The British government continues to refuse to negotiate sovereignty of the islands, as British governments have continuously, citing the democratic rights of the 3,000 British citizens who currently inhabit them. Of course, the government’s determination to hold onto the Falklands would have nothing to do with the small matter of oil exploration, just begun in [...]

From the always wonderful Blue Gal.
I can’t believe I live on the very same planet there are women waxing their crotches in order to have Swarovski crystals glued onto that very same area in a decorative manner. The “spa treatment” people promise the crystals last an entire five days.
First of all, the good Lord did [...]

It was in 1983, one of the most tense years of the Cold War, when the Reagan administration was deploying Pershing II missiles in Europe, and the arms race with the Soviet Union was at a fevered pitch, that a young man at Columbia University wrote a rather interesting article discussing the nuclear freeze movement, student activism, and what it all signified. He concluded that:

[The nuclear freeze movement] is at once a warning to us that the old solutions of more weapons and again more weapons will no longer be accepted in a Europe that is already a powderkeg waiting to go off; and it is an invitation to work towards a peace that is genuine, lasting and non-nuclear.

Twenty-two years later, this same man would become a US Senator and begin to put words into action via significant nuclear non-proliferation legislation. Nuclear arms reduction became a top-tier issue of his presidential campaign; when Barack Obama was elected President of the United States, he kept nuclear weapons as a central issue of his administration.

Obama speaking in Prague, April 2009. Click the image to watch the video.

His April 2009 speech in Prague was a much more sophisticated version of his musings as a student. In it, he laid out his goals for the US nuclear posture as well as a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or New START. He  emphasized that though the US would maintain a “safe, secure, and effective” nuclear arsenal, his goal was to reduce the role nuclear weapons play in our national security strategy. He also indicated that he hoped the US and Russia could negotiate a New START treaty by the end of 2009.

Well, the reality is that both the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and New START have been delayed considerably. The NPR will probably not be out until late March or April; New START negotiators have taken a break and will meet again sometime in the first two weeks of March.

Understandably, given the administration’s ongoing emphasis on nuclear weapons issues, the pundits, wonks, and national security reporters are all trying to read the tea leaves regarding these delays. Commentary on the NPR has ranged from tersely worded reprimands to constructive attempts to discover reasons for the delay, as well as a number of thoughtful “what next?” pieces.

Most significant were a couple of pieces on New START, published by Josh Rogin at The Cable (a Foreign Policy blog). The pieces were significant because, despite their questionable sourcing, they were snapped up with very few questions asked. The lack of response by the Obama administration was also significant, and I’ll get to that in a moment.

The first of Rogin’s two articles made classic use of the FOX News Question Mark with the title: “‘New START’ dead on arrival?” The article’s title seems to be derived soley from quotes from the Senate’s most strident arms control opponent, Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and a statement from Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) that he doesn’t have a vote count yet.

I spoke with John Isaacs, who is the Executive Director of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. I asked him what he thought of the “dead on arrival” implication. He said:

I think Josh Rogin took a couple of quotes, including from unfriendly sources, and wove it into a story that goes beyond what, certainly, a lot of people feel.

Let me start off with this. There’s certainly a lot of uncertainty. We don’t know when the treaty will be signed. Without knowing when the treaty will be signed, we don’t know when it might be considered. There’s also uncertainty because the Senate schedule is always uncertain, 365 days a year, assuming they’re meeting.

So it’s certainly possible that the treaty does not get considered by the Senate this year. But to treat it both as a given that the treaty won’t be considered this year, or, alternatively, the treaty is “dead on arrival”, both are wrong. One is definitely overstated, and one is simply wrong on the facts, as far as I’m concerned.

I know I’m more optimistic than most people, but on the New START agreement, you have Republicans such as McCain of Arizona and Lugar of Indiana and Corker of Tennessee have already more or less endorsed the treaty. You also have ten Senators who signed a letter in 2009 telling the Obama administration not to [weaken] missile defense, but saying it’s important to negotiate a New START treaty. Among the signers are people like Jon Kyl, and Sessions of Alabama, and Lieberman of Connecticut, and others.

But again, it is true that things could get delayed. The Nuclear Posture Review has been delayed. The signing of the New START agreement has been delayed, and Senate consideration of the treaty is [therefore] delayed.

Rogin’s second article regarding New START again had a provocative headline that was barely held up by the contents of the article. The headline claimed that “Hill sources” say there won’t be a New START treaty in 2010, period, but only cites vague statements by (clearly) opposition sources. Again, it’s a huge overstatement of whatever thin facts there are.

Most importantly, as Kingston Reif over at the Nukes of Hazard blog notes, Rogin updated his article with a statement from Harry Reid’s office, stating that the Senate is expecting to have the New START treaty under consideration in 2010, and that they “have seen nothing to this point to alter this expectation…”.

Reif points out that:

Reid’s statement demonstrates that the judgment expressed by Rogin’s “multiple Hill sources” was premature and that these sources may have come from only one side of the aisle.

Rogin’s tendency to rely on opposition sources for information, anonymous or otherwise, should be a red flag for the White House. Rogin has proven time and again that he likes to talk to Senator Kyl in particular. Allowing one of the fiercest opponents to nuclear arms control to dominate the debate is dangerous in so many ways.

In fact, Max Bergmann at the Center for American Progress nailed it when he pointed out that Kyl et al. will try to obstruct arms control treaties in much the same way that the Republicans have obstructed health care legislation. Specifically:

Kyl may now try to avoid outwardly opposing START, using instead Senate processes to covertly gum up ratification. Kyl knows that delaying START by even a year would be a significant setback to the entire arms-control agenda. Delaying may not ultimately defeat START, but it would effectively kill all the momentum behind Obama’s global zero vision, something that Kyl is very much opposed to.

Yet we haven’t heard a single word from the White House in response to anything Senator Kyl and his friends have been saying. I’m pleased that Harry Reid’s office responded to one of Rogin’s articles, but given the fact that the Obama administration has given such top-tier billing to nuclear weapons issues, you’d think it would be wise to respond and debunk some of the spin, especially at this crucial moment when so many delays are giving an opening for attacks, whether they’re warranted or not.

The Obama administration needs to look back at how Jon Kyl helped crush ratification of the Comprehensive (Nuclear) Test Ban Treaty in 1999, and learn a lesson from that example. In a recent conversation I had with the nuclear weapons historian Richard Rhodes, he described it this way:

Jon Kyl managed to subvert [the test ban treaty] before, in a really diabolical sneak attack, where he conned the Democrats into raising the issue of ratification after he was sure he had the votes to defeat it and then took them up on it.

The lesson to the Obama administration is this: do not let the opposition get the upper hand here. They know what they’re doing, and they will get their way. Come out with a statement before it’s too late.

This is Obama’s “dream”, if you will, this dream of a world where nuclear weapons play a more diminished role, where our national security is less dependent on nuclear deterrence than ever before.

It’s time to step up to the plate and win the nuclear PR war.

Ed. note: Above the Law has teamed up with Law Shucks, which has done excellent work translating all of the layoff news into user-friendly charts and graphs: the Layoff Tracker.

How many times have we heard this before?

The number of Americans filing first-time claims for unemployment insurance unexpectedly increased last week, a sign that the economic recovery will be uneven as the labor market struggles to rebound.

Initial jobless applications rose by 22,000 to 496,000 in the week ended Feb. 20, the highest level in three months, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington. The total number of people receiving unemployment insurance gained and the four- week moving average of weekly claims jumped close to a three- month high.

At least it’s not just the employment sector that’s reporting bad news.

In the last week alone, reports on new and existing home sales, jobless claims, durable goods orders, consumer confidence and manufacturing have all missed expectations. Worries about a Greek debt default spreading to other vulnerable European nations have resurfaced — after quieting for a few weeks.

On the other hand, fourth-quarter earnings were spectacular compared to year-ago numbers. The financial sector, which spins off so much legal work, dragged overall earnings up 201% compared to last year – even without that segment, earnings were up 16%. It’s not clear yet whether strengthening corporate financials will be able to recover over the drag of economic data.

Meanwhile, it was all quiet on the law-firm front this week. Details after the jump.

We’re a little hesitant to say that there were no reported layoffs last week, because last time we did that, word came out that Drinker Biddle sneaked in under the wire. But it looks like this might be the week that ends the series of one-reported-layoff per week that has been the hallmark of 2010.

Just because they weren’t laying people off doesn’t mean firms were resting on their laurels. The scramble to tweak the business continues.

And as Hiring Partner recently wrote, it is all just business.

Seyfarth Shaw provided some more information about what its take on merit-based compensation will look like. As far as we recall, that’s the first firm that also addressed the most-important component of these changes in the system: the effect on billing rates. As we said before, clients don’t care about lockstep; they care how much they’re being charged for the work. One quote we found interesting was this:

Seyfarth’s system may be unique in spelling out a link between client billing rates and associate pay, Zimmerman said. While clients may appreciate knowing what level of service they’re paying for, he added that such a system may also lead them to shy away from hiring the lowest performers.

Is that supposed to be a bad thing? It also muddies the distinction between poor performance and undeveloped skills. The former should be avoided, the latter just means that someone is inexperienced. It can also mean that clients aren’t paying for overqualified associates doing scutwork (to the extent that work isn’t being sent off to India anyway).

Winston & Strawn is also abandoning lockstep, but is still classifying associates by class year. Within those years, individual salaries will range up to market rates. Absent further information, that’s exactly the kind of fundamentally flawed departure from lockstep we’re talking about – if the firms are willing to pay some people in a particular class less than others, shouldn’t that assessment be passed through to clients? Otherwise, firms are incentivized to deflate salaries in order to maximize the spread to the billing rate.

Meanwhile over in London, Freshfields remains on lockstep and is unfreezing salaries. English firms are far more attached to lockstep in the partner ranks than their US counterparts, so we’re not surprised to see it persist for associates. But just because they like lockstep doesn’t mean they’re willing to keep laggards on. Clifford Chance is tightening the performance requirements on its partners by instituting annual performance reviews and delegating to management the ability to oust poor performers (previously they could appeal to a vote of the full partnership).

One front that popped back up for discussion this week was deferrals, and how things will shake out when the deferrals end. 34.7% of ATL respondents would like to say, “Bye-bye BigLaw” and stay in their public-interest jobs. At Law Shucks, we think the guy who thinks they’ll be missed is out of his mind. Kash and Lat are just skeptical. But coming completely out of left field is the partner who claims firms would seek retribution against those who don’t return. We called BS on that.

The running tallies for the week, month, and year are in the conclusion of the post on Law Shucks (and don’t forget to check back later in the week for the Month in Layoffs for February, complete with charts).

Law – Lawyers & Law Firms – Services – LawShucks – United States

It promises to be the most exciting contest of the Vancouver Olympics, Canada versus Team USA in hockey. I will be watching because I have…

VAIL, Colo. (AP) – Vail Resorts is honoring Lindsey Vonn by naming a trail on Vail Mountain after the Olympic medal winner.

More on Olympics

The Vancouver Olympics have entered their final day, but Saturday was filled with lots of action and a range of medal events. With a stunning 36 medals and at least one more guaranteed, the U.S. set a Winter Olympics medal record, while Canada…

As the death toll from Saturday morning’s 8.8 earthquake off the coast of Chile reaches over 700, attention is split between rescue operations and providing shelter and resources for the two million people across the South American coastal nat…

When she was 13, Okana Jakpor tested her mom before and after using ozone-generating air purifiers and found that the air purifiers worsened her pulmonary functions. She confirmed these findings with other subjects.
“When doing research for my experiment, I read that the California Air Resources Board was writing a regulation to limit ozone emissions from [...]

 … and her babies Zipper and Velcro.   Check out the feed!…

What is really scary about this kind of technology use is that it creates excellent breeding grounds for child predators, such pedophiles and sex offenders, to prey on kids.

The “Move Your Money” campaign was featured on CBS Sunday Morning this week. Arianna appeared on the show to talk about why moving money out…

SYDNEY — Thousands of people in lavish costumes and various states of undress danced and partied their way through Sydney’s streets on Saturday, in Australia’s annual Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Parade.

The parade – one of the worl…

deepakchopra.com…