UPDATE: House adjourns; overtime likely

Updated 3:07 p.m.

The House of Delegates has adjourned until noon Saturday as negotiators from each chamber continue to seek a deal on the state budget.

House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, said that while it remains possible, he does not consider it likely that lawmakers will approve a budget in time to adjourn on Saturday.


Earlier:

RICHMOND — Two days of legislative negotiations have produced modest advances toward a new state budget, but both sides say a shift in attitudes may be the most promising development.

A dozen lawmakers expected to toil late into Thursday evening hoping to shake hands on a deal by Friday. With a deal in place by noon, the General Assembly could still meet its Saturday adjournment deadline.

The legislature has to reconcile a budget through 2012 that’s more than $4 billion short of projected revenues, the sharpest and longest downturn for state finances in modern times.

After testy encounters between Senate and House negotiating teams earlier in the week, including pledges by both sides to stand firm until the fiscal year’s end in June to get their way, relations thawed Wednesday.

“The atmosphere has been more conciliatory (with) more desire to see each other’s priorities and get this game over,” said House Appropriations Committee Chairman Lacey Putney, an independent from Bedford and the lead House negotiator.

No matter the outcome, thousands of local and state government jobs are likely to be eliminated over the new budget’s two-year life, services are likely to be streamlined or cut, and some city and county governments will have to consider property tax increases.

House and Senate conferees and experts from the staffs of both chambers’ money committees broke into small working groups Wednesday night and Thursday to refine spending plans in major spending areas such as public safety and health and human resources.

The most towering obstacles, however, remained Thursday evening, with about 48 hours remaining in the scheduled life of the 2010 session. And any breakdown in the talks could send the session into overtime for the fifth time in 10 years.

Sen. Janet D. Howell, a conferee, agreed that the talks appeared to have turned a corner, but there are demands on which the Senate won’t relent, including restoring many House cuts to state support to local public schools.

“We’ve been in no rush. We’re still not in any rush,” said Howell, D-Fairfax County.

For the House’s Republican majority and Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell, the priority is limiting the amount of fee increases the Senate had sought to generate additional revenue, particularly new levies for filing lawsuits in Virginia courts.

“The bill as passed by the Senate is extraordinarily high and would put us at the most prohibitive court fees in the country,” McDonnell said in an AP interview. “But I think some reasonable increase at this point would be appropriate.”

The Senate has already reduced its court fee proposal by nearly one-fourth, from almost $51 million to nearly $39 million, but Putney said the take is still too high.

Read More

Israeli troops, Palestinians clash near Jerusalem

By DALIA NAMMARI
The Associated Press
Saturday, March 13, 2010; 11:30 AM

JERUSALEM -- Several dozen Palestinian women scuffled with Israeli troops on the outskirts of Jerusalem on Saturday amid rising religious and political tensions in the disputed city.

The confrontation erupted at the Qalandiya crossing between the West Bank and Jerusalem.

The women chanted "Jerusalem is Arab, our eternal capital," briefly planted a Palestinian flag on one of the crossing's metal gates and tried to push through it. Israeli troops scuffled with the women and dispersed them with tear gas. At one point, a firebomb hit a military jeep and soldiers rushed to extinguish the fire.

As the women withdrew, Palestinian teens threw stones at soldiers who closed the crossing to traffic.

The Israeli military said four protesters were detained but no one was hurt.

Saturday's protest came at a time of growing friction in Jerusalem.

The Palestinians want to establish a capital in the eastern sector of the city, captured and annexed by Israel in the 1967 Mideast War. Israel's hard-line leader, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, refuses to consider partition, insisting he will never relinquish control over any part of Jerusalem.

Earlier this week, Israel announced plans to build 1,600 more homes for Jews in east Jerusalem, setting off a bitter diplomatic row with the United States, Israel's closest ally.

Jerusalem also has seen several protests in recent weeks against Israel's decision to include two West Bank shrines on a list of national heritage sites. The move's practical implications are not clear, but the Palestinians see it as a provocation
Click here!

Five Palestinians were injured later Saturday in clashes with Israeli soldiers in the West Bank, Palestinian medics said. Residents of a village near Nablus said they tried to prevent settlers from bathing in a water cistern they depend on for agriculture.

Palestinian villagers then hurled rocks at soldiers who tried to maintain order between the sides. The soldiers responded with tear gas and rubber coated steel bullets, injuring the Palestinian, the medics said.

On Friday, Israel sealed the West Bank for at least two days, in an attempt to prevent more protests.

Even when a closure is not in effect, most West Bank Palestinians are barred by Israel from entering Jerusalem. The Qalandiya crossing is one of the main gateways for Palestinians who obtain special entry permits to the city.

Read More

Democrats seek agreement, vote on health care

By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent
Under White House pressure to act swiftly, House and Senate Democratic leaders reached for agreement Friday on President Barack Obama's health care bill, sweetened suddenly by fresh billions for student aid and a sense that breakthroughs are at hand.

"It won't be long," before lawmakers vote, predicted Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She said neither liberals' disappointment over the lack of a government health care option nor a traditional mistrust of the Senate would prevent passage in the House.

At the White House, officials worked to maximize Obama's influence over lawmakers who control the fate of legislation that has spawned a yearlong struggle. They said he would delay his departure on an Asian trip for three days - until March 21 - and he will go to Ohio next week for a campaign-style pitch for his health care proposals.

The delay gives congressional leaders much-needed breathing room to finish the legislation and nail down support from wavering lawmakers.

"I'm delighted that the president will be here for the passage of the bill; it's going to be historic," said Pelosi, D-Calif. - though there's no guarantee the House can act by then. A procedural vote in the House Budget Committee is set for Monday afternoon, but as of late Friday lawmakers still hadn't gotten the final analysis from the Congressional Budget Office that they need to go forward.

With Democrats deciding to incorporate changes in student aid into the bill, Republicans suddenly had a new reason to oppose legislation they have long sought to scuttle.

"Well of course it's a very bad idea," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "We now have the government running banks, insurance companies, car companies, and they do want to take over the student loan business."

He said it was symptomatic of Democrats' determination to have "the government expand its tentacles into absolutely everything."

At its core, the health care bill is designed to provide health care to tens of millions who lack it and ban insurance companies from denying medical coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions. Obama also wants the measure to begin to slow the rate of growth in medical costs nationwide. Most people would have to get insurance by law, and poor and middle-income Americans - including families of four earning up to $88,000 - would receive subsidies.

Whatever the outcome, there was no doubt the issue would reverberate into this fall's elections, with control of Congress at stake.

The health care bill appeared on the cusp of passage in early January, but was derailed when Senate Republicans won a Senate seat in Massachusetts, and with it, the strength needed to sustain a filibuster and block a final vote.

In the weeks since, the White House and Democrats have embarked on a two-part rescue strategy. It calls for the House to pass legislation that cleared the Senate in December, despite numerous objections, and for both houses to follow immediately with a second bill that makes changes to the first.

The second, fix-it bill would be drafted under rules that strip Senate Republicans of the ability to require Democrats produce a 60-vote majority.

Obama outlined numerous requested changes several weeks ago, many of them designed to satisfy the concerns of House Democrats.

They would increase subsidies for lower income families who cannot afford insurance, give additional money to states that provide higher-than-average benefits under Medicaid, and gradually close a coverage gap in the Medicare prescription drug program used by millions of seniors.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/03/12/1808726/dems-seek-agreement-quick-vote.html#ixzz0i4qVz28w

Read More

Obama pushing on health care end game

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama is pushing a new anti-fraud plan and his top health official is challenging the nation's insurers as the administration cranks up the pressure for a sweeping overhaul of the nation's medical system.
Discuss
COMMENTS (1)

Obama is to speak Wednesday in suburban St. Louis, his second health care address in three days. His speech comes as congressional Democrats stand on the brink of delivering the president a dramatic success with passage of his massive overhaul legislation -- or a colossal failure if they can't get it done.

As part of the administration's campaign, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sketched out a stark choice for insurers: oppose reform and eventually lose customers, or work with the White House to improve the legislation.

She told insurers in a speech that if overhaul fails, premiums will continue to rise and employers will cancel coverage. She said the industry may make money initially, but "this kind of short-term thinking won't work in the long run for the American people or our health care system. It won't work for you."

Sebelius called on insurers to take the millions they might spend on attack ads and give Americans relief from rising double-digit premium increases, and "instead of spending your energy attacking the parts of the president's proposal you don't like, you can use it to strengthen the parts you do."

Sebelius' plea comes as business groups that oppose the legislation are stepping it up, with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce announcing a coordinated campaign to spend as much as $10 million on ads, starting Wednesday, saying, "Stop this health care bill we can't afford."

Leaders in the House and Senate are awaiting a final cost analysis from the Congressional Budget Office in the next day or so that will allow them to start counting votes -- and twisting arms -- in earnest. In the House, in particular, getting the needed majority will be touch and go.

The two-step approach now being pursued calls for the House to approve a Senate-passed bill from last year, despite House Democrats' opposition to several of its provisions. Both chambers then would follow by approving a companion measure to make changes in that first bill.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has said he expects the House to act by March 18, the day Obama leaves for an overseas trip. That timetable would be tough to meet, and congressional leaders told White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel that they don't need deadlines handed down from the White House.

Republicans are playing on House Democrats' suspicions of their Senate colleagues, arguing that Senate Democrats may not hold up their end of the bargain and the votes will be damaging politically for Democrats in November

Read More

Lost Boys star Corey Haim dies age 38 after 'drug overdose'

ACTOR Corey Haim has died at the age of 38 after an apparent accidental drug overdose.

The actor who was best known for his role in the 1987 vampire film The Lost Boys, was found in an unresponsive state at an apartment, near Burbank, California.

Police said Haim's mother was at the home at the time.

The actor, who struggled with drug addiction, was pronounced dead Providence St. Joseph's Medical Centre.

Canadian-born Haim was a teen heartthrob in the 1980s and appeared in several movies with fellow Lost Boys star Corey Feldman, with the two dubbed the Two Coreys.

However, his career never took off and the quality of his roles steadily decreased.

As the work dried up, Haim became more and more dependant on drugs.

In 2000 he confessed to taking around 85 Valium a day to calm his nerves.

He claimed to have finally overcome his drug habit in 2004, saying: "'I'm clean, sober, humble and happy."

However, while filming the direct-to-video sequel to Lost Boys in 2008, his co-star Feldman said he wanted nothing to with him until he kicked his addiction.

Haim began acting lessons as a child after by his mother enrolled in classes trying to help him overcome shyness.

He first broke into mainstream acting playing the role of Larry in the Canadian comedy series The Edison Twins, which ran from 1982 through until 1986.

Read More

Roberts: Scene at State of Union 'Very Troubling'

U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts said Tuesday the scene at President Obama's first State of the Union address was "very troubling" and that the annual speech to Congress has "degenerated into a political pep rally."


TUSCALOOSA, Ala. -- U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts said Tuesday the scene at President Obama's first State of the Union address was "very troubling" and that the annual speech to Congress has "degenerated into a political pep rally."

Responding to a University of Alabama law student's question about the Senate's method of confirming justices, Roberts said senators improperly try to make political points by asking questions they know nominees can't answer because of judicial ethics rules.

"I think the process is broken down," he said.

Obama chided the court for its campaign finance decision during the January address, with six of the court's nine justices seated before him in their black robes.

Roberts said he wonders whether justices should attend the address.

"To the extent the State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I'm not sure why we're there," said Roberts, a Republican nominee who joined the court in 2005.

Roberts said anyone is free to criticize the court and that some have an obligation to do so because of their positions.

"So I have no problems with that," he said. "On the other hand, there is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum. The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court -- according the requirements of protocol -- has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling."

Breaking from tradition, Obama used the speech to criticize the court's decision that allows corporations and unions to freely spend money to run political ads for or against specific candidates.

"With all due deference to the separation of powers, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections," Obama said.

Justice Samuel Alito was the only justice to respond at the time, shaking his head and appearing to mouth the words "not true" as Obama continued.

In response to Roberts' remarks Tuesday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs focused on the court's decision and not the chief justice's point about the time and place for criticism of the court.

"What is troubling is that this decision opened the floodgates for corporations and special interests to pour money into elections -- drowning out the voices of average Americans," Gibbs said. "The president has long been committed to reducing the undue influence of special interests and their lobbyists over government. That is why he spoke out to condemn the decision and is working with Congress on a legislative response."

Justice Antonin Scalia once said he no longer goes to the annual speech because the justices "sit there like bumps on a log" in an otherwise highly partisan atmosphere.

Roberts opened his appearance in Alabama with a 30-minute lecture on the history of the Supreme Court and became animated as he answered students' questions. He joked about a recent rumor that he was stepping down from the court and said he didn't know he wanted to be a lawyer until he was in law school.

While Associate Justice Clarence Thomas told students at Alabama last fall he saw little value in oral arguments before the court, Roberts disagreed.

"Maybe it's because I participated in it a lot as a lawyer," Roberts said. "I'd hate to think it didn't matter."

Read More

Maddox is a brainy child besides speaking fluently Khmer

Maddox and Mom (AP)

MADDOX JOLIE-PITT IS A BRAINY CHILD

10th March 2010
Daily Star (UK)

NOT only does Maddox Jolie-Pitt have the world’s best-looking parents, he’s also got the brains of a mini-Einstein.

Angelina Jolie, 34, and Brad Pitt, 46, have been raving to pals that their adopted eight-year-old from Cambodia is intellectually gifted and has a high IQ.

A Hollywood source said: “Maddox is amazingly smart and loves books and tinkering with gadgets.

He is a gifted painter and sketch artist, takes piano lessons, does well in football and speaks fluent English, French, Spanish and his native Khmer.”

Yep, we feel slightly inadequate.

Click to Read More...

Posted by Socheata

Read More

Obama Bypasses Members of Congress and Heads Right for Their Constituents

President Obama has finished trying to turn the Republican tide on health care reform and is now focusing his sights on average Americans. It is through their prism that Mr. Obama hopes to prod members of congress to urgently pass his health care reform legislation and he did so in full-on campaign style Monday in Pennsylvania.

A deafening crowd welcomed the President to Arcadia University, just north of Philadelphia, where Mr. Obama told them he gets it.

"We need to give families and businesses more control over their own health insurance and that's why we need to pass health care reform; not next year, not five years from now, not ten years from now. But now."

But what is it exactly that brings the President to the Philadelphia area? If you ask the Republican National Committee, it's salvaging the faltering campaign of Democratic Senator Arlen Specter. Ironically, the group says, it's the health care reform push that is taking its toll on his re-election bid.

The RNC cited a February Franklin and Marshall College Poll Monday as evidence. The poll says only 30% of Pennsylvanians approve of the job Senator Specter is doing compared to a 52% approval rating last March, when the health care debate began.

Mr. Obama's aides say his visit was not about elections. "I wouldn't say that this is about any specific targeting in that sense," Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton told reporters. "I mean, if you look at where we're going, it doesn't really have an impact on a particular member. But Philadelphia is a place where they are seeing these rising costs really crush their -- crush families and businesses and local government."

The President is in his comfort zone in such public settings. He has hit the road before on behalf of his health care agenda.

But this time, the message is more urgent. As Mr. Obama traverses the country-- hitting St. Louis on Wednesday-- will members of Congress feel the nudge of their constituents enough to get on board with his health care agenda? There isn't much time left to find out. The White House has said they want a House-passed bill by the time President Obama heads overseas on March 18.

Read More

Is it still the man’s job to approach a woman?

During this Women’s Herstory Series, I want to discuss relevant issues that women face today while also honoring great women of the past and present. As the economy has moved away from the agrarian society and into the industrial sector, more women have left conventional roles of homemaker, housewife, and other domestic occupations. Now, we see more women in powerful positions making strides in the professional sector. Women have fought for equal rights, representation, and access to resources that their male counterparts freely enjoy. We demand equal pay and opportunity in all sectors both private and public. But for all of the fuss that women make about equality in their professional standing, do we really want the potential burden of equality in our dating lives too?

Burden in the equality of dating sounds like a loaded phrase. But, as I’ve met more and more very eligible single women who are looking to date, I encounter a common denominator in many of these singles. Most women that I know of still believe that it is the man’s job to approach and pursue a woman. Ironically, these are the same women who fiercely claim to be independent, self-confident, and self-assured. Well if you’re so independent, self-confident, and self-assured, why not walk up to your Mr. Right? (This article focuses on the exchange between heterosexuals but I will discuss the exchange between two women in a separate post.)

I challenge women with this archaic mentality of waiting for a male to approach them. While you’re waiting for your next date, potential male suitors are passing you by. When these women who wait on men to find them don’t have anyone ask for their number, they immediately internalize the lack of attention. Show me a woman who feels rejected and I’ll show you a woman who will start to temporarily self-destruct. “It must be my hair” or “I didn’t wear the right outfit” she’ll whine to herself and girlfriends. From the conversations that I’ve had with the opposite sex, a woman doesn’t have to always wear the perfect outfit. She’s allowed to have her imperfections. (Men who don’t allow for imperfection aren’t worth your time anyway.)

“So why aren’t these men approaching me if I’m a full package?” many women ask. It’s probably because they pick up on all your independence, self-esteem, and self-confidence that you boldly present. These men are more than likely intimidated by you. Or, these may may falsely believe that you’re seeing someone else if you look too busy to be bothered. Some women inadvertently make themselves inapproachable. If you find that you’re not attracting as many fellows as you want to, do a self-evaluation of your own approachability. Approachability exists in the little things like direct eye contact, body language, a cute smile and perhaps saying something like “Good day.” These ice-breakers show that a woman is friendly and open worthy of a second glance. It may be intimidating at first, but practice this a few times. There is such a false idea that women who make themselves available are being trashy. Proper advertisement of one’s availability and exploiting oneself are completely different sides of the self-propagating scale.

Men have told me that it is actually sexy if a woman approaches. It shows a genuine sense of self-confidence and an ability to go after what one wants. What man doesn’t want the kind of woman who knows exactly what she wants and isn’t afraid to get it? So, cast aside your self-esteem that may be a bit superficial and try on a pair of big girl panties. Go after the one that you really want. Who knows, maybe he was too afraid to go after you…

In sum, if we’re going to ask for equal rights, we better be prepared for what that really means. It means that you need to take all that equality that your ancestors have fought for and put it into practice. You can’t have all the glory without any of the guts. My question to the readers are:

1.) When was the last time you were approached? How did the scenario look?

2.) When was the last time you approached someone? What did that look like?

3.) Would you be willing to approach a man and ask for his phone number or a future coffee date?

4.) Do you think it’s time for women to start empowering themselves and approaching men?

If you have any interesting answers to these questions, write something in the comments section. I always read them.

Please stay involved in our Herstory Month Series!

Read More

Dr. Edgar Wayburn, Medal of Freedom Winner, Sierra Club Hon. President, dies at 103

A Towering Figure in the Modern Conservation Movement
Published on Mar 8, 2010 - 7:44:57 AM

San Francisco, CA Mar. 8, 2010 - Honorary Sierra Club President and Presidential Medal of Freedom winner, Dr. Edgar Wayburn died late Friday night at his home in San Francisco in the presence of his family. He was 103.

The following is a letter from Sierra Club Deputy Executive Director, Bruce Hamilton, followed by a biography of Dr. Wayburn:

"Ed Wayburn was one of the towering figures on the national and world stage of conservation. He was the 20th Century John Muir."

"Ed would take a vision such as protecting 100 million acres of Alaska or protecting the Marin Headlands as a national park and run with it until he accomplished what seemed impossible. He enlisted the help of Presidents, Cabinet members, powerful members of Congress, mayors, and millions of Americans and would not take no for an answer. This is why he is credited by President Clinton as 'the man who saved more wilderness and parks in the United States than any other American.' "

"When you or your grandchildren marvel at the wilderness in Redwood National Park, Alaska, or the Marin Headlands you will be witnessing the living legacy of Ed Wayburn. It is his lasting gift to all of us."

A longer tribute and bio of Dr. Wayburn celebrating his 100th birthday is available

Read More