PEEK

Buzz, perspectives, insight and news from AlterNet

MIT: Eating Local Food Is the Key to Solving Our Obesity Epidemic
Posted by Tara Lohan on November 11, 2009 at 7:45 AM.

Sometimes it takes more than Michael Pollan to get through to people. New research from MIT about how locally grown foods can reduce our obesity problem is welcome news. Right now Americans are getting bigger and bigger -- between 1980 and 2006 obesity among teenagers grew from 5 to 18 percent; and 7 to 17 percent for pre-teens. These gains are contributing more to the onset of diseases like type 2 diabetes, strokes and heart problems, writes Peter Dizikes of MIT News Office.

A group of MIT researchers found that what's driving our obesity epidemic is "our national-scale system of food production and distribution, which surrounds children -- especially lower-income children -- with high-calorie products." Precisely what folks in the pro-food/local foods movement have been saying for years. And it makes sense considering the shocking figure that 90 percent of American food is processed according to the USDA, Dizikes highlights.

Thankfully the researchers didn't just stop at pointing out the obvious, they offered a solution:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

How Anti-Choice Dems and Mike Huckabee Could Team Up to Screw Over America's Women
Posted by Allison Kilkenny, True/Slant on November 11, 2009 at 4:45 AM.

Two things caught my eye this morning that paint a pretty bleak dystopian future.

First, Politico reports that the latest Gallup polls confirm Mike Huckabee is the front-runner for the 2012 presidential nomination. Seriously. That’s the same Mikey Huckabee, who let Wayne Dumond, a convicted rapist, go free in order to appease his right-wing pals (Dumond went on to sexually assault and kill a woman in Missouri,) advocated isolating AIDS patients from the general population, believes in teaching Creationism side-by-side with evolution, supports building a 700-mile border fence along the Mexico-US border, and who doesn’t think gays or women should be permitted to serve in the military.

That guy. President. And sure, lots can happen between now and November 2012 that will promptly knock Huckabee out of his first-place rank. He could gain all of that weight back, become a raging alcoholic, and publicly shame himself when he projectile vomits all over David Letterman during his next Late Night visit.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Marine Reservist Chases, Assaults Greek Orthodox Priest Whom He Mistook for an Arab Terrorist
Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress on November 11, 2009 at 1:00 AM.

Alexios Marakis, a Greek Orthodox priest visiting the U.S., got lost in Tampa and tried to stop and ask directions from Marine reservist Jasen D. Bruce. But instead of offering help, “Bruce struck the priest on the head with a tire iron.” The reservist believed Marakis, who spoke limited English, was an Arab terrorist. Bruce chased the priest for three blocks, “and even called 911 to say that an Arabic man tried to rob him.” According to a news release:

“During the chase, the suspect called 911 and claimed an Arabic male attempted to rob him and he was going to take him into custody,” a Tampa Police Department news release states. “When officers arrived, the suspect claimed the man was a terrorist.”

Police arrested Bruce for “aggravated battery with a deadly weapon” and are investigating whether he committed a hate crime.

Idaho Republican Blake Hall Fired for Throwing Used Condoms on the Lawn of a Woman He Was Stalking
Posted by Steven D., Booman Tribune on November 10, 2009 at 4:25 PM.

This story about prominent Idaho political figure and Republican National Committee member Blake Hall and his conviction for stalking his former girlfriend is pretty disturbing, nonetheless, especially from the "ewww!" factor alone:

Blake Hall, a leading figure in Idaho and national politics for 25 years, was fired Monday as a deputy prosecuting attorney in eastern Idaho and has resigned from the Republican National Committee. [...]

Idaho Falls police reported that witnesses said Hall disposed of used condoms on the lawn of the woman's house. Nineteen condoms were turned over to police, collected on 10 different dates, according to a police report. Both Hall and his lawyer acknowledged the condoms belonged to him, according to a police report. [...]

"I was so tired of being victimized," the woman said. "It is unimaginable that a 56-year-old would be so deviant."

Well, at least he didn't try to choke her to death. And it's clear from his behavior he hasn't been seduced by the Gay Side, so far as we know. In Republican Political circles I guess that makes him a stand up guy. Which is why, even though he has to serve a six month 15 day jail term, resign from the RNC, and was fired from one of the government jobs he held, he still gets to keep his second government job as a civil attorney for Fremont County, Idaho:

But Hall, 56, will keep his $31,000-a-year job as the civil attorney in nearby Fremont County, according to Prosecutor Joette Lookabaugh, a Republican who hired Hall in January.

Lookabaugh said she told Hall he would keep his job "unless or until his ability to do an outstanding job for Fremont County citizens is compromised." [...]

"I understand that political figures are held to a higher standard," she said. "What is disturbing is the fact that often people who have devoted their lives to public service are not given the same benefits, or are treated more harshly, than the public at large. There seems to be a certain amount of political glee in striking down the well-known for any real or perceived foible."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Fox Mogul Rupert Murdoch Echoes Glenn Beck, Calls Obama a Racist
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 10, 2009 at 3:10 PM.

MURDOCH FANS THE FLAMES.... It seemed, for a while, like the political world was prepared to move beyond the animosity between Fox News and the White House. Presidential aides seemed to cut back on noticing the Republican network's partisan efforts, and Fox News returned to more routine, everyday bashing of Democrats.

Indeed, just 13 days ago, we learned that White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs met personally with Fox News SVP Michael Clemente. There was talk of a "truce." It was time to move on.

Or so we thought. just four days after the reported "truce," Chris Wallace gave Rush Limbaugh a half-hour of airtime on "Fox News Sunday," which the right-wing radio host used to make one ridiculous attack against the president after another. There was no obvious reason for the interview.

And just a few days after Wallace's love-fest with Limbaugh, Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch told Sky News Australia that Glenn Beck's infamous anti-Obama tirade -- Beck called the president a "racist" with "a deep-seated hatred for white people or white culture" -- was accurate.

SKY NEWS: The Glenn Beck, who you mentioned, has called Barack Obama a racist and he helped organize a protest against him. Others on Fox have likened him to Stalin. Is that defensible?

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Shooting at Portland Office Park; 2 Dead, 2 Wounded
Posted by AlterNet Staff, AlterNet on November 10, 2009 at 1:59 PM.

Police confirm that two people have been killed and two wounded in a suburban Portland drug-testing facility. KATU.com reports:

KATU reporter Kerry Tomlinson is on the scene of the shooting in Tualatin at the intersection of Martinazzi and Warm Springs and has learned that Tualatin Police have confirmed that there are two deceased victims, one male and one female.

Tualatin Police have also confirmed two injured victims who were transported to Emanual Hospital.

The shooting was reported to take place at 7575 SW Mohawk, near the Martinazzi intersection.

One victim was shot, who was in a white lab coat who may have worked at a blood clinic, described a man coming in with two guns and she said the shooting began and she began running.

The woman was shot in the leg and it is believed she did not suffer life-threatening injuries.

Police have information that the area is safe and the suspect is no longer at large.

Could the Stupak Amendment Get the Boot in The Senate?
Posted by mcjoan, Daily Kos on November 10, 2009 at 1:31 PM.

Sen. Barbara Boxer said today in an interview with HuffPo's Sam Stein and Ryan Grim that efforts to add Stupak's Coathanger amendment in the Senate would very likely fail.

"If someone wants to offer this very radical amendment, which would really tear apart [a decades-long] compromise, then I think at that point they would need to have 60 votes to do it," Boxer said. "And I believe in our Senate we can hold it."

"It is a much more pro-choice Senate than it has been in a long time," she added. "And it is much more pro-choice than the House."

Boxer's reading of the political landscape might seem like the hopeful spin of an abortion-rights defender. But it was seconded by a far less pro-choice lawmaker, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.)

"It would have to be added," sad the Montana Democrat of an amendment that mirrored that offered Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) in the House. "I doubt it could pass."

The procedural aspect of that could, however, get a little dicey should Ben Nelson and Bob Casey actually try to introduce an amendment on the floor as they are threatening to do. Expect to read more from David on that aspect soon. The key thing seems to be to convince Nelson and Casey to forgo pushing this amendment, and that could be what Boxer is intending to do. Casey, when he's had time to think about it, might realize the potential of this effort in blowing up the overall healthcare reform bill entirely, and back off. Nelson might not give a crap if he blows it all up.

But there's one person that can exert some influence over Nelson, and that's Barack Obama, who stated very clearly yesterday that the Stupak Coathanger amendment goes too far in restricting women's access and in changing the "status quo" on federal funding for abortion. Perhaps a little direct pressure from the President on Nelson would dissuade him from pushing his own restrictive effort.

That statement from Obama, perhaps as well as some education from her fellow pro-choice colleages, seems to have swayed Claire McCaskill. Yesterday she stated that the Senate could live with Stupak, displaying a profound misunderstanding of how bad the amendment really is. So her tweet last night backtracking that statement was most welcome.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Woops! Bill O'Reilly Doesn't Remember What the Public Option Is Called, or That It's Pretty Popular (Video)
Posted by Ben Armbruster, Think Progress on November 10, 2009 at 12:14 PM.

Last night on Fox News, host Bill O’Reilly and analyst Brit Hume discussed the prospects for the Senate passing a health care reform bill. After struggling with the terminology for the “public option,” O’Reilly ultimately concluded that “all the polls say” that “the folks don’t want it.”

Hume, a regular Fox News misinformer, surprisingly corrected O’Reilly, noting that Americans actually support the public option:

O’REILLY: They call it, you know, the public sector. What is the –

HUME: Public option, you mean?

O’REILLY: Public option, whatever. The folks don’t want it. … But it looks to me like they have maybe 55 votes to pass it. And that means they could be filibustered and never come up for a vote.

HUME: That’s what it looks like right now. The public option, actually some polls show that the public option standing by itself is not at all unpopular, but it is kind of popular. But that depends on how the poll question is raised. … We don’t need to go into all that right now.

Watch it:

Those trying to derail reform with a public option try to claim that Americans don’t support it. “All the polls now indicate substantial opposition to this particular type of health care reform,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said last night on Fox. But Hume is right. Americans do support the public option, as recent polling shows:

– CNN/Opinion Research, Oct. 30 – Nov. 1: 55 percent support “creating a public health insurance option administered by the federal government that would compete with plans offered by private health insurance companies.”

– Ipsos/McClatchy, Oct. 30 – Nov. 1: 51 percent support the “creation of a public entity to directly compete with existing health insurance companies.”

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Call Joe Lieberman's Bluff: A Real Fort Hood Inquiry Would Likely Shut Him Up
Posted by John Nichols, TheNation.com on November 10, 2009 at 11:00 AM.

Following the horrific shootings at the Fort Hood army base in Texas, Connecticut Senator Lieberman pulled a thread from the right-wing blogosphere and called for a congressional inquiry into whether the incident was an act of "terrorism."

Not domestic terrorism, but full-blown terrorism that is comparable to what is seen in the most unstable of warzones.

"This was an attack on America troops," Lieberman chirped on Fox New Sunday. "You've got to see it as if 12 American troops were killed in Afghanistan."

But, wait, U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan are fighting a strategically-sophisticated and structurally-coordinated enemy that employs traditional military tactics and terrorist strategies such as suicide bombings in urban areas.

Is Lieberman serious about making a comparison between what happened at Fort Hood and what happens in Kabul?

Not really.

When he's pinned down, Lieberman makes the slightly more precise calim that the Army doctor who killed 13 people and wounded 29 at Fort Hood showed signs of being a "self-radicalized, homegrown terrorist."

Never mind that another way of saying "self-radicalized, homegrown terrorist" might be "completely isolated mental-health case."

Never might that, when he started running the "terrorist" line on Fox New Sunday, host Chris Wallace used a sound line of questioning to make it clear that the senator did not have "any evidence so far (from) what you and your staff have heard in briefings that.. he was exchanging communications either in this country or overseas with other Islamic radicals."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

President Obama Has Refused to Stand Up for Women, Plain and Simple
Posted by Melissa McEwan, Shakesville on November 10, 2009 at 9:45 AM.

I can't put it any more plainly than that. And, no -- it's not hyperbole. I wish it were.

The White House on Monday signaled it would keep its distance in the increasingly vocal debate over whether health insurance reform should include language related to abortion.

When asked whether the president supported Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich.) amendment to prohibit the public insurance plan from covering abortion services, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dodged the question -- multiple times.

"Well, ask me that right before Christmas and the end of the New Year," Gibbs said during today's press briefing, noting the president still expected to sign a healthcare bill before the year's end.

The press secretary later clarified, "We will work on this and continue to seek consensus and common ground."

FUCK THAT.

There is no fucking "common ground" between people who believe in women's right to autonomy over their own bodies and people who believe that women's bodies are property of the government, or their doctors, or their husbands, or anyone else who gets a vote on whether they have to be pregnant even if they don't want to be.

Either you stand on the side of women's equality and independence or you don't.

It is fucking ludicrous that our DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT refuses to take a stand on this issue.

And this mealy-mouthed bullshit —"I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill"—is contemptibly craven. I'm absolutely fucking livid that a man who had the audacity to claim to be a champion of women's right to choose would abandon women in this way. Not that I'm surprised. Of course I'm not surprised. I always knew this was bullshit. A lack of surprise makes me no less furious about the depth of his callous disregard for women.

That? Is also not hyperbole: "In case you are wondering about the real life effects of playing cheap politics with pregnancy, read this.

And this. ... All women will be losing coverage for necessary abortions when a wanted pregnancy goes wrong. It only has an exemption for the life of the mother, but not for her her health, nor for severe and fatal fetal abnormalities. Click those links for what that means in real life."Women's real lives—something our president evidently doesn't give a fuck about. Or might. Y'know, depending on which way the wind is blowingin December.

For the record: This isn't me hysterical. Nor overwrought. Nor upset. Nor reactionary. Nor irrational. Nor hypersensitive. Nor any other word one might use to dismiss a feminist in this moment.

This is me angry and brimming with contempt.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Korean Warships Exchange Fire on the SK/NK Border
Posted by Staff, AlterNet on November 10, 2009 at 8:29 AM.

From AFP:

A North Korean patrol boat was set ablaze after exchanging fire with South Korea's navy on Tuesday, Seoul officials said, as cross-border tensions rose a week before a scheduled US presidential visit.

The two sides blamed each other for the clash, the first for seven years near the disputed Yellow Sea border.

President Lee Myung-Bak called an emergency meeting of security ministers as his Prime Minister Chung Un-Chan accused the North of making a "direct attack" on a South Korean high-speed patrol craft.

"There was no damage on our side while a North Korean patrol boat engulfed in flame sailed back (across the border)," Chung told parliament.

He described the clash, which follows recent peace overtures from the North, as unplanned and urged people to stay calm.

Some analysts, however, said Pyongyang may be sending President Barack Obama a message, eight days before he arrives in South Korea as part of an Asian tour.

Defence Minister Kim Tae-Young told parliament the North's boat sailed more than 1.6 kilometres (one mile) south of the border and "I believe they clearly knew about the intrusion".

The Joint Chiefs of Staff said the South's boat sent several warning signals after the North's craft crossed the border, but the intruder held its course.

After the South fired warning shots, "the North's side opened fire, directly aiming at our ship. Then our ship responded by firing back, forcing the North Korean boat to return to the north," the statement said.

"There were no casualties on our side. We are on the lookout for any further provocations by the North," it said.

"We fired heavily on the North Korean vessel," an unidentified navy official told Yonhap news agency, adding the initial assessment was that it suffered considerable damage.

"We express our strong protest to North Korea and urge it to prevent a recurrence of such incidents," said Brigadier-General Lee Ki-Sik of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

He said the two sides exchanged fire for two minutes from a distance of about three kilometres. The North fired about 50 rounds, 15 of which hit the South Korean boat.

The border known as the Northern Limit Line (NLL) has always been a potential flashpoint and was the scene of bloody naval clashes in 1999 and 2002.

General Lee said the North breached the NLL 22 times this year. But this was the first time the South had to fire warning shots, because the patrol boat kept intruding despite five warning signals.

North Korea's military, however, told its South Korean counterpart to apologise for a "grave armed provocation" and said Seoul's ships had opened fire while its craft was north of the border.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

RNC Chairman Michael Steele: My Fellow Republicans Fear Me Because I'm Black
Posted by Steve Benen on November 10, 2009 at 7:16 AM.

STEELE SCARES WHITE REPUBLICANS.... It's been a couple of weeks since the RNC's Michael Steele said something foolish and had to walk it back, so I suppose we were due for another gem.

Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman Michael Steele, who is known for making controversial statements, on Sunday said that white Republicans are afraid of him. [...]

The Republican chairman appeared on NewsOne's "Washington Watch" this weekend, a new Sunday political talk show aimed at a black audience. The host, Roland Martin, asked Steele how Republicans could reach out to black voters.

Roland Martin noted that he's long believed that white Republicans "have been scared of black folks."

Steele replied, "You're absolutely right. I mean I've been in the room and they've been scared of me."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

So the Stupak Amendment Sucks: Here's What You Can Do About It
Posted by Jill Filipovic, Feministe on November 10, 2009 at 6:00 AM.

Saturday night, by a five-vote margin, the House of Representatives passed health care reform legislation. It's an incredible victory -- Americans desperately need health care reform, and this bill is a step in the right direction. It means that millions of uninsured and under-insured people will be able to go to the doctor when they get sick, and will be able to get treatment when they need it. It means an end to gender-based insurance ratings; it means an end to listing pregnancy, c-section, rape and domestic violence as pre-existing conditions; it means maternity coverage. Those are fantastic victories.

But they came at a price -- and as usual, women paid. As Ann put it, It's pretty fucking cramped underneath this bus, what with 50% of Americans down here. The Stupak amendment to the health care bill, which blocks even private insurance companies from covering abortion services, passed -- with 64 Democrats supporting it. You can read their names here. Thirty-nine Democrats voted against health care reform. The majority of those Democrats also voted for the Stupak amendment.

That's right: There were 21 Democrats who voted to kill the health care bill, but who also voted for an anti-choice amendment to attach to that bill. If any Democrats need to be taken out in the next primary cycle -- besides Stupak -- it's these 21.

I'm happy that a health care bill passed in the house. But checking my email Saturday morning and getting word about the Stupak amendment felt like a gut-punch. Spending the afternoon listening to the floor debates, and then watching the votes tick in, was sickening. I don't envy Nancy Pelosi's position, and I don't actually fault her for putting the amendment up for a vote -- but I do fault the anti-choice Democrats who voted for it. I especially fault Rep. Stupak, who is a Democrat himself. It's one thing to be a pro-life Dem who supports lowering the abortion rate through contraception access and sexual health education (oh, and comprehensive health care reform), but who doesn't need to punish women. It's quite another to sponsor a bill that strips health care from women in the name of “pro-life” politics. Of course, Stupak and his co-sponsor, Joe Pitts, are no strangers to compromising women’s lives in the name of life:

The amendment, named for Representatives Bart Stupak, D-Mich, and Joe Pitts, R-Penn. Stupak is a so-called "Democrat for Life;" Pitts has been a dogged supporter of failed abstinence-only policies, domestically and internationally, and was among those who succeeded in adding language forbidding the provision of contraceptive supplies for HIV-positive women in U.S. global AIDS funding.

Bravo, really guys.

Reproductive health care is health care. And thanks to spineless, misogynist Democrats, women are not going to get the care they need. Beyond that, this is just another example of a party reliant on women to win elections throwing women under the bus as soon as our needs become inconvenient. As Ann says:

[Liberal dudes will] be explaining that it's not a big deal because the Stupak amendment can be stripped out by the conference committee (which I very much hope it will, but am not holding my breath) and because there are potential loopholes (though I have yet to hear a convincing one).

On some level, I don't care about the nitty-gritty details of this amendment. This isn't just about how the money is allocated or what workarounds exist. This has me so incredibly infuriated because it further segregates abortion as something different, off the menu of regular health care. It is a huge backward step in the battle to convey -- not just politically, but to women in their everyday lives -- that reproductive health care is normal and necessary, and must be there if (or, more accurately, when) you need it.

This also sets apart women's rights from the Democratic/progressive/whatever agenda. As something expendable. But fundamental rights for women are not peripheral. They are core. And not just because of so-called "progressive" values. In a political sense, too: Seeing as how the Democratic party relies on women voters to win elections, you would think they would have come around to this no-brainer by now.

Yes, we got hosed.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Bill O'Reilly Goes After Sesame Street: ‘We May Have To Ambush Oscar’
Posted by Ben Armbruster, Think Progress on November 10, 2009 at 4:30 AM.

During an episode of Sesame Street that was originally broadcast two years ago, a character tells Oscar the Grouch, who happens to be reporting for "GNN" (Grouchy News Network), that she is switching her news viewing loyalties to "Pox News," adding, "Now there is a trashy news show."

Right winger Andrew Breitbart's "Big Hollywood" blog took on the Sesame Street menace last week proclaiming: "Add one more soldier to the Left's war on Fox News: Oscar the Grouch":

If Mom and Dad watch cable news, it's better than 50/50 they watch "POX News." So what gives? PBS -- a network partially funded with my tax dollars -- has the right to tell my kids that their parents watch "trashy" news? The message is clear, I can't even sit my kids in front of "Sesame Street" without having to worry about the Left attempting to undermine my authority.

Thursday night on Fox News, host Bill O'Reilly picked up on Big Hollywood's rant and couldn't resist defending his network against the smear merchants at Sesame Street. "Say it ain't so. Sesame Street trashing Fox News!" O'Reilly complained. After airing the segment in question, O'Reilly said wryly, "We may have to ambush Oscar." Watch it:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Focus on the Family's Insurance Plan Covers Abortion (And Other Ironies of The Latest Assault on Choice)
Posted by Eyal Press, TheNation.com on November 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM.

As is now widely known, added to the health care reform bill just passed by the House of Representatives was a provision barring access to abortion called the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. Passed with the support of sixty-four Democrats, Stupak-Pitts doesn't merely prohibit coverage of abortion in a public option. It also forbids women who receive a federal subsidy from purchasing any health insurance plan that covers the procedure, even if the abortion is paid out of a separate pool of private premium dollars (for all the background and details, see my colleague Emily Douglas' post).

If this highly regressive amendment makes its way into the legislation that Barack Obama eventually signs, millions of less affluent women who obtain access to affordable health insurance will thus join the ranks of low-income women on Medicaid, most of whom live in states that don't cover abortion procedures. The two-tiered system that dictates who in America has "choice" (more privileged women do, less affluent women do not) will be further entrenched.

But if the social consequences of Stupak-Pitts are clear, the logic is not. Supporters of the provision evidently want to assure taxpayers that they will not be forced to subsidize abortion in any way. But if they are serious about this, why haven't they drawn up an amendment abolishing tax breaks for employer-sponsored health insurance? As Jonathan Cohn has pointed out, this is by far the largest subsidy in health care policy today. (It is also a regressive subsidy, but that's another story.) If the employer-sponsored insurance that a worker gets happens to cover abortion – which, in roughly half the cases, it does – than that taxpayer already subsidizes abortion.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »