In a softball interview with New York Senator Chuck Schumer on NBC's Today on Wednesday, co-host Matt Lauer recited Democratic talking points on the budget fight perfectly: “[For] the Tea Party and others on the far right….does it seem to you, Senator, that this is less about a fiscal debate or an economic policy debate and they are making an ideological stand here?” [ Audio available here ] A visibly pleased Schumer excitedly agreed: “That's exactly right, Matt. You've hit the nail on the head…. they have an ideology just to get rid of all government ….the Tea Party doesn't represent all of America. In fact, their popularity is rapidly declining and that ought to be a message to Speaker Boehner.” In his question to Schumer, Lauer was dismayed by conservative calls for “no funding for Planned Parenthood, no funding for climate control, public broadcasting.” [Video added below]
Continue reading …SWAT Team Evicts Granny From Her House Because Bank Refused To Take Payments After Her Husband’s Death
April 6, 2011 No CommentWhen enough people see things like this with their own eyes, I suppose that’s when we’ll have a democratic revolution in this country: Last week, a SWAT team forcefully evicted Rochester resident Catherine Lennon from her New York home, arresting at least six protestors and neighbors in the process , according to MSNBC.com. The federal debate over the foreclosure process has heated up in recent weeks, with the Obama administration backtracking on an earlier, more dramatic proposition that would have required mortgage lenders to reduce monthly payments for millions of homeowners like Lennon. Lennon, a grandmother living with her children and grandchildren, says she was willing to make mortgage payments to government-sponsored mortgage insurance firm Fannie Mae, but that the bank refused to accept her checks because the property was not in her name. Her husband — the official homeowner — died in 2008 without writing a will, leading to a legal battle between Lennon and her bank. Take Back The Land-Rochester, a group dedicated to defending community housing and now supporting Lennon, staged an eviction in the weeks leading up to the altercation. The day of the confrontation, police arrested protestors for attempting to block entrance to the house. “This is not America,” a neighbor told a local television crew. “This is not what America should be.” Bank of America released a statement in response to the controversy saying Lennon had fallen behind on her payments, becoming delinquent. In turn, TBLT’s Ryan Acuff said that while Lennon was delinquent on payments to Countrywide and Bank of America, she had “not only met with the Housing Council, the local HUD approved mortgage counselors, but attempted to engage with Bank of America.” “[T]he fact remains,” Acuff continued, “that Bank of America refused her attempts to pay and efforts to negotiate modifications to her mortgage for the reasons stated above.” Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) has reached out to Fannie Mae to re-review Lennon’s case. After speaking with high-level representatives, Lennon says she is “very positive” about the prospect of her house being returned to her. The difference is, during the Great Depression, hundreds of people would have shown up to stop this, not fewer than a dozen.
Continue reading …SWAT Team Evicts Granny From Her House Because Bank Refused To Take Payments After Her Husband’s Death
April 6, 2011 No CommentWhen enough people see things like this with their own eyes, I suppose that’s when we’ll have a democratic revolution in this country: Last week, a SWAT team forcefully evicted Rochester resident Catherine Lennon from her New York home, arresting at least six protestors and neighbors in the process , according to MSNBC.com. The federal debate over the foreclosure process has heated up in recent weeks, with the Obama administration backtracking on an earlier, more dramatic proposition that would have required mortgage lenders to reduce monthly payments for millions of homeowners like Lennon. Lennon, a grandmother living with her children and grandchildren, says she was willing to make mortgage payments to government-sponsored mortgage insurance firm Fannie Mae, but that the bank refused to accept her checks because the property was not in her name. Her husband — the official homeowner — died in 2008 without writing a will, leading to a legal battle between Lennon and her bank. Take Back The Land-Rochester, a group dedicated to defending community housing and now supporting Lennon, staged an eviction in the weeks leading up to the altercation. The day of the confrontation, police arrested protestors for attempting to block entrance to the house. “This is not America,” a neighbor told a local television crew. “This is not what America should be.” Bank of America released a statement in response to the controversy saying Lennon had fallen behind on her payments, becoming delinquent. In turn, TBLT’s Ryan Acuff said that while Lennon was delinquent on payments to Countrywide and Bank of America, she had “not only met with the Housing Council, the local HUD approved mortgage counselors, but attempted to engage with Bank of America.” “[T]he fact remains,” Acuff continued, “that Bank of America refused her attempts to pay and efforts to negotiate modifications to her mortgage for the reasons stated above.” Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) has reached out to Fannie Mae to re-review Lennon’s case. After speaking with high-level representatives, Lennon says she is “very positive” about the prospect of her house being returned to her. The difference is, during the Great Depression, hundreds of people would have shown up to stop this, not fewer than a dozen.
Continue reading …SWAT Team Evicts Granny From Her House Because Bank Refused To Take Payments After Her Husband’s Death
April 6, 2011 No CommentWhen enough people see things like this with their own eyes, I suppose that’s when we’ll have a democratic revolution in this country: Last week, a SWAT team forcefully evicted Rochester resident Catherine Lennon from her New York home, arresting at least six protestors and neighbors in the process , according to MSNBC.com. The federal debate over the foreclosure process has heated up in recent weeks, with the Obama administration backtracking on an earlier, more dramatic proposition that would have required mortgage lenders to reduce monthly payments for millions of homeowners like Lennon. Lennon, a grandmother living with her children and grandchildren, says she was willing to make mortgage payments to government-sponsored mortgage insurance firm Fannie Mae, but that the bank refused to accept her checks because the property was not in her name. Her husband — the official homeowner — died in 2008 without writing a will, leading to a legal battle between Lennon and her bank. Take Back The Land-Rochester, a group dedicated to defending community housing and now supporting Lennon, staged an eviction in the weeks leading up to the altercation. The day of the confrontation, police arrested protestors for attempting to block entrance to the house. “This is not America,” a neighbor told a local television crew. “This is not what America should be.” Bank of America released a statement in response to the controversy saying Lennon had fallen behind on her payments, becoming delinquent. In turn, TBLT’s Ryan Acuff said that while Lennon was delinquent on payments to Countrywide and Bank of America, she had “not only met with the Housing Council, the local HUD approved mortgage counselors, but attempted to engage with Bank of America.” “[T]he fact remains,” Acuff continued, “that Bank of America refused her attempts to pay and efforts to negotiate modifications to her mortgage for the reasons stated above.” Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) has reached out to Fannie Mae to re-review Lennon’s case. After speaking with high-level representatives, Lennon says she is “very positive” about the prospect of her house being returned to her. The difference is, during the Great Depression, hundreds of people would have shown up to stop this, not fewer than a dozen.
Continue reading …SWAT Team Evicts Granny From Her House Because Bank Refused To Take Payments After Her Husband’s Death
April 6, 2011 No CommentWhen enough people see things like this with their own eyes, I suppose that’s when we’ll have a democratic revolution in this country: Last week, a SWAT team forcefully evicted Rochester resident Catherine Lennon from her New York home, arresting at least six protestors and neighbors in the process , according to MSNBC.com. The federal debate over the foreclosure process has heated up in recent weeks, with the Obama administration backtracking on an earlier, more dramatic proposition that would have required mortgage lenders to reduce monthly payments for millions of homeowners like Lennon. Lennon, a grandmother living with her children and grandchildren, says she was willing to make mortgage payments to government-sponsored mortgage insurance firm Fannie Mae, but that the bank refused to accept her checks because the property was not in her name. Her husband — the official homeowner — died in 2008 without writing a will, leading to a legal battle between Lennon and her bank. Take Back The Land-Rochester, a group dedicated to defending community housing and now supporting Lennon, staged an eviction in the weeks leading up to the altercation. The day of the confrontation, police arrested protestors for attempting to block entrance to the house. “This is not America,” a neighbor told a local television crew. “This is not what America should be.” Bank of America released a statement in response to the controversy saying Lennon had fallen behind on her payments, becoming delinquent. In turn, TBLT’s Ryan Acuff said that while Lennon was delinquent on payments to Countrywide and Bank of America, she had “not only met with the Housing Council, the local HUD approved mortgage counselors, but attempted to engage with Bank of America.” “[T]he fact remains,” Acuff continued, “that Bank of America refused her attempts to pay and efforts to negotiate modifications to her mortgage for the reasons stated above.” Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) has reached out to Fannie Mae to re-review Lennon’s case. After speaking with high-level representatives, Lennon says she is “very positive” about the prospect of her house being returned to her. The difference is, during the Great Depression, hundreds of people would have shown up to stop this, not fewer than a dozen.
Continue reading …WaPo TV Reviewer Grouses About New Show Chronicling ‘Selfish’ Coupon-clipping Moms
April 6, 2011 No CommentOn the surface, TLC's “Extreme Couponing” — premiering tonight at 9:30 p.m. EDT — may look to you and me like an innocently voyeuristic look into the lives of fellow Americans who take penny-pinching to the extreme, saving at times hundreds of dollars on grocery store runs. But that's why we're not TV critics for a liberal metropolitan newspaper. Washington Post's Hank Stuever worked in a healthy share of left-wing grousing about capitalism and insisted that the coupon-clippers highlighted by the program were insufferably selfish souls. “Little piggies go to market, and clean up on Aisle 5,” the article's online headline snarked. “Repulsion may or may not be the show’s ultimate intent, but it stirs up unsettling and complex thoughts, not only about the sins of gluttony and pride, but also about the production and consumption of cheap, processed food,” Stuever insisted. “There’s also something to snack on for those of us fretting over an ever-widening wealth gap amid dwindling resources.” But who are these gluttonous people? Some of them are moms of large families: Each segment of “Extreme Couponing” culminates in a dazzling and literal money shot. Voila! A mother of seven in Spring, Tex., uses her coupons to reduce a bill of $555 to $6. How, exactly, is it gluttonous to provide for a large family in a way that saves a boatload of money? Stuever never squares that with his central thesis that so-called extreme couponers are incredibly selfish individuals: [M]y real beef, which I’m selling for half-off today, is that the subjects of “Extreme Couponing” are never seen stopping at a food bank on the way home to share some of their largess — except once, in the original “Extreme Couponing” special.
Continue reading …WaPo TV Reviewer Grouses About New Show Chronicling ‘Selfish’ Coupon-clipping Moms
April 6, 2011 No CommentOn the surface, TLC's “Extreme Couponing” — premiering tonight at 9:30 p.m. EDT — may look to you and me like an innocently voyeuristic look into the lives of fellow Americans who take penny-pinching to the extreme, saving at times hundreds of dollars on grocery store runs. But that's why we're not TV critics for a liberal metropolitan newspaper. Washington Post's Hank Stuever worked in a healthy share of left-wing grousing about capitalism and insisted that the coupon-clippers highlighted by the program were insufferably selfish souls. “Little piggies go to market, and clean up on Aisle 5,” the article's online headline snarked. “Repulsion may or may not be the show’s ultimate intent, but it stirs up unsettling and complex thoughts, not only about the sins of gluttony and pride, but also about the production and consumption of cheap, processed food,” Stuever insisted. “There’s also something to snack on for those of us fretting over an ever-widening wealth gap amid dwindling resources.” But who are these gluttonous people? Some of them are moms of large families: Each segment of “Extreme Couponing” culminates in a dazzling and literal money shot. Voila! A mother of seven in Spring, Tex., uses her coupons to reduce a bill of $555 to $6. How, exactly, is it gluttonous to provide for a large family in a way that saves a boatload of money? Stuever never squares that with his central thesis that so-called extreme couponers are incredibly selfish individuals: [M]y real beef, which I’m selling for half-off today, is that the subjects of “Extreme Couponing” are never seen stopping at a food bank on the way home to share some of their largess — except once, in the original “Extreme Couponing” special.
Continue reading …WaPo TV Reviewer Grouses About New Show Chronicling ‘Selfish’ Coupon-clipping Moms
April 6, 2011 No CommentOn the surface, TLC's “Extreme Couponing” — premiering tonight at 9:30 p.m. EDT — may look to you and me like an innocently voyeuristic look into the lives of fellow Americans who take penny-pinching to the extreme, saving at times hundreds of dollars on grocery store runs. But that's why we're not TV critics for a liberal metropolitan newspaper. Washington Post's Hank Stuever worked in a healthy share of left-wing grousing about capitalism and insisted that the coupon-clippers highlighted by the program were insufferably selfish souls. “Little piggies go to market, and clean up on Aisle 5,” the article's online headline snarked. “Repulsion may or may not be the show’s ultimate intent, but it stirs up unsettling and complex thoughts, not only about the sins of gluttony and pride, but also about the production and consumption of cheap, processed food,” Stuever insisted. “There’s also something to snack on for those of us fretting over an ever-widening wealth gap amid dwindling resources.” But who are these gluttonous people? Some of them are moms of large families: Each segment of “Extreme Couponing” culminates in a dazzling and literal money shot. Voila! A mother of seven in Spring, Tex., uses her coupons to reduce a bill of $555 to $6. How, exactly, is it gluttonous to provide for a large family in a way that saves a boatload of money? Stuever never squares that with his central thesis that so-called extreme couponers are incredibly selfish individuals: [M]y real beef, which I’m selling for half-off today, is that the subjects of “Extreme Couponing” are never seen stopping at a food bank on the way home to share some of their largess — except once, in the original “Extreme Couponing” special.
Continue reading …
The dog-poo crusader would be wise to stay anonymous – after helping a newspaper campaign on the issue, I should know A shadowy figure in Lincoln, known locally as Pooperman , is targeting inconsiderate persons who allow their dogs to foul footpaths. Pooperman leaves notes such as this on the offending piles: “Don’t leave it. You might be the one who steps in it the next time you walk this way.” The local council’s environmental enforcement officer suggests that, rather than leaving notes, concerned Lincoln citizens should “observe dog owners to make sure they clean up after their pets, perhaps asking them to remove the mess if they try to leave it”. However, although Pooperman’s sentiments are eminently reasonable and, indeed, very politely expressed, he might do well to preserve his anonymity. Demanding face to face that an offender, pick up poo takes courage, and whether the owner is a tough with a terrier or a pensioner with a poodle, they are likely to be vocal in their defence of their dog’s right to go where it likes. The passions raised by poo run high, as I well know. When I was a lowly editorial assistant, the national paper I worked on decided to run an anti-dog-poo campaign and a large part of the co-ordination fell to me. Aspiring young journalists are eager for bylines on any topic, but there are more elegant subjects in which to be typecast. There is, of course, a serious side to dog fouling. The faeces of unwormed dogs can spread some very nasty diseases and all dog poo is deeply unpleasant stuff. But I was unprepared for the depth of feeling I encountered. I received abusive phone calls from both factions: the ones that felt we weren’t doing enough (were we meant to come and pick it up ourselves?) and those who felt our snazzy laminated campaign posters, which featured a dog and a steaming heap in a red circle, were offensive in themselves. The debate raged across our letters page week after week; MPs weighed in, local radio stations got involved and an entire class of schoolchildren each prepared individual projects around the campaign and proudly sent them in. I opened the post with caution in those days, but luckily no one felt sufficiently moved to send us a sample, though a suspicious-looking packet of dried sphagnum moss caused a false alarm that sent my colleagues fleeing. The moss had been sent by an inventive reader who felt that dog owners could carry bags of sphagnum with them to cover their dogs’ leavings. Ah, yes, the inventors. A surprising number of people had spent a surprising amount of time trying to address this knotty problem, presumably feeling that simply picking up the stuff and binning it was just too simple. For months after the campaign ended, eager beavers with too much time on their hands kept ringing me to describe in loving detail their long-handled grabbers, freeze-dry canisters, special pong-proof carry containers and so on. In the end, I had to get tough. “The campaign has ended,” I sternly told one. “We cannot possibly feature your poo bag design in this newspaper, however original it may be.” “I thought perhaps you were personally passionate about the subject,” replied the forlorn inventor. That would be a no. And I am, in fact, less passionate about it today than ever. I now live in the countryside, which is crammed with poo: cow poo, sheep poo, horse poo, bird poo. Sticking notes on all the poo that currently surrounds me would be a lifetime job for Pooperman and no one would read them anyway. My happy dog, like all his country neighbours, has untrodden acres in which he can poo where he likes – without bothering anyone. Animals Hygiene Hester Lacey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
As the use of pro-anorexia websites increases, some vulnerable women are finding themselves the targets of grooming by the porn industry. Nicola Hobbs reports ‘As you know, beauty has one name: being thin. Our models are underweight, skinny, thin, bony – just like you. We want you. Regardless of the costs, we want you to join our agency. Let’s face facts, on anorexic porn websites, men are masturbating watching your pictures. You are a superstar of starvation and if you were selling and marketing your frame you would be more wealthy than most of us because men would pay any price for watching those pictures.” This was the email Sasha McDonald was sent last year from a pornography agency specialising in anorexic images. McDonald was 15 when she was first diagnosed with anorexia nervosa. “I was very lonely and felt worthless,” she says. “I retreated into an online pro-anorexic [pro-ana] community and shared everything. I didn’t realise the danger I was putting myself under.” Despite receiving professional support, McDonald found herself becoming more entrenched in the online anorexic world. She wrote a blog of her battle with anorexia, recording the small amounts she ate and publishing photographs of herself in her underwear as evidence of her emaciated body. “I was dangerously underweight and so ill that I felt proud of the comments from other website users saying how beautiful and skinny my body was. I relied on the judgments of the friends I had made on pro-anorexia websites because I assumed they were people like me – scared, depressed, exhausted and battling an illness that torments you continuously,” says McDonald. But McDonald was horrified when a fellow member of one pro-anorexia website emailed her requesting that she join a pornography agency. “My anorexic friend was actually a 46-year-old male with a fetish for skinny women,” she says. “He had pretended to be a young girl and persuaded me to share sexually explicit pictures and tried to convince me to join his modelling agency for the super-skinny.” McDonald also found that emaciated photographs she had published of herself on her blog had been posted on anorexia porn forums for users with fetishes about super-skinny women to admire. “Beautiful girl – much prettier than all those meat mountains. Bones and ribs must be very visible. If their BMI [body mass index] is above 15, they are not attractive,” says one forum user commenting on a skeletal photograph of McDonald. McDonald, now 19 and training to be a doctor, had recovered sufficiently to avoid being drawn into the world of anorexia porn, but others with eating disorders have not been so fortunate. Anorexia porn is growing in popularity and the prevalence of pro-anorexia websites is making those with eating disorders easy targets for grooming. Vulnerable users of pro-anorexia websites are increasingly being courted for their emaciated frames by pornography agencies specialising in images of extremely thin women. Optenet, an international IT security company, reported that between 2006 and 2008 the number of pro-ana websites globally increased 470% to more than 1,500 and social networking and blogging has seen a surge in online pro-anorexia content. One anorexia pornography agency admits to paying owners of pro-anorexia websites for each person who joins it after being contacted via the sites. “I pay the owner of this pro-ana community a donation for every model I found here,” confesses a “skinny scout” in the email to McDonald. The porn agencies’ websites have two roles. They sign up new clients and advertise images, films and escort-type services, such as body worshipping, fantasy role play and private photography sessions, for those “hooked on skinnies”. Some of this porn is free to access while other “professional” agencies charge a monthly membership fee for regularly updated sexually explicit images and videos of emaciated women. Agencies also host anorexia porn on YouTube and advertise on anorexia pornography forums. These forums often offer advice on how to groom users of pro-anorexia websites into taking and sharing explicit photographs of themselves. Ronny Bi, originally from China, now living in Canada, says she was held captive and forced into anorexia pornography after being tricked by someone she had been in contact with online. “He forced me to pose for photos both in revealing clothing and nude, it was sickening. I was too weak to fight back because of how thin I was. I was completely powerless.” Bi, who was held captive with another person with an eating disorder, was starved by her captor in order to make her as emaciated and marketable as possible. “Sadly, I was not the only woman he did this to,” she says. “Eventually, both of us managed to escape but my friend died shortly afterwards from heart failure due to her anorexia. It was shortly after this that I found out he had posted all of the photos he took of us online and they spread to all the pro-ana and anorexia pornography websites like wildfire.” Against her will All the explicit photographs of Bi were taken against her will, she says, and she has fought to get them removed from the internet in order to protect other vulnerable women. She believes that the pornography has put her life at risk and, after having a number of heart attacks, multiple organ failure and other medical conditions, is terminally ill because of her eating disorder. “The thinner the person is, the more likely they are to be contacted by a fetishist. I never wanted any of this attention and those photos have done a good part in destroying my life and keeping me severely anorexic,” says Bi. “I wish I could force these men to live in my head for a week so they could experience the hell I have to live in every single day, and then ask them if they still find anorexia beautiful.” Anorexia nervosa has the highest mortality rate of all psychiatric illnesses, but in the UK, those with the mental illness have no protection from online exploitation. The legality of anorexia porn means that indecent images of vulnerable adults can be freely published. “It is government policy that controls a balance between freedom of expression and protection of the public on published material which should be proportionate to the potential harm that might be caused,” says Justin Millar, a member of the Home Office’s computer crime team. “The general test of obscenity is flexible, reflecting society’s attitude towards pornographic material. But even if material is not illegal, it is open to anyone concerned about the content of pornography websites to ask the relevant internet service provider to remove them.” Bi is still contacted to pose for sexually explicit pictures despite being bedridden and requiring 24-hour care. “Because of how well known I am [online], I get contacted quite often by anorexic fetishists,” she says. “I am constantly dealing with perverted stalkers and harassment. Some send me sexually explicit emails, telling me all the things they want to do to me and others offer to pay me in exchange for nude photos.” Before she became too ill, Bi ran Eating Disorder Refuge, an online support community. She has developed a “shame list” of nearly 50 people and websites to look out for to try to prevent vulnerable people with eating disorders from enduring what she went through. She believes that the only way to protect others is to make it illegal to publish online revealing or sexually explicit photographs of people with a BMI of below 17.5, the diagnostic criteria for anorexia. “There should be a worldwide law in place to protect those with anorexia from those horrible, disgusting perverts,” says Bi. “Those with anorexia fetishes will target women who are so far into their illness that they are easily manipulated and extremely vulnerable. It may be that the anorexics targeted are incapable of making a proper decision on being photographed and therefore their permission to be photographed in this manner should be void.” Experts agree that much more could be done. “Criminals and predators target vulnerable people online; they simply have no conscience about what they do. Vulnerable people are often not able to make good decisions for themselves and they need others to help protect them,” says Jennifer Perry, an e-crime consultant. “If the UK set the precedent of removing a set of offensive material it would encourage different countries to also take action. Currently, the most effective way to address this problem is education and discussing how people are being approached and exploited.” Many feel that much of the onus should fall on internet service providers. “Responsible internet service providers would remove the most hardcore and toxic material,” says Susan Ringwood, chief executive of beat, a UK eating disorder charity . “Pro-ana sites don’t hold out any hope at all, they can trap people in a negative cycle of despair.” Lucky escape Samira Jay feels she had a lucky escape. Although she believes that pro-anorexia websites helped her to realise that she had a problem, Jay admits that she would never have published explicit photographs of herself if she had known that they were being used for sexual gratification. Now 19, and studying in Newcastle, she developed anorexia at 11. “It sickens me to the stomach knowing that my photographs could have been used for porn,” she says. “At the time, I was lonely and the pro-anorexia community gave me a purpose in life. Most users posted photographs of their naked bodies because when you have anorexia, the eating disorder is the only thing you feel you are good at, so it gives you a sense of achievement.” Jay acknowledges that she is not fully recovered, but she now speaks out about her historic use of pro-anorexia websites to make vulnerable people aware of the dangers of using them. “I knew my photographs might be used as ‘thinspiration’ by other eating disorder sufferers but the thought that they were being used for sexual enjoyment never even crossed my mind,” she says. Some names have been changed. Anorexia Mental health Health guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …