Saturday, January 21, 2012

Republicans say Obama wrong to cut military funds (AP)

CHARLESTON, S.C. ? Republicans looking to challenge President Barack Obama say the president is wrong to cut military spending and charge that he's putting the United States at risk.

Front-runner Mitt Romney says the United States needs to maintain its military at any cost so that no one would ever think of testing its might.

GOP rival Rick Santorum says Obama is trying to balance the budget at the expense of those serving in uniform. And former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says military spending not only protects the country but educates its veterans.

Congressman Ron Paul of Texas alone says he would cut spending, an unpopular position in South Carolina, home to 413,000 veterans and eight military bases.

Santorum calls such cuts "disgusting" and Romney calls them "doomsday."

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/usmilitary/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20120120/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gop_debate_military

john galt john galt post office hours post office hours coptic coptic breaking bad season finale

Friday, January 20, 2012

Analysis: BlackBerry licensing seen RIM's likeliest scenario (Reuters)

TORONTO (Reuters) ? Research In Motion may still see software licensing as an important part of its turnaround plan, even though Samsung has denied that it might pay to use the BlackBerry maker's technology or even buy the company.

RIM has likely held talks with several handset makers about using its new QNX platform, said a prominent RIM shareholder, who said he was briefed by the company. The operating system, already used in the PlayBook tablet, will power RIM's next-generation smartphones due out later this year.

The shareholder, who declined to be identified because he was unauthorized to speak on the record, said he also believes Samsung is interested in a licensing deal despite its statements to the contrary.

"I'm secure they're talking about licensing stuff," the shareholder said, referring to the South Korean smartphone maker. "I don't know if they're looking to buy the company and I don't care."

RIM's existing product lineup has struggled to compete with Apple's iPhone and iPad and the slew of large-screen and powerful devices from Samsung and other manufacturers using Google's Android operating system.

It also faces a resurgent Microsoft, which has built mobile software that powers Nokia's newest devices, among others.

The Canadian smartphone company has hemorrhaged U.S. market share after a year marked by product delays and a botched launch of its PlayBook tablet. That has led to a 75 percent drop in market valuation and incessant talk about a sale of the company.

RIM's shares have jumped nearly 40 percent since a Reuters report in December cited sources saying RIM had rebuffed takeover overtures from Amazon.com and others because it prefers to fix its problems on its own.

Two of those sources said at the time that RIM could strike technology licensing deals to boost revenue.

During RIM's earnings conference call five days earlier, founder and co-chief executive Mike Lazaridis and his salesman cohort Jim Balsillie promised that RIM would look at all strategic alternatives as it seeks a turnaround.

"We are leaving no stone unturned," Balsillie said. "We ask for your patience and confidence," Lazaridis added.

The prospect of RIM shopping its QNX-based BlackBerry 10 software to rivals or even opening up its unique network for their use has excited some investors and analysts more than the less likely scenario of an outright sale.

"If Samsung or any other Android partner were to integrate RIM's enterprise services like Blackberry Messenger into their offering, they would achieve instant differentiation in the increasingly monochrome Android space," Frost and Sullivan analyst Craig Cartier said.

BREATHING ROOM

Such a deal would presumably give RIM's stock a lift and ease some of the intense pressure on the company's co-chiefs for drastic change.

"The ideal scenario for them would be to find something which unlocked additional value which could appease shareholders while they continue to run the business themselves," Atlantic Equities analyst James Cordwell said in an interview.

Still, he expressed doubt that rival handset makers would rush to snap up a licensing agreement with RIM given most are well served by Android, Microsoft has created a viable alternative, and RIM has failed to deliver in the past.

"Ultimately it's not proven in the market and they've got a pretty patchy track record in terms of actually delivering these things on time and then being as good as they say they're going to be," he said.

The Playbook, RIM's first experiment with the QNX software, was panned when launched last spring because important features were missing from the tablet. Since then sales have been poor. RIM recently delayed its first QNX-equiped BlackBerry phones until late 2012.

Even so, Taiwan's HTC and others might consider licensing QNX because of the cost associated with using Google's free software, after Microsoft unleashed a storm of litigation and eked out royalty agreements on many of those using Android.

As Scotia Capital's Gus Papageorgiou points out, RIM could offer QNX at a lower price or even for free and then charge via network operators once these new customers sign up for the popular BlackBerry Messaging service or RIM's famous enterprise-grade security and compression.

But that plan would have its drawbacks.

"If RIM were to license out QNX and allow all devices to tap into BlackBerry services, it could drastically impede the competitive advantage of its existing devices," Papageorgiou said, suggesting it may then have to offload the handset unit.

As always, much depends on how the two men most responsible for both the roaring success of the Blackberry and its more recent stumbles envision RIM's future.

Lazaridis and Balsillie, who own each 5 percent of the company, have taken on a more humble tone in recent quarters but have shown no outward signs that they're ready to quit.

Yet if tech precedent plays out, time may be in short supply for any seismic shift at RIM.

"As you've seen with the likes of Nokia and Palm, when things go wrong they can unwind very quickly," Atlantic's Cordwell said.

(Reporting by Alastair Sharp; Editing by Frank McGurty)

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/personaltech/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20120118/bs_nm/us_rim

susan powell jonah hill neutrinos neutrinos autumnal equinox rob bell jaycee dugard

Obama showcases support from Romney???s equity peers (Daily Caller)

President Barack Obama?s deputies are fitting Gov. Mitt Romney up as a heartless and greedy investor, eager to strip-mine companies and throw workers onto the street.

He?s a ?corporate raider who thinks outsourcing jobs, stripping down companies, and bankrupting them for profit represents the best of the free enterprise system,? Brad Woodhouse, the spokesman for the Democratic National Committee declared Jan. 12.

But on Tuesday Obama sat down with three of Romney?s professional peers whom he had recruited for his resume-boosting presidential ?Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.?

The televised campaign-style event showed Obama listening and nodding as Romney?s peers offered him advice on how to spend taxpayers? money.

But Obama?s investor-advisers aren?t free market Republicans, such as Mitt, who argues that his investments have helped create 110,000 jobs in the last 20 years.

Instead, they?re Democrats, and they include John Doerr, a senior partner at California-based Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, and Mark Gallogly, a co-founder chief of Centerbridge Partners.

The third, who has feet in both camps, is Richard Parsons. He?s the former chief of Time Warner, the current head of Citigroup ? which got a huge federal bailout in 2009 ? and a senior adviser at Providence Equity Partners.

Obama made sure to praise his own council Tuesday. ?This has not been a show council. ? It will pay off in terms of solidifying this recovery and allow us to move forward in a way where it actually translates into jobs,? he told the TV cameras.

But the TV image of Obama kibbitzing with the capitalists is much different from the image of Romney that was painted Jan. 16 by the DNC chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Back then, a full 12 hours before Obama?s White House meeting, she described Romney as ?a corporate raider for Bain Capital [whose mission] was never job creation ? it was putting profits over people by bankrupting companies, outsourcing jobs and laying off workers.?

But these three investors at the White House Jan. 17 have shared with Obama some the wealth that they?re gained by using government to boost their investments, line their pockets and goose their social status.

John Doerr earned billions of dollars at the intersection of government and capitalism, for example, by donating to Democratic politicians while investing in green-tech companies that benefit from Democratic policies.

Doerr?s firm, California-based Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, is one of the investors in Fisker Automative, a Finland-based auto company that got a $529 million loan guarantee from Obama?s administration. After the guarantee was confirmed, Fisker dropped plans to manufacture the autos in the United States.

But Doerr has given back by donating $171,400 to Democratic politicians since 2007.

He?s also given $100 to a single GOP politician in 2010.

The other partners at his firm have given back roughly $550,000 to Democratic politicians and groups, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Republicans got roughly $150,000 from the company since 2007. In 2007, Romney got $2,100 in a donation from one the firm?s partners.

The partisan skew is routine in the investment world, where investors routinely lobby government officials to shield or boost their private investments.

For example, Romney?s former partners at Bain have donated roughly $3 million to political causes since 1990. Democratic causes and legislators got 75 percent of the cash, while GOP causes got roughly one-quarter of the funds. Romney got only $130,000 from his mostly-Democratic colleagues. (RELATED: Romney attacked for work at Bain Capital while Democratic-leaning Bain execs are spared)

The second equity investor at the White House meeting, Gallogly, raised somewhere between $200,000 and $500,000 for Obama by bundling donations from his friends.

He has also sent $270,000 in 66 donations to Democrats since 2007. That makes sense, if only because he?s invested in GMAC Commercial Finance, an auto-lending firm whose value is shaped by Obama?s bailouts for General Motors and Chrysler.

Still, Gallogly did not completely ignore Republicans. He sent one donation worth $2,400 to South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham.

The third attendee, Parsons, is a partner at Providence, whose principals have donated $356,100 since 2007 to political causes. More than half went to Democrats. Again, the donations are rational, because the firm has invested in many companies whose fate is tied to government policy. For example, the firm has invested in the Spanish-language media firm, Univision, whose audience and revenues are boosted by Democrats? support for Hispanic immigration and by their opposition to cultural integration.

As head of AOL/Time-Warner, and now as head of Citigroup, Parsons donated $84,900 to Democratic and GOP causes since 2007, including the maximum limit of $4,600 to Obama in 2008.

In 2007 and 2008, the company donated $5.74 million to politicians, 63 percent of which went to Democrats.

That kind of love is returned many-fold in D.C. ? Citigroup got a $45 billion aid package in 2009 following the bursting of the government-inflated real estate bubble that had earlier generated billions of dollars in benefits for Citigroup and for Democratic politicians, activists and faithful voters.

Parsons is also giving back by serving as a board member of The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc.

Trading commission could legalize US based political futures market

Obama showcases support from Romney's equity peers

'Kim K. vs. The Gap' lawsuit gets personal

Colbert independent run could hurt Obama

'Mademoiselle' too sexist for French town

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/obama/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/20120117/pl_dailycaller/obamashowcasessupportfromromneysequitypeers

mls draft khloe kardashian mark davis marine urination video hostess cadillac ats marines urinating

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Native American Remains: Tribes And Researchers Clash Over Bones

BERKELEY, Calif. -- On a bluff overlooking a sweep of Southern California beach, scientists in 1976 unearthed what were among the oldest skeletal remains ever found in the Western Hemisphere.

Researchers would come to herald the bones ? dating back nearly 10,000 years ? as a potential treasure trove for understanding the earliest human history of the continental United States. But a local tribal group called the Kumeyaay Nation claimed that the bones, representing at least two people, were their ancestors and demanded them back several years ago.

For decades, fights like this over the provenance and treatment of human bones have played out across the nation. Yet new federal protections could mean that the vast majority of the remains of an estimated 160,000 Native Americans held by universities, museums and federal government agencies, including those sought by the Kumeyaay, may soon be transferred to tribes.

A recent federal regulation addresses what should happen to any remains that cannot be positively traced to the ancestors of modern-day tribes. Museums and agencies are required to notify tribes whose current or ancestral lands harbored the remains, then the tribe is entitled to have them back.

Prestigious institutions from Harvard to the University of California, Berkeley have already begun working through storehouses of remains uncovered by archeologists, highway and building contractors and others since the 19th Century. A few are surrendering bones to Native tribes, and others are evaluating whether to do so.

Tribes have hailed the rule, saying it will help close a long and painful chapter that saw native peoples' bones stolen by grave robbers, boxed up in dusty storerooms and disrespected by researchers.

"Darn it, these are people," said Louis Guassac, a member of the Kumeyaay Cultural Repatriation Committee. "This isn't stuff. You don't do this to people. I don't care how long they've been there. You respect them."

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 provided for the return of remains connected to modern-day tribes. But it was not until 2010 that a rule on the disposition of so-called culturally unidentifiable remains was finalized by the Department of the Interior. Until then, more than 650 universities and other institutions had no clear guidance about how to return those remains, which account for the bones of about 116,000 people in their collections. That rule is still playing out, sometimes fractiously.

Universities find themselves tugged one way by the law's mandates, another by faculty research needs.

Some anthropologists say more remains will become off limits, imperiling study of the diets, health, migrations and other habits of ancient peoples without guaranteeing that the remains will wind up with their true descendants. "There really isn't any balance anymore," said Keith Kintigh, associate director of the School of Human Evolution and Social Change at Arizona State University. "The public and scientific interest in (the remains) no longer have any weight."

In recent months, Harvard's Peabody Museum has received requests for about 500 remains and hired additional staff as they respond to the 2010 rule, said Patricia Capone, the museum's repatriation coordinator.

At the University of Michigan, officials have decided to transfer the bulk of their 1,580 culturally unaffiliated remains to 13 Native American tribes who want them. In the meantime, they have been put off limits to researchers. "The law is very clear that they will be transferred," said school spokesman Rick Fitzgerald.

At UC-Berkeley, more than 6,000 of the roughly 10,000 remains that were deemed culturally unidentifiable are now subject to potential transfer to tribes. And the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Archaeology here has added four new staff members to help match remains to tribes if possible and notify tribes whose lands held the remains.

The small, eclectic museum recently celebrated the 100th anniversary of a recording made by Ishi ? the last surviving member of the Yahi tribe who emerged from hiding in Northern California in 1911. The museum displays artifacts such as Pomo baskets, an Achumawi rabbit-skin blanket and arrowheads Ishi made out of obsidian and glass_ but not the remains of native peoples.

The collection of bones _one of the country's largest ? is in storage. Officials declined to show them to The Associated Press during a recent campus visit on grounds that that could be offensive to tribes.

The university currently has four pending requests for remains. And Museum Director Mari Lyn Salvador said the regulation change has caused concern among researchers.

"There are very important opportunities to understand contemporary medicine ... information that could be very useful to these (Native) communities themselves in terms of better understanding diabetes and other illnesses," she said.

The university presents such information to tribes, she said, but lets the tribes decide whether to allow researchers to work with the bones.

Tens of thousands of individual Native American remains have been collected since the mid-19th century. Some grave sites were looted or excavated to support scientific research, including a study of skulls purporting to show that Native Americans were inferior to Caucasians, according to Robert Bieder, an Indiana University professor who has written about the phenomenon.

The bones in dispute at UC San Diego have long since been out of the ground. They were excavated more than three decades ago from land around the university chancellor's house in La Jolla by a professor from another school. But a photo of the original discovery shows the outlines of two skeletons with skulls, buried head to toe.

Since their discovery in 1976, they have been studied at the Smithsonian and carbon dated at the University of Oxford, according to Margaret Schoeninger, a professor in the Department of Anthropology at UCSD and the university's representative on Indian burial issues.

When the Kumeyaay Nation ? a dozen native bands with reservations in San Diego County ? first demanded the remains, the university rejected its claim that they were the tribe's ancestors.

Researchers have said Kumeyaay remains were cremated early in the tribe's history, not buried. They have also questioned whether the remains are even Native American, given their age, although the university has concluded that they are.

"In terms of what the Kumeyaay have put forward, the only thing I've heard is their belief, their deep tie to the land and folklore," Schoeninger said. "We need empirical evidence."

Tribal representatives say they have an oral history that goes back thousands of years and connects them to the remains.

In light of the recent rule, university officials did a reevaluation, concluding that the skeletons came from the Kumeyaay's ancestral lands while still maintaining they were not the Kumeyaay's direct ancestors.

In a filing in December, the university said it would turn the remains over to the Kumeyaay although it gave other tribal groups until Jan. 4 to come forward and dispute the Kumeyaay's claim.

Kumeyaay repatriation officials say they will accept the remains.

"It's pleasing to know that these are going to finally be returned and properly taken care of," Guassac said. "They are going to be getting the respectful treatment they deserve."

One option, he said, is that the remains will be reburied.

"; var coords = [-5, -72]; // display fb-bubble FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, 'top', {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: 'clear-overlay'}); });

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/16/native-american-remains_n_1209131.html

jessica chastain nook tablet eagles magic johnson involuntary manslaughter stevens johnson syndrome verdict in michael jackson trial

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Microsoft Pitches Private Cloud To IT With System Center 2012

Posted: January 18th, 2012 | Author: admin | Filed under: #Tech | No Comments ?

Microsoft?s System Center 2012 is available today as a Release Candidate, the last milestone before a final release. Along with Hyper-V and Windows Server, the upgraded System Center forms the key building blocks for Microsoft?s private cloud strategy, providing management tools for desktops, mobile devices, both physical and virtual servers, and a mix of resources across private data centers and public clouds such as Windows Azure.



Source: http://blog.dszewczyk.com/2012/01/18/microsoft-pitches-private-cloud-to-it-with-system-center-2012/

walking dead weldon weldon danica patrick david garrard indy car kinder morgan

HBT: Yankees, Hughes avoid arbitration with 1-year deal

Phil Hughes and the Yankees have agreed to a one-year deal worth $3.2 million, avoiding arbitration.

Hughes had a disappointing 2011, as injuries limited him to just 75 innings and he posted a 5.79 ERA, but he made $2.7 million and would have been in line for a decent-sized raise if the two sides went to a hearing.

His role for this season isn?t entirely clear after the Yankees traded for Michael Pineda and signed Hiroki Kuroda, because one of Hughes, Freddy Garcia, or A.J. Burnett will seemingly have to be the odd man out in the rotation.

Hughes has bullpen experience, spending most of 2009 as a reliever with lots of success, and taking him out of the rotation?at least initially?could also be a way to avoid doubling his workload following back problems and arm fatigue.

Source: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/16/phil-hughes-gets-3-2-million-from-yankees-avoids-arbitration/related/

childish gambino camp drake take care tracklist justified blake shelton tim lincecum congress

Tim Tebow Can't Keep Up With Tom Brady As Broncos Lose To Patriots

FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- Looks like Tebowmania has run its course.

Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow couldn't pull off another improbable comeback on Saturday night, when Tom Brady and the New England Patriots effectively buried the NFL's feel-good story of the year with a 45-10 rout.

The Patriots advanced to the AFC title game for the sixth time in 11 seasons, and the Broncos head into the offseason with renewed questions about their unconventional quarterback.

"After a little while, when we continued to fall behind" it sank in, an upbeat Tebow told reporters after the game. "But even at halftime, when we came in and said we were going to play one play at a time, you never know what's going to happen. We just weren't able to get it done."

The Tebow phenomenon was built during a six-game winning streak ? three of them in overtime ? and then magnified when he hit Demaryius Thomas for an 80-yard touchdown on the first play of overtime in last week's playoff victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers. But the Patriots overwhelmed the Broncos, and Tebow wasn't able to stop it.

"Overall, it's been a very special opportunity for me, something I'm very thankful for, very thankful I had the opportunity to build some of the great relationships with teammates and coaches," he said. "We've overcome a lot of different forms of adversity, to win some special games, to have great memories of last week and to be able to get into the playoffs. There's a lot of things we are proud of, even though it's hard to see that now."

After scurrying around the field for four quarters ? usually with Patriots defenders close behind ? Tebow stood calmly at the podium in his postgame interview and tried to focus on the positive things that have happened to him this season. Wearing a purple tie and matching shirt, open at the collar, Tebow talked about meeting a sick child in the hospital and bringing a smile to his face.

"I'm very thankful for that platform," he said. "So I wouldn't change it for anything."

The Broncos were 1-4 when Tebow was named the starter. After splitting his first two games, they won six in a row with him as quarterback and Tebowmania was in full bloom.

Then the Patriots got to Denver on Dec. 18 and won 41-23 to snap the winning streak. The Broncos lost their next two games as well to finish with a three-game slide, but they qualified for the playoffs when the Oakland Raiders lost to the San Diego Chargers on the final day of the regular season.

In the wild-card round against Pittsburgh, Thomas' 80-yard touchdown catch-and-run on the first play of overtime gave the Broncos their first playoff win in six years.

And heading into the second round, it was all Tebow, all the time.

The internet buzzed with people Tebowing ? mimicking the quarterback's pregame prayer pose ? and that didn't go over so well in New England, where they think their quarterback deserves some attention, too. Talk radio callers questioned Tebow's talent, and even fans at the Boston Bruins game started a derisive cheer against the Broncos quarterback.

That carried over to Foxborough, where the "Teeee-Bow!" chant came out in the second half as he struggled to muster an offensive attack.

"Sometimes you definitely don't want it all because you'd love to just go to dinner and hang out with friends and be a normal 24-year-old," Tebow said. "That makes it sometimes hard, but I wouldn't change it for the world just because by having that platform to be able to walk into the hospital and share with kids."

Broncos coach John Fox said the team had a lot to be proud of, and Tebow did, too. But there were few highlights on Saturday.

"We're a work in progress," Fox said.

On Denver's first possession, Tebow threw an incompletion and lost a fumble. By halftime, he had completed just three of 10 passes for 28 yards. By that time, Brady already had thrown five of his six touchdown passes.

"I just wanted to show character. You just continue to fight, and it doesn't change who you are, who you play, how you go out there. You should be the same at all times," Tebow said. "That's what I wanted to show. It didn't matter whether it was the first play or the last play or you were down by 42. I was going to be the same player and I was still going to give everything I have. Because that's all I have to give. Every time I step on the field, I'm going to give my whole heart, regardless score-wise of what's happening."

Tebow just couldn't overcome a defense ranked 31st in the NFL.

"They did some good things, stunting up front," he said. "They played well. I thank my teammates for their effort even when things didn't go well."

Now he goes into the offseason trying to improve. The question is: Will he be the starter again next season?

"Of course, he's our guy," safety Rahim Moore said. "People put too much pressure on him. He's going to have some good and some bad. I believe in him and I would like him to be our quarterback."

"; var coords = [-5, -72]; // display fb-bubble FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, 'top', {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: 'clear-overlay'}); });

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/15/tim-tebow-broncos-tom-brady-patriots-season-ends_n_1207162.html

three stooges pujols mythbusters miami marlins hanley ramirez blago mumia abu jamal