Scalia Says Torture not Punishment

Not sure how long this will stay up since I think Comedy Central pulls them after a day or two, but I found this funny...and then very, very disturbing. Torture is not punishment? And this is why it is not considered under US law as "cruel and unusual punishment"? WHAT THE FUCK? Why is this man among the most powerful legal minds in the country? He would probably be best fitted as special counsel to a Sith Lord. Ugh....shudder. I will see if I can track down the actual interview with Barbara Walters *correction--CBS interviewer that is not Barbara Watlers* so that we can view the statement in context.

LSD inventor Albert Hofmann dies

Albert Hofmann, the Swiss chemist who discovered the hallucinogenic drug LSD, has died of a heart attack at his home in Basel at the age of 102.

Mr Hofmann first produced LSD in 1938 while researching the medicinal uses of a crop fungus.

He accidentally ingested some of the drug and said later: "Everything I saw was distorted as in a warped mirror".

He hoped LSD could be used to treat mental illness, but it became a popular street drug in the 1960s.

'Turn on, tune in, drop out'

While working with the drug in the Sandoz pharmaceutical laboratory a few years after first producing it, Mr Hofmann ingested some of the drug through his fingertips.

He went home and experienced what he described as visions of "fantastic pictures, extraordinary shapes with intense, kaleidoscopic play of colours".

The drug was popularised by Harvard professor Timothy Leary who suggested that people "turn on, tune in, drop out".

Rock stars and the counter-culture of the 1960s picked up LSD as a wonder drug but horror stories began to emerge of users suffering permanent psychological damage.

LSD was made illegal in many countries beginning in the late 1960s.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/7374846.stm

Thanks for the memories.

McCain calls Obama insensitive to poor people

By RASHA MADKOUR
Associated Press Writer

Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Sunday called Democratic rival Barack Obama insensitive to poor people and out of touch on economic issues.

The GOP nominee-in-waiting rapped his Democratic rival for opposing his idea to suspend the tax on fuel during the summer, a proposal that McCain believes will particularly help low-income people who usually have older cars that guzzle more gas.

"I noticed again today that Sen. Obama repeated his opposition to giving low-income Americans a tax break, a little bit of relief so they can travel a little further and a little longer, and maybe have a little bit of money left over to enjoy some other things in their lives," McCain said. "Obviously Sen. Obama does not understand that this would be a nice thing for Americans, and the special interests should not be dictating this policy."

The Arizona senator deflected questions about his record on the Bush administration's tax cuts — he initially opposed them but now supports extending them — by again criticizing Obama.

"Sen. Obama wants to raise the capital gains tax, which would have a direct effect on 100 million Americans," McCain said. "That means he has no understanding of the economy and that he is totally insensitive to the hopes and dreams and ambitions of 100 million Americans who will be affected by his almost doubling of the capital gains tax."

In an interview with "Fox News Sunday," Obama said McCain "not only wants to continue some of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and corporations, he actually wants to extend them, and he hasn't told us really how he's going to pay for them. It is irresponsible. And the irony is he said it was irresponsible."

Obama also said he would not raise the capital gains tax higher than it was under President Reagan and added, "I'm mindful that we've got to keep our capital gains tax to a point where we can actually get more revenue."

Ahahaha....wait, did I read that correctly? Yup. Hahahahah...whoa...tears. The gas tax is a regressive tax, yes. But if we want to improve the economic bottom lines of poor families temporarily suspending the gas tax is a stupid way to do it. Recall that a substantial portion of highway funds come from the gas tax. I guess we could just only use toll roads...but that would be regressive too. If McCain really wanted to help poor families he could push for increases in the minimum wage up to a reasonable level, maybe call for credits to poor families for health care expenses (or better, offer them affordable insurance), or do a hundred other things. Hell, how about calling for Congress to suspend the corporate welfare that put between $2 and $4 billion dollars into the pocket of big oil in the first place (see the 2005 energy bill approved by the last Congress). God forbid that the people making windfall profits with every penny increase in oil prices pay anything back. Anyway, I am off track. The point is that McCain's "sensitivity" to the poor is both insincere and less economically effective than about 1000 other strategies. If anything, it would put more money into the pockets of oil companies by encouraging people to buy more gas (and let's not forget the environmental impact; but that is a tangent gone too far). And the capital gains thing....poor people ain't got stock. Sheesh!

****************

In the spirit of fairness to Senator McCain, I should point out that he did vote against the final version of the 2005 energy bill. However, he has consistently voted against legislation that reduces corporate welfare to oil companies and vote in favor of bills proposing greater tax breaks for them. So, the argument, I think, still stands.

NC Senate Democratic Primary Endorsement

On the issues, there's a clear progressive choice in the Democratic primary: Chapel Hill businessman Jim Neal is our pick to take on Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole come November. And let's put it right out there: Neal is openly gay, which should no more influence whether he gets your vote than the fact that he's also openly white. What should influence it is his platform: Neal opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq and supports getting our troops out now; he supports universal health care; is against capital punishment; wants to scrap No Child Left Behind, Bush's counterproductive education program; proposes making the federal tax system more progressive; and advocates an Apollo-style program to wean the country from imported oil and develop alternative-energy sources, including conservation.

On gay rights, Neal supports full equality, including marriage, as a matter of law. But he also recognizes that the First Amendment guarantees religious freedom when it comes to whether same-sex unions should be sanctioned by various faiths.

Given his background as a Wall Street investment banker and venture capitalist, Neal is at his best when dissecting the causes of the nation's widening gap between rich and poor and the erosion of middle-class jobs. He calls it "unconscionable" that corporate CEOs make 400 times as much money as the average worker. His prescription for fixing what ails us includes sweeping investments in education and our economic infrastructure, not war, and for junking free-trade policies in favor of fair-trade ones. He thinks the federal government should prepare to buy mortgages and refinance them to prevent foreclosures.

Neal is hardly a perfect candidate. He's never run for office, can be long-winded and abstract about policy, and while he grew up in North Carolina, he's lived elsewhere most of his adult life. He acknowledges that his business life has had its ups and, recently, some downs. He's not rich, and has had trouble raising money despite having been a top fundraiser for the '04 Democratic ticket of Kerry-Edwards.

That said, Neal didn't get into this race until every potential "establishment" candidate from Gov. Mike Easley on down had walked away from it. That includes state Sen. Kay Hagan, D-Guilford, who announced that she wouldn't run, but changed her mind a few weeks later—after Neal declared. Party leaders in Washington and Raleigh quickly endorsed her; the inescapable conclusion was that they feared having a gay candidate on the ticket.

Hagan is a former bank lawyer whose politics are rooted in the moderate-to-conservative side of the party. As one of the Senate's appropriations chairs, she's helped shape state budgets that do well by education but maintain a regressive tax structure. On the campaign trail, she's finally getting up to speed on national issues; for example, after not knowing what to say about Iraq, she's lately started to talk about "redeploying" out of there, though not on any timetable.

She obviously expects to be Dole's opponent and is keeping her powder dry—and away from any "liberal" influences—until the main event. She's refused to meet Neal in a televised debate on grounds that the three other, minor candidates weren't invited too. The three—Duskin Lassiter, Howard Staley and Marcus Williams—weren't invited because they aren't running serious, let alone statewide, campaigns.

In the Republican primary, we endorse neither candidate. Dole has devoted most of her first term to traveling the country—not, however, including North Carolina—as chair of the Republican Senate Campaign Committee. Her efforts in that regard were not just a failure but an embarrassment. Worse, though, is her steady support for all things Bush. The only exception is her newfound enthusiasm for harassing illegal immigrants, the tack she's used to re-introduce herself to the state she supposedly represents. Dole's primary opponent, a retired New York City cop named Pete DiLauro, is a perennial office-seeker with nothing to recommend him.

This endorsement is taken from the Triangle Independent Weekly, a publication from the Raleigh-Durham area. We haven't talked about more local politics in a while, and until recently I embarrassingly knew barely anything about the Senatorial, congressional, and gubernatorial candidates. So here is something on the issue. I generally agree with the endorsement of Neal for Senate. I am realistic enough, however, to know that an openly gay candidate has a snowball's chance in Hell of being elected in North Carolina. Still, if he makes it through the primary, he might have shot against Dole. She has done jack shit for the state and has been sucking the teat of the W for 7 years. Bad Dole.

Candidates and the space race...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- One issue the presidential candidates are not saying much about is space exploration. But some scientists, military experts and intelligence analysts say the next president may well determine whether America keeps an edge in space.

Last year, the United States managed 16 space launches; Russia had 22; China blasted off 10. China's exploding economy is paying for the education of hundreds of thousands of engineers each year, they are acquiring less space technology from other nations and developing more of their own, and they appear committed to dominating the heavens.

Their space program is still behind, says Robert Zubring, one of America's strongest proponents for Mars travel, but it is rocketing.

"And we're standing still. If we continue to stand still, by the middle of the next decade, their space program will be superior to ours and they'll be moving on to the moon and Mars, while we're ... looking back on our former greatness," he said. Watch more on the space race »Just in November, a Chinese robotic spacecraft circled the moon, capturing 3-D images. Chinese scientists talk about mining the lunar surface for possible nuclear energy resources that are plentiful there but rare on Earth.

Mars is a real target for future travel.

And remember when the Chinese shot down that weather satellite? Military experts do. After all, American troop movements, bomb targeting, intelligence, banking and communications systems now rely on eyes in the sky.

"They're making a point, absolutely. ... They were demonstrating a capability not only to themselves but to the rest of the world that they're a power of reckoning in the use ... in the dominance ... of space," retired U.S. Army Gen. David Grange said.

All three major presidential candidates -- Sens. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain -- say space is important, but none is strongly talking about a timeline for the moon or Mars. And certainly, there are other pressing issues: the war and the economy.

But there is genuine and growing fear among some scientists that if space does not become a higher priority, the Chinese program will be on par with America's by the end of the next president's second term. Then, it will be a real race to Mars even if we want to join in.

Just between you and me, if either candidate had the testicular (or ovarian?) fortitude to say "Yes, I will make it our goal to out a manned mission on Mars within the next 10 years", they would seel my vote outright. Nuts to healthcare, the economy, and Iraq! Earth is old hat! Let's freakin' get back into the business of doing cool stuff, and go to Mars already, dammit!

"Hospitals Terrorize the Uninsured..."

The McCain-Lobbyist Connection

Not only does the McCain campaign have more current and former lobbyist bundlers than any other candidate, but McCain has more current and former lobbyists working on his campaign staff than any other candidate in the 2008 presidential election. Media Matters for America has previously catalogued the extensive number of lobbyists and their deep connections to industries, such as the communication and financial industries, which McCain oversaw as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee.

As the graphic (on the page here) illustrates, McCain's presidential campaign is chock full of former and current lobbyists. Point your mouse at one of the campaign staffers surrounding McCain to see who they have lobbied for.

From a page from Media Matters on a book about John McCain.

Corporate U: The relationship between business and academia

Corporate U
Thursday, April 24 2008 by Frank Stasio and Olympia Stone

The relationship between business and academia has always been uneasy. Corporate funding accounts for a small percentage of all university research funds--seven percent of the total--but that percentage has grown more rapidly than any other in the past decade. So, is the privatization of the public universities at our doorstep? Kurt Smith, associate professor in the Department of Philosophy at Bloomsburg University in Pennsylvania, and WUNC Education Reporter Dave DeWitt join host Frank Stasio to talk about the corporatization of higher education.

Use the following to listen to the archive of this talk:
http://wunc.org/tsot/archive/sot0424a08.mp3/view


I heard this story on NPR's "The State of Things" yesterday. Although I had come to some of the same conclusions, it was very interesting to hear it explained from the perspective of marketing and economic consumerism.

McCain asks N.C. GOP not to run ad

TV spot links Obama and former pastor Wright; says 'he's too extreme'

The Associated Press

updated 1:51 p.m. ET, Wed., April. 23, 2008

INEZ, Ky. - Republican John McCain asked the North Carolina GOP not to run a television ad that brings up the controversial former pastor of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

North Carolina Republican party officials insisted the ad will run as planned despite McCain's request.

The ad opens with a photo of Obama and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright together and a clip of Wright, whose incendiary comments about race have bedeviled Obama.

"He's just too extreme for North Carolina," the narrator says in the 30-second spot.

Dividing the American people
"We asked them not to run it," McCain told reporters on his campaign bus in Kentucky Wednesday. "I'm sending them an e-mail as we speak asking them to take it down.

"I don't know why they do it. Obviously, I don't control them, but I'm making it very clear, as I have a couple of times in the past, that there's no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don't want it," McCain said.

McCain said the ad was described to him: "I didn't see it, and I hope that I don't see it."

Republican National Committee chairman Mike Duncan, campaigning Wednesday with McCain, said he had left a voice mail message for state party chairwoman Linda Daves asking her to pull the ad.

McCain, in an e-mail to Daves, said he will draw sharp contrasts with Democrats. "But we need not engage in political tactics that only seek to divide the American people."

North Carolina GOP spokesman Brent Woodcox said the ad will begin running statewide on Monday, a week before the state's crucial May 6 primary.

'It is entirely appropriate'
The ad actually targets gubernatorial candidates Richard Moore and Bev Perdue, Democrats who have endorsed Obama.

"We have a great relation with the RNC and we fully support John McCain for president," Woodcox said. "But this is an ad about two North Carolina candidates for governor. The ad is going to run."

Daves defended the ad, saying it "presents a question of patriotism and judgment."

"It is entirely appropriate for voters to evaluate candidates based on their past associations," Daves said.

North Carolina Democratic Party chairman Jerry Meek said the ad is an attempt to distract attention from real issues.

"It's one thing to criticize somebody for associating with somebody else," Meek said. "But to criticize somebody for associating with somebody who associates with somebody else is ludicrous. Where does it end?"

Obama has denounced the most inflammatory of Wright's comments, but says the pastor shouldn't be judged solely on a handful of remarks. Obama has expressed admiration for the pastor, who officiated at his wedding, baptized his two daughters and inspired the title of his best-selling book, "The Audacity of Hope."

North Carolina's primary will divide 115 delegates among the Democratic presidential candidates and decide the party's nominee for governor. Polls indicate that Obama holds a comfortable lead over rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in the state.

I find this all odd. Why is the NC GOP targeting the democratic gubernatorial candidates during the primaries? Sure, they don't like Obama, and presumably don't like the gubernatorial candidates. But this is a primary, so Republicans can't vote for against these candidates anyway. Plus the ad is pretty dumb since it demonizes the two candidates who are associated with Obama, who is associated with Rev. Wright. Now, McCain looks pretty good for asking the NC GOP to pull the ad, but the NC GOP now looks ridiculous. In addition, in an NPR interview with the NC GOP leader this afternoon she actually used the phrase "I about fell about" when describing the number of emails she had received about the emails. Ugh...

Anti-CNN.com

http://www.anti-cnn.com/

I heard about this on NPR this morning. It's a site run by an independent activist inside China that attempts to point out the anti-Chinese bias in the Western media that surrounds the Tibet protest issue. I am personally of mixed opinion about the Tibet issue, but I think it probably has garnered disproportionate attention in the West, especially given the much, much worse abuses of human rights and international law that occur throughout the world. I have never quite understood why so many people are up in arms over Tibet but never mention word one about Chinese weapons sales to Zimbabwe or oil deals with Sudan, two countries with absolutely deplorable human rights records. Anyway, I just wanted to toss this up here it show a different view of events. Media should always be subject to scrutiny, and God knows what you read in the paper or see on CNN is often not the "whole" story.

Carter: Hamas will accept Israel

Former US President Jimmy Carter has said that Hamas is prepared to accept the right of Israel to "live as a neighbour next door in peace".

After meeting Hamas leaders last week in Syria, he said it was a problem the US and Israel would not meet the group.

His comments came as the Israeli army launched a formal investigation into the death of a Reuters cameraman killed in the Gaza Strip last week.

And two Palestinians died in Israeli air strikes in the territory.

Monday's strikes killed one Palestinian in the southern city of Rafah and a Hamas militant at Beit Hanoun, a border town from where rockets are often fired at Israel.

'Regressed'

Mr Carter, speaking in Jerusalem, said Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking had "regressed" since the US hosted Middle East talks in November at Annapolis.

The former US president was criticised by the US and Israel for visiting the Syrian capital Damascus last week to meet exiled Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal.

But he defended his visit on Monday, telling Israel's Council on Foreign Relations: "The problem is not that I met with Hamas in Syria. The problem is that Israel and the United States refuse to meet with someone who must be involved."

Mr Carter said Hamas had reiterated its position that it would accept an Israeli state within its pre-1967 borders, living in peace with Israel, if such an agreement was approved by Palestinians.

Speaking to the BBC's Newsnight programme, Mr Carter said: "Hamas indicated to us at least - I'm not guaranteeing their commitment - that if Israel is willing to have a mutual ceasefire and a renunciation of violence in Gaza and in the West Bank, they will accept it, and as a first step they would even accept just limiting that to Gaza.

"So I think that what they have said, if they were honest and we wrote it out so there wouldn't be a mistake, it's a very significant development."

Israel, the US and the European Union regard Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, as a terrorist organisation.

Hamas is officially dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the creation of an Islamic state in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.

Shalit deadlock

Mr Carter also said that the release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, captured by Hamas and other militant groups during a raid into Israel two years ago, was being held up by the lack of direct communication between Israel and Hamas.

Mr Carter said the difficulty was in agreeing the identity of the Palestinian prisoners to be released in return.

He said Egyptian officials had told him that Israel had agreed to release 1,000 prisoners, in principle.

However, it had accepted only 71 names on a list of hundreds of prisoners submitted by Hamas.

Mr Carter also said Hamas had agreed to let Cpl Shalit send a letter to his parents.

Investigation

Meanwhile, Israel said it would investigate the death of Palestinian Reuters cameraman Fadel Shana, who died with several other civilians in Gaza last Wednesday.

New York-based Human Rights Watch says it has evidence an Israeli tank team fired either recklessly or deliberately at Mr Shana.

The final footage taken by Mr Shana - and released by Reuters - shows the tank firing in his direction. The Israeli army denies deliberately targeting civilians.

Israeli Human rights group B'tselem has reported that Mr Shana was killed by a "flechette" shell.

The shell is an anti-personnel weapon that explodes in the air and releases thousands of small metal darts over a wide area.

The group called on the Israeli Army's judge advocate general to order the immediate cessation of the use of the shell and open a criminal investigation of the event. The group says the weapon is prohibited.

from bbc.co.uk

Alright Jimmie. Big step; long way to go. Sadly, note the 4 additional Palestinian deaths, including one journalist. And what the #%&*? Flechette rounds? The use of "anti-personnel" weapons that are by design indiscriminate is repugnant. We can have a conversation about the Geneva Convention and how all military weapons are intended to kill, sure, but weapons like this, much like land mines and cluster bombs, kill at least as many civilians as combatants, and the people that use them know that. So what makes using these weapons different than terrorism? The intention of both is to force concession from the other side, and the result is deaths of innocent people via indiscriminate damage? The only difference I see is that the "legitimate" military force is allowed the convenience of the term "collateral damage" where terrorists are just terrorists. Anyway, for anyone interested here is a Reuters report of the above-mentioned killing:

*************************************************************************************
An update: Hamas' exiled leader has said it will not accept Israel's right to exist but would offer a 10-year truce if Israel withdrew to its 1967 borders. Here is a link to the story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7359661.stm

Fight erupts in Jerusalem church

Israeli police had to break up a fist fight that erupted between Greek and Armenian Orthodox clergymen at one of Christianity's holiest sites.

The scuffles broke out at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem on Orthodox Palm Sunday.

Brawls are not uncommon at the church, which is uneasily shared by various Christian denominations.

In this case, witnesses say an Armenian priest forcibly ejected a Greek priest from an area near the tomb of Jesus.

They say the attacker felt the Greek priest had spent too long at the tomb.

When police arrived to break up the fight, some were reportedly beaten back by worshippers using palm fronds.

Two Armenians were detained by police, prompting supporters to stage a rally in protest outside the police station.

Rivalry between the six different churches which grudgingly share the Holy Sepulchre dates back to the aftermath of the crusades, and to the great schism between Eastern and Western Christianity in the 11th Century.

Each denomination controls, and jealously guards, its own section of the labyrinthine site.

Source: bbc.co.uk

Ah religion. I am pretty sure that God loathes most of his (or her) followers. Either that or he find their utter ass-hattery hilarious.

Simpsons returns to Venezuelan TV

The Simpsons has returned to TV in Venezuela after it was deemed unsuitable for children - and was replaced by Baywatch.

A spokeswoman for the station Televen said the popular US cartoon about the yellow dysfunctional family would now be shown in an early evening slot.

The series was branded "inappropriate" in its original morning slot.

Venezuela's TV authorities forced the network to take it off air by threatening to fine it.

The National Telecommunications Commission also said the channel would be taken off air if it failed to move the show from its 1100 slot.

It claimed the saga of Homer Simpson, wife Marge and their three children flouted regulations that prohibit "messages that go against the whole education of boys, girls and adolescents".

It said that some unspecified complaints had been received from viewers.

Venezuelan TV is known for filling its schedules with re-runs of old US series and Latin American soap operas.

It also includes a talk show hosted by the country's president, Hugo Chavez.

From bbc.co.uk

This is hilarious. I can actually see why some people might not want The Simpsons on in the morning during a kids programming block, but replacing it with "Baywatch"? Mmm....wholesome....

Carter in Damascus to meet Hamas

Former US President Jimmy Carter is in Syria, where he is due to meet exiled Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal.

Mr Carter is on a tour of the region and has met Hamas officials in Egypt and Israeli President Shimon Peres.

Correspondents say Mr Carter has been snubbed by other senior Israeli leaders because of the meeting with Mr Meshaal.

But Israeli industry minister Eli Yishai has told Mr Carter he is willing to meet Hamas leaders to negotiate the release of prisoners held by the group.

His spokesman said Mr Yishai had passed the proposal to Mr Carter ahead of his trip to Syria, saying he was "ready to meet with all necessary Hamas members" - including Mr Meshaal - for talks.

Palestinian militant groups including Hamas captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in a raid into Israel two years ago.

Such a meeting involving Mr Yishai - the leader of the orthodox Shas party - would be against Israeli government policy. Shas is an important member of the governing coalition in Israel, holding four cabinet posts.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper he did not meet Mr Carter as it would have been perceived as negotiations with Hamas.

"Were Jimmy Carter to have met with me, and two days later with Khaled Meshaal, it could have created a facade of negotiations between us and Hamas," he said.

Cabinet minister Rafi Eitan said he doubted that Mr Yishai would be allowed to negotiate a prisoner deal alone.

"Every cabinet minister has to keep in line with the government resolutions," he told Israel Radio, Reuters reports.

Mr Meshaal, who survived an assassination attempt by Israeli agents in 1997, became Hamas political chief after Israel's killing of the group's founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, in March 2004.

He has said that Hamas accepts and supports the Arab peace initiative, which offers peace and recognition to Israel in return for a full withdrawal from the land captured in 1967 in the West Bank, the dismantling of Jewish settlements and the establishment of a Palestinian state with a capital in east Jerusalem.

He says Hamas wants a mutual ceasefire, that would also include the West Bank and which would reopen Gaza's borders - but anything else would be Israel dictating a Palestinian "surrender".

Talks needed

The United States, which is trying to isolate Hamas, has distanced itself from Mr Carter's trip, saying it is in a personal capacity and not helpful to the peace process.

Mr Carter is also expected to meet Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during his visit. After Syria, he is due to travel to Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

The former US president has said he is not trying to mediate in the Arab-Israeli conflict, but believes peace will not be achieved without talking to Hamas and Syria.

Israel, the US and the European Union consider the Islamist militant movement Hamas a terrorist organisation, refuse to deal with it directly and all pursue policies to isolate it.

Mr Carter brokered the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty, the first in between Israel and an Arab state.

He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for "decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development".

Fromm bbc.co.uk

Come on Jimmy!!! No whammies. I think it is interesting to note that Hamas' political chief says that he supports that Arab Peace Initiative and that he wants a mutual ceasefire. I understand the wariness of many policy makers in the US and Israel of negotiating with Hamas, but it seems like some level of talks have to happen for any progress to be made. Here's hoping Jimmy can get the ball rolling.

At the risk of editorializing...

Well, that's pretty much what we do here anyway, so here goes. A Question about Reliability of Reporting and Media-Government relations:

Yesterday I had an interesting meeting with an anthropologist at my university. She has done some interesting research on the El Salvadoran civil war and was a correspondent there during the conflict, mostly covering violations against health care workers and civilians. She also did some reporting in neighboring Nicaragua during their civil war, which was occurring during roughly the same time period. During our discussion about the conflict, she seem particularly interested in addressing the problems she encountered reporting during the war and about how much bias and misinformation there had been.

The obvious problem was that the Salvadoran government was not happy with reporters taking pictures of and writing stories on the 1000s of civilian deaths they were causing every year. The more surprising problem she addressed was how reluctant her editors were to run many of her stories. Apparently, the New York Times (as well as other major dailies) informed reporters that for every episode of state-sponsored violence included in their stories they needed to include two episodes of insurgent violence. The problem here was that the balance was already hugely skewed, so even if they were able to cover every instance in which a rebel killed a civilian they would only capture a tiny portion of the violence done by the regime. At any rate, the impetus for this restriction was that the State Department was constantly hounding editors and claiming that they were either biased in their reporting or that they were endangering national security by helping turn public opinion in favor of Marxist rebels--e.g. emboldening congress to restrict military aid to the Salvadoran government.

The group Accuracy in Media (a well known conservative watchdog group) also launched a campaign against what they called biased reporting on the conflict. This campaign largely targeted the NYT reporter Ray Bonner, whose reports of the El Mozote massacre and similar atrocities committed by the Salvadoran government led to a backlash against the Reagan regime's support of the government (Reagan and AIM called the reports propaganda). Following AIM's campaign and pressure the Reagan admin Bonner was pulled from El Salvador and demoted to a metro beat reporter in NY. Needless to say, it became extremely difficult to get accurate information about the conflict, as well as others in the region.

I had read similar stories about reporting during this conflict and heard similar anecdotes. It was interesting, though, to discuss the issue with someone who experienced the whole thing first hand. Interestingly, her opinion of the US media in general was less than favorable, and she thought that for international news particularly the BBC and other European news outlets were far more reliable. This conversation also made me think about related stories I have heard regarding accuracy in reporting and state interference in the media in the context of the War on Terror.

So, this all begs the important questions:
1) How much faith do we have that the media reports that we read (and post on this blog) are in any way an accurate representation of what is happening in the world? 2) Is it ever appropriate for the government to lean on, pressure, or otherwise restrict the scope or slant of journalism? (and how much does this still occur?) 3) Have American news outlets particularly fallen far behind their counterparts in Europe in terms of journalistic integrity? Relatedly, what does this say about freedom of the press in this country, both now and historically?

US army develops robotic suits

By Rajesh Mirchandani
BBC News, Utah

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Rex Jameson, software engineer

On the big screen, films like Robocop, Universal Soldier and forthcoming release Iron Man show humanoid robots with superhuman powers. But in Utah they are turning science fiction into reality.

We are at a research facility on the outskirts of Salt Lake City, ringed by beautiful snow-capped mountains. Once they held the Winter Olympics here; now they are testing endurance in other ways.

The aluminium limbs gleam in the brilliant sunshine, as the strange metal skeleton hangs from a safety harness at the outdoor testing site. It seems to be treading water; actually its programme is telling it to keep the hydraulic fluid in its joints moving.

Rex Jameson, a software engineer here at laboratories run by Sarcos, the robotics firm which designed the XOS exoskeleton, steps up and into the suit.

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Stephen Jacobsen, Sarcos

The lightweight aluminium exoskeleton, called XOS, senses Rex's every move and instantly moves with him; it is almost like a shadow or a second skin. It is designed for agility that can match a human's, but with strength and endurance that far outweigh our abilities.

With the exoskeleton on and fully powered up, Rex can easily pull down weight of more than 90 kilos, more than he weighs.

For the army the XOS could mean quicker supply lines, or fewer injuries when soldiers need to lift heavy weights or move objects around repeatedly. Initial models would be used as workhorses, on the logistics side.

Later models, the army hopes, could go into combat, carrying heavier weapons, or even wounded colleagues.

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

The XOS in action

There are still problems to solve, not least how to create a mobile power supply that can last an effective length of time.

But the US military expects to take delivery of these early prototypes next year, and hopefully deploy some refined versions within eight years.

It is a long way off before we see robot soldiers that can fly or fire missiles - like in the movies - but the designers are already imagining future versions more reminiscent of Hollywood.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/7351314.stm

Now this is pretty cool. Mech-suits are nearly here!

Vitamins 'may shorten your life'

Research has suggested vitamin supplements do not extend life and could even lead to a premature death.

A review of 67 studies found "no convincing evidence" that antioxidant supplements cut the risk of dying.

Scientists at Copenhagen University said vitamins A and E could interfere with the body's natural defences.

"Even more, beta-carotene, vitamin A, and vitamin E seem to increase mortality," according to the review by the respected Cochrane Collaboration.

The research involved selecting various studies from 817 on beta-carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium which the team felt were the most likely to fairly reflect the benefits of the supplements.

It has been thought that these supplements may be able to prevent damage to the body's tissues called "oxidative stress" by eliminating the molecules called "free radicals" which are said to cause it.

This damage has been implicated in several major diseases including cancer and heart disease.

'Just eat well'

The trials involved 233,000 people who were either sick or were healthy and taking supplements for disease prevention.

VITAL VITAMIN FACTS Vitamin A: Found in? Oily fish, eggs and liver; Good for? Thought to boost immune system, and help skin, sight and sperm formation Vitamin C: Found in? Many fruit and vegetables; Good for? Helps heal wounds and assists the body in absorbing iron, may boost the immune system Vitamin E: Found in? Vegetable oils, seeds and nuts; Good for? May help boost circulation and keep elderly people active Beta-carotene: Found in? Vegetables that are reddish-orange in colour; Good for? May boost vision and keep the mind sharp Selenium: Found in? Butter, nuts, liver and fish; Good for? May boost the immune system How many take vitamins? Between 10-20% of people in the West How much is the global market worth? About $2.5bn (£1.3bn)

After various factors were taken into account and a further 20 studies excluded, the researchers linked vitamin A supplements to a 16% increased risk of dying, beta-carotene to a 7% increased risk and vitamin E to a 4% increased risk.

Vitamin C did not appear to have any effect one way or the other, and the team said more work was needed into this supplement - as well as into selenium.

In conclusion, "we found no evidence to support antioxidant supplements for primary or secondary prevention," they said.

It was unclear exactly why the supplements could have this effect, but the team speculated that they could interfere with how the body works: beta-carotene, for instance, is thought to change the way a body uses fats.

The Department of Health said people should try to get the vitamins they need from their diet, and avoid taking large doses of supplements - a market which is worth over £330m in the UK.

"There is a need to exercise caution in the use of high doses of purified supplements of vitamins, including antioxidant vitamins, and minerals," a spokesperson said.

"Their impact on long-term health may not have been fully established and they cannot be assumed to be without risk."

A 'stitch-up'

But the Health Supplements Information Service, which is funded by the association which represents those who sell supplements, said many people were simply not able to get everything they needed from their diet.

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Dr Rosemary Leonard's advice on vitamins

"For the millions who are not able to do that, vitamins can be a useful supplement and they should not stop taking them," said spokeswoman Pamela Mason.

Another nutritionist who has formulated supplements described the review as a "stitch-up" and only reviewed studies which examined the effect they had on reducing mortality, rather than other advantages.

"Antioxidants are not meant to be magic bullets and should not be expected to undo a lifetime of unhealthy habits," said Patrick Holford.

"But when used properly, in combination with eating a healthy diet full of fruit and vegetables, getting plenty of exercise and not smoking, antioxidant supplements can play an important role in maintaining and promoting overall health."

Bad news for all of those people living under the illusion that a kiwi-strawberry flavored vitamin water and a handful of centrum are doing something to improve their health. Not that I don't believe that vitamins and supplements are useful; in fact, I think they can be really helpful for a number of conditions and ailments, especially in the short term. The worrying thing is that many Americans falsely believe that they are getting all the nutrients they need from "enriched" processed foods and/or vitamins. This reminds me of another article I read recently about truth in advertising in the food industry. For instance, "whole grain" doesn't mean whole wheat, but most consumers don't recognize the difference. Many studies have shown that whole grain foods like whole wheat or whole rye breads have lots of health benefits (protection against cancers and heart disease, etc.). But most breads and similar products that say "whole grain" contain some small portion of one of these whole grains while the rest is just enriched wheat flour, which usually has all the nutrients stripped out during processing but has some vitamins added back in. These products are not really any healthier than other processed products, but they are designed to make consumers think they are. Just something to consider. You can't get around the fact that humans need to eat healthy to be healthy--you can't balance out a Baconator with a couple of vitamins.

Death Penalty for Child Rape Is Fought

By CAIN BURDEAU

Original AP Story location

SLIDELL, La. (AP) — When the news broke last month that a janitor had been arrested and accused of raping boys in the bathroom at an elementary school, the issue of justice and retribution became the talk around dinner tables and baseball fields.

Castrate him, some said. No, let the other inmates deal with him. No, execute him.

Castration and jailhouse vigilantism are out of the question, but putting a child rapist to death is within the bounds of Louisiana law.

For how much longer?

That's a question the U.S. Supreme Court takes up Wednesday when it hears arguments on whether a state can impose the death penalty for the rape of a child, or whether that would amount to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Constitution.

Supporters of Louisiana's law argue that child rape is so evil and so utterly traumatizing that justice cries out for death. But others warn that the law will further traumatize youngsters and make rapists more likely to kill their victims.

In 1977, the Supreme Court said states cannot execute anyone for the rape of an adult. But the high court did not address the rape of a child.

The last time someone in the U.S. was executed for something other than murder was in 1964, when a man went to the electric chair in Alabama for robbery. That same year, a man in Missouri went to the gas chamber in what was the last time someone in this country was put to death for rape.

Louisiana is the only state with someone on death row for rape of an adult or child. In fact, it has two people awaiting execution for child rape. At least five other states — Georgia, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas — have similar laws.

"These are the only two men on any death row in any Western democracy for this offense," said Billy Sothern, a lawyer with the Capital Appeals Project, a nonprofit law firm that represents the Louisiana man at the center of the Supreme Court case, Patrick Kennedy.

Kennedy, a 43-year-old man with an IQ of 70, was convicted and sentenced to death for raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter in 1998 in Harvey, a New Orleans suburb.

The Louisiana law — which applies to anyone found guilty of aggravated rape of a child 12 or younger — breezed through the state Legislature in 1995; members got sidetracked only over whether to castrate child rapists.

"That's one of my proudest pieces of legislation," said former state Rep. Pete Schneider, a Slidell brick manufacturer and Republican.

The other man on death row in Louisiana for child rape is Richard Davis, convicted of repeatedly attacking a 5-year-old girl he looked after with his girlfriend in 2004 and 2005. The man who prosecuted him, Brady O'Callaghan, said child rape deserves the death penalty.

"It is so evil. There is no justification for it," he said. "This isn't a heat-of-passion killing. It's not about money."

Opponents, including the National Association of Social Workers and the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, warn that the prospect of the death penalty could give child rapists a powerful incentive to kill their victims. They might figure they have nothing to lose by killing the lone witness.

Also, child advocates warn that children, in many cases, are raped by people they know, and executing a relative could traumatize a youngster. Also, the law might make it harder to prosecute such cases by making children afraid to speak up for fear of what might happen to a relative, said Dr. Scott Benton, a pediatric forensic physician.

The debate has flared anew in Slidell, where 41-year-old janitor Dino Jay Schwertz was accused last month of child rape. Police say he confessed to the crimes.

His voice rising over the clang of baseball bats and clapping from the crowd at an after-school game, mortgage-company loan officer Cedric Bayone said he might support the death penalty in a child rape case.

"We've got to send a message to all these sex offenders: We're not playing when it comes to our children," he said.

But Penny Robertson, a mother of three, opposes the death penalty for a child rapist: "He's going to get it either way it goes. God's going to get him in the end. Death is the easy out for him, and I don't think he deserves an easy out."

Israeli tanks withdraw from Gaza

Israeli forces have withdrawn from Gaza after air and ground operations which left at least eight Palestinians dead.

Tanks entered central Gaza on Friday and exchanged fire with militants in the fiercest day's fighting for weeks.

The incursion came after Palestinian militants killed two Israelis at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal on Wednesday.

The head of Gaza's main power plant has warned it will have to halt electricity supplies to some 500,000 people unless Israel resumes fuel shipments there.

Rafiq Maliha said he only had two to three days worth of fuel left to run the plant, which generates about a third of the coastal territory's electricity.

The European Union, which provides fuel to the plant, said it was waiting for approval from the Israeli authorities, who cut supplies after Wednesday's attack.

Civilian casualties

Palestinian witnesses reported seeing several Israeli tanks rolling out of central Gaza, near the Bureij refugee camp, before dawn on Saturday.

The Israeli military later confirmed the operation, which some believed signalled the start of a major offensive, had ended at about 0400 (0100 GMT).

The day's violence started in the early hours of Friday morning when Israeli aircraft killed two militants near the southern town of Khan Younis, Hamas said.

Later, Israel tanks and bulldozers advanced about one kilometre (0.6 miles) over the Israel-Gaza border near Bureij, drawing heavy fire from local militants armed with anti-tank missiles, mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades.

Two Palestinian boys aged 12 and 13, two 17-year-old teenagers, and a 19-year-old were killed by air strikes and tank fire in the area, Palestinian medics said.

More than a dozen other people were injured. There were no Israeli casualties.

An Israeli air strike overnight killed a Hamas militant in central Gaza.

The Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, has vowed to strike at the Islamist movement so that it will be "no longer able to act against Israeli citizens".

Mr Olmert said Israel would pursue a dual policy of hitting Hamas and "serious and responsible negotiations that can lead us to agreements" with the rival Fatah movement, led by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Hamas seized control of Gaza last June after routing Fatah. Mr Abbas now heads a Western-backed administration in the West Bank.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/7344385.stm

We have covered this before; really nothing has changed in the past few months. I just wish to point out that while Hamas' terrorist activities are certainly repugnant, Israel's response only makes the situation worse. How many Israelis were killed in recent weeks? How many Palestinians? Israeli should defend itself, but when its defense results in a death count of 5:1, it seems unjust. Condemn Hamas all you like. When Israel is seen as just as guilty as Hamas there will be some balance. Sadly, Israel is seen as legit in its attacks and Hamas is a terrorist group even though the attacks are pretty similar in terms of civilian casualties (though Israel is efficient enough to cause on average more deaths). I am not advocating Hamas' cause; I would just appreciate equal blame for Israel.

Fresh chaos for US air passengers

The US's biggest airline has cancelled 900 more flights after safety concerns forced it to ground 300 planes - nearly half its passenger-carrying fleet.

It is the third day of cancellations by American Airlines. Nearly 2,500 flights have been affected, causing delays for 100,000 passengers.

The action follows an inspectors' warning of problems with wiring repairs on the MD-80 aircraft two weeks ago.

Other major US carriers have also been forced to ground planes for inspection.

Alaska Airlines has cancelled more than 40 flights, and Midwest Airlines 10, to inspect their own MD-80 jets.

Delta Air Lines, which operates 117 of the twin-engined craft, was likely to call off "a handful of flights", the Associated Press reported the airline as saying.

Full responsibility

American Airlines has said the cancellations are likely to continue until Saturday.

It's my fault and I take full responsibility Gerard Arpey Chief executive

Chief Executive Gerard Arpey apologised profusely for the inconvenience to passengers.

"We are doing everything we possibly can to reaccommodate our customers," he said.

"It's my fault and I take full responsibility."

Mr Arpey added that the cancellations would cost the airline "in the tens of millions of dollars".

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been tightening up its inspections since it was discovered last year that fuselage cracks on Southwest planes had gone undetected because of missed inspections.

The FAA said it had checked several American MD-80s a fortnight ago and decided that improvement work carried out did not meet its standards.

From BBC.co.uk

This is a great example of the one of the key problems with too little regulation of industry. The extent to which major US carriers ignored the airworthiness directive, stonewalled investigators, and even bullied FAA directors to curtail investigations (and even issued threats against investigators that pushed the issue) is ridiculous and frightening. To hear the airlines tell it, they weren't quite following each and every precise, specific, and minute safety check...but it was really no big deal. As someone who flies quite a lot, I find this really, really disturbing. We trust that the FAA issues specific regulations for the safety of the millions of passengers that fly each year, and that the airlines comply in part because it's the law and in part because if failure to do so results in a crash they suffer a drastic drop in passengers--this would the market "righting" itself. But apparently they have disregarded the law and are willing to gamble on safety. I am amazed that airlines get away with what they do. In all honesty, most should have been dismantled and sold repeatedly (but oh right, they always get bailed out and then their CEOs still get massive bonuses). Yeah market! Good job on the housing and mortgage thing too. God forbid that there be any regulation. Let the market work itself out...even if means unsafe aircraft and the collapse of a major sector of the US economy.

Obama again calls for talks with Iran

Shifting the focus of the presidential race to the Iraq war, John McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton bickered during Senate hearings about bringing troops home, while Barack Obama repeated his position that a dialogue must be held with Iran if the US seeks to improve the situation in Iraq.

According to Obama, while he wants US troops out of Iraq, he would not initiate a precipitous withdrawal. And he said talking regularly to the Iranians is critical to getting to the point where it would be safe to end American involvement.

"I do not believe we are going to be able to stabilize the situation without them," Obama said.

Commanding Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker faced largely deferential questioning from Republican nominee McCain, who backs a continued US presence in Iraq, and Democratic rivals Clinton and Obama, both advocates of getting out of the oil-rich country after five years of war.

Petraeus and Crocker, both highly respected for their conduct of the conflict since taking over last year, responded gingerly, knowing one the three senators was likely to be the next commander in chief.

In the Foreign Relations Committee, McCain said promises to withdraw forces "would constitute a failure of political and moral leadership."

"I fundamentally disagree," Clinton said later, when it was her turn to speak. "Rather, I think it could be fair to say that it might well be irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced the results that have been promised time and time again."

From his seat on the Foreign Relations panel, Obama prodded the two officials to redefine success as a means of closing down the conflict.

The Illinois senator and Democratic front-runner said he worried that the goals - completely eliminating al-Qaida and Iranian influences - might be impossible to meet and troops could be there for 20 or 30 years in a fruitless effort.

"If, on the other hand, our criteria is a messy, sloppy status quo but there's not huge outbreaks of violence, there's still corruption, but the country is struggling along, but it's not a threat to its neighbors and it's not an al-Qaida base, that seems to me an achievable goal within a measurable timeframe," he said.

Both Democrats contend the five-year-old war has made the United States less safe and is a crippling drain on the American economy. McCain said U.S. forces are succeeding.

Petraeus also acknowledged in questioning from McCain and committee chairman Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, that the Iraqi military operation against militia forces in Basra late last month was poorly planned. He said Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who ordered the assault, did not consult sufficiently with American forces.

"Suffice to say it was a disappointment," McCain asked.

Petraeus responded: "It was. Although it is not over yet, senator."

In opening remarks, Petraeus said he would recommend to U.S. President George W. Bush that the current drawdown of troops be put on hold for 45 days after July, when the so-called "surge" force is to have left the country. He refused to commit to a date for restarting the withdrawal.

While McCain is virtually guaranteed the Republican spot in the race, Clinton and Obama continue battling in a close and historic battle for their party's nomination. She is seeking to become the first woman president; he aims to be the first black president.

Obama has accumulated more delegates, won more primary and caucus contests and leads in the popular vote against Clinton. The latest AP tally of delegates showed Obama with 1,638 to Clinton's 1,501, including superdelegates _ party leaders and elected officials who are free to vote for whichever Democrat they want.

On Wednesday, Obama will be returning to the campaign trail in Pennsylvania, which holds the next primary contest on April 22, offering the largest remaining prize of 158 delegates. Clinton hopes to replenish her campaign coffers with a fund-raising concert in New York featuring Elton John.

A new Quinnipiac University poll of Pennsylvania voters showed Clinton's previously large lead over Obama had shrunk to 50-44. Clinton's lead has dropped from a 9-point advantage a week ago and 12 percentage points in mid-March.

Seeking to assure a victory in the upcoming balloting, Clinton is targeting Pennsylvania media markets with five new television ads that deliver specific messages to different regional and ethnic audiences.

Her campaign began airing the ads Tuesday, three in the expensive Philadelphia market where polls show rival Obama has been gaining support.

The ads come as Obama has been outspending Clinton in Pennsylvania. As of Sunday, Obama had spent $3.6 million (€2.29 million) in the state to Clinton's $1.3 million (€830,000), according to data compiled by TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group.

Obama updated his ad mix in the state as well. A new ad features some of the women in his life - his half sister, his grandmother and his wife - in what is an obvious outreach to women voters who form a core of Clinton's support.

As the ads began airing, the Clinton campaign also issued a fundraising appeal to counter Obama's spending advantage in the state.

"They're trying to end the race for the White House with an unyielding media blitz," an e-mail to supporters says. "Don't let a sea of Obama ads overwhelm our powerful message in Pennsylvania. Contribute now."

Clinton irked by Richardson endorsement

Original Article

By LAURA KURTZMAN
Associated Press Writer

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Former President Clinton is still smarting over New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson's endorsement of Barack Obama.

During a private meeting with California Democrats this past weekend, Clinton grew red-faced as he talked about how he expected Richardson, who was a member of Clinton's Cabinet, to back Hillary Rodham Clinton for the presidential nomination or at least stay neutral, according to several people who attended.

Instead, Richardson endorsed Obama late last month, calling him a "once-in-a-lifetime leader."

"He sort of gets a little redder and redder and redder, but he wasn't off the deep end as I had seen him in the past," said Inola Henry, an uncommitted superdelegate. "It was sort of like, 'Gee, I'm a martyr.' He seemed more hurt than anything."

Clinton used his appearance at the state Democratic Party convention in San Jose to lobby California's 21 uncommitted superdelegates to support his wife.

After posing for a group photograph with the former president, superdelegate Rachel Binah told Clinton she was disappointed that one of his allies, strategist James Carville, had compared Richardson to Judas after he endorsed Obama.

Clinton, according to several people present, distanced himself from Carville's remarks. But he went on to say that he had not expected Richardson to endorse the Illinois senator, especially since the New Mexico governor had invited Clinton to Santa Fe to watch the Super Bowl on Feb. 3.

"He did say he certainly had been led to believe that he was going to get the endorsement," Henry said Wednesday. She was one of about 15 superdelegates - some uncommitted, others backing Clinton - who attended Sunday's meeting with Clinton before he addressed the convention.

Aleita Huguenin, another superdelegate, remembered Clinton saying, "We thought he'd let us know if he did an endorsement." But Huguenin said the comments about Richardson were "a minor blip in the whole meeting."

According superdelegate Chris Stampolis, Clinton said only that Richardson had promised not to endorse Obama, saying, "'He told me to my face five times he would not do that.'"

Binah did not respond to repeated requests for comment, but she previously told The Associated Press she supports Clinton. Other superdelegates interviewed by the AP said it was Binah's statement that prompted Clinton's comments about Richardson's decision.

Pahl Shipley, a spokesman for Richardson, said his boss never promised to endorse Hillary Clinton.

"He never told the president or anybody else, for that matter," Shipley said. "The governor respectfully disagrees with the president."

Richardson, the nation's only Hispanic governor, endorsed Obama on March 21, shortly after the Illinois senator gave a speech about race. It was a blow to the Clintons because of their long association with Richardson, who served as Clinton's energy secretary and ambassador to the United Nations.

Clinton's campaign declined to comment, except to say the former president was in California to promote his wife's candidacy.

"President Clinton discussed the importance of this election with Democratic Party members and how after 46 primaries and caucuses, by virtually every measure, this election remains a very close race," campaign spokesman Luis Vizcaino said in a statement. "President Clinton is incredibly popular in the Golden State, and the convention was a great opportunity for him to speak directly with members of the California Democratic Party."

Bob Mulholland, a spokesman for the state party who attended the private meeting, said Clinton expressed himself passionately but insisted the meeting was productive.

"I left the meeting feeling this was great," Mulholland said. "The guy had time to talk to us about the campaign."