THE OTHER SHOE DROPS: Updates To Previous Posts
† Pakistan: How The Candidates Dealt With Reality, Not Hypotheticals (second item): Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf agreed to allow investigators from Scotland Yard to help get to the bottom of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto's assassination, as England is perceived as more disinterested in the outcome than the U.S. The parliamentary elections originally scheduled for January 8th have been postponed until February 18th. Meanwhile, despite The Washington Post and The New York Times both giving Hillary Clinton (D-NY) high marks for mouthing all the right words during the crisis precipitated by Bhutto’s assassination, she seems unaware that Musharraf is not running for office. As Thomas Houlahan of Middle East Times notes, “The upcoming elections are for the next parliament. Musharraf was just elected president of Pakistan, overwhelmingly, by popularly elected electors on Oct. 6. He's just begun his five-year term as the president of the country.” And as columnist Jack Kelly points out, Hillary got the number of children Bhutto had wrong and wrongly stated that he, too, was assassinated (he was executed for treason). Maybe The Washington Post and The New York Times should re-think their assessments of her foreign policy acumen.
†The Truth Is Out There: Part III: Two people who were with Dennis Kucinich when he spotted a UFO above actress Shirley MacLaine's house in September 1982 have come forward to corroborate his story. One of them, Paul Costanzo, 55, a trumpet player and jujitsu black belt, who was employed as MacLaine's assistant, personal trainer and bodyguard at the time, tells The Wall Street Journal (subscription required): "At no time did I feel afraid, even though I felt very small," says one witness, Paul Costanzo. "I sensed that I was in the presence of a greater technology and intelligence." Costanzo’s girlfriend saw the UFO, too.
† How Poor Is Poor?: In New York City, a single mother with three kids could be eligible for up to $40,000 in federal, state and local means-tested assistance programs – none of which counts as “income,” according to the standard Washington, D.C. has been using for decades to determine poverty. Now, the Bloomberg administration is trying to come up with its own definition of poverty to “better assess whether the tens of millions of dollars the city plans to spend on new anti-poverty programs will improve poor people’s standard of living,” reports The New York Times:
The 42-year-old federal poverty standard, which is pegged to the annual cost of buying basic groceries, is widely viewed as outdated and off-target. …
The politics of determining a poverty level are intense because the number largely determines eligibility for numerous federal entitlement programs. And, perhaps as important, it is used by people across the political spectrum as they debate how well this nation cares for its less fortunate. …
Upwards of 600,000 families in the city are in public housing or receive substantial rental assistance. Other aid that would be counted toward income includes food stamps, subsidized child care and cash that is returned to families through the earned income tax credit and other tax credits. These benefits can be worth thousands of dollars a year for each family, and if that were the only change made in the formula, the number of poor in
But
In its new formula, the city would set its poverty threshold at about 80 percent of the median amount spent by American families on essential goods, which would include food, rent, clothing, utilities, and a little extra. Costs would be adjusted to reflect
Cynics, such as American Enterprise Institute scholar Douglas J. Besharov, are waiting with bated breath to see whether the new formula results in an even higher higher poverty rate.




Comments