Senators see path to immigrants' legalization

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Illegal immigrants might face around a 10-year wait to become legal permanent U.S. residents under sweeping immigration overhaul legislation taking shape in the Senate, negotiators said Thursday. That's shorter than some current wait times though longer than some advocates might like.

Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Robert Menendez of New Jersey discussed the timeline in a roundtable meeting with Hispanic-focused media. The senators and their aides emphasized that nothing has been agreed to and the timeline could change.

The timeline refers to how long someone would have to wait in a new provisional legal status before qualifying for permanent residency and a green card. The legislation is expected to immediately grant provisional legal status to many of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now in the country, but they couldn't get green cards until the border has been secured, and they would have to meet criteria including learning English and paying fines.

The process "is likely to be in the range of 10 years, I say in the range because we have not nailed this down," Durbin said. He said various factors go into the timeline, including the need to establish border security first, something Republicans have insisted on.

Menendez said a 10-year wait would not be inordinate considering that under current law many illegal immigrants face a 10-year prohibition against returning to the country if they leave.

"If you think about it, under current law there is a 10-year bar, so the bottom line is you would have to wait anyway," Menendez said. "The difference is you would get the opportunity to be here, to come forward, to work, to travel, and in doing so to earn your pathway" to citizenship.

A green card is the crucial first step toward citizenship although it takes up to five years for a green card holder to become a citizen under current law. So if it takes 10 years to get a green card, the total wait time for citizenship could be closer to 15, advocates fear.

"We understand that bipartisan lawmaking requires compromise. But we think waiting 15 years for a chance to become a citizen is too long," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice. "We will continue to fight for a clear, direct and inclusive path to citizenship that has achievable requirements and a more reasonable time frame."

The emerging legislation, which faces an uncertain future in Congress, is expected to require illegal immigrants to petition for citizenship behind those already attempting the process. That means some length of wait would be inevitable, although experts said lawmakers could shorten the wait times by making more green cards available.

"Going to the back of the line is inevitably a lengthy process because of current backlogs for which there have been insufficient numbers of visas in current law," said Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute.

Wait times vary greatly under current law for people to get green cards, depending on factors including what country they're from. For Mexicans trying to join family members legally in the U.S. the wait time can be 12 to 15 years, Meissner said.

The exact process and length of time for an illegal immigrant to get a green card is just one of many contentious issues being discussed by Durbin, Menendez and six other senators in a bipartisan group trying to finalize an immigration bill by spring. Even if they succeed the bill faces a tough road in the Democratic-controlled Senate and an even tougher one in the Republican-led House.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., another negotiator on the legislation, emphasized no decisions have been made. "Nothing has been decided yet with respect to the path to citizenship," Schumer said through a spokesman in response to the comments from Durbin and Menendez.

Also Thursday, union leaders announced a 14-city campaign to mobilize support for immigration overhaul plans.

___

Associated Press writers Luis Alonso Lugo and Sam Hananel contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/senators-see-path-immigrants-legalization-171551730.html

snowy owl one for the money 10 minute trainer sarah burke death etta james funeral erin brockovich dodgeball

PFT: Ravens won't restructure deals to keep core

Reuters

Things aren?t going to be easy for the Panthers this year for many reasons.

But the schedule doesn?t exactly do them any favors.

The Panthers have the league?s hardest strength of schedule number for the 2013 season, as they?re playing teams with a combined 138-116-2 record (.543).

Of course, strength of schedule can be a remarkably overstated thing, for several reasons.

One, teams in the same division are generally clumped together, since the league?s scheduling rotation means each team plays 14 of the same opponents, with the final two based on divisional standings (ones play ones, fours play fours). Thus, the Panthers NFC south rival Saints are third, Falcons 15th and the Buccaneers 17th based on the current numbers.

For example, Each NFC South team plays six games in the division, along with facing the entire NFC West and AFC East.

The Panthers drew the Giants (9-7) and Vikings (10-6) as their two rotating intra-conference games, while the Saints got the Cowboys (8-8) and Bears (10-6), the Falcons will play the Redskins (10-6) and Packers (11-5) and the Bucs got the Eagles (4-12) and Lions (4-12).

Secondly, it all goes out the window once the season starts, and someone turns out to be much better than anyone anticipated.

But it?s February, and it?s something to talk about.

For what it?s worth, the league?s ?easiest? schedule belongs to the Broncos, whose opponents had a combined 110-146 record (.430) last year.

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/07/ravens-wont-restructure-contracts-to-keep-team-together/related/

my bloody valentine Super Bowl Winners what time does the superbowl start Kaepernick Tattoos jay z superbowl time what time is the super bowl

New drug is first to help patients with recurrent low-grade ovarian cancer

Feb. 8, 2013 ? Low-grade serous ovarian cancer is less common and aggressive than the high-grade variety, yet exceptionally difficult to treat when frontline therapy fails.

"After surgery, with or without pre-surgical chemotherapy, when low-grade serous ovarian cancer persists or returns, chemotherapy and hormonal therapy are relatively ineffective," said David Gershenson, M.D., professor in The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Department of Gynecological Oncology and Reproductive Medicine.

Response rates for treatment are measured in single digits. Gershenson and colleagues have spent the greater part of 20 years characterizing the disease, which makes up 10 percent of ovarian cancer cases, and searching for new ways to treat it. Cancer recurs or persists in 80 to 85 percent of patients.

A phase II clinical trial by the National Cancer Institute's Gynecological Oncology Group provides the first evidence of a drug that shows a relatively high response rate for these patients.

Selumetinib halts growth or shrinks tumors

In the first-targeted therapy clinical trial for low-grade serous ovarian cancer, eight of 52 (15 percent) patients had a complete or objective partial response (tumor shrinkage) and 34 (65 percent) had no disease progression during the two-year course of the study. Study results appear in the February edition of The Lancet Oncology.

"These are remarkably encouraging results for what can ultimately be a devastating disease," said Gershenson, the paper's senior author.

These patients have a median overall survival of 80 months, about twice as long as those with high-grade disease, who are typically in their 60s when diagnosed and comprise 90 percent of ovarian cancer patients. The average age of women with low-grade cancer falls in the early 40s, Gershenson said, and it's not uncommon to see women in their 20s, 30s and 40s and the occasional teenager with the disease.

High-grade serous ovarian cancer is susceptible to chemotherapy upon relapse or recurrence.

Median overall survival not reached

Cancer-causing genetic mutations in BRAF and KRAS genes occur more frequently in low-grade ovarian cancer, so the researchers chose a drug that targets the molecular network that includes those genes.

Selumetinib inhibits MEK1/2, a critical molecule in what's known as the MAPK pathway, which includes BRAF and KRAS.

All 52 patients had received at least one previous therapy, with 30 having had three or more. Clinical trial results with selumetinib include:

* Median progression-free survival of 11 months and 34 patients (65 percent) went at least six months without their disease worsening.

* Two-year overall survival of 55 percent.

* Median overall survival had not been reached, because more than half of patients (61 percent) remained alive at the time of data cutoff for the study.

* No treatment-related deaths.

Side effects ranged from cardio and gastrointestinal toxicity to pain, fatigue, anemia and dermatological effects. Of the 52 patients, 22 had their doses reduced and 13 ultimately left the study due to side effects.

Researchers obtained tumor samples sufficient for DNA analysis from 34 patients. While 14 patients had KRAS mutations and two had BRAF mutations, there was no connection between having those mutations and whether the patients responded to selumetinib.

Gershenson said researchers will further explore the question of matching drug to mutation during a larger phase 2/3 clinical trial that he will lead with investigators from the NCI Gynecological Oncology Group and the United Kingdom. The study will enroll 250 patients and is likely to begin later this summer.

Phase 2 trials generally do not include a control or comparison group, but the team noted treatment results for 58 women not in the trial who were treated at MD Anderson with current options. Between them, these patients received 108 different chemotherapy regimens, which produced one complete and three partial responses for an overall response rate of 3.7 percent.

A step toward personalized therapy for ovarian cancer

In an accompanying commentary, Sven Mahner, M.D., and Jacobus Pfisterer, M.D., Ph.D., German oncologists who did not participate in the research, note that the study is a step toward individualized treatment for ovarian cancer that reflects important molecular differences between low-grade and high-grade disease.

The response rate and disease stabilization rate are "particularly promising in a setting of heavily pretreated recurrent disease."

"A strength of the study is mandatory reference pathology of recurrent disease to ensure exclusion of patients with progression to high-grade disease, who are likely to benefit from chemotherapy, and recurrent borderline ovarian tumors that have excellent prognosis with salvage surgery alone," Mahner and Pfisterer wrote.

Co-authors with Gershenson are first author John Farley, M.D., of Creighton University School of Medicine at St. Joseph's Hospital in Phoenix; William Brady, Ph.D., and Heather Lankes Ph.D., of Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y.; Vinod Vathipadiekal, Ph.D., and Michael Birrer, M.D., of Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Robert Coleman, M.D., MD Anderson's Department of Gynecological Oncology; Mark Morgan, M.D., Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia; Robert Mannel, M.D., of University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City; S. Diane Yamada, M.D., University of Chicago; David Mutch, M.D., Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo., and William Rodgers, M.D., Lenox Hill Hospital, New York.

The clinical trial was sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute and funded by NCI grants (CA 27469 and CA 37517) to the Gynecological Oncology Group.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

---

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

---

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/top_health/~3/4Ed9BZ9PWxs/130208152711.htm

Olga Korbut Usain Bolt 2012 Olympics Katie Ledecky Aaron Ross Sikh temple lollapalooza Nastia Liukin

Exclusive: Dell shareholder Southeastern unhappy with buyout

(Reuters) - Dell Inc's largest independent shareholder, Southeastern Asset Management Inc, has told the computer maker that a $24.4 billion buyout bid undervalues it, adding to a chorus of investor dissatisfaction with the landmark deal to take it private, two sources close to the situation said.

Southeastern has privately told the company that it is "disturbed" by a $13.65 per share offer for the third-largest PC maker by a consortium led by founder and CEO Michael Dell, and instead believes Dell is worth $20 per share, the sources said on Thursday.

The Memphis, Tennessee-based fund, which owns a 7.5 percent stake in Dell, did not return calls seeking comment.

Southeastern has not commented publicly since the deal was announced on Tuesday, but Chief Executive Mason Hawkins said in a September 30 filing that the fund believed the company's shares were worth in the "low 20s" even if Dell's personal computing business was valued at nothing.

A representative for the buyout consortium, which also includes private equity firm Silver Lake Partners and Microsoft Corp, declined to comment. Dell was not available for comment.

The sources said the buyout consortium has no plans to raise its current bid. The buyers are counting on the shareholders eventually realizing that no better options exist for Dell than their current offer, they said.

Southeastern's reservations could create new uncertainty about the deal. Over the past few days, some other Dell shareholders have indicated they will vote against the deal.

Further complicating the largest leveraged buyout since the financial crisis is the influx into Dell shares in recent weeks by event-driven funds and risk arbitrage investors. Such investors now own roughly 20 percent of company, according to investor estimates, and could bet on a higher offer.

"Let the fools sell low - don't make us all fools," said Nick Tompras, president of Alpine Capital Research in St Louis. Tompras said his firm would vote its 2 million Dell shares against the deal.

Schneider Capital Management in Wayne, Pennsylvania, which owned almost 350,000 Dell shares at the end of September, will also vote against the deal, President Arnie Schneider said.

Southeastern stands to be among the biggest losers if the deal is completed at the current price.

Sanford Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi estimated Southeastern paid an average of more $20 a share for its stake, meaning a loss of at least $825 million at the current $13.65 offer price.

Hawkins, a 40-year veteran of the money management business who has agitated against companies in the past, could take his objections public.

Last year, Hawkins applauded the board of embattled gas producer Chesapeake Energy Corp for stripping CEO Aubrey McClendon of his title as chairman after revelations by Reuters that McClendon's personal dealings might be in conflict with the company's interests.

A few days later, Hawkins sent a letter urging the board to consider selling the company in the wake of a stock plunge caused by the reports. McClendon resigned this year.

Hawkins also agitated against troubled Japanese medical device company Olympus Corp in 2011, after disclosures of a massive accounting scandal, eventually calling for key members of the company's board to resign or be replaced.

LACK OF OPTIONS

Dell has agreed to a 45-day "go shop" period, during which it would look for an alternative deal, but the sources said they did not expect an alternative buyer to emerge.

Meanwhile, the buyout consortium is hoping that investors will realize they do not have any other options when they see the regulatory filing detailing the actions Dell took before arriving at the current deal, the sources said. That filing is expected in mid-March.

Before arriving at the deal, Dell considered various options, which included remaining a stand-alone company, separating its PC business, a leveraged recapitalization or restructuring its assets, one of the sources said.

But it realized that these options would not work, the source said.

Dell was regarded as a model of innovation as recently as the early 2000s, pioneering online ordering of custom-configured PCs and working closely with Asian component suppliers and manufacturers to assure rock-bottom production costs. But it missed the big industry shift to tablet computers, smartphones and high-powered consumer electronics such as music players and gaming consoles.

As of 2012's fourth quarter, Dell's share of the global PC market had slipped to just above 10 percent from 12.5 percent a year earlier as its shipments dived 20 percent, according to research house IDC.

The company's problems made the option to remain independent unattractive, the source said. A leveraged recap -- taking on excess debt to pursue a large share repurchase or pay out a dividend -- would have been a risky proposition, the sources said.

The large number of shares in the hands of index funds also complicates the task of critics. Passively managed funds owned about 292 million, or 17 percent, of Dell shares, according to Thomson Reuters data. Excluding Michael Dell's stake, that represents over 20 percent of the vote.

Opponents of the deal would have to muster a majority vote, excluding Michael Dell's stake, to shoot down the deal.

While index funds typically have policies that they will only vote in favor of mergers that maximize shareholder value, in practice they tend to vote yes.

(Reporting By Nadia Damouni and Greg Roumeliotis in New York and Aaron Pressman in Boston; Additional reporting by by Sam Forgione in New York; Editing by Paritosh Bandal, Gary Hill, Ryan Woo and Richard Pullin)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-dell-shareholder-southeastern-unhappy-buyout-010248344--sector.html

kobe bryant google play Christmas Story after christmas sales case mccoy case mccoy UFC 155

Turning repulsive feelings into desires

Feb. 6, 2013 ? Hunger, thirst, stress and drugs can create a change in the brain that transforms a repulsive feeling into a strong positive "wanting," a new University of Michigan study indicates.

The research used salt appetite to show how powerful natural mechanisms of brain desires can instantly transform a cue that always predicted a repulsive Dead Sea Salt solution into an eagerly wanted beacon or motivational magnet.

Mike Robinson, a research fellow in the U-M Department of Psychology and the study's lead author, said the findings help explain how related brain activations in people could cause them to avidly want something that has been always disliked.

This instant transformation of motivation, he said, lies in the ability of events to activate particular brain circuitry -- a structure called the nucleus accumbens, which sits near the base of the front of the brain and is also activated by addictive drugs.

Cues for rewards often trigger intense motivation. The smell of food can make a person suddenly feel hungry when this wasn't the case earlier. Drug cues may prompt relapse in addicts trying to quit. In some cases, desires may be triggered even for a relatively unpleasant event.

Researchers studied how rats responded to metal objects that represented either pleasant sugar or disgustingly intense Dead Sea saltiness. The rats quickly learned to jump on and nibble the sweetness cue, but turned away from and avoided the saltiness cue.

But one day the rats suddenly woke up in a new state of sodium appetite induced by drugs given the night before. On their first re-encounter with the saltiness cue in the new appetite state, their brain systems became activated and the rats instantly jumped on and nibbled the saltiness cue as though it were the sugar cue.

"The cue becomes avidly 'wanted' despite knowledge the salt always tasted disgusting," Robinson said.

The sudden brain changes help explain how an event, such as taking an addictive drug, could become "wanted" despite a person's knowledge of the negative and unpleasant consequences of the drug.

"Our findings highlight what it means to say that drugs hijack our natural reward system," said Robinson, who authored the new study with Kent Berridge, James Olds Collegiate Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

---

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by University of Michigan, via Newswise.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

---

Journal Reference:

1. Mike?J.F. Robinson, Kent?C. Berridge. Instant Transformation of Learned Repulsion into Motivational ?Wanting?. Current Biology, 2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.01.016

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/~3/ubtWqeNqUOw/130206162127.htm

mashed potatoes Apple Black Friday how to cook a turkey emma stone Frys tryptophan BestBuy.com

Boy Scouts on edge as they await decision on gays

Jacquelyn Martin / AP

Pascal Tessier, 16, center left, a Scout, and his brother Lucien Tessier, 20, who had earned the rank of Eagle Scout, pose for a portrait with their parents, Oliver Tessier, left, and Tracie Felker, at their home in Kensington, Maryland, on Monday. The two Tessier boys enjoyed Cub Scouts, progressed to Boy Scouts, and continued to thrive there even as many in their troop became aware that each boy was gay.

By Miranda Leitsinger, Staff Writer, NBC News

Published at 4:45 a.m. ET: Special prayers have been urged, petitions handed in, phone calls placed and pleas for a delay made, all over a decision on an issue that has rocked one of America?s most popular youth organizations: whether or not gays can join the Boy Scouts.

A decision by national Scout leaders is expected Wednesday. Some fear an unwanted new era, while others are welcoming what they believe is an overdue change that comes amid other recent gains for the LGBT rights movement nationwide.

President Barack Obama has twice weighed in on the issue, earlier this week affirming his support for including gays in the Boy Scouts of America, while former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has called for an end to what he labelled the ?war on Scouts.?

?The Boy Scouts are a fundamental part of this nation?s moral bedrock and they are one of our great cultural institutions. We have trusted them to grow and develop our young men for over a century,? Zach Wahls, an Eagle Scout and son of a lesbian couple campaigning for gays to be included, said Tuesday. ?They?re a big deal, and that is why this proposed change is so critically important.?

Advocates on both sides of the issue have stepped up their campaigns ahead of the BSA's final decision: They?ve encouraged their backers to?make their voices heard through a phone-in and email deluge. A conservative group, the Family Research Council, said that it and 41 other groups ran a newspaper ad on Monday asking the BSA not to change the policy, and some conservative religious groups have urged their supporters to join in prayer to ask the board not to accept gays.

Related:?'Gravely distressed': Religion looms large over Boy Scouts decision on gays?

John Makely / NBC News file

Ryan Andresen had recently completed the requirements to earning his Eagle Scout award, including his final project of building a "tolerance wall" for victims of bullying like himself, but his Scoutmaster would not sign off on honoring him with the Boy Scouts' highest ranking because he is gay, his mother said. Here, Ryan holds an Eagle Scout pin that was sent to him from a supporter.

A coalition of Boy Scouts councils representing some 540,000 youth -- or 20 percent of the organization?s 2.6 million active Scouts -- asked the national organization on Monday to delay a decision on ending the controversial policy, saying it was concerned ?about the pace at which such actions are being taken,? according to a statement posted on the website of the Utah-based Great Salt Lake Council. ??

Roger ?Sing? Oldham, spokesman for the conservative Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee, said the outpouring of feedback on the issue came as no surprise to him since his group felt the BSA had not allowed opponents of the change to weigh in on the proposal, which?was announced just a little more than one week ago?and was being reviewed by national leaders.

Oldham said he had spoken with some troop leaders, pastors and parents who have expressed concern about the way forward if gays are allowed, particularly those units that will try to maintain the ban locally as would be permitted under the proposal.?For more than two-thirds of Scouting groups affiliated with religious bodies, faith plays a large role in the private youth organization.

?When local chapters begin realizing the financial liability that they face if they exercise the local option then ? they?re going to have to say we either fall into step or we have just to end the relationship,? he said. ?There?ll be attrition over time and, you know, the Scouts will have permanently altered the face of who they are into the future.?

'Feeling of shame'
Some have said they will even leave the organization over the issue.

Angela Russell, who has an 11-year-old in the Boy Scouts and a 9-year-old in the Cub Scouts, said that if the BSA allows gays, particularly as leaders, they would be ?breaking their own highly held codes to be ?morally straight? and to commit to such principles via oaths and promises.?

If the ban is lifted, ?I must remove my boys from this program. My heart truly aches to think of it,? Russell, of Auburn, Wash., wrote in a letter she emailed to NBC News.??However, to leave them in a program that goes against its own teachings would be worse.?

But another mother, of a Boy Scout and two Cub Scouts, said she had ?been torn for years? over the policy since her own mother is a lesbian and allowing gays would be a relief.

?I am very happy about the things my children have learned and the tools they have been given from the program,? Gina Beaudry, 37, of Raleigh, N.C., who will be the Cub Scoutmaster for her sons pack this year, wrote in an email to NBC News.?

?To have this ban lifted would take away some of the feeling of shame I feel for the organization that has been so beneficial to my children.?I would hate to see any child or parent not feel like they were welcome in the program.?

Related:?After years of heartache, gay Scouts and supporters react warily over proposal to lift ban

The proposed policy change comes just seven months after the BSA said it was sticking with its ban following a confidential two-year review.

That review was announced months after Jennifer Tyrrell was dismissed from her post as leader of her son?s Tiger Cubs den because she is a lesbian, and a few months before California teen Ryan Andresen was denied his Eagle award because he is gay.

Both cases made national headlines, roiling the private youth organization. Some critics pointed to declining membership numbers as a sign that families were being turned off over the issue. The controversy also prompted a few hundred Eagle Scouts to turn in their hard-earned regalia in protest of the ban, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 2000.

Wahls believes the Boy Scouts will lift the exclusion of gays and rejects the idea it will cause any ?mass exodus.?

?We don?t think that that?s going to be a problem at all and think that this move will definitely bolster Scouting for future generations,? he said, later adding, ?Our generation has embraced LGBT rights, and like all things, Scouting should not be playing catch up, it should be blazing the trail.?

Related:?

Gay teen denied Eagle Scout: 'Change is happening' over Boy Scouts anti-gay policy

Eagle Scouts return badges to protest policy banning gays

Boy Scouts: We're keeping policy banning gays?

If you are a current or former member of the Boy Scouts and would like to share your thoughts on how your troop, pack or council is handling the possibility of a change in the membership policy, you can email the reporter at miranda.leitsinger@msnbc.com. We may use some comments for a follow-up story, so please specify if your remarks can be used and provide your name, hometown, age, Boy Scout affiliation and a phone number.

Source: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/06/16859099-boy-scouts-on-edge-as-they-await-decision-on-gays?lite

sloth birth control pill recall ground hog day florida primary results black history groundhogs day paula abdul

HBT: Newspaper says A-Rod is scared, paranoid

I generally have no problem with anonymous source reporting. Anonymous sources often make it possible for reporters to get stories they otherwise wouldn?t get. The entire trade rumor circuit which, no matter what you think about it, is extremely popular among readers, is based on it. ?Bigger, important news often hinges on?anonymity because people are sharing information which could get them fired. Or worse. ?It?s a necessary part of journalism and anyone who dismisses a story merely because it?s sourced anonymously is being foolish.

That said, there are limits to what can and can?t be sourced anonymously. For example, you have to give the reader some sense of what kind of source the person is so as to give them at least some confidence that the information you?re imparting is legitimate as opposed to 100% pure, unadulterated baloney.

For example, ?a government source? is more useful than merely saying ?a source.? A ?source who has examined the documents/microfilm/offer/whatever? is useful. A ?source close to [notable person]? is a bit more vague, but it?s something. ?All of it beats saying ?a source.?

In contrast, if your anonymous source seems impossible ? like, there?s no?immediately?plausible person saying x, y, z who would know, that?s a big problem. If your story makes a savvy reader focus way more on where the information could possibly be coming from than the information itself, that?s likewise a problem.

With that I give you the latest from Daily News. A paper which has, thus far, embarrassed itself repeatedly since last Tuesday?s revelations about the A-Rod/Biogenesis story:

Alex Rodriguez?is taking his wildest swing yet in his fight against steroid allegations: The Yankees and MLB are conspiring to push him out of the game.?Sources say the embattled Yankee star is ?scared? that bigger forces are at work to try to discredit him and sink his career ???He?s scared, because he thinks this is so unbelievably false, and he?s wondering who could be behind this ? He thinks something could be going on larger than anyone might think.?

The person quoted thusly is repeatedly identified as ?a source.? There is no sense if this is a friend of A-Rod?s, a business associate or anything. There is no information imparted which even suggests to the reader that the source might have some access and insight into A-Rod?s psyche. This could just as easily be a hot dog vendor speculating about what A-Rod might feel as it could be a confidant.

And in this story, from this source, that truly matters. It matters because the information here paints A-Rod in a negative (indeed paranoid) light. This after a week?s worth of the Daily News more or less transcribing highly implausible ?the Yankees are going to dump A-Rod? talking points from the Yankees front office with almost zero critical analysis at all. And, of course, a decade?s worth of trying to slam and humiliate Rodriguez at every possible opportunity.

In short, the Daily News has done nothing to warrant the benefit of the doubt here. Its sources are incredibly thin. This latest story conveniently serves to bolster the Daily News? ?A-Rod is done as a Yankee? narrative. Given the peculiarly inside vibe to this ? and the fact that no one truly close to A-Rod would be a likely Daily News source give its treatment of him over the years ? it is damn nigh impossible to imagine who on Earth could be the Daily News? ?source.?

But is it true? I suppose the beauty of the way this story is written is that we have no way of knowing and no way of checking. ?But therein also likes the very best reason to question this story coming from this outlet.

Source: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/05/the-daily-news-claims-that-a-rod-is-scared-and-paranoid-and-they-know-how/related/

lint buenos aires train crash argentina train crash nancy pelosi nancy pelosi gop debate republican debate