With the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) trashing all predictions of a tight race, Manmohan Singh (76) will take fresh oath this week, only the second Indian Prime Minister since Jawaharlal Nehru in 1962 to return to power after a full five-year term.
With 206 seats — 61 more than 2004 — India’s grand old party ran up its best tally in 18 years, winning urban and rural seats from across the country. (Listen to podcast: Part 1, Part 2)
The victory also boosted the standing of party general secretary Rahul Gandhi (39) who led the charge into India’s most populous state, Uttar Pradesh — where the Congress won 21 seats, the highest in 25 years.
Latest results and leads indicate the UPA is around a dozen seats short of the halfway mark of 272 in a House of 543. The alliance will bridge the gap through independents and smaller outfits.
With 60 per cent of India now under 35 years of age, expect to see some younger MPs getting ministerial berths, as it happened in 1984 when Rajiv Gandhi led the Congress to 404 seats, its best showing ever. The party won 232 seats in 1991.
“People have appreciated the work done by us,” said Congress president Sonia Gandhi, beaming, as Singh stood stoically by her side.
“We worked for them with sincerity.”
As Sonia spoke to reporters at her 10, Janpath residence on Saturday, Congress workers across the country distributed sweets, burst crackers and danced in the streets.
With the Left and the BJP tally declining, the verdict is being seen as an approval of the UPA government’s policies, particularly the redistribution of wealth to India’s poorest through unprecedented welfare schemes that totalled nearly Rs 1,00,000 crore in rural development, agriculture, health and education.
The Prime Minister’s image — as an able and incorruptible administrator and reformer — coupled with urban makeovers, helped the party deliver all seven seats in Delhi and all six in Mumbai to the Congress.
For the BJP it was back to square one, plummeting from its 2004 figure of 138 to 116 on Saturday, close to its 1991 tally when it began its ascendancy to become India’s ruling party by 1998.
Its best performance was 182 seats in 1999.
The 15th Lok Sabha election also rejected the concept of a non-BJP, non-Congress third front pushed by the Left, particularly the CPM, which declined in its bastions of West Bengal and Kerala.
Sonia’s popularity grew over the last five years after she renounced the post of prime minister in 2004, and later when she resigned as a Parliament member when the BJP tried to build a campaign against her that she was holding an office of profit.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
India boosts 'strategic presence' along Chinese border
India is strengthening its strategic depth and presence along the Chinese border in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir. The purpose is to maintain vigil over the Chinese road from Lhasa to Xijiang in the Tibetan Autonomous Region. The road passes through the strategic mountainous area of Aksai Chin.
The construction of Indian roads in the region is a follow-up action after the country reactivated its two strategically important airfields in May and November last year after more than four decades.
The idea is to build India’s “strategic presence” there as new global realities and challenges are emerging on the borders, said an Army officer on condition of anonymity.
These roads will connect Daulat Beg Oldie and Fukche air fields which were reactivated on May 31 and November 4, 2008, for the first time after the Sino-Indian war of 1962.
“The roads are being constructed from both the eastern and western flanks,” confirmed minister of tourism Nawang Rigzin Jora, who represents Leh constituency in the J&K Assembly. He said work is in progress.
While the minister did not reveal much about the reasons for these roads, the army officer recalled: “We had lost Aksai Chin because of our absence there. But now we have realised that the presence in all the fields is required with the twin objective to strengthen ourselves strategically and make our presence felt there. We can also keep tabs on the Chinese activities in the Aksai Chin region.”
The argument for building roads is that there cannot be a permanent dependence on the air presence, though there are plans to land fighter planes. The AN-32 and medium sized transport plane IL-76 have already landed there.
The Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fixed-wing aircraft (AN-32) landed at Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO). Following this, IL-76 planes made sorties over the region and landed in the airfield.
The Advanced Landing Ground (ALG), where the aircraft landed at DBO, has an unpaved surface and is located in the Aksai Chin area at a height of 16,200 feet near the strategic Karakoram Pass, very close to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.
DBO is an important army forward area post linking the ancient silk route to China. This base was built during the India-China conflict in 1962. Packet aircraft of the IAF operated from DBO between 1962 and 1965. In 1996, an earthquake caused some loosening of the surface soil, making this base unfit for further fixed-wing aircraft operations.
But now everything has been repaired and the airfield is functional.
The construction of Indian roads in the region is a follow-up action after the country reactivated its two strategically important airfields in May and November last year after more than four decades.
The idea is to build India’s “strategic presence” there as new global realities and challenges are emerging on the borders, said an Army officer on condition of anonymity.
These roads will connect Daulat Beg Oldie and Fukche air fields which were reactivated on May 31 and November 4, 2008, for the first time after the Sino-Indian war of 1962.
“The roads are being constructed from both the eastern and western flanks,” confirmed minister of tourism Nawang Rigzin Jora, who represents Leh constituency in the J&K Assembly. He said work is in progress.
While the minister did not reveal much about the reasons for these roads, the army officer recalled: “We had lost Aksai Chin because of our absence there. But now we have realised that the presence in all the fields is required with the twin objective to strengthen ourselves strategically and make our presence felt there. We can also keep tabs on the Chinese activities in the Aksai Chin region.”
The argument for building roads is that there cannot be a permanent dependence on the air presence, though there are plans to land fighter planes. The AN-32 and medium sized transport plane IL-76 have already landed there.
The Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fixed-wing aircraft (AN-32) landed at Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO). Following this, IL-76 planes made sorties over the region and landed in the airfield.
The Advanced Landing Ground (ALG), where the aircraft landed at DBO, has an unpaved surface and is located in the Aksai Chin area at a height of 16,200 feet near the strategic Karakoram Pass, very close to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.
DBO is an important army forward area post linking the ancient silk route to China. This base was built during the India-China conflict in 1962. Packet aircraft of the IAF operated from DBO between 1962 and 1965. In 1996, an earthquake caused some loosening of the surface soil, making this base unfit for further fixed-wing aircraft operations.
But now everything has been repaired and the airfield is functional.
Happily Ever Laughter
When you first meet Mavis and Jay Leno, it’s the electricity between them that gets you and their long-lasting love that makes them the anomaly. Two strongs can make one—they fit.
She arrives first—on time—doesn’t need hair or makeup and graciously agrees to be touched up, as a team is waiting. Unassuming, thoughtful and at ease, she exudes an air of total calm, a quiet dignity that you somehow know is deep and true. An intelligence and genuine concern lead her to bring me up to date on the condition of women in Afghanistan, her lifelong passion, even as she allows us to curl those curls because “my husband likes them wild.”
Then her husband enters, one of the most famous faces in the world, with white hair that begs to be smoothed (yet why would you—it’s the trademark that says, “Let me be, it’s who I am”) and a presence that makes everyone smile. Jay’s eyes are tired (he’s just returned from a trip to Detroit, where he entertained unemployed autoworkers), but they light up when they focus on his wife of 28 years. They touch, and the bond between them envelops everyone. Welcome to the Lenos’ love story.
I met Mavis a few years ago at our monthly book club. (She is a voracious reader whose passion is English history.) I was first struck by her depth of character and self-awareness—she is someone with a strong sense of purpose, compassion and curiosity. What I have come to know is that she’s someone who turns her wisdom into action. She works unceasingly with the Feminist Majority Foundation to help girls and women around the world gain rights through education so that human equality is realized.
Given the never-wavering glare on celebrity couples, I was impressed with their authentic relationship, one that feels grounded and decidedly non-Hollywood. Although I liked her before our interview, I told my husband of 34 years that in its aftermath, I had fallen in love with Mavis Leno. By that I mean the kind of unbridled universal love we feel for others when we realize what qualities they bring to humanity. What I learned from the Lenos’ love is how much a partner can help us discover such qualities in ourselves. Jay brings out the best in Mavis, and Mavis brings out the best in Jay. That has to be the definition of a perfect marriage.
Sue Smalley: Jay, I’ve heard Mavis talk about you so many times and how much in love she is. I guess I always felt you should share that story. Even just having your pictures taken a few moments ago, I could feel how happy you are being next to each other. You’re best friends, aren’t you?
Mavis and Jay Leno: [In unison.] Oh yeah.
JL: I had this discussion with Drew Barrymore on The Tonight Show. She was asking about being married, and I said, “You should always marry your conscience.” By that I mean, in show business—it happens in sports and politics, too—you go through the usual avarice, and you need someone who will go, “What are you doing? You don’t act like this.” If you wind up with someone who enjoys those things, you go to hell pretty much together. I spent half of my life trying not to disappoint my mother and the other half trying not to disappoint my wife. I mean, you have to respect the standard. You need to be able to look in the mirror.
SS: Mavis says, from the bottom of her heart, “He could never disappoint me.”
ML: No, because I truly know him, and he truly knows me. I met Jay in 1976. I’ve known him—
JL: Over 33 years.
ML: It was in January—I don’t remember the day. But at the time I thought, Holy s--t! That comedian is gorgeous! I had gone to the Comedy Store with my girlfriend because I was writing comedy with some partners. Friends kept saying, “You have to hang out at the Comedy Store and the Improv—you’ll meet people who can give you jobs.” The first time I went, they sat us front row center—that means you’re this far from the comic. And there was Jay.
SS: Was that at the very beginning of your career, Jay?
JL: Yeah, pretty much. But the interesting thing is, I’ve probably lived with five women—and every one of them was born on the same day. I can look at a woman and go, “September 5.” I don’t know why that is. I don’t look for a woman born on September 5, I just wind up attracted to them.
ML: Just casually, he asked what my birthday was, and I said, “September 5.” He started laughing. I remember it so clearly. I said, “What?” And he said, “Aw, nothing.”
JL: I remember I had Cathy Guisewite [of the “Cathy” comic strip] on, and I said, “I’m happily married...don’t take this wrong...I am attracted to you but in an odd way. Were you born on or around September 5?” And she said, “Yes, on September 5.” I said, “Sorry, I’m not flirting,” and then I explained. It made me laugh.
ML: When he finished his act the night we met, I needed to go to the ladies’ room. What I didn’t know was in the Comedy Store back then, that area was the only place for the comedians to hang out. So when I came out of the bathroom, he said, “Are you that girl in front?” and I said, “Yes, that was me.”
SS: Did you really notice her?
JL: Yeah!
ML: My friends spent most of their time at the Improv, so that’s where I started going. It just gradually evolved, you know? I had made up my mind when I was little that I would never get married or have children, so I had no agenda.
JL: Then I started to work. Her family were like church mice—they didn’t have two cents. I mean nothing—not even, like, taxes.
ML: My father was an actor. Enough said.
JL: But you know, I had this insurance policy, and I thought if something happened to me, my girlfriend wouldn’t be covered, but if we’re married, we’re covered, so...we might as well get married. Not the most romantic. Mavis didn’t even get an engagement ring until—
ML: He was going to get me one, but we had just bought a house, so why would I do that? I’m not that kind of person. So this is what he bought me 10 years ago. [Laughs and looks at the large diamond on her finger.]
SS: Mavis, your parents were happily married...why didn’t you want to marry?
ML: Maybe because my parents were not the typical American couple of that time. They had a very egalitarian relationship—actually, most of the traits I have that people consider feminine, I got from my dad, and the common sense, self-control and practicality is from my mother. When I was little, we would watch The Honeymooners. Here’s a very attractive woman, and whenever her husband is with Norton, what are they talking about? “How can we get away from the wives?” “If only it wasn’t for the wives.” Meanwhile, this woman has nothing to do, lives in this tiny place, cooks his dinner and listens to him talk. As a feminist even then, it was difficult to watch.
SS: You’re mad about it now.
ML: I am! I would see Lucy and other shows—if they wanted money, they had to ask for it, like they were a kid. That was not my plan for myself.
JL: My mother was from Scotland, had a horrible childhood—came to the country by herself when she was 11. My grandmother had run off with a younger guy, and my grandfather was stuck with six kids.
ML: His mom was the youngest.
JL: But he could only afford to take care of five, so they took her around the neighborhood as a servant girl to try to see if people would keep her for a few weeks.
ML: Jay, how are you telling this story? Her father took her there but not as a servant!
JL: But it gets to the comedy angle. My mother was not a depressed person, but I always sensed a sadness. Every time I could get my mother to laugh, it was like a huge gift. My dad was Italian and very outgoing. He would say, “Show people you’re Angelo’s boy.” My mother would say, “Whatever you do, don’t call attention to yourself.” So it was hilarious to be stuck in the middle. When I made it sort of big, I bought my dad a Cadillac, and of course, he had to get the white Cadillac d’Elegance with the red velour interior. My mother was mortified. They would drive down the street, and she would sit below seat level, and people would say, “I saw your father driving and yelling at somebody.” Sometimes if she saw people looking, she would roll down the window and go, “We’re not Cadillac people. My son got us this.” My father would yell, “Of course we’re Cadillac people! We’ve got a goddamn Cadillac! We’re driving the goddamn thing. It’s paid for!”
SS: And they were together their whole life?
JL: My dad was never sick a day in his life, but when my mother died, he was gone in nine months.
SS: Interesting how that happens.
JL: My mom took care of the inside of the house. Dad took care of the outside. We went through three ovens in my lifetime.
ML: She was like a short-order cook. There would always be steam coming out of the kitchen, pots boiling.
JL: Every breakfast, lunch, dinner—always a full thing. She didn’t even buy a box of spaghetti. She would make her own.
ML: I was crazy about Jay’s parents.
JL: We married on their wedding day, November 3.
SS: On purpose? As an honor?
JL: I thought my mom would like that—November 3, 1980.
ML: We had a very small wedding at a friend’s house with a couple friends.
JL: We didn’t tell anybody.
SS: Mavis, you didn’t want to get married, and now there’s such a connection. What changed your mind? Was Jay different?
ML: It was just that by the time we were together, I was 34. I had been a feminist for years, and I finally realized that fight was won, you know? I was past it, although that was an important gesture for me to make—that I could live without being married.
SS: What was it about Jay?
ML: Well, I was insanely in love with him—but I had had a long relationship before and never for one minute thought about marrying that guy. My belief was that I was a voyager, that I was just going to spend some time on this island and sail along and spend some time on that island. But with Jay, I realized all this time I’d been sailing, he was the destination.
SS: Jay, what was it about Mavis?
JL: Well, probably the sense that you don’t want to be somewhere else when you’re together. I mean, I’m home every night after work. I don’t go out—no boys’ night, card night or any of that stuff. I don’t feel the need.
ML: He thinks the same things are important that I think are important, the same things are wrong that I think are wrong. We have the same temperament, and we understand each other completely. Before Jay, I had the opposite experience with men to what most women have, because my father was so demonstrative. He must have told my mother he loved her a million times a day. So I always had relationships with men who were that same way—gave lots of presents but were flaky and unrealistic, tending toward the depressive. Stuff that means so much to women means nothing to me. Just be there when I need you, but the rest of the time, I take care of myself. And that was—and is—Jay.
SS: Interesting that Jay picked a woman who’s so strong. He looks at you with the admiring sense of someone who is her own person.
ML: Funny thing is, when we first got to know each other, in the ’70s, it was that in-between time with feminism. Men had stopped saying it was awful and started saying they were supporters, because they could get laid that way.
SS: So it was inauthentic?
ML: Yeah, but the thing with Jay was, from day one, he just saw me. I remember saying that I often felt I was from another planet, that I connected to people but I wished I could meet somebody from my own species. The first time talking to Jay, I said, “Oh! You’re one, too! Hi!”
SS: I think that may be the definition of “soul mate.”
JL: Well, I always look for qualities in women that I don’t have. I am attracted to the do-gooder—the rescue-a-cat type.
ML: Don’t be ridiculous—you’re the most do-gooder type in the world!
SS: I guess Jay means he values it in another person.
JL: I always tell guys, “Look like a man, think like a woman.” That’s the best way to get through life.
ML: I think we’re both saying the same thing—the quality we admire is somebody who aspires to goodness.
JL: Yeah.
ML: Here is who Jay is: When we were first going out, he’d get off at the Comedy Store late at night, and we’d go get groceries at the all-night Ralphs on Sunset. One night, there was this man harassing a woman. Suddenly, Jay yelled, “Honey! Hold on, we’re coming!” and he started walking across the lot, and the guy took off. Jay said to the girl, “Do you want to me hang around or follow you a little way? To make sure this guy...” She said no. I’d lived almost all my life in Hollywood, and there aren’t any men I ever went out with who would have done that. He didn’t even think twice. Right there, I said, “Okay!” I mean, a component of love, really, has to be admiration. Of course, I thought he was the sexiest thing I’d ever seen. I still do. And certainly, he was the funniest. He made me laugh till I almost died many times in the course of a lifetime.
JL: Yeah, it’s better than with women who are like, “I don’t get it...”
SS: I love thinking of those many nights you’ve been cracking up.
ML: I don’t think it’s an accident that comedians have the longest marriages in show business.
SS: Do they?
JL: Oh, yeah.
ML: Sure, think about it. Don Rickles, Bob Newhart, Bob Hope. You could go on and on. It’s a huge advantage. Being funny is just the best way to get through life in a relationship.
JL: I think that’s probably true.
ML: I mean, I can’t ever fight with him—he is very even-tempered.
JL: If you marry someone, there’s really nothing worth fighting about. I mean if you marry someone who is not crazy—that’s the first step. Because everything emanates from that. So when the wife says, “I have to do this.” Well, is this that important to you? All right, then.” It doesn’t matter that much, so why argue?
ML: Like I said, it’s the admiration. When Jay and I didn’t have that much money, when we were first married, we went to Monte Carlo because Jay was doing some stuff for—
JL: John Davidson.
ML: Yeah, The John Davidson Show. One night, Jay found a wallet lying on the ground. There was money and a work visa and, without thinking twice, Jay said we had to find this guy. He went back out in the square and just yelled—
JL: “Jean-Paul! Jean-Paul Tourneau!” I kept yelling, and this guy came running over, saying, “I am Jean-Paul!” like in one of those bad movies where the guy steps out of the dark and goes, “I am Jean-Paul—why you call my name?”
ML: That was funny, but the guy was in tears, you know. He was so glad to get it back. That’s Jay.
SS: You have the same values. And you laugh. Those are two key things to this marriage’s long life.
ML: Exactly. It’s really important to think the same things are funny. And the good examples—Jay’s and my parents’ happy marriages undoubtedly contributed. I think a lot of people have a very unrealistic idea of what a long relationship will be like.
JL: Happiness is a privilege, not a right. Read the fine print.
ML: People always say, “Work on a marriage.” I think if you work on knowing your own faults and trying to correct them, you’re not going to have to work on your marriage
JL: I got a job. I don’t need another.
ML: When we got married, it dawned on me that his then manager, who was a lawyer, would want a prenup, even though Jay didn’t have a lot of money then. So I decided to preempt it for him. I told Jay, “You know your manager is going to want a prenup. I’ll be perfectly happy to sign it, so don’t worry.” And Jay got mad. He said, “What? You’re already planning we’re going to get divorced?” We just trust each other in a really deep way.
SS: You really do fit.
ML: I knew a lot of funny and interesting people, but I didn’t know very many trustworthy people. But with Jay, I didn’t have to think about it. When a quality is there, it stands out.
JL: There are no jokes about wives. If someone is joking about their wife onstage, consciously or subcon-sciously, they mean it.
ML: Jay’s thing is, you elevate the powerless person and make fun of those who are misusing their power.
SS: It’s funny, Jay, because in the beginning you said Mavis is your conscience, and that’s exactly what you show in your jokes.
JL: The Wall Street guy you can nail, the plumber—
ML: If he asks someone in the audience, “What do you do, sir?” and the guy says, “I’m a plumber,” Jay will say, “Oh, someone who does an honest day’s work!” But if it’s a banker, he’ll say, “Oh, so you screw widows and orphans for a living.”
JL: Hopefully funnier than that...
ML: Am I a stand-up? No.
SS: My husband and I have been together 39 years. When I look back, I can see our relationship change. Do you find that in yours?
ML: A couple of periods were a little more difficult. When Jay got The Tonight Show, the first years were hard for me. All of a sudden, Jay had this day job, and every person on the planet was asking him for something. So I thought, I’m going to be the one who doesn’t ask for anything. Then it gave him relief at home, but that can also feel like distance. I don’t know if he was aware of it because he was so swamped by the job—just the time demands alone, and the pressure.
JL: It’s not really a high-pressure job. Do I look like I’m under pressure? Write joke, tell joke, get check. It couldn’t be simpler. You go to a place like Detroit, and you meet people with real jobs. Show business, let me tell you: The higher up you go, the more retarded people assume you are. They’ll say, “Jay drove here by himself! He drove to the studio alone—yes, he did! He came in his own car!” [Applauds.]
SS: You’re in a business where people are so self-important, and yet you remain the same.
JL: I think that’s the key—not to take yourself too seriously. It’s not high pressure unless you make it that way. It’s not like doing CPR. I was always happy with whatever level I was at. If you’re always looking for the next level, you’re not going to be happy.
ML: At that time, for me, he was gone a lot, and it was not only a new situation for him, it was a situation I had never experienced. And I didn’t know anybody to ask, “Well, how did you handle this?” So it took a little while before I figured it out.
SS: Did it make your relationship stronger?
ML: Absolutely, because you know, however steadfast your feelings for each other, your life circumstances are going to go all over the place. We’ve been through the death of my parents and his and the loss of Jay’s brother. We started off with not very much money, and now we have a lot. But we’ve stayed the same. The great thing about Jay is whatever he says, that’s it. It’s genuine.
JL: That’s right! I put my foot down. It’s the law!
ML: No. If he says, “Oh, I’ll do that,” then it’s done. When we were first together, if I wanted to talk to him about something, I would fall into the mode I had used with men in my past, where I would come in with a chip on my shoulder, all my arguments marshaled. But Jay would just say, “Okay.” Finally I realized I don’t need to do all that.
SS: You thought you could depend on him, and now, all these years later, you have all this documentation that the theory was correct.
ML: The whole thing is simple: Pick the right person; be the right person.
SS: That’s a great line.
ML: If I have one more conversation with a woman about what she wants in a man and how little she’s willing to give in return—I mean, wake up. When Jay and I lived together for a year before we married, he had an opportunity to be in a show in New York. He was actually nervous when he said, “I have this chance...” I thought, That’s great—why is he so rattled? And he said, “If I take it, I have to be in New York—would you move?” And I said, “Of course. Look, I’m with you now—I’m really with you.” And then he relaxed. I asked, “Would you turn it down if I didn’t want to?” and he got serious and said, “My career is for us. Everything I do is for us.” And the last wall inside me fell—I knew he would be on my side in everything. If you can’t do it for the person because you love them—
SS: Then you’re never going to do it. Mavis, do you still go to the show after all these years?
ML: Off and on, but we watch The Tonight Show together every night at home.
JL: Look, I always tell people, you don’t fall in love with a hooker. That’s what show business is. You can enjoy show business...and then go home.
She arrives first—on time—doesn’t need hair or makeup and graciously agrees to be touched up, as a team is waiting. Unassuming, thoughtful and at ease, she exudes an air of total calm, a quiet dignity that you somehow know is deep and true. An intelligence and genuine concern lead her to bring me up to date on the condition of women in Afghanistan, her lifelong passion, even as she allows us to curl those curls because “my husband likes them wild.”
Then her husband enters, one of the most famous faces in the world, with white hair that begs to be smoothed (yet why would you—it’s the trademark that says, “Let me be, it’s who I am”) and a presence that makes everyone smile. Jay’s eyes are tired (he’s just returned from a trip to Detroit, where he entertained unemployed autoworkers), but they light up when they focus on his wife of 28 years. They touch, and the bond between them envelops everyone. Welcome to the Lenos’ love story.
I met Mavis a few years ago at our monthly book club. (She is a voracious reader whose passion is English history.) I was first struck by her depth of character and self-awareness—she is someone with a strong sense of purpose, compassion and curiosity. What I have come to know is that she’s someone who turns her wisdom into action. She works unceasingly with the Feminist Majority Foundation to help girls and women around the world gain rights through education so that human equality is realized.
Given the never-wavering glare on celebrity couples, I was impressed with their authentic relationship, one that feels grounded and decidedly non-Hollywood. Although I liked her before our interview, I told my husband of 34 years that in its aftermath, I had fallen in love with Mavis Leno. By that I mean the kind of unbridled universal love we feel for others when we realize what qualities they bring to humanity. What I learned from the Lenos’ love is how much a partner can help us discover such qualities in ourselves. Jay brings out the best in Mavis, and Mavis brings out the best in Jay. That has to be the definition of a perfect marriage.
Sue Smalley: Jay, I’ve heard Mavis talk about you so many times and how much in love she is. I guess I always felt you should share that story. Even just having your pictures taken a few moments ago, I could feel how happy you are being next to each other. You’re best friends, aren’t you?
Mavis and Jay Leno: [In unison.] Oh yeah.
JL: I had this discussion with Drew Barrymore on The Tonight Show. She was asking about being married, and I said, “You should always marry your conscience.” By that I mean, in show business—it happens in sports and politics, too—you go through the usual avarice, and you need someone who will go, “What are you doing? You don’t act like this.” If you wind up with someone who enjoys those things, you go to hell pretty much together. I spent half of my life trying not to disappoint my mother and the other half trying not to disappoint my wife. I mean, you have to respect the standard. You need to be able to look in the mirror.
SS: Mavis says, from the bottom of her heart, “He could never disappoint me.”
ML: No, because I truly know him, and he truly knows me. I met Jay in 1976. I’ve known him—
JL: Over 33 years.
ML: It was in January—I don’t remember the day. But at the time I thought, Holy s--t! That comedian is gorgeous! I had gone to the Comedy Store with my girlfriend because I was writing comedy with some partners. Friends kept saying, “You have to hang out at the Comedy Store and the Improv—you’ll meet people who can give you jobs.” The first time I went, they sat us front row center—that means you’re this far from the comic. And there was Jay.
SS: Was that at the very beginning of your career, Jay?
JL: Yeah, pretty much. But the interesting thing is, I’ve probably lived with five women—and every one of them was born on the same day. I can look at a woman and go, “September 5.” I don’t know why that is. I don’t look for a woman born on September 5, I just wind up attracted to them.
ML: Just casually, he asked what my birthday was, and I said, “September 5.” He started laughing. I remember it so clearly. I said, “What?” And he said, “Aw, nothing.”
JL: I remember I had Cathy Guisewite [of the “Cathy” comic strip] on, and I said, “I’m happily married...don’t take this wrong...I am attracted to you but in an odd way. Were you born on or around September 5?” And she said, “Yes, on September 5.” I said, “Sorry, I’m not flirting,” and then I explained. It made me laugh.
ML: When he finished his act the night we met, I needed to go to the ladies’ room. What I didn’t know was in the Comedy Store back then, that area was the only place for the comedians to hang out. So when I came out of the bathroom, he said, “Are you that girl in front?” and I said, “Yes, that was me.”
SS: Did you really notice her?
JL: Yeah!
ML: My friends spent most of their time at the Improv, so that’s where I started going. It just gradually evolved, you know? I had made up my mind when I was little that I would never get married or have children, so I had no agenda.
JL: Then I started to work. Her family were like church mice—they didn’t have two cents. I mean nothing—not even, like, taxes.
ML: My father was an actor. Enough said.
JL: But you know, I had this insurance policy, and I thought if something happened to me, my girlfriend wouldn’t be covered, but if we’re married, we’re covered, so...we might as well get married. Not the most romantic. Mavis didn’t even get an engagement ring until—
ML: He was going to get me one, but we had just bought a house, so why would I do that? I’m not that kind of person. So this is what he bought me 10 years ago. [Laughs and looks at the large diamond on her finger.]
SS: Mavis, your parents were happily married...why didn’t you want to marry?
ML: Maybe because my parents were not the typical American couple of that time. They had a very egalitarian relationship—actually, most of the traits I have that people consider feminine, I got from my dad, and the common sense, self-control and practicality is from my mother. When I was little, we would watch The Honeymooners. Here’s a very attractive woman, and whenever her husband is with Norton, what are they talking about? “How can we get away from the wives?” “If only it wasn’t for the wives.” Meanwhile, this woman has nothing to do, lives in this tiny place, cooks his dinner and listens to him talk. As a feminist even then, it was difficult to watch.
SS: You’re mad about it now.
ML: I am! I would see Lucy and other shows—if they wanted money, they had to ask for it, like they were a kid. That was not my plan for myself.
JL: My mother was from Scotland, had a horrible childhood—came to the country by herself when she was 11. My grandmother had run off with a younger guy, and my grandfather was stuck with six kids.
ML: His mom was the youngest.
JL: But he could only afford to take care of five, so they took her around the neighborhood as a servant girl to try to see if people would keep her for a few weeks.
ML: Jay, how are you telling this story? Her father took her there but not as a servant!
JL: But it gets to the comedy angle. My mother was not a depressed person, but I always sensed a sadness. Every time I could get my mother to laugh, it was like a huge gift. My dad was Italian and very outgoing. He would say, “Show people you’re Angelo’s boy.” My mother would say, “Whatever you do, don’t call attention to yourself.” So it was hilarious to be stuck in the middle. When I made it sort of big, I bought my dad a Cadillac, and of course, he had to get the white Cadillac d’Elegance with the red velour interior. My mother was mortified. They would drive down the street, and she would sit below seat level, and people would say, “I saw your father driving and yelling at somebody.” Sometimes if she saw people looking, she would roll down the window and go, “We’re not Cadillac people. My son got us this.” My father would yell, “Of course we’re Cadillac people! We’ve got a goddamn Cadillac! We’re driving the goddamn thing. It’s paid for!”
SS: And they were together their whole life?
JL: My dad was never sick a day in his life, but when my mother died, he was gone in nine months.
SS: Interesting how that happens.
JL: My mom took care of the inside of the house. Dad took care of the outside. We went through three ovens in my lifetime.
ML: She was like a short-order cook. There would always be steam coming out of the kitchen, pots boiling.
JL: Every breakfast, lunch, dinner—always a full thing. She didn’t even buy a box of spaghetti. She would make her own.
ML: I was crazy about Jay’s parents.
JL: We married on their wedding day, November 3.
SS: On purpose? As an honor?
JL: I thought my mom would like that—November 3, 1980.
ML: We had a very small wedding at a friend’s house with a couple friends.
JL: We didn’t tell anybody.
SS: Mavis, you didn’t want to get married, and now there’s such a connection. What changed your mind? Was Jay different?
ML: It was just that by the time we were together, I was 34. I had been a feminist for years, and I finally realized that fight was won, you know? I was past it, although that was an important gesture for me to make—that I could live without being married.
SS: What was it about Jay?
ML: Well, I was insanely in love with him—but I had had a long relationship before and never for one minute thought about marrying that guy. My belief was that I was a voyager, that I was just going to spend some time on this island and sail along and spend some time on that island. But with Jay, I realized all this time I’d been sailing, he was the destination.
SS: Jay, what was it about Mavis?
JL: Well, probably the sense that you don’t want to be somewhere else when you’re together. I mean, I’m home every night after work. I don’t go out—no boys’ night, card night or any of that stuff. I don’t feel the need.
ML: He thinks the same things are important that I think are important, the same things are wrong that I think are wrong. We have the same temperament, and we understand each other completely. Before Jay, I had the opposite experience with men to what most women have, because my father was so demonstrative. He must have told my mother he loved her a million times a day. So I always had relationships with men who were that same way—gave lots of presents but were flaky and unrealistic, tending toward the depressive. Stuff that means so much to women means nothing to me. Just be there when I need you, but the rest of the time, I take care of myself. And that was—and is—Jay.
SS: Interesting that Jay picked a woman who’s so strong. He looks at you with the admiring sense of someone who is her own person.
ML: Funny thing is, when we first got to know each other, in the ’70s, it was that in-between time with feminism. Men had stopped saying it was awful and started saying they were supporters, because they could get laid that way.
SS: So it was inauthentic?
ML: Yeah, but the thing with Jay was, from day one, he just saw me. I remember saying that I often felt I was from another planet, that I connected to people but I wished I could meet somebody from my own species. The first time talking to Jay, I said, “Oh! You’re one, too! Hi!”
SS: I think that may be the definition of “soul mate.”
JL: Well, I always look for qualities in women that I don’t have. I am attracted to the do-gooder—the rescue-a-cat type.
ML: Don’t be ridiculous—you’re the most do-gooder type in the world!
SS: I guess Jay means he values it in another person.
JL: I always tell guys, “Look like a man, think like a woman.” That’s the best way to get through life.
ML: I think we’re both saying the same thing—the quality we admire is somebody who aspires to goodness.
JL: Yeah.
ML: Here is who Jay is: When we were first going out, he’d get off at the Comedy Store late at night, and we’d go get groceries at the all-night Ralphs on Sunset. One night, there was this man harassing a woman. Suddenly, Jay yelled, “Honey! Hold on, we’re coming!” and he started walking across the lot, and the guy took off. Jay said to the girl, “Do you want to me hang around or follow you a little way? To make sure this guy...” She said no. I’d lived almost all my life in Hollywood, and there aren’t any men I ever went out with who would have done that. He didn’t even think twice. Right there, I said, “Okay!” I mean, a component of love, really, has to be admiration. Of course, I thought he was the sexiest thing I’d ever seen. I still do. And certainly, he was the funniest. He made me laugh till I almost died many times in the course of a lifetime.
JL: Yeah, it’s better than with women who are like, “I don’t get it...”
SS: I love thinking of those many nights you’ve been cracking up.
ML: I don’t think it’s an accident that comedians have the longest marriages in show business.
SS: Do they?
JL: Oh, yeah.
ML: Sure, think about it. Don Rickles, Bob Newhart, Bob Hope. You could go on and on. It’s a huge advantage. Being funny is just the best way to get through life in a relationship.
JL: I think that’s probably true.
ML: I mean, I can’t ever fight with him—he is very even-tempered.
JL: If you marry someone, there’s really nothing worth fighting about. I mean if you marry someone who is not crazy—that’s the first step. Because everything emanates from that. So when the wife says, “I have to do this.” Well, is this that important to you? All right, then.” It doesn’t matter that much, so why argue?
ML: Like I said, it’s the admiration. When Jay and I didn’t have that much money, when we were first married, we went to Monte Carlo because Jay was doing some stuff for—
JL: John Davidson.
ML: Yeah, The John Davidson Show. One night, Jay found a wallet lying on the ground. There was money and a work visa and, without thinking twice, Jay said we had to find this guy. He went back out in the square and just yelled—
JL: “Jean-Paul! Jean-Paul Tourneau!” I kept yelling, and this guy came running over, saying, “I am Jean-Paul!” like in one of those bad movies where the guy steps out of the dark and goes, “I am Jean-Paul—why you call my name?”
ML: That was funny, but the guy was in tears, you know. He was so glad to get it back. That’s Jay.
SS: You have the same values. And you laugh. Those are two key things to this marriage’s long life.
ML: Exactly. It’s really important to think the same things are funny. And the good examples—Jay’s and my parents’ happy marriages undoubtedly contributed. I think a lot of people have a very unrealistic idea of what a long relationship will be like.
JL: Happiness is a privilege, not a right. Read the fine print.
ML: People always say, “Work on a marriage.” I think if you work on knowing your own faults and trying to correct them, you’re not going to have to work on your marriage
JL: I got a job. I don’t need another.
ML: When we got married, it dawned on me that his then manager, who was a lawyer, would want a prenup, even though Jay didn’t have a lot of money then. So I decided to preempt it for him. I told Jay, “You know your manager is going to want a prenup. I’ll be perfectly happy to sign it, so don’t worry.” And Jay got mad. He said, “What? You’re already planning we’re going to get divorced?” We just trust each other in a really deep way.
SS: You really do fit.
ML: I knew a lot of funny and interesting people, but I didn’t know very many trustworthy people. But with Jay, I didn’t have to think about it. When a quality is there, it stands out.
JL: There are no jokes about wives. If someone is joking about their wife onstage, consciously or subcon-sciously, they mean it.
ML: Jay’s thing is, you elevate the powerless person and make fun of those who are misusing their power.
SS: It’s funny, Jay, because in the beginning you said Mavis is your conscience, and that’s exactly what you show in your jokes.
JL: The Wall Street guy you can nail, the plumber—
ML: If he asks someone in the audience, “What do you do, sir?” and the guy says, “I’m a plumber,” Jay will say, “Oh, someone who does an honest day’s work!” But if it’s a banker, he’ll say, “Oh, so you screw widows and orphans for a living.”
JL: Hopefully funnier than that...
ML: Am I a stand-up? No.
SS: My husband and I have been together 39 years. When I look back, I can see our relationship change. Do you find that in yours?
ML: A couple of periods were a little more difficult. When Jay got The Tonight Show, the first years were hard for me. All of a sudden, Jay had this day job, and every person on the planet was asking him for something. So I thought, I’m going to be the one who doesn’t ask for anything. Then it gave him relief at home, but that can also feel like distance. I don’t know if he was aware of it because he was so swamped by the job—just the time demands alone, and the pressure.
JL: It’s not really a high-pressure job. Do I look like I’m under pressure? Write joke, tell joke, get check. It couldn’t be simpler. You go to a place like Detroit, and you meet people with real jobs. Show business, let me tell you: The higher up you go, the more retarded people assume you are. They’ll say, “Jay drove here by himself! He drove to the studio alone—yes, he did! He came in his own car!” [Applauds.]
SS: You’re in a business where people are so self-important, and yet you remain the same.
JL: I think that’s the key—not to take yourself too seriously. It’s not high pressure unless you make it that way. It’s not like doing CPR. I was always happy with whatever level I was at. If you’re always looking for the next level, you’re not going to be happy.
ML: At that time, for me, he was gone a lot, and it was not only a new situation for him, it was a situation I had never experienced. And I didn’t know anybody to ask, “Well, how did you handle this?” So it took a little while before I figured it out.
SS: Did it make your relationship stronger?
ML: Absolutely, because you know, however steadfast your feelings for each other, your life circumstances are going to go all over the place. We’ve been through the death of my parents and his and the loss of Jay’s brother. We started off with not very much money, and now we have a lot. But we’ve stayed the same. The great thing about Jay is whatever he says, that’s it. It’s genuine.
JL: That’s right! I put my foot down. It’s the law!
ML: No. If he says, “Oh, I’ll do that,” then it’s done. When we were first together, if I wanted to talk to him about something, I would fall into the mode I had used with men in my past, where I would come in with a chip on my shoulder, all my arguments marshaled. But Jay would just say, “Okay.” Finally I realized I don’t need to do all that.
SS: You thought you could depend on him, and now, all these years later, you have all this documentation that the theory was correct.
ML: The whole thing is simple: Pick the right person; be the right person.
SS: That’s a great line.
ML: If I have one more conversation with a woman about what she wants in a man and how little she’s willing to give in return—I mean, wake up. When Jay and I lived together for a year before we married, he had an opportunity to be in a show in New York. He was actually nervous when he said, “I have this chance...” I thought, That’s great—why is he so rattled? And he said, “If I take it, I have to be in New York—would you move?” And I said, “Of course. Look, I’m with you now—I’m really with you.” And then he relaxed. I asked, “Would you turn it down if I didn’t want to?” and he got serious and said, “My career is for us. Everything I do is for us.” And the last wall inside me fell—I knew he would be on my side in everything. If you can’t do it for the person because you love them—
SS: Then you’re never going to do it. Mavis, do you still go to the show after all these years?
ML: Off and on, but we watch The Tonight Show together every night at home.
JL: Look, I always tell people, you don’t fall in love with a hooker. That’s what show business is. You can enjoy show business...and then go home.
Officials: Abducted SoCal boy reunited with mom
A 3-year-old boy abducted from his family home in San Bernardino nearly two weeks ago by two armed men was reunited with his mother today after police found him wandering a Mexican border town's streets, sheriff's officials said.
The reunion took place in the California border city of Calexico, a day after detectives and FBI agents received a call from officials in the neighboring Mexican city of Mexicali saying they found a boy that could be Briant Rodriguez, San Bernardino County sheriff's Lt. Rick Ells said.
Mother of kidnapped boy, 3, pleads for...Ells said a municipal police officer in Mexicali found the boy wandering the streets by himself late Thursday. The officer initially thought the child was from the neighborhood and took him to several houses seeking his family before leaving him in child protective custody, Ells said.
Mexican authorities did not realize who the child was and didn't issue an Amber alert until Friday afternoon, he said.
Ells said Briant's mother, Maria Rosalina Millan, and investigators boarded a plane to Calexico Friday night. An FBI agent crossed the border and handled immigration paperwork for the boy, who holds dual U.S. and Mexican citizenship, he said.
The FBI agent brought Briant back across the border for the reunion Saturday, Ells said.
Ells had no details about the child's condition or how long he had been left alone.
Investigators were continuing to investigate why Briant was abducted and why his family was targeted. Millan said two men burst into her home on May 3, tied up the family, stole money and other property then left with her youngest child.
The kidnappers had not demanded a ransom and the initial investigation pointed to the kidnappers being strangers to the family.
Federal and local investigators were looking at several theories, including that the Spanish-speaking kidnappers were from Mexico and may have had ties to organized crime there.
Authorities later released a photo of two men they said were the kidnappers. The blurred image was taken from a surveillance camera in a home-improvement store as the men bought tape believed to have been used to bind Millan and her children.
The family lives in a modest, single-story home in a lower-income area abutting the city of San Bernardino, about 60 miles east of Los Angeles.
The reunion took place in the California border city of Calexico, a day after detectives and FBI agents received a call from officials in the neighboring Mexican city of Mexicali saying they found a boy that could be Briant Rodriguez, San Bernardino County sheriff's Lt. Rick Ells said.
Mother of kidnapped boy, 3, pleads for...Ells said a municipal police officer in Mexicali found the boy wandering the streets by himself late Thursday. The officer initially thought the child was from the neighborhood and took him to several houses seeking his family before leaving him in child protective custody, Ells said.
Mexican authorities did not realize who the child was and didn't issue an Amber alert until Friday afternoon, he said.
Ells said Briant's mother, Maria Rosalina Millan, and investigators boarded a plane to Calexico Friday night. An FBI agent crossed the border and handled immigration paperwork for the boy, who holds dual U.S. and Mexican citizenship, he said.
The FBI agent brought Briant back across the border for the reunion Saturday, Ells said.
Ells had no details about the child's condition or how long he had been left alone.
Investigators were continuing to investigate why Briant was abducted and why his family was targeted. Millan said two men burst into her home on May 3, tied up the family, stole money and other property then left with her youngest child.
The kidnappers had not demanded a ransom and the initial investigation pointed to the kidnappers being strangers to the family.
Federal and local investigators were looking at several theories, including that the Spanish-speaking kidnappers were from Mexico and may have had ties to organized crime there.
Authorities later released a photo of two men they said were the kidnappers. The blurred image was taken from a surveillance camera in a home-improvement store as the men bought tape believed to have been used to bind Millan and her children.
The family lives in a modest, single-story home in a lower-income area abutting the city of San Bernardino, about 60 miles east of Los Angeles.
Even to Save Cash, Don’t Try This Stuff at Home
Saving money never cost quite so much.
When the toilet in Carol Taddei’s master bathroom began to break down a few months ago, she decided it would be cheaper to buy a new one than pay for repairs. Ever frugal in this dismal economy, Ms. Taddei, a retired paralegal, then took her economizing a step further, figuring she could save even more by installing the new toilet herself.
Initially, things looked good with the flushing and the swishing. That is, until the ceiling collapsed in the room below the new (leaky) toilet. Rushing to get supplies for a repair, Ms. Taddei clipped a pole in her garage. It ripped the bumper off her car, and later, several shelves holding flower pots and garden tools collapsed over her head.
“It just kept getting worse,” Ms. Taddei said, ruefully describing what came out to be a $3,000, three-day renovation at her suburban Minneapolis home, finished by a professional from Mr. Handyman, a home repair service that takes emergency calls.
With the sour economy has come a class of ambitious do-it-yourselfers who are tackling things that, before the days of rampant penny-pinching, might have been left to paid professionals. An unlucky few like Ms. Taddei have learned that being thrifty sometimes comes at a high price and can bring along with it a new scourge of the times: saver’s remorse.
“Oh, tell me about it,” Ms. Taddei said. “Sometimes it’s better just to bite the bullet.”
Certain things are almost always true when times are tough, experts say, and they are not all bad. People drive less to save on gas, so there are fewer car crashes. People smoke less because cigarettes are expensive. Diets simplify and, sometimes as a result, become more healthful. Stress levels, on the other hand, tend to increase.
And while there is no national database that tracks do-it-yourself home injuries in recessions, experts say that there does seem to be an increase in the kind of accidents and mishaps that come with spending more time at home, based mostly on anecdotal evidence.
“We are seeing an increase in minor injuries, sprains and contusions,” said Dr. Peter Lamelas, who operates four urgent care centers around Palm Beach County, Fla.
The centers are seeing an increase in patients in general, perhaps because urgent care centers are a less expensive alternative to hospital emergency rooms. Based on figures for this year so far, Dr. Lamelas is expecting to have 20,000 more visits from patients than last year.
“We’ve been seeing a lot of musculoskeletal problems from people lifting heavy things, maybe moving or doing things they’re not accustomed to,” Dr. Lamelas said. “A lot of back injuries, shoulder injuries. Lacerations all the time.”
Ramon Estrada has saver’s remorse, foodie style. Hoping to save on groceries and avoid costly restaurant meals about three months ago, he accepted almost two dozen steak and fish filets from someone who offered his family their uncooked party leftovers. Being a culinary student, Mr. Estrada jumped at the chance to spend an evening chopping and seasoning and grilling, then cooling and repackaging the bounty of free food for dinners and lunches during the week.
The family ate some of the surf-and-turf on the spot. It tasted delicious, but about four hours later, “I’m completely feeling horrible,” said Mr. Estrada, 27. “Cramping stomach, the most horrible thing ever.”
Mr. Estrada’s brother had to be rushed to the emergency room. Mr. Estrada became so dehydrated that he also had to see a doctor a few days later, at the cost of at least $400 for drugs and treatment and four days of missed work.
“We learned something,” he said. “Saving money wasn’t worth all of that.”
Hair stylists and auto mechanics are often among those called to the rescue when things go wrong for money-savers.
“One of my clients decided to bleach her hair all over instead of coming in to get a full head of highlights,” said Sunny Brewer, a stylist in St. Clair, Mich. “She put bleach on her scalp and pulled it through to the ends and left it on for an hour. She had hair down past the middle of her back and now she’s sporting a chin-length bob because her hair broke off.”
The client, somewhat mortified, did not want to be mentioned by name in this article. But she did allow Ms. Brewer to tell her story as a cautionary measure.
We had to go in and do corrective color,” Ms. Brewer continued. “I charge by the hour, and I worked on her for four hours. So by the time it was over, she ended up spending close to $1,000 to have her hair corrected when it could have been $175.”
Don Tommasone, the owner of Village Automotive, a car care center in a Chicago suburb, says he spends a lot of his time these days doing corrections, too.
“We open the hood and can tell the guy tried to do it himself with cheap parts,” Mr. Tommasone said. “We see at least one a day like that. At least. The No. 1 part replaced: the battery.”
Sasha Bernstein is among those who decided to skip out on the salon. About six months ago, Ms. Bernstein, 26, decided she would save $60 a month by buying an at-home kit and waxing her own bikini line. All she can say is that it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Often, though, the wounds are only to one’s pride.
Tony Contreras, who works at a nonprofit legal service clinic in San Francisco, saves money on his daughter’s haircut by trimming it himself. His wife, Sierra Filucci, called the latest style “a horribly uneven mess.”
But both parents keep telling Lola, 4, how cute she looks, even though they said they cringe anytime people mention their daughter’s creative hairdo.
In suburban Baltimore, Lynne Sherman was the temporary fix when her husband’s attempt to hang molding ended up puncturing a pipe, which sent water spouting into their daughter’s bedroom. Ms. Sherman plugged the hole with her finger until a carpenter arrived.
“My husband said, ‘I took woodworking and shop in high school, so when we’re ready to do it, I’ll do it,’ ” Ms. Sherman, 50, said of the project gone awry, which cost $250 to fix, and about which her husband swore her to secrecy. “You can’t print what his reaction was, and I started that nervous laughter, ‘Oh, God what do we do?’ Now I have to say, we don’t do things ourselves anymore.”
When the toilet in Carol Taddei’s master bathroom began to break down a few months ago, she decided it would be cheaper to buy a new one than pay for repairs. Ever frugal in this dismal economy, Ms. Taddei, a retired paralegal, then took her economizing a step further, figuring she could save even more by installing the new toilet herself.
Initially, things looked good with the flushing and the swishing. That is, until the ceiling collapsed in the room below the new (leaky) toilet. Rushing to get supplies for a repair, Ms. Taddei clipped a pole in her garage. It ripped the bumper off her car, and later, several shelves holding flower pots and garden tools collapsed over her head.
“It just kept getting worse,” Ms. Taddei said, ruefully describing what came out to be a $3,000, three-day renovation at her suburban Minneapolis home, finished by a professional from Mr. Handyman, a home repair service that takes emergency calls.
With the sour economy has come a class of ambitious do-it-yourselfers who are tackling things that, before the days of rampant penny-pinching, might have been left to paid professionals. An unlucky few like Ms. Taddei have learned that being thrifty sometimes comes at a high price and can bring along with it a new scourge of the times: saver’s remorse.
“Oh, tell me about it,” Ms. Taddei said. “Sometimes it’s better just to bite the bullet.”
Certain things are almost always true when times are tough, experts say, and they are not all bad. People drive less to save on gas, so there are fewer car crashes. People smoke less because cigarettes are expensive. Diets simplify and, sometimes as a result, become more healthful. Stress levels, on the other hand, tend to increase.
And while there is no national database that tracks do-it-yourself home injuries in recessions, experts say that there does seem to be an increase in the kind of accidents and mishaps that come with spending more time at home, based mostly on anecdotal evidence.
“We are seeing an increase in minor injuries, sprains and contusions,” said Dr. Peter Lamelas, who operates four urgent care centers around Palm Beach County, Fla.
The centers are seeing an increase in patients in general, perhaps because urgent care centers are a less expensive alternative to hospital emergency rooms. Based on figures for this year so far, Dr. Lamelas is expecting to have 20,000 more visits from patients than last year.
“We’ve been seeing a lot of musculoskeletal problems from people lifting heavy things, maybe moving or doing things they’re not accustomed to,” Dr. Lamelas said. “A lot of back injuries, shoulder injuries. Lacerations all the time.”
Ramon Estrada has saver’s remorse, foodie style. Hoping to save on groceries and avoid costly restaurant meals about three months ago, he accepted almost two dozen steak and fish filets from someone who offered his family their uncooked party leftovers. Being a culinary student, Mr. Estrada jumped at the chance to spend an evening chopping and seasoning and grilling, then cooling and repackaging the bounty of free food for dinners and lunches during the week.
The family ate some of the surf-and-turf on the spot. It tasted delicious, but about four hours later, “I’m completely feeling horrible,” said Mr. Estrada, 27. “Cramping stomach, the most horrible thing ever.”
Mr. Estrada’s brother had to be rushed to the emergency room. Mr. Estrada became so dehydrated that he also had to see a doctor a few days later, at the cost of at least $400 for drugs and treatment and four days of missed work.
“We learned something,” he said. “Saving money wasn’t worth all of that.”
Hair stylists and auto mechanics are often among those called to the rescue when things go wrong for money-savers.
“One of my clients decided to bleach her hair all over instead of coming in to get a full head of highlights,” said Sunny Brewer, a stylist in St. Clair, Mich. “She put bleach on her scalp and pulled it through to the ends and left it on for an hour. She had hair down past the middle of her back and now she’s sporting a chin-length bob because her hair broke off.”
The client, somewhat mortified, did not want to be mentioned by name in this article. But she did allow Ms. Brewer to tell her story as a cautionary measure.
We had to go in and do corrective color,” Ms. Brewer continued. “I charge by the hour, and I worked on her for four hours. So by the time it was over, she ended up spending close to $1,000 to have her hair corrected when it could have been $175.”
Don Tommasone, the owner of Village Automotive, a car care center in a Chicago suburb, says he spends a lot of his time these days doing corrections, too.
“We open the hood and can tell the guy tried to do it himself with cheap parts,” Mr. Tommasone said. “We see at least one a day like that. At least. The No. 1 part replaced: the battery.”
Sasha Bernstein is among those who decided to skip out on the salon. About six months ago, Ms. Bernstein, 26, decided she would save $60 a month by buying an at-home kit and waxing her own bikini line. All she can say is that it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Often, though, the wounds are only to one’s pride.
Tony Contreras, who works at a nonprofit legal service clinic in San Francisco, saves money on his daughter’s haircut by trimming it himself. His wife, Sierra Filucci, called the latest style “a horribly uneven mess.”
But both parents keep telling Lola, 4, how cute she looks, even though they said they cringe anytime people mention their daughter’s creative hairdo.
In suburban Baltimore, Lynne Sherman was the temporary fix when her husband’s attempt to hang molding ended up puncturing a pipe, which sent water spouting into their daughter’s bedroom. Ms. Sherman plugged the hole with her finger until a carpenter arrived.
“My husband said, ‘I took woodworking and shop in high school, so when we’re ready to do it, I’ll do it,’ ” Ms. Sherman, 50, said of the project gone awry, which cost $250 to fix, and about which her husband swore her to secrecy. “You can’t print what his reaction was, and I started that nervous laughter, ‘Oh, God what do we do?’ Now I have to say, we don’t do things ourselves anymore.”
Tricky Repair of Camera Goes Well for Astronauts
After two days of tense spacewalks drawn out by balky bolts and badly fitting equipment, the astronauts aboard the space shuttle Atlantis on Saturday breezed through the trickiest and most delicate job of their 11-day mission to the Hubble Space Telescope: fixing a camera that had not been designed to be repaired in space.
Working as calmly as if they were in shirt sleeves in the basement rather than wearing the equivalent of boxing gloves and sailing through space at five miles per second, John M. Grunsfeld and Andrew J. Feustel conducted “brain surgery” on the Hubble’s Advanced Camera for Surveys. They unscrewed screws not meant to be unscrewed and yanked circuit boards, finishing in less than three hours a job that had been allotted nearly five hours and two spacewalks.
Even the most optimistic members of the team had warned that repairing the camera was a long shot. Dr. Grunsfeld, already respected for his Hubble fix-it endeavors on two earlier missions, said before the flight that this would be a nail-biter.
When he began to remove screws almost an hour ahead of schedule, gasps and cheers broke out in the cabin of Atlantis.
“I don’t think real brain surgeons say ‘Yahoo’ every time they pull something out,” Dr. Grunsfeld said.
“Maybe they should,” replied Col. Michael T. Good of the Air Force, who was orchestrating events from inside Atlantis.
The day’s success raised the repair team’s confidence that it would succeed on Sunday, when similar surgery will be tried on another ailing instrument, the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph.
It was, as Scott D. Altman, the shuttle’s commander, said Saturday morning as the astronauts set out, “a great day for a spacewalk.”
Dr. Grunsfeld was on his second spacewalk of this mission and his seventh over all, every one in the name of the Hubble. Dr. Feustel was making his second spacewalk. On Thursday, the pair overcame a stuck bolt to replace the most ancient of the Hubble’s cameras, the wide-field camera No. 2, with a new version.
Dr. Grunsfeld and Dr. Feustel warmed up for the main event by installing on the Hubble a new spectrograph, the Cosmic Origins Spectrograph.
Spectrographs break down light into its constituent wavelengths, allowing astronomers to discern the composition, temperature and motions of celestial objects. The Hubble’s astronomers hope to use the instrument to trace tendrils of gas that stretch through the universe like a spider web, connecting galaxies.
The new spectrograph went into a slot occupied for the last 16 years by a box of corrective lenses known as the Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement system. When it was installed in the space telescope in 1993, it provided special lenses that folded like a shower rod and took the blur out of the Hubble’s flawed vision. But all of the Hubble’s instruments now have their own correction optics, and Costar is headed for the Smithsonian Institution.
The advanced camera was a workhorse until its demise in 2007, with some of the Hubble’s most famous pictures to its credit, including the one in 2004 called Ultra Deep Field, which showed galaxies forming only 800 million years after the Big Bang.
Engineers were planning three hours’ worth of tests overnight to make sure the camera was repaired.
When it conked out in 2007, engineers said it was unlikely that the camera could be fixed. Not only was it not designed to be taken apart by astronauts wearing boxing gloves, and some parts of it were inaccessible, but the astronauts already had their hands full training to repair a spectrograph that had also not been designed to be tinkered with in space. That work will be the highlight of the spacewalk on Sunday.
Working as calmly as if they were in shirt sleeves in the basement rather than wearing the equivalent of boxing gloves and sailing through space at five miles per second, John M. Grunsfeld and Andrew J. Feustel conducted “brain surgery” on the Hubble’s Advanced Camera for Surveys. They unscrewed screws not meant to be unscrewed and yanked circuit boards, finishing in less than three hours a job that had been allotted nearly five hours and two spacewalks.
Even the most optimistic members of the team had warned that repairing the camera was a long shot. Dr. Grunsfeld, already respected for his Hubble fix-it endeavors on two earlier missions, said before the flight that this would be a nail-biter.
When he began to remove screws almost an hour ahead of schedule, gasps and cheers broke out in the cabin of Atlantis.
“I don’t think real brain surgeons say ‘Yahoo’ every time they pull something out,” Dr. Grunsfeld said.
“Maybe they should,” replied Col. Michael T. Good of the Air Force, who was orchestrating events from inside Atlantis.
The day’s success raised the repair team’s confidence that it would succeed on Sunday, when similar surgery will be tried on another ailing instrument, the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph.
It was, as Scott D. Altman, the shuttle’s commander, said Saturday morning as the astronauts set out, “a great day for a spacewalk.”
Dr. Grunsfeld was on his second spacewalk of this mission and his seventh over all, every one in the name of the Hubble. Dr. Feustel was making his second spacewalk. On Thursday, the pair overcame a stuck bolt to replace the most ancient of the Hubble’s cameras, the wide-field camera No. 2, with a new version.
Dr. Grunsfeld and Dr. Feustel warmed up for the main event by installing on the Hubble a new spectrograph, the Cosmic Origins Spectrograph.
Spectrographs break down light into its constituent wavelengths, allowing astronomers to discern the composition, temperature and motions of celestial objects. The Hubble’s astronomers hope to use the instrument to trace tendrils of gas that stretch through the universe like a spider web, connecting galaxies.
The new spectrograph went into a slot occupied for the last 16 years by a box of corrective lenses known as the Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement system. When it was installed in the space telescope in 1993, it provided special lenses that folded like a shower rod and took the blur out of the Hubble’s flawed vision. But all of the Hubble’s instruments now have their own correction optics, and Costar is headed for the Smithsonian Institution.
The advanced camera was a workhorse until its demise in 2007, with some of the Hubble’s most famous pictures to its credit, including the one in 2004 called Ultra Deep Field, which showed galaxies forming only 800 million years after the Big Bang.
Engineers were planning three hours’ worth of tests overnight to make sure the camera was repaired.
When it conked out in 2007, engineers said it was unlikely that the camera could be fixed. Not only was it not designed to be taken apart by astronauts wearing boxing gloves, and some parts of it were inaccessible, but the astronauts already had their hands full training to repair a spectrograph that had also not been designed to be tinkered with in space. That work will be the highlight of the spacewalk on Sunday.
First Lady Delivers a Charge to Graduates
Michelle Obama on Saturday encouraged the first full graduating class at the University of California, Merced, to help change the world by using the same determination they had shown in bringing her to campus.
“A few people may be wondering why did I choose the University of California, Merced, to deliver my first commencement speech as first lady,” Mrs. Obama said. “The answer is simple: you inspired me, you touched me.
“There are few things that are more rewarding than to watch young people recognize that they have the power to make their dreams come true. And you did just that.”
Mrs. Obama was drafted to speak here at the smallest, newest campus in the University of California system through a lobbying effort by students and their families. They peppered the White House with letters, videos and hundreds of Valentine’s Day cards.
“And let me tell you, it worked,” she said. “Because I’m here.”
The speech capped weeks of anticipation at the university for an event that left some students star-struck on a blazingly bright and hot afternoon.
“I haven’t seen anyone of that magnitude in person,” said Daniel Titcher, 22, a senior. “Maybe a state senator or assemblyman or something, but nothing like this.”
The appearance also delighted university officials, who had been working to raise enough money to pay for a more elaborate commencement, attended by more than 10,000 people. The $700,000 price tag for the event included enhanced security, like dozens of metal detectors. Lookouts were on rooftops around the school’s quad, and Secret Service agents patrolled the campus, which sits surrounded by browning farmland outside Merced.
John Garamendi Jr., the vice chancellor for university relations, said he had been supportive but skeptical when student leaders told him they were trying to book Mrs. Obama. “I said, ‘Good luck,’ ” Mr. Garamendi recalled, with a laugh. “I said, ‘I love you guys.’ And I kept walking.”
But sure enough, in late March, Mrs. Obama announced that she would make her sole college commencement appearance this season at the Merced campus. The decision brought a swell of pride to this university in the Central Valley of California.
“Anybody who asks where my daughter’s graduating from, I say, ‘U.C. Merced,’ and they go, ‘Oh!’ ” said Shelly Comer, a nurse whose elder daughter, Michelle, was receiving her degree in psychology. “And then they start talking about Michelle Obama.”
Mr. Garamendi echoed that. “The eyes of the world are on us at this moment,” he said. “People are learning that there are positive things happening in California’s Central Valley.”
The first lady’s visit brought a jolt of excitement to the region, which has been battered by drought, high unemployment and a high foreclosure rate.
Conor Mangan, 22, said he hoped that Mrs. Obama’s appearance would help the local economy, if only for a day. “I hope it pays off,” said Mr. Mangan, who noted that he had backed Ron Paul in the presidential race.
Economic concerns were also on the mind of Irvin Junprung, 22, a biology major, who summed up the immediate plans for him and many of his fellow graduates. “Find work,” Mr. Junprung said.
Speaking at the commencement, Mrs. Obama stayed on inspirational terrain, echoing President Obama’s themes of community service and perseverance in tough times. “My husband knows a little something about the power of hope,” she said. “You are the hope of Merced. And this nation.”
“A few people may be wondering why did I choose the University of California, Merced, to deliver my first commencement speech as first lady,” Mrs. Obama said. “The answer is simple: you inspired me, you touched me.
“There are few things that are more rewarding than to watch young people recognize that they have the power to make their dreams come true. And you did just that.”
Mrs. Obama was drafted to speak here at the smallest, newest campus in the University of California system through a lobbying effort by students and their families. They peppered the White House with letters, videos and hundreds of Valentine’s Day cards.
“And let me tell you, it worked,” she said. “Because I’m here.”
The speech capped weeks of anticipation at the university for an event that left some students star-struck on a blazingly bright and hot afternoon.
“I haven’t seen anyone of that magnitude in person,” said Daniel Titcher, 22, a senior. “Maybe a state senator or assemblyman or something, but nothing like this.”
The appearance also delighted university officials, who had been working to raise enough money to pay for a more elaborate commencement, attended by more than 10,000 people. The $700,000 price tag for the event included enhanced security, like dozens of metal detectors. Lookouts were on rooftops around the school’s quad, and Secret Service agents patrolled the campus, which sits surrounded by browning farmland outside Merced.
John Garamendi Jr., the vice chancellor for university relations, said he had been supportive but skeptical when student leaders told him they were trying to book Mrs. Obama. “I said, ‘Good luck,’ ” Mr. Garamendi recalled, with a laugh. “I said, ‘I love you guys.’ And I kept walking.”
But sure enough, in late March, Mrs. Obama announced that she would make her sole college commencement appearance this season at the Merced campus. The decision brought a swell of pride to this university in the Central Valley of California.
“Anybody who asks where my daughter’s graduating from, I say, ‘U.C. Merced,’ and they go, ‘Oh!’ ” said Shelly Comer, a nurse whose elder daughter, Michelle, was receiving her degree in psychology. “And then they start talking about Michelle Obama.”
Mr. Garamendi echoed that. “The eyes of the world are on us at this moment,” he said. “People are learning that there are positive things happening in California’s Central Valley.”
The first lady’s visit brought a jolt of excitement to the region, which has been battered by drought, high unemployment and a high foreclosure rate.
Conor Mangan, 22, said he hoped that Mrs. Obama’s appearance would help the local economy, if only for a day. “I hope it pays off,” said Mr. Mangan, who noted that he had backed Ron Paul in the presidential race.
Economic concerns were also on the mind of Irvin Junprung, 22, a biology major, who summed up the immediate plans for him and many of his fellow graduates. “Find work,” Mr. Junprung said.
Speaking at the commencement, Mrs. Obama stayed on inspirational terrain, echoing President Obama’s themes of community service and perseverance in tough times. “My husband knows a little something about the power of hope,” she said. “You are the hope of Merced. And this nation.”
Series: Bad sciencePrevious | Index Speculation, hypothesis and ideas. But where's the evidence
You will be familiar with the work of Professor Baroness Susan Greenfield. The Oxford University professor is head of the Royal Institution of Great Britain, where she has charged herself with promoting the public's understanding of science, of what it means for there to be evidence for a given proposition. This is important work.
You will also be aware of her more prominent activity on the terrifying risks of computers, exemplified in the Daily Mail headline "Social websites harm children's brains: Chilling warning to parents from top neuroscientist", "Computers could be fuelling obesity crisis, says Baroness Susan Greenfield" in the Telegraph, and so on.
These stories arise from a string of lectures, public meetings, pronouncements and articles in the popular press, generated by Greenfield over the past few years. They are never set out as a clear hypothesis with the accompanying evidence and a clear suggestion of what research programmes might be planned to clarify any uncertainties. She has explained, when criticised for a lack of clarity, a lack of evidence and an excess of panic, that these are merely ideas, speculations, hypotheses.
But with her repeated experience of being the engine behind such scare stories over many years, she should be able to predict that her "speculations" and "hypotheses" will inevitably result in scare stories in the press.
This week, we learn about her concerns on obesity through the Telegraph and Daily Mail. "Computer games, the internet and social networking sites may be fuelling the obesity crisis" is the theory. By encouraging kids to sit around? No – "by changing the workings of the brain, an eminent scientist has warned."
Do Greenfield's ideas have any substance? Let's see. "While a child who falls out of a tree will quickly learn not to repeat the mistake, someone who goes wrong on a computer game will just keep playing." It seems to me that experimenting in a safe environment is one of the key, enduring, almost definitive features of all play. "Computer use could be cutting attention spans, stifling imagination and hampering empathy," she said. "As a result, the parts of the brain involved in these traits will not develop properly."
With the best will in the world, this seems slightly foolish, simply because there are so many different things you could do with a computer, some of which would probably enhance attention span, imagination, and empathy.
Let us be clear. It is possible that much of the Baroness's output on this topic is speculative flim flam, dressed up in a science-y "gloss". And perhaps it is dangerous and unhelpful for one of our most prominent science communicators to appear repeatedly in the media making wild headline-grabbing claims about the dangers of computers, with minimal evidence. Is Greenfield unhelpfully misrepresenting what it is that scientists do, and indeed the whole notion of what it means to have empirical evidence for a clearly stated claim, thus undermining the public's understanding of science?
I don't know. I am merely raising it as a hypothesis. We need to examine these questions in more detail. I am very, very happy to do so.
courtsey:the guardian uk
You will also be aware of her more prominent activity on the terrifying risks of computers, exemplified in the Daily Mail headline "Social websites harm children's brains: Chilling warning to parents from top neuroscientist", "Computers could be fuelling obesity crisis, says Baroness Susan Greenfield" in the Telegraph, and so on.
These stories arise from a string of lectures, public meetings, pronouncements and articles in the popular press, generated by Greenfield over the past few years. They are never set out as a clear hypothesis with the accompanying evidence and a clear suggestion of what research programmes might be planned to clarify any uncertainties. She has explained, when criticised for a lack of clarity, a lack of evidence and an excess of panic, that these are merely ideas, speculations, hypotheses.
But with her repeated experience of being the engine behind such scare stories over many years, she should be able to predict that her "speculations" and "hypotheses" will inevitably result in scare stories in the press.
This week, we learn about her concerns on obesity through the Telegraph and Daily Mail. "Computer games, the internet and social networking sites may be fuelling the obesity crisis" is the theory. By encouraging kids to sit around? No – "by changing the workings of the brain, an eminent scientist has warned."
Do Greenfield's ideas have any substance? Let's see. "While a child who falls out of a tree will quickly learn not to repeat the mistake, someone who goes wrong on a computer game will just keep playing." It seems to me that experimenting in a safe environment is one of the key, enduring, almost definitive features of all play. "Computer use could be cutting attention spans, stifling imagination and hampering empathy," she said. "As a result, the parts of the brain involved in these traits will not develop properly."
With the best will in the world, this seems slightly foolish, simply because there are so many different things you could do with a computer, some of which would probably enhance attention span, imagination, and empathy.
Let us be clear. It is possible that much of the Baroness's output on this topic is speculative flim flam, dressed up in a science-y "gloss". And perhaps it is dangerous and unhelpful for one of our most prominent science communicators to appear repeatedly in the media making wild headline-grabbing claims about the dangers of computers, with minimal evidence. Is Greenfield unhelpfully misrepresenting what it is that scientists do, and indeed the whole notion of what it means to have empirical evidence for a clearly stated claim, thus undermining the public's understanding of science?
I don't know. I am merely raising it as a hypothesis. We need to examine these questions in more detail. I am very, very happy to do so.
courtsey:the guardian uk
Military spending not fit for purpose, says army head
The head of the army, General Sir Richard Dannatt, today delivered his starkest warning yet to the government about pressures on his soldiers, describing the defence budget as "unbalanced" and "heavily skewed" in favour of hi-tech, expensive platforms irrelevant to present conflicts such as Afghanistan.
In a clear reference to such projects as plans to deploy expensive US jets on two new large aircraft carriers and buy new Eurofighters for the RAF, he said: "We have an absolute obligation to understand their needs and to provide [British troops] with the tools and training to do their jobs, and not squander our increasingly scarce resources on those things that are not relevant to today's and tomorrow's absolute requirements."
Noting that just 10% of the existing defence equipment programme was being spent on the army, he continued: "History will not judge our decision-making kindly if we duck the difficult decision and just muddle through. We are at the cross-roads."
Dannatt said the armed forces were likely to be engaged in "intervention and stabilisation operations". "We are in an era of persistent conflict. Iraq and Afghanistan are not aberrations, they are signposts to the future. We risk becoming irrelevant if we do not adapt right across the board."
In a speech to the Chatham House thinktank, Dannatt called for a major rethink of Britain's military capabilities – much of which was still the legacy of the cold war. The threat of an attack on Britain by a hostile state had diminished; the danger now was of an "age of upheaval" characterised by a "kaleidoscope of conflict" involving terrorism, insurgency, and piracy.
He said the fight against al-Qaida-inspired extremism was "probably the struggle of our generation – perhaps our thirty years war" and that many of Britain's existing capabilities were of "questionable relevance".
The British were criticised by some in the US for failing to support the Iraqis more effectively when they took control of Basra from the militias after British forces had withdrawn from the city.
"Credibility with the United States is earned by being an ally that can be relied on to state clearly what it will do and then do it effectively.
"Credibility is also linked to the vital currency of reputation and in this respect there is a recognition that our national and military reputation and credibility, unfairly or not, have been called into question at several levels in the eyes of our most important ally as a result of some aspects of the Iraq campaign."
• The Royal Marine killed on Thursday while travelling in a Viking armoured vehicle near Lashkar Gah in Afghanistan was named yesterday as Jason Macki, 21.
In a clear reference to such projects as plans to deploy expensive US jets on two new large aircraft carriers and buy new Eurofighters for the RAF, he said: "We have an absolute obligation to understand their needs and to provide [British troops] with the tools and training to do their jobs, and not squander our increasingly scarce resources on those things that are not relevant to today's and tomorrow's absolute requirements."
Noting that just 10% of the existing defence equipment programme was being spent on the army, he continued: "History will not judge our decision-making kindly if we duck the difficult decision and just muddle through. We are at the cross-roads."
Dannatt said the armed forces were likely to be engaged in "intervention and stabilisation operations". "We are in an era of persistent conflict. Iraq and Afghanistan are not aberrations, they are signposts to the future. We risk becoming irrelevant if we do not adapt right across the board."
In a speech to the Chatham House thinktank, Dannatt called for a major rethink of Britain's military capabilities – much of which was still the legacy of the cold war. The threat of an attack on Britain by a hostile state had diminished; the danger now was of an "age of upheaval" characterised by a "kaleidoscope of conflict" involving terrorism, insurgency, and piracy.
He said the fight against al-Qaida-inspired extremism was "probably the struggle of our generation – perhaps our thirty years war" and that many of Britain's existing capabilities were of "questionable relevance".
The British were criticised by some in the US for failing to support the Iraqis more effectively when they took control of Basra from the militias after British forces had withdrawn from the city.
"Credibility with the United States is earned by being an ally that can be relied on to state clearly what it will do and then do it effectively.
"Credibility is also linked to the vital currency of reputation and in this respect there is a recognition that our national and military reputation and credibility, unfairly or not, have been called into question at several levels in the eyes of our most important ally as a result of some aspects of the Iraq campaign."
• The Royal Marine killed on Thursday while travelling in a Viking armoured vehicle near Lashkar Gah in Afghanistan was named yesterday as Jason Macki, 21.
Labour MPs who cheat on expenses will be deselected
Any Labour MP found to have made improper expenses claims will be automatically deselected and barred from standing at the next general election as the party desperately tries to overcome the constitutional crisis facing parliament.
The Guardian has learned that the radical proposal is expected to be agreed next week by Labour's national executive, a move that acknowledges the deep anger among voters to the escalating scandal over MPs' claims.
Gordon Brown has also given ministers a Monday night deadline to ensure their expenses claims for the past five years are lodged with the parliamentary authorities and ready for publication.
Any deselection would happen after the parliamentary commissioner for standards had ruled that an MP had been found clearly guilty of improperly claiming.
The prime minister, who is expected to give a major TV interview on Sunday, is to resist a more sweeping grassroots proposal from leftwing NEC members that would compel every sitting Labour MP to go though a fresh selection process so the public can be reassured all candidates are "fit and proper persons" to stand at the election. Labour officials met and said such a move would be unfair.
In another rollercoaster day which saw the first ministerial casualty of the affair and signs of simmering public anger, Scotland Yard and the Crown Prosecution Service announced they were setting up a joint panel to consider multiple allegations that MPs have broken the law in their expenses claims. The police said they were acting because they had received so many complaints from the public.
In other key developments:
• A second Labour backbencher, David Chaytor, was forced to concede tonight that he had claimed £13,000 in expenses to cover mortgage interest payments on his London flat after the mortgage had been paid off. Downing Street said Chaytor was likely to be interviewed by Nick Brown, the chief whip, and face suspension from the parliamentary party along with a similar backbench offender Elliot Morley. Chaytor said he had made an unforgivable error and would repay the money.
• Lord Foulkes, a close friend of the Speaker, Michael Martin, gave a broad hint that Martin had decided to resign before the election, saying it was logical for him to do so by then.
• Shahid Malik, the justice minister, was forced to stand down from his post by Brown pending an investigation into whether an allegedly subsidised rental of a home in his Dewsbury constituency represented a breach of the ministerial code. He is the first minister to be disciplined since the allegations started, but last night won the support of his local party.
• William Hague, the Tory deputy leader, revealed he was going to divest himself of the vast bulk of his outside interests, a decision that will put pressure on the other shadow cabinet members.
• David Cameron, battling to keep abreast of public anger over the allegations of sleaze, told his Scottish Tory party that this was a time of "great danger" for democracy in the UK.
• The deputy leader of the house, Chris Bryant, was forced to deny stories that he had flipped his second home.
• The former father of the house, Tam Dalyell, was accused of attempting to charge £18,000 for two bookcases two months before he stood down as an MP in 2005.
The furore surrounding Malik forced Brown to act early yesterday. It was alleged Malik should have declared on the ministerial register that the rent on his constituency home was below the market rate, so making him potentially beholden to the landlord. The prime minister told him to step down after discussions with the cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O'Donnell, and the justice secretary, Jack Straw. The true market value of the rent of the home was a matter of dispute, and some ministers said Malik had been made a sacrificial lamb. He said he would return to the government with his head held high.
Morley, the former minister suspended from the parliamentary Labour party on Thursday, said he might quit as the MP for Scunthorpe over the issue. He said: "What matters to me is the view of my local people and my local party. I need to talk this through with them."
Similar signs of a grassroots rebellion were emerging in the Tory party, with two-thirds of those polled on the Conservative Home website urging the Tory MP Andrew Mackay, to quit over his expenses
The Guardian has learned that the radical proposal is expected to be agreed next week by Labour's national executive, a move that acknowledges the deep anger among voters to the escalating scandal over MPs' claims.
Gordon Brown has also given ministers a Monday night deadline to ensure their expenses claims for the past five years are lodged with the parliamentary authorities and ready for publication.
Any deselection would happen after the parliamentary commissioner for standards had ruled that an MP had been found clearly guilty of improperly claiming.
The prime minister, who is expected to give a major TV interview on Sunday, is to resist a more sweeping grassroots proposal from leftwing NEC members that would compel every sitting Labour MP to go though a fresh selection process so the public can be reassured all candidates are "fit and proper persons" to stand at the election. Labour officials met and said such a move would be unfair.
In another rollercoaster day which saw the first ministerial casualty of the affair and signs of simmering public anger, Scotland Yard and the Crown Prosecution Service announced they were setting up a joint panel to consider multiple allegations that MPs have broken the law in their expenses claims. The police said they were acting because they had received so many complaints from the public.
In other key developments:
• A second Labour backbencher, David Chaytor, was forced to concede tonight that he had claimed £13,000 in expenses to cover mortgage interest payments on his London flat after the mortgage had been paid off. Downing Street said Chaytor was likely to be interviewed by Nick Brown, the chief whip, and face suspension from the parliamentary party along with a similar backbench offender Elliot Morley. Chaytor said he had made an unforgivable error and would repay the money.
• Lord Foulkes, a close friend of the Speaker, Michael Martin, gave a broad hint that Martin had decided to resign before the election, saying it was logical for him to do so by then.
• Shahid Malik, the justice minister, was forced to stand down from his post by Brown pending an investigation into whether an allegedly subsidised rental of a home in his Dewsbury constituency represented a breach of the ministerial code. He is the first minister to be disciplined since the allegations started, but last night won the support of his local party.
• William Hague, the Tory deputy leader, revealed he was going to divest himself of the vast bulk of his outside interests, a decision that will put pressure on the other shadow cabinet members.
• David Cameron, battling to keep abreast of public anger over the allegations of sleaze, told his Scottish Tory party that this was a time of "great danger" for democracy in the UK.
• The deputy leader of the house, Chris Bryant, was forced to deny stories that he had flipped his second home.
• The former father of the house, Tam Dalyell, was accused of attempting to charge £18,000 for two bookcases two months before he stood down as an MP in 2005.
The furore surrounding Malik forced Brown to act early yesterday. It was alleged Malik should have declared on the ministerial register that the rent on his constituency home was below the market rate, so making him potentially beholden to the landlord. The prime minister told him to step down after discussions with the cabinet secretary, Sir Gus O'Donnell, and the justice secretary, Jack Straw. The true market value of the rent of the home was a matter of dispute, and some ministers said Malik had been made a sacrificial lamb. He said he would return to the government with his head held high.
Morley, the former minister suspended from the parliamentary Labour party on Thursday, said he might quit as the MP for Scunthorpe over the issue. He said: "What matters to me is the view of my local people and my local party. I need to talk this through with them."
Similar signs of a grassroots rebellion were emerging in the Tory party, with two-thirds of those polled on the Conservative Home website urging the Tory MP Andrew Mackay, to quit over his expenses
China builds first sex theme park
China is building what is billed as its first sex theme park, aimed at improving both the sex education and the sex life of its visitors.
Due to open in Chongqing in October, Love Land will include displays of giant genitalia, naked bodies and an exhibition on the history of sex.
The park will also offer sex technique workshops and safe-sex methods.
Among the attractions is a giant rotating statue of the lower part of a nearly naked woman.
"Sex is a taboo subject in China but people really need to have more access to information about it," the park's manager, Lu Xiaoqing told the China Daily state newspaper.
"We are building the park for the good of the public. I have found that the majority of people support my idea, but I have to pay attention and not make the park look vulgar and nasty."
He was inspired to build the park after a visit to South Korea's popular sex theme park in Jeju.
Critics say Love Land is a vulgar concept, and that the Chinese people are not ready to talk publicly about sex.
"These things are too exposed," Liu Daiwei, a Chongqing policewoman, was quoted as saying by the China Daily.
"I will feel uncomfortable to look at them when other people are around."
Due to open in Chongqing in October, Love Land will include displays of giant genitalia, naked bodies and an exhibition on the history of sex.
The park will also offer sex technique workshops and safe-sex methods.
Among the attractions is a giant rotating statue of the lower part of a nearly naked woman.
"Sex is a taboo subject in China but people really need to have more access to information about it," the park's manager, Lu Xiaoqing told the China Daily state newspaper.
"We are building the park for the good of the public. I have found that the majority of people support my idea, but I have to pay attention and not make the park look vulgar and nasty."
He was inspired to build the park after a visit to South Korea's popular sex theme park in Jeju.
Critics say Love Land is a vulgar concept, and that the Chinese people are not ready to talk publicly about sex.
"These things are too exposed," Liu Daiwei, a Chongqing policewoman, was quoted as saying by the China Daily.
"I will feel uncomfortable to look at them when other people are around."
Gang fools Mexico prison guards
An armed gang disguised as police has broken into a jail in northern Mexico and freed more than 50 prisoners.
A convoy of at least 15 vehicles arrived at the prison with gang members all apparently disguised as federal police officers.
Once inside, the prison authorities were persuaded that an inspection was under way and guards were overpowered.
A manhunt is underway for the fugitives - believed to be linked to the powerful drug smuggling Gulf cartel.
Army troops as well as local and federal police have begun a search and set up roadblocks near the prison facility in Zacatecas and neighbouring states.
President Felipe Calderon has declared war on the illegal narcotic organisation in Mexico, deploying 40,000 troops to fight the cartels.
In some regions instances of beheadings and attacks on police have become commonplace, with the deaths of 6,000 people last year alone blamed on illegal narcotics.
But progress in the war against the cartels has been limited by the fact that in the face of well armed and well financed drug cartels, this country's law and order institutions have proved weak and easily corruptible, the BBC's Stephen Gibbs in Mexico City says.
A convoy of at least 15 vehicles arrived at the prison with gang members all apparently disguised as federal police officers.
Once inside, the prison authorities were persuaded that an inspection was under way and guards were overpowered.
A manhunt is underway for the fugitives - believed to be linked to the powerful drug smuggling Gulf cartel.
Army troops as well as local and federal police have begun a search and set up roadblocks near the prison facility in Zacatecas and neighbouring states.
President Felipe Calderon has declared war on the illegal narcotic organisation in Mexico, deploying 40,000 troops to fight the cartels.
In some regions instances of beheadings and attacks on police have become commonplace, with the deaths of 6,000 people last year alone blamed on illegal narcotics.
But progress in the war against the cartels has been limited by the fact that in the face of well armed and well financed drug cartels, this country's law and order institutions have proved weak and easily corruptible, the BBC's Stephen Gibbs in Mexico City says.
Sri Lanka army 'defeats rebels'
The Sri Lankan president has declared a military victory over the Tamil Tigers after 26 years of bloody civil war.
Speaking on a visit to Jordan, Mahinda Rajapakse said he would return home to a nation totally free from the "barbaric acts" of the rebel group.
However, senior officials told the BBC fighting rages on in a tiny area of the north-east where the Tigers' leadership is said to be cornered.
More than 70,000 people have died in the bitter war for a Tamil homeland.
See a map of the conflict region
The last weeks of the war have been marked by a growing chorus of international concern over the fate of Tamil civilians caught up in the intense fighting.
Sri Lanka's military spokesman, Brig Udaya Nanayakkara, says 25,000 civilians have made it out of the conflict zone in the past 72 hours, 11,800 of them on Saturday alone.
However, more remain inside the small area where the Tamil Tigers may be preparing for a fight to the death.
The UN and Western governments have called on Sri Lanka to exercise restraint in its pursuit of a military victory over the Tigers.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has become the latest leader to speak out on the issue, declaring on Saturday that there would be "consequences" if Sri Lanka did not work to ensure an orderly end to the conflict.
'Humanitarian operation'
Speaking in Jordan, Mr Rajapakse said: "My government, with the total commitment of our armed forces, has in an unprecedented humanitarian operation finally defeated the LTTE militarily.
"I will be going back to a country that has been totally freed from the barbaric acts of the LTTE," he added
But the BBC's Charles Haviland, in the capital, Colombo, says a senior government spokesman in Jordan with the president could not confirm that fighting had ended in the north-east.
There are now concerns that the Tamil Tiger leadership is preparing for a last stand, our correspondent says.
The Tigers' leadership has said repeatedly that they will not surrender, and are thought to be keeping thousands of civilians as human shields.
There have also been reports that the Tigers are preparing a mass suicide in the face of a military defeat.
A UN spokesman, Gordon Weiss, told Associated Press the organisation still had "grave fears" for the safety of an estimated 30,000 to 80,000 people still inside the combat zone.
Earlier, Sri Lanka's defence secretary told the BBC that the army was closing in on the remaining fighters for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (the full name for the Tamil Tigers).
"We have restricted the LTTE to one square kilometre-like area, so we will mop up and seize the rest of the LTTE cadres and the leadership," Gotabhaya Rajapakse said.
He said the army did not know exactly where to find rebel leader Vellupillai Prabhakaran, but expressed confidence he would be tracked down.
"If he has not committed suicide then he should be there," Mr Rajapakse said.
Prabhakaran began the fight for a separate state for Sri Lanka's minority Tamils in the early 1970s, progressing into a violent civil war in 1983.
Tigers landlocked
The capture of the Tigers' last remaining stretch of coastline earlier on Saturday was hailed as a decisive breakthrough by Sri Lanka's army.
Few images exist of Tamil Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran
For the first time ever the rebels do not have sea access, and the army is "progressing" to clear remaining rebel-held land, Brig Udaya Nanayakkara said.
Speaking after the president's statement, he said military action in the north-east was ongoing, also branding it a "rescue, humanitarian operation".
The Tigers once boasted a deadly and much-feared naval strike capability, often using boats to launch lethal attacks during the long years of their guerrilla campaign.
State TV showed images of explosions and plumes of smoke rising from close to the coastline, as well as images of celebrating troops in coastal areas.
The army said the scenes proved that the Tigers were blowing up their own caches of ammunition, but there is no independent confirmation of that claim.
Speaking on a visit to Jordan, Mahinda Rajapakse said he would return home to a nation totally free from the "barbaric acts" of the rebel group.
However, senior officials told the BBC fighting rages on in a tiny area of the north-east where the Tigers' leadership is said to be cornered.
More than 70,000 people have died in the bitter war for a Tamil homeland.
See a map of the conflict region
The last weeks of the war have been marked by a growing chorus of international concern over the fate of Tamil civilians caught up in the intense fighting.
Sri Lanka's military spokesman, Brig Udaya Nanayakkara, says 25,000 civilians have made it out of the conflict zone in the past 72 hours, 11,800 of them on Saturday alone.
However, more remain inside the small area where the Tamil Tigers may be preparing for a fight to the death.
The UN and Western governments have called on Sri Lanka to exercise restraint in its pursuit of a military victory over the Tigers.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has become the latest leader to speak out on the issue, declaring on Saturday that there would be "consequences" if Sri Lanka did not work to ensure an orderly end to the conflict.
'Humanitarian operation'
Speaking in Jordan, Mr Rajapakse said: "My government, with the total commitment of our armed forces, has in an unprecedented humanitarian operation finally defeated the LTTE militarily.
"I will be going back to a country that has been totally freed from the barbaric acts of the LTTE," he added
But the BBC's Charles Haviland, in the capital, Colombo, says a senior government spokesman in Jordan with the president could not confirm that fighting had ended in the north-east.
There are now concerns that the Tamil Tiger leadership is preparing for a last stand, our correspondent says.
The Tigers' leadership has said repeatedly that they will not surrender, and are thought to be keeping thousands of civilians as human shields.
There have also been reports that the Tigers are preparing a mass suicide in the face of a military defeat.
A UN spokesman, Gordon Weiss, told Associated Press the organisation still had "grave fears" for the safety of an estimated 30,000 to 80,000 people still inside the combat zone.
Earlier, Sri Lanka's defence secretary told the BBC that the army was closing in on the remaining fighters for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (the full name for the Tamil Tigers).
"We have restricted the LTTE to one square kilometre-like area, so we will mop up and seize the rest of the LTTE cadres and the leadership," Gotabhaya Rajapakse said.
He said the army did not know exactly where to find rebel leader Vellupillai Prabhakaran, but expressed confidence he would be tracked down.
"If he has not committed suicide then he should be there," Mr Rajapakse said.
Prabhakaran began the fight for a separate state for Sri Lanka's minority Tamils in the early 1970s, progressing into a violent civil war in 1983.
Tigers landlocked
The capture of the Tigers' last remaining stretch of coastline earlier on Saturday was hailed as a decisive breakthrough by Sri Lanka's army.
Few images exist of Tamil Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran
For the first time ever the rebels do not have sea access, and the army is "progressing" to clear remaining rebel-held land, Brig Udaya Nanayakkara said.
Speaking after the president's statement, he said military action in the north-east was ongoing, also branding it a "rescue, humanitarian operation".
The Tigers once boasted a deadly and much-feared naval strike capability, often using boats to launch lethal attacks during the long years of their guerrilla campaign.
State TV showed images of explosions and plumes of smoke rising from close to the coastline, as well as images of celebrating troops in coastal areas.
The army said the scenes proved that the Tigers were blowing up their own caches of ammunition, but there is no independent confirmation of that claim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)