For Perhaps $490 a Month, a Home on the Hudson River

Leslie Day feeding sea gulls from her 43-foot cruiser at the 79th Street Boat Basin. Dr. Day, a naturalist and author who teaches at an elementary school, has lived at the boat basin for 32 years.

From the New York Times:

Leslie Day flirted, dated, married, raised a family and found her life’s work in Manhattan — or rather, just off its shore.

Born on the Upper West Side, she moved to a 34-foot houseboat at the 79th Street Boat Basin when she was 30, single and a masseuse. She found her future husband, a biologist, on the 43-foot houseboat next door. After they were wed, they traded up to a 57-foot houseboat, and they raised a son. Now, as empty-nesters, the couple live on a 43-foot cruiser.

Dr. Day, 62, who is now an elementary school teacher, recently wrote “Field Guide to the Natural World of New York City.” When Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg honored her book last fall in a ceremony at Gracie Mansion, he reached the part of his script that noted where she lived and ad-libbed a reaction she had heard many times. “Do you really?” he said. “That’s amazing. Thirty-two years and it never sunk or anything like that?”

Since 1937, when Franklin Delano Roosevelt was president, the 79th Street Boat Basin has been an object of fascination off the island of Manhattan, part fishing village, part Monte Carlo and all floating opera all of the time.

The boat basin floats on five main docks on the banks of the Hudson River. For decades, there have been as many as 100 pleasure craft, some pristine, others slovenly — schooners, houseboats, yachts and trawlers — tethered just off the Riverside Park promenade, three blocks from Broadway and Zabar’s.

Critics have called the residents squatters on public property, in a high-end trailer park; even the city government, which owns the docks, has not always been comfortable with the arrangement.

But the boaters call themselves a community with rights like any other. Residents have ranged from millionaires to those between jobs. All seem to embrace self-expression. One man liked wearing a Superman sweatshirt as he bounced on a trampoline on the dock.

“Over the years,” said Ed Bacon, 67, a yacht broker and the resident of longest standing at more than 37 years, “we’ve had starving artists, Wall Street financiers, rock promoters, computer programmers, United Nations employees and,” pausing to laugh, “Dick DeBartolo.” He is a senior writer at Mad magazine, who maintains a boat as an office.

Mr. Bacon, a former I.B.M. executive, would not have it any other way. Living among people like himself, he said, would be like “reading from only one page of a book.”

Ed Bacon, the resident of longest standing at the 79th Street Boat Basin, and Regina Jordan with their pet, Ollie, at home on their ketch. Mr. Bacon is a former I.B.M. executive; Ms. Jordan is a chef. “At first, in the 1970s, the boat basin was a divorcés’ heaven,” Mr. Bacon said. “All of these guys were divorced and all they would wind up with is the boat. It became a real party place.”

The naturalist Leslie Day on her cruiser. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg wondered if she had ever lived on a boat that sank. [photos by Gabriele Stabile]

Celebrities have visited, too. Aristotle Onassis once anchored his yacht there. Malcolm Forbes, Frank Sinatra and Mario Puzo, whose boat was named Godfather, used the basin.

But the living, despite appearances, is not always easy. When a ferry rumbles past, throwing up a huge wake, the residences buck and weave like horses. Low tide, meaningless on land, sends the docks downward by five feet or more.

In the cold months, pets fall into chilly water. People slip on icy piers. In an especially frigid winter, a miniature Antarctica can freeze around the basin. In 2005, ice floes caused more than $400,000 damage to the river pilings and other dock infrastructure, according to the city’s Department of Parks and Recreation.

Miraculously, there have been no major fires. But bloated corpses have bumped up boat side, spoiling someone’s morning coffee. Once, a distraught man in a tuxedo leapt into the river, but residents saved him.

What the boat basin has not had for a while is newcomers, though that is beginning to change.

Keith Kerman, the chief of operations for the Parks Department, said the agency stopped issuing permits for year-round dockage in 1994 in an effort to gradually reduce the population of full-timers, who once occupied nearly all of the 116 permanent slips. The city wanted more public access, and more revenue: Short-term rentals bring in more money. Now, the number of full-timers has fallen to 43.

After years of clashes with the remaining residents, the two sides reached a compromise: The department would issue a small number of new annual permits, infusing new blood into the community.

A permit to dock a boat is one of the last real estate bargains in Manhattan, costing a fraction of even a tiny Upper West Side apartment rental. It costs $108 a foot for the summer season; $88 a foot for the other six months. Thus, a typical 30-foot boat would cost $5,880 in annual dock fees, or $490 a month.

Planned by Robert Moses when he was the city parks commissioner, the boat basin was built in 1937 to offer summer dockage to the public.

By the 1960s, however, boaters began to live there year-round and the number of so-called transient boaters, those who stayed for days or weeks, fell.

By the 1970s, there were problems. Outside managers stopped maintaining the docks, and residents filed lawsuits.

In 1989 the city resumed management of the basin.

One of the fiercest critics of the boat basin has been the Riverside Park Fund, a private group that raises money for the park. In 1991, Peter M. Wright, then its chairman, said, “The people in the boat basin are squatters on public land.”

Now, James T. Dowell, the fund’s president, said, “The conditions are immeasurably improved.” He added, “The fund has been pleased that the balance has shifted toward seasonal and day people, so it’s a much more public amenity.”

There is a full-time dockmaster. The Parks Department provides, free of charge, a boat pump-out system that connects directly to the boats of full-timers and visitors. (Dumping raw sewage into the river is illegal.) Paper and other garbage can be discarded in a nearby container. A fresh-water line system is also free, but electricity, telephone, television and Internet access are paid for by boaters.

Mr. Bacon, who began living at the boat basin during the Lindsay administration, and his second wife, Regina Jordan, live with a 2-year-old toy poodle, Ollie, on a two-mast cutter-rig ketch that is 54 feet long. It is Mr. Bacon’s third and largest boat.

Mr. Bacon remembers his first winter, in 1970, as especially tough. It was hard to get electricity to boats, he recalls, and there were frequent power failures. To get fresh water, boaters ran garden hoses underwater and to their boats. Mr. Bacon remembers hauling six or seven buckets of water from the dock faucet just to take a shower.

“You learned to cooperate very quickly,” he recalled. Camaraderie and cocktails were strong.

“At first, in the 1970s, the boat basin was a divorcés’ heaven,” he said. “All of these guys were divorced and all they would wind up with is the boat. It became a real party place.”

With the increase in part-timers, revenues from dock fees have risen sixfold, to $241,000 last year from $40,000 in 2001. (There is a waiting list of 450 names for part-time slots, from May to October.)

Last month, an audit by the city comptroller found “fiscal irregularities” that raised “serious concerns about the possibility of fraud.” The comptroller, William C. Thompson Jr., recommended a much tighter system of monitoring operations, including the collection, recording and reporting of gross receipts.

The parks commissioner, Adrian Benepe, said that the department had already strengthened fiscal controls and that there was no evidence of misappropriation of funds.

Last year, when the Parks Department began issuing new annual permits, the first two boaters began moving in.

Sim Cass, 51, a baker and a former sailor in the British merchant navy, is one of them.

He said that he fell in love with the boat basin at first sight, in 1983. “You can see the horizon and the sun and the arc of the moon,” he said, “and yet you are decidedly in Manhattan.”

Mr. Cass, who now lives in an apartment in the East Village, first applied for a year-round permit seven years ago and was finally issued one last October. He plans to move in this summer and live on his 37-foot trawler, which is already docked there.

“I’d love to live there now,” he said, noting that he is waiting for his daughter to leave for college. “Wintertime is spectacular!”

Like other new full-timers, Mr. Cass must ensure his boat is seaworthy. By May of next year, the 19 full-time boats that the Parks Department considers unseaworthy must be fully operational, in case of an emergency evacuation.

Gene Greenspun, now 89, lived on his boat for 32 years until 2002, when an early-morning wake from a passing boat smashed his craft against the pier. He escaped but his boat sank.

A widower who now lives in an East Side apartment, Mr. Greenspun said the other day that he was miserable, as he put it, “on land.”

But Mr. Greenspun, a developer of a manufacturing process for children’s dolls, could not move back. “It was like a child dying,” he said. “You don’t hang around the place where the child died.”

For Mr. Greenspun and others who have left, Mr. Bacon, the yacht broker, is planning a reunion June 12 at the boat basin. So far, he has contacted more than 100 alumni, out of several hundred.

“We’ll have a lot to talk about,” Mr. Bacon said.

V-Day Censored At A Local High School

From the Daily Sundial:

Vagina, a six-letter word that has caused an uproar at Cleveland High School. The school's administration has deemed the word "obscene." This is an accreditation year for the school, which is why such a commotion is not surprising.

A special Vagina Day edition of the school's newspaper Le Sabre was distributed on Feb. 14. The newspapers were dispensed during first period, with one headline reading, "Have a Happy Vagina Day!" Administration officials intercepted the stack of papers from being delivered to the rest of the school.

Immediately following, Principal Robert Marks spoke with Editor in Chief Richard Edmond to discuss why he was pulling the paper. He claimed Edmond's own political agenda was a factor in why the paper in itself was so "obscene."

Edmond said that Marks told him the paper was "a piece of shit" that should be handed out on Hollywood Boulevard."

Edmond said the staff understands that they are producing a newspaper for a high school audience, but they are also aware that an anatomical diagram of the vagina is something each high school student has seen in their Los Angeles Unified School District mandated Health class.

An announcement was made during second period instructing teachers to not pass out the paper, as remaining papers were to be collected by the deans and vice principals. However, supportive teachers passed out the papers willingly, seeing no problem with the articles.

During third and fourth period, newspapers were still in circulation despite the efforts made by teachers and the administration.

The faculty was divided in their initial reaction to the issue. Some teachers were reported to have been ripping up the issue in front of their classes, even taking issues already in the possession of students to do so.

A number of students were passing out stacks of papers during lunch as administrators were ripping papers out of the hands of interested students as they were reading them.

Journalism advisor Coleen Bondy, who didn't want to be quoted, was instructed by Marks to not distribute any remaining issues she had in her classroom during fifth period.

10 Things Your Restaurant Won't Tell You

Competition is fierce, and eateries work every angle to capture your dining dollars. Here are some angles for you to work.

From Smart Money:

1. "It's more about the sizzle than the steak."

Business is good for the restaurant industry. Americans now spend roughly half their food budget dining out, and restaurants expect revenue of more than $537 billion in 2007. That's a 67% increase since 1997.
But it's not just our collective avoidance of the kitchen that's pumping profits: Restaurants work every angle these days, using marketing psychology to get you to spend more.

At legendary Aureole Las Vegas, spandex-clad "wine angels" retrieve bottles from a 42-foot-tall spirits tower. The thinking behind the spectacle: "Anything that gets patrons' attention will get them to spend," says restaurant designer Mark Stech-Novak.
Fast-food outlets use a high-stimulus environment to maximize the source of their profit: "It encourages faster turnover," says Stephani Robson, a senior lecturer at the Cornell School of Hotel Administration. "Specifically, the use of bright light, bright colors, upbeat music and seating that does not encourage lolling."
Even menus are rigged. "We list the item that makes the most profit first so it catches your eye," says restaurant consultant Linda Lipsky, "and bury the highest-cost item in the middle."

2. "Eating here could make you sick."

The 2006 E. coli outbreak that started at a New Jersey Taco Bell and sickened more than 60 people was traced to green onions. But food-borne illness isn't the only cause for concern: In a separate December incident, 373 people in Indianapolis got sick after eating at an Olive Garden where three employees tested positive for the highly contagious norovirus.

"You don't call out (sick) unless you're on your deathbed," says freelance chef Leah Grossman. Indeed, according to a recent study, 58% of salaried New York City restaurant workers reported going to work when sick; the number is even higher for those without benefits.

"A lot of poor, transient people work in restaurants," says Peter Francis, a co-author of industry exposé "How to Burn Down the House." "They're not giving up the $100 they'd make in a shift because they're sick."

How can you protect yourself? Check inspection results, which are often posted online by local departments of public health. Or just visit the restroom; it "tells you everything you need to know about a restaurant," Francis says.

3. "Our markups are ridiculous."

It's no secret that restaurants enjoy huge markups on certain items: Coffee, tea and sodas, for example, typically cost restaurants 15 to 20 cents per serving, and pasta, which costs pennies, can be dressed up with more expensive fare and sold for $25 a dish or more. At a fine-dining restaurant, the average cost of food is 38% to 42% of the menu price, says Kevin Moll, the CEO and president of National Food Service Advisors. In other words, most restaurants are making roughly 60% on anything they serve.

It's not all gravy though. Restaurants keep only 4 cents of every dollar spent by a customer, says Hudson Riehle, the vice president of research and information services at the National Restaurant Association. The remainder of the money, he says, is divided among food and beverage purchases, payroll, occupancy and other overhead costs.

Given the slim profit margin, many restaurants rely on savvy pricing to create the illusion of value. Putting a chicken dish on the menu for $21 will make a $15 pasta dish, where the restaurant is making a big profit, seem like a bargain, says Gregg Rapp, the owner of consulting firm MenuTechnologies.net.

4. "Big Brother is watching you . . . eat."

No one likes having their every move scrutinized, but that may be just what's happening at your favorite restaurant. Cameras are popping up everywhere, from four-star eateries to the place where you grab your lunchtime sandwich.

At historic Randy's Steakhouse in Frisco, Texas, where checks average $45 to $50, co-owner Don Burks has installed 12 cameras around the premises. Of those, two pick up activity in the dining rooms, and two are aimed at the bar.

"We've had customers stand on chairs to try to take out a camera," Burks says. "But the cameras aren't even pointed at them; they're pointed at the wine rack." Their primary purpose: deterring employee theft.

At some restaurants, however, the cameras are indeed trained on the tables. At New York City's four-star Daniel, for example, four closed-circuit cameras monitor the dining rooms, offering a bird's-eye view of every plate.

"It's about maintaining a quality of service," says Daniel spokeswoman Georgette Farkas. "With the cameras, the chef can tell when each course needs to be plated and served." So much for that romantic dinner for two.

Yelling may feel good, but when it comes to getting resolution to your consumer complaint, there are better ways to succeed.

5. "There's something fishy about our seafood."

Even when you pay top dollar for a seafood dish, you might not get what you're expecting. About 70% of the time, for example, those Maryland crab cakes on the menu weren't made using crabs from Chesapeake Bay, says James Anderson, the chairman of the Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics at the University of Rhode Island. Because of high demand, crabs are often from other Eastern states or imported from Thailand and Vietnam. (Look closely at the menu: "Maryland-style" crab is the giveaway.)

There's also the problem of outright substitution -- inexpensive fish, such as pollack, getting passed off as something pricier, like cod. How widespread is the problem? In 2006 the Daytona Beach (Fla.) News-Journal sent fish samples to a lab to prove that four out of 10 local restaurants were pawning a cheaper fish as grouper. The same lab also checked seafood from 24 U.S. cities and found that, overall, consumers have less than a 50-50 shot at being served the fish they ordered.

What can you do? Ask where the fish comes from. "If they're not sure if the fish is from Alaska or Asia, I order the beef," Anderson says.

6. "Reservation? What reservation?"

When Timothy Dillon, 34, showed up at new Chicago trattoria Terragusto for his friend's birthday, he wasn't expecting a wait. He'd made a reservation for four, then called the day of to confirm and add one more. The restaurant told him no problem, but when the party showed up, they were met with a long wait.

"After almost an hour of standing by the bar being ignored, we ended up leaving for another restaurant," Dillon says. Terragusto says it was its first week open: "We were probably working out a lot of glitches," a spokesperson says.

As Dillon discovered, a reservation isn't a guarantee. "Overbooking is almost a necessary evil," says John Fischer, associate professor of table service at the Culinary Institute of America. Restaurants calculate their average no-show percentage for any given night, then overbook the restaurant by that much, hoping it will come out even.

How to avoid Dillon's fate? It's considered poor taste to offer a tip before you're seated, Fischer says, so if it's your first time, inquire politely after 15 minutes. But go ahead and slip the manager or maître d' $10 or $20 on the way out; it should ensure you're seated promptly next time.

7. "Our specials are anything but."

"I'm very careful about ordering my food," says Rick Manson, the owner of Chef Rick's restaurant in Santa Maria, Calif. If he orders oysters, Manson says, he'll offer multiple dishes on the menu that use oysters, "to make sure I use every one of them." Nonetheless, countless variables can leave surplus ingredients at the end of the day -- which often become tomorrow's special.

"It could be the chef legitimately wants to try out something new," says Stephen Zagor, the founder of consulting firm Hospitality & Culinary Resources. "But it could also be something nearing the end of its shelf life that needs to get out of the kitchen."

How can you tell a good special from a bad one? Watch out for "an expensive item used in a way that's minimizing its flavor," Zagor says, such as a lamb chop that's been cut, braised and put into a dish where it's a supporting player.

Pastas, stews and soups containing expensive meats are also suspect. "There's an old saying in the restaurant industry," says David A. Holmes, the vice president and director of Out East Restaurant Consultants. "'Sauce and gravy cover up a lot of mistakes.'"

8. "There's no such thing as too much butter."

Think that salmon fillet you ordered for dinner is good for you? Think again. Restaurants load even their healthiest fare with butter and other calorie-heavy add-ons. Restaurant meals average 1,000 to 1,500 calories, says Milton Stokes, a registered dietitian and spokesman for the American Dietetic Association. That's roughly two-thirds of the daily average calories recommended by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. And according to a recent study, women who eat out five times a week consume an average of 290 additional calories per day.

Though most Americans assume that fast food is the worst offender, similar fare at casual sit-down restaurants can be even more caloric. The classic burger at Ruby Tuesday, for example, has a whopping 1,013 calories and 71 grams of fat. The McDonald's Big Mac, with its 540 calories and 29 grams of fat, seems downright diet-worthy by comparison.

"We butter our hamburger buns," says Julie Reid, the vice president of culinary for Ruby Tuesday, "so we tell people if they're looking to cut calories, they shouldn't eat the bun." If that sounds less than appetizing, try splitting an entrée with someone, or order an appetizer instead of a main dish.

9. "Nice tip -- too bad your waiter won't get it."

Just because you tip your waitress 10 bucks, it doesn't mean she's going home with that money. More than likely, she'll have to pass on some of it to the people who helped her serve you: The bartender might get $2, and the busboy $3 to $5. It's called a tip pool, and it's becoming standard practice in many restaurants. "It happens often that if someone leaves a voluntary tip (for their server), a significant portion of that money is going to other people," Zagor says.

According to federal law, only employees who customarily receive tips -- wait staff, hosts, bartenders and bussers -- can participate in the tip pool. But sometimes management takes a cut. In 2006, waitstaff from the Hilltop Steak House in Saugus, Mass., won $2.5 million in damages after complaining that managers dipped into their tips.

Mandatory gratuities are also divvied up. At high-end restaurants such as New York City's Per Se and Napa Valley's French Laundry, both owned by chef Thomas Keller, the practice is called service compris.

"The 20% service charge is clearly stated on the menu, and it's equally divided among the staff," says a spokesperson for both restaurants. Though the tip pool is designed to foster a team environment among staff, for customers it means something else entirely: that your gratuity isn't specifically rewarding the waiter or sommelier who provided you with exemplary service.

Who's Getting Abortions? Not Who You'd Think

More than one-third of adult American women are estimated to have had at least one abortion.

Half of the women are 25 or older; most already have a child:

In American pop culture, the face of abortion is often a frightened teenager, nervously choosing to terminate an unexpected pregnancy. The numbers tell a far more complex story in which financial stress can play a pivotal role.

Half of the roughly 1.2 million U.S. women who have abortions each year are 25 or older. Only about 17 percent are teens. About 60 percent have given birth to least one child prior to getting an abortion.

A disproportionately high number are black or Hispanic. And regardless of race, high abortion rates are linked to hard times.

“It doesn’t just happen to young people, it doesn’t necessarily have to do with irresponsibility,” said Miriam Inocencio, president of Planned Parenthood of Rhode Island. “Women face years and years of reproductive life after they’ve completed their families, and they’re at risk of an unintended pregnancy that can create an economic strain.”

Who has abortions?

Activists on both sides of the abortion debate will soon be marking the 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which established a nationwide right to abortion. Since Jan. 22, 1973, there have been roughly 50 million abortions in the United States, and more than one-third of adult women are estimated to have had at least one.

Who are these women?

Much of the public debate focuses on teens, as evidenced by the constant wranging over parental notification laws and movies like the current hit “Juno,” in which the pregnant heroine heads to an abortion clinic, then decides to have the baby.

In fact, the women come from virtually every demographic sector. But year after year the statistics reveal that black women and economically struggling women — who have above-average rates of unintended pregnancies — are far more likely than others to have abortions. About 13 percent of American women are black, yet new figures from the Centers for Disease Control show they account for 35 percent of the abortions.

Black anti-abortion activists depict this phenomenon in dire terms — “genocide” and “holocaust,” for example. But often the women getting the abortions say they act in the interests of children they already have.

“It wasn’t a hard decision for me to make, because I knew where I wanted to go in my life — I’ve never regretted it,” said Kimberly Mathias, 28, an African-American single mother from Missouri.

She had an abortion at 19, when she already raising a 2-year-old son.

“It wasn’t hard to realize I didn’t want another child at that time,” Mathias said. “I was trying to take care of the one I had, and going to college and working at the same time.”

She was able to graduate, now has an insurance job, and — still a single mother — has a 3-year-old son as well as her first-born, now 11.

'A silent killer'

By contrast, Alveda King, a niece of Martin Luther King Jr., calls herself a “reformed murderer” for undergoing two abortions when she was young.

Now an outspoken anti-abortion campaigner, King says the best way to reduce abortions among black women is to dissuade more of them from premarital sex.

“We give free sex education, free condoms, free birth control,” she complained. “That’s almost like permission to have free sex, and the higher the rate of sexual activity, the higher the rate of unintended pregnancy.”

Anti-abortion activist Day Gardner of the National Black Pro-Life Union says many blacks are unaware of their community’s high abortion rate.

“We don’t talk about it,” Gardner said. “It’s a silent killer among us.”

She contends that abortion-rights supporters tempt black women into abortion by suggesting they can’t afford to raise the child. But Gardner also acknowledges that some black women make this argument on their own.

“We had the whole civil rights movement — now we’re in a place where we’re moving further toward equality,” Gardner said. “So women think, ‘For once, I can see the American dream. I can have the house and the job, but it would postpone it to have another child. I can’t afford to take time off.’ ”

Dr. Vanessa Cullins, a black physician who is Planned Parenthood’s national vice president for medical affairs, said the allegations of “black genocide” do not help women meet day-to-day challenges.

“These actions take attention away from medically proven ways to reduce unintended pregnancy — comprehensive sex education, affordable birth control, and open and honest conversations about relationships,” she said

Looking beyond racial dividing lines, Cullins views the right to abortion as an important component in the ability of all American women to determine the right size for their family.

“Groups that become assimilated in U.S. culture and experience economic opportunities naturally decide to limit family size, because they want to take part in the American dream,” she said. “If you’re a single mother, achieving the dream is all the harder, so it makes sense to limit family size so you can shower as much support as you can on the children you have.”

Financial pressures

Georgette Forney, who had an abortion when she was 16 and is now an anti-abortion campaigner leading Anglicans for Life, says she often sees economic pressures triggering abortions, even in middle-class families.

“In one situation, the husband was adamant that they were on track to pay for their two sons’ college education, and a third child would throw off his whole calculation,” Forney recounted. “So that baby was aborted and that woman was devastated. It was a five-year process to recover.”

Forney said she also encountered a single mother who was worried she might lose custody of her daughter in light of a suit by the biological father. The woman then became pregnant, Forney said, and had an abortion in violation of her own beliefs because she feared having a second child would jeopardize prospects for keeping her daughter.

“We’ve begun to depend on abortions,” Forney said. “We feel we have to choose between our unborn child and our born children.”

Martha Girard, on the other hand, says she’s appalled by the notion that women should lose the right to choose.

A hospital ultrasound technician from Pleasant Prairie, Wis., and a mother of three, Girard had an abortion two years ago, at the age of 44, when she mistakenly thought she was too old to get pregnant.

Having been through three difficult pregnancies previously, and coping with a mentally disabled eldest son, she felt abortion was the prudent choice.

“I knew that this pregnancy would end up badly — I could feel it — and we’ve already got enough problems with the mentally ill son,” Girard said.

“I was very sad and depressed the first week,” she added. “But because it’s hard on you emotionally and some women regret it, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong, that someone else should decide for you.”

The Journal of Family Issues published a report earlier this month asserting that women often choose abortion because of their wish to be good parents.

That means women who have no children want the conditions to be right when they do, and women who already are mothers want to care responsibly for their existing children, said the lead author, Rachel Jones, a researcher with the Guttmacher Institute.

“These women believed that it was more responsible to terminate a pregnancy than to have a child whose health and welfare could be in question,” Jones said.

Number of abortions declining

Even among many abortion opponents, the Guttmacher Institute — which supports abortion rights — is considered the nation’s best source of abortion statistics.

Federal statistics do not include California, the most populous state, because its government does not provide data. But Guttmacher researchers surveyed abortion providers there as well as in other states to produce the latest national estimate of 1.2 million abortions in 2005. That’s down from a peak of 1.6 million in 1990 but still represents more than 20 percent of all pregnancies.

One of the Guttmacher’s top researchers, Stanley Henshaw, said the recent drop may disguise the fact abortion rates remain relatively high for black and Hispanic women. He believes the most effective countermeasure would be wider availability of contraceptives such as intrauterine device, or IUDs, that don’t require attention as frequently as condoms or birth-control pills.

Though abortion is commonplace across the country, urban areas have far higher rates than rural areas where access to abortion providers can be difficult.

New York, New Jersey, California, Delaware, Nevada, Maryland and Florida had the highest abortion rates in 2005, according to the new Guttmacher report released this week. Wyoming, Idaho, Kentucky, South Dakota and Mississippi had the lowest rates — the latter two states have just a single abortion clinic in operation.

Susan Hill, founder of the National Women’s Health Organization that runs the remaining Mississippi clinic, says the statistics may not fully reflect a subgroup of relatively affluent women who obtain unreported abortions through their private doctors.

“In Mississippi, it’s the poor women who don’t have access to that who have to run through the maze of protesters screaming and yelling abuse,” Hill said. “Wealthier women can be more creative about their alternatives.”

According to Guttmacher data, the abortion rate among women living below the federal poverty level is more than four times higher that among women from middle-income and affluent households.

An increasing number of women avoid surgery by using the RU-486 abortion pill or other early medication — these now account for about 13 percent of all abortions.

Of all U.S. women getting abortions, about 54 percent are doing so for the first time, while one-fifth have had at least two previous abortions. Of those over 20, the majority have attended college. Almost a third have been married at some point. About 60 percent have at least one child; one-third have two or more.

“I don’t think most people understand that these are women who have families, who are making a very serious decision about their reproductive health,” said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “The stereotype is that the decision is made lightly. It is not.”

Strikers Complain as Leno Dominates Late-Night

The New York Times reports:

Jay Leno made a triumphant return to late-night television Wednesday night, easily dominating the ratings competition over his chief rival, David Letterman, and delivering a traditional full-length monologue — even though he was performing without his team of 19 writers.

Members of the Writers Guild picketed the NBC studio in Burbank, Calif.

But how Mr. Leno was able to accomplish that feat has become the subject of an increasingly fractious dispute between the NBC star and the Writers Guild of America, which has been on strike against the movie studios and television networks for the past two months.

The Writers Guild of America West and the Writers Guild of America East moved Thursday to prevent Mr. Leno from performing any more monologues, while NBC executives said Mr. Leno would ignore the strike rules set up by the writers and would tell his scripted jokes as planned on Thursday’s broadcast of “The Tonight Show.”

The dispute could affect the other late-night shows that are without writers because of the strike. Both “Late Night with Conan O’Brien” on NBC and “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on ABC returned to the air this week, and their hosts did not perform scripted monologues.

Two shows on Comedy Central, “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” and “The Colbert Report” with Stephen Colbert, are scheduled to return Monday. If Mr. Leno is able to continue to perform material he writes for himself, it might open the door for the other hosts to do the same.

The clash over Mr. Leno’s monologue comes at a critical time in the two-month strike for the networks and the guilds. Ratings for the highly lucrative late-night talk shows rose sharply on Wednesday, bringing smiles to the faces of network and advertising executives.

The shows had experienced steep declines in viewership when the guild began to strike in early November, halting production on the shows of Mr. Leno, Mr. Letterman, Mr. O’Brien, Mr. Kimmel and Craig Ferguson.

“Everybody’s happy that the late-night shows are back,” said Steve Lanzano, the chief operating officer of MPG, a division of Havas, the global communications agency. “It’s going to mean more ratings points in the marketplace, which has taken a real hit in the past year.”

Late-night talk shows are also an important beachhead for the striking writers, who see the hosts, particularly Mr. Letterman, as sympathetic to their cause.

In a telephone interview Thursday night, Patric M. Verrone, the president of the Writers Guild of America West, said that with strike talks at a standstill, there had been some hope that the deal that allowed Mr. Letterman to return with writers would help move the situation toward a settlement. But, he said, “instead the companies are choosing to pit these guys against us.”

The conflict seems about to play out on late-night’s biggest show, “The Tonight Show.” Mr. Leno said on the air Wednesday that he was following the rules set down by the writers before the strike and was writing his own jokes for the monologue. In their outline of what could be permitted during the strike, the writers expressly excluded guild members from writing any material for use by any of the companies affected by the strike, even material written for their own use.

NBC executives said Thursday that Mr. Leno and his writers held a meeting on Monday with Mr. Verrone and that Mr. Leno had told Mr. Verrone he was going to write his monologue material himself. According to the NBC executives, Mr. Verrone gave Mr. Leno his approval.

But Thursday the guild challenged that interpretation of what had happened in the meeting. Mr. Verrone said, “The sense of it was, Jay was going to play by the book.” He said that Mr. Leno had brought up his work as a guest host in a strike in 1988, and “I can understand that there may have been some confusion for Jay about that.”

He said that he had a telephone conversation with Mr. Leno on Thursday, and “I made it absolutely clear that he cannot write for the show.”

One of Mr. Leno’s writers who attended the meeting with Mr. Verrone supported Mr. Leno’s version that he had been given some assurance that he could write his monologue.

“Jay said, ‘Let me get this clear: I’m allowed to write my monologue,’” said the writer, who asked not to be identified because he was a strike supporter and did not want publicly to challenge the guild’s version of events. “Verrone said, ‘Well, since you are taking one for the team, we won’t hassle you about that.’”

The writer added, “There was no way Jay could have misinterpreted what was being said.”

Neal Sacharow, a spokesman for the Writers Guild of America West, said that after Mr. Verrone clarified the strike rules, it would be “a clear violation” if Mr. Leno wrote and performed a monologue on Thursday night’s show.

Asked what the guild would do if Mr. Leno performed a monologue anyway, Mr. Verrone said any violation of strike rules would be brought before a Strike Rules Compliance Committee.

NBC executives said Thursday evening that Mr. Leno, who was scheduled to tape his show at 8:30 p.m. Eastern time, would continue to write and perform his monologue based on the contract between the guild and all production companies that was in effect when the strike began. That contract cannot be superseded by the strike rules imposed by the guild, said Andrea Hartman, executive vice president and deputy legal counsel of NBC.

“The strike rules cannot contradict the scope and express terms of the overall agreement,” Ms. Hartman said.

According to an appendix in the contract, which NBC said remained in effect during the strike, the definition of “literary material” specifically excludes “material written by the person who delivers it on the air.”

Mr. Verrone said the guild interpreted that rule differently, saying that it covered only performers who were not also hired as writers for a production and that Mr. Leno was listed as a writer on his own show.

Media buyers and network representatives said movie studios and other advertising clients were enthusiastic about the return of original programming. Among the studios, Walt Disney Pictures, Warner Brothers, Lionsgate Entertainment Corporation and the Weinstein Company advertised Wednesday during “The Late Show.”

The late-night shows enjoyed significant viewership increases on Wednesday, presumably because viewers were curious about how Mr. Leno would perform and what Mr. Letterman would say about the strike.

“The Tonight Show” averaged 7.2 million viewers, almost three million more than its season-to-date average, and “The Late Show” averaged 5.5 million viewers, nearly two million more than its average.

The strong ratings for the hosts’ returns belie the sagging advertising market for late-night television. Before the strike began the late-night shows had shed approximately 10 percent of their viewers. Two months of forced repeats — at one point NBC showed an episode of “The Tonight Show” from 1992 — exacerbated the declines.

The income from late-night TV is significant. A 30-second commercial on Mr. Leno’s show costs roughly $50,000, according to media buyers. Both “The Tonight Show” and “The Late Show” were expected to earn more than $200 million in ad revenue in 2007, according to estimates by TNS Media Intelligence.

Mr. Leno has led Mr. Letterman since 1995. Some observers expect Mr. Letterman’s access to writers and ability to book prominent entertainers to increase his viewership. Media buyers said the greater test for both hosts would come later this month.

“In the coming weeks, if Leno is unable to secure guests, I think there could be a narrowing of the gap between the two shows,” said Shari Anne Brill, senior vice president of the media agency Carat USA.

Other late-night shows also showed ratings gains on Wednesday. “Late Night with Conan O’Brien” averaged 2.8 million viewers, up 55 percent from the season averages. “The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson” averaged 2.2 million viewers, up 31 percent. The ABC show “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” with 1.8 million viewers, was down slightly from its season average.

Anarchists in the Aisles? Stores Provide a Stage

Stocked with messages - Artists, would-be advertisers use unsuspecting stores as medium



The New York Times reports:

This is the season of frenetic shopping, but for a devious few people it’s also the season of spirited shopdropping.

Otherwise known as reverse shoplifting, shopdropping involves surreptitiously putting things in stores, rather than illegally taking them out, and the motivations vary.

Anti-consumerist artists slip replica products packaged with political messages onto shelves while religious proselytizers insert pamphlets between the pages of gay-and-lesbian readings at book stores.

Self-published authors sneak their works into the “new releases” section, while personal trainers put their business cards into weight-loss books, and aspiring professional photographers make homemade cards — their Web site address included, of course — and covertly plant them into stationery-store racks.

“Everyone else is pushing their product, so why shouldn’t we?” said Jeff Eyrich, a producer for several independent bands, who puts stacks of his bands’ CDs — marked “free” — on music racks at Starbucks whenever the cashiers look away.

Though not new, shopdropping has grown in popularity in recent years, especially as artists have gathered to swap tactics at Web sites like Shopdropping.net, and groups like the Anti-Advertising Agency, a political art collective, do training workshops open to the public.

Retailers fear the practice may annoy shoppers and raise legal or safety concerns, particularly when it involves children’s toys or trademarked products.

“Our goal at all times is to provide comfortable and distraction-free shopping,” said Bethany Zucco, a spokeswoman for Target. “We think this type of activity would certainly not contribute to that goal.” She said she did not know of any shopdropping at Target stores.

But Packard Jennings does. An artist who lives in Oakland, Calif., he said that for the last seven months he had been working on a new batch of his Anarchist action figure that he began shopdropping this week at Target and Wal-Mart stores in the San Francisco Bay Area.

“When better than Christmas to make a point about hyper-consumerism?” asked Mr. Jennings, 37, whose action figure comes with tiny accessories including a gas mask, bolt cutter, and two Molotov cocktails, and looks convincingly like any other doll on most toy-store shelves. Putting it in stores and filming people as they try to buy it as they interact with store clerks, Mr. Jennings said he hoped to show that even radical ideology gets commercialized. He said for safety reasons he retrieves the figures before customers take them home.

Jason Brody, lead singer for an independent pop-rock band in the East Village, said his group recently altered its shopdropping tactics to cater to the holiday rush.

Normally the band, the Death of Jason Brody, slips promotional CD singles between the pages of The Village Voice newspaper and into the racks at large music stores. But lately, band members have been slipping into department stores and putting stickers with logos for trendy designers like Diesel, John Varvatos and 7 for All Mankind on their CDs, which they then slip into the pockets of designer jeans or place on counters.

“Bloomingdale’s and 7 for All Mankind present the Death of Jason Brody, our pick for New York band to watch in 2008,” read a sticker on one of the CDs placed near a register at Bloomingdales. “As thanks for trying us on, we’re giving you this special holiday gift.” Bloomingdales and 7 for All Mankind declined to comment.

For pet store owners, the holidays usher in a form of shopdropping with a touch of buyer’s remorse. What seemed like a cute gift idea at the time can end up being dumped back at a store, left discretely to roam the aisles.

“After Easter, there’s a wave of bunnies; after Halloween, it’s black cats; after Christmas, it’s puppies,” said Don Cowan, a spokesman for the store chain Petco, which in the month after each of those holidays sees 100 to 150 pets abandoned in its aisles or left after hours in cages in front of stores. Snakes have been left in crates, mice and hamsters surreptitiously dropped in dry aquariums, even a donkey left behind after a store’s annual pet talent show, Mr. Cowan said.

Bookstores are especially popular for self-promotion and religious types of shopdropping.

At BookPeople in Austin, Tex., local authors have been putting bookmarks advertising their own works in books on similar topics. At Mac’s Backs Paperbacks, a used bookstore in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, employees are dealing with the influx of shopdropped works by local poets and playwrights by putting a price tag on them and leaving them on the shelves.

At Powell’s Books in Portland, Ore., religious groups have been hitting the magazines in the science section with fliers featuring Christian cartoons, while their adversaries have been moving Bibles from the religion section to the fantasy/science-fiction section.

This week an arts group in Oakland, the Center for Tactical Magic, began shopdropping neatly folded stacks of homemade T-shirts into Wal-Mart and Target stores in the San Francisco Bay Area. The shirts feature radical images and slogans like one with the faces of Karl Marx, Che Guevara and Mikhail Bakunin, a Russian anarchist. It says, “Peace on Earth. After we overthrow capitalism.”

“Our point is to put a message, not a price tag, on them,” said Aaron Gach, 33, a spokesman for the group.

Mr. Jennings’s anarchist action figure met with a befuddled reaction from a Target store manager on Wednesday in El Cerrito, Calif.

“I don’t think this is a product that we sell,” the manager said as Mr. Jennings pretended to be a customer trying to buy it. “It’s definitely antifamily, which is not what Target is about.”

One of the first reports of shopdropping was in 1989, when a group called the Barbie Liberation Organization sought to make a point about sexism in children’s toys by swapping the voice hardware of Barbie dolls with those in GI Joe figures before putting the dolls back on store shelves.

Scott Wolfson, a spokesman for the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission, said he was not sure if shopdropping was illegal but that some forms of it could raise safety concerns because the items left on store shelves might not abide by labeling requirements and federal safety standards.

Ryan Watkins-Hughes, 28, a photographer from Brooklyn, teamed up with four other artists to shopdrop canned goods with altered labels at Whole Foods stores in New York City this week. “In the holidays, people get into this head-down, plow-through-the-shopping autopilot mode,” Mr. Watkins-Hughes said “‘I got to get a dress for Cindy, get a stereo for Uncle John, go buy canned goods for the charity drive and get back home.’”

“Warhol took the can into the gallery. We bring the art to the can,” he said, adding that the labels consisted of photographs of places he had traveled combined with the can’s original bar code so that people could still buy them.

“What we do is try to inject a brief moment of wonder that helps wake them up from that rushed stupor,” he said, pausing to add, “That’s the true holiday spirit, isn’t it?”

New Orleans Council Votes For Demolition Of Housing

The NY Times reports:

After protesters clashed violently with the police inside and outside the New Orleans City Council chambers on Thursday, the Council voted unanimously to allow the federal government to demolish 4,500 apartments in the four biggest public housing projects here.

The Council also called on the Department of Housing and Urban Development to reopen some apartments in the closed projects immediately and to rebuild all of the public housing units that it bulldozes. The agency plans to replace barracks-style projects, known as “the bricks,” with mixed-income developments.

“We need affordable housing in this city,” said Shelley Stephenson Midura, a Council member who proposed the resolution that was adopted. But, she added, “public housing ought not to be the warehouse for the poor.”

Advocates for public housing residents contended that the agency’s plan would not provide enough housing for the 3,000 families who lived in the projects before Hurricane Katrina, almost all of them black. Many of them have not been able to return to the city, and some protesters said they were being deliberately excluded from New Orleans.

“The issue is and the question remains, who’s in the mix,” said the Rev. Torin T. Sanders, pastor of the Sixth Baptist Church, referring to the plan for mixed-income housing. He and other speakers at the four-hour hearing before the vote said past redevelopment efforts had shut out most public housing residents.

The city’s shortage of low-cost housing was only going to get worse in the coming months, as the federal government tried to move more than 30,000 people out of government-owned trailers, said Courtney Cowart, strategic director of disaster response for the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana.

But representatives of the residents’ councils at three of the projects spoke earlier in the hearing, describing the poor conditions at the complexes before the storm and expressing their support for the new plans.

“It’s about being able to walk into a house and say this is a house, not a project,” said Donna Johnigan, a resident at the B. W. Cooper Apartments, which the government began to demolish last week.

The future of public housing in New Orleans has been a subject of debate in this storm-scarred city, involving race, money, history, the right to return and who gets to make the decisions.

That the three black members and four white members on the City Council joined to support the demolition seemed to echo a widely held feeling here, crossing racial lines, that the old housing projects were deeply dysfunctional for their residents and for the people who lived nearby.

Mistrust of the government was voiced by many of the speakers who opposed the demolition. Supporters said most of the protesters were people who did not live in New Orleans, much less in the four housing projects.

Police officers tried to keep protesters out of the Council chambers once all the seats were filled. Demonstrators tried to push through some iron gates to get in when the police used what appeared to be pepper spray and stun guns; at least two protesters needed medical treatment.

There was also a brief fight inside the chambers, and the police ejected some demonstrators. About 15 protesters were arrested, the police said, mostly on charges of disturbing the peace.

Raising Children Behind Bars

The NY Times reports:

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 created a far-sighted partnership between the federal government and the states that agreed to remake often barbaric juvenile justice systems in exchange for federal aid. Unfortunately, those gains have been steadily rolled back since the 1990s when states began sending ever larger numbers of juveniles to adult jails — where they face a high risk of being battered, raped or pushed to suicide. The act is due to be reauthorized this year, and Congress needs to use that opportunity to reverse this destructive trend.
As incredible as it seems, many states regard a child as young as 10 as competent to stand trial in juvenile court. More than 40 states regard children as young as 14 as “of age” and old enough to stand trial in adult court. The scope of the problem is laid out in a new report entitled Jailing Juveniles from the Campaign for Youth Justice, an advocacy group based in Washington. Statistics are notoriously hard to get, but perhaps as many as 150,000 young people under the age of 18 are incarcerated in adult jails in any given year.

As many as half of the young people who are transferred to the adult system are never convicted as adults. Many are never convicted at all. By the time the process has run its course, however, one in five of these young people will have spent more than six months in adult jails.

Some jails try to protect young inmates by placing them in isolation, where they are locked in small cells for 23 hours a day. This worsens mental disorders. The study says that young people are 36 times more likely to commit suicide in an adult jail than in a juvenile facility. Young people who survive adult jail too often return home as damaged and dangerous people. Studies show that they are far more likely to commit violent crimes — and to end up back inside — than those who are handled through the juvenile courts.

The rush to criminalize children has set the country on a dangerous path. Congress must now reshape the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act so that it provides the states with the money and the expertise they need to develop more enlightened juvenile justice policies. For starters, it should rewrite the law to prohibit the confinement of children in adult jails.

On Veterans Day, A Sobering Look At The Iraq War's Toll

Although average U.S. soldier in Iraq is older than average Vietnam soldier, those being killed and injured are disproportionately young.

MTV reports:

Monday (November 12) marks the observed Veterans Day — and also the 25th anniversary of the dedication of "The Wall," the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C. And on the holiday, the enduring toll the battle in Iraq has taken on American troops can be summed up by one phrase: the Invisible War.

That's how Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and author of the Iraq memoir "Chasing Ghosts," refers to the war that has been raging since 2003 and has had a startlingly different effect on veterans returning than the war it's most often compared to, Vietnam.

"This is not a drafted army, it's a professional force, so folks are staying in longer, they're older and they're more likely to have families," he said of the average age of Iraq warriors, which is around 27. "But those who are being killed and injured are disproportionately young — the people you played soccer with and went to high school with."

Another reason Rieckhoff calls the Iraq war "invisible" is that while 12 percent of the U.S. population served in World War II, less than 1 percent have suited up for Iraq. "The numbers are less in terms of casualties [than Vietnam or World War II], because the numbers overall are smaller. That means less people are being impacted, so our generation is uniquely disconnected from the war and how it's affecting veterans."

Also, unlike Vietnam, where soldiers typically did one tour and were rotated back home, some Iraq troops are returning to the front three or four times for long stretches, with many of the fighters becoming disconnected from what's going on in society back home, making for a hard time re-integrating when they return. "Here, people are worried about 'American Idol,' and over there they're ducking for cover in Fallujah," Rieckhoff said. Though medical advances and the use of body armor are helping to save the lives of Iraqi soldiers who might have died in previous wars, Rieckhoff said traumatic brain injuries could end up impacting 10-20 percent of veterans, a number that might end up between 150,000 and 300,000 people.

President Bush has often resisted comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq, but the two biggest wars fought by the United States in the past 40 years share at least one sobering similarity: the toll they've taken on American troops and their loved ones.

The following figures are compiled from Globalsecurity.org, Time, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Combat Area Casualty File, National Archives, Walter Reed Medical Center, Discover, the Iraq Body Counts Web site, The New York Times, The American War Library and Defense Manpower Data Center:

» Number of soldiers who have died in combat:
Vietnam: 58,148
Iraq: 3,859

» Average age of soldiers killed in combat:
Vietnam: 23
Iraq: 27

» Total number of soldiers deployed:
Vietnam: More than 9 million (1965-1975); 543,000 at peak
Iraq: 1.5 million (2003-2007); 162,000 at peak

» Wounded in action:
Vietnam: More than 300,000, with just over 150,000 requiring hospitalization
Iraq: 28,451

» Women killed in war theater:
Vietnam: 8
Iraq: 92

» Missing in action:
Vietnam: 2,300
Iraq: 4

» Mental-health problems:
Vietnam: 18.7 percent of Vietnam veterans suffer from a stress disorder
Iraq: One in three Iraq veterans will face mental-health issues or post-traumatic stress disorder; nearly a quarter of all U.S. troops serving in Iraq are coming home with problems requiring mental health or medical treatment.

» Civilian casualties:
Vietnam: Between 2 and 5 million
Iraq: Officially 76,000-83,000 since 2003, with unofficial estimates of up to 655,000

Another major difference between Iraq and Vietnam, according to Rieckhoff, is that Iraq veterans are returning even more confused than their peers when it comes to the mood in hometowns and bases. "People say, 'I hate this war, how can I support the troops?' " he said of a phrase he hears often. "I say, 'You don't have to support the war, but support the warriors.'

"I think the American public understands that, but there's still confusion, anger and anxiety around it and soldiers are coming back and saying, 'I just don't want to deal with it,' " he continued. "So they want to be around people who are like them and understand them, and that's isolating. I walked around New York today and this doesn't feel like a country at war. I was at a Veterans Day parade on Sunday and there were 20,000 people there and 70,000 at the Giants game. That's why this is an invisible war: When they come home and put that uniform on the shelf, there's nothing that tells anyone, 'I was in the war.' Not everyone comes back wounded, but they all come back changed."

Pregnant Woman Killed in Mass L.A. Street Fight

The Guardian reports:

A planned street fight involving 30 women in Los Angles ended in tragedy with the death of a woman who was eight months pregnant, police announced today.
She was killed in front of dozens of spectators, after another woman involved in the brawl rammed her car into her. The driver has been charged with murder.

Two other women were injured in the incident, which happened yesterday.

The driver of the car, Unique Bishop, 21, fled the scene, but she later turned herself in, police said.

"It was totally an intentional act to kill the woman. It was the driver's way of settling the dispute. It was a horrific act," said LAPD Deputy Chief Charlie Beck.
Police said the cause of the dispute is unclear, but it was part of a planned confrontation between two groups of women in their early 20s.

Witnesses told police they saw women shouting at each other and fighting in the car park of a discount store. The fight then moved on to the street and into a petrol station.

Dozens of people gathered at the petrol station and watched as Ms Bishop got into her car and drove it into the group. One of the victims was pinned against another car, police said.

It is unclear whether the dead woman's unborn baby survived. Another victim was in critical condition and expected to lose her leg, authorities said. None of the victims' identities were released.

"We have seen women around gangs before, but we haven't seen anything like this event before," said a police commander, Pat Gannon.

The Price of a Four-Star Rating

Katy McLaughlin explains how chefs and restaurant owners are paying more attention to food bloggers these days, and in some cases showing respect -- or fear. Plus, see a list of Web sites that can be useful guides to good food and restaurants -- especially if you know where each site stands on graft.

The WSJ reports:

Dine, a contemporary American restaurant in Chicago, has been open for less than two years. But on one popular Web site, it is already rated half a star shy of Charlie Trotter's.

How did Dine garner such favorable reviews? One thing that probably didn't hurt: It fed many of the reviewers free. Last August, Dine spent about $1,500 on an event for members of Yelp, a Web site where consumers post reviews and rate restaurants. The nearly 100 members were treated to an open bar, duck roulade appetizers and red velvet cupcakes for dessert. As a bonus, they all received certificates for discounts on subsequent meals. The result: a torrent of favorable reviews on Yelp. Most reviewers mentioned that they attended a Yelp event, though few highlighted that the food and drink was free.

"I think if I was picking up the tab I wouldn't enjoy it as much," says Leigh Kelsey, a 28-year-old Chicago file clerk at a law firm who attended the event and posted positive comments on Yelp. A spokeswoman for Dine says attendees were not required to write reviews of any nature, positive or negative.

As online food sites become increasingly influential in the restaurant business, chefs and owners are plying bloggers with free meals to get good write-ups. Some are also posting favorable reviews about themselves on popular Web sites or becoming Internet scribes.

Among those using the tactics are some of the biggest names in the business. Terrance Brennan, co-owner and chef of New York's Artisanal Bistro and Picholine, hosted a cheese class for bloggers last year, waiving the usual $75-a-person fee. Bill Telepan, chef and co-owner of Telepan in New York, donated a $200, four-course meal to one influential blogger's online contest. And in Washington, the Park Hyatt's Blue Duck Tavern says it invited a customer back for a free Father's Day meal after she posted a negative comment on the Washington Post's Web site. (In a follow-up post, the diner wrote, "We will definitely return to Blue Duck Tavern," not mentioning that she had been invited free.)

Traditionally, top critics for magazines and newspapers have tried to dine anonymously and paid their own way. The goal: to ensure that the review reflects the way average customers can expect to be treated. Some prominent reviewers have even donned wigs to conceal their identities.

In recent years, online reviews written by the masses have emerged as an alternative. They promised honest, unbiased recommendations free from the potential snobbery and insider-ism of professional food writers. But now, restaurateurs are trying to woo the people who write about food online, creating a new crop of insiders.

Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman says that "Elite Squad" events, such as the one hosted by Dine, don't guarantee positive reviews, and that attendees are asked to disclose any freebies. Still, Mr. Stoppelman is concerned that some reviews could appear influenced by the events. Yelp is now testing a system in which reviews of events are posted separately from regular reviews, so that readers will clearly understand when the consumer didn't pay. In addition to restaurants, Yelp visitors can review many other services, from dentists to beauty salons.

There are now some 21,000 food blogs, according to Technorati, a company that tracks and analyzes blogs; in August, 40.5 million people visited the top 25 food-related Web sites, according to comScore, an Internet analyst. These include sites like Chow, which has a message board, Chowhound, that allows people to share tips with each other. On eGullet, foodies share pictures of their latest meals and debate issues like how to behave in a three-star French restaurant.

There are food sites for every gastronomic obsession, from Curdnerds, founded by a Brooklyn cheese enthusiast, to Chocolateandzucchini, the food diary of a young French woman. There are blogs hosted by self-appointed critics, like Restaurantgirl or Amateur Gourmet in New York, and gossipy blogs like Tablehopper, based in San Francisco. Many bloggers don't hide who they are, actively seek out relationships with chefs and accept free meals.

"I accept the comps because I don't have a budget," says Marcia Gagliardi, who writes Tablehopper. She says she eats free about two-thirds of the time, and that complimentary meals do not sway her opinion, writing on the site: "Just because a restaurant is hosting me...it doesn't mean I will write a glowing review."

Traditional critics often say they won't write a review until a restaurant has been open at least a month or so, and then only after dining multiple times. But blogs and message-board postings can turn one bad meal into a public fiasco.

Last fall, Amateur Gourmet blogger Adam Roberts slammed the New York restaurant Le Cirque in a blog entry entitled "Only a Jerk Would Eat at Le Cirque." Mr. Adams, who was dining with his parents, recounted how he felt snubbed when the restaurant gave them a remote table at the back and the owner refused to hobnob with his mother. Readers responded with their own tales of unpleasant meals at Le Cirque and sympathy for Mr. Adams.

To manage the debacle, the restaurant tracked down Mr. Roberts' parents in Boca Raton, Fla., and mailed them an invitation to return for a meal on the house. Le Cirque co-owner Marco Maccioni says he wanted to make up for the bad experience.

Mr. Adams then penned another column about Le Cirque, and posted it on a blog called Serious Eats. In it, he described how the family was pampered during their subsequent meal. He also disclosed that the meal was free.

About three years ago, Mr. Adams, 28, was an unhappy law school student with a hankering to write and an interest in food. He started writing blog posts from the perspective of a wide-eyed innocent in the world of gourmet cooking and dining, and says he was stunned when the blog became popular. He now lives off of advertising income from it, as well as free-lance writing jobs and a recently published book titled "The Amateur Gourmet."

Bill Telepan says donating a free meal last October to the blog Restaurantgirl was his way of saying thank you. The blog was launched last year by food enthusiast Danyelle Freeman. Ms. Freeman, says Mr. Telepan, had "been very nice to me. She did an interview with me, she's mentioned me in good terms." Mr. Telepan says he regularly contributes his time and energy to food magazines, and considered his donation to Restaurantgirl part of these promotional activities.

Ms. Freeman is one of a growing number of bloggers who have crossed the line into print media. In August, the New York Daily News hired her as its new restaurant critic. She says she stopped taking free meals before getting the new job to give her reviews more credibility.

Chefs say there's another upside to getting chummy with bloggers: advice on improving the food. In San Francisco, Chef Robbie Lewis of Bacar restaurant says he considers Ms. Gagliardi, of Tablehopper, "a friend" at this point. After hosting her at a "friends and family dinner" -- a meal to try out new dishes on close associates about a month after starting as the executive chef at the restaurant -- Mr. Lewis took her advice. He changed the way he plated a roasted baby leek dish, so it was easier for diners to get a taste of poached egg and sauce with each bite.

"I can't get feedback from other critics before publication," says Mr. Lewis. Ms. Gagliardi didn't write a subsequent review, but frequently mentions events at Bacar on her site.

It's relatively easy for restaurants to ingratiate themselves to key food bloggers. Publicists across the industry say they now include bloggers and food Web site forum hosts on their media lists, and regularly invite them to opening parties, free meals and other events.

Sites that rely on consumers to post reviews and rate restaurants are vulnerable to another concern: positive comments written by restaurant employees who don't disclose their affiliation with the restaurant they're writing about. Zagat Survey, for instance, has been criticized for a system that could potentially allow staffers of a restaurant to submit positive reviews. Co-founders Tim and Nina Zagat say methods have been implemented to make sure this doesn't happen. They will not disclose what these methods are, but say they have dropped restaurants from guides when they discover that the owners have asked staff to submit reviews.

Ed Levine, CEO of Left Bank Brasserie Group, which owns six restaurants in the San Francisco Bay Area, says he was delighted when he read a Yelp post about Tanglewood, his year-old upscale American restaurant in San Jose. The reviewer wrote that he was "pleasantly surprised" that "portion size has changed dramatically," and service had improved. Previously, the restaurant had been blasted by Yelpers complaining about high prices and small portions. As a result, Mr. Levine lowered the cost of entrees and beefed up portions.

"I read it and said, 'Oh my God, the changes we made have really paid off! We nailed it!' " Mr. Levine recalls. However, he says he was later tipped off by a senior staff member that the review was posted by a waiter at the restaurant. Mr. Levine says he doesn't ask staff to post positive reviews on Web sites, though he does ask them to fill out Zagat surveys about the restaurant.

Scott Rodrick, president of Rodrick Management Group, which owns and operates 20 restaurants on the East and West Coast, says that a couple of months ago he noticed several Yelp postings about how friendly the bar staff is at one of his restaurants. That struck him as suspicious: Only a short while before, he'd reprimanded the bartending team for being aloof to customers. "I'm sure it's a case where they told their friends that 'my boss sat me down,' " Mr. Rodrick says.

Tom Walton, a San Francisco Bay Area restaurant publicist, says he encourages his clients to enlist their staff, friends and family to "stuff the ballot box to counter bad Web reviews." It is the only way, Mr. Walton says, to fight back against anonymous reviews that assail a business, whether justified or not.

One Web site set says it has set up a system for policing postings. Eater, a restaurant news and gossip site, posts reviews it suspects of coming from restaurateurs themselves in its "Adventures in Shilling" feature. Editors then assign passages a "shill probability" rating, up to 100%.

Eater says it does not allow writers to accept free meals when they are reviewing a restaurant. It does allow them to accept free food, including appetizers served at opening parties or meals eaten with a publicist, if they are not specifically writing a review of the restaurant. The site requires writers to disclose when they get something free. EGullet says it asks its forum hosts to disclose when they got anything free from a restaurant.

Chowhound says it does not allow posts from anyone connected to a restaurant or from consumers who have received complimentary meals. Staff writers for Chow can accept a free meal from a restaurant, though not when they're writing a review of the restaurant, says Jane Goldman, the site's editor in chief. Ms. Goldman says it isn't financially feasible for the site to do otherwise. She says if she had the resources, she wouldn't allow contributors to accept free goods or services, "because it subtly influences the recipient."

Recently, a handful of restaurateurs have become outspoken critics of what they view as unfair posts. David Haskell, managing director of West Hollywood's BIN 8945, which specializes in wine pairings, says that about six months ago he attempted to respond to what he viewed as incorrect comments posted about his restaurant on Chowhound. One diner said the restaurant was "way too overpriced" while another called it "snooty for what it is."

But his posting was deleted by the site. Mr. Haskell then posted a letter on Eater's Los Angeles site announcing that he has officially "banned Chowhound." The ban is unenforceable, Mr. Haskell says, but expresses his disapproval of Chowhound's policy.

For Mario Batali, the tipping point was an article on Eater about a dispute between him and one of his restaurant's landlords. In response, he wrote an article for the site titled, "Why I Hate Food Bloggers," in which he decried blogs as bastions of "untruths, lies and malicious and personally driven dreck."

Jeffrey Chodorow, the managing partner behind 28 upscale restaurants around the world, including Asia de Cuba and China Grill, says food bloggers are "aggravating," because, he says, they base much of their reportage on unconfirmed rumor. Some of his restaurants have been panned in postings on Eater.

To create a platform to respond to critics and review other restaurants, Mr. Chodorow recently did the logical thing: He started his own food blog.

Kathy Griffin Silenced

Kathy Griffin's Emmy Remarks to Be Censored

The AP reports:

Before Kathy Griffin won a creative arts Emmy last weekend for her reality show, 'My Life on the D-List,' she joked that an award would move her to the C-list. She was right: 'C' as in censored. The TV academy said her raucous acceptance speech will be edited when the event, which was taped, is shown Saturday on the E! channel.
The main prime-time Emmy Awards air the next night on Fox.

'Kathy Griffin's offensive remarks will not be part of the E! telecast on Saturday night,' the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences said in a statement Monday.

In her speech, Griffin said that 'a lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus.'

She went on to hold up her Emmy, make an off-color remark about Christ and proclaim, 'This award is my god now!'

The comedian's remarks were condemned Monday by Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who called them a 'vulgar, in-your-face brand of hate speech.'

According to the TV academy and E!, when the four hour-plus ceremony is edited into a two-hour program, Griffin's remarks will be shown in 'an abbreviated version' in which some language may be bleeped.

The program was in production and unfinished, an E! spokeswoman said Monday.
Requests for comment were left Monday evening by phone and e-mail with Griffin's publicist. They were not immediately returned.

The Catholic League, an anti-defamation group, called on the TV academy to 'denounce Griffin's obscene and blasphemous comment' at Sunday's ceremony.

The academy said Monday it had no plans to address the issue in the prime-time broadcast.

The organization may have another delicate issue to consider, this one involving an off-color fake music video that aired last December on 'Saturday Night Live' and won a creative arts Emmy for best song.

Andy Samberg of 'SNL' said Saturday that he had yet to be asked by the TV academy to perform the tune with Timberlake on the Fox broadcast, but he was willing.

Timberlake, on a concert tour, is scheduled to be in Los Angeles next weekend.
The subject of their '(Blank) in a Box' video: wrapping a certain part of the male anatomy and presenting it to a loved one as a holiday present.

The academy has said that 'show elements are in the process of being worked out.'

Transcript of 'Leno' - Fred Thompson's Announcement

Fred Thompson announces his candidacy for the 2008 Republican Presidential ticket.

Transcript:

FRED THOMPSON: Thank you.

JAY LENO: Thanks for coming. I hope you didn't hear the monologue.

FRED THOMPSON: I did. We'll let the Tennessee joke slide until after the election.

JAY LENO: Right.

FRED THOMPSON: You know, I appreciated that last segment you did, though. Every once in a while I need something that just makes me glad I got out of television. (Laughter.)

JAY LENO: Oh, really. Thanks. That's very kind of you. I've got to ask you something. You were here in June. You said then you were testing the water. You've been in the water for a while now. Are you starting to get a little wrinkly? (Laughter.)

FRED THOMPSON: These wrinkles don't come from the water. (Laughter.)

JAY LENO: They don't come from the water. All right. What's the temperature? Is it tepid? What does the water tell you.

FRED THOMPSON: Nice and warm.

JAY LENO: Nice and warm?

FRED THOMPSON: It hasn't been that long really. We've done it a few months, where a lot of people have been working on it since they were in the choir in high school. So we're where we need to be right now, and that's one of the things I wanted to talk to you about. I'm running for President of the United States.

JAY LENO: All right. (Applause.)

FRED THOMPSON: Thank you.

JAY LENO: I'm excited. Wow.

FRED THOMPSON: Thank you.

JAY LENO: Well, that's very exciting. Now, it took a long time to decide this.

FRED THOMPSON: Not really. We started ‑‑ we mentioned it the first time in March. A lot of people have been, of course, running for some time. Everybody kind of changed the rules. Usually you don't announce until after Labor Day, but they started running a lot earlier, spending millions of dollars and so forth, and everyone said that you couldn't run this year without raising a hundred million dollars and starting much earlier. I don't believe that. I wasn't in the room when they made the rules; so I had to kind of follow my own lead. So we started around the kitchen table in late March talking about it, thinking about it, thinking about what kind of world and what kind of country our kids were going to grow up in and how many people have a chance to do something about it. And I decided that it was time for me to step up. So I did. (Applause.)

JAY LENO: A lot of the pundits say, "Oh, well, you waited too long."

FRED THOMPSON: No, I don't think so. Of course, we'll find out, but I don't think people are going to say, you know, "That guy would make a very good President, but he just didn't get in soon enough." (Laughter.) Communications being what they are nowadays, if you can't get your message out in a few months, you're probably not ever going to get it out. Most people don't start paying attention to these elections until they get a little closer. They treat politicians kind of like the dentist ‑‑ they don't have anything to do with them until they have to, until the election is near. (Laughter.)

JAY LENO: Well, you haven't spent any money yet, and you're second in the polls. There must be something to the theory.

FRED THOMPSON: Not too bad. Well, you can't tell much by polls these days, but obviously the people are going to give me an opportunity to talk to them about the things that I think are important. I think there will be decisions made in the next few years that are going to impact our lives and the lives of our kids and grandkids for a long, long time. They're going to determine whether or not we're a weaker, less prosperous, more‑divided nation than we have been. We can't let that happen on our watch.

JAY LENO: Now, if you ‑‑ Giuliani, Romney, McCain ‑‑ which of those guys is the toughest opponent? Which do you fear the most?

FRED THOMPSON: I don't know. I know them all to a certain extent. John McCain and I sit side by side on the Senate floor. He's a good friend and will be after this is over with unless, of course, he beats me.

JAY LENO: Right. (Laughter.)

FRED THOMPSON: Then I'll have to take another look at it, but I can't gauge them. I still think it's kind of early. You know, if you look back in history, some of these primary states, early primary states, have changed from what the polls were from like three weeks out.

JAY LENO: Right.

FRED THOMPSON: They're all formidable, but I think I will be, too. So the nation is not going to be hurt by having one more good person step into the race.

JAY LENO: Now you're on the cover of "Newsweek." It says "Lazy Like a Fox," which is ‑‑ I used to get this in school. "Jay has the ability but does not apply himself. (Laughter.) "If Jay spent as much time" ‑‑ Do you consider yourself a good ‑‑ do you like to campaign, or is it one of those necessary evils?

FRED THOMPSON: No, I like the part where you get out with the people.

JAY LENO: Right.

FRED THOMPSON: That's kind of been my history, you know, the red pick‑up truck and all, you know, more than just symbolism. First of all, it got me away from the staff. They couldn't ride along in the truck. It also got me out with the people.

JAY LENO: You took a truck and drove around?

FRED THOMPSON: Took my truck and with one guy. A lot of times he drove; sometimes I drove. We'd go from town to town and announce ahead of time we were showing up, pull up in the square. I'd get in the back of the truck in the bed and make a speech, and we'd move on. And we went from 20 points down against a popular incumbent congressman to 20 points ahead on election night. And then, two years later, we ran again in another contested race, won by another 20 points. I won in Tennessee ‑‑ if I can brag a little bit on myself politically ‑‑ by 20 points in two races in a state that Bill Clinton carried twice. So I must like campaigning enough to get the job done. And the same thing is true with regard to what we're facing now. Of course, the stakes are much more important, I think, much more serious when you're running for President, and I take it that way. I'm going to do my dead‑level best to make sure that the people get an opportunity to make the decision. You know, the pundits have all decided one way or another. The media and a lot of people make their living off of politics nowadays, and that's fine. But if I can get out with the folks, sometimes I'll communicate to them on the air waves, where tonight, I think, right after the show is over, we're going to have on our website ‑‑ Fred08.com ‑‑ I'm on for about 15 minutes telling the folks what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. So we're using that. And then we're going tonight, Jeri and the kids are backstage here. We're going to go to Iowa. So we'll do that plus grassroots campaigning which is what we're going to do in Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina for the next, oh, seven days.

JAY LENO: You mentioned New Hampshire now. Your fellow Republicans are debating tonight, and they're a little miffed at you for being here instead of being there. What do you say?

FRED THOMPSON: Well, we'll have an opportunity to debate a lot. I've been debating in courtrooms in the country since I was 28 years old and political forums and so forth. So they're fine, and we'll do our fair share.

JAY LENO: What do you think of them? As someone who watches these debates, I must admit it's a little thirty‑second ‑‑

FRED THOMPSON: I don't think much of them.

JAY LENO: How would you like to debate? FRED THOMPSON: I would do it in small groups preferably one‑on‑one and set aside a segment of time ‑‑ Newt Gingrich has a good idea. He talks about the Lincoln‑Douglas debates. The circumstances are different, but the principal is still the same: A thoughtful discussion over a period time to get to know what people are really thinking and what they're really like. The segments now, you know, you've got ten guys if everybody shows up, you know, with 30, 40 second sound bites. It's not designed to enlighten the American people. It's more designed for the people who are putting the debates on, and you run from one to another to another to another, and that's all well and good. I'll do my share, but I don't think it's a very enlightening forum to tell you truth. And I'll tell you something else. For those who talk about that New Hampshire situation, I'm certainly not disrespecting them, but it's a lot more difficult to get on the "Tonight Show" than it is to get into a presidential debate. (Applause.)

JAY LENO: Exactly. We'll be right back with Fred Thompson right after this. (Commercial break.)

JAY LENO: We're back with newly announced Presidential candidate Fred Thompson. And that is the most presidential suit I've ever seen.

FRED THOMPSON: Thank you very much.

JAY LENO: That's the one they issue when you're going to run?

FRED THOMPSON: The official Presidential suit.

JAY LENO: Let me ask you. I've got some bumper stickers. Let's see if you like any of these here. "Fred Thompson Because Giuliani is Too Hard to Spell." (Laughter.) I like this one, "Fred Thompson. He has a narrow stance." (Laughter.) Probably can't comment on that one.

FRED THOMPSON: Uh‑uh.

JAY LENO: We'll try one more. "Because I'm not Dr. Phil." (Laughter.)

FRED THOMPSON: I have been mistaken for Dr. Phil.

JAY LENO: Really.

FRED THOMPSON: Yes.

JAY LENO: If it works, use it.Let me ask you about some serious matters. The Iraq war, obviously the biggest issue in the campaign ‑‑ were you for it?

FRED THOMPSON: Yeah.

JAY LENO: You were for it.

FRED THOMPSON: I think we got to remember what it would be like if we had not done what we did. Saddam would still be there, having defeated the United Nations, all the resolutions. It would have defeated the United States in effect. It would have been in a position to continue its nuclear weapons program. His two sons would still have been doing what they were doing ‑‑ putting people in human shredders and attacking their neighbors. And I think, especially in light of what Iran is doing right now, they certainly would have been in a nuclear competition in that part of the world, sitting on those oil reserves. To think that, had we not gone in there, we wouldn't have any problems or anything, I think is dead wrong.

JAY LENO: Do we stay?

FRED THOMPSON: I think we stay until we get the job done, Jay. I don't think ‑‑

JAY LENO: What is the definition of "get the job done"? I think that's the part that is confusing people.

FRED THOMPSON: Until it is pacified enough for those people who walk through those lines with people shooting at them in some cases who voted, put their finger in the ink and so forth, the first time in that part of the world, in the history of the world, until they have an opportunity to have a free life and to not be killed by al‑Qaeda and others fighting in that part of the world. I think that's doable. I think it's tough, but I think we can't afford to go into a situation and not show resolve. I think the most dangerous thing in the world that could happen to the United States of America is for people to think we're weak and divided. Iraq is a part of a much bigger picture ‑‑ Iraq and Afghanistan. There's a global war going on. We are the main target and those who would befriend us. The enemy is ruthless. Al‑Qaeda is here in this country. National intelligence estimates tell us that. They are strong. They're trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. I don't know how much ‑‑ how more stark the situation could be. That's going to be the situation we're going to have to deal with for sometime regardless of what happens in Iraq, but if the wrong result happens in Iraq and we're perceived the wrong way by friends and enemies alike, it's going to make the situation more difficult, and we're going to be more vulnerable. It's a tough deal, but a it's a choice of two bad choices. It's not a good and a bad.

JAY LENO: Well, how about Iran? Do you see possible military action there as well? I mean, at what point does it stop?

FRED THOMPSON: You can't ever tell what the facts on the ground are going to be a year or two years from where we're sitting here. Obviously our intelligence know some things that you and I don't know. I was chairman of a committee that dealt with some of these issues for the Secretary of State until I resigned to do this. I had a high security clearance, but I don't know exactly where they are in their nuclear program. I don't think our intelligence knows precisely, but they're moving in that direction, and they're clearly responsible for more and more of our problems. They are sending in these improvised explosive devices. They're training Iraqi militants in Iran and sending them back in to Iraq. They're sponsoring Hezbollah and probably as we speak are planning another attack on Israel. They support Hamas. They support terrorism all around the world. They've got a fellow who is not put together well upstairs running the country and has threatened the destruction of Israel. I mean, sometimes, when these maniacs make threats, they mean it, and it comes to pass later on. So we've got to take that situation very seriously, but obviously a military attack is the last thing in the world that you want to have to do, and there's some things that we can do that probably will not necessitate that.

JAY LENO: I just wonder what we do to get a ‑‑ I grew up ‑‑ when I was a kid, John F. Kennedy was President. It was the Peace Corps, and we would send American college students to these countries, and they would love us. I think we made friendships that were good for 25, 30 years because Americans had befriended these countries. And it seems like we are not well‑liked around the world. Maybe I'm naive and maybe because I'm in show business, but it seems like I would want people to like us as a country because they think we're a ‑‑ I know we're a good country, but I wonder what we have to do to get these allies, these other countries to maybe ‑‑ what are we doing wrong?

FRED THOMPSON: Well, part of that comes with being the strongest, most powerful, most prosperous country in the history of the world. I think that goes with the territory. We're more unpopular than we need to be. That's for sure, but our people have shed more blood for the liberty and freedom of other peoples in this country than all the other countries put together. (Applause.) And I don't feel any need to apologize for the United States of America. We don't make ‑‑

JAY LENO: I wasn't suggesting that ‑‑

FRED THOMPSON: I know you weren't. We make mistakes. I think we can do some things better. I think part of what we've got to do with regard to the global terrorist problem I talked about is for all the forces of civilization, all of our friends and people who love freedom need to understand that this is a battle against freedom and tyranny worldwide, that the good guys need to be on one side. To the extent that we can do better in reaching out and convincing people, sharing intelligence and sharing military operations and so forth and equipment and know‑how and technology, we certainly need to do that. We have shown how difficult it is to shoulder these burdens or the greatest share of these burdens by ourselves, and we need to do that. But we need to keep it in perspective. We're probably never going to be loved by everyone as long as we're that way. Look, on the other hand, at a place like France. We've gotten more criticism probably from French leaders and French people or press than anybody else; yet they elected a person that came over here, shook President Bush's hand before the election, went back, and said, "We want to be friends with the United States," and they elected him. (Applause.) So we may have misjudged ‑‑ we may have taken some of that rhetoric coming from the leaders of that country from what the real people think. So it's not a totally clear picture.

JAY LENO: So you're off to Iowa tonight?

FRED THOMPSON: Off to Iowa.

JAY LENO: It starts right now.

FRED THOMPSON: It starts right now. (Applause.)

JAY LENO: Senator, good luck in your campaign, sir. (Applause.) Come back and see us any time.

FRED THOMPSON: Appreciate it. Thank you.