House Speaker John Boehner signaled Thursday that a compromise is coming with Democrats on immediate cuts in government spending, as Tea Party supporters rallied near the Capitol demanding House Republicans to fight for bigger spending cuts or else just let the government shut down.

Boehner noted that Republicans are fighting for the biggest spending cuts they can get, given that Democrats are in control of the White House and Senate.

Boehner said there’s no agreement yet on how much he and Democrats are willing to compromise in cutting the day-to-day budgets of federal agencies over the coming six months. The GOP House has voted to cut more than $60 billion from this year’s budget, and Democrats have been moving steadily in his direction.

The Ohio Republican has agreed to discuss a compromise of around $33 billion in spending cuts over the next six months—considerably less than Tea Party activists have demanded.

The tentative split-the-difference plan would end up where GOP leaders started last month as they tried to fulfill a campaign pledge to return spending for agencies’ daily operations to levels in place before President Barack Obama took office. That calculation takes into account the fact that the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, is about half over.

Under Biden’s math, the White House is conceding $73 billion in cuts from Obama’s requests, which contained increases never approved by Congress. Republicans originally wanted $100 billion in cuts using the same gauge.

Some tea party-backed GOP lawmakers want the original $100 billion in cuts, and it’s unclear how many of the 87 freshmen Republicans elected last fall will approve of the arrangement between top Democrats and Boehner, who plans to meet with freshman GOP lawmakers.

Both sides said the figure under consideration is tentative at best and depends on the outcome of numerous policy stands written into the bill.

Freshman Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger suggested Tea Part activists to save their powder for bigger fights ahead, including next year’s budget and a must-pass bill to allow the government to borrow more money to meet its commitments. Republicans hope to use that measure to force further spending cuts on the president.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Republicans in Congress objected Thursday to the Homeland Security Department’s now-rescinded practice of requiring secretive reviews by political advisers of hundreds of requests for government files under the Freedom of Information Act. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the chairman of a House oversight committee, said the process “reeks of a Nixonian enemies list” and was unacceptable.

The senior official in charge of submitting files for the reviews, Mary Ellen Callahan, acknowledged there had been “management challenges” in the program and said the political scrutiny “at times took longer than anticipated.” But Callahan deflected suggestions by Issa that the process injected political considerations into decisions about federal records the government was turning over to journalists, watchdog groups, or even members of Congress.

Democrats vigorously defended the department and, by extension, the Obama administration. The committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, said that Issa’s accusations are unsubstantiated.

The Homeland Security Department abandoned its practice of requiring approval by political appointees before some information could be released after the Associated Press investigated the program last year. Since July, political advisers have been afforded three business days to object to the release of information that otherwise could be withheld under nine provisions in the law protecting national security, privacy, or confidential decision-making. If there are no objections, the records can be released.

Issa said some information that was censored in government files should have been released, and he said delays resulting from the reviews of up to three months were unacceptable.

Cummings cited results of a one-year inquiry by the Homeland Security inspector general that found no evidence that political advisers prohibited federal records from being disclosed. Although the inspector general called the previous system an “unprecedented involvement in the FOIA process,” the report concluded that the advisers “had little to contribute.”

This week, Callahan reduced the period for political advisers to review government files to one business day. But the inspector general said even the new, speedier process “is not required by FOIA and seems inconsistent” with the Obama administration’s instructions prohibiting unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles under the Freedom of Information Act.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

In the shadow of Japan’s struggle to stem radioactive leaks from its stricken nuclear complex, police in white moon suits pull bodies of tsunami victims from an evacuated zone in halting work interrupted by radiation alarms.

The crisis at the plant, which has compelled Japanese officials to increasingly turn to international help in stemming the leaks, has sometimes overshadowed the other disaster wrought by a March 11 tsunami: the decimation of hundreds of miles of northeastern coastline, the displacement of tens of thousands, and the deaths of an estimated 19,000 people.

Efforts to recover the bodies from the 12-mile evacuation zone around the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant have been slowed by a wasteland of debris, but also by fears of radiation. Police in that prefecture dressed in full radiation suits retrieved 19 corpses from the rubble Wednesday, the police official said.

Each officer wears a radiation detector and must leave the area whenever an alarm goes off—a frequent occurrence that has often dragged the operation to a halt, the official said.

There also are concerns about the disposal of bodies, because Japanese tend to cremate their dead, and fires can spread radiation. The Health Ministry recommends that the bodies be cleaned and those with even small levels of radiation should be handled only by people wearing suits, gloves, and masks.

Radiation concerns also have complicated efforts to bring the plant itself under control. Radioactive contamination in groundwater underneath a reactor has been measured at 10,000 times the government health standard, restricting where crews can work.

Japanese officials are increasingly seeking outside help, including experts in eliminating contaminated water from French nuclear giant Areva. Experts and a robot from the U.S. have also arrived in Japan.

Because of the radiation leaks a mandatory evacuation zone around the plant has been ordered, and authorities have also recommended people in the 20-mile band might want to leave, too.

There were concerns Wednesday that the evacuation zone might need to be expanded after the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that radiation levels in a village outside the voluntary band registered at twice the threshold the agency recommends for evacuations.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Rebels fighting to install Ivory Coast’s democratically elected president began besieging the main city of Abidjan on Thursday after seizing a key seaport overnight, as he vowed to “reestablish democracy and enforce the choice of the people.”

The top military commander of the country’s entrenched ruler fled to the residence of South Africa’s ambassador. But an adviser to longtime President Laurent Gbagbo said he would not step down even in the face of a rebel onslaught on the country’s commercial capital.

The international community declared Alassane Ouattara the winner of the November presidential election, but Gbagbo has clung to power for months. The violence has left at least 462 people dead, and up to 1 million have fled their homes amid the post-election chaos.

United Nations radio announced that the port of San Pedro, 190 miles west of Abidjan, was taken by rebels late Wednesday. Residents said by telephone that soldiers retreated in trucks while firing into the air as the rebels moved in.

Rebels also took Gbagbo’s hometown, the village of Mama, and Yopougon, a district of Abidjan that fervently supports Gbagbo, said a close aide to Ouattara.

Advancing on foot while firing into the air, the rebels set up roadblocks on one of Yopougon’s main thoroughfares and have been battling with police since early Thursday morning, said a local resident.

They have faced almost no resistance but many fear that army troops still loyal to Gbagbo plan to make a final stand in Abidjan, the country’s economic hub and the only place Gbagbo still has power.

Ouattara’s whereabouts were not immediately known. He had been holed up for months in the lagoonside Golf Hotel in Abidjan, protected by United Nations peacekeeping troops.

Ouattara and Gbagbo have vied for the presidency for months, with Ouattara using his considerable international clout to try to financially and diplomatically suffocate Gbagbo. After the final round of diplomatic efforts had failed to remove Gbagbo, the rebels launched a dramatic offensive this week, seizing control of the country from the west, the center and the east.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

UPDATE: The British government said one of Muammar Qaddafi’s closest confidantes, Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa, has resigned after flying to England from Tunisia Wednesday. His departure could open the door for some hard intelligence, though Britain refused to offer him immunity from prosecution.

Libyan officials, who initially denied Koussa’s defection, said he had resigned because he was sick with diabetes and high blood pressure. Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said Koussa was given permission to go to Tunisia, but the regime was surprised to learn he had flown to London.

The opposition blames Koussa for the assassinations of dissidents in western capitals and for orchestrating the 1988 Lockerbie bombing over Scotland and the bombing of another jet over Niger a year later. The links have never been confirmed.

In another blow to the regime, U.S. officials revealed Wednesday that the CIA has sent small teams of operatives into rebel-held eastern Libya while the United States debates whether to arm the opposition.

OUR EARLIER REPORT: The new commander of international military operations in Libya warned Thursday that anyone attacking civilians would be “ill-advised” to continue, and said he would look into a report by a Vatican envoy that air strikes had killed 40 innocent people.

As NATO took over command of all air operations over Libya from the United States, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that President Barack Obama has no additional U.S. military moves in mind, calling it a pick-up ballgame at this point.

Canadian Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard said the bloc had already deployed more than 100 fighters and support aircraft to monitor the no-fly zone over Libya and prevent attacks on civilians.

The alliance also had a dozen frigates patrolling the Mediterranean Sea off Libya to prevent weapons shipments from reaching the warring sides.

NATO aircraft had already flown more than 90 sorties since the alliance took over command at 2 a.m. EDT, Bouchard said.

Bouchard said NATO would investigate a claim by the Vatican’s envoy in Libya that air strikes in Tripoli during the night had killed 40 civilians—though he noted that the alleged incident was said to have taken place before NATO took command.

The report by the Fides news agency quoted Bishop Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, the apostolic vicar of Tripoli, as saying he had learned that a building in the district of Buslim had collapsed during bombing, killing 40 people inside.

Bouchard said the alliance had very strict rules of engagement, and was very careful in going after any targets.

NATO’s assumption of command comes at a sensitive moment in the war between the rebels and loyalist forces. Muammar Qaddafi’s ground troops have nearly reversed the gains rebels made since the international airstrikes began. The battlefield setbacks have led to increased calls for the international community to supply weapons to the lightly armed rebels.

Speaking in Stockholm, NATO’s Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Thursday that the alliance doesn’t support U.S. and British suggestions that the UN mandate for the international military operation in Libya allows arming rebels.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

After Ohio lawmakers passed a bill limiting collective bargaining rights for 350,000 public workers across the state late Wednesday, unions and Democrats vowed to put it on November’s ballot as a referendum.

The Senate voted 17-16 to pass the bill and then sent it to Republican Gov. John Kasich for his signature, which is expected this week. The vote followed a day filled with Statehouse demonstrations by about 750 people, who raucously chanted and shouted throughout the process.

The measure affects safety workers, teachers, nurses, and a host of other government personnel. It allows unions to negotiate wages and certain working conditions but not healthcare, sick time, or pension benefits. It gets rid of automatic pay increases and replaces them with merit raises or performance pay. Workers would also be banned from striking.

A ballot challenge would stall implementation of the law that House Speaker Bill Batchelder said “will give control back to the people who pay the bills.”

Gov. Kasich has said his $55.5 billion, two-year state budget counts on unspecified savings from lifting union protections to fill an $8 billion deficit hole.

During House debate, state Rep. Robert Hagan, a Democrat from Youngstown, said the bill wasn’t aimed at saving money, but to “bust the unions.”

Though protests were much larger in Wisconsin, Ohio unions claim they hold the hearts of a majority of voters in their political swing state.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker signed a bill this month eliminating most of state workers’ collective bargaining rights. That measure exempts police officers and firefighters; Ohio’s does not.

The Ohio bill has drawn thousands of demonstrators, prompted a visit from the Rev. Jesse Jackson, and packed hearing rooms in the weeks before the Senate passed the earlier version of the measure. Its reception in the House had been quieter, as unions resolved themselves to its approval and shifted their strategy to the fall ballot.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Some people are great starters and some are great finishers. A garage filled with half-done projects, a bedside table stacked with half-read books, and a school shelf stuffed with half-completed curriculums bears witness to which of these I am. I won’t even mention the new running gear sitting idle in my closet.

I say that because, for finish-challenged folk like me, any long-term task is a struggle. Which stinks because, as a mom, I happen to hold one of the most long-term jobs currently available. Someone should have told me. If I were a marathoner, aka a finisher, it might be easier, but I’m not. I’m a sprinter. If I set out to teach my kids Latin and they can’t conjugate three verbs and decline four nouns by day end, chances are, I quit. Thus, the stuffed garage and the pile of books.

Spring break is a tease for people like me who bolt out of the gate in August but are spent by Christmastime. It’s a trailer to the upcoming feature called Summer, which is still an agonizing two school-filled months from debuting. Testing, Eagle Scout projects, final theater productions, research papers—are still ahead. I’m limping along at mile 24.5 of the 2010-11 school marathon facing a huge hill and plumb out of Jelly Belly Sports Beans.

Maybe that’s why I read last month’s Atlantic magazine with only muted interest. The headline that initially caught my eye—“The Great Mom vs. Mom Debate”—lived up to its promise, the debate being added to this time by Sandra Tsing Loh and Caitlin Flanagan, who chime in with their thoughts on controversial Tiger Mother Amy Chua. Loh takes the “I give up” path: “We mothers teach what we know, and this is the same sloppy, low-impact way I do drafts as a writer. (I follow the old writer’s chestnut: ‘When you face writer’s block, just lower your standards and keep going.’)” Meanwhile, Flanagan says the real reason moms are rattled by Chua is that the “good mothers” (as opposed to Tiger Mothers) know they can’t be “nice” and get their kids to perform at Ivy League standards.

To which I say, Amy Chua, I am so, so over both you and the mommy wars you represent.

The moms I know, including myself, thrown into the race with nary a hamstring stretch to prepare us, are running the race of motherhood the best we can. Once in a great while we book along at a 6-minute mile (a pace Chua can apparently keep ad infinitum), other times we’re sucking wind. Most days we’re clocking about an 11-minute mile, occasionally tripping and falling into the brambles, brushing ourselves off, pulling the stickers out of our knees, and determinedly cheering ourselves on toward that great “finish” line (you define it—end of the school year? . . . graduation? . . . bedtime?).

Aesop said, “Slow and steady wins the race.”

It goes against my sprinting mentality, but I hope he’s right. Winning the race means a lot of things, but for me, right now, it means simply crossing the finish line, hopefully without puking on the side of the road.

Let us have a “time out” from the wars and upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa to consider another war taking place in too many of our homes. That would be the war against our children and the one between parent and child.

A report from the website The Daily Beast should get our attention. The story, written by Conchita Sarnoff and Lee Aitken, reveals how new documents the writers obtained show how hedge fund manager Jeffrey Epstein, who last year completed a 13-month sentence for soliciting prostitution from a minor, managed to “finesse the kinds of sex-crime allegations typically associated with a hefty prison sentence.” The Daily Beast found that, “despite overwhelming evidence of sex crimes with dozens of young girls,” a “protracted campaign to undermine the prosecution” coupled with “fear and intimidation experienced by victims during pre-trial proceedings” resulted in “a set of charges that became a virtual slap on the wrist.”

A new film, not about hedge fund managers, but about online predators who scour the internet preying on children, will help many parents (and teens if they’ll listen) become more aware of the threat they face. It’s called Trust and it is being released Friday in a small number of theaters. You’ll have to look for it (or demand it), but it is a film all parents should see with their teens or preteens. The film is rated R for rough language and sexual content, but it is real and the shock value is appropriate for the subject matter.

Directed by David Schwimmer, who starred in the sitcom Friends, Trust is the story of 14-year-old “Annie,” who makes friends with a “boy” named “Charlie.” Charlie, supposedly 16, texts Annie and begins his seduction by addressing the insecurities many teenage girls feel about their looks and lack of self-esteem.

After weeks of email and chat room exchanges, Charlie’s magnetism draws Annie into a face-to-face meeting. At first she is sickened that he is much older than he said, but by now she is hooked by his flattery and even though she knows he is a liar, she wants to believe his lies. They have sex in a cheap hotel room.

Annie’s girlfriend learns about this and tells the school principal. He calls the police. Officers tell the parents and the maelstrom begins. Annie hates her girlfriend and her parents. Even though Charlie has committed statutory rape and clearly has exploited her, Annie can’t bear to tear herself away from him. When the FBI identifies several other young girls he has similarly abused, Annie at first doesn’t believe them until cruel reality sets in.

The parents, who see themselves as protectors of their children, feel betrayed and suddenly powerless. Annie feels betrayed by her best friend. Trust is broken on several levels. The ending is not what you might expect, because there is no end to child exploitation, there’s only awareness and an effective defense.

In an age where every cell phone is a computer with internet access, there are no “parental controls” that can fully protect our children and grandchildren from sexual predators. In this cyber age, the old parental warnings not to take candy from strangers or get into a stranger’s car have limited effect, especially when pedophiles can slither directly into your child’s bedroom via internet connection.

David Schwimmer is not new to this subject. He is a member of the board of directors of the Rape Treatment Center at Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center, which says it has assisted more than 40,000 sexual assault victims, both children and adults.

“Our hope,” says Schwimmer, “is that this movie starts a dialogue for parents and their children about internet safety and how sometimes the internet can be the ’scary uncle’ that no one wants to acknowledge.”

We’d better acknowledge it and Trust helps us do so. It is a powerful and necessary lesson for parents and children. Go see it. It isn’t entertainment. It’s real life.

© 2011 Tribune Media Services Inc.

“But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief was coming, he would not have left his house to be broken into” (Luke 12:39).

Houses are always getting broken into. Personal houses. Marriage houses. Church houses. Nation houses. The enemy never tires.

Housekeepers, on the other hand, get restless with watching, and they tend to slack off. Jesus says they get mean or they become partiers (v.45)

It is considered a disgrace, in the Bible, when a person or nation is not prepared. Kings who go to war and find that they are not able to finish what they started are rightly ridiculed. So are builders of towers who run out of cement in the middle of the project (14:28-33).

In the throes of a disaster is no time to start thinking about preparedness. That all has to be thought of in advance. Jesus says that if you want to follow Him you had better think it through it before you start, and take account of what this adventure is going to cost you. Are you willing to give up your own plans? Do you have a strategy for unexpected attacks?

I have come up with a little strategy for attacks of the enemy. Of course I pray and fill up on God’s Word. But in addition to that, I have found it helpful, in times of temptation, to have a few stock questions to put to myself. These are generally what you would regard as small temptations. (I am hardly ever tempted to attack Libya, for example.) They are so small that I would be embarrassed to mention them except that I have found that these are the stuff real life is made of.

For instance, I might have a desire to say something to someone or ask something of someone. But there is a hesitation in my spirit. That hesitation might be an indication that what I want to say is not of the Spirit but is of demonic origin. (Those two are always in active opposition. See Galatians 5:17). The funny thing is that the desire never seems that strong until I start to mount a little resistance. Then it puts up more fight, finally removing the velvet glove to reveal an iron fist.

Very strong temptations are almost like being in the Colosseum if you try to fight them. The mano a mano is brutal. This is especially so when the act you are tempted to is not explicitly proscribed in the Scriptures and Satan is telling you that it’s fine and you’re being overly scrupulous.

This is very dangerous ground unless you are forearmed with a few weapons just for the occasion. Ephesians 6 was written for just such times, and it prescribes weaponry of prayer and Bible knowledge and righteousness. This is what Jesus used to keep the thief out of his house in Luke 4, and I also begin to pray, and to summon every Scripture I can think of that applies even remotely to the situation.

In addition, I put these three questions to myself when the matter involves another person, which it almost always does:

1. Does this thing you want to say or do proceed from faith? Or is there another way that is more of faith?
2. Is this thing you want to say or do the most loving thing to do or say? Or is there a way that is slightly more loving?
3. Does this proposed action bring the most glory to God? Or is there a way that is more glorifying to God?

Even with all that, I can barely keep the thief out of the pantry.

But after having my house broken into most of my life, I am determined to keep a close watch on all the entrances from now on.

Listen to commentaries by Andrée Seu.

Hello!

Random question of the day: If someone asked, “What is your biggest flaw?” in an interview, how would you respond?

This is our daily (except for Sundays) open thread, where you can 1) answer my question, 2) talk about something else, or 3) say something truly encouraging to the commenter before you.