text:
My boyfriend and I have been dating around three months and we have decided to move in with each other. He told me he was HIV-positive right from the start, and has been on disability for a while now. My boyfriend indicates no signs of getting sick and has placed his drug problems and sexual promiscuity behind him. He goes to the gym regularly and looks fine, but my friends and family have begun to ask questions about why he is not employed and why we wish to move in together so soon. I am thinking about telling people, including my parents, that he is HIV-positive so they will understand why he is not working and why he needs me. But I'm afraid that they will be judgemental and I am not sure what to do. Help!
The decision to disclose any serious illness, not just HIV, to family and friends should always be considered thoroughly before any action is taken. The world can be unpredictable, and people are not always judged fairly or with sound logical reasoning. Allowing an illness to remain private may be considered the best solution -- as long as no one is emotionally or physically damaged by that decision. Often times, honest straightforward discussion of very sensitive issues, such has HIV status, can at a later time, be used against a person in a harmful way. Prejudice and limited insight are more often than not the real issues here. To hope that all people will be accepted and viewed justly is not always a given, and for this reason, one should move slowly when discussing any emotionally laden issues.
Also, not everyone is very understanding when someone is unemployed and thus has become dependent on his or her mate or government funding because they are ill. We would expect people in general to have sympathy but this is not always the case, especially when it comes to a disease as stigmatized as HIV. The statement to your parents that your boyfriend has HIV would bring fourth a natural sense of protection for their child's health, based on a normal fear that you would become infected. This would add great stress and concern to them and possible resentment toward your boyfriend.
This statement would also raise questions as to why your boyfriend has HIV. It would not be surprising for your parents to begin wondering about this man's past drug use and sexual behavior. This would again raise issues of concern for your parents, as a person's past behavior is usually indicative of their future behavior. And, of course, your friends and family may worry that you will be at heightened risk of becoming infected with HIV yourself.
Speaking to your friends and family on this issue may make them worry that have become involved with someone who may be an emotional and financial burden, to speak frankly, and someone who in their eyes would not be a very "good catch." The very fact that your boyfriend has no indication of illness and is healthy enough to attend a gym would make anyone question why he is not fully employed -- and maybe it should make you wonder too.
Regardless of illness, people need to have a sense that they are productive in life. Employment plays a very important role in most people's lives, providing the structure and the economic independence we need to help in our sense of self. Your boyfriend, who has the strength and discipline to work out in a gym, probably has the ability to "work out his brain" at a form of employment that suits his personality. Aside from his HIV status, why is your boyfriend unemployed? For his own mental (and financial) health, employment should strongly be encouraged.
Taking Stock of the Relationship
The beginning of any intimate relationship is usually a very passionate time, when many core issues can be overlooked by the strong controlling drives of sexual attraction. As psychological research continues to point out, the people in whom we develop a strong interest are usually those we find physically attractive, which speaks little to our long-term social compatibility with this person. Thus, to decide to live together after knowing someone only three months would again raise a great many "red flags" to anyone, not just your concerned parents.
People need to feel in control of their own lives and your boyfriend, who has a history of drug abuse and sexual promiscuity coupled with an unemployed status, does not sound as if he has fully adjusted to living independently. Are you his provider after knowing him only three months? Any courtship should last a while before people move in together, and certainly the relationship should be as equal as possible right from the start, financially as well as emotionally. Financial or emotional concerns should always be discussed before any living arrangement is completed, as they can be overlooked in the rush to set up a home together. Once the passion of lust has settled down, often the emotional and financial burdens take center stage in the couple's discussions, whereas they should have been placed first before living arrangements were already set. No relationship is easy, and HIV certainly doesn't make things any easier. Communication is always the key in any relationship in addition to independent emotional stability!
Giving it Time
For all of these reasons, I would consider holding off telling your family or friends any information on your boyfriend's HIV status. This information will only bring concern to your parents and friends for your safety and possibly bring resentment toward your boyfriend. Further, that he is unemployed cannot be justified by his HIV status unless he is truly disabled. In consultation with his doctor, your boyfriend should consider finding some employment -- not just for financial independence, but also for the structure and emotional balance that employment usually provides.
Further, you should ask yourself why you are motivated to move in with someone after only knowing them three months? Infatuation, coupled with financial needs, is not a sound basis for a long-term, live-in relationship. Time is a good indicator about whether a relationship is the "real thing," and there are good reasons for long "engagements"! Giving things more time will allow two people to get to know each other more fully. After at least a year, you will know if it's really a good idea to move in together, and by then you will be in a better position to discuss with your family and friends your boyfriend's health concerns. Until that time, please be sexually safe and encourage your boyfriend to seek employment and develop his independent living skills.
|J. Buzz von Ornsteiner, Ph.D. is a psychologist and behavioral consultant in New York City and writes the "Psychologically Speaking" column. He is also the host of "Ask Dr. Buzz," a Body Positive-sponsored weekly call-in radio show about HIV/AIDS issues on WWRL 1600 AM at 2:30 on Wednesdays.


text:
Nexolon breaks ground for plant
With ceremonial hard hats on and shovels in hand, city officials and executives from CPS Energy and Nexolon broke ground Wednesday on the company's solar panel manufacturing plant at Brooks City-Base.
The plant, which is expected to employ more than 400 workers in San Antonio, is a key component of a plan that calls for building a series of solar power facilities capable of generating a total of 400 megawatts of energy. City-owned CPS has agreed to purchase the power.
While Nexolon, whose parent company is based in South Korea, has been battered by a downturn in the solar industry, officials looked on the bright side Wednesday.
"We believe that we have a once-in-a-generation chance to be a world leader in an industry that is growing stronger and stronger by the year," Mayor Julián Castro said. "This is very exciting for me because I see our new energy economy in San Antonio really taking off."
Castro also complimented City Manager Sheryl Sculley and her staff for negotiating the deal that brought Nexolon to Brooks, calling it a "well-negotiated agreement that was good for all sides and ensured that this investment was made in San Antonio."
As part of that deal, the Brooks Development Authority approved giving Nexolon access to 86 acres of land at the former Air Force base valued at $17 million for just $5 million. The city pledged to make $12 million worth of infrastructure investments at Brooks to make up the difference.
But Nexolon's involvement in the project has become controversial because of the company's poor financial condition. Its financial troubles continued through the second half of last year, with the manufacturer losing $71 million in that period, up from the $60 million it lost in the first six months of 2012.
The company has not yet reported to South Korean regulators how much cash it had or how much debt it carried at year's end, according to information provided by Bloomberg News. On June 30, the company had less than $20 million in cash and carried a substantial debt load.
Company officials attending the groundbreaking again disputed the notion that their financial difficulties could prevent them from completing and operating the plant.
"We are putting more equity in Korea and, also, we're going to put more here," Nexolon Chairman Woo Jeong Lee said. He also said the ongoing losses had not made it harder for the company to raise cash.
Nexolon America is part of the OCI Solar Power-led consortium that won the contract to build CPS's 400 megawatt project, which requires the bid winners to invest $100 million in the San Antonio area and create 800 new jobs locally. Nexolon's plant is expected to account for half of the required job creation.
Nexolon executives have said their company has already set aside much of the money they would need to complete the plant, though they declined to say how much. They also said their contract with OCI Solar contains significant penalties, which they would incur if they fail to complete the project.
Twitter: @ndhapple

subset: commoncrawl


text:
- Our prevent defense was successful in that in prevented victory for us. The coaching staff would probably counter that they were getting "enough" of a rush, but I just don't think so. A few blitzes and at the very least keeping Matthews in there to rush the pass every time would have been smart. Or Bishop – who would have had fresh legs. Yes, playing the regular defense we'd been playing all game may not have been the answer either considering it was so bad – but at least putting Roeth under more pressure might have prevented some of the easier completions they ended up getting.
- Not sure why a guy like our CB Josh Bell was in there anyway on that last play.
- AJ Hawk hurt this team today. He's fine against the run – in fact, the last few games, I'd say he's been very good. But he is an absolute liability in coverage. Heath Miller had 7 catches for 118 yards – several against Hawk.
- Pitt clearly did their homework on us. They got more yards passing than any other team has against us this year and it didn't seem too hard. They primarily went after Tramon and Jarrett Bush and Hawk – and that last pass came against recently acquired Josh Bell.
- While Ben Roeth gets sacked a ton, when he does buy time and shakes free, he often causes huge damage because his WRs don't stop running around. Hines Ward does that extremely well, despite the fact that he's a jackass. It's so frustrating because many times we had Roeth dead only to have a huge pass completed on us.
- Rodgers was fantastic. Our offense came around in the second half, though we never did get the running game going.
- We have to be excited about Finley. He's getting the ball because he's getting it done. Great job especially in the second half by all of our WRs and Finley. Great job.
- It's weird, whenever I watch the Packers, I get this feeling like we never really have control over games. I think that may be due in good part to not imposing our power on other teams with the run game and/or establishing legit rhythm on offense. We just seem out of sync – though the good thing is that we're managing to score points in the face of that. (Better rhythm in the 2nd half though.)
- Remember who missed a 34 yard FG. Mason Crosby. Kicking field goals isn't easy – especially at Heinz Field. But I'm not kidding when I say that if there were such a thing as teleporting, I could have set down my beer (an Esser Pilsner – highly recommend it), walked on the field and probably made that one. Playoff teams need playoff kickers and we should be keeping close tabs on John Carney, Matt Stover (or maybe Adam Vinatieri) – and maybe even give Jason Elam a call despite him having a poor year in Atlanta.
- Clay Matthews is a beast. Great game. Not sure why Brad Jones (who also had a nice game) lost so much playing time to Poppinga at the end of the game. Poppinga had one nice play, but was thrown about on the rest of the plays.
- I'm pissed we lost that game. We came back and fought hard. But putting a prevent defense out there just plain didn't work. Pitt marched down the field and scored a TD. Yes, it was a bit unlucky and if Cullen Jenkins makes that sack, which there was no excuse for missing, we likely would have won. Our defense definitely needs to go back to work and figure out why Pitt was able to use us like they did. And our offense needs to do a much better job of figuring out how we can get into a better rhythm.
- But at the same time, I'm not suicidal here. This loss hurts but I hope it's one the team can analyze and then forget quickly. We didn't get crushed or anything, we lost to a wiley bunch of Super Bowl veterans/a quality coaching staff and we still have a very good shot at the playoffs – which I think continues to be a realistic basic goal for this regular season. For those dumb enough to take any comfort in my predictions, I'll offer this prediction: Packers 45, Seahawks 13.
Game Thoughts Pitt
13 Responses to "Game Thoughts Pitt"
Keefer Says:
December 20, 2009 at 10:25 pm |
Thanks for your excellent comments (as always). The loss was gut wrenching, but the offense showed true grit. The defense was uncharacteristically poor, so hopefully lessons will be learned. I was surprised that we got back and took the lead after the start we had and because for most of the game it "felt" like we'd never catch up. Once we did, the defensive scheme failed us…this game will end the talk of having the best defense in the league!
Hopefully the Redskins will keep the Giants in check and we'll go into Week 16 with a two game lead over them.
Ron La Canne Says:
December 20, 2009 at 11:43 pm |
For the first time this year Capers failed the team. His change to a 3 man rush sealed the deal. The total lack of Safety/Corner depth was exposed big time. Bargin basement Db's are no better than bargain basement O linemen.
Crosby is a failure. He contimues to push the ball right on FG attempts and this has not been corrected. He either gets some tutoring or they better find someone who can at least make the < 40 yds kicks. He damn near mised 2 xp's too.
Next week is now a must win. At least it wasn't a conference loss. They only have three in conference now. And the Cards are not looking all that impressive in their last two games. Let's hope that trend continues.
Dave in Tucson Says:
December 21, 2009 at 12:52 am |
Defense on that last drive was the same crap-tastic pass defense the Packers played all game long.
Steelers were getting huge pass plays all game long. Roethlisberger finished with 504 yards passing, and had five (5!) receivers with catches of at least 25 yards. That didn't just happen on the last drive.
Cindy V Says:
December 21, 2009 at 1:20 am |
How many field goals will Crosby need to miss before McCarthy does something about it?
I think that the Packer WR need to stop complaining about Finley getting the ball so much and perhaps catch a few of the balls that some their way. Too many dropped balls. I know that Aaron overthrew a few times, but I also saw WR getting hit on the numbers and the ball falling to the ground.
What happened to the run game? I thought December/cold weather games were ideal for the run?
Aaaron took some big hits today. I'm so afraid that if he gets hurt, the team sinks. I don't have confidence that Matt Flynn would be able to lead the team.
Who is Joshua Bell and what was he doing covering Mike Wallace on that last play?
If anyone can answer these questions, I'd appreciate it.
Trav Says:
December 21, 2009 at 1:48 am |
Cindy: I read this in Bedard's post game blog:
"On the final Steelers touchdown from Ben Roethlisberger to Mike Wallace, CB Josh Bell was supposed to play underneath Wallace at all costs. Packers had three deep safeties on the play."
Obviously that didn't happen. Bell also had the penalty when Jenkins came up with the sack. Between his 2 huge miscues, Bush's general crappy play, and Mason's miss, we watched a W float away.
DaveK Says:
December 21, 2009 at 11:19 am |
Gut wrenching defeat. I don't think I have the stomach right now to even talk much about the the x's and o's. Best for fans and the Packers to just move on and chalk that one up to a tough loss on the road against a motivated and talented team that had 10 days to prepare for the Packers. Still can't believe that was the same Pitt offense that scored 6 against the Browns……
Moving forward….The Redskins could make it easy on us tonight by beating the Giants. Best case scenario is that the Giants lose, Packers beat Seattle, and the Packers get a rest game against the Cardinals.
Root for the Skins tonight.
Root for the Eagles against Denver. They might catch MN for the #2 seed and its better if they win the division instead of Dallas.
Root for the Bears next Monday against MN. We want the Vikings game against the Giants to actually mean something.
Joe Says:
December 21, 2009 at 11:46 am |
"For the first time this year Capers failed the team." I have to respectfully disagree. Capers failed the team in both Vikings games.
The final drive by Pitt was frustrating to watch. On at least one play Ii watched the d-linemen get penetration and then pull back. The announcers said that it looked like the Packers were in a defense designed to keep the QB in the pocket (i.e. trying to prevent flushing him and letting him run for a first down). That (if correct) is incredibly stupid. Is Big Ben a running threat? Not really and as long as we kept him in bounds it would be great if he ran. Why would you intentionally give the QB 5 plus seconds to throw? Anyone can find someone with time.
56Coop Says:
December 21, 2009 at 1:02 pm |
Big Ben put that ball where it had to be. I think that one was better than his Super Bowl winning pass. Gotta give him credit.
There were plenty of chances to put this one away. Rdogers was off during the 1st half and receviers dropped a lot of the balls that were on target. Spot on assesment of Hawk. He can play the run, not the pass. Can't understand why Poppinga got so much playing time.
And then, there's Crosby. I hope soon it'll be, there goes Crosby.
TheChoj Says:
December 21, 2009 at 3:49 pm |
While Crosby's FG was the difference in the score, I think it was the defense that cost us the game. If we had even eliminated one or two of the penalties on the last drive, we wouldn't won the game
andrew Says:
December 21, 2009 at 8:00 pm |
i think every time you watch a game and judge you are way to hard on aj hawk.. mind you he is not the best coverage lb no one has ever claimed him to be but against lesser tes he covers them perfectly fine heath miller is one of the best tes in the league obviously a run stopping lb like hawk is going to have a hard time covering him against a top tier te its a mistake to put a run stopping lb on coverage and i believe capers should know that nd not have hawk responsible for that coverage hawk missed a tackle.. but so does everyone else.. every single player misses tackles you just key on hawk missing them cause you for some reason dislike him.. on limited time he is almost leading the team in tackles nd is our best run stopping linebacker.. i dont see why you have a grudge against him if our team lets him go we will see a lot more rushing yards given up by our defense all your other commetns are on point though
Bruce Johnson Says:
December 21, 2009 at 8:52 pm |
They should have run more just to settle Rodgers down and to take time off the clock. Regardless of how tough the defense was.


text:
The racist role of blackface in American society
Clip: 02/04/2019 | 11m 23s
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam now says he is not pictured in a 1984 yearbook photo of people in blackface and Ku Klux Klan costumes, although he admits he wore blackface on a separate occasion. Regardless, he is facing calls to resign. Yamiche Alcindor talks to Duke University's Mark Anthony Neal and The Atlantic's Vann Newkirk about the role of blackface in America's fraught racial history.
Aired: 02/04/19Video has closed captioning.
The full episode is no longer available for online streaming. Why?
Please continue to enjoy extra(s) from this episode.
Problems Playing Video?
Major corporate funding for the PBS NewsHour is provided by BNSF, Consumer Cellular, Leidos, Babbel, and Raymond James. Funding for the PBS NewsHour Weekend is provided by Mutual of America. For a complete list of funders for the PBS NewsHour and PBS NewsHour weekend, click here.


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Clarence Page, John Hofmeister, Mike Pence, Dana Priest
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Obama fights for jobless benefits. Will it benefit his job?
Let's play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I'm Chris Matthews out in Los Angeles. Leading off tonight: Three months to go. When President Obama today blasted Republicans for refusing to extend unemployment benefits, you could practically hear Democrats across the country saying, Finally! The president said the same Republicans who created this deficit and gave tax cuts to the wealthy won't help those out of work now. Come November, we may look back and say this is the day that the mid-term election campaign really began.
Plus, the crisis in the Gulf of Mexico is not over yet, but the cap on the oil well is still holding. There are concerns that oil or gas may be seeping out beneath the seabed, but no oil has leaked into the gulf for four days. We'll check with our favorite expert tonight.
Also, here's my question of the day. Do Republicans have any ideas about how to cut spending, or do they just went to demagogue the issue? If you saw "MEET THE PRESS" yesterday, you saw that neither Senator John Cornyn or Congressman Pete Sessions could name a single dollar in budget cuts they would propose. What I want to know is, why do Democrats let them get away with this bluffing? Are they afraid to call the bluff?
Plus, a "Washington Post" investigation found that nearly nine years after the September 11 attacks, the federal government's intelligence system has grown exponentially. More than 1,200 government organizations do intelligence work -- 1,200! But is it making Americans safer? That's my question to "The Washington Post's" Dana Priest. She's coming here tonight.
And finally, Sarah Palin, creator of new words? Palin's put herself in the company of William Shakespeare, who she says also created new words. "Refudiate"—that's her new word. Is this "refudiate-gate," or does "refudiate" mean to restart a feud? Check out the "Sideshow."
We start with the president taking on the Republicans over unemployment benefits. Charlie Cook of "The Cook Political Report" is an NBC News political analyst and Clarence Page is a columnist for "The Washington Post." (SIC)
Thank you, Charlie, and thank you, Clarence. Let's go to Charlie first. Do you think that the—here's the president today, and I want to you to analyze this politically, why he decided to go so hard on the Republicans this Monday. Here's the president.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For a long time, there's been a tradition under both Democratic and Republican presidents to offer relief to the unemployed. That was certainly the case under my predecessor, when Republican senators voted several times to extend emergency unemployment benefits.
And I have to say, after years of championing policies that turned a record surplus into a massive deficit, the same people who didn't have any problems spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn't offer relief to middle class Americans like Jim (ph) or Leslie (ph) or Denise (ph) who really need help.
MATTHEWS: You know, Charlie, just a few days ago, it seems, the president was saying Washington is the problem. Every time he left town, he'd say, I can't wait to get out of Washington. That was the problem. Now it's the Republicans are problem. He's going partisan. Here it is mid-July. Is this the way it's going to go, and why?
think it is. And I think part of it is the president—and I think this is kind of an extension of what Robert Gibbs started a week ago Sunday on "MEET THE PRESS," that, OK, you're disappointed in us Democrats. You're mad at us Democrats. But this isn't a free lunch here. If you throw us out, you're putting the other guys, you're putting Republicans in. And this is what they stand for or what they're opposing.
So I think it's a useful exercise for the president to try to draw some very clear contrasts with Republicans to kind of move beyond the fact that people are disappointed and/or mad at Democrats.
But the other thing I think is that, some of the president's personal politics is that, as bright as he is, people see him as cerebral. They see him as aloof and that he doesn't connect with people as much as, say, Bill Clinton did on a personal level. And I think they've got to work at creating that connection because in those remarks today, he really did talk about the pain, the anguish that a lot of these unemployed people are going through. And I frankly think he needs to do more of that.
MATTHEWS: Well, let's go to—let's go to Clarence on that. Here he is bringing three people out there to his right there, on the Rose Garden. The names are Jim, Leslie and Dennis (ph), are their first names. He is trying to personify unemployment benefits and not just unnamed numbers out there. There they are, the three people coming out with him. Is this what Charlie—is Charlie right, he's trying to say, I'm with the worker bees, the people out there who want to work. This other crowd, the Republicans, are with the rich who want to keep the Bush tax cuts for the very rich.
CLARENCE PAGE, "CHICAGO TRIBUNE": That's right. He's borrowing a technique from, certainly, Ronald Reagan, certainly was famous for putting a face on problems. In this case, he brings out real people who are suffering real problems with trying to find a job. These are not slackers or shirkers, as conservatives will argue, that giving people unemployment benefits takes away their incentive to want to go out and look for a job. Here are people looking for work and they can't find it. And so he is siding with the people here, while he tries to cast the Republicans as siding with the supply-side theorists, with big business, with people who don't care.
So that's the theater here. That's the optics. And it's important now at a time when his approval ratings are low but his personal approval is still high. People still like him as a person, but his approvals as far as his job performance are down. But his numbers are still better than the Republicans in Congress, and Democrats in Congress, too, for that matter. So that's—that's the way he's drawing the line in the sand.
MATTHEWS: You know, I wish conservatives would come to Washington or any big city around 6:00 o'clock in the morning, guys, and see who's waiting for the bus to go to work in the morning, the poor people. They're out there trying to get to work. And any time a job opens, an entry-level job, as I said the other day, at any hotel or any business in any big city, the lines go around the block. So people who say people don't want to work are lying, or at least they're refusing to see the facts. The poor people get up the earliest. They catch public transportation, if they can find it, and they go to work in nine chances out of ten. And that's what's going on and that's why you got to keep thinking about what side are you on sometimes.
Here's the president today. Let's listen.
OBAMA: Over the past few weeks, a majority of senators have tried not once, not twice, but three times to extend emergency relief on a temporary basis. Each time, a partisan minority in the Senate has used parliamentary maneuvers to block a vote, denying millions of people who are out of work much needed relief. These leaders in the Senate who are advancing a misguided notion that emergency relief somehow discourages people from looking for a job should talk to these folks!
MATTHEWS: There's a little expression, Charlie, that the Tory party's the stupid party. I don't think so. I think the Republicans have calculated who's going to vote this November. The unemployed are not going to vote. The poor people aren't going to vote. The worried people aren't going to vote. The angry people are going to vote. The better-off people are going to vote, and that's who they're talking to here. Go after deficits. Blame it on the Democrats. Screw the working guy who's out of work because they figure that guy or that woman isn't going to work for them—isn't going to vote for them this fall.
COOK: I think angry people...
MATTHEWS: Is that their calculation?
COOK: Angry people are the people that voted in 2006, and those angry people tended to be Democrats. And now the angry people tend to be Republicans.
But I think the way the Republican leadership is looking at this is voters, a lot of voters, are really disappointed, angry with the president, angry at Democrats. Why should we throw him a lifeline and give him any successes? And I think what the White House is now trying to say is, OK, if that's the game you're going to play, let's put a cost on that. Let's make you pay the price for opposing things like extending unemployment compensation so—or unemployment insurance.
So I think what we're doing is we're looking at—you know, we are seeing battle lines drawn in a way that we had not seen earlier in this election cycle. I think you're absolutely right.
MATTHEWS: Let's be brutal Clarence. Is it a real calculation by the Republicans that the better-off people, the people above the national economic average, are saying, I want to keep my tax cuts. I'm smart enough to vote Republican if I want that goal. And I know a lot of pain out there. I'm not a compassionate conservative this year. It's every man and every woman for himself this time around. I don't even want to pretend to be compassionate this time. Screw the people who are unemployed. I want my taxes cut and kept cut.
PAGE: Well, whether they're quite that caustic or sarcastic in their thinking...
MATTHEWS: You don't think?
PAGE: ... there's no question that their base feels like there—this—jobless benefits only help to keep people unemployed, keep them lazy. That's what I'm hearing in e-mails from tea party folks and other members of the Republican base right now. But the thing is, though, in those districts where Republicans have chance...
MATTHEWS: You're hearing from the happy people, Clarence.
PAGE: I'm sorry?
MATTHEWS: You're hearing from the happy people.
PAGE: Happy people. Right. But you know, they've got to get swing voters, though. That's where the real battle is for these seats that Democrats have that are vulnerable. Republicans need to win swing voters. The swing voters, a lot of them want—well, for them, this is a choice election. Is the person who is challenging the incumbent better than the incumbent? And that's where Democrats have to show that they're the party with a heart here that is going to really answer the problems of the—of working folks, whereas, you know, the Republicans are...
MATTHEWS: OK, let's...
PAGE: ... the party that is standing on the sidelines.
MATTHEWS: ... let's look at the president. Here he is today. Here's the president. I'm sorry. Let's watch the president for a second, then you're in here, Charlie.
OBAMA: It's time to stop holding workers laid off in this recession hostage to Washington politics. It's time to do what's right not for the next election but for the middle class. We've got to stop blocking emergency relief for Americans who are out of work. We've got to extend unemployment insurance. We need to pass those tax cuts for small businesses and lending for small businesses. Times are hard right now. We are moving in the right direction. I know it's getting close to an election, but there are times when you put elections aside. This is one of those times.
MATTHEWS: Charlie, is he renewing his marriage vows with Nancy Pelosi here? Is he making up for what Gibbs said the other day about how the Democrats might lose the House?
COOK: Well, I think he's trying—I think he's—Democrats are disillusioned. They're dispirited. And you know, there's a sense, on the one hand, that they need to be realistic and let Democrats know, Hey, you know, we're in danger of losing everything. But on the other hand—and they do need to fire them up.
But you know, and you and Clarence both talk to Republican members of Congress off the record all the time. And if you ask them, Where did the Republican Party go wrong in the last decade, and most of these Republicans would say, We betrayed our principles, we gave up conservative principles, we spent too much.
And so they're sort of born-again free—conservatives in the sense they're saying, Now we need to start drawing lines and we've got to draw lines immediately and starkly. And that's what you heard, for example, from Senator McConnell yesterday on "MEET THE PRESS," is that, yes, we misbehaved, we were bad, but we got to draw hard lines now. And that's what they're doing and...
MATTHEWS: Yes.
COOK: ... you know, we'll see whether Democrats can stick them with it.
MATTHEWS: Well, they still didn't have the guts to say what they're going to cut when David asked them. We'll get to that later in the show. The Republicans were asked—Cornyn was asked and—and the other guy was asked, Pete Sessions was asked, Name one program you're going to cut. Again and again, David tried to get an answer out of them, and neither guy was going to talk. So that tells you a lot, too. They love the argument of cutting government spending, but they won't name a single program they personally will put their name on cutting.
Thank you, Charlie Cook. Thank you, Clarence Page of "The Chicago Tribune."
Coming up, that cap on the BP oil well is still holding, which is good
news, but there are signs of seepage on the ocean floor, which could mean -
below the (INAUDIBLE) which could mean disaster is far from over. The latest on the oil spill from an experience, our favorite expert, Hofmeister, when we return.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: In what states does President Obama enjoy his highest approval ratings? Well—and in which states does he have the lowest? Well, first the states where he's highest. Tied for fifth place, New York and Connecticut, where 57 percent approve the job the president's doing. At four, Maryland, then Delaware, home of the vice president, Hawaii, where President Obama was born, and the District of Columbia, where 85 percent approve.
We'll have the five states where President Obama has his lowest approval numbers later in the hour. You can guess what they are by then.
HARDBALL back after this.
ADM. THAD ALLEN, U.S. COAST GUARD (RET.), NAT'L INCIDENT CMDR.: We have agreed that we will go forward with another 24-hour period from today to tomorrow.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. That's national incident commander Admiral Thad Allen, of course, announcing the oil leak will remain capped for now. But both BP and the government are on edge.
John Hofmeister is a former Shell Oil executive and author of "Why We Hate the Oil Companies." John, as always, I welcome your expertise. What do you make of this? Keep it in civilian terms here. They're keeping the cap on. That's good news. What's the worry here?
JOHN HOFMEISTER, FORMER SHELL OIL PRES.: Well, they're going to take it day by day, which is really important because credibility and confidence, I think, are really critical to what the next steps might be.
In the case of confidence, there are many people, including in the White House, including the Department of Energy, who doubt the integrity of the well casing, who believe that the well casing could well be ruptured or damaged in some respect, and that could cause leaks way down in the well, where oil could be—with the pressure cap on, could be working its way out of the casing, into the space between the wellbore, which is where the original hole was dug, and the casing itself.
It's not a lot of space, but that oil could be moving up into the geology above the earth, where the break point is, and could be emerging somewhere, as what we have heard about today, you know, the seepage, the possible seepage. So confidence is critical—leaving the cap on another day, take more tests, see if the pressure keeps rising—that's really what they're trying to do.
MATTHEWS: Well, we've all learned through weeks of this that the real hope for ending this catastrophe is the relief well drilling that's going on right now. Would this problem you're talking about, the possibility of basically internal bleeding, to use a human term—is that a danger to the operation of bringing up this relief well?
HOFMEISTER: Depending upon where the leak might be, if there is a leak, yes, it could be a danger. It could be that they somehow enter the casing and cement the casing shut, and that's shut down, but outside the casing in the perimeter where the wellbore is, that they get continued leakage. Now, what they can try to do is design the killing process, the relief well process, to try to cement both inside and outside the casing. That would be a little different than what their intentions have been, but I don't see any technical reason why they couldn't do that.
MATTHEWS: Does it matter whether the break in the pipeline, the well, is above or below where they intersect it with the relief well operation?
HOFMEISTER: Yes, I think if the break is below and they cement outside the well—outside the casing as well as inside the casing, that should bring it to a stop. And that's, of course, what they want to do. If for some reason the break is above and they don't cement the outside of the wellbore, then you could get continued leakage, seepage, above where they might have cemented the casing, and we could have a problem for a long time to come.
MATTHEWS: Boy, that's complicated. Let me ask you about the possibility that this well is tapped out and that's the explanation of why there's lower pressure than expected.
HOFMEISTER: Well, you know, 6,700, 6,800 pounds per square inch is still a lot of pressure. That's like—you know, imagine a square inch with 3.5 tons of pressure on it. That's a lot of pressure. It might have been as high as 25,000 or 30,000 psi. Some people thought it was even higher.
Now, a well does reduce its pressure as time goes on. That's what causes wells to go into decline. So, that's evidence that the well is in decline. But, still, at that level of pressure, this is still a high-pressure well.
MATTHEWS: In civilian terms again—and I appreciate you for using them—"The Wall Street Journal," which has been doing great report on this—by the way, it's the reporting part of "The Wall Street Journal," not the crazy op-ed page or the crazy editorial page, but the reporting part of "The Wall Street Journal," which is still sound as a dollar, I think, they're pointing out the fact of what went wrong here. What did go wrong, based about that, John, about the latest reporting?
HOFMEISTER: Well, you know, from the earliest moment, when I heard about this blowout, I immediately thought human factors, because the systems, the processes, the procedures, the equipment, the engineering, I mean, the industry has earned with credibility the right to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, 40,000 -- or—I'm sorry -- 35,000-plus wells, 40 years of experience.
None of this has happened before. So, you immediately go to what could possibly have gone wrong? And you start thinking about bad judgments, or, as I said in an op-ed many, many months ago, that the issue of communications, human-to-human communications, the issue of chain on command—chain of command on a drilling rig, these are critical success factors.
And if you don't have the open communications, the ability to resolve conflict amicably and come back for more conflict amicably, if you can't do that, and have a proper chain of command, and you have got somebody giving orders that perhaps does not have the experience or the knowledge that exists, then you have got a real problem.
It's like a village on that rig.
MATTHEWS: And is part of the problem that the—is part of the problem that, as they said in politics years ago—I think it was Ozzie Myers with the—whatever it was—Abscam—he said money talks. Could it be that the money coming down, the money issue from the top of these oil companies said to the management put the pressure on speed here, not safety?
HOFMEISTER: I think it all depends upon what is baked into the DNA of the operators.
If they have a safety management system which has been taken on board, which is sacrilegious to violate it, then money doesn't matter. There are any number of projects, Chris, all over the world that go beyond budget and beyond timing. And there's no problem with that, other than, hey, it costs more, it was delayed.
But you don't jeopardize people lives if you have got a safety management system that is intact, that is baked into the DNA of the culture, the hearts and minds of the people on that rig.
MATTHEWS: OK. That's if you have straight arrows in the management division.
Anyway, thank you very much, John Hofmeister, as always.
Up next: Sarah Palin says she's like Shakespeare, that she's able to make up new words. She's at ease with that. Anyway, the "Sideshow" is coming up. This is an interesting topic. Pick your side when we come back. Maybe she's right. Maybe she does have the power to create words like "refudiate."
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Back to HARDBALL. Time for the "Sideshow."
Well, first: Sarah Palin with her word of the day. On FOX last week, the ex-governor whacked the NAACP for its resolution condemning what it called racism within the Tea Party movement. Listen for the word she used.
SARAH PALIN ®, FORMER ALASKA GOVERNOR: And the president and his wife—you know, the first lady spoke at NAACP so recently. They have power in their words. They could refudiate what it is that this group is saying.
MATTHEWS: Wow, interesting word there, refudiate. By the way, that was not Tina Fey.
on Sunday, Palin used the term again, this time in a Twitter post about the mosque being built near the World Trade Center site.
She called upon peaceful Muslims, as she called them, to refudiate its construction. After getting some teasing in the blogosphere, Palin took down that Twitter post and later put up this one—quote—"Refudiate, misunderestimate, wee-wee'd up." Those were examples she suggests of new word.
English is a living language, she argued. "Shakespeare liked to coin new words, too. Got to celebrate it."
Well, that's her. Let's keep listening to her. Maybe we will get a clue.
Next: The Tea Party reaches its tipping point. It started when Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams wrote a fictional, you might say, letter in defense of slavery to President Abraham Lincoln—quote—these are his words—quote—"We coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us colored people."
Well, that's—Williams called that satire. The leaders of the National Tea Party Federation called it trouble. Yesterday, they expelled Williams.
The sentiment continued today. The Tea Party Nation, the group that hosted that big party convention down in Nashville, has just put out a statement saying they have—quote—"zero tolerance," a zero-tolerance policy against racism, and they will ban any other members who show themselves to be racist.
OK. I'm going to wait to see just one of those Tea Party people pull down one of those racist signs at the next Tea Party rally. I'm going to just wait. Reach over, grab the sign and tear it out of the guy's hands. Then I will believe you.
Finally, Alvin Greene makes his campaign debut. South Carolina's come-out-of-nowhere candidate gave his first speech as the Democratic U.S. Senate nominee yesterday. Let's listen to his words.
ALVIN GREENE (D), SOUTH CAROLINA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: Let's get South Carolina and America back to work.
GREENE: Let's move South Carolina and America forward.
GREENE: Let's get South Carolina back to work from Alvin, South Carolina, to Greenville, South Carolina.
GREENE: Let's reclaim our country from the terrorists and the communists.
MATTHEWS: Wow, that was Mr. Greene speaking. I don't get this whole thing.
Now for tonight's "Big Number." How Americans know that it was President Bush who enacted TARP, that 7$00 billion bank bailout. Well, according to a new Pew survey, just 34 percent of us. Almost half, 47 percent, think it was President Obama who did it. Just a third of Americans know that President Bush, his team, engineered the big bank bailout—just 34 percent, tonight's not-so-"Big Number."
Boy, is that important.
Up next: Republicans say they're against government spending, but why can't any of them say what programs they would cut if they were in charge? It happened again this weekend on "Meet the Press." We're going to try to get some answers out of Republican leader U.S. Congressman Mike Pence.
That's coming up next here.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
HAMPTON PEARSON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I'm Hampton Pearson with your CNBC "Market Wrap."
A late-day rally setting up some moderate gains today, the Dow Jones industrials adding 56 points, the S&P 500 climbing six points, and the Nasdaq finishing 19 points higher.
Stocks struggled early in the day on a decline in homebuilder confidence. But it turned around toward the close on earnings optimism in the tech sector. IBM reporting just after the closing bell quarterly profits coming in line with expectations, but top-line revenue was a bit light. Shares are tumbling in after-hours trading.
And Texas Instruments also posting after the bell. Again, a big jump in earnings was right in line with forecasts, but the revenue was on the shy side. Elsewhere, Halliburton shares soaring 6 percent after reporting an 83 percent jump in second-quarter profits, but the company says the ban on deepwater drilling could hurt its full-year results.
And Boeing got a boost after racking up around $9 billion with new orders at the Farnborough Air Show.
That's it from CNBC, first in business worldwide—now back to
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
What's the Republican plan if they take back power in Congress? Do they have any real plans to cut spending?
Indiana Congressman Mike Pence is the Republican Conference chairman, the number-three leader in the House of Representatives.
Congressman, thank you for joining us.
REP. MIKE PENCE ®, INDIANA: Hi, Chris.
MATTHEWS: I want you to listen to your colleagues, Congressman Pete Sessions and Senator John Cornyn. They were with David Gregory on "Meet the Press" yesterday. Let's listen to what they said.
DAVID GREGORY, MODERATOR, "MEET THE PRESS": What painful choices are Republicans prepared to make? Are they going to campaign on repealing health care, for instance, repealing financial regulation? Would you like to see those two things done?
REP. PETE SESSIONS ®, TEXAS: Well, first of all, let's go right to it. We're going to balance the budget.
GREGORY: How do you do it? Tell me how you do it? Name a painful choice the Republicans are prepared to say we have to make.
SESSIONS: Well, first of all, we need to make sure that as we look at all that we are spending in Washington, D.C., with not only the entitlement spending, but also the bigger government, we cannot afford anymore. We have to empower the free enterprise system. See, this is where...
GREGORY: Congressman, these are not specifics.
SESSIONS: We need to go back to the exact same agenda that is empowering the free enterprise system, rather than diminishing it.
GREGORY: Senator, I'm sorry. I'm not hearing an answer on specific -
what painful choices to really deal with the deficit. Is Social Security on the table?
SEN. JOHN CORNYN ®, TEXAS: Well, the president has a debt commission that reports December the 1st.
My hope is they will come back with a bipartisan solution to the debt and particularly entitlement reform, as you mention. But I...
GREGORY: But wait a minute. Conservatives need a Democratic president's debt commission to figure out what it is they would want to cut?
CORNYN: I say we need to do this on a bipartisan basis.
MATTHEWS: Well, Congressman Pence, I would like to follow up on that.
What are the Republican plans? You have a good shot at taking back the House of Representatives. Do you have an agenda for balancing the budget?
PENCE: We sure do. Different than Democrats in Congress this year, Republicans passed a budget last year that actually would reduce deficits by $5 trillion over 10 years and reduce federal spending by $3 trillion. That was in the budget that we passed.
We had a stimulus alternative that cost half as much as the president's. And, according to their economic analysis, it would have created twice as many jobs. We had alternatives on health care, alternatives on energy. And as we go forward with the solutions that we have been offering, Chris, those are going to be a big, big part of the conversation we have with the American people going forward.
MATTHEWS: Well, the big problem, as you and I know, Congressman, and nobody wants to say what they want to cut. It's always Alphonse and Gaston: You tell me.
The Republican Party I grew up with was the party of fiscal responsibility. So, it seems to me your party could take the lead here and say what you want to cut. Do you want to cut in the entitlements? Where? Medicare? Social Security? Where in the discretionary domestic spending?
Where in Defense? Where in foreign aid?
Give me about three or four, even one or two, big-chunk ways to reduce a $1.6 trillion deficit.
PENCE: Well, right. That's $1.6 trillion this year. It's the second year in a row the deficits have been over a trillion.
Some of that, I admit, was inherited by the economic and the bailout policies of the last administration. But, look, again, Republicans went on the record last year. We committed to a 10-year budget that was—had $5 trillion less in deficits, $3 trillion less in spending.
For my part, I have co-authored with Jeb Hensarling of Texas a spending limit amendment to the Constitution. You know, getting spending under control begins with electing a party that wants to get spending under control.
Since the Democrats took control of the Congress, Chris, there's been an 84 percent increase in non-defense discretionary spending. Now, the president wants to freeze it at that level. But that's freezing it at an 84 percent increase.
We need—we need to set goals. They need to be serious goals. And then we need to be prepared to do the hard work on—on everything in this budget through fiscal restraint and reform to bring our federal budget within its means and within the means of the American people.
MATTHEWS: I sympathize with you, Congressman, but you're the party of fiscal responsibility. The people watching and listening right now on radio or on television, who are listening now, where do you want to cut the federal budget? Give me some programs you want to cut.
PENCE: Well, look, I mean in the category of discretionary spending, I personally have associated myself with hundreds of billions of dollars of wasteful government programs, you know, whether it be defense spending, intelligence spending, all the security issues, or whether it be traditional discretionary spending or whether it be entitlement reform.
Republicans have really a long record of proposals that we have embraced over the years that—that we're prepared to move on. But, again, I think it all really begins with electing a majority in Congress that wants to get federal spending under control.
This president and this Congress have us on a pathway for $1 trillion deficits as far as the eye can see. And the American people have had it, Chris. They feel like Washington is out of touch.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
PENCE: They're not making the hard decisions.
And, as I said, Republicans committed to a budget last year that would put $5 trillion less on the deficit, $3 trillion less in spending. And we're willing and ready, if awarded with the ability to lead this Congress again, we're ready to go to work on that and put the American people's money where our mouth is.
MATTHEWS: Right. But, you know, that cartoon—you know we grew up with "Popeye." And there was the character in "Popeye" named Wimpy. And he would always say, I will gladly pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger today.
You're asking for control of Congress today on the promise—promissory note that you will come up with actual program cuts. Now, I keep throwing out—you know the biggest causes of the deficit. You're more well-read on this than I am. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid—you put all the federal receipts we commit and taxes, and they all could just be gone right there, exhausted in those three programs. We got defense systems you could name.
But nobody wants to name what they want to cut by name, do they?
Isn't that fair to say on both parties?
PENCE: Well, it may be fair towards some members of Congress. But, again, I hasten to add Republicans—and it is astonishing to me the Democrat majority did not even try to pass a budget this year. But last year, Republicans adopted a budget that had $3 trillion in spending cuts in it, and that would be cuts in discretionary spending, and it also would be cuts through reforms of entitlements.
I think, you know, it's all going on the table.
PENCE: I understand the politics of saying, well, name this, name that program. But I can tell you, take a look at the Republican budget last year, Republicans have been on the record about—about rolling back this runaway freight train of spending that frankly begun under the last Republican administration, has been put on steroids under this one. The American people want to get federal spending under control and as our budget shows, we're ready to do it.
MATTHEWS: OK. See that—that's a good headline. The Democrats and Republicans on steroids when it comes to spending, I know with the promise cuts.
Let me ask you about this extension of unemployment right now.
PENCE: Yes.
MATTHEWS: The president is pushing for it and you party says he's not willing to pay for it. What is going to happen to those unemployed people? What should happen to them?
PENCE: Well, what should happen to them—
MATTHEWS: They're not going to get benefits.
PENCE: Well, no—what should happen to them is we should extend unemployment benefits, but we ought to pay for it, Chris. I mean, Republicans will offer an alternative.
MATTHEWS: OK. What will you cut—
PENCE: The stimulus bill.
PENCE: Our alternative said you take $34 billion in unspent stimulus funds. I mean, the American people know the stimulus bill has utterly failed. So, why don't we take $34 billion out of the stimulus funds that hasn't been spent and use that to pay to help Americans who are the victims of these—the failed policies of this and frankly the previous administration?
I mean, this economy is struggling. The American people want us to get this economy moving again. But we need to help people at the point of need. We just got to pay for it.
I mean, when I'm home, people are saying, for heaven's sake, we've got to see job creation. We got to have economic policies that work. But we've also got to get spending under control.
We can do that. Take the unspent stimulus funds, $34 billion, provide that in unemployment benefits to Americans that are hurting, and then let's try some new economic policies that will release the inherent power of this economy.
MATTHEWS: Right now, it looks to me like we all look at this big Niagara Falls coming at the end here. At some point, the Congress is going to have to decide what to do with the Bush tax cuts, especially for the upper income people. And I know the very upper income people pay a lot of taxes. We all know that.
Is it your party's position right now, Congressman Pence, that you're going to try to keep the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy, even at the time you're saying no extensive unemployment? And even though both factors could lead to a higher deficit, you're going to lean towards keeping tax cuts for the rich, but lean hard against extending unemployment benefits? You're comfortable fighting this next election on that line: keeping the Bush tax cuts for the rich, avoiding extending unemployment benefits for the working poor. You're comfortable fighting this election on that issue?
PENCE: No, I'm comfortable fighting this election on being the party that wants to pay for unemployment benefits by making sure—
MATTHEWS: But what about the tax cuts?
PENCE: Absolutely. Let me be as clear as a bell on HARDBALL. House Republicans are determined to fight and to oppose the largest tax increase in American history with everything we've got.
PENCE: I don't know anybody back in Indiana, or anywhere across the country that thinks allowing the largest tax increase in history to take effect in January makes any sense in getting this economy moving again.
MATTHEWS: OK. These are great rhetoric. And I understand the business everybody is in. We're in journalism, too. You like hyped-up words, too. But you use the words like steroids and largest tax cuts in history.
But the bottom line is, your party position going into this election is no extensive unemployment benefits unless cuts are made elsewhere. And yet, you will not stop—in other words, you will continue the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy at the cost of a higher deficit.
That's fair enough, isn't it? That's a fact.
PENCE: I don't know—I don't know—I don't know anybody who thinks that they pay too little in taxes. I don't know anybody who thinks that by raising taxes in January, they're going to create jobs. I mean, come on, Chris. This is—
MATTHEWS: Well, you got me there. Nobody wants to pay taxes. Let me ask you this: what's the unemployment—
PENCE: The administration may think that raising taxes in January is a pathway to prosperity. But I would venture to guess—almost every American knows you don't raise taxes during a recession.
MATTHEWS: OK, with a guy making $10 million a year is going to keep his tax cut. And the guy who's hoping to get unemployment comp this week isn't gong to get it because the Republican leaders, and I understand that's your position.
What's the unemployment rate in Indiana right now, sir?
PENCE: It's banging right up to 10 percent. It's worse in some counties in my district.
MATTHEWS: And you're willing to face it. It's 10 percent as of the last couple of months. Are you willing to face that unemployment rate and still say no to the people on unemployment comp, even though they paid into it?
PENCE: I am—I am willing to stand up for every American to help Americans at the point of need and also to say that I want to be a part of leadership in Washington, D.C. that's willing to make the harder choices, to put a priority on some spending over others.
Look, the American people want to help people at the point in the need. They want to see us pursuing policies that will create jobs. But, Chris, I got to tell you, maybe you can hear it out there on the west coast. Back home in Indiana, at a county fair on Friday night, all I heard about was when are you people going to get serious about getting spending under control?
MATTHEWS: I think the unemployment rate is even worse out here.
Thank you very much. And keep coming back to HARDBALL.
Congressman Mike Pence—
PENCE: You bet.
MATTHEWS: -- number three Republican leader in the House.
Up next, in the wake of the September 11th attacks, the federal government built up its national security and intelligence bureaucracy. But did it make us safer? That's the problem, it were so complex it's so difficult to manage. One has to wonder whether we're getting the job done of protecting us and keeping us safe.
We got a huge story coming up here—thanks to Dana Priest, who wrote the big story for "The Washington Post." She's coming here next. You got to hear this one.
This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDALL.
A "Washington Post" investigation shows a national security and intelligence system so completely disorganized and unwieldy that it's mindboggling. Dana Priest, by the way, led "The Washington Post" investigation.
We'll be right back. We'll be right back.
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.
Well, are we safer than we were before 9/11? A new "Washington Post" investigation casts a lot of doubt on that. Dana Priest led "The Washington Post" investigation.
Welcome, Dana. Thank you.
You're a heck of a reporter. So, here's the question. I think a lot of people want to bottom line this as you would want do as a journalist: 9/11, something like that, a conspiracy, a well-coordinated attack on the United States. Would we—would we be more likely to catch it with all this moving around of boxes and bureaucracy?
DANA PRIEST, THE WASHINGTON POST: Well, simultaneous hit from airplanes, yes, I don't think that's going to happen again. We've pretty much locked down—locked down the airline industry and done a good job there.
But this report really is not about that. It talks about how big the whole system has grown and we found that there's over 2,000 corporations that work for it, and 1,300 government organizations working at the top secret level.
You know, when we started to do this, we started looking at the secret level and there were too many organizations there to actually even hope to track. So, we went up to top secret because that was a smaller universe. And yet, still, we found 850,000 people who have top secret clearances.
And maybe the most disturbing thing to me as a reporter with some decent sources in the government is just how many senior officials said, we don't really know how many people are employed here, we don't know how much the system costs, and it's become so unwieldy that we can't determine whether it's effective and we can't determine whether it's making us safer. So that was really the bottom line. That there's a lack of information that's become so big that it's in some sense has overwhelmed the progress that's been made in other areas like information sharing.
MATTHEWS: Well, when we had the Christmas bomber, we had information coming from the father of the suspect who said my son's on the warpath. He's coming to the United States. We had simultaneous information from Yemen that something was up in that area, and nobody put the dots together.
What has your reporting told us about dot connection?
PRIEST: Well, that's a perfect example of how the largeness of the system has overwhelmed some of the progress, because really, it's become so big that it's blurred the lines of responsibility where people aren't sure whether they're the ones that are responsible for getting to the very bottom of a tip.
And we had this new National Counterterrorism Center that was created where thousands of people work. It costs billions of dollars to set up. It was supposed to be the premier organization do that, and yet on this incident, what happened was they didn't run the tips to ground and what happened after that when they admitted that they had a problem was that they asked for more analysts, they asked for more air marshals, they asked for more money.
And that's always been the solution for a problem, is just to throw more and more and more money at it.
And as director of the CIA, Leon Panetta, and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tell us, that more is not always enough. That more is—it really is too much at this time with deficits and with the recession that they all expect that they're going to be having to cut back. And so, they're going to go review their programs and look to see where it's most sensible to do that.
But we found incredible overlap and redundancy, organizations doing the same sort of thing.
MATTHEWS: You're president of the United States and you have a problem. You read something in the paper that scares you about something happening somewhere in Yemen or somewhere in Somalia. You're worried about what's happening in Uganda. Who do you call and have a serious chat with and really learn something from? Is it Leon Panetta? Is it the national director?
Who is it that really is the president's guy or woman on this thing?
PRIEST: Well, I think if it's overseas, you probably call the CIA director and the national security agency director. You don't call the DNI, the director of national intelligence unless you want to wait a little while to get them to call the CIA and them to call the national security agency and really get it together.
MATTHEWS: Yes. Right.
PRIEST: That system is not quite working as I think a lot of Americans think that it should be. Put one guy on top. He's in charge. It's not really working that way.
MATTHEWS: Got you. Got to go. Dana Priest, congratulations on a big piece of journalism and a lot to absorb now.
PRIEST: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: When we return, let me finish with some thoughts about why Republicans can't say what programs they'd cut, even as they grumble appropriately about government spending, tell us what to cut, put your neck on the line. They're not doing it.
You're watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with something my colleague David Gregory started yesterday. On "Meet the Press," he pressed the top Republican campaigners, Senator John Cornyn and Congressman Pete Sessions on government spending. So, what are you going to cut? I love that question.
Here's Gregory calling their bluff. "You're here bashing the other side for spending too much. You say you want to cut spending, OK, Senator, and Congressman, you're the two the folks out there raising money for Republicans to take over the Congress. You're out there hitting the Democrats for not cutting back on spending, blasting that $1.6 trillion deficit this year. OK now, show me your cuts."
Cornyn and Sessions had nothing—no plan to cut the deficit, no cuts, nothing.
I'm not surprised just depressed. How many years have we put up with this? OK, from both sides.
But Republicans used to be the party of fiscal responsibility—you know, cash and carry, not buying something you can't afford. That was when the party was based in the Midwest heartland, when Republicans thought like farmers and small business folk. They knew the price of things and haggled over price and squeezed the budget, both at the store and at the kitchen table so they could stay out of debt. That was the party of Bob Taft and Jerry Ford and later Bob Dole and it's gone. G-O-N-E.
What's left is the party of supply side, see you later budgeting, dynamic score-keeping and all the rest. Ronald Reagan started this with his promise to cut the deficit by eliminating, quote, "waste, fraud and abuse" from government spending. Well, that was a smoke screen for, quote, "I'm not going to tell you what I want to cut because you'll kill me for it."
Well, watch Cornyn and Sessions scramble to find the rhetorical ploy. It won't be "I'll gladly pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger today." That was wimpy in the "Popeye" cartoons, but it will be exactly that and other cleverly chosen words, and it will still be a bluff like they tried on David Gregory Sunday morning.
That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
Right now, it's time for "THE ED SHOW" with Ed Schultz.
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 Maine Law Further Protects Health Care Providers in Preferred Provider Arrangements A new Maine law will give physical therapists and other health care providers additional protections when they enter into contracts for preferred provider arrangements. Public Law 399 (LD 1466) will require health plans to disclose certain information and materials to providers at the time a preferred provider arrangement contract is offered. The legislation will prohibit contracts that allow health insurance companies to make changes to key terms, such as reimbursement rates, without the provider's written consent after the agreement has been entered. LD 1466 was sponsored by Maine Senate Majority Leader Seth Goodall (D-19) and supported by the Maine Chapter of APTA. The new provisions will take effect October 8.


text:
Bennett J. Loudon, Staff Writer, Democrat & Chronicle
The business community has a new resource to get help from experienced experts.
The series, hosted by Alex Zapesochny, is an outgrowth of the efforts of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Working Group of the Finger Lakes Regional Economic Development Council. The regional council is one of 10 created to develop long-term strategic plans for spurring economic growth and new jobs across the state.


text:
Steven Yarinsky MD, FACS
About the Practice
Practice Philosophy
For over 25 years Steven Yarinsky, MD and the expert staff of Saratoga Springs Plastic Surgery, PC have been dedicated to providing you with an exceptional level of quality service and care to get the best possible in cosmetic surgery of your body, breasts and face. Dr. Yarinsky practices the Art and Science of Cosmetic Medicine. We are here to help you look and feel your best by enhancing your natural beauty and rejuvenating your appearance.
Dr. Yarinsky wants to be sure you make an education decision regarding your procedure. He personally answers emails and takes your calls after hours, before and after your procedure.
We offer you the only Joint Commission accredited office cosmetic surgery center in the Capital District for your comfort, privacy, convenience and cost savings over the hospital setting. Your procedure is done right at our state-of-the-art office facility! Our Joint Commission accreditation is your assurance that we provide you the "Gold Standard of Safety" in health care.
Plus we provide the complete range of Medispa services at Saratoga Springs Medispa including advanced medical skin care, massage, Endermologie Lipomassage cellulite treatment, laser hair removal, sclerotherapy, laser capillary and age spot removal. Our licensed massage therapist, expertly trained Nurses and aesthetician provide you with medispa services at the Saratoga Springs Medispa (visit www.yarinsky.com). As the only Capital District certified "Expert Injector" Dr. Yarinsky personally performs your Botox and facial filler injections. Breast Augmentation and Breast Lifts, Liposuction, Tummy Tucks, Facelifts, Nose Reshaping, Laser Skin Smoothing and Eyelid lifts are some of our most commonly requested procedures.
Call us at (518)583-4019 for an informative and friendly consultation visit. We care about you and want to help you make the best possible choice! Come visit with Dr. Yarinsky and our staff and you will see why so many people in Vermont, Upstate New York, Western Massachusetts and the Albany Capital District choose us. We are truly at your service.
To schedule your consultation with Dr. Yarinsky and his staff and save $100 on our standard consultation fee, call (518)583-4019 or contact us today! Visit www.yarinsky.com
Practice Specialization
Practice Specialization/Procedures Performed: Full Spectrum of Cosmetic Procedures for body, breast, and face:
Breast Procedures:
Breast Augmentation, Breast Lift, Breast Revision, Inverted Nipple Correction, Tubular Breasts Male Breast Reduction
Body Contouring:
Liposuction, Tummy Tuck, Thigh & Arm Lifts, Labiaplasty (female genital enhancement)
Facial Procedures:
Ultra-Pulse Laser Skin Resurfacing, Eyelid, Face & Neck Lifts, Nose, Ear, Lip, Cheek & Chin Reshaping, Lip & Line Plumping with Fat Injections, Ultherapy®,Skin Cancer, Mole and Tattoo Removal, Scar Revision, Earlobe repair
Skin Treatments:
Botox® Cosmetic, Xeomin®, Juvederm®, Radiesse®, Belotero®, SkinMedica® Peels, Sculptra® Aesthetic, Microdermabrasion - Dermapeel, glycolic peels, Genesis V - laser facial, Excel V™- age spot treatment
Laser Procedures:
Laser Hair Removal, Excel V™- Laser Face Capillary & Age Spot Removal, Sclerotherapy- Leg Spider Vein Treatment & Ultra-Pulse Laser Facial Resurfacing
Medispa Services:
Laser Hair Removal, Excel V™- Laser Face Capillary & Age Spot Removal, Sclerotherapy- Leg Spider Vein Treatment, Microdermabrasion - Dermapeel, SkinMedica® Facial Peels, glycolic peels, Endermologie Lipomassage Cellulite Reduction, Massage Therapy, Non-Surgical Skin Tightening- Ultherapy®
Additional Information
Office Hours:
Monday through Thursday: 8 a.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Fridays: 8am – 2:45 pm
Background & Certification
Board Certification
American Board of Plastic Surgery
Advanced Education in Cosmetic Surgery from ASAPS
Certified by Sientra, Allergan and Mentor for Gel Implants
Professional Background
Dartmouth College
Hanover, New Hampshire
Biology Major, A.B. Degree, Magna Cum Laude, 1978
Medical School:
State University of New York
Health Science Center at Syracuse
Syracuse, NY
M.D. Degree 1982
The Ohio State University Hospitals
Columbus, Ohio
General Surgery Resident 1982-1985
Marshall University Medical School
Huntington, West Virginia
General Surgery Resident 1985-1987
Medical College of Ohio- Northwest Ohio Plastic Surgeons, Inc.
Toledo, Ohio
Plastic Surgery Resident 1987-1989
Awards & Honors
ASAPS Certificate of Advanced Education in Cosmetic Surgery
Selected as one of America's "Top Plastic Surgeons" for 2013 by Consumers' Research Council of America
"Best of 2012 & 2013 Plastic & Cosmetic Surgeons" by Plastic Surgery Practice Magazine
"Best of the Saratoga Region Plastic Surgeon 2013" by Saratoga Today's Newspaper
Affiliations & Memberships
Hospital Affiliations
The Saratoga Hospital - active staff member Glens Falls Hospital - affiliate/courtesy staff member
Society Memberships
American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (ASAPS)
American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS)
North Eastern Society of Plastic Surgeons
New York Society of Plastic Surgeons Mensa Saratoga County Medical Society
Medical Society of the State of New York
Your Consultation
Dr. Yarinsky and his staff provide you with a detailed extensive consultation to educate you about any procedure and/or result that you desire to enhance your body, breast and face. Dr. Yarinsky personalized consultations are informative and comprehensive.
Dr. Yarinsky is experienced and trained in all the new breast augmentation implant options including the new "Gummy Bear" implants
Testimonial from one of Dr Yarinsky's patients:
"I consulted with 3 different practices [regarding liposuction, tummy tuck, breast augmentation and breast lift]. None of the others were as informative or caring as you folks. I left the other places with more questions than answers and the feeling that I had taken up too much of the doctor's time. I left Saratoga Springs Plastic Surgery feeling like I could make an informed decision and would be in good hands." J.L
Staff & Facilities
Surgical Facility
We have the only Joint Commission accredited office cosmetic surgery facility in the Capital District / Upstate New York area for your comfort, convenience, privacy and safety. Our Joint Commission accreditation represents the "gold standard" in safety in health care. You have your procedure done right at our office and recuperate at home.
Computer Imaging
Computer imaging may be done at your consultation appointment and is particularly valuable to preview how great you might look after nose or face reshaping. You can see by the computer enhanced photo image whether cosmetic enhancement of your face will meet your expectations.
Skin Care Products
Skinceuticals®, SkinMedica®, VIVITÉ®, EltaMD®, Scarguard
Languages Spoken
Payment Options
VISA, MasterCard, Discover, Cash, Check, Debit Cards, Up to 100% Financing Options with CareCredit. Ask our staff about seasonal and package procedure discounts.
Steven Yarinsky MD, FACS
7 Wells St, Saratoga Springs,
Request More Information
- View Website
View phone number
Phone: 518-583-4019


text:
Bridal Style Finder
Take our quiz & say 'I do' to your dream dress!Style Quiz
Select all that apply
Select all that apply
Select all that apply
Select all that apply
(Matching dresses: )
Style Finder
Take the quiz to discover the perfect look for your
bridal party
(Matching dresses: )
FABRIC: Chiffon
Spirited Molly JBD is so much fun! She features a one shoulder neckline with peekaboo cut out. Her cute gathered A-line skirt with hidden pockets will have you elated! Inspired by Azazie Molly.
Because some of our fabrics take on dye a bit differently than our chiffon, we're not able to offer all of our fabrics in every color. If the color you're looking for isn't listed on the dress order page, unfortunately, it means we're not able to make it in that color. I'm so sorry about that!
While we do offer custom sizing as an option, we are not able to offer custom design options at this time. We take quality very seriously and to stay consistent, we're unable to make any changes to our patterns and designs, like adjusting the length of a knee-length dress to floor-length, removing embellishments, adding sleeves or changing fabrics.


text:
STANFORD, Calif. (AP) Aaron Bright scored a season-high 19 points, Dwight Powell added 16 and Stanford earned its first Pac-12 Conference victory, beating Washington State 78-67 Wednesday night.
Chasson Randle added 16 points for the Cardinal (10-6, 1-2 Pac-12), who ended a two-game slide.
Brock Motum matched his season-high with 29 points to lead the Cougars (9-6, 0-2). Mike Ladd added 15 points.
The largest lead for either team was six points until Stanford began pulling away in the final minutes.
D.J. Shelton hit consecutive 3-pointers for Washington State to tie the game at 37 with just under 13 minutes to play.
The lead changed hands six times afterward.
Stanford led 27-23 at halftime after Randle and Bright each hit a 3-pointer in the last five minutes.
This was the fifth game involving the Cougars that neither team scored more than 27 points in the first half.
It was a first for Stanford.


text:
Custom Closets
At Closets by Design, we offer three closet systems to choose from. Each will maximize your space and create a closet that helps organize not only your clothes, but your life as well. We build each closet with you in mind.
If you want an easy answer to closet clutter, our Everyday Collection is right for you. Its basic yet useful design will give your closets a fresh look at a sensible price. This collection consists of ¾" straight edge panels, shelves and half overlay flat face doors and drawers. The Everyday Collection is also available with half overlay Deco doors and drawers and crown and base molding.
Combine simplicity and style with our Classic Collection. It unites essential organization with stylish design to create the practical closet you've been looking for. This collection features our exclusive soft edge treatment and half overlay doors and drawers. Upgrade to our Classic Premium Package design which consists of ¾" soft edge panels and shelves, inset doors and drawers, accompanied by our stylish top shelf.
The Regency Collection is excellence in closet design. This collection incorporates 1 1/8" panels, ¾" shelves and our exclusive soft edge treatment, and half overlay doors and drawers with flat face and soft edge. Enhance your closet even further with our Regency Premium Package consisting of 1 1/8" soft edge panels, ¾" soft edge shelves, inset doors and drawers.
Our collections offer a vast array of custom options and features.


text:
Attacks individual right to keep and bear arms
Steve Watson
Dec 18, 2012
Barack Obama's former head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein, a long time advocate of eviscerating the Second Amendment, has penned a piece that essentially labels anyone who defends long standing gun rights in the US as "crazy".
In the editorial titled Gun Debate Must Avoid Crazy Second Amendment Claims, Sunstein argues that the individual right to bear arms, supported and reaffirmed consistently by courts across the nation, constitutes "wild and unsupportable claims about the meaning of the Constitution."
"Sure, it could fairly be read to support an individual right to have guns." writes Sunstein of the Second, "But in light of the preamble, with its reference to a well-regulated militia, it could also be read not to confer an individual right, but to protect federalism, by ensuring that the new national government wouldn't interfere with citizen militias at the state level."
He then goes on to claim that for decades it was never recognized that the Second Amendment protected the individual's right to keep and bear arms, and that it was only with the Supreme Court decision in 2008 that individual rights were established.
"We should respect the fact that the individual right to have guns has been established, but a lot of gun-control legislation, imaginable or proposed, would be perfectly consistent with the court's rulings." Sunstein writes.
"It is past time to stop using the Second Amendment itself as a loaded weapon, threatening elected representatives who ought to be doing their jobs." Sunstein concludes.
This constitutes an old argument that is used by big government gun grabbers and those politically motivated to erode individual rights. The Supreme Court decision in 2008 UPHELD the individual right to keep and bear arms, as many other court decisions and Justice Department memoranda has before. It did not ESTABLISH that right, as Sunstein argues.
In 2004, the Justice Department noted, "A 'right of the people' is ordinarily and most naturally a right of individuals, not of a State and not merely of those serving the State as militiamen. The phrase 'keep arms' at the time of the Founding usually indicated the private ownership and retention of arms by individuals as individuals, not the stockpiling of arms by a government or its soldiers, and the phrase certainly had that meaning when used in connection with a 'right of the people,'"
"Moreover, the Second Amendment appears in the Bill of Rights amid amendments securing numerous individual rights, a placement that makes it likely that the right of the people to keep and bear arms likewise belongs to individuals," the DOJ's report continued.
Sunstein's argument against individual gun rights hinges on the notion that the Founders used the word "people" to mean "states", a clearly ridiculous suggestion especially given that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were penned by the most meticulous wordsmiths in history.
Thomas Jefferson himself wrote in several drafts of the Virginia constitution, provisions that "no freeman shall be debarred the use of arms."
In addition, state-level precursors to the Second Amendment made it clear that keeping arms was each person's individual right "for the defence of themselves and the state."
In his argument, Sunstein even wrongly cites the 1939 case of U.S. v. Miller, to argue that there is no individual right to keep and bear arms. In reality, however, the court in that case duly noted that the "militia" mentioned in the Second Amendment comprised all able-bodied males – ie individuals.
Sunstein, and those who have propelled the same argument about the Second Amendment are twisting its meaning. The founders explicitly crafted the Second Amendment as a bulwark against government tyranny. Armed militia — citizens of a country — were to defend against the possible rise of a tyrannical state, not only merely to organize for hunting expeditions or to defend against small scale criminal activity.
We have seen this kind of Rhetoric before from Sunstein. During a lecture at the University of Chicago Law School on October 27, 2007, he argued that "The Supreme Court has never suggested that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to have guns."
Sunstein either misunderstands the original purpose of the Second Amendment or stands opposed to an armed citizenry guarding against tyranny.
Given that Sunstein has also argued that the First Amendment should be "reformulated", and has called for taxing or banning outright, as in making illegal, opinions and ideas that the government doesn't approve of, it is clearly only his views on the Constitution and Bill of Rights that are "crazy", and not those of the Founders.
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones' Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.
This article was posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Tags: gun rights


text:
Artifacts/yclept (Label)
Analog Music from a Lost World
About Artifacts/yclept
Originally a label, now a community of musicians and their various projects.
» VIEW ALLArtifacts/yclept Fans
Related Albums
Featured Collection
» VIEW BLOG Artifacts/yclept Blog Feed
hfayekay on 04/30/2014 at 02:45PM
"Music for People Who Aren't Afraid of the Moment"
Direct from Richmond, Virginia, underground label ARTIFACTS/yclept offers a goldmine of early 70s/80s jazz improv & post-punk sounds from related outfits Idio-Savant & Orthotonics.
A pure example of the textural free-jazz inspired sound from the thick of the new wave scene of the 70s & early 80s, Idio-Savant trumpeter Paul Watson described their process being "…like a trance like state or automatic type of playing." (Milwaukee Journal, Dec.1988) Their emotionally driven, form-defying yet maturely crafted improvisations were further lauded by such institutions as the Richmond-Times Dispatch, Cadence Magazine, & Jazz Digest. A few musical configurations later, a version of Idio dubbed "Orthotonics" successfully experimented with steering the stochastic sound into a more melodic direction, complete with post-punky intellectually warped lyrics like "Too Hot to Trotsky."
The FMA is happy to annouce 3 albums from Idio-Savant: Shakers in a Tantrum Landscape ('79), The Alpha Audio Sessions ('79), & Trans-Idio ('81) & 3 more from Orthotonics: Accessible as Gravity ('83), Wake Up You Must Remember ('84), & Luminous Bipeds ('86) now available for your listening & downloading pleasure! PLUS! You would be remiss to forego the wealth of information & graphics in the bonus biographical PDFs provided for both bands bands here (Idio) & here (Ortho).
Stay tuned for more gems from the ARTIFACTS/yclept vault coming to the FMA in the near future!
TAGGED AS:orthotonics, idio-savant, artifactsyclept
blxl on 06/21/2013 at 04:15PM
Necroscopix (1970-1981): Analog Music from a Lost World
The newly released Artifacts/yclept 2-disc compilation Necroscopix (1970-1981) is a simple documentary survey of a very particular time and place; a sliver of a local culture — made in imitation of, or perhaps as a salute to the work of musicologist, Dick Spottswood, one of our heroes. The best stories can't be told in this amount of space, but here's an outline.
"...in Richmond, or in any Southern city for that matter, you do see types now and then which depart from the norm. The South is full of eccentric characters; it still fosters individuality. And the most individualistic are of course from the land, from the out of the way places."
— Henry Miller,
"The Air-Conditioned Nightmare" (1945)
The oddest of us were, to be sure, not from the Big City, but while many here came from places like Boones Mill, Roanoke, Martinsville, Clarksville and Culpeper in Virginia, and Winston-Salem and Greensboro in North Carolina, nearly half came from the D.C. suburbs, all converging on the urban scene around the art school at Virginia Commonwealth University in the late 1960's.
And, if the South is indeed full of "eccentric characters," what is art school, if not a universally potent magnet for creative misfits? There isn't a person on these two discs who ever intended to be what the Japanese call a "salary man," and though most succeeded in that intention, some inevitably succumbed, while more than a few died resisting in their own way (see the list, please) — and others just disappeared.
Richmond is less than 100 miles from Our Nation's Capital, which in pre-digital days was still worlds away from the major centers of the Counter Culture on the West Coast and in NYC, and that remove forced us to interpret and synthesize a take on the zeitgeist that was uniquely our own.


text:
Security update for Linux kernel
(Last modified: 31AUG2006)
solutions Security update for Linux kernel SuSE Linux Maintenance Web (d501672f20f1f468d24344550dbc92e0)
Product(s): SUSE CORE 9 for IBM S/390 31bit
Patch: patch-11194
Release: 20060831
Obsoletes: none
- CVE-2006-3745: A double userspace copy in a SCTP ioctl allows local attackers to overflow a buffer in the kernel, potentially allowing code execution and privilege escalation. [#199441]
- CVE-2006-4093: Local attackers were able to crash PowerPC systems with PPC970 processor using a not correctly disabled privileged instruction ("attn"). [#197810]
- CVE-2006-3468: Remote attackers able to access an NFS of a ext2 or ext3 filesystem can cause a denial of service (file system panic) via a crafted UDP packet with a V2 lookup procedure that specifies a bad file handle (inode number), which triggers an error and causes an exported directory to be remounted read-only. [#192988]
- disable reading from /proc/sys/vm/toss_page_cache_nodes [#199686]
- patches.suse/delayed-atime-3: fixed a typo [#197710]
- Enable context-dependent symlinks in OCFS2 [#195081]
- Enable watchdog on IBM x460 for i386/x86-64 [#194555]
- Fix knfsd intermittently returns ENOENT on GETATTR of valid file or directory [#193934]
- fix race on link [#191713]
- A set of NFS fixes: [#189132]
- VFS: Ensure LOOKUP_CONTINUE flag is preserved by link_path_walk()
- Optimise away an excessive GETATTR call when a file is symlinked
- Cleanup initialisation of struct nfs_fattr
- Convert cache_change_attribute into a jiffy-based value
- Make nfs_fattr record the time at which the rpc call started
- Optimise inode attribute cache updates
- Remove redundant 'verifier' argument to nfs_update_inode()
- Don't let nfs_end_data_update() clobber attribute update information
- Optimise attribute revalidation on close().
- forcedeth: fix random memory scribbling bug [#188013]
- Fix problem with /proc/scsi remove-single-device [#186236]
- Fix possible work queue corruption resulting in oops. [#183391]
- sun disk label fix: use unsigned rather than signed int for sector count. [#183366]
- Updated: Page cache locking fix [#183048]
- CKRM: Free argv stuff at exec if it has been allocated earlier [#182973]
- Fix for kernel panic during power-on sequence. [#175925]
- Updated the double completion fix for fusion driver [#172910]
- Fix race in pagevec_strip [#158289]
- Fix reiserfs latencies caused by data=ordered [#154374]
- Fixed: sysctl_overcommit_memory is set to OVERCOMMIT_NEVER [#153342]
- Fix return value for 'mt tell' ioctl [#145383]
- reiserfs: fix transaction overflowing [#145070]
- ignore multiple COMM_START_WRITE_NETDUMP_ACK packets [#138321]
- Make portmap requests 'hard' when nfs filesystem is mounted 'hard' [#95374]
- Added latest patchset from IBM: Patchcluster 39
- Problem-ID: 25393 - xpram: module parameter parsing.
- Problem-ID: 24645 - qeth: qethconf not adding ipa entries
- Problem-ID: 25507 - cio: 5 min timeout after setting chpid offline.
- Problem-ID: 25511 - cio: Fix some path grouping and path verification related problems.
- Problem-ID: 25564 - qeth: race during setup of qeth device
- Problem-ID: 25599 - zfcp: ERP "deadlock" when registering a scsi device
- Problem-ID: 22069 - zfcp: duplicate usage of zfcp's scsi_er_timer
- Problem-ID: 25799 - iucv: multiple interfaces with same peer established
- Problem-ID: 25801 - cio: permanent subchannel busy conditions may cause I/O stall
- Problem-ID: 25802 - cio: Disallow ccwgroup devices containing non-unique ccw devices.
- Problem-ID: 26016 - qeth: race when reboot and recovery run concurrently
- Problem-ID: 26068 - qeth: kernel panic under heavy UDP workload
- Problem-ID: 26014 - qeth: stack trace with msg "inconsistent lock state"
- Problem-ID: 26103 - cio: I/O stall due to lost interupt after CHPID vary off/on cycle
- Problem-ID: 26118 - dasd: kernel BUG when setting a DASD device offline.
- Problem-ID: 19628 - zfcp: reopen adapter on do_QDIO error
- Problem-ID: 26144 - qeth: Setrouting for ipv6 invalid on hipersockets.
- Problem-ID: 23427, 24855 - cio: Inconsistent values in channel measurement facility.
- In the former Kernel the HZ_TIMER was switched on by default. This is now switched off. (see
cat /proc/sys/kernel/hz_timeron the system)
rpm -Fvh kernel-s390x.rpm kernel-source.rpm kernel-syms.rpm
When rebooting the Linux on zSeries z/VM guests, please ensure that you have installed the PTFs for APAR VM63742:
- z/VM 4.4: UM31426
- z/VM 5.1: UM31428
Finally, reboot the system with
shutdown -r now
to load the new kernel (replace "now" with the appropriate amount of time to allow local users to cleanly log out, for example "+5" for five minutes.)
Download Source Packages
Download the source code of the patches for maintained products.
The Origin of this information may be internal or external to Novell. Novell makes all reasonable efforts to verify this information. However, the information provided in this document is for your information only. Novell makes no explicit or implied claims to the validity of this information.
Any trademarks referenced in this document are the property of their respective owners. Consult your product manuals for complete trademark information.


text:
Gerard attends a special screening of 'The Hangover' hosted by The Cinema Society and Details on June 4 in New York.
The German official site for Gamer has been launched, with a slightly different trailer. Visit the site now!
More hi-res production photos from The Ugly Truth have been added to the gallery.


text:
Another alphabetical game, but this time backwards. The category is villains from video games. If you like, put a notation as to what game features the villain. It doesn't have to be main boss, or even a boss, just any enemy from a game.
Z - Zeromus (Final Fantasy IV).


text:
Recommended for you
Home » Customer Showcase ebooks » Travelbasys: modern & serving the world
Most Recent Flipbooks
Powertec and Software AG: Working together to help farmers
ASPINA motors toward the Internet-of-Things era
Cumulocity IoT created new business opportunities for ASPINA and expanded the versatility of its offerings, including intelligent life-saving medical devices.
A Tale of Digital Triumph
How operational excellence is enabling a bold transition in banking
Buildings optimize and conserve energy with BSA and Software AG
Smart buildings - what does this really mean? Check out how BSA and Software AG can help you to connect, monitor, analyze and control the systems in your buildings – saving money, time and creating
Processes coming into fashion
Future Intelligence and Cumulocity IoT light up smart cities
FINoTTM Lighting from Future Intelligence, built on Cumulocity IoT, adds "smart" to lighting systems - on the road, or in the parking lot.
Electrical Utility's Digital Transformation with Alfabet
Malaysia's leading electricity utility flips the switch on for digital business transformation with Alfabet.
Primur chooses Cumulocity IoT to win business in Australia
CSBP: Automating fertiliser supply in Western Australia with Telstra and Cumulocity IoT
CSBP in Australia is using an automated solution developed by Telstra and based on Cumulocity IoT for monitoring farmers' tank levels to supply farms with the fertiliser they need, when they need it.
Cumulocity IoT helps you get a degree in IoT Engineering!
James Cook University in Cairns, Australia is offering the first-ever degree in IoT Engineering. Using Cumulocity IoT, students can create real-life projects in weeks.
Digital Government Transformation with ARIS and Alfabet
Governments around the world facing challenges due to dynamical political, economic and social changes, therefore governments need to respond faster by adapting change and transformational culture.
Prinzhorn aims for growth with webMethods.io B2B integration platform
Software AG's webMethods.io B2B integration platform was selected to help Prinzhorn Group achieve its rapid growth strategy.
The Birth of Smart Government
Delivering platform-enabled digital services
Process Management Solutions Take Metro Bank to Market
Metro Bank, the first new mainstream UK bank to be launched since the financial crisis, leaped over many challenges by working with ARIS and Alfabet for process and GDPR excellence.
ARIS helps TDC Group to Connect and Comply
Using ARIS Connect and ARIS Aware, TDC can model and document its processes for GDPR compliance on time.
Rehosting saves millions and improves citizen services
Continuously up to date in the cloud with ARIS
See how Software AG Business Process Modeling software ARIS Cloud is helping Nationwide get faster access to the newest BPM capabilities to maximize their investment in process architecture.
Telstra and Software AG transform Australian Water Management
In drought-prone Australia, Telstra is leveraging Cumulocity IoT to develop a Water Management Solution Accelerator - to collect sensor data, create alerts and warn utilities of leaks.
W&W get 150% ROI with ARIS GRC
Automating risk: Banking on security with webMethods