Klementyna blog

Richmond the latest low seed for Kansas

So far in this NCAA tournament, the top-seeded Kansas Jayhawks are riding an easy-looking path toward the Final Four.

Yet again.

The Jayhawks returned to Alamodome on Thursday for the first time since winning their last national championship here in 2008. Most recall that overtime win over fellow top seed Memphis after first beating North Carolina to open the Final Four.

Easier to forget is how the Jayhawks got there: Beating seeds that were 16, eight, and then a 12 and 10.

Sound familiar to this run?

Kansas has beaten as 16 seed (Boston), a nine (Illinois) and will face a No. 12 seed in the Richmond Spiders on Friday. Then it's a 10 or 11 seed at worst.

"When you're in the business long enough you're going to have things like that crop up," Kansas coach Bill Self said. "But I haven't thought about the (similarities) at all."

If the Jayhawks (34-2) return to the Final Four this year, they'll join Michigan State in 2001 and North Carolina in 1991 as the only schools to get that far without having to beat a seed higher than nine. Awaiting Kansas if it beats Richmond will be either 11th-seeded Virginia Commonwealth or 10th-seeded Florida State.

Only five teams have reached the Final Four by feasting on teams seeded eighth or lower, according to STATS LLC. One of those schools: the 2008 Jayhawks, which beat 12th-seeded Villanova in the round of 16 that year.

Richmond (29-7) is hoping to fare better.

The Spiders have only one other round of 16 appearance. That was in 1988, before most players on their roster were even born. Richmond did stun Kansas in its only other meeting, breaking the Jayhawks' streak of 52 wins against unranked opponents at Allen Fieldhouse, but that was back in 2004.

"Their experiences are fairly limited," Richmond coach Chris Mooney said. "So to be able to play Kansas in the Sweet 16 in the Alamodome is probably big stuff for them, and for all of us."

It's big for the city of Richmond in general. The Spiders arrived in San Antonio with Virginia Commonwealth, Richmond's neighbor back home.

But the Spiders don't want to be remembered as a novelty. Mooney has combed through film trying to figure out how to beat the Jayhawks, looking not only at recent games but any the Jayhawks survived with a slim margin of victory.

Kansas has rolled so far. It started by beating both 16th-seed Boston University and ninth-seeded Illinois by double-digits. Richmond, meanwhile, edged fifth-seed Vanderbilt before cruising past Morehead State.

The Spiders are the lowest seed still around, which technically makes them the biggest underdog in a region that is already the first in NCAA to have three double-digit seeds still alive this late in the tournament.

"I think everyone is confident," Richmond guard Cedric Martel said. "We've shown in the past we can compete with bigger teams. It's a great experience to play a number one seed in the tournament. We're trying to make history."

So could Kansas — or at least tie history.

The 2001 Spartans are owners of the easiest — at least on paper — path to the Final Four. The seedings of Michigan State's first four opponents added up to 48, a total Kansas can match with a win over Richmond and if it winds up playing Virginia Commonwealth.

Self brushed aside questions about any apparent bracket luck. He called facing 12th-seeded Davidson in the round of eight in 2008 — which came down to the last possession — the toughest of that tournament apart from the final with Memphis.

Seeking to bolster his case, Self then pointed out Richmond's NBA prospects, making a nod to 6-9 forward Justin Harper. He said the Jayhawks won't look at the Spiders as a 12th seed but instead as being "incorrectly seeded" from the start.

"The field here is strong," Self said. "It may not appear from a seeding standpoint to be as strong as 1, 2, 3 and 4 that are left, but I guarantee that there will be nobody that will be looking forward to playing anybody in this field right now."

ATR Supports Ethanol Repeal, Opposes Coburn Tax Hike

WASHINGTON, March 29, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is the body of asent today by ATR Tax Policy Director Ryan Ellis to Senator Tom Coburn (R-Ok.) in response to a :

Dear Dr. Coburn:

I write today in response to your letter of March 29, 2011, regarding your attempts to repeal the ethanol tax credit.

First, Americans for Tax Reform opposes the ethanol tax credit, and always has. It is one of literally hundreds of tax code provisions which are bad tax policy and bad policy otherwise. We support its full and permanent repeal.

Second, the best policy outcome is to eliminate the ethanol tax credit in a way that leaves money in the hands of taxpayers, not increases the amount of money going to Washington for the Appropriations Committees to spend. Your amendment as written to repeal the ethanol credit (unfortunately) does the latter. ATR supports coupling the repeal of the ethanol tax credit with an offsetting tax cut of equal or greater size to avoid a net tax increase on the American people.

Third, the ethanol tax credit is not a spending program, despite your repeated attempts to claim that it is. According to the Joint Tax Committee (), your amendment would increase taxes by $4.869 billion over the next two years. Repealing the ethanol credit is the right thing to do, but other taxes must be reduced in the same legislation by at least this much to prevent a net tax increase.

Spending programs and tax relief are not the same thing. If the government lets Tom Coburn keep a dollar of his own money, that is not the same thing as the government stealing a dollar from Ryan Ellis and giving it to Tom Coburn. The differences between tax relief and spending are unambiguous.

Fourth, we have made our position on this crystal clear to you, to your staff, and to the media. An article by Chris Casteel in The Oklahoman ( March 28, 2011) accurately quotes me articulating ATR's position that the ethanol tax credit is bad tax policy, bad energy policy, and must be repealed in a tax revenue-neutral way. I spent 40 minutes on the telephone with your Communications Director, John Hart, on Wednesday, March 23, 2011, and transmitted the same message; he told me that he understood ATR's position. However, our position is not accurately reflected in your letter sent today. If there is something we could do to make our position more clear, please let me know.

Fifth, please understand that our position on this matter has little to do with any specific deduction or credit and much to do with avoiding massive tax increases, such as those you supported in the Simpson-Bowles-Obama commission. That plan would have not simply eliminated guppy tax credits like ethanol, but also chopped away at the whale-sized mortgage interest deduction, charitable deduction, state and local tax deduction, and the employer-provided healthcare exclusion.

Eliminating a small tax credit without offsetting tax cuts of equal or greater size creates the precedent that net tax increases are a legitimate fiscal tool for pro-taxpayer policymakers. Ted Kennedy's definition of "tax reform" was to broaden the base and do nothing else, but that's simply not acceptable to taxpayers. How is a tax-compromised conservative movement supposed to tell Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and others "no" the next time they ask us to raise taxes?

Sixth, the Taxpayer Protection Pledge (signed by 41 United States Senators, ) does not protect any individual deduction or credit, or stand in the way of tax reform. It simply requires that any elimination of a deduction or credit be offset with a tax cut of equal or greater size. Senators who have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge have promised to their constituents and the American people (N.B., not to ATR) to "oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar-for-dollar by further reducing tax rates." This is clear. This is unambiguous. Support for your amendment as written is simply inconsistent with this promise.

Americans for Tax Reform once again urges you to modify your ethanol tax credit repeal amendment to include a tax cut of equal or greater size to the tax increase you have proposed. Given the relatively-small size of the tax increase you have offered, this should be a simple matter. I remain ready to assist your staff in modifying your amendment so it becomes Pledge-compliant. Obviously, some tax cut offsets make for better policy than others, but the first test is avoiding a net tax hike at all.

If you append to your amendment a tax cut of equal or greater size to the tax increase you have proposed, ATR will then endorse and urge all senators to vote for your amendment. ATR opposes net tax increases as a matter of principle, and your amendment as currently written is a net tax hike.

Sincerely,

Ryan Ellis

Tax Policy Director

Americans for Tax Reform is a non-partisan coalition of taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose all tax increases. For more information or to arrange an interview please contact John Kartch at (202) 785-0266 or by email at .

SOURCEAmericans for Tax Reform

http://abyrmjoucn.bloggermany.com/;Disco Fever volume 3;.http://moijvtqucznh.blogsenegal.com/;All I Think About / Tennis Skirts | U D I;.http://fmapyioru.blogbarbados.com/;Mission 2 Mars;.http://ibujsmado.bloglatvia.com/;No Title | Panyard Productions;.http://ykmrndpbsoi.blogguadeloupe.com/;Minus the Bear | Planet of Ice;

Grammy Awards 2011 to Hit Variety of Notes Tonight

The Grammy Awards 2011 are music's biggest show. Although the Grammy Awards 2011 are far from the first, or last, awards show of the year, it still towers over all the rest. They are the Oscars of the industry, so they fittingly air two weeks before the Oscars this year. While the biggest names in movies are still preparing for their show, the most electric names in music are walking down the red carpet tonight. But the Grammy nominees won't just be sitting in their seats all night, as most will sing in between collecting their prizes.

The amount of musical award shows has piled up more and more over the years. Yet this one is still the most prestigious in the business, as winning here is still the most sought after honor in music. With 109 categories this year, a lot of people will be claiming that honor tonight.

But of course, the are only airing the major categories in the televised broadcast. These feature headliners like Eminem, Bruno Mars, Jay-Z, Lady Antebellum, Lady Gaga and many more. Leading the way is Eminem, as he has 10 nominations for his comeback efforts, and is still riding buzz from his Super Bowl commercials.

Yet his music is to be judged tonight, as his "Love The Way You Lie" is up for Song of the Year, against "Need You Now" "Forget You" "The House That Built Me" and "Beg, Steal or Borrow" In addition, Eminem's "Recovery" is among the Albums of the Year, along with "Need You Now" "Teenage Dream" "The Fame Monster" and "The Suburbs"

Of course, the Grammy Awards 2011 aren't just about the categories. There stands to be just as much buzz around the musical acts, as much of the industry's A-list - whether they're nominated or not - is performing. Reportedly, it all starts with a tribute to special guest Aretha Franklin, to welcome her back after her recent health problems.

Christina Aguilera is among those slated to pay tribute, in her first performance since her Super Bowl mishap. Later on, Dr. Dre will perform with Eminem, while Bob Dylan plays acoustic with the Avett Brothers and Mumford & Sons, and Cee Lo Green tells Gwyneth Paltrow to "Forget You"

This doesn't scratch the surface of what the Grammy Awards 2011 may bring. There's also Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga to consider, along with Rihanna, Katy Perry, Beyonce, the Glee kids, and Barbra Streisand receiving the MusiCares Person of the Year honor. Whatever else happens, the music world and the blogosphere will be on high alert to cument it.

The Grammy Awards are slated to run from 8 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. EST on CBS.

Sources

Wall Street Journal-

NJ.com-

Chevron penalty is $9.5 bln for cleanup in Ecuador

QUITO (AFP) – US oil giant Chevron's court-ordered indemnification of Ecuadoran communities for environmental pollution increases 10 percent to $9.5 billion under a provision in Ecuadoran law, a lawyer for the plaintiffs said Tuesday.

The $8.6 billion penalty announced Monday did not include an additional 10 percent allowed under the law for environmental management costs, according to Pablo Fajardo, attorney for the Amazon communities that sued Texaco in 1993.

It is believed to be the largest fine imposed on an oil company resulting from an environmental lawsuit.

Chevron, which inherited the lawsuit when it purchased Texaco in 2001, blasted the court's decision as a "product of fraud" and said it will challenge it.

Despite the victory, the plaintiffs also plan to appeal, saying the penalty is insufficient compared to the health and environmental damage caused by caused by Texaco's oil extraction between 1964 and 1990.

They say soil and rivers were contaminated and that local residents reported higher rates of cancer. They were seeking more than $27 billion.

"We have instructed our lawyers to file the appeal for the judge to reconsider the figures," Luis Yanza, director of the Assembly of People Affected by Texaco, said Tuesday.

The ruling came from a court in the town of Lago Agrio in the province of Sucumbios, near the Colombian border.

Chevron claims it was absolved of liability because Texaco paid $40 million in cleanup efforts, approved by the government, before it was bought by Chevron.

Chevron said the judgment "is illegitimate and unenforceable. It is the product of fraud and is contrary to the legitimate scientific evidence."

This fine passes the record of $5 billion initially imposed on ExxonMobil Corp. for an oil spill off the coast of Alaska in 1989. But that amount was later reduced to $500 million after a series of appeals by Exxon.

Last year, British oil giant BP contributed $20 billion to a compensation fund for cleanup efforts and victims of its massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Most Asian shares rise after Wall Street gains

TOKYO – Most Asian markets advanced after Wall Street pushed higher overnight despite a rate hike by China.

Japan's Nikkei 225 stock average rose 0.2 percent to 10,659.01.

Automakers advanced, with Toyota Motor Corp. leading the way. The issue surged 4.6 percent after raising its full-year earnings forecasts Tuesday, citing booming sales in China and other emerging markets. It also benefited from a U.S. government report that ruled out electronic flaws in runaway Toyota vehicles.

Elsewhere, Hong Kong's Hang Seng index added 0.3 percent to 23,546.68. The Shanghai Composite index inched up 0.9 percent to 2,800.06., and Australia's S&P/ASX 200 added 0.5 percent to 4,915.50.

Benchmarks in South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore posted declines.

In New York on Tuesday, the Dow Jones industrial average finished higher for the seventh consecutive day. Investors took in stride a move by China's central bank to control inflation by raising short-term interest rates.

The Dow rose 71.52 points, or 0.6 percent, to close at 12,233.15.

The broader Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 5.52, or 0.4 percent, to 1,324.57. The Nasdaq composite index rose 13.06, or 0.5 percent, to 2,797.05.

In currencies, the dollar slipped to 82.36 yen from 82.38 yen late Tuesday. The euro rose to $1.3634 from $1.3627.