Find a show you like and click the 
button. The show will be added to your My Playlist page and updated 24/7 with new videos.
Search Results
2 Views
20:15:59 01/04/12
Demi Lovato in Seventeen Magazine's February 2012 Issue
[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 20:15:59 01/04/12
Demi Lovato in Seventeen Magazine's February 2012 Issue
VIDEO: The singer reveals to Seventeen magazine who her true friends were in rehab, but says that she'd have intense fights with Miley! NOTHIN' LIKE A LITTLE HELP FROM YOUR FRIENDS... AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT DEMI LOVATO HAD WITH BFF'S LIKE SELENA GOMEZ AND MILEY CYRUS DURING HER STINT IN REHAB LAST YEAR. BUT, THE SKYSCRAPER SINGER REVEALS, WHILE SHE AND SELENA NEVER FIGHT, MILEY'S A DIFFERENT STORY. SHE TELLS SEVENTEEN, "Miley and I are very strong-headed, so when we fight, it's brutal and we're like, 'We're never going to be friends again!' Then two days later, we're like, 'I love you and I miss you!'...AND SHE ADDS, "No matter how many times we fight, we will always be in each others' lives." ANOTHER CLOSE PAL? KIM KARDASHIAN! DEMI SAYS SHE QUOTE "was there for me when not many people were. I could count on my hands how many people were there for me. So the people who were, I didn't forget it." WHAT A DIFFERENCE A YEAR MAKES! SHE ALSO TELLS THE MAG, SHE'S CLEAN AND HEALTHY. "I don't drink, I don't do drugs, I don't throw up after my meals, I don't starve myself," SHE SAYS, "There's nothing that I do that I feel ashamed of." AND YOU CAN FIND OUT MORE OF DEMI'S CONFIDENCE SECRETS IN FEBRUARY'S SEVENTEEN. FOR CELEBTV, IM KELLI ZINK. From: CelebTV Views: 1931 26 ratings Time: 01:08 More in Entertainment
0 Views
20:15:59 01/04/12
Demi Lovato in Seventeen Magazine's February 2012 Issue
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 20:15:59 01/04/12
Demi Lovato in Seventeen Magazine's February 2012 Issue
VIDEO: The singer reveals to Seventeen magazine who her true friends were in rehab, but says that she'd have intense fights with Miley! NOTHIN' LIKE A LITTLE HELP FROM YOUR FRIENDS... AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT DEMI LOVATO HAD WITH BFF'S LIKE SELENA GOMEZ AND MILEY CYRUS DURING HER STINT IN REHAB LAST YEAR. BUT, THE SKYSCRAPER SINGER REVEALS, WHILE SHE AND SELENA NEVER FIGHT, MILEY'S A DIFFERENT STORY. SHE TELLS SEVENTEEN, "Miley and I are very strong-headed, so when we fight, it's brutal and we're like, 'We're never going to be friends again!' Then two days later, we're like, 'I love you and I miss you!'...AND SHE ADDS, "No matter how many times we fight, we will always be in each others' lives." ANOTHER CLOSE PAL? KIM KARDASHIAN! DEMI SAYS SHE QUOTE "was there for me when not many people were. I could count on my hands how many people were there for me. So the people who were, I didn't forget it." WHAT A DIFFERENCE A YEAR MAKES! SHE ALSO TELLS THE MAG, SHE'S CLEAN AND HEALTHY. "I don't drink, I don't do drugs, I don't throw up after my meals, I don't starve myself," SHE SAYS, "There's nothing that I do that I feel ashamed of." AND YOU CAN FIND OUT MORE OF DEMI'S CONFIDENCE SECRETS IN FEBRUARY'S SEVENTEEN. FOR CELEBTV, IM KELLI ZINK. From: CelebTV Views: 1931 26 ratings Time: 01:08 More in Entertainment
7 Views
22:00:00 12/11/11
Jon Huntsman: Yes, There Is Overwhelming Scientific Evidence For Man-Made Climate Change
[LESS INFO] 7 VIEWS | ADDED 22:00:00 12/11/11
video platform video management video solutions video player
Personally, I think progressive groups missed a real opportunity by not reaching out to Jon Huntsman months ago to support his moderate views. We know that the toxic extremism of the Republican primary process is a big part of why our country's in the intractable mess we're in, and until we fix that, simply electing Democrats won't be enough. Wouldn't it be smart to support some Republicans who actually want to make reasonable decisions for the good of the country? Unions could have pushed his candidacy to their Republican members in the primaries, maybe even encouraged members to switch registrations to show support. Yeah, it's unorthodox - but what else is working?
As I wrote several months ago, a study indicates as many as one-third of registered Republicans don't vote. because they don't like extreme candidates. Someone like Huntsman could have motivated those people to get back to the polls, especially if it looked like he had a chance. Instead, he's been left to drift, just more chum for the right-wing sharks. He's trying to stay alive by spouting a weird mix of common sense and right wing dogma, but at least on This Week with Christiane Amanpour today he walks back his recent statement and admits that yes, there is overwhelming scientific evidence for man-made climate change: >
AMANPOUR: Six candidates faced off in Des Moines last night, but Jon Huntsman wasn't one of them. The former Utah governor, who entered this campaign with enormous fanfare, has failed to qualify for a spot on the debate stage. Iowa isn't part of the Huntsman strategy, though. He has put all of his firepower into New Hampshire. And he joins us this morning from Manchester. Governor, thank you for joining us. Let me quickly ask you, I'm sure you do not want to get into who won, who lost, but who do you think won on the stage last night?
HUNTSMAN: Well, Christiane, thank you for having me, first and foremost. I think with respect to last night, all I can say, with all due respect to your terrific network, was I was delighted to be here in New Hampshire having a town hall meeting. We have four town hall meetings today. We have a debate with Newt Gingrich on Monday. And this is a state that is incredibly important for us.
And on the debate stage last night, I believe that the most important issue of all confronting the American people wasn't even touched upon, and that is the deficit of trust that we have in the United States. In fact, it may have -- it played right into the trust deficit. That is, nobody trusts Congress anymore. We need term limits in Congress. We need to close the revolving door that allows members of Congress to move right on into the lobbying profession. No one has trust anymore toward the executive branch. No one trusts Wall Street, with banks that are too big to fail. So the -- I would argue that the issues that are most salient in our political dialogue today weren't even touched upon last night.
AMANPOUR: So then how do you explain the phenomenal rise of Newt Gingrich? You say people don't have trust, and yet he does seem to be speaking, at least to Republican voters, in a way that you aren't, for instance.
HUNTSMAN: Well, listen, there have been so many ups and downs in this race, I'm getting whiplashed, quite frankly. We've had six front-runners in the span of about six months. And all I can tell you, having spent a whole lot of time here in New Hampshire -- we have had 116 public events in this state -- is that the voters will begin to coalesce around a candidate about a week to 10 days out. The marketplace is still open. People are shopping. They are listening very, very carefully. And all I can say, Christiane, is the two messages that we're delivering to the people here on the ground, the economic deficit which is the cancer metastasizing in this country and one that is a national security problem, I would say, and the trust deficit are the two biggest issues we face today. And we're getting people showing up to our town hall meetings in numbers I never would have imagined. They're signing up afterwards, they're taking lawn signs home.
I feel very good about their trajectory here in this great state. And this is always the state that upends conventional wisdom. So let's not fall back onto conventional wisdom. That never holds true in the end.
AMANPOUR: All right, but people are trying to figure out how you're going to really break out, because you are at the moment at the bottom of the pack, despite the fact that some independents, for instance in New Hampshire call you the sanest one running. Our George Will has said that you deserve a searching second look from conservatives. Ross Douthat of the New York Times calls you the most electable conservative remaining in the race. And yet as I say, what you are offering doesn't seem to be resonating. It appears that the Newt Gingrich, sort of bombast and brash, in your face against Obama is what's resonating.
HUNTSMAN: Christiane, we're doing better in New Hampshire than half the people on that stage last night when you look at the recent polls. We're going nowhere but up. We started as a margin of error candidate. I'm no longer a margin of error candidate because our messages are working.
People want to know if they're going to have a president who's going to call for term limits for Congress. They want to know they're going to have a president who will take on banks that are too big to fail. And it doesn't matter if we fix taxes or create a more streamlined regulatory environment or move toward energy independence. If we're stuck with banks that are too big to fail, with this implied guarantee by the taxpayers, we're setting ourselves up for disaster.
So we've moved from zero to now double digits, and in the weeks ahead, I do believe we're going to move right up toward the top of the pack, understanding full well that people simply don't make decisions until days out, from in this case, January 10th.
I like our position. They want an honest, honorable, trustworthy person in this race. They want someone whose core they can trust going forward. We're putting ourselves forward as that person. And I like our position.
AMANPOUR: I just want to put up a graphic, because, again, talking about New Hampshire, you are back in fourth place there. So given how important New Hampshire is to you staying in the race, tell me honestly where you have to come in order to stay in the race?
HUNTSMAN: We have to beat market expectations, Christiane. And I have every expectation that we're going to beat market expectations.
AMANPOUR: Where is that, second, third? Where do you think you'd be?
HUNTSMAN: I'm not going to play the numbers game. I am not going to play the numbers game, but we're going to be right up toward the top. We have done nothing but climb in every poll since we entered this market, and our message is connecting with people. I can feel it on the ground. I have a very good visceral sense of where this campaign is going. And we're going to surprise and upend conventional wisdom, I can tell you that right now.
AMANPOUR: All right, let me ask you about where this campaign is going. I read to you a few comments from people before, including one who called you the sanest one still running. But it appears that you're reversing some of your own eminently sensible positions, for instance on climate change. You in August tweeted that "to be clear, I believe in evolution, and I trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy." You have been tweeting about this sort of rightward swing, you've been jabbing at the base. And yet last week, you sort of rolled that bit back on climate change. You sort of said there isn't enough science. I mean, what are you doing?
HUNTSMAN: Well, Christiane, I'm not changing at all. I have said all along that I put my faith and trust in science. When you have 99 out 100 climate scientists, you have members of the National Academy of Sciences who have weighed in on a body of research on the subject matter, I say that's where I put my trust.
Yes, there might be one percent of scientists who still are questioning some of those assumptions, and that debate and discussion will continue. But as for me, let me make it crystal clear. I'm on the side of science in this debate. I don't know a whole lot of people on Capitol Hill who are physicists or climate scientists. I think this is a discussion that needs to be taken out of the political lane and kept in the science lane.
AMANPOUR: One more question, you have said that you will endorse and support whoever's the nominee. If it is Newt Gingrich, will he get your endorsement?
HUNTSMAN: Well, listen, I don't have to worry about that, because we're moving up in this great state of New Hampshire. We're going to be the nominee, and I don't have to worry about anything beyond that.
AMANPOUR: Jon Huntsman, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
HUNTSMAN: Thanks, Christiane.
1 Views
22:00:00 12/11/11
Jon Huntsman: Yes, There Is Overwhelming Scientific Evidence For Man-Made Climate Change
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 22:00:00 12/11/11
video platform video management video solutions video player
Personally, I think progressive groups missed a real opportunity by not reaching out to Jon Huntsman months ago to support his moderate views. We know that the toxic extremism of the Republican primary process is a big part of why our country's in the intractable mess we're in, and until we fix that, simply electing Democrats won't be enough. Wouldn't it be smart to support some Republicans who actually want to make reasonable decisions for the good of the country? Unions could have pushed his candidacy to their Republican members in the primaries, maybe even encouraged members to switch registrations to show support. Yeah, it's unorthodox - but what else is working?
As I wrote several months ago, a study indicates as many as one-third of registered Republicans don't vote. because they don't like extreme candidates. Someone like Huntsman could have motivated those people to get back to the polls, especially if it looked like he had a chance. Instead, he's been left to drift, just more chum for the right-wing sharks. He's trying to stay alive by spouting a weird mix of common sense and right wing dogma, but at least on This Week with Christiane Amanpour today he walks back his recent statement and admits that yes, there is overwhelming scientific evidence for man-made climate change: >
AMANPOUR: Six candidates faced off in Des Moines last night, but Jon Huntsman wasn't one of them. The former Utah governor, who entered this campaign with enormous fanfare, has failed to qualify for a spot on the debate stage. Iowa isn't part of the Huntsman strategy, though. He has put all of his firepower into New Hampshire. And he joins us this morning from Manchester. Governor, thank you for joining us. Let me quickly ask you, I'm sure you do not want to get into who won, who lost, but who do you think won on the stage last night?
HUNTSMAN: Well, Christiane, thank you for having me, first and foremost. I think with respect to last night, all I can say, with all due respect to your terrific network, was I was delighted to be here in New Hampshire having a town hall meeting. We have four town hall meetings today. We have a debate with Newt Gingrich on Monday. And this is a state that is incredibly important for us.
And on the debate stage last night, I believe that the most important issue of all confronting the American people wasn't even touched upon, and that is the deficit of trust that we have in the United States. In fact, it may have -- it played right into the trust deficit. That is, nobody trusts Congress anymore. We need term limits in Congress. We need to close the revolving door that allows members of Congress to move right on into the lobbying profession. No one has trust anymore toward the executive branch. No one trusts Wall Street, with banks that are too big to fail. So the -- I would argue that the issues that are most salient in our political dialogue today weren't even touched upon last night.
AMANPOUR: So then how do you explain the phenomenal rise of Newt Gingrich? You say people don't have trust, and yet he does seem to be speaking, at least to Republican voters, in a way that you aren't, for instance.
HUNTSMAN: Well, listen, there have been so many ups and downs in this race, I'm getting whiplashed, quite frankly. We've had six front-runners in the span of about six months. And all I can tell you, having spent a whole lot of time here in New Hampshire -- we have had 116 public events in this state -- is that the voters will begin to coalesce around a candidate about a week to 10 days out. The marketplace is still open. People are shopping. They are listening very, very carefully. And all I can say, Christiane, is the two messages that we're delivering to the people here on the ground, the economic deficit which is the cancer metastasizing in this country and one that is a national security problem, I would say, and the trust deficit are the two biggest issues we face today. And we're getting people showing up to our town hall meetings in numbers I never would have imagined. They're signing up afterwards, they're taking lawn signs home.
I feel very good about their trajectory here in this great state. And this is always the state that upends conventional wisdom. So let's not fall back onto conventional wisdom. That never holds true in the end.
AMANPOUR: All right, but people are trying to figure out how you're going to really break out, because you are at the moment at the bottom of the pack, despite the fact that some independents, for instance in New Hampshire call you the sanest one running. Our George Will has said that you deserve a searching second look from conservatives. Ross Douthat of the New York Times calls you the most electable conservative remaining in the race. And yet as I say, what you are offering doesn't seem to be resonating. It appears that the Newt Gingrich, sort of bombast and brash, in your face against Obama is what's resonating.
HUNTSMAN: Christiane, we're doing better in New Hampshire than half the people on that stage last night when you look at the recent polls. We're going nowhere but up. We started as a margin of error candidate. I'm no longer a margin of error candidate because our messages are working.
People want to know if they're going to have a president who's going to call for term limits for Congress. They want to know they're going to have a president who will take on banks that are too big to fail. And it doesn't matter if we fix taxes or create a more streamlined regulatory environment or move toward energy independence. If we're stuck with banks that are too big to fail, with this implied guarantee by the taxpayers, we're setting ourselves up for disaster.
So we've moved from zero to now double digits, and in the weeks ahead, I do believe we're going to move right up toward the top of the pack, understanding full well that people simply don't make decisions until days out, from in this case, January 10th.
I like our position. They want an honest, honorable, trustworthy person in this race. They want someone whose core they can trust going forward. We're putting ourselves forward as that person. And I like our position.
AMANPOUR: I just want to put up a graphic, because, again, talking about New Hampshire, you are back in fourth place there. So given how important New Hampshire is to you staying in the race, tell me honestly where you have to come in order to stay in the race?
HUNTSMAN: We have to beat market expectations, Christiane. And I have every expectation that we're going to beat market expectations.
AMANPOUR: Where is that, second, third? Where do you think you'd be?
HUNTSMAN: I'm not going to play the numbers game. I am not going to play the numbers game, but we're going to be right up toward the top. We have done nothing but climb in every poll since we entered this market, and our message is connecting with people. I can feel it on the ground. I have a very good visceral sense of where this campaign is going. And we're going to surprise and upend conventional wisdom, I can tell you that right now.
AMANPOUR: All right, let me ask you about where this campaign is going. I read to you a few comments from people before, including one who called you the sanest one still running. But it appears that you're reversing some of your own eminently sensible positions, for instance on climate change. You in August tweeted that "to be clear, I believe in evolution, and I trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy." You have been tweeting about this sort of rightward swing, you've been jabbing at the base. And yet last week, you sort of rolled that bit back on climate change. You sort of said there isn't enough science. I mean, what are you doing?
HUNTSMAN: Well, Christiane, I'm not changing at all. I have said all along that I put my faith and trust in science. When you have 99 out 100 climate scientists, you have members of the National Academy of Sciences who have weighed in on a body of research on the subject matter, I say that's where I put my trust.
Yes, there might be one percent of scientists who still are questioning some of those assumptions, and that debate and discussion will continue. But as for me, let me make it crystal clear. I'm on the side of science in this debate. I don't know a whole lot of people on Capitol Hill who are physicists or climate scientists. I think this is a discussion that needs to be taken out of the political lane and kept in the science lane.
AMANPOUR: One more question, you have said that you will endorse and support whoever's the nominee. If it is Newt Gingrich, will he get your endorsement?
HUNTSMAN: Well, listen, I don't have to worry about that, because we're moving up in this great state of New Hampshire. We're going to be the nominee, and I don't have to worry about anything beyond that.
AMANPOUR: Jon Huntsman, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
HUNTSMAN: Thanks, Christiane.
1 Views
17:30:23 11/25/11
Thank You - For the Occupation, For the Intensity, For Lettin' Me Be Myself Again
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 17:30:23 11/25/11
It's like the old-timers always said: Don't quit before the miracle happens.
While the Arab Spring showed that people can still accomplish the impossible, Our political debate was frozen in corporate cynicism. Now everything has changed. For the United States, spring came in autumn. Who says miracles don't happen?
Like a Prayer
A few months ago I prayed for something. Granted, it wasn't the kind of prayer that's sanctioned by any ecclesiastical authority. And, okay, maybe it wasn't exactly a "prayer." I guess the technical term for it would be "blog post." But trust me, it was a prayer.
I'd been asked to write something for the Fourth of July, and I wrote we have to fight a new war, a " war of independence from corporate politics ." To be honest, those words felt Utopian even as I wrote them. Still, I never doubted them. The words were born out of the desperate sense that so many of us shared, a sense that our society is collapsing. And that it will keep on collapsing unless we change the way we think.
I wasn't arguing for any particular policy or platform. "The problem isn't just with politicians, or even the system," I said then. "The problem is dependence itself."
Oh, come on. How starry-eyed can you get? Stop depending on politicians? Declare psychic and political independence from celebrity-driven politics and media-made leaders? I'd always considered myself a realist, but this was almost embarrassingly idealistic.
Except for the fact that it happened.
Passionate Intensity
Like so many others, I had grieved and raged over the lack of commitment displayed by good people. Cynics, robber barons, and American warlords are hard at work degrading - and downgrading - this country. In a strange set of parallels, we were reenacting the stories of the Third World countries we'd invaded. Like them, we were becoming a nation where servile or fearful politicians served a cynical oligarchy while the people's way of life died all around them.
Some might call it karma - or simply "payback."
But whatever you call it, the forces of hate and greed were running wild. The "two-party" system seemed to offer nothing in response except a) posturing, b) surrender, and c) a politics of compromise that seemed to amount to little more than ... well, see "a)" and "b)", above. Good people were fighting for better policies, and I tried to play my part. But too many of us focused on the prose of politics and not its poetry.
Meanwhile, too many politicians got lazy quoting Bill Clinton's hack line: Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. It can be, of course. But before our eyes, the "good" became the enemy of the "perfect" and the mediocre became the enemy of the good. Then the cynical became the enemy of the mediocre, and democracy began to die.
Meanwhile the other side gained its momentum with every passing month, fueled by a pseudo-populist movement ginned up by corporate-funded political hacks. A nation that had rejected the politics of greed and oligarchy at the ballot box was even more suffocated by it than before. No wonder so many people were uninspired, discouraged, despondent. Some people quoted William Butler Yeats:
The best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity.
The good people who did burn with passionate intensity were in danger of turning the torch on themselves. " The game is over," wrote Chris Hedges . "We lost. The corporate state will continue its inexorable advance until two-thirds of the nation is locked into a desperate, permanent underclass."
As boom times came back to Wall Street, depression - emotional as well as economic - entombed the majority. But the suffering of the majority turned invisible inside the Beltway, as politicians debated deficits in a broken economy. It was like debating water conservation while the house burned down.
The Condition of Everything
Miles of commentary have been written about the Occupy movement. As the occupations gained steam, people criticized them for their lack of specific policy demands. But they were right not to issue specific demands. They were declaring independence from a frame of mind, a set of assumptions that led to passive acceptance of an unacceptable system.
And they had passionate intensity.
I've told this story before, but I'll tell it again: When OccupyDC marched down K Street, in the early days of the movement, a young security guard asked an older one what they were protesting. "I'm not sure," said the older man. "But I think they're objecting to ..." He circled his hands to indicate the environment around him. ".... the condition of everything. "
By objecting to the condition of everything, the Occupiers changed the political dialog in this country. By rejecting leaders and insisting on self-governance through General Assemblies, they taught us by example how to escape emotional dependence. Like William Butler Yeats, they understood that you can't distinguish the dancer from the dance.
One of the movement's most articulate and forceful advocates is Chris Hedges.
Recalling Democracy
The Wisconsin uprising had been going on for months, even in the dark days of July. The miracle of Wisconsin is that it's still going on. People there occupied their capitol to protest laws designed to break the middle class, laws written by corporate America's "ALEC" division. Then they mounted recall efforts against recently elected GOP State Senators, reducing their majority and draining resources from their coffers.
Now Gov. Walker is facing a recall. The struggle in Wisconsin isn't about "Democrats" against "Republicans." It's about resisting politicians that are wholly-owned subsidiaries of corporate America.
The people of Wisconsin showed the country how to resist. Now they're showing us how to persist.
And just this month, Ohio voters rejected an ALEC-inspired initiative to strip that state's workers of rights. Maine voters rejected a move to overturn election-day registration, another attempt to restrict the ability of lower-income citizens to vote. And Mississippi rejected a definition of prenatal rights so extreme that many anti-abortion advocates were disturbed by its implications for the rights, health, and safety of women.
Like I was saying: Miracles.
Radical Innocence
But elections aren't the point. They can be a reflection of the change we need, but they're not the change itself. The real changes are personal. "When I remake a song," said Yeats, "it is myself that I remake." The Rolling Stones said "It's the singer, not the song."
We misunderstood our own power. We were being distracted and manipulated by fear and anger. Our minds, our souls, were being manipulated by what the Native American poet and activist John Trudell calls "the mining of the essence." One of the reasons we were powerless is that we believed we were powerless. That's even true economically. "All money is a matter of belief," said Adam Smith.
We needed to push our fear and anger away to see the obvious truths all around us: The corporations rule our political process. That our democracy is dying. That Wall Street is filled with people who broke moral (and sometimes actual) laws and forced the rest of the country to pay the price. We had to see with fresh eyes.
"All hatred driven hence," wrote Yeats, "the soul recovers radical innocence."
Our political process has become too cynical. Even reasonable and very moderate ideas favored by a majority of Republican voters, as well as others - a breakup of five or six too-big-to-fail banks, a public option health plan that's only available to one American in twenty - were declared impossible.
We needed an infusion of radical innocence, the innocence of Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson, of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. We sometimes think of innocence as something childlike and weak. But innocence has great power. Innocence changes the world.
We needed that radical innocence,and we got it. What we do with it now is up to us.
Can we commit ourselves to moving forward, to persevering against all odds? The future's unwritten. But we know what's happening right now. The political dialog has shifted in a way that seemed impossible a few months ago. I don't know how you feel about that, but I know how I feel.
I feel thankful. So thankful, in fact, that I'm gonna let Sam & Dave tell you all about it. Take it away, fellas:
6 Views
03:00:00 11/08/11
Occupy's A**hole Problem: Flashbacks from An Old Hippie
[LESS INFO] 6 VIEWS | ADDED 03:00:00 11/08/11
During Tuesday's Occupy Oakland General Strike, the so-called "Black Block" vandalized stores and buildings as peaceful Occupiers try desperately to stop them. [Caution: Strong Language-- NSFW]
Guest Editorial by Sara Robinson , Senior Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future
I wish I could say that the problems that the Occupy movement is having with infiltrators and agitators are new. But they’re not. In fact, they’re problems that the Old Hippies who survived the 60s and 70s remember acutely, and with considerable pain.
As a veteran of those days — with the scars to prove it — watching the OWS organizers struggle with drummers, druggies, sexual harassers, and racists brings me back to a few lessons we had to learn the hard way back in the day, always after putting up with way too much over-the-top behavior from people we didn’t think we were allowed to say no to. It’s heartening to watch the Occupiers begin to work out solutions to what I can only indelicately call the a**hole problem. In the hope of speeding that learning process along, here are a few glimmers from my own personal flashbacks — things that it’s high time somebody said right out loud.
1. Let’s be clear: It is absolutely OK to insist on behavior norms.
Occupy may be a DIY movement — but it also stands for very specific ideas and principles. Central among these is: We are here to reassert the common good. And we have a LOT of work to do. Being open and accepting does not mean that we’re obligated to accept behavior that damages our ability to achieve our goals. It also means that we have a perfect right to insist that people sharing our spaces either act in ways that further those goals, or go somewhere else until they’re able to meet that standard.
2. It is OK to draw boundaries between those who are clearly working toward our goals, and those who are clearly not.
Or, as an earlier generation of change agents put it: You’re either on the bus, or off the bus. Are you here to change the way this country operates, and willing to sacrifice some of your almighty personal freedom to do that? Great. You’re with us, and you’re welcome here. Are you here on your own trip and expecting the rest of us to put up with you? In that case, you are emphatically NOT on our side, and you are not welcome in our space.
Anybody who feels the need to put their own personal crap ahead of the health and future of the movement is (at least for that moment) an a**hole, and does not belong in Occupied space. Period. This can be a very hard idea for people in an inclusive movement to accept — we really want to have all voices heard. But the principles Occupy stands for must always take precedence over any individual’s divine right to be an a**hole, or the a**holes will take over. Which brings me to….
3. The consensus model has a fatal flaw, which is this: It’s very easy for power to devolve to the people who are willing to throw the biggest tantrums.
When some a drama king or queen starts holding the process hostage for their own reasons, congratulations! You’ve got a new a**hole! (See #2.) You must guard against this constantly, or consensus government becomes completely impossible.
4. Once you’ve accepted the right of the group to set boundaries around people’s behavior, and exclude those who put their personal rights ahead of the group’s mission and goals, the next question becomes: How do we deal with chronic a**holes?
This is the problem Occupy’s leaders are very visibly struggling with now. I’ve been a part of a**hole-infested groups in the long-ago past that had very good luck with a whole-group restorative justice process. In this process, the full group (or some very large subset of it that’s been empowered to speak for the whole) confronts the troublemaker directly. The object is not to shame or blame. Instead, it’s like an intervention. You simply point out what you have seen and how it affects you. The person is given a clear choice: make some very specific changes in their behavior, or else leave.
This requires some pre-organization. You need three to five spokespeople to moderate the session (usually as a tag team) and do most of the talking. Everybody else simply stands in a circle around the offender, watching silently, looking strong and determined. The spokespeople make factual we statements that reflect the observations of the group. We have seen you using drugs inside Occupied space. We are concerned that this hurts our movement. We are asking you to either stop, or leave.
When the person tries to make excuses (and one of the most annoying attributes of chronic a**holes is they’re usually skilled excuse-makers as well), then other members of the group can speak up — always with I messages. I saw you smoking a joint with X and Y under tree Z this morning. We’re all worried about the cops here, and we think you’re putting our movement in danger. We are asking you to leave. Every statement needs to end with that demand — We are asking you to either stop, or else leave and not come back. No matter what the troublemaker says, the response must always be brought back to this bottom line.
These interventions can go on for a LONG time. You have to be committed to stay in the process, possibly for a few hours until the offender needs a restroom break or gets hungry. But eventually, if everybody stays put, the person will have no option but to accept that a very large group of people do not want him or her there. Even truly committed a**holes will get the message that they’ve crossed the line into unacceptable behavior when they’re faced with several dozen determined people confronting them all at once.
Given the time this takes, it’s tempting to cut corners by confronting several people all at once. Don’t do it. Confronting more than two people at a time creates a diffusion-of-responsibility effect: the troublemakers tell themselves that they just got caught up in a dragnet; the problem is those other people, not me. The one who talks the most will get most of the heat; the others will tend to slip by (though the experience may cause them to reconsider their behavior or leave as well).
This process also leaves open the hope that the person will really, truly get that their behavior is Not okay, and agree to change it. When this happens, be sure to negotiate specific changes, boundaries, rules, and consequences (if we see you using drugs here again, we will call the police. There will be no second warning), and then reach a consensus agreement that allows them to stay. On the other hand: if the person turns violent and gets out of control, then the question is settled, and their choice is made. You now have a legitimate reason to call the cops to haul them away. And the cops will likely respect you more for maintaining law and order.
Clearing out a huge number of these folks can be a massive time suck, at least for the few days it will take to weed out the worst ones and get good at it. It might make sense to create a large committee whose job it is to gather information, build cases against offenders, and conduct these meetings.
And finally:
5. It is not wrong for you to set boundaries this way.
You will get sh-t for this. But…but…it looks a whole lot like a Maoist purge unit! No. There is nothing totalitarian about asking people who join your revolution to act in ways that support the goals of that revolution. And the Constitution guarantees your right of free association — which includes the right to exclude people who aren’t on the bus, and who are wasting the group’s limited time and energy rather than maximizing it. After all: you’re not sending these people to re-education camps, or doing anything else that damages them. You’re just getting them out of the park, and out of your hair. You’re eliminating distractions, which in turn effectively amplifies the voices and efforts of everyone else around you. And, in the process, you’re also modeling a new kind of justice that sanctions people’s behavior without sanctioning their being — while also carving out safe space in which the true potential of Occupy can flourish.
2 Views
03:00:00 11/08/11
Occupy's A**hole Problem: Flashbacks from An Old Hippie
[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 03:00:00 11/08/11
During Tuesday's Occupy Oakland General Strike, the so-called "Black Block" vandalized stores and buildings as peaceful Occupiers try desperately to stop them. [Caution: Strong Language-- NSFW]
Guest Editorial by Sara Robinson , Senior Fellow, Campaign for America’s Future
I wish I could say that the problems that the Occupy movement is having with infiltrators and agitators are new. But they’re not. In fact, they’re problems that the Old Hippies who survived the 60s and 70s remember acutely, and with considerable pain.
As a veteran of those days — with the scars to prove it — watching the OWS organizers struggle with drummers, druggies, sexual harassers, and racists brings me back to a few lessons we had to learn the hard way back in the day, always after putting up with way too much over-the-top behavior from people we didn’t think we were allowed to say no to. It’s heartening to watch the Occupiers begin to work out solutions to what I can only indelicately call the a**hole problem. In the hope of speeding that learning process along, here are a few glimmers from my own personal flashbacks — things that it’s high time somebody said right out loud.
1. Let’s be clear: It is absolutely OK to insist on behavior norms.
Occupy may be a DIY movement — but it also stands for very specific ideas and principles. Central among these is: We are here to reassert the common good. And we have a LOT of work to do. Being open and accepting does not mean that we’re obligated to accept behavior that damages our ability to achieve our goals. It also means that we have a perfect right to insist that people sharing our spaces either act in ways that further those goals, or go somewhere else until they’re able to meet that standard.
2. It is OK to draw boundaries between those who are clearly working toward our goals, and those who are clearly not.
Or, as an earlier generation of change agents put it: You’re either on the bus, or off the bus. Are you here to change the way this country operates, and willing to sacrifice some of your almighty personal freedom to do that? Great. You’re with us, and you’re welcome here. Are you here on your own trip and expecting the rest of us to put up with you? In that case, you are emphatically NOT on our side, and you are not welcome in our space.
Anybody who feels the need to put their own personal crap ahead of the health and future of the movement is (at least for that moment) an a**hole, and does not belong in Occupied space. Period. This can be a very hard idea for people in an inclusive movement to accept — we really want to have all voices heard. But the principles Occupy stands for must always take precedence over any individual’s divine right to be an a**hole, or the a**holes will take over. Which brings me to….
3. The consensus model has a fatal flaw, which is this: It’s very easy for power to devolve to the people who are willing to throw the biggest tantrums.
When some a drama king or queen starts holding the process hostage for their own reasons, congratulations! You’ve got a new a**hole! (See #2.) You must guard against this constantly, or consensus government becomes completely impossible.
4. Once you’ve accepted the right of the group to set boundaries around people’s behavior, and exclude those who put their personal rights ahead of the group’s mission and goals, the next question becomes: How do we deal with chronic a**holes?
This is the problem Occupy’s leaders are very visibly struggling with now. I’ve been a part of a**hole-infested groups in the long-ago past that had very good luck with a whole-group restorative justice process. In this process, the full group (or some very large subset of it that’s been empowered to speak for the whole) confronts the troublemaker directly. The object is not to shame or blame. Instead, it’s like an intervention. You simply point out what you have seen and how it affects you. The person is given a clear choice: make some very specific changes in their behavior, or else leave.
This requires some pre-organization. You need three to five spokespeople to moderate the session (usually as a tag team) and do most of the talking. Everybody else simply stands in a circle around the offender, watching silently, looking strong and determined. The spokespeople make factual we statements that reflect the observations of the group. We have seen you using drugs inside Occupied space. We are concerned that this hurts our movement. We are asking you to either stop, or leave.
When the person tries to make excuses (and one of the most annoying attributes of chronic a**holes is they’re usually skilled excuse-makers as well), then other members of the group can speak up — always with I messages. I saw you smoking a joint with X and Y under tree Z this morning. We’re all worried about the cops here, and we think you’re putting our movement in danger. We are asking you to leave. Every statement needs to end with that demand — We are asking you to either stop, or else leave and not come back. No matter what the troublemaker says, the response must always be brought back to this bottom line.
These interventions can go on for a LONG time. You have to be committed to stay in the process, possibly for a few hours until the offender needs a restroom break or gets hungry. But eventually, if everybody stays put, the person will have no option but to accept that a very large group of people do not want him or her there. Even truly committed a**holes will get the message that they’ve crossed the line into unacceptable behavior when they’re faced with several dozen determined people confronting them all at once.
Given the time this takes, it’s tempting to cut corners by confronting several people all at once. Don’t do it. Confronting more than two people at a time creates a diffusion-of-responsibility effect: the troublemakers tell themselves that they just got caught up in a dragnet; the problem is those other people, not me. The one who talks the most will get most of the heat; the others will tend to slip by (though the experience may cause them to reconsider their behavior or leave as well).
This process also leaves open the hope that the person will really, truly get that their behavior is Not okay, and agree to change it. When this happens, be sure to negotiate specific changes, boundaries, rules, and consequences (if we see you using drugs here again, we will call the police. There will be no second warning), and then reach a consensus agreement that allows them to stay. On the other hand: if the person turns violent and gets out of control, then the question is settled, and their choice is made. You now have a legitimate reason to call the cops to haul them away. And the cops will likely respect you more for maintaining law and order.
Clearing out a huge number of these folks can be a massive time suck, at least for the few days it will take to weed out the worst ones and get good at it. It might make sense to create a large committee whose job it is to gather information, build cases against offenders, and conduct these meetings.
And finally:
5. It is not wrong for you to set boundaries this way.
You will get sh-t for this. But…but…it looks a whole lot like a Maoist purge unit! No. There is nothing totalitarian about asking people who join your revolution to act in ways that support the goals of that revolution. And the Constitution guarantees your right of free association — which includes the right to exclude people who aren’t on the bus, and who are wasting the group’s limited time and energy rather than maximizing it. After all: you’re not sending these people to re-education camps, or doing anything else that damages them. You’re just getting them out of the park, and out of your hair. You’re eliminating distractions, which in turn effectively amplifies the voices and efforts of everyone else around you. And, in the process, you’re also modeling a new kind of justice that sanctions people’s behavior without sanctioning their being — while also carving out safe space in which the true potential of Occupy can flourish.
0 Views
19:00:00 09/18/11
Bill Clinton Public Private Cooperation Is A Way Out Of Jobs Crisis
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 19:00:00 09/18/11
video platform video management video solutions video player
Former President Bill Clinton appears on This Week With Christiane Amanpour to talk about the upcoming Clinton Global Initiative and its focus on job creation . I was part of a group of bloggers that got to meet with him a few years ago, and he was talking about green retrofits then. As I recall, the energy savings numbers he said could be created by retrofits were jaw-dropping, so this makes more sense than ever: >
AMANPOUR: Now, sir, your mantra right now is jobs, jobs, jobs. What do you think can happen to radically shift the unemployment picture and also pass muster in Washington in these very partisan times?
CLINTON: Well, I don't know that I'm the best person to answer the second part of that question. But I believe that we, those of us who aren't in government, can think of ways to create jobs which will reinforce what I believe are the positive suggestions coming out of Washington. Essentially, the president's plan has big payroll tax cuts in it, which will benefit the economy by lowering the average family's tax bill by 1,500 dollars. And then they can have that to spend. That will help. And then by lowering payroll taxes for employers, will make it more attractive for them to hire new people. But those of us who aren't in government, we don't have anything to do with that. So what we should do is focus on possible areas of job creation that will free up some of the corporate money that's in Treasuries now, that could be invested in America, and make bank loans more attractive to create jobs.
So that's what we try to do. We try to go around thinking about ways to specifically to do that. And if you look at the way the CGI program is set up this year, we also are trying to create more jobs around the world by focusing on the possibilities of green energy elsewhere, because it's not just in America that the green tech jobs are growing at twice the rate of overall employment. It's -- that's true around the world. And by focusing on trying to empower women and girls, because in many other countries, they're left out of the economy. And that's dragging the economic prospects of everyone down.
AMANPOUR: So what will tell the CEOs and the world leaders who come to your Clinton Global Initiative meeting this next week?
CLINTON: Well, I will ask them to put aside for the moment whatever their recommendations are to Washington about changes in the corporate tax laws or the trade bills or, you know, the tariffs that are imposed on component parts that some manufacturers use here but have to import from overseas, and just think about where we are now and what we can do now with the resources we now have. For example, I think we'll have an update on an announcement we made in Chicago, where the AFL-CIO and a couple of its affiliate unions are going to put some of their own pension funds into putting people to work retrofitting buildings and doing other things that will create jobs for their members and for other Americans in a way that will actually make more money for the pension funds than just putting it into the stock market will today. And they'll be in partnership with business instead of having a Washington political fight with them.
AMANPOUR: Where do you see -- obviously, this is all about this stubborn unemployment rate. Where do you see the unemployment, after all of these suggestions, and if they're implemented -- where do you see it standing this time next year?
CLINTON: Well, if you look at the program that the president has outlined, I think if we had the payroll tax cuts and the special incentives to hire the long term unemployed, and we did some of the things that I have been pushing very hard for, to invest building retrofits, which, if we did it right, could create a billions of jobs, the estimates are right across the economic board, including by Mr. Zandy who was an economic adviser to Senator McCain in the 2008 election.
All of the estimates that it will create somewhere between 1.3 and two million jobs, and drop unemployment by approximately one percent, maybe a little more. That's if they're implemented. That's -- we can't do much better than that right now, unless -- unless there is an aggressive action, which seems unlikely in Washington's political climate, to clean up this housing mess, because that's freezing too much investment in place.
So I think that it's a very good program that he outlined. I think if the Congress seriously takes him up on it and they start trying to work through it and get anything approaching the amount of activity that was recommended, they could put about two percent more on the GDP growth of the coming year, and they could drop unemployment by somewhere between one to two million. Or they can create one to two million jobs.
AMANPOUR: You have said in the past that this is not time for Mexican standoff or sort of macho politics. What can be done to make people in this city understand that the country faces a national emergency in this regard?
CLINTON: Well, we need a little bit of help from the American people. I mean, conflict has proved to be remarkably good politics. And it -- that sort of thing, you know, that -- it's very hard for the people in Washington, who got there based on pure conflict, pure attack, pure ideology, to take it seriously when their same constituents are saying please do something positive. That's not how they got elected. We live in a time where there's this huge disconnect between the way the political system works and the way the economic system works. If you look -- there are places all over America, believe it or not, that have low unemployment, high growth, strong home prices, jobs being created, a shortage of skilled workers.
And in every one of those places, they have networks of cooperation. San Diego has the largest number of Nobel Prized scientists in America. It's become the biotech center of the country. Everybody knows Silicon Valley's back. But look at what's happening in Pittsburgh, where they're trading steel for nanotechnology and other biomedical advances. Look at what's happening in Cleveland, around the Cleveland Clinic. Look at what's happening in Massachusetts, with the recovery of high-tech manufacturing around the MIT area. I can give you lots and lots of other examples. Every place the American economy is booming, cooperation is the order of the day. But conflict is still good politics in Washington. So until the American people make it clear that whatever -- however they voted in past elections, they want these folks to work together and to do something, there's going to be a little ambivalence in Washington.
AMANPOUR: Let me ask you this, then: Mayor Bloomberg of New York has said this week that unless something is done to really address this unemployment problem, there could be riots in the street, unrest. Do you -- do you agree with that?
CLINTON: I don't know. There have been demonstrations in many other countries where the same thing is going on. But if you -- the most important thing Mayor Bloomberg said recently is to offer land on Governor's Island or Roosevelt Island or the Navy Yard in Brooklyn for a new world-class science and technology research center. And he said that he'll kick in $100 million worth of investment if a group of universities will put one there, because he wants New York, in effect, to rival Silicon Valley as a technology center. That's the kind of thing that works. If you want put people to work, we've got to focus on what works, and what works is not all this back and forth fighting in Washington.
I think, as I said, I think that if we can't fix the housing crisis now -- which is probably not politically possible, but should be done -- we can't return to full employment . But if we adopt the plan that the president outlined, according to all this economic analysis, it will create between 1.5, 2 percent increase in GDP growth. It will put a million or two million people to work, and we'll be on the way back. We need some signal out of Washington that they understand that cooperation is good economics, even if conflict is good politics.
AMANPOUR: Mr. President, obviously the current situation in various polls are suggesting that people aren't satisfied with President Obama's leadership on this. And there was a special election in New York in District 9 that the Democrats lost after holding it for nearly 100 years. What does that say to you?
CLINTON: Well, the New York case is -- I know that district very well, and they were good enough to vote for me twice. But, I think, Mayor Koch had a big impact on that election because of the controversy surrounding Israel and how they're reacting to the proposal of the Palestinians to get the U.N. to recognize them as a state. I think that had a lot to do with it.
I also think it's a real blue-collar district that is suffering economically. So, it didn't surprise me. And I don't think -- and the Nevada district was a Republican district. So it's just -- it is what it is. We won not very long ago that district in upstate New York that had been Republican for even longer than this district had been Democrat because of the Medicare plan, and the Republicans have stopped talking about their plan to voucherize Medicare. So I -- there's a lot of upheaval now. A lot of, you know, people are feeling disjointed because they're hurting economically and they don't see the country going forward.
0 Views
05:23:27 09/15/11
Too many problems in my life
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 05:23:27 09/15/11
http://rehdogg.bandcamp.com/album/virgin-islands-reggae-explosion (Intro) So much problems inside of my life, I don’t understand why From time meh born,you know what I mean Want you understand what me ah chat seh, mercy me All people who struggle, I want you listen this lyrics consciously seen (Verse) There’s so many problems going on in meh life, when will I settle down get a girl to be my wife My mother wants me to commit to Jesus Christ, but the demons inside always put up a fight Life is unfair and the world is not nice,every man in this world will have to pay a price I’m living hell on earth all day and in the night, drink Budweiser until I’m high as a kite Soundclick emcees join and unite,continue my lyrics yes I chat through the mic Bob Marley told us it would be all right, but I highly disagree my life is put up a fight Here is a quote from Tom Ripley, If I had a big eraser I would rub out the world The first person I would start with is myself,cause I have too many secrets backed up on myself No matter how hard I try my life is a lie, happy on the outside but sad inside Pain so deep I’m drowning that is no lie, most times I’d rather live in a virtual world I had a virtual girl but I had to leave her, she fell too deep in love so I had to leave her Cause this love inside I have none, that’s why I have to come and tell everyone (Verse) There’s so many problems in my life going on, I have to settle down and het a nice wife And my mother told me I have to pray to Jesus Christ, but the demons inside always put up a fight a Life is unfair and the world is not nice, every man in the world will have to pay a price I’m living on earth and hell that’s a lie, try to sort things that takes time Soundclick emcees time to unite, now these conscious lyrics I’m spiting here through the mic (Break) Bob Marley told us it’s gonna be all right but I highly disagree my life is one big fight Umm yeah I don’t know what’s going on, but I know it’s time to reborn I want you to listen to me cause you know Reh Dogg come to reborn Yeah (5 times) (Verse) I was born on the Island St. Thomas, the tourist them come and they want to run me out Them sort of things make me get dangerous, so meh get dangerous and then meh get anxious Hit them one cuff and they fall to the ground, the tourist them really,really,really, bother me But that’s all right with me I don’t care, cause I went away and moved away cause I played dare Anyway I want you to understand me, so many problems in a meh life I need to pray to Jesus Christ my mother said, she may be right that’s a good answer I thought I found true love but I guess I was wrong, that’s why I decide to write this song So I can remain calm thought our feelings were strong, we use to sit back in my bed and watch funny movies I remember your favorite Something Mary; we used to watch it laugh so hard until we pee Play PS2 until we both fell asleep, you were my boo God knows how much I loved you I guess I was a fool would you believe me, I don’t know but it’s time that you go Cause you know I am the star of the show, Christmas was Merry but New Years better yeah http://rehdogg.bandcamp.com/album/virgin-islands-reggae-explosion
13 Views
08:17:09 08/12/11
Bouncing In Boots For Your Booty
[LESS INFO] 13 VIEWS | ADDED 08:17:09 08/12/11
HI Your Fit Day Friends !
Hey! Do you still want to get that sexy summer bod?
Or, maybe you're on the rebound from a joint injury...
Or, maybe you're just looking for that cool piece of equipment that is super fun and will get you fit and lean in a short amount of time...
Or, you just like toys!
OK! So, remember I told you that I would find ways to work out to keep me in super duper shape before my pending hip surgery?
Well, I had this super idea that I could design running shoes with springs on the bottom that would take the impact off my joints and it would be less painful to walk and super fun to use, as well as keep my booty in shape. But then I said, "Hmm! Why invent the wheel when somebody else has done the work for me? Why not ask the Kangoo Jump people to help me?"
So that's what I did.
And I think these Boots were made for YOU!
Boots Not Just Made For Walking!
My first try with the Kangoo jumps was back in June. It had been raining the last couple weeks in May so I had to put trying the boots out on hold. But finally the clouds separated, and the sun shined through and I got off my ball ( I use a stability ball as my desk chair) and decided to hop down to the Lake. No, I hadn't put the boots on just yet. That was actually a pun. And since it takes too long to hobble on my hip, I got in my car and headed 4 blocks to Lake Merritt.
"Another Lake Merrit July Drama Sunset"
But something compelled me to take a detour and instead I drove over to the Piedmont High School track where there wouldn't be any stray ducks, dogs or pelicans underfoot; I could count on level ground; and there was no chance of bouncing into the lake...with the pelicans.
"Pelicans at Lake Merritt, Oakland, CA"
I'll tell you this: in retrospect, walking down the steps to the track in my Chaco sandals and getting onto the track was actually the hardest part. Because once I put on the Kangoo Jumps it was shear joy to 'walk' and 'run' and just be able to amble pain free.
Check These Out
All Kangoos are a cool, ninja, space age ski/roller blade-like boot design with cambered curved springs on the bottom. And they're reasonably light, and lighter than roller blades-well, at least my roller blades-with just enough weight to give you the right amount of stability and a good workout. I mean, you're still lifting boots with every hop!
"My feet in Kangoo Jumps"
Getting into them was pretty quick and easy. Adjusting the cleats no problem. Figuring out the pressure to secure them was hit or miss and I probably will need a few more romps before they feel comfortable around the shin.
The track wasn't crowed but just carrying the boots in my hand drew attention to me. I wasn't going to complain about that. I'm a fitness diva, remember!
In fact, I'm hoping that I can get more people involved in using these boots and coming to my bootcamps. (HA! HA! Boot Camps! Kangoo Style!)
Once I had them securely on my feet I was like the Jolly Green Giant. I was amazed at how stable they were. Everyone kept asking me if I felt like I would topple over or twist my ankle. Absolutely NOT. Have you ever felt like you would fall over in ski boots? (assuming the ski is not attached to the boot and you're not ripping down a mountain). There is absolutely no inclination to fall over. And that is a good thing! seeing that I'm only planning on having ONE surgery.
Giving It a Go On My Kangoo Jumps
Because this was my first adventure out in my Kangoos I didn't want to over do it. They say to hop around, up and down, break them in. So I tried that, but was pretty tentative, babying my hip. But I soon realized that the boots actually roll you forward and the impact isn't directly on your hip. So I became more bold, and set off down the track... at a slow run. And behold, I was bouncing with no burn in my joint.
The track is 1/4 mile around. After three times around-running, walking, hopping, and repeating that-I was already working up a sweat and I could feel my running muscles in my legs-the ones I hadn't worked in that running way since December '10- start to come alive. I felt alive! And free........
I spent 15 minutes Kangooing and by the time I stopped I felt like I had instead sprinted up a mountain. It was that good of a workout and my legs and glutes felt pumped. All without any pain in my hip joint. In fact, my hip feels better in these boots running and walking than I do ambling, or more like hobbling right now, on my own two feet, whether in my shoes or Vibram 5 Fingers.
Here's a video of me in San Francisco bouncing in my boots :
Putting The Spring Back Into Your Life
The Kangoo Jumps are designed to take up to 80% of the impact off your joints. So for those of you who have osteoarthritis in your hips or knees (I'm not sure about back pain but you can check out their website) and have had to give up your favorite sport or activity you may have a second chance. So I highly recommend these Kangoo Jumps for anyone who has had to give up their favorite impact activity, things like hiking, trekking, and even martial arts, due to joint pain in their knees and hips and possibly back. Because you can do all of these sports in Kangoo Boots. Obviously do your research and consult with your doctor first. I certainly did before I started using them.
In fact, I contacted one of the leading hip surgeons in the world, Dr. Koen De Smet, to get his opinion and approval. And after he reviewed the website he said that they were suitable for what I wanted to do, and as long as it I didn't hurt I was fine.
Boots for your Booty
I have to admit I was getting a bit soft in the inner thigh and butt since I wasn't able to run in the hills or do any of the sprint training that I love to do for the past several months. But in the past month I have seen a noticeable difference in the tone of my inner thighs, quads and butt and the Kangoo jumps have miraculously toned up my legs in just this short amount of time.
And here's a bonus for those of you who have some extra weight to lose: They say that you burn twice as many calories using the Kangoo Boots and that 30 minutes in your Kangoos is like an hour in your normal training shoes. That's not hard to believe. After bouncing around San Francisco and Lake Merritt for just 30 minutes a pop these past few weeks it felt like I had done a six mile trail run in the Berkeley hills.
So, not only are these a great workout, burn calories, tone up your booty, and are a hoot to use, they are a time saver as well. What's not to like about them!
What's Next ?
So, my game plan is to Kangoo Jump for the next two months which will take me up to the week that I leave for overseas for my hip surgery. There will be no more Kangoo jumping for at least 10 months after surgery. But I'll have other exercises that I will be doing to keep our butts in shape, literally!
So be sure to follow my blog, and watch the videos, for more cool stuff that will keep your legs toned, your booty nice and round, and your body fit and lean.
Stay tuned for more Kangoo Jump videos so you can get the 'JUMP on fitness!'
Your Trainer, and Nutrition and Wellness Coach,
Debby K !
Make it Your Fit Day ...
1 Views
18:02:57 05/02/11
Video: Kirtland officials react to news of bin Laden's death
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 18:02:57 05/02/11
the approximately 3-thousand people killed in the minute thumbnail 12:03 pm september eleventh attacks-- the resulting war on terror has claimed thousands of erican lives. according to the department of defense .... since fighting began in afghanistan ... nearly 15-hundred u-s servicemen and women have died in operation freedom. as for the war in iraq-- which resulted from the war on terror-- the lives of more than 44- hundred american military members were claimed .... as well. the state department of veterans services website says to date.... 75 of those brave men and women who have died .... have been new mexico natives. with so many military personnel based here in the state... we went out today to see what the mood is like amongst the community. sharon erickson continues our team coverage-- live from the gates of kirtland air force base. sharon? antoinette... security has been heightened at air force bases across the country... and here at kirtland as well. the threat level across the united states was raised by the military- shortly after it was announced to the world that osama bin laden was dead. air force officials tell k- minute thumbnail 12:04 pm o-b eyewitness news 4... this means all workers must have the appropriate identification to get on the base property ... and they're asking everyone to have a heightened awareness of suspicious activity. we tried to talk to some airmen today... who weren't allowed to speak on camera... but we did catch up with veterans who say they're happy with the news that the world's most wanted man-- osama bin laden-- is finally dead. "i know that very many people were glad because they lost loved ones. today should be a celebration, a day for us to remember, and maybe even make a new holiday." whilyou've seen the celeations around the u-s-- military members are more subdued here at kirltand. airman told me off camera- they know al qaeda won't go away because bin laden is gone... but it's certainly a moral victory for those who feel he's responsible for the september 11th attacks. no word on how long security around the country will minute thumbnail 12:05 pm stay heightened. live at kirtland air force base. sharon erickson. kob eyewitness news 4.
2 Views
17:12:37 01/08/11
Paladinette Introduces “Jobless Talk Rant” to 99er Nation
[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 17:12:37 01/08/11
Yesterday, Paladinette Introduced “Jobless Talk Rant” to the 99er Nation. Jobless Talk Rant is a YouTube version of the opening remarks of her BlogTalk Radio Show, which airs Fridays at noon Pacific called Jobless Talk.
Jobless Talk was the first BlogTalk Show dedicated exclusively to “the stories of the unemployed, benefit extensions, Washington inaction to help the jobless millions, the out of control US unemployment rate and what Congress is not doing to help the 99er Nation.”
The 99er’s Rant can be found on ThePaladinette’s YouTube Channel http://www.youtube.com/user/ThePaladinette?feature=mhum and her show is even available free on I-Tunes. As She put it in yesterday’s show “I am even on Itunes Isn’t that a HOOT! Itunes.apple.com/bw/podcast/paladinette-blog-talk.../id373134073 free Podcast downloads you can schedule to automatically go into your I-TUNES PodCast Library!”
Yesterday’s Jobless Talk Show was the first of the New Year and came after a two week Holiday hiatus, since December 17, 2010.
This first installment of the Jobless Talk Rant comes in 2 parts (seen below) and is focused upon stirring the 99er Nation out of their apathetic and often self-deprecation lethargy after the long, unfruitful Tier 5 fight in 2010.
> “Actually I am trying to stir up 99ers from their sadness and Depression. What is happening to the 99er Nation is SHAMEFUL - but the shame is on Washington NOT the 99ers. Whether or not you agree with everything I write or opine that makes no difference to me - what matters is that I/We can agree to disagree and still stand in brother/sisterhood rising up to take our rightful place and demand what we have a right for - SURVIVAL! VIVA la 99er Nation, Arise and stand proud of what you have come through with NO HELP from Washington - only us helping each other!” Yesterday’s episode of Jobless Talk was the first of the new 2 hour format and was full of inspiring ideas, personal stories and poignant - In Your Face Style Paladinette is well known for employing.
> “Honestly I am not here to molly coddle anyone. I cannot and likely will NEVER understand anyone in our situation NOT being thrilled over the good fortune bestowed upon another down and out American. Some folks were actually pissed off at me at the end of last year because I found a benefactor to keep this show on the air. Now I will never understand not being absolutely THRILLED over the blessings God bestows on a fellow human being struggling to survive. Do not allow anyone to make you feel less than INCLUDING yourself.”
One of the most important suggestions she makes during this diatribe of a 99er Wake Up Call is to STOP fighting amongst themselves and remember everyone is human, makes mistakes and does their utmost best to lead the 99er Nation to what they need from Washington, in the form of more UI benefits NOW and a robust Jobs bill very soon.
One of the “Key STRATEGIES” she lays out in both her show and yesterday’s rant is:
> All of you need to:
GET over to U-Cubed [ http://www.unionofunemployed.com ] and sign up it is free and Rick Sloan who runs it is so smart about Washington and how it works. He has a long history and background in advocating for working class America with his involvement in IAM union. This man is so smart and U-Cubed will be a mover and shaker this year in the 99ers fight. How many people are represented in the 99ers union group what 20,000 or more? > I say stay with the 99ers union thing but also Get on U-Cubed now, today. When you get there, send me a friend request Paladinette . We need an army of folks fed up enough to take this fight to victory. I assure you that 20K people - ready to fight for survival of the 99ers under the leadership of Rick Sloan will make a HUGE difference and expedite the reward of our efforts. > So - spread the word. Get the word out to all the groups, blogs social networks, FB pages, radio shows, unemployed friends, pass out flyers if that is they only way you can help. Tell your friends and family to join you in this fight. It will help educate them, inspire you and positive energy attracts like energy. The power of like-minded people coming together for a good cause simply has to spawn something good.
The time to hide in your homes behind your computers is transcending into a call for more visible involvement. Hold your elected officials accountable. They put us in this mess and I for one intend to be politely in their face until we get what the 99er Nation needs to survive and eventually thrive. We will not be ignored any longer.
So I ask you How bad do you want to survive? Do you want it bad enough to pitch in and leave comfortable and apathy AND your ego at the door? Well now is the time and today is the day!
>
I will NOT GIVE UP OR GIVE IN! Nor will I stop trying new things that have the potential to effect the CHANGE necessary to help the 99ers - What you think of me personally is really none of my business. RATHER It is what we can accomplish together that is important the rest is distractions and immaterial crap!
SO I ASK You all out there in Unemployed America once AGAIN
Who is with me?
PLEASE SPREAD THES LINKS AROUND the Blogosphere wherever Jobless Americans may roam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKaCkUJCbLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFegx5f_KOk
[The donation button below is for me, Paladinette. If you like what I write please donate so I can keep on fighting for the 99ers! Thank You!]
3 Views
15:52:35 12/27/10
Trashy Tabloid Analysis: Star Sources
[LESS INFO] 3 VIEWS | ADDED 15:52:35 12/27/10
Star Magazine is the "trashy tabloid" that was first analyzed. Life & Style and in Touch Weekly were purchased at the same time (by a very brave man named Dennis Rose) in order to assist in the Trashy Tabloid Analysis that was previously explained.
It is very hard to get through a single tabloid from cover to cover due to the amount of analysis that needs to be done. There are many things than can be focused on, but from pages 1-39 (out of the 84 pages) the biggest thing noticed within this specific tabloid (this may be true of the others, but the analysis is going to be of each single tabloid and then at the end there can be comparisons)is that there are no sources to the stories.
The pages that have been analyzed thoroughly and read are pages 1-39, so this analysis is only for Star Magazine December 27, 2010 issue pages 1-39 with a focus on credibility of sources.
The magazine claims to have so many "Exclusive Interviews," but the only interview that falls under that category is the interview with Kristen StephensonPino. She tells the magazine all about how Johnny Depp is into her and all sorts of things. Of course, the only other sources credited within that article (titled "Johnny Hits On Teen Model") are anonymous sources. Unfortunately, the magazine mentions that she is a "full natural C-cup" before informing readers that Kristen is 19-years-old. So, the fact that she is a full natural C-cup is clearly more important than how old this "teen model" is. Maybe pages 39-84 will be more impressive.
The other articles all had quotes from "insiders" or "pals." How about going out and finding someone who will go on record so that the article can be credible. That's not journalism - that's laziness. Why should anyone trust what is being said by someone who won't even reveal the name publicly. For all we know the "inside source" is some random person on the street that the "reporter" found.
Then there's the cover story about Ashton Kutcher being involved in a "MURDER SCANDAL."
All right - his ex-girlfriend from many years ago had been murdered, and he will apparently be making statements in court regarding what he knew about her and the alleged killer. Also, the magazine calls the alleged killer a "cold-blooded serial killer" without ever saying "allegedly" or anything that could save face.
The entire article has not even a single interview with Ashton Kutcher. So, it's an article about Ashton Kutcher "being involved in a murder scandal," but the only interviews are a Detective and a "friend."
At least attempt to get an interview from someone credible and then put "*CREDIBLE PERSON* was unable to be reached for comment" or "*CREDIBLE PERSON* refused to comment." Something that shows that the reporter isn't just a lazy person who sits around listening to gossip and interviewing random people on the street. Seriously, I feel bad that Dennis had to pay money for this publication. I am glad that the analysis will be thorough, but honestly. This isn't journalism.
The quote from the friend is: "Ashton's worried sick about taking the witness stand."
That is according to "a friend."
Really? Why don't you go ask Ashton himself.
Why doesn't the friend have a name?
This drove me crazy throughout the entire analysis process - which is why I stopped on page 39. I haven't even gotten to the big Tom Cruise - Katie Holmes cover story yet. Fingers are crossed that there is an actual interview done with Tom or Katie and included within the article. Seriously.
If the only "sources" that your publication has are "friends," "pals," "insiders" and "guests" then either your reporters are lazy or no one wants to go on record - if no one wants to go on record and have their name associated with a quote then GO FIND SOMEONE WHO WILL. Go find someone who is willing to have their name printed in the magazine in attribution to the quote. It's understandable to have maybe one anonymous source every so often, but if the ONLY source in your article is an ANONYMOUS source - then you don't have an article. The blogs on the internet have more research and credible sources than that publication which has a paid staff and has a nice readership.
It would be nice to see demographics and statistics of the readership of Star. There is also an article within the first 39 pages regarding one of the stars of MTV's Teen Mom - something to do with her being pregnant again and not knowing who the father is - that didn't have any sources either...
Nikky Raney reading Star Magazine That's all for pages 1-39.
This magazine was the most expensive of the three. This one was $3.99 and the other two were $2.99, but don't worry there's no sales tax in New Hampshire.
Is this publication trying to be a respected news source or is it content with being filled with gossip and unreliable information? It's sad that magazines like Newsweek are faced with tough times in publication - but magazines like Star are selling no problem. There's something wrong with this picture -- and the Future of Journalism needs to fix it.
Originally Posted at The Future of Journalism
1 Views
20:30:34 12/16/10
The Crying Game
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 20:30:34 12/16/10
Okay, I admit it: I'm a weeper. I cry during abandoned dog commercials, the final scenes of "Field of Dreams" and "Marley and Me" and honestly, pretty much all other times. My kids laugh at my tendency to go to tears. But for as much as I cry, I do have the ability to hold it together in a professional setting. I have never once cried in an office or work setting.
But curiously, John Boehner feels no similar need to button up his emotionality and there are videos galore of him tearing up on the House floor. It's so ubiquitous that the progressive blogosphere even dubbed him "Cryin' John Boehner".
But now the traditional media is noticing it too...and they're beginning to wonder if Boehner is tough enough for the job : >
I’m sure we’ll get used to having a speaker of the House who weeps a lot.
That would be John Boehner, the new guy.
“He is known to cry,” the outgoing speaker, Nancy Pelosi, told Deborah Solomon in The Times Magazine. “He cries sometimes when we’re having a debate on bills.”
Pelosi, of course, does not cry in public. We will stop here briefly to contemplate what would happen if she, or any female lawmaker, broke into loud, nose-running sobs while discussing Iraq troop funding or giving a TV interview.
(Pause)
O.K., moving forward.
Boehner is a gravel-voiced Ohioan who wears snazzy suits and hangs out a lot with lobbyists. One of the few cheery prospects the new year holds for Democrats is his upcoming demonization, since there is no such thing in 21st-century America as a loveable leader of the House of Representatives. Unless America is totally won over by the idea of a Sobbing Speaker.
Can you imagine the field day that the right wing noise machine would have had if Nancy Pelosi teared up as much John Boehner? The mind reels. >
The most arresting moment came when Boehner told Stahl he can no longer make visits to schools, or even look at the little kids on the playground, because he immediately starts crying.
That had me alarmed. I thought there was going to be some terrible story about an ailing child that would then force me to have warm and sympathetic thoughts about John Boehner.
But no. The reason, Boehner finally choked out, was because “making sure these kids have a shot at the American dream, like I did, is important.”[..]
“I spent my whole life chasing (sob) the American dream,” he told the cameras. “Put myself through school, working every rotten job there was ...”
The American Dream has had such a bad year. During the campaign, it was tossed around by billionaire candidates who insisted on telling groups of underprivileged children that they, too, could someday own a mega-yacht or run a slimy but extremely profitable health care corporation.
Now, John Boehner is blaming the Dream for making him howl like an abandoned puppy.
Oh snap! Maddow also suggests that perhaps if Boehner changed his policies, he'd have less to cry about . And while some other sensitive men might defend Boehner, there is also a growing whisper that his tears may be symptomatic of a larger problem : >
John Boehner’s latest public crying episode has gotten Capitol Hill talking, and some are speculating that there’s a simple explanation for the waterworks: He’s drunk. “For years, political professionals have quietly discussed Boehner’s drinking,” writes Matt Lewis of Politics Daily . “Some have told me off the record that his mannerisms remind them of that of an alcoholic.”[..]
So is the drinking to blame for the crying? Politico once noted that Boehner “cries more often later in the day,” and he often seems to slur his words right before such outbursts.
Well, he'd hardly be the first alcoholic in Congress, but I think there should simply be a rule: THERE'S NO CRYING IN POLITICS.
1 Views
04:59:39 12/04/10
Video: Cyclists demand safer conditions
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 04:59:39 12/04/10
an albuquerque family mourns... and, new at 10... a biking community is outraged about another cyclist killed in traffic. prominent attorney and unm professer tim vollmann's death yesterday--- after being hit by a garbage truck--- has many avid bike riders calling for immediate attention to the dangers of the road. eddie garcia joins us with the story. bicyclists i spoke with knew vollmann and consider his death a major loss to the community... they say especially considering this time of year - it's time to think of others when you're on the ro. the vollmann family tells us the biggest tragedy about their father's death is the the time they won't ever be able to spend with him. he's going to miss out on the traveling that him and my mom had planned. bicycle coalition president doctor diane albert says this should be a wake-up call to all motorists who drive new mexico roads. there's an anonymity and a feeling of empowerment that you can pretty much do whatever you want in your car and you can get away with it. but often with many bicycle involved crashes - the cyclist suffers the brunt. jennifer buntz who is most known for setting up ghost bike memorials around town says the biking infrastructure at the intersection of comanche and i-25 iinadequate - and that plays a role as well. this should be more than five feet this bike lane and that way if somebody fell over they'd have a cushion they'd have some buffer. during our interview cyclists came to honor vollmann and shared the same complaints about the road. this is a sketchy spot ...the whole road up the way is just kind of frightening and the bike lane disappears right when you get to the freeway you just have to ride in the gutter there's just no other option you have to engage traffic. all agree driver and bicyclist attention is necessary. if we could all be more attentive and more aware of our surrounding as we go down the road, no matter what vehicle we're in - we will all be safer. they hope getting out the word will help save other families from the pain the vollmann's now have to live with. he just gave to everybody, everybody i know has stories of tim volmann and what he did for them. albuquerque police tell me the driver of the garbage truck most likely will not face any charges - they believe vollmann some how lost control on this dangerous stretch of road
2 Views
13:08:00 11/25/10
Video: REINTERGRATION PART 4
[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 13:08:00 11/25/10
After a deployment...Veterans return home excited for life to get back to normal. But after more than a year away many soldiers find home and work life are very different than before they left. On day four of our series on Reintegration, Reporter Megan Lowry explains the struggles of returning to workand fitting in to a new normal. When Colonel Bob Fode was deployed to Iraq in 2004 he says leaving home...felt surreal. "There were 500 of us on the plane and you could hear a pin drop. We are thinking can we handle what's in front of us and that's just the deployment that's not talking about I have a family back home and an employer and how's that going to work." And after more than 13 months away from home... "It's a relief to put your boots down in North Dakota. But relief for Bob is short lived.... "When you get back life hits you at a million miles and hour. When you have the uniform on you only have one job to do, not mowing the lawn getting the kids to school or walking the dog." Kevin Iverson Director of Employee Support for the Guard and Reserves says the adjustment back to civilian life is different for each soldier. " Everybody's experience is different during a deployment some people will go back to work just fine and others will have more problems." The North Dakota Department of Transportation has had 16 employees deploy since 2003. Some more than once. When some is deployed we feel the emotions that go with that other employees have to step up to the plate and make sure that persons job is done while they are gone." Making communication between employees and employers a crucial part of the transition back to work. "I got in the elevator my first day back and there were three new employees I had never seen before. It's not easy coming back because you leave with one frame of reference and 13 months later everything changed." Which he says, can be frustrating... Department Director Frances Zieglar says when the employee returns he is given a few weeks to work back to his routine. (Zieglar)"We keep the person who has been doing their job there so there is a re-mentoring period." (Fode) "I worked with Dave and he was able to tell me what's happened and what's happening in the future and that helps." Creating a NEW normal There is re-renergiznig of the work group" "There is no old routine, you come back a whole new person with a new set of things to do and a greater appreciation for a lot of things in life." Megan Lowry, Kx News. Fode says returning back to work is a very positive experience. Tomorrow, reporter Kate Schell will conclude our week long series...as she heads up in a Black Hawk with a helicopter pilot, who just recently returned from Iraq. Hear his story tomorrow.
