Al Sharpton is not happy with Glenn Beck.  On The O’Reilly Factor yesterday he took umbrage with Beck’s desire to “take back the Civil Rights movement.”  Now, as I see it there are several reasons a so-called Black Community leader like Sharpton could find that language offensive.

It could be that be Al believes that the Civil Rights movement – one in which Americans of all races, creeds and backgrounds came together to forge a new national character that elevated previously down-put groups to equal legal and social footing with the majority population as a whole – is the exclusive property of African-Americans.  He said so much during his counter-rally when he commented on the date being the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s “I Have A  Dream” speech on the mall. “This is our day!” Sharpton bloviated.  “And we ain’t giving it away!”

I guess the idea that those on the mall this Saturday had no right to that day came as a surprise to Dr. Alveda King who is the niece of Dr. King and was a featured speaker at Beck’s rally.  It may have even come as surprise to the late MLK himself were he alive.  He was, after all,  the man who referred in his
speech to “All God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics…” coming together.  And isn’t that what made King’s speech so special?  That his was a message of inclusion.  Not an “us versus them” but a gigantic national ”we.”  King understood that the cancer of racism destroys the entire body (America), not just the organ (minorities) it specifically targets.  In comparison, Sharpton’s comments seemed so beneath the memory of King.  So petty.  So small as to make one shake his/her head and ask what happened to this most noble of movements that began when a woman on a bus refused to give up her seat to a white man so many years ago?

And this really gets to the heart of Sharpton’s problem with Beck’s incredibly successful gathering.

When Mr. Beck speaks of “taking back” the Civil Rights movement, he is not using code language for returning to the days of Jim Crow and “separate but equal.”  Sharpton knows this of course.  And for so-called religious leaders like Al Barnum to imply as such is nothing more than a cynical act rooted in self-preservation.  What Beck means by this is that the Civil Rights movement that arose from the mist of exclusion and bigotry came to champion the ideals of racial harmony, equality, and overcoming our divisions (“we shall overcome”).  But somewhere along the way to the promised land it was effectively hijacked by a band of self-promoting charlatans, self-righteous statists,  and shake-down artists, urged on by their enablers in the left wing literati, for whom agitation and protest has become a lucrative cottage industry.

The movement has also become synonymous with a certain political agenda that stresses affirmative action, cradle-to-grave government hand-outs, and patronizing attitudes towards personal responsibility.  In other words, a litmus test somehow came into being whereby one’s commitment to racial equality is measured by one’s level of assent to the Democratic Party’s social platform.

I argue that the policies that so many left-leaning self-proclaimed minority advocates have implemented (which have imprisoned great numbers as permanent wards of the welfare state while financially rewarding socially destructive behavior) have done more damage to the very fabric of minority communities since that great speech on August 28, 1963 than any klansman would have ever dared
hope for.  70% Black babies born out-of-wedlock.  Inner-cities racked in poverty, despair, gang-banging and drug violence.  Homicide now the leading cause of death among young Black males. Millions imprisoned.  And looming over it all, a haze of political correctness that stifles honest and productive
dialogue about the true causes of the plight so many African-Americans still endure despite an ocean of entitlements courtesy of stubborn adherence to defunct leftist dogma and funded by the American taxpayer.

This state of disharmony suits P.T. Sharpton just fine.  So long as he has a fight to fight, real or fabricated, so long as so many of his people remain in a state of second-class citizenship (despite the root cause) his career will be secure and his income steady.  Indeed, for men like Sharpton, a truly
color-blind society, ie. getting to the real promised land for which Dr. King dared to pine  on the very grounds of the Beck rally, would be the worst thing that could possibly happen.  It would make him and his professional protest machine irrelevant and thus would he be a has-been on the political
scene as well as drain his coffers.  Worst of all, he would be a nobody.  Just another city preacher in a tailor-made suit.  No wonder the Reverend Al is all tied in knots over of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who rallied in peace under a clear blue sky to reaffirm the dream that King so eloquently
relayed to another just as peaceful group 47 years before.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and without the ever diminishing shade of the MSM’s loosening hammer-lock on information framing the discussion on race, it is becoming quite apparent that Dr. King’s dream realized, the one that Glenn Beck wishes to
re-claim for all Americans, would put Al Sharpton out of a job.

In any other business but the grievance industry that is called a conflict of interest.  I think it’s time for the Reverend Al to recuse himself from  this discussion once and for all.

Big Government

President Obama blasted Senate Republicans on Monday for blocking a small business assistance bill.

Washington (CNN) – President Barack Obama blasted Senate Republicans on Monday for blocking a small business assistance bill, calling their opposition “pure partisan politics.”

The country needs a “full scale attack” on economic sluggishness, he told reporters at the White House.

“While we have taken a series of measures and come a long way … too many Americans are still looking for work and too many communities are far from being whole again,” he said.

The president also said his economic team is “hard at work” on a series of new measure designed both to spark short-term hiring and lay the foundation for long-term economic growth.

Full story

CNN Political Ticker

In recent days, New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg has become a beloved press figure as a result of his unshaking support for the Ground Zero mosque.

Isn’t it fascinating how in this environment where rich people are being demonized at every turn all you need to do is a support a popular liberal cause and your financial sins are instantly forgiven?

With this in mind, the good folks at Big Journalism have uncovered some rather startling financial connections between this media mogul and the Arab world that haven’t raised any eyebrows from journalists that love to follow the money when there’s a conservative at the other end of the smoking wallet.

Consider the uproar last week surrounding News Corporation’s contribution to the Republican Governors Association.

As you read Mondo Frazier’s marvelous piece "Follow the Money: Could Mayor Bloomberg’s Media Business Interests in the Middle East Have Anything to Do with His Support of the Ground Zero Mosque?" ask yourself why the seemingly always curious press have ignored any examination of this billionaire’s motives:

On October 2, 2009, The Dubai Chronicle reported Chairman and President of Bloomberg LP Peter T. Grauer met with UAE Vice President, Prime Minister and Ruler of Dubai His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum at Maktoum’s Emirate office. According to the Dubai Chronicle, Grauer gave a presentation of Bloomberg future expansion plans in the ‘area of business information’ in the United Emirates, North Africa, and India. Grauer stated the UAE was a great place to expand, the UAE’s "logistic facilities" the ‘biggest incentive for investors and companies to expand their businesses in the country and the region beyond’.

"Particularly since the meltdown of the western capitalist system, there has been an increasingly large focus on the virtues of Islamic finance. Today, there is no one single provider of information that caters to the Islamic finance market. So by Bloomberg being here, we are in the process  of building out an Islamic finance product. We are very confident that we can build a product that meets the needs of the market right now."

-Max Linnington, Regional Head of Bloomberg Middle East and South Asia on the company’s plan to build a Bloomberg hub in Dubai at the Dubai International Financial Centre(DIFC), October 29, 2009

But there’s more:

On March 10, 2010, the Khaleej Times reported Bloomberg Set for Dubai expansion in bid to double revenues by 2014.

"Bloomberg, a leading global provider for financial data and news services, plans to "significantly boost regional operations from its Dubai hub as it is bullish about growth prospects of the emirate as a global financial center, a top executive said."

The coincidences continue: the Mayor’s company is banking on "doubling revenues by 2014″ in a region that just happens to be largely populated by Muslims.

As I said at the top, this is the kind of smoking gun the press would normally attack like a pack of hungry wolves.

Couldn’t all the international publicity Bloomberg is now getting for being America’s foremost supporter of this mosque be doing wonders for his position in the Arab world? Mightn’t that dramatically help his media company’s push into this region?

Why hasn’t this gotten the kind of coverage News Corp’s contribution to the RGA got last week?

After all, the point made by folks on the Left was that News Corp’s reporting can’t possibly be taken seriously if it’s making such a large donation to one political Party.

Shouldn’t the same be true for Bloomberg? If his media company has recently invested time and money in the Muslim world, and could benefit tremendously from the favorable publicity he’s getting concerning his advocacy of this mosque, shouldn’t his veracity be similarly questioned?

This seems especially the case given further revelations about News Corp’s connections to Saudi billionaire Al-Waleed bin Talal.

For those that missed it, former Bush administration official Dan Senor was on Fox & Friends Monday, and he made a comment about Al-Waleed’s financing of the Ground Zero mosque.

This led liberal media members – including Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart – to point out that Al-Waleed is the biggest shareholder in News Corp.

Missing in this newest Fox News gotcha was that it actually demonstrated FNC’s ability to separate the interests of its largest investor from its reporting.

Think about it: if Fox was doing Al-Waleed’s bidding, its hosts and contributors wouldn’t be attacking a mosque their largest investor was funding. That would quite literally be biting the hand that feeds them.

Quite the contrary, as the news outlet that has been the most outspoken against the location of this Islamic center, Fox has taken a position that can’t be at all popular with its largest shareholder.

Maybe someone should inform Stewart and all the other Fox haters in the media of this delicious dichotomy.

Which brings us back to New York’s mayor: if the press think FNC is incapable of separating its reporting from its political contributions, shouldn’t they have similar concerns that Bloomberg can’t separate his business interests from his mayoral decisions?

Or do such conflicts of interest only arise for conservatives?

NewsBusters.org – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

In their newest case against the already-convicted 20-something Miami arms dealer Efraim Diveroli, the feds accused him this week of using a front company to hide his continuing involvement in the arms trade. But a closer look at Diveroli’s recent dealings suggest that, even as he was awaiting sentencing on his initial conviction for selling the U.S. government poor-quality and illegal munitions for use in Afghanistan, Diveroli engaged in a series of transactions designed to obscure his involvement in companies involved in the arms business.

AEY, Inc., the business that Diveroli used a few years back to sell the U.S. Army out-of-date Eastern European munitions, is still around and is run out of Diveroli’s upscale home in Miami Beach.

A second company named in the charges is also headquartered at Diveroli’s home address: Pinnacle Minerals Corporation is a “mining company,” according to the charges, which was created in September 2008. Diveroli was the company’s registered agent until March, when the company changed its registered agent to lawyer Marko Cerenko of Miami Beach, according to the company’s corporate filings in Florida. Cerenko, shown here aboard a boat, previously served as an attorney at AEY, Inc., according to his LinkedIn profile. The former Duke tennis player and University of Miami School of Law grad did not return multiple phone calls from TPMMuckraker on his cell phone or at his law firm, Hogan Greer & Shapiro.

The feds allege they have Diveroli on tape talking to a federal agent about his involvement in Pinnacle. Diveroli allegedly told the feds that “Aaron Monahan,” one of the individuals also mentioned in the charges, is an employee of Pinnacle, who along with “Jake” served as the point of contact for the ammunition deal with Advanced Munitions.

According to what Diveroli allegedly told the feds, his partner at Pinnacle owns Advanced Munitions, another company that figures prominently in the charges. That appears to be a reference to Diveroli pal Dejan Djuric, who is president, vice president and secretary of Pinnacle, according to Florida corporation records.

Identified only by his initials, “D.D.” in the court filings against Diveroli, Djuric plays a prominent role in the latest charges. Djuric allegedly set up a new company late last month called Advanced Munitions Distribution, Inc. Djuric is also listed as president of that company, according to Florida corporation records. Diveroli himself is not listed in the public filings of the corporation, but the feds allege that Advanced Munitions Distribution is a “front company” designed to conceal Diveroli’s arms trading. Diveroli allegedly told an undercover officer of Advanced Munitions that he “finances their inventory” sometimes.

Diveroli allegedly told an undercover ATF officer in early August that Djuric’s business, Advanced Munitions, bought another of his companies, AmmoWorks, a week earlier. Diveroli said it wasn’t beneficial to Advanced Munitions to have his name associated with it, so he would remain on board as a consultant and would get an exclusive consulting contract, the feds allege.

It’s not yet clear if any of Diveroli’s associates — including Djuric or two others referred to in the federal complaint as “Jake” and “Aaron Monahan” — will be charged in relation to the broader conspiracy revealed in the affidavit, but the feds indicate that there’s a larger criminal case at stake.

“More details will be coming out in the future,” Steve Cole, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s office told Florida Today. “Obviously he had some links in Brevard County.”

Djuric, who is also listed in Florida corporation records as president of Balkan Export, Inc., hung up when reached by phone by a TPM reporter and did not return a subsequent voicemail message.

As the feds zero back in on Diveroli, a quick refresher on his background that might help explain how a 24-year-old ends up as an arms dealer He took over AEY, Inc., from his father Michael Diveroli around 2004 or 2005 when he was 19 years old. His grandfather, Yoav Botach, is one of the wealthiest property owners in Los Angeles and may have a net worth of up to $ 700 million. His uncle, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, is a former spiritual adviser to Michael Jackson, the host of a popular satellite radio program and author of the books The Kosher Sutra and Kosher Sex.

And another uncle, Bar-Kochba Botach, runs a South Central Los Angeles arms firm run called Botach Tactical that a story in L.A. Weekly earlier this month linked to AEY, Inc. through a 2004 federal contract that listed one of Diveroli’s AEY addresses in Miami Beach as the mailing address for Botach Tactical.

As a teen, Diveroli spent summers working for Botach Tactical, according to his grandfather’s common-law wife, Judith Boteach, who has a palimony suit pending against the family patriarch, told L.A. Weekly.

Cynthia Hawkins, the Orlando lawyer representing Diveroli in the criminal case, did not return TPM’s phone calls.

Efraim Diveroli – Afghanistan – Business – Florida – Arms industry

TPMMuckraker

Call us cynical but we wonder whether Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s passionate backing of the building of a controversial mosque near Ground Zero stems as much from Bloomberg’s belief in America’s “freedom of faith” as it might from the Mayor’s belief in the “virtues of Islamic finance?”

Does the Mayor’s unshakable support have anything to do with The Bloomberg (company) becoming a ‘single provider of information that caters to the Islamic business market’?  A Bloomberg five-year business plan for an Islamic finance portal via a Bloomberg hub at the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) is already a reality.

Michael Bloomberg, has become a staunch supporter of the Cordoba House (Park51) Ground Zero Mosque.  In the process, the Mayor has lectured opponents on “religious liberty” and, by extension, implied that opposition to the mosque is largely based on bigotry.

Lately, Bloomberg has become so insistent on the mosque’s being built at its planned location that The New York Post has labeled him Pro-Mosque Mike.”

A defiant Mayor Bloomberg, saying there should be no compromise, insisted last night that a mosque be built near Ground Zero, declaring, “We must do what is right, not what is easy.

While Bloomberg hasn’t been shy about questioning the motives of those opposed to the mosque’s location, the media has shied away from the Mayor‘s motivations.  But what of the Mayor’s motives? What might they be? Does a strong passion for religious liberty explain all?

Some of Bloomberg LP’s officials may hold some clues.

On October 2, 2009, The Dubai Chronicle reported Chairman and President of Bloomberg LP Peter T. Grauer met with UAE Vice President, Prime Minister and Ruler of Dubai His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum at Maktoum’s Emirate office. According to the Dubai Chronicle, Grauer gave a presentation of Bloomberg future expansion plans in the ‘area of business information’ in the United Emirates, North Africa, and India. Grauer stated the UAE was a great place to expand, the UAE’s “logistic facilities” the ‘biggest incentive for investors and companies to expand their businesses in the country and the region beyond’.

“Particularly since the meltdown of the western capitalist system, there has been an increasingly large focus on the virtues of Islamic finance. Today, there is no one single provider of information that caters to the Islamic finance market. So by Bloomberg being here, we are in the process  of building out an Islamic finance product. We are very confident that we can build a product that meets the needs of the market right now.”

–Max Linnington, Regional Head of Bloomberg Middle East and South Asia on the company’s plan to build a Bloomberg hub in Dubai at the Dubai International Financial Centre(DIFC), October 29, 2009

Some details about the DIFC:

The DIFC is the world’s fastest growing international financial centre. It aims to develop the same stature as New York, London and Hong Kong.

It primarily serves the vast region between Western Europe and East Asia.

Could the plans of Bloomberg LP have an influence on Bloomberg the Mayor?

Recently he claimed, “We would send a signal around the world that Muslim-Americans may be equal in the eyes of the law, but separate in the eyes of their countrymen.”

Might the Mayor be more interested–even just the tiniest bit–in some parts of the world than in others?

Might Bloomberg’s speech have sent a signal to the Middle East – which by a great coincidence, is the site of the Dubai International Financial Centre, the location of one of Bloomberg LP’s ten worldwide hubs?

On March 10, 2010, the Khaleej Times reported Bloomberg Set for Dubai expansion in bid to double revenues by 2014.

“Bloomberg, a leading global provider for financial data and news services, plans to “significantly boost regional operations from its Dubai hub as it is bullish about growth prospects of the emirate as a global financial center, a top executive said.”

The coincidences continue: the Mayor’s company is banking on “doubling revenues by 2014″ in a region that just happens to be largely populated by Muslims.

The Mayor, when he isn’t busy rallying support for a mosque opposed by a large majority in NYC and 70% of Americans at large, is in the newsgathering business. Bloomberg makes a lot of money providing financial news in a timely manner.

One more coincidence: if you do a search for financial news from Dubai and the Middle East, chances are, your only sources-outside the Mayor’s own Bloomberg.com — are The National, the Dubai Chronicle or the Khaleej News.

While we were able to easily access articles from the National, Dubai Chronicle or the Khaleej News about the Bloomberg Dubai hub, a search of Bloomberg.com came up empty.  Ten pages of results: nothing.

Does it concern the Mayor that Bloomberg.com is getting scooped on news about Bloomberg LP?

Michael Bloomberg has made billions of dollars being a savvy businessman. Might a savvy businessman consider it prudent to maintain good relations in the Muslim world–a part of the world where the Mayor’s company hopes to “double revenues by 2014?”

How does Mayor Bloomberg’s support for the Ground Zero mosque — based, he says, on the issue of freedom of faith – square with the “virtues of Islamic finance” and an Islamic finance portal in Dubai with Bloomberg LP‘s aim of becoming “the world’s single provider of information that caters to the Islamic finance market?”

One more important question: will the NYC media ask Hizzoner if he has any potential conflicts to act as an impartial broker on Park51? Doesn’t it seem just that the survivors and families whose loved ones lost their lives on 911 receive some answers — before receiving any more lectures from the tiny, Boston-born Democrat turned Republican turned Independent turned Republican turned Whatever Mayor of the City of New York?

It’s easy to imagine the Mayor becoming enthusiastic over opportunities when billions of dollars are to be made. Enthusiasm is a hard emotion to contain.

Even when a majority of his constituents remain opposed to the latest object of Bloomberg’s enthusiasm.

Big Journalism

(Jonathan H. Adler)

My Case Western colleague, Scott Shane, has a brief item linking the lack of hiring by small businesses to the collapse in home prices.  Specifically, he identifies five reasons the “residential real-estate mess” is holding back small business job creation:

1. Declining house prices have softened demand for small businesses’ products and services.
2. Small businesses are overrepresented in the real estate-related industries that have been decimated by the residential housing market collapse.
3. Small business owners use their homes to obtain business credit.
4. Banks have tightened lending standards in response to a rising share of non-performing real estate loans.
5. Small business owners were major customers of residential real estate loans during the boom, making them among the consumers hardest hit from the collapse in home prices.

He concludes:

Waiting for small business owners to begin hiring in this economic recovery has become like waiting for Godot. Rather than continuing to wait (while chanting the mantra that “small businesses are the major job creators in economic recoveries”), we should acknowledge why small businesses aren’t leading job creation this time around and come up with solutions to the residential real estate problems that are holding them back.

Doing this is imperative. Slightly more than half (50.2 percent) the private sector works in small companies. If the residential real estate mess keeps the small business sector from hiring, it will be awfully difficult to reduce our unemployment rate to a reasonable level.

The Volokh Conspiracy

Good Morning America’s Bianna Golodryga on Sunday featured a liberal activist arguing for more government intervention in the form of paid time off laws and "affordable" child care. The ABC host never identified Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner’s ideology or the fact that she’s a Huffington Post contributor. Instead, Golodryga fretted about "bias" against women who have children.

The Rowe-Finkbeiner interview and the preceding segment lamented the fact that women who have children often don’t end up making as much as men and also females who don’t have kids. Neither segment even hinted that there could be two sides to the story.

Instead, Rowe-Finkbeiner was allowed to lobby, "We know that passing family-friendly policies and programs like paid family leave, like affordable child care, like access to paid sick days, like access to flexible work options, those things actually help lower the gap between women and men."

Rowe-Finkbeiner’s blogs on the Huffington Post have advocated for a number of left-wing causes, including attacking Arizona for its tough immigration law.

The segment also featured a woman by the name of Kiki Peppard. Golodryga explained: "Kiki Peppard spent a decade as a successful bookkeeper before taking leave to spend more time with her kids. But, when she went to reenter the work force after a divorce, she found herself on the outside looking in."

An ABC graphic blandly identified that Kiki "had a hard time finding work." However, according to MomsRising.org, where Rowe-Finkbeiner is the executive director, Peppard has ties to the organization dating back to 2006. Golodryga also skipped this fact.

Instead, she wondered, "So, we heard Kiki’s story. How common and widespread are stories like hers?" Rowe-Finkbeiner played dumb: "You know, I hear from women like Kiki everyday. Kiki is definitely not alone."

ABC on Sunday went way beyond being one-sided. Not identifying either of these women, their agendas and their connections is incredibly misleading.

A transcript of the August 22 segment, which aired at 8:40 am EDT, follows:

BIANNA GOLODRYGA: In America’s Jobs this morning, we’re going to look at the pay gap. The disparity between what men and women make has been shrinking over the years. And while it’s still not exactly equal, it is getting better, except for one particular group of women. They’re some of the most accomplished women in the world. Supreme Court justices. A former secretary of state. Even the head of Homeland Security. But, despite their widely varying political differences, they all have one thing in common: These woman don’t have children. And experts say, that fact may contribute directly to their success. According to the University of Chicago, men and women right out of school had nearly identical incomes and hours worked. But, 15 Years later, the men made 75 percent more than the women in the group. The only exception to the room? A small group of women who never had children. Their pay equaled the men.

KIKI PEPPARD: There is such a double standard.

GOLODRYGA: Kiki Peppard spent a decade as a successful bookkeeper before taking leave to spend more time with her kids. But, when she went to reenter the work force after a divorce, she found herself on the outside looking in.

PEPPARD: The very first question asked me was, "Are you married?" And the second question was, "Do you have any children? This went on for the first 18 job interviews. On my19th job interview, they did not ask me about my marital status. They did not ask if I had children and hired me.

GOLODRYGA: It’s long been assumed women make less than men because they have more career disruptions. But the unequal pay disparity also pits moms against non-moms. Women with kids are 44 percent less likely to be hired than women without. And they’re paid $ 11,000 less. And in this economy, that bias can be devastating to many families just trying to get by. And joining me now from Seattle to talk more about this is Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, the co-founder and executive director of MomRising.org. Good morning. Thanks for joining us, Kristin.

KRISTIN ROWE-FINKBEINER (executive director, Momsrising.org): Good morning.

GOLODRYGA: So, we heard Kiki’s story. How common and widespread are stories like hers?

ROWE-FINKBEINER: You know, I hear from women like Kiki everyday. Kiki is definitely not alone. One of the thing is that this problem is bigger than most people realized. In fact, the maternal wall standing in the way of the glass ceiling. And here’s what it looks like: Women without children make 90 cents to a man’s dollar. Women with children make only 73 cents to a man’s dollar. So, this is a big discrepancy. And we have a big issue with pay discrimination against mothers.

GOLODRYGA: So, when we hear statistics like that, what can be done to level out the playing field in the workforce?

ROWE-FINKBEINER: Well, we have a big issue to address. And that’s that we have a 1950s work policy structure but we have a modern labor force. We’re now more than 50 percent of the labor force are women for the first time in history. But, that doesn’t mean we’ve reached full equality as we just heard in the segment. Because, right now, women and mothers are struggling. Moms are working full time and can’t put food on the table. In fact, one in four children in our nation are experiencing food scarcity in their households because of economic limitations, according to the USDA. So, the solutions are there. We have solutions. We know that passing family-friendly policies and programs like paid family leave, like affordable child care, like access to paid sick days, like access to flexible work options, those things actually help lower the gap between women and men. And they raise all boats. Because, it’s not just moms who need the policies, but everybody needs those policies in order to excel in their life, in the workplace and with their families.

GOLODRYGA: But, now of all times, with the economy being so bumpy, with jobs being even more difficult to find, what should moms who are planning on taking time off do to avoid falling behind?

ROWE-FINKBEINER: Well, professional women who decide to take time out of the labor force need to do four things. One, and most importantly, they really need to keep up with their professional contacts. Maintain those contacts so they have smooth sailing when they move back into the labor force. Two, they need to make sure that their professional accreditations are up to date while their out of the labor force. Three, this is really important. They need to find a mentor. Somebody who has navigated this interesting seas before and can help them navigate through. And fourth, one thing that’s very important is to find volunteer positions that you can put on the resume while you’re out of the labor force to show that you were productive while you were staying home with kids. Not that staying home with kids isn’t an important job in and of itself. Because it is. One of the things, though that is critically important to understand is that because we have a 1950s work policy structure in our nation still, we haven’t updated our policies like most other countries have, that most women can’t stay out of the labor force. So, we have a huge problem where we, you know, don’t have paid family leave, like 177 other countries do. And because of that, we see the implications on kids with a quarter of families with young children living in poverty. So, it’s important to recognize that not that many people can stay out of the labor force.

GOLODRYGA: That is true, indeed. Especially in these times.

NewsBusters.org – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Read this post »

Hot Air » Top Picks

They took their protests right to the steps of Congress. Hundreds of students, including ten from Georgia, lobbied at the nation’s capitol for “The Dream Act,” which offers undocumented students a chance to become legal citizens.

I contend we don’t need “Immigration Reform” but “Enforcement Reform,” meaning the federal government should do its job and enforce the existing laws on the books. However, the children of illegal aliens believe they should get a pass because they didn’t do anything wrong.

Here’s my analogy on this situation….

Let’s say one day a family wakes up to the sound of the front door of their home being bashed in. The father is handcuffed and escorted out of the home by federal law enforcement officials and is charged with embezzlement. The family is told they have five minutes to gather their most personal belongings and then vacate the premises because their home and automobile are being seized because stolen money is believed to have purchased said assets.

The family soon finds out their bank accounts have been frozen because they too may contain monies as a result of the father’s possible theft.

Who should the family be mad at, the federal government that suspected the father of theft or the father for putting the family in the precarious position they find themselves in now? I suspect the wife would be rightfully furious with the husband, as would be the kids. But when it comes to parents who knowingly violated our sovereign border, no blame is being issued to them by their children. No, it’s the federal government’s fault for not letting those kids have their way and let them operate freely in a country they are in illegally.

For this reason (as lacking in compassion as is sounds) I have no sympathy for the offspring of illegal aliens who are being denied in-state tuition for colleges, or admittance at all. They have no business protesting a college, state legislature, congress or citizenry of a state or the nation. If anything, these kids should demand their parents explain why they decided to break the law and hide out for decades knowing it could hurt them in the long run.

The federal government wouldn’t drop the charges against an embezzler because it would inconvenience his or her family.

Illegal aliens aren’t deserving of amnesty and their kids are in no position to make demands.

And that’s something you’re not likely to read in the MSM.

Big Journalism