In the USA...
Hackers produce disturbing video evidence in Ohio gang rape caseBy David Ferguson
RawStory
Thursday, January 3, 2013 9:10 EST
KnightSec, a hacking group affiliated with the “Anonymous” collective, has released a video of teenager Michael Nodianos glorying in the gang rape of a 16-year-old girl by his high school football player teammates. According to the Atlantic Wire, hackers are intervening, putting now-scrubbed evidence back online because other teenagers and citizens of football-crazed Steubenville, Ohio are proving to be reluctant to help authorities prosecute a rape case against the town’s teenage football stars.
“She is so raped right now,” said Nodianos to the camera. “There won’t be any foreplay for a dead girl. It ain’t wet now, to be honest. Trust me, I’m a doctor.”
He was referring to an incident in late August, when two players on Steubenville High School’s prestigious football team, The Big Red, reportedly drugged a 16-year-old girl and sexually assaulted her, carrying her unconscious body by the wrists and ankles from party to party, urinating on her and abandoning her at the end of the night at her parents’ house. The players, Trent Mays and Ma’lik Richmond, are currently on house arrest in Steubenville after being remanded from the county juvenile detention center.
The boys glorified their crime online, shooting Instagram photos of the assault, making lewd updates on Facebook and Twitter, and allowing their friends, like Nodianos, to shoot photos and make their own updates and videos about the incident. In spite of the abduction and attack’s high profile in social media, townspeople have been reluctant to aid the prosecution of the crime in any way, lest it jeopardize The Big Red’s chances at another state championship.
Nate Hubbard, 27, a volunteer Big Red coach, went so far as to accuse the victim of making the whole thing up to excuse a night of excessive partying, “The rape was just an excuse, I think,” he told the New York Times.
“What else are you going to tell your parents when you come home drunk like that and after a night like that?” Hubbard asked. “She had to make up something. Now people are trying to blow up our football program because of it.”
A juvenile judge and a Steubenville county prosecutor have both had to recuse themselves from the case because of ties to the football team. Steubenville is a small town, the judge told the Times, “Everybody knows everybody.”
With the investigation stymied, KnightSec created a WikiLeaks-style site called “Local Leaks,” where it put on display a dossier about the so-called Steubenville “Rape Crew,” including new information about team boosters and Big Red head coach Reno Saccoccia, as well as the video of Nodiano riffing on his friends’ crime.
Wearing an Ohio Buckeyes T-shirt, Nodianos said the victim was “deader than a doornail.”
“They pissed on her,” he said, before launching into a list of famous people the teenage victim was “deader than,” including “Caylee Anthony” and “OJ Simpson’s wife,” as well as “John F. Kennedy” and slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin.
The dossier published by KnightSec also revealed the intricate web of association between top Big Red players and staff and Steubenville’s top brass. Coach Saccoccia regularly breakfasts with the county sheriff. One of the boys accused of suppressing the crime is the son of a county prosecutor.
Meanwhile, it will be difficult for the defense team to allege that no crime took place with Nodianos insisting in his video, “They raped her more than the Duke lacrosse team” and slapping his thigh and laughing when a teammate asks, “Is she going to feel it?” and responding, “No, she’s dead!”
Watch the video, embedded via YouTube, below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22UsHZXPi7Q&feature=player_embedded*************
Did ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ filmmakers have secret links to CIA? U.S. Senate vows to find outBy Xan Brooks, The Guardian
Thursday, January 3, 2013 8:00 EST
US Senate Intelligence Committee to investigate whether film-makers Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal had access to classified material
The controversy surrounding the fact-based terrorist drama Zero Dark Thirty looks set to continue as the US senate intelligence committee launched an investigation into the relationship between the film’s makers and CIA officials. The committee will probe whether Zero Dark Thirty’s director and writer were granted “inappropriate access” to classified material.
Directed by Kathryn Bigelow and scripted by Mark Boal, Zero Dark Thirty charts the nine-year hunt for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and climaxes in the successful raid on Bin Laden’s compound in May 2011. CIA officials have admitted briefing the film-makers on the project but insist that the finished picture is “a dramatisation” as opposed to a historical record.
Reuters reports that internal documents, released in response to a freedom-of-information request, already show that Michael Morell – the CIA’s then deputy director and now acting chief – met with the film-makers. A Pentagon email also claims that Mark Boal was briefed by the CIA “with the full knowledge and full approval/support” of Leon Panetta, the former CIA director and subsequently US secretary of defence.
The senate investigation will be headed by Democrat senator Dianne Feinstein who last month joined two other senators in lambasting Zero Dark Thirty’s depiction of torture. Feinstein, Carl Levin and John McCain claim that the film is “grossly inaccurate” in its suggestion that coercive interrogation tactics were instrumental in gathering information about Bin Laden’s whereabouts.
The CIA has yet to comment on the senate investigation. In a statement released last month, Morell insisted that Zero Dark Thirty was “a dramatisation, not a realistic portrayal of the facts”.
Morell did, however, appear to concede that the film implied that “enhanced interrogation techniques”, including waterboarding, played a role in gathering information ahead of the successful May 2011 raid. “Whether enhanced interrogation techniques were the only timely and effective way to obtain information from those detainees, as the film suggests, is a matter of debate that cannot and never will be definitively resolved,” he said.
© Guardian News and Media 2013
************
Maddow: Boehner speakership has devolved into defiance and derisionBy Eric W. Dolan
RawStory
Thursday, January 3, 2013 0:04 EST
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow ripped House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) on her show Wednesday night, framing him as an weak leader who was obstructing Congress with his incompetence.
“The speakership of John Boehner has been chaotic from the beginning, but it has now devolved into outright defiance of his leadership, outright derision against him from his own side,” she said. “His own plan to avert the fiscal cliff before Christmas went to the floor where it was quickly clear the bill wasn’t going to pass so it was humiliatingly pulled.”
“The White House eventually stopped negotiating with John Boehner went it became clear that there was no point, because it didn’t matter what he said Republicans would do. Republicans were not taking instruction from him, so he couldn’t promise anything about their behavior, so why would you talk to him about what Republicans are going to do?”
Maddow noted the current Republican-led House had passed less legislation than any House in American history, even failing to approve important bipartisan legislation like the farm bill. More recently, Boehner faced a sharp backlash from both Republicans and Democrats for failing to hold a vote on funding for Hurricane Sandy relief efforts.
*************
Cantor’s revolt exposes Republican rift in fight for party’s futureBy Paul Harris, The Guardian
Wednesday, January 2, 2013 21:41 EST
A Republican civil war, which has simmered under the surface since the party’s defeat in last November’s presidential election, has now burst firmly into the open and pitted party leaders against each other.
Majority leader Eric Cantor’s extraordinary vote against House speaker John Boehner in Tuesday’s late-night vote in the House of Representatives may have prevented America from toppling over the so-called fiscal cliff, but it exposed the deep rifts that are destabilising a party once famed for its unity and discipline.
Cantor, 49, a self-styled “young gun” who hews relentlessly to rightwing conservative orthodoxy, is now pitted against Boehner, 63, a “country club” Republican whose pragmatic streak drives him to move the party to the centre in a bid to learn a lesson from President Barack Obama’s second-term victory.
“Clearly, Boehner and Cantor are not bosom buddies. They never have been,” said Professor David Cohen, a political scientist at the University of Akron.
That might be an understatement now. Just six hours before the crucial vote Cantor’s spokesman, Doug Heye, sent a message on his Twitter account playing down rumours of a split. “Majority Leader Cantor stands with @speakerBoehner. Speculation otherwise is silly, non-productive and untrue.”
However, Cantor then came out publicly against the bill, voting no, while Boehner himself – when tradition usually demands that a Speaker not vote – made a point of personally voting yes. “It is extraordinary for a speaker to vote,” said Republican pollster Steve Mitchell, head of Mitchell Research and Communications.
The two men could come to personify a growing ideological split in the party. Boehner, with his fondness for golf and his year-round tan, has a reputation for old-school deal-making. He is seen as a master of backroom politics who is willing to sacrifice policy principle in favour of pragmatic politicking that improves the position of the party as a whole. As the Republican party seeks to come to terms with a demographic future that is seen as more friendly to Democrats, Boehner is viewed as someone who might steer the party away from the rightwing extremes that deter emerging voting blocs such as Hispanics and women.
Cantor, however, is a darling of that rightwing; popular with the Tea Party-backed politicians who swept into the House in the 2010 mid-terms and who still wield enormous power. Together with Mitt Romney’s former running mate, Paul Ryan, and majority whip, Kevin McCarthy (who also voted no), Cantor co-wrote a 2010 book called Young Guns that sought to be a manifesto for an emerging generation of rightwing ideologues.
Cantor’s high-profile “no” vote in the fiscal cliff debate now propels him to the front of the conservative movement. It is a bloc that sees Mitt Romney’s failure to defeat Obama as an example of what happens when you run a moderate who has to espouse rightwing views he does not genuinely hold instead of a true conservative candidate.
It is a profound split in the party. While Boehner does not look immediately under threat when it comes to a fresh vote this week on his speakership, he does appear to now be in the minority in the House. Just 84 other Republicans joined Boehner in voting for the compromise bill to avoid the fiscal cliff, while 150 Republicans lined up behind Cantor in the no camp. “You have the whole notion of people who want to stand on principle and those who want to be more pragmatic,” said Professor Tim Hagle, an expert in Republican politics at the University of Iowa.
The fight is also causing problems among other major Republican figures. New Jersey governor Chris Christie, seen as a leading contender to run for president in 2016, fumed that the “toxic internal politics” of the Republicans in the House had been partly responsible for failing to pass a bill that would deliver billions of dollars of vital aid to areas in the north-east hit last year by Hurricane Sandy.
The split also represents different ways of looking at where the party’s focus should be. Boehner and the more pragmatic wing of the party see the Republicans’ 2012 defeat as a sign that the party is losing touch with a younger and more ethnically diverse national electorate that can deliver a candidate to the White House. The party’s conservatives, however, look to their own party’s still Tea Party-infused base and gerrymandered congressional districts that too often provide safe seats to extremists.
As the 2014 mid-term elections hove into view, some observers believe that those backing Boehner could be punished for their ‘yes’ vote and further undermine Boehner’s position. “Some of those Republicans who voted for this are going to lose their seats because of this one vote,” said Mitchell.
That means Cantor’s dissent could tie in with eventual ambitions to take Boehner’s job. If Republicans in the House emerge from 2014 even more in the grip of conservative ideologues, he will be well-placed to launch a bid for the speakership himself. “Cantor is a shrewd political animal. He is incredibly ambitious. He will do whatever he needs to do to take control of that speaker’s gavel,” said Professor Cohen.
That would defy a general consensus view that says Republicans should not repeat the sort of presidential primary that marred the 2012 race, when the Republican field was dominated by misfit candidates who courted the rightwing base at the expense of wooing centrist Americans. Cantor’s rise would see the party go even further right. It is a problem that Boehner is no doubt aware of.
“Boehner has a problem on his hands. He could only get a third of his party to vote for the fiscal cliff legislation. That is a sign of weakness,” Cohen said.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2013
****************
Fiscal Cliff: Obama signs American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 into lawBy Agence France-Presse
Thursday, January 3, 2013 6:39 EST
President Barack Obama has signed into law the contentious compromise bill hammered out in Congress, narrowly averting the US ‘fiscal cliff’ of tax hikes and drastic, immediate cuts in spending, the White House said early Thursday.
In a statement, the White House said that Obama late on Wednesday signed the “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012,” raising taxes on households earning above $450,000 and delaying spending decisions for two months.
Officials said the US president, who is on vacation in Hawaii, signed the measure electronically by autopen.
The “fiscal cliff” crisis was finally averted on Tuesday as the House of Representatives, by a vote of 257 to 167, approved a stop-gap agreement passed one day earlier by the US Senate.
The measure dodged across-the-board tax hikes and automatic spending cuts that had threatened to unleash economic turmoil and perhaps drive America back into recession.
The hard-fought agreement, seen as a political victory for Obama, raised taxes on the very rich and delayed the threat of $109 billion in automatic spending cuts for two months.
The respite will prove temporary, however: The Democratic administration and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives face several clashes in the coming months on spending cuts and raising the government debt ceiling.
Had the deal fallen apart, all Americans would have been hit by tax increases and spending cuts would have kicked in across government — a combined $500 billion shock that could have rocked the fragile recovery.
Relief was felt internationally and markets surged, although China’s official news agency Xinhua warned: “People, or governments, can overspend for some time, but they simply cannot live on borrowed prosperity forever.”
Obama also signed into law a $633 billion US defense spending bill that funds the war in Afghanistan and boosts security at US missions worldwide.
“I have approved this annual defense authorization legislation, as I have in previous years, because it authorizes essential support for service members and their families, renews vital national security programs, and helps ensure that the United States will continue to have the strongest military in the world,” Obama said in a statement early Thursday after signing the measure.
Obama said that he signed the measure despite reservations.
“In a time when all public servants recognize the need to eliminate wasteful or duplicative spending, various sections in the Act limit the Defense Department’s ability to direct scarce resources towards the highest priorities for our national security,” the president said.
“Even though I support the vast majority of the provisions contained in this Act… I do not agree with them all,” he said in his statement, adding that he did not have the constitutional authority to approve piecemeal items within the sprawling bill.
“I am empowered either to sign the bill, or reject it, as a whole,” he said.
***********
January 2, 2013
Tax Deal Shows Possible Path Around House G.O.P. in Fiscal Fights to ComeBy JONATHAN WEISMAN
NYT
WASHINGTON — With the contentious 112th Congress coming to a close, the talks between the White House, Senate Republicans and Senate Democrats that secured a path around a looming fiscal crisis on Tuesday may point the way forward for President Obama as he tries to navigate his second term around House Republicans intent on blocking his agenda in the 113th.
For two years, the president has seen House Republican leaders as the key to legislative progress, and he has pursued direct talks with Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio and Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the majority leader. That avenue of negotiation proved fruitless, in large part because House Republicans were deeply divided about any compromise that Mr. Obama would accept. The failure led Mr. Boehner to tell his colleagues this week that he would not be engaging in any more one-on-one negotiations with the president.
But negotiations over the fiscal impasse pointed to a new and unlikely path as more fiscal deadlines approach. In this case, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader and a veteran legislative dealmaker, initiated negotiations with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., which instigated talks between them and the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. That produced sweeping tax legislation that averted large tax increases for most Americans and across-the-board spending cuts.
Then both Senate leaders worked hard to deliver the votes of a vast majority of their reluctant members, isolating House Republican leaders, who found themselves with no way forward other than to put the bill before the House and let Democrats push it over the finish line.
“I think this is the fourth time that we’ve seen this play out, where Boehner finally relents and lets the House consider a measure, and Democrats provide the votes to pass it,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat. “When they reach the point where their hand is forced, where there’s no other place to turn, they’ll do the right thing.”
That realization may lead to a more formalized process to begin bipartisan negotiations in the Senate to put pressure on the House. The deal that passed on Tuesday lifted the threat of tax increases that could have crippled the economy, but in other ways it compounded near-term fiscal threats. The government reached its statutory borrowing limit on Monday, giving Congress at best two to three months to raise the debt ceiling or risk a debilitating default on federal debt.
Around the same time, a two-month delay in the institution of across-the-board military and domestic spending cuts will lapse. Then, by the end of March, the current stopgap spending law financing the federal government will end, raising the specter of another government shutdown.
If House Republicans believe they can use those deadlines to extract concessions from the president on spending cuts, the White House may go elsewhere for a deal, Democrats say.
An official knowledgeable about the last negotiations said on Wednesday that the president would use such a strategy only if he was convinced that House Republican leaders would not or could not compromise. But in meeting with Senate Democrats on Monday and House Democrats on Tuesday, Mr. Biden labored to convince lawmakers that the White House had a way forward that would avoid last-minute theatrics and would not entail a stream of compromises on party principles, according to lawmakers who were there.
“One of the main concerns is, where do we go from here?” said Representative Elijah E. Cummings, Democrat of Maryland, adding that Democrats feared that compromises on tax increases for the rich in the deal approved on Tuesday would lead to cuts in Social Security and Medicare in the next round of talks. “He has a game plan for that.”
A senior Democrat said that game plan would start in the coming weeks, when Mr. Obama addresses his agenda in his State of the Union address and lays out his budget for the 2014 fiscal year, due in early February.
That opening bid should restart talks with Congress on an overarching agreement that would lock in deficit reduction through additional revenue, changes to entitlement programs and more spending cuts, to be worked out by the relevant committees in Congress. But this time, those talks might start in the Senate.
House Republican aides said the past few weeks were unique and not indicative of anything going forward. The president won re-election on a pledge to raise taxes on income over $250,000. His mandate does not extend beyond that, one aide said. Besides, officials in both parties warn, neither Mr. Reid nor Mr. McConnell will want to lead on the difficult issues now in view. Mr. Reid was reluctant, at best, about joining the Biden-McConnell talks.
And Mr. McConnell has made it clear that future deficit deals should be done through “regular order” — Congressional committees, Senate and House debates and open negotiations, not private talks. Officials in both parties worry that as his 2014 re-election campaign gets closer, Mr. McConnell will be increasingly reluctant to have his fingerprints on deals with the president.
Even if a Senate route can be institutionalized, Mr. Durbin said he doubted that it would smooth the passage of bipartisan deals, given the difficulties Mr. Boehner has getting his troops in line. “His anguish has a timetable. It goes through phases and places that I don’t understand,” Mr. Durbin said of the speaker. “And I am afraid every scary chapter has to play out every step of the way before anything is resolved.”
Michael Steel, a spokesman for Mr. Boehner, said the last-minute crunch that produced the tax accord was necessary only because the Senate refused to act earlier. The House passed legislation months ago to extend all the expiring Bush-era tax cuts and to stop automatic military cuts by shifting them to domestic programs.
***********
January 2, 2013
For Obama, a Victory That Also Holds RisksBy DAVID LEONHARDT
NYT
WASHINGTON — The deal significantly raises taxes on the rich, with no expiration date. It extends tax credits for the poor and the middle class. It provides more jobless benefits. Largely overlooked, it extends an alternative-energy tax credit that has helped create a clean-energy boom.
And it includes almost no spending cuts.
For President Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress, the fiscal deal reached this week is full of small victories that further their largest policy aims. Above all, it takes another step toward Mr. Obama’s goal of orienting federal policy more toward the middle class and the poor, at the expense of the rich.
Yet the deal, which the Senate and the House have passed and Mr. Obama is expected to sign soon, also represents a substantial risk for the president.
Throughout the negotiations of the last two months, Mr. Obama pushed for a larger agreement, one that would have canceled other looming budget deadlines, starting with one on the debt ceiling. He and his aides saw the so-called fiscal cliff, with its trillions of dollars in scheduled tax increases that Republicans abhorred, as leverage to start fresh in a second term and avoid more deadline-driven partisan fights.
“I want a big deal. I want a comprehensive deal,” Mr. Obama said almost two months ago, at his first post-election news conference. “I want to see if we can, you know, at least for the foreseeable future provide certainty to businesses and the American people.”
When House Republicans made it clear that they opposed a big deal, however, Mr. Obama decided to take the smaller deal, bank a series of victories and wait to fight another day. The alternative — debated inside the White House, but not ultimately a close call — would have been to go over the cliff in the hope of forcing Republicans into a larger deal.
Without that larger agreement, Mr. Obama will be left to find solutions to future budget deadlines without the leverage that came with the prospect of automatic tax increases.
“The best world would have been a bigger agreement,” an administration official acknowledged. “This is a big win in a second-best world.”
Perhaps the best prism through which to see the Democrats’ gains is inequality. In the 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama said that his top priority as president would be to “create bottom-up economic growth” and reduce inequality.
He has governed as such. In the 2009 stimulus, he insisted on making tax credits “fully refundable,” so that even people who did not make enough to pay much federal tax would benefit. The 2010 health care law overhaul was probably the biggest attack on inequality since it began rising in the 1970s, increasing taxes on businesses and the rich to pay for health insurance largely for the middle class.
As part of this week’s deal, Mr. Obama did make several major compromises. He accepted much less in overall tax revenue than the government would have received absent any deal. He allowed a payroll-tax cut, which applied to most households, to expire. And he yielded both on aspects of the estate tax and on the level at which the top marginal income-tax rate would start, moving it to $450,000 for couples, from $250,000.
Still, using inequality as a yardstick, he won much of what he had wanted. By holding firm to a top rate of 39.6 percent — up from 35 percent — he locked in a substantial tax increase for the very richest, who have received the biggest pretax raises in recent years.
On average, the top 0.1 percent of earners — whose incomes start at $2.7 million and go much higher — will pay $444,000 more in taxes in 2013 than they otherwise would have, according to the Tax Policy Center. The increases stem from both the fiscal deal and the new taxes in the health care law.
In effect, the deal preserves the “compassionate conservative” part of President George W. Bush’s tax agenda — reducing federal income taxes on the working poor, sometimes to zero — while limiting the parts that most helped the affluent.
Even one of the chief architects of the Bush tax cuts, R. Glenn Hubbard, now dean of Columbia Business School, did not celebrate the enshrinement of most of them. He said in an interview that the deal would amplify the tax code’s distortions on the economy.
Former President Bill Clinton, by contrast, has told people that he considers the deal a good one, according to two people who have spoken to him.
Beyond income tax code, the deal continued jobless benefits for two million long-term unemployed who otherwise would have lost them immediately. And it extended, for one year, an energy tax credit that has reduced alternative-energy costs and increased use.
The question that hangs over the deal for Democrats is whether they will have to play defense on the budget for the rest of Mr. Obama’s presidency.
When Republicans stepped back from a larger deal last month, one that would have resolved the debt ceiling, Mr. Obama faced a choice. He could have worked toward a smaller deal, as he did, or insisted that the debt ceiling had to be part of any package.
White House officials took the path they did because they feared that a hardened stance on the debt ceiling would result in no deal at all: taxes would have risen on nearly everyone; automatic spending cuts would have begun; jobless benefits would have ended for many; and markets may have reacted badly.
In the chaos that could have followed, the officials believed, a grand bargain would have been unlikely. If anything, Democrats — worried they would be blamed for the economy’s troubles, as the party holding the White House — might have struggled to get a deal as good as this week’s. Having won this round, Democrats still have compromises to offer Republicans in the next one, like changes to Social Security.
But some of Mr. Obama’s allies wonder if he should have taken the risk of a confrontation now. A stalemate next time will bring no threat of higher taxes, and Republicans may stand firmer, demanding cuts that undo Mr. Obama’s recent gains.
“I now fear that we are heading toward a crisis that can dwarf what we’ve just been through,” said Robert Greenstein, president of the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “We really won’t know how best to view the deal, and how well the White House has done, until the debt limit is done.”
The wait for a fuller answer will not last too long: The federal government is on pace to need a higher debt limit by March.
Jonathan Weisman contributed reporting.
***********
GOP obstruction kills 18-year-old Violence Against Women ActBy Eric W. Dolan
RawStory
Wednesday, January 2, 2013 17:22 EST
The current term of Congress ended on Wednesday without re-authorizing the Violence Against Women Act, a nearly two-decade-old measure to aid victims of domestic and sexual violence.
Though the Senate approved the VAWA last year with bipartisan support, Republicans in the U.S. House had opposed the legislation because it added new protections for illegal immigrants, LGBT individuals, and Native Americans.
“The House Republican leadership’s failure to take up and pass the Senate’s bipartisan and inclusive VAWA bill is inexcusable,” Sen. Patty Murray said in a statement to The Maddow Blog. “This is a bill that passed with 68 votes in the Senate and that extends the bill’s protections to 30 million more women. But this seems to be how House Republican leadership operates. No matter how broad the bipartisan support, no matter who gets hurt in the process, the politics of the right wing of their party always comes first.”
Rather than vote on the Senate version of the VAWA, House Republicans passed their own watered-down version of the bill that omitted the new provisions. The White House warned it would veto the House bill, which was opposed by groups like the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the American Bar Association, and others because it ignored vulnerable populations.
Vice President Joe Biden and Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) were reportedly in last-minute talks to resolve the differences between the House and Senate bills, but nothing materialized before the legislative session ended.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who co-authored the VAWA along with Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID), said last month he would re-introduce the legislation in the next Congress.
“We will continue our discussions, and we will work tirelessly to have a good bill enacted into law. This is not the end of our efforts to renew and improve VAWA to more effectively help all victims of domestic and sexual violence,” Leahy said.
“We have seen enough violence. If we cannot get the Leahy-Crapo bill over the finish line this year, we will come back next year, and we will get it done.”
***********
Christie lambasts House Republicans over Sandy bill: 'Shame on Congress'Republican New Jersey governor singles out 'failure' of John Boehner after Speaker delays vote on hurricane Sandy aid.
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 2 January 2013 22.20 GMT
The plain-speaking governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, embarked on an extended tirade against his own party members in Congress on Wednesday, raging against what he described as the "toxic internal politics" of House Republicans.
Christie, a high-profile Republican who is among the potential candidates for a run at the presidency in 2016, used invective against his own party usually only heard in attacks from Democrats.
Although he was specifically angry over the House's failure to vote on a compensation package for victims of hurricane Sandy, he expanded his rant to criticise House Republicans in general and the House Republican Speaker John Boehner in particular.
In the face of heavy criticism from Christie and other Republicans, Boehner scheduled a vote on the aid package for Friday.
Christie, speaking at a 40-minute long press conference before that announcement, reflected widespread criticism, mainly on the left but also among independents and many Republicans, that the Tea Party-backed Republicans in the House are a disruptive influence, creating chaos in Washington.
"Americans are tired of the palace intrigue and political partisanship of this Congress, which places one-upmanship ahead of the lives of the citizens who sent these people to Washington DC in the first place," Christie said.
He added: "America deserves better than yet another example of a government that has forgotten who they are there to serve and why." Referring specifically to the failure to act on the hurricane Sandy package, he said: "Shame on you. Shame on Congress."
Christie said that, historically, lawmakers in Washington did not play politics with disaster relief, but in the present atmosphere, everything was the subject of gamesmanship. "They are so consumed with their internal politics, they've forgotten they have a job to do," Christie said. "Everything is the subject of one-upmanship. It is why the American people hate Congress."
His anger over hurricane Sandy was echoed by other governors and members of Congress from the north-east.
Even before Christie's remarks, the showdown over the fiscal cliff fully exposed the extent of the divisions within the Republican party. Republicans in the Senate, dominated by moderate members who have held their seats for a long time, voted as a largely cohesive unit on Tuesday in favour of the fiscal cliff deal.
There were only five rebels, two of them senators who are Tea Party favourites: Marco Rubio and Rand Paul.
In contrast with the Senate, the House, whose membership is backed to a greater extent by the Tea Party, was deeply divided. Only 85 Republicans voted for the fiscal cliff deal, with 151 against.
The divide was geographical as well as ideological, with a large bloc of those voting in favour predominantly from the more liberal north-east and those against from the more conservative south.
At the press conference, Christie said Republicans had failed in their duty by not passing the hurricane Sandy package. Republicans, conscious of keeping down federal spending, have questioned measures in the package that they regard as wasteful.
"Last night, the House of Representatives failed that most basic test of public service and they did so with callous indifference to the suffering of the people of my state," he said.
"There is only one group to blame for the continued suffering of these innocent victims: the House majority and their Speaker John Boehner," he added. He described Boehner's decision to cancel the vote on the aid package as disappointing and "disgusting".
Christie is a popular figure and his reputation grew over his handling of hurricane Sandy, in particular his bipartisan posture and his willingness to put aside politics to work with president Barack Obama, even though the White House election was looming.
He could struggle to win support among fellow Republicans in mid-west states such as Iowa, where the first of the caucuses are held, because his views on abortion, gun control and immigration are regarded as too liberal.
Rubio, who voted against the fiscal cliff deal, is among the present favourites.
***********
Obama signs sweeping U.S. defense spending billBy Agence France-Presse
Thursday, January 3, 2013 7:23 EST
President Barack Obama has signed into law a $633 billion US defense spending bill that funds the war in Afghanistan and boosts security at US missions worldwide.
“I have approved this annual defense authorization legislation, as I have in previous years, because it authorizes essential support for service members and their families, renews vital national security programs, and helps ensure that the United States will continue to have the strongest military in the world,” Obama said in a statement early Thursday after signing the measure.
Obama, who is vacationing in Hawaii, said that he signed the measure despite reservations.
“In a time when all public servants recognize the need to eliminate wasteful or duplicative spending, various sections in the Act limit the Defense Department’s ability to direct scarce resources towards the highest priorities for our national security,” the president said.
“Even though I support the vast majority of the provisions contained in this Act… I do not agree with them all,” he said in his statement, adding that he did not have the constitutional authority to approve piecemeal items within the sprawling bill.
“I am empowered either to sign the bill, or reject it, as a whole,” he said.
The meaure was hammered out by House and Senate conferees last month after each chamber voted to approve separate versions of the bill.
It includes $527.4 billion for the base Pentagon budget; $88.5 billion for overseas contingency operations including the war in Afghanistan; and $17.8 billion for national security programs in the Energy Department and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
The bill authorizes $9.8 billion for missile defense, including funds for a Pentagon feasibility study on three possible missile defense sites on the US East Coast.
It also extends for one year the restriction on use of US funds to transfer Guantanamo inmates to other countries, a limitation critics say marks a setback for Obama’s efforts to close the detention center.
***********
January 2, 2013
A Soaring Homicide Rate, a Divide in ChicagoBy MONICA DAVEY
NYT
CHICAGO — This city’s 471st homicide of 2012 happened in the middle of the day, in the middle of a crowd, on the steps of the church where the victim of homicide 463 was being eulogized. Sherman Miller, who was 21, collapsed amid gunfire not far from the idling hearse that was there to carry away James Holman, 32, shot to death a week earlier.
The funeral shooting at St. Columbanus Catholic Church on the South Side left neighbors fretting that no place, not even a church, felt safe any longer. “It’s become the Wild Wild West,” said Charles Childs Jr., who had watched from across the street as mourners screamed and scattered.
The shooting, on Nov. 26, was one more jarring reminder of just how common killings seem to have grown on the streets of Chicago, the nation’s third-largest city, where 506 homicides were reported in 2012, a 16 percent increase over the year before, even as the number of killings remained relatively steady or dropped in some cities, including New York.
But the overall rise in killings here blurs another truth: the homicides, most of which the authorities described as gang-against-gang shootings, have not been spread evenly across this city. Instead, they have mostly taken place in neighborhoods west and south of Chicago’s gleaming downtown towers.
Already, 2013 began with three gun homicides on New Year’s Day, two of them on the South Side. Like other cities, Chicago has long been a segregated place, richer and whiter on the North Side, and the city’s troubling increase in killings has accentuated a longstanding divide.
“It’s two different Chicagos,” said the Rev. Corey B. Brooks Sr., the pastor of New Beginnings Church on the South Side, who had led the funeral service for Mr. Holman the day shots rang out, then found himself leading Mr. Miller’s funeral service a week later. The authorities here have described both shootings as gang related. “If something like that had happened at the big cathedral in downtown Chicago or up north at a predominantly white church, it would still be on the news right now, it would be such a major thing going on.”
More than 80 percent of the city’s homicides took place last year in only about half of Chicago’s 23 police districts, largely on the city’s South and West Sides. The police district that includes parts of the business district downtown reported no killings at all. And while at least one police district on the city’s northern edge saw a significant increase in the rate of killings, the total number there still was dwarfed by deaths in districts on the other sides of town, and particularly in certain neighborhoods.
Along the streets downtown and in neighborhoods on the North Side not far from Lake Michigan, some residents acknowledged that they had heard about a rise in the city’s homicide rate, but said it had not affected their own sense of safety. “This area is a bit of a Garden of Eden,” said Gwen Sylvain, as she walked dogs along a residential street not far from the Loop.
Others said they rarely had reason to go to the Chicago’s South or West Sides, only a few miles away, and some longtime residents said they had never once ventured to such neighborhoods. Police business on the North Side rarely seems to rise beyond an overly enthusiastic Cubs fan or a parking quibble, said Kyong Lee, who said that in the past he had, without consequence, forgotten to lock up his family’s shoe repair business.
In Back of the Yards, a South Side neighborhood near the city’s old meatpacking district, the tenor was far different. Mothers spoke of keeping their children inside from the moment school ended, and businessmen of decisions to lock the front doors of their shops during business hours. “I don’t go out at night,” said Jesse Martinez, who recalled the gun pressed to his head as he was robbed a few years ago inside the hat and boot store he has run for 32 years.
Over all, crime in Chicago dropped 9 percent in 2012 from the year before in what city officials say was the largest decrease in 30 years. Among crimes that saw dips last year: rape, robbery and car theft. With the city’s longtime gangs splintering into factions and increasing problems with retaliatory violence, homicides rose suddenly in the first three months of the year — running some 60 percent ahead of the year earlier — creating a pace that slowed significantly as the year went on.
City officials attributed the improvement to a broad anti-gang strategy that includes an elaborate police audit of gang members, removal of vacant buildings and efforts to involve neighbors. Some have called for increased gun control legislation; of 7,000 guns recovered by the Chicago police in recent months, handguns are most common, but 300 were assault weapons.
“A child shot is a child of the City of Chicago,” Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who lives on the North Side, said in an interview in which he addressed the long-held divisions in a city known for its endless array of distinct neighborhoods on the North, South and West Sides. “Don’t anybody think that it’s ‘over there,’ ” the mayor said. “It’s a tear on this city.”
No arrests have been made in the deaths of Mr. Holman or Mr. Miller, who died on the steps of the church that Al Capone’s mother once attended regularly and where Barack Obama distributed food to the needy just after he was elected president in 2008. The authorities say three guns were believed to be present when Mr. Miller died. The police say Mr. Miller was carrying a gun. And bullet casings from two other weapons were found on the steps.
At Mr. Miller’s funeral in December, a large contingent of Chicago police officers waited outside.
“It’s gotten to the point, unfortunately, where something as significant as a funeral is subject to gang violence, and I can’t even believe that we’re having this conversation,” Garry McCarthy, the police superintendent here, said in an interview. “I’m not willing to gamble that maybe they’re not going to bring their guns this time.”
Inside that funeral, at another church on the city’s South Side, Mr. Brooks stood near Mr. Miller’s coffin, recalling what had happened at the last funeral. “Ever since then,” Mr. Brooks told Mr. Miller’s mother, who sat before him, “my heart has been so torn.”
As friends of the deceased stepped past his framed photograph to stand at a microphone, Mr. Brooks called for peace in the church, read out his own cellphone number (in case, he said, anyone needed it), and stopped one young man from launching into a rap, for fear, Mr. Brooks said later, of what new trouble that might stir.
In a corner of the church, a friend of Mr. Miller revealed text messages he had sent to her during Mr. Holman’s funeral, minutes before he was shot: “dis preacher like he talkin straight to me,” one of the messages read. “He talkin bout hurts and pain. I cant run from the pain cause its gone hurt me worse if I’m by myself because I gotta think about everything.” In tears, she recalled how she had replied to the texts with questions, but Mr. Miller never responded.
*************
December 31, 2012 09:00 AM
Wright's Law: A Unique Teacher Imparts Real Life LessonsBy Diane Sweet
In a perfect world, all children would have at least one teacher this special. Jeffrey Wright uses wacky experiments to teach children about the universe, but it is his own personal story that teaches them the true meaning of life.
A now yearly tradition, Mr. Wright gives a lecture on his experiences as a parent of a special needs child. His son, Adam, now 12, has a rare disorder called Joubert syndrome, in which the part of the brain related to balance and movement fails to develop properly. Visually impaired and unable to control his movements, Adam breathes rapidly and doesn’t speak.
This annual lecture about Adam, and the meaning of life, love and family is what leaves the greatest impression on Jeffrey Wright's students.
NYT:
“When you start talking about physics, you start to wonder, ‘What is the purpose of it all?’ ” he said in an interview. “Kids started coming to me and asking me those ultimate questions. I wanted them to look at their life in a little different way — as opposed to just through the laws of physics — and give themselves more purpose in life.”
Mr. Wright starts his lecture by talking about the hopes and dreams he had for Adam and his daughter, Abbie, now 15. He recalls the day Adam was born, and the sadness he felt when he learned of his condition.
“All those dreams about ever watching my son knock a home run over the fence went away,” he tells the class. “The whole thing about where the universe came from? I didn’t care. … I started asking myself, what was the point of it?”
All that changed one day when Mr. Wright saw Abbie, about 4 at the time, playing with dolls on the floor next to Adam. At that moment he realized that his son could see and play — that the little boy had an inner life. He and his wife, Nancy, began teaching Adam simple sign language. One day, his son signed “I love you.”
In the lecture, Mr. Wright signs it for the class: “Daddy, I love you.” “There is nothing more incredible than the day you see this,” he says, and continues: “There is something a lot greater than energy. There’s something a lot greater than entropy. What’s the greatest thing?”
“Love,” his students whisper.
“Wright’s Law” recently won a gold medal in multimedia in the national College Photographer of the Year competition, run by the University of Missouri. The filmmaker, Zack Conkle, 22, a photojournalism graduate of Western Kentucky University is also a former student of Mr. Wright’s. He says that he made the film because he would get frustrated trying to describe Mr. Wright’s teaching style.
Click to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bSu_Snlbsw&feature=player_embedded#!