August 31st, 2011
Latest On Tropical Storm Katia: Not Quite A Hurricane Yet
Published on August 31st, 2011 @ 11:34:28 pm , using 381 words
![]()
The Weather Channel
Katia continues to strengthen as it moves off to the west-northwest in the central Atlantic Ocean.
As you can see on the projected path map below, Katia is far away from land and it is too early to determine if any land areas will be affected in the future. It may not reach the longitude of the Leeward Islands until around Labor Day.
Interactive map: Projected path
To see the latest status and access our full collection of maps for tracking, use the links below or scroll down.
Click to access: Status | Satellite | Model Tracks
|
So, where exactly is the cyclone's center located now? If you're plotting the storm along with us, click on the "Current Information" map below to get the latitude/longitude coordinates, distance away from the nearest land location, maximum sustained winds and central pressure (measured in millibars).
![]() |
Latest status including wind speed, location, movement and pressure.
> See Current Storm Information |
How does the system look on satellite imagery. Click on "infrared" satellite imagery, to see how "cold" the cloud tops are. Brighter orange and red shadings concentrated near the center of circulation signify a healthy tropical cyclone.
![]() |
Meteorologists have a variety of numerical models to use as guidance in forecasting the track of tropical cyclones. Get an "inside look" at what these various models are saying regarding the track of this current system. (Important note: These model tracks should not be considered an official forecast. For the official forecast, see our current forecast swath.)
![]() |
See where the various models forecast the center of this system to track.
> Enlarge Model Forecast Tracks |
You can get a full briefing on the tropics in our "Tropical Update" video, our exclusive "Tropics Watch" graphics page or our Tropical Update news article.
Watch The Weather Channel for the latest on this system and other areas we're monitoring.
|
Related Video
|
Explore weather.com
|
|||||
August 31st, 2011
Obama Apologist Condi Rice: In Same Mode As Powell, Takes Issue With Vice-President Cheney's New Book
Published on August 31st, 2011 @ 11:24:59 pm , using 557 words
WASHINGTON WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday she resented what she viewed as an attack on her integrity by former Vice President Dick Cheney in his just-published memoir. Speaking in an interview with Reuters, Rice rejected Cheney's contention that she misled President George W. Bush about nuclear diplomacy with North Korea. "I kept the president fully and completely informed about every in and out of the negotiations with the North Koreans," Rice said in her first public comments on the matter. "You can talk about policy differences without suggesting that your colleague somehow misled the president. You know, I don't appreciate the attack on my integrity that that implies." Rice, in a telephone interview, also disputed a passage in Cheney's memoir, "In My Time," in which he says the secretary of state "tearfully admitted" that the Bush administration should not have apologized for a claim in Bush's 2003 State of the Union address on Iraq's supposed search for uranium for nuclear arms. Cheney, who opposed a public apology for the unfounded claim, wrote that Rice "came into my office, sat down in the chair next to my desk, and tearfully admitted I had been right." "It certainly doesn't sound like me, now, does it?" Rice said in the interview. "I would never -- I don't remember coming to the vice president tearfully about anything in the entire eight years that I knew him." "I did say to him that he had been right about the press reaction" to the administration's acknowledgment that the remarks about Iraq seeking uranium in Africa should not have been in Bush's speech, Rice said. "And so I did say to the vice president, 'you know, you were right about the press reaction.' But I am quite certain that I didn't do it tearfully," she said. Rice is the latest former senior Bush aide to fire back at Cheney's memoir and its characterization of the vice president's bureaucratic rivals. Rice's predecessor, former secretary of state Colin Powell, on Sunday said Cheney's book levels "cheap shots" at colleagues and mischaracterizes events. Rice said she believes her last contact with Cheney was at the groundbreaking ceremony for Bush's presidential library. Asked if Cheney were trying to settle scores, Rice said, "I am not going to question the vice president's motives, because he is somebody with whom I had a good relationship and for whom I had, and still have, a great deal of respect." "But I have to say that some of the things that he said about his colleagues are not in keeping with the high respect that I have always had for him," she added. "I think they do fall into the category of cheap shots." Rice played down speculation that she might be asked to serve as a Republican vice presidential candidate in 2012. "I am not cut out for such things," she said. When a reporter pointed out that this was not an absolute, Shermanesque denial, she laughed and replied: "No, no no. I am a happy university professor... We'll all find great candidates. I won't be one of them." More From Reuters (Writing by Warren Strobel; Editing by Eric Walsh)
August 31st, 2011
President Reschedules Speech "So Impotent" It Could Wait Until After His Vacation: At Speaker's Request
Published on August 31st, 2011 @ 11:10:56 pm , using 1135 words

Foxnews
President Obama has accepted House Speaker John Boehner's request to postpone his planned jobs speech by a day, after the White House announced Wednesday that it was scheduling the address for the same night as a GOP 2012 primary debate in California.
“Today, the President asked to address the Congress about the need for urgent action on the economic situation facing the American people as soon as Congress returned from recess," Press Secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.
"Both Houses will be back in session after their August recess on Wednesday, September 7th, so that was the date that was requested. We consulted with the Speaker about that date before the letter was released, but he determined Thursday would work better," he said.
"The President is focused on the urgent need to create jobs and grow our economy, so he welcomes the opportunity to address a Joint Session of Congress on Thursday, September 8th and challenge our nation's leaders to start focusing 100% of their attention on doing whatever they can to help the American people," he said.
"We appreciate the President working with us tonight and look forward to hearing his new proposals," a Boehner spokesman said.
Earlier Wednesday, Obama's letter to congressional leaders had requested to speak before a joint session of Congress on Sept. 7 at 8 p.m., which is the very same time as the scheduled GOP two-hour debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
The president, however, first needed permission from congressional leaders in order to deliver the address.
While House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi welcomed the president, Boehner had said in a letter late Wednesday afternoon that he would like the president to pick a different time, and told GOP members during a conference call that he'd invite Obama to speak on Thursday.
Since the House does not come into session until Sept. 7, with votes scheduled that evening, Boehner had expressed concern about the time it would take to conduct the security sweep in time for a presidential speech. He did not mention the debate in his reasoning.
Sources familiar with the conference call also said Boehner explained that a joint session is a difficult procedure to pull off in a short time.
"It is my recommendation that your address be held on the following evening, when we can ensure there will be no parliamentary or logistical impediments that might detract from your remarks," Boehner had written.
Boehner's spokesman added in a statement that the White House had also ignored protocol by not first requesting a date from the speaker's office.
"It's unfortunate the White House ignored decades -- if not centuries -- of the protocol of working out a mutually agreeable date and time before making any public announcement," Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck said.
A senior House Democratic aide later called Boehner's office "childish" for asking the president to reschedule.
"The childish behavior coming out of the speaker's office today is truly historic," the aide said. "It is unprecedented to reject the date that a president wants to address a joint session of the Congress."
The White House had insisted the timing was coincidental. Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters earlier that there were many scheduling "considerations" and suggested the president had no interest in detracting from the debate viewership.
But Carney downplayed the debate as one of many on the political calendar. He said the White House would "carry forward" with its planned speech regardless of "whatever the competing opportunities on television are, whether it's the wildlife channel or the cooking channel."
Republicans were quick to slam the president for the move. Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus called it a "thinly-veiled political ploy."
"President Obama's decision to address Congress at the same time as a long-scheduled Republican Presidential debate cements his reputation as Campaigner-in-Chief," he said in a written statement.
Earlier a Reagan Library official, speaking to Fox News, said there was no official reaction yet from the organizers of the debate, but the event has been on the schedule for months. Politico, which is co-sponsoring the debate with NBC News, had said the debate would not be postponed.
Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe didn't buy the White House explanation. "No, that's not just coincidental," the Oklahoma senator told Fox News Radio, suggesting mischief was afoot. "Why else would he choose 8 o'clock on Wednesday?"
However, by scheduling the speech on the same night, the president ran the risk of becoming even more of a punching bag if the debate sponsors pushed back the time. Republican candidates would have had an immediate opportunity to rebut the president's speech on live TV.
"Potentially, it will backfire," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics. "Obama's elevated this debate to a face-off with him rather than a face-off with the Republican candidates."
Andrea Saul, spokeswoman for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, had said in a statement that viewers would have a choice between "Republican candidates talking about the future of America, or Barack Obama talking about the future of his presidency."
Though the debate is one of many, it would be the first to feature Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who jumped into the race shortly after the last debate, which was co-sponsored by Fox News. Perry has quickly vaulted into the lead position in many national polls.
Obama is expected to outline proposals for both long-term deficit reduction and job creation.
The plan is likely to include a mix of infrastructure spending and tax relief, as well as other proposals. For months, the president has been pushing for new trade agreements, patent reform and an extension of the payroll tax cut, among other initiatives.
With Republicans in control of the House and Democrats in control of the Senate, the president will need bipartisan support for any proposals he lays out. After bitter partisan debates led to last-minute agreements on government funding and a debt-ceiling increase, the president is calling on lawmakers to come together around his new proposals.
"It is my intention to lay out a series of bipartisan proposals that the Congress can take immediately to continue to rebuild the American economy by strengthening small businesses, helping Americans get back to work, and putting more money in the paychecks of the Middle Class and working Americans, while still reducing our deficit and getting our fiscal house in order," Obama wrote in his letter Wednesday to Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and Boehner.
Fox News' Chad Pergram contributed to this report.
August 31st, 2011
Obama's NLRB tells a church school it's not religious enough
Published on August 31st, 2011 @ 10:21:14 pm , using 613 words
The Washington Examiner

Most people have heard by now of NLRB's unprecedented decree that Boeing Co. cannot build a new airline production facility in South Carolina.
But Obama's NLRB is also claiming the authority to dictate labor policies and order union elections at Catholic universities if they are not religious enough.
St. Xavier University was founded in 1846, the oldest Catholic school in Illinois. Its corporate member is a Catholic body with the "powers for the governance of" St. Xavier, that "links the University to the [Catholic] Church and makes it an officially recognized member of the Church."
St. Xavier's Board of Trustees must have at least four nuns from the order that founded the school, and, according to its bylaws, its governing body must "ensure [St. Xavier] continues its educational and religious mission."
After quoting these sources and many others, NLRB's regional director concluded in true Orwellian fashion that "the evidence establishes" that St. Xavier is "a secular educational institution or university."
To support this astounding conclusion flying in the face of the facts (not to mention common sense), NLRB claimed a 1979 Supreme Court affirms this authority.
Yet that case -- NLRB v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago -- actually says the complete opposite of what Obama's NLRB claims.
In an instance of deja vu, the Supreme Court in Catholic Bishop considered a challenge to an NLRB order asserting authority over lay teachers at Illinois Catholic high schools. (Sound familiar?)
NLRB claimed that it had no authority over a church but that it possessed power over church-related bodies that are not purely religious, such as schools. The court considered whether the National Labor Relations Act granted NLRB such power.
Noting the religious mission of Catholic schools, the Supreme Court declared, "Good intentions by government ... can surely no more avoid entanglement with the religious mission of a school" than legislation the court previously struck down as unconstitutional violations of religious liberty.
Turning to the facts of that case, the court reasoned, "The church-teacher relationship in a church-operated school differs from the employment relationship in a public ... school. There is no escape from conflicts flowing from [NLRB's] exercise of jurisdiction over teachers in church-operated schools and the consequent serious First Amendment questions that would follow."
The court then noted that nothing in the law's language suggested NLRB has power over any church-affiliated organizations. The court invoked one of the most basic principles of American law, that a federal statute "ought not to be construed to violate the Constitution if any other possible construction remains available."
Accordingly, the court held that federal law did not give NLRB the power it was claiming, so the court need not consider whether to strike down that provision. Instead, it held NLRB lacked any legal jurisdiction to judge the schools' religiosity, and vacated NLRB's order.
Far from authorizing NLRB's action against St. Xavier, the ruling does the opposite of affirming the government has no such power over church schools. NLRB's contrary assertion is a frightening power grab that must be taken to court.
So economic and social conservatives now have a common problem. Obama's NLRB is being wielded as an instrument of unfettered federal power. Congress and the courts must act to end this imperial overreach.
Examiner legal contributor Ken Klukowski is director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council and a member of the faculty at Liberty University School of Law.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2011/08/now-obamas-nlrb-tells-church-school-its-not-religious-enough#ixzz1WeMf1z85
August 31st, 2011
Speech Stunt Backfires on Obama After Boehner Boxes Him In
Published on August 31st, 2011 @ 10:19:09 pm , using 210 words
Fox Nation /

By Michael O'Brien and Molly K. Hooper, The Hill
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has asked President Obama to address a joint-session of Congress on Thursday, Sept. 8, when it wouldn't conflict with the Republican presidential debate.
Citing logistical difficulties, Boehner requested that Obama hold his jobs address, which Obama wants to deliver next Wednesday, one day later.
The Speaker's letter made no mention of the more obvious conflict: between the president's speech, and a Republican presidential debate scheduled on Wednesday night at 8 p.m. EST. That debate is the first of the post-Labor Day political season, and the first one in which Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) is set to participate.
The response by Boehner sets up an early showdown between Obama and the Congress just returning from its August recess....
A speech on Thursday would compete with the opening night of the NFL season, traditionally a ratings winner.
This year's opener, televised on NBC, features the reigning Super Bowl champion Green Bay Packers against the New Orleans Saints. More than 27 million viewers watched last year's NFL opener on NBC. By contrast, 32.1 million people -- on a total of 10 networks -- watched Obama's speech on healthcare to a joint session of Congress shortly after Labor Day in 2009.
====================================================================================================
THE LETTER

Read more at thehill.com
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/179067-boehner-asks-obama-to-move-speech-to-thursday#ixzz1WeLBF5Xs
<< 1 ... 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 ... 2409 >>












