Sunday, November 4, 2012

Bloomberg mishandles New York City marathon controversy

NEW YORK (AP) ? Mayor Michael Bloomberg tried to sell the New York City Marathon as a symbolic victory for the city after a devastating storm, invoking two of the biggest symbols of them all ? Rudy Giuliani and 9/11.

The former mayor, Bloomberg said, made the right decision by holding the marathon less than two months after the 2001 terror attacks: "It pulled people together, and we have to find some ways to express ourselves and show our solidarity with each other."

Then, he kept talking.

"You have to keep going and doing things, and you can grieve, you can cry and you can laugh all at the same time," he said.

And once again, the city cringed, hearing another false note that renewed familiar criticism that New York's billionaire businessman mayor is tone-deaf to suffering during a crisis. By the time Bloomberg changed course three hours later Friday and called off the world's largest marathon, he already had offended a passel of flood-weary New Yorkers.

"He is clueless without a paddle to the reality of what everyone else is dealing with," fumed Joan Wacks, whose waterfront condo in Staten Island was under 4 feet of water. "He's supposed to be the mayor of all the city, but he's really the mayor of Manhattan."

It was a rare reversal for Bloomberg, who's known for sticking by his decisions, however unpopular. He's built a reputation for being an efficient, independent-minded pragmatist in office, a philanthropist and public health innovator, and he has gotten praise for the city's preparedness for the storm.

In his first comments Saturday since canceling the race, Bloomberg continued to defend his belief that the event could have gone on but conceded the controversy had become a distraction.

"I still think that we had the resources to do both," Bloomberg told WCBS-TV during a visit to Queens. "There are lots of people in this city ? some hurt, some not. It's a big part of our economy."

"But it was just becoming so divisive that whether it's a good idea or not, we just don't need the distraction."

To the people who came from all over the world for the race, Bloomberg said he would tell them: "I'm sorry. I fought the battle, and sometimes things don't work out."

As the mayor was speaking, he was met by catcalls from Queens residents angry about the city's response to the storm.

It was not the first time that the mayor has seemed out of synch with the people he leads.

There was the post-Christmas blizzard that dumped 2 feet of snow on the city in 2010, when the mayor raised hackles by encouraging New Yorkers to enjoy the snow or see a Broadway show to help the city's economy. Residents said the mayor failed to appreciate the outer-borough New Yorkers stranded by snow drifts that hadn't been plowed, unable and without the money to go to the theater.

There was a long-running feud about Sept. 11 victims' remains that were recovered in downtown Manhattan five years after the attacks. A victim's family member, Diane Horning, said then that the mayor indicated he didn't identify with families wanting their loved ones' remains because he wanted to donate his body to science.

Bloomberg was branded an out-of-touch, big-business cheerleader when he said Con Edison's chairman "deserves a thanks from this city" amid a 10-day blackout that affected 174,000 people in parts of Queens in July 2006.

"Going after the CEO just because somebody wants to have somebody to blame doesn't make a lot of sense," Bloomberg said as the outage was in its eighth sweltering day. The remark raised eyebrows, even among the politicians standing behind the mayor at a news briefing.

All this week, the mayor kept returning to economics when defending his decision to keep the marathon going. Officials said the marathon brings in $340 million; it was unclear how much the city still stands to get from the thousands of runners already in town.

"For those who were lost," he said earlier this week, "you've got to believe they would want us to have an economy and have a city go on."

Before Friday's cancellation, Bloomberg had faced criticism from everyone from sanitation workers unhappy that they had volunteered to help storm victims but were assigned to the race, to police union leaders, to the Manhattan borough president to his ally, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

Melanie Bright, who went three days without electricity and hot water, said the mayor didn't get it. "He feels like we should carry on with our lives, even though people have lost everything," she said.

In a sign of how swiftly the tide turned, City Hall told local officials well into midafternoon Friday that the race was on, according to a person familiar with the situation, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss behind-the-scenes conversations.

Ultimately, though, Bloomberg relented and canceled the event.

"We cannot allow a controversy over an athletic event ? even one as meaningful as this ? to distract attention away from all the critically important work that is being done to recover from the storm," he said.

The decision quickly drew praise from some of the same officials who had slammed the marathon schedule hours earlier. The mayor made a "sensitive and prudent decision that will allow the attention of this city to remain focused on its recovery," said Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer.

But for Eddie Kleydman, motioning toward huge piles of ruined furniture in his Staten Island street, the mayor's last-minute change of heart wasn't enough.

"He's worried about the marathon. I'm worried about getting power," Kleydman said. "So he called it off. He has to come here and help us clean."

___

Associated Press writers Leanne Italie, Christine Rexrode and Michael Rubinkam contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/stance-marathon-mayor-misreads-nyc-070257392--spt.html

earthquake news 12 world series morgan freeman giants Natina Reed Sandy Hurricane

Rihanna & Chris Brown Jet Off On Romantic Getaway

Rihanna & Chris Brown Jet Off On Romantic Getaway

Rihanna and Chris Brown are rumored to be enjoying a short vacation together. The off/on couple, who got back together recently while Chris is still [...]

Rihanna & Chris Brown Jet Off On Romantic Getaway Stupid Celebrities Gossip Stupid Celebrities Gossip News

Source: http://stupidcelebrities.net/2012/11/rihanna-chris-brown-jet-off-on-romantic-getaway/

jessica simpson gives birth carrie underwood blown away chk carrie underwood ryan seacrest kentucky derby beltane

ImmigrationTALK?President Obama and Governor Romney on ...

?

By Attorney Gail S. Seeram

?

As the U.S. presidential election is this week, it may be helpful for undecided voters to see where each candidate stands on immigration.? Through their speeches and presidential debates, each candidate briefly describes their position on immigration enforcement and immigration reform.
President Obama has an established record of being tough on immigration enforcement as we have seen record deportation from the U.S. under his administration.? Also, he has acted through executive order to grant status to immigrant widows of U.S. citizens and grant young immigrants deferred action and temporary work authorization.? Governor Romney does not have a clear record on immigration since he has not initiated any immigration policies as governor and has not voted on any immigration matters.
For those who are naturalized U.S. citizens, immigration should be an important voting issue for you since you were once considered an immigrant in this country and I am sure, have family and friends who are still struggling as illegal or legal immigrants in the U.S.
For me, the clear choice for immigration reform is President Obama but you decide based on the following statements from each candidate.
President Obama has been quoted as follows:
Des Moines Register, October 23, 2012: ?We need to get immigration reform done, and I?m fully committed to doing that.?? ?The second thing I?m confident we?ll get done next year is immigration reform.?
Univision Forum, September 19, 2012: ?I am happy to take responsibility for the fact that we didn?t get [comprehensive immigration reform] done. But I did not make a promise that I would get everything done 100 per cent when I was elected as president.
What I promised was that I would work every single day as hard as I can to make sure that everybody in this country, regardless of who they are, what they look like, where they come from, that they would have a fair shot at the American dream. And that promise I?ve kept.?
Univision-Enrique Acevedo Interview, April 13, 2012: ?I can promise that I will try to do it [immigration reform] in the first year of my second term. I want to try this year. The challenge we?ve got on immigration reform is very simple.
I?ve got a majority of Democrats who are prepared to vote for it, and I?ve got no Republicans who are prepared to vote for it. It?s worse than that. We now have a Republican nominee who said that the Arizona laws are a model for the country; that ? and these are laws that potentially would allow someone to be stopped and picked up and asked where their citizenship papers are based on an assumption.?
Governor Romney has been quoted as follows: CNN GOP candidate debate, January 16, 2012 ?Those who come into the country legally would be given an identification card, and if employers hire someone without a card, then those employers would be severely sanctioned. If you do that, people who have come here illegally won?t be able to find work. And over time, those people would tend to leave the country, or self-deport. I don?t think anyone is interested in going around and rounding up people around the country and deporting 11 million illegal immigrants into America.
?Let?s focus our attention on how to make legal immigration work and stop illegal immigration.?
GOP candidate debate (Reagan Library), January 30, 2008 ?My plan is this, which is for those that have come here illegally and are here illegally today, no amnesty. Now, how do people return home? Under the ideal setting, at least in my view, you say to those who have just come in recently, we?re going to send you back home immediately; we?re not going to let you stay here. You just go back home.
?For those that have been here, let?s say, five years, and have kids in school, you allow kids to complete the school year, you allow people to make their arrangements, and allow them to return back home.
?Those that have been here a long time, with kids that have responsibilities here and so forth, you let stay enough time to organize their affairs and go home.?
GOP candidate debate, January 5, 2006: ?I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the 12 million people who?ve come here illegally should all be allowed to remain in the US permanently, potentially some of them applying for citizenship and becoming citizens, others just staying permanently.
?That is a form of amnesty, and that it?s not appropriate. We?re a nation of laws. Our liberty is based upon being a nation of laws. I would welcome those people to get in line with everybody else who wants to come here permanently. But there should be no special pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for those that have come here illegally. I welcome legal immigration.
?Of course we need to secure the border. We need to have an employment verification system with a card to identify who?s here legally and not legally. We need to have employer sanctions that hire people that then don?t have the legal card. But with regards to those already here, it is simply not right and unfair to say they?re going to all get to stay.?

?

?

Source: http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2012/11/04/immigrationtalk-president-obama-and-governor-romney-on-immigration/

jake owen oosthuizen louis double eagle bubba masters winner instagram facebook mike wallace

Saturday, November 3, 2012

Answer three 'why' questions: Abstract thinking can make you more politically moderate

ScienceDaily (Nov. 2, 2012) ? Partisans beware! Some of your most cherished political attitudes may be malleable! Researchers report that simply answering three "why" questions on an innocuous topic leads people to be more moderate in their views on an otherwise polarizing political issue.

The research, described in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, explored attitudes toward what some people refer to as the ground zero mosque, an Islamic community center and mosque built two blocks from the site of the former World Trade Center in New York City. When the Islamic center first was proposed it sparked a heated debate pitting proponents of religious freedom against those who felt the center should be moved away from the site of the 9/11 attacks out of reverence for those killed by Muslim extremists.

"We used the ground zero mosque as a particularly polarizing issue," said University of Illinois psychology professor Jesse Preston, who supervised the research with graduate students Daniel Yang and Ivan Hernandez. "People feel strongly about it generally one way or the other." Yang, now a postdoctoral researcher at Yale, designed the study with Preston and led the experiments.

The researchers used techniques known to induce an abstract mindset in people, Preston said. Previous studies had shown that asking people to think broadly about a subject (with "why" rather than "how" questions, for example) makes it easier for them to look at an issue from different perspectives.

" 'Why' questions make people think more in terms of the big picture, more in terms of intentions and goals, whereas more concrete 'how' questions are focused on something very specific, something right in front of you, basically," Preston said.

Previous research showed that abstract thinking enhances creativity and open-mindedness, but this is the first study to test its power to moderate political beliefs, Preston said.

The interventions were simple. In the first experiment the researchers established that, after viewing an image of an airplane flying into one of the World Trade Center towers, liberals and conservatives held opposing attitudes toward the ground zero mosque and community center.

A second study repeated the first with new participants and included one minor -- but significant -- change. Before they gave their views on the mosque and community center, participants answered either three consecutive "why" questions or three consecutive "how" questions on an unrelated topic -- in this case, about maintaining their health.

The "why" questions, but not the "how" questions, moved liberals and conservatives closer together on the issue of the Islamic center, Preston said.

"We observed that liberals and conservatives became more moderate in their attitudes," she said. "After this very brief task that just put them in this abstract mindset, they were more willing to consider the point of view of the opposition."

The researchers conducted a third experiment online to test the effects in a more diverse population. In this round, they asked participants to read an ambiguous "faux Yahoo! News" article that included multiple arguments for and against the Islamic center.

Those who viewed the article in an easy-to-read format remained polarized in their views, the researchers found. But those who read the same article after it had been photocopied and made harder to read were more moderate in their responses.

Making the information harder to read induced abstract thinking, Preston said.

"It's a surprisingly powerful manipulation because people are thinking in a different way and putting in more mental effort while reading," she said.

"We tend to think that liberals and conservatives are on opposite sides of the spectrum from each other and there's no way we can get them to compromise, but this suggests that we can find ways of compromising," Preston said. "It doesn't mean people are going to completely change their attitudes, because these are based on pervasive beliefs and world views. But it does mean that you can get people to come together on issues where it's really important or perhaps where compromise is necessary."

This is one of two new studies from Preston's lab to explore interventions that moderate political bias. The other study, reported in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, tackles attitudes toward capital punishment and verdicts in a mock criminal trial.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:


Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Journal References:

  1. D. Y.- J. Yang, J. L. Preston, I. Hernandez. Polarized Attitudes Toward the Ground Zero Mosque are Reduced by High-Level Construal. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2012; DOI: 10.1177/1948550612446973
  2. Ivan Hernandez, Jesse Lee Preston. Disfluency disrupts the confirmation bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2013; 49 (1): 178 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.08.010

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/living_well/~3/zxSfD5Phl4Y/121102151948.htm

rodney king Webb Simpson Fathers Day Quotes Stevie J mothers day 2012 cinco de mayo osama bin laden death

Past is Present in 'An Enemy Of The People'

Copyright ? 2012 National Public Radio. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

IRA FLATOW, HOST:

This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. Even though it was produced in 1883, the storyline in Henrik Ibsen's play "An Enemy of the People" could have been written yesterday. A scientist discovers some inconvenient truths, facts that if revealed could cost those in power a lot of money and change many lives, including his own family's, for the worse.

What's a scientist to do? That question is at the center of the drama, and it's one of the reasons this new Broadway production of the play is so riveting. Joining me now to talk more about the play are two of its lead actors. Tony Award-winning actor Boyd Gaines plays Thomas Stockmann in the play; and the award-winner Richard Thomas plays Peter Stockmann, who happens to be his brother in the play. He's also - Mr. Thomas is also the honorary chairman of the National Corporate Theatre Fund.

Also with us is David Shookhoff, he's the education director for the Manhattan Theatre Club. Thank you all for joining us today.

RICHARD THOMAS: Pleasure to be here.

FLATOW: A fantastic, fantastic production.

BOYD GAINES: Thank you.

FLATOW: I saw it - tell us about the play, Richard, for people who may not be - you're the mayor of a town that have spas or baths (unintelligible)...

THOMAS: A Norwegian spa town that's a town that really gets all of its revenue from the business at the spas, and my character is the mayor of the town, who's in charge of obviously maintaining the town's prosperity and considers himself to be the moral guardian of the town.

(LAUGHTER)

THOMAS: His brother is a bit of a problem for him.

GAINES: I beg your pardon.

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: All right, tell us about who the brother is.

GAINES: I play Thomas Stockmann, Peter's brother, and who is the - through the influence of his brother Peter has become the medical officer for the baths. He's been secretly, for the last year, been sampling the waters of the baths for impurities and sending them off to the university laboratories only to discover that they are rife with bacteria and pollution, and the revelation of that becomes the motor of the play.

THOMAS: To rebuild everything would cost - it just means that everything would essentially have to be done over, all the pipes re-laid, a swamp drained, and it's hundreds and hundreds of thousands of crowns.

FLATOW: And we're going to play a little clip, that essentially - the frank exchange of views you two have.

(LAUGHTER)

GAINES: Yes, we do have, we have several, and this is the first big one.

FLATOW: This is the big one, talking about rebuilding.

(SOUNDBITE OF PLAY, "AN ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE")

THOMAS: (As Peter Stockmann) You're just going to have to retract the whole thing publicly.

GAINES: (As Thomas Stockmann) What did you just say?

THOMAS: (As Peter) You're going to find that you've been mistaken.

GAINES: (As Thomas) Am I?

THOMAS: (As Peter) You will express your confidence in the committee and its commitment to ongoing improvements, which may be merely cosmetic.

GAINES: (As Thomas) You have to reroute the whole system, Peter.

THOMAS: (As Peter) As an employee, you haven't the right to tell me anything.

GAINES: (As Thomas) I haven't the right?

THOMAS: (As Peter) No, you work for me, Thomas. And you'll find in your contract that one of the rules is that you're not allowed to contradict a superior.

GAINES: (As Thomas) What? I'm a doctor. I'm a man of science (unintelligible)...

THOMAS: (As Peter) The world doesn't revolve around your science. It's about money.

You could say that's my point of view.

FLATOW: Has anything changed that much in 30 years? I mean, and that's what makes the play so riveting for today.

GAINES: Well, the - one of the - I mean, there are specific scientific facts, you know, pollution, the idea of bacteria, which is, you know, coming to the forefront with Lister and Pasteur and even Jennings at the beginning of the 19th century, it's a new idea, and people are loathe to change their views on science.

THOMAS: It's just the kind of thing that one could conveniently call a theory.

GAINES: Yeah, no, exactly, a theory. And it is incredibly inconvenient financially, and basically everyone starts covering their own butts.

FLATOW: Yeah, 1-800-989-8255 is our number if you'd like to talk about this play. David Shookhoff, you're the education director for the Manhattan Theatre Club. This program is relevant to kids? You bring in school kids to talk about the ethical dilemmas that you find here?

DAVID SHOOKHOFF: Indeed, more than talk about. We have a relationship with some 40 schools in the New York area, and some number of those are right now - well, right now they're out of school because of the hurricane, but they have been and will be studying these issues but studying them in the theatrical mode.

We're trying to make the ideas that Richard and Boyd have been talking about personal for them, the ethical ideas of the inconvenient truths in personal terms, you know, what happens if there's a cheating scandal at the school, and you have to blow the whistle or feel compelled to blow the whistle.

What if there's asbestos in the gym, and you're on the team, and the coach is saying don't let anybody know. And we give - we enable them to dramatize those issues, you know, drawn from their own lives as a kind of a template against which they can view and resonate with the play when they come to see it.

FLATOW: Now, this play has been adapted quite a few times. How is this production different than the original?

SHOOKHOFF: The original, I wasn't there for the original.

(LAUGHTER)

SHOOKHOFF: You know, but what we have done, Rebecca Linkovich(ph) has done an extraordinary job, I think, of making the play sinewy and muscular and relevant and as - you know, made it really a play for our times, not that the original wasn't either, but she's I think pared away, you know, and cut to the essentials.

GAINES: Compressed it.

FLATOW: You know, lots of plays get revived on Broadway, but very - most of them are musicals. I mean, was it difficult to get this revived?

THOMAS: Actually we did a reading of it in, what, April I guess it was, and for Manhattan Theatre Club, and when we read it, everyone in the room, it just jumped off the page. It was crying out to be produced not only because it's a wonderful new voice for the play but because of how the play speaks about the world that we're living in.

But I think that the personal aspect of it that you're speaking about is so important because it's a play so much about conscience, really, and each one of us on the personal level every day has to face do I do the pragmatic thing, do I do the idealistic thing, do I - what, you know, do I make that phone call, do I take that job, do I quit that job, do I make up with this person, or do I pull the covers on that person.

It's - we have these dilemmas. We do this play every day ourselves in our own lives, and sometimes we're the mayor, and sometimes we're the doctor.

FLATOW: Very well-put. Boyd?

GAINES: Well, I think what's interesting - Richard and I have noted, we share a dressing room, and so we get our after-show visitors every night seem to take away a very different story depending on their political or scientific or ethical points of view.

Some people - I think it's a play that insults everyone across the board as only that little Norwegian man could do. Whether you be conservative or liberal or Libertarian, it cuts across, it cuts across the board. But it's so relevant. We're in election season right now. There's a line in Ibsen's fifth act, when my character says to my father-in-law, you can't - I can't change the fact, and he goes yes you can, anyone can change facts.

FLATOW: And that's right out of the original...

THOMAS: I think our two most interesting performances will be election night and the day after. I think it's going to be - no matter what happens. I think it's going to be very interesting.

GAINES: The night after the last debate, oh, lots of lines jumped, you know, off the page into the audience.

THOMAS: Yeah, the audience likes to participate, and because in the fourth act we have a town meeting where we are actually addressing the audience...

GAINES: We incorporate the - right.

THOMAS: The fourth wall is broken. They - last night we got, you know, you got lots of support from the house, you know.

FLATOW: Yeah, they jumped in?

THOMAS: Yeah, the bad comes in, and they applaud, and then he comes in, and nobody's applauding, and the audience, well, we're going to applaud for him. We'll applaud.

(LAUGHTER)

THOMAS: And it's very exciting when they participate, and I would imagine when young people come to see it, they like that scene a lot.

SHOOKHOFF: I'm excited to have the students come see this play more so than perhaps many of the other shows we've done because it's such a rich template for wrestling with values and choices, moral and ethical choices. And indeed the way we're approaching the play with students is I think at one point Richard's character talks about the situation as a conundrum, that there's a complexity to this. There are two points of view.

And what we're asking the students, we're not making it easy for them to make a decision. You know, what about the mayor's point of view? What about the cost of rebuilding the town? So it isn't just - you know, Ibsen was a sensitive and smart enough artist that he doesn't make it, you know, a polemic. It's really, it's a conundrum, it's a complex, rich issue with all sorts of personal and ethical questions.

It's the scientist in the moral domain.

FLATOW: What other plays would you compare it to? You say you bring students to other plays.

SHOOKHOFF: Well, we, at Manhattan Theatre Club, we bring students to virtually all the plays that we do, and the fun and excitement most recently, I guess, the end of last season we did a play about another public - areas of public policy. We did a play called "The Columnist," which Boyd played a featured role. And we had students there wrestling with the power of journalism and so forth.

And we try to again make - help them personalize and see the play both as drama but also as something that's personally meaningful.

FLATOW: Yet there are always little touches of comic relief in the play.

THOMAS: Well, he did consider it his comedy, if you can believe that.

(LAUGHTER)

THOMAS: But it's a Norwegian comedy.

SHOOKHOFF: It's a Norwegian comedy.

THOMAS: But it is funny.

GAINES: The audience laughs. It's a social comedy. I mean, really it's about social foibles, and, you know, the fact that everyone covers their little bailiwick and does - turns on a dime is funny but true.

THOMAS: Yeah, the ironies are very rich in the play, and the humor is there for people who want - sometimes it takes a little while. They're coming to see Ibsen. They're coming to see this play. They don't - they're ready to be serious. They're not quite ready to have as much fun as they're able to.

SHOOKHOFF: It's not the slapstick of when we did (unintelligible).

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: I was trying to figure out where that - the drunk in the audience fit in there.

SHOOKHOFF: Well exactly, and I mean, that's pure Ibsen. And then in fact just - there's some running gags that didn't make it into this adaptation just in the - in to save time and to...

FLATOW: Yeah, it's a longer play, then.

SHOOKHOFF: Yeah, we - it's quite a bit - there's quite a bit cut out but nothing essential. I mean, that's the remarkable thing about it.

FLATOW: It's a terrific production.

SHOOKHOFF: And these guys are too modest to discuss the audience reaction, but they're - the audiences are cheering and standing up and shouting.

THOMAS: And booing and hissing occasionally.

GAINES: Richard loves nothing more.

FLATOW: We'll come back and talk lots more about the play, so give us a call, our number 1-800-989-8255, here with Boyd Gaines, who plays Thomas Stockmann in the play; and Richard Thomas, who plays Peter Stockmann; also David Shookhoff is here. Our number, as I say, 1-800-989-8255, "An Enemy of the People." Hope we are not. So stay with us. We'll be right back after this break.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

FLATOW: I'm Ira Flatow. This is SCIENCE FRIDAY from NPR.

This is SCIENCE FRIDAY. I'm Ira Flatow. We're talking with actors, as you can tell, and they love to talk.

(LAUGHTER)

GAINES: What?

FLATOW: Which we do ourselves, sitting here with Boyd Gaines and Richard Thomas. You know Richard Thomas from his Broadway and TV work, and also because you are also the honorary chairman of the National Corporate Theatre Fund. Tell us about that.

THOMAS: I am the newly invited honorary chairman of the National Corporate Theatre Fund. So I'm busy doing my homework and learning more and more about it all the time. It's a terrific organization. It's a liaison organization, basically, between the private sector and resident not-for-profit companies around the country, which is very important these days, because as we know, that getting money to the arts is very, very difficult.

And this organization's not just about getting money to the arts. It's about the dialogue between corporations, the private sector and these creative, you know, these artistic organizations. But the thing that's exciting today, vis-a-vis what we're talking about, is that NCTF has just launched a new initiative called Impact Creativity, which is working with the theater education departments in these theaters and cities all around the country, 19 different cities, trying very hard to keep alive these particular programs for using theater to teach.

FLATOW: Right.

THOMAS: And it's an extraordinary thing. People go into the schools, professionals go into schools and work with young people. People come to the theater. Young people come to the theater. It's very much along the lines of what you're talking about with your discussions, post-show discussion.

Trinity Rep works with young people with autism. The Goodman Theater, in its production of, you know, "A Christmas Carol," talks about - talks about physics by showing the kids how they get the - how they get the actors to fly, you know, the pulleys and cables.

There are so many, many exciting and fun and interesting ways that theater can be used, and Impact Creativity is very, very committed to keeping this relationship going using one side of the brain to teach the other, I guess, because - and it's not just about creative students or kids who are studying the arts. It's really very much for kids who are studying science, technology and mathematics.

It's amazing how theater is applicable across the board. But if you want to know - people want to know more about it or donate or are interested to find out about it, they can go online to impactcreativity.org for more info.

FLATOW: We also, on sciencefriday.com, have a link to that (unintelligible).

THOMAS: That's great. Yeah, it's a wonderful initiative, and it's a wonderful organization.

FLATOW: And we're talking about a terrific play, "An Enemy of the People," which Boyd Gaines and Richard Thomas star in. And it's a science-based play, all these plays that we like to talk about on SCIENCE FRIDAY. It's going to be running for how long now?

THOMAS: We play through the 18th of November.

GAINES: Of November.

: It's been extended two weeks. So you'll still have a chance to come see it.

GAINES: Right. And if you're in the New York area, please come see us. It's a great time to be supporting the New York theater with the hurricane and...

FLATOW: The lights are on?

GAINES: The lights are on, shows are playing. Come see us. We had a woman who walked across the Brooklyn Bridge yesterday.

THOMAS: And two people who came to see the show spoke to me afterwards and said they'd come across various - walked across various bridges to come and see the show.

FLATOW: It is a great show. 1-800-989-8255. Let's go to the phones. Mordecai(ph) in Rochester, New York. Hi. Welcome to SCIENCE FRIDAY.

MORDECAI: Thank you. Good afternoon, gentlemen. I wanted to comment on Henrik Ibsen. You mentioned the words of this play, "An Enemy of the People," jumping off the page. Well, not long ago, (unintelligible) the play "Hedda Gabler," which he also wrote, people were saying, well, this is all settled. This play is old-fashioned. We don't think about those things in that way anymore. But in my opinion, that would jump off the page today, too. What do you think?

THOMAS: Absolutely right.

GAINES: It does. I would say the vast majority of his plays jump off the page, especially if they're presented in a way that keeps them from being museum theater, without the sense of, you know, that being bored is good for you.

FLATOW: David Shookhoff, do you agree?

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: Absolutely. And the specific play the caller mentioned, "Hedda Gabler," is just an extraordinary play about a woman with great genius and no talent, if you will, we find in a repressive society, not knowing, you know, what - how to live, finally. And it's a tragic dilemma and a commentary on social repression and women's issues.

THOMAS: I think it's interesting that, really, the only two characters in "An Enemy of the People" who sort of come out of it unscathed by the author are the two women, the character of your wife and your daughter.

GAINES: The most true to themselves, one who protects the family, the mother, and the other, who is the...

THOMAS: Her father's daughter.

GAINES: Her father's daughter, the most revolutionary.

FLATOW: Yeah, you know, I was looking - I went back on Wikipedia, and I was looking up the years around the play was written, the late 1800s, trying to think of the catalyst that's why a playwright would suddenly write a play about this. What was going on at that time?

GAINES: He was mad.

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: He was angry.

THOMAS: He was - it's kind of - it's like if you want to get back at the critics, write "An Enemy of the People." There was such a firestorm about "Ghosts" and also "A Doll's House," which a woman does not the things that that woman does in that play. And in large measure, unless I'm incorrect, this play was written as an enraged response to what he felt was the small-mindedness of the critical reception of his plays.

GAINES: Quite quickly, I think, over a few months.

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: Exactly. And, yeah. But I think he also did it knowing what he was doing. I mean, he also expected it and was prescient in this respect, he expected it to be popular, and it was, because he also knew that he was tapping into things that, you know, people would resonate with.

FLATOW: And even though you feel sympathetic a bit for the scientist and his conflict that's going...

GAINES: A bit.

(LAUGHTER)

THOMAS: A lot.

FLATOW: But he also has a moment where he's thinking, the wheels are turning in his head, gee, maybe I can make something out of this myself. He considers it.

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: Right, well, he also talks about a torchlight procession that he's sort of...

FLATOW: Right, fame, he wants some fame.

GAINES: He's - well, he's a character who is happy to have creature comforts, a new prosperity. He's come - after having been banished to the hinterlands, through the help of his brother attains this position at the baths, is living high on the hog, entertaining his friends, sees himself as a hero. And even though he sort of pooh-poohs the idea of being celebrated, he clearly embraces it, and then runs into reality, which is that he won't be the hero. He'll be the whistleblower.

But he - and finally, the play takes this - Ibsen, and not the Arthur Miller version, which a lot of people are familiar with - is - comes to realize that to be an independent voice, you will stand alone. You will somewhat be banished from society. You will stand alone. And he is revealed to the audience to be a flawed, but noble person.

THOMAS: I think Ibsen beautifully portrays in the play the corruptibility of the pragmatist, my character, and the possibly inherent dangers of idealism and the idealist, who...

GAINES: Especially naive idealism.

THOMAS: Naive idealism, who would at - in his tirades, I - well, a small group of intellectually superior people should really be running the show, and people should be shot at dawn. I think that, you know, Ibsen didn't have much patience with any groups of any kind.

GAINES: He was not a joiner.

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: But what's also true is he takes those ideas, and he makes them juicy and rich and, you know, and his play is infused with passion. And it's a family drama. It's about two brothers.

FLATOW: Yeah, to make things worse, it becomes a family argument.

GAINES: It finally is, is a conflict between two brothers, and...

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: Which is the genius of...

THOMAS: You kind of wonder, if they weren't brothers, whether some sort of solution might have been reached.

GAINES: We've had that discussion, is that - you know, I mean, that scene that you played the clip from is a perfect example where fraternal conflicts reign.

FLATOW: Yeah. And just to wrap up, it's playing, "An Enemy of the People" is at the Samuel Friedman Theater until November 18th.

GAINES: Correct.

FLATOW: Well, maybe the SCIENCE FRIDAY bump will get you a little further.

GAINES: Well, we hope. Come see us.

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: West 47th Street.

FLATOW: I'm here with Boyd Gaines and actor Richard Thomas. David Shookhoff is the education director at the Manhattan Theatre Club. And I went through the whole interview without mentioning John-Boy once.

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: I'm very happy about my (unintelligible).

THOMAS: Well, good night, Ira.

(LAUGHTER)

FLATOW: Thank you, gentlemen, for being part of our...

GAINES: Good night, Ira.

, MANHATTAN THEATRE CLUB: It's been our pleasure.

FLATOW: You're welcome.

Copyright ? 2012 National Public Radio. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to National Public Radio. This transcript is provided for personal, noncommercial use only, pursuant to our Terms of Use. Any other use requires NPR's prior permission. Visit our permissions page for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.

Source: http://www.npr.org/2012/11/02/164181613/past-is-present-in-an-enemy-of-the-people?ft=1&f=1007

Home Run Derby 2012 San Diego fireworks steve nash july 4th higgs boson Malware Monday First Row Sports

Houston Car Accident Lawyer Austin Personal Injury ... - Legal Office

Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.

Source: http://attorney.solve-up.com/attorney/houston-car-accident-lawyer-austin-personal-injury-attorney-texas/

divine mercy chaplet albert pujols the shining mariano rivera mariano rivera jobs report tiger woods masters 2012

Friday, November 2, 2012

iPad Mini is fun but you may want to wait

2 hrs.

I think the best way to review the iPad Mini is to pit it against competitors in a series of death matches. After all, come holiday time, you'll likely put your money down on just one tablet ? or none. In making the decision, you will consider the iPad Mini against the reduced-price?iPad 2, the Amazon Kindle Fire HD, Google's Nexus 7 by Asus, and the full-size?iPad, now in its fourth generation. You may even weigh it in against Microsoft's Surface RT.?Let's just get all of?that comparison shopping?out of the way for you right?now.

First, though, let's talk for a moment about what the iPad Mini is. It's a mini iPad. OK, moving on.?

No, seriously, it really is just a miniaturized version of the tablet that's already been sold 100 million times. The biggest advantage of the smaller size that I've found is that it's a lot easier to type on, so you may find it to be a more helpful email companion. It's also nicer to hold when reading, but its screen ? which I will discuss further on ? gets in the way of pure literary immersion.

Before you get into the review, take a look at my video walkthrough:

Vs. iPad 2
Compared to 2011's iPad 2, the Mini has much better front and back cameras.?And because it has the same pixel resolution in a smaller display, the screen density is better, too. It's not a "Retina" screen like the 3rd- and 4th-gen iPads ? you can still see the pixels that make up letters?when you're reading, for instance ? but it's certainly?easier on your eyes than the iPad 2 screen.

The iPad Mini also has Siri, while the iPad 2 (for reasons that defy logic) does not. And if you're going to buy a tablet with cellular connectivity ? not?that I recommend going that route unless you are on the road a lot, or have a corporate expense account paying your wireless bills ? the $459?iPad Mini can give you high-speed 4G LTE connectivity on AT&T, Sprint or Verizon. You'll?be stuck with slower 3G on the $529 cell-connected?iPad 2. I'm just gonna spell this part out for you: Even if you do?buy an iPad 2, for the love of Pete do not buy the one with the cellular connection!

So what are the iPad 2 advantages, for $70 more? Well, there's a roomier display and an old 30-pin connector?? in case you're wedded to older accessories or want to keep using that rat's nest of white cables in your junk drawer.?The new iPad Mini has the new Lightning connector, and so does the full-size?4th-gen iPad.?

WINNER: iPad Mini

Vs. Microsoft Surface RT
The most innovative product of the season comes from Microsoft. The Surface RT tablet packs a lot in for $499, and the re-envisioning of Windows as a matrix of "live" tiles is compelling in the always-connected era.

But despite its elegant design, innovative keyboard and airplane-tray-table-friendly proportions, there is at its core a software challenge that makes it hard to recommend, especially to the huge number of?people who seek tablets because they are easier to use than computers. Until the Surface RT's software gets more user friendly, and until there are enough apps to make it a worthwhile platform, it remains stuck?in the "Wait and See" bin.

WINNER: iPad Mini

Vs. Kindle Fire HD
Amazon's second-generation, $199?7-inch tablet was improved in all ways over the initial product, but the experience is largely the same. That is, fire up your tablet, open your wallet, and Amazon will fill your life with books, videos, music and games till kingdom come. But don't expect to do anything else on this, because productivity is not its strong suit.

Also weighing against the Kindle Fire HD is the fact that?Amazon is smart enough to build a?Kindle reader, Amazon Prime video and a bunch of other apps for the iPad, too. A happy Amazon customer can get pretty far on an iPad, never having to buy a Kindle device.?That's fine with Amazon, because the company makes money on the content, not the hardware.

If you're mainly into watching movies and reading books, there are two key bonuses that the Kindle Fire HD brings to the table, besides a cash savings of $130: a 16x9 screen aspect ratio, meaning movies like "The Avengers" fill up the whole display; and a higher pixel resolution than the iPad Mini, that?you may notice while watching high-def content and can definitely see when reading text.?

So what does paying?$130 more for an iPad Mini actually get you? The iPad has a much better Web browser and email experience, and though Amazon has cloud storage and streaming music (and?even a music matching service like Apple's), the iPad's?iCloud suite promises more, including synced contacts, documents, notes and browser history, not to mention advanced services like?iMessage, Photo Stream and Siri.?

The biggest reason to choose iPad, however, is apps. Apps, apps, apps. More of that next.

WINNER: Draw (because of the $130 difference and the screen resolution)

Vs. Nexus 7
All the nerds love the $199 Nexus 7 hardware, and I get that ? it's a pretty little machine. But unless you are really just?focusing on Web and email, there's just not a lot of directions you can go with it.

Its advantages are on par with the Kindle Fire HD's: the?16x9 widescreen display?with tighter pixel resolution makes it better for movies and books. But with only a few exceptions such as Netflix, it's hard to get movies and TV shows from anywhere but Google itself, and ditto for books.?For now, buying a Google tablet means, essentially, paying Google for content. I, for one, would rather give my content allowance to Amazon or Apple, because they both have strong track records of selling digital media, and Google doesn't have a track record of selling anything but ads.

Worse still, there are seriously zero apps available for Android tablets.?You can put apps on?an Android tablet, sure, but almost?every one is just a stretched-out Android?phone app, even the ones you'd expect to be tablet-ized, like Kindle Reader and the Weather Channel.

WINNER: iPad Mini?

Vs. Fourth-generation iPad
You now know what you get ? and what you lose ? by saving $130 and buying one of the $199 Android tablets. But what do you gain by spending an extra $170 for the full monty? Well, that larger Retina display is the main thing, and let me tell you, it really does make a huge difference in eye-strain, especially for us night-time e-book readers. Movies, too, will look nicer on the high-definition screen. Here's a screen comparison to illustrate what I mean:

In general, you will also?find that larger screen size to be better for many apps that are meant for interaction, like sketch apps, or strategy games that require multiple windows.

Speaking of games, you also get Apple's latest-generation A6X processor, a dual-core chip with quad-core graphics. Game developers are going to be optimizing for that, not the 2011-era A5 that's inside the iPad Mini.

But a larger tablet may not be what you want. Some people have been waiting for something that offers the convenience and app lineup of the iPad in a package closer in size to a paperback book. Well, that's what the iPad Mini is.

WINNER: Draw

Vs. iPad Mini 2
Wait, what?? Apple put out an iPad Mini 2 already?? No, it hasn't. But you know that within 12 months, it certainly will. And Apple will have sorted out a way to jam a higher-resolution screen and faster processor in there. (It'd be nice if Apple lowered the price to $299 while at it, but we're not holding our breath.)

There are many examples of this in Apple's history, but it's easiest to simply look back on the larger iPads. The iPad 2 was a huge step up from the first iPad, because it got cameras and a thinner body. The third iPad basically completed the formula for perfection with better cameras and a high-resolution Retina display. In fact, the third iPad is so good, the only reason the fourth generation exists is to tidy up Apple's own production lines, and perpetuate the Lightning connector.

So then you extrapolate: Is there a consistent complaint about?the iPad Mini, one that holds up even in Apple's world of "we know better than you" design choices? Yes, it doesn't have a Retina screen. Then ask, what's the chance that Apple fixing this particular problem within 12 months? Answer: 100 percent.

So then the calculus is, how much happiness do I sacrifice by waiting a year for an iPad Mini? Is it worth it to buy a cheaper tablet and put the remaining $140 in the iPad Mini 2 fund? Do I even have the willpower to resist a shiny new Apple product??

WINNER: Non-existent future iPad Mini 2 with Retina display ? assuming you can hold out for it.

Wilson Rothman is the Technology & Science?editor at NBC News Digital. Catch up with him on Twitter at @wjrothman, and join our conversation on Facebook.

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/review-ipad-mini-beats-competition-you-may-want-wait-1C6820707

easter bunny navy jet crash virginia beach isiah thomas passover easter recipes live free or die hard carlos pena