Eyewitness: Authorities “Must Have Known” About Bombing

» Eyewitness: Authorities “Must Have Known” About Bombing Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!:
"When Bidondi again attempted to ask police about why people were being told to remain calm before the bombs exploded, there was no response.
“They kept making announcements saying to the participants ‘do not worry, this is just a training exercise’” said Stevenson, who is the University of Mobile’s Cross Country Coach.
“Evidently, I don’t believe they were just having a training exercise, they must have known,” Stevenson told Local15 News.
“They must have had some sort of threat or suspicion called in,” adding that spotters were stationed on roofs of buildings and that bomb sniffing dogs were going up and down the finish line.
Stevenson said the level of security he witnessed was unlike anything he had experienced as a marathon runner before in major cities such as Chicago, Washington D.C., and London."

Let the river run: Dam removal accelerates across Michigan

Let the river run: Dam removal accelerates across Michigan | MLive.com:
"Michigan may be the Great Lakes State, but its 36,000 miles of rivers are becoming popular commodities for cities looking to revitalize downtowns, attract visitors and lure new businesses."

Sequester effects in Michigan: See which programs, agencies will be hit hardest by federal cuts

Sequester effects in Michigan: See which programs, agencies will be hit hardest by federal cuts | MLive.com
"Federal funding accounts for roughly $20 billion of the state's $48.2 billion budget, and the sequester-related loss of $150.5 million represents less than four-tenths of one percent of total state spending.
The sequester will directly affect needy children, according to the state, due to elimination of a federally-funded program that provides a $137 clothing allowance to $21,000 kids each August.
Schools stand to lose $56 million in federal funding next year, likely forcing reductions in after-school programs, vocational training and more."

Report: Scottville man arrested for allegedly driving 'super drunk,' causing accident

Report: Scottville man arrested for allegedly driving 'super drunk,' causing accident | MLive.com:
"The driver and passenger were taken to Memorial Medical Center with reportedly minor injuries."

Muskegon County meetings this week

Muskegon County, Michigan:
"Ways & Means Committee Meeting
When: Tuesday, April 16th - 4:00 PM (new start time)
Location: Hall Of Justice, Board Room, 4th Floor, 990 Terrace St., Muskegon, MI 49442
Click Here for Agenda

Jail and Juvenile Transition Center Committee meeting
When: Thursday, April 18th - 2:00 PM
Location: Hall Of Justice, Board Room, 4th Floor, 990 Terrace St., Muskegon, MI 49442

Port Advisory Committee Meeting
When:  Friday, April 19, 2013, 1:30pm
Location:  GVSU MAREC, 200 Viridian Drive, Muskegon "

Drive-in Theaters Start Kickstarter Campaigns, Ask for Donations to Pay for Digital Projector Conversions

Drive-in Theaters Start Kickstarter Campaigns, Ask for Donations to Pay for Digital Projector Conversions | TIME.com:
"Yes, there are still drive-in theaters in existence, though it’s rare for a state to have more a handful left. For example, there are eight drive-in theaters in Michigan, according to MichiganDriveIns.com.
MLive reported that at least one of the existing theaters, the Capri Drive-In, just paid $144,000 to upgrade two of its projectors to digital.
It’s unlikely that all of the other drive-ins will be able to do the same.
Drive-ins are hardly big money makers; more than 150 others in the state have closed over the years."

The 10 Absolute Worst Media Reactions To The Boston Marathon Bombings | Mediaite

The 10 Absolute Worst Media Reactions To The Boston Marathon Bombings | Mediaite:
"IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER, below are the 10 worst media reactions to the Boston bombings "

'via Blog this'

Breaking media silence

Breaking media silence: Column

Yes. So why wasn't it news? Pro-choice writer Megan McArdle of The Daily Beastnotes that it's about fear of where the story would go, and what it would require writers to confront: "Gosnell is accused of grisly crimes that I didn't want to think about. ... I understand why my readers suspect me, and other pro-choice mainstream journalists, of being selective -- of not wanting to cover the story because it showcased the ugliest possibilities of abortion rights. The truth is that most of us tend to be less interested in sick-making stories -- if the sick-making was done by 'our side.' "

It was fine to dwell at length on the Newtown, Conn., shootings, because those could be blamed on the evil NRA. But writing about these dead innocents might be a political liability instead of a political asset. It might have been awkward for President Obama.

It's also true that in our polarized -- and moralistic -- political culture, shouts of Have you no decency? are so common that it's easy to assume that pretty much any such story is probably exaggerated and politicized. And the reports in the Gosnell case were ghoulish enough that it was probably especially easy to believe that they were exaggerated. Alas, that turned out not to be the case. It was no doubt Powers' status as a liberal, and as a woman, that let her break through the wall of denial in a way that others might not have been able to.

Climate scientists struggle to explain warming slowdown

Climate scientists struggle to explain warming slowdown | Reuters:
"My own confidence in the data has gone down in the past five years," said Richard Tol, an expert in climate change and professor of economics at the University of Sussex in England.
Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius first showed in the 1890s how man-made carbon dioxide, from coal for instance, traps heat in the atmosphere.
Many of the exact effects are still unknown.
Greenhouse gas emissions have hit repeated record highs with annual growth of about 3 percent in most of the decade to 2010, partly powered by rises in China and India.
World emissions were 75 percent higher in 2010 than in 1970, UN data show."

5 Unacknowledged, Unexpected, and Unavoidable Facts about Govt Spending and the Economy

5 Unacknowledged, Unexpected, and Unavoidable Facts about Govt Spending and the Economy - Reason.com

Gillespie argues that:

1. We’re spending too much. Two wars, entitlement growth, and a massive stimulus are the results of a spending frenzy over the last decade.
2. We’ve got too much debt. Every level of government is in over their heads. The literal and figurative bankruptcies of cities such as Stockton, California and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania are the canaries in the coal mine.
3. Debt overhang kills growth. The latest studies are clear: excessive debt, sustained over long periods of time, hurts economic growth. Beyond the cost of higher interest rate payments, increasingly higher debt loads – which Gillespie calls “a ziggurat of doom” – promises to reduce opportunities for everyone.
4. Spending growth is driven by entitlements. Since the Great Society programs of the 1960s, the government has switched from providing infrastructure and basic services, to being a national insurance broker. The consequences of this are dire because, as statistician Nate Silver notes, "most of us don't much care for our insurance broker."
5. Trust in government is at historic lows. This kind of distrust is an inevitable result of a mismanaged economy. Yet it's also cause for optimism. Public discontent sow the seeds of reform, allowing the possibility of meaningful fiscal reform.

The Fact-Free Gun-Control Crusade

The Fact-Free Gun-Control Crusade | National Review Online:
"Amid all the heated, emotional advocacy of gun control, have you ever heard even one person present convincing hard evidence that tighter gun-control laws have in fact reduced murders?"

EEOC Probes Employer Use of Criminal Background Checks

EEOC Probes Employer Use of Criminal Background Checks - Executive Branch Project

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, according to recent news reports, is making a particular effort to restrict allegedly discriminatory use by employers of criminal background checks. Because African-Americans and Hispanics are more likely to be arrested or convicted of crimes than members of other racial and ethnic groups, the EEOC’s thinking goes, an employer policy that excludes job applicants based on past arrests or convictions will have a disparate impact on African-Americans and Hispanics and, if not job-related and justified by business necessity, may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In April 2012, the EEOC issued a new Enforcement Guidance regarding such employer criminal background checks.  Some civil rights advocacy groups praised the document, stating that it willhelp “remove unfair barriers for people who have moved beyond their pasts” and discourage employers from discriminating against employees who have paid their debt to society.”

But critics raised both substantive and procedural concerns about the new guidance. Substantively, critics noted that the new policy does not do enough to make clear in what circumstances an employer may use a background check; it notably contains no “safe harbors” and may chill some lawful use of checks. The Guidance was also criticized for claiming to pre-empt state laws requiring some types of employers to conduct criminal background checks, placing firms in  “a damned if you check, damned if you don’t” bind. Because the Guidance may encourage employers to change their hiring procedures to benefit one racial group, it may also violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Some social science research also suggests that use of criminal background checks may actually lead to increased hiring of African-Americans. Employers barred from checking criminal histories may be inclined to wrongfully use race as a proxy for criminal history. (Disclosure: I work at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights for Gail Heriot, one of the signatories to this letter. But the views expressed in this blog post are my own and not necessarily those of the Commission on Civil Rights or Gail Heriot.)

Procedurally, the EEOC voted for the Guidance without giving the public opportunity to comment on a draft, arguably getting full in terrorem effect while bypassing all procedural safeguards. Constance Barker, the only member of the EEOC who did not vote in favor of the new Guidance,discussed other procedural issues at some length in her dissent.

The EEOC appears committed to rigorous enforcement of the new Guidance. At a Chamber of Commerce luncheon, EEOC member Victoria Lipnic emphasized the EEOC’s commitment to pursuing these cases, noting that “Criminal background checks are ripe for the picking.”

Although the EEOC does not ordinarily make investigations public until a case has been filed,  news stories about recent targets of EEOC investigation suggest that the agency is  setting a fairly high bar for “business necessity.” Such investigations include a probe into the use of checks at  a company that provides security services, and also an unnamed firearms retailer, although the employer believes that federal law requires him as a federal firearms licensee to conduct such checks.