It’s my suspicion that the controversy about President Obama’s nominee for Surgeon General may have been instigated by Jenny Craig with the hope of attracting…
Posts Tagged ‘Regina’
Sybil Adelman Sage: Did Jenny Craig Stir the Pot About Dr. Regina Benjamin’s Weight?
July 24th, 2009 |
No Comments
Water bills to fall due to five-year price cap
July 23rd, 2009 |
No Comments
Ofwat’s initial decision is likely to spark protests from water companies, which called for an average £28 above-inflation hike in their business plans
Households will benefit from a £14 fall in average water bills to £330 before inflation over the next five years, industry regulator Ofwat said today.
The 4% fall was announced in Ofwat’s “draft determination” on price limits for water and sewerage costs in England and Wales for 2010-15.
But the regulator’s initial decision is likely to spark protests from water companies, which called for an average £28 above-inflation hike in their business plans.
Ofwat’s chief executive, Regina Finn, said: “We understand times are hard and we have listened to what customers have told us.
“They want a safe, reliable water supply at a reasonable cost. People can shop around for the best deal on many things, but not water.”
The regulator said its draft determination would still allow water companies to “invest extensively” in the network and spend almost £21bn over the five-year period.
More than £4bn will be invested in improving drinking water and protecting the environment, Ofwat said.
Spending plans will also reduce the risk of extreme weather – such as 2007′s floods – disrupting supply for around 10 million people, it added.
The regulator will make its final decision on prices in November before the new regime comes into force next April.
Before then it faces talks with water firms which had called for a more generous deal to reflect tougher conditions – such as rising bad debts in the recession – and higher financing costs following the credit crunch.
Finn added: “Our decisions allow efficient, well-run companies to invest in the right place at the right time for the right price.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Regina Spektor:Far
July 17th, 2009 |
No Comments
By: Dennis Cook
Regina Spektor‘s fifth album cements the notion that she isn’t just another comely chica at a piano. With a steady hand, curiously angled wit and on-point melodic sense, Far (released June 23 on Sire/Warner) makes a good argument that she’s Randy Newman‘s curly-topped little sister.
“You went into the kitchen cupboard/ got yourself another hour/ and you gave half of it to me/ We sat there looking at the faces of the strangers in the pages/ till we knew them mathematically/ They were in our minds until forever/ but we didn’t mind/ we didn’t know better.”
The above verse opens the album as Spektor’s confident, quasi-classical piano and Matt Chamberlain‘s drums skip with child-like glee before we’re soon in that kitchen making computers out of macaroni pieces and counting up our feelings. She simultaneously tickles the places in our brains that adore Paul McCartney and e.e. cummings, poetry in populist motion. Far goes down so smoothly that it’s only on repeat that one realizes how many big thoughts Spektor has stuffed into her ditties – views from space, astute observations on faith and how one laughs in the face of, well, all the horrors outside our windows. She’s especially succinct and adroit at handling God on “Laughing With,” which neatly foils notions of flat atheism by citing all the situations no one is laughing at God (and noting that “God can be funny,” something fundamentalists of all stripes frequently forget). But even when she’s not so sky-high-minded, Spektor ladles up music that’s bright and danceable and oh-so-smart without ever breaking a sweat (and she’d catch that perspiration with her eyelashes anywayÂ…).
Moods shift flexibly, where the big blue planet, humanizing reverie of “Blue Lips” is sandwiched between the bouncing inducement to just move “Eet” and “Folding Chair,” the niftiest summer number this season. There’s little she seems incapable of handling with style and a personal character that’s rarely less than seductive and almost never grating in the way that kindred iconoclastic ancestors like Jane Siberry, Nina Hagen and Kate Bush can often be. And like honey to a bee, she’s attracted some clever collaborators. Besides Chamberlain (your go-to skin thumper for girly singer-songwriters when he’s not a Critter Buggin), there’s ELO’s Jeff Lynne, Reggie Watts (Maktub), veteran producer David Kahne (Tony Bennett, Stevie Nicks, Sublime) and engineering comer Jacknife Lee (U2, Snow Patrol, Bloc Party). Often multiple studios and many hands projects like this come across as scattered and overly manipulated but Far‘s vision is all Spektor, who sings with characteristic carelessness, a strong voice utilized like a flaming baton – wild and beautiful despite all the practiced sureness underlying each move.
Far feels timely, a song cycle that’s absorbed the general feeling of being overwhelmed and frightened that marks the early 21st century but refuses to be cowered despite the acknowledged weight of it all. Where it would be easy for Spektor to capitalize on her nook on VH1 and their ilk, she’s sidestepped the spotlight being proffered for a richer and, I dare say, nobler path. Far drives down to the deep strata of us with laughter and sincerity, a giggling hallelujah just when we need one.
JamBase | Tickled Blue
Go See Live Music!
Friday Playlist
July 17th, 2009 |
No Comments
WE GO UNPLUGGED AS OUR THOUGHTS WING NORTHWARD
 |
This morning we find ourselves thinking of back porches and non-amplified stages, acoustic music on the brain as this year’s Northwest String Summit gets underway. Our faithful scribe Sarah Hagerman is on the scene to note the nitty ‘n’ the gritty for JamBase but we wanted to wing a 6-pack of twang speckled goodness to her, the rest of the Summit-ers and really anyone who likes a bit o’ quirk with their pickin’.
This week’s Playlist begins with the great U.K. outfit The Broken Family Band and an early love ditty from their catalog. Then, it’s enduring folkie David Wilcox to tell us about hanging loose even when things splatter everywhere. That’s followed by some hot, sweet licks from the latest Dan Hicks release, a gospel scorcher from the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band from the second Will The Circle Be Unbroken collection and a genuine classic team up of Steve Earle and The Pogues. Lastly, it’s newfangled space cowboy Devendra Banhart‘s salute to poultry.
And check out last week’s Playlist with Pavement, Regina Spektor, BLK JKS and more! |
Friday Playlist
July 10th, 2009 |
No Comments
 |
A distinctly summery feel permeates this week’s mini-mix. The music on our stereos and in our tiny, white ear-buds shifts as temperatures rise, the humidity and sunshine steering us towards tunes fit for flip-flops, ocean shorelines and bare legged comfort. Here’s a few sweet strains to help move y’all in that direction, beginning with a new one from Regina Spektor‘s swell new Far album. From their things bloom buoyantly with Marcy Playground and a salute to nude sunbathing (and the lucky ones who get to enjoy the golden baked benefitsÂ…) from Pavement. The second half of our assortment rolls into Camper Van Beethoven‘s sing-along romp about long haired lovelies and surfing followed by a wonderfully groovy number about our modern penchant for self-medication from San Jose, CA’s fab The Mumlers and a swell, vibrating epilogue from excellent up-and-comers BLK JKS.
And check out last week’s Playlist with Latyrx, The Hold Steady, Cheap Trick and more!
Can you call for the abolition of the monarchy without risking the noose?
As long as pabloquema isn’t plotting the Queen’s death, Anna Fairclough is confident he can avoid prosecution for treason
pabloquema asks:
To keep this reply reasonably short, I am going to assume that you are not actually advocating or plotting the Queen’s death, which could amount to treason, carrying a penalty of life imprisonment (in addition to the penalties for any other offences you may commit).
Probably more to the point is section 3a of the Treason Felony Act 1848, which makes it an offence for any person (British subject or not) to call for the abolition of the monarchy. The wording of the act is as follows:
The section can be explained in reasonably plain English as prohibiting:
1. compassing (contriving) etc generally; and
2. compassing (contriving) by publication, in order:
(a) to deprive the monarch of the Crown; or
(b) to levy war against the monarch; or
(c) to encourage foreigners to invade the UK.
It remains an open question whether calling for abolition of the monarchy by peaceful means would fall foul of (a) above, or whether only those calling for abolition by the use of force would be caught. That question came before the House of Lords in a 2003 case brought by the Guardian’s editor Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General (Appellant) ex parte Rusbridger and another (Respondents) but the Lords declined to decide it because, since no prosecutions under section 3 have been brought since 1883, and none were threatened, the court felt that the question was purely theoretical, and it was not the function of the courts to bring the statute book up to date.
Section 3 above would certainly appear to prohibit peaceful political debate on the virtues of republicanism. Whilst refusing to decide the point, Lord Steyn in the Rusbridger case explained that “The part of s3 of the 1848 act which appears to criminalise the advocacy of republicanism is a relic of a bygone age and does not fit into the fabric of our modern legal system. The idea that s3 could survive scrutiny under [the Human Rights Act 1998] is unreal”. If such a case were ever to be prosecuted, then, it is very likely that section 3 of the 1848 act would be reinterpreted using the Human Rights Act 1998 so as to give proper weight to the rights protected by article 10: the right to freedom of expression.
Article 10 is not an absolute right, so interferences with freedom of speech can be justified provided they meet the criteria laid down in article 10(2). Broadly, this means that interferences need to be governed by a clear and accessible law; pursue one of the legitimate aims listed in 10(2) (such as national security, public safety, the prevention of disorder or crime, the protection of health or morals, the protection of the reputation or rights of others); and be proportionate to the aim pursued.
A comparison might be drawn with the fairly recent case of R (on the application of Green) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court (2007) in which a Christian group sought unsuccessfully to bring a private prosecution for blasphemous libel – another archaic offence – against the BBC and the production company of Jerry Springer – the opera. The court considered whether the existence of the offence of blasphemy breached article 10, and decided that it did not, but only because blasphemy should be understood to be criminal only “if what is done or said is such as to induce a reasonable reaction involving civil strife, damage to the fabric of society or their equivalent.” It would not be enough to show that “some people of particular sensibility are, because deeply offended, moved to protest.” Rather, “what is necessary to make such material a crime is that the community (or society) generally should be threatened.” The test here is set so high that it is hard to envisage what behaviour would be criminal – and the offence of blasphemous libel was in any event promptly repealed following this case.
Finally, you might be relieved to see from the wording of the section above that the penalty for calling for the abolition of the monarchy is not the noose, but merely being transported beyond the seas for the remainder of your natural life. Whilst that might not sound so bad, unfortunately successive legislative changes mean that the penalty would now be life imprisonment. Even if it were the noose, you could rely on the Human Rights Act again, because, by incorporating article one of the thirteenth protocol, the death penalty is prohibited in the UK.
So to sum up: if you are unlucky enough to be the first person prosecuted for calling for the abolition of the monarchy since 1883, you could argue that your prosecution breaches your right to freedom of expression, and if your campaign is peaceful you are virtually certain to succeed. If youadvocate the use of violence, or some particularly heinous means of deposing Her Majesty, you might face more difficulty as well as potentially committing other offences at the same time, including sedition (vilifying or degrading the Queen with intent to cause violence). Whatever happens, you won’t face the noose.
Do you have a civil liberties or human rights question for the Liberty lawyers? Post it in our Liberty Clinic open thread.