Soxy

Linky-link. Pelosi seeks global warming committee By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer Thu Jan 18, 6:52 PM ET WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) sought to create a special committee Thursday in an effort to jump-start long-delayed government efforts to deal with global warming and produce a bill by Independence Day. Pelosi, D-Calif., said the committee would hold hearings and recommend legislation on how to reduce greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide generated by fossil fuels, that most scientists blame for a gradual warming of the earth's climate. "I promise to do everything in my power to achieve energy independence ... and to stop global warming," Pelosi said. Pelosi set a goal of the Fourth of July for finishing a global warming bill that would "truly declare our energy independence." The committee will be led by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who shares Pelosi's goals, said a Democratic leadership aide, speaking on condition of anonymity because Pelosi had yet to announce her choice. Actual bill-drafting duties will be left to committees that have a say in the matter. That could be several because global climate change could affect virtually everything. Pelosi's move increases the likelihood that Democrats will propose far tougher constraints on greenhouse gas pollution than the Bush administration wants. She also has outflanked for now — and angered — a few Democrats who head important House committees. "We should probably name it the committee on world travel and junkets," said Rep. John Dingell (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which overseas the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency. "We're just empowering a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs to go around and make speeches and make commitments that will be very difficult to honor," said Dingell, a champion of the auto industry, which could be required to producing cleaner-burning and more fuel efficient vehicles. Dingell, the House's longest-serving member at age 80, long has viewed environmental legislation as being his domain. "They're going to get under the feet of and interfere with those who are trying to do a decent job of legislating," Dingell said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I'm unaware of anything they will do that will be of any value." Reminded that Markey was one of his proteges, Dingell replied: "I won't be able to help him on this undertaking, now will I?" Dingell convened Democratic members of his committee for two hours of private talks Wednesday. He said they agreed to send a delegation to meet with Pelosi and iron out who controls what. "We're all jealous of our jurisdiction," Rep. Gene Green (news, bio, voting record), D-Texas, said after the meeting. Rep. George Miller (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., said the new committee builds pressure on the Bush administration, Dingell's panel and other members of Congress. It creates "an opportunity to go from denial into what needs to be done in the future," he said. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., withheld judgment until he learned more. Rangel would have jurisdiction on any tax legislation aimed at affecting industry behavior on the environment. "The appointees are totally unknown," he said. "I understand that they will have no legislative authority." Environmentalists hailed Pelosi's decision as a momentum-builder to challenge the administration. "This is a really gutsy move by the speaker," said Philip Clapp, president of National Environmental Trust. "Action on global warming is so urgent that the speaker has probably taken the only course that could produce a comprehensive bill before the 2008 elections swamp the political process."

QUOTE(maggliopipe @ Jan 19, 2007 -> 11:41 AM) I can't seem to find video yet of Colbert on O'Reilly's show via youtube or google video. Anyone else have any luck? I was clamoring for a longer interview but it was entertaining nonetheless. And I hope that was really the microwave from the No-Spin Zone's green room. Comedy Central often has the previous night's clips on their website. Did you try looking there?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 19, 2007 -> 10:37 AM) I saw the story on yahoo news. Seems like O'Reilly did ok for himself, huh? He was really calm and not condescending. It was like a totally different person from his own show, almost like he was sedated. But I also think Colbert wasn't baiting him as much as I had expected.

Hi-larious. Although, I must say, I thought O'Reilly came off of Colbert looking a million times better than he does on his show. Maybe he's doing the same thing as Colbert, but just got put on the wrong station and realized he could make craploads of money?

I'm probably the only one, but I was a little sad for Karen. That was rough. I think my favorite in the episode was Jim's talking head when he said, "Congratulations universe, you win." That's my new motto. Not as funny as last week, but solid and moved the plot along nicely.

Jake learned it was wise to always carry a snack for his Great Dane in his pocket.

I am not going to lie, the segment on the Daily show about this made me laugh harder than I have in a long time. But, then again, artificial anuses ARE comedy gold.

Happy birthday and enjoy your palindrome year!

I haven't really been watching this season, just flipping between that and something better. I was really glad they were nice to the big kid in the hawaiian shirt, he obviously had some type of mental retardation. During his audition my sister (who is a special ed teacher) called me and was like, if they're mean to him I'm not watching this show again. Fortunately, they weren't. And I totally agree with the high school bullies comment. I don't remember the show being this mean, but I just can't sit through an episode anymore.

Linkage From today's NYT: Editorial Ending the Prison Windfall Published: January 17, 2007 The Census Bureau typically uses the decennial census to test data-collection methods that become routine later on. The 2010 census should include a test run at counting the nation’s 1.4 million prison inmates at their permanent addresses instead of in prisons. That would help bring an end to a corrosive but little known practice that distorts the political process in virtually every corner of the country. Inmates are denied the right to vote in all but two states. But state lawmakers treat them as residents of the prisons when drawing legislative maps, to inflate the head count in lightly populated rural areas where prisons are typically built. This creates legislative districts where none would ordinarily be, shifting political influence from the heavily populated urban districts where inmates live. Once inflated, these towns and counties siphon an outsized portion of state and federal aid. Politicians in districts with prisons sometimes brag openly about the windfall, as they mock “constituents” who are powerless to remove them from office and are packed onto buses and driven hundreds of miles to their real homes the minute they leave the prison walls. The Census Bureau was made pointedly aware of this problem last fall. A report it commissioned noted that counting inmates at prisons distorted the political process and raised legitimate concerns about the fairness of the census itself. That report, by the National Research Council, recognized that the methods would not be simple to change, but urged the bureau to seeks ways to do it. Collecting and verifying residential information for prison inmates is a complicated job. But the report suggested a perfectly reasonable interim solution. The bureau could publish detailed counts of the prison populations, so that the inmates could be subtracted at redistricting time. These figures would illuminate corrupt redistricting committees that use prison counts to pad districts that fall short of federal population requirements. The Census Bureau has a crucial role to play in putting and end to this despicable practice. The 2010 census is as good a time as any to get started.

Doomsday clock moves forward from 11:53 to 11:55. 'Doomsday Clock' Moves Nearer Midnight By RAPHAEL G. SATTER Associated Press Writer Published January 17, 2007, 10:53 AM CST LONDON -- The world has nudged closer to a nuclear apocalypse and environmental disaster, a trans-Atlantic group of prominent scientists warned Wednesday, pushing the hand of its symbolic Doomsday Clock two minutes closer to midnight. It was the fourth time since the end of the Cold War that the clock has ticked forward, this time from 11:53 to 11:55, amid fears over what the scientists are describing as "a second nuclear age" prompted largely by atomic standoffs with Iran and North Korea. But the organization added that the "dangers posed by climate change are nearly as dire as those posed by nuclear weapons." The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, founded in 1945 as a newsletter distributed among nuclear physicists concerned by the possibility of nuclear war, has since grown into an organization focused more generally on manmade threats to the survival of human civilization. "As scientists, we understand the dangers of nuclear weapons and their devastating effects, and we are learning how human activities and technologies are affecting climate systems in ways that may forever change life on Earth," said Stephen Hawking, the renowned cosmologist and mathematician. "As citizens of the world, we have a duty to alert the public to the unnecessary risks that we live with every day, and to the perils we foresee if governments and societies do not take action now to render nuclear weapons obsolete and to prevent further climate change." The bulletin's clock, which for 60 years has followed the rise and fall of nuclear tensions, would now also measure climate change, the bulletin's editor Mark Strauss told The Associated Press. "There's a realization that we are changing our climate for the worse," he said, "That would have catastrophic effects. Although the threat is not as dire as that of nuclear weapons right now, in the long term we are looking at a serious threat." The threat of nuclear war, however, remains by far the organization's most pressing concern. "It's important to emphasize 50 of today's nuclear weapons could kill 200 million people," he said. The decisions to move the clock is made by the bulletin's board, which is composed of prominent scientists and policy experts, in coordination with the group's sponsors. Since it was set to seven minutes to midnight in 1947, the hand has been moved 18 times, including Wednesday's move. It came closest to midnight -- just two minutes away -- in 1953, following the successful test of a hydrogen bomb by the United States. It has been as far away as 17 minutes, set there in 1991 following the demise of the Soviet Union.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 05:15 PM) um... why? BTW, I read that Bush will be talking about Global Warming in the SOTU address. So, if he makes some grand promises about environmental legislation, will he then have Tony Snow follow the speech immediately afterwards with words amounting to "he didn't really mean it"? Like he did last year? I just find him interesting, to me Webb seems kind of unpredictable and unusual. That's pretty much it. He's just interesting to me.

I'm really looking forward to Jim Webb's rebuttal to the State of the Union. Should be interesting.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 02:49 PM) I just read about that on nbc5.com. What would cause that to happen? I don't know how big he was, but I remember a year or two ago in FL (I think) some inmate wanted to be hung, but they wouldn't allow it because it would have been cruel and unusual. Apparently, he was so large that he would have been decapatated (sp?). So maybe if this guy was a chunker that could also have resulted in, well, what happened.

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Jan 15, 2007 -> 02:52 PM) Does anyone know - can gums become enflamed from sinus issues? I've never had perfect gums, but in the last week to two weeks, they have become so enflamed and swollen. They were doing better than usual and then I had the sinus thing and hence puffy gums. Now they are itchy and sore. I am going to have to floss the hell out of them this week and use my generic Listerine (labels match between the two). Are you on any ant-histis? When my allergies (or sinus) are really bad and I take any prescription allergy stuff for an extended period I have a hard time flossing because it's so painful. I'm not sure if my symptoms were the same as yours, but, yes, I have had gum problems when my sinuses are acting up.

Time to end Don't ask Don't tell policy? Personally, I think it's time to get rid of the policy (well, past time). But what does everyone else think? Editorial from today's Trib: Time to tell Published January 15, 2007 For President Bush and others who would like to ramp up the size of the U.S. armed forces, this step is a no-brainer: Get rid of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which has cost the country more than 11,000 military personnel in the last 14 years. Last year, 742 men and women who had signed up to serve their country were kicked out for being gay. Besides the money it costs to replace and retrain gay personnel who are discharged--a 2005 Government Accountability Office report put that figure at $191 million since the policy began--"don't ask, don't tell" robs the armed forces of untold numbers of qualified candidates who never enlist. Such a policy makes zero sense in times of peace and less than zero when the country is at war. Several U.S. House members have made clear their intention to revisit "don't ask, don't tell" this session. John M. Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1993 to 1997, said in a recent New York Times piece that while he supported the policy in 1993, the time may be right to reconsider. "Don't ask, don't tell" was a compromise forged in 1993, after President Bill Clinton learned the hard way that the country wasn't ready to lift the longstanding ban on gays in the armed forces. The military mindset at the time was that allowing openly gay troops would compromise combat readiness by lowering morale, recruitment and unit cohesion. The policy, Shalikashvili wrote, was "a useful speed bump that allowed temperatures to cool for a period of time while the culture continued to evolve." Under the compromise, gays are allowed to serve in the military as long as they keep quiet about their sexual orientation. At that point, apparently, the culture's attitude toward gays had evolved only from "Uncle Sam doesn't want you" to "Uncle Sam doesn't want to know." Happily, we have evolved further. Last month, a Zogby poll of service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan found that 73 percent said they were comfortable serving alongside gays; 23 percent said they knew for sure there was at least one gay person in their unit. A Gallup poll in 2004 found that 63 percent of Americans favored letting gays serve in the military; the same year, the Urban Institute estimated 65,000 already were. The 24 countries that allow gays to serve have had few problems integrating their armies. Last year, Britain's Royal Navy began a drive to recruit gays. Mindful of the 1993 backlash--and of the fact that they probably don't have the votes--those who favor repeal are in go-slow mode. Though she is among more than 120 members of Congress who signed onto such a bill last year, Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House has more pressing national security needs at the moment. In his op-ed piece, Shalikashvili called for a "measured, prudent approach to change." But it would be a mistake to put off hearing the issue. Most measures that could be taken to add more troops would take several years to make a difference. By that time it's not at all clear we'll need them. But eliminating "don't ask, don't tell" would have an impact right away. And it would remove, finally, the cruel and unfair burden placed on gay patriots who are forced to lie about who they are for the privilege of serving their country.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 14, 2007 -> 12:01 AM) YES! Remember the opening scene with the family eating chicken for Sunday dinner with the Padres game on? Wonderfalls and Firefly were good too. Futurama was good as well. (Yes, I know it's coming back) Good call on Wonderfalls! I love that show, I have the dvd. I also have to vote for Arrested Development.

Hilarious: The cretins rule in “Alpha Dog,” which has much the same entertainment value you get from watching monkeys fling scat at one another in a zoo or reading the latest issue of Star magazine.

Thoughts? Texas-based pizza chain accepts pesos, takes heat Far from the border, Mexican dough a no-go for immigration foes By Jeff Carlton Associated Press Published January 12, 2007 DALLAS -- A pizza chain has been hit with death threats and hate mail after offering to accept Mexican pesos, becoming another flash point in the nation's debate over immigrants. "This is the United States of America, not the United States of Mexico," one e-mail read. "Quit catering to the ... illegal Mexicans," another said. Dallas-based Pizza Patron said it was not trying to inject itself into a larger political debate about illegal immigration when it posted signs this week saying "Aceptamos pesos"--or "We accept pesos"--at its 59 stores across Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada and California. Pizza Patron spokesman Andy Gamm said the company was just trying to sell more pizza to its customers, 60 percent of whom are Hispanic. Wal-Mart, H-E-B supermarkets and other American businesses in towns along the Mexican border accept pesos. Some businesses in New York and Minnesota along the northern border accept Canadian dollars. The difference here is that many of the pizza joints are far from the border, in places like Dallas, more than 400 miles away, and Denver, more than 700 miles away. "If people would understand that the majority of our customers are Hispanic, then it might make more sense for a company to sell pizza for pesos," Gamm said. "It doesn't make sense in Connecticut. And it doesn't make sense in North Dakota or in Maine. But it makes perfect sense here in Dallas, in Phoenix, in Denver--areas far from the border that have significant Hispanic populations." The company said it has received hundreds of e-mails, some supportive, most critical. While praising the pesos plan as an innovative way to appeal to Hispanics, a partner in the nation's largest Hispanic public-relations firm said a backlash was inevitable. "Right now there's a lot of anti-immigrant rhetoric going around that could make them a lightning rod," said Patricia Perez, a partner at Valencia, Perez & Echeveste in Los Angeles. Pizza Patron proclaims on its Web site that "to serve the Hispanic community is our passion." Its restaurants are in mostly Hispanic neighborhoods, and each manager must be bilingual and live nearby, said Pizza Patron founder Antonio Swad, who is part-Italian, part-Lebanese. Many Pizza Patron customers have pesos "sitting in their sock drawers or in their wallets," Gamm said. "We're talking small amounts, where it would be inconvenient to stop and exchange on the way back--maybe 10 or 20 dollars' worth of pesos." The promotion will run through February and then be re-evaluated, Swad said. In the first week, payments in pesos have accounted for about 10 percent of business at the five restaurants operated by the corporation, Pizza Patron said. At a Pizza Patron in Dallas, Veronica Vargas bought a pizza Wednesday for her son Nathan's fourth birthday. She paid with pesos her father brought home two weeks ago after a trip to see family in Mexico. She said she is an occasional Pizza Patron customer, but came that day because she could pay with pesos. Her father wasn't going to use them because he had no plans to go back to Mexico soon. "I would mostly think a restaurant would do this in a border town," she said. "But it got me over here."

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2007 -> 10:28 AM) Dwight isn't going anywhere. The show would be over without him. In all seriousness, he is probably the least replacable character on the program. Yeah, I'll just miss all the regular Dwight/Jim interactions until he comes back. Jenna Fischer has said (many times) on her blogs that all the regular cast members have long term contracts, but I'll still miss Dwight aroudn the office. Though it would be hilarious if he ends up at Staples. . .

Good episode. I loved it when Phyllis told Karen she could pay her back later for the makeover. The look on Karen's face was priceless. And the sales calls were totally awesome. And I CANNOT wait to see what Angela does to Andy. That will be *awesome.* I'll miss Dwight though. He was probably my favorite part of the show.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 11, 2007 -> 11:59 AM) Anna Nicole Smith and Pam Anderson. Never was a huge fan of either (I'm talking about there hay-days too). Anna was always a bit big for me while Pam was pretty good looking but I don't think she was near as pretty as a lot of other girls, she just happened to be running on the beach a lot (ah what a classic show). Little trivia (side note) did you know that Baywatch was the first show to have closed captions?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 11, 2007 -> 11:57 AM) I admit, I caught an episode of Beauty and the Geek last week and it was absolutely hillarious. First time I had ever seen it, but the concept leads to great TV. I am not ashamed to admit I like that show. I'd like to see them switch the genders though. Have hot guys and nerdy girls. Although, knowing guys, they would probably still get with the nerdy girls given no other options. So maybe it wouldn't work. . .

So, what media (or peer) dubbed hottie don't you find attractive? This is sort of the opposite of the Strange Crush thread. I'll start: Brad Pitt. Just don't get it. Prince William. Looks just like his father. Christian Slater. Looks like he's always sucking on a lemon. Victoria Beckham. Too much clavicle, thanks.

Is it just me or is Posh Spice/Victoria Beckham not attractive? I just don't get the fuss about her.