Is set to be executed tomorrow despite unreviewed evidence that he is not guilty.
The Supreme Court is set to review his case--six days after his execution date.
This is disgusting, it's immoral, it's basically everything that makes the death penalty a terrible idea. I'm opposed to it in any case, but in this particular one it's making me physically ill.
I wish there was more I could do.
Can we please put to bed the myth that oil prices haven't skyrocketed because of speculators? Yes, that is not the whole story. But the idea of supply and demand is just absurd. Today, oil jumped by a mere $16? Why? Because the Democrats aren't willing to give Wall Street a complete bailout with no questions asked? The response is to invest in oil and other commodities, thus further shifting the suffering for the financial collapse on the backs of working Americans. Speculators are now making Americans pay more for key commodities, despite the fact that there is no supply and demand issues driving such a price spike.
This should not be allowed to happen. While I'm not calling for the nationalization of resources or for governments to enact strict price controls on the international commodity markets, there should be more closely regulated rules. I am comfortable calling on price caps, shutting down the markets when prices go up (and maybe also down) more than a certain percentage each day. I also support a large tax on oil profiteering and speculation.
Moreover, I oppose and deeply resent how Wall Street is forcing poor and working-class people around the world to make up for their failings. Congress should not only be investigating why the economic collapse happened and more closely regulating the financial industries. They should also be investigating who is pushing commodity prices to unreasonable heights, who is getting rich of it, and why we have such a system in the first place.
This is class warfare.
The recent comments by Bernalillo County, New Mexico, Republican chairman Fernando Cabezade Baca concerning why he thinks Latinos won't vote for Obama are outrageous :
"The truth is that Hispanics came here as conquerors. African-Americans came here as slaves. ... Hispanics consider themselves above blacks. They won't vote for a black president."They are outrageous. But entirely expected to someone who has spent time in New Mexico. Not all Latinos think this way. But there is a very loud, if rather small, population of upper-class Hispanos who feel very strongly that this is true.
The idea that John F. Kennedy was a great president is one of the strangest baby boomer narratives. Now we have a new film arguing that Kennedy would have kept us out of Vietnam. This despite the fact that there is no evidence suggesting such a thing. Kennedy was ready to begin a nuclear war with the Soviets over Cuba. His administration acted in a wide variety of loathsome ways in Africa. He ran on a platform that was to the right of Richard Nixon on foreign policy issues. Richard Nixon! Plus, Kennedy increased US presence in Vietnam!!!
I know that Kennedy is a more appealing figure to intellectual baby boomers than Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, but I'm sorry, there is very little difference between any of the three in how they approached the Cold War. JFK was not a peacenik, no matter how much you want him to be.
The conservative attempts to take over colleges retains its hilarious ineptness.
It's so shocking that their attempts have failed so far! I mean, who could have guessed that Americans were generally completely uninterested in engaging in an ideological holy war against liberal professors!!!
I feel their new tact, to fund courses in the classics and triumphalist American history with right-wing funding but without overt ideological overtones, is also bound to fail. First, what is the connection between reading the classics and becoming conservative? Certainly it can happen--and there's no question that a larger number of conservative professors are classics or ancient historians than other fields. But there's not much of a correlation, as I am sure many of the writers and commenters on this blog know.
Second, who is going to teach these classes? The idea that there is this huge cadre of right-wingers with Ph.D.s floating around looking for jobs but being denied because of their politics is absolutely absurd.
And the reason is simple--what self-respecting conservative would go to school for all this time and make so little money?
The only hope these groups have is to take advantage of institutions' financial problems to become major funders that allow them to make curriculum changes. Which given the precarious funding for higher ed in many states is a real possibility.
Obama's bailout plan makes sense. It is important to save the financial markets, but there needs to be punishment as well. Government needs to play a much more active role in regulation. Also, if there is going to be a bailout, the middle and working classes need to be bailed out too. For why should government only help the rich? Obama seeks to limit golden parachutes, which I completely agree with. He demands that homeowners facing foreclosure be able to stay in their homes, another sensible proposition. I would actually go a big step farther, and tie the repeal of the bankruptcy bill to the bailout. If the wealthy can screw up and then force taxpayers to bail them out, why can't regular people screw up and get help too?
Via Cogitamus.
The Washington Post has a story about a recent experiment conducted by two political scientists:
Political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler provided two groups of volunteers with the Bush administration's prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One group was given a refutation -- the comprehensive 2004 Duelfer report that concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded in 2003. Thirty-four percent of conservatives told only about the Bush administration's claims thought Iraq had hidden or destroyed its weapons before the U.S. invasion, but 64 percent of conservatives who heard both claim and refutation thought that Iraq really did have the weapons. The refutation, in other words, made the misinformation worse.
A similar "backfire effect" also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.
(You can read some more commentary about this article at Mother Jones, and find a link to the study)
So today I went to a rally for Obama on Temple campus. He wasn't there, but Howard Dean was, along with Mayor Nutter (whom I not-so-lovingly refer to as M. Nuts).
Political speeches are mostly all the same, but I've got a warm spot in my heart for Howard. I volunteered for Dean back in 2004, and wrote piles of emails to the DNC begging for his chairmanship. I still think sometimes that he would've been a better general election candidate than Kerry, but I absolutely do NOT want to argue that point here. Suffice it to say, it was nice for me to be able to shake his hand and tell him that I supported him four years ago and have him say thanks and look like he meant it.
The girl behind me in line actually said that she wasn't going to vote--I think I terrified her when I turned around and asked her why. I doubt I was very nice.
But what I really wanted to write about was the guy outside the rally with a sign. The gathering was in a big room in the student center, and of course there were a couple of protesters.
This particular guy had a sign that said "Billionaires for Obama" and had a list of corporate logos from companies that have donated to the Obama campaign. His friend had a sign that said "Vote McCain/Obama, More of the Same."
Now, they had a point to some degree. I obviously don't agree that McCain and Obama are the same. There are plenty of substantial differences at this point that I didn't see back in 2000 between Bush and Gore. But to be fair, back in 2000 I was the same age that these kids probably are now, and it was easier to be rebellious.
On the way out of the rally, I asked the guy with the sign what his message was. He said "I'm encouraging people to vote for McCain or Obama!" I asked again, "But what's your message?"
He didn't have an answer.
Now, I'm a huge fan of the First Amendment, as everyone here probably knows, and I absolutely support your right to protest, and occasionally, as my friend Denise says, "To make a total ass of yourself in public."
And I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. Not only that, I wrote Op-Eds and donated money and slapped Nader stickers up around town.
But this guy, today? He wasn't encouraging a Nader vote. He wasn't encouraging a McKinney vote or a Bob Barr vote or a Ron Paul vote or even for people to write his own name in there.
His sole purpose in being there was, apparently, to point out to people like the girl in line behind me, already inclined not to vote because "it's pointless," that they have company in their cynicism. He was just there to be a cynic with a sign.
At that point, I wanted to ask him, like Ren does constantly, "But what's the plan?"
I mean, I probably agree with most of what that guy thinks. But at this point, I'm going to go with trying to change what I can actually change. And I'm not just standing outside with a sign. I'm walking door to door, knocking, calling, donating, writing, working my tail off to change things.
Now, maybe that kid with the sign is working that hard on something. He certainly spent time making his sign and standing outside and probably being subject to much more obnoxious comments than my simple question.
But at some point, I think protest and pseudoanarchism is just a cover for cynicism, so you don't have to get involved in a race that you have any chance of winning.
I knew Nader wasn't gonna come even close to winning back in 2000. Yeah, we were gunning for that 5% of the vote, which we didn't get. But I didn't have anything invested in election day. Not like 2004, where I volunteered for Dean and then for Kerry and spent all election day knocking on strangers' doors.
And not like this year, where I've traveled farther and given more hours to Obama from the primaries on.
When you put that much into it, there's the risk that you fail. That you wake up the day after election day feeling like you've had your heart broken. It's easier not to lose.
And it's certainly easier just to sit back in your safe middle-class white life and not think about the real humans that suffer while you wait for perfection in order to what, take maybe an hour out of your busy middle-class white life to VOTE?
Howard Dean, at the rally, said "You get a D for voting. That's the minimum effort." And he's right.
These kids today had the energy and the motivation to show up with signs to protest outside of the rally: GOOD. But when asked, they couldn't tell me what they wanted to come of it?
It makes me think of the All song:
You're tired of being pushed around
Want to tear the system down?
Hey bro - let's go!
Just quit your bitchin' about the situation
It's not that tough and it's not enough to point your finger
And I don't know why you should listen to me 'cause I'm just a singer
Your open mouth don't make you tough
I see you and I'll call your bluff
What are you for?
I want to know, why don't you tell me so?
What are you for?
Quit giving me negative, what makes you want to live?
What are you for?
This may in fact be the single stupidest thing I have ever read.
Kathleen Murphy slams on movie critics for actually, you know, thinking about movies and writing about what they love. Instead, they are supposed to mirror the general opinion and reaffirm whatever the public goes to see.
There are really so many choices for the worst part of this article. One great moment is when Murphy slams on movie critics for talking about old directors like Fritz Lang and then lists some of his movies. Oh, how ironic and cute!
But I think the low point is this:
Apologizing for his preference for Cinemah over popcorn movies, highbrow New York Times critic A.O. Scott actually had the nads to claim that he's doing us a favor by sharing the "pleasure, wonder and surprise we associate with art."
Don't bother beaming us up, Scotty. What we crave is consensus, write-ups that mirror the majority, the movie tastes of the teens and proles who rule the box office.
I feel like offering Murphy a copy of Richard Hofstadter's Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. Because this piece is a perfect example of American anti-intellectualism. Not only is she opposed to what film critics say, she's opposed to anything that doesn't affirm the majority as she defines it. This article almost could only have been written in this country.
I am sad to hear of Jun Ichikawa's demise.
The only Ichikawa film I have seen is "Tony Takitani." But for this beautiful movie alone, Ichikawa deserves to be mourned. Based upon a Haruki Murakami short story, this achingly sad film about a lonely man who meets and marries a fashionable woman is one of the decade's best. Spare and simple, it is basically about a man who doesn't realize how lonely he has always been until he is alone once more. I was completely awed by this film when I saw it a few years ago. I highly recommend checking it out.
In principle, I have no real problem with the Bush Administration socializing much of the financial markets, in particular the takeover of AIG. What I do have a problem with is the hypocrisy involved with supposed free-market, small-government Republicans acting like European socialists. If the Republicans would admit that their ideas are wrong and the socialization of important societal functions was a good thing, I would be happy. But of course they won't. They'll go on spewing the same rhetoric and like always they'll be a little man behind the rhetorical curtain.
Leading Republicans don't actually believe most of their rhetoric. For them, government exists to support their interests. So they can pay no taxes, make terrible financial decisions with the promise of huge short-term profits, and know that the government will bail them out time after time. They will learn nothing from their previous behavior and no doubt will again engage in bad investments and shady practices to maximize profit.
And they are also happy to use the government to screw over the little guy, pushing for the bankruptcy bill because Americans need to show "personal financial responsibility." Well, where's that personal financial responsibility you scumbags. And of course we can't have a national health care plan because that would be socialism. It would raise our taxes! Yet, what is this bailout of the financial markets going to do to our nation's economy? Will we have to raise taxes? Or will we just engage in the same kind of chimeric financial policies of putting off debt and sacrificing the long-term health of the nation for short-term solutions?
I predict the latter.
If only Americans knew enough about old vice-presidential candidates to use such a slogan:
Sarah Palin. Combining the gravitas of Dan Quayle, the skeletons in the closet of Thomas Eagleton, and the beliefs of Dick Cheney.
To me that's pretty damning. But I realize that like 2% of Americans under the age of 35 know who Eagleton is and not as many more as we'd like to think know who Quayle is.
Oh well. I like my slogan.
Harriet Wilson statue, Milford, New Hampshire. Wilson was the first African-American novelist in U.S. history. Her 1859 work, Our Nig, exposed black indentured servitude in the North and was based on her own experiences as a girl. The work was ignored until Henry Louis Gates rediscovered it in 1982.
Seattle Mariners pitcher Erik Bedard is unlikely to pitch next year after surgery for a torn labrum.
USS Mariner calls the trade bringing Bedard in last winter the worst in franchise history. Basically, we traded our entire farm system, along with the excellent reliever George Sherrill, to the Orioles for two years of Bedard. He wasn't any good in Seattle, was a pain in the ass in the clubhouse, wouldn't talk to the media, and then got hurt. He will be a free agent at the end of next season. For 80 innings of crappiness, the Mariners gave up three amazing prospects that they desperately need to rebuild from one of the worst seasons in franchise history. The Mariners were supposed to compete for the AL West title this year, though that was clearly ridiculous, even in April. Instead, they are trying not to lose 100 games.
Truthfully, the Mariners have a long history of making terrible trades--trading a couple of bums named Jason Varitek and Derek Lowe to the Red Sox for Heathcliff Slocumb, trading Danny Tartabull to Kansas City for Scott Bankhead. So it remains to be seen if the Bedard trade is worse.
But in any case, this season sucks and I am glad it is almost over. The only redeeming thing is that Ichiro got 200 hits last night for the 8th straight season, tying the all-time record of consecutive 200 hit seasons set by Wee Willie Keeler between 1894 and 1901. Assuming he doesn't get hurt, we can expect him to break that record next year. Ichiro!
PS--I knew I was forgetting one horrible trade of the past. Walking to the office I remembered when the Mariners traded Carlos Guillen to Detroit for Ramon Santiago because they thought Guillen was a bad influence on Freddy Garcia. I wonder what happened to that Guillen fellow...
There's a long way to go until November. A lot could happen. But it seems that the Republicans have peaked early. McCain's selection of Sarah Palin is turning into the disaster that I thought it would. She really is a Tom Eagleton-like choice. Although she energized the base, the rest of America is discovering that she is incompetent, corrupt, and just not very smart. The McCain campaign's desperate Hail Mary is coming up short. Plus McCain has gone so over the top negative (another desperate move) that it is starting to haunt him. The economy is tanking and if this election is about the economy, the Republicans lose big. The Democrats should be running commercials with McCain admitting that he has no experience on economic issues on a loop. Plus, 7 soldiers died in Iraq today. Probably a one-time uptick, but that doesn't help McSame either. Overall, things are not looking good for McCain.
The CNN Poll of Polls now shows Obama back up by 2.
Again, it's a long ways until the first Tuesday in November. And I still don't think Obama has run a very effective general election campaign. But I am feeling a lot more confident than I was 10 days ago.
Pennsylvania Hall Fire, 1838. This building was burned by a mob for having women and African-Americans speaking advocating for women's suffrage and abolitionism.
It also should be noted that this is an excellent example of the deep-seated hostility in the North to equal rights, especially for African-Americans, and that the history of northern racism is as long and painful as that in the South. But it doesn't get the same publicity.
As a result of a couple really ridiculously titled movies I’ve reviewed recently (namely, the top two in the list), I decided to put together a list of some of my favorite ridiculous movie titles. It’s not a ranking and it’s sure as hell not a quality judgment, but I’ve only listed movies that I’ve actually seen. I’m sure I’m forgetting some, but here we are.
SURRENDER—HELL!: Nothing’s better than punctuating your title with an exclamation point. Never has there been a title more fun to yell out. This is the worst kind of ‘50s jingoistic war film.
NUDE FOR SATAN: If you’re looking for nudity and Satanism, do you really need to go farther?
TORSO, OR THE CORPSE SHOWED EVIDENCE OF CARNAL VIOLENCE: Torso is the English language equivalent of the Italian I Corpi presentano tracce di violenza carnale. I prefer the more descriptive original title for this ‘80s slasher flick but, with the English, you at least know where people are getting stabbed.
THE INCREDIBLY STRANGE CREATURES WHO STOPPED LIVING AND BECAME MIXED UP ZOMBIES: Ray Dennis Steckler is one of the true kings of Z-grade films. The title became even more ridiculous than its original, The Incredibly Strange Creatures: Or How I Stopped Living and Became a Mixed-Up Zombie, after Columbia’s threat of a lawsuit. Steckler stars in the film under one of the all-time great pseudonyms: Cash Flagg.
THOU SHALT NOT KILL…EXCEPT: Vietnam vets rearm themselves to battle hippy cultists. This anti-hippy Straw Dogs finishes with a man being impaled on a motorcycle...awesome.
FOR YOUR HEIGHT ONLY: This comes close to the worst movie I’ve ever seen, but there’s always Titanic. A Bond parody from the Philippines, it features little 003 ½ crack midget spy and ladies’ man. Really, without seeing it, there’s no explaining how insane this movie is.
EVEN DWARVES STARTED SMALL: The one film on the list I will defend on its merits and the second straight film to feature little people, this early Werner Herzog allegory is only the second all dwarf cast in film history. If I remember correctly, Erik really hates this movie, which clearly raises the quality a couple of notches.
YOUR VICE IS A LOCKED ROOM AND ONLY I HAVE THE KEY: A pretty standard, and fairly decent, giallo film from Sergio Martino, who also made the above Torso, based heavily on Poe’s “The Black Cat.”
JESUS CHRIST: VAMPIRE HUNTER: The cover for the DVD of this film features Jesus with wrestler El Santo doing karate. Indeed, the movie fulfills this promise as Jesus returns to protect the lesbian community of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, from vampires. A true modern classic.
PORNO HOLOCAUST: In the early ‘80s, when the cannibal film was hot in Italy, Aristide Massacessi (aka, Joe D’Amato) decided it would be a good idea to make one that included a couple of hardcore scenes. Brilliant idea for a brilliant movie, this is one of the most reprehensible films I’ve ever seen.
THE EROTIC NIGHTS OF THE LIVING DEAD: I’ve included a 10b here because this is almost the exact same movie as Porno Holocaust, only the brown people have put makeup on and are now flesh-eating zombies instead of flesh-eating natives. Massacessi covers all his bases here, zombies or cannibals, there’s something for everybody.
Poor House/Farm. Huron, South Dakota, 1913.
This image comes from a postcard of the time. Why someone would want a postcard of a poorhouse, I don't know. But there were postcards of basically everything back then, including lynchings. I should investigate this phenomenon further. I will when I have time, i.e., after I die.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to 1886!!! Today, we are watching a freak show.
Look at the sights!!! The world's shortest man meets the world's leggiest woman!
That will be followed by some bear baiting and then opium for everyone! Before we start though, let me comb the large chunks of food out of my huge beard.
What's that? It's not 1886? It's 2008? Then why the hell is the New York Times reporting on the world's shortest man meeting the world's leggiest woman? And why do I have such a huge beard? Hmmm...it not being 1886, what explanation do I have for my Gilded Age bathing habits? Or my laudanum addiction? Or my hatred of eastern European ethnic groups?
Boy, do I have some explaining to do...
The story of the GOP delegate that was robbed of $50,000 by a beautiful woman who "drugged" him in a St. Paul hotel room has been making the rounds (see the Huffington Post). As the story goes, he invited the woman up to his hotel room during his stay for the convention, where she asked him to get undressed... after that he doesn't remember.
In any event, he reports that she stole about $50,000 of personal belongings.
What kind of asshat has $50,000 worth of personal belongings in his hotel room? What kind of personal belongings are worth a total of $50,000? Well...
The haul included a $30,000 watch, a $20,000 ring, a necklace valued at $5,000, earrings priced at $4,000 and a Prada belt valued at $1,000, police said.
First off all, this guy sounds like the biggest douchebag in the country. A $5,000 necklace? A $20,000 ring? That wasn't a wedding ring, either, the dude is single. Is a man that wears a $20,000 ring even remotely attractive?
Aside from the above evidence of asshattery, earlier in the week, he was interviewed randomly at the convention. His insights on foreign policy are especially illuminating.
"Less taxes and more war," he said, smiling. He said the U.S. should "bomb the hell" out of Iran because the country threatens Israel. Asked by the interviewer how America would pay for a military confrontation with Iran, he said the U.S. should take the country's resources. "We should plant a flag. Take the oil, take the money," he said. "We deserve reimbursement." He said an attack on Iran was needed to protect Israel, and he offered how it could be accomplished through "strategical airstrikes". "Hopefully, just bomb the hell out of them from the sky. No troops," he said.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you an asshat of the first order-- one dumb enough to get his rich ass robbed by a prostitute and committ the above statements to film. Bravo, asshat, bravo.
In the spring, I am teaching a class called "Food, Drugs, and Sex: Bodies and Environments in History." This will definitely be the most experimental course I have ever taught. I'm looking forward to it even though it also scares me. Basically, this is a course that centers the body in history and looks at what we put into our body and what comes out of it, showing how the human body both changes nature and is changed by the environment.
Part of the point of this class is for me to work out ideas of my own about bodies and nature, which is central to my own work, but which I have not dealt with a lot on a theoretical level.
Core to many of these ideas is Foucault. Did any of you deal with Foucault on the undergraduate level? If you did, would you recommend it for higher level undergraduates? Would I be crazy for doing so? I am not that excited by theory generally, but I need to deal with this myself.
The other issue with teaching a class with this title is that it could attract a lot of bozos and frat guys who think they can sit around talking about how much they like to fuck. Teaching some Foucault early on could drive these people out. So that's a point in its favor.
Thoughts?
It is hard to miss this headline on the yahoo home page today: “Big blunder part of wild loss” accompanied by a picture of rookie Eagles receiver, DeSean Jackson.
Now, there are at least two things incredibly wrong with that story (and not just because I’m an Eagles fan who watched her home team lose after leading for most of the 4th quarter).
1. On a day when Wall Street is tumbling and sending stocks reeling all over the world, a story about a rookie NFL player’s ego getting ahead of himself should not be the front page header on any site, though I must say this beats “how to find out if your man really likes you.” While forcing information down people’s throats is not good business or media strategy, journalism has to be able to do the delicate balance of offering relevant information to citizens while also satisfying its consumers (consumers and citizens being one and the same with very different tendencies). But a Yahoo! home page, which is uniquely positioned as a media source -- one that is incredibly hard to avoid regardless of whether you are checking your email, analyzing horoscopes or looking up a definition --- is the ideal platform to thrust important information on people without being guilty of the proverbial “hiding medicine in icecream” and I think giants like yahoo and google should be using their wide popularity to educate civilians.
2. The second reason why it’s wrong is that rookie wide receiver DeSean Jackson’s “bonehead move” as yahoo! calls it, while extremely asinine, had little to do with the Eagles’ loss itself. In the very next play, as the Yahoo! story goes on to explain, the ever-infallible Brian Westbrook covered the one yard needed to score the missed touchdown. There are many things that go right or wrong in a game, and any number of them are usually attributable to a loss, but articles such as these neither tell the whole story nor capture the excitement. There are times of course, when a game-changing or even season-changing mistake can occur, as with Tony Romo’s infamous botched snap in the NFC playoff round two years ago. Romo did have something similar for Eagles fans last night – a fumble that turned into a Philadelphia TD, turning the tide in favor of the birds. But it was a McNabb fumble in the last quarter, which might have cost Philly the game, though considering his flawless efficiency through most of it, it’s hard to place blame.
While football is unequivocally pleasing to the eye (be it a QB’s impeccably placed touchdown pass or the sight of his receiver rise with the ball and nestle it in his palms), often times we lesser mortals relive it last by reading the reviews and articles that follow on subsequent days and weeks. It would be a good idea for the media to do a better job of it.
Last night someone threw some grenades into a plaza during Mexico's Independence celebrations in the capital city of Michoacán. The governor of Michoacán is claiming it was drug cartels. So far, 8 are dead and over 100 people are wounded, but the numbers or changing quickly. You can read more about it here or here (in English). If it does turn out to be related to organized crime, this would be the first time they have engaged in such an open attack on civilians, and during a symbolic political event. The consequences of this attack are likely to be pretty bad...
From Kay Warren's Indigenous Movements and Their Critics: Pan-Maya Activism in Guatemala. From what I understand, a well-respected book.
"That night I got quite drunk as I wrote my field notes. I felt I had been absorbed by a variant of the transforming-selves notion of personhood in Maya culture- which holds that the self is not stable or fully knowable. It appeared that I had been apprehended in a way that offered little chance for escape. How could I prove I was just myself, that there was nothing menacing to unmask?"
And you thought that happened several years ago, with the advent of the Internet. I mean a different kind of e-media: call it old media's answer to hyperlinks, RSS feeds, and all that good stuff that its technological cousin has to offer.
If I can’t quite (yet) wrap my arms around the idea of an electronic book, I must say my first taste of e-ink magazine technology is not looking very good. Esquire’s much-hyped e-ink cover came out last week and the reviews are in. Wired hated it, and Engadget loved it.
Gizmodo, like a good geek Web site merely stuck to dissecting the electronics behind it and didn’t offer an opinion.
I walked into a Barnes & Noble to take a quick glance, but there was no way I was going to purchase the over-priced magazine for a whopping $5.99. What's worse, as Wired reports, this "special collector's edition" is not being made available to regular subscribers who themselves will have to buy it at the newsstand price as opposed to the 50c they would pay otherwise. Apparently the production costs were up to 10$ per cover. As Chris Snyder notes, that’s anything but smart business strategy.
The cover has a rectangular plate of electronic paper inserted with a blinking caption that proclaims, "the 21st Century Begins Now." In case you had any doubt, this is pretty much the best way to reinforce it. This Esquire gig was just eye candy though, something to get people to go gaga over and others to write about (and make 6 bucks apiece while they're at it). This is in no way the ultimate productive use of e-technology: a blurb on the cover is not a commercial for electronic paper, it's something the traditional paper can do just as well! If Esquire were to have done this right, they might have tried it alongside a story or added dimension to an illustration.
Let’s hope that the first e-newspaper will be less disappointing, which is very close, thanks to Plastic Logic, which has unveiled its electronic newspaper reader: a letter-size, sleek device, capable of reading formats ranging from PDF to Word and Powerpoint. An Electronics Show in Vegas early next year will announce which newspapers will use Plastic Logic’s services.
Now that sounds more promising – for the unwieldy reading experience that is the newspaper with its folding and re-folding, uneven columns, split sentences, story jumps, running heads, and low-quality paper, technology might actually offer some comfort.
A magazine, on the other hand, needs little help. It's pretty fabulous as is.
Dear Delta,
If you don't want to make me angry, please don't use a song that starts with a woman saying "Hello" as part of your hold music. I don't really like saying hello back to a song and then feeling like an idiot.
Thanks!
Friday night, (in Claremont, CA, about 30 minutes west of where I live) the author David Foster Wallace committed suicide. The NYT has the obituary.
I first read A Supposedly Funny Thing I'll Never Do Again in college, and ended up reading a number of his works after that. Even if I ultimately didn't like everything I read of his, I always appreciated the technique, the sheer power of his virtuosic writing (I do disagree with the many people who thought Infinite Jest was in need of editing; to me, the sprawling, expansive length seemed almost necessary to the project as a whole). In any event, author deaths are always strange to me, especially under circumstances like this one.
Also, I'm not sure how I feel about the phrase "zeitgeisty buzz" in the Times article.
After two years, including having to start over when my computer died last year, I have finished putting all of my music on my computer. My last album, a Cross Canadian Ragweed and Robert Earl Keen mix a friend made me probably 6 years ago. The total amount of music: 16,287 songs adding up to 47.4 days. At best, this is probably an average-sized music collection for the people who write on this blog.
Contingent of Native Americans visiting John Collier, Secretary of the American Indian Defense Association (and later Commissioner of Indian Affairs), Mill Valley, CA, late 1920s
-I told Erik earlier this week that I had little hopes for the OSU (sorry - that's THE Ohio State University)/USC game, and even fewer hopes for another OSU title game appearance. I just didn't think they had as good a team as everybody seemed to think they might. With Beanie Wells out, I really thought OSU didn't stand much of a chance against USC. Still.....ouch.
-That said, if the Bucks couldn't win in Hell-A (see what I did there?), it's good to see that at least the Notre Dame won in the one annual game where I don't-totally-and-rabidly root against the Irish.
-And now to things that actually do matter to the universe. While it's impressive that Francisco Rodriguez set the record for saves, if the pitcher who leads the leagues in wins, ERA, win percentage, and is second in WHIP, complete games, and shutouts doesn't win the Cy Young, baseball writers will prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that they truly do not know what the hell they are doing (and yes, I'm biased and partial, but the Angels are going to the playoffs, wherease the Cy Young is all I've got to hang my happiness on. Oh, that, and the fact that the Yankees aren't going to the playoffs....ah, sweet, glorious, beautiful, fair, just life).
Earlier this year, I profiled the Brazilian author Machado de Assis, who is arguably the greatest writer in Portuguese ever and who died 100 years ago this month. In accordance with this centennial and his recent flourishing in English, the New York Times has an article up on Machado de Assis and his surgence (it's not really a "resurgence," given that he was never in vogue in English). It's an interesting read, though it doesn't offer anything amazingly new or groundbreaking (if I didn't know better, I'd say Rohter was ripping me off). If any readers are in New York this week, they should definitely check out the commemmorations of films and presentations. I can't attest to any of the films based on Machado de Assis's works. I can't really speak to the films based on his works, but I think the criticisms and challenges raised in the article are valid. To me, as strange as it sounds, I always felt Assis and Philip Roth were similar in that you could never really fully capture the essence and visions of their works on the big screen, because so much of it is so closely bound in their narrative voice and writing style, two things that simply do not get translated to film. Still, I can't say the movies are no good, and so anybody who can should check them out this week.
And it should go without saying, but, for God's or anybody else's sake, if you haven't read any Machado de Assis, get out there and get some to read. You won't be disappointed.
Software CEO Jeff Hawn bought a ranch near Fairplay, Colorado. Like many nouveau riche who have purchased rural estates in the West during the last 20 years, Hawn didn't understand what he was getting into. Specifically, he lacked understanding of the common conceptions of property in the West. Much of that area of Colorado is essentially open range. For you non-westerners out there, on the open range, livestock are unfenced and wander wherever they want. Hawn didn't like his neighbor's bison coming over to his property to graze. He considered his land "pristine." When it continued, he invited hunters to kill them. 32 were shot. Hawn is now being charged with 32 counts of animal cruelty.
We are seeing these kinds of conflicts all over the West. These rich urbanites are buying their dream homes in Colorado, Montana, Idaho, and other western states. Then they find out that their neighbors have animals. Those animals smell. Sometimes they come onto your property. The neighbors have large farm machines. These are working people and they start that work early in the morning. You wake up at 5:30 am. You don't like that. So you try to organize other new residents against this, attempting to pass ordinances limiting animal usage, noise, and other nuisances. Of course, this makes your neighbors furious, dividing communities between old-timers and new residents.
The kind of jerkish behavior Hawn engaged in is not the only interesting bit about this story. I am also amused that he referred to his land as "pristine." What does Hawn mean by this? Does he really think animals have not grazed that land? Animals much more damaging than bison have been on that land for at least 120 years. The ecology of Colorado has been vastly changed by Europeans since their arrival. There is nothing "pristine" about the place. But these people building their starter castles in the forest have heavily romanticized these places. When their romantic vision clashes with the reality of working people, conflict ensues.
People like Hawn have deeply damaged these rural western communities. Property values have skyrocketed. Many ranchers, facing economic hard times, have split their ranches into small parcels that are then sold to rich baby boomers. These new residents demand urban amenities but don't want to pay the taxes to make that happen. They don't contribute to the fabric of the local communities, such as volunteer fire departments. If their home catches on fire, they want someone there immediately. But new residents don't want to serve in these rural communities, overtaxing the older residents and diminishing the ability of these institutions to be effective. They also are shocked when forest fires burn up their homes. They can't believe that firefighters don't protect their backyard. But when their backyard is a national forest, these things happen.
Essentially, you have thousands of people every year buying land in places that look pretty but which are also working and sometimes dangerous landscapes. People don't do any research to understand what life in the rural West is like. They have a romantic image in their minds and a very specific idea of property rights that don't always conform to the reality of West. This is a pretty extreme case, but conflicts like this are taking place throughout the West all the time.
It's pretty clear I think that my sympathies lay with the older residents, who understand the land they work on and respect that land, even if they don't always treat it that well. Nothing is worse for the land and for wildlife than these subdivided ranches where people have built homes every 1/4 mile. Working to keep properties together, whether as working ranches or as nature preserves is the best thing for the land and the people who live out there. Keeping second (or third or fourth) home buyers out, or at least forcing them to take a course in life in the rural West would also be a good thing for the environment and for the communities they want to live in.
Studies suggest that global warming will lead to higher rates of kidney stones. Why? Increased deyhdration.
As a kidney stone survivor, let me tell you that I can think of no better reason to fight climate change than this. Wow, that sucked.
Via Treehugger.
We haven't had any music discussions on here lately.
In response, let me declare that "Albuquerque" is Neil Young's best song.
Maybe I'm biased because I lived there. But it's a great song.
Also Tonight's the Night is his best album.
I'm probably the only person in the world who thinks these things.
Events in Bolivia this week have gotten virtually no attention in the U.S. (due in no small part because people don't care, as well as the fact that the media has had the presidential campaigns, the non-Chilean 9/11 anniversary, and now Hurricane Ike to discuss). However, in the last few days, things have escalated to a point that Bolivia's internal crisis between Morales and the highlands vs. the four lowlands regions are threatening to blow up into a transnational diplomatic crisis.
In summary, despite Morales winning the referendum on his administration in early August, the situation has only worsened between his administration and the four eastern lowlands regions that have wanted virtual economic and political secession. As Erik accurately surmised, the situation has come to a standstill, with neither side gaining the upper hand as violence only escalates. Confrontations between rural workers (often of indigenous backgrounds) and the opposition (often of "whiter" and wealthier backgrounds) have escalated, with 8 deaths (seven of them campesinos who were surrounded and attacked) and 34 injuries yesterday alone. Morales also expelled the U.S. ambassador from Bolivia on Wednesday, claiming that the ambassador is supporting the four regions in an effort to undermine Morales's leadership. While the U.S. State Department called such claims "baseless," there is absolutely no more reason to trust the U.S. than there is Morales, particularly given our history of having the highest levels of the executive branch undermining leaders we didn't like in the past (Guatemala in 1954, Brazil in 1964, Chile in 1973 [hat-tip to Randy], Argentina in 1976, Nicaragua in the 1980s, or Venezuela in 2002).
However, unlike previous times of conflict in Bolivia, this time, the threat of hemispheric involvement is greater. Already, as a sign of "solidarity," Hugo Chavez has expelled the U.S. ambassador from Venezuela. While this is the story that's getting the most press in the U.S., though, in many ways it's the least important for the rest of the South American continent. In addition to the violence, opponents of Morales blew up one of the major pipelines between Bolivia and Brazil. The attack on the pipeline had an immediate effect on Brazil, as Brazil gets 25% of its daily fuel from Bolivia through this pipeline.
Although the service was restored relatively quickly, Brazil and Bolivia's other neighbors are finding it more difficult not to get involved. Marco Aurelio Garcia, Brazil's special assessor for International Affairs for the President, said yesterday that Brazil "will not tolerate any rupture of institutional order in Bolivia," saying that Morales's overthrow would cause enormous problems for the entire continent. And Lula spoke with Argentine president Kristina Fernandez Kirchner, Chile's Michele Bachelet, Morales, and Chavez yesterday, in an effort to (as the article puts it) "mobilize the countries of the region - especially the Group of Friends of Bolivia, formed by Brazil, Colombia, and Argentina - so that they can serve as an intermediary channel between the government and the opposition in Bolivia."
These actions and statements are far from empty international bluster (even Chavez is probably not making empty threats when he promised to aide an armed resistance movement if the democratically-elected Morales were to be overthrown) that will not be backed up by action. It has been a very long time since the governments of so many South American countries were in such quick contact to try to aide another country (and the last time they were in contact, it was to root out and kill subversives in Operation Condor). The fact that Brazil, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, and Venezuela are all clearly concerned and not afraid to enter into the equation to make sure Bolivia's institutions remain in tact reveals just how severe the situation has gotten. Certainly, I hope things will get better, but like Erik back in August, I just don't see how they can right now, given how much of a stalemate it's become between Bolivia and the lowlands regions.
If Obama loses this election, the primary reason will be racism.
I am among the Democrats who are freaking out a little bit because the Obama campaign is allowing McCain to control the debate and seem to be unwilling to punch him in the gut. I thought we learned these lessons in 2000 and 2004. Others seem to think people like me are overreacting. It's not often that I am more pessimistic than Dave Noon, but this is one case. Bill Clinton seems pretty confident too, for whatever that's worth.
I'm willing to relax and accept this. But what I worry about is racism in Michigan. Tom S. has a great post about the deep-seated racial animosity in Michigan. This could easily cost Obama the state. Michigan has an above-average percentage of older white people. Most people point to the riots of 1967 as the seed of racial hatred in Michigan, but of course it goes back much farther. Detroit during World War II was not a nice place when it came to racial harmony. For anyone interested in these issues, I suggest reading Thomas Sugrue's The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit, which is one of the best history books I have ever read.
U.S. politics is ultimately driven by local issues. Talking heads don't talk about this much because they would have to work and understand the nation rather than staying in Washington and creating grand narratives out of trivia. When Tom Daschle lost his Senate seat in 2004, it wasn't because Democrats can't win anymore in places like South Dakota. It was because he had basically abandoned the state and had listed his residence as Washington, D.C., for tax purposes. That pissed off enough South Dakotans that they voted him out of office. Similarly, Kathleen Sebelius' surprising success as governor of Kansas has a lot to do with her personal political skills, but at least as much to do with infighting that has crippled the Kansas Republican party over the past 10 years.
If Obama loses the election, it is probably because he loses Michigan. If he loses, every commentator will create grand narratives as to why, probably focusing on his lofty rhetoric, his supposed elitism, his inability to connect with working-class voters, or some other bullshit. But the real reason will be racism. Enough people won't vote for him because he's black that it could cost him the election. A lot of those people live in places that weren't going to go Democratic anyway--Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, etc. But Michigan should go Democratic. If it doesn't, it isn't anything Obama did or didn't do. It's because he's black.
I was hoping Obama's candidacy would open a national discussion on race, but of course it hasn't. It's something no one wants to talk about. The Republicans certainly don't want to bring it up because they want the racist vote and want to play on racist symbols and ideas to undermine Obama without being too obvious about it. The media doesn't want to talk about it, I guess because it would impinge their white viewership and would be seen as biased against McCain. Obama doesn't bring it up because it doesn't seem like good politics from his angle, which might be right.
If Obama loses, he loses because of racism. And if that happens, some more cynical Democrats will claim that we should have nominated Hillary because she wouldn't have had that problem and would have won easily. That's probably a bad argument. I say probably because if the Democrats win only their normal states and if Arkansas would have put us over the top, the argument makes electoral sense. But Hillary would have been far less competitive in the West. New Mexico might have gone to the Democrats, but that's unsure. Certainly Colorado would not be competitive, nor would Nevada or Montana. Virginia and Iowa, I don't know. But while Obama has not been able to continue his 50 state strategy into the general election, he has least opened up states for Democrats that have not been competitive for 15 years.
Unless something really bad happens between now and then, I say this:
Win or lose--Obama in 2012!
I have said repeatedly that anti-immigration activists don't care one whit about the legality of immigrants. They care strictly about their race.
To replace deported Mexicans and Central Americans in meatpacking plants, employers have turned to legal African immigrants, particularly Somalis.
Via Rick Perlstein, the response is predictably racist, at least in Shelbyville, Tennessee.
The Tyson plant where the Somalis and other Muslims work decided to give the workers a Muslim religious holiday off instead of Labor Day. People in central Tennessee went berserk. Quite ironic given the anti-union attitude so prevalent in that part of the South.
If you really want to see how race trumps legal status in immigration debates, read the comment thread to the original newspaper story. But I warn you, the extreme racism is vomit-inducing.
Last month I wrote a post about how Mexico's former ruling party, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) is still a major force in Mexican politics. A couple days ago, a new poll came out suggesting the PRI is regaining strength and will likely do well in the upcoming midterm elections in July 2009.
First of all, just because you say it's a martini doesn't mean it's a martini.(See Erik's post from awhile back)
Next, super-expensive "martinis" (note correct use of scare quotes) that come with jewelry are ridiculously stupid.
Scott's Seafood in Costa Mesa has a $3,300.00 fauxtini for sale through October that comes with diamonds set in white gold.
And the recipe? Blue Curacao, some fruit juice of some kind, and vod-fucking-ka. It costs over three grand, and it doesn't even have any gin.
