Kurtz leaves DailyBeast after retracted blog post

FILE - This April 25, 2012 file photo shows journalist Howard Kurtz at the world premiere of "Knife Fight" during the 2012 Tribeca Film Festival in New York. Kurtz has left online news and commentary site The Daily Beast, a day after the website retracted one of his blog posts about the coming out of NBA player Jason Collins. Both Kurtz and Daily Beast editor-in-chief Tina Brown confirmed his departure over Twitter. Kurtz did not acknowledge any link between the retraction and his departure. He tweeted that ?we began to move in different directions, both sides agreed it was best to part company.? (AP Photo/Evan Agostini, file)

FILE - This April 25, 2012 file photo shows journalist Howard Kurtz at the world premiere of "Knife Fight" during the 2012 Tribeca Film Festival in New York. Kurtz has left online news and commentary site The Daily Beast, a day after the website retracted one of his blog posts about the coming out of NBA player Jason Collins. Both Kurtz and Daily Beast editor-in-chief Tina Brown confirmed his departure over Twitter. Kurtz did not acknowledge any link between the retraction and his departure. He tweeted that ?we began to move in different directions, both sides agreed it was best to part company.? (AP Photo/Evan Agostini, file)

FILE - This April 25, 2012 file photo shows journalist Howard Kurtz at the world premiere of "Knife Fight" during the 2012 Tribeca Film Festival in New York. Kurtz has left online news and commentary site The Daily Beast, a day after the website retracted one of his blog posts about the coming out of NBA player Jason Collins. Both Kurtz and Daily Beast editor-in-chief Tina Brown confirmed his departure over Twitter. Kurtz did not acknowledge any link between the retraction and his departure. He tweeted that ?we began to move in different directions, both sides agreed it was best to part company.? (AP Photo/Evan Agostini, file)

NEW YORK (AP) ? Columnist Howard Kurtz left The Daily Beast on Thursday, a day after the website retracted one of his blog posts about the coming out of NBA player Jason Collins.

Both Kurtz and Daily Beast editor-in-chief Tina Brown confirmed his departure over Twitter.

Kurtz did not acknowledge any link between the retraction and his departure.

He tweeted that "as we began to move in different directions, both sides agreed it was best to part company."

He added that "this was in the works for some time" and that it was time for him to "move on to other opportunities."

In the retracted post, Kurtz says Collins didn't "come clean" about the fact that he was engaged to be married to a woman before declaring he was gay.

But Collins does just that in the Sports Illustrated piece that came out Monday.

Brown tweeted simply that Kurtz and The Daily Beast had "parted company ... we wish him well."

Kurtz, The Washington Post's former media columnist, is also the host of CNN's "Reliable Sources." CNN did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Kurtz and a spokesman for The Daily Beast also did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/4e67281c3f754d0696fbfdee0f3f1469/Article_2013-05-02-DailyBeast-Kurtz/id-a3a939e1f2cc443388e225d7e54588b2

venus williams Freeh Report direct tv wimbledon ray allen Savages Home Run Derby 2012

Meet the Yahoo Caucus

Congress is filled with informal caucuses, from the Black Caucus to the Wine Caucus. I have a new one to propose, which might be among the largest: the Yahoo Caucus.

I actually began to think about this group last year, when Rep. Daniel Webster, R-Fla. (yes, that is really his name), tried to eliminate the Census Bureau?s annual American Community Survey. ACS is a critically important source of data, by neighborhood, that businesses, manufacturers, retailers, home builders, and local governments use to make critical decisions. The survey provides data on local labor markets, traffic patterns, crime, income, poverty, and countless other areas. It tells businesses the best place to open plants, locate stores, or build homes; tells local governments where and when to place police and firefighting forces; informs emergency planners about disaster preparation; and on and on. Eliminating it would be colossally stupid and counterproductive?but what placed Webster on the Yahoo list was his comment at the time: ?This is not a scientific survey, it is a random survey.? Ouch. Webster has been superseded by Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., who wants to eliminate all funding for all census surveys other than the big one every decade.

Another charter member of the caucus is Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga., who famously said last year that evolution, embryology, and the "big bang" theory were ?lies straight from the pit of hell.? Naturally, Broun is a senior member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee. A new member of the caucus is the chairman of that committee, Lamar Smith, R-Texas, a smart guy (intelligence is not the determining factor here) who this week floated the notion of having every science grant application at the National Science Foundation pass a key hurdle--explaining how the idea would directly benefit the American people. This went beyond the previous efforts by many Yahoos to defund all political science grants to attack grants in every scientific area, social and hard sciences alike, and ultimately make the peer-review process, the linchpin of scientific enterprise, superfluous. Some of the most significant scientific research projects started as out-of-the-box, ?wild-eyed ideas? whose immediate benefit to the broader public would not be evident for decades. What a great idea to have Congress vet the ideas instead of scientific peers.

But the largest class of Yahoos is the group of lawmakers ardently supporting the sequester now hitting a range of government policies and programs.

In the weeks leading up to the implementation of the sequester, a steady stream of House Republicans expressed their eagerness to bring it on. House Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy said, ?This may be the only way we get real spending cuts over the next year.? Budget Chairman Paul Ryan said, ?The sequester is going to happen.? Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana said, ?The consensus is that we want the sequester numbers to come in and finally see spending reduced in Washington.? Rep. Scott DeJarlais of Tennessee said, ?Sequestration needs to happen.?

For every lawmaker like Sens. John McCain or John Thune, who fretted about mindless cuts in defense (while saying nothing about mindless cuts in domestic programs), there were 10 House Republicans who were happy with budget cuts; they did not care where they came from or how they were implemented.

And that is where my disdain is especially focused. From the failure of the super committee forward, to the alarm by House Republicans that some of their Senate counterparts might endorse a plan to raise revenues and make cuts in the growth of Social Security and Medicare, it has become clear that reducing debt is not the real priority here. Cutting government is. But it is not a careful or reasoned effort to create a leaner and meaner government, focused on priorities, operating efficiently and solving problems prudently. It is instead a slash-and-burn approach that reflects a combination of extreme ideology and extreme ignorance, an ardent belief in cutting government without knowing or caring what government is.

Basic research is especially endangered. Here is the reality: Basic research is the fundamental building block for American ingenuity and creativity, as well as our unsurpassed role as the globe?s innovators. In the Mad Men era, Ma Bell could create and fund Bell Labs as a prestigious loss leader, and let other companies turn the research product into commercial ventures. Those days are long gone. No company will spend money on something that has no immediate payoff, hits the next quarter?s profits, and may be exploited by other companies down the road. Only government can do the basic research work that has an enormous long-term payoff for society.

The defense sequester exempts military personnel and focuses on civilian employees at the Defense Department?and DARPA, the brilliant agency that spearheaded the development of the Internet and has created many other valuable innovations, will suffer as a consequence. At the National Institutes of Health, the sequester will be devastating to new research grants. As Elias Zerhouni, the former head of NIH, has pointed out, the grants are usually for five years, rolled over each year. So a 10 percent cut overall in research grants could mean a 50 percent cut in new grants. NIH, the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Science Foundation and the Food and Drug Administration have already seen their budgets shaved over several years of pressure on discretionary spending, which have grant funding levels at roughly those of the Eisenhower era. For new and emerging scientists aspiring to careers in medical research, NIH grants are critical?many are already discussing changing their career paths or going to a place like Singapore, which is stepping up with ample sums to attract our best and brightest. The impact of the cuts is equally damaging for medical schools, teaching hospitals, and universities.

So for lawmakers who stampeded in to make sure the flights back to their districts would run on time by shifting funds to air-traffic controllers from airport improvement and construction--while blithely cheering on cuts in research--welcome to Yahoo Land.

Norm Ornstein is a contributing editor at National Journal and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.

?

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/meet-yahoo-caucus-200827599.html

Colorado shooting victims aurora Angie Everhart tom hardy British Open leaderboard Jessica Ghawi People Water

AB Inbev sees volumes fall in key markets

BRUSSELS (AP) ? Anheuser-Busch InBev NV, the world's largest brewer, says that its profits rose in the first quarter in spite of falling sale volumes in important markets.

The company behind Budweiser, Stella Artois, and Becks said Tuesday that even though revenues grew by 1.5 percent in the first quarter, volumes declined by 4.1 percent.

Beer volumes in Brazil, one of its key markets, had declined by 8.2 percent while there was a fall of 5 percent in North America.

Shares in the company fell nearly 3 percent in early trading to 17.50 euros after the company revised its outlook for volume growth in Brazil.

AB InBev said that it now expects beer volume in 2013 "will be either flat or down low single-digits" compared to 2012.

"Consumers continue to be under short-term pressure in Brazil and so we have adjusted our commercial plans," a company statement said. It said the poor results of the quarter were due to an early Carnival, high food inflation and bad weather.

The company also blamed the weather in the United States for its volume slump there. Tight purses because of the economy and higher gas prices also contributed to the problems, it said.

Much of Europe also suffered through an unusually rough late winter and timid spring and beer volumes declined by 7 percent, and by as much as 9.1 percent in its home market of Belgium.

Things were even worse in Russia where the beer volume decline stood at 17 percent. One piece of good news was China, where volumes grew by 15.5 percent. The company expects strong growth there for the rest of 2013.

Net profit for the company rose to $2.05 billion compared to $1.67 billion the year earlier.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/ab-inbev-sees-volumes-fall-key-markets-091014137.html

doug hutchison larry brown thomas kinkade pat summit brewers matt cain adastra

Joe Lonsdale Of Formation 8 Sees Goverment, Finance, Healthcare, Energy And Logistics As Ripe Areas For Disruption

One of the common themes that we’re hearing from investors during Disrupt NYC has been that the areas that are ready to be disrupted might not be anywhere close to the sometimes sexier-appearing consumer space. Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir Technologies and current partner at Formation 8, discussed some of his thoughts on what will be and should be disrupted by way of technology. The areas of interest for him and his firm are government, finance, healthcare, energy and logistics. Lonsdale’s history is an interesting one: “I think I was really lucky to work as a little kid at PayPal, grew up in the valley as a coder.” Why aren’t more companies focusing on the areas that Lonsdale mentioned? He says it’s because younger entrepreneurs have no visibility into those verticals: “For example, there’s hundreds of problems in finance, but these kids haven’t worked with multi-million dollar backend security.” However, the need is clearly there, as any space with a lot of data flowing through it needs more tech: “There’s an explosion in information, so upgrading the technology in these industries is the fun thing now.” Currently, Lonsdale’s Formation 8 firm is seeking out companies that are working on solving hard problems that turn into scalable platforms. The firm has raised a whopping $448 million fund and has been heavily involved in the Asian market, a location that Lonsdale says more U.S.-based entrepreneurs are starting to focus on. Lonsdale even says that there might be more opportunities for smart ideas in Asia, due to a surplus of mobile devices among the population. With a wider-than-tech worldy vision as a passionate former coder, entrepreneur and current investor and mentor, Lonsdale is very interested in Palantir’s pro-bono work against human trafficking and making sure that we don’t have a cyber 9/11: “There’s a cyber battle going on in the background, it’s good that we’re spending a lot of money to make sure that it doesn’t happen.” Additionally, Lonsdale wants immigration reform immediately so that the U.S. can stay competitive enough to give smart people the support system that they need, rather than sending them through a process that demoralizes them. He called the current system “disgusting.”

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/KhzEV76Pp3A/

Cabin Fever 2 Alexis Wright Zumba binder full of women Microsoft Surface Candy Crowley binders of women presidential debates

Just Because It's Easier To Raise VC Money, That Doesn't Mean You Should

When should an entrepreneur raise money, who should they raise from….and, well, should they even raise? These were some of the questions discussed on a morning panel at TechCrunch Disrupt NY 2013, which included participation from?Mike Abbott of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Aaref Hilaly of Sequoia Capital, AngelList’s Naval Ravikant, and Box Group’s David Tisch. Pitching A Partner Vs. A Firm The VCs debated the various merits of pitching or working with an individual partner at a firm, versus considering what the entire firm could offer, in terms of guidance and experience. Abbott said that at KPCB, each partner has a different set of experiences to offer. Hilaly challenged that, while that’s true, the premise that it’s a single VC partner is most important to a founder, noting that individual?partners?are not as important as the collective partnership, like at Sequoia. There, everyone has their own specialities, but the entire firm gets behind the company, he says. (And yes, even Color, he admitted, responding to a question from the panel’s moderator, TechCrunch co-editor Alexia Tsotsis.) Ravikant, however, offered a different, more challenging answer to the question about who and how entrepreneurs should?determine who to work with and pitch to: just use AngelList. “As a technology entrepreneur, I wanted to solve the problem with a product,” he explains, adding that he tells founders to use the product, and “call me later if you fail.” The A Round When an entrepreneur has moved beyond the seed stage, the next question that typically gets asked is who to raise the A round from? Tisch says that’s an impossible question to answer. The only data point you have is that someone has invested in another company like yours before, or has recently blogged about their interest in similar technology, he explains. When someone asks him about the A round, he replies, “just go meet with them all and see who’s interested.” The problem, he continues, is that VCs can’t really advertise their interests, because it would be limiting. That being said, he admitted that being New York-based himself, he likes to send founders to area firm USV. What Do You Want To Fund? Then, the burning question that?entrepreneurs?are continually curious about: What areas do you want to invest in? Abbott responds with a fairly pat answer that KPCB is about investing in the technology that can enable the world-changing trends. Tsotsis wanted to know

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/NAp-pzYpIgU/

whitney houston casket photo match play championship the national enquirer marie colvin cm punk cm punk lint

Landrieu Primed to Lead Energy Panel ? If She Wins Reelection

It?s been 18 years since Louisiana saw one of its own lead the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, arguably the most important congressional panel to the energy-rich state.

Now, with Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., announcing last week he is retiring after this session of Congress, Louisianans have another chance to lead Energy and Natural Resources with their Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, who faces a tough reelection in a red state that voted 58 percent in favor of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney in the 2012 election.

Landrieu is the third-most-senior Democrat on the Energy panel, after current Chairman Ron Wyden of Oregon and Tim Johnson of South Dakota. But Johnson has already announced he is retiring after this Congress, and Wyden also happens to be the second-most-senior Democrat on the Finance Committee, considered one of the most powerful?and therefore coveted?panels in Congress. In the wake of this domino effect prompted by Baucus?s retirement announcement, Landrieu coould become the top Democrat on the Energy committee.

?I thought she was in good shape politically before the Baucus retirement,? said former Sen. Bennett Johnston, D-La., who chaired the Energy panel from 1987 to 1995. ?But I think since the Baucus retirement, it pretty much seals the deal. Louisianans understand how important the Energy and Natural Resources Committee is to the state.?

That?s a confident take on an outcome dependent on several big open questions. Will Democrats keep control of the Senate? Will the current chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee choose to take the Finance Committee gavel in 2014, as conventional wisdom suggests? Will chairing a congressional committee make a big difference in a political campaign, because voters could well care less about such inside-baseball issues and more about the economy generally? Will Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., try to maneuver around Landrieu?whose views on energy are more conservative than those of almost every other Democrat in the Senate?to ensure a more moderate Democrat gets the committee?s top spot?

With fewer than 200 days to go until Election Day 2013, it?s not too early to start speculating, but it is too early to confidently know the answers to any of these questions.

For her part, Landrieu is already articulating one of her key reelection platforms, and it?s intricately tied to her leadership on the Energy committee.

?Without sounding braggadocious, I?m indispensable in this effort to secure for Louisiana a significant and reliable string of revenue to save our coast,? Landrieu said in an interview with The Times-Picayune?about a week before Baucus announced his plans to retire.

Landrieu is implicitly referring to legislation she is sponsoring, along with Senate Energy and Natural Resources ranking member Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, which would immediately direct to coastal states more than a third of the money companies drilling for oil and natural gas offshore pay to the federal government. Current law will direct this money to coastal states beginning in 2017. Landrieu says the additional money would be instrumental in restoring and maintaining Louisiana?s coastlines. Wyden has expressed an interest in pursuing her legislation this Congress, but it?s unlikely it will become law before Election Day 2013.

?She will be working to convince the people of Louisiana they have more to gain by having a moderate voice in Washington who has great seniority at this point than they do to elect a new senator and start all over again,? said Gordon Taylor, a principal at lobbying firm Ogilvy Government Relations who has worked in the Louisiana delegation for 12 years and knows Landrieu well.

Since her first election in 1996, Landrieu has never won more than 52 percent of the vote. And over the past 17 years, the state has become more Republican. Of the eight elected federal public offices in the state, six are held by Republicans, including Landrieu?s fellow senator, David Vitter, and the governor, Bobby Jindal. Most polling shows Landrieu slightly ahead of any of her potential challengers, including current Louisiana Republican Reps. Bill Cassidy and John Fleming and former Rep. Jeff Landry, R-La. The nonpartisan Cook Political Report predicts it will be ?one of the more competitive contests of the cycle.? She also has more cash on hand than any of her challengers, according to Federal Election Commission reports.

The political dynamics of Landrieu?s reelection campaign could well rest on issues other than energy, despite the state?s dependence on the industry. Her recent vote in support of expanding background checks for guns, for example, could turn off voters in the deep-red northern part of the state. The prospect of becoming chair of the Energy committee could help more in her pocketbook than in voting booths.

?I?m sure it?ll help her raise money," said John Maginnis, a Louisiana strategist who writes a weekly political newsletter. "But I don?t know if it?s going to change the real composition of the race.?

TOMORROW: A look at the dynamics Landrieu must address if she does become the top Democrat on the Energy committee.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/landrieu-primed-lead-energy-panel-she-wins-reelection-132501481.html

superbowl kick off time 2012 new york giants hot wings recipe 7 layer dip recipe chris carter superbowl 2012 kickoff time what time is the super bowl 2012

PFT: Mathieu's agent: Guaranteed money a must

AP

The Steelers plunged to 8-8 in 2012.? Some think they?ll be worse in 2013.? Here?s a look at the quality of a draft class aimed at helping them get better.

What they needed:? Running back, receiver, linebacker, quarterback, cornerback, tight end, offensive line.

Who they got:
Round 1: Jarvis Jones, LB, Georgia.
Round 2: Le?Veon Bell, RB, Michigan State.
Round 3: Markus Wheaton, WR, Oregon State.
Round 4: Shamarko Thomas, S, Syracuse.
Round 4: Landry Jones, QB, Oklahoma.
Round 5: Terry Hawthorne, CB, Illinois.
Round 6: Justin Brown, WR, Oklahoma.
Round 6: Vince Williams, LB, Florida St.
Round 7: Nick Williams, DT, Samford.

Where they hit:? They needed a high-impact pass rusher, and they got the guy with both potential and production.? Jones could be the next great Steelers linebacker, and they wisely waited for him to fall into their laps at No. 17.? Bell gives them a guy who could instantly become the starting running back, and they?ve once again taken receivers in the two rounds (three and six) where they found Mike Wallace, Emmanuel Sanders, and Antonio Brown.

Where they missed:? Thomas, an undersized safety whose best attribute is his ability to deliver big hits, suffered multiple concussions last season.? It?s too much of a risk to take with a fourth-round draft pick.? Ditto for Jones; if the Steelers are looking for a backup, they could have waited until a later round than four.? The decision not to take a tight end could be a problem, if Heath Miller suffers a setback while recovering from a torn ACL.

Impact rookies:? Jones and Bell likely will instantly be added to the starting lineup.? Barring injury, each could become a candidate for rookie of the year on their respective sides of the ball.

Long-term prospects:? A solid draft class with a couple of guys who could become contributors and leaders in the near future.? And if the Steelers are still as good at scouting receivers as they were when finding Wallace, Sanders, and Brown, Thomas and Justin Brown could become difference makers, too.

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/29/mathieus-agent-says-no-contract-without-guaranteed-money/related/

christopher columbus columbus day columbus day Stacy Dash Amber Tamblyn Lilit Avagyan Nashville TV Show