Tennessee."
],
[
"Memphis Mayor Myron Lowery"
]
] | Myron Lowery: I greeted the Dalai Lama with a fist bump and a pun .
He says H1N1 virus led to fears about spread of the new disease .
He says he's been encouraging people to use fist bump to reduce spread .
Lowery: "A fist bump is just another expression of warm friendship" |
Editor's note: Nafees A. Syed, a junior at Harvard University majoring in government, is an editorial editor at The Harvard Crimson as well as a senior editor and columnist for the Harvard-MIT journal on Islam and society, Ascent. She is chairwoman of the Harvard Institute of Politics Policy Group on Racial Profiling.
Nafees Syed says President Obama's early words and actions send a powerful, positive signal to Muslims.
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) -- President Obama has given the Muslim community around the world the message we have been waiting for.
He reassured Muslims in America that "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers." For those like me who were critical of his standoffish attitude toward Islam during his campaign, this signaled a welcome change.
Even more important was his subsequent statement: "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect."
In traveling throughout Western Europe in the past two years, I heard several anti-American comments; these Europeans were challenging me, a Muslim, about American foreign policy in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Muslim countries, I've heard admiring comments about how great it must be to live in a rich country like America, followed by accusations that, "your President Bush doesn't like us Muslims."
As a Muslim-American, I have found myself in a difficult position. In America, I've had to explain Islam to other Americans, and abroad, I've had to explain America to those in the Muslim world.
Obama has done all Americans a favor by extending a hand of friendship to the Muslim world. For me personally, it has alleviated the pain of witnessing the country I love engage in a foreign policy that I could not approve of as a Muslim and as an American -- a foreign policy that created mutual distrust between Americans and Muslims. And Obama has followed up on his statements with actions.
In his first steps as president, Obama has initiated the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison, called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq and appointed former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, well-respected for his role in the Northern Ireland peace process, as special envoy for the Middle East.
For the past few weeks, I've heard overwhelming praise from Muslims for Obama's recent actions.
Obama has recognized a key fact that former President George W. Bush did not: Muslims in America and elsewhere are strongly affected by the situation of other Muslims in the world.
There is a popular saying of the Prophet Mohammed's that the Muslim community is like one body: If one part hurts, the entire body feels the pain. Muslims are very aware of this message and, in the last 20 years, three conflicts have continuously dominated the Muslim consciousness: Chechnya, Kashmir and, most notably, Palestine.
Obama recognized this when he chose his first interview as president to be with a reporter from Al-Arabiya, indicating he would actively engage Arab media. The Palestinian-Israeli issue dominated the interview, with Obama promising to work toward a solution involving both sides of the conflict.
To understand the challenge Obama faces in changing America's role in the conflict, one must realize the situation he walked into as president. Muslims around the world were watching the suffering of innocent Palestinian civilians in a Gaza military campaign conducted with a green light from the Bush administration. Obama is essentially trying to rebuild a relationship that has been destroyed.
However, Obama's tone of respect and not condescension, a clear break with the past, improves the chances that such a relationship could arise.
His interview with Al-Arabiya was filled with reassuring statements that America is "ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest," that "the language we use has to be a language of respect." After years of hearing rhetoric of "a crusade" and "Islamofascism" from the U.S. government, Obama's policy of listening, not dictating, has generated optimism in the Muslim world.
I | [
"Who says Muslims worldwide have shared concern about key issues?",
"What did Obama's interview with Al-Arabiya talk of?",
"Who said anything about Bush?",
"What is Obama doing?",
"What Nafees Syed said about Obama`s reaching to Muslim world?"
] | [
[
"Nafees Syed"
],
[
"Palestinian-Israeli issue"
],
[
"Muslim countries,"
],
[
"has given the Muslim community around the world the message we have been waiting for."
],
[
"positive signal"
]
] | Nafees Syed: Obama is reaching out to Muslim world with words, actions .
She says Muslims worldwide have a shared concern about key issues .
Syed: Obama's interview with Al-Arabiya talked of respect and partnership .
She says Bush administration used harsh language of crusade, Islamofascism . |
Editor's note: Nancy G. Brinker is the founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure, named after her only sister, Susan, who died from breast cancer in 1980. The organization describes itself as the "world's largest grassroots network of breast cancer survivors and activists fighting to save lives, empower people, ensure quality care for all and energize science to find cures." Brinker served as Ambassador to Hungary in 2001 and Chief of Protocol of the United States during the Bush administration.
Nancy Brinker says a bill by Sens. Ted Kennedy and Kay Bailey Hutchison would renew the fight against cancer.
(CNN) -- During his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Obama urged a new effort "to conquer a disease that has touched the life of nearly every American, including me, by seeking a cure for cancer in our time."
It was a call to action that resonated for me, as it's a cause I've dedicated my life to pursuing.
Nearly three decades ago I promised my sister, Suzy, who died at age 36 from breast cancer, that I would do everything I could to end the disease that took her life.
A couple of years later, I too was diagnosed with breast cancer, at age 37. Fortunately my cancer was detected and treated much earlier than Suzy's, and it was much smaller and not nearly as aggressive. Following a mastectomy and four rounds of chemotherapy, I am now a 25-year survivor.
We have made a lot of progress since the 1980s. We now have a basic understanding of breast cancer, which is the foundation for discovering the cures. And with this new understanding, we're moving toward more personalized treatments -- as each patient and each tumor is different, their treatment must reflect those differences.
Yet while we are in position to experience significant advances, the sad fact remains that we are still facing an enormous cancer crisis -- cancer will claim the lives of more than a half-million people this year -- about 1,500 people a day.
In all, 40 percent of Americans will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives, including approximately 1.4 million new cases this year alone. With the graying of the Baby Boom generation, we are about to experience a cancer tsunami.
Thus I was inspired to hear our new president call for reigniting our nation's war on cancer. And it didn't take long for a bipartisan group of senators to answer that challenge. The group, led by Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, and Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, who have been working together and in close consultation and collaboration with the cancer community for more than a year, introduced the 21st Century Cancer ALERT (access to life-saving early detection, research and treatment) Act.
This bill is an effort to address our shortcomings and renew our commitment to discovering and delivering the cures to cancer.
In a period where Democrats control both the Congress and the White House and true bipartisanship is a rare and precious commodity, I am grateful to both senators, particularly Hutchison, for ensuring that this was a true partnership, and that everyone had a seat at the table. For Kennedy, this is obviously a personal issue. Hutchison has been with us in this fight since our early days, and this would not have happened without her leadership.
The first step in saving lives is in detecting cancer early. If breast cancer is a guide, developing effective early detection techniques is critically important to increasing mortality rates. For example, when my sister died, only 77 percent of women who discovered their cancer before it spread beyond the breast survived at least five years. After nearly three decades of investments and advancements, the five-year survival rate has increased to 98 percent.
Unfortunately, many cancers still do not have effective early detection methods. Ovarian cancer is a particularly devastating example: There is no screening diagnostic, thus a diagnosis is most often made after the cancer has spread.
According to the American Cancer Society, when ovarian cancer is detected locally, the survival rate is 92 | [
"Who is the survivor?",
"Who made a promise to her sister?",
"What would go far toward energizing fight against cancer?",
"Who made a promise?",
"Who is Nancy Brinke?",
"What kind of cancer did she die from?",
"When did she have breast cancer?",
"What kind of legislations is she looking for?",
"Who dedicated herself to fighting the disease?"
] | [
[
"Nancy G. Brinker"
],
[
"Nancy G. Brinker"
],
[
"a bill by Sens. Ted Kennedy and Kay Bailey Hutchison"
],
[
"Nancy Brinker"
],
[
"founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure,"
],
[
"breast"
],
[
"1980."
],
[
"renew our commitment to discovering and delivering the cures to cancer."
],
[
"Nancy Brinker"
]
] | Nancy Brinker: I made promise to my sister who died of breast cancer .
A cancer survivor, Brinker says she's dedicated herself to fighting the disease .
She says new legislation would go far toward energizing fight against cancer . |
Editor's note: Nancy Grace is the host of "Nancy Grace" on HLN nightly at 8 and 10 p.m. ET. Read an excerpt from her new novel "The Eleventh Victim" published by Hyperion. Nancy Grace found it challenging to complete her first novel, "The Eleventh Victim." (CNN) -- Readers of Nancy Grace's debut novel, "The Eleventh Victim," would be forgiven if they assumed the main character is based on Grace. After all, the heroine of the novel becomes an Atlanta, Georgia, district attorney after her fiancé is murdered and later relocates to New York for a fresh start. But Grace said there are some differences between her and her protagonist. "Hailey is a much better person than I am," Grace said. The tough-as-nails anchor of the HLN show that bears her name was driven to complete her first book of fiction, which she said has been in the works for almost a decade. The novel centers on the character of Hailey Dean, a psychology student who becomes a prosecutor after the tragic murder of her fiancé just weeks before their wedding. The mystery takes flight when Dean, having relocated to Manhattan and trained as a therapist, discovers that her patients are being murdered in a copycat style of an Atlanta serial killer from her past. Grace -- who is also the author of the nonfiction book "Objection!" -- recently spoke to CNN about the challenges of giving birth to both twins and a thriller, who might die in her next novel and what she thinks about television shows like "Saturday Night Live" parodying her. CNN: You are a working mother of two year-old twins. How in the world did you find time to write a book? Nancy Grace: It was hard work. I had done "Objection" and I had an idea for a second nonfiction. I went back to my editor and I said "Here's an idea for another nonfiction." She said "Yeah, it's OK, you got anything else?" I said "No, but I do have an old manuscript I've been working on for a long time, a murder mystery." I told her it's not finished yet, I have about 300 pages. I took it over that day and the next day they told me they wanted a two-book series on Hailey Dean. Then I thought "Oh Lord, now I've got to finish it." That happened around the time I got pregnant. Watch Nancy discuss her new book » I had a difficult pregnancy. I was in a wheelchair, I threw up every day, I broke my foot during the pregnancy, so a lot of crazy things happened. Finally, after the twins came, the deadline came. I literally had to sit in the bed with the computer and force myself to finish it. I knew what was going to happen in each of the four storylines, but I had to get there. I would be up sometimes until 3 or 4 in the morning. The twins, one would wake up, by the time I would get that one fed and down, the other one would wake up and then it was time to get up at 5:30. CNN: You said you knew who did it in terms of the mystery early on in the writing. So how did the book change during its development? Grace: The characters really developed. It's like getting to know a person. Read an excerpt from the novel There are certain things Hailey simply would not do. You get to know your characters and they become richer and more intricate because you get to know the character. I would not do anything that was out of character for them. CNN: The plot and the settings sound very familiar to your own life. How much of you is in Hailey? Grace: Hailey is a much better person than I am, I can tell you that much. She's very brave. She thinks her way out of difficult and almost | [
"What is said about the character?",
"What is the name of the lead character?",
"what does Grace say?",
"What is Grace's novel?",
"what is Nancy Grace's debut novel?",
"Who is Hailey Dean?",
"what is Nancy Grace's debut novel called?",
"Who is the second book about?",
"Who wrote The Eleventh Victim?",
"What did Nancy Grace say?",
"Who is The Eleventh Victim about?",
"What is the name of Nancy Grace's debut novel?",
"What does Grace say about the main character?",
"What is the title of Nancy Grace's debut novel?"
] | [
[
"there are some differences between her and her protagonist."
],
[
"Hailey Dean,"
],
[
"\"Hailey is a much better person than I am,\""
],
[
"\"The Eleventh Victim\""
],
[
"\"The Eleventh Victim\""
],
[
"heroine of the novel"
],
[
"\"The Eleventh Victim\""
],
[
"Hailey Dean."
],
[
"Nancy Grace"
],
[
"\"Hailey is a much better person than I am,\""
],
[
"Hailey Dean, a psychology student"
],
[
"\"The Eleventh Victim.\""
],
[
"\"Hailey is a much better person than I am,\""
],
[
"\"The Eleventh Victim.\""
]
] | Nancy Grace's debut novel, "The Eleventh Victim" has a story similar to hers .
Grace says main character "is a much better person than I am"
The thriller was almost a decade in the making .
Book first of two planned about prosecutor-turned-therapist Hailey Dean . |
Editor's note: Nathaniel Frank is author of "Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America" and is senior research fellow at the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara, that has focused on gender, sexuality and the military. He also teaches on the adjunct faculty at New York University.
Nathaniel Frank says there's no evidence that letting gays serve openly would harm the military.
(CNN) -- This week, four senior retired officers wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post predicting "grave harm" to the military if President Obama moves forward with his vow to let gays serve openly.
"Our experience," they wrote, "and that of more than 1,000 retired flag and general officers," suggest that lifting the ban would harm unit cohesion, recruitment and retention, and would ultimately "break the All-Volunteer Force."
The argument is an old one, and was an effective canard in defeating President Clinton's move to lift the ban in 1993. But it has never been rooted in fact or evidence, and the effort of these officers to defeat equal treatment this time around will face mountains of opposing data and a dramatically changed cultural landscape.
The officers who oppose openly gay service do not base their arguments on any new information. In addition to their own experience -- an impressive credential that's nevertheless too vague to hang an argument on -- the officers rely on a single poll.
They cite an unscientific survey -- it does not draw from a representative sampling but from newspaper subscribers -- indicating that 58 percent of the military oppose lifting the ban and that, if it's lifted, 24 percent claim they will leave or consider leaving after their tour ends.
But it's naïve at best, and disingenuous at worst, to confuse this opinion survey with a sound prediction of actual behavior. When both Britain and Canada proposed lifting their gay bans in the 1990s, similar opinion surveys found much higher numbers -- about two-thirds in both cases -- claiming they, too, would leave. In each case, no more than three departures were attributed to the policy change. Three.
In fact, the evidence showing that openly gay service works is overwhelming. Since 1957, when the U.S. military began doing its own studies on gays in the military, every last bit of research has shown that openly gay service works.
Studies of foreign militaries include a 1993 Government Accountability Office study of allied nations that found that "the presence of homosexuals in the military is not an issue and has not created problems in the functioning of military units"; a 1994 assessment by the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences finding that predicted negative consequences of ending gay exclusion in the Canadian Forces never materialized; the 2000 assessment of the British Ministry of Defense, calling its new policy of equal treatment "a solid achievement" with "no discernible impact" on recruitment or other critical variables; and four academic studies conducted by the Palm Center, where I work, finding that lifting bans in Britain, Israel, Canada and Australia had no negative impact on military readiness, including on recruitment and retention.
The officers writing in The Washington Post question the relevance of foreign militaries to this debate, mocking the idea that the U.S. military "must emulate Denmark, the Netherlands and Canada." But they failed to note that 24 of our closest allies let gays serve openly, including Britain, whose combat-tested soldiers and sailors serve shoulder to shoulder with U.S. forces.
While our military and culture are unique in the world, it's an astonishing vote of no-confidence in American troops to say that they are not capable of doing what 24 other militaries have done successfully. Ours is a professional, disciplined fighting force, and the assertion that a diverse military would lack order and discipline is, as Rep. Patrick Murphy, an Iraq War veteran, has said, "an insult" to him and the entire U.S. military.
But it's not just foreign militaries that provide real evidence on gay service. A majority of U.S. troops | [
"Who oppose letting gay troops serve?",
"who are accepted widely today in military?"
] | [
[
"58 percent of the military"
],
[
"gays"
]
] | Nathaniel Frank: Some retired military officers oppose letting gay troops serve .
He says they don't understand wide acceptance of gays today in military .
He says many other nations have approved gay service without harm .
Frank: Polls vastly exaggerate number of officers who might leave . |
Editor's note: Nell Minow is editor and chairwoman of the Corporate Library, an independent research company, and was named one of the 20 most influential people in corporate governance by Directorship magazine and "the queen of good corporate governance" by BusinessWeek Online. She has co-written three books. Nell Minow says AIG's board must be held accountable for the $160 million in bonus payments. (CNN) -- The stories about the outrageous $160 million bonus payments at AIG have all omitted the most important names. They are the members of AIG's Board of Directors Compensation Committee. These people should have been on the hot seat before the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises, alongside CEO Ed Liddy. Although there is a lot of blame to go around, ultimately the buck stops -- or, I should say, the bucks should have stopped -- with them. Why haven't we learned that it is the boards who are responsible for the massive failures of strategy and risk management at these companies? Regulators, journalists, securities analysts and investors routinely ignore the most obvious indicators of investment risk that are presented by bad boards of directors. This is particularly obvious in the case of AIG, which has been a serial offender in corporate governance, especially in executive compensation. Those of us who remember former CEO Hank Greenberg's departure from AIG in 2005, after a corporate governance meltdown that included excessive compensation, appreciate the irony of his comment to ABC News that the retention bonuses were "mind-boggling." Mr. Kettle, Pot is on line 1. Compensation committees are not responsible for individual pay packages below the CEO, but they are responsible for determining their overall structure -- and for making sure that the CEO's job includes effective management on compensation issues. Retention of employees may be a legitimate goal of a compensation program, but it can be accomplished in a way that is both effective and credible by being tied to performance goals and by delaying vesting until after the bailout funds are returned to taxpayers. The Corporate Library released a report in February about the boards of the bailout companies, many of which were outliers in their governance and compensation practices. Some of these were clear indicators of investment and liability risk. In several cases, we found individuals who not only sat on more than four corporate boards but also sat on more than one of these particularly troubled boards during this period. Former White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles, for example, served on the boards of Morgan Stanley, General Motors and Wachovia -- and at various times was also a director at Merck, VF Corp., Krispy Kreme and Cousins Properties. Several other directors from these troubled boards also sat on either five or six boards altogether. We call the phenomenon of directors who serve on four or more corporate boards "overboarding." Overboarding can limit the time and attention a director has for each board. It can also be an indicator of -- or a contributor to -- so many relationships and connections that it makes it more difficult to provide the respectful skepticism necessary for independent oversight. In all, 11 of the 27 companies we identified as "troubled" had at least one overboarded director. Six had more than one; at Merrill Lynch, there were five. By comparison, fewer than 30 percent of S&P 500 companies have even a single overboarded director, and fewer than 5 percent have more than one. Another key finding from our analysis: Shareholders at these companies were well aware of the relative weakness of these boards and had expressed their dissatisfaction by withholding votes from many of these individuals the year before these companies collapsed. At least 13 individual directors, all of whom sat on at least three corporate boards during this period, had received a 13 percent or higher negative vote. The highest of these was a 38.58 percent negative vote received by Sir Winfried F.W. Bischoff at McGraw-Hill, where he sat on the compensation committee. Bischoff also served on the boards at Citigroup (as chairman and interim CEO), Eli Lilly and Prudential. Although the businesses of | [
"who should be held to account?",
"who is ultimately responsible for the firm's mistakes?",
"what does she say about finance firm board members ?",
"what is it that Nell Minow say people overlook"
] | [
[
"AIG's board"
],
[
"the boards"
],
[
"must be held accountable for the $160 million in bonus payments."
],
[
"obvious indicators of investment risk"
]
] | Nell Minow: People often overlook crucial role of company board of directors .
She says AIG's board is ultimately responsible for the firm's mistakes .
Minow: Compensation committee members should be held to account .
She says many finance firm board members are too busy on other boards . |
Editor's note: On CNN's "State of the Union," host and Chief National Correspondent John King goes outside the Beltway to report on the issues affecting communities across the country. Joe Ray, left, says the cost of providing full-time workers with health care is worth it. PORTLAND, Maine (CNN) -- Joe Ray has no complaints about the economy but plenty of worries about what he sees and hears in Washington. His company, Free Range Fish & Lobster, processes 8 million pounds of fish a year, plus shellfish and lobsters. A recession means restaurant sales are down some, but that decline is more than offset by the surge in people looking for seafood as they eat more meals at home. "We're up about 30 percent," Ray said during a tour of the operation along the Portland waterfront. He says the cost of providing full-time workers with health care is expensive but worth it. "To keep good employees," he said. "So you don't have to keep changing the flow of people that are coming in and out. It costs money to do that, too." But when it comes to the debate over national health care reform, Ray sees the price as out of line with what the country can afford right now. Watch CNN's John King preview Sunday's show from a dock in Maine » "I think I'd rather just be left alone," Ray said. "Just pay my bill and try to deal with it that way." A fiscal conservative, he has a simple view of President Obama. "Right now, he is just spending, spending, spending, and I just hope it helps the country," Ray says. Paul Hogan is on the other end of the country's health care tug-of-war "It is just a crazy system, and it needs to be fixed," said Hogan, a retired attorney who held a party at his Kennebunkport home Wednesday evening to watch Obama's speech to Congress. He posted notice of his viewing party on the Obama political organization Web site but in the end watched the speech with a half-dozen friends and neighbors. No strangers signed up, as was common at such events during the Web-driven Obama presidential campaign. "I think it is much harder to get people involved in an issue," Hogan said. "I think there are lots of people who will get involved every two years or every four years and will talk to their neighbors for elections." Maine is an interesting stage in the health care debate for a number of reasons. Consider just these two: • The decline in support for Obama's handling of health care has been pronounced among Americans who consider themselves political independents, and in Maine, nearly four out of every 10 voters is "unenrolled" or independent of any political party. In the latest CNN polling, for example, 45 percent of all Americans disapproved of how Obama is handling his job as president. Among independents, his disapproval rating was 53 percent. And specifically on health care, 44 percent of all Americans approve of Obama's handling of the health care issue, while 53 percent disapprove. Among independents, only 33 percent approve of the president's handling of health care, while 61 percent disapprove. • Maine's two U.S. senators, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, are among the handful of realistic Republican targets as the White House tries to get at least modest GOP support. Snowe, in particular, has a crucial voice at the moment because of her seat on the Senate Finance Committee. We visited Snowe's Portland office the morning after the president's speech, and it was clear that she was getting mixed advice. "No gov't h c.," an office worker scribbled on a legal pad as she took one of the dozens of morning calls. "Supp Publ Opt," is another notation made during a call a few minutes later, shorthand for supporting the public option that Obama and most Democrats would prefer | [
"Who travels to Maine?",
"What is the name of John King's show on CNN?",
"What state does Olympia Snowe represent?"
] | [
[
"John King"
],
[
"\"State of the Union,\""
],
[
"Maine's"
]
] | CNN's State of the Union with John King airs Sunday at 9 a.m. ET .
King travels to Maine to get voters' take on health care reform .
Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, has been a key figure in health care negotiations . |
Editor's note: On CNN's "State of the Union," host and chief national correspondent John King goes outside the Beltway to report on issues affecting communities across the country. County administrator Brenda T. Buck is trying hard to help create eight to 10 sawmill jobs for Jefferson County. FAYETTE, Mississippi (CNN) -- The odds are against Brenda T. Buck, and she knows it. So she counts on what she calls the Sandwich Philosophy: "Take it one bite at a time." Buck is the county administrator in Jefferson County, a rural area in southwest Mississippi dotted with small churches, modest homes and markers noting a Civil War skirmish. "It is a great small town, and everybody knows everybody," Buck says. If you look through the statistics, three things jump out: • The Census Bureau lists the population of Jefferson County as 86 percent African American, the highest percentage of any county in the United States. • It is the fourth-poorest county in the United States, with a median income of $15,037. • The unemployment rate in August was 18.6 percent, the highest of Mississippi's 82 counties. "It has not always been this way," says Angelia Shelvy, a single mother of three who is among the unemployed. "I think we are forgotten." Shelvy had a job making $10,000 a year as a teacher's assistant, but she left it to take a job paying twice as much, signing on with a union that provides workers to nuclear power plants. Her parents agreed to care for her children when she had to travel, for months at a time, as far away as Arizona. Shelvy thought it was the right thing to do for her family, but phone calls to home at bedtime proved otherwise. Her 4-year-old, especially, had a rough time adjusting. "I'm like, 'You have Granny.' He's like, 'No, I don't want Granny; I want you to hold me,' " Shelvy told us. "I missed Mother's Day twice; for two years I missed it. ... So I decided that it was more important for me to be here with my children." Back home now, she has been searching for work since March, looking as far as 90 minutes away from Fayette. "I did Internet searching, different jobs, hospitals, different schools," she said. "They're not hiring. They either say they are not hiring, or I'm not qualified. I don't have enough years of experience. 'We'll call you later.' 'Get back with us.' And it's been stressful for me." Buck spends hours a day trying to help, and most of her time with the Board of Supervisors is spent debating economic development ideas. At home, too, she is reminded of the bleak local jobs market. Her husband isn't there. He's working 900 miles away, at the moment, in Indiana. "He works with a company that has been going into a lot of the car plants" during refittings and downsizing, Buck said. "We have four kids. ... He is here basically maybe a total combination of, maybe, two months out of the year." The county got a modest amount of federal money to buy new police cruisers. But its requests for stimulus money to improve its roads have been ignored, at least to date, and as Buck continues to press those requests, she also is pushing smaller economic development grants. Reliable Mat LLC is her current obsession. The screeching hum of a giant saw greets visitors, and inside the warehouse are dozens of pallets of neatly stacked firewood, waiting to be loaded on 18-wheelers and distributed across the country for the coming winter. On the grounds, there are 10 workers, some running giant logs through the saw, others stacking and wrapping the wood for shipment. On average, the men make about $100 day, and Paul Southerland, the company's general | [
"What is the fourth-poorest county?",
"What are breadwinners forced to do sometimes?",
"Who is the county administrator?",
"What state is Jefferson County in?",
"What is Brenda T. Buck's job title?",
"Who is working to bring jobs to Jefferson County?"
] | [
[
"Jefferson"
],
[
"travel,"
],
[
"Brenda T. Buck"
],
[
"southwest Mississippi"
],
[
"County administrator"
],
[
"Brenda T. Buck"
]
] | Jefferson County is fourth-poorest in U.S.; the recession came late but hit hard .
Sometimes, breadwinners must leave state, and their families, to scrape by .
County administrator Brenda T. Buck wants to bring jobs close to home .
She considers every new job created in her county a small victory . |
Editor's note: On CNN's "State of the Union," host and chief national correspondent John King goes outside the Beltway to report on issues affecting communities across the country. Pope McLean Jr. tells CNN's John King that a lot of farms are hurting because of the global recession. LEXINGTON, Kentucky (CNN) -- Crestwood Farm is tucked into the rolling hillsides of Kentucky's legendary bluegrass country. Kipling and Unbridled Energy are among the stallions critical to the reputation -- and the bottom line -- of the McLean family business. And just how do the stallions prove their value? "When their progeny does well on the race track," Pope McLean Jr. said. "Can't bluff that. That's when they prove what they are worth." Pope McLean Sr. got into the horse business in college and took over Crestwood Farm in 1970. His son worked on the farm while growing up. After college he took a job in the financial sector, but in 1991 he returned to Crestwood. His brother Marc returned a few years later, and their younger sister Grandison joined after she graduated from college. "It's been pretty much a family business since that point," Pope McLean Jr. said during a tour of the 1,000 acre property. Kentucky is to horse racing what Michigan is to the domestic auto industry. Racing and breeding thoroughbreds is a multibillion-dollar business in the state and the source of some 100,000 jobs. But "The Sport of Kings" is hardly exempt from these painful economic times, and in fact is taking a severe blow in the global recession. "It's truly an international industry, so we have people, a lot of buyers, from Europe come in. And they have dialed back," McLean said. "Domestic buyers have dialed back their participation, as well. The good horses are still bringing decent money, but everyone has to lower their expectations." At this year's Keeneland September Yearling Sale, which McLean calls the horse industry's version of the NBA draft, the gross was down more than 41 percent from last year, the largest year-to-year drop in the 66-year history of the auction. "The prices are down, and our production costs increased with commodity prices going up and so forth, so it definitely puts a squeeze on commercial breeding operations," McLean said. "A lot of farms are hurting. And then you have the credit squeeze that has hurt a lot of farms, too." McLean sees another lean year next year, and then hopes for a rebound because of an odd twist to the laws of supply and demand. In 2008, when the stock market was plummeting, 30 percent fewer mares were bred, so the supply of horses available at auction the year after next will be smaller. "I think people just decided to pull back," McLean said. "So the supply of horses available at auction will be reduced and that should start to help market conditions." At Crestwood, McLean predicts an "about even" year. "We're down at bit," at the moment, he says. "I feel pretty sure there will be quite a few farms that will go out of business." Out of business is an all too common theme in Hazard, a coal country town in Eastern Kentucky's Appalachia region about 120 miles away from Lexington and horse country. Statewide, the unemployment rate in Kentucky is 11.1 percent. Hazard is the county seat in Perry County, where the jobless rate has been on a steady climb and is 12.7 percent. On Main Street, a clothing and novelty store is closing down, along with an adjacent print and copying shop. Fallout, locals say, from the closing of a uniform plant that had employed more than 140 people, and then a Weyerhaeuser lumber facility that employed 180. Joanne Caron knew there were problems when Weyerhaeuser canceled weekend shifts, "but we didn't think it would be that drastic." The bad news came suddenly in March when workers were told their jobs were | [
"How many jobs does the horse racing industry create?",
"What is the source of 100,000 jobs in Kentucky?",
"What have the domestic and international buyers dialed back?",
"What is the Kentucky unemployment rate?",
"Who has dialed back participation?",
"What is the unemployment rate in Kentucky?"
] | [
[
"100,000"
],
[
"Racing and breeding thoroughbreds"
],
[
"their participation,"
],
[
"11.1 percent."
],
[
"\"Domestic buyers"
],
[
"11.1 percent."
]
] | Jefferson County is fourth-poorest in U.S.; the recession came late but hit hard .
Sometimes, breadwinners must leave state, and their families, to scrape by .
County administrator Brenda T. Buck wants to bring jobs close to home .
She considers every new job created in her county a small victory . |
Editor's note: On CNN's "State of the Union," host and chief national correspondent John King goes outside the Beltway to report on the issues affecting communities across the country. Christine Quinn, speaker of the New York City Council, and her partner, Kim Catullo, talk to John King. NEW YORK (CNN) -- As she lobbies members of the New York Senate these days, the politician in Christine Quinn can understand what the gay rights activist in her sometimes cannot. "The fear of the unknown," is how she describes it. "This is a vote they've never cast before. And they don't know how people are going to react. You are in a position where people's reaction to you is the key to your success. And the unknown creates fear and fear often creates paralysis." Quinn is the openly gay speaker of the New York City Council, and a proponent of legalizing same sex marriage in New York state. "It is really encouraging to see what's happening around the country in places where you really wouldn't expect it, like Iowa," says Quinn's longtime partner, Kim Catullo. "To be in a place like New York and not have it just doesn't seem to make sense." The New York Assembly passed legislation allowing same-sex marriages earlier this month, and the question now is whether there are enough votes in the state Senate to pass the legislation before the legislature adjourns for the year. Go behind the scenes with John King as he discusses his report from New York Quinn, who spent time in Albany this past week meeting with undecided senators, is cautiously optimistic. "It was amazing how much openness there was," she said of private meetings with lawmakers who are undecided and even a few who have said they are likely to oppose the legislation. "We just all have to create a moment for them to step forward. So I really think it is going to happen this month, before the legislative session is over." Maggie Gallagher sees the Senate math quite differently. "We are now working in 24 Senate districts," says Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriages. "We know we have generated thousands of phone calls to legislators. I don't think they will be passing a gay marriage bill this session." Watch both sides assess chances of passing same-sex marriage bill » The New York legislation is part of a growing national debate, and one which will gain even more attention because of the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy and the nomination of federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor to fill it. "Not tomorrow. Not likely in the coming year unless the courts move dramatically faster than we are used to seeing them move," is how Columbia Law School Professor Suzanne Goldberg answers when asked when the issue of same-sex marriage is likely to make the Supreme Court docket. "But certainly some time in the next couple of years we're likely to see the Supreme Court issue a position or two on this issue." Goldberg knows Sotomayer well; the judge is also a lecturer at Columbia. "We've never spoken about the issue," Goldberg told us. "I have no inside information about her views. What I would say is that she is both a wise person and a thoughtful person and being wise and thoughtful are the right ingredients for reaching what to me is the right answer on this issue, which to me is that equality applies to all people." The likelihood of the issue reaching the Supreme Court in the next year or two raises the stakes in the state battles. Opponents of California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage vow to try again in 2010 in hopes of a different result. A new federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8 was filed this week and could well be among the cases that make it to the Supreme Court eventually. Five states now allow same-sex marriage: Maine, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts | [
"what was the bill about",
"What did the N.Y. Assembly pass?",
"Who hopes President Obama will change mind?",
"when was the bill passed",
"Who is lobbying hard against same-sex marriages?",
"Who passed bill allowing same-sex marriages?",
"Who's an openly gay politician?",
"Name the openly gay politician"
] | [
[
"legalizing same sex marriage"
],
[
"allowing same-sex marriages"
],
[
"Christine Quinn, speaker of the New York City Council, and her partner, Kim Catullo,"
],
[
"earlier this month,"
],
[
"Gallagher,"
],
[
"The New York Assembly"
],
[
"Quinn"
],
[
"Christine Quinn"
]
] | N.Y. Assembly passed bill allowing same-sex marriages; willl state Senate pass it?
Christine Quinn, openly gay politician, optimistic; says opponents fear the unknown .
National Organization for Marriage lobbying hard against it, head thinks it won't pass .
Proponents hope President Obama will change mind, support issue . |
Editor's note: Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 and was counselor to Clinton in the White House.
Paul Begala says Republicans are failing to respond to the real economic pain felt throughout the U.S.
(CNN) -- As the fight over President Obama's economic recovery package heats up, the two sides are beginning to define themselves with admirable clarity.
The president says we have a crisis that is heading toward a catastrophe.
In announcing his new Economic Recovery Advisory Board, President Obama declared, "The situation could not be more serious. These [new unemployment] numbers demand action. It is inexcusable and irresponsible for any of us to get bogged down in distraction, delay, or politics as usual, while millions of Americans are being put out of work."
The Republicans, on the other hand, have honed their economic message: Denial, Delay, Do Nothing.
Denial
It begins with denial. Former Bush adviser Karl Rove and Fox News host Bill O'Reilly opined in December that it's the media's fault. The said the press is overhyping bad news; the economy, they suggested, is not really all that bad. "So you are agreeing with me," O'Reilly said, "that there is a conscious effort on the part of The New York Times and other liberal media to basically paint as drastic a picture as possible, so that when Barack Obama takes office, that anything is better than what we have now?"
"Yes," said Mr. Rove.
OK. I guess if you're wealthy like Mr. Rove and Mr. O'Reilly you can afford to pretend the recession is a vast media conspiracy. But for the 3.7 million Americans who have lost their jobs in the Bush-Republican recession, Messrs. Rove and O'Reilly seem dangerously out of touch.
Delay
"Let's slow down. Let's take our time," said Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Nebraska). "Few things are going to be as important as this." Generally that's good advice. But with the economy losing 19,000 jobs a day, is delay really a wise strategy? Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) seems to think so. He told CNN's John King, "We could shelf this bill and start again. That's what we really need to do."
Do Nothing
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is widely considered a rising star in the GOP. He was even mentioned as a potential running mate for 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain. His strategy, again articulated to John King on "State of the Union," is to do nothing -- let companies, communities and families fail.
"We're going to go through a process of deleveraging," Sanford said. "And it will be painful. The question is, do we apply a bunch of different Band-Aids that lengthen and prolong this pain or do we take the Band-Aid off? I believe very strongly: Let's get this thing over with, let's not drag it on."
Set aside the callousness of Sanford's metaphor -- that joblessness at the highest level since the Great Depression is somehow like a scratch that doesn't even need a Band-Aid.
Focus instead on Sanford's substantive message: You're on your own. Write if you get work. This befits a party which has high-ranking members who deny the effectiveness of the New Deal. What's next, denying that the federal government put a man on the moon?
What Bipartisanship?
Given the GOP's combination of flat-earth economics and scorched-earth politics, it should come as no surprise that it looks like 98.6 percent of Washington Republicans oppose President Obama's economic recovery package. They either do not understand the depth of the recession or they do not realize the results of the recent election.
I don't know what more President Obama can do. He has named three prominent Republicans to his Cabinet (Robert Gates at Defense, Ray LaHood at Transportation and Judd Gregg at | [
"Who did Paul Begala criticize?",
"What is the attitude of some in the GOP?"
] | [
[
"Republicans"
],
[
"Do Nothing"
]
] | Begala: McCain's VP choice unqualified to be heartbeat from the presidency .
Choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is "shockingly irresponsible," he says .
Begala says choice makes McCain's age, health, and judgment central issues . |
Editor's note: Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 and was counselor to Clinton in the White House. Begala is not a paid political consultant for any politicians or candidates. Click here for a rival view Paul Begala says McCain's VP choice, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is completely unqualified to be president. (CNN) -- John McCain needs what Kinky Friedman calls "a checkup from the neck up." In choosing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, he is not thinking "outside the box," as some have said. More like out of his mind. Palin a first-term governor of a state with more reindeer than people, will have to put on a few pounds just to be a lightweight. Her personal story is impressive: former fisherman, mother of five. But that hardly qualifies her to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. For a man who is 72 years old and has had four bouts with cancer to have chosen someone so completely unqualified to become president is shockingly irresponsible. Suddenly, McCain's age and health become central issues in the campaign, as does his judgment. In choosing this featherweight, McCain passed over Tom Ridge, a decorated combat hero, a Cabinet secretary and the former two-term governor of the large, complex state of Pennsylvania. iReport.com: 'McCain pick might be a gimmick' He passed over Mitt Romney, who ran a big state, Massachusetts; a big company, Bain Capital; and a big event, the Olympics. He passed over Kay Bailey Hutchison, the Texas senator who is knowledgeable about the military, good on television and -- obviously -- a woman. He passed over Joe Lieberman, his best friend in the Senate and fellow Iraq Kool-Aid drinker. He passed over former congressman, trade negotiator and budget director Rob Portman. And he also passed over Mike Huckabee, the governor of Arkansas. For months, the McCainiacs have said they will run on his judgment and experience. In his first presidential decision, John McCain has shown that he is willing to endanger his country, potentially leaving it in the hands of someone who simply has no business being a heartbeat away from the most powerful, complicated, difficult job in human history. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer. | [
"what did begala say"
] | [
[
"Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is completely unqualified to be president."
]
] | Begala: McCain's VP choice unqualified to be heartbeat from the presidency .
Choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is "shockingly irresponsible," he says .
Begala says choice makes McCain's age, health, and judgment central issues . |
Editor's note: Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political contributor, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992 and was counselor to Clinton in the White House. He was a co-host of "Crossfire" on CNN with Robert Novak from 2002 to 2005. Paul Begala says he admired Robert Novak for his skepticism about authority, work ethic and faith in his beliefs. (CNN) -- In our innumerable debates, I delighted in calling Bob Novak "the finest mind of the 12th century." One time, though, he scowled and growled, "I prefer the 15th century. Spanish Inquisition. Those were the days." Novak left this world on Tuesday, but he also left his mark. Needless to say I disagreed with Bob about virtually every political issue, and sometimes our on-air debates continued as profanity-laced shouting matches after the show ended. Despite our profound differences, though, we were friends. Here's why: Bob was an iconoclast. He loved poking conventional wisdom in the eye. If all the media elite were perched on the same wire, Bob would land on the opposite wire and gleefully squawk at them. Bob was an ideologue more than a partisan. One of the many sources of tension between us was the fact that I am a partisan Democrat who believes that, from time to time, my personal ideological agenda must take a backseat to advancing a broader progressive agenda carried by my party. Not Bob. He was a conservative first, last and always, and when he felt the Republican Party had strayed from his hard-core anti-tax, anti-government ideology he would hammer the GOP with the same withering ridicule he usually dispensed to Democrats. Bob was deeply skeptical of authority. He was a lowly lieutenant in the United States Army, and he instinctively distrusted big shots -- a rarity in a town that is often dazzled by rank. For a guy who said he preferred business to government, he was not afraid to show his contempt for network executives with whom he disagreed. Bob had a remarkable work ethic. In the predawn hours after the 2004 presidential debate in Miami, Bob slipped in the shower, breaking his hip. The injury was terribly painful, and Bob was rushed to the hospital. Within 24 hours he was propped up in bed, working the phones and banging out a column on his laptop. Bob was an old-school reporter. Most pundits (your humble author included) devour the reporting of others and regurgitate our opinions. While strongly opinionated, Bob also reported. His sources, especially in the GOP, were wide and deep. When I was a White House official, one of my most dreaded responsibilities was dealing with Bob. He didn't support much of anything we were trying to do, but he never lied to me, never broke his word, and tried his hardest to get things right. Accuracy mattered enormously. Bob could be civil. This will astonish some, because Bob could also be rude. But he taught me at least one lesson in civility. On "Crossfire," I carried a debate over into the commercial break. I badgered and hectored and attacked the guest who was on the right. I was angry and I let him have it. "Wait just a #*& $@#^ minute," Bob screamed at me. "You're out of line. You're being rude. Get off his back. He's come here on our show to make his case and you're abusing him. We call them 'guests' for a reason, Paul." He was right. Bob loved sports. One tiny island of common ground Bob and I could share was a love of sports. When James Carville and I joined "Crossfire" in 2002, CNN had a much-hyped debut planned for April 1. Bob didn't care. Maryland was playing for the NCAA basketball championship and he was going to be there. Producers pleaded, but Bob was unmoved. He did the show via satellite from Atlanta, Georgia, | [
"What did Paul Begala say?",
"What did Bob Bovak work hard at?",
"What were Bob Novak's political beliefs?",
"Who says Bob Novak was a friend even though they differed on many issues?",
"What relation was Bob novak to Paul Begala?"
] | [
[
"he admired Robert Novak for his skepticism about authority, work ethic and faith in his beliefs."
],
[
"hardest to get things right."
],
[
"conservative"
],
[
"Paul Begala"
],
[
"co-host of \"Crossfire\" on CNN with Robert"
]
] | Begala: McCain's VP choice unqualified to be heartbeat from the presidency .
Choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is "shockingly irresponsible," he says .
Begala says choice makes McCain's age, health, and judgment central issues . |
Editor's note: Peggy Wallace Kennedy is the daughter of George C. Wallace and Lurleen Wallace, who both were governors of Alabama. She lives in Montgomery, Alabama, with her husband, Mark Kennedy, a retired state Supreme Court justice. They have two sons, Leigh, a decorated veteran of the Iraq war, and Burns, a college sophomore.
Peggy Wallace Kennedy says her father sought absolution for his segregationist views.
MONTGOMERY, Alabama (CNN) -- I heard a car door slam behind me and turned to see an elderly but spry woman heading my way.
The night before, a gang of vandals had swept through the cemetery desecrating graves, crushing headstones and stealing funereal objects.
My parents' graves, situated on a wind-swept hill overlooking the cemetery, had not been spared. A large marble urn that stood between two granite columns had been pried loose and spirited away, leaving faded silk flowers strewn on the ground.
I was holding a bouquet of them in my arms when the woman walked up and gave me a crushing hug. "Honey," she said, "you don't know me, but when I saw you standing up here on this hill, I knew that you must be one of the girls and I couldn't help myself but to drive up here and let you know how much me and my whole family loved both of your parents. They were real special people."
I thanked her for her kind words as we stood side by side gazing down at the graves of Govs. George Wallace and Lurleen Wallace.
After a few moments, the woman leaned into me and spoke almost in a conspiratorial whisper. "I never thought I would live to see the day when a black would be running for president. I know your daddy must be rolling over in his grave."
Not having the heart or the energy to respond, I gave her bony arm a slight squeeze, turned and walked away. As I put the remnants of the graveyard spray in the trunk of my car, I assumed that she had not bothered to notice the Barack Obama sticker on my bumper.
When I was a young voter and had little interest in politics, my father would mark my ballot for me. As I thought about the woman in the cemetery, I mused that if he were alive and I had made the same request for this election, there would be a substantial chance, though not a certainty, that he would put an "X" by Obama's name.
Perhaps it would be the last chapter in his search for inner peace that became so important to him after becoming a victim of hatred and violence himself when he was shot and gravely injured in a Laurel, Maryland, shopping center parking lot. Perhaps it would be a way of reconciling in his own mind that what he once stood for did not prevent freedom of opportunity and self-advancement from coming full circle; his final absolution.
George Wallace and other Southern governors of his ilk stood defiantly in the 1950s and '60s in support of racial segregation, a culture of repression, violence and denial of basic human rights.
Their actions and the stark images of their consequences that spread across the world galvanized the nation and gave rise to a cry for an end to the American apartheid. The firestorms that were lit in Birmingham, Oxford, Memphis, Tuscaloosa, Montgomery, Little Rock and Selma were a call to arms to which the people responded.
And now a new call to arms has sounded as Americans face another assault on freedom. For if the stand in the schoolhouse door was a defining moment for George Wallace, then surely the aftermath of Katrina and the invasion of Iraq will be the same for George W. Bush.
The trampling of individual freedoms and his blatant contempt for the rights of the average American may not have been as obvious as an ax-handle-wielding governor, but Bush's insidiousness and piety have made him much more dangerous.
Healing must come, hope will be our lodestar, humility will reshape the American conscience, and honesty in both word and deed | [
"what does the daughter says about Wallace?",
"what does Peggy Wallace Kennedy says about his dad?",
"Ex-segregationist Wallact sought absolution for what?",
"Peggy Wallace Kennedy says what?"
] | [
[
"her father sought absolution for his segregationist views."
],
[
"her father sought absolution for"
],
[
"his segregationist views."
],
[
"her father sought absolution for his segregationist views."
]
] | Peggy Wallace Kennedy: My dad, George Wallace, might have backed Barack Obama .
Ex-segregationist Wallace sought absolution for his earlier views, daughter says .
She says Obama will help heal the nation after wounds of Katrina and Iraq war . |
Editor's note: Penn Jillette -- the larger, louder half of Penn & Teller -- is a magician, comedian, actor, author and producer. Obama and McCain both promise a government that will watch over us ... "I don't like that," says Penn Jillette. (CNN) -- Everyone I talk to seems to think the president of the United States right now is stupid. The Bush presidency is stupid speeches, stupid high gas prices, stupid bad economy, stupid war on terrorism, stupid war on drugs, stupid hurricane fixing, stupid global warming, stupid war -- stupid, stupid, stupid. They all seem to think we need to get a smarter guy in the White House fast, and Bush is so stupid, that task shouldn't be too hard. Not me. I'd like to say that I believe every president in United States history, including the stupid one we have now, is smarter than me. My alma mater is Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Greatest Show on Earth Clown College, so I'm damning with faint praise, but I'm stupider than this here stupid president. Maybe I'm less stupider than Bush than I'm stupider than Jefferson. But I'm stupider than all the stupid in both of them put together. The idea, especially from the Democrats that I know, is, we just get a smarter guy in the White House, and all the problems will go away. We'll have smart speeches, smart high gas prices, smart bad economy, smart war on terrorism, smart war on drugs, smart hurricanes, smart global warming, smart war in Georgia -- smart, smart, smart. Barack Obama is way smarter than Bush -- so way, way smarter than me. Obama is way more charismatic than me. He did his big speech for about 80,000 people; I'll do my show tonight in Vegas for about 1,000 people. He's more ambitious than I; he's going to be the next president of the United States, and I couldn't even get to week three of "Dancing with the Stars." Obama is a great leader. He can fire people up and get them to do what he wants. He does smart speeches that promise everyone everything they need and make us feel good about our country and how much greater our government could be. But I don't think our next president being a great leader is a good thing. I'm worried about someone smarter than Bush taking over that tremendous power. Charisma and ambition increase my fear exponentially, and a great leader scares me to death. We need someone stupid enough to understand that the president of the United States can't solve many problems without taking away freedom and therefore shouldn't try. The only reason John McCain scares me a little less is because I think he's a little less likely to win. They both promise a government that will watch over us, and I don't like that. I don't want anyone as president who promises to take care of me. I may be stupid, but I want a chance to try to be a grown-up and take care of my family. Freedom means the freedom to be stupid, and that's what I want. I don't want anyone to feel my pain or tell me to ask what we can do for our country, or give us all money and take care of us. Gene Healy at the Cato Institute explains that the Founding Fathers wanted the president "to faithfully execute the laws, defend the country from attack and check Congress with the veto power whenever it exceeded its constitutional bounds." That sounds like plenty to me. You gotta be smarter than me to do all that, but you don't have to be as smart as Obama, and you sure don't have to be a great leader. Our first seven presidents averaged a bit more than three public speeches a year, and they didn't promise jobs for everyone, day care, dental exams and free stuff. It's really hard to find someone | [
"What did Penn Jillette say?",
"What everyone is thinking according to Penn Jillette ?",
"What's Jillette stance on Obama ?",
"For what reason does McCain scare Jillette less?",
"What does Jillette say about Obama?"
] | [
[
"\"I don't like that,\""
],
[
"seems"
],
[
"is a great leader."
],
[
"likely to win."
],
[
"is way smarter than Bush"
]
] | Everyone thinks we need to get a smarter guy in the White House, says Penn Jillette .
Jillette: Obama is a great leader who fires people up, gets them to do what he wants .
McCain scares Jillette a little less because he's a little less likely to win .
Ron Paul, Bob Barr say they want much smaller government . |
Editor's note: Peter Bergen is CNN's national security analyst and a fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington and at New York University's Center on Law and Security. His most recent book is "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader." Peter Bergen says it's crucial to correctly frame the nature of a war before beginning it. WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President-elect Barack Obama and his foreign policy advisers and speechwriters are wrestling with one of the most important speeches of his presidency, his inaugural address. One of their toughest conceptual challenges is how to describe and recast what the Bush administration has consistently termed the "war on terror." The dean of military strategists, Carl von Clausewitz, explains the importance of this decision-making in his treatise "On War": "The first, the supreme, the most decisive act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish...the kind of war on which they are embarking; neither mistaking it for, nor trying to turn it into something that is alien to its nature." Clausewitz's excellent advice about the absolute necessity of properly defining the war upon which a nation is about to embark was ignored by Bush administration officials who instead declared an open-ended and ambiguous "war on terror" after the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001. Bush took the nation to war against a tactic, rather than a war against a specific enemy, which was obviously al Qaeda and anyone allied to it. When the United States went to war against the Nazis and the Japanese during World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt and his congressional supporters did not declare war against U-boats and kamikaze pilots, but on the Nazi state and Imperial Japan. The war on terror, sometimes known as the "Global War on Terror" or by the clunky acronym GWOT, became the lens through which the Bush administration judged almost all of its foreign policy decisions. That proved to be dangerously counterproductive on several levels. The GWOT framework propelled the Bush administration into its disastrous entanglement in Iraq. It had nothing to do with 9/11 but was launched under the rubric of the war on terror and the erroneous claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The theory was that he might give such weapons to terrorists, including al Qaeda to whom he was supposedly allied, and that he therefore threatened American interests. None of this, of course, turned out to be true. The Bush administration's approach to the war on terror collided badly with another of its doctrines, spreading democracy in the Middle East as a panacea to reduce radicalism. It pushed for elections in the Palestinian territories in which, in early 2006, the more radical Hamas won a resounding victory, propelled to power on a wave of popular revulsion for the incompetence and corruption of the Fatah party that had dominated Palestinian politics since the 1960s. Imprisoned by its war on terror framework, the Bush administration supported Israel in a disastrous war against Hezbollah in Lebanon in the summer of 2006. Hezbollah is not only a terrorist group but is also part of the rickety Lebanese government and runs social welfare services across the country, yet for the Bush administration its involvement in terrorism was all that mattered. As is now widely understood in Israel, the war against Hezbollah was a moral and tactical defeat for the Israeli military and government. Events in the current Israeli incursion in Gaza will determine whether history repeats itself. Under the banner of the war on terror, the Bush administration also tied itself in conceptual knots conflating the threat from al Qaeda with Shiite groups like Hezbollah and the ayatollahs in Iran. In 2006, for instance, President Bush claimed that "the Sunni and Shiite extremist represent different faces of the same threat." In reality, Sunni and Shiite extremists have been killing each other in large numbers for years in countries from Pakistan to Iraq. The groups have differing attitudes toward the United States, which Sunni extremists attacked in 1993 and again on 9/11, while Shiite militants have never done so. So | [
"Who never correctly framed the \"global war on terror\"?",
"What President is being criticized here?",
"What does Bergen say the president went to war against?",
"Who never correctly framed the war?",
"Who went to war against the tactic of terrorism?",
"What did Bergen say the president actually went to war against (what \"tactic\")?",
"What should the war be lead aganst?"
] | [
[
"Bush administration officials"
],
[
"Bush"
],
[
"a tactic,"
],
[
"Bush administration officials"
],
[
"Bush"
],
[
"on terror,"
],
[
"terror.\""
]
] | Peter Bergen: Bush never correctly framed the "global war on terror"
He says the president went to war against the tactic of terrorism .
Instead, Bergen says, the U.S. should be leading a war vs. al Qaeda .
Bergen: al Qaeda is a formidable enemy, but not the equivalent of fascism . |
Editor's note: Peter Bergen is a fellow at the New America Foundation, a Washington-based think tank that promotes innovative thought from across the ideological spectrum and at New York University's Center on Law and Security. He's the author of "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader." Peter Bergen says deals with the Taliban could further destabilize the situation in Afghanistan. (CNN) -- It is a longstanding cliché that there is no military solution in Afghanistan, only a political one. Linked to this is the newer, related notion, rapidly becoming a cliché, that the United States should start making deals with elements of the "reconcilable" Taliban. As with many clichés, there is some truth to both these notions, but neither of these comforting ideas are a substitute for a strategy that is connected to what is happening on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Sunday's New York Times ran an interview with President Obama in which he said that, just as the U.S. had made peace agreements with Sunni militias in Iraq, "There may be some comparable opportunities in Afghanistan and in the Pakistani region." He also cautioned that this could be "more complex" than was the case in Iraq. It's not only going to be more complex, but doing deals with the Taliban today could further destabilize Afghanistan. Before getting to why that is the case, let's stipulate first that there are always going to be some local commanders of the Taliban who can be bribed, coerced or otherwise persuaded to lay down their arms. In fact, the Afghan government already has had an amnesty program in place for Taliban fighters for four years. Thousands of the Taliban already have taken advantage of the amnesty, a fact that tends to be glossed over in most of the recent discussions of the issue. That being said, there are nine reasons why doing deals with most of the various factions of the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Pakistan that are labeled "the Taliban" are more in the realm of fantasy than a sustainable policy. First, the Afghan government is a sovereign entity and any agreements with the Taliban must be made by it. Right now the weak and ineffectual Afghan government is in no position to negotiate with the Taliban, other than to make significant concessions of either territory or principle, or both. Second, while Obama didn't talk about dealing with Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar, it is worth pointing out the Taliban leadership, including Mullah Omar, has in the past several months taken every opportunity to say that it has no interest in a deal with the Afghan government. And just last week, Mullah Omar urged the Pakistani Taliban to refocus their efforts on attacking U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Those statements should be taken at face value. Third, Mullah Omar's intransigence is utterly predictable. He was prepared to sacrifice his regime on the point of principle that he would not hand over Osama bin Laden after 9/11. And he did. This does not suggest a Kissingerian realism about negotiations, but rather a fanatical devotion to his cause. Fourth, the Taliban believe they may be winning in Afghanistan, and they also are confident that they are not losing, which for an insurgent movement amounts to the same thing. They see no need to negotiate today when they can get a better deal down the road. Fifth, the Taliban leadership is largely in Pakistan. Side deals done with the Afghan Taliban will have little or no effect on the fact that the command and control of the insurgency is in another country. Sixth, when Pakistan's government has done "peace" deals with the Taliban in the Pakistani tribal regions in 2005 and 2006 and in the northern region of Swat earlier this year, they were made following military setbacks by Pakistan's army. Those deals then allowed the militants to regroup and extend their control over greater swaths of Pakistani territory. Why would new agreements with the Taliban on either side of the Afghan-Pakistan border yield different results? Seventh, "reconcilable" Afghan Taliban leaders have already reconciled to the | [
"Who does Bergen say is too weak?",
"What government is too weak?",
"Who thinks it's winning the war?",
"Who said Taliban is gaining more support?"
] | [
[
"Afghan government"
],
[
"Afghan"
],
[
"Taliban"
],
[
"Peter Bergen"
]
] | Peter Bergen: Idea of dealing with moderate Taliban is gaining more support .
Bergen says it's not likely to be a strategy for success in the Aghanistan war .
Taliban leadership thinks it's winning the war and won't cut a deal, he says .
Bergen: Afghan government too weak to engage in meaningful talks . |
Editor's note: Peter Bergen, CNN's national security analyst, is a fellow at the New America Foundation, a Washington-based think tank that promotes innovative thought from across the ideological spectrum, and at New York University's Center on Law and Security. He's the author of "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader." Peter Bergen says Osama bin Laden is still alive and still significant eight years after September 11. HELMAND, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Eight years after September 11, the "war on terror" has gone the way of the dodo. And President Obama talks instead about a war against al Qaeda and its allies. What, then, of al Qaeda's enigmatic leader, Osama bin Laden, who has vanished like a wisp of smoke? And does he even matter now? The U.S. government hadn't had a solid lead on al Qaeda's leader since the battle of Tora Bora in winter 2001. Although there are informed hypotheses that today he is in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province on the Afghan border, perhaps in one of the more northerly areas such as Bajaur, these are essentially guesses, not "actionable" intelligence. A longtime American counterterrorism analyst explained to me, "There is very limited collection on him personally." That's intelligence community shorthand for the fact that the usual avenues of "collection" on a target such as bin Laden are yielding little or no information about him. Those avenues typically include signal intercepts of phone calls and e-mails, as well as human intelligence from spies. Given the hundreds of billions of dollars that the "war on terror" has consumed, the failure to capture or kill al Qaeda's leader is one of its signal failures. Does it even matter whether bin Laden is found? Yes, it does. First, there is the matter of justice for the almost 3,000 people who died in the September 11 attacks and for the thousands of other victims of al Qaeda's attacks around the world. Second, every day that bin Laden remains at liberty is a propaganda victory for al Qaeda. Third, although bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri aren't managing al Qaeda's operations on a daily basis they guide the overall direction of the jihadist movement around the world, even while they are in hiding. Those messages from al Qaeda's leaders have reached untold millions worldwide via television, the Internet and newspapers. The tapes have not only instructed al Qaeda's followers to continue to kill Westerners and Jews, but some also carried specific instructions that militant cells then acted on. In March 2008, for instance, the al Qaeda leader denounced the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper as a "catastrophe" for which punishment would soon be meted out. Three months later, an al Qaeda suicide attacker bombed the Danish Embassy in Islamabad, killing six. Some reading this may think: But what's the proof that the al Qaeda leader is still alive? Plenty. Since September 11, bin Laden has released a slew of video and audiotapes, many of which discuss current events. After a nine-month silence, for instance, bin Laden released a 22-minute audiotape on March 14, sharply condemning the recent Israeli invasion of Gaza. Are these tapes real? Not one of the dozens of tapes released by bin Laden after 9/11 has been a fake. Indeed the U.S. government has authenticated many of them using bin Laden's distinctive voiceprint. And what about the persistent reports that he is ill? In 2002, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf said bin Laden had kidney disease, for which he required a dialysis machine, and was therefore likely dead. But the stories of bin Laden's life-threatening kidney problems are false, judging by his appearance in videos that he released in 2004 and again in 2007, in which he showed no signs of illness. On the 2007 tape, the al Qaeda leader had even dyed his white-flecked beard black, suggesting that as the Saudi militant entered his fifth decade, he was not | [
"The war on terror has failed to capture who?",
"Who still inspires al Qaeda?",
"Who has yet to be captured?"
] | [
[
"Osama bin Laden"
],
[
"Osama bin Laden"
],
[
"Osama bin Laden"
]
] | Peter Bergen: Osama bin Laden still inspires al Qaeda .
He says 8 years after 9/11, the "war on terror" has failed to capture him .
He says law of averages suggests bin Laden will eventually be caught or killed . |
Editor's note: Peter Bregman is chief executive of Bregman Partners Inc., a global management consulting firm, and the author of "Point B: A Short Guide to Leading a Big Change". He writes a weekly column, How We Work, for HarvardBusiness.org. Peter Bregman says good times persuaded people to sacrifice what they loved for money. NEW YORK (CNN) -- I started my consulting business 11 years ago with a laptop computer in a living room. It grew quickly. The first year I made more money than I had in the previous three combined, the second year I doubled that and by the third year I began to fantasize about retiring within the decade. Then everything crashed; the dotcom revolution, the financial services industry and my business. I had a large number of subcontractors and a small number of employees who had become friends. I also had a bad feeling things wouldn't turn around quickly. My wife and I were in a tough spot. We had one child and another on the way, bills that were accumulating and hopes for the future that were moving out of reach. However bad it was then, these days it's worse. Back then the recession hit certain sectors and left other ones alone. Home prices were going up, so people felt protected, and there were loans to help. Today, everything's been hit, nothing's going up and credit is frozen. Many have already lost jobs, homes, self-identities, luxuries and necessities. And there's more to come. That's especially true for many older Americans, who might not have 10 years to recover and who don't have sources of income other than their savings -- which have dwindled dramatically. They don't deserve to live with the fear they now feel. I'm still living in a rental apartment because I didn't want to take out a loan I couldn't pay back. I saved money. Invested it. And now my investments are down 70 percent. But it is what it is. And when we wake up in the morning we are left with the question, "Now what?" It's actually a great question, because in a situation in which we've lost control, it gives us a little back. "Now what?" means we have a choice, in this moment, to do something. What's it going to be? I think it's a mistake to try to rebuild what we've lost. We have less now and I think we can do better with less. Having less forces choices. And consciously making those choices can bring us closer to the things we care about. Which can make a poorer life richer than a rich one. Because the research is clear. Above a basic threshold, more money doesn't make us happier. But we think it will, so we do all sorts of things that make us unhappy in order to get it. A senior leader in an investment bank called to tell me she was leaving her job. She realized she wouldn't make much money in the next few years and didn't want to miss her children growing up. Did you get that? She was willing to miss her children growing up if the money was good enough. People act in ways they'd rather not in order to make money that doesn't make them happy. Maybe, if we do this downturn right, we can get out of that cycle. So, what makes you happy? Is it spending time with people you love? Working on a pet project? Having the time to exercise? Being part of a community and feeling cared for? Knowing the answer enables you to make decisions that will prioritize those things. Of course, losing money can break people apart; we fight about money, people lose jobs and get depressed; tension rises as mortgage bills sit on the kitchen table unpaid; resentment builds when one person doesn't live up to his own and others' expectations. But I am also seeing the opposite. Losing money can bring you | [
"People sacrificed what for money?",
"Who is Peter Bregman?",
"What did Peter Bregman say people during the boom sacrifice to obtain more money?",
"What does Peter Bregman suggest people should do during hard times?",
"Does Bregman think money increases happiness?"
] | [
[
"they loved"
],
[
"chief executive of"
],
[
"good times"
],
[
"sacrifice"
],
[
"doesn't make us happier."
]
] | Peter Bregman: In the boom, people sacrificed their joys for more money .
He says beyond a certain point, money doesn't increase happiness .
Bregman: Use hard times to evaluate what makes you happy and pursue it . |
Editor's note: Peter Bregman is chief executive of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm, and the author of "Point B: A Short Guide to Leading a Big Change". He writes a weekly column, How We Work, for HarvardBusiness.org.
Peter Bregman says recession is an opportunity to reorient the focus of your working life to what you love to do.
NEW YORK (CNN) -- A friend of mine, a senior leader in a pharmaceutical company, spends all her spare time doing yoga, taking classes in comparative religions, reading about spirituality, speaking with others about their beliefs. Just talking about it energizes her.
Which is not how she feels about her day job.
"Why don't you leave your job and do something with this full time?" I asked her.
"I've thought about it. But I could never make the kind of money I make now."
She might be right. But the question isn't whether she could make as much money. Even if she stays in her job she's unlikely to do that in this economy.
The question is far broader and more interesting. What would her life look like -- in every dimension she values -- if she decided to pursue her passion full time?
She needs to consider the contribution she'd make. The relationships she'd foster. The fun she'd have. The feelings she'd carry with her throughout the day. Her engagement in her work. In short, what her life would mean.
And, of course, also the money. Which, as it turns out, might actually be greater if she were more engaged in her work. Gallup has collected data on 5.4 million employees in over 137 countries and concluded that engaged employees are more productive and customer-focused. And more profitable. Which could mean more money for her.
But why are we even having this conversation during the worst downturn this country has seen in the last 70 years? Isn't she lucky simply to have a job?
Yes. And, because of that, she's also stuck. For better and worse, she probably won't leave.
But maybe you're not so lucky -- you've been laid off or might be soon; you're a student coming into the job market; or like several people I know, you've been thinking about a change.
Well, this is your opportunity. You didn't want to risk a change when things were going well. There was too much to lose.
But this downturn, this economic mess we're in, could be your chance. When everything was going well, we spent money we didn't have thinking we would make more tomorrow. Well, tomorrow came. It's easy to point a finger at Bernie Madoff (and he deserves the finger), but the truth is, it's not just him. We're all victims of our own little Ponzi Schemes. But now we know.
The life we've been living, the debt we've been incurring, is unsustainable. Maybe the layoff is a favor. You were treated as expendable. But were you, working those long hours to keep a job you didn't love, treating your self as expendable too?
Depressing? Sure. But now that we know, we can do something about it.
I don't want to be cavalier; I know food on the table is a necessity. We still need work and money. Here are our new rules for finding it:
Rule #1: Don't spend too much time looking for your next job. As I discuss in my article for Harvard Business, "Need to Find a Job? Stop Looking So Hard," searching for a job more than 1-2 hours a day will actually make it less likely you'll find one.
Rule #2: Focus your time on what you're truly passionate about. Get more training. Expand your comfort zone with new activities, new people. Studies show that 80 percent of jobs are found through networking. | [
"People have to rethink what?",
"What provides an opportunity and a challenge?",
"What gives you time to rethink what you do?",
"What to do when laid off?"
] | [
[
"reorient the focus of your working life"
],
[
"recession"
],
[
"recession"
],
[
"you're truly passionate about. Get more training. Expand your comfort zone with new activities, new people."
]
] | Peter Bregman: The recession provides an opportunity as well as a challenge .
He says people who were working just for money now can rethink what they do .
He says, if you were laid off, focus your time on what you love doing .
Bregman: Spending time with people is best route to fulfilling new job . |
Editor's note: President Lyndon B. Johnson secured passage of Medicare, the Voting Rights Act and other milestone legislation. Tom Johnson, who served as one of LBJ's White House press secretaries, is former chief executive of CNN News Group and former publisher of the Los Angeles Times. He is an associate member of the board of visitors of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Tom Johnson says President Lyndon Johnson would have used every tool to get Congress to pass a health care bill. (CNN) -- LBJ would: Have a list of every member of Congress on his desk. He would be on the telephone with members (and their key staffers) constantly: "Your president really needs your vote on this bill." He would have a list of every special request every member wanted -- from White House tours to appointments to federal jobs and commissions. He would make a phone call or have a personal visit with every member -- individually or in a group. Charts, graphs, coffee. They would get the "Johnson Treatment" as nobody else could give it. He would have a willingness to horse-trade with every member. He would keep a list of people who support each member financially. A call to each to tell them to get the vote of that representative. He would have Billy Graham calling Baptists, Cardinal Cushing calling Catholics, Dr. Martin Luther King calling blacks, Henry Gonzales calling Hispanics, Henry Ford and David Rockefeller calling Republicans. He would get Jack Valenti to call the Pope if it would help. He would have speeches written for members for the Congressional Record and hometown newspapers. He would use up White House liquor having nightcaps with the leaders and key members of BOTH parties. Each of them would take home cufflinks, watches, signed photos, and perhaps even a pledge to come raise money for their next election. He would be sending gifts to children and grandchildren of members. He would walk around the South Lawn with reporters telling them why this was important to their own families. He would send every aide in the White House to see every member of the House and Senate. He would send me to see Sen. Richard Russell and Rep. Carl Vinson because I am a Georgian. He would call media executives Kay Graham, Frank Stanton, Robert Kintner, and the heads of every network. He would go to pray at six different churches. He would do newspaper, radio and TV interviews -- especially with Merriman Smith, Hugh Sidey, Sid Davis, Forrest Boyd, Ray Scherer, Helen Thomas, Marianne Means, Walter Cronkite, Phil Potter, Bob Novak. He would threaten, cajole, flirt, flatter, hug -- and get the health care bill passed. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Tom Johnson. | [
"what would Lyndon Johnson have used to pressure legislators?",
"what would Lyndon Johnson gained by granting lawmakers' special request?",
"What did Tom Johnson say about Lyndon Johnson?",
"what does Tom johnson says about Lyndon johnson?"
] | [
[
"every tool"
],
[
"to pass a health care bill."
],
[
"would have used every tool to get Congress to pass a health care bill."
],
[
"would have used every tool to get Congress to pass a health care bill."
]
] | Tom Johnson: Lyndon Johnson would use many tools to get action in Congress .
He would have used staff, intermediaries to pressure legislators .
He would have gained support by granting lawmakers' special requests .
He would have used every device to get the health care bill passed . |
Editor's note: Rachel Motte blogs at www.evangelicaloutpost.com and writes for Wheatstone Academy, a Christian educational program for high school students. She is a graduate of Biola University and the Torrey Honors Institute. Rachel Motte says Rush Limbaugh still can animate conservative popular opinion. (CNN) -- It's no secret that liberals throughout the nation are rejoicing at Rush Limbaugh's supposed status as leader of the Republican Party. I can see why. He's easy to pick on. His rhetoric is extreme, and his personal life has at times been less than picture-perfect. I've heard some pundits refer to Vice President Joe Biden as "the gift that keeps on giving." I imagine the left feels the same way about Limbaugh. Rush was an integral part of my childhood. I must have been 6 or 7 when I started listening in the late 1980s. I remember that my parents and their friends found him refreshing, and I remember that he made them laugh. I memorized his song parodies and even tried to write a few of my own based on the events I heard him talk about. When I was 11, I once spent several hours trying to call his show, redialing after every busy signal, over and over. I never got through. It's probably just as well; I think I had planned to try to talk him into running for president. I no longer think he'd make a good president -- we're all much better off when he sits behind the EIB microphone. Rush taught me a lot about personal responsibility, the value of freedom of speech and the love of country. At 26, I've outgrown many of my childhood habits, but I never outgrew Rush. Have conservatives outgrown him? Is it time to distance ourselves by dismissing him as just "an entertainer," as Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele initially did before apologizing? My friend John Mark Reynolds wrote recently that Rush is "a shallow thinker" who will alienate today's young adults rather than draw them in. He argued that Rush's "insider lingo" and harsh demeanor are problematic at a time when the Republican Party is losing the young adult vote. Is he right? Has Rush Limbaugh outlived his usefulness to the conservative movement? Should we take a cue from the Democrats' glee and relegate El Rushbo to a back room like an aging and unpopular distant relative? Not by a long shot. Rush doesn't need to be removed as leader of the Republican Party, because he's never held that position, much as Democrats would like you to think he has. He's a vitally necessary part of the conservative movement, but he's no one's leader. Don't give him more credit than he deserves, and don't fall prey to the Democrats' carefully planned attempts to inflate his authority. Steele learned the hard way a few days ago that the opposite extreme is also not true -- Rush is not a mere entertainer. One of his most important contributions to the conservative movement has been his ability to energize the base. This is particularly vital now given the recent election results. Someone has to keep the troops from giving up, and like it or not, for now that someone is Rush. It doesn't really matter whether he's a shallow thinker. What does matter is that he knows how to prod people into action. That's all well and good, but is it sustainable? What works for me and for the many other "Rush babies" out there may not work for our younger siblings. Thanks to the Obama campaign, new activists aren't going to be as easily attracted by witty aphorisms and wordplays as previous demographics were. President Obama's impressive rhetorical skills appeared to raise the level of public discourse during the campaign. As far as I can tell he didn't actually say anything new, but so many things sounded new when he said them. I don't think he changed the content of the age-old feud between right and left, but he did change the style, providing a stark contrast to the | [
"Who did Rachel Motte grow up listening to?",
"Who does Limbaugh appeal to?",
"Who's style has a great appeal to conservatives?",
"What group does Limbaugh appeal to?",
"Motte said who set a new bar for public discourse?",
"What did Motte say about Obama?",
"Who did Rachel Motte listen to?"
] | [
[
"Rush"
],
[
"the conservative movement"
],
[
"Rush Limbaugh"
],
[
"the conservative movement"
],
[
"President Obama's"
],
[
"campaign, new activists aren't going to be as easily attracted by witty aphorisms and wordplays"
],
[
"Rush Limbaugh"
]
] | Rachel Motte says she grew up listening to Rush Limbaugh and became a big fan .
She says Limbaugh's style still has great appeal to conservatives .
Motte: Obama has set a new bar for public discourse, winning over young voters .
Limbaugh may not appeal to the young as much, but he's still relevant, Motte says . |
Editor's note: Ralph J. Begleiter teaches communication, journalism and political science at the University of Delaware. During two decades as CNN's "world affairs correspondent," Begleiter was the network's most widely traveled reporter. Ralph J. Begleiter says the Pentagon's new policy on media access to coffins of war dead is a milestone. NEWARK, Delaware (CNN) -- The reversal of two decades of policy on images of returning war casualties is an important and welcome milestone for the American people. The Pentagon's decision announced Thursday allowing media coverage of coffins of war victims returning to Dover Air Force Base -- if families agree -- restores to its rightful, honorable place the immense value of the sacrifice American troops make on behalf of their nation. It allows the American people to honor the dignified and respectful return of war casualties to home soil for the last time. Although no one should have a veto over the nation's ability to pay respects to its fallen troops, I believe most families will decide that their sons and daughters deserve to be recognized publicly for their sacrifice. These men and women enlisted in the military for their nation. They fought for their nation. They died for their nation. Their return should be respectfully and publicly acknowledged by their nation. The ban on images of returning casualties started accidentally, and without any reference to the "privacy" of the families of those who gave their lives in service to the nation. The accident of media history occurred in December 1989 when poor White House scheduling placed President George H.W. Bush before live television cameras just as the first American casualties were arriving at Dover Air Force Base from the U.S. invasion of Panama. CNN and two other major TV networks fired up their split-screen technology, showing on one side the president joking with White House reporters just before the Christmas holiday -- and on the other the sober images of flag-draped military caskets being carried ceremoniously by honor guards across the tarmac at Dover. After the holidays, the president appealed publicly to reporters to "help me" overcome a public impression that he had been insensitive on TV about the returning casualties. News media had been covering the return of war casualties since World War II. Some military personnel believe the showing of those images -- and others from the jungles of Vietnam -- contributed to a gradual growth of anti-war sentiment during the 1960s. Just days before the Gulf War began in January 1991, the new media policy was formalized in a cable sent by the Defense Department to its posts: There would be no media coverage of returning casualties at Dover or other stops along the way home. The directive made no mention of anyone's privacy but portrayed the ban on coverage of returning casualties as an effort to ease pressure on stressed families, who might feel obliged to travel to Dover to witness the return of their loved one with news media watching. Over the next decade, several exceptions were made to the ban on media coverage at Dover, including for the return of Navy personnel killed in the bombing of the USS Cole off Yemen's coast, just weeks before the election that brought the second President Bush into office. Ironically, throughout the ban on media coverage of returning casualties, the Pentagon continued documenting this important part of any war by assigning military and government contract photographers to take pictures of the flag-draped caskets. Those images, among the most poignant, respectful and dignified tributes to troops who died in service of their nation, were carefully maintained by the Defense Department. They were used for training of honor guards and for commemorating the significance of war casualties. Although taken by the government, those images were withheld from public view. From the aftermath of September 11, 2001, through the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the Pentagon kept taking those pictures even as it expanded its ban on media coverage of returning casualties -- now arguing that such war images would somehow invade the privacy of families of the deceased troops. It was those images that a series of Freedom of Information Act requests pried loose in 2005 after months of legal skirmishing. (Those | [
"Who said that U.S. policy on photographing war dead was result of coincidence?",
"What was the new policy allows?",
"Begleiter urged the government to resume using its photographers to document what?"
] | [
[
"Ralph J. Begleiter"
],
[
"American people to honor the dignified and respectful return of war casualties to home soil for the last time."
],
[
"take pictures of the flag-draped caskets."
]
] | Ralph J. Begleiter: U.S. policy on photographing war dead was result of coincidence .
He says it was due to split-screen image of president joking while coffins returning .
Begleiter: New policy allows the nation to pay proper respect to war dead .
He urges government to resume using its photographers to document the toll . |
Editor's note: Randall Balmer, an Episcopal priest, is professor of American religious history at Barnard College, Columbia University, and a visiting professor at Emory University. His most recent book is "God in the White House: How Faith Shaped the Presidency from John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush." Randall Balmer supports Obama's unusual broadening of a president's words to include nonbelievers. NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Obama's mention of "nonbelievers" in his inaugural address represents an important broadening of the circle of acceptability in American life, an acknowledgement of our growing diversity and a fuller embrace of the principles articulated in our nation's charter documents. One of the hallmarks of American life, dating to the 17th century, is its religious pluralism. The Atlantic seaboard during the colonial period was home to everyone from Puritans, Roman Catholics and Dutch Reformed to Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians, Swedish Lutherans, Anglicans, Huguenots, Mennonites and Schwenckfelders. Jews arrived in New Amsterdam in 1654, refugees from South America after the Portuguese takeover of Recifé. Somehow it all worked, especially in the crucible of religious pluralism in the Middle Colonies: New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, where William Penn launched his "Holy Experiment" of religious toleration. In the context of the New World, these religious groups learned to coexist with remarkably little conflict, and when it came time to configure the new nation, the founders in their wisdom elected not to designate any group as the state religion. "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," the First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads. This provision set up a kind of free market for religion in America, allowing religious groups to compete in a marketplace unfettered by government interference. Indeed, American history is littered with religious entrepreneurs (to extend the economic metaphor) who have peddled their wares in this marketplace and thereby contributed to the vigor and vitality of American religious life. The story of religion in America life has been one of expansion and ever-increasing diversity. Although Roman Catholics were present in the colonial period -- Maryland, named for the wife of Charles I, was founded by Catholics from England -- Catholics arrived in great numbers from Ireland, Germany and Italy over the course of the 19th century. Many Protestants, their hegemony threatened, resisted, sometimes with violence. Jews from Germany and Eastern Europe came as well. Most of the resistance was episodic. With notable -- albeit unfortunate -- exceptions, we Americans eventually rise to our better selves and embrace the principles of equality and toleration enshrined in our charter documents. And we can trace these changes in our rhetoric. The term "Judeo-Christian," although coined late in the 19th century, became popular in the 1930s as the clouds of war were gathering in Europe. In 1955, after World War II, when so many sons of Jewish and Catholic immigrants fought the Axis powers, sociologist Will Herberg published a book entitled "Protestant-Catholic-Jew," arguing that any of these religious expressions was legitimately "American." The following decade saw still more changes. The civil rights struggle brought the vibrancy of African-American religious life to national attention, and Lyndon Johnson's signature on the Hart-Cellar Immigration Act in 1965 removed immigration quotas. In the decades since, the arrival of people from around the world, especially from South Asia and Southeast Asia, has literally recast the religious landscape of the United States. Muslim mosques, Hindu temples, Sikh Gurdwäräs and Buddhist stupas have sprouted across the nation, from cities to the countryside. And our rhetoric has evolved as well. Whereas America might once have been described as a "Protestant" nation and then a "Christian" nation (to reflect the inclusion of Roman Catholics), we moved to "Judeo-Christian" and then "Protestant-Catholic-Jew." More recently, we have talked about the "Abrahamic Traditions," Jews, Christians and Muslims, thereby broadening the circle to include Islam, one of the three major monotheistic religions. | [
"Who said \"It's unusual for a president to include nonbelievers in his words\"?",
"What religions have been included?"
] | [
[
"Randall Balmer"
],
[
"Puritans, Roman Catholics and Dutch Reformed to Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians, Swedish Lutherans, Anglicans, Huguenots,"
]
] | Randall Balmer: It's unusual for a president to include nonbelievers in his words .
He says America has widened its circle of religion for hundreds of years .
Balmer says rhetoric has grown to include Jews, Muslims, Hindus .
The First Amendment makes it appropriate to recognize nonbelievers, he says . |
Editor's note: Raquel Cepeda is an award-winning journalist, documentary filmmaker and former editor of Russell Simmons' Oneworld magazine. Cepeda wrote and directed the feature documentary, "Bling: A Planet Rock," about hip-hop's obsession with diamonds and its effect on the decade-long conflict in Sierra Leone. Cepeda is based in New York, where she was born to Dominican parents. Find her at http://djalirancher.com/blog/.
Raquel Cepeda says people don't fit into the neat categories outlined by the U.S. Census.
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Let's all pretend to be the astrologer Walter Mercado for a moment. Say we predict that the Obama administration's master plan to engage people of Latino/Hispanic/Spanish origin proves to be effective.
Let's say that along with strategic partners Telemundo and the Census Bureau, they somehow manage to corral the millions of "Latinos" into filling out the 2010 census forms in April. Say the idea of plot-kneading the message into an already half-baked yet inexplicably popular telenovela, "Mas Sabe el Diablo," wins over the hearts and minds of "Latinos" everywhere.
But what's a Latino?
While we all may speak a version of our Spanish colonizer's language, contrary to popular belief, we're not all Mexican. Yes, the majority of Latinos in America are of Mexican descent, but we also hail from other countries around the world.
Take the ethnically ambiguous 15 percent of us who descend from the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico and Cuba. An overwhelming majority of us aren't solely of Spanish, black or native origin: We're all of the above and then some (some of our ancestors migrated from Asian, Middle Eastern and an array of European countries).
With the 2010 census upon us, the time is now for the fastest-growing minority group in the country to define themselves for themselves and at the same time clear up the cultural confusion surrounding our identity. But how can we, given the perplexing racial categories on the census, coupled with our own complex identity issues, paint an accurate picture of who and how complex we are, not just what we are?
Take me, for example; I'm a first-generation American, the product of Dominican parents whose short-lived relationship could have rivaled that of Shakespeare's own telenovela, Romeo and Juliet. My family is made up of a rainbow coalition of racial chameleons.
Recently, I was told that my maternal grandmother's own abuela was Vietnamese; my maternal great-great-grandfather was Haitian; somewhere on my paternal side, we're supposedly Sephardic. As in many Dominican families in my New York neighborhood -- Washington Heights -- with ties to the motherland, blackness is rarely discussed.
When I traveled to Sierra Leone and Ghana, I was asked if I was Moroccan, Lebanese or Eritrean. In Paris, if I was Brazilian or Arabic. In fact, I've been singled out a couple of times when entering and leaving Brazil, and was once accused of having a fake American passport by an agent. Being mistaken for everything but a person of Dominican heritage has certainly piqued my desire to examine how I and other Latinos fit into our national and global communities.
When I learned that nearly eighty percent of Puerto Rico's 4 million colorful residents checked off the "white" racial box on the last census, I wasn't floored -- given the alternatives. Race in the Caribbean lies in the eye of the beholder. And the beholder, from centuries of colonization, has more often than not been socialized to reject their blackness despite our collective and direct relationship to slavery.
An association with a historically discriminated ethnic group like African-Americans somehow drives the idea that the American dream is out of reach. In the American media, people with darker complexions are often grossly stereotyped. And Spanish language television often depicts people with darker skin and so-called African features as shiftless, ignorant and at the bottom of the social barrel.
This sort exposure, along with other factors, will result in a Latino with dark skin to | [
"What does Raquel Cepeda say about the census?",
"What does Raquel Cepeda say about the Latinos ?"
] | [
[
"people don't fit into the neat categories outlined by the U.S."
],
[
"people don't fit into the neat categories outlined by the U.S. Census."
]
] | Raquel Cepeda: The census tries to categorize people by ethnicity, race .
She says reality is Latinos have very varied, complex backgrounds .
She says many people resist being classified by simple labels . |
Editor's note: Rep. Charles Boustany is a Republican who represents southwest Louisiana. Before being elected to Congress, Boustany practiced medicine as a cardiothoracic surgeon for 14 years. Rep. Charles Boustany says Democrats' health care plans don't focus on quality. (CNN) -- Americans deserve the best health care system in the world -- one that emphasizes quality, but reduces cost, so all Americans can participate. As a doctor, I saw firsthand the problems many patients face finding a doctor, navigating the system, and paying their health care bills. Unfortunately, Democrats' plans in Congress fail to focus on quality. House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, recently stated that the Democrats were proposing "a government-run nightmare operated by federal bureaucrats." If enacted, their plans would complicate the system and take more money from American pockets -- a nightmare, indeed. One report estimates more than 100 million people could drop their current health care coverage if the plans were open to all employers. One reason cited for the drop in current coverage -- businesses no longer offering private coverage -- would contradict the president's promise to allow Americans to keep their current coverage, if they like it. Imposed employer mandates could cost 4.7 million people their jobs. All of this means that many people who like their current health insurance might not be able to keep it and be forced into a new system, including a government option with lower reimbursement rates that might discourage their current doctor from continuing to treat them. Just as a doctor has the obligation to be honest and straightforward with their patients, Democrats in Washington must inform the public of the impact their plans will have on current insurance and the exact costs. As the economy struggles to recover, Americans are rightfully concerned about the potential cost of health reform, as shown by a recent CNN survey. Before we know how much it will cost and how it will affect those currently with insurance, we cannot have an open and honest debate on the merits of any proposal. While the House bill remains unscored by the Congressional Budget Office, health overhaul plans being crafted by Senate Democrats will likely cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years and could fail to cover millions of Americans. As a doctor, I know there is a better way to help all Americans achieve meaningful health care access. The president's proposed cuts in health care spending will result in limited treatment options for patients, and by shifting the burden of debt to the next generation of Americans, our children will be the ones helping to defer the outrageous costs. With our government's inability to maintain the Medicare and Medicaid programs that we currently fund, how much deeper can the hole get? The Government Accountability Office refers to Congress' failure to face Medicare's monetary difficulties as a "leadership deficit." Even some Blue Dog Democrats are asking if funding a new plan is even possible if the government cannot solve the funding problems of the current plans. Patients in these programs continue to be denied access to a doctor in many communities. A few months ago, I received an e-mail from a Medicaid patient diagnosed with a brain tumor. Doctors told her that she would likely be put on a six-month waiting list for brain surgeons currently serving Medicaid patients. For timely care, she had to borrow a neighbor's car, secure child care for her autistic child and drive four hours to a hospital in Shreveport, Louisiana. Patients in government-run plans obviously deserve better than this, so is this new government-run plan going to be any better? Republicans will give all Americans the liberty to select the plan that works best for them and let those who like their health care coverage keep it. We pledge to make quality health care coverage more available and less expensive, including those with pre-existing health conditions. We want to protect Americans from losing their current health coverage because an employer drops private coverage for a government-run program. This plan should also improve American lives through effective wellness, prevention and disease management programs, while finding innovative treatments for life | [
"What could burden next generation with enormous cost?",
"What plans are Boustany talking about?",
"What did Boustany say about health plans?",
"Who would be burdened with the enormous cost?",
"What could many Americans lose?"
] | [
[
"cuts in health care spending"
],
[
"Democrats' health care"
],
[
"care"
],
[
"our children will"
],
[
"their jobs."
]
] | Rep. Boustany: Many Americans could lose current health plans .
He says they could wind up in government system without current doctors .
Boustany: Plans could burden next generation with enormous cost . |
Editor's note: Republican Leslie Sanchez was director of the White House Initiative on Hispanic Education from 2001 to 2003 and author of "Los Republicanos: Why Hispanics and Republicans Need Each Other." She is CEO of the Impacto Group, which specializes in market research about women and Hispanics.
Leslie Sanchez says Republicans should treat Hispanics as part of the mainstream of America.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As the members of the Republican National Committee prepare to choose a party chairman to serve for the next two years, the calls for new "Hispanic outreach" initiatives are flying -- in my view, unnecessarily.
It is probably true that President Obama's election marks the beginning of a post-partisan, post-racial America, or at least a time when these issues are less divisive than in years past.
But will the two political parties be as able to look beyond the stereotypes of Latinos and what the Latino experience is in this country, as they have for other ethnic and racial groups?
As Republicans, we need to win at least 35 percent of the Hispanic vote to win the presidency. In 2008, John McCain got 31 percent, slightly exceeding the average for the past eight presidential elections. We've had our high points (George W. Bush 2004, 44 percent) and low points (Bob Dole 1996, 21 percent).
Ten years ago, as an RNC press aide, I was given the responsibility for developing a team that would design a multimillion-dollar ad strategy to appeal to the nation's emerging Latino electorate.
We conducted seminal research on Hispanic voting patterns that is still of value today. For example, we identified a "GOP Upside" of another 25 percent of Hispanics who were voting Democrat on the generic presidential ballot question but would be interested in voting for a Republican who offered a campaign agenda focused on family, education and job-creation issues.
So it is mystifying to me to hear the ongoing references to the party's need to find "a new way" to speak to the nation's largest minority bloc. It's like being asked to reinvent the wheel.
This isn't just a Republican problem. Democrats do this too, relating to Latinos as if we're primarily poor, immigrant or both. It doesn't work anymore, if it ever did. And although the anti-immigrant rhetoric spouted by Tom Tancredo and others was offensive to Hispanics and projected a "We don't want you here" image for the GOP, the fact is that it was offensive to a lot of other people, too.
In the age of Obama, that kind of exclusive message is just not marketable.
If Republicans truly want to develop a winning strategy for appealing to Hispanics, they need look no further than Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. They appealed to them not as Hispanics or immigrants but as Americans with an equal stake in the future of the country.
What Hispanics want, and what we as Republicans want them to want, is to be included in the American experience.
During the period in which Hispanics constituted a small minority of the overall nation, efforts like Richard Nixon's to ensure that they were counted in the national census were important because it meant inclusion.
When people believe that they are already part of a community, such patently obvious efforts come across as patronizing. Hispanics, especially young professionals like me who were born and raised here in the United States, believe that we deserve more than a couple of high-profile meetings and a few Spanish-language ads.
That was certainly true during the 2008 presidential campaign, which had little to interest Hispanics at all. McCain trumpeted his record as a champion of comprehensive immigration reform to Hispanics, while his campaign tried to make him more palatable to Republican conservatives by de-emphasizing his record as a champion of comprehensive immigration reform.
McCain was hurt among Latinos by the perception that he caved in on immigration enforcement and abandoned his own bill.
Obama's campaign message to Hispanics, though delivered largely in Spanish through his campaign Web site, was patronizing. In the summary of issues | [
"What do Hispanics want to be seen as?",
"What is part of the American mainstream with broad interests?",
"What are the hispanics part of?",
"Who is reaching out to Hispanics?",
"What did the candidates talk about?",
"To who will the outreach be?"
] | [
[
"part of the mainstream of America."
],
[
"Hispanics"
],
[
"mainstream of America."
],
[
"Republican National Committee"
],
[
"new \"Hispanic outreach\" initiatives"
],
[
"women and Hispanics."
]
] | Leslie Sanchez: Republicans are talking about a new outreach to Hispanics .
She says Hispanics are part of the American mainstream with broad interests .
Sanchez: Candidates, including Obama, talked about narrow issues .
She says Hispanics want to be seen as Americans, with a stake in the future . |
Editor's note: Reza Sayah is one of the few Western journalists reporting from Tehran after the Iranian government placed restrictions on coverage. A man in the crowd holds up a photo of Ahmadinejad during Khamenei's address at Friday prayers. TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- People in the crowd sang songs of tribute as they waited. When he arrived, they stood and welcomed him in unison: "Praise be to God and to his prophet, Mohammed." Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader for two decades, took the stage during Friday prayers at Tehran University with a few notes on small pieces of paper in his left hand. He leaned on the lectern with his right arm, crippled in an 1981 assassination attempt. He was ready to put an end to a week of unrest. First, a sermon about the dangers of division and disunity, using the language of Islam. Then came secular sentences, decidedly direct. He praised the huge turnout at the polls as a victory for Iran but criticized post-election turmoil as the work of Iran's enemies -- the United States, Israel and Britain. "The enemies want to destroy our confidence. They want to create doubt about the election," Khamenei said. A full hour passed before he delivered a verdict that supporters of opposition presidential candidate Mir Hossein Moussavi did not want to hear. "Eleven million votes difference?" he asked. "Sometimes there's a margin of one hundred thousand or two hundred thousand, or one million, maximum. Then one can doubt, be concerned that there has been some rigging or manipulation. "But there's a difference of 11 million votes. How can vote rigging happen?" To be clear, he reminded the crowd of the victor at the polls. It was the man sitting in the front row: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He was the "the absolute victor," Khamenei said. "If political elites want to ignore or break the law and willy-nilly take wrong measures which are harmful, they will be held accountable for all violence and blood and rioting." Few in the crowd were disappointed with the cleric's words. "Death to America!" the people chanted repeatedly, interrupting Khamenei's speech. "Death to Israel." Noticeably absent Friday was Moussavi, the man who had sparked Iran's unrest by calling for a recount of the votes. Absent, too, were Moussavi's supporters, who did not take to the streets to protest as they had done in previous days. There were no signs and placards on the streets. Or people clamoring for change. The tens of thousands who showed up for Friday prayer were a stark contrast to the demonstrators. They were mostly religious conservatives, supporters of Ahmadinejad. And they had a message for the president's opponent, though it was not always consistent. Some were conciliatory. "The nation should come together," one said. "We are all one." Others took a hard line: "They must stop with the demonstrations, otherwise there will be consequences." Just what those consequences might be may become apparent Saturday afternoon, when the demonstrators are expected again on the streets of Tehran. But for now, Iran's supreme leader had issued his warning clearly: Enough is enough. | [
"What does supreme leader sermonizes about?",
"What did the crowd chant?",
"Who endorses official results?",
"What did Khamenei sermonize about?",
"What did the supreme leader sermonize about?",
"Who did Khamenei blame for the post-election turmoil?",
"Who did the Ayatollah want re-elected?",
"What does the crowd repeatedly chant?",
"Who interrupts him to chant \"Death to Isreal\"?",
"Who sermonized about the dangers of diviosn and disunity?"
] | [
[
"the dangers of division and disunity,"
],
[
"\"Praise be to God and to his prophet, Mohammed.\""
],
[
"Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,"
],
[
"the dangers of division and disunity,"
],
[
"the dangers of division and disunity,"
],
[
"the United States, Israel and Britain."
],
[
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad."
],
[
"\"Death to America!\""
],
[
"the people"
],
[
"Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,"
]
] | Supreme leader sermonizes about dangers of division and disunity .
Khamenei: Post-election turmoil the work of the United States, Israel, Britain .
Ayatollah endorses official results showing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was re-elected .
Crowd repeatedly interrupts him to chant "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" |
Editor's note: Rich Roll, one of Men's Fitness magazine's "25 Fittest Guys in the World" in 2009, was the first athlete to compete in the Ultraman World Championships on an entirely plant-based diet. He's sharing insights today as part of Dr. Sanjay Gupta's "Four Months to Fitness" effort. Before: At 40 years old, Rich Roll called himself "fat, unhappy and fed up." (CNN) -- I can still remember it, vivid as yesterday. It was the eve of my 40th birthday, and I walked upstairs to take a shower. And I was winded. I mean very winded. As I was trying to catch my breath, I took off my shirt, looked in the mirror and tried to convince myself that I was still that fit guy I had always thought I was. Somehow, I had been able to skate by on this delusion for all too many years. But the denial had finally caught up to me. I saw my true reflection, and I couldn't lie to myself anymore. I was in the worst shape of my life. I was fat, unhappy and fed up. It's the typical story. First it's the career. Then comes marriage, followed by kids. Your time is no longer your own, and you resign yourself to "maturity," "filling out" or whatever euphemism for middle age that soothes that idea that you are simply overweight, unfit and unhealthy. I'm here to say that it doesn't have to be that way. I don't care how busy you are. I don't care how old you are, how many kids you have or how little time you think you have. The power rests within yourself to enact any change in your life you desire. And I can say this because I have seen it happen in myself and countless others. After that fateful day of clarity, I made a decision to change my life. Not a vague, wishy-washy notion that I should "get in shape," maybe "eat better" or possibly "go on a diet," but rather a specific long-term plan to enhance my wellness in a way that would not only stick, but fit within the parameters of my busy life as a full-time lawyer, husband and father of four small children. In my case, it began with a well-researched and supervised seven-day fruit and vegetable juice cleanse (during which time I weaned myself off caffeine), followed by an entirely plant-based nutrition program -- an animal-product-free regimen I have adhered to ever since. The immediate result was a rather surprising and unexpected increase in my energy levels, leading to a very gradual return to exercise, building up slowly over an extended period of time. The results were hardly overnight. But two years later, I had lost well over 30 pounds. And not only did I keep the weight off, I was the most fit I had ever been in my life. At 42 years old, I competed in the Ultraman World Championships, a grueling three-day uber-endurance triathlon circumnavigating the Big Island of Hawaii that involves 6.2 miles of swimming, 260 miles of cycling and culminates with a 52.4-mile double marathon run. I placed 11th overall and was the third-fastest American. To top it off, Men's Fitness magazine recently named me one of the "25 Fittest Guys in the World." (Not that I actually believe I deserve such an honor!) Quite an extreme contrast from that day I looked in the mirror. I'm not advocating that everyone should test himself or herself so severely. But my point is that change starts with a decision followed by baby steps along a new, consistent trajectory that, over time, can lead to dramatic results. I'm nothing special. I'm not a professional athlete. I'm just a normal family guy. But if I could experience such a vast transformation in my own life, I know with certainty that everybody has within himself the | [
"Who named Roll one of the 25 Fittest Guys in the World?",
"Who was the most fit he'd ever been?",
"What advice does Rich Roll give?",
"who named him 25 fittest guy?",
"At what age was Roll in the worst shape?",
"Who was one of the \"25 Fittest Guys in the World?",
"Who was Approaching 40?",
"what did roll say?",
"Who was named the \"25 Fittest Guys in the World\"?",
"What happened after two years?",
"What did Rich Roll says?",
"What did he do to become fit?",
"when was he named one of the 25 Fittest",
"Who is approaching 40?",
"who was in the worst shape",
"Who was named one of the 25 fittest guys in the world?"
] | [
[
"Men's Fitness magazine's"
],
[
"Rich Roll"
],
[
"The power rests within yourself to enact any change in your life you desire."
],
[
"Men's Fitness"
],
[
"40 years old,"
],
[
"Rich Roll,"
],
[
"Rich Roll"
],
[
"called himself \"fat, unhappy and fed up.\""
],
[
"Rich Roll,"
],
[
"lost well over 30 pounds."
],
[
"called himself \"fat, unhappy and fed up.\""
],
[
"seven-day fruit and vegetable juice cleanse (during which time I weaned myself off caffeine), followed by an entirely plant-based nutrition program"
],
[
"2009,"
],
[
"Rich Roll"
],
[
"Rich Roll"
],
[
"Rich Roll,"
]
] | Rich Roll: Approaching 40, "I was in the worst shape of my life"
Two years later, he was the most fit he'd ever been .
This year, Men's Fitness named Roll one of the "25 Fittest Guys in the World"
To become fit, set a specific goal, be consistent and take it one day at a time, he says . |
Editor's note: Robert J. Shiller is a professor of economics at Yale University. This op-ed is based on his book with George Akerlof, "Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism." Akerlof is a 2001 Nobel laureate in economics and professor of economics at the University of California at Berkeley. Robert Shiller says basic psychogical factors led to excesses which have devastated the economy. (CNN) -- President Obama's National Economic Council head Lawrence Summers noted in his speech March 13 that the economic crisis has led to an "excess of fear" that must be reversed. To understand the role fear plays in the current crisis, we must understand the role of human psychology. John Maynard Keynes thought psychology was the major cause of economic booms as well as busts, though this aspect of his work is now largely forgotten. He said people's economic decisions, in both good times and bad times, are largely, ultimately, if indirectly, driven by animal spirits, primitive psychological tendencies. In a recently published book, George Akerlof and I identified three animal spirits that played critical roles in the current economic meltdown. They are confidence, bad faith and storytelling. Let's first consider confidence and its dictionary meaning. Confidence means complete and secure trust. But trust goes beyond the rational use of information that is usually considered in economic theory. Trust is largely an emotion. Indeed we saw the role of vivid emotions in the stock and housing market booms that brought on our current problems. Trust is a state of mind that is the opposite of vigilance. People were purchasing and selling complex financial instruments without looking carefully at them. This trust is broken. The second animal spirit that came into play was bad faith. With so many trusting people, an uglier side of human nature became prominent. The temptation for smart promoters was overwhelming. Questionable practices boomed, and regulators failed to step in, because of the view, taken from economists, that private markets would be self-policing. Investors would only put their money at increased risk if they were duly compensated by higher expected returns. Thus, there was little worry about laxity of regulation in securities and real estate markets. But, this self-policing view did not consider that these investors might be overconfident. There is a myth that capitalism produces what people really want, as long as firms can make a profit. But, instead, more generally, it produces what people think they want, as long as firms can make a profit. True, unregulated capitalism will produce good medicines that cure our ills. But unregulated capitalism will also produce snake oil that people think they want, but does not cure our ills. (To guard against the production of such things, the federal government established the Food and Drug Administration in 1906.) The problem of snake oil has special relevance for financial assets, which are only pieces of paper. Most investors can surmise their value only from what others, such as accountants and rating agencies, tell them. These accounting and rating agencies also have their own incentives. And those incentives have not been fully aligned with the public's interest. And so when people are overconfident, financial markets produce assets that take advantage of that overconfidence. If unprotected by effective regulation, people will be sold snake oil assets. Just recently an industry arose, in Wall Street and beyond, to produce them. A third animal spirit bolstered the previous two. People act and think and live according to stories, especially human interest stories, not usually abstract calculation. That goes for their personal decisions. But there is also always a story, usually with some grain of truth and human interest, about the economy. These stories are often overly exuberant, on the one side, or overly pessimistic on the other. Ten years ago we had the story of the dot-com millionaires. Most recently we believed alchemists of financial engineering were packaging risky financial assets to make them safe. People were overconfident. And markets took advantage of their beliefs to sell them | [
"Basic psychological factors are key to to what?",
"Who said that the government must aim for full employment and widely available credit?",
"Who says that the government has a role in preventing fraud from being sold to the public?",
"What is Robert Shiller known for?",
"What is Shiller's first name?"
] | [
[
"excesses"
],
[
"Robert Shiller"
],
[
"Robert Shiller"
],
[
"professor of economics at Yale University."
],
[
"Robert"
]
] | Robert Shiller: Economic boom gave rise to schemes that relied on trust .
He says basic psychological factors are key to restoring confidence .
Government has a role in preventing fraud from being sold to the public, he says .
Shiller: Government must aim for full employment and widely available credit . |
Editor's note: Roland S. Martin, a CNN political analyst, is a nationally syndicated columnist and author of "Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith," and the forthcoming book, "The First: President Barack Obama's Road to the White House." He is a commentator for TV One Cable Network and host of a one-hour Sunday morning news show.
As a columnist, I'm used to writing things that offend other folks. It comes with the job. And there are times when I have responded to what other folks in the media will say and write. Again, it's just what we do.
There have been a number of things I've read and heard over the past few months, but one that has totally ticked me off is the recent column by ESPN's Rick Reilly in the March 22 issue of ESPN The Magazine.
Reilly uses his column to personally attack Greg Wise, the boys head basketball coach at Jack Yates High School in Houston, Texas. In the despicable piece, Reilly tries to link Wise with a fight in the parking lot after Yates destroyed archrival Booker T. Washington. Apparently shots were fired, and in Reilly's world, it's all tied to Yates beating them 132-68.
So I wonder if Reilly blames Gary Williams for Maryland upsetting No. 4 ranked Duke, this leading to fans going bonkers -- some say riot -- and 28 people getting arrested.
I've seen folks fight after one-point losses; that's just what happens when dumb folks talk trash in the parking lot. They either duke it out with fists, or these days, pull out a gun to make their point.
Reilly then has the gall to say that the school district in Houston needs to intervene to "stop" Wise, even suggesting that Yates Principal Ronald Mumphery should "grow a pair." So what do you propose Rick? Tell him not to blow other teams out? So the next time we see a 59-0 or 77-0 score in football, are we to scold the coach and tell him he will be suspended if his teams keeps scoring points?
Should Bob Stoops have been put on administrative leave when his Sooners destroyed my Aggies 77-0? In fact, last year Oklahoma beat my Aggies 65-10. Hey, Rick, wasn't 45, 50, 60 or even 70 enough for Stoops? Why 77 points?
The Reillys of the world will remark that, "Oh, these are poor high school students. Their self-esteem will be hurt by this." Bullcrap, Rick. Yes, Yates has blown teams out by 50, 60 and even 100 points. When you're good, it happens.
Let me be clear: I'm not objective on this issue. I graduated from Yates in 1987, where I attended the Magnet School of Communications. I watched Yates in 1985 win the football state championship by going undefeated and blowing out teams every week. That team set a state record for most points and set about another 20 records. They were just as dominating in football as this year's basketball team.
What wimps like Reilly object to is Wise teaching his team to press, press and press. Yates used this strategy to win the Class 4A state championship last year, and this weekend will try to win another title. They play all 15 guys and rotate them in and out. They wear the opposing team out, forcing them to commit turnover after turnover. On the side of their championship rings is the slogan, "32 minutes of hell." It's similar to what Nolan Richardson's Arkansas teams were nicknamed, "40 minutes of hell.'
Guys like Reilly love to jump on the poor souls campaign. But I learned a long time ago that when you put on your uniform and lace 'em up, you stand a chance of getting your butt kicked. That's all a part of the game.
What guys like Reilly also don't understand is that their words matter. And by writing such a horrible piece about Wise, he is | [
"What is Roland's last name?",
"Who wrote a column blasting coach?",
"What did Rick Reilly blast in the column?"
] | [
[
"Martin,"
],
[
"Rick Reilly"
],
[
"Greg Wise, the boys head basketball coach at Jack Yates High School in Houston, Texas."
]
] | Roland Martin's old high school has nation's best basketball team .
Rick Reilly of ESPN wrote a column blasting coach for running up the score .
Roland Martin says there's nothing wrong with the way team plays . |
Editor's note: Ronald F. Ferguson is Senior Lecturer in Education and Public Policy at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and the Harvard Kennedy School. His most recent book is "Toward Excellence with Equity: An emerging vision for closing the achievement gap," published by Harvard Education Press. He is the creator of the Tripod Project for School Improvement and also the faculty co-chair and director of the Achievement Gap Initiative at Harvard University.
Ronald Ferguson says parents can play a key role in improving their children's education.
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Raising the quality of teaching and learning in American schools is a priority. It receives a great deal of attention in our national discourse and should receive more.
Test scores and graduation rates are improving faster in other nations than in the United States and this threatens our quality of life in a competitive world.
In addition, achievement gaps between racial groups in the United States remain large. The social and political vitality of the nation may depend on closing these racial gaps. Blacks and Hispanics are doing better than in the past compared to whites, but still not nearly good enough.
Making schools better should be only one part of our national strategy. Life at home has been a relatively neglected topic and needs to come out of the shadows.
Especially in churches, neighborhood organizations, families and informal social networks, helping parents do their best needs to be as big a priority as achieving excellent schools.
This goes beyond public policies. I am talking about changes in mindsets and lifestyles in a national social and cultural movement to close achievement gaps between groups -- a movement to achieve excellence with equity.
More reading at home is a place to start. I present data in my recent book based on a large sample of students in elementary and secondary schools from several states.
Black and Hispanic students reported less leisure reading at home compared to whites, watched television more, were much more likely to have televisions in their bedrooms and (perhaps as a consequence) were more prone to become sleepy at school. Also, blacks and Hispanics, including those with college-educated parents, reported fewer books in their homes than whites whose parents had fewer years of schooling.
However, life at home helps shape academic outcomes long before children begin reading books. Family-level supports in the first two years of life help predict achievement years later, in elementary school.
Beginning soon after birth, the most supportive mothers teach the joy of living and learning, through lots of active, encouraging, verbal and nonverbal communication. They engage actively in helping children learn to walk and talk and to explore their new world and manipulate their toys and other objects.
Such mothers exist in large numbers in every racial group. Nonetheless, in a recent study by Harvard's Richard Murnane and co-authors, differences in mother-child interaction patterns like these were found to account for one-third of the black-white gap in math and English skills at the beginning of kindergarten -- and one-quarter at the end of third grade.
As children get older, highly responsive parents spend time with children, look for ways to be helpful and encourage them to voice their opinions. They are good listeners and they teach their children that they have a right to be heard and that people in positions of authority can sometimes be persuaded. The same parents can also be demanding, providing rules and structure and holding children consistently accountable for their behavior.
Professor Jelani Mandara of Northwestern University found in a nationally representative sample that students who achieved the highest test scores among blacks, Hispanics and whites had parents who were both responsive and demanding.
According to the study, white parents were much more likely to be both responsive and demanding than black and Hispanic parents; whereas black parents, in particular, were often highly demanding, but tended not to be as responsive in the ways the study measured. Among early adolescents, differences along these dimensions helped account for the higher test scores of whites as compared with blacks and Hispanics.
Findings like the above should be part of the conversation among black and Hispanic | [
"What is improving?",
"Whose achievement has been improving?",
"What will the vitality of the U.S. depend on?"
] | [
[
"Test scores and graduation rates"
],
[
"Blacks and Hispanics"
],
[
"closing these racial gaps."
]
] | Ronald Ferguson: Vitality of U.S. may depend on closing racial achievement gaps .
He says achievement of black and Hispanic students is improving .
He says further progress could come if parents were more responsive to children .
Ferguson: Harvard has started a program to improve quality of parenting . |
Editor's note: Roya Hakakian is the author of "Journey from the Land of No: A Girlhood Caught in Revolutionary Iran." Her web site is http://www.royahakakian.com/live/. Roya Hakakian says she lived through an earlier moment when Iranians thought freedom was at hand. (CNN) -- Since last Saturday, the images of Neda Agha Soltan, the young woman who died on the streets of Tehran, keep playing before my eyes. When I don't look at the clip on my computer, it runs on its own in my mind's eye. What has me so riveted is not entirely empathy, the intuitive human response the images are bound to stir in everyone. There is also something less noble at work in me, an obsession with seeing my own face upon hers. Each time I see her die, I die along with her. I, too, was born and raised in Iran. My coming-of-age years coincided with the Iranian revolution of 1979. I, too, was on the streets, watching and rooting for the demonstrators. Nothing seemed more natural, more compelling than being on the streets, calling for freedom, breathing the intoxicating, the dangerously euphoric Tehran air. I was 12 in 1978, yet I was as undaunted as any adult. Nothing, least of all my pleading parents, could keep me away from the rooftops at 9 p.m. Amid the night's dark, where the crowds were as indiscernible as ghosts, the shouts of "Allah-o-akbar" rose from every rooftop like smoke rising from an invisible bonfire. We were all victims of the flames and the very arsonists at once. We were burning in the fire of our own making. Thirty years hence that fire still burns in Iran, because moments before her death, Neda Agha Soltan cried: "I'm on fire!" I am entranced by her because she and I are the only two possibilities of the dictatorial narrative: Death or escape. She died. I escaped. I live. And because I live I cannot escape her death -- the memory of her large eyes languidly drifting to one side, then freezing upon the abyss. Survival of this kind brings its own eternal damnation: A bifurcated existence lived in the here and now, but perpetually haunted by there and then. Making peace with the past would have been easier, if only the essence of that past had not been in doubt, if its dignity were intact. But in my first American ride in my first American taxi cab, I learned the staggering counter-narrative that I would hear again and again, dominating the western perceptions of Iran, when the driver asked: "So, where are you from?" "I come from Iran," I said, in broken English. "Eeran," he asked with uncertainty. "Eeeran?" Then passing his fingertips across his throat like a knife, he said, "Eeran ... Khomeini?" In that, 2,500 years of civilization was reduced to one vile name and the invocation of a throat being slit. It did not take long for me to learn that between the Iran that I knew and the Iran that Americans knew was a discrepancy as vast as the waters that separated us. I soon learned that the images of a fist-throwing mob of angry men and darkly veiled women burning the Uncle Sam effigies were the only images that most Americans had of Iran. Those images had little in common with the Iran I knew -- greater in numbers and in the grip of the same fist-throwing crowds. With Neda's death, the Iran I know finally has a face. The sequence of her death is the sequence of our nation's struggle in the past 30 years: The democratic future that 1979 was to deliver collapsing, then trails of blood -- that of so many executed or assassinated -- streaming across its bright promise. The film of Neda's death is the abbreviated history of contemporary Iran. If history is a contest among competing narratives and icons, let the image of a young woman lying on the ground | [
"what did Roya say",
"What does Roya say?",
"When was the revolution in Iran?",
"What did Roya Hakakian say?",
"what did Hakakian say"
] | [
[
"she lived through an earlier moment when Iranians thought freedom was at hand."
],
[
"she lived through an earlier moment when Iranians thought freedom was at hand."
],
[
"1979."
],
[
"she lived through an earlier moment when Iranians thought freedom was at hand."
],
[
"she lived through an earlier moment when Iranians thought freedom was at hand."
]
] | Roya Hakakian: I was a girl in Iran during the revolution of 1979 .
She says she saw the hopes of democracy and freedom quashed .
Hakakian: Join me in praying for Neda and other fallen Iranians . |
Editor's note: Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a member of the San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board and a nationally syndicated columnist. Read his column here. Ruben Navarrette says hate crimes should be punished severely because they're aimed at society as a whole. SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- To think there are some people who still argue that the law shouldn't categorize some offenses as hate crimes and allow for enhanced criminal penalties. They claim that all sorts of crimes are motivated by hate, and to separate some from others elevates some victims over others and amounts to the state policing thoughts and feelings. They also fear that politicians and institutions are simply yielding to political correctness, liberal pressure groups and identity politics. My view is that hate crimes deserve special punishment because they don't just victimize whoever they're aimed at; they're intended to send a message, and they terrorize the whole society. That debate might have been settled Wednesday at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, where hate was on display. A shooting left one man dead: Stephen Tyrone Johns, a six-year veteran of the museum's security staff who, according to museum director Sara Bloomfield, "died heroically in the line of duty." The alleged assailant is James von Brunn, a Holocaust denier who created an anti-Semitic Web site. The 88-year-old often challenged the authenticity of "The Diary of Anne Frank," the book about a teenage girl living in Amsterdam during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands. So it was probably no coincidence that the shooting occurred on the same day the museum had scheduled a play based on a fictional meeting between Anne Frank and Emmett Till, a martyr of the civil rights movement. Von Brunn also had longstanding ties to white supremacist groups, according to authorities. These outfits flourish in bad times because they give underperformers something really valuable: convenient scapegoats for their troubles, failures and shortcomings. Without that, these misfits might actually have to look in the mirror and take responsibility for their own lives. Although these groups are properly categorized as "hate groups" by organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, what also fuels them are things like fear and insecurity. Nowadays, their targets are often Latinos, especially immigrants. But, before that and for much of the history of this country, the targets have been African-Americans. And, for much of the history of the world, they have been Jews. And that prejudice hasn't gone away. Consider what the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the former Chicago, Illinois, pastor whose relationship with Barack Obama became an issue in the presidential election, recently told the Virginia newspaper, the Daily Press, when asked if he speaks to Obama. "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me," Wright said in an apparent reference to some of Obama's aides. Wright later said he misspoke and meant to refer to "Zionists." A researcher for the Southern Poverty Law Center has said her group had a thick file on von Brunn going back 20 years and that he had become a "hardcore neo-Nazi." Von Brunn blamed a six-year prison term he once served -- for the attempted kidnapping of Federal Reserve board members in 1981 -- on "a Negro jury," "Jew/Negro attorneys" and "a Jew judge," according to his Web site. In documents read at trial, von Brunn wrote that his goal was to "deport all Jews and blacks from the white nations." Also, on his Web site, there's a message lamenting how "bit by bit government institutions and Congressmen fell into JEW hands -- then U.S. diplomacy, businesses, resources and manpower came under Jew control." You get the picture. It's no mystery what this guy is, to anyone but himself. His court-appointed lawyer from the Federal Reserve case said von Brunn, a veteran, considers himself a patriot. He's no such thing. That concept is best defined as love for one's country, not hatred for everyone else. It's | [
"Who does Navarrette say have been targets of haters?",
"Who are targets of haters?",
"Who has been targets of hate?",
"What should be punished more severly?",
"What does Navarrette say should be punished more severely?",
"What does Navarrette say hate crimes terrorizes as a whole?",
"Who says hate crimes should be punished more severely?",
"What terrorize society was a whole?"
] | [
[
"Latinos,"
],
[
"Latinos, especially immigrants."
],
[
"Latinos,"
],
[
"hate crimes"
],
[
"hate crimes"
],
[
"society"
],
[
"Ruben Navarrette"
],
[
"hate crimes"
]
] | Ruben Navarrette: Hate crimes should be punished more severely .
He says hate crimes terrorize society as a whole .
Navarrette: Latinos, blacks and Jews have all been targets of haters .
He says Obama is right to urge constant vigilance against hate . |
Editor's note: Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a member of the San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board, a nationally syndicated columnist and a regular contributor to CNN.com. Read his column here. Ruben Navarrette Jr. says President Felipe Calderon's war on drugs remains a noble battle for the soul of Mexico. SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- It has nothing to do with Michael Jackson or Sarah Palin, but there's a big story brewing south of the border to which Americans should pay close attention. Like a monster that refuses to die, Mexico's once-disgraced Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, made a convincing comeback in last weekend's midterm elections. The PRI recaptured its majority in the 500-member Chamber of Deputies and won five of six governorships up for grabs. The rival National Action Party, or PAN, which had controlled the legislative branch since 2000, suffered heavy losses. German Martinez, president of the PAN, resigned this week after taking responsibility for the electoral failures. Political observers on both sides of the border are calling the elections results a no-confidence vote in the Mexican economy and a significant rebuke to President Felipe Calderon's admirable but all-consuming war against the drug cartels. Calderon -- who is in the PAN -- is halfway through a six-year term, so he wasn't on the ballot. The presidency is next on the ballot in 2012, and observers think that the fact that the PRI aced its midterms sets the party up nicely to accomplish something that seemed unthinkable just a few years ago: retake the top job that it held for much of the 20th century -- 71 years, to be precise -- through corruption and intimidation. In 2000, the PAN's Vicente Fox broke that streak and reintroduced democracy in Mexico. Calderon squeaked out a narrow victory against a third-party candidate in 2006. The Harvard-educated lawyer and economist immediately and bravely took the fight to drug lords across the country, unleashing the military in a conflict that has so far killed more than 10,000 Mexicans with no end in sight. And there are now serious issues -- as spelled out this week in The Washington Post -- involving allegations of torture, forced disappearances and other abuse by the Mexican military as it seeks to retaliate for the killing of soldiers and other terrorist acts committed by the drug cartels. The Obama administration, which has pledged to support Calderon's drug war, would no doubt like to put an end to this alleged behavior before paying out the remainder of the $1.4 billion in aid to Mexico that Congress approved in the Merida Initiative. The trouble is that President Obama has been reluctant to make human rights demands of an adversary such as Iran, which could make it hard to lean on a friend such as Mexico. And as Mexican human rights activists point out, the U.S. government is in a difficult position to preach against torture given that it is accused of using it in Iraq, Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Still, Calderon's war remains a noble battle for the soul of Mexico. And there's evidence that the drug cartels are feeling the pinch. Unable to move their product to customers in Canada and the United States, the cartels are growing desperate. The Calderon government is seizing so much of the product and arresting or killing so many drug traffickers, that profits are slipping. The drug lords are forced to import more guns from the United States at higher prices and channel more drug shipments to Mexican customers, who pay lower prices than the cartels could charge Americans if the drugs were making their way north. This is bad news for the traffickers. But it's great news for the Mexican people, even if they don't know it. Judging from reports in the Mexican press, many Mexicans -- while supportive of the drug war -- think it ultimately will fail, and they're tired of the violence. Many fault Calderon for, in a popular metaphor, "stirring the hornet's nest." Meanwhile, although the PRI didn't explicitly campaign on a platform of being anti-drug war, the implied message was that | [
"What are drug dealers feeling?",
"What does Ruben Navarrette Jr. say?",
"Who faults Calderon for stirring up violence with the war on drugs?",
"What is the name of the Mexican leader?"
] | [
[
"the pinch."
],
[
"President Felipe Calderon's war on drugs remains a noble battle for the soul of Mexico."
],
[
"Ruben Navarrette Jr."
],
[
"President Felipe Calderon's"
]
] | Mexican leader Felipe Calderon may face defeat in 2012 after PRI makes comeback .
Some Mexicans fault Calderon for stirring up violence with war on drugs .
Calderon should address problems and press ahead, Ruben Navarrette Jr. says .
Evidence points to drug traffickers feeling the pinch, Navarrette says . |
Editor's note: Ruben Navarrette is a nationally syndicated columnist and a member of the editorial board of the San Diego Union-Tribune. Read his column here. Ruben Navarrette asks whether Obama's cool, calm demeanor will be a plus in negotiating with world leaders. SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- Make no mistake, Barack Obama is one cool customer. Now, after the last debate, it seems all but certain that the Iceman cometh to the White House. Radio talk show hosts and rank-and-file Republicans spent the last few weeks pleading with John McCain to take the gloves off and take the fight to Obama. How's that working out, folks? In this week's match-up, Obama snatched the gloves out of McCain's hands and slapped him silly with them. I suppose the hope was that Obama would get rattled and make a mistake. But Obama doesn't get rattled or make many mistakes. I still have no idea what type of president Obama would make. But he's an extraordinary politician. In fact, he may even be better than Bill Clinton who, while he had the IQ and EQ, also had the burden of a legendary red-hot temper. Obviously, it takes a lot to get under Obama's skin. McCain sure tried. Maybe this is the guy we want negotiating with world leaders. Maybe after eight years of George W. Bush stubbornness, on the heels of eight years of Clinton emotiveness, we need to send out for ice. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, 58 percent of those who watched the debate said Obama did the better job and 31 percent said that about McCain. That makes three skins for Obama. In earlier polls, 54 percent of those who watched thought Obama won the second debate, and 51 percent thought he won the first one. This week, McCain turned in his best performance of the debates, and the first 30 minutes -- with McCain bringing up Obama's problematic encounter with the now famous Joe the Plumber; and the quip about how he isn't Bush and how Obama should have run four years ago -- were near flawless for the Republican. iReport.com: Are you Joe the Plumber? Get out your plunger and share your thoughts McCain put Obama on the defensive, and it showed. If McCain had been that aggressive throughout the first two debates -- firm but not necessary unlikable -- we might be looking at a different race right now. But, over the next hour, Obama regained his stride and eventually dominated the exchange. And, in the end, with his sarcastic crack about school vouchers -- "Because there's not enough vouchers; therefore, we shouldn't do it, even though it's working. I got it." -- McCain was profoundly unlikable. So said the polls. In the CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, 70 percent of debate watchers found Obama more likable. Only 22 percent said that about McCain. McCain's supporters wanted him to bring up some of the allegedly shady characters from Obama's circle of acquaintances that give some Americans pause and lead them to question the Democrat's values. There are good reasons to have that conversation, and bad ones. A friend and fellow journalist told me Obama's Chicago posse was important because it formed "the political womb where the fetal Obama grew into a politician. ... That tells us who he is and what either he believes himself or is at least willing to tolerate as president." Frankly, that argument makes a lot more sense than what many of the Obama haters are saying about how these "Friends of Barack" prove he is a couple of flag pins short of being a full-blooded American. That's nonsense. For instance, with William Ayers -- the unrepentant domestic terrorist who Obama first claimed was just a guy who lived in his neighborhood but with whom we now know the Illinois senator had a more substantial relationship -- the issue isn't Obama's patriotism but his truthfulness. Still, it was obviously a mistake for McCain to bring up Ayers during | [
"What was Obama's attitude?",
"Who did McCain attack?",
"What did McCain try to do?",
"What does America need?"
] | [
[
"cool, calm demeanor"
],
[
"Obama."
],
[
"get under Obama's skin."
],
[
"to send out for ice."
]
] | Ruben Navarrette: McCain tried to get under Obama's skin with attacks .
Obama remained cool and wound up ending strongly in the debate, he says .
Navarrette says Ayers attacks backfired even though issue is legitimate .
America may need the cool-headedness of Barack Obama, he says . |
Editor's note: Rudy Ruiz founded RedBrownandBlue.com, a site featuring multicultural political commentary, hosts a nationally syndicated Spanish-language radio show; and wrote a guide to success for immigrants ("¡Adelante!" published by Random House). He is co-founder and president of Interlex, an advocacy marketing agency based in San Antonio, Texas. Rudy Ruiz says people hold on to their views despite the evidence for fear of being labeled a flip-flopper. SAN ANTONIO, Texas (CNN) -- As people shout over each other and tune out diverging views in town hall meetings, the health care debate is proving to be symptomatic of a major ailment threatening our nation: A contagious culture of closed-mindedness threatens to suffocate our progress as a society. Why has it become so difficult to even consider changing our minds about important issues? Here's my diagnosis. Increasingly, the willingness to change one's position on political issues has been misread as a mark of weakness rather than a product of attentive listening and careful deliberation. During the 2004 Presidential campaign, the successful branding of John Kerry as a flip-flopper doomed his bid. Fear of "flip-flopper syndrome" is apparently catching like the flu, because today politicians are not alone in their determination to adhere to partisan positions despite the changing needs of our nation. Nearly everyone's so reluctant to appear wishy-washy that they stand firm even when the evidence is against their views. Three factors exacerbate this paralysis by lack of analysis: labels, lifestyles and listening. First, the labels ascribed to many potential policy tools render sensible options taboo, loading what could be rational, economic or social measures with moral baggage. This narrows our choices, hemming in policy makers. Any proposal including the words "government-run" elicits cries of "socialism" and "communism." Any argument invoking the words "God" or "moral" sparks accusations of "right-wing extremism," "fascism," or "Bible-thumping." Instead of listening to each other's ideas, we spot the warning label and run the other way. Second, our lifestyles favor knee-jerk reactions. The way we think, work and live in the Digital Age demands we quickly categorize information without investing time into rich interaction, research and understanding. We're hesitant to ask questions because we don't have time to listen to the long, complicated answers that might follow. And we lack the time to fact-check competing claims. In our haste, it's easier to echo our party's position than drill down, questioning whether party leaders are motivated by our best interests or the best interests of their biggest contributors. Third, we tend to listen only to like-minded opinions as media fragmentation encourages us to filter out varying perspectives. If you're a liberal, you avoid FOX News. If you're a conservative you revile MSNBC. The dynamic is even more pronounced online, where a niche media source can be found for any outlook. This silences the opportunity for meaningful dialogue and deliberation that might lead to reformulating positions, forging sustainable compromises, and developing consensus crucial to moving our nation forward on complex issues. So how can we overcome this challenge, starting with the health care debate? How do we open our minds to the possibility that we could actually learn from somebody else? Here's my prescription. For starters, we should eschew the notion that changing our minds is a character flaw. To the contrary, experts believe it's a manifestation of higher intelligence. Renowned psychologist Stuart Sutherland wrote in "Irrationality," his seminal 1992 book: "The willingness to change one's mind in the light of new evidence is a sign of rationality not weakness." To further free our minds, we should aggressively treat the three Ls: Let's lose the labels: from "flip-flopper" to "commie," from "fear-monger" to "right-wing nut job." Trash the diatribe; mull the ideas. Let's engage in some | [
"Who said that its become unfashionable to have an open mind about issues?",
"What labels obscure the real choices?",
"Waht is a sign of rationality?",
"What labels does Rudy Ruiz use?",
"Labels like what obscure the real choices?",
"What has become unfashionable?",
"What is a sign of rationality?",
"Who said \"It's become unfashionable to have an open mind about issues?\"",
"What does he say is a sign of rationality?",
"What says Rudy Ruiz?"
] | [
[
"Rudy Ruiz"
],
[
"flip-flopper."
],
[
"willingness to change one's mind in the light of new evidence"
],
[
"\"right-wing extremism,\" \"fascism,\""
],
[
"ascribed to many potential policy tools render sensible options taboo,"
],
[
"to appear wishy-washy"
],
[
"\"The willingness to change one's mind in the light of new evidence"
],
[
"Rudy Ruiz"
],
[
"willingness to change one's mind in the light of new evidence"
],
[
"people hold on to their views despite the evidence for fear of being labeled a flip-flopper."
]
] | Rudy Ruiz: It's become unfashionable to have an open mind about issues .
He says labels like "socialism" and "fascism" obscure the real choices .
He says it's a sign of rationality to be open to the evidence .
Ruiz: Let's listen to each other and take into consideration wider range of viewpoints . |
Editor's note: Rudy Ruiz founded RedBrownandBlue.com, a site featuring multicultural political commentary. He is host of a nationally syndicated Spanish-language radio show and wrote a guide to success for immigrants ("¡Adelante!" published by Random House). He is co-founder and president of Interlex, an advocacy marketing agency based in San Antonio, Texas. Rudy Ruiz says the lives of U.S. presidents can make them positive role models for students. SAN ANTONIO, Texas (CNN) -- Perhaps we got too used to living in a nation where the president inevitably becomes persona non grata. Maybe after the Clinton and Bush years, we forgot how to give a president a chance to serve not just as a punching bag but also as a role model. Have we become so disenchanted and polarized we can't give our own president a chance to teach our children something about what it takes to succeed? As a small-town boy, I drew inspiration from presidential biographies. As I got lost in the adventures of Teddy Roosevelt, the spirit of George Washington and the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, I found kernels of America's greatness. In those pages, I unearthed a yearning to dream beyond my surroundings, to strive for more, to seek a way to contribute to our nation. Many of the leaders, including Abraham Lincoln, born in a log cabin in Kentucky, ascended from humble beginnings on the wings of education to guide America forward. Devouring their stories, it ceased to matter where I was from or how far removed I was from the centers of power. With an education and a dream -- in America -- anything was possible. Whenever President Obama addresses our youth, he embodies the power of education. Education is the cornerstone of our democracy, the key to upward mobility, a linchpin to transforming whimsical dreams into actionable goals. Ask Bill Clinton. Raised by his widowed mother in Arkansas, he became a Rhodes Scholar. Look at Barack Obama. Emerging from a broken family, he built on degrees from Columbia and Harvard in his odyssey to the White House. Remember Dwight Eisenhower. Hailing from Kansas, he attended West Point on his way to heroism. From both sides of the aisle, education has propelled the career trajectories of our nation's leaders. Even if we disagree with a president's policies, we should accept he can serve as a role model in a broader way. For example, Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Nobody would argue this was admirable. But Jefferson was also a great thinker, diplomat and strategist. He co-authored the Declaration of Independence and helped America become a global power by engaging Europe and transacting the Louisiana Purchase. Was he perfect? Of course not. Would we want our children to emulate his every action. No way. But has he been an inspirational role model over time? As a parent, I understand people's concerns about the concepts to which their children are exposed. But the content of the president's speech to students should assuage any worries regarding his motives. Clearly, his agenda is to inspire kids to make the most of education in building a better life, not to brainwash a generation to do his bidding. Pointing to his own experiences, as well as those of others from diverse and modest origins, his remarks convey the importance of personal responsibility, perseverance and education in fulfilling one's potential while contributing to our nation's future. The only way to argue with that is by confusing the issues, twisting the situation into something it was never intended to be. It's gotten so bad, some folks don't want their kids exposed to the president because they're afraid he'll teach them socialism. My answer is that even if he did plan to discuss socialism, they should let their child listen. Of course, the president wouldn't do that, but why is that my answer? Because, as another role model -- President Reagan -- once said: "All great change in America begins at the dinner table." In that light, the president's speech isn't a threat but an | [
"who drew inspiration from presidents",
"what gives students positive messages?",
"what can give students a positive message",
"Inspiration was drawn from the lives of who?",
"what does ruiz say?"
] | [
[
"Rudy Ruiz"
],
[
"lives of U.S. presidents"
],
[
"lives of U.S. presidents"
],
[
"U.S. presidents"
],
[
"Rudy"
]
] | Rudy Ruiz: After Clinton, Bush years, presidents aren't viewed as role models .
He says he drew inspiration from the lives of American presidents .
He says Obama and others show the power of education to improve society .
He says letting students hear Obama's speech can give them a positive message . |
Editor's note: Sarah Hughes won the gold medal in figure skating at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, and is a graduate of Yale University. Medalist Sarah Hughes says the Games are about excellence and unity. (CNN) -- What are the first thoughts that pop into your mind when you hear the word Olympics? Probably something synonymous with excellence, greatness, excitement, achievement. Maybe it's the striking image of Nadia Comaneci scoring a perfect 10 etched in your mind, or the experience of following Michael Phelps' quest to win a record-breaking eight gold medals last summer in Beijing, China. Or is it the thrill of watching the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team winning the gold medal in Lake Placid, stacked up against unimaginable odds, that occupies that space? I could go on and on, but whatever image the Olympics has for you is probably accompanied by a feeling of pride, happiness, joyfulness, maybe even a childlike glee. Sometimes it's the simple way you can sum up your response to the question -- and perhaps that's the point of asking the question -- but it would be foolish to ignore other aspects of the Games that contribute to making the event happen. Although the presence of public officials at host-city bids shows the International Olympic Committee that they are behind the bid and will be supportive, such appearances are not required. On Friday, President Obama, a Chicago, Illinois, resident for many years, will arrive in Copenhagen, Denmark (his wife is already there), to support and try to persuade the IOC voters in favor of the 2016 Chicago bid. Obama's visit to Copenhagen will make him the first U.S. president to attend an Olympic host-city vote. His visit will not be the first by a president (or prime minister) whose country went on to win a bid for the Games. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his wife were in Singapore lobbying IOC members for the 2012 Summer Games host-city vote when London was awarded the event. Two years later, Russian President Vladimir Putin went to the host-city vote in Guatemala when Sochi, a relatively unknown city, won the right to host the 2014 Winter Games. The other 2016 contenders vying for votes from the 100-plus eligible members of the IOC are Madrid, Spain; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; and Tokyo, Japan. Michelle Obama, a lifelong Chicagoan enthusiastically championing the U.S. bid, is displaying her "Olympic spirit." On Monday, the eve of her visit to Copenhagen, she spoke of being ready to woo each voter individually if need be: "Gloves are off. I'm talking to everybody. That's what my schedule looks like." Sounding like an Olympic competitor already herself, she added that she didn't "think there's one person left off." It is easy to come to the conclusion that I might be biased, having won a gold medal in figure skating at the 2002 Salt Lake City Games, but I was an American and a fan long before those Games, and I will be one long after. The memories, unity and patriotism from the Salt Lake Games wasn't about any one particular thing but about all those little "things" coming together: the result of what the participants -- the fans, volunteers, competitors, coaches, moms, dads, sisters, brothers, cities and nations -- created by sharing the best we have to offer with one another. That's what the Olympics are about. They are about greatness, they are about excellence, but above all, the Games are about unity. In a September 10 letter to IOC members, Obama wrote about how he "sees the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games as an extraordinary opportunity for America to renew our bonds of friendship and welcome the world to our shores with open arms." And on Friday, when Obama arrives in Copenhagen, he will be joined by Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, newly appointed Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and King Juan Carlos of Spain. Let the | [
"What are the Olympic Games about?",
"Who is showing she shares the Olympic spirit?",
"What are the games about?",
"What is about excellence and unity in support of U.S. teams?",
"Who is showing they share the Olympic spirit?"
] | [
[
"excellence and unity."
],
[
"Michelle Obama,"
],
[
"excellence and unity."
],
[
"the Games"
],
[
"Michelle Obama,"
]
] | Sarah Hughes: Obama is among other world leaders who have sought Olympics .
She says Games are about excellence and unity in support of U.S. teams .
She says Michelle Obama is showing she shares the Olympic spirit . |
Editor's note: Saturday marks one year since Hamas' defeat of Fatah in the fierce struggle for control of Gaza. CNN correspondent Ben Wedeman has been covering the region for over 15 years. He reports from Gaza on daily life and reality over the past year in this fractious land. CNN's Ben Wedeman reports on the past year in Gaza, where people are safer but out of food, gas, and patience. GAZA CITY, Gaza (CNN) -- "If you take pictures, I'll kill you! I'll kill you!" screamed a masked Fatah gunman, pointing his AK-47 assault rifle at my cameraman, Joe Duran. "Calm down! Calm down!" I shouted back at him, turning to Joe to tell him to put the camera down. Joe and I had ducked into a fruit and vegetable shop in Gaza City. We had been covering the funeral of a Fatah gunman killed in a clash with Hamas rivals when our third gunbattle of the day had broken out. The gunman left, much to everyone's relief, and I put my small video camera on the floor and pressed the button to record the constant roar of machine gun fire, which went on for more than half an hour. Earlier in the day, Joe and I were on a street corner videotaping Hamas militiamen when a jeep full of Fatah irregulars opened fire, just down the street from an elementary school. As guns blazed, schoolchildren ran for cover. I watched as shopkeeper Khadar Aliyan slammed shut the doors of his grocery store, the expression on his face one of fear and utter exasperation. "I'm going home," he told me. "I'm afraid. We're done for. It's never been this bad." It was violence like this, which we witnessed on December 2006, that reached a climax in the second week of June 2007. When it ended on June 14, 2007, with Hamas roundly defeating Fatah, Gaza went quiet. And quiet -- relative quiet, that is -- has been Hamas' biggest accomplishment since. No longer do you worry about being kidnapped. Gunbattles, though they can happen, are much less common. After last June's takeover (or coup d'etat, as Fatah supporters call it), Hamas quickly imposed law and order, tried to reacquaint Gaza's drivers with long-forgotten traffic regulations, launched a municipal cleanup campaign, and forced the release of kidnapped BBC journalist Alan Johnston, who had been held in captivity for almost six months. Chaos-weary Gazans applauded all of these initiatives. But the honeymoon ended quickly as reality sank in. Since Hamas won parliamentary elections in January 2006, and even more so since last year's takeover, Israel has tightened its siege of Gaza. Israel has restricted supplies of gasoline, diesel and electricity to Gaza, limited the amount of food and other goods entering the strip, and made it virtually impossible for manufacturers and farmers in Gaza to export anything to the outside world. Israeli officials say these measures are intended to pressure Hamas, which is on the U.S. government list of terrorist groups, to stop its members and other factions from firing mortars and rockets into Israel. Israel Defense Forces reports that 1,500 Qassam rockets were fired into Israel from Gaza in 2007, and 2,383 in the past six years. As a result, almost all of Gaza's factories have shut down and thousands of workers have lost their jobs. Between 70 and 80 percent of the population is dependent on food supplied by the United Nations Refugee Works Agency, set up after more than 700,000 Palestinians became refugees after the war that resulted in Israel's creation in 1948. Life in Gaza, never easy, in the last year has become a grinding daily struggle to make ends meet. For the vast majority of Gazans, it means they must spend much of their time trying to secure basic commodities. Such as cooking gas, which comes from Israel. In the past, when supplies were plentiful, it was sold from the back of trucks and donkey carts. Not | [
"Although it is safer for Gazans, what are they in desperate need of?",
"what are the children running from",
"what has hamas done to help",
"what children are running from?",
"what wedeman describes?",
"Are children faced with gunfire violence?",
"Who describes violence, gunbattles?"
] | [
[
"of food, gas, and patience."
],
[
"guns"
],
[
"After last June's takeover (or coup d'etat, as Fatah supporters call it), Hamas quickly imposed law and order, tried to reacquaint Gaza's drivers with long-forgotten traffic regulations, launched a municipal cleanup campaign, and forced the release of kidnapped BBC journalist Alan Johnston,"
],
[
"guns"
],
[
"reports from Gaza on daily life and reality"
],
[
"As guns blazed, schoolchildren ran for cover."
],
[
"CNN's Ben Wedeman"
]
] | Wedeman describes violence, gunbattles, fear before Hamas .
Reports on encounters with assault rifles, children running from gunfire last year .
Now, it's safer but Gazans desperate for gas, cooking fuel, jobs .
One woman: "Hamas hasn't done anything for us, nor has Fatah" |
Editor's note: Simon Johnson, a former International Monetary Fund chief economist, is a professor at MIT Sloan School of Management and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Peter Boone is chairman of Effective Intervention, a UK-based charity, and a research associate at the Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics. They run http://baselinescenario.com/, a global economy Web site. Simon Johnson, above, and Peter Boone say the U.S. could be in for a long period of virtually no growth. (CNN) -- Euphoria returns! Who could have guessed that Bank of America stock would rally 70 percent the week it learns the Feds are demanding new capital equal to nearly half the bank's market capitalization? The ongoing grim news -- on rising unemployment, continued (albeit slower) economic decline, and ordinary working Americans being hammered on all sides -- is being ignored by stock and commodity markets. Is America now back on track for growth? The answer to that is almost surely no. Rising stock markets don't necessarily mean a sharp recovery is under way. Consider the case of Japan in its first lost decade of the 1990s. After falling 63 percent from its peak in late 1989, the Nikkei staged a 32 percent rally in one month. It then remained volatile but around the same level for nearly 10 years -- because the return on assets and capital investors could earn proved so low throughout that economy. During the 1990s, Japan's banking system was burdened with bad loans that kept eating into profits and its nonfinancial companies had excess capacity that had to be wound down; these problems were made worse by a decline in the working population. The initial excess of capital, supplemented by high ongoing savings from households and corporations, kept interest rates low. Throughout this period the price/earnings ratio on stocks ranged from 30 to 50 (it's 51 today), compared with 15 to 20 in Europe and the United States. The logic was simple: With so little return available on all assets, local investors were willing to pay up for stocks even if the dividends were a paltry 1-2 percent. Does this sound familiar? We think so. The current rally in stocks marks one clear success -- the fear of a systemic collapse due to loss of confidence in our financial system has subsided. This is good news, and an important achievement of President Obama's team. However, our "turning Japanese" phase may just have begun. The "stress tests" that were just completed do not mark the renewed health of our banking system. We still have 22 percent of Americans with houses worth less than their mortgages, and there are parallel problems for commercial property and other sectors. Many bankruptcies are yet to come. Most publicly traded large homebuilders are deep in debt, yet they are burning cash and waiting to see if -- magically -- the two-year stock of unsold housing can somehow disappear. We've barely begun to downsize our auto industry, and the parts suppliers and dealers that go along with it, to reflect the lower level of consumer spending and scarcer availability of credit for the future. All of this is also true across much of Europe. In essence, Europe and the United States both are saddled with zombie banks (which don't really lend), zombie corporations (which don't grow), and a decline in the relative size of the working population (as more people try to retire). This "Japanese" scenario can persist for many years. The biggest risk now is that the Federal Reserve and the Treasury try to re-leverage our way out of a Japanese-style prolonged recession by flooding the economy with cheap credit -- like they did in 2002, but to an even greater degree. Cheap government finance for powerful banks is a great cocktail for re-election; running stress tests that weren't really stressful is a good indication this is where policy is heading. This time the money won't come from consumers (or from China, as it did after 2002); it will be American and European central | [
"What has been described as zombie?",
"What is a zombie bank?",
"Whose economy is suffering?",
"What could the economy be in for a long period?",
"What kind of banks is the article referring to?",
"What Is Johnson, Boone known for?",
"Which country's economy suffered with similar problems?"
] | [
[
"corporations (which don't grow),"
],
[
"(which don't really lend),"
],
[
"U.S."
],
[
"virtually no growth."
],
[
"of America"
],
[
"They run http://baselinescenario.com/,"
],
[
"Japan"
]
] | Johnson, Boone: Stocks are rallying as if economy is out of the woods .
They say that's premature, and we could be in for a long period of stagnation .
Japan's economy suffered for years from similar problems, they say .
Johnson, Boone: We have zombie banks and zombie companies . |
Editor's note: Since 2007, CNN and CNN.com have followed the story of Youssif, an Iraqi boy disfigured when he was burned by attackers. Today, CNN's Arwa Damon catches up with the boy and his family, now living in California where Youssif is undergoing treatment. Today Youssif goes to school in California and continues to have treatment to help his scars. LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Youssif stands on stage beaming as he belts out "Jingle Bell Rock," his tiny burned hands waving in sync with his classmates at Hamlin Street School. His mother, Zaineb, stands at the back, cradling his little sister, Aya, tears rolling down her face. "I am so proud of him," she says. "It reminds me of what he was like in Iraq when he used to sing in kindergarten. I felt for a moment that none of this had happened. My son was back, without fear, strong." Youssif spots us, and waves wildly. Little appears to remain of the sullen and withdrawn dark-eyed boy we first met in Baghdad more than a year ago. It has been almost two years since masked men in Baghdad doused Youssif, then just 4 years old, in gasoline and set him on fire. His mother still doesn't sleep at night. "I still blame myself. I should have protected him. Sometimes I say to myself that I wish it had happened to me, just not to him." Zaineb says, her voice starting to quiver. "If only I hadn't let him go out to play that day." Today Youssif plays freely, without fear. "Let's race" he shouts to his friend Brandon as the two boys dash across the schoolyard. A couple of minutes later the two are playfully jostling over a rubber ball. Youssif shrieks and bursts into laughter as the two play catch. "It's like this weight has been lifted off of me, off of him," his father, Wissam, says. "It's like we've left this dark, depressing state where we were consumed by Youssif and the attack that had happened. You know, it's so hard to see a child, my child, go through something like this. When I see him like this, I feel like he's coming back." Watch more on Youssif's recovery » After CNN and CNN.com first reported Youssif's story in 2007, more than 12,000 CNN.com users contributed to a fund set up by the Children's Burn Foundation of Sherman Oaks California, enabling the boy and his family to travel to the United States for treatment. Youssif has undergone more than a dozen surgeries. Much of the thick scar tissue around his eyes, mouth and nose -- left by his treatment in Baghdad -- has been removed. He currently has yet another tissue expander in his left cheek, intended to stretch out "good skin" to be used to replace his scar tissue. Youssif has grown used to the sometimes painful treatments. "When I started this process of tissue expansion, I would have to chase him around the room," Dr. Peter Grossman, Youssif's surgeon, tells us as he injects more liquid into the expander. "We'd need three people to hold him down for these injections." Youssif will probably have many more surgeries stretched out over time. "The problem we have with Youssif is that every operation we do tends to heal well after surgery, but then a month after, he starts to form these really thick scars," Grossman said. "It's probably best at this time to let his body relax, let these scars mature over a period of a year or two years." Today, Youssif grimaces in pain but braves it alone, refusing to take his father's hand. "Seven or eight times put water," Youssif says back at home, explaining how the tissue expansion works. "I am not scared. It goes here," he says pointing to the scarring over his lip. He's not all | [
"What lies ahead for Youssif?",
"Where was Youssif set on fire?",
"Youssif was set on fire my masked men where?",
"Who is being treated for burns and scars?"
] | [
[
"more surgeries stretched out over time."
],
[
"Baghdad"
],
[
"Baghdad"
],
[
"Youssif"
]
] | Youssif continues to be treated in California for his burns, scars .
He is enrolled in school and learning English .
More surgeries lie ahead .
Boy was doused with gasoline, set on fire by masked men in Baghdad . |
Editor's note: Since becoming State Department producer in 2000, Elise Labott has covered four secretaries of state and reported from more than 50 countries. Before joining CNN, she covered the United Nations. Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meet in Washington. WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi made the rounds in Washington just as President Obama's national security team shifted its attention to Pakistan. This week Secretary of Defense Williams Gates called the Afghan border with Pakistan the "epicenter of jihad." And the renewed focus on Pakistan suggests that Obama has a new role for Pakistan in the battle against al Qaeda and the Taliban. After all, in developing a strategy for "Afpak," Obama acknowledged the United States cannot win in Afghanistan without cooperation from Pakistan, the suspected hideout of Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders. Which is why the buzzword of both Qureshi and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week was "partnership," as in the United States and Pakistan are united in a "strategic partnership" against a common enemy. Right now, the relationship between the two countries is less a partnership and more an uneasy marriage with a history fraught with decades of mutual mistrust and disappointment. In the late 1980s, the United States partnered with Pakistan to supply mujahedeen fighters with weapons and training to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan. Then the United States abandoned the region, leaving the Pakistanis, in Clinton's words, "awash in drugs...and jihadists who had been trained up in conjunction with us." Now the Americans are back. But, rightly, the Pakistanis are wondering if this time they will stay. This week Qureshi urged the United States not to repeat history, but rather to articulate a "long-term commitment" for the region. That's exactly what the United States is trying to do with an aid package worth $1.5 billion a year for five years for social and economic development and with discretionary military spending. By building roads, schools and democratic institutions, the United States hopes to combat both Islamic extremism and anti-Americanism. In part the aid has had the opposite effect. Tough conditions attached to the aid to ensure the Pakistanis are fighting terrorism on their own soil have prompted fears and resentment about renewed -- and unwanted -- American influence. The military spending in the Kerry-Lugar legislation threatens to cut off assistance if Pakistan fails to crack down on extremists or uses the funding to attack neighboring countries, namely India. It requires Pakistan's cooperation in efforts to dismantle nuclear weapons networks operating in the country and demands Pakistan provides the information about its military budget and chain of command, all of which has given birth to grave concern in the military that the aid package is compromising Pakistan's sovereignty. The bill also makes reference to the southwestern city of Quetta and eastern town of Muridke. Both are believed to be hubs for al Qaeda and Taliban leaders, which suggests that the United States could target those cities for the kind of drone attacks which have drawn Pakistani ire. As the Pakistani parliament debates the bill, street protests over the aid have spread through the country. The fears about sovereignty have only been aggravated over U.S. plans to send hundreds more diplomats to its embassy in Islamabad. Washington says the additional staff is needed to distribute and monitor the aid, but it has all left Pakistanis humiliated and feeling like a child who needs a babysitter. Pakistan also wants more credit from the United States for decisive action it has taken against terrorists, including its recent offensive in the Swat Valley. The United States has been impressed by the Pakistani army's recent offensive against the Taliban in Swat. And it is encouraged that Pakistan is gearing up to launch a major offensive in Waziristan, believed to be a stronghold of both the Taliban and al Qaeda. But the conditions attached to the aid are a symptom of the United States' longstanding doubts about the Pakistanis' capacity to be a reliable partner it needs in the struggle against al Qaeda and the Taliban. Not only are there concerns about Pakistani intelligence | [
"What is description of U,S - Pakistan relationship?",
"who is the foreign minister",
"what is fraught with mistrust",
"What is the U.S. aid package of $1.5 billion for?",
"What is the purpose of $1.5 billions U.S. aid to Pakistan?"
] | [
[
"between the two countries is less a partnership and more an uneasy marriage with a history fraught with decades of mutual mistrust and disappointment."
],
[
"Shah Mahmood Qureshi"
],
[
"relationship between the two countries"
],
[
"social and economic development"
],
[
"combat both Islamic extremism and anti-Americanism."
]
] | U.S.-Pakistan relationship fraught with decades of mistrust and disappointment .
Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi asks U.S. for "long-term commitment"
U.S. aid package of $1.5 billion is for social and economic development . |
Editor's note: Steve Clemons directs the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation and publishes The Washington Note, a popular political blog. Steve Clemons says the Nobel panel correctly decided Obama's approach to diplomacy holds great promise. WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Cynics will say that Oslo was jealous that Copenhagen, Denmark, scored a visit from President Obama, and giving him a Nobel was the only way to get him to Norway. But the Nobel Committee's decision to make Obama the only sitting U.S. president since Woodrow Wilson to receive the Nobel Peace Prize shows the committee's clear-headed assessment that Obama's "unclenched fist" approach to dealing with the world's most thuggish leaders has had a constructive, systemic impact on the world's expectations of itself. Obama has helped citizens all around the world -- including in the United States -- to want a world beyond the mess we have today in the Middle East and South Asia. They want a world where America is benign and positive, and where other leaders help in supporting the struggles of their people for better lives rather than securing themselves through crude power. Obama has found a way in this interconnected world of cell phones, Twitter, Facebook and other social networking to reach a majority of the world's citizens with his message of hope for a better world. He speaks past the dictators to regular people and has, on the whole, raised global political expectations about everything from climate change to nuclear nonproliferation in ways that no one in history has done before. Americans tend to look at everything from a U.S.-centric lens, and many woke up this morning shocked that Obama, who just saw a lot of his political capital wasted on trying to secure the 2016 Olympics for his hometown of Chicago, has gotten a fresh injection of sizzle to fill the Obama bubble. The world has been mesmerized by Obama since he started to run for the presidency. The battle between Hillary Clinton and Obama for the Democratic nomination did more to educate the rest of the world about real political choice -- and about a system in which no candidates had an automatic lock on victory -- than any USAID program could have achieved. Obama's decision to make the ulcerous Israeli-Palestinian negotiations one of the first foreign policy challenges of his administration, rather than the last, defied most seasoned analysts' expectations. His message to Iran's citizens, marking the Persian new year holiday of Nowruz, and his powerful and captivating speech in Cairo, Egypt, communicated to Muslims all around the world that their lives and their faith and their expectations for a better world were vital and as valid as any others. From his perch in the White House, Barack Obama affirmed the humanity of Muslims and told them that America does value Muslim lives. Obama's posture and rhetoric have reversed the collapse of hope and trust that the world's citizens had in America and stopped the degradation of America's image during the tenure of George W. Bush and Richard Cheney. Should a U.S. president get the Nobel Peace Prize if he's about to send more U.S. troops, armed drones, bombs, tanks and other military hardware into the war-ripped zones in Afghanistan? Or should Obama get the prize if he hasn't even succeeded in getting Israeli-Palestinian negotiations going? Or if he hasn't gotten Iran to drop its nuclear ambitions and to re-enter the international system on constructive terms? The answer is yes. I think that given how the odds were already so stacked against Obama on the global economic and security fronts, one can only be amazed at what this unlikely and fascinating president has done with "optics." The night before Obama's inauguration, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel accepted my congratulations and responded, "It's going to be tough, and right now we can only change the optics," meaning that political perceptions and appearances could be changed more quickly than hard realities. What is brilliant about Obama and why he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize is that he is a global leader who clearly saw the gains that could be made in changing "the optics" of the | [
"What has Obama changed?",
"Who won the Peace Prize?",
"what caused the collapse of hope?",
"What did Clemons say?",
"What does Steve Clemons say about Americans?",
"What did he say about this?",
"What has Obama's rhetoric done?"
] | [
[
"reversed the collapse of hope and trust that the world's citizens had in America"
],
[
"President Obama,"
],
[
"tenure of George W. Bush and Richard Cheney."
],
[
"the Nobel panel correctly decided Obama's approach to diplomacy holds great promise."
],
[
"tend to look at everything from a U.S.-centric lens,"
],
[
"the Nobel panel correctly decided Obama's approach to diplomacy holds great promise."
],
[
"have reversed the collapse of hope and trust that the world's citizens had in America"
]
] | Steve Clemons: Many Americans shocked that Obama won Peace Prize .
He says the rest of the world sees how Obama has changed international tone .
He says Obama's rhetoric has "reversed the collapse of hope" in the world . |
Editor's note: Steve Perry is the founder and principal of the Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Hartford, Connecticut, and author of "Man Up!: Nobody is Coming to Save Us," which offers solutions to problems in the black community. Steve Perry says a question from a parent started his journey to creating a top-performing school. HARTFORD, Connecticut (CNN) -- "Why do only rich kids get good schools?" I was the founder and director of a part-time out-of-school college preparatory program. The questioner was a parent; herself a victim of a dulled urban education. The statement was more of an indictment than question, and I had no answer. "Well, why can't this program be a school," she offered. The program sent 100 percent of our graduates to college. We served poor students who were the first generation in their families to attend college. We provided college preparation through a six-week summer program, after-school tutoring and in-school academic advising. That single mother's question came at the end of the summer program. This was always a tough time. As the kids said goodbye to their friends and the program's high expectations, we all looked at the school year with great trepidation. We knew that the students were returning to failed schools with very low expectations -- and results to match. Like that mom, I too wondered why wealth and whiteness are too often linked to quality education. Her question connected to a discussion that I'd been having with some colleagues during the summer program. All of the teachers in that program worked in failed urban schools. Many had tried to reform traditional urban schools. They'd started formal and informal programs, identified groups of kids and connected to parents. Each had had some success with some kids, but the conditions that led to the need to do something went unchanged. The question was raised at the end of our 2002 summer program. My first instinct was to begin down the path of opening an all-male minority charter school. In Connecticut, charter schools are publicly funded and privately run, with no teachers' unions, no school board influence and no centralized curriculum. These were the pluses. There was only one minus: There was no money. The charter idea was dead as soon as it began. I assembled an all -black team. My plan was to put black educators together, and we would show 'em. Brothers and sisters were gonna open a successful charter school. Black educators serving black kids. This was my first major mistake. Talent and commitment have no color. Kids don't care what color their teachers are, and I shouldn't have either. After almost a year of stops and starts with a team that was not effectively assembled, I realized that I failed in my judgment because I did not keep my eye on the goal, which was to build a school that sent kids to college regardless of their hue or economic status. I have never made that mistake again. I doubled back and went into the schools and found the teachers who stayed the latest and arrived the earliest. I looked for the most ambitious teachers who had a reputation of being the most talented, and we started a second team. I am a social worker. I knew that I could run an organization, but wasn't sure about developing curriculum. When I created Team 2, my first pick was the best teacher I could find. Rich Beganski is the perfect complement, or opposite, of who I am. He's meticulous and lives and breathes curriculum. He is an operations genius. He was a longtime assistant coach who never wanted to be coach. I've never been an assistant and don't want to be one. Our team was composed of a white guy, a Latina, a black woman and a black man bound by a single commitment: to send kids to college. In 2003-04, Connecticut was settling a desegregation case. A component of the agreement was to open eight magnet schools | [
"What does his school send all graduates to?",
"Who is Steve Perry?",
"What kind of education do children from low income families get?",
"What started process of building a quality school"
] | [
[
"college."
],
[
"Hartford, Connecticut, and author of \"Man Up!: Nobody is Coming to Save Us,\""
],
[
"dulled urban"
],
[
"a question from a parent"
]
] | Steve Perry: A parent asked why only rich kids get good schools .
He says question started process of building a quality school .
Perry says his team fought bureaucracy, union to try something new .
He says his school is highly rated and sends all graduates to college . |
Editor's note: Tara Wall is deputy editor for The Washington Times. Before joining the newspaper, she was a senior adviser for the Republican National Committee and was named a public affairs director in the Department of Health and Human Services by President Bush. Read her columns here.
Tara Wall says President Bush will be remembered for keeping America safe.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In his final radio address as president-elect on the Sunday ahead of his inauguration, Barack Obama said President Bush "extended the hand of cooperation" to him throughout this period of transition. It was a final act of civility, on Mr. Bush's part.
It is a trait that is not surprising to those who know Bush (or those paying some attention at least half of the time). At least one Democrat has given him credit for it. Unfortunately, that tone of civility has been lost on the Democratic leadership over the past eight years.
Civility aside, how others -- more importantly, history -- will judge the 43rd president of the United States, is the question that has followed Bush out the door. Lucky for him, it won't just be up to Democrats to determine.
"I believe President Bush will be vindicated," said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in an interview a couple of weeks ago. She may be an ardent defender of Bush, but I believe she's right. She, like I, have a different vantage point than what has been routinely portrayed.
While sitting in the Oval Office with the 43rd president, for what was his last official week in office last Thursday, I got the sense that he feels he will be vindicated, too.
He won't say as much, directly, but indirectly points to what matters most in his eyes -- protecting the homeland. "History will eventually see ... that not only was it necessary to take the steps I took, but [they] led to a better world," the president told me.
On a personal level (and for the sake of full disclosure), I must say that I have had the pleasure of working for and knowing Bush from his first campaign for president and throughout his presidency.
I started as a volunteer in 1999, then worked as a spokeswoman during his second campaign and then as an appointee in his administration.
Not only have I counted it an honor and a privilege to serve the 43rd president, but I have always had a deep respect for him as a person of faith, his strident conviction in doing what was right for the country and his commitment to closing the disparities that exist between black and white Americans -- no matter the mistakes made and lessons learned. Above all, it is his dignity and civility that stand out to me most.
Yet, for many conservatives (not just liberals), Bush has failed on many fronts. From the miscalculation of the insurgency in Iraq, to failed intelligence gathering and the issues of maintaining fiscal conservatism and delivering real immigration reform -- I can't tell you how many Republicans and conservatives I've spoken to over this past year who have told me how "disappointed" they've been with Bush. A few among them voted for "change" as a result.
The legacy Bush leaves behind won't be everything he wanted (particularly as it relates to popularity), but on many fronts, it will be better than that of his predecessor. Bill Clinton may have been popular, but his moral failings brought shame on the office of the presidency and tainted the people's house.
That will forever be a stain on Clinton's legacy. Not to mention, there was no such "civility" or "cooperation" when Clinton turned the keys over to Bush. I prefer principle over popularity any day.
On the moral front, President Bush delivered. On the social front, he delivered. On the fiscal front he failed considerably. Yet, on the national security front and on many domestic policies, he succeeded.
Depending on your vantage point, success may mean something wholly different. The details will be debated for decades to | [
"Who praised President Bush for the cooperative nature of transition?",
"who is praised",
"Who delivered on national security and many domestic issues?"
] | [
[
"Barack Obama"
],
[
"President Bush"
],
[
"President Bush"
]
] | Tara Wall: Eric Holder's remark that we're a "nation of cowards" was wrong .
She says he ignores the millions of votes Obama got from white voters .
Instead of hope, she says, Holder offered anger and resentment .
Obama has urged Americans to focus on the racial progress that's occurred . |
Editor's note: Tara Wall is deputy editor for The Washington Times. Before joining the newspaper, she was a senior adviser for the Republican National Committee and was named a public affairs director in the Department of Health and Human Services by President George W. Bush. Read her columns here.
Tara Wall says Eric Holder's "nation of cowards" comment struck the wrong tone.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- First, we're a nation of whiners; now, we're a nation of cowards.
The coward comment comes from none other than President Obama's newly minted attorney general, Eric Holder.
The remarks were part of a speech Holder delivered for Black History Month. Yet, even in that context, the words came across as arrogant, condescending and not at all becoming a statesman.
One dictionary definition of coward is "lacking courage." Stinging words for a country at war, where white and black soldiers are shedding the same color blood. Are they cowards?
Ironic too that Holder's remarks come at a time when the nation has just elected its first black president and witnessed the confirmation of its first black attorney general (Holder himself). Forget that more whites than blacks cast their ballots for a black man to lead the nation. So this is how Holder says thanks?
Did the attorney general not think about the weight his words would carry? Was he simply trying to be provocative? Is this his way of bringing the races together? Does his position or his color give him the bravado to think that he can get away with calling us cowards?
Imagine for a moment if John McCain or George W. Bush uttered those words. The criticism would have known no bounds. i-Report.com: Share your thoughts on Holder's comments
You'll recall, it was just a few months back that a media frenzy erupted when former Sen. Phil Gramm called national leaders (not the nation) a bunch of "whiners." Media pundits and broadcasters blasted Gramm for weeks, until he was forced off McCain's campaign.
Gramm's words, while true, were mild in comparison to Holder's. Where is that same outrage and moral condemnation over Holder's loose lips? It's a rhetorical question, of course.
And as much as we are constantly reminded of the past "mistakes" this country has made, is there nothing worth celebrating, no times when racial harmony brought racial reconciliation? Little of that made it to Holder's speech. Instead, he chose the celebratory occasion to exact punishment by way of guilt.
It makes one wonder, why does every race speech by those on the left have to begin (and end) with repudiation and insult? Why must there be a constant reminder of what went wrong without giving due recognition to what went right?
I will acknowledge that the country can always do better when it comes to race, but as much as Republicans are accused of refusing to admit racism exists, assuredly Democrats exploit it for every inch of territory they can garner. They point fingers, threaten and name-call without offering real solutions or substantive conversation.
One regular reader of The Washington Times, a Democrat, forwarded me a letter he sent to Holder, telling the attorney general how much he "applauds" his remarks but saying he had one request: "I would like to recommend that your office take the lead in ensuring the appointment of at least one African-American on every committee and task force that is created by the President of the United States and current cabinet Secretary's."
How's that for affirmative action on demand? More like affirmative extortion. The writer also stated in closing: "Let us (by "us," he means black folks) take advantage of every opportunity that is before us." I was particularly struck by the words "take advantage." It is a line of thinking and supposed reasoning to justify black Americans getting what's "due."
This was just one person's opinion, but it reflects a sentiment shared by many liberals. It also reveals a get-it-all- | [
"What did Tara Wall say?",
"Who said we're a \"nation of cowards\"?",
"What did Eric Holder say that we're a nation of?",
"Who got millions of votes from white voters?"
] | [
[
"Eric Holder's \"nation of cowards\" comment struck the wrong tone."
],
[
"Eric Holder."
],
[
"of cowards."
],
[
"President Obama's"
]
] | Tara Wall: Eric Holder's remark that we're a "nation of cowards" was wrong .
She says he ignores the millions of votes Obama got from white voters .
Instead of hope, she says, Holder offered anger and resentment .
Obama has urged Americans to focus on the racial progress that's occurred . |
Editor's note: Taresh Moore is a student at Winston Salem State University in North Carolina. The 21-year-old senior traveled to Washington, D.C., to attend the inauguration. Alfred Bouey is a World War II veteran and a grandson of slaves. WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Alfred Bouey, an 84-year-old African-American, still remembers the stories from his grandfather about the scars on his body from the beatings he took as a slave in the South. Bouey, of Oak Park, Illinois, attended Tuesday's inauguration of President Obama. Words can't express his excitement and happiness about witnessing history. A World War II veteran, he never thought he would live to see a black president in America. Bouey grew up in Arkansas and saw racism firsthand. He witnessed his mother being mistreated by whites in the South, but he never saw her give up. He eventually left Arkansas for Chicago. Bouey attended the inauguration after winning Brookdale Senior Living's Experiences of a Lifetime contest. Residents at various Brookdale Senior Living communities nationwide shared their experiences and submitted their wishes as part of the contest. Bouey shared his story and said he'd like to be there when Obama was sworn in. "My grandfather and grandmother were whipped and beaten, and had the scars to prove it," he said. With CNN.com's help, Taresh Moore spoke with Bouey about the inauguration ceremony. Below is a transcript of their interview. Moore: How are you today? Bouey: I'm great. I couldn't feel any better right now. Moore: How did it feel to take part in this historic inauguration? Bouey: It felt very great. I can't find any words to express my happiness. I am speechless and full of joy. Moore: What will you remember most about the inauguration? Bouey: I will remember that I was actually there. I lived to see this historic event. I'm 84, and I had the chance to witness this. Not too many people had that opportunity, and I am honored. Moore: How did you feel when you found out that you and your family were going to Washington, D.C., to take part in the inauguration? Bouey: I was happy. At first when I was asked to take part in the survey, I didn't mind sharing my story because I had many stories to share. When I found out I had the opportunity to go, I was very grateful. I couldn't wait to get here. Moore: Did you ever believe you would live to see an African-American president in your lifetime? Bouey: No. I never thought I would live to see one. Growing up, my mother wanted me and my brother and sister to get an education. And we all did. An education will take you far, and we see that it did for our new president and for me. But I'm glad I lived to see this. It's a wonderful experience, and I am very proud of it! Moore: How was it growing up in the South? Bouey: I was born in Philadelphia and moved to Arkansas at the age of 1. Growing up, everything was segregated -- in the schools, restaurants and just everywhere. Blacks couldn't do this and we couldn't do that. I came to the point where I got tired of it all in the South and just moved away. I moved to Chicago on June 2, 1946. Moore: Was it better in Chicago? Bouey: Yes, a lot better. Better opportunities for blacks. Moore: You have lived a life that has seen the scars on the body of a former slave, who was your grandfather, to seeing America's first African-American president all in one lifetime. How does that make you feel? Bouey: I feel that America has come a long way. And I mean a very long way. My grandfather had scars from slavery. My mother wasn't a slave, but she still was beaten in the cotton fields | [
"who is alfred bouey",
"What is the age of Alfred Bouey?",
"Where did Alfred Bouey grow up?",
"Alfred Bouey's mother was mistreated by who?",
"who attended obama's inauguration?",
"what did bouey see in his childhood?"
] | [
[
"World War II veteran and a grandson of slaves."
],
[
"84-year-old"
],
[
"Arkansas"
],
[
"whites in the South,"
],
[
"Taresh Moore"
],
[
"saw racism"
]
] | Alfred Bouey, 84, attended the inauguration of the nation's first black president .
Bouey, who grew up in Arkansas, saw his mother being mistreated by whites .
"It's good to see the white Americans appreciate and show love to the new president"
Bouey says, "I am ... full of joy" |
Editor's note: Ted Epperly, M.D., a family physician in Boise, Idaho, is president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, which represents more than 93,000 physicians and medical students nationwide. He spent 21 years in the U.S. Army, including service as a family physician, chief of a Mobile Army Surgical Hospital emergency room during Desert Storm and Desert Shield, and deputy commander of an Army medical center. Ted Epperly says recruiting more primary care doctors would improve access to quality health care. (CNN) -- Clayton Christensen, Jason Hwang and Vineeta Vijayaraghavan are right about one thing in their CNN commentary titled "We don't need more doctors." America's health care system is broken. It requires significant reform if patients are to have access to convenient, affordable and -- most importantly -- high-quality care that results in good outcomes. But they have missed a central point. We need more primary care physicians now and we will need even more in the future as the baby boom generation ages. If Americans are to see meaningful health care reform, they must have a primary care doctor to whom they can turn for everyday problems: annual physicals and preventive care, diagnosis and treatment for common illness, and diagnosis and treatment of complex, chronic conditions, referral to subspecialists, and coordination of care provided by a team of professionals. Our current system has a serious and growing shortage of these primary care physicians. Today, only 30 percent of physicians provide primary care and 70 percent subspecialize in a single organ system or disease. We need a system in which patients get the right kind of care at the right time in the right place by the right type of provider. They need health services that provide not just convenient hours for minor health problems, but also medical expertise that ensures consistent, ongoing care; accurate diagnoses of symptoms; coordination with pharmacists, other specialists and allied health professionals such as physical therapists; consistent follow-up; and convenience. All at an affordable cost. Several health reform proposals set forth by President Obama and Congress would move federal policy in that direction. How? They incorporate convenience, efficiency, continuity of care and access to a system that relies on the patient-centered medical home -- a concept in which physicians coordinate care with a team of health professionals, offer evening and weekend office hours, and use electronic communication with patients and members of the health care team. But this concept won't be fulfilled unless we have health reform that increases the number of primary care physicians. Right now, America has a current and worsening shortage of primary medical care. Christensen, Hwang and Vijayaraghavan contend that increasing the number of physicians also leads to "greater intensity of care, but not better health outcomes." But their argument leaves out a major caveat. Although a greater number of subspecialists does increase the intensity, number and cost of services, research by Barbara Starfield at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health consistently demonstrates the opposite occurs in communities with more primary care physicians, particularly family physicians. Starfield concludes that an increase of one primary care physician per 10,000 population resulted in a reduction of 34.6 deaths per 100,000 population at the state level. Katherine Baicker, professor of health economics at Harvard School of Public Health, and Amitabh Chandra at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government confirm these findings. Their research shows that increasing the number of primary care physicians results in a significant increase in the quality of health care and a reduction of cost to patients. However, increasing the number of subspecialists was associated with higher costs and poorer quality. At issue, then, is not the total number of physicians, but the number of family physicians and their primary care colleagues. Demographics, an aging population and resulting increased demand for services will require a significant increase in the number of these physicians. Given the long-term process required to train primary care physicians, we will continue to struggle with a shortage of primary care physicians, and that shortage will affect patients' access to care. Family physicians now are working to fill some of those gaps, according | [
"Who commented on primary care doctors?",
"What does America need more of?",
"Do studies show that primary care doctors improve health-care outcomes according to Epperly?",
"What is the name of the doctor who believes that America needs more primary care doctors to expand access?",
"What do studies show that primary care doctors improve?",
"What do primary care doctors improve?",
"what does he say the studies will improve",
"who said we need more care doctors",
"What are doctors seeking to make more easily available?"
] | [
[
"Ted Epperly"
],
[
"primary care doctors"
],
[
"quality health"
],
[
"Ted Epperly"
],
[
"access to quality health"
],
[
"access to quality health"
],
[
"access to quality health care."
],
[
"Ted Epperly"
],
[
"quality health care."
]
] | Dr. Ted Epperly: America needs more primary care doctors to expand access .
He says studies show primary care doctors improve health-care outcomes .
Epperly: Doctors are seeking to make services more easily available . |
Editor's note: The Rev. Donald Cozzens is writer in residence and adjunct professor of theology at John Carroll University in Cleveland, Ohio. A priest of the Diocese of Cleveland with a doctoral degree, he is the author of several books on the Catholic Church, including "Sacred Silence: Denial and the Crisis in the Church" and "Freeing Celibacy," both published by Liturgical Press. For another view on this topic, read here. The Rev. Donald Cozzens says the debate over celibacy for priests will be around for decades. (CNN) -- It's an issue that simply won't go away. In spite of signals from the Vatican discouraging even discussions of obligatory celibacy for Catholic priests, the almost 1,000-year-old rule is under the microscope. And it will be for decades to come. Here's why. In the Catholic tradition, even though sex is cast as sinful unless expressed in the conjugal embrace of husband and wife, it is held as fundamentally good, a part of God's creation. The church even holds that marriage (including spousal lovemaking) is a sacrament -- something sacred that contributes to the sanctity of husbands and wives. In light of this official teaching, it is dawning on many Catholics that mandatory celibacy for priests, a canonically imposed discipline of the church, is precisely that -- a discipline. They are asking, "How is it that a discipline of the church has been allowed to trump a sacrament of the church?" In effect, the church is saying that should God call a man to the priesthood, God will not, at the same time, call that individual to the sacrament of marriage. It's right to ask, how does the church know this? Public opinion surveys indicate that most Catholics, priests included, believe the discipline of celibacy needs a serious review. Recently the retired archbishop of New York, Cardinal Edward Egan, observed that obligatory celibacy is open for discussion. It is not, Egan noted, a matter of dogma. For decades now, bishops from Asia, Europe and the Americas have asked Vatican officials to consider optional celibacy for priests. The church's official response is consistent and succinct: As a precious gift from God, the discipline of celibacy for priests will remain in place. This, in spite of the inherent paradox lying just below the claim that the gift of celibacy is a precious gift of God to the priesthood and the church: How can a gift be legislated? The church answers that if a man is called to the priesthood, God will grant him the gift of celibacy. Many priests today wonder how church leaders know this. Reading the mind of God in this matter -- in any matter of church discipline -- is risky business. More and more Catholics today are coming to understand that celibacy as a universal law for priests had its origins in the 12th century and that during the church's first millennium, priests and bishops -- and at least thirty-nine popes -- were married. Still, most well-read cradle Catholics are surprised to learn that St. Anastasius, pope from 399 to 401, was succeeded by his son, Pope St. Innocent I, and that a century later Pope St. Hormisdas' son, St. Silverius, also was elected to the papacy. Even in our secular world, it's common to speak of church-based ministry as a calling, a vocation. Isn't it possible that God would call an individual to the priesthood and to the sacrament of marriage? God apparently did so for more than half the church's history. How do we know that God isn't doing so today? For some years now I've been teaching in the religious studies department at John Carroll University in Cleveland. I've asked dozens of serious, healthy young students if they have given any thought to being a priest. They seem flattered by the question. With only one exception, each has answered, "Yes, I've thought about being a priest, but I want a family." There are, of course, other factors, urgent and pressing, that will | [
"What is 1000 years old?",
"Were popes ever married?",
"What gift should be considered optional?",
"Church views marriage as what?"
] | [
[
"obligatory celibacy for Catholic priests,"
],
[
"at least thirty-nine"
],
[
"celibacy"
],
[
"a sacrament"
]
] | The Rev. Donald Cozzens: Celibacy is 1,000 years old but not intrinsic to the church .
Many popes were married in the first millennium of the church, Cozzens says .
Cozzens says church views marriage as sacred; why should priests be denied it?
Cozzens: Celibacy is a gift that should be optional, not mandated by the church . |
Editor's note: The Rev. Robert Barron is Francis Cardinal George Professor of Faith and Culture at Mundelein Seminary and author of several books, including "Eucharist," "Word on Fire: Proclaiming the Power of Christ" and "The Priority of Christ: Toward a Post-Liberal Catholicism." Barron is the director of WordOnFire.org, a global media ministry based in Chicago, Illinois. For another view on this topic, read here. The Rev. Robert Barron says celibacy sets the priest apart as a symbol of the world to come. (CNN) -- The scandal surrounding the Rev. Alberto Cutie has raised questions in the minds of many concerning the Catholic Church's discipline of priestly celibacy. Why does the church continue to defend a practice that seems so unnatural and so unnecessary? There is a very bad argument for celibacy, which has appeared throughout the tradition and which is, even today, defended by some. It goes something like this: Married life is spiritually suspect; priests, as religious leaders, should be spiritual athletes above reproach; therefore, priests shouldn't be married This approach to the question is, in my judgment, not just stupid but dangerous, for it rests on presumptions that are repugnant to solid Christian doctrine. The biblical teaching on creation implies the essential integrity of the world and everything in it. Genesis tells us that God found each thing he had made good and that he found the ensemble of creatures very good. Catholic theology, at its best, has always been resolutely, anti-dualist -- and this means that matter, the body, marriage and sexual activity are never, in themselves, to be despised. But there is more to the doctrine of creation than an affirmation of the goodness of the world. To say that the finite realm in its entirety is created is to imply that nothing in the universe is God. All aspects of created reality reflect God and bear traces of the divine goodness -- just as every detail of a building gives evidence of the mind of the architect -- but no creature and no collectivity of creatures is divine, just as no part of a structure is the architect. This distinction between God and the world is the ground for the anti-idolatry principle that is reiterated from the beginning to the end of the Bible: Do not turn something less than God into God. Isaiah the prophet put it thus: "As high as the heavens are above the earth, so high are my thoughts above your thoughts and my ways above your ways, says the Lord." And it is at the heart of the First Commandment: "I am the Lord your God; you shall have no other gods besides me." The Bible thus holds off all the attempts of human beings to divinize or render ultimate some worldly reality. The doctrine of creation, in a word, involves both a great "yes" and a great "no" to the universe. Now there is a behavioral concomitant to the anti-idolatry principle, and it is called detachment. Detachment is the refusal to make anything less than God the organizing principle or center of one's life. Anthony de Mello looked at it from the other side and said "an attachment is anything in this world -- including your own life -- that you are convinced you cannot live without." Even as we reverence everything that God has made, we must let go of everything that God has made, precisely for the sake of God. This is why, as G.K. Chesterton noted, there is a tension to Christian life. In accord with its affirmation of the world, the Church loves color, pageantry, music and rich decoration (as in the liturgy and papal ceremonials), even as, in accord with its detachment from the world, it loves the poverty of St. Francis and the simplicity of Mother Teresa. The same tension governs its attitude toward sex and family. Again, in Chesterton's language, the Church is "fiercely for having children" (through marriage) even as it remains "fiercely against having them" (in religious celibacy). Everything | [
"What is the question asked by the Rev?",
"Who rejects the \"marriage is spiritually suspect\" defense?",
"What sets the priest apart as a symbol of another world?",
"What did the Rev. Robert Barton say?"
] | [
[
"Why does the church continue to defend a practice that seems so unnatural and so unnecessary?"
],
[
"Barron"
],
[
"celibacy"
],
[
"celibacy sets the priest apart as a symbol of the world to come."
]
] | The Rev. Robert Barron: Why does Church back practice that seems unnecessary?
He says he rejects the "marriage is spiritually suspect" defense of celibacy .
But celibacy sets the priest apart as a symbol of another world, he says . |
Editor's note: The author has ridden motorcycles more than 125,000 miles since 1999, including solo trips from Georgia to California and Canada. She takes us inside the world of motorcycle travel. Bikers approach Mount Mitchell, North Carolina, during a road trip through the Blue Ridge Mountains. SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK, Virginia (CNN) -- We were parked at a peaceful, shady overlook beside Virginia's Skyline Drive, admiring the green mountains and the river far below, when Keith realized he needed a new rear tire, and he needed it now. A bald tire is a serious problem when you're traveling by motorcycle: We don't carry spare tires, for obvious reasons, and a blowout on two wheels could be life-threatening. Keith decided he could make it 100 miles to the Harley-Davidson dealership in Richmond, Virginia, as long as we kept it slow, so our seven bikes headed that way. It's been said that a great trip in a car is like watching a first-rate movie -- but a great trip on a motorcycle is like living the movie. For our road trip, we had chosen an eight-day itinerary from our homes outside Atlanta, Georgia, through the mountains of North Carolina and Virginia, then east to the Atlantic shoreline and south along the coastal islands of the Outer Banks. The trip offered a spectacular ride up the Blue Ridge Parkway, a winding two-lane that clings to the ridgeline through North Carolina and Virginia. The elevation often reaches 5,000 feet or more, so temperatures were cool despite a heat wave down below. See map » Our motorcycle motorcade passed panoramas of blue-tinged mountains and rolling meadows set off by split-rail fences. We motored through dense forests whose overhanging branches turned the road into a cool green tunnel. Rhododendrons and mountain laurels in bloom lined the road. See photos of this Harley road trip » It all looks better from a motorcycle, because you're so immersed in it -- not just looking out from inside a cage of steel and glass. In fact, we call cars cages and the people who drive them -- you guessed it -- cagers. See how motorcycle travel differs from car travel » The smells were intense: fresh-cut hay, pine trees baking in the sun, honeysuckle -- and sometimes, the not-so-pleasant aroma of ripening roadkill. Songs of determined birds rang out over the rumble of the motors. Riding a motorcycle on a road like this is a physical pleasure, too, as you lean right, then left, then right, to guide the bike smoothly through the parkway's sweeping curves. You swoop, you glide -- it's like dancing, or like those dreams where you're flying. In Virginia, Skyline Drive offered an abundance of wildlife. We saw five deer in 40 miles, including a small fawn with its mother -- none of them close enough to threaten a collision, and all of them smart enough to run the other way when they saw us coming. Finally we arrived at the dealership in Richmond to replace Keith's balding tire. We knew we'd be there for a while -- so we made ourselves at home. We ordered pizza to be delivered and Neil brought in his laptop so everyone could upload their snapshots. It might seem strange for customers to take over a retail establishment, but a Harley dealership always feels like home. There's a strong sense of community among motorcycle riders (and by extension, the stores). Almost all riders wave to other riders on the road, whether they're on Harleys like ours or small, speedy sport bikes or huge, silent Honda Gold Wings. Bikers fall into conversations with other bikers as if we already know each other because -- in a way -- we do. We've all experienced the same joys and aggravations -- but it's mostly joys. One of those pleasures is how people go out of their way to be helpful or to strike up a conversation with a group of bikers. All kinds of folks wave to us on the road -- from | [
"what were they riding?",
"where did they go",
"where is the road trip?",
"how many days were there?",
"how many people were involved"
] | [
[
"motorcycles"
],
[
"For our road trip, we had chosen an eight-day itinerary from our homes outside Atlanta, Georgia, through the mountains of North Carolina and Virginia, then east to the Atlantic shoreline and south along the coastal islands of the Outer Banks."
],
[
"through the Blue Ridge Mountains."
],
[
"eight-day"
],
[
"seven"
]
] | Bikers: Motorcycle road trips are more exciting than in other vehicles .
"It's like dancing, or like those dreams where you're flying," says Harley owner .
Follow CNN.com writer's road trip through Blue Ridge Mountains, Outer Banks .
Eight-day ride includes tire repair, wildfire, Kitty Hawk, pirate lore, wild ponies . |
Editor's note: The following story, based on testimony in Phillip Garrido's trial for a 1976 kidnapping, contains some sexually explicit material. Phillip Garrido is show in an early mug shot taken in connection with the 1976 rape and abduction case. (CNN) -- Fifteen years before the girl was held captive in the shed, there was the woman in the warehouse -- and at least one other woman who escaped capture. Phillip Garrido, who with his wife is charged in the 1991 kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard, had been convicted of kidnapping before. When he stalked, kidnapped and raped Katie Callaway Hall on November 22, 1976, he fulfilled an overpowering sexual fantasy that he had methodically planned for weeks, according to court records obtained by CNN. He told police it was his second kidnapping attempt of the day. Those facts came to light in Garrido's 1977 trial, in which he was convicted and sentenced to 50 years for kidnapping and rape. In her testimony, Hall said Garrido asked for a ride in her car, then bound and handcuffed her before taking her to a small warehouse in Reno, Nevada, where he repeatedly raped her for 5½ hours. It was not an act of impulse. "He told me he had been renting it [the small warehouse] for a couple weeks, preparing it," Hall testified. Watch how Garrido prepared for and explained the kidnapping » It is CNN policy to withhold the identity of alleged victims of sexual assault. But in this case, Hall recounted her ordeal last week in an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," saying it changed her life forever. "I had to tell everyone I met what had happened to me -- because I didn't feel like myself. It was as if I had to explain why I wasn't 'normal,' " she said. Watch Hall describe her ordeal » She was not his first victim that day. The trial transcript reveals that Garrido told authorities that one hour before Hall's kidnapping, he tried to kidnap another woman, who wrestled away and escaped. And, police in Antioch disclosed last week that Garrido was charged with raping a 14-year-old in 1972, but the charges were dropped because the victim refused to testify. Watch details of the 1972 case » In the case involving Hall, CNN reviewed the 1977 trial documents, which include Garrido's psychiatric evaluation and the testimony of Hall and Garrido. The documents reveal a pattern of behavior that Garrido is accused of repeating in the 1991 kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard, who was recently found after being kept in a shed for 18 years. The 32-year-old documents also detail Garrido's self-described struggle with drugs and his efforts to control his sexual obsessions. Can sex offenders be cured? » Garrido and his wife, Nancy, have pleaded not guilty to charges involving Dugard's abduction, but police say he admitted kidnapping her in his initial interview. Police say Garrido and his wife kidnapped Dugard outside her home in South Lake Tahoe, California, and took her to an elaborate compound hidden in the backyard of their Antioch, California, home more than 160 miles away. Tucked behind overgrown trees and a fence were tents, outbuildings and a soundproof shed where Dugard lived with the two daughters she had with her captor. Out of sight Garrido took great pains to make sure nobody could find the camp, not even the parole officer who visited twice a month at times, police said. Hall, too, was taken directly to a carefully prepped small warehouse after her kidnapping. As they drove from South Lake Tahoe, California, where she was abducted, to Reno, she tried to persuade Garrido to rape her in the bushes. "I asked him, couldn't we just pull over and get it over with," she testified. But Garrido was determined. "You might as well get that our of your mind; you are going with me, you have got no choice," Hall testified Garrido told her, according to court transcripts. "I have | [
"What did to their victims?"
] | [
[
"raped"
]
] | Trial transcripts show Phillip Garrido tried to kidnap woman before Katie Hall in 1976 .
Garrido methodically prepared places to bring kidnapped Hall .
Kidnap suspect spoke in trial about his drug-fueled, uncontrollable sexual urges .
"You are going with me, you have got no choice," Hall recalls Garrido saying . |
Editor's note: The n-word appears in this piece because CNN feels the context in which it is used is pertinent to the story of James "Little Man" Presley. James "Little Man" Presley has worked in the cotton fields of Sledge, Mississippi, since he was just 6 years old. SLEDGE, Mississippi (CNN) -- James Presley stands amid chopped cotton, the thick Mississippi mud caked on his well-worn boots. A smile spreads across his face when he talks about voting for Barack Obama and what that might mean for generations to come. His voice picks up a notch. He holds his head up a bit higher. "There's a heap of pride in voting for a black man," he says. At 78, Presley is a legend of the past living in the present and now hopeful for the future. A grandson of slaves, he's one of the few men left in America so closely tied to his slave past, still farming cotton on the same land as his ancestors. He's picked cotton since he was just 6 years old. He and his wife of 57 years, Eva May, raised 13 children and six grandchildren in a cypress-sided house in the middle of cotton fields in northwestern Mississippi. He was a sharecropper most his life, but rarely qualified for food stamps. Watch "Obama, he come up like" » His father died in 1935 when he was 5, and he had to step up and be the "Little Man" of the house, a nickname that has stuck seven decades later. He's lived a raw-knuckled life where hope moved at a molasses-slow pace. The last time he had hope for a better future was four decades ago -- first with President John F. Kennedy and then with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Obama has changed everything to the poor in these parts. iReport.com: What does Obama's presidency mean to you? "I'm a church man," he says. "And I kind of figured this here is about like it was with Moses with the children of Israel. On that day, when he gets to be president, we're all going to be rejoicing." Does he have plans to celebrate on Inauguration Day? "Oh man, it's gonna be nice. I believe we're gonna have a good time," he says. "I never thought one would get there." See photos of the weather-beaten home where Little Man raised so many children » As the nation prepares for Obama's inauguration on January 20, CNN.com traveled to Sledge, Mississippi, a forgotten town of about 500 people in the heart of the Mississippi Delta that some consider to be the birthplace of blues in America. Nearly 20 percent of residents over the age of 60 live below the poverty line, according to the 2000 census. That number nearly doubles, to 37.5 percent, for residents under the age of 19. About three-quarters of the population are black. Two-thirds of the people here make less than $35,000 a year. Presley says the fact the nation will have a black president will have a ripple effect in poor communities like his. For the first time ever, he says, black parents and grandparents can tell youngsters in rural America that through education, anything is possible -- that the White House isn't just for white folks. Three of his children graduated from college. Two have died -- one as a youth, one as an adult. It never gets easier, he says, no matter what age they die. Obama has already brought inspiration to future generations of his own family. "I might be dead and gone, but it's going to be a good thing to me, because I know that they ain't gotta go through what I went through. They'll have a better time, a more joyous time, than what I had when I come along. It is gonna be grand to them and to me, too." " | [
"How old was James when he started working the cotton fields?",
"What is James Presley's age?",
"Who was James \"Little Man\" Presley?",
"What were Presley's grandparents?",
"What is Jame's Presley's nickname?",
"What is James Presley's nickname?",
"When did James father die?"
] | [
[
"6 years"
],
[
"78,"
],
[
"is a legend of the past living in the present"
],
[
"slaves,"
],
[
"\"Little Man\""
],
[
"\"Little Man\""
],
[
"died in 1935"
]
] | James "Little Man" Presley, 78, has worked cotton fields since he was 6 years old .
"There's a heap of pride in voting for a black man," says the grandson of slaves .
His dad died when he was 5; Obama "knows what it is to come up without a father"
His message: "The important thing in life is to try to live and do the best you can" |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and Web site based in Brooklyn, New York. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a very transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers.
Brooklyn, New York (VICE) -- When people talk about fashion week, they are usually referring to London, Paris, New York and Milan. When I discovered that Islamabad was having its first ever fashion week, I was especially intrigued. In a country where the majority of women cover up and similar events in the past have been threatened with fundamentalist attacks, this had to be about promoting Pakistan's textile industry in a strangled economy. The majority of Pakistan's population wears traditional Shalwar Kameez or Burkha, are vehemently religious, poor and enjoy about a 50% illiteracy rate. I quickly learned that there are pockets of Pakistani society that have Western sensibilities, which warrants the fashion industry to grow and justifies the need for a fashion week.
The British High Commission advises against all but essential travel to Pakistan. After pondering how essential fashion journalism is, against the wishes of my family I flew out to Islamabad in January with the director William Fairman to document an event so incongruous with the Pakistan we see on the news, people thought we'd made it up. This fashion week represented an exclusive elite of Western-centric Pakistanis.
I managed with relative ease to secure carte blanche to film fly-on-the-wall at the event, with the exception of filming people boozing or blaspheming on camera.
For example, before we left I was warned I'd better cover up and wear long dresses, which is evident in the film. As soon as I arrived I realized that I needn't have worried, that most of the girls at the fashion week dressed like Western girls. It was just one example of how Pakistan is misunderstood in the West.
See the rest of Pakistan Fashion Week at VICE.COM
For a week I watched relatively scantily-clad models on a runway in a blast-proof basement of a 7-star hotel just a short drive from the Islamic militant hubs in the troubled northwest. There was a latent atmosphere of volatility: fundamentalists don't have to try hard to work out that these hotels are crawling with Westerners and Pakistani liberals 365 days a year. As a result, the seats at the fashion shows were often half-empty. Social events such as these are few and far between in Pakistan. A young Pakistani rapper we met while out there told us how he struggles to perform live, as live events are often shut down for risk of militant attacks. More than serving as a platform for the textile industry and an attempt at improving Pakistan's world image, the Fashion Week was predominantly just something for people to do, a distraction from the adversity of daily life there.
I spent a week in the care of Pakistan's affluent elite, and my time with them taught me that Pakistan is an acutely divided country of extremes. There is a great deal of resentment towards this outmoded elite from the rest of the country. There is no middle class as we know it. This privileged community lives in compounds with armed guards at their gates. They employ a live-in staff and a chauffeur. They inhabit a bubble of ersatz Western life. One woman told me she thought that fashion, not drones, was the answer to Pakistan's problems. Whether this is the case, or not, remains to be seen. | [
"What country did the vice visit?",
"Who went to Pakistan for a behind-the-scenes look at fashion week in Islamabad?",
"VICE goes to Pakistan for a behind-the-scenes look at what?"
] | [
[
"Islamabad"
],
[
"William Fairman"
],
[
"fashion week"
]
] | VICE embeds with rebel groups on the front lines in Libya .
Journalists were surprised by how young some rebels were .
When asked why they were fighting, "freedom" was the common answer . |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and Web site based in Brooklyn, New York. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a very transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers.
Brooklyn, New York (VICE.COM) -- While the average American's understanding of the conflict in Kosovo is a simple, two-sided Sneetch-battle between the mountainous region's dominant Serbian minority and oppressed Albanian majority, the reality is a lot more convoluted than a Wikipedia page or morning radio parody of the Beach Boys' "Kokomo" can accurately convey. In addition to the Serbs in the north and Albanians in the south, Kosovo is host to a pizza pie of smaller ethnic groups like Gorans, Illyrians, and Roma scattered in enclaves throughout the entire country.
During the 1998-1999 war, as the Serbian Yugoslav Army and NATO-backed Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army vied with each other to see who could rack up the most atrocities, these sub-minorities were victims of a disproportionate amount of collateral brutality. Especially the Kosovo Roma, more widely known as "gypsies." Of the 250,000 people displaced from their homes by the fighting, an estimated 90,000 were Roma, a figure which is a little more jarring when you realize the region's total Romani population is just a little north of 100,000.
To help them deal with the refugee problem, the United Nations invited Paul Polansky, an American activist for gypsy rights, then working in Prague, to the city of Mitrovica to act as a liaison for the burgeoning community of Roma's so-called Internally Displaced People.
"The UN were having gypsies running into schoolhouses seeking shelter from the Albanians who were chasing them out of their homes," says Polansky from his house in Southern Serbia. "And so they opened a few Internally Displaced People camps, but they didn't know how to work with the gypsies, so they needed an expert to actually move into the camps to live with them and advise them. That's what they brought me to Kosovo to do."
Polansky was immediately unimpressed by the conditions at the camp he moved into an old French army barracks called Osterode.
See the rest of The VICE guide to the Balkans at VICE.com
"There were about 1,800 tents put up by the 23rd Pioneer Regiment of the British Army. They were put on toxic wasteland. The land itself was lower than the road coming into the camp and so when it rained there was water in all the tents. The only food they were given was flour and beans. They needed water to cook with but there was no water for cooking, no water for cleaning, and when I complained to the UN they said, 'Well, these are gypsies, they know how to look after themselves.' It was a constant fight just to get them to deliver water. We were not guaranteed any security. The Albanians were attacking the camp. We had children die because UN police refused to take them to hospital"
Despite Polansky's efforts, conditions at the Osterode camp continued to deteriorate. The British regiment in charge of protecting the camp was withdrawn and children began to show symptoms of health effects from the campsite's proximity to dumping grounds for industrial waste.
"In 1999, some Danish soldiers on patrol in Mitroviza had shown symptoms of lead poisoning," Polansky told us. "So their blood was taken, and it came back they had extremely high levels of lead poisoning. So in the summer of 2000, a UN medical team took blood tests all over Mitrovica. They found the highest lead levels were in the gypsy camps because they had been built on the tailings stands of the mines and the pollution from the smelter drifted right over their camp. Their blood samples were sent to a lab in Belgium and it was found that the children in these camps had the highest lead levels in medical literature."
Eventually Polansky got fed up with the UN | [
"What person found hundrens of tents on the wastelands",
"What did Paul Polanski investigate",
"What did he find on the wasteland",
"What person said there was high levels of lead",
"What American investigated the treatment",
"High levels of what were found in the camps",
"Where di Polansky find the tents?"
] | [
[
"Paul Polansky,"
],
[
"Internally Displaced People camps,"
],
[
"1,800 tents"
],
[
"Polansky"
],
[
"Paul Polansky,"
],
[
"lead poisoning."
],
[
"toxic wasteland."
]
] | VICE embeds with rebel groups on the front lines in Libya .
Journalists were surprised by how young some rebels were .
When asked why they were fighting, "freedom" was the common answer . |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has recently been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and Web site based in Brooklyn, New York. VBS.TV is Vice's broadband television network. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a very transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers. Viewer discretion advised.
Brooklyn, New York (VBS.TV) -- Recently, VBS headed to Naples, the capital of the Campania region in southern Italy, to shoot two documentaries about the Camorra, the most powerful but least understood of the Italian crime cartels.
One piece was about the peculiar world of the Camorra's homegrown Neapolitan pop stars, known as Neomelodics. The other, excerpted here, focused on the environmental emergency brought on by the Camorra's manipulation of garbage disposal in the region. Each proved to be a strange and infuriating experience.
The daytime hours were spent visiting housing blocks where every family had reported at least one case of cancer because of illegal toxic waste dumps behind their homes. Our evenings, however, were spent at town square celebrations sponsored by the Camorra two blocks away and attended by the same families we had met earlier that day. The Camorra, it was suddenly clear, was dumping toxic waste in people's backyards and then hosting Neomelodic pop concerts in their front yards.
See the rest of Toxic: Napoli at VBS.TV
Today, the Camorra's Naples is Italy on steroids, and it's the result of a marriage of convenience between two powerful Italian forces. Neapolitans we met were, on the one hand, fed up with the garbage situation. On the other, very few had any interest in pointing fingers at the Camorra.
The Gerlando family is a prime example. On one of the last days of our shoot, we spent an afternoon with sheep farmers Patrizia and Mario Gerlando at their home in the Campanian countryside.
The Gerlandos were forced to leave their home in the town of Acerra (a suburb of Naples) because all of their sheep were mutating and dying due to the high levels of dioxin in the pastures where they grazed. Despite Acerra being the most well-documented case of the Camorra's involvement in Campania's environmental crisis, after the cameras were packed away, Mario and Patrizia told us that the Camorra had nothing to do with anything and that it would take someone like Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to come fix the situation. | [
"What are the consequences of years of pollution?",
"Who documenting powerful Italian crime cartel \"strange, infuriating\"",
"What has resulted in environmental crisis?",
"What are the consequences of pollution",
"Who documented crime cartel",
"What does the cartel control",
"What does VBS find \"strange, infuriating\"?"
] | [
[
"sheep were mutating and dying"
],
[
"CNN.com"
],
[
"Camorra's manipulation of garbage disposal"
],
[
"all of their sheep were mutating and dying due to the high levels of dioxin in the pastures where they grazed."
],
[
"VBS"
],
[
"garbage disposal"
],
[
"environmental emergency brought on by the Camorra's manipulation of garbage disposal in the region."
]
] | Crew of three gets firsthand look at poverty, substance abuse in war-ravaged Liberia .
Women at local brothel tell of beatings by U.N. soldiers, child prostitution .
An ex-warlord who claims to have killed babies, cannibalized victims guides crew . |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has recently been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and Web site based in Brooklyn, New York. VBS.TV is Vice's broadband television network. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a very transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers. Viewer discretion advised.
London, England (VBS.TV) -- In previous episodes of The Vice Guide to Travel, we road-tripped through North Korea, shopped for dirty bombs in Bulgaria, and hunted mutant wild boars in Chernobyl. Little did we know that all of our harrowing journeys would leave us only semi-prepared for a recent trip to war-ravaged, godforsaken Liberia.
Since 1989, a series of brutal civil wars -- primarily fought by drug-addicted, prepubescent orphans -- has rendered Liberia one of the most dangerous countries in the world. Everyone has heard the stories of abject poverty, ubiquitous substance abuse and wanton violence taking place there, but we don't really believe anything that we don't see for ourselves. So, stomachs firmly knotted, off we went.
We arrived in Liberia with a small crew of three and quickly rendezvoused with a local journalist who would be our fixer and guide. Our first shooting location was the West Point slum, home to 80,000 people living in conditions that redefine squalor. Miles of rotting garbage surround the slum, which has no sewage system. Pretty much everyone -- even the local government officials -- defecates and urinates in the open. Drugs, prostitution and armed robbery are the main industries. We got to know some of the residents of West Point, who told us their stories as they smoked heroin and cocaine and begged us for money.
Next we visited a local brothel. The women who lived there talked with us about the U.N. soldiers who have sex with the child prostitutes and beat the older women, and then leave without paying.
Watch episode 2 from the Vice Guide to Liberia on VBS.TV
But perhaps the most revelatory portions of our trip to Liberia came from meeting the major warlords of the nation's civil wars. There's a tradition in Liberian militias of taking on extravagant noms de guerre. Hence, our subjects were named General Bin Laden, General Rambo and General Butt Naked. The latter, in particular, was one of the most notorious Liberian warlords. He claims to have personally killed 20,000 people including babies, and to have sometimes cannibalized his victims.
Today, General Butt Naked goes by his birth name, which is Joshua. During our time together, he told us that Liberia will surely implode into civil war again when the U.N. leaves next year. But in the meantime, Joshua wants to redeem himself. He offered us a glimpse of the Liberia that he wants to forge, and we found ourselves growing to like him. He took us to his church, where he rehabilitates child soldiers. We watched as he preached his way through Monrovia on a Sunday.
Is there a chance that his mission will succeed, and further civil war can be averted in this desperate country? That's one of the many questions that we came away with upon our safe return from Liberia. Watch our documentary about our time there and see what you think. | [
"How many in the crew?",
"Where were the women?",
"What country are they touring?",
"What did the ex-warlord claim?"
] | [
[
"three"
],
[
"a local brothel."
],
[
"Liberia."
],
[
"to have personally killed 20,000 people including babies, and to have sometimes cannibalized his victims."
]
] | Crew of three gets firsthand look at poverty, substance abuse in war-ravaged Liberia .
Women at local brothel tell of beatings by U.N. soldiers, child prostitution .
An ex-warlord who claims to have killed babies, cannibalized victims guides crew . |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has recently been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and Web site based in Brooklyn, New York. VBS.TV is the broadband television network of VICE. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers.
Brooklyn, New York (VBS.TV) -- In this installment of the Vice Guide to Film, VBS co-founder Shane Smith travels to Russia to meet the pioneers of one of the most peculiar experimental film movements in history: Parallel Cinema.
The genre marries Soviet avant-garde agitprop filmmaking (black and white, silent, odd angles, extreme closeups, rapid fire editing of good Soviets at work) with something called "Necro-realism," a movement spearheaded by filmmaker Yvegny Yufit and consisting of very weird gay male zombie flicks that feature fat bald men having sex and eating each other's brains. It was meant to be a comment on the impending fall of the Soviet system and the decadence of the apparatchiks in charge. It grew to become much more.
While Russia is known for its experimental works of the 1920s -- auteurs like Dziga Vertov and Sergei Eisenstein spring to mind -- this freedom of expression ended when Stalin took power. For 60 years, Russian film was dominated by the drab, state-approved imagery of Socialist realism. This genre was defined by stark scenes of the proletariat soldiering and toiling diligently over the land. Making movies outside this milieu meant that the film-lovers, artists, actors and rock musicians who collaborated to create it were risking life and limb at the hands of the KGB. But when the Soviet Union collapsed, the threat of its primary intelligence agency diminished and Russian filmmakers began to unleash six decades of pent-up creative energy. The films that emerged were an insane mish-mash of booze, violence, surrealism and insanity. Parallel Cinema was born.
Watch the rest of Russian Parallel Cinema at VBS.TV
For this episode, Shane journeys to Moscow and St. Petersburg to meet several of the surviving founders of Parallel Cinema and Necro-realism, many of whom are today extremely successful commercial producers and directors. In fact, a few of them now run some of the country's key networks and continue to make films. Shane manages to uncover this fascinating underground art community and finds that to this day the Parallel Cinema movement thrives. The devoted still have weekly Parallel screenings and events, and even put out a monthly film publication. Still, as he immerses himself in this unique film tradition, it becomes clear that, given Russian's present volatility, it may not exist much longer. | [
"what happened to Soviet Union?",
"Who is the VBS journalist?",
"Who are the pioneers of the film movement?",
"Who did the VBS journalist meet with?"
] | [
[
"collapsed,"
],
[
"Shane Smith"
],
[
"Parallel Cinema."
],
[
"the pioneers of one of the most peculiar experimental film movements in history: Parallel Cinema."
]
] | Crew of three gets firsthand look at poverty, substance abuse in war-ravaged Liberia .
Women at local brothel tell of beatings by U.N. soldiers, child prostitution .
An ex-warlord who claims to have killed babies, cannibalized victims guides crew . |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has recently been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and website based in Brooklyn, New York. VBS.TV is VICE's broadband television network. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a very transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers.
Brooklyn, New York (VBS.TV) -- In 2008, the world cast its eyes on Beijing, the sprawling Chinese metropolis that was set to play host to the Summer Olympics.
At VBS.TV, we caught wind of another story that soon had our full attention. As Chinese officials were taking unprecedented and often controversial measures to sanitize the notoriously foul Beijing air, much of the rest of the country was still covered in a thick blanket of noxious smog.
According to a World Bank survey at the time, 16 of the world's 20 most-polluted cities were in China.
At the top of that list is the city of Linfen, a coal-mining and manufacturing hub in the heart of Shanxi Province. Within weeks, we assembled a film crew and went off to the landlocked province in northern China to find out more.
After touching down in Beijing and making a quick visit to the Olympic countdown clock, we set out to visit the single most polluted place on Earth, hoping to place the dubious ranking into a human context.
Despite the Chinese government's promise of a marathon-friendly city, the Beijing air at the time was still plenty oppressive. But nothing could have prepared us for the dystopian scenario we encountered during our week in Linfen and the surrounding area.
See the rest of Toxic Linfen at VBS.TV
Before the trip, I had researched thousands of images of the pollution that plagues Linfen and Shanxi province, but to see it in person is, quite simply, devastating.
The sun sets before it is supposed to, disappearing into a curtain of smog above the true horizon. Residents scavenge the roadside for coal that falls from the seemingly endless cavalcade of coal trucks, gathering it with bare hands. Schoolchildren play against the nonstop backdrop of billowing exhaust. Many of the elderly have trouble speaking between gasps of widespread emphysema.
Residents of Linfen are aware of the growing threat the polluted air and water pose, and some of them have left the city. Most, however, have no choice but to stay.
The infamy of a No. 1 ranking in the news media eventually motivated China to focus more attention on cleaning up Linfen, but unfortunately, the scene of overwhelming pollution is still rampant in many parts of the country.
As easy as it is to criticize China's bold industrial development, our visit was also a clear reminder of the same pattern of manufacturing and consumption that has occurred elsewhere since the dawn of the Industrial Age.
In China, it just happens to be on a much grander scale and on the back of a globalized economy that has rendered China into an assembly line for the world. The most compelling research I came across to this end are recently published studies showing particulate matter from China's factories and mines reaching across the Pacific Ocean to North America's West Coast.
China obviously has some cleaning up to do, and more importantly, some major strategizing to achieve a sustainable economy.
Our futures are inextricably linked. Back in New York City, the coal mines of Shanxi Province feel worlds away, but as oil now gushes ceaselessly into our own backyard, we should pay even more attention to Linfen if we don't want it to be a glimpse into our own future. | [
"What hovers over Linfen?",
"What does Linfen produce and consume in large amounts?",
"What is the air quality like?"
] | [
[
"pollution"
],
[
"coal-mining"
],
[
"foul"
]
] | The city of Linfen has a permanent toxic smog hovering over the city .
Air quality there is the equivalent of smoking three packs of cigarettes a day .
Linfen produces and consumes large amount of coal . |
Editor's note: The staff at CNN.com has recently been intrigued by the journalism of VICE, an independent media company and website based in Brooklyn, New York. VBS.TV is Vice's broadband television network. The reports, which are produced solely by VICE, reflect a transparent approach to journalism, where viewers are taken along on every step of the reporting process. We believe this unique reporting approach is worthy of sharing with our CNN.com readers.
Brooklyn, New York (VBS.TV) -- Whenever someone at our office bitches about being overworked, our stock response is "Beats digging ditches."
While the express intention of the statement is usually not-so-supportive, we think it's a healthy reminder that at the end of the day, we are all basically professional e-mailers and should be thankful for such.
The wildland firefighters who work for Grayback Forestry in Medford, Oregon, have no such motivational adages because their job is actually digging ditches. Around active forest fires. On the sides of mountains. You can't even bitch at these guys for having cushy government pensions to fall back on when they get older, because they're all private-sector contractors. Which means if they aren't out fighting forest fires or doing preventative forestry on unburned woods (basically extreme landscaping), they are losing money. They are the hardest working men in the tree business.
Southern Oregon in the summer is a tinderbox. Last year the state recorded some 560 wild fires, the majority of which occurred in the seemingly endless sea of trees running across its bottom from the Cascades to the Pacific Coast. Humidity is next to nonexistent, which is extremely pleasant, but means that even an errant spark from a chainsaw or the proverbial cigarette butt out the car window can set the entire region ablaze.
Flying into the Rogue Valley, there is evidence of past wild fires is everywhere: From the miles-long scar of the 2002 "Biscuit" fire stretching past the horizon, to the smaller pockets of charred trees crowding the edge of towns to the blue Wilderness-Firefighter-ribbon bumper stickers flying past on the I-5 to the elaborate wildfire and firefighter shrines at a local bar.
See more of Oregon Fire Lines at VBS.TV
There are very few places firemen aren't revered as local heroes, but the wilderness firefighters of Oregon go past people simply risking their lives to help others into a crazy superhero realm where their work regularly prevents entire settlements from being destroyed. They're literally the guardians of their communities. Incidentally, their work is also very beneficial for the forest.
We spent a few days following a crew of Grayback forest-firefighters walk up the sides of what most people would consider a cliff, to chop down underbrush in preparation for a controlled burn. This is what they like to call "project work" -- the light stuff they do between fires. The work is the hardest and least rewarding work we have ever tried to do. Unless you consider 12-hour-plus shifts of backbreaking labor, virtually zero outside recognition, and occasional accusations of being shills for the timber industry rewards. Which we do not.
This piece was originally produced in August 2010 | [
"What type of work are the firefighters doing?",
"What hour shifts do they do?",
"Which group followed firefighters?",
"What is the VBS following?",
"What does the VBS call it?",
"What type of burn was this?",
"How long are the shifts?",
"What does the 12 hr shift involved?"
] | [
[
"digging ditches."
],
[
"12-hour-plus"
],
[
"VBS.TV"
],
[
"a crew of Grayback forest-firefighters"
],
[
"\"Beats digging ditches.\""
],
[
"controlled"
],
[
"12-hour-plus"
],
[
"backbreaking labor, virtually zero outside recognition, and occasional accusations of being shills for the timber industry"
]
] | The city of Linfen has a permanent toxic smog hovering over the city .
Air quality there is the equivalent of smoking three packs of cigarettes a day .
Linfen produces and consumes large amount of coal . |
Editor's note: This article contains profanity that some may find offensive. This is part one of a three part series showing different aspects of life inside Colombia's drug gangs. A gang member sniffs in a cloud of cocaine dust as he cuts the drug with other substances. MEDELLIN, Colombia (CNN) -- A young man with tattoos covering one arm rolls hundreds of marijuana joints in the half-light of a shack, perched on a hillside in a Medellin slum. A 9mm pistol and a .38 revolver lie on his work bench. An old battery-powered radio blares out the salsa music classic, "Todo Tiene Su Final" or "Everything Comes To An End." "I'm getting calluses on my tongue rolling all these spliffs," he laughs, telling me has enough marijuana for about 1,000 joints. He and his comrades plan to sell them for about 50 cents apiece. A few doors away, two other gang members have raided their mother's kitchen for soup plates, drinking glasses and a blender. They've just taken delivery of a kilogram (2.2 pound) brick of pure cocaine. Their job now is to cut it and package it in gram bags to peddle on street corners they control. Watch as cocaine is cut » A female gang member shows up with two more bags, one containing powdered caffeine and the other lidocaine, a dental anesthetic used to dilute the pure cocaine. They mix business with pleasure. Every now and again one of the gang members pulls off the top of the blender and breathes in a cloud of pulverized cocaine. One of them coughs and keels over in the kitchen. Seconds later, he's back on his feet snorting cocaine off a spoon. "Breathing that cocaine cloud mellows me out so I need a line to take me back up," he says. Standing in the background, snorting lines of pure cocaine off a pocketknife is the gang leader, a man in his mid-20s. His cohorts call him "Chief." He tells me they'll sell the heavily cut cocaine for $1.50 a gram. Higher purity powder goes for about $4 a gram. That's much cheaper than the $50 or $60 a heavily cut gram costs on most U.S. and European streets, according to estimates from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. I agree to conceal Chief's true identity to protect him from the police and rival gangs. As we chat, he dismantles a small caliber pistol. Watch the gangs in action » "Around here the only law is the rules of the street," he explains. "The rules don't change; they always will be the rules, here or anywhere else." A trusted source, who made the introduction for me, tells me Chief is a "total animal living on borrowed time," who has earned so many enemies he cannot risk stepping outside the few hundred square yards of his home turf. "I'm only human, of course I get afraid," he says. "Afraid my life will end suddenly before I can do anything to get out of this war." Since the time when undisputed cocaine king Pablo Escobar held sway here, the "northeastern commune" district has forged a fearsome reputation as a recruiting ground for drug cartel hit men and violent gang wars. Medellin is once again in the grip of a vicious drug war. In January to September this year, city authorities say the murder rate has more than doubled with almost 2,000 killings. Officials at the Medellin public prosecutor's offices say the vast majority of victims were shot, likely victims of rival drug gangs and cocaine capos. Watch marijuana joints being rolled by the hundreds » That makes Medellin as dangerous as Ciudad Juarez, the frontier town dubbed Mexico's most dangerous city as a result of the ongoing cartel war there. Authorities in Juarez say killings are up from last year and are hitting record highs. Colombian authorities estimate there are around 130 street gangs -- known as "combos" -- in Medellin, totaling some 6,000 members | [
"How many killings have there been?",
"where drug war raging",
"Where did these killings happen",
"What did they sell",
"What does the gang sell?",
"Where is the drug war?"
] | [
[
"2,000"
],
[
"Medellin"
],
[
"Medellin"
],
[
"cocaine."
],
[
"cocaine."
],
[
"Medellin"
]
] | Drug war raging in Medellin, Colombia, has seen almost 2,000 killings this year .
Gang leader says violence sparked by power vacuum as old bosses arrested .
His gang sells cocaine and marijuana and he rules through violence .
But he refuses to say which cartel boss is bankrolling his gang . |
Editor's note: This is an excerpt from "Zeitoun" by Dave Eggers, a nonfiction account of a Syrian-American immigrant and his extraordinary experience during Hurricane Katrina. Eggers is the author of five other books, including "What Is the What," a finalist for the 2006 National Book Critics Circle Award. Eggers is the founder and editor of McSweeney's, an independent publishing house based in San Francisco. Dave Eggers writes that Abdulrahman Zeitoun dreamed of fishing on the Syrian coast as Katrina approached. (CNN) -- FRIDAY, AUGUST 26, 2005 On moonless nights the men and boys of Jableh, a dusty fishing town on the coast of Syria, would gather their lanterns and set out in their quietest boats. Five or six small craft, two or three fishermen in each. A mile out, they would arrange the boats in a circle on the black sea, drop their nets, and, holding their lanterns over the water, they would approximate the moon. The fish, sardines, would begin gathering soon after, a slow mass of silver rising from below. The fish were attracted to plankton, and the plankton were attracted to the light. They would begin to circle, a chain linked loosely, and over the next hour their numbers would grow. The black gaps between silver links would close until the fishermen could see, below, a solid mass of silver spinning. Abdulrahman Zeitoun was only thirteen when he began fishing for sardines this way, a method called lampara, borrowed from the Italians. He had waited years to join the men and teenagers on the night boats, and he'd spent those years asking questions. Why only on moonless nights? Because, his brother Ahmad said, on moon-filled nights the plankton would be visible everywhere, spread out all over the sea, and the sardines could see and eat the glowing organisms with ease. But without a moon the men could make their own, and could bring the sardines to the surface in stunning concentrations. You have to see it, Ahmad told his little brother. You've never seen anything like this. And when Abdulrahman first witnessed the sardines circling in the black he could not believe the sight, the beauty of the undulating silver orb below the white and gold lantern light. He said nothing, and the other fishermen were careful to be quiet, too, paddling without motors, lest they scare away the catch. They would whisper over the sea, telling jokes and talking about women and girls as they watched the fish rise and spin beneath them. A few hours later, once the sardines were ready, tens of thousands of them glistening in the refracted light, the fishermen would cinch the net and haul them in. They would motor back to the shore and bring the sardines to the fish broker in the market before dawn. He would pay the men and boys, and would then sell the fish all over western Syria -- Lattakia, Baniyas, Damascus. The fishermen would split the money, with Abdulrahman and Ahmad bringing their share home. Their father had passed away the year before and their mother was of fragile health and mind, so all funds they earned fishing went toward the welfare of the house they shared with ten siblings. Abdulrahman and Ahmad didn't care much about the money, though. They would have done it for free. Thirty-four years later and thousands of miles west, Abdulrahman Zeitoun was in bed on a Friday morning, slowly leaving the moonless Jableh night, a tattered memory of it caught in a morning dream. He was in his home in New Orleans and beside him he could hear his wife Kathy breathing, her exhalations not unlike the shushing of water against the hull of a wooden boat. Otherwise the house was silent. He knew it was near six o'clock, and the peace would not last. The morning light usually woke the kids once it reached their second-story windows. One of the four would open his or her eyes, and from there the movements were brisk, the house quickly growing loud. With one child awake, it was impossible to keep the other | [
"What approached the Gulf Coast?",
"Where was Katrina approaching?",
"who is dave eggers",
"What state did Zeitounm emigrate to?",
"Where did Abdulrahman Zeitoun grow up?",
"Who emigrated to America and settled in New Orleans?",
"Who grew up in Syria?",
"Who grew up in Syrian fishing town?",
"Where did Zeitoun settle?"
] | [
[
"Katrina"
],
[
"Syrian coast"
],
[
"is the founder and editor of McSweeney's, an independent publishing house based in San Francisco."
],
[
"New Orleans"
],
[
"Jableh, a dusty fishing town on the coast of Syria,"
],
[
"Abdulrahman Zeitoun"
],
[
"Abdulrahman Zeitoun"
],
[
"Abdulrahman Zeitoun"
],
[
"New Orleans"
]
] | Dave Eggers: Abdulrahman Zeitoun grew up in a Syrian fishing town .
He says Zeitoun emigrated to America and settled in New Orleans .
Zeitoun and his family thought little of Katrina as it approached the Gulf Coast . |
Editor's note: This is an excerpt from Jane Velez-Mitchell's new book "iWant" published by HCI Books. Velez-Mitchell anchors "Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell" on HLN nightly at 7 p.m. ET. Jane Velez-Mitchell writes about her journey from addiction and overconsumption to a simpler, honest life. This is the story of my ch . . . ch . . . changes, which took me from insanity to clarity, from egocentricity to altruism, from alcoholism to activism. These changes have marked an evolution in what I want from this life. I am what I want. What I seek to consume, possess, and achieve is a mirror that reflects my lusts and cravings, values and priorities, and moral boundaries or lack thereof. I am happy to say that what I want today is much less toxic and self-centered than what I used to want. It's taken decades of self-examination to peel back the layers and figure out what really makes me happy. And while I'm still searching for my ultimate bliss, I know for sure it's not what I once thought it was. It's not alcohol, cigarettes, money, food, sugar, or status symbols: I've consumed all of those in massive quantities, and they've just made me miserable. Now, I want what can't be tasted, smoked, worn, seen, or counted. It's the opposite of material. As sappy as it might sound, what I want is spiritual. Watch Jane talk about her new book » The shift from material to spiritual is a particular challenge in our culture. We have allowed ourselves to be defined by our consumption, instead of by our ability to move beyond it. To keep consumers consuming, the corporate culture has brainwashed us into thinking we can change ourselves by changing what we buy, which pills we pop, what type of booze we swill, what gated community we join, what kind of golf clubs we swing, and what kind of cancer sticks we dangle between our lips. We've been told that certain consumer choices say a lot about us, that they reveal our character. If we've stepped up to a more prestigious brand, we've changed for the better. Nonsense! We cannot consume our way into personal growth. Yet, millions of us have bought into this cynical concept of faux identity. If you keep buying the "latest and the greatest" but feel like you're stuck in the same place, you're just changing labels, and that's not changing. That's rearranging. Real change occurs on the emotional, psychological, and spiritual levels, not in a shopping mall, a car dealership, online, at the drugstore, at the liquor store, or at the fast-food joint. For too long, we have allowed ourselves to be manipulated by forces whose sole purpose is PROFIT and POWER. We have given advertisers leave to claim that inanimate objects have spiritual qualities. One ad, in perhaps the world's most prestigious newspaper, urges us to buy an expensive diamond by insisting that such a purchase will feed the soul, lift the spirit, and increase our resolve to achieve whatever we wish. Really? How exactly does a diamond feed the soul? It's absurd! This is false advertising. Today, as a culture, we are awash in false advertising. As a society, we've lent legitimacy to these patent lies by literally buying into them. As a result of this unnecessary, self-indulgent consumption, we've gone a long way toward destroying our natural environment with our waste. Perhaps most important, by obsessing about material things, we've cheated ourselves out of the most fundamental aspect of the human experience: real experiences that result in real growth. Unlike diamonds, meaningful experiences can actually feed the soul, resulting in self-development and self-knowledge. Authentic change has allowed me to gradually learn why I'm here experiencing this existence as well as what I am destined to contribute during my lifetime. For me, | [
"On what levels does change occur?",
"Who is the author named in the piece?",
"What did Velez-Mitchell write?",
"How long has she self-examined?",
"WHat is the name of the author writing about addiction?",
"What did Velez-Mitchell say about where change occurs?"
] | [
[
"spiritual"
],
[
"Jane Velez-Mitchell"
],
[
"\"iWant\""
],
[
"decades"
],
[
"Jane Velez-Mitchell"
],
[
"spiritual levels,"
]
] | Jane Velez-Mitchell writes of her journey from addiction to a simpler, honest life .
She says it's taken decades of self-examination to find out what makes her happy .
Velez-Mitchell: "Change occurs on the emotional, psychological, and spiritual levels" |
Editor's note: This is the first in a series of planned collaborations between CNN and the online investigative journalism organization, ProPublica.org. Silver State Bank grew impressively under CEO Tod Little. He says he was forced out for favoring slow growth. LAS VEGAS, Nevada (CNN) -- Sitting back in his leather chair, working as a consultant for a small Las Vegas bank, Tod Little is sure of one thing: Practically anyone, he says, could have made money as a banker in the go-go days of real estate in Nevada. Go-go days that lasted until the fall of 2008. "It didn't take a rocket scientist to run a bank in this town for the past 10 years," Little told CNN. CNN's Special Investigations Unit and the online investigative journalism organization ProPublica.org got a brief look inside the collapse of a regional bank. What the two organizations learned was both old and new: bankers giving themselves large salaries and generous bonuses, at the same time they are lending millions of dollars on what, according to one lawsuit, were essentially parcels of bare dirt with little potential of big income. Silver State Bank had been in business in the Las Vegas suburb of Henderson for 10 years when Little, the bank's founder and CEO left. The bank had grown impressively under his guidance, but Little said his managers wanted more and he was forced out. "They wanted bigger salaries, bigger lifestyle, fancier offices. Whatever. However you want to view that," Little told CNN. One of those managers was new bank president Corey Johnson, who declined to answer any questions. Three other managers declined comment to CNN, as well. Silver State and others loaned money on the promise of Las Vegas' commercial real estate boom with the belief that undeveloped land would be turned into shopping centers, hotels and offices. Records show that land and houses were being "flipped" or resold over and over at huge profits. Bill Martin, a Las Vegas banker who once worked as a regulator for the Comptroller of the Currency in Washington, said what was happening to Silver State was clear. "They were over-advancing on construction, you know, more liberal advances on construction," Martin said. "It all worked last year [and] the year before and the year before. So they just kept doing it." Banking regulators issued repeated so-called "mild" warnings to banks concerned they were amassing large amounts of commercial development loans and lowering lending standards. But Martin says those warnings -- delivered by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation personnel often on a quarterly or semi-annual basis in their field visits to Silver State -- were ignored. One Silver State loan that turned out to be especially poor was to a Las Vegas developer who had been a longtime customer of the bank. According to bank records, a developer named Thomas Jurbala, received almost $100 million from Silver State during a 10-year period. In 2008, Jurbala came calling again and the bank approved a $24 million loan for a piece of ground in North Las Vegas far from the Last Vegas strip, supposedly valued at $48 million. It was a so-called "interest reserve loan" in which the bank not only loaned the principle amount but the interest, as well. Then, according to bank records, it booked the interest as revenue. Regulators say those sorts of deals are not uncommon in construction loans. But this particular piece of land was undeveloped with only a permit to build a casino there one day. It is near the Las Vegas Speedway and in court papers the developer said he hoped a casino could be built. However, the entire project was scrapped before a spade was ever turned, and the land sits empty surrounded by a fence. The project was scrapped because Silver State went under. Doug French, the man who made that loan, reluctantly agreed to sit down with CNN for a taped interview. He is now vice president at a Libertarian think tank in Auburn, Alabama. French told CNN that at "the time" he | [
"what ignored Silver state?",
"what company did he work for",
"what say Bank CEO?",
"What did Silver State ignore?",
"Who was forced out?",
"what banks failed"
] | [
[
"warnings"
],
[
"Silver State Bank"
],
[
"he was forced out for favoring slow growth."
],
[
"warnings to banks concerned they were amassing large amounts of commercial development loans and lowering lending standards."
],
[
"Tod Little."
],
[
"Silver State"
]
] | Bank CEO says he was forced out for favoring slow growth, not being powerhouse .
Former regulator: Silver State ignored repeated warnings from banking regulators .
Silver State one of 27 that failed in 2008; many bankers believe 2009 will be worse . |
Editor's note: This is the first story in an ongoing series of reports CNN is doing about economic survival in this time of financial crisis. Sean, Brooke and Courtney with their parents, Donna and Robert LeBlanc, in a 2008 Christmas photo. (CNN) -- Donna LeBlanc gave her husband, a former restaurant manager, the stark ultimatum: become a pizza delivery man or their family "wouldn't make it." The Lafayette, Louisiana, family of six was struggling with $45,000 of mounting medical debt from Donna LeBlanc's unexpected case of pneumonia and tonsillitis a year earlier. The family savings account had dwindled to $100. "It's embarrassing for my husband to take a job he is overqualified for, and I know he feels ashamed at times," says Donna LeBlanc, a 35-year-old mother with four children. "But this is what we have to do and we're going to make the best out of it." She watched her husband, Rob LeBlanc, 35, load Domino's pizza boxes into their family car and deliver orders until near dawn for $10 an hour. The family first told their story of falling on hard times on iReport.com. Share your economic survivor story with CNN. Until last summer, Rob LeBlanc had worked as a manager at a truck stop restaurant, making $55,000 a year. He lost that job to the falling economy. Rob LeBlanc says he noticed business at the truck stop getting sluggish a year ago. Then the spike in gas prices last summer exacerbated the restaurant's dire circumstances. Many penny-pinching truck drivers avoided his restaurant altogether, he says. Rob LeBlanc filed for unemployment compensation immediately after he lost his job. More than 4.6 million Americans were collecting unemployment benefits as of early January, according to the Labor Department. In Lafayette, a quiet city of about 114,000 tucked away in southern Louisiana, many of the jobs center around servicing the oil and gas industry, but Rob LeBlanc was unwilling to work offshore and away from his family. When he applied for other jobs, he was told he was either under-qualified or had too much experience. After several weeks of searching, he took the only job he could get -- a Domino's pizza delivery man, a job that would cover the family's expenses. "I had to swallow my pride and take whatever I could get," Rob LeBlanc says. "I kept telling myself one of these days something better will come along." He spent nearly five months delivering pizzas at Domino's. He admits he fell into depression during that time. But the family received good news Friday, when a private security company hired Rob LeBlanc to be a security officer. He says the company offers many opportunities to move up to a managerial position. "My first thought was to tell my wife right away," he says. "I could hear the relief in her voice." Taking a job as a pizza man wasn't the only sacrifice he's made for his family -- he's also selling his beloved 2003 Kawasaki motorcycle. Donna LeBlanc earns a few hundred dollars a week exterminating mosquitoes for a bug control company. Before her husband lost his job, she had talked of going back to school to pursue a biology degree at Louisiana State University. The LeBlanc family lives lean in their five-bedroom, three-bathroom house with its $440 a month mortgage. The couple is teaching their children about budgeting and bargaining while relying on coupons and sales. They no longer eat out and no longer have cable TV. For entertainment, they attend free movies at a church. Donna LeBlanc takes pride that they have no credit card debt. Their children Brooke, 9, Christopher, 14, and Courtney, 13, no longer receive allowances. Soon after her father's job loss, Courtney started cleaning houses and baby-sitting and earned enough money to buy a dress for her first school dance -- off the clearance rack. The LeBlancs' oldest child, Sean, 16, who attends high school, | [
"What pizza restaurant did he work for?",
"What did LeBlanc earn at the job he lost?",
"What kind of job did he take?",
"What caused Rob LeBlanc to lose his job?",
"Who lost his $55,000 manager job?"
] | [
[
"Domino's"
],
[
"$55,000"
],
[
"a pizza delivery man"
],
[
"the falling economy."
],
[
"Rob LeBlanc"
]
] | Rob LeBlanc lost his $55,000 manager job because of the troubled economy .
To keep family out of debt, he took a $10 per hour pizza delivery job .
The couple and their four children learned to budget and save .
Mom: The experience has "bought the family closer together" |
Editor's note: This story is based on interrogation reports that form part of the prosecution case in the forthcoming trial of six Belgian citizens charged with participation in a terrorist group. Versions of those documents were obtained by CNN from the defense attorney of one of those suspects. The statement by Bryant Vinas was compiled from an interview he gave Belgian prosecutors in March 2009 in New York and was confirmed by U.S. prosecutors as authentic. The statement by Walid Othmani was given to French investigators and was authenticated by Belgian prosecutors. Al Qaeda recruits say they received training in how to handle rockets, explosives and bombs. (CNN) -- The interrogations of two accused Westerners who say they trained and fought with al Qaeda in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region provide an inside view of the terror group's organizational structures. Arguably, they shed more light on the state of al Qaeda than any material previously released into the public domain. The documents reveal training programs and the protective measures the terrorist organization has taken against increasingly effective U.S. missile strikes. Bryant Vinas -- a U.S. citizen who says he traveled to Pakistan in September 2007 to fight against Americans in Afghanistan -- stated that between March and July 2008 he attended three al Qaeda training courses, which focused on weapons, explosives, and rocket-based or -propelled weaponry. During these classes, attended by 10-20 recruits, Vinas was taught how to handle a large variety of weapons and explosives, some of them of military grade sophistication, according to his account. Read how al Qaeda is now operating Vinas stated he became familiar with seeing, smelling and touching different explosives such as TNT, as well as plastic explosives such as RDX, Semtex, C3 and C4 -- the explosive U.S. authorities have stated was used in al Qaeda's attack on the USS Cole in 2000. Vinas also learned how to make vests for suicide bombers. Vinas stated he was also instructed how to prepare and place fuses, how to test batteries, how to use voltmeters and how to build circuitry for a bomb. Read how Vinas met with al Qaeda leaders According to his account, al Qaeda also offered a wide variety of other courses including electronics, sniper, and poisons training. Instruction in the actual construction of bombs, he stated, was offered to al Qaeda recruits who had become more advanced in their training. Vinas' training during this period was very similar to the training described by members of a French-Belgian group who also spent time in the tribal areas of Pakistan in 2008. Walid Othmani, a French recruit, stated the group were given explosives training and taught how to fire rocket launchers and RPGs. Othmani provided French interrogators with an account of his time in Pakistan after being arrested on his return to Europe. Three other members of his group are now in Belgian custody awaiting trial for "participation in a terrorist group." Belgian prosecutors told CNN Othmani has been charged in France with participation in a criminal conspiracy with the aim of preparing a terrorist act. A Belgian legal document detailing his interrogation report was obtained by CNN. Like Vinas, Othmani said the group had been required to sign forms before their training. Othmani stated his group was required to pledge absolute obedience to their handlers and indicate whether they wanted to become suicide bombers. Othmani provided interesting new details about the training facilities being used by al Qaeda in the tribal areas. His group trained in a small mountain shack, a far cry from the large camps al Qaeda had run in Taliban-era Afghanistan, when it had been able to operate with little danger of being targeted by military strikes. Othmani's account made clear that al Qaeda has had to decentralize its operations in Pakistan in response to the growing effectiveness of U.S. Predator strikes. However the wide number of training courses described by both Vinas and Othmani suggest that al Qaeda has been able to adapt well to the new security environment. By operating a larger number of smaller facilities, al Qaeda would also appear to have increased its resilience to attack. Read how al Qaeda is looking for Western targets While the classrooms are safer from drone attacks | [
"Where did the group train?",
"Some sessions could be geared for what?",
"What does the recruit tell of?",
"What did Al Qaeda recruit tell?",
"who recruit tells of weapons and explosives training courses?",
"What did Al Qaeda offer?"
] | [
[
"trained in a small mountain shack,"
],
[
"how to handle rockets, explosives and bombs."
],
[
"say they received training in how to handle rockets, explosives and bombs."
],
[
"they received training in how to handle rockets, explosives and bombs."
],
[
"Al Qaeda"
],
[
"training in how to handle rockets, explosives and bombs."
]
] | Al Qaeda recruit tells of weapons and explosives training courses .
Group trained in a small mountain shack -- a far cry from large Afghan camps .
Al Qaeda also offered electronics, sniper, and poisons training courses .
Some sessions could be geared for killing in Europe and United States . |
Editor's note: This story is part of an ongoing series of profiles CNN is doing about economic survival in this time of financial crisis. Married couple Lindsay De Vore and Eliot Kohan on their delayed honeymoon to Orlando, Florida. (CNN) -- At age 23 and fresh out of college, Eliot Kohan was diagnosed with an aggressive form of leukemia. He was told he had four months to live. He survived. But the disease left him and his wife, Lindsay De Vore, who live in St. Paul, Minnesota, saddled with thousands of dollars of medical bills on top of their student loans and daily expenses. But their struggles taught them an important lesson in saving money. "When you have medical issues, it's easy to spiral into some sort of depression," the 26-year-old a technology analyst for a private contracting company in St. Paul said. "My goal was to keep moving forward. I wanted to create some stability for our us." All of that hard work saving for the past few years has paid off. The couple is elated to be closing next month on their first home in St. Paul, thanks to the troubled economy. De Vore and Kohan first told their story on CNN's iReport.com. Share your economic survivor story with CNN. The timing couldn't have been better for the couple to purchase a modest three-bedroom, one-story stucco house. De Vore and Kohan locked into a historically low mortgage rate of 4.9 percent this month. The couple selected a foreclosed home, slashing nearly $20,000 off the final price. "We wouldn't have been able to buy this house if the economy weren't the way it is," said De Vore, 25, who works in the financial aid office at a private college in St. Paul. "We were in the perfect position." There were more than 300,000 foreclosure filings reported nationwide in December, marking a 17 percent increase from the previous month and a 41 percent increase from December 2007, according to RealtyTrac, a foreclosure listing service. Meanwhile, unemployment continues to climb to rates unseen in decades. Yet the rocky economy is having a positive effect on some Americans, who are finding it the ideal time to buy a home. Similar to many married couples, Kohan and De Vore envisioned owning a house perhaps two or three years down the road, they say. Soon the couple says they noticed interest rates and home prices dipping so low that they found themselves nabbing a home as soon as they could afford the down payment. But the couple's ability to afford their first home is a story about fiscal responsibility, patience and determination. De Vore and Kohan, who met in their freshman year at St. Paul's Hamline University in 2002, moved into a two-bedroom apartment during their last year of college. For the past five years, they have remained in the same collegiate apartment, furnished with Craigslist finds and family hand-me-downs. "Money was a reason we've stayed here so long," Kohan said last week, bundled up with his wife because their apartment's heater broke. "But at a certain point, we felt like we were growing out of it in more ways than just physically. We wanted a change of pace." The couple says they've always been tight with money, keeping credit card usage limited to emergencies and being picky about what they spend their money on. But they became more "money-conscious" in June 2006, when Kohan was diagnosed with leukemia. He needed a costly stem cell transplant, and the couple did not have enough money. The sickness was evident in his frail face and bruised body. Luckily, when he went on leave from his job, his employers offered to hold his position until he recovered. Back in his hometown of Fergus Falls, a small city in western Minnesota, Kohan's family and friends threw a benefit, raising $12,000 toward the costly medical bills. He soon recovered, but the experience forced him to refocus his goals in | [
"what did they benefit from?",
"Who offered the mortgage?",
"what city is the first home in?",
"what cancer did eliot kohan have?"
] | [
[
"raising $12,000 toward the costly medical bills."
],
[
"De Vore and Kohan"
],
[
"St. Paul,"
],
[
"leukemia."
]
] | The couple will close on their first home next month in St. Paul, Minnesota .
They benefited from low mortgage rates and prices on foreclosed homes .
Eliot Kohan's leukemia diagnosis helped him realize they had to start saving early .
"We worked hard. We didn't cut corners," Lindsay De Vore says . |
Editor's note: Tom Wilkerson is chief executive officer of the United States Naval Institute, a nonprofit professional association which describes itself as an independent forum for examining issues related to the Navy, Marines and Coast Guard. He spent 31 years in the military, rising to major general of Marines and, in his last assignment, serving as commander, Marine Forces Reserve.
Retired Major General Tom Wilkerson says the U.S. should attack the pirates at their bases.
(CNN) -- It is well past time to take a serious look at piracy off the coast of Africa.
Initially, the U.S. ignored the threat, and when public outcry about our seeming indifference became louder, we formed a combined task force of international navies in the Gulf of Aden under command of a U.S. Navy rear admiral to "deter, disrupt and thwart" the pirates.
Today, it is clear that initiative has failed. In fact, this bit of muscle-flexing did so little to intimidate pirates operating out of Somalia that they have actually increased the number of attacks in the last month.
Significant among those attacks, pirates on Wednesday boarded and temporarily held a U.S.-flagged vessel, the container ship Maersk Alabama. The U.S. crew and its captain retook the vessel, but at the price of the captain becoming a hostage to the four pirates in one of the Maersk Alabama's lifeboats. Several hours later a U.S. warship, the Aegis destroyer USS Bainbridge, arrived on scene and, as I write, the standoff with the pirates continues.
What an embarrassing and frustrating event! A bunch of maritime thugs brazenly seized a vessel flying the flag of the nation with the most powerful navy the world has ever known. The fault does not lie with the ships and sailors of Combined Task Force-151. They have been given the proverbial mission impossible -- stop pirate attacks in an area four times the size of Texas with only three U.S. Navy ships and a total of 12 to 15 allied/friendly warships. Not gonna happen!
But embarrassment aside, there is real potential for loss of life and for continued attacks on vessels plying these waters. The issue is simple but difficult -- how do we eliminate the pirate threat?
Strangely, we seem unable to learn from our own history. In 1804 President Thomas Jefferson said "Enough" to paying 20 percent of the U.S. national budget as tribute to Barbary pirates. His response was clear and successful -- build a strong naval task force, equip it with a sizeable contingent of Marines, and send it to attack and defeat the pirates in their lair. The sailors and Marines sent on that mission did just that -- and in the process wrote a stirring page in our nation's early history.
The problem today is that we have refused to take the Jefferson model. We've confined our anti-piracy efforts to the open seas and left the pirates' home bases on land as a sanctuary. Thus, the pirates continue to operate with relative freedom and stealth. We and our allies only respond, never seizing the initiative.
The Jefferson model is a better answer: Take on the pirates where they are, rather than guessing where they will be. In short, attack them at their home bases.
There they are vulnerable. There is where they plan and prepare for raids on vessels. There is where they arrange ransom for held ships and crew members. From these bases, pirates are free to conduct raids without fear of reprisal, let alone interference from organized justice. They are free to venture out to prey upon one of the 33,000 ships that pass near their coast each year, knowing that they can return to the absolute security of their land bases and enjoy their spoils.
It is time to change strategy and take the fight to the pirates, as our military predecessors did with great success more than 200 years ago.
In the 21st century, anti-piracy measures should ideally be the responsibility of local and regional law enforcement. Unfortunately, the non-functioning government of Somalia is unable to bring police or military forces to bear against criminal piracy launched from its own territory.
The predicament has done | [
"what does a pirate do/",
"where does one find pirates?",
"who said to follow example set 200 years ago by Thomas Jefferson?",
"whose strategy has failed to deter piracy?",
"who represent threat to crews and cargo?",
"Which president set a good example for piracy 200 years ago?"
] | [
[
"on Wednesday boarded and temporarily held a U.S.-flagged vessel,"
],
[
"off the coast of Africa."
],
[
"Retired Major General Tom Wilkerson"
],
[
"task force of international navies"
],
[
"pirates."
],
[
"Thomas Jefferson"
]
] | Tom Wilkerson: Pirates based in Somalia represent threat to crews and cargo .
He says U.S. strategy so far has failed to deter piracy .
Wilkerson: We should follow example set 200 years ago by Thomas Jefferson .
He says the U.S. needs to attack the pirates at their bases . |
Editor's note: Uwe Reinhardt is James Madison professor of political economy at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. From 1986 to 1995 he served as a commissioner on the Physician Payment Review Committee, established in 1986 by Congress to advise it on issues related to the payment of physicians. Uwe Reinhardt says health costs are rising at unsustainable pace, gobbling up middle-class incomes. (CNN) -- Watching the angry outbursts at town hall meetings on health reform and the continuing public ambivalence about current efforts to reform our health system almost makes me wish that the reform effort fails. Perhaps Americans need to be taught a basic lesson on the economics of employment-based health insurance before they will feel as smugly secure with it as they do now and before they will stop nitpicking health-reform efforts to death over this or that detail. And America's currently insured middle class will be increasingly desperate if health reform fails. Millions more such families will see their take-home pay shrink. Millions will lose their employment-based insurance, especially in medium and small-sized firms. And millions will find themselves inexorably priced out of health care as we know it. Milliman Inc., an employee benefits consulting firm, publishes annually its Milliman Medical Index on the total health spending by or for a typical American family of four with private health insurance. The index totals the family's out-of-pocket spending for health care plus the contribution employers and employees make to that family's job-related health insurance coverage. The Milliman Medical Index stood at $8,414 in 2001. It had risen to $16,700 by 2009. It is likely to rise to $18,000 by next year. That is more than a doubling of costs in the span of a decade! Since 2005, the index has grown at an average annual compound rate of 8.4 percent. Suppose we make it 8 percent for the coming decade. Then today's $16,700 will have grown to slightly over $36,000 by 2019. Economists are convinced that this $36,000 would come virtually all out of the financial hides of employees, even if the employer pretended to be paying, say, 80 percent of the employment-based health insurance premiums. In the succinct words of the late United Automobile Worker Union leader Douglas Fraser: "Before you start weeping for the auto companies and all they pay for medical insurance, let me tell you how the system works. All company bargainers worth their salt keep their eye on the total labor unit cost, and when they pay an admittedly horrendous amount for health care, that's money that can't be spent for higher [cash] wages or higher pensions or other fringe benefits. So we directly, the union and its members, feel the costs of the health care system." ("A National Health Policy Debate," Dartmouth Medical School Alumni Magazine, Summer 1989: 30) Unfortunately, very few rank-and-file workers appreciate this fact. Aside from their still modest out-of-pocket payments and contributions to employment-based insurance premiums, most employees seem sincerely to believe that the bulk of their family's health care is basically paid for by "the company," which is why so few members of the middle class have ever been much interested in controlling health spending in this country. The price for that indifference will be high. If efforts at better cost containment fail once again, and health care costs rise to $36,000 on average for a typical American family of four under age 65 -- as almost surely it would -- that $36,000 will be borne entirely by the family. That family's disposable income would be much higher if the growth of future health spending was better controlled. And, as noted, many smaller firms will stop altogether providing job-based health insurance. It would be a major problem for families with an income of less than $100,000 a year. In 2007, only about 25 percent of American families had a money income of $100,000 or more. Close to 60 percent had family incomes of less than $75,000. Here it must be remembered that | [
"what does he say about health costs",
"Where do dollars spent on health care come from?",
"where does the money come from",
"Where does Reinhardt say that money spent on health care comes from?",
"Who wants people to consider what will happen if health reform fails?"
] | [
[
"are rising at unsustainable pace, gobbling up middle-class incomes."
],
[
"virtually all out of the financial hides of employees,"
],
[
"virtually all out of the financial hides of employees,"
],
[
"financial hides of employees,"
],
[
"Uwe Reinhardt"
]
] | Uwe Reinhardt: Consider what will happen if health reform fails .
He says health costs have already doubled in a decade .
Reinhardt says dollars spent on health care come out of wages for middle class . |
Editor's note: Virg Bernero is the mayor of Lansing, Michigan and chairman of the Mayors and Municipalities Automotive Coalition (MMAC). He is one of the mayors of U.S. cities appearing on "American Morning" this week. Mayor Virg Bernero says the American worker has been sold out by backers of free trade. (CNN) -- While America reels from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, it is time that we take a deeper look at the root causes of our current predicament. The cold, hard truth is that the unholy alliance between Washington and Wall Street has sold out the American worker and exported our standard of living. Driven by the insatiable greed of Wall Street profiteers and accelerated by the false promise of free trade, our manufacturing base has been chased out of this country and along with it the livelihood of millions of hard-working Americans. It's fashionable these days among the politicians, pundits and so-called experts to claim that free trade is actually good for us. They say it enables us to buy cheaper goods made with cheap foreign labor and this, in turn, raises our standard of living. With all due respect, the free traders need to ask themselves a more fundamental question: how will Americans buy those goods when they don't even have a paycheck that covers their mortgage, much less the college tuition for their children? Watch Mayor Bernero speak to American Morning's John Roberts » More than one pundit has told me I need to take a broader view. As the mayor of one of America's countless manufacturing communities, the only view that matters is the one my citizens see every day: Record job losses, home foreclosures and, thanks to the Wall Street wizards, a credit crunch so severe that it is nearly impossible to finance a new car. This isn't a predicament faced just by Michigan or the Midwest. This is the story of America, told in thousands of desperate households from Connecticut to California. The pundits claim our manufacturing sector is a relic of the old economy. We're told that we just can't compete anymore. We're told that our future is in the service economy, that jobs in health care and finance and knowledge-based industries will recreate the prosperity our nation once knew. The truth is that our industrial heritage is an example of everything that was right with our nation's economy. Good jobs with good benefits created the middle class in this country, and now it is being systematically dismantled under the banner of free trade and globalism. Those who continue to espouse free trade ominously warn that protectionism is the wrong path for our nation; that challenging the holy doctrine of free trade invites a global trade war. Yet we already face rampant protectionism across the globe. Pursuing a free trade agenda in a protectionist world is tantamount to unilateral disarmament. Our trading partners routinely employ taxes, tariffs and subsidies that underwrite their exports and restrict American products from entering their home markets. They use currency manipulation to reduce the relative cost of their goods here in the USA. The fact is we're not competing against other companies; we're competing against other countries. I've toured the Hyundai plant in Asan, Korea. The Koreans are wonderful people, but their technology isn't any better and they're not working any harder than Americans. The difference is that Hyundai doesn't have to pay legacy costs. The Korean government takes care of their retirees. Hyundai doesn't pay health care costs because they have national heath care. If you don't think that's an unfair advantage, you're kidding yourself. Many Americans are unaware that China sold 10 million cars last year -- more than General Motors or Toyota. I can assure you the Chinese government is part and parcel of that success. They're involved in their industry. The Korean government is involved in their industry. If we are going to have any chance to compete globally, our government must get involved in our industry and help us rebuild America's industrial might before it is too late. There's no question that we need | [
"What does Bernero say free trade is?",
"What does Virg Bernero say?",
"what is free trade",
"What must be rebuilt in America?",
"what has happened to free trade",
"what must we rebuild",
"who sold out american works",
"what did he say america must do"
] | [
[
"unholy alliance between Washington and Wall Street"
],
[
"the American worker has been sold out by backers of free trade."
],
[
"They say it enables us to buy cheaper goods made with cheap foreign labor and this, in turn, raises our standard of living."
],
[
"industrial might"
],
[
"sold out by backers of"
],
[
"America's industrial might"
],
[
"backers of free trade."
],
[
"get involved in our industry and help us rebuild"
]
] | Virg Bernero: Washington and Wall Street have sold out the American worker .
He says we must rebuild America's industrial might before it is too late .
Bernero: Free trade in protectionist world is like unilateral disarmament . |
Editor's note: Watch "The Situation Room" at 5 p.m. ET Tuesday for more from CNN's Brooke Baldwin about the dog rescue. Authorities raided a residence in Laurens County, Georgia, and found dogs scarred and malnourished. LAURENS COUNTY, Georgia (CNN) -- It was 8 a.m. October 15. Our CNN crew had been up for a while, waiting. We still didn't have an address. My producer, Susan Brown, and I had several questions: What would the living conditions of these dogs be like? What about the man whose door the Sheriff's Office was about to knock on? He was unaware of the raid that was about to occur in his backyard. Despite all of our planning, unknown variables were at play. First stop was the Sheriff's Office in Laurens County, which is in central Georgia. Starting with information from a tip line, authorities had uncovered clues that led them to believe they needed to intervene and investigate. The plan was this: The sheriff would drive to the property to execute the search warrant for particular objects generally associated with dogfighting, and for the dogs themselves. Watch the dog raid unfold » Expressing concerns about the conditions at this private residence where dogs were suspected of being bred for dogfighting, Laurens County Sheriff Bill Harrell said, "If anything is going wrong, we want to get it stopped." Private investigators with Norred and Associates Inc. will work alongside Harrell and his deputies, leading tactical teams. The teams were made up of veteran investigators donating their time, effort and expertise, along with volunteers of the Dublin-Laurens County Humane Society, who would collect and care for the dogs. All of the team members had experience with animals, particularly pit bulls. Based on information from the tip line, they were starting the day prepared to find as many as 60 dogs chained up in the woods behind one man's house in East Dublin, Georgia. These men and women waited, braced for battle -- only the war they were waging was on animal cruelty. "I want to thank everybody for coming. It's for a good thing. It's for the dogs." Chuck Simmons, a private investigator and former police chief, was mapping out the search area on a dry erase board. He was warning his crew about snakes, water from recent rains and nonsocialized dogs. After loading up crates on several trucks, everyone headed out. With the address of the raid location in hand, our crew joined a convoy of half a dozen cars down several rural roads to our final location. We arrived at a one-story ranch house with several acres of grounds. The sheriff beat us there. He and his deputies were already roping off this man's front yard with yellow crime tape. Rollin Monta "Monty" Loyd, the property owner, appeared furious. As the teams moved into the woods behind his home, our crew was stuck in front and across the street. We could not go on the property to get the shots we wanted, because that would be trespassing. We couldn't see the dogs, but we could hear them. The private investigators, who were part of the raid, videotaped the operation. Half an hour into the raid, reports began to come in. The good news: The dogs were still there; news of the raid hadn't leaked. The bad news: There weren't 60 dogs, as anticipated; there were more. The final count was 97. Most of the dogs were pit bull terriers; many were puppies. They were found cowering in cages or chained. Some older dogs were scarred -- possible signs of fighting, investigators said. Others were malnourished, simply skin and bone. Their conditions were atrocious, according to Terry Wolf of the Dublin-Laurens County Humane Society. "Their chains are too short to reach shelter, those who have shelter. The water that they have seems to be recent rainwater with algae in it, and I've seen no food bowls. Most of them are very timid," Wolf | [
"Who would execute search?",
"Who wants to execute a search warrant?",
"How many dogs were chained?",
"What were the dogs at the private residence bred to do?",
"What were dogs bred for?",
"What was the dog allegedly bred to?",
"What does the Laurens County sheriff plan to execute on the home?",
"How many dogs did authorities find?"
] | [
[
"The sheriff"
],
[
"The sheriff"
],
[
"60"
],
[
"dogfighting,"
],
[
"dogfighting,"
],
[
"dogfighting,"
],
[
"the search warrant"
],
[
"97."
]
] | The plan: Laurens County sheriff would execute search warrant on home .
The claim: dogs at private residence allegedly bred to fight .
Authorities find: Almost 100 dogs chained, some malnourished, others scarred . |
Editor's note: Watch the full interview with Serena Williams on "Your $$$$$" Saturday at 1 p.m. ET and Sunday at 3 p.m. ET on CNN. Serena Williams says she believes she apologized for her actions promptly and completely. NEW YORK (CNN) -- Serena Williams just wants to move on. But the controversy around her obscenity-laced tirade at a line judge at the U.S. Open continues. Williams, 27, said she was "in the moment" and doesn't really remember her now-famous outburst at a line judge who had called a foot fault. It was a 12-second verbal attack that has played over and over for three days. "It was a really tough point in the match and it was really close and got a really tough call that wasn't the correct call, and, you know, things got a little heated and I had a conversation with the line judge that didn't go so well," Williams said. Williams, ranked No. 2 in the world by the Women's Tennis Association, said she does not recall moments of Saturday's incident but believes she apologized for her actions promptly and completely. Watch Williams talk about call » "I couldn't apologize any sooner, and then also I learned from my mistakes ... I was talking to [former Giants defensive end] Michael Strahan earlier today and he said how, when he's out there you're so intense. Obviously, when you get a bad call, it's like 'What's going on?' So when you're in the moment, you are just there. You don't really quite remember exactly what's going on," Williams said. Williams found herself explaining her outburst while promoting her recently published memoir, "On the Line," in which she details growing up the youngest of five sisters, her struggles on the court and off, and her positive messages of inspiration, especially to her younger fans. "Those kids probably just need to know it's great to be a competitor, how passionate someone is, and just making the right decisions at the right time -- realizing that, hey, everyone falls, 'Wow, she's human, she made a bad decision, a bad choice.' " Williams added, "I am not a robot. I have a heart and I bleed." In the aftermath of Saturday's match, tournament officials fined Williams $10,000 for unsportsmanlike conduct and $500 for smashing a racket during the same event. So far, no suspensions have been served, but the United States Tennis Association has said that it has launched an investigation into the incident. | [
"What is Williams promoting?",
"when did the event happen?",
"Who made an obscenity-laced tirade at the U.S. Open?",
"What does Williams play?",
"What do her young fans see?",
"What can her young fans see?"
] | [
[
"her recently published memoir,"
],
[
"Saturday's"
],
[
"Serena Williams"
],
[
"Tennis"
],
[
"positive messages of inspiration,"
],
[
"positive messages of inspiration,"
]
] | Tennis star's obscenity-laced tirade at the U.S. Open stays in the spotlight .
She's fielding questions about it as she promotes new book .
Williams says she was "in the moment" and doesn't remember all that was said .
Her young fans can now see "she's human, she made a bad decision," she says . |
Editor's note: We asked readers to weigh in on CNN.com Live producer Jarrett Bellini's vacation destination, and you chose South Africa. Check back for a wrap-up of his trip. Jarrett Bellini explores South Africa's Cape of Good Hope. CAPE TOWN, South Africa (CNN) -- The very best travel days often happen when good karma and perfect timing collide. And, somehow, on this morning, it also took a bit of tequila. Of course, normally, the latter ingredient tends to be counterintuitive. But not here. I arrived at the reception desk-slash-bar of my hostel, Long Street Backpackers, at 8:40 in the morning to be picked up for a full day of shark-diving. Fun. Productive. Presumably safe. However, it was then that I learned that the seas were deemed too rough, and the tour was cancelled. Bugger. Next thing I know, a glass of tequila is slammed in front of me with a bit of sage bartender advice, "Might as well." Normally, one would simply decline and go about attempting to have a relatively human-like existence on planet Earth. But at this place, there's really no backing out. In fact, unless you like spontaneous hat parties and have a thing for sleeping under tables, it's best not to hang out in the reception room. Fortunately, I'm a rather strong-willed individual, free-thinking and confident. So, naturally, I buckled under the pressure. What can I say? I like these people. They wear funny hats. But as I was sitting there with a few other hostel folks who, apparently, also found it completely fit to begin ruining their day before nine, a Dutch kid came into the room and offhandedly mentioned that he and two Dutch girls had a car and were driving out to the Cape of Good Hope. My ears perked up. "Can I come?" And just like that, I was rescued from the gates of hell. I love you, Holland! The Cape of Good Hope is the southwestern-most point of the African continent, and it's an absolute thing of beauty. Panoramic views paint the sky as waves crash against the rocky shore. Here, the Atlantic and Indian Oceans become one. But not really. A decorative sign in the gift shop boasts: Where Two Oceans Merge. However, the real currents actually come together a little farther east. It's still amazingly beautiful, so, you know ... whatever. And after a full day of hiking and exploring the Cape with my new friends, we arrived back at the hostel to find our other friends right where we left them. Their heads turned as I entered, and one of them yelled out, "Jarrett! Shots!" Might as well. | [
"Who get to choose on his destination?",
"CNN.coms Jarrett Bellini travelled to which country?",
"where did he travel to",
"Who chose the destination and shared travel suggestions?",
"Who is travelling to South African?",
"where was the chance meeting"
] | [
[
"readers"
],
[
"South Africa's Cape of Good Hope."
],
[
"South Africa."
],
[
"Jarrett Bellini"
],
[
"Jarrett Bellini"
],
[
"reception desk-slash-bar of my hostel, Long Street Backpackers,"
]
] | CNN.com's Jarrett Bellini is traveling in South Africa .
Readers chose his destination and can share their travel suggestions .
Bellini will provide updates from South Africa on CNN.com and CNN.com Live . |
Editor's note: We asked readers to weigh in on CNN.com Live producer Jarrett Bellini's vacation destination, and you chose South Africa. Check back for updates on his trip. CNN.com's Jarrett Bellini tours vineyards outside Cape Town, South Africa. CAPE TOWN, South Africa (CNN) -- I'm not a wine drinker. Before today's excursion, in fact, I could only tell you that on the face of the planet there existed three types of wine: red, white and Carlo Rossi. The reds are good with meat. The whites go with fish. And, according to what I learned from my dad, Carlo Rossi goes with a glass of ice. So, exploring South Africa's wine country, just a short drive from Cape Town, seemed like a perfect educational way for me to spend my day. I mean, it was that or go to a museum. Our guide, Jack, was amazingly knowledgeable about the subject, but without being a pretentious jerk. Really, as far as he is concerned, the best wine in the world is whatever wine you enjoy. I didn't ask, but was curious if that applied to Boone's Farm? Throughout the day, we hit four wineries, tasting 23 bottles in all. I know because I kept hash marks on my hand. I'm pretty classy. Now, despite the outstanding info we received from our guide as we sipped and swirled and spat, I can't say that I'm any better at understanding the finer points of wine than I was this morning when I woke up. However, I did manage to get a solid buzz. And that should be worth something. Even without the wine, a visit to South Africa's vineyards is a great addition to a traveler's to-do list. It's not far from the city and the scenery is beautiful. If you need an added incentive, there are even a few cheese farms in the area where you can really crank the whole experience up to 11. I personally thanked one of the goats for his contribution. He didn't seem to care. He also didn't seem physically capable of producing anything that might actually turn into cheese. But I thanked him anyway. What can I say? I'm not a wine drinker. | [
"through whom will the updates be provided",
"what did they choose",
"In which country to Jarrett Bellini traveling",
"On what media will Bellini provide updates of his travels",
"Where does Jarret provide updates about his travels?",
"to where is she travelling",
"Who is Jarrett Bellini?",
"Where did jarret go?",
"What is that readers are able to chose and suggest"
] | [
[
"CNN.com"
],
[
"South Africa."
],
[
"South Africa."
],
[
"CNN.com"
],
[
"CNN.com"
],
[
"Cape Town, South Africa."
],
[
"CNN.com Live producer"
],
[
"South Africa."
],
[
"vacation destination,"
]
] | CNN.com's Jarrett Bellini is traveling in South Africa .
Readers chose his destination and can share their travel suggestions .
Bellini will provide updates from South Africa on CNN.com and CNN.com Live . |
Editor's note: We asked readers to weigh in on CNN.com Live producer Jarrett Bellini's vacation destination, and you chose South Africa. Check back for updates on his trip. Giraffes are a common sight in Kruger National Park. KRUGER NATIONAL PARK, South Africa (CNN) -- I spent two nights sleeping under a full-moon sky, nestled in my trusty hammock at Kruger National Park. Our guides provided us with tents, but I figured I wouldn't have too many opportunities in my life to slumber in the open bush on the African continent. Thus, I rested more or less exposed throughout the night, hoping that a lion wouldn't figure that he wouldn't have too many opportunities in his life to maul a sleeping American tourist in the open bush on the African continent. Needless to say, I survived, and it was magnificent. Visually speaking, I wasn't sure what, exactly, to expect from a South African safari, for my complete mental database of safari images spanned a wide variety of distinct landscapes, and most were cartoonishly obstructed by rich, middle-aged tourists covered head to toe in unnecessary beige safari gear. However, Kruger National Park seemed to fit, quite perfectly, my idea of the African savannah. Arid and brown from the winter dry season, it was a forever-long expanse of low trees and dusty earth, the kind that somehow allows the early sun to reflect that perfect glow of stunning reds and oranges. See the animals » Our guide was a self-proclaimed African bushman named Elson, who seemed to have an amazing one-ness with both the land and the animals. We'd be driving down one of the many nondescript dirt roads at a fairly fast pace, only to have him hit the brakes of our jeep, slam into reverse and point out a leopard 200 yards away. It would take the rest of us a fair bit of time to finally see what he noticed at a mere passing glance. He knew the land, and he knew the animals -- a talent that proved helpful for finding the less common residents in the savannah. The other creatures carelessly came into view as though the roads and cars were just a natural part of their habitat, a mild annoyance at worst. iReport.com: Share your South Africa experiences and suggestions Kruger National Park is roughly the same size as Israel, and here, many animals roamed right along the roadside, gnawing on whatever vegetation remained until the rainy season would flourish the plants anew. Seemingly endless miles of terrain, and there they were just feet away from us. If you didn't know you were in a national park, you might think you were in a zoo. That's how close the animals came to our jeep. Only, here, they weren't in separate enclosures, wandering aimlessly within an artificial terrain. This was truly their home, and we were only passing guests. Giraffes tore away at high branches. Elephants walked fearlessly, one-by-one across the road. Rhinos ... well, the rhinos pretty much just sat there looking stupid. But the zebras frolicked. The hippos splashed in the water. And the baboons stopped at nothing to make me laugh. Of course, the rare lions and leopards pretty much just shaded themselves under distant trees, and the crocs swam silently through the bog. But they were there. And we were there. And it was beautiful. And just as soon as it began, our time in the South African bush was over. A couple of giraffes and elephants met us by the roadside to bid our group farewell as we drove out of the park. The preserve faded silently behind us, and the road ahead paved my way to Swaziland for a short stopover before continuing to the second part of this South African journey. | [
"Jarrett Bellini is traveling in which country?",
"where is travelling jarett bellini",
"Jarrett Bellini reported for which news website?",
"who is jarrett bellini",
"who chose the desitination",
"who is in south africa",
"WHo chose his destination and can share their travel suggestions?"
] | [
[
"South Africa."
],
[
"South Africa."
],
[
"CNN.com"
],
[
"CNN.com Live producer"
],
[
"readers"
],
[
"Jarrett Bellini's"
],
[
"readers"
]
] | CNN.com's Jarrett Bellini is traveling in South Africa .
Readers chose his destination and can share their travel suggestions .
Bellini will provide updates from South Africa on CNN.com and CNN.com Live . |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.