TomatoPie wrote:
For subscribers only.

Can you share highlights here?

Congress recently raised the federal minimum wage to $7.25 an hour by 2009, in the name of helping low-income families escape poverty. But a sobering new report from the New York City-based Center for an Urban Future shows how minimum-wage laws are already hurting the unskilled and inexperienced.

The "Summer Help" study assesses New York City's publicly funded Summer Youth Employment Program (SYEP), which each year matches tens of thousands of young people between the ages of 14 and 21 with employers ranging from the local library to investment banks.
...
Today... the New York program serves 20% fewer young adults than it did in 1999, and last year it turned away 30,000 mostly black and Latino applicants. The report cites minimum wage-increases in the Empire State -- one of 30 states that mandates a minimum higher than the federal floor -- as a factor in the program's decline.

"The higher state minimum wage that went into effect in 2005," writes author David Jason Fischer, "added to the challenge of funding SYEP by increasing the cost per participant, making it difficult to keep SYEP enrollment levels the same without year-over-year budget increases or additional administrative cuts." New York's minimum wage increased once again this year to $7.15 from $6.75, adding another $3.5 million in costs.

TomatoPie wrote:Try to open your mind, just a little.

An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.
...
The unclassified summary of Plame's employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, "Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."

Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."

During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.

Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert.

This was classified information.

Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA, in which she oversaw the work of other CIA employees, and she attained the level of GS-14, step 6 under the federal pay scale.

Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters handled by the CIA.

Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA.

Without discussing the specifics of Ms. Wilson's classified work, it is accurate to say that she worked on the prevention of the development and use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States.

In her various positions at the CIA, Ms. Wilson faced significant risks to her personal safety and her life.

GunbladeVIII wrote:

Warszawa wrote:Keith Olbermann has a special comment on this issue tonight on Countdown. I believe he will ask the Prez to resign.

So he wants President Cheney?

GunbladeVIII wrote:

Warszawa wrote:Keith Olbermann has a special comment on this issue tonight on Countdown. I believe he will ask the Prez to resign.

So he wants President Cheney?

phdave wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:Try to open your mind, just a little.

May 30 was not that long ago. It was on that date in this thread that I posted this:

An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.
...
The unclassified summary of Plame's employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, "Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."

Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."

Also, on March 16th the CIA director Michael Hayden prepared a statement read by Congressman Henry Waxman, chair of the U.S. House Committee on Government Reform, at a hearing on the CIA Leak:

During her employment at the CIA, Ms. Wilson was under cover.

Her employment status with the CIA was classified information prohibited from disclosure under Executive Order 12958.

At the time of the publication of Robert Novak's column on July 14, 2003, Ms. Wilson's CIA employment status was covert.

This was classified information.

Ms. Wilson served in senior management positions at the CIA, in which she oversaw the work of other CIA employees, and she attained the level of GS-14, step 6 under the federal pay scale.

Ms. Wilson worked on some of the most sensitive and highly secretive matters handled by the CIA.

Ms. Wilson served at various times overseas for the CIA.

Without discussing the specifics of Ms. Wilson's classified work, it is accurate to say that she worked on the prevention of the development and use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States.

In her various positions at the CIA, Ms. Wilson faced significant risks to her personal safety and her life.

Anyone who reads these official, unambiguous statements about Valarie Wilson's undercover status and still goes back to older, unofficial sources that claim otherwise is just wasting everyone else's time.

TomatoPie wrote:And don't you think that, with all the zeal tha Fitzy spent chasing a marginal player like Scooter, he'd be ALL OVER a violation of law concerning the outing of a covert agent? You bet he would.

TomatoPie wrote:Check out the stuff I have posted, it debunks that claim by Hayden. Naturally a partisan like Waxman is gonna trumpet it, that has no meaning. Victoria Toensing WROTE the law on covert agents, she is better qualified to judge when it's been breached than is some CIA hack with an axe to grind about the Bush admin.

A classic Washington power couple, diGenova, 53, and Toensing, 56, occupy a strange, symbiotic nexus between the media and the law that boosts their stock in both worlds. They are clearly players, which gives them access to juicy information, which gets them on television, which generates legal business.

"Dozens of Washington lawyers are trying to get on these shows," diGenova says. "I think it's very healthy. We can destroy myths and shoot down misunderstandings." Toensing sees televised debate as a good way of sharpening the old legal skills. "It's something that gets the body juices going," she says.

The two law partners not only talk about the Monica Lewinsky investigation -- they've been quoted or on the tube more than 300 times in the month since the story broke -- but have been drawn into the vortex. Toensing was approached by an intermediary for a Secret Service agent who had supposedly seen something untoward involving President Clinton and the former intern. DiGenova was at the heart of a quickly retracted Dallas Morning News account of that matter. What's more, diGenova took to the airwaves Sunday to charge -- based on nothing more than one reporter's inquiry -- that private investigators "with links to the White House" were digging up "dirt" on him and his wife.
...
Name a high-profile investigation in this city and chances are the prosecutorial pair is involved.

Charges that Republican Rep. Dan Burton improperly demanded campaign contributions from a lobbyist for Pakistan? DiGenova and Toensing are the Indiana congressman's personal attorneys.

Newt Gingrich's ethics problems? Toensing represents the speaker's wife, Marianne, to ensure her compliance with House ethics rules.

A House committee investigation of the Teamsters and the union's links to improper Democratic fund-raising? DiGenova and Toensing are leading the probe as outside counsel.

(And don't shortchange Toensing's role. When the newspaper Roll Call ran an unflattering piece about conflict-of-interest charges related to the couple's hiring, Toensing denounced the reporter as a sexist for leaving her out of the first few paragraphs. "I'm just as big as he is!" she shouted at an editor. Toensing says now that "they pretended I didn't quite exist. They attributed my client to Joe. I've had to deal with this all my life as a woman.")

The couple's Teamsters probe for the House Committee on Education and the Workforce has made them a lightning rod for Democratic criticism. First there was grumbling that their official role would conflict with their work for other clients, such as the American Hospital Association, for whom they are registered lobbyists. Then the Democrats charged that diGenova and Toensing couldn't be doing much on their $300,000-a-year contract -- which requires each lawyer to put in 80 hours a month -- since they spent so much time in television studios trashing President Clinton in the Lewinsky case.

Their television advocacy is hardly a state secret. As former prosecutors, both diGenova and Toensing have largely defended the aggressive tactics of independent counsel Kenneth Starr and repeatedly challenged the president's veracity.

"They've become a public spectacle, which means they can't be impartial" in the Teamsters probe, says Missouri Rep. William Clay, the committee's ranking Democrat. "It's a payoff from Newt Gingrich and the Republican Party to both Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova. . . . They have been on television over 200 times and not once have they been talking about an issue we're paying them $25,000 a month to handle for the Congress. It's a hell of a part-time job."

The committee's minority staff has even issued an official tally of comments and appearances by the attorneys since late January (34 in the Associated Press, 19 on CNBC's "Rivera Live," 15 in The Washington Post, 11 in the New York Post, 2 in the Montreal Gazette).

DiGenova and Toensing laugh off the attacks, saying it's hardly shocking that Republican committees hire Republican lawyers, or that former prosecutors appear on television.

Press sightings of social interactions between Toensing, her husband, Joseph E. diGenova, and Novak abound:

An October 1, 2004, article on Salon.com reported that Novak was a guest along with Toensing and diGenova at a September 21, 2004, party in Washington to celebrate the success of the book Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry (Regnery, 2004).

According to an October 17, 2001, "Reliable Source" column in The Washington Post, Novak was among "70 friends" hosted by diGenova to celebrate Toensing's 60th birthday at the Palm restaurant.

A February 27, 1998, profile of Toensing and diGenova in The Washington Post reported that "[t]he couple retreat on weekends to their Fenwick Island, Del., beach house, hanging with such pals as Robert Novak and Bill Regardie."

dajafi wrote: Seriously, is there anything these guys could do that you wouldn't justify?

The setting was the picturesque acreage of the Crane residence, where a backyard opened up into a rolling, expansive park. An American flag decorated a faded red barn and sunshine shimmered off the top of a glassy pond.

A film-making crew from Chicago was on hand to shoot the scene. One of the campaign’s top advertising consultants, Jim Margolis, stood under a tree with his eye on a monitor.

Things went a little off-script when a bug flew into the senator’s mouth. He looked directly at the camera, declaring: “Sorry I’ve got one of those little bugs. Don’t film that.”

(“Let me get some water guys,” Mr. Obama said, motioning to his staff. After a moment, he declared: “Don’t worry, I’m going to survive this. I hadn’t had lunch yet – protein.”)

dajafi wrote:On a lighter note...

Obama eats bugs!

The setting was the picturesque acreage of the Crane residence, where a backyard opened up into a rolling, expansive park. An American flag decorated a faded red barn and sunshine shimmered off the top of a glassy pond.

A film-making crew from Chicago was on hand to shoot the scene. One of the campaign’s top advertising consultants, Jim Margolis, stood under a tree with his eye on a monitor.

Things went a little off-script when a bug flew into the senator’s mouth. He looked directly at the camera, declaring: “Sorry I’ve got one of those little bugs. Don’t film that.”

(“Let me get some water guys,” Mr. Obama said, motioning to his staff. After a moment, he declared: “Don’t worry, I’m going to survive this. I hadn’t had lunch yet – protein.”)

I don't look at the Drudge site, but I have to assume he's got one of those flashing blue lights to indicate the importance of this story...

Happy 4th to all. If the Phillies bum you out today, the "Revolution" show on the History Channel seemed pretty cool when I was watching it earlier. It's a 12-parter, on till 11 tonight.

Al Gore’s son was arrested early Wednesday on suspicion of possessing marijuana and prescription drugs after deputies pulled him over for speeding, authorities said.

Al Gore III, 24, was driving a blue Toyota Prius about 100 mph on the San Diego Freeway when he was pulled over at about 2:15 a.m., Sheriff’s Department spokesman Jim Amormino said.

The deputies said they smelled marijuana and searched the car, Amormino said. They found less than an ounce of marijuana along with Xanax, Valium, Vicodin and Adderall, which is used for attention deficit disorder, he said.

drsmooth wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:Buffett is a great man in many ways, and also a caring man. He is obviously uncomfortable about the wealth he has amassed.

this is fatuous nonsense. You really have nothing on which to base this assertion, other than your skewed notions about how a guy with the loot buffet has should feel.

Billionaire Warren Buffett -- a Case of the Guilts?
By Larry Elder
Thursday, July 5, 2007

Whatever happened to Warren Buffett, the world's third-richest man? Guilt, a feeling of being blessed by luck, forgotten lessons -- who knows? In any case, Buffett now believes that government should redistribute the wealth earned by others to those who did not earn it.

....

At a Hillary Rodham Clinton fundraiser speech before 400 movers and shakers, Buffett denounced our tax system. According to Buffett, he pays taxes at a lower tax rate than does his $60,000-a-year secretary, 17.7 percent and 30 percent, respectively. But Buffett has long been sympathetic toward big government. .....

But let's examine the assertion that Buffett pays a higher tax rate than does his secretary.

Buffett says he earned $46 million in 2006, with a tax rate of 17.7 percent -- all, says Buffet, without attempting to avoid paying higher taxes. .... First, Buffett, on his $46 million a year, paid -- at his 17.7 percent rate -- over $8 million in taxes.

Now let's deal with his secretary, whom he claims pays his or her taxes at a 30 percent rate. Buffett, in his speech, provided no details about the secretary. But even with minimal deductions, the highest possible federal tax bracket for a single person earning $60,000 a year is 25 percent. We don't know whether Buffett's secretary is married, a homeowner or renter, or has children.

Let's suppose Buffett's secretary is a single person, a renter, no kids, and makes no IRA contribution (or any other gross income adjustments) and claims the standard deductions. This scenario places the secretary in the highest possible income tax bracket. But after the standard deduction ($5,150) and one personal exemption ($3,300), the secretary's taxable income becomes $51,550 -- the 25 percent tax bracket. This means the secretary pays $9,439 in taxes -- or 15.7 percent of the $60,000 annual income. Assuming the secretary lives in Nebraska (where Buffett is headquartered), with its highest income tax bracket at 6.84 percent, the secretary pays $2,663 to the state, or another 4.4 percent of the $60,000. Altogether, this gives the secretary a total tax rate of 20.1 percent.

Throw in one kid under 17 years of age, and a $4,000 contribution to an IRA, and this single parent secretary -- still renting and claiming the standard deduction -- now has a taxable income of $41,850. With one child tax credit, secretary pays $4,814 in federal income taxes, just 8 percent of the $60,000-per-year income. Single-parent secretary also pays $2,076 in income taxes to Nebraska, for a total of 11.5 percent of the $60,000 per year annual income.

Now suppose we're talking about a married secretary, with a stay-at-home spouse. They file jointly, pay a home mortgage and have two kids under the age of 17. They place $4,000 in an IRA and itemize $15,000 in deductions. Here the tax picture changes dramatically. Taxable income drops to $27,800 -- the 15 percent tax bracket. With child tax credits, secretary now pays $1,419 in federal taxes, or 2.4 percent of $60,000. Add in another 2 percent for $1,218 in state taxes, and secretary pays a grand total, state and federal, of 4.4 percent on the $60,000-a-year salary.

....

During his speech, Buffett also explained why he became a Democrat. Republicans, he says, think, "I'm making $80 million a year. God must have intended me to have a lower tax rate." Interesting. Does Buffett know that Republicans donate more money to charity than do Democrats? In his book "Who Really Cares," author Arthur Brooks explains why. Republicans believe in limited government, and therefore feel the responsibility to help the needy falls on their shoulders. ....

Warszawa wrote:Heard Ron Paul on Michael Smerconish this morning. I wish he was running as an independent. Wondering what the conservatives on the board think of him.

:?:

TomatoPie wrote:Your good friend Larry Elder sheds some light on WB: