Court Settlement Paves Way For Veterans To Restore Memorial Cross In Mojave Desert

UC Davis Medical Center workers took to the picket line this morning to protest what they say is inadequate staffing and misplaced financial priorities. Surgical technician Katie Caton, right, cheers on her fellow workers in front of the hospital during a labor strike on Tuesday, May 21, 20013.The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees planned the walkout of workers at the UC Davis Health System and University of California hospitals in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego and Irvine. Harbinder Singh, a laborer at UCD Med Center carries protest signs in front of the hospital during a labor strike on Tuesday, May 21, 20013. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees planned the walkout of workers at the UC Davis Health System and University of California hospitals in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego and Irvine. Hospital workers at UCD Med Center carry protest signs in front of the hospital during a labor strike on Tuesday, May 21, 20013.The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees planned the walkout of workers at the UC Davis Health System and University of California hospitals in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego and Irvine.

A committee largely signed off Tuesday on a plan to give Gov. Scott Walker broad authority to sell state property, but stipulated that lawmakers must sign off on any sale.

Good news for women in politics: Most Americans are unlikely to discount your expertise regarding national security simply because you’re female. Abstract gender stereotypes do not impact people’s decision to vote for female candidates “in any meaningful way,” according to research published this month in Political Research Quarterly. “Beyond the interplay between political party and stereotypes in shaping evaluations of women candidates, these data provide little evidence that people take any traditional gender stereotypes they may hold and translate them directly into a decision to vote for or against a woman candidate,” Kathleen Dolan of the University of Wisconsin in Milwaukee explained in her study. Previous research has found that voters tend to believe men are experts on crime, economic, national security, and immigration policy, while women are experts on education, child care, health care, and abortion issues. Male politicians are also stereotyped as being divisive and assertive, while female politicians are stereotyped as being compassionate and consensus-builders. But whether these traditional gender stereotypes affected the evaluation of individual real-life candidates remained unclear. For her study, Dolan surveyed 3,150 adults in the run up to the 2010 elections, when a record number of women ran for office. She found gender stereotypes had no significant impact on the evaluations of individual female candidates, with one exception. Those who held traditional gender stereotypes evaluated female Democratic House candidates as less competent regarding stereotypical “men’s issues.” Female Republican House candidates, on the other hand, were seen as just as competent as their male opponents regarding stereotypical “men’s issues.” The fact that Republicans are typically perceived as strong on national security and crime likely blunted the effect of female stereotypes. Along with examining the relationship between gender stereotypes and candidate evaluations, Dolan also examined whether stereotypes influenced vote choice. But again, she found little evidence that gender stereotypes had a significant impact on who people decided to vote for. The candidate’s political affiliation, however, was consistently the most important factor. Like any study, Dolan’s research is limited in scope. In her study, she warned against interpreting the findings too broadly. Though gender stereotypes don’t appear to be a major influence on people in the voting booth, it possible that stereotypes “exert an influence on other stages of the electoral process,” Dolan wrote in her study. “While it is clear that the analysis presented here suggests a need for more nuanced thinking about the potential power of abstract gender stereotypes in American politics, nothing about this project seeks to make the claim that gender no longer matters to the fate of women candidates,” she explained.

A Senate panel voted on Tuesday to provide weapons to rebels battling the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad, the first time lawmakers have endorsed the aggressive U.S. military step of arming the opposition in the 2-year-old civil war. With a degree of trepidation, the Foreign Relations Committee voted 15-3 for a bill that would provide lethal assistance and military training to vetted rebel groups, and would slap sanctions on anyone who sells oil or transfers arms to the Assad regime such as Iran and Russia. The measure also establishes a $250 million fund to aid in the transition if and when Assad falls. An intense committee debate over the bill underscored congressional fears about greater U.S. military involvement in a Mideast war after more than a decade of American combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also exposed divisions within the Republican Party about U.S. foreign policy that will remain well into the 2016 GOP presidential nomination fight. The fate of the bill is uncertain, with opposition among several senators and far less enthusiasm in the House for stepped-up U.S. military action. The legislation does send a strong message as the Obama administration mulls its next step. After some 90 minutes of discussion -- and rejection of several amendments to undercut the measure, a bipartisan argument for increased U.S. action in Syria swayed lawmakers. "The greatest humanitarian crisis in the world is unfolding in and around Syria," said Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., the committee chairman. "Vital U.S. interests are at stake including the stability of the Middle East, loose chemical weapons, and the danger that Syria becomes a safe haven for extremists. The United States must play a role in tipping the scales toward opposition groups and working to build a free and democratic Syria." Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, the panel's top Republican, implicitly criticized the Obama administration as he joined Menendez in embracing the measure. "Much of the policy on Syria has been done on an ad hoc basis," Corker said. "This bill lays out a strategy." The United Nations estimates that more than 70,000 people have been killed and more than 1 million displaced after two years of fighting between Assad forces and rebels. The Obama administration has provided millions of dollars in humanitarian assistance but has been wary of calls to arm the rebels or launch military strikes despite recent evidence that Assad has used chemical weapons on his people. The administration is mulling its next step as Secretary of State John Kerry pursues a diplomatic solution. Opposing the legislation were Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a potential presidential candidate in 2016, and Democratic Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico and Chris Murphy of Connecticut. Udall questioned whether the United States would know what rebel groups it was arming as it introduced more lethal weapons into a chaotic situation while Murphy argued that the U.S. hasn't learned from history. "We have failed over and over again in our attempts to pull the strings of Middle Eastern politics," he said. Paul said the U.S. is war weary and reluctant to get involved in a murky conflict with so many factions. He said there is no assurance that the weapons would end up in the hands of "liberty-loving, Jeffersonian-type of democrats." "It's impossible to know who are friends are," he said. His arguments put him at odds with another potential White House candidate -- Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who backed the legislation and insisted that it was critical to help groups battling the well-armed, pro-Assad forces and radical jihadists. The committee turned back two amendments sponsored by Paul, one saying the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force does not allow intervention in Syria and another that barred weapons to Syria. Paul pointed out the irony that one of the most effective rebel groups fighting Assad is Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaida-affiliated group. The goal of the legislation is to ensure that the rebel groups meet a certain criteria with no links to terrorism. The panel also rejected a Udall amendment that would have limited the weapons to .50-caliber arms and smaller. The senator warned that heavier weapons could end up in the hands of U.S. enemies. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a fierce proponent of aggressive U.S. military might against Syria, pointed out that Assad's forces have used helicopter gunships, tanks, Scud missiles and heavy artillery. "The senator wants to use shotguns against Scud missiles," McCain said derisively. Udall said Saudi Arabia and Qatar are providing weapons to the opposition forces. The United States, he said, "could turn over the weapons we're talking about and next day they end up in the hands of al-Qaida." On Wednesday, Kerry will meet with 10 of America's closest Arab and European allies in Jordan. Officials said the gathering has two aims: to change Assad's calculation, only fortified by his recent military successes, that he can win the war militarily, and to persuade both the government and the opposition to attend peace talks next month in Geneva. ____ Associated Press writer Bradley Klapper in Muscat, Oman, contributed to this report. Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.    

From the May 21 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Andrea Tantaros Show:TRANSCRIPT: TANTAROS: We are looking at the most devastating footage, where people were killed by a tornado and President Obama is going to speak. And he is going to try and look like he is in control. Like he is doing something, 'cause that is what he does. "I'm going to try and play the president. I'm going to look like I'm in charge and I'm in control and I'm being updated, OK?" If I am living in Oklahoma, I am nervous that he is in control. Because over the past couple of months and years, judging on all these scandals, the message coming from the White House is that he has blinders on. That he doesn't know about these things. If we are to take the tornado tragedy with the other tragedies, President Obama, did he just learn about the tornado by turning on Shep Smith yesterday? Did anyone tell him about the tornado, or did they just keep it from him? OBAMA [AUDIO CLIP]: I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this, I think it was on Friday. TANTAROS: So if we are to believe the history of the White House, and their handling of all these big issues, because the government's so vast, it's so big, according to David Axelrod, the message they have given us is that he can't handle it. It's too big, there's too much going on. If I'm in Oklahoma, I'm nervous, I'm stressed out, because President Obama has not been in control of any of these other things. Why are we to believe today, all of a sudden, he's going to step up to a podium and be in control and know everything? See this is why lying is not a good idea. This is why making your boss look weak, and incompetent, and uninformed, is not a good idea. Because no one believes him when he tries to look like he is in control. Are you in control, President Obama? Are you the president? Or is it just, "Hey, I'm the president, no one tells me anything around here. Just a passerby, hey, I'm sort of like a figurehead, an ambassador, I play basketball with celebrities, I glad-hand in Mexico, other than that, sorry. Just a -- just a face here." That is why you can't put the message out that you're incompetent. And if his lawyer is incompetent, then as Lanny Davis says, the lawyer should be fired. But she's not, because no one ever gets fired in the administration.