text:
July 12, 2011 | 51:31 | Public Domain
White House Press Briefings are conducted most weekdays from the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room in the West Wing.
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 7/12/2011
12:55 P.M. EDT
MR. CARNEY: I think we're ready. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thanks for being here on this very, very warm day in the summer in Washington.
I have no announcements to make, so I will go right to questions.
Ben Feller of the Associated Press.
Q Thanks, Jay. How are you?
MR. CARNEY: I'm great, thanks. How are you?
Q Good, thanks. Two questions. I'd like to get your reaction to something that the Speaker said today in which he said the debt limit increase is the President's problem, and that President Obama has to put forward a plan that Congress can pass. What's your reaction to those two things?
MR. CARNEY: The need for the United States to take action so that it fulfills its obligations and pays its debts, as it has in the entirety of its existence, is not a Democratic problem, it's not a Republican problem. It's an American problem. And it's something that we have to do together. The President feels very strongly about this.
I would also note that while Congress has to vote to raise the debt ceiling, the President doesn't have a vote in this. It's Congress that has to act.
The President didn't stand up here yesterday and say, hey, show you a lot of charts and graphs about how previous Congresses under a Republican President accumulated enormous amounts of deficits and debt, and that this is what they needed to vote -- to deal with, and it wasn't his problem. He didn't say that because he doesn't believe that. He believes it's his responsibility as the President of the United States to lead, to work with Congress to resolve these issues together for the American people.
So I think that's clearly where this President stands, and it's clearly I think the way that the American people view this.
If we were to default on our obligations, who suffers? Democrats, Republicans or Americans? Americans suffer. The American economy suffers. The global economy suffers.
Q What about I guess the broader issue here? You've got the Speaker's statement that I read; you've got the Senate Republican leader, Senator McConnell, offering a harsh speech today on the floor in which he questioned the President's leadership and said that the real solution to this problem probably isn't going to happen as long as this President is in the Oval Office. I'm curious what -- is this whole process right now moving forward or backwards?
MR. CARNEY: What I think was said was unfortunate, because this President has made clear his willingness to compromise, to take heat from his own party, to do things that would force him and Democrats to move outside their comfort zone in order to meet Republicans halfway to achieve a significant deficit reduction deal the likes of which I think the American people deserve. I mean, this is an opportunity that shouldn't be passed up.
This President is going to be in office for at least another 18 months, and I think that the American people expect Congress to work with him. And this President surely expects and will make every effort to work with this Congress, as he has. I mean, there really isn't an option.
So, in answer to your question about which direction the process is moving in, I mean, by fits and starts, the process continues to move forward because despite elevated rhetoric, the fact is everyone recognizes, everyone who has been in that room and who will be in that room again this afternoon recognizes that there is no alternative here to taking action and dealing with the problems before us, that there has to be a compromise and, in the end, together, we have to do the right thing so that we don't default on our obligations and so that we can achieve significant deficit reduction.
Jeff.
Q Jay, did the President hear Senator McConnell's speech on the floor?
MR. CARNEY: No. He was in meetings.
Q Does the White House have a more specific reaction to what McConnell said?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think I addressed it a little bit, but if you have a specific question about a thing that he said --
Q Is it helpful to this process?
MR. CARNEY: Well, look, I think that Americans expect their leaders in Washington to talk to them, not to talk -- not to take actions based on the demands of the most vocal elements of their parties, okay? That's true of Democrats and it's true of Republicans. And the fact is, no one will get everything he or she wants out of this process. No one will be wholly satisfied by the result. The President knows he won't be, but he'll be satisfied by the achievement of an agreement that's balanced and that gets important things done.
So he will continue to work with leaders of both parties, beginning again this afternoon in the Roosevelt Room, to try to find common ground and to reach a compromise so that we can move this process forward and fulfill our obligations.
Q Even with elevated rhetoric, as you said, aside, on both sides, both positions seem to be very entrenched. How do you see a deal coming when neither side, whether it's the White House, congressional Democrats or congressional Republicans, are indicating any hint on moving on those specific positions?
MR. CARNEY: Well, as I've said throughout this process, there's -- sometimes there's rhetoric that has been put out there in public that doesn't necessarily match what has often been very constructive and respectful conversations in the meetings, and usually has been. So I think that the leaders will come together, the President and the Vice President will come together, and they will continue to push forward towards an agreement, because there is no alternative here.
As I've just said, the President has said, and the leaders themselves have said, the consequences of default would be so severe, and they would not be esoteric. This would not be just a Wall Street problem. It would be a problem for Americans on Main Streets across the country. It would affect jobs, it would affect interest rates that directly affects housing payments and credit card payments, and it would be severe.
And I think everyone sees that reality and recognizes is. The path from here to there will certainly be challenging, but we'll get there.
Q Last question. Do you have specific benchmarks that you would like to see reached on a daily basis as these talks continue?
MR. CARNEY: No, we don't. We are very aware of and we remind others in the room of the fact that we don't have a lot of time here. August 2nd is a hard and fast and real deadline. Congress needs time to do the things it would have to do to produce legislation, so we have to back up from that deadline. So we're in the matter-of-days phase of these negotiations.
Yes, Jake.
Q Mitch McConnell said, "In my view, the President has presented us with three choices: smoke and mirrors, tax hikes or default. The Republicans choose none of the above. I hoped to do good, but I refuse to do harm."
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think I would simply ask you, as you and everyone else in this room and other reporters who are covering this, whether you think that's true, because what -- for better or worse -- well, that's actually not true. For better or worse, a lot of what has been on offer, a lot of what has been considered and talked about, is now out in the public domain. And I don't think there's any credible observer of these negotiations and analysts of the general problems we have, in terms of deficit and debt reduction, who would not say that we have not been credible?
Q I think we have a general --
MR. CARNEY: I mean, who would say that we have not been credible. Because the fact is, this President is willing to do significant things, in terms of discretionary cuts, entitlement reform that strengthens the programs and increases their solvency further into the future for future generations -- tough things that will not be easy to convince Democrats to go along with.
But he's willing to do that, because he thinks that's what leadership requires. I mean, it's not -- he's not standing here saying, that's what I want to do; he's saying, I have to do it because I'm President and it's important and this is an opportunity that we should not pass up.
Q So in the spirit of rebutting this idea that it's all been smoke and mirrors, is the President willing to raise the retirement age for Medicare and Social Security?
MR. CARNEY: There is no reason for me, from here, or for the President, from here, when he was here several times in recent days, to negotiate the particulars from the podium.
Q I'm not asking you to negotiate it; I'm asking you to explain it.
MR. CARNEY: And -- well, what we have said is -- what the President stood here and said, not with regard to a specific proposal, is that a lot of the reporting out about what has been under consideration has been accurate. And I would simply say, for those of you -- most of you who are familiar with these issues and know what hard choices are, to judge for yourselves whether that -- whether the kinds of things that we've been willing to consider do not constitute significant demonstrations of willingness to compromise. And I think the answer is, they absolutely do.
And this President has never taken a "my way or the highway" approach, because he understands that he's not a monarch, that we live in a great democracy built upon a two-party system, and by and large, nothing big gets done in Washington unless Democrats and Republicans come together. And they only come together if each side is willing to give, the way Ronald Reagan did and Tip O'Neill did, the way Bill Clinton did and Newt Gingrich did, and many of their predecessors in American history. That's the only way this gets done.
And in the end, because the elected officials who are here are here representing the American people, I think it will get done. And we will press up until the very end for the biggest possible deal.
Q Also, I'm not sure if I missed this, but have you guys -- has the White House reacted at all to what's been going on at the U.S. embassy in Syria, the demonstrations and the violence?
MR. CARNEY: Yes. And we have, and the Secretary of State has. I think --
Q I've seen statements from State. I'm wondering if you -- if the White House has a response.
MR. CARNEY: Well, I would simply say that, echoing what Secretary Clinton said, our position is that President Assad is not indispensible and that we had called on him to lead this transition. He clearly has not and he has lost legitimacy by refusing to lead the transition.
We want to see the Syrian people's desire for democratic transformation carried out. The attacks or the thugs storming the embassy is not acceptable, and we've made that clear to the Syrian government that it is their responsibility, as it is the responsibility of host nations around the globe, to provide security for and to maintain security for foreign embassies, in this case the U.S. embassy.
Q Why does the White House think there has been such tolerance of Assad's behavior among other Arab leaders who did not -- who denounced Qaddafi?
MR. CARNEY: I don't have an answer to that question for you. I mean, what we have said has been very clear about its -- the unacceptable things that he's done, the killings and the arrests that have continued. Even when he had the opportunity to have this meeting with the opposition on July 10th, the unacceptable behavior by the government, the attacks on its people continued. And that proved that he was not going to lead this transition.
Dan.
Q Thank you. Specific to these talks, are you saying then that the rhetoric that we're hearing in public from Republicans does not match the tone of what's going on inside the room?
MR. CARNEY: Look, I think it's fair to say that the tone inside the room has by and large been frank and constructive and not highly contentious at all. That doesn't mean that there aren't disagreements. But as was the case certainly in the Biden-led talks, the atmosphere continues to be constructive and respectful. And we expect that to continue.
Q So do you think the Republicans are then playing to their base by --
MR. CARNEY: I don't want to play political analyst from here. I just think that it's important to recognize that we will not get from here to there, either side, if we heed only the calls of our most ideological supporters. We have to be -- we have to acknowledge that maximalist positions will not prevail. It's just -- logic dictates otherwise.
And this is not an esoteric exercise because we have the absolute accepted need to deal with fulfilling our obligations and paying our debts. So in the end, the President remains optimistic that we will reach an agreement. He will continue to fight for the most substantial deficit reduction package possible, and he will continue to -- in the meeting this afternoon and his discussions from this day forward with leaders -- remind them that none of this is easy, so if you're going to do something hard, you might as well go big. You might as well do something historic and reach a significant deficit reduction package, a package that deals with our long-term debt issues for many years to come and allows us to put the American economy back on solid footing as we enter into sort of full-bore competition in the 21st century. That's the best outcome here, and that's the outcome he's trying to find.
Q So while the President pushes for that big deal, will he also be reviewing the math on the more mid-range package that was discussed in the Biden talks?
MR. CARNEY: Well, as he's said for a while now, smaller deals are possible -- I mean, not the short-term ones that he's made clear he will not sign because we are the United States of America; we do not come to the brink of defaulting on our obligations every several weeks or months -- that's not acceptable to him.
But deals short of the so-called grand bargain, the deals that put us in the $4 trillion range over 10 to 12 years are certainly possible, and he has asked on two occasions now, when meetings ended, for the leaders who have come to come to the Roosevelt Room, to bring with them their proposal for what can get us to the biggest deal possible. And each member's definition of the biggest deal possible might -- will obviously differ in size.
So they're doing serious work, both in the room and at the staff level. But the President will continue to push and argue for the most significant package and balanced -- that will, in a balanced way, achieve a big number that does something substantial in what he said yesterday, the out-years.
I mean, one of the reasons to do the bigger deficit reduction package, that we've talked about -- this has been the primary objective, based on their own words, that the Republicans have put forward since the midterm elections last fall. I mean, this was a moral imperative, this is an economic imperative, we have to get our deficits and debt under control, and the President is saying, okay, let's do it.
And since we have to do it together, then we have to compromise, because obviously the purist position on the Republican side will not pass, will not become law, and the purist position on the Democratic side will not pass and become law. So the alternative is compromise.
Chip.
Q Jay, John Boehner also says that during their weeks -- in fact, he said two months -- of discussions, a couple months of discussions, the idea of raising taxes was never even on the table. True?
MR. CARNEY: Well, the President from the beginning, since his speech at George Washington University, has made clear that the approach he brought to the table, that the Vice President brought to the table, was a balanced approach that included dealing with spending in our tax code.
Q What about in the private conversations with John Boehner --
MR. CARNEY: Look, I'm not going to characterize those conversations, except that a grand bargain, a significant deficit reduction deal, is not possible if it's not balanced, and certainly not possible in a divided government with this President and this Congress. So the -- but I'm not going to get into the specifics of the negotiations or the private, one-on-one conversations between the Speaker and the President.
Q And shifting gears, Bernie Sanders was on the floor of the Senate today and he noted that President Obama in 2008, in a taped addressed to AARP, said "John McCain's campaign has suggested that the best answer for the growing pressures on Social Security might be to cut cost-of-living adjustments or raise the retirement age. Let me be clear: I will not do either." Is that a promise that has gone by the bye, at least regarding cost-of-living adjustments?
MR. CARNEY: Again, I will not get into the specifics of ideas that have been considered. What I will say is that the President has been willing to get outside of his comfort zone to discuss different measures, to do what he has said -- will go to the general program there in terms of Social Security -- that he firmly believes -- and economists back him up on this -- that Social Security is not an issue when you talk about our near- and medium-term deficits. But he is interested in taking steps to increase its solvency and strengthen the program.
But what I won't get into is which specific measures might be taken to do that. But, again, when we talk about making hard choices, he has demonstrated his willingness to do that because he thinks the American people want something big. And the reason, when we talk about Social Security, even though it is not a driver, it is not the problem when we talk about our deficits, it does have long-term solvency issues that can be -- that can be addressed and we can strengthen the program. And he has said that if we're going to make some tough decisions now in the interest of getting something big, that he's willing to have those conversations about all entitlements, including Social Security.
So, again, this is not -- this is something that we've always, from the State of the Union address on, talked about on a separate track, separate from the need to deal with our deficits. But he is willing to do, in the name of doing something big and comprehensive, talk about what he talked about in the State of the Union, which is take measures that would strengthen it and increase its solvency.
Q More generally, then, without asking about what they specifically talked about on Social Security, is the situation now so severe that when the President talks about making tough choices and getting out of your comfort zone, that that means being willing to break firm promises that he made previously?
MR. CARNEY: Again -- well, I don't know what exactly you're referring to except for the one you just --
Q Well, you won't answer the specific question, so maybe the general.
MR. CARNEY: What I will say is that it requires making tough choices, and compromise requires not necessarily being exactly where you were in your ideal world. When you put a proposal forward in Congress that passed the House, even though it had no chance in the Senate and no chance to be signed into law, you could stick with that as your absolutist position, or you can recognize that you're not going to get that and that we are absolutely under an obligation to reach a compromise. You can put forward a framework, as the President did in April at George Washington University, for his vision of $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 to 12 years, that deals with spending in entitlements and discretionary spending, defense spending and the tax code.
But you can also recognize that you're not going to get that exactly the way you wrote it. That's the President's approach.
Mike.
Q Jay, my understanding is the President, in the interview with CBS, has suggested that there's some concern that Social Security checks may not go out August 3rd. Can you provide us a little context on that, and did he indeed say that?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think it's up to CBS to -- I don't want to scoop their interview, but the -- and I think that will air tonight -- I mean, the fact of the matter is, and Secretary Geithner has talked about this -- I mean, we no longer have authority to borrow money if we do not raise the debt ceiling, which we remain confident will happen, so this is speculative.
But the fact is one of the reasons why we absolutely have to take action is because we stop -- we lose our authority to borrow money. And as you know, we have obligations that exceed the money we take in -- significantly exceeds the money we take in. And that would then entail a kind of Sophie's choice situation where you have to decide what bills you can pay.
And the fact is that whether it's Social Security checks or veterans' benefits or disability benefits -- I mean, there is -- there are -- the number of decisions that would have to be made -- and this is beyond my expertise, so I encourage you to go to Treasury -- I mean, it's pretty clear that the effect will be significant.
And so, no, we can't guarantee, if there were a default, any specific bill will be paid. Because the choices that some have said -- oh, we can just pay interest, so we can pay the bond holders, in some cases and in many cases Chinese -- the Chinese government, but not pay Social Security recipients or veterans or benefits recipients.
So that's the kind of choice that nobody wants the United States of America to have to make, that's why the leaders have been clear that we will vote to have the United States fulfill its obligations, and the President feels strongly that that will happen.
Q Does the change in tone, where you hear some Republican leaders saying today that they feel like we may be heading for a missed opportunity in terms of a big deal, suggest that we're heading for an August 2nd nail-biter on this issue?
MR. CARNEY: Well, look, I think it is an unfortunate reality that, as we've seen with the CR, as we've seen so many times, that we tend to -- that Congress tends to push these things up to the very last minute. While that's inconvenient, in many cases, it is the way things happen. In this case, it's more than inconvenient because of the -- even before August 2nd, the possibility -- if it's perceived to be a possibility -- that Congress will not act in time could have an effect on markets, could have an effect that would be damaging to the economy.
So we think it's very important and the President's made it clear: Let's not -- let's get this done sooner rather than later, and the clock is ticking.
Q One quick one on another topic. We understand an executive order is coming related to a gun-related issue. We've already heard from some groups, lawmakers expressing concern that this could be trampling on Second Amendment rights. Do you have a response to that?
MR. CARNEY: Well, first of all, I would refer all -- you're talking about the long gun issue on the Southwest border?
Q My understanding was changes to the database used for background checks.
MR. CARNEY: I don't have anything. I don't even -- I'm not even aware of that. There is obviously an issue that's about -- which is this is a law enforcement issue about illegal gun trafficking to the Mexicans on the border states is the long gun one, which I refer you to the Justice Department for. But I don't even -- I don't have anything for you on that.
Q Jay, can I follow up on that just very quickly?
MR. CARNEY: Yes. I'll get to yours.
Q Does the President believe that a new regulation is going to have a real impact on stopping the illegal flow of arms to Mexico?
MR. CARNEY: Well, as the Deputy Attorney General said yesterday, this targeted measure will improve the ability of ATF to detect and disrupt the illegal weapons-trafficking networks responsible for diverting firearms from lawful commerce to criminals and criminal organizations. So, yes, we believe it will improve the ATF's ability to do that.
Q I want to go back to something you just said. You described the tone of the meetings as frank and constructive. Given the fact that some people with knowledge of the meetings have described them as essentially being stalled, can you explain specifically --
MR. CARNEY: Well, I didn't say they had come to agreement on the issues.
Q But what's been constructive about them?
MR. CARNEY: But, I mean, it was the contrast to some of the heated, fairly partisan rhetoric that has been heard elsewhere. And we're not getting that in the room, which is not to say sometimes there aren't starkly absolutist positions expressed in the room. That happens sometimes, but they're done in very calm and constructive tones. (Laughter.)
Q At this point heading into the fourth meeting --
Q How is that constructive?
Q -- what do you think the meetings have accomplished so far?
MR. CARNEY: I think the meetings have made clear the absolute imperative to take action, to have the United States make sure that it fulfills its obligations. They've been very -- remember that most people in that room were not participants in the negotiations led by the Vice President. Some were, but not all. So there's a level of detail and specificity that essentially others are being brought into.
And, obviously, not everybody was involved in conversations that the President and the Speaker of the House were having. So there's a sort of broadening of the knowledge base about what has been discussed, where are the possible areas of compromise, and where are the challenges, the disagreements that still exist, and various ways to get from small to big.
Q Some people have described the meetings as not having accomplished anything, though. How would you describe, going into meeting number four, where are we now?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I would say that this only gets done if we act together, and that means the President and the leaders of Congress of both parties. Doesn't make the meetings easy. It doesn't mean that every minute of every meeting is highly productive. But it does mean that it's essential that we have these meetings to get our work done. I mean, really, there's no -- it doesn't have to be pleasant for it to be essential.
Q Is there any --
MR. CARNEY: And also I don't want to suggest that it's unpleasant. I'm just saying that it's -- that there's really not a choice here. And so it's not like if we just break up and go do something else that the problem goes away.
Q Is there any concern, given the heated rhetoric that we've heard today, that the talks could break down at the end of today?
MR. CARNEY: Well, no, because I think that there are no alternatives to continuing to talk and to find compromise, and I think that it's important to remember that the Biden-led negotiations, as asserted by participants in both parties, made significant progress, and that, as the President made clear here yesterday, he and the Speaker of the House had very constructive talks.
Out of that, there should be -- and certainly the American expect -- people demand that there be potential for compromise. So that's what we're working towards.
Q Until just recently, most -- there have been a lot of conversations about changing the cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security, but it was always in the context of --
MR. CARNEY: There you go again.
Q -- always in the context of a Social Security plan, trying to make Social Security solvent for the long term.
How would you respond to people who would say that that that's the appropriate way to do this, not as part of a debt negotiation -- deficit -- overall deficit --
MR. CARNEY: I think I just answered this, in that the President does believe that this is a separate issue but it is also an important issue, and that the fact that it's a separate track doesn't mean that it's not -- that if there's the political will to do it as part of this overall package, then we should do it. And by "it" I mean not addressing the specific measures that you raise -- or measure that you raise, but to take measures that will strengthen the program and enhance its long-term solvency without slashing benefits.
So the -- I mean, I'm not sure -- because they can happen within the same framework without -- but it doesn't change the fact that taking measures to increase and strengthen the program -- I mean, increase its solvency and strengthen the program is a way of dealing with our short-term deficit issues because they're not related.
Q But correct me if I'm wrong, there's been no suggestion that the changes in Social Security would actually solve the 75-year Social Security problem, so essentially you would just be maybe taking a bite out of it without really --
MR. CARNEY: I don't think anybody is under any illusion that even a significant deficit reduction package or one that includes some of these other things would solve all problems for all times. But it is our obligation to take measures to strengthen and increase and lengthen the solvency of these programs that have been the foundation of economic security for America's senior citizens -- Medicare and Social Security. I mean, any measure we took -- look, the significant reforms that Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill put into -- made law in the 1980s extended Social Security's solvency and strengthened it for a very long time -- when that Reagan-O'Neill compromise, by the way, was a balanced compromise that included dealing with revenues and --
Q But that was all within Social Security, and this wouldn't be that way.
MR. CARNEY: Right -- I don't understand the point you're making. The fact that that was all within Social Security is true and we can do Social Security entirely separate or we can do it as part of this, but it is still solving a separate problem.
Q Does the President have any plans of traveling outside of Washington while this issue is still unresolved? Is he sort of committed to staying here?
MR. CARNEY: I have -- I think he's made clear that we're going to meet every day until this is done.
Q So we shouldn't expect him to be going and taking his case out to the public across the country?
MR. CARNEY: I'm not going to -- I don't have any announcements to make about his travel schedule, but he is committed to meeting every day with these leaders until this is done.
Q On weekends as well?
MR. CARNEY: Yes, sir.
Q Can you say whether President Obama and Secretary Geithner have had discussions about what you have termed as the Sophie's choice type of decisions that they will face on funding come August 2nd?
MR. CARNEY: I don't know. They have regular meetings; I don't know that they've had those conversations. I'm sure that Secretary Geithner has briefed the President on the details of the circumstance that would present itself on August 3rd. But I don't know if they've talked about that. And I'm not even sure -- again, I would refer you to the Treasury Department about how those decisions would be made.
Q The President yesterday, he said that he'd like to see more from the business community in terms of lobbying to get a deal done and to sound some of the alarms for if the debt ceiling is not raised August 2nd. Can you specify some of the actions he'd like to see and whether or not the letter that was sent today from some 470 CEOs -- was that enough?
MR. CARNEY: Well, look, I don't think -- I think it's welcome. You cited this -- I was going to mention this to you as obviously not something we organized -- I believe the Chamber did -- but a letter from hundreds of business leaders that says, "We believe it is vitally important for the U.S. government to make good on its financial obligations and to put its fiscal house in order. First, it is critical that the United States government not default in any way on its fiscal obligations. A great nation, like a great company, has to be relied upon to pay its debts when they become due. This is a Main Street, not a Wall Street, issue."
"The debt ceiling trigger" -- I'm just skipping around here to relevant points -- "The debt ceiling trigger does offer a needed catalyst for serious negotiations on budget discipline, but avoiding even a technical default is essential. This is a risk our country must not take.
"Second, our political leaders must agree to a plan to substantially reduce our long-term budget deficits with a goal of at least stabilizing our nation's debt as a percentage of GDP, which will entail difficult choices."
We couldn't have said it better. And we agree.
Q So is there more, though, beyond --
MR. CARNEY: Well, look, I think -- we think everyone has a stake in this. It can seem arcane, understandably, when I and others stand up and talk about debt-to-GDP ratios and the need to not default on our obligations and to raise the debt ceiling. I mean, I honestly -- what is the debt ceiling? I think for most Americans, it sounds like gobbledygook. What they want is for the economy to be strong, for jobs to be created, and for Washington to work. And with that as our goal -- with those three objectives as our goal, it's pretty obvious what we have to do.
Q The President is having lunch with two of the CEOs who signed that letter. Is he going to be asking them to do more?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I don't -- I think that lunch is happening now. I'm not sure -- I'm sure they will discuss this issue --
Q Was the debt limit on the agenda today?
MR. CARNEY: Well, there wasn't a printed or written agenda. I'm sure that because this is an issue that so many businesses are worried about, understandably, I'm sure it will come up.
Q Who is he having lunch with?
MR. CARNEY: I think we put this out to or we gave it to the pool here, but he is having, as he has done throughout his administration, he will have lunch, or is having lunch now with four business leaders to discuss ideas to grow the economy and create jobs. They will specifically discuss the importance of working with the private sector to promote job training efforts, including ways that companies have been partnering with high educational institutions to develop curriculum and programs that ensure graduates will have the appropriate background and skills to succeed and get hired within the companies.
The business leaders in attendance are Clarence Otis of Darden Restaurants, Scott Davis of UPS, Sam Palmisano of IBM, and Matt Rose of BNSF.
Q There is no agenda?
MR. CARNEY: What's that?
Q No agenda? (Laughter.)
MR. CARNEY: Well, this is a broad outline of one topic they will likely talk about. But I don't want -- just because they're going to talk about this doesn't mean they won't talk about those other issues because those other issues are quite clearly of concern and in the news right now.
Q Jay, the Treasury Secretary did say this morning that in its push not only for the debt ceiling but for the big deficit-cutting package the administration could use some support. Is the White House doing anything to rally those less vocal, less ideological elements of the public to get involved?
MR. CARNEY: Meaning which groups? I mean, I think we're making our case; the President has come before you --
Q You've said you feel like lawmakers are responding to sort of the fringes in their party and that Americans --
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, we welcome the letter that was -- I think Julianna said 470 business leaders --
Q But the Chamber you said organized that. Is the White House doing anything to gin up some --
MR. CARNEY: As the President said, we have conversations with business leaders all the time. He does; others do. I'm sure this has been an issue. We're not in some sort of organized effort that I know of. I mean, this is pushing on an open door, if you will. These are issues that they are very concerned about for obvious reasons. And as the letter makes clear, while they are concerned about it for obvious reasons, it is not a concern limited just to business and it shouldn't be.
It obviously affects every American who has to worry about interest rates, mortgage payments, credit card payments, worries about his or her job. The impact of a default would be catastrophic for so many people around the country and the globe that we simply cannot even entertain the possibility that it might happen.
Q The CBS interview is on their website, so I'm going to read a little bit from it just to clarify this.
MR. CARNEY: Are you going to ask me to confirm?
Q Something like that. "This is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are veterans' checks. These are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out." Is 70 million a number you all believe of checks that would stop being given out -- this is a very high number, so let me make sure --
MR. CARNEY: I think it's at least that high that the Treasury Department issues or the government issues. But I would check with Treasury.
Q Was his answer in -- was it an answer to a question or did he volunteer this fact?
MR. CARNEY: It was an answer to a question.
Q Is this a point he'll continue to make on his own?
MR. CARNEY: Look, we're not -- if asked -- and he's spent a lot of time taking questions lately, so if asked I think he'll make the point, as he did today, we're not spending a lot of time warning about what would happen if we defaulted, because we do not believe we will default. We accept what leaders of Congress have said about the impermissibility of allowing the United States to default on its obligations.
So we believe we will get there by hook or by crook through this process, and we will -- Congress will vote as necessary, Democrats and Republicans, because this is not a Democratic or a Republican problem, it's an American problem, and we will take action necessary to deal with it, and take advantage, hopefully, in the biggest possible way, of the opportunity presented here to achieve something significant.
And remember that way back when, when this process began, the linkage between raising the debt ceiling and significant deficit reduction was one that was put forward by Republicans because they believed it was the primary objective. The number one item on their agenda list when it came to domestic policy, economic policy, probably all policy was to deal with cutting spending, reducing our deficit, reducing our long-term debt problem. And the President has made clear that we accept the challenge and we are willing to compromise to get there. And he still believes, even at this late date, that the biggest possible deal is the best way to go.
Q Can you tell us what his reaction was when the Majority Whip Cantor -- Majority Leader Cantor said that he considered it in terms of who's making concessions, that their concession in return for you giving spending cuts is to allow a vote on the debt limit?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think that's one version of the question that somebody in the front row asked, which is that that's -- this is not the President's problem --
Q I want to know what his reaction was, though.
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think he was asked about this in the interview, and it's very much what I just said, which is, wait a second, this is an American problem. It's not a Democratic problem, it's not a Republican problem, it's not this President's problem. In fact, as I said, this is not a vote on new spending. This is a vote to fulfill the obligations made by previous Congresses under a previous President by and large, okay? When President Clinton left office, there were surpluses. Everyone agrees, right? I know that there -- people like to argue over absolutely settled facts, but I think we can all agree that there were budget surpluses when Bill Clinton left office -- "as far as the eye could see" was the phrase commonly used.
By the time President Obama was sworn into office eight years later, there was the largest debt and largest deficits in history. Okay? And these are -- as the President has said, these are cars that have already been purchased and vacations that have already been taken, and now it's time to pay the bills.
He did not say, however, when asked about this, oh, well, it's not my responsibility; it's Congress's responsibility because they ran up the bills. They voted and didn't pay for two wars; they voted and didn't pay for substantial tax cuts, including tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and didn't pay for them; a Medicare prescription drug program that they voted for, including every leader in that room from the Republican Party -- didn't pay for it.
These are the obligations that we have to now pay. So -- but you know what the President said? He goes, "It's my responsibility, too. It's my responsibility, too. I will work with Congress because we have to do this as a nation; it's an American challenge, and we do it together."
Q But did he say something to them yesterday, in the meeting they had in the afternoon in response --
MR. CARNEY: About this issue?
Q Yes.
MR. CARNEY: I'm not aware. I know the -- well, on different -- I'm not going to -- we're not going to read out the dialogue from the meetings. I'm not aware of anything of that nature that he said. Because what I -- when I was just channeling him, with a little filigree of my own, the -- that was in response to some of the statements made this morning.
Q Since the President has reconvened these talks under his own auspices, has any progress been made?
MR. CARNEY: Yes, there has, in the sense that, as I was saying I think in answer to Laura's question or somebody else's questions, the participants in these meetings haven't been engaged, all of them, in the detailed discussions that were led by the Vice President or, obviously with the exception of the Speaker and the President, the conversations that the Speaker and the President had.
So there had been progress in that the -- more people now are aware of what the playing field looks like, where the compromises can be found, and what it takes to build upon a smaller package to the biggest possible package, and the hard choices that getting from small to big require.
Q That doesn't sound like anything further agreed to.
MR. CARNEY: That's progress.
Q That's progress?
MR. CARNEY: If this were easy, we'd be done and having happy hour at 4:00 p.m. today, but it's not going to happen.
Q Really quickly, let me ask you from the other direction -- the clear impression from this end of the looking glass is that the positions have hardened. Is that wrong?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think there has been some hardening of positions, restating of absolutist positions. We have encountered that along the way. But our only counsel at this point in response to that is that time is running out, ladies and gentlemen. We need to put that absolutism aside, leave it at the door, and get to the hard work of reaching an agreement.
Ann.
Q Did you say this had been moved today to the Roosevelt Room?
MR. CARNEY: Oh, where was it --
Q You've said that a couple times.
MR. CARNEY: Were we not in the Roosevelt Room today?
MR. EARNEST: I think they're in the Cabinet Room.
MR. CARNEY: I'm sorry. It's been in the Cabinet Room; it will be in the Cabinet Room. I get my fancy rooms with fancy pictures mixed up. (Laughter.)
Q The statements, the public statements, that everybody -- people have been making before you go into the session today, do those hurt? Do those make it more difficult to negotiate once you get in the room?
MR. CARNEY: Well, look, everybody here -- or everybody there, rather, in those rooms is an elected official who's been around politics for a long time. And I think most participants have pretty thick skin, which is not to say it helps, but I think everybody can get over it pretty quickly.
Q And one other thing. Does the White House have any problem with federal dollars being sent to a counseling clinic that engages in the controversial therapy of trying to cure people of being gay?
MR. CARNEY: Ann, I confess I do not have an answer to that question. Sorry.
Let me move around a little bit. Yes, go ahead.
Q Jay, if you could talk a little bit about the assassination of the Prime Minister's brother in Afghanistan, and who you guys believe might have been responsible for it -- the Taliban has claimed responsibility -- and whether or not you think there's an increased threat to security in the south as troops withdraw?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I would say obviously that this is -- at a personal level we -- our prayers and sympathies are with the Karzai family during this difficult time. The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms the murder of President Karzai's half-brother in Kandahar.
We obviously -- we don't know who is responsible. There have been some claims and we will certainly work with the Afghan authorities on that, but right now I think the moment here is one -- is a personal one, and we express our condolences and condemn the murder.
Q Some questions on "don't ask, don't tell." Last week the Ninth Circuit issued an order barring the government from enforcing this law. I'm sure the President heard the news last week. Is he supportive of the decision?
MR. CARNEY: Is he aware of it?
Q I'm sure he heard the news last week. Is he supportive of the decision?
MR. CARNEY: The Justice Department is reviewing the order, and I think I would point you to them for further information. The President's position, obviously, on the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" is quite clear. And he fought hard to make it happen and it was a significant accomplishment late last year.
Q But as the head of the administration, was the President in support of this court order ending that enforcement of "don't ask, don't tell"?
MR. CARNEY: Again, I'm going to refer you to the Justice Department as they review that decision.
Q Do you anticipate that the administration will challenge or appeal this decision?
MR. CARNEY: I think that's the same answer.
Q So what impact is this going to have on repeal certification? I mean, the President said before that it's going to happen within a matter of weeks, not months. Is it going to have any impact on that?
MR. CARNEY: I think that the process moves forward. I'll refer you to the Defense Department. I know Secretary Gates, shortly before he left, said that it was moving along very well and that we do expect it to happen in the near future. But so I don't think there's an impact.
Q Is there any definite date or time set --
MR. CARNEY: I'd refer you to the Defense Department, but I don't believe so.
Q Thanks, Jay. On Syria, if as you say President Assad is not indispensible and if, as you say, he has failed to lead the transition, then why hasn't the President called for him to step down?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think you'll note that we've said today that -- and the Secretary of State has said this -- that President Assad has lost his legitimacy. And the issue here is a matter of factual analysis, and that is that President Assad had an opportunity to lead this transition. And we have always said he should lead or leave. He had that opportunity and he passed it up.
And for that reason, not because he's lost -- it doesn't matter nearly as much that he's lost legitimacy in our eyes. This is a matter of analysis that he's lost legitimacy in the eyes of the Syrian people who are increasingly demanding change. There's really a growing consensus among the Syrian people that this transition needs to take place and that President Assad is not going to lead it. The Syrian people should be able to decide their own future.
Q And given the 1,400-plus deaths in Syria that have occurred against civilians, how is this different from Libya?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I could review the facts for you. But as you know, there was an imminent threat of a massacre. There was a broad-based, multinational coalition that was not just the United Nations -- or NATO rather, but through the United Nations Security Council Resolution, included NATO action as well as coalition participation by nations in the region and, again, the opportunity to work in a multinational way to forestall a massacre against the Libyan people. And as we have said throughout the unrest that has affected the region -- North Africa and the Middle East -- every country and every circumstance is different.
Okay, one more. I always do one more. Lester, for you.
Q Thank you very much. Will the President speak out in support of Maryland's giving illegal aliens in-state tuition at colleges and universities?
MR. CARNEY: I'm not aware of that issue, Lester, so I don't have an answer for you.
Q You're not aware of that issue?
MR. CARNEY: I'm not. Thanks, guys.
Close Transcript
ACA Open Enrollment Kickoff and Briefing
Weekly Address: Honoring Our Veterans
Remarks at the Veterans Day Ceremony
Wreath Laying at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier
2016 NBA Champion Cleveland Cavaliers
President Obama Meets With President-Elect Trump


The Breville VTT320 two slice toaster in damson purple will make a sleek and smart addition to any kitchen boasting a number of helpful features. It has variable browning control which allows you to choose how dark or light you like your toast and variable width slots allowing breads of various thicknesses to be fully toasted. So whether it's a small slice or something a bit bulkier–all sizes are properly accommodated. Features include a reheat button which brings cooled toast back up to temperature without burning it; a defrost button which automatically lengthens the toasting time to allow for the defrosting of frozen bread and a mid-cycle cancel button allowing you to stop the toasting process as and when you want to. Remove smaller items without burning your fingers thanks to the extra-high lift which raises the bread carriage for easier access. And keep crumb mess to a minimum with the removable crumb tray which collects any crumbs that may fall from the bread as you toast it. The VTT320 has an unusual and eye-catching damson and stainless steel finish and is also fitted with illuminated blue buttons for easy use, cord storage and a non-slip base.


text:
GET /api/1.0/browse/pov/Japanese%20American%20man/
"prev_api": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/browse/pov/Japanese American man/?limit=25&offset=None",
"next_api": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/browse/pov/Japanese American man/?limit=25&offset=None",
"id": "The Brighter Side of Dark: Toyo Miyatake, 1895-1979 (film)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/The%20Brighter%20Side%20of%20Dark:%20Toyo%20Miyatake,%201895-1979%20(film)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/The%20Brighter%20Side%20of%20Dark:%20Toyo%20Miyatake,%201895-1979%20(film)/"
"title_sort": "brightersideofdarktoyomiyatake",
"description": "A 1996 short documentary film by Robert Nakamura about the life and career of Los Angeles photographer Toyo Miyatake. Through Miyatake's personal and artistic life (he was very much engaged with other modernists of the 1920s and '30s), the film reveals the vibrant artistic and intellectual milieu of Los Angeles's Little Tokyo district prior to World War II as well as the impact Executive Order 9066 and Miyatake's wartime incarceration had on his artistic career. Using a camera lens that he smuggled into the camp at Manzanar where he was incarcerated, Miyatake reconstructed a camera and eventually became the official camp photographer, producing iconic images of camp life and the landscape of the Eastern Sierras. After the war, Miyatake was able to reconstruct his photography business and resume work at his studio in Little Tokyo. For generations, he was the community's most trusted portrait photographer, enlisted for weddings, graduations, and other celebratory milestones in the lives of Japanese Americans.",
"Grades 6-8",
"Expression through art",
"Immigrant experience"
"id": "One of Many (film)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/One%20of%20Many%20(film)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/One%20of%20Many%20(film)/"
"title_sort": "oneofmanyfilm",
"description": "Short dramatic film written and directed by Byron Yokomi centering on George Miyamoto, a young man at one of the Arkansas concentration camps facing major life decisions brought on by the loyalty questionnaire crisis. Yokomi made the film as an MFA student at Florida State University.",
"Drama"
"Disillusionment and dreams",
"Patriotism - positive side or complications"
"id": "After Silence: Civil Rights and the Japanese American Experience (film)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/After%20Silence:%20Civil%20Rights%20and%20the%20Japanese%20American%20Experience%20(film)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/After%20Silence:%20Civil%20Rights%20and%20the%20Japanese%20American%20Experience%20(film)/"
"title_sort": "aftersilencecivilrightsandthejapaneseamericanexperiencefilm",
"description": "Documentary film that focuses on the forced removal and incarceration of Japanese Americans from Bainbridge Island, Washington, as recounted through the perspective of Dr. Frank Kitamoto, who was a child during World War II. The story is told through interaction between Kitamoto and a small group of high school students from Bainbridge High School as they develop archival photographs from the incarceration and discuss its relevance to post 9/11 America. The film ends with the 2002 dedication of a memorial and plaque marking the site of the Bainbridge Islanders' departure. After Silence was produced by the Bainbridge Island Historical Society as part of an exhibition on the community's World War II experience, with funding from the Washington State Civil Liberties Public Education Program and the Charles W. Gaugl Foundation.",
"Patriotism - complications",
"Fear of other",
"Power of the past"
"Limited availability"
"id": "The Cats of Mirikitani (film)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/The%20Cats%20of%20Mirikitani%20(film)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/The%20Cats%20of%20Mirikitani%20(film)/"
"title_sort": "catsofmirikitani",
"description": "An award-winning documentary film from 2006 about a homeless Nisei artist named Jimmy Tsutomu Mirikitani and the friendship that develops with filmmaker Linda Hattendorf on the streets of New York.",
"Disillusionment and dreams"
"id": "Journey to Washington (book)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/Journey%20to%20Washington%20(book)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/Journey%20to%20Washington%20(book)/"
"title_sort": "journeytowashingtonbook",
"description": "Ghostwritten autobiography by Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawai'i, authored with Lawrence Elliott and published in 1967. One of the first autobiographies by a Nisei, Journey to Washington was published as Inouye was finishing his first term as a U.S. Senator from Hawai'i and preparing to run for reelection. The book covers his life up to that time, beginning with his grandfather leaving Japan to come to America to pay off a debt and ending with his father visiting the White House to visit President John. F. Kennedy. A success story that established a template for many Nisei memoirs to come, the book reinforced the \"model minority\" narrative then current. Reader's Digest also excerpted the book in its February 1968 issue. The book includes three forewords, by President Lyndon Johnson, Vice-President Hubert Humphrey, and Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield.",
"books"
"mediatype_label": "Books",
"mediatype_icon": "fa-book",
"Memoir"
"Self-reliance",
"Patriotism - positive side or complications",
"Empowerment"
"rg_readinglevel": [
"id": "Most Honorable Son (film)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/Most%20Honorable%20Son%20(film)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/Most%20Honorable%20Son%20(film)/"
"title_sort": "mosthonorablesonfilm",
"description": "Documentary film that profiles Nisei war hero Ben Kuroki, tracing his life from his Nebraska childhood, his fight to be allowed to serve in the military after the attack on Pearl Harbor, his bombing missions over Europe and Japan, and his visits to American concentration camps in which Japanese Americans were held. Kuroki tells much of the story in his own words, which are augmented by many interviews with crew members who flew with him in both Europe and Japan. In addition to archival footage and photographs, the filmmakers also film reenactments of a few key episodes. Among the incidents highlighted are the dramatic raid on the Ploesti oilfields in what is now Romania, one of Kuroki's last missions in Europe; his speech before the Commonweath Club in San Francisco upon his return; and his visit to the Heart Mountain concentration camp of which inmates Eiichi Sakauye, Jack Tono, and James Sakoda provide various perspectives. The film ends with the 2005 ceremony at which he received the Distinguished Service Medal and his speech at that event. Directed by Bill Kubota for KDN Films and NET Television, the title Most Honorable Son comes from the nickname given to him by his squadron members.",
"Documentary",
"Biography"
"War - glory, necessity, pain, tragedy",
"Heroism - real or perceived"
"id": "American in Disguise (book)",
"json": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/api/1.0/articles/American%20in%20Disguise%20(book)/",
"html": "http://resourceguide.densho.org/American%20in%20Disguise%20(book)/"
"title_sort": "americanindisguisebook",
"description": "American in Disguise is Daniel Okimoto's account of his search for identity in America and Japan. The book was originally published in 1971 by John Weatherhill, Inc, with a foreword by James Michener.",
"Identity crisis",
"Wisdom of experience"

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


6. Does Length Really Matter?
There comes a time in every woman's life when she looks in the mirror and wonders if her haircut is making her look older. I don't believe that haircuts have an expiration date, but I do believe that there are a few things you can do with your haircut that can take years off your face, or at least help minimize the years a little. So don't worry, I'm not going to suggest that you cut all your hair off or get a perm.
These tips can be incorporated into just about any haircut or length and are guaranteed to help you turn back the hands of time.
Long flowing hair is beautiful and youthful, but one length hair isn't doing anything for the years on your face. When your hair's length is too long and unshaped without layers, it draws your face down and makes you look older than necessary. Layers that draw the eye up, give your hair movement, create shape, and amplify volume are key to looking younger. Whether you choose to have long hair, short hair, or anything in between, when it comes to looking younger, layers are your best friend.
Another haircut trick to tick the years off your face is to add soft face framing layers to your haircut. These shorter hairs around your face give an instant face lift and can help mask some of the father time's not so generous gifts. Not only does a little face framing help camouflage wrinkles, but they can also help slim your face as well. Who knew that the right layers can take 10 years and 10 pounds?
One of the fastest ways to bring out your youthful glow is to add bangs to your haircut. Bangs are great for minimizing fine lines and wrinkles around your eyes and forehead, and they instantly give your face a lift by drawing the eye up. Bangs are easy to style and look great with just about any haircut. There's not a one-size-fits-all rule for bangs, so work with your hairstylist to choose bangs that will best fit your face shape and your personality. Bangs are also great for keeping your hair looking fresh and styled, even on days when you pull it up in a ponytail or a bun.
Volume and texture incorporated into your hairstyle can do wonders for making you look younger than you are. Straight flat hair can look stringy and thin, making you look older, droopy, and otherwise boring. Ask for texture and volume in your haircut, especially in the crown area. When styling your hair, try adding texture with waves and a little curl to your hair to skim the years right off.
One of the best ways to keeping you looking young is to keep your hair healthy and your ends clean and crisp. As we age, our hair can grow thinner and more brittle, resulting in more breakage. Take good care of your hair and get yourself on a regular haircut schedule to keep your look youthful, fresh, and healthy. Not only will you look younger, but beautiful, healthy hair is a great way to feel younger as well.
While I don't think that anyone length of hair will make you look younger, I do believe that really long hair isn't helpful in taking the years off your look. Not only does really long hair drag your face down, but let's face it ladies, really long hair is harder to maintain as our hair grows older, thinner, and more frail. Keeping the length above the collarbone helps to make incorporating the other tips that I discussed a lot easier to pull off, plus your hair will look fuller and more healthy.
If you were blessed with a full, thick head of mature hair, however, by all means, rock that length.


text:
Bob Lane's Emergencies (c. 1969)
by Steve Olsen | Oct 14, 2019 | History
Steve Olsen chatting with Bob Luddy while he adds oil to Stearman N1852M at West Bay Aviation.
Editor's introduction: Bob Lane was a highly skilled pilot and instructor who operated the West Bay Aviation flight school at San Carlos Airport in the 1960's and early 1970's. Steve Olsen is a pilot and certified flight instructor who was mentored by Bob and went on to a long career in the airlines. His reminiscences of Bob's handling of several emergencies follows.
I was with Bob Lane when he landed Stearman N1852M shown in the above image in Foster City before it was complete. At the time the street and sidewalks were in and the future building sites in the southern portion of the city were smooth lots. I am pretty sure this occurred on 1/17/69. Normally we were only up on flight for about 1.0 hours but this day my log book shows 1.4 hours.
Bob came up to me one day and said that for some reason the engine on the Stearman was acting up after about one hour of flight. He was taking it up to try to figure out the problem. Did I want to come along. Well, YA!
After all, how much trouble could one get in with Bob in a Stearman. He had been flying them almost 30 years. We went up and took turns doing some aerobatics and nothing had happened by an hour in the air so Bob indicated he wanted to fly home. We had been over Crystal Springs Reservoir, this is before the FAA informed us that that would no longer be tolerated. We headed back and as we crossed El Camino or Bayshore the engine suddenly STOPPED. There was no warning or hesitation, it just stopped.
Bob immediately indicated he had the controls and did all the things that might bring the engine back to life without effect. We were not in position to land at San Carlos so Bob headed for the one of the clear areas of Foster City. Bob picked a long area as I could see he was about to line up on it. At the far end I could see a large pile of very large pipes. I was still quite new to the Stearman and not being fully aware of it's sink rate was sure we would run into the pipes on our rollout.
Bob continued the approach, made a beautiful landing that seemed a mile short of the pile of pipes. We got out and discussed the situation. Bob was dumbfounded. I mentioned that it seemed like we "just ran out of gas"! Bob's face lit up in recognition and he ran over to the aircraft, jumped up on the lower wing and reached up to the gas cap on the upper wing. As he opened it, even from my distance I could hear a sucking noise.
It seems that when the airplane was restored, after years in the rafters of some barn or hangar, no one had blown out the vent pipe for the gas tank. As gravity took the gas down to the carburetor and the tank became less full and a vacuum developed in the tank preventing the gas from draining.
Soon after that discovery a police car arrived and shortly thereafter Rodger Hims, our Chief of Maintenance and Board Member. He worked full time as a lead Mechanic at United at SFO. He must have gone to the office and heard of our plight and driven over and found us. When Bob told him of the problem he disconnected the line and we were ready to go.
Bob told our story to the police officer and he seemed at a loss of what to do with us. Roger stepped in and made a fantastic presentation to the officer with his mechanics credentials, as only Roger could. He impressed upon the officer that he was a representative of the FAA and gave us authority to take off from the field and fly back to SQL. The officer bought it and we were gone, I think he was just glad to be done with us.
We took the Stearman to the maintenance shop, had the vent line blown our and reattached and that was the end of that problem.
The other emergency could have been a lot worse. Bob was instructing Ray Stern in competition Aerobatics. Ray was a champion wrestler, body builder and owner of several gyms. He had decided to try his hand at competition aerobatics and bought a two place Zlin that was competitive and at the same time could be used for instruction.
They had just taken off to the north west when the engine stopped. Bob took over and unsuccessfully attempted to restart the engine with a backup fuel pump. At the time there was a dump to the right and Bob lined up on a road heading north east. Everything looked good till they got a little lower and he realized there was a barbed wire fence along one side of the road. Because of their low altitude they had to land straight ahead. As they landed, the barbed wire fence tangled in the gear and around the wing and about the same time the gear hit a concrete anchor. The wing and gear were a mess but the two occupants were not hurt. They got out, surveyed the damage and prepared for another day. The plane was repaired and they continued training in it until Ray bought a single place Pitt Special. That plane was later sold to a lady who took some lessons before crashing because of her medication. I believe it turned out she had a prognosis of being terminal and on very strong meds. She should not have been in an aircraft.
As the newspaper clipping on the right indicates, Bob had a serious illness. I was working at Buchanan Field in Concord at the time and my wife and I visited Bob and Gladys at Sequoia Hospital during his short stay there. He had been diagnosed as terminal and it was very hard to see Bob in such a condition.
The original indication occurred very unexpectedly as it was relayed to me by friends.
Bob and the owner of another Stearman decided they would take a Stearman to the Flying Lady airport and restaurant by Morgan Hill. Bob was to fly the south bound leg and the owner would bring the plane back to San Carlos. As Bob was landing the aircraft it left the runway, went though a orchard and in the process the wings and tail were stripped off the aircraft. Once again the two occupants were not hurt. The owner, in the front seat, turned around and looked at Bob and Bob was laughing. This was so out of character for Bob.
When they got home he was taken to a doctor where he was diagnosed with terminal cancer. It was in his lungs and brain and I guess throughout his body
Several of his close friends felt bad for not relating some of the strange things that Bob had been doing recently. One of the things was that Bob couldn't remember the combination on a hanger lock that he had known for years.
Bob went West on November 25, 1973.


text:
The Grand Food Bargain: A Conversation with Kevin Walker
By Jada Mosley / On March 25th, 2019
In this conversation, Kevin D. Walker answers the question: What is the grand food bargain?
#FOREWORDFRIDAY: Food on the Cheap
By Jada Mosley / On March 1st, 2019
In this week's #ForewordFriday, hear the story of the straight-shooting "green economy cowboy" Bob Quinn in his own words.
A Chat with Bob Quinn & Liz Carlisle
By Jason Leppig / On February 25th, 2019
Kirkus Reviews called it "A compelling agricultural story skillfully told; environmentalists will eat it up." In Grain by Grain: A Quest to Revive Ancient Wheat, Rural Jobs, and Healthy Food...
Saving More Than Seeds
By Andy Dyer / On April 3rd, 2018
Gene banks and seed vaults are saving and protecting crop seeds and the genetic diversity within crops, crop races, and some closely related species. There are some 1,700 gene and seed banks in the world with perhaps the most well-known being the...
Can Urban Gardening Make Us Whole?
By Laurie Mazur / On October 23rd, 2017
An in-depth look at how urban gardening is hoping to heal divisions that have plagued Milwaukee—and our nation as a whole
Size Does Matter: The Ecology of Organic Food
By Andy Dyer / On May 18th, 2016
The push for organic food to supplant conventionally produced food (i.e., produced with pesticides, supplements and artificial fertilizers) has always been hampered by the claim that the organic production style couldn't provide the volume of food needed...
Want to Raise Backyard Chickens in Nation's Capital? You're Out of Cluck
By Baylen J. Linnekin / On May 13th, 2016
Washington, DC attorneys Allison Sheedy and Daniel McInnis share their home in the city's Chevy Chase neighborhood with their four children. They share their large yard with Mrs. Tiggy-winkle, Minnie Mouse, India, and Red, their four egg-laying hens.
Federal Judge Rules Skim Milk Isn't 'Skim Milk'
This is what happens when government regulators control definitions of words.
Seedless bananas and monocultures: a perfectly bad combination
By Andy Dyer / On March 28th, 2016
The Cavendish banana was truly fortunate to have been discovered by humans. Without our adoption, this sweet and attractive—but seedless—banana would have disappeared into the jungle long ago because, as a genetic mistake, it was doomed to be an asexual...
How Local Food Systems Build Resilience for Turbulent Times
By Laurie Mazur / On July 6th, 2015
Consider, for a moment, that lettuce leaf on your plate. It probably traveled a long way to get there—about 1,500 miles, on average.1 In fact, your dinner has probably seen more of the world than you have: the average American meal contains ingredients...


text:
You are here: Home / French World / William Ropp 'Tafari: He who Inspires Awe' Ethiopia
William Ropp 'Tafari: He who Inspires Awe' Ethiopia
Art Archive, Ethiopian, Features Archive, French Archive, French World, Photography, Throckmorton Fine Art / May 3, 2018 by Editors
William Ropp
Ropp is a French photographer nicknamed "the shadow sculptor" for his unusual portrait technique.
The Shadow Sculptor
Spencer Throckmorton describes how Ropp would, "shine a bright beam of light from a 50-year old Czech flashlight to illuminate his subjects, who are placed in total darkness and asked to stare directly into the camera lens in a pose of their own choosing. Ropp relies on an extended exposure time, as long as ten minutes, to capture the dark scene which makes the image a little blurry, but sharply defines the subject's eyes. It's truly a unique photographic technique that makes Ropp's work seem somewhat otherworldly, like something created by a painter."
Ropp spent his early career in theater and photographing figures in distorting mirrors. He never directs his subjects, preferring to capture their own inner feelings and emotions.
One constant in Ropp's work is his subject's penetrating gaze. They are usually looking right at you with a stare that almost leaps out of the picture plane. When they are not looking at you, there is usually a very singular line of attention between the subject and something in or just outside the picture frame.
William is a very charming man, very French, but an international as well. He loves people and speaks good English. We asked Ropp how he so regularly captures his subject's bare soul. It's a challenge because often they don't even speak the same language .
Ropp said with a laugh that he has many ways to open people up. One he shared with us is he asks his subject to close their eyes and think of their happiest dream. Then he tells them to open their eyes and takes the picture at that moment while they are still in the dream. It is really uncanny how William breaks through the mask and captures the person inside.
Ropp is best known for his portraits of children. He has published several photography books. His work is in important collections at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, The Spencer Collection at the New York Public Library, Museet for Fotokunst Odense in Denmark, and others.
The artist currently lives and works in France.
William Ropp 'Tafari: He who Inspires Awe'
William Ropp Tafari: He who Inspires Awe is at Throckmorton Fine Art in Midtown East, Manhattan, Monday – Saturday from May 3 – June 23, 2018.
Tafari means "he who inspires awe" in Amharic, the official language of Ethiopia. It was the name of Tafari Makonnen (1892 – 1975) who is better known to westerners as Haile Selassie, the last emperor of Ethiopia. Rastafarians (Ras Tafari or King Tafari) revere Haile Selassie as an incarnation of God.
A Family of Inspiration
The inspiration for this series came from Ropp's maternal great-grandfather, Louis Jacolliot (1837 – 1890). Jacolliot was a world traveler who wrote over 50 books about his journeys to Tahiti, India, Australia and Africa. As a boy Ropp would read his grandfather's stories. In his 40s, he felt the irrepressible desire to return to Africa.
This exhibition mostly focuses on the people of Ethiopia. Working in color, Ropp contrasts their penetrating gazes with the natural beauty of the land around them.
It is easy to connect with Ropp's images because he works inside the collective unconscious that we share with all humanity.
Visiting Throckmorton Fine Art
145 East 57th Street, New York, NY 10022
(between Lexington & Third Ave)
Midtown East, Manhattan
Tuesday – Saturday: 11 am – 5 pm
(4) (5) (6) to Lexington Ave
(N) (R) (W) to Lexington Ave – 59th St
(E) to Lexington Ave – 53rd St
(M) to Lexington Ave – 53rd St
For more information, visit www.throckmorton-nyc.com
If you are interested in any of these artists, please contact art consultant Ximena Ojeda


There�s a lot we still don�t understand when it comes to sleep. We know certain changes occur in the brain, and we have a few guesses as to why, but even the experts only have theories about many aspects of sleep in general and dreaming in particular.
Sleep has long been thought of as a way to process, sort and store the day�s events, and more and more research is supporting that notion. Imagine the brain as a second gut, says Rubin Naiman, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist specializing in integrative sleep and dream medicine at the University of Arizona. �At night, the brain metaphorically swallows, digests and sifts through information, and, just like the gut, eliminates,� he says. �What the brain keeps becomes a part of who we are.� Dreaming, he says, is like the brain�s digestive system.
But there�s plenty about dreaming we only think we know. Below, a few of the little-known facts and bogus myths about dreams.
You�ve probably heard that dreams only occur during rapid eye movement or REM sleep. But we�re actually constantly dreaming, says Naiman. We�re more tuned in to dreams during REM sleep, he says, but just because you don�t �see� the dream, doesn�t mean it�s not there. As the night progresses, periods of REM sleep lengthen, so the majority of our dreams occur within the latter third of the night, he says.
INSECTS AND FISH DON�T HAVE REM SLEEP.
The trauma of an alarm dragging you into the waking world can cause you to forget where you were floating just moments before. The best way to remember your dreams, says Naiman, is to allow yourself to wake up slowly, over a matter of minutes, lolling about in your grogginess. Just don�t try too hard to hold onto those fleeting images. �If you chase a dream, it�s going to run away,� he says.
A 2014 study found more spontaneous activity in a part of the brain called the temporo-parietal junction among people who regularly recall their dreams, compared with people who rarely do. The differences weren�t just during sleep, but also while study participants were awake. Previous research found that people who remember more dreams also react more to sounds during sleep (and while awake) than people who don�t remember many dreams.
There�s little as frustrating as waking up mad at someone from something he or she did in a dream, only to realize there�s no way you can talk those feelings out and still sound sane. But biologically, it makes sense that those feelings linger after your eyes open, says Naiman. �The experience we have in the dream registers in the body and in the brain in almost exactly the same way,� he says. Your blood pressure or heart rate might spike, for example, like in a real-life stressful scenario, helping to cement those emotional experiences of the dream, he says.
Despite the myth that our dreams occur in a split second, in reality dreams can play out for 20, 30, even 60 minutes, says Naiman. They�re likely only a couple of minutes long at the beginning of the night and lengthen along with REM periods as the night progresses.
NIGHTMARES AREN�T ALWAYS ABOUT FEAR.
Bad dreams are surely scary, but there are other underlying emotions at work. In a 2014 study, researchers analyzed dream logs of 331 people and found that many nightmares and bad dreams elicited feelings of failure, worry, confusion, sadness and guilt. The researchers also found that men are more likely to have bad dreams centered around violence or physical aggression, while women�s bad dreams focused on relationship conflict.
YOUR DREAMS AREN�T WEIRD, THAT IS, UNTIL YOU CALL THEM WEIRD.
�When you�re having the dream, no matter how �weird� it is � you�re in a poker game with a giant green squirrel and Queen Mary � it�s not weird,� says Naiman. �It�s only after you wake up and step into the waking world and look at the dream that it seems weird.� Comparing �weird� in the dreaming and waking worlds is like comparing dietary customs in two wildly different cultures, he says, making one seem strange in the context of the other. �We need to refrain from exclusively interpreting dreams from the waking world,� he says � which means it�s time to toss those dream dictionaries.
YOU CAN DIE IN YOUR DREAMS � AND LIVE TO TELL THE TALE.
This article originally appeared on Expandedconsciousness.com.


text:
Poison Prevention Adults | Medication safety
Swallowing Eye Drops is Dangerous!
Over-the-counter eyedrops and decongestant sprays are frequently used to treat upper respiratory congestion and irritated, red eyes. When consumed by mouth, they may result in serious toxicity and even death.
In a scene from the 2005 movie "Wedding Crashers," Owen Wilson's character adds eye drops to another character's drink with the intent of causing gastrointestinal discomfort and diarrhea. While the end result of this prank created a funny and memorable dinner party scene, the poisonous effects of eye drops are much more serious in real life.
Eyedrops and nasal decongestant sprays often contain ingredients intended to reduce eye redness and nasal stuffiness. These medications are available over-the-counter in pharmacies in the United States and are frequently not packaged in child-resistant containers. More than 100 of these products contain an ingredient, tetrahydrozoline, that is similar to a commonly used blood pressure-lowering medication called clonidine. Examples of brands that may contain tetrahydrozoline or related compounds include Visine®, Clear Eyes®, and Murine®. Tetrahydrozoline causes constriction of blood vessels when it is applied directly on the eye; this reduces eye redness. When used in high amounts or when ingested, tetrahydrozoline can also cause sleepiness, low blood pressure, and a dangerously slow heart rate. Young children who consume small amounts of tetrahydrozoline (as little as one-half of one teaspoon) can develop sleepiness and difficulty breathing. Teenagers and adults who drink larger amounts may also experience heart rhythm abnormalities and breathing problems that can be life-threatening. Interestingly, despite its reputation as a gastrointestinal irritant, diarrhea is not a common side effect of tetrahydrozoline consumption.
There are approximately 130 cases of tetrahydrozoline exposure reported each year to the online poison control tool webPOISONCONTROL®. Most cases of tetrahydrozoline exposure occur in adults, but more than one-fourth of all exposures occur in toddlers (1-2 years of age). Because tetrahydrozoline ingestion can cause significant toxicity in young children, it is very important for parents and caregivers of young children to be aware of this potentially very dangerous poison.
If you or a loved one drank eyedrops or nasal decongestant sprays by accident or on purpose, do not wait for symptoms to occur. Immediately use the webPOISONCONTROL® online tool or call 1-800-222-1222. Both options are free for the public, and available 24 hours a day.
Kelly Johnson-Arbor, MD
Medical Toxicology Physician
Always use eyedrops and decongestant sprays according to the package label; never drink these products.
Because these medications are often sold without child-resistant packaging, it is very important to keep these products far away from the reach of young children.
Remember that movies are not the same as real life: these products do not cause diarrhea, but they may cause life-threatening health issues and even death after people drink them.
A 64-year-old man was found dead in his home; the cause of death was initially presumed to be falling down a flight of stairs. When his autopsy revealed a high level of tetrahydrozoline in his system, investigators interviewed his wife, who admitted that she had added eye drops to his food to poison him. The wife was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and tampering with a food or drug and is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence.
Eddy O, Howell JM. Are one or two dangerous? Clonidine and topical imidazolines exposure in toddlers. J Emerg Med. 2003 Oct;25(3):297-302.
Osterhoudt KC, Henretig FM. Sinoatrial node arrest following tetrahydrozoline ingestion. J Emerg Med. 2004 Oct;27(3):313-4.
Lee BY. How Visine eye drops in the mouth can kill, here are two cases. Forbes. 2020 Jan 18. Accessed June 8, 2021.
Knowles H. Officials said he died in a fall. Then his wife admitted to poisoning his water with eye drops. The Washington Post. 2020 Jan 17. Accessed June 8, 2021.
Swenson K. His wife said he died falling down the stairs. Police say she poisoned him- with eye drops. The Washington Post. 2018 Sep 5. Accessed June 8, 2021.


text:
Worldcon 76 Academic Track
deadline for submissions:
The 76th World Science Fiction Convention
nathanielwms@worldcon76.org
DEADLINE EXTENDED: March 1, 2018
Science fiction always plays a part in recreating our world and directing civilization's progress. While much SF takes place in a hypothetical "future," the entire body of speculative literature influences and interacts with our world—suggesting potentialities, solutions, organizational methods, alternative cultures, and paths to follow or avoid. In that spirit, the 76th World Science Fiction Convention (Worldcon) in San José, California has chosen "Make the Future" for its overarching theme.
The Academic Track Committee welcomes proposals for scholarly presentations, especially those that study content tied to our "Make the Future" convention theme, such as the following examples:
Any and all utopian or futurist novels, short stories, comic books, or other media
Classic SF works that changed the direction of their era
Dystopian novels, comic books, and other media that portray catastrophic scenarios to prevent them from happening in reality (1984, The Handmaid's Tale, The Water Knife, Bitch Planet, etc.)
SF groups as progressive communities ("slan shacks," writers' colonies, online communities, etc.)
Ties between SF literature and socio-political movements
Ties between maker culture and science fiction, including DIY art and music, steampunk, deiselpunk, and any other design aesthetics
Major movements in the SF genre's history
Additionally, we are interested in proposals incorporating Worldcon visiting authors, timely content, or regional interest (such as California/Western authors or settings). Such topics might include:
Guests of Honor Spider Robinson and Chelsea Quinn Yarbro, or Ghost of Honor Edgar Pangborn
Works of Robert A. Heinlein
Other authors planning to attend Worldcon 76
Silicon Valley in SF
Science fiction in Wild West dime novels and pulps
Mill Valley and San Francisco in Invasion of the Body Snatchers (book and/or films)
Philip K. Dick's writing during his years living in Point Reyes Station
Kim Stanley Robinson's "Three Californias" trilogy and related works
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein at its 200th anniversary
As part of Worldcon programming, academic-track audiences often include a blend of scholars, writers, artists, readers, and fans. Presentations should be academically rigorous, but also accessible to a wide variety of interests and backgrounds. We welcome papers from scholars at all stages of their research careers, including advanced undergraduate students and independent scholars. Panels or roundtables that include SF creators (writers, directors, game designers, etc.) are highly encouraged as well.
NEW: The Heinlein Society is generously sponsoring a $250 award for the best paper on academic track.
In many ways, Worldcon's academic track offers an ideal opportunity for scholars to reach audiences they might not see at exclusively academic conferences.
The committee is seeking three kinds of proposals:
Paper – one 20-minute long presentation
Panel – a group of 3 to 4 related presentations of 15- to 20-minute length each
Roundtable – a group of speakers on a specific topic moderated by one individual for an hour plus question/answer period
WHAT TO SUBMIT:
For INDIVIDUAL PAPERS, include the following items (clearly labeled) in a single document:
Your name and contact information
Maximum 300-word abstract summarizing the focus and concept of your presentation
Maximum 100-word biographical note including academic affiliation (if applicable), sample prior publications/presentations, and any other connections to SF community
For PANELS, include the following items (clearly labeled) in a single document:
Name and contact information of panel's chair
Title of panel and a maximum 200-word statement describing its focus
Maximum 300-word abstract summarizing the focus and concept of each presenter's paper
Maximum 100-word biographical note for each speaker, including academic affiliation (if applicable), sample prior publications/presentations, and any other connections to SF community
For ROUNDTABLES, include the following items (clearly labeled) in a single document:
Name and contact information of roundtable's organizer and moderator
Title of roundtable, its topic, and a maximum 300-word statement describing its focus
Short list of sample discussion topics
Maximum 100-word biographical note for each speaker, including academic affiliation (if applicable), sample prior publications/presentations, and other connections to SF community
We will accept only one presentation per scholar, although presenters are welcome to moderate or chair one other session.
HOW TO SUBMIT:
All proposals should be sent as Word or PDF email attachments to callforpapers@worldcon76.org by midnight PST, MARCH 1, 2018 (new, extended deadline). Please provide a subject line that identifies the type of presentation you're proposing using this format: "[Panel or Paper or Roundtable] Proposal: [your title]
Example: Paper Proposal: Invasion of the Body Snatchers and the Bay Area
Note: All selected speakers will be responsible for their own Worldcon membership, travel, and all related expenses. For more information on purchasing membership, see the Worldcon 76 convention website. Membership includes access to the entire convention, not just the academic track.
For more on the Worldcon's history and theme, visit http://www.worldcon76.org/about-worldcon
This CFP has been viewed 2,465 times.


text:
NGC 4465 ist eine Spiralgalaxie vom Hubble-Typ Sc im Sternbild Jungfrau an der Ekliptik. Sie ist schätzungsweise 327 Millionen Lichtjahre von der Milchstraße entfernt und hat einen Durchmesser von etwa 45.000 Lichtjahren. Unter der Katalognummer VCC 1182 wird sie als Mitglied des Virgo-Galaxienhaufens aufgeführt, ist dafür jedoch zu weit entfernt.
Im selben Himmelsareal befinden sich u. a. die Galaxien NGC 4464, NGC 4467, NGC 4470, NGC 4472.

Das Objekt wurde am 31. März 1886 vom französischen Astronomen Guillaume Bigourdan entdeckt.

Weblinks
 SIMBAD Astronomical Database

Einzelnachweise

Virgo-Galaxienhaufen
Spiralgalaxie

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Find the compatible EasyShare DX3700 USB cable, EasyShare DX3700 AV cable, EasyShare DX3700 HDMI cable, or EasyShare DX3700 cord for your Kodak EasyShare DX3700.
If you need any assistance with Kodak EasyShare DX3700 parts please call us toll free 800-278-4002 9am-5pm CT Mon-Fri or email support@dcables.com anytime and our knowledgeable sales team will assist you in finding the correct Kodak accessory. All Kodak EasyShare DX3700 accessories come with a Compatibility Guarantee and Same Day Shipping.
Item #: R10566 - Kodak EasyShare DX3700 USB Cable - Download images from your Kodak EasyShare DX3700 to your computer's USB port.
Item #: R10703 - Kodak EasyShare DX3700 AV Cable - Display images from your Kodak EasyShare DX3700 on your TV.
Item #: R15844 - Kodak EasyShare DX3700 Memory Card Reader - Transfer files from your Kodak EasyShare DX3700 memory card to a computer using this reader.


text:
Steve Franklin Williams (né le  à Lakewood, Colorado et mort le  à Denver, Colorado) est un catcheur américain.

Joueur de football américain de l'université de l'Oklahoma, il devient catcheur en 1982 à la  devenu  (UWF) en 1986 et remporte dans cette fédération le championnat poids-lourds de l'UWF notamment. Il rejoint ensuite la  et remporte le championnat du monde par équipe de la  (NWA) version Mid-Atlantic. En 1990, il part au Japon où il lutte à l' (AJPW) où il fait équipe avec Terry Gordy avec qui il devient à cinq reprises champion du monde par équipe AJPW entre 1990 et 1993 et vainqueurs des éditions 1990 et 1991 du tournoi . De plus ils font un bref passage à la  (WCW) où ils sont les premiers championnat du monde unifié par équipe de la WCW et de la NWA en 1992. De retour au Japon, il remporte le championnat poids-lourds  AJPW et est étoffe son palmarès de champion du monde par équipe en l'étant avec Johnny Ace, Gary Albright et Vader.

En 2004, il annonce qu'il est atteint d'un cancer de la gorge mais continue sa carrière afin de payer ses frais médicaux avant d'arrêter en 2008. Sa santé décline et il meurt le .

Jeunesse
Williams pratique la lutte au lycée où il est double champion du Colorado. Il continue à pratiquer la lutte à l'université de l'Oklahoma et fait aussi partie de l'équipe de football américain des Sooners de l'Oklahoma. Il fait aussi partie de l'équipe de lutte et atteint la finale du championnat NCAA en 1982 où il perd face à Bruce Baumgartner. C'est à l'université qu'on lui donne aussi le surnom de «   » car il participe à un tournoi de lutte avec un masque de hockey pour protéger son visage après une blessure. Les spectateurs prèsents y voient alors un hommage à Jason, le tueur du film Vendredi 13 d'où ce surnom.

En 1983, il signe un contrat avec les Generals du New Jersey et intègre la liste de réserve en cas de blessure.

Carrière de catcheur

Mid-South Wrestling et Universal Wrestling Federation (1982-1987)
Bill Watts propose à Williams de l'entraîner pour devenir catcheur à la . Il y fait son premier combat le  où il bat Bob Roop. En fin d'année, le  le désigne  de l'année 1982.

En 1985, il remporte son premier titre en devenant avec Ted DiBiase champion par équipe de la  après leur victoire sur Ricky Morton et Robert Gibson. Ils perdent ce titre le  après leur défaite face à Al Perez et Wendell Cooley ; Bob Sweetan remplace alors DiBiase qui est alors au Japon. Le , ils deviennent une deuxième fois champion de la . En fin d'année, le  et le magazine  lui décerne le titre de catcheur ayant le plus progressé de l'année.

En 1986, la  change de nom pour devenir l' (UWF) et le duo Williams-DiBiase deviennent les premiers champion du monde par équipe de l'UWF mais perdent ce titre le  face à Butch Miller et Luke Williams. Le , il participe au tournoi pour désigner le premier champion poids-lourds de l'UWF où il élimine Rick Steiner au premier tour avant de se faire sortir par Terry Gordy.

Le , il décède après une longue bataille contre son cancer de la gorge.

Caractéristiques

 Prises de finition

  ()

 Prises favorites

 Managers
 Jim Ross
 Skandor Akbar

Palmarès

  (AJPW)
 AJPW Triple Crown World Heavyweight Championship (1 fois)
 AJPW Unified World Tag Team Championship (5 fois avec Terry Gordy, 1 fois avec Gary Albright et and 1 fois avec Johnny Ace)

  (IWA Japan)
 IWA World Tag Team Championship (1 fois avec Ryo Miyake)

 Mid-Atlantic Championship Wrestling
 NWA Mid-Atlantic Heavyweight Championship (1 fois)

 United States Wrestling Association
 USWA Southern Heavyweight Championship (1 fois)

  /  (UWF)
 Mid-South Tag Team Championship (1 fois avec Ted DiBiase)
 UWF Heavyweight Championship (1 fois)
 UWF Tag Team Championship (1 fois avec Ted DiBiase)

 Universal Wrestling Federation (Herb Abrams)
 UWF SportsChannel Television Championship (1 fois)
 UWF World Heavyweight Championship (1 fois)

 World Championship Wrestling
 NWA United States Tag Team Championship (1 fois avec Kevin Sullivan)
 NWA World Tag Team Championship (1 fois avec Terry Gordy)
 WCW World Tag Team Championship (1 fois avec Mike Rotunda et 1 fois avec Terry Gordy)

Récompenses des magazines
 Pro Wrestling Illustrated
 Catcheur ayant le plus progressé en 1985
 PWI Tag Team of the Year en 1992 avec Terry Gordy

 Wrestling Observer Newsletter Awards
  de l'année 1982
 Catcheur ayant le plus progressé de l'année 1985
 Équipe de l'Année en 1992 avec Terry Gordy
 Match de l'Année en 1996 avec Johnny Ace vs. Mitsuharu Misawa et Jun Akiyama
 Membre du Wrestling Observer Hall of Fame (2011)

Notes et références

Liens externes

Naissance à Lakewood (Colorado)
Naissance en mai 1960
Décès en décembre 2009
Catcheur américain
Joueur de football américain des Sooners de l'Oklahoma
Catcheur de la All Japan Pro Wrestling
Catcheur de la World Wrestling Federation
Catcheur de la World Championship Wrestling
Décès à 49 ans


Steve Moak Jr. listens in during a House Judiciary Committee hearing.
Steve Moak Jr., the son of former Governor Doug Ducey appointee Debbie Moak, founded a company that developed an app to help drug-treatment patients communicate with their counselors remotely.
Sponsored by Senator Kate Brophy McGee, Senate Bill 1532 would give $750,000 to the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment Center System (AHCCCS), the state's Medicaid program, for the app. Another unrelated $750,000 appropriation would go to Yavapai County for pretrial intervention programs.
Debbie Moak also attended the hearing.
AHCCCS would in turn distribute at least some of those funds to an app developer that would run a program for pretrial diversion drug patients.
The bill does not specify an app developer, and lawmakers said AHCCCS would go through a procurement process to find a contractor. But during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, only one company's name came up.
"True Mobile App would be paid under this," said Jeff Taylor, a former drug addict serving as a lobbyist for Moak's company.
Moak Jr.'s mother is the former head of Ducey's Office of Youth, Faith, and Family. Debbie Moak, who was present at the Wednesday committee meeting, resigned suddenly in 2017. Not long after, Phoenix New Times revealed that the Office of Youth, Faith, and Family awarded a $600,000 grant to a nonprofit she founded at the same time she we was serving as the agency's director.
Steve Moak Sr., meanwhile, is a prominent Republican donor. He gave $5,000 to Ducey in 2017, as well as another $10,000 to the governor's victory fund. He donated $500 to Brophy McGee, the sponsor of SB 1532.
Brophy McGee did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Approached in the Capitol on Wednesday, Steve Moak Jr. declined to say whether he or anyone associated with True Mobile Health approached Brophy McGee about sponsoring the bill. He denied that his company was a shoo-in for the contract, should the bill pass.
"There are quite a few competitors including actual organizations in Arizona," Moak Jr. said. "We're just one of many who would go through the RFP process."
Moak Jr. declined to name any of his competitors. No other companies had representatives speaking in favor of the bill.
Under the bill, the patient-engagement app would be required to allow patients to send urine to a service provider for DNA testing and provide video-conferencing between service providers and patients. The app would also track the whereabouts of a patient.
Supporters of the bill say it would provide a much-needed service for addicts, making it easier for them to stick to their goals and stay out of prison.
Opponents of the bill, primarily Democrats, say they're unclear exactly how the money would be spent.
Democratic State Representative Kirsten Engel pointed out that the bill would release funds for "purchasing and supporting" an app, but True Mobile Health is already available on the Apple App Store for free.
"I am concerned that if we have $1.5 million here we are using it in a good way," Engel said.
The True Mobile Health app bills itself as a "personalized support program designed to help people in early recovery navigate the daily challenges of staying sober."