"Coca-Cola Co. posted better-than-expected quarterly profit after it stepped up marketing and got higher prices for soda in North America. The company has been struggling to boost global sales amid economic volatility overseas and a shift away from soda at home, with tactics such as premium-priced ‘‘mini-cans.’’ Overall soda volume in North America was flat, but noncarbonated drink sales rose 3 percent. Earnings were $770 million. A year earlier, Coke earned $1.71 billion. Revenue slipped to $10.87 billion but beat the forecasts.... PepsiCo Inc., whose stable of brands includes beverages and Frito-Lay snacks, posted fourth-quarter profit that topped estimates even as currency headwinds hurt sales. Profit was $1.12 a share, the Purchase, N.Y., company said."
Maybe you would like a cheeseburger and chips with this?
Release the entire 9/11 report
Yes, you really need to hear this:
"Netanyahu says he will go ahead with speech to US Congress" Associated Press February 10, 2015
JERUSALEM — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that he will travel to Washington to speak before Congress next month despite calls to cancel his speech.
Netanyahu’s remarks at an election rally come amid an uproar over his planned speech about Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“A bad deal with Iran is forming in Munich that will endanger Israel’s existence,” he said.
Have you ever heard of the Boy Who Cried Wolf?
“Therefore, I am determined to go to Washington and present Israel’s position before the members of Congress and the American people.”
I don't need to be reminded that you Zionists control the Congre$$ like sock puppets.
House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, extended the invitation without discussing it beforehand with the White House. That angered the Obama administration.
Netanyahu’s speech would come just ahead of Israel’s March election. Administration officials have privately suggested that the Israeli prime minister was playing politics with his country’s relationship with the United States, while Netanyahu’s allies have argued that Obama was conceding too much to Iran in the talks.
President Obama on Monday defended his decision not to invite Netanyahu to the White House so close to the Israeli election.
Obama also said he did not envision any more extensions in continuing negotiations with Iran to prevent the nation from obtaining nuclear weapons, and he pleaded for more time to allow those talks to play out before imposing new sanctions that could impede a deal.
The nuclear negotiations have already been extended twice and face a late March deadline for working out the main outlines and a June deadline for a detailed agreement.
Some House Democrats are circulating a petition asking Boehner to postpone the Netanyahu speech.
“It appears that you are using a foreign leader as a political tool against the president,” states the letter being circulated among lawmakers by Representatives Keith Ellison of Missouri, Steve Cohen of Tennessee, and Maxine Waters of California. The names of the signers won’t be released until next week.
--more--"
"Leahy, most senior senator, to skip Netanyahu speech" Associated Press February 11, 2015
WASHINGTON — The Senate’s most senior lawmaker said Tuesday he will skip the Israeli prime minister’s speech to Congress next month on Iran, calling the invitation by Republicans without White House consultation a ‘‘tawdry and high-handed stunt.”
He's up for reelection in 2016 and I will bet he is likely retire before then; otherwise, he would be going. Either that or Israel can't field an opponent against him up there.
Seven-term Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont joined a half-dozen Democrats who are boycotting Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech. ‘‘They have orchestrated a tawdry and high-handed stunt that has embarrassed not only Israel but the Congress itself,’’ Leahy said.
I wonder who the others are.
Democrats have said the speech is an affront to President Obama, who has said he won’t meet with Netanyahu when he’s in the United States. Obama said Monday he has ‘‘very real differences’’ with the Israeli leader....
Can we keep him then?
--more--"
I'd say BYOB but....
"Boston City Council members skeptical on BYOB" by Andrew Ryan, Globe Staff February 11, 2015
BYOB in Boston restaurants? Not so fast.
Skepticism greeted a proposal introduced Wednesday in the City Council that would allow diners to “bring your own bottle” of beer or wine to small restaurants.
City Councilor Ayanna Pressley previously championed expanding the number of liquor licenses in Boston, citing it as an economic development tool for underserved neighborhoods. But Pressley spoke critically Wednesday of the BYOB proposal, articulating a litany of concerns.
Addressing her colleagues in the City Council chamber, Pressley suggested that BYOB could create a two-tiered system in which liquor licenses remained in more affluent neighborhoods and BYOB would be relegated to Dorchester, Hyde Park, Mattapan, and Roxbury.
Pressley said she had concerns about how BYOB would be regulated, and feared the practice would lower the cost of dining and, consequently, reduce tips for wait staff.
Legalizing bring-your-own-bottle restaurants would be good for customers as well as economic growth.
City Council President Bill Linehan also expressed concern that BYOB could hurt established restaurateurs who invest in liquor licenses, which cost up to $75,000 for wine and beer, and $375,000 for a full bar.
Other councilors endorsed the measure, which was referred to the Government Operations Committee. It will be the subject of a yet-to-be-scheduled public hearing.
City Councilors Michelle Wu and Stephen Murphy proposed the initiative. The goal, they said, is to encourage the growth of small restaurants in neighborhoods that do not have vibrant dining scenes.
The BYOB phenomenon has flourished in other cities, including Philadelphia and Chicago, and was recently adopted in Brookline. BYOB establishments have operated successfully alongside restaurants with liquor licenses.
Proponents say BYOB makes it easier for budding chefs to open neighborhood spots. But the BYOB idea could spark a backlash from established restaurateurs who make significant investments in liquor licenses.
The measure would need the approval of the City Council and the signature of Mayor Martin J. Walsh. In an interview last week with the Globe, Walsh expressed skepticism about BYOB but said he was “open to the idea.”
--more--"
