A Virginia mother and father were charged with felony child abuse and neglect after their 4-year-old daughter ran to the home of a neighbor who found the girl’s siblings naked and trapped in a room covered with feces and urine. (March 29)
Continue reading …Tom Brokaw appeared on Tuesday's Today show to offer his analysis of Barack Obama's Libya policy, as well as his empathy for a president who has experienced more “unexpected circumstances” than any Oval Office occupant has seen in his “adult lifetime.” Today co-host Matt Lauer prompted the former NBC Nightly News anchor to tell the audience what he told him right before going on air – that he couldn't “recall a time where a president has faced a confluence of events, like the confluence of events taking place right now.” Brokaw, who did qualify his response noting that FDR did have his share of “challenges,” went on to specify that from the Libya crisis, to the disaster in Japan, to the budget fight he's never seen a president have it so bad, as seen in the following March 29 Today show exchange: MATT LAUER: You mentioned something to me when you first walked in the studio this morning. You said that you haven't, in your memory, you can't recall a time where a president has faced a confluence of events, like the confluence of events taking place right now. Just explain that. TOM BROKAW: Well in my adult lifetime. Certainly FDR did have these challenges. But in my adult lifetime and as a reporter, here you have a president who has two wars underway, is engaged in really what is a third war. The world's third largest economy, Japan, has been gravely wounded by a tsunami and an earthquake – now has a nuclear meltdown. One of the principle members of the President's national security team said to me last night, “I'm more worried about that, than I am about Libya.” And then we have, here at home, a recession that we cannot completely get out of yet. And political paralysis in Washington over the budget. All of that has arrived at, at the Oval Office, at the same time. Now when presidents get elected, that's their job. Is to take on the big, the big assignments, the big challenges. But there have been few that have come as swiftly as all of these have from unexpected circumstances. LAUER: Tom Brokaw, Tom always good to have you here and lend your perspective. I appreciate it. BROKAW: Great, my pleasure Matt.
Continue reading …Tom Brokaw appeared on Tuesday's Today show to offer his analysis of Barack Obama's Libya policy, as well as his empathy for a president who has experienced more “unexpected circumstances” than any Oval Office occupant has seen in his “adult lifetime.” Today co-host Matt Lauer prompted the former NBC Nightly News anchor to tell the audience what he told him right before going on air – that he couldn't “recall a time where a president has faced a confluence of events, like the confluence of events taking place right now.” Brokaw, who did qualify his response noting that FDR did have his share of “challenges,” went on to specify that from the Libya crisis, to the disaster in Japan, to the budget fight he's never seen a president have it so bad, as seen in the following March 29 Today show exchange: MATT LAUER: You mentioned something to me when you first walked in the studio this morning. You said that you haven't, in your memory, you can't recall a time where a president has faced a confluence of events, like the confluence of events taking place right now. Just explain that. TOM BROKAW: Well in my adult lifetime. Certainly FDR did have these challenges. But in my adult lifetime and as a reporter, here you have a president who has two wars underway, is engaged in really what is a third war. The world's third largest economy, Japan, has been gravely wounded by a tsunami and an earthquake – now has a nuclear meltdown. One of the principle members of the President's national security team said to me last night, “I'm more worried about that, than I am about Libya.” And then we have, here at home, a recession that we cannot completely get out of yet. And political paralysis in Washington over the budget. All of that has arrived at, at the Oval Office, at the same time. Now when presidents get elected, that's their job. Is to take on the big, the big assignments, the big challenges. But there have been few that have come as swiftly as all of these have from unexpected circumstances. LAUER: Tom Brokaw, Tom always good to have you here and lend your perspective. I appreciate it. BROKAW: Great, my pleasure Matt.
Continue reading …Even before he found himself thrown in the brig for allegedly handing over classified material to WikiLeaks, Bradley Manning led a troubled life in rural Oklahoma. PBS talks to Manning’s family and friends, including a lengthy interview with father Brian Manning, and discovered that as a child, Manning had few…
Continue reading …Syria’s Cabinet has stepped down, and President Bashar Assad accepted the resignation following a meeting today, according to state-run television. It’s the latest concession by the government aimed at appeasing more than a week of mass protests. Assad is expected to address the nation in the next 24 hours to…
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Donald Trump was interviewed by phone by Greta Van Susteren yesterday and doubled down yet again on his Birtherism : TRUMP: What does this have to do with race? This has absolutely nothing to do with race. The fact is that if you look at what’s happened with respect to this birth certificate issue, he doesn’t have it, he’s spent millions of dollars on lawyers trying to get out of the issue, they give what’s called a certificate of live birth, which doesn’t even have a signature on it — and anybody can get a certificate of live birth — it’s nothing to do with a birth certificate. And they are really reeling! Now, they talk all sorts of things. You don’t have a doctor or a nurse — this is the president of the United States, and no doctor, no nurse, nobody’s come forward saying, ‘I delivered that beautiful baby.’ There’s so many things! Even if you look at the newspaper, the so-called newspaper article in Hawaii — that was days after he was born! So, that wasn’t like when he was born! And if you really think about a couple of things — whoever took a newspaper advertisement — now these were poor people. These aren’t rich people. Whoever took a newspaper advertisement to announce the birth of your baby? Now, I don’t think you know of anybody, and I know of nobody — and I know poor people and rich people, but I’ve never heard of taking a newspaper ad to advertise that you have a baby. All Trump is really doing is proving his stupidity and gullibility — not exactly desirable qualities in a president. At the very least, he’s demonstrating how clueless and out of touch a rich guy he really is. Here’s the newspaper birth announcement in question: enlarge This is from FactCheck.org, which explains that a pro-Hillary/anti-Obama blogger first dug this up from the Honolulu Advertiser’s archives of Sunday, Aug. 31, 1961. This isn’t an advertisement — rather, this is a standard newspaper birth announcement. You see, in the old days, before large corporations took over newspapers and forced them to gradually eviscerate their newsgathering functions, newspapers sent out their cops-and-courts reporters about once a week to collect all the previous week’s birth listings from local hospitals. (This practice has long since fallen by numerous newsroom-budget-cutting waysides.) In other words, the Advertiser announcement was collected by the paper itself and stands as independent corroboration that Obama was born in a Honolulu hospital. The fact that Trump doesn’t know of anyone who has their birth listed in the paper by anything other than an ad indicates how out of touch this rich man really is. And while we’re mentioning the young couple’s poverty … does Trump really believe that both Barack Obama Sr. and a very pregnant Stanley Ann Dunham-Obama were able to make what was in 1961 a long and difficult and expensive journey to Kenya for young Barack’s birth, and then return in time for Barack Sr. to resume his fall classes in Hawaii? As for why no doctor has turned up claiming to have overseen Obama’s birth, well, that would be because he is dead. The doctor in question was Dr. Rodney T. West, a since-deceased obstetrician who told his friends about Obama’s birth at the time in a memorable fashion — memorable enough that they wrote it down, like his friend Barbara Nelson: “I may be the only person left who specifically remembers his birth. His parents are gone, his grandmother is gone, the obstetrician who delivered him is gone,” said Nelson, referring to Dr. Rodney T. West, who died in February at the age of 98. Here’s the story: Nelson was having dinner at the Outrigger Canoe Club on Waikiki Beach with Dr. West, the father of her college friend, Jo-Anne. Making conversation, Nelson turned to Dr. West and said: “‘So, tell me something interesting that happened this week,’” she recalls. His response: “Well, today, Stanley had a baby. Now that’s something to write home about.” The new mother was Stanley (later referred to by her middle name of Ann) Dunham, and the baby was Barack Hussein Obama. “I penned the name on a napkin, and I did write home about it,” said Nelson, knowing that her father, Stanley A. Czurles, director of the Art Education Department at Buffalo State College, would be interested in the “Stanley” connection. She also remembers Dr. West mentioning that the baby’s father was the first black student at the University of Hawaii and how taken he was by the baby’s name. “I remember Dr. West saying ‘Barack Hussein Obama, now that’s a musical name,’” said Nelson, who grew up in Kenmore and went to Hawaii in 1959 to be in Jo-Anne’s wedding party. When Nelson was offered a job as a newspaper reporter and photographer at her friend’s wedding reception, it led to her living in Hawaii for 47 years. She returned to Kenmore in 2006. As for the “Certificate of Live Birth” Obama has presented since 2008, Trump is simply lying when he claims that “anybody can get” one; the state of Hawaii, in fact, only hands them out to people it can certify were born there. (The lack of a signature is utterly insignificant; many — in fact, most — states feature no signatures on their birth certificates.) As we explained to Sean Hannity : 3. This birth certificate is the same birth certificate anyone born in Hawaii would present as proof of citizenship. “Our Certificate of Live Birth is the standard form, which was modeled after national standards that are acceptable by federal agencies and organizations,” Okubo said. “With that form, you can get your passport or your soccer registration or your driver’s license.” 4. The director of Hawaii’s Department of Health confirmed that Obama was born in Honolulu. “There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. “Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. “No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.” The continued dispute that Hannity and Trump seem to think is so significant is so important, in fact, is over the privacy-protected medical records of Obama’s birth — what the Birthers are calling his “long form birth certificate,” but are in fact the private medical records of his birth kept at the hospital, containing large amounts of personal medical information about Obama’s mother, including gynecological data. And as Hawaii officials have explained numerous times, these records are protected by privacy laws, and for perfectly sound reasons: Hawai’i’s disclosure law (Hawai’i Revised Statutes 338-18) states that “it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part on any such record … ” The law further states that the Health Department “shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record.” Those who have “direct and tangible interest” are generally limited to the person named in the record, the spouse, parent, descendant, or personal representative, or by someone who is involved in marital, parental or death litigation involving the named person’s vital record or other legal reason established by a court order, and various official agency or organization representatives, including the state director of health, according to the law. This, ultimately, is where we get into the question of race. As we already asked of Trump: Is a birth certificate acceptable to every known authority for every other citizen of that state somehow unacceptable proof of citizenship for presidential candidates? Or do they believe that every candidate for president should have to release for public review the private medical records, including personal medical information about their late mothers, of their own births? Once again: If the answer to either of these is “no,” then why are they demanding it only of Barack Obama — while simultaneously talking about his five years spent in Indonesia? Because that’s when it becomes obvious that the problem isn’t where Obama was born. It’s his racial heritage. And the utter mendaciousness of the attack — not to mention the fact that Fox is blithely providing trump a platform for this nonsense — reeks of a Swift Boat attack to me. That may be why we’re seeing this.
Continue reading …Let’s explore the myth that psychiatric conditions aren’t as well defined as other medical diseases and psychiatric treatments aren’t supported by as much scientific evidence, and don’t work as well, as other medical treatments. Even my fellow psychiatrists believe this. I’ll take broken limbs and that sort of thing out of the equation and go on from there. Are psychiatric conditions nothing more than labels for normal behaviors? Is a person with social anxiety disorder just a shy person? Is depression just an experience we all have to live with during hard times? What makes a super-punctilious person a case of obsessive-compulsive disorder? It’s true that some psychiatric conditions exist on a continuum with normal reactions, normal states of being. Differentiating them from normal is no different than deciding what level of blood pressure is ‘hypertension,’ how many pounds add up to ‘obesity,’ or how many hours of labor it should take before a baby is born. A condition rises to the level of disease when it handicaps a person, is associated with bad outcomes, and/or can be treated — in psychiatry just as in the rest of medicine. Do psychiatrists just sit around and vote psychiatric diagnoses in or out of the diagnostic manual? This notion assumes that medical diagnoses are handed down on tablets like the Ten Commandments. On the contrary; specialists have to look at the evidence and then make judgments about the criteria for medical diagnoses. The difference between a benign tumor and a cancer is a matter of how many sick cells appear under the microscope. Of course oncologists have to make that decision, and they presumably they have some sort of vote to make it official. Do we know more about what causes other diseases than we do about the causes of psychiatric illnesses? Let’s take juvenile diabetes. We all know that diabetes is caused by the failure of the pancreas to secrete normal amounts of insulin. But what causes that? We say it’s an autoimmune condition — the body attacks its own insulin-secreting cells. Why does that happen? We don’t know. We do know a lot about the causes of psychiatric conditions. Several of them have a strong hereditary component — they run in families. Certain kinds of childhood experiences and later traumas have an effect. Sometimes people with certain genes can become ill only under certain circumstances. Are psychiatric illnesses not real because there are no diagnostic tests for psychiatry? The substrate, the physical location, of thought, mood, and behavior, is the brain. That’s not a part of the body we like to biopsy without an extremely good reason. The consistency of the brain is something like Jell-O — not easy to use an x-ray to see where it’s broken. Using brain scans, however, we now can distinguish between the brain of a person with depression and a person who is not depressed — and make many, many other such observations. Those observations correlate with what we learn by interviewing a patient and observing his or her behaviors. Do psychiatrists want to label everybody as sick so as to fill our practices? There is a shortage of psychiatrists. I don’t know any psychiatrists with time on their hands. Our incomes are at the lower end of the medical totem pole, along with family medicine and pediatrics, which makes it difficult to repay the over $100,000 in student loans we have, on average, but we make a good living. Is there a scientific basis for psychiatric treatment? The New England Journal of Medicine some years ago published a paper demonstrating that far fewer than half the treatments used for cardiovascular diseases are supported by good scientific evidence. Psychiatric treatments work about as well as other medical treatments (1). How can talking to someone cure a real disease? Well, it can. It can also help cancer patients to live longer; it can lessen the pain of diseases and procedures. We see the same changes on brain images whether a person’s depression is relieved by psychotherapy or medication. Do psychiatric medications turn people into ‘zombies,’ or change their personalities? Any medication can cause ill effects in some people, especially if they take too large a dose. Are psychiatric medications ‘brain-altering’? A person who recovers from depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, or obsessive-compulsive disorder can seem to have a changed personality — a healthy one. People treated for schizophrenia can use their brains to make contributions to society and have fulfilling lives because their brains are no longer cluttered with hallucinations and delusions. Prejudice against psychiatry, psychiatric patients, and psychiatrists goes back millennia. It’s hard enough to have a painful and possibly disabling disorder, or to treat one, without suffering from stigma as well. The brain is not only the most complicated organ of the body — it’s one of the most complicated entities in the universe. So psychiatric problems don’t have simple answers. Just like our colleagues in other branches of medicine, no more and no less, there is much more that we don’t know than that we do know. Like our medical colleagues, we’ll keep relieving the suffering of people who are ill, and we’ll keep doing research to understand and treat them ever better. (1) Stotland NL. Presidential address. Am J Psychiatry 2009: 166:1101-1104
Continue reading …More New York Times' s crusading against state spending cuts in Tuesday's edition. Reporter Michael Cooper’s “ Michigan, With Persistent Unemployment, Cuts Jobless Benefit by Six Weeks ” raised quite a grand commotion out of a small cut in Michigan’s unemployment benefit plan: The state will now pay only 20 weeks of benefits to the jobless, instead of the standard 26 weeks (and even those come before federal unemployment benefits kick in, which now run for up to 99 weeks). The story’s text box implied bad faith on the part of new Republican Gov. Rick Snyder. “ A surprise inside a bill whose purpose was to extend federal benefits .” Michigan, whose unemployment rate has topped 10 percent longer than that of any other state, is about to set another record: its new Republican governor, Rick Snyder, signed a law Monday that will lead the state to pay fewer weeks of unemployment benefits next year than any other state. Democrats and advocates for the unemployed expressed outrage that such a hard-hit state will become the most miserly when it comes to how long it pays benefits to those who have lost their jobs. All states currently pay 26 weeks of unemployment benefits, before extended benefits paid by the federal government kick in. Michigan’s new law means that starting next year, when the federal benefits are now set to end, the state will stop paying benefits to the jobless after just 20 weeks . The shape of future extensions is unclear. Cooper overlooked an argument: Perhaps one factor in why unemployment rates are so high is that unemployment benefits are so generous. The idea that unemployment benefits can reduce workers's incentive to work has been advanced by such right-wingers as Paul Krugman , economist turned left-wing columnist for the Times (though when Republicans made the same argument he called them crazy). Cooper implied ulterior motives on the part of “business groups,” and later threw in an anti-business aside: Advocates for the unemployed called it a bad trade. “We have a temporary change to help some jobless workers that is imposing an indefinite or permanent cost on future jobless workers,” said Rick McHugh, a staff lawyer for the National Employment Law Project, which opposed the law. “And that does seem doubly unfair when the temporary help for current jobless workers is almost totally paid for by the federal government.” But business groups saw the state’s need to change its unemployment law as an opportunity to make the cuts to benefits that they have long sought. …. More than half the states together owe the federal government more than $46 billion that they borrowed to pay for their unemployment programs during the downturn. Many states had salted away too little money in their unemployment trust funds during good times — often because they cut taxes on employers — and saw their funds depleted by the length and depth of the recession, and the slow pace at which businesses have begun hiring again. Now some other states are thinking about reducing unemployment benefits. Cooper used still more loaded language, accusing a similar bill in Florida of threatening to “undo a consensus” (so what?) of generous state unemployment benefits, which are in addition to the 99 possible weeks of federal unemployment benefits. In Florida, where the unemployment rate hovers at 11.5 percent, even higher than Michigan’s current rate of 10.4 percent, lawmakers are zeroing in on a similar bill. The Florida House also approved a bill this month to reduce the number of weeks unemployed workers could receive benefits to 20 weeks, from 26, and make it easier for businesses to deny benefits to applicants. A Senate bill takes a less stringent approach and does not cut the number of weeks workers can receive benefits. (It is unclear how the differences will be resolved.) Doing so would undo a consensus that emerged in the years after World War II that states should pay up to 26 weeks of unemployment benefits. And it would come as the average length of unemployment has risen .
Continue reading …The world-famous actor was also the world’s biggest-selling celebrity perfumer – and she had a genuine flair for the business Hollywood icon Elizabeth Taylor’s obituaries may have praised her acting and charity work, but it seems they left out one thing – the “most beautiful woman in the world” was also the world’s biggest-selling celebrity perfumer . The actor left an estimated $600m – $1bn fortune, largely the yield of her scent empire, it was revealed yesterday. In 1987 Taylor invented the “celebrity perfume” franchise with her first fragrance, Passion, and released her last, Violet Eyes, in 2010. But while today such merchandise is often the result of a popstar turning up to a photoshoot and pointing at a bottle, Taylor’s had a genuine flair. A shrewd businesswoman, she teamed up with the respected Elizabeth Arden company and supervised the entire collection of 11 perfumes, even when her health failed. Unusually, she also always wore her own creation, the top-selling White Diamonds (actor Richard Harris was allegedly kicked out of Taylor’s mansion for drinking it), and never took her side job for granted – perhaps because perfumery gave her a fatter paycheck than Hollywood ever did. But how could an actor who had seldom worked in her last decades, and whose beauty had long since been lost to illness and obesity, continue to shift more perfume than Britney and JLo at the peak of their powers? It’s simple – Taylor represented true glamour at a time when stars are divided between the po-faced elite and the downmarket oversharers. Nobody wants to smell of soy lattes, yoga mats and macrobiotic baby food. Much less beef curries, Prozac and tears. Taylor instead offered a heady world where men were alpha and women were unapologetically, lethally, feminine. Yet Richard Burton’s observation that Taylor was “too bloody much” could just as accurately have been levelled at her potent scents. They pulled no punches and made no allowances for modernity, even while insipid unisex fragrances dominated the market in the 90s. Elizabeth Arden has announced that it has no plans to retire the range in the wake of Taylor’s death. Rightly so. Taylor’s perfumes still offer us the star quality we crave, and represent a woman whose memory will linger long after they fade. Elizabeth Taylor Sali Hughes guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …