Mood:  smelly

Viagra May Decrease Ability to Smell

NEW YORK -- Higher doses of Viagra (sildenafil) may impair the ability to smell, which is possibly related to an increase in nasal congestion, German researchers report in The Journal of Urology.

A team led by Dr. V. Gudziol at the University of Dresden Medical School studied 20 healthy, young male volunteers who received Viagra, at a 50- or 100-mg dose, or inactive "placebo" and then were exposed to an odor-dispensing device.

The researchers tested the subjects' odor detection threshold, odor discrimination and odor identification ability.

They found that the 100-mg dose caused a drop in smelling or "olfactory" ability, specifically odor discrimination and odor threshold, compared with placebo. The 50-mg dose, by contrast, had no effect on olfactory function.

"In our subjects, the most likely reason for impaired...olfactory function was nasal congestion" brought on by Viagra, the authors write. They note that, while it was not evaluated in this study, previous reports have linked Viagra with a drop in nasal airflow.

News Max.com ~ Reuters ** Viagra May Decrease Ability to Smell

Posted by yaahoo_ at 12:01 AM EST

Updated: Thursday, 18 January 2007 12:33 AM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  spacey

Posted by Marc Morano

The Weather Channel’s most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming. This latest call to silence skeptics follows a year (2006) in which skeptics were compared to "Holocaust Deniers" and Nuremberg-style war crimes trials were advocated by several climate alarmists.

The Weather Channel’s (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program "The Climate Code," is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their "Seal of Approval" for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe.

"If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval. Clearly, the AMS doesn't agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns," Cullen wrote in her December 21 weblog on the Weather Channel Website. [Note: It is also worth taking a look at the comments section at the bottom of Cullen’s blog, very entertaining.] CLICK HERE. This latest call to silence skeptics of manmade global warming has been the subject of discussion at the annual American Meteorological Society’s Annual conference in San Antonio Texas this week, CLICK HERE.

"It's like allowing a meteorologist to go on-air and say that hurricanes rotate clockwise and tsunamis are caused by the weather. It's not a political statement...it's just an incorrect statement," Cullen added. [Note to Cullen: As the resident ‘climate expert’ at TWS, you should know that Hurricanes in the Southern Hemisphere do rotate clockwise. Also, Cullen and the media have ignored the growing climate skepticism by prominent scientists, CLICK HERE.

Cullen’s call for decertification of TV weatherman who do not agree with her global warming assessment follows a year (2006) in which the media, Hollywood and environmentalists tried their hardest to demonize scientific skeptics of manmade global warming. Scott Pelley, CBS News 60 Minutes correspondent, compared skeptics of global warming to "Holocaust deniers" and former Vice President turned foreign lobbyist Al Gore has repeatedly referred to skeptics as "global warming deniers." CLICK HERE & HERE.

Cullen Featured Advocate of Nuremberg-Style Trials for Climate Skeptics

In addition, Cullen’s December 17, 2006 episode of "The Climate Code" TV show, featured a columnist who openly called for Nuremberg-style Trials for climate skeptics. Cullen featured Grist Magazine’s Dave Roberts as an eco-expert opining on energy issues, with no mention of his public call to institute what amounts to the death penalty for scientists who express skepticism about global warming, CLICK HERE.

Cullen’s call for suppressing scientific dissent comes at a time when many skeptical scientists affiliated with Universities have essentially been silenced over fears of loss of tenure and the withdrawal of research grant money. The United Nations Inner Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process has also steadily pushed scientists away who hold inconvenient skeptical views and reject the alarmist conclusions presented in the IPCC’s summary for policymakers, CLICK HERE.

Cullen also participated in the New York premiere of the fictional Hollywood global warming disaster film The Day After Tomorrow in 2004 and has routinely promoted celebrity environmental views, CLICK HERE. The Weather Channel, which has billed itself as itself as the "pre-eminent provider of weather information," also served as a consultant to The Day After Tomorrow and allowed the use of its name and logo in the movie.

Broadcast meteorologists (TV weatherman) skeptical of climate alarmism have -- up until now -- been unburdened to speak out on climate issues. Cullen’s call for decertification by the AMS can only serve to intimidate skeptics and further chill free speech in the scientific community. Stripping the "Seal of Approval" from broadcast meteorologists could affect their livelihoods, impact their salaries and prestige. TV weathermen are truly the last of the independent scientists and past surveys have shown many of them to be skeptical of manmade global warming claims. Their independence is being threatened now. For more info on the background of the AMS seal, CLICK HERE.

Intimidating scientists with calls for death trials, name calling and calls for decertification appears to be the accepted tactics of the climate alarmists. The real question is: Why do climate alarmists feel the need to resort to such low brow tactics when they have a compliant media willing to repeat their every assertion without question, CLICK HERE.

The alarmists also enjoy a huge financial advantage over the skeptics with numerous foundations funding climate research, University research money and the United Nations endless promotion of the cause.

Just how much money do the climate alarmists have at their disposal? There was a $3 billion donation to the global warming cause from Virgin Air’s Richard Branson alone. The well-heeled environmental lobbying groups have massive operating budgets compared to groups that express global warming skepticism. The Sierra Club Foundation 2004 budget was $91 million and the Natural Resources Defense Council had a $57 million budget for the same year. Compare that to the often media derided Competitive Enterprise Institute’s small $3.6 million annual budget.

In addition, if a climate skeptic receives any money from industry, the media immediately labels them and attempts to discredit their work. The same media completely ignore the money flow from the environmental lobby to climate alarmists like James Hansen and Michael Oppenheimer. (ie. Hansen received $250,000 from the Heinz Foundation and Oppenheimer is a paid partisan of Environmental Defense Fund)

The alarmists have all of these advantages, yet they still feel the need to resort to desperation tactics to silence the skeptics. Could it be that the alarmists realize that the American public is increasingly rejecting their proposition that the family SUV is destroying the earth and rejecting their shrill calls for "action" to combat their computer model predictions of a "climate emergency?" CLICK HERE.

That may be the real Inconvenient Truth. After all, even the UN is reportedly downgrading man’s impact on the climate by 25% and now concedes that cow "emissions" are more damaging to the planet than C02 from cars. CLICK HERE.

Related Links: INHOFE SPEECH ON POLAR BEARS AND GLOBAL WARMING

UN DOWNGRADES MAN'S IMPACT AND COW 'EMISSIONS' MORE DAMAGING THAN CO2 FROM CARS

SENATOR INHOFE ANNOUNCES PUBLIC RELEASE OF "SKEPTIC’S GUIDE TO DEBUNKING GLOBAL WARMING"

INHOFE SAYS NEW UN ASSESSMENT PROVES FEARS OF MANMADE CATASTROPHIC GLOBAL WARMING ARE ‘UNSUSTAINABLE’

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works ~ Press Room **
Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics

Related: LIBTARD "GLOBAL WARMING" ALERTS... California Freeze Kills up to 75% of California's Citrus Crop, Yet the Algore "consensus" is that the world is burning up
WINTER KILLS ---- 5 die in car wrecks across Texas
300-mile stretch of I-10 still closed ---- Ice plays havoc with power grid
Cold Ruins Nearly $1B of Calif. Citrus; Schwarzenegger Seeks Disaster Aid
NOW IT IS SNOW IN MALIBU

Posted by yaahoo_ at 10:05 PM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 11:03 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  loud

Baby Noah and Democrat "Moral Obligations"

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: As you people remember, one of the first items on the agenda for the Nancy Pelosi Democrat House was legislation to expand the use of human embryos for stem cell research. They passed that legislation on January 10th, a week ago today, 253 to 174. It has to go to the Senate and then to the president. It will be vetoed -- well, hell, I can't say it will be vetoed, but it's got a tough road ahead. There's one inarguable fact about embryonic stem cell research, and that is in order for scientists to manufacture the stem cells that they want for research, the embryo must be destroyed. Notwithstanding that, the new House Democratic leader Steny Hoyer claimed that the Democrats' legislation did not seek to destroy life. “No, no, we're not destroying life when we destroy those embryos.” What are they doing? Well, he insisted that the legislation preserved and protected life. He said, “We have a moral obligation to provide our scientific community with the tools it needs to save lives.”

So, see, this is how the Democrats define moral obligation. You snuff out the embryo, you slice it up, you smash it, you kill it, and you wipe it out. You don't even bury it, you just wipe it out, and then you save lives in the process, even though no research indicates that that will happen yet. Six days after the Democrats passed their bill -- and you heard about baby Noah? AP ran this headline: Embryo Saved After Katrina is Born. The long and short of the story was that in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, extraordinary measures were taken to rescue 1400 embryos frozen in canisters of liquid nitrogen at a New Orleans hospital which was flooded and was sweltering, and one of those rescued embryos was later implanted. And yesterday, in the early morning hours, a baby boy named Noah by his parents was born. Of course, everybody was all warm and fuzzy and touchy-feely and, “Ah, ah, isn't it wonderful! They named him Noah, after the flood of Katrina, oh, oh, oh.” And it was. It's a beautiful thing, don't misunderstand, not making fun of anybody here. A lot of people congratulated the parents. A lot of people were moved deeply and emotional by this. But what had to happen? An embryo was not destroyed, folks. An embryo was implanted. Embryo became Noah.

I can only imagine that our newly elected friends in the Democrat Congress have to be unhappy here. Noah was a potential tool to cure diseases, and Noah was just stolen right out from under them. Steny Hoyer ought to be flipped out today. The minute Noah was born, when he found out that there were 1400 of these frozen embryos, “Look at the possible research tools there!” Instead, one of them was saved and implanted, we've got a human being named Noah, a little boy, and you've seen his picture on TV. What does he represent? The denial of a research tool to the Democrat Congress! If they were honest in what they actually say and believe, they would be outraged today that Noah exists.

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...
(AP: Embryo saved after Katrina is born)
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.
Rush Limbaugh.com ** Baby Noah and Democrat "Moral Obligations"

Posted by yaahoo_ at 8:52 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  loud

Critics See 'Slippery Slope' in Reintroduced Federal 'Hate Crimes' Law

As the new Democratic majority continues its 100-hour legislative blitz in the U.S. House, one Democrat has quietly reintroduced controversial legislation that would give the federal government more authority over so-called "hate crimes."

On Jan. 5, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas introduced a bill that would create federal guidelines for the sentencing of violent criminals who were "motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim."

It expands the scope of current federal hate crime law, which extends federal oversight to crimes that prevent the victim from engaging in a federally protected right - such as voting - and that are motivated on the basis of race, color, religion or nationality.

The new bill expands the definition of a hate crime to include sexual orientation, gender and disability and allows for any violent crime to be considered a hate crime regardless of whether is affects a victim's ability to engage in a federally protected right.

According to the bill, Congress has the authority to oversee hate crimes because of its constitutional powers to supervise interstate commerce. "Such violence affects interstate commerce in many ways," the bill states, and "instrumentalities of interstate commerce are used to facilitate the commission of such violence."

Jackson-Lee has introduced similar legislation in the past. Since 1999, she has introduced the same bill every two years. None of the bills made it out of the House Committee on the Judiciary to see a vote on the House floor.

The bill passed the House in 2005 as an amendment to the Children's Safety Act, but the Senate did not pursue its full passage.

Opponents of the bill believe it threatens free speech by opening the door for legislation aimed at curbing offensive speech.

The National Prayer Network (NPN), a group that encourages Christians to pray for the country, calls the bill "the most dangerous legislation ever to come before Congress" and charges that "it leads directly to an end of free speech."

The bill specifically addresses violent crimes that result in bodily harm, but NPN Director Ted Pike said it "sets us on a slippery slope" toward limiting speech that is offensive to the protected groups.

Pike told Cybercast News Service the bill "is not as far-reaching in its formative state" as hate crimes legislation in Canada that has been used to limit criticism of homosexuality.

"But it does set up a bias-oriented federal justice system ... and it can inevitably be broadened to involve speech crimes as well as physical crimes," Pike argued.

"It will be up to judges ... to begin to interpret and adjudicate from the bench and inevitably they broaden out the definition of a hate crime," he added.

Opponents of the bill also insist that hate crimes are not a serious enough matter for Congress to address.

According to data collected from local law enforcement agencies by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, there were 7,163 incidents of hate crimes in 2005. More than half of the crimes were motivated by race. Fewer than one in five were motivated by religion or sexual orientation.

Jackson-Lee's office was unavailable for comment on Monday, a federal holiday.

Cybercast News Service ~ Nathan Burchfiel ** Critics See 'Slippery Slope' in Reintroduced Federal 'Hate Crimes' Law

The new Demented-crat congress has nothing better to do than legislate "feelings"...

This country needs more hate crime laws like it needs a nuclear strike. And a nuclear strike might just do less harm than this law.

Under her bullshit law -- without making any attempt to physically harm anyone -- you could be tried, convicted, and imprisoned just for uttering offensive words.

For years, the libtard left keeps proulgating hate-crime legislation, in one form or another, not so much to 'protect' anyone, but in an effort to muzzle those who don't have the proper attitudes, and to eventually control what we say and speak.

Just how many of these things are the moonbats going to roll out? There's the law that turns churches into lobbies and thus restricts their ability to speak out against moral wrongs before an election, and then there's the resurrected "Fairness Doctrine," and now there's this. All this crap in their first two weeks on the job... Unbelievable.

Posted by yaahoo_ at 5:57 PM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 6:08 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  surprised

Attorney Found Naked In Courthouse With 14-Year-Old

PHILADELPHIA -- A criminal defense lawyer was arrested after a sheriff's deputy found him naked with a 14-year-old girl in a courthouse conference room, authorities said Tuesday.

Larry Charles, 49, has been charged with solicitation, attempted statutory sexual assault and related counts, said Lt. Dan Bagnell of the Police Department's Special Victims Unit.

A sheriff's deputy making his rounds in the Criminal Justice Center on Monday afternoon looked into a lawyers' conference room on the third floor and discovered Charles and the girl, Bagnell said.

"He had asked for sex. But there was no physical contact we're aware of by the time the deputy arrived at the scene", Bagnell said.

Bagnell said the girl was not a client of Charles, but their exact relationship was not clear.

Charles was awaiting arraignment early Tuesday afternoon and bail was not yet set. A woman who answered the phone at his office said she could not immediately comment.

Courts were closed Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day and it was unclear how Charles and the girl got into the conference room.

Though court proceedings were not in session, the courthouse was open for attorneys who might want to conduct other business in the building.

NBC10 Philadelphia ~ Assoc. Press ** Attorney Found Naked In Courthouse With 14-Year-Old

Posted by yaahoo_ at 4:00 PM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 4:12 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  d'oh

Fidel Doesn't Trust Great Cuban Health Care

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: "Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro is in 'very grave' condition after three failed operations and complications from an intestinal infection known as diverticulitis, a Spanish newspaper said Tuesday. The newspaper El Pais cited two unnamed sources from the Gregorio Marañon hospital in the Spanish capital of Madrid. The facility employs a surgeon ... who flew to Cuba in December to treat ... Castro." Apparently what happened there is Castro had diverticulitis. Diverticulitis is not life-threatening. It's life changing, but it's not life-threatening. What they did is they had three famed operations to deal with this. They took out part of the large intestine and they had to rewire the plumbing, and it broke, and there was flooding of waste matter and all kinds of infections set in. The point is, he's in very grave condition now and may not survive this -- if all this is true. He had three surgeries, and all done by Spanish doctors. The question is: I keep hearing about what a great health care system Cuba has.

The Cuban health care system, we keep hearing about it from the American left, "Why, why, everybody has free health care, and it's really good," and so forth. I've never noticed any leftists going to Havana for their own medical care, or sending their kids there, and I guess when it came time to save his own life, Fidel decided he didn't want access to the Cuban health care system as well.

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...
(AP: Spanish paper: Castro in grave condition after 3 failed operations)
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.
Rush Limbaugh.com ** Fidel Doesn't Trust Great Cuban Health Care

Posted by yaahoo_ at 12:01 AM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 4:28 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  chillin'

California Freeze Threatens Citrus Crop

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

As you know, the Al Gore movie, an Inconvenient... Well, lie, truth, they're trying to show it in as many schools across the country as possible. In Seattle, some parents have finally said, "Wait a minute! This is propaganda! If you're going to show this, show the alternative point of view on this. This is by no means concluded science." It's "scientific consensus," which is not science. Again, I say, folks: if there is consensus in science, there's no science.

"What do you mean Rush? We all have to agree and get along."

It's very simple. I'll be happy to explain this. Consensus is nothing more than a bunch of wusses getting together and coming up with a proposition they can all agree on for whatever reasons. Usually they have political biases or some other thing and just want to avoid controversy. Let's say that a bunch of scientists got together and said, "You know what? We have formed a scientific consensus that the earth is flat." Would the consensus make it right? No, because science has told us we now know the earth is round. Science is what it is. It's not the result of consensus, and the only reason people think that there's global warming is because a whole bunch of scientists are have agreed and they come up with a consensus. So this movie's all over the place, and finally some people are stepping up, like parents, of all places in Seattle, to try to stop this. Well, in the midst of all this global warming we keep hearing about all the mild temperatures in the Northeast and so forth:

"Three nights of freezing temperatures have cost California up to three-quarters of its billion-dollar citrus crop, according to an industry estimate given Monday as forecasters warned that the cold weather could batter groves through midweek. Other crops, including avocados and strawberries, also have suffered damage in the cold snap," as well. "'This is one of those freezes that, unfortunately, we'll all remember,' California Department of Food and Agriculture Secretary A.G. Kawamura said. Damages from the latest freeze will likely surpass those caused by a three-day freeze in December 1998 that destroyed 85 percent of California's citrus crop, a loss valued at $700 million..." Now, the global warming advocates can say, "See? It is warming because in '98 when they had the freeze 85% of the crop was destroyed. This time only 75% of the crop will be destroyed. So it is getting warmer."

They'll twist it and turn it however they choose, but the fact is if we have global warming (sigh). I just get tired of trying to make this case. "Citrus growers already have lost between 50 and 75 percent of their crops to the cold snap, said Philip LoBue, a Tulare County farmer and chairman of California Citrus Mutual, a 2,000-member trade organization. 'When you're already cutting ice within the oranges, you know those are gone,' LoBue said. While growers hastened to pick as much of the $960 million in fruit still hanging on trees before the cold hit Friday, an industry labor shortage meant much of the crop went unharvested," and yes, there is in association with this freeze, in the California citrus industry, a desire for more "undocumented workers" to do the picking. They just don't have enough, despite all of the illegal immigrants in town and in the state, the citrus growers are still saying, "We could have gotten to save a lot more of the crop if they'd have just had some more undocumented workers!"

Read the Background Material...
(Warning! Rising levels of science abuse)
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.
Rush Limbaugh.com ** California Freeze Threatens Citrus Crop
Related: WINTER KILLS ---- 5 die in car wrecks across Texas
300-mile stretch of I-10 still closed ---- Ice plays havoc with power grid
Cold Ruins Nearly $1B of Calif. Citrus; Schwarzenegger Seeks Disaster Aid
NOW IT IS SNOW IN MALIBU

Posted by yaahoo_ at 12:01 AM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 10:17 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  silly

Oil drops 3.4 percent, Saudi says don't panic

NEW YORK -- Oil prices plunged more than 3 percent on Tuesday after Saudi Arabia said OPEC production cuts were working well and there was no need for an emergency meeting of the producer group.

U.S. crude <CLc1> settled down $1.78 to $51.21 per barrel after touching $50.53, the lowest level since May 26, 2005, in earlier activity. Brent futures <LCOc1> shed 86 cents to $52.26.

The price has fallen around 16 percent since the end of last year, in part due to warm weather in the U.S. Northeast, the world's top heating oil market, in early January.

"We took measures in October in Doha and measures in Abuja (in December) and I believe these measures are working well. Inventories in the fourth quarter have come down ... which puts the market closer to balance," Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi said in New Delhi.

"Do not panic. Actually there is no reason for a meeting."

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) agreed to cut 1.2 million barrels per day (bpd) of output from November 1 and then to cut another 500,000 bpd from February 1.

There has been speculation OPEC could hold an emergency meeting before its next scheduled conference on March 15.

Venezuelan Energy and Mines Minister Rafael Ramirez has said oil prices had fallen "too much" and that he would favor an extra meeting.

Other commodities have also faced a rocky start to the year and base metals fell in early trading on Tuesday before stabilizing around midsession.

"We should not underestimate the global mood on commodities," said Frederic Lasserre of SG CIB in Paris. "There is not as much appetite for commodities anymore."

He predicted oil prices would test $50 in the near term, but then fresh buying interest could emerge.

Analysts said OPEC would also brake the slide and deeper price falls could drive the cartel to implement further cuts.

"We don't really see a collapse in prices. The further it goes down, the more hesitant the market will be about going even further," said Eoin O'Callaghan of BNP Paribas. "OPEC still has an impact on the market."

(Additional reporting by Fayen Wong in Sydney, Mayank Bhardwaj and Unni Krishnan in New Dehli, Barbara Lewis in London)
Reuters ~ Matthew Robinson ** Oil drops 3.4 percent, Saudi says don't panic
Related: Oil falls to 20-month low, eyes key $50 mark

Posted by yaahoo_ at 12:01 AM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 4:16 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  spacey

Kucinich: Congress To Take On FCC

Over the weekend, the National Conference for Media Reform was held in Memphis, TN, with a number of notable speakers on hand for the event. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made an surprise appearance at the convention to announce that he would be heading up a new House subcommittee which will focus on issues surrounding the Federal Communications Commission.

The Presidential candidate said that the committee would be holding "hearings to push media reform right at the center of Washington.” The Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee was to be officially announced this week in Washington, D.C., but Kucinich opted to make the news public early.

In addition to media ownership, the committee is expected to focus its attention on issues such as net neutrality and major telecommunications mergers. Also in consideration is the "Fairness Doctrine," which required broadcasters to present controversial topics in a fair and honest manner. It was enforced until it was eliminated in 1987.

Kucinich said in his speech that "We know the media has become the servant of a very narrow corporate agenda" and added "we are now in a position to move a progressive agenda to where it is visible."

FCC Commissioner Michael Copps was also on hand at the conference and took broadcasters to task for their current content, speaking of "too little news, too much baloney passed off as news. Too little quality entertainment, too many people eating bugs on reality TV. Too little local and regional music, too much brain-numbing national play-lists." Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein also spoke at the event.

Friday Morning Quarterback Album Report ** Kucinich: Congress To Take On FCC

Funny, I don't remember Demented-crats campaigning for the suppression of speech they don't like. Now the libiot moonbats think they have a mandate for this. Someone should've taught this "intellectual, smarter than everyone else" libtard (in the third grade) that the right to free speech doesn't extend to any constitutional right to be listened to.

UPDATE: El Rushbo himself chimes in on the latest libtard attempt to enact the Fairness Doctrine: "This is just the Stalinist left's latest attempt to muzzle this program..."

"All you supporters of the Fairness Doctrine who think this show needs to be 'balanced,' let me tell you something: The truth does not need balance. And the truth is what we do on this program." More Quotes

Kucinich Revives "Hush Rush" Movement

•

•

•

•

•

•

Posted by yaahoo_ at 10:13 PM EST

Updated: Wednesday, 17 January 2007 7:41 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink

Mood:  silly

Equal Cheers for Boys and Girls Draw Some Boos

By Winnie Hu

WHITNEY POINT, N.Y. -- Thirty girls signed up for the cheerleading squad this winter at Whitney Point High School in upstate New York. But upon learning they would be waving their pompoms for the girls’ basketball team as well as the boys’, more than half of the aspiring cheerleaders dropped out.

The eight remaining cheerleaders now awkwardly adjust their routines for whichever team is playing here on the home court -- “Hands Up You Guys” becomes “Hands Up You Girls”-- to comply with a new ruling from federal education officials interpreting Title IX, the law intended to guarantee gender equality in student sports.

“It feels funny when we do it,” said Amanda Cummings, 15, the cheerleading co-captain, who forgot the name of a female basketball player mid-cheer last month.

Whitney Point is one of 14 high schools in the Binghamton area that began sending cheerleaders to girls’ games in late November, after the mother of a female basketball player in Johnson City, N.Y., filed a discrimination complaint with the United States Department of Education. She said the lack of official sideline support made the girls seem like second-string, and violated Title IX’s promise of equal playing fields for both sexes.

But the ruling has left many people here and across the New York region booing, as dozens of schools have chosen to stop sending cheerleaders to away games, as part of an effort to squeeze all the home girls’ games into the cheerleading schedule.

Boys’ basketball boosters say something is missing in the stands at away games, cheerleaders resent not being able to meet their rivals on the road, and even female basketball players being hurrahed are unhappy.

In Johnson City, students and parents say they have accepted the change even as they question the need for it.

Several cheerleaders there recalled a game two years ago, long before the complaint, when the squad decided at the last minute to cheer for the girls’ team because a boys’ game was canceled.

The cheers drowned out directions from the girls’ coach, frustrated the players, and created so much tension that the cheerleaders left before halftime.

“They asked, ‘Why are you here?’ ” recalled Joquina Spence, 18, a senior cheerleader. “We told them, ‘We’re here to support you,’ and it was a problem because they kept yelling at us.”

But, as the New York State Public High School Athletic Association warned in a letter to its 768 members in November, the education department determined that cheerleaders should be provided “regardless of whether the girls’ basketball teams wanted and/or asked for” them.

The ruling followed a similar one in September in the Philadelphia suburbs, and comes as high schools nationwide are redefining the role of cheerleaders in response to parental and legal pressures as well as growing sensitivity to sexism among athletic directors, especially as more women step into those roles.

Federal education officials would not specify how many Title IX complaints concerning cheerleading the Office for Civil Rights is investigating. But a spokesman said the department received 64 complaints nationwide last year concerning unequal levels of publicity given to girls’ and boys’ teams -- which includes the issue of cheerleading -- most from New York state. That compares with a total of 28 such complaints over the previous four years.

In September, the Prince George’s County, Md., public schools agreed to provide publicity equally for its male and female athletes, including cheerleaders at competitive events, as part of a lengthy list of changes after the National Women’s Law Center raised Title IX complaints against the 134,000-student district.

Last February, a statewide group of physical education teachers in California called for cheerleaders to attend girls’ and boys’ games “in the same number, and with equal enthusiasm” as part of its five-year goals.

And for the first time this fall at Westborough High school in the Boston suburbs, cheerleaders were provided for all the varsity athletic teams, including girls’ field hockey and volleyball. “In our minds, there’s no major or minor sports,” said Brian Callaghan, Westborough’s athletic director.

Here in the Binghamton area, three schools named in the original complaint -- two in Elmira, N.Y., and one in Horseheads -- are rebelling against the ruling, in the latest in a series of arguments over fulfilling the requirements of Title IX, which has been a source of contention among educators, athletes and feminists alike since its adoption in 1972.

James Young, a lawyer for the Horseheads Central School District, said cheerleaders there compete in their own tournaments and are not seen as support players. He noted that the “Rowdy Raiders” pep group is already dispatched to cheer for boys’ and girls’ teams alike.

“We regard our cheerleaders as athletes, while they are working on a 1970s stereotype that cheerleaders are here to support the boys,” Mr. Young said of the education department’s ruling. “We have a really solid women’s athletics program and we support it our way.”

Richard T. Stank, president of the Southern Tier Athletic Conference, which represents the 17 schools in the Binghamton area named in the complaint, said even some of the school officials and coaches complying with the ruling question its validity. “I don’t see how cheerleaders having to be at boys’ and girls’ games is what Title IX was set up to do,” he said.

Under Title IX, all schools and colleges that receive federal money are prohibited from gender discrimination in any area, from academics to athletics. The education department has interpreted that mandate to mean, among other things, that girls’ and boys’ teams must receive equal treatment, from the salaries of their coaches to the condition of their locker rooms.

Intended to expand opportunities for female athletes, Title IX essentially requires schools and colleges to spend equivalent amounts on men’s and women’s sports programs. But some Title IX supporters complain that some schools have twisted the letter of the law to skirt its spirit, cutting lower-profile men’s sports like wrestling or swimming to offset the costs of football rather than adding women’s teams. But others complain that the law has expanded women’s teams of limited interest at the expense of more popular boys’ teams.

Cheerleading has long been a source of contention. Some women’s sports advocates complain that schools count it as a varsity sport as a sneaky way to increase the numbers of the female side of the athletic department balance sheet without changing historic disparities. Others see the varsity letters as a mark of respect for the athletic and acrobatic feats the squads perform.

So while the complaint that originated here was based on whether the boys and girls basketball players were being treated equally, the ruling has renewed questions about cheerleaders’ status.

Rosie Pudish, the parent who filed the original complaint, said she did so even though her own daughter, Keri, a varsity basketball player at Johnson City High School, did not particularly want cheerleaders at her games.

Ms. Pudish said that as many as 60 cheerleaders, along with their friends and parents, would attend the boys’ games, injecting a level of excitement and spirit that was missing from the girls’ contests.

“It sends the wrong message that girls are second-class athletes and don’t deserve the school spirit, that they’re just little girls playing silly games and the real athletes are the boys,” said Ms. Pudish, an accountant who works for the federal government.

At most high schools, including those in New York City and its suburbs, cheerleaders traditionally follow the boys’ basketball and football games, and only occasionally root for other teams -- like girls’ basketball -- if a playoff berth or a championship is at stake.

So far, no one here has suggested that football cheerleaders have to show up for field hockey games next fall. But the education department ruled that if the Binghamton-area schools provided cheerleaders for boys’ basketball games, then they must provide them on the same terms for girls’ basketball.

To comply, nearly all of the schools have decided to send cheerleaders to an equal number of boys’ and girls’ games, and only at home to avoid overloading the cheerleaders’ schedules. That drew complaints from cheerleaders who liked traveling to away games -- and from boys’ basketball players and fans who were left cheer-less half the time.

“It’s probably toughest on some of the parents,” said John Allen, athletic director of the Chenango Valley Central School District, just northeast of Binghamton. “All of a sudden they’re at games, and there are no cheerleaders.”

At a small school like Whitney Point, with 525 students, the ruling has devastated a cheerleading program that had just begun to rebound after being eliminated in budget cuts in 2002. Some of the girls who dropped out just did not want to cheer for other girls, while others said the team was not as fun without traveling to away games and being able to check out routines by rival cheerleading teams. (Since most schools in the league are complying with the ruling by keeping cheerleaders on their home courts, the squads are now left to rah-rah without response.)

The girls’ basketball players complained about the change, too; the coach asked cheerleaders to stay on the bench at crucial moments during the first few games so as not to distract his players. But after an awkward start, the girls have settled into a routine of sorts, and have posed together for post-game pictures.

Katelin Maxson, 17, a senior who is the cheerleading captain, said that while she does not mind cheering for the girls, it has doubled her workload: She has continued the tradition here of decorating the lockers of the basketball players on game days and bringing them treats.

“We joined sports to have fun, but they’re basically taking the fun away and giving us more work,” she said. “The interest is down so much, and it’s going to keep dropping, until there’s no cheerleading anymore.”

NY Times (Jihad Journal) ~ Winnie Hu ** Equal Cheers for Boys and Girls Draw Some Boos

Posted by yaahoo_ at 2:35 PM EST

Updated: Monday, 15 January 2007 4:27 PM EST

Share This Post

Permalink