Battle of the Boards erupts over Paddle Surfing
Current mood: quixotic
Category: Life

I'm very intrigued by Paddle Boarding & Surfing. It looks like fun and you can even do it in a Marina. I'm just worried about learning to surf again. Or buying an even "longer" Long Board...

And hey, when you find a surfing story in The Christian Science Monitor (an excellent fair minded paper) you just have to pass it on. :)


Battle of the Boards erupts over Paddle Surfing

Stand-up paddle surfers use larger boards and paddles to catch waves, but traditional surfers resent the intrusion of the often-novice boarders in their waters.

By Evan Pondel | Correspondent / September 23, 2008 edition

It's been nearly 30 minutes since the last rideable wave rolled through first point at Malibu, and about three dozen surfers are cold and downright cranky. "Would someone please deposit a token to start the wave machine," grouses one surfer.

A few chuckles and pseudo dolphin cries later, a wave forms in the distance and a mass migration of surfers begins jockeying for position.

"It's mine, it's mine," a longboarder shouts as he maneuvers his 10-foot projectile in front of the oncoming wall of water. He is sandwiched between 15 other surfers, all of whom are charging the same wave with ravenous eyes and visions of 10-toe glory.

And then there's Tom Tilberg, already standing on his board and gracefully sweeping the water with a paddle like a gondolier. Two quick strokes and he's the first one in the wave, enjoying a 50-yard ride that ends with a frothy finish.

"It's just too easy to get into waves on this thing," says Mr. Tilberg, riding his stand-up paddle board. "Sometimes you get dirty looks."

Wave envy – or perhaps animosity – runs deep in southern California as more people jockey to ride the same crowded breaks. Now a new form of surfing is gaining popularity that is adding to the congestion off coastlines around the country.

Called stand up paddle surfing, or SUP for short, it involves using a big surfboard that is stable enough to stand on when in flat water. Then, wielding a paddle or "blade" for propulsion, SUP riders canoe up to catch a wave.

The technique makes it far easier to paddle into everything from a snapper to a hollowed-out A-frame and has opened the exclusive world of surfing to more novices.

Which is where the problem begins. Many traditional surfers, a cliquish group to begin with, resent these table-top-size boards invading their aquatic turf.

They sniff that SUP is like riding a bike with training wheels. Like skiing with a helmet. Like hitting a baseball off a tee.

Or, as veteran Malibu surfer Eric Walker, puts it: "It's like watching a Mack Truck come down the line versus a Toyota Echo."

But the purists may want to get used to their paddling cousins. Like snowboarding, SUP doesn't look like it will vanish with the next swell. "It's not a fad – it's already sticking," says Matt Warshaw, author of "The Encyclopedia of Surfing."

•••

On average, waves at Malibu's first point, arguably among the best on the West Coast, provide rides that range from 5 to 10 seconds. When you consider that several dozen surfers usually vie for each swell, you can begin to understand the arithmetic behind the animosity.

Moreover, just having someone slashing around in the surf with a paddle, and already in the standing position before a wave even breaks, further irritates traditional boarders, who spend most of their time laying idle on their bellies.

Surf shops up and down southern California's coast are selling stand-up boards and offering lessons. The problem is that SUP riders with little or no surfing experience don't understand the etiquette of the water.

"SUPs will pull into a wave with their paddles right in front of you, and you're like, 'really, did that just happen?' " Mr. Walker says. "Too bad there isn't a bike lane for stand up surfers."

Yet not all SUP riders are new to the sport. In fact, the roots of stand-up surfing reach back more than 100 years ago, when wave riders in Hawaii were using paddles and wood planks for transportation. Some surfers even believe that today's version of stand-up surfing echoes the practices of the ancient Polynesians.

"SUP is a throwback to what true watermen all aspired to do, and once you try it, you're instantly hooked," says Scott Bass, a San Diego surf talk radio host. "But it's also a curse."

Mr. Bass, who prefers stand-up surfing when the waves aren't big enough for shortboarding, says SUP is like having too much of a good thing.

"People see stand-up riders catching waves and suddenly they're everyone's enemy," he says. "There are some beaches where there's such a negative vibe that stand-up surfers don't even step foot in the water."

On a recent weekend afternoon at Topanga State Beach in Los Angeles County, nearly 40 surfers bobbed offshore without a single SUP. The crowd at Malibu was similar, as Sunny Chang, an outdoor instructor for the store REI, was just finishing up her session.

Ms. Chang says contrary to what traditional surfers think, she believes SUP riders are always welcome.
"It's just a slightly different way of surfing," says Chang, her 9-foot, 2-inch longboard tucked under her arm. "Everyone is entitled to surf."

But Jefferson Wagner, a Malibu city councilman, disagrees. "Stand-up paddle boarders should be banned from the surf zone," says Mr. Wagner, who owns Zuma Jay, a surf shop that is a Malibu icon. "SUPs are too large and bulky for a person to control around other people."

Most SUPs are nine to 10 feet long, not much different than longboards. But they are at least an inch and a half thicker and wider than traditional boards. And many SUP riders don't wear leashes to keep their boards from tumbling toward surfers and swimmers closer to shore.

"I can just see some unsuspecting family visiting from the East Coast getting slammed by one of these boards set loose in the water," Wagner says.

Kayaks are already banned at Malibu's Surfrider Beach, so Wagner doesn't think it's unreasonable to banish SUPs as well. Of course, the cost of stand-up surfboards could end up being more of an impediment than any government restrictions or gnarly vibes in the water. Most SUPs, often carbon-wrapped, run anywhere from $1,000 to $2,000, and that usually doesn't include the $250 paddle.

Freddie Morales, a longboarder, says he has no problem with SUPs "in the lineup" as long as stand-up riders and traditional surfers respect each other.

"There used to be a rivalry among longboarders and shortboarders, but that has basically dissipated," says Mr. Morales, who works at Masi Custom Surfboards in San Diego. "I suspect the same will eventually happen between SUP and traditional surfers."

•••

Some resistance to SUP clearly remains more philosophical than pragmatic. Many purists believe using a paddle and a lumbering board is like surfing with a pontoon boat.

They prefer the purity of using arms and legs to propel themselves into a wave and then relying on their own dexterity and balance and feel to negotiate the water – in other words, "true" surfing.

"I have no interest in trying SUP," says Chris Dewind, a devoted shortboarder and college student from Malibu. "You see these SUP riders sitting way outside or on the shoulder [of a point break], and they just don't care about the other surfers."

Mr. Dewind admits that it is more difficult to catch a wave on a shortboard than a SUP, but "I still think they should go find their own peaks – away from traditional surfers."

Still, not everyone believes there needs to be segregated surf zones. Greg Bonann, a Los Angeles County lifeguard and creator of the TV series "Baywatch," draws a comparison between SUVs and smaller cars.

"One is bigger, and you don't want to get hit by it, but there is no reason that you can't share the road together," Mr. Bonann says. Then he offers a piece of pure laid-back L.A. advice to SUPs: "Surf politely, enjoy one another, and enjoy the waves."

2:30 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Gov Kathleen Sebelius to be Obama’s VP
Current mood: excited
Category: News and Politics

It looks like we are just hours away from Obama naming his VP.

Since I'm a political guy I made my guess months ago. And strangely, I haven't changed my mind.

Kathleen Sebelius Governor of Kansas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Sebelius

Governor Kathleen Sebelius has always been on the "List" and now she is on the "Short List" along with Texas Democratic Rep. Chet Edwards, US Senators Joe Biden of Delaware and Evan Bayh of Indiana, and Gov Tim Kaine of Virginia.

Why Gov. Kathleen Sebelius?

The answer is simple - she will capture ALL of Hillary's disgruntled female voters.

None of the other contenders can do that.

All of the VP contenders have the following in common:

None of them have military experience.
None of them have any real international political experience.
None of them are nationally known.

Only Kathleen can bring in the female vote.

I've heard she isn't an exciting speaker. I say so what?

Obama has that covered.

Kathleen is Catholic, but is also pro-choice. She has excellent credential when it comes to education and the environment. She doesn't have a problem with guns and hunting, but is against concealed weapons and automatic weapons.

And finally -- besides being the Governor of Kansas -- she is well connected in the vital state of Ohio -- where her Dad was Governor.

She is our nation's first Daughter/Father Governor.

So if Obama hasn't sent out that text message yet -- I'm going to post this blog.

Please remember who said it first... Unless Obama picks Gov Tim Kaine of Virginia... Then you can say "That Tom guy don't know"....

8:34 PM - 2 Comments - 3 Kudos - Add Comment

John McCain -- Internet dunce
Current mood: enlightened
Category: News and Politics

McCain's campaign confirms that the Senator is "aware" of the Internet.
Those tubes and stuff....

John McCain, Internet dunce
Why the Arizona senator, who can barely Google, is not the chief that an increasingly technological world requires.

By Amanda Terkel

Aug. 13, 2008 | John McCain spends a lot of time talking about Iraq. He also likes talking about terrorism. But one issue he rarely touches upon is technology. In fact, under the "Issues" section of his campaign Web site, technology isn't even an option. He has people like former Hewlett-Packard chairman and CEO Carly Fiorina and former eBay president and CEO Meg Whitman advising him. But the campaign usually deploys them to talk about economic issues like tax cuts and gas prices.

Most of the tech talk surrounding McCain has so far focused on his self-admitted computer ignorance. "I'm an illiterate who has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance that I can get," McCain said in an interview with Yahoo/Politico earlier this year. Last month, McCain admitted that he has "never felt the particular need to e-mail."

Tech has put the McCain campaign on the defensive about whether a president needs to be actively engaged in the Internet to lead an increasingly wired country. At the tech-savvy Personal Democracy Forum conference in June, Mark Soohoo, McCain's deputy e-campaign director, drew snickers when he desperately insisted, "You don't necessarily have to use a computer to understand how it shapes the country ... John McCain is aware of the Internet."

It has also brought up the unsavory topic of McCain's age, with people wondering if his lack of technology skills is simply part of the "generational gap" between him and younger voters. But even in his own demographic -- white, college-educated men over 65 -- McCain is an outlier. According to new data from the Pew Internet & American Life Project, approximately three-quarters of this group use the Internet. "Basically, John is a technological troglodyte, and proud of it," said former Federal Communications Commission chairman and Obama supporter Reed Hundt.

One area being overlooked, however, is the need for progress on America's technological infrastructure.

The United States currently sticks out globally for having no national broadband policy -- a plan to give every American access to affordable high-speed Internet connections. Roughly half of the country's households still lack broadband connections, and the United States continues to fall behind. "Broadband will soon be an indispensable communication technology affecting the way we learn, the way we work, and the way we communicate," Charles Benton, chairman and CEO of the Benton Foundation, wrote in June. "However, at the dawn of this Digital Age, those who could benefit the most from this economically empowering technology are also those most likely to be left without access because of where they live or how much money they make."

Science and technology certainly haven't been priorities under the Bush administration. A 2005 report by the National Academy of Sciences concluded, "The scientific and technical building blocks of our economic leadership are eroding at a time when many other nations are gathering strength." McCain has given little indication that he intends to be much different, and that has some tech experts worried.

"What concerns me is that [McCain] will do as George Bush did, which is to make technology an issue related to how he raises money to run the government or to fund campaigns, and not as an independent issue that is important to grow America," said Stanford University professor and Internet expert Lawrence Lessig. "Technology for the Bush administration is a total non-issue, even though that was the thing that drove most growth in 1992 to 2003. And the reason I think he'd be led to that is because [he's] a guy who doesn't understand anything about technology in the first place."

McCain has not released a tech platform, although he may do so this week. On this front, he lags behind Barack Obama, who unveiled his last year. Mark Lloyd, vice president of strategic initiatives at the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, pointed to the fact that some of McCain's top advisors also advised Bush. "I think that the people who determine his tech policies, like [former FCC chairman] Michael Powell and a few others who were his top advisors, will talk, as Bush has talked about, getting advanced telecommunications services to all Americans," said Lloyd. "But mainly their model is to allow the industry to determine what all this means, which is the danger."

These worries aren't unfounded. McCain has a long record of blocking progress on tech issues. He has served as a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation since coming to the Senate in 1987, and as chairman from 1997 to 2001, and again from 2003 to 2005. He oversaw the committee at a crucial point in history: the explosion of the Internet economy.

During McCain's tenure, the committee oversaw the implementation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the first major overhaul of U.S. telecom law in nearly 62 years. McCain had to choose whether to be pro-competition or pro-big business. In most instances, he chose the latter route, by opposing increased Internet access for schools and libraries, backing large mergers to benefit the telecom industry and supporting a virtual system of haves and have-nots.

Lloyd said the Senate Commerce Committee during this time devoted "far too little oversight to the good things in the 1996 Telecommunications Act." Those included "making sure there were equal opportunities to participate in the industry afforded to women and minorities and small businesses." He added, "There was a rush to essentially allow industry players to get into each other's businesses and consolidate in the industry."

McCain's long history in the Senate has one main theme: Government can do no good in telecom policy. "McCain is a pure free-market ideologue," said Mark Cooper, director of research at the Consumer Federation of America. "Their [Bush and McCain] belief is that government should just get out of the way and let the private sector do it. Clearly, in the financial markets, the private sector has done a horrible job."

Other media experts have characterized McCain's Commerce Committee tenure as a lost opportunity to make progress on telecommunications policy. "The thing that stands out for his entire tenure is that he has never had a priority, and has never had, to my knowledge, any accomplishment of any kind at all," said Hundt.

McCain has said that closing the digital divide -- the gap between people with access to digital technology and those without -- is one of his top tech priorities. Speaking to the Consumer Federation of America in 2001, he said it was "our greatest challenge in the 21st century." It may therefore be surprising to learn that McCain was one of the most vocal opponents of Education Rate (E-Rate), a program designed to provide discounts to schools and libraries to connect to the Internet.

E-rate, established as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, may have gotten off to a shaky start, but many tech experts agree that it has been a success. According to the Benton Foundation, nearly $19 billion in discounts have been provided to schools and libraries, and more than 90 percent of classrooms in rural, high-minority and low-income school districts now have Internet connections.

McCain opposed E-Rate in the late '90s, concerned about the impact it might have on the telecom industry. He mostly cited concerns about government waste and "inflated" costs. Groups such as the American Library Association were so outraged that they encouraged their members to contact obstinate senators, including McCain.

Over the next few years, McCain shifted his views on the program. He instead focused on making schools and libraries set up a filtering system to keep children away from undesirable sites -- a requirement opposed by libraries, school boards, civil libertarians, technology interests and even some conservatives.

"The prevention lies not in censoring what goes into the Internet," said McCain of his Internet School Filtering Act in 1998, "but rather in filtering what comes out of it onto the computers our children use outside the home." McCain's position was so strict that even former Sen. Rick Santorum, a hard-line conservative, proposed a more moderate compromise bill.

In a 2000 Republican presidential debate, McCain had the gall to take credit for wiring schools, despite his opposition to E-Rate: "We took a major step forward when we decided to wire every school and library in America to the Internet. That's a good program."

Not only did McCain oppose E-Rate, but he fought tooth and nail against the entire Telecommunications Act of 1996. The bill wasn't perfect, and has had a mixed record. As Lloyd noted, "Part of the concern was that there had been, frankly, too little debate about the act before the public, and that the broadcasters were getting extraordinary benefits without sufficient return to the public for what they were doing."

McCain was one of just five senators to vote against the bill, arguing that it was too regulatory. In fact, a common theme of McCain's views on tech policy is the belief that law can rarely be used to benefit telecommunications. Government intervention, for the most part, is bad. "Unless there is a clear-cut, unequivocal restraint of competition, the government should stay out of it," McCain said in 2007. "These things will sort themselves out."

At a 1999 Senate Commerce Committee hearing, McCain criticized the Telecommunications Act, arguing that it encouraged large mergers. "By redrawing the ownership and competition rules that govern the industry, it has created incentives, both intended and unintended, for companies to merge." But McCain did little to stop them.

"McCain was encouraging the notion of competition, but really did very little to limit consolidation," said Lloyd. Hundt added that McCain has "never successfully opposed any merger." At a Federalist Society debate in June, Hundt also challenged Powell, a McCain supporter, to name one merger the senator has opposed since 1986. Frustrated, Powell replied, "Well, I'm not going to attempt to do that. I think it's a cheeky argument."

In 2003, McCain also voted against a bill that would have tightened media ownership rules -- and, in theory, fostered more diverse voices -- and introduced a bill limiting the FCC's ability to regulate telecommunications takeovers. As Bloomberg's Christopher Stern wrote recently, "McCain sees the Internet mainly as a business and trusts market forces to foster innovation for society's benefit."

(After trying to talk to several McCain campaign advisors, Salon was told to contact his Senate office for a response. McCain's Senate office did not respond to repeated inquiries.)

More recently, McCain has sided with the telecom industry in the network neutrality debate. In 2006, consumer advocates supported legislation by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., that would have prevented broadband providers from creating a pay-for-play system. Telephone networks already operate on neutrality principles. Calls go through equally as well whether someone is calling her grandmother or Steve Jobs. But without net neutrality, say its advocates, the Internet would operate on a different model. Sites willing to pay large sums of money would be faster to access, generating more revenue for telecoms.

The CEOs of some of the world's most innovative technology companies -- including Google and Yahoo! -- wrote the House Energy Committee in 2006, worried that the "longstanding openness of the Internet" was being threatened. (Ironically, Whitman, who was then heading eBay, also signed the letter.) They urged the committee to adopt net neutrality rules that were "both meaningful and readily enforceable." Michael Arrington of TechCrunch, a popular technology blog that endorsed both McCain and Obama in the primaries, called net neutrality "probably the most important issue in Silicon Valley."

McCain sided against competition and opposed Markey's legislation. In 2007, he argued, "When you control the pipe you should be able to get profit from your investment."

McCain has boasted that he has "never done any favors for anybody -- lobbyist or special interest group -- that's a clear, 24-year record."

But the record isn't so clear. McCain's chairmanship of the Senate Commerce Committee has been good for large corporations, and they have rewarded him handsomely. In 2000, Washington Internet Daily, a trade site, reported that McCain was the "[c]lear leader in fund-raising from high-tech companies." Over those past two years, McCain collected $1.2 million from communications and electronics companies, including nearly $700,000 from phone companies and telecom infrastructure firms.

In 1998 and 1999, McCain wrote at least 15 letters to the FCC, urging members to take action on issues that had potentially major consequences for his campaign donors. For example, McCain wrote two letters in April and May 1999, asking the commission to make a decision on a $62 billion pending merger between telephone companies Ameritech and SBC Communications. The merger went through later that year. A few weeks before the April letter, Richard Notebaert, then head of Ameritech, co-hosted a fundraiser for McCain. He took in approximately $50,000. Just before the May letter, SBC and Ameritech officials contributed or solicited about $120,000 in donations for McCain's campaign.

At the time of the merger, SBC was a client of Davis, Manafort and Freedman, a firm run by McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis. (Davis is now serving as McCain's 2008 campaign manager.)

The current campaign cycle is also shaping up to be lucrative. U.S. Telecom Association president and CEO Walter B. McCormick Jr., Sprint CEO Daniel R. Hesse, and Verizon chairman and CEO Ivan G. Seidenberg have each raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for McCain's campaign. AT&T executive vice president for federal relations Timothy McKone has raised at least $500,000.

McCain has steadfastly resisted using the federal government's power to ensure America's technological advancement. But that approach will not work as other countries begin to outpace the United States.

When McCain took over his second tenure of the Senate Commerce Committee, the United States ranked fourth in broadband penetration, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. In 2007, two years after he had given up that position, the United States had dropped to 15th in the world. The rest of the developed world, which chose to be pro-competition, is now racing ahead of the United States.

Americans don't expect the next president to be Twitterer-in-chief, but he will need to lead an increasingly technologically savvy nation and ensure that the benefits of advanced telecommunications reach as many people as possible. "Government doesn't need to manage the technological developments," Hundt said at the June Federalist Society debate. "But it ought to establish a rule of law where entrepreneurs can raise money and enter these markets."

Closing the digital divide and developing an equitable broadband strategy will be a significant challenge. Cooper of the Consumer Federation of America said McCain won't be up to the task. "Nobody believes if McCain gets into office he's going to fix federal communications policy," he said. "He doesn't have any credibility when it comes to [initiating] a government act. Obviously, he's trading on the capital he built up when he was the straight-talk express. But that capital is dissipating very quickly."

3:57 AM - 2 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Earthquake Rattles Southern California
Category: News and Politics

Shake, Rattle and a Big Roll......

July 30, 2008
Earthquake Rattles Southern California
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER

LOS ANGELES — A moderate earthquake, the largest in Southern California since 1999, struck 35 miles east of downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday morning. It swayed buildings and tossed food off grocery store shelves, but there were no reports of major injuries or damage.

The earthquake, which registered a 5.4 magnitude, was centered near Chino Hills in San Bernardino County and was felt as far east as Las Vegas and south to San Diego.

"This is moderate," said Erik Pounders, a geologist with the United States Geological Survey in Pasadena. "Which means it was strong enough to be felt, but wasn't even powerful enough to knock everything off your desk."

Still, cellphone lines were jammed throughout the region as people frantically made calls in the immediate moments after the jolt. Officials in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's emergency management office urged Californians to free up the lines for emergency use.

State and local officials immediately raced to inspect bridges, levees and other major infrastructure projects, but found only a water main break. Train service in many areas was disrupted as the inspections continued, and at the Disneyland Resort in Anaheim, visitors were taken off rides. Inspections there yielded no reports of damage, officials said.

"This earthquake reminds us yet once again that in California we have to be prepared for everything and anything," Mr. Schwarzenegger said at a news conference in Los Angeles.

Some schools and office buildings were evacuated temporarily as people braced for the roughly 50 aftershocks by midafternoon, one of which registered at 3.8. The Los Angeles City Council, meeting downtown, adjourned briefly to regroup after the event.

The quake began slowly about 11:40 a.m. and continued for several disarming seconds. Many residents experienced an eerie, dizzying sensation of having rolled from side to side on rollers that are common in high-rise buildings retrofitted to withstand earthquakes, which leave buildings swaying for several seconds after a quake.

Denise Cattern, a spokeswoman for Chino Hills, a suburb of about 80,000, said residents and businesses were reporting lots of things falling from walls and shelves.

"Our nerves have been rattled," Ms. Cattern said, "but with the low-rise construction everything seems to be fine."

Jessica Chang, 12, was in class working on a math problem in Chino Hills when the shaking began. She said a vase fell on her head but she was not injured.

"When it started, I felt the shaking under my feet," she said. "I thought I was going to die. But my teacher told us to calm down." Her brother, Jayden, 5, piped in that he thought it was a "Tyrannosaurus rex walking."

The aftershocks cracked the walls and floors of homes and buildings in nearby Diamond Bar, said Lt. John Saleeby, the watch commander in the Los Angeles County sheriff's office in that town.

Elizabeth Cespuglio, 17, of Corona, about eight miles from the epicenter, was watching television and working on her computer when the shaking began. She ran to a door frame, as experts advise.

"I always kind of liked quakes when they were tiny," she said by telephone. "But after it lasted longer it kind of freaked me out." Two pictures fell from a wall in an adjacent bedroom but they did not break, and she did not see any other damage to the home. The quake was the largest in Southern California since a 7.1 magnitude quake hit an unpopulated area of the high desert in 1999. The last powerful earthquake in urban Los Angeles — among the most seismically active regions in the world — struck in 1994 and was centered in Northridge, a section of the city in the San Fernando Valley.

Rebecca Cathcart and Randal C. Archibold contributed reporting from Los Angeles, and Ana Facio Contreras from Chino Hills.

8:38 PM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Guide to Santa Monica, California - My Town - Your Town
Current mood: amused
Category: Travel and Places

It is always interesting to me that a paper in the United Kingdom would write about the small town that I live in.

It is a weird and wonderful place, with amazing physical beauty. However, it is strange to me that people plan their very important holidays/vacations here. Heck, I wake up here every morning. And we look forward to vacations elsewhere. Our place looks out on to the Pacific and the beaches stretching 20 miles in either directions. There are few places like this one.

So if you are coming to my town -- drop me a line. I'll tell you the "insider information" on where to go on your budget. But don't expect me to buy you a drink. I'll be too busy looking for someone else's hometown, that looks like paradise to me! :)

The Daily Telegraph
Guide to Santa Monica, California

By Paul Mansfield
Last Updated: 12:30PM BST 25 Jul 2008

Sunset in Santa Monica. On the veranda of the Georgian Hotel, guests sip cocktails and contemplate the singular scene opposite. In Palisades Park , joggers and power walkers weave between homeless people camped out on the grass. A Paris Hilton lookalike steers her shih-tzu, clad in a diamanté vest, towards the new "doggy bakery" on Santa Monica Boulevard, while on the beach, veterans of the Iraq war are setting up "Arlington West", the display of wooden crosses that commemorates the number of American soldiers who have died since 2003. Tourists stop to stare as the sun goes down. All of Los Angeles, you might say — natural beauty, self-indulgence, social problems, liberal politics — is alive and flourishing here by the side of the ocean.

Santa Monica has always been one of Los Angeles County's most interesting cities. In the 1900s, when it was linked by streetcars to downtown Los Angeles, it was a holiday playground for working class Angelenos, who flocked to the newly built Santa Monica Pier, complete with Ferris wheel. High-rollers from Hollywood came to gamble in the casino boats moored offshore. Hotels sprung up, several of which — such as The Georgian, built in 1933 and home in its time to Clark Gable, Carole Lombard and mobster Bugsy Siegel — are still there. With its golden beaches, laid-back lifestyle and easy access to the rest of Los Angeles, Santa Monica is an excellent base for visitors to LA and a holiday destination in its own right.

The city is compact, laid out in a grid system with a manageable core of half a dozen blocks. This — based around the specially constructed (and slightly ersatz) Third Street Promenade — is where most of the shops, bars and restaurants are based. The Zagat guide recently voted Santa Monica the best area for restaurants in southern California for the second year running — no mean achievement in a state famous for good food.

Outside the centre, in the upper reaches of Wilshire and Santa Monica Boulevards, lies a slightly grittier city, with tatty shops rubbing shoulders with bijou designer stores. In between lie peaceful, tree-lined streets of rent-controlled housing, much of it in Spanish-mission style. No wonder Santa Monica is popular with young professionals, many of a liberal persuasion.

The beach remains Santa Monica's calling card. Crowds still flock to the fairground rides on the pier; the adjacent Muscle Beach is filled with "bodies beautiful" working out; in the International Chess Park, elderly men hunch over their boards and clocks. The notably visible homeless - or "people in transition", as Santa Monica prefers to call them - are looked after by more than 20 support programmes.

Half an hour's waterfront stroll to the south takes you to Venice Beach, Santa Monica's edgier younger brother, where the assembled weirdos, street artists, New Agers, souvenir sellers, bikers, students and random nutters form a sort of medieval carnival, which is as gritty now as it was in the counter-culture days of the Sixties, when Jim Morrison and others lived here.

Venice is fun, but when it comes to the perfect place to watch the sunset, the veranda of The Georgian Hotel definitely has the edge.

Santa Monica Basics
Getting there

Paul Mansfield travelled with Virgin Atlantic (08705 747747, www.virgin-atlantic.com). London Heathrow return fares cost from £418.
Must-sees

The beach and adjoining Palisades Park; Santa Monica Pier; Arlington West memorial; architecture, from Romanesque Revival to 1930s Streamline Moderne; the Santa Monica Museum of Art; the bike trail between Santa Monica and Venice: bikes (£4 per hour, from Perry's Café; 310 939 0000, www.perryscafe.com) on Ocean Front Walk; Venice on Sundays.
Where to stay

(Prices are for a double room and include breakfast. Ask about offers.)

The Georgian, 1415 Ocean Avenue (001 310 395 9945, www.georgianhotel.com). Beautifully restored Thirties hotel in a superb location. From £134.

Hotel California, 1670 Ocean Avenue (001 866 571 0000, www.hotelca.com). A fun and funky place just steps from the beach. Rooms are surprisingly comfortable, with hardwood floors and Egyptian cotton sheets. From £90.

Shutters on the Beach, 1 Pico Boulevard (001 310 458 0030, www.shuttersonthebeach.com). The celebrities' choice, right on Santa Monica beach near the pier. Hockneys and Lichtensteins in the lobby underline Shutters' sophistication. There's a large outside pool, a spa and two restaurants. From £290.
Where to eat

(Prices are for two with wine.)

Santa Monica's hippest place to eat is currently Wilshire, 2454 Wilshire Boulevard (001 310 586 1707, www.wilshirerestaurant.com). Stylish interconnecting rooms lead to a garden patio. Modern American cuisine with organic, locally sourced food. Fashionable clientele, including many figures from ''the business'', but casual is the norm, with even jeans acceptable. Around £85.

Chinois on Main, 2709 Main Street (001 310 392 9025 ). Wolfgang Puck, one of the leading lights of the LA culinary scene, offers a French-Asian menu, including curried oysters and Chinese chicken salad. A faultless and friendly service. £70.

The Lobster, 1602 Ocean Avenue (001 310 458 9294, www.thelobster.com). At the entrance to the pier but not the tourist trap it appears. Chef Allyson Thurber serves superb fresh seafood with a great view. A locals' favourite. £55.
Cafés, diners and bars

Chez Jay, 1657 Ocean Avenue (001 310 395 1741, www.chezjays.com). A "dive" with a jukebox and a floor strewn with peanut shells. The steaks and seafood are good, but it's more of a bar than a restaurant. The actor-owner Jay Fiondella's "no cameras and no autographs" policy has made it a late-night favourite of celebrities for nearly 50 years. £30.

Cha-Cha Chicken, 1906 Ocean Avenue at Pico (001 310 581 1684, www.chachachicken.com). Resembles a Caribbean beach shack dropped on to a busy Santa Monica junction. Wonky tables attended by friendly staff. The food — jerk chicken, black-pepper shrimp, fried plantain — is wonderful, as is the Jasmine iced tea.
Clubs

V Lounge, 2020 Wilshire Boulevard. Sunken dance floor with two large neon-lit bars. Live bands.

Zanzibar, 1301 Fifth Street. Super-cool hip-hop place with Indian-African theme, dark walls and leather ottomans.

Shopping

The Third Street Promenade has the usual favourites such as Gap, Diesel and Urban Outfitters. Montana Avenue has a huge collection of quite pricey boutique stores. Quirkier options are to be found in the upper reaches of Wilshire Boulevard, and on Main Street.

Guidebooks

The Rough Guide to Los Angeles and Southern California, £12.99.

Further information

Santa Monica Visitor Centre, 1920 Main Street (001 310 393 7593, www.santamonica.com).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/northamerica/2458106/Guide-to-Santa-Monica,-California.html

9:33 AM - 2 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Iraq’s Prime Minister Agrees with Obama on Pullout
Current mood: confused
Category: Life

Of course Iraq Wants us Gone as Much as much as We want to GO.

Why in the Heck is that a Surprise to Bush & McCain?

Obama Makes War Gains
Maliki's Embrace of Withdrawal Timeline Confounds McCain

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 22, 2008; A06

AMMAN, Jordan, July 21 -- When Sen. Barack Obama left Washington last week, he was under pressure to defend what Republican critics called an arbitrary deadline for withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq. By Monday, the White House and rival Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign were at pains to explain why the Iraqi prime minister had seemingly all but endorsed Obama's relatively rapid timeline for getting out.

Obama has certainly not won the argument over Iraq policy. Far from it. His proposal to withdraw U.S. combat forces over a 16-month period still faces serious questions, including from some of the commanders who might be asked to implement it if he is elected.

But the curious turn of events made for an unexpected opening act for the Democrat's week-long tour of seven countries, demonstrating anew the combination of agility and good fortune that has marked his campaign.

Whether Obama can count on Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in the days ahead is another matter. The Iraqi government does not speak with one voice on this matter, and it is not yet clear how current negotiations with the administration will conclude and how much emphasis will be placed on making a withdrawal timetable or "time horizon" conditions-based.

Beyond that, Obama's opposition to the troop "surge" that has helped quell violence and U.S. casualties -- and that McCain vociferously supported -- leaves plenty of room for further questions about his judgment at that moment. McCain's advisers were quick to suggest Monday that it was only because of the success of the increase that Obama can project the drawdown of troops over a 16-month period.

But as political theater, the events of the past few days have played unfailingly in the Democrat's favor. On Friday, a day after Obama left for Afghanistan and Iraq, Bush administration officials announced that the United States and Iraq had agreed on a time horizon for removing troops. Then, twice in three days, Maliki embraced a withdrawal timeline similar to Obama's. Beyond that, McCain shifted ground to declare that he, too, favors sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.

McCain, campaigning in Maine, was blistering in his criticism of Obama on Monday. He said his rival has been "completely wrong" on Iraq and "has no military experience whatsoever," and argued again that any withdrawal from Iraq must be based on conditions on the ground.

The Republican's campaign advisers noted that he has also embraced a withdrawal timetable for Iraq. In a recent speech, he said his goal would be to remove all U.S. combat forces by the end of his first term as president. But McCain said that could happen only if Iraq is secure and stable. Obama, he said, has gotten it backward -- calling for a timetable first and foremost, with no real regard for conditions on the ground.

"You've got a situation where Senator Obama has been incessantly criticizing the Iraqi government for 18 months," said Randy Scheunemann, McCain's senior foreign policy adviser. "Now here's something he thinks can work to his political advantage and so he's embracing it, while at the same time rejecting the considered military judgment of those who made the successes of the surge possible, like Gen. [David H.] Petraeus and Gen. [Raymond T.] Odierno."

The Iraqi prime minister's commentary about timetables was rolled out first through an interview in the German magazine Der Spiegel in which he explicitly mentioned Obama's 16-month timetable and gave it a favorable review. Later, after urgent inquiries from officials at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad seeking clarification, a spokesman said that Maliki had been misinterpreted. But he did not specifically explain what was misstated.

Then on Monday, after Maliki met with Obama, his spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said the Iraqis were working toward a deadline that would call for U.S. combat forces to be out of Iraq by the end of 2010, at most eight months after Obama's timetable. He also said the timetable was not discussed when Maliki met with Obama and Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), who are accompanying the senator from Illinois.

White House press secretary Dana Perino was peppered with questions at her daily briefing on Monday about the apparent similarity between Obama's plan and Maliki's latest pronouncements.

Asked whether the administration would prefer that the Iraqis not talk about specific dates, she replied, "We don't think that talking about specific negotiating tactics or your negotiating position in the press is the best way to negotiate a deal. However, we understand that they're a sovereign country and they'll be able to do that. We're just not going to do it on our end."

If there was a strategic goal for Obama's trip to Afghanistan and Iraq, it was to broaden the debate from focusing largely on his proposal to withdraw combat forces from Iraq over a 16-month period to the question of whether the conflict in Iraq has sapped the United States' ability to combat the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

As Obama prepared for his trip, almost all the focus was on his troop withdrawal plan for Iraq -- and there was considerable criticism that his firm deadline ignored any consideration of conditions on the ground.

McCain led the criticism, saying Obama was wrong about the troop increase and was naive to establish such a short and seemingly rigid timeline for leaving Iraq. From Iraq, some military commanders weighed in as well, raising doubts as to the wisdom of Obama's proposal.

Over the weekend, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also raised questions about setting such a timetable, calling it "very dangerous" to establish a deadline of about two years from now for withdrawing troops.

Against this criticism, Obama appeared determined not just to defend his timetable, but also to shift the focus of the debate. He used his speech to link the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to argue that the conflict in Iraq continues to deplete the U.S. military's capacity to wage what he called the more important war, in Afghanistan.

McCain and Obama agree that more troops are needed in Afghanistan, but they remain far apart on how the war in Iraq fits into this equation, just as they remain at odds over the terms of ending U.S. involvement in Iraq. That debate will continue to play out between now and November with more turbulence ahead, resulting from the twists and turns of the past three days.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/21/AR2008072102851_pf.html

10:06 AM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

How Obama went from Underdog to Alpha
Current mood: jubilant
Category: News and Politics

AMAZING...

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-obamawins4-2008jun04,0,2262582.story?track=ntothtml

From the Los Angeles Times
COLUMN ONE

How Obama went from underdog to alpha

His charisma, soaring oratory and modern campaign strategy upset the Clinton machine.
By Mark Z. Barabak
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

June 4, 2008

CHICAGO — Barack Obama was composing his speech the night Hillary Rodham Clinton won New Hampshire, saving her presidential campaign. He glanced up to see Jim Margolis, his media strategist.

"Well?" Obama asked.

"Well," Margolis recalls replying. "I guess we're going to have to do it the hard way."

It was never going to be easy. Whatever happens in the general election, Obama's victory over Clinton after an epic 16-month battle for the Democratic nomination will go down as one of the great political upsets of all time.

Just three years out of the Illinois Legislature, saddled with an odd-sounding name and bearing the added burden of race, Obama beat a candidate boasting the party's most vaunted political operation, its premier fundraising machine and its most popular brand name.

It was a triumph of charisma and soaring oratory -- two of the oldest commodities in politics -- fused with a thoroughly modern campaign that harnessed the Internet like never before.

Obama could not compete with Clinton for the support of the political establishment, so he attracted hundreds of thousands of new voters. He could never out-raise Clinton among big donors, so he created an online network of small donors, stunning even his own advisors by raising more than $265 million. He couldn't overcome Clinton's name recognition in big states -- at least starting out -- so he focused on small ones, a strategy that proved decisive when the nominating contest became an incremental fight for delegates.

He started as an underdog, but that worked to Obama's advantage. His strategists felt free to challenge conventional thinking, like the notion that targeting young people and Republican-leaning states would be a waste of time and resources. Both proved crucial to Obama's success.

The freedom to fail buoyed the Illinois senator and his team when national polls last fall showed Obama trailing by as much as 30 points, leading many political pundits to write him off. "We didn't have the burden of expectations and a lifelong career path," said David Plouffe, Obama's preternaturally calm campaign manager. "We were very much, 'If it works out, it works out.' "

Obama also benefited from blunders committed by the Clinton camp, among them the failure to appreciate the importance of the Iowa caucuses; an expectation that the race would end quickly -- which meant the candidate was left flat-footed and broke when it didn't; and, perhaps above all, Clinton's decision to run as the candidate of experience at a time when Democratic voters were ravenous for change.

Sitting in his Chicago office, Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, pointed to his bookshelf and a copy of "Microtrends," a slice-and-dice examination of America by Mark Penn, his onetime counterpart in the Clinton campaign. "There's also such a thing as macro-trends, and they are often what define elections," Axelrod said, as elevated commuter trains rumbled below his window.

"Elections are generally defined by the incumbent . . . and rarely do people look for a replica. They almost always look for a remedy and, in [President] Bush's case, that was particularly so," Axelrod went on. "The question was, was Hillary Clinton really the remedy? It was our supposition, based on everything we could see, and intuition, that Barack represented the starkest departure from Bush and from the kind of politics that people were really recoiling from in Washington."



All winning campaigns seem brilliant in retrospect. The reverse is true for a losing effort: The mistakes are obvious with the clarity of hindsight. But in Clinton's case, many of them are still startling.

Despite its fearsome reputation, many of the Clinton campaign's decision-makers had never worked in a presidential primary. It showed not just in their underestimation of Iowa and other caucus states, but the attempt to run a general election campaign, aimed at the political center, in a contest dominated early on by liberal voters.

Penn's experience helping guide President Clinton to reelection in 1996 -- with the aid of a strong economy and weak GOP opponent -- was not like the tough 1992 campaign.

"You had some tremendously talented people, but not a lot who were seriously tested in battle," said one Clinton loyalist familiar with the inner workings of her campaign.

By contrast, key members of the Obama team -- Margolis, Axelrod, national field director Steve Hildebrand, communication strategists Larry Grisolano and Robert Gibbs -- had all worked in at least one presidential campaign. Plouffe knew the national landscape at a granular level from stints with the Democratic House and Senate campaign committees.

The Clinton operation, which prided itself on pugnacity, was rife with backbiting and turf battles: between the field staff and headquarters, among Penn and his fellow strategists. The tensions slowed decision-making and produced a constant struggle over the candidate's message, which shifted throughout the race. Clinton, the voice of Washington wisdom, gave way to Clinton the insurgent. Clinton's softer side was highlighted for a time, then Clinton became a fist-shaking populist.

The Obama campaign operated on a more even keel, like the candidate himself. His message -- boiled down to two words, hope and change -- never wavered. There were differences among advisors, mainly over how hard to hit back when their candidate was attacked. But disagreements rarely surfaced in public; there was a cohesion and mutual regard among Obama strategists that was sorely lacking in the Clinton campaign -- and, for that matter, those of the last two Democratic nominees, Al Gore and John F. Kerry.

"When we had low points, there wasn't someone who came in screaming, pointing fingers in 12 different directions," Margolis said.

Obama insisted that his campaign work that way. "We're all in this together," Axelrod recalled the candidate telling his top strategists at an early organizational meeting in January 2007. "We're going to rise or fall together. No sharp elbows. No big egos. I want us all to be a team."

If there was a crucial point in the race, it was the Iowa caucuses. Obama's victory didn't win him the nomination. But it can be strongly argued that Clinton's third-place finish marked the beginning of the end of her candidacy, which had always been predicated on a string of early wins. That was how Gore captured the nomination in 2000 and Kerry in 2004, starting with victories in Iowa.

Obama's win in the overwhelmingly white state was crucial in sending a message to black voters, particularly in South Carolina, another early-voting state, who were initially skeptical of his candidacy.

"Iowa helped reinforce the notion that Obama was a real candidate who had a chance of victory," said Bill Carrick, a Democratic strategist and South Carolina native, who stayed neutral in the nominating fight. "That took what everyone presumed would have been a Clinton asset -- the support of the African American community -- and turned it into an Obama asset."

From the beginning, it was Obama's goal to finish ahead of Clinton in Iowa; anything less, Obama strategists believed, would have likely ended his candidacy. "It was a very sketchy deal going forward," Axelrod said. "We thought we could navigate that, but we weren't confident."

Initially, the campaign set its sights on second place. The presumption was that former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who never stopped running after his 2004 try for president, would win Iowa. But Edwards, overshadowed by the Obama-Clinton duel, began to fade, and by late fall Obama was narrowly leading in some state surveys. (Edwards would come in second, just ahead of Clinton, and quit the race by the end of January.)

While the Obama campaign was single-minded about Iowa -- investing so much time and effort in the state that he began slipping in national polls -- Clinton strategists were much more ambivalent. Some suggested she skip Iowa, given its left-leaning electorate and the face time voters demand; former deputy campaign manager Mike Henry was among those strategists. He wrote a memo arguing that Clinton's efforts would be better spent elsewhere. Iowa, after all, was one of the few places where Clinton's husband had never seriously campaigned, denying her the built-in advantage she enjoyed in other states. (In 1992, when Bill Clinton made his first presidential bid, Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin was running, so the rest of the Democrats ceded the state.)

But after Henry's memo became public in May 2007, Clinton rejected his advice. "I'm unequivocally committed to competing in Iowa," she told Radio Iowa.

Despite that, however, insiders describe a constant fight over resources and the time Clinton would spend in the state. "They didn't know what they didn't know, and they didn't come to understand that until very late," said one of her key Iowa supporters, who requested anonymity to speak candidly.

The New York senator spent more than $20 million in Iowa and devoted more than 60 days of campaigning. But Clinton, 60, could not top Obama's organizational effort -- and not just because he outspent her or visited more often. Obama, 46, was a political phenom, a captivating speaker who drew tens of thousands of Iowans to his events, starting with his February 2007 announcement swing. To attend, participants were asked to provide their phone numbers and e-mail addresses; within days the campaign followed up by asking them to volunteer.

It was a strategy replicated across the country, providing the "human capital," as Axelrod put it, to build a national grass-roots network at a relatively low cost. Even better, many of the same supporters went online to contribute to Obama's campaign, paying for the professional organizers the campaign dispatched to lead its volunteer army.

Obama "overwhelmed her from the bottom up," said Joe Trippi, an Edwards advisor who made pioneering use of the Internet as manager of Howard Dean's 2004 presidential run.



Most critical was the campaign's focus on small states, particularly those holding caucuses. Clinton strategists believed that caucuses, which require a commitment of several hours and tend to draw the party's most liberal activists, were unlikely to attract voters taken with Clinton's more centrist message. Instead, they expected to steamroll through the big states, where the former first lady's establishment support and household name offered a huge advantage -- and they spent accordingly.

But that overlooked a crucial thing about the way Democrats choose their nominee.

The Republican Party awards its delegates on a winner-take-all basis. The system is designed to quickly winnow the field and swiftly settle on a nominee. Under those rules, Clinton almost surely would have beaten Obama.

But the Democrats allocate their delegates on a proportional basis, meaning even a losing candidate is guaranteed a share. Although Obama lost most of the bigger states to Clinton, he often walked away with a healthy chunk of delegates by keeping competitive; under party rules, his big wins in small places paid off much more than Clinton's smaller victories in big states.

Take hard-fought Pennsylvania. Clinton won 55% to 45%, netting 12 delegates. Obama, by contrast, netted that many breezing through Idaho, which he carried, 79% to 17%. With scant effort he won Kansas, 74% to 26%, netting an additional 14 delegates.

Overall, Obama's caucus wins in 17 states and territories accounted for most of his lead over Clinton in pledged delegates, or those awarded on the basis of election results. That, in turn, helped Obama win over a majority of what the Democrats call superdelegates, the 800 members of Congress and party insiders who enjoy automatic votes at the nominating convention in Denver.

After winning Iowa on Jan. 3, Obama strategists were counting on a victory five days later in New Hampshire to propel him into Feb. 5, the biggest day of primary balloting in history. Voters in 22 states and American Samoa were heading to the polls, and Clinton looked to be a strong favorite.

Obama lost New Hampshire -- and perhaps deserved to, Axelrod now says, after taking what amounted to a victory lap around the state. But he bounced back Jan. 26 with a big win in South Carolina.

Luck helps in politics, and one of Obama's biggest breaks came from an unlikely source: former President Clinton. The results of the South Carolina primary were magnified, Obama strategists believe, by Bill Clinton's headline-grabbing performance in the state.

He chewed out a reporter and also suggested Obama's growing black support could cost his wife victory, a not-so-subtle way, some thought, of injecting race into the campaign. Afterward, the former president outraged many African Americans -- his loyal supporters as president -- by comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson, who won South Carolina during his quixotic 1988 campaign. The publicity drew heightened attention to Obama's 28-point margin, Plouffe said, and soured many voters on the Clintons and their combative style of politics. That underlined Obama's promise to bring a fresh approach to Washington and "gave us added velocity heading into Feb. 5," Plouffe said.

In their private calculations, the Obama camp strategists expected their candidate to end that day trailing Clinton by about 100 elected delegates. Instead, he won 13 of the 23 contests -- six of them caucuses -- and finished with a lead of 30 elected delegates.

Clinton's quick-kill strategy had failed, and proved to be one of her costliest mistakes. Worse, she was experiencing money problems. On Feb. 6, it was announced that Clinton had lent her campaign $5 million and that some staffers were working without pay. (Despite raising more than $215 million, she would eventually lend her campaign more than $11 million to keep the lights on.)

"I think the Clinton camp's basic attitude was that the whole calendar was set up to deliver the knockout blow on Feb. 5," Obama told reporters the day after. "We've got many more rounds to fight."

Obama, with his national grass-roots network and Internet-fueled fundraising, was ready in a way Clinton was not. Over the next month, between Feb. 5 and March 4, he won 11 consecutive contests and expanded his lead among elected delegates to more than 150. Although it was not clear at the time, the race was essentially decided.

The two fought to a draw in March in Texas, Clinton winning the primary and Obama winning its caucuses. Clinton took Rhode Island, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico and South Dakota. Obama won Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Guam, North Carolina and Montana, and barely lost Indiana.

A flap over Obama's incendiary ex-minister, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., scared away some voters in the last few states, but not superdelegates.

Undeterred, they steadily streamed toward the presumptive nominee. The only thing left was for Obama to run out the calendar and for the party to resolve a dispute over Florida and Michigan, two states that broke the rules by voting early. Clinton's fight to recognize their delegates was her last stand; she suffered a final setback Saturday with an agreement to seat them with half a vote each, dashing her last chance of significantly cutting Obama's delegate lead.

The delegates he added Tuesday in South Dakota and Montana, along with an outpouring of superdelegate support, finally allowed Obama to claim the nomination and become the first African American to win a major-party presidential nomination.

Speaking to supporters Tuesday night in New York City, Clinton praised Obama and his campaign, but stopped short of conceding. She said she would spend the next few days deciding "how to move forward, with the best interests of our country and our party guiding my way."

Axelrod remains a Clinton fan. In the office at his consulting firm, about a mile from Obama headquarters, he keeps a framed picture of the senator, an old acquaintance, taken a few years ago with his wife and daughter. She was a good candidate, he said, a strong debater and a compelling personality. But her strategy was flawed.

She campaigned too long as a lofty front-runner, following the old rules of politics, emphasizing the past, downplaying her own attempt to make history as the nation's first woman president. It was no match for Obama's message of hope and change, embodied by his breaking of racial barriers and the new blood he drew into the political system.

"She just wasn't well-positioned," Axelrod said, "for the year this was."

mark.barabak@latimes.com

9:36 AM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Yes We Can Obama Song by Will.I.Am

Yes We Can Obama Song by Will.I.Am

8:55 PM - 0 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Barrack Obama Speech

Barrack Obama Speech

8:53 PM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

Who will be Who’s Vice President? I Love this Stuff.....
Current mood: excited
Category: News and Politics

Sam Nunn would be a shoe in for the Demo's -- if he wasn't older than Dirt! But then again Obama is so young that may be the perfect choice!

We will see.


VP race? Pundits start their engines

By Chris Cillizza and Shailagh Murray

The Washington Post

WASHINGTON — Sen. Barack Obama's victory in North Carolina and near miss in Indiana last week remove much of the doubt about whether he will win the Democratic nomination for president. With Obama the likely Democratic nominee and Sen. John McCain long his party's presumptive nominee, the search for their vice-presidential picks can now begin.

Here's our list of the five most logical veeps — assuming McCain and Obama are the candidates — ranked in order of their likelihood of being chosen, with No. 1 on each side considered the likeliest.

Republicans

5. Mitt Romney: A few months ago, it would have seemed crazy to include Romney on a list of potential McCain vice-presidential picks. It was an open secret that the two men didn't like each another, but politics is a funny game, and Romney is charting an aggressive fundraising schedule on behalf of McCain over the coming months.

4. Charlie Crist: No single politician had more to do with McCain becoming his party's standard-bearer than the governor of Florida. Crist's endorsement of the senator from Arizona just before the Sunshine State primary put McCain over the top and cemented his grip on the nomination. But, if polling is to be believed, McCain may have an easier time there if Obama is the nominee and won't necessarily need Crist.

3. Rob Portman: Portman, who spent 12 years in Congress before several stints in the Bush White House, will be one of the finalists for the job. Why? He hails from Ohio — perhaps the swingingest of swing states this fall — and is widely acknowledged as an expert on economics.

2. John Thune: Thune is handsome and articulate and comes across as a moderate, despite his very clear conservative voting record. Thune is also a hero in conservative circles, thanks to his defeat of then-Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., in 2004. The one knock on Thune is that he hails from a state that is already well in hand for Republicans.

1. Tim Pawlenty: The Minnesota governor remains the single possibility in the Republican vice-presidential field who best fits what McCain wants and needs in a VP. Pawlenty has been elected twice in a Democratic-leaning state that is almost certain to be a battleground in the fall. He is liked and respected by both conservatives and moderates, and he gets rave reviews for his political instincts. He has also known McCain for nearly three decades and, at 47, could allay some concerns about McCain's age.

Democrats

5. Sam Nunn: It's hard to argue with Nunn's place as one of the pre-eminent Democratic thinkers on foreign-policy and defense issues. He spent more than two decades in the Senate representing Georgia and chaired the Armed Services Committee. That résumé, coupled with the fact that Nunn is a white Southerner, could well make him an appealing pick for Obama.

4. Tim Kaine: Kaine's great strengths in this process are biography and geography. A former missionary and a man who is eager to talk about his faith, Kaine could help Obama bridge the "God gap" that has emerged in recent presidential elections. He is also the highest-ranking elected official in Virginia, an emerging battleground state, and his popularity, coupled with Obama's appeal to African-American voters statewide and white voters in Northern Virginia, could make the contest for the Old Dominion a barn burner.

3. Hillary Rodham Clinton: After Clinton's speech in Indianapolis last Tuesday, many within the party thought she was opening the door to the idea of sharing the ticket with Obama. Her rhetoric since then, however, particularly her comments about "white voters," may well quash the "Dream Ticket" talk before it begins in earnest. While Clinton has broad and deep support within the Democratic Party, picking her as vice president would seem to run counter to Obama's change message.

2. Ted Strickland: Although Obama may not feel compelled to name Clinton to the ticket, he is well aware of the need to offer an olive branch of sorts to the backers of the senator from New York. Strickland, the first-term governor of Ohio, may fit the bill. Not only is he an active and high-profile Clinton supporter, but he is also the popular chief executive of a state that Obama must find a way to win if he hopes to be president.

1. Kathleen Sebelius: The second-term Kansas governor earns the top spot because of her ability to further bolster Obama's strengths while not exacerbating his weaknesses. Picking Sebelius would affirm Obama's core message of change and would give Obama's run even more historic weight. Sebelius' electoral success in traditionally Republican Kansas would also echo Obama's pledge to change the electoral map in the fall.

Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company

6:26 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Malibu Beach Rental only $150,000 a month
Current mood: shocked
Category: Movies, TV, Celebrities

Crazy but true!


http://www.latimes.com/news/la-re-lease24mar24,0,6257839.story?track=ntothtml

From the Los Angeles Times

A sizzling summer in Malibu: a rental for $150,000 a month

That’s the peak -- so far. Those who can handle a sky-high price like the proximity to stars that it buys them.

By Ann Brenoff
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

March 24, 2008

For summer lease: Four-bedroom, eight-bathroom bluff-side Malibu house. Price -- $150,000 a month.

That’s a jaw dropper, even for Malibu. The Cliffside Drive property’s rental price is a local record high, according to the Multiple Listing Service, but it’s just the latest pinnacle in a summer rental market that seems to have no high-water mark. Even mundane beachfront houses are renting for as much as $70,000 a month, and they’re still expected to be snapped up by mid-April.

It all seems impossible, when real estate is wilting just about everywhere else. But Malibu in the summer isn’t like everywhere else.

The housing market’s troubles haven’t touched homes valued at $10 million or above -- which pretty much defines the Malibu beachfront, according to John Karevoll of DataQuick Information Systems, a real estate research firm. And rents reflect that.

A big chunk of the summer crowd is from the entertainment industry, and hobnobbing never comes cheap. Plenty of deals are made at the beach -- and if you aren’t there, someone else will be. And of course, there’s also the opportunity to bump into Pamela Anderson buying organic carrot juice at Ralphs or to sip a latte next to Pierce Brosnan at Starbucks.

Finally, corporate money is pumping up Malibu prices as large publicity firms and companies with products to sell use summer rentals to host celebrity-studded bashes -- chock-full of product placements that wind up in photos in magazines and online. The "party houses" may find themselves on a tighter leash this summer, though, as the Malibu City Council takes steps to curtail noise and traffic complaints.

Still, the prices are head-spinners.

Chris Cortazzo, listing agent for Malibu’s new top seed -- all 11,000-plus square feet of it -- touts the property’s completely private location (that’s Realtorspeak for paparazzi-proof). The Mediterranean-style home has direct beach access via steps down a cliff and interior furnishings described alternately as "tons of marble and fancy chandeliers" or "on the gaudy side." That last description from a competing listing agent. Leasing requires a two-month minimum and a hefty $300,000 security deposit.

Not far behind in price is a $135,000-a-month architectural four-bedroom house plus a detached studio with a pool and spa on Malibu Colony beach, listed by Coldwell Banker Previews agent Susan Monus. Gorgeous as it may be, tire-kickers might not like that the property is on a through street. Still, there are few better addresses than this -- you’ve got Adam Sandler and Jeremy Piven up the street, Brian Grazer and Mel Brooks around the corner. And it’s quite close to where Paris Hilton rented last summer.

The official realty line is that those who don’t secure a lease by mid-April are likely to lose out on the primo beach neighborhoods of the Colony, Broad Beach and Carbon Beach, and there seems to be plenty of people ready to pony up more than what average Joes earn in a year for a month of lounging along the gilded coast. (Gawkers can access http://idx.themls.com/caroldarrow/lease.cfm and mosey through the marble halls.)

It’s the same story on the East Coast, where a house on Long Island’s Southhampton Village is listed at $450,000 for the month of August.

"The choice Hamptons properties get rented early," said Silke Oellrich of Prudential Douglas Elliman. "People started coming to look for summer homes in November," she said. (The Hamptons’ siren song must have captured the heart of Hollywood heavyweight Steven Spielberg, who just bought a property there for about $20 million.)

Of Monus’ three Malibu summer beach listings, one listed at $100,000 a month already has been scarfed up, and she expects the remaining two -- the aforementioned listing at $135,000 a month and another at $80,000 a month -- to go shortly. A count of top agents’ websites found at least 11 summer listings for $75,000 or more a month, and there are more that are discreetly held by agents, who don’t post them on websites or the MLS.

"Malibu is the Riviera of the United States," Monus says, shrugging off the prices. And she may be right. Even Newport Beach and Laguna Beach top out at about $60,000 a month.

Is it really that incredible to summer in the ’bu?

Apparently so. In the words of actor and Malibu renter Daniel Baldwin, "Malibu in the summer is where the United States ends and life begins."

Baldwin is leasing a furnished Villa Malibu apartment through Coldwell Banker agent Scotty Brown, who lists 10 units in the complex for the summer that rent for a relatively modest $10,000 to $30,000 a month. Villa Malibu, on the inland side of the Pacific Coast Highway, comes with its own concierge, tennis pro, car service and personal trainer. No, they won’t cut your meat for you.

Sharon Clayton, 44, a banker, keeps homes in London, Bahrain and Tampa, Fla. She rents the same "small" house on Carbon Beach each summer to entertain business associates. Last year, she paid $85,000 for a three-month rental.

"We have visitors of all ages at our parties in the summer -- from the single digits to close to the triple digits," she said in an e-mail, "and we all enjoy dancing together in the summer!"

Michael Gardner, a Malibu agent with Prudential who likes to track such transactions, predicts that the demand this summer will surpass that of any previous year. "By May," he said, "all the good listings may very well be gone." Previous years saw four homes break the $100,000-per-month mark, with one topping out at $120,000 on Broad Beach, Gardner said.

"Recession? What recession?" he asked.

Most of the summer rentals are second homes and remain vacant or scarcely used during the winter months. But come summer, people want to be at the beach. Monus said summer renters have come from Europe and other states, but most live closer, in Brentwood, Bel-Air or the Hollywood Hills.

Brown of Coldwell Banker was a bit blunter. Who rents these places? Anybody who can afford it, he said, and most likely those "anybodies" are somebodies from the entertainment world.

Even some celebrity owners are joining the beach party.

Cindyana Santangelo, who has appeared in "CSI: Miami," "ER" and "Law & Order," is offering her Cove Colony home for $55,000 for the month of August. Regis Philbin and his wife, Joy, are among those she said are interested.

Coldwell Banker listing agent Madison Hildebrand said that because of the location, the home is likely to get snapped up quickly. The 3,460-square-foot house has 50 feet of beachfront, and if you don’t mind some sand in your Christian Louboutins, you can walk to two popular beach haunts -- Paradise Cove and Geoffrey’s restaurants. The five-bedroom house comes decorated with custom-made furniture, including a white leather sleigh bed in the white-on-white master suite.

If that doesn’t suit, Ozzie and Sharon Osbourne have listed their La Costa beach home at $85,000 a month with a two-month minimum. The house had been listed for sale but then offered on a $37,500 monthly lease -- off-season. Situated on La Costa Beach -- nobody’s A-list, but also without the A-list’s aggravation -- the three-story home has an Italian courtyard entrance, a stainless-steel kitchen and multiple fireplaces. There are ocean views from three of the five bedrooms. Sotheby’s agent Jonah Wilson -- son of the late Beach Boy Carl Wilson -- has the listing with Tracy Testin and Terry O’Connor of Prudential Malibu.

Available just to the north in Malibu Cove Colony is a compound with more than 100 feet of beach frontage. There’s an oceanfront spa, two master suites plus two more bedrooms, and plenty of decks overlooking the ocean. The home comes with TiVo, but it doesn’t allow pets. Summer rent is $95,000 a month.

Most homeowners, although happy to pocket the extra money, say they really don’t want to lease to those who would turn their homes into Party Central.

The party scene at last summer’s LG House Malibu is still being groaned over. The Colony house was outfitted to the nines with LG Electronics, including an HDTV/refrigerator with a 15-inch LCD screen in the door and an ice maker that offered a choice of cube shapes. The parties -- some lasted 22 hours -- were invitation-only, but paparazzi descended on the scene like bees to the hive as the house played host to young Hollywood. Neighbors howled about the loud noise, blasting music and parking nightmare the parties created.

The Malibu City Council is considering final passage of an ordinance at its meeting today that would require a permit for parties with more than 100 people at private residences -- and limit such parties to four a year. The goal, said Gail Sumpter, Malibu’s division manager for permit services and code enforcement, is to avoid a repeat of last year. The result might be that some corporate tenants turn their favor to South Bay beach towns where no such restrictions exist, but local real estate agents aren’t worried. This is, after all, Malibu, and that carries its own cachet.

"You want to know what Malibu in the summer is like?" asks Daniel Baldwin. "I start my day with coffee at Starbucks up at Trancas, then take Katie -- my boxer rescue -- for a walk along the beach."

Baldwin is partial to El Matador state beach, where he sometimes brings his 11-year-old son Atticus to look for starfish during low tide.

"It’s a marvelous place," he said.

ann.brenoff@latimes.com

5:07 PM - 6 Comments - 6 Kudos - Add Comment

Actor Unions Need to Get Act Together...
Current mood: annoyed
Category: Movies, TV, Celebrities

These two Unions have had at least a year to settle these problems.
This stuff drives me crazy!

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-sag12mar12,1,5346257.story

From the Los Angeles Times

2 actors unions to play nice

By Richard Verrier
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

March 12, 2008

Two unions representing Hollywood’s actors moved closer toward ending a fight that threatened to overshadow upcoming contract negotiations with the studios.

Leaders of the Screen Actors Guild agreed Tuesday to hold a joint board meeting with the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists on March 29 to draft proposals for negotiations that could begin in early April.

The actors’ contract expires June 30, and SAG leaders are being pressed by some prominent members to begin talks immediately to avoid another debilitating work stoppage on the heels of the Hollywood writers strike.

AFTRA President Roberta Reardon warned last week that the union would begin negotiations as early as this month -- without the Screen Actors Guild -- unless SAG dropped demands to change the terms of their 27-year partnership.

The groups have sparred over how to apportion votes on a joint committee that negotiates the main film and prime-time TV contract. SAG has long complained that each union gets equal weight even though SAG members account for the vast majority of earnings. SAG has 120,000 members compared with 70,000 in AFTRA.

Although SAG did not formally respond to Reardon’s letter, AFTRA so far has not made good on its threat to break ranks with its sister union.

The detente comes after leaders from both organizations were pressured by the AFL-CIO, of which both unions are members, to end an embarrassing spat before contract negotiations.

During a meeting in San Diego last week, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney admonished the leaders to settle their differences, two people familiar with the meeting said. A spokesman for the AFL-CIO declined to comment. AFTRA representatives also declined to comment.

On Tuesday, AFTRA Executive Director Kim Roberts Hedgpeth met with News Corp. President Peter Chernin and studio negotiator Nick Counter to discuss the upcoming talks. SAG leaders have had their own informal meetings with top studio executives.

The two unions, which share 40,000 members, could have a hard time finding common ground. AFTRA leaders support recent contracts negotiated by writers and directors. SAG leaders, however, have stressed that they will push for higher pay from new media and also seek something writers and directors couldn’t get -- more money from DVD sales.

richard.verrier@latimes.com

12:55 AM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

Santa Monica - Classic Beach, but Much More
Current mood: grateful
Category: Travel and Places

Santa Monica is the Hometown I selected for myself. Or maybe she selected me.

No matter. Home is where you feel you belong. Fit in. For me that's right here on the sandy Pacific Coast.

If you do come to town, be sure to visit the Santa Monica Pier Aquarium operated by Heal the Bay. It is great for kids, the young at heart, and those who want to peek under the waves of Santa Monica Bay.

Their web address is:

http://www.healthebay.org/smpa/


New York Times

February 22, 2008
American Journeys | Santa Monica, California

Classic Beach, but Much More