Peanuts, Charles Schulz, and Women

I haven't been a Peanuts (the comic strip) fan since I was about 7. However, Charles McGrath's book review of David Michaelis' biography of Charles Schulz is fascinating. Apparently (I at least never knew this), Schulz was moody, often depressed, and seemed like less than a cheerful person a majority of the time, and I never realized that the male characters of Peanuts were bits and pieces of Schulz himself, while the female characters were based on women in his life. To wit:

"Peanuts” was almost transparently autobiographical. There really was anunattainable Little Red-Haired Girl. Her name was Donna Mae Johnson, and shejilted Schulz in July 1950; he nursed the rejection, along with all the other slights he suffered from wished-for girlfriends, for the rest of his life.Charlie Brown, wishy-washy, disillusioned, but also secretly ambitious, was theartist himself, of course; and so were Linus, the oddball; Schroeder, meticulousand gifted; and, above all, Snoopy, with his daydreams, his fantasies, his senseof being undervalued and misunderstood. Violet, with her mean streak; and Lucy,bossy, impatient and sarcastic, were all the controlling, withholding women inSchulz’s life, especially his mother and his first wife, Joyce."

That's certainly a less-than-charming perspective on women, and given Peanuts' readership, it must have been at least somewhat influential, , as have many other comics that I'd never considered as anything more than virtually-never-funny (think Margaret in "Dennis the Menace" or even Suzie from the beloved "Calvin and Hobbes", though she was a far more complex version of the "girl who studies hard and hates fun" model. Plus, Calvin and Hobbes was great).

Historical Image of the Day

Populist cartoon, Houston Daily Post, 1896

Why I Generally Hate Travel Writing

This review of São Paulo is an example of everything wrong with travel sections: cultural imperialism, the "the world is my playground and I can't be inconvenienced with things like poverty", the "I'm here to see how the rich live" narrative, the "the third world is dirty and ugly" meta-narrative, "other class-cultures are crass to me" (the complaint about graffiti, which, from having seen it personally, is quite well done and artistic), the complete ignoring of social and economic problems while simultaneously trying to find the best "values" possible...it has it all. I don't love São Paulo, but this article is just as offensive, ridiculous, ignorant, and neo-colonialist as they come.

Thailand

I'm so far from surprised that the Thai coup is falling apart. You mean that if you support a military coup but don't support it brutally crushing the opposition, that it might not work? The forces of Thaksin, the country's leader who was overthrown, are on the rebound. The coup is divided between hard-liners and more moderate elements and support for the military government from the crown seems to be dwlinding. Corruption is as bad in the military regime as under Thaksin. Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont had to reshuffle his cabinet recently because of the corruption of several of his ministers.

There are several possibilities here. The best is that elections scheduled for December go forward and are relatively peaceful. The worst is a hard-line coup from elements who really want Thailand to be like Burma, but with tourism and foreign investment. The reality I think is that it will lean toward the former rather than the latter. Thailand has an awful lot to lose from a brutal military takeover and the King occupies a position of respect that no one in Burma can lay claim to. Moreover, large sections of the public, particularly the nation's innumerable poor, love Thaksin and so there is a popular backlash against the coup as well.

Behind the Woodshed

Last year, Oregon's freefall started with a terrible loss at Washington St., a week after being defeated by a very good Cal team. Do you think the Oregon coaches reminded the team of this?

At halftime, Oregon is leading WSU 40-0. Dixon is 19-25-259-2. Fair to middling, don't you think? Oregon has forced 3 turnovers. WSU's run offense? 18 carries for 15 yards.

Sounds good to me.

Creepy Historical Quote of the Day

The slogan of the Camp Fire Girls from 1911:

"We glorify work because through work we are free."

Similar statements have proven less than accurate in the 20th century world.

From Susan Schrepfer's Nature's Altars: Mountains, Gender, and American Environmentalism, 155.

Lyrad's Random 10

Everybody knows that The Pixies were a great and influential band; there's nothing I can say that hasn't been said many times. "Planet of Sound" is from Trompe le Monde, there last album, and one generally considered less than their best. I had a late entry onto the Pixies bandwagon, I was too wrapped up in Motley Crue to think about anything else, and it wasn't until I saw a video of their version of Jesus and Mary Chain's "Head On" that I heard of them. I bought this one and, subsequently, the rest which helped greatly in getting me away from the '80s glam fetish (even though I have Power Symphony on this list...I just can't get the cheesy metal out of my veins). Thank you Pixies. In spite of its reputation, it is one of my favorites still, if for no other reason than it was the first, though my favorite album from them is Bossanova, which is often called their worst, so maybe my judgements are just skewed.

1. The Pixies--Planet of Sound
2. Irakere--Bacalao con Pan
3. Blind Willie Johnson--Take Your Stand
4. Ennio Morricone--Acido e charme (from the soundtrack to Trio Infernale)
5. Reverend H.R. Tomlin--Lord, I Just Can't Keep from Crying
6. Henri Lazarof--Necompe (8 Soundscapes) for Percussion; Soundscape 7 (New England Conservatory New Music Ensemble)
7. Tom Waits--Hold On
8. Power Symphony--The Way of the Sword
9. Ray Charles--Hot Rod
10. Roy Smeck--Kalima Waltz

Saving the Amazon Rainforest

Alana Herro writes of NGOs attempting to halt all Amazon deforestation by 2015. I wonder if this is possible. She claims that with a large cash infusion from foreign donors that this is possible. I'm intrigued but highly skeptical. Lula has not proven to be a leader on environmental issues. Logging, mining, and cattle interests still are expanding in the region. Will the enforcement ever be there to stop these people? Saving these forests is something of a world emergency, and not for aesthetic reasons. The oxygen these trees provide is going to be key in doing anything to fight climate change. In fact, we need a pretty heavy reversal in forest use to try and convert some of that carbon dioxide into oxygen.

Still, plans like these can only be positive and I hope they succeed.

Historical Image of the Day

Stipend time, Mt. Cristo Rey, El Paso, 1938

Really?

I don't care who it alienates (although it's not like I care who my normal posts alienate) - is a Hannah Montana story, featuring none other than Billy Ray Cyrus's offsping, really the top story at CNN.com right now (1 AM Brazilian time, midnight EST in the US)??????

I mean.......COME ON

Friday Guitar Blogging

Danny Gatton. Astonishing. Watch how he bends the string behind the nut at 0:54. There are guitarists who make you want to go and practice, and then there are guitarists who make you want to just give up. Gatton fell into the latter category.

Mike Huckabee Prefers The "No Brain" Style of Education

Mike Huckabee is complaining that the American education system focuses too much on the left brain, calling it “the biggest single mistake we’ve made in the last generation."

Why? We focus too much on logic!

Huckabee would no doubt prefer the fundamentalist Christian focus on the "No Brain" approach, which would completely exclude science from the classroom. If you took science out of the schools, imagine what you would have time for--Preaching 101, shows by Christian "rock" bands, Noah studies--it just opens everything up.

Mister Trend's Random 10

Cartola was one of Brazil's greatest samba writers, and his story parallels that of so many of America's greatest bluesmen (Skip James, Son House, and Mississippi John Hurt, among others). From the favela of Mangueira, he was one of the most famous samba composers of the 1930s. However, as was typical of the times, he would write songs that record companies would record with other artists, yet he would never see any of the royalties. After the 1930s, he faded into a normal routine in Mangueira, one of Rio's oldest and most famous favelas. "Re-discovered" washing cars in the late-1950s, Cartola returned to the public eye, opening a samba club that served as a launching point for some of Brazil's greatest artists (Paulinho da Viola being the most famous but not the only example), and even recording material again in the 1970s. While he did see at least some profit from these songs, he continued to be fairly poor, and still lived in Mangueira when he died in 1980. Since then, he has practically become a national hero, acknowledged as one of the greatest sambistas ever, and his songs are widely sung and re-interpreted to this day. For anybody who wants to know anything about Brazilian music, there are few better places to start than Cartola.

1. "Sing Me Out the Window" - Múm
2. "Backyards" - Broken Social Scene
3. "Motherfucker = Redeemer (Part One)" - Godspeed You Black Emperor!
4. "Tremor Christ" - Pearl Jam
5. "Little Demon" - Screamin' Jay Hawkins
6. "Something in the Night" - Bruce Springsteen
7. "Grande Deus" - Cartola
8. "Fewer Words" - Badly Drawn Boy
9. "She Came In Through the Bathroom Window" - The Beatles
10. "Havana Moon" - Chuck Berry

Historical Image of the Day

James G. Swan image of Chehalis Treaty Ground, 1855

Lula and Biofuels at the UN General Assembly

I'm a little late in getting to this, but there is a great article from the Guardian about Lula's address to the UN during the general assembly. The main foci of Lula's address were biofuels, both in Brazil and in a global economic context, and economic systems. He was very right to criticize the one-sided agrigultural protectionism Northern Hemisphere, pointing out it was part of a broader system that "perpetuates dependency and underdevelopment".

However, what was really important in his speech was the material relating to biofuels. He was both defensive of the production of biofuels in Brazil, and criticized the North and other countries that remain uninformed about how Brazil produces biofuels. He took on both critiques from the "developed world" ("His speech reflects strong irritation in Brazil that many of the critics of the country's biofuel programme are using arguments about environmental protection and food shortages either as an excuse for northern protectionism or simply to defend their own oil and gas industries") and critiques from countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, and Cuba, who want biofuel programs curbed and agriculture to focus on the hunger question instead. As Lula pointed out, it doesn't have to be an either/or proposition, and it isn't an either/or proposition in Brazil, where "only a fifth of Brazil's arable land is currently under cultivation and of this less than 4% is used for ethanol". With criticisms like these coming from both the North and the governments furthest left in Latin America, no wonder Lula was a little defensive.

And he was totally justified, too. The article points out the "crocodile's tears" of Europe and the U.S., who claim to be concerned about social conditions in Latin America. Where in the hell do Europe and the U.S. have room to criticize Latin America for social conditions, given centuries of colonialism, imperialism, neo-colonialism, and extremely punitive trade and economic relations, be it via one-sided tariffs, privatization, or the IMF and World Bank?

And of course, Chavez, Morales, and Cuba don't get off hook here. It's fine to be concerned with hunger, and far more consistent of them than the Northern Hemisphere to be worried about social justice, but trying to nail Brazilian industry and tie it to U.S. inefficiency here is irresponsible. Plus, both Bolivia and Venezuela rely so heavily on petroleum for their national incomes, they of course would have a less-than-altruistic concern if petroleum consumption fell and biofuel consumption rose globally. And let's not forget that, while it isn't a strained relationship, Chavez has occasionally struggled rhetorically and ideologically with Brazil as the two compete to increase their presence in South America.

That said, hats off to Lula. While his speech was in no way without its own political agendas and concerns, his points were fair and accurate, and I hope he continues defending Brazil and Brazilian interests that could actually help the globe (you know - the whole "non-fossil fuels" thing) as well as he did at the UN General Assembly.

Gore

First, congratulations to Al Gore for winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Despite what many Americans seem to think, global warming is happening and it will lead to major, catastrophic changes in human and natural history. Even for many people who believe that something is happening, it seems like a distant problem not worth worrying about. This is an absolute falsehood. The backlash against Gore in the last week from the British judge and US writers claiming some kind of exaggeration or bad science is absurd. The only two reasons I can see why these claims are getting so much press are that, again, many people really don't want to admit that we have irrevocably changed the planet through our industrialization and consumerism and that press organizations hold to some idea of "balance" even when one side is clearly right. This is particularly true when it is progressives who are right. In these cases, even if reactionary forces are completely loony, they get equal press coverage.

Thus it disturbs me that in the Times website front page about Gore's award, they print this comment from a reader:

“The Nobel committee continues its record of rewarding left-wing alarmists.”

Why? Is this their way of saying that there are two sides to this debate that has only one correct side? Giving people like this forums for their idiocy only legitimizes their viewpoint for the public and further delays any real changes taking place that might do something about global warming.
So kudos to Gore and the opposite of kudos to the Times.

UPDATE, 10:47 AM: The Times is changing the featured reader comments but at least 1/2 of them continue to be anti-Gore screeds. Here's the latest: "Nobel is probably spinning in his grave. . . . Another left wing triumph over science and logic." What gives with featuring these people?

Sinatra

I know that many in my generation scoff at Frank Sinatra and his style of music. I used to be one of these people myself. But I am increasingly coming to believe that those whose profess this belief have not actually really sat down and listen to the man. His singing is really quite impressive. He'll never be a real favorite of mine I guess. But every now and then, right now for instance, he really hits the spot.

NFL 2007 Week 5: NFC Edition

NFC EAST: If there’s one thing that makes me sick this season, it’s that Dallas is 5-0. The only thing more disturbing to me than the stupid cocky looks on Owens’ and Romo’s faces is the one on Jerry Jones’ skeletal mug. Even so, and I should whip myself for admitting to it, I was hoping they would win last Monday. Now that they have, I am really hoping for them to beat the snot out of New England this week and start to put an end to this Pat/Colts garbage, which I have previously described. Washington is surprising everyone with their competent play; none more so than Detroit, who was stomped on defense by the Jason Campbell juggernaut and on offense by a squad that allowed an average of .8 yards per throw on the pass-happy Lions. From 0-2 to 3-2, the Giants have some fooled that they’re coming around. The surging defense and the returning Brandon Jacobs is good evidence, but they played a truly subpar Jets team last week and nearly ruined it. Unfortunately, they play the Falcons this week, which should almost certainly bring them to 4-2, which is one of the more misleading records in football this year. The Eagles coming off their bye is the real question mark here. They really should beat the Jets this week, and if Brian Westbrook is in the lineup, they almost assuredly will. If not, though, we saw against the Giants what he means to that offense, so it also could be a total Jets rout (the Jets consider a “rout” a 17-14 victory at this point, though, so take it for what it’s worth).

NFC NORTH: The Packers finally lost and I’m glad. I’m am definitely in the great minority here, but I’m no fan of Favre and don’t really care if he’s successful in the winter of his career. I’m happy the Bears are doing badly, but someone had to take Green Bay off their pedestal, so it might as well have been a team led by a former Bronco. Chicago didn’t look too sharp, though, and couldn’t do anything no matter how many times they had the ball handed to them. Will they continue winning versus the Vikings, who are coming off a bye? That depends of the Vikings. I don’t know if Tavarius Jackson’s the answer, but he’s back this week. If they can get the offense together, they will certainly beat the Bears, whose offense absolutely will not be able to stand up the Vikings’ superior defense, especially Benson, whom I predict will have under twenty yards for the game. On a sad note of this division, however, it appears that John Kitna has fallen out of favor with his God. I can’t believe that Jesus would allow a team with that kind of receiver corps to only score three points, but the truth is undeniable. What have you done Kitna? My suggestion: more animal sacrifices.

NFC SOUTH: David Carr actually beat a team? I thought that was amazing until I remembered that they played the Saints. Now, Carr is saying that he’s hurting, so good ol’ Vinnie might be starting. That should really kickstart a team who has looked above average, though marginally so, and needs to step up if they’ll win the division. It’s all about Testaverde. We’ll see if he remembers which player to line up behind (hint: he’s in the center), a problem he was known for in his short time in Dallas. The lowly Saints just get lower. Eventually, they’re going to have to win, no matter how they play, but I have a hard time believing it will be this week against Seattle, who are faltering but are still the clear better team. Their best chance comes in two weeks against the Falcons, who will quickly be known as the butt of that division; only by sheer luck are they not already considered such. Harrington finally looked like himself last week after a couple of decent performances. After he worked so hard to lose the game, Petrino finally put Leftwich in, who looked absolutely super. Needless to say, Harrington is back in the game. Tampa Bay has had some tough games, including this week against Tennessee, but they’ve given good showings even in their losses. Garcia may not be the most efficient quarterback in town, but he’s not turning the ball over (at all), and that’s really important to a team that puts defense first. This defense will win the division for them and, though it is still a Gruden coached team, I can mildly support their success (for long-standing Madden Football reasons).

NFC WEST: Apparently, the entire western half of the United States sucks at football this year. It’s hard to say which is more dismal, the NFC or the AFC in the west. Rest assured, both divisions are working hard for the most dismal championship. The Seahawks got absolutely destroyed by the Steelers, turning the division’s clear best into total mush. I think the idea that Seattle is falling apart to be a knee jerk reaction, but they are facing a lot of age problems and their receivers are still terrible, no matter how many times they change it up. I’ve said for a couple of years now that the Cardinals have the talent to be one of the best teams in the NFC but, now that they’re doing (relatively) well, I have a hard time believing in it. It’s like the Raiders winning the AFC West; you know they have to fail sometime. They barely beat a winless team last week and allowed Gus Frerotte to score 31 points in the process, which I hardly consider worthy of praise. The Rams have the tough, but doable, task of beating Baltimore this week. If Gus can manage some of the magic he did last week, and they can put a few points on the board, the Ravens’ offense does not have the power to catch up. They were barely able to hold it together against San Francisco last week and they could only manage nine points; I wouldn’t exactly call them offensive dynamos. The NFL benefits from the ‘Niners’ bye this week; the league won’t be further stunk up by their horrible play.

Dobbs

Why do I even do it? Why do I open a link to the latest Lou Dobbs' piece? Do I hate myself? Do I have a sick fascination with evil? Sigh.

Yesterday, Dobbs opened up on Democrats refusing to wear the flag lapel pin. First, I want to congratulate those Democrats like Barack Obama who are drawing the line. It's a stupid, meaningless symbol that panders to the basest part of American society.

But that is Lou Dobbs' schtick and he defends it. He uses the classic right-wing "you're a traitor but the fact that you can do that is why this is such a great country even though I wish I could throw you in prison you commie bastard" trope.

Dobbs pukes:

"The Couric, Moyers and Obama explanations of their discomfort with the wearing of the American flag should give us all pause, because whatever our partisan affiliation, whether liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, each of us should at least agree that we are Americans, that our allegiance is to this country and that our national values of individual liberty and equality are the foundation upon which we all stand as Americans. The flag belongs to all of us as Americans, and it's our right to either wear a lapel pin or not.

I choose to wear that flag on my lapel because the nation it represents makes that choice possible."

Meanwhile, Lou is paying a Mexican migrant 13 cents a day to wash his American flag bed sheets.

Mannion on Tarantino

Lance Mannion has a great post on why Quentin Tarantino doesn't love movies. I mostly agree with all of this. Tarantino more or less sucks, even if he has the ability to write occasionally witty dialogue.

Check it out.

Historical Image of the Day

Thomas Jefferson

Perhaps you've heard of this guy.

Album Review: Radiohead, "In Rainbows"

Given the sycophantic nature of so many of Radiohead's fans, I'll be up front: while having listened to the band since my early teens (Pablo Honey being the second CD I ever bought), I thought they were just sort of going through the motions on Hail to the Thief. It's not that I thought they didn't try - I just thought the album fell flat. Radiohead hadn't lost their willingness to experiment, to try things; they just had reached the point where their experiments, their sound, wasn't as interesting. That's not to say Hail to the Thief was bad - some songs ("Where I End and You Begin", "There, There") were absolutely killer. I just thought the album had fallen flat. That was it. The Bends, OK Computer, and Kid A were remarkable artistic feats that couldn't be repeated, and I was OK with that. Radiohead had just arrived to the point where their music was good, interesting, but not captivating.

I was wrong.

In Rainbows is as beautiful, unique, and daring as anything Radiohead has done. That becomes clear from the first 3 seconds. Every Radiohead album in the last 10 years has laid out, manifesto-style, how it is different from its predecessors on the first track (see: "Airbag", "Everything in its Right Place", "Packt Like Sardines", and "2+2=5"). In Rainbows is no exception. Immediately, the sole driving drum beat of "15 Step" lets you know that things have changed, before Yorke's voice and the soft, enchanting guitars come in. It isn't a "return to rock" (the stupidest phrase of those who ignorantly complain about each album not being The Bends). Radiohead never eschewed their guitars, even on Kid A. But that isn't the point. What is great here is how they are using their guitars. Where on their earlier material, they were as interested in having accoustic and electric clash and smash into each other ("Just", "Paranoid Android"), now they are interested in creating lilting melodies of electric/accoustic interplay ("Reckoner," "Jigsaw Falling into Place") as well as driving, fast (by Radiohead standards) tunes ("Bodysnatchers") that don't just fit together perfectly; they make you nod your head and want to dance around. The songs don't rock in the traditional sense, but that doesn't matter - they make you want to move, and that's as new and exciting and daring as anything Radiohead has done before.

But they haven't ignored the beauty, either. "All I need" is driven by a calming piano line and atmospherics, with the song developing to a loud-yet-beautiful "trip-through-space" type tone, while Yorke's voice comes in and out. And the strings (which aren't totally new to Radiohead's recent work - just see "How to Completely Disappear") give that beauty a dimension their songs never had before, making the otherwise OK "Faust Arp" (the weakest song on the album, though by no means a throwaway) better than maybe it should have been, weaving in and out with the accoustic guitar; "House of Cards" perfectly joins atmospherics, strings, guitars, and Yorke's falsetto at the end to enter into realms of sonic tranquility and beauty Radiohead hasn't achieved before; yes, "Fake Plastic Trees" and "Pyramid Song" were also examples of this, but they displayed a fragility and fear that is totally absent here. Yorke has never sounded more sure of himself, and the music of the Greenwoods, O'Brien, and Selway back that up.

On top of this, Yorke's voice has never been more beautiful ("Reckoner" and album-closer "Videotape" being just two examples). As the sunny album-title indicates, there simply isn't as much bitterness and anger as there was on Hail to the Thief, nor the isolation and alienation of Kid A and Amnesiac. That's not to say Yorke has totally lost touch with his at-times paranoid disposition; while the first verse of "House of Cards" starts off with Yorke delicately declaring, "I don't want to be your friend, I just want to be your lover", the second starts, "Infrastructure will fall" - a great line that has some political doomsday tones to it even as he simply uses it to describe a love built like said house of cards.

And make no mistake - Radiohead's willingness to explore and experiment with their sound hasn't disappeared. While there may be no "Treefingers" here, they do something just as radical: they actually play with folk conventions, on the amazing "Jigsaw Falling Into Place". And elements of ambient-electronics still fade in and out of the songs; they just don't dominate it anymore. Indeed, In Rainbows smoothly and perfectly melds that electronic sound with their guitars in exactly the way Hail to the Thief didn't.

For those waiting for another OK Computer (or for the hipsters too cool to admit that OK Computer is their best album, another Bends): please stop. It won't happen, nor should it - those albums were great, but repetition would be disappointing, especially from a band that sticks to trying new things like Radiohead does. In Rainbows is as good as anything they've done, offering a blend of song styles they haven't had since Bends. It is not hard to see how their previous work has led up to this point, nor is it difficult to see how In Rainbows is different, and that's what makes it so great: it's both of their earlier work, and something new. And that puts it up there with their best work.

5.5/6 Square Glasses

NFL 2007 Week 5: AFC Edition

AFC EAST: While it’s certainly not surprising that New England put the hurt on Cleveland, I sure wish it had been the other way around. If there’s one thing I’m sick of hearing about over the last five years or so in football it’s the Colts/Patriots rivalry. It was cute for a little while, but I’m really sick of it. It makes me sick to say it, but I’m actually rooting for the Cowboys to beat the Patriots next week. I don’t know that it’s going to happen but, even if it has to be Dallas, it would be nice to hear about another team for a change. In the ongoing suckfest of the rest of the division, none of the teams could manage a win. 2-13 combined for the Bills, the Jets, and the Dolphins. Buffalo’s defense, to their credit, tried really hard to win. If Stanford hero Trent Edwards and their terrible offense could have made anything at all happen off of Tony Romo’s six turnovers, there would have been no drama. But no, Buffalo laughs in the face of respectability. Will Cleo Lemon turn anything around in Miami? He can’t do worse and, hopefully, won’t be stupid enough to cut-block a 320lb defensive tackle. How much brain damage has already occurred in Trent Green to make him think tackling Travis Johnson with his face was a good idea? He’ll have a lot of time for the memory to sink away into dementia before his return next season. The Jets haven’t beaten the Giants in fourteen years. One would think that they’d win some year, but not this week. Depending on which Eagles team shows up this week, they might win, but it’s looking pretty shaky for Pennington & Co.

AFC North: Pittsburgh rolled over Seattle in one of the Seahawks worst showings in a long time. The Steelers’ defense shut them down on every level, allowing a mere 25 rushing yards to Shaun Alexander. It wasn’t like Pittsburgh’s offense had the greatest game and even tried to give it away in the special teams, but Seattle just wouldn’t take the gift. It’s amazing that the Ravens have three wins after the games they’ve played, but they are getting lucky that their opponents’ performances are just that much worse. They skimmed by San Francisco, scoring on three big field goals, but it’s hard to lose when the ‘Niners can only manage six first downs. Just like the old days, the defense won the game for them, but the squad simply won’t be good enough to carry the offense all season. It still makes me laugh that the Browns aren’t actually in last place, though they can count on being there by the end of the season. Derek Anderson vs. Tom Brady isn’t the king of matchups, and the loss here is no surprise at all. Anderson is helped so much by the breakout performances of Braylon Edwards these past few weeks. If he actually lives up to his potential, and Cleveland can find a quarterback that’s not a complete loser, the combo of Edwards and Winslow could be scary in the next few years. I think the Bengals are competing with the Broncos for stupidest breakdown of the year. The two teams are playing the same season. Cincinnati’s pass game is working pretty well, and will get even better in a few weeks, but the defense is really bad. They have the good fortune to come back from the bye week to play the lowly Chiefs, so they might be able to turn it around, but it could also be L.J.’s long awaited breakout this season, in which case they’ll be crushed.

AFC South: The South continues to shock with all three teams putting together consistent seasons. I’m a little surprised the Colts are still undefeated. They’re a good team for sure, but I don’t see the same team on the field this year as last. They don’t seem as sharp and, while their defense is clearly better now than before, their offense is less experienced and softer. They’re doing what they need to do, though, and ran away with the win against a very good Bucs defense. After this week’s bye, they get Denver. I’d love to think the Broncos are good enough to take them out, but this is delusional. They’ll be 6-0. Tennessee and Jacksonville both come off their bye weeks with tough games at Tampa and Houston, respectively. Jax will lose, but I’m not sure about the Titans yet. Tampa’s defense is really good, but they’ve done a good job of slicing up defenses so far and they might continue here. I’m still really happy for Houston. They may, technically, be last in the division but, at their best, they look second only to the Colts in the division. They’ll roll over the Jaguars to continue the best start to a season in their short history.

AFC West: The Raiders are first?! The Raiders?!! This is ridiculous. Granted, they were on bye last week, so have played one less game, but is this whole division so bad that Oakland is competitive? I just can’t understand. Oakland is a terrible team. How they have two wins is beyond me but, given that no team in the West has more than two wins, the race is far from over. San Diego took Denver behind the woodshed, that’s for sure. Not only was it the worst home loss for the Broncos since the merger, they lost perennial Pro Bowl cut-blocker Tom Nalen for the year. He is one of the best centers to ever play the game, and has anchored an extremely consistent line for over a decade. I really hope this isn’t the last game he plays, it would be a terrible way to remember him. The most damning statistic right now against Denver is their –61 point differential, which is better than only two teams in the league: the winless Saints at –68 and the winless Rams at –67. Hey, at least Denver has wins…losers. If the Chargers running game had to break out somewhere, I guess it’s most fitting to have it be against the Broncos, whose run defense is abysmal. Hell, it wasn’t even Tomlinson who really came through; Michael Turner averaged over fourteen yards per carry. Ridiculous. Finally, speaking of ridiculous, the Chiefs still suck. I skipped them last week, as there are only so many synonyms for sucking and I ran out, but I do want to mention that Larry Johnson had nine carries for twelve yards. Good job, Herm, that’s the way to answer those critics saying you were running him too much. You show ‘em, buddy.

Infuriating Hypocrisy from the Bush Administration

OK, Michael Chertoff. If you want to defend a border fence between the U.S. and Mexico on the Orwellian grounds of security, fine. If you want to rely on two-faced appeals of defense for the national economy (even as jobs continue to be outsourced) as a means to justify said fence, do so. Hell, if you want to come out and just say, "you know, we're just racists here in this administration, and the brown, Mexican threat scares us SO!", I'd be fine with that. But you have no room to complain about the "environmental degradation" border-crossers cause when you work for the administration that has one of the worst environmental records ever.

Historical Image of the Day

Tenskwautawaw, aka, The Prophet

Tom Verducci Is Not Good

The baseball writers at the Sports Illustrated website really suck. This is opposed to their first rate football writers. But God Tom Verducci and Jon Heyman are terrible.

Not only are they completely dismissive of any statistic that actually explains baseball, but they are Yankee-obsessed to the max. Verducci's latest column is entitled "Monday's Five Cuts: Five Thoughts on the Indians-Red Sox Matchup and More." There's a decided emphasis on the More. For it's all about the Yankees!!!

Of his 5 points, 4 at least mention the Yankees while 2 are entirely about the Yankees. The only thing we learn about the upcoming ALCS is that Sabathia is a tough pitcher. Wow, I didn't know that.

There seems to have been this bizarre expectation that the Yankees would actually win the World Series this year. This was arguably the worst Yankees team in their 13 year playoff run and had the Tigers not completely plotzed in the second half, they likely would have not even made the playoffs. Yet for Verducci and so many others, baseball is the Yankees.

In related news, should we keep a count of how many times Tim McCarver mentions Derek Jeter in the upcoming FOX coverage, even though the Yankees won't be playing?

Rev. Christian von Wernich Sentenced in Argentina

Following up on this post, Argentine courts found Rev. Christian von Wernich guilty of conspiring with the military during Argentina's "Dirty War", and a tribunal has sentenced him to life in prison. There isn't much I have to add from my original post. It's just worth repeating that, even if this decision ends up being the first and last of its kind, it's good to see that not only a clergyman punished for his role in the repression, but to see that the Church and Argentine society have been forced to deal with the Church's role in the brutal repression of the dictatorship.

But What Will I Eat For Dinner?

Con Agra Foods, Inc., voluntarily stopped production Tuesday at the Missouri plant that makes its Banquet pot pies after health officials said the pies may be linked to 139 cases of salmonella in 30 states.

What food group does pot pies fall into? Is there a food group that includes things we ingest that are not actually food?

Historical Image of the Day

Benedict Arnold

More Numbers

Patrick McMannon, from the Akron Beacon Journal, gives us this:

"The Indians hit. 315. in the series and had a .524 slugging percentage. The Yankees hit .228. The Indians scored 24 runs, New York 16.
Cleveland’s team ERA was 3.41. New York’s was 5.89. The 6-4 final pretty much matched those numbers."

He's absolutely right. The Indians pitched well. They hit well. They were a team that finished the regular season with 96 wins, tied for most in the majors. Anybody who thinks they came out of nowhere just doesn't pay attention to baseball. We had two 19-game winners (Sabathia and Carmona), the 2nd-best individual ERA (Carmona); our third starter had 15 wins (Byrd). While all the world fell in love with Joba the last two months, Cleveland brought up Jensen Lewis, Aaron Laffey, and Rafael Perez; Laffey was a very good starter, and Lewis and Perez were part of the best bullpens in baseball. Perez and setup man Raphael Betancourt both finished with sub-1.80 ERAs. When the Indians had to finish off Minnesota in September, they went to Minneapolis and swept them; then, they swept the Tigers to finish them off. They did what they had to do against the Yankees. They were simply a better team. It isn't that the Yankees quit, or didn't show up - they were just outmatched by a very, VERY good team (Joe Torre himself acknowledged this in the post-game conference). With numbers like the ones above and below, it's time to acknowledge the facts - the Indians are for real, and have been good all year round. Those who are now surprised just haven't paid attention.

Further Thoughts on the ALDS

-Waking up yesterday, I was befuddled at the mass agreement that Byrd shouldn't pitch, that you should send Sabathia out on 3 days rest, that Torre knew what he was doing, and Wedge did not. Howard Bryant was the most egregious , but in no ways alone (Rob Neyer and just about everybody at CNN were similar in their opinions. I kept wondering why they accepted this so easily. First, who said it was a good idea to send Wang out on 3 days rest, that just because he was in Yankees stadium, he wouldn't be tired? And that was totally the case (1 IP, 4 ER). Secondly, I know Byrd had a relatively high ERA, and the Yankees had owned him in the past. But he also had 15 wins this year. 15. You don't get 15 wins by luck or accident. Byrd wasn't perfect, but he had enough skill and grit to grind out 15 wins. It was a huge disservice to him as a pitcher to act like Sabathia was the only logical choice (he who, only once in his life, pitched on 3 days rest). Hats off to Byrd, and to Wedge for sticking by him. And he used him perfectly - Byrd got the 5 innings the Tribe needed, the bullpen did the rest, and now the Tribe will have Sabathia and Carmona ready 1-2 for the Red Sox. So, Howard Bryant et al? EAT IT.

-For all the praise the Yankees offense gets (the general narrative this year having been, "They score, but their pitching is shakey"), the following stat is rather telling:
Two-out hitting with RISP
Indians 12-24
Yankees 0-7

Did the Yankees probably get cold at the wrong time? Sure. And I know they scored more runs than anybody in the regular season. But if one team is batting .500 in those scenarios, they are doing an amazing job; if you're putting up an 0-for in that key "2-outs w/RISP", well...that's just not good. And it means your hitters aren't producing.

-The Indians hitters were lights out. They were patient, they were smart, they played small-ball AND could (and did) hit it deep. Sizemore was 6-16 (.375); Martinez was 6-17 (.353); Garko, 4-11 (.364); and while Hafner was only 4-16 (.250), he also walked 5 times and scored 4 runs in 4 games. The heart of the order got the job done, with great aid from others like Shoppach yesterday (2-3), Nixon (2-4), and Cleveland Indians hero Kenny Lofton (also 6-16).

The Yankees? Not so much. Of course, the New York media and frenzied fans will pile on A-Rod (4-15, 1 RBI on his solo-shot yesterday), but he's not alone. Damon was 5-18 (.278), and when you take out his great game on Sunday, he was 2-14; Abreu was an average 4-15 (.267); Posada, 2-15 (.133); Matsui, 2-11 (.182); and "Mr. Clutchiosity", Derek Jeter himself, was 3-17 (.176). Barring Shelley Duncan (who only had 4 at-bats), only Robinson Cano hit above .300 (5-15, .333). So the Yankees stunk it up, and Jeter should be nailed even harder than A-Rod for his failure to perform. His defenders can say, "he's done it in the past" all they want, but last time I checked, your team doesn't measure success by what you did in 2000.

-With all that production, this is particularly delightful: the Yankees' 2007 payroll was $189 million; the Tribe's - $61 million. Clemens, Jeter, and A-Rod made more this year than the entire Indians roster. The Tribe has the second lowest payroll of the AL. I can't say what an amazing job Mark Shapiro has done, putting that team together, with limited funds and no room for errors on a bad 6-million dollar signing. And it's just great that he put together a team that, with less than 1/3 the payroll, took down the Yankees.

-I totally agree with Rev. Paperboy in this thread: "Just caught this headline on CNN:"Yankees get spanked"So the story is that the fabulous New York Yankees, america's favorite sports brand-name label lost -- not that the plucky Cleveland Indians, who have not won a world series since the 1950's and were playing against the richest team in MLB, won. What a crock! I suppose the headline after the next presidential election will be "America's Mayor defeated"". While I hope he's right about the "America's Mayor" part, it's just crap that the Yankees "lost" this, and the Indians didn't "win" it. Last I checked, Indians had better pitching (which is what matters in playoffs anyways), and won 2 more games in the regular season than the Yankees. So credit where credit's due, here.

-So much for 0-6 in the regular season. Hopefully, people will stop using regular season results in head-to-head matchups (especially when the latter series was the beginning of August) to predict how playoffs will go. October is a different issue. End. Of. Question.

-In the managing department, Wedge totally outmanaged Torre. You can look at a number of Torre decisions, and say, "that probably wasn't a good idea" (leaving Chamberlain in in game 2; Wang on 3 days rest; and so on). And that just isn't because the Indians won - even had the Yanks won, people would scratch their heads; they'd just say, "but they made it, so....". Wedge only had one probable mistake - leaving Trot Nixon in Sunday after Clemens went out. After that, he was perfect. He left Sabathia in just long enough. He let Carmona lead them to extra innings. He managed his batting lineup great. He handled the bullpen perfectly. He had faith in his players (most notably, but in no way singularly, Byrd). All the credit should go to Eric Wedge. He knew what he was doing. And yet almost nobody is giving him the credit he deserves (the CNN article only gets to Wedge's great managing on pg. 2 here, and it only warrants 3 2-line paragraphs). Is Torre's probable departure huge news? Absolutely. But it isn't the only managerial story here, and we should remember that.

-All that said, I love my Sawx fans, but you got your World Series 3 years ago - Tribe nation has waited 59 years. GO TRIBE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Speechless and Joyous

Dear George Steinbrenner, the New York Yankees, the Yankees Organization, etc., et al:

Love, Mr. Trend.

Evil Defeated

Yet again, evil, i.e., the New York Yankees has been defeated. The world can rest knowing that the ever present spectre of Satan will be held at bay for at least 12 more months.

Costa Rica approves CAFTA membership

If early reports are to be trusted (and I'm not seeing any reason at this point why they shouldn't be), Costa Rica's referendum on joining CAFTA passed yesterday by a 52-48 percent victory. While this is far from an overwhelming victory, it does matter for Arias, as he had pretty much his entire governmental plan staked on its passage.

I'm not sure what this will mean for Costa Rica. Given how free trade and neoliberal policies in general have worked, I suspect it will be negative overall. Some may see victory in that some of the agricultural products of Costa Rica will have greater access to the U.S. market, particularly pineapple (as of right now, Hawaiian pineapple is far cheaper in the U.S., due to tariffs imposed on Costa Rican imports, which may now be reduced). Certainly, the country's general GNP may go up. However, those who will probably benefit the most are the foreign companies (such as Chiquita, which is responsible for so much of the pineapple and banana production in Costa Rica). Costa Rican farmers themselves could very well suffer heavily from this election, as has happened in so many other countries that have voted for free trade agreements (which have led to large companies coming in on the cheap and taking over, or futhering their control). I really fail to see how this is going to help the 900,000 Costa Ricans (in a nation of about 4 million) who are impoverished.

On the other hand, I agree with Boz, too - having failed in this election, there is little else the anti-free-trade coalition will be able to rally around, and it will probably dissipate in the very near future, torn by the ideological divisions that exist within it (as it does range from the far left to the far right). I lived in Costa Rica in the 2002 elections, when free trade was already becoming a major issue, and while I saw the movement in its incipient phase, it was already clear that it was basically bringing together political ideologues and everyday people that otherwise would have nothing to do with each other politically (radical university students, politically moderate small- and mid-sized business owners, and right-wing hacendados otherwise have very little they can agree upon).

At any rate, this is in no way an irreversible decision, and things could work out, especially because Costa Rica is not dependent strictly on exportation of agrigultural and technological products (it has an Intel plant there) - it makes a large portion of its annual income via the ecotourism business. However, I do fear what the short- and mid-term (and maybe long-term) effects could be on Costa Rica. Either way, it will be worth keeping an eye on to see how things turn out.

Ché Guevara and South American Dictatorships

As leftists throughout Latin America and the world prepare to mark the 40th anniversary of the murder of Ché Guevara, fresh news comes out that shows Latin American dictators were at least somewhat coordinated in tracing and tracking down Guevara, revealing a collaboration that well pre-dates the official institution of Operation Condor. While this is certainly newsworthy, it should come as no surprise to anybody that the military governments of South America were in collaboration with each other before the institutionalization of such cooperation via Operation Condor. We tend to forget, in the post-Cold War era, how polarized everything was, and how threatening governments and societies (those dictatorships didn't happen without significant societal support) viewed "Communism". They did all they could to mobilize against perceived threats (real or imagined), and so, as I said, the fact that Brazil was informing Bolivia that Guevara was trying to slip across their shared border, while new, should not be surprising in the least.

The Increasing Historical Importance of the Pinochet Arrest of 1998

I think this article really does a great job in showing how increasingly important the 1998 arrest of Augusto Pinochet is becoming, not just in Chile (where, just this week, his wife and children had arrests issued for their roles in laundering money Pinochet embezzled during his 17-year dictatorship, a great sign that, despite his death, justice seems to be marching on), but around the hemisphere and the world. The article points to Chile's extradition of Alberto Fujimori to Peru last month as a possible watershed in bringing (self-) exiled dictators and human rights abusers to trial, but I think we can really look at the decision in London as the watershed moment here. That decision at the time was huge, simply because somebody was finally saying to Pinochet, "You're no longer immune", and while he never faced trial for the crimes in Spain, he did continuously fight a losing battle in the Chilean courts for 9 years. Of course, the Chilean justice system, the human rights organizations that kept the cases going, and the families who lost loved ones are responsible for that battle as much as anything, but without the catalyst of the decision in London, it's unclear all of that would have happened.

Why does all this matter? The article makes that pretty clear - since Pinochet, human rights violators have been increasingly susceptible to charges of the crimes they committed as leaders of countries. There is no more easy, peaceful, quiet exile for these men. Fujimori is the most recent example of this, and Milosevic was perhaps more notorious in the West, but it doesn't end with these two men. Jorge Videla remains under house arrest in Argentina; other Argentine military men are increasingly scrutinized and even prosecuted for their role in Argentina's dirty war; even in Colombia, Álvaro Uribe has had to answer tough questions as cabinet members around him fall for their ties to the paramilitaries.

I think there are really two factors that explain this change since the late-1990s. First, there is the recent shift in international law and policy that the article mentions, in which international courts no longer are impotent to let mass-murderers and dictators go free. Secondly, and just as important to my view, there is the increasingly mobilized, interconnected, and fearless human rights movement. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and hundreds of other international, national, and local groups, have been able to push their quest for justice in the last 10 years, aided in no small part by the technological revolution of the internet, where they can communicate between groups via e-mail and get their message out easily to a broad audience via webpages, thus keeping somebody in Australia up to date with what is going on in Peru, or somebody in the U.S. updated on the current crises in Africa.

While all of this is good news, there is still a long way to go. Unfortunately, our notions of "human-rights violations", particularly in the United States and in Western Europe, are still too strongly framed in the imperialist worldview in which only the so-called "third-world" countries and leaders who (if not openly hostile to one's nation-state) are on less-than-friendly terms can be guilty of such crimes. Our own leaders who openly support repressive regimes or who ignore the inhumane conditions in our own countries are not and (to many eyes) cannot be guilty of crimes against their people. We still operate under the notion (defined by the U.S. and Europe in the wake of World War II) that, to be guilty of such crimes, you have to wage a campaign of "mass murder", again with the dominant hegemons defining "mass" in such a way to exclude them from inclusion of these crimes. Thus, while we can condemn Jorge Videla, Henry Kissinger, who not only openly supported Videla but, in papers released last year, explicitly told the Argentine junta in 1976 that they could do whatever they wanted carte blanche and the U.S. would support it, is still making tens of thousands of dollars offering his "wisdom" on the lecture circuit. As the article says, "some atrocities against civilians offended not just the laws of a country, but also international standards of human rights."

The emphasis here should fall on some. Until we redefine our notion of crimes against "human rights" to include actions that our own governments, past, present, and future, have perpetrated, the quest for justice in international human rights will be one-sided, punishing only those of the "developing" world, while leaders of the "developed" world will remain able to act in any way they wish with no worries of paying the consequences someday, relying on their impugnity for their actions.

Yeah, Derek, it was ALL part of THE PLAN

Courtesy the Cleveland Plain Dealer, I caught this nugget from Jeter that most other articles had left out:

“Talk about a home-field advantage, they let the bugs out . . . just when you’ve seen it all,” Jeter said after the Tribe’s 2-1 victory Friday."

Yeah, Jeter - "we" let the bugs out. We were just waiting for the right opportunity, and then we released an unthinking, brainless creature on the Yankees, confident they would mess up your pitcher but not our pitcher, and that, somehow, none of the hitters or fielders would be affected. Then, with the tie locked up, we would just outlast your bullpen. That was EXACTLY the plan.

Just when you think he can't be any dumber.....

My Favorite State of the Moment

I now submit Travis Hafner's name for "GREATEST NORTH DAKOTAN EVER"

Friday Guitar Blogging

Albert Lee.

Concert Review--Gene Watson & Jimi Tunnell

On a night of unexpected booking, I had the opportunity to see legendary country balladeer Gene Watson this past weekend at Dan’s Silverleaf, where 9/10 of the shows I attend are held. I don’t know if he was a late addition to the schedule or if I was just not paying attention, but I didn’t hear about the show until the day before. I was excited to see him, but I didn’t really know what to expect. Outside of a few cuts on the radio, I haven’t listened to his music in years. I didn’t make any special arrangements and just assumed that the show would be normal. Luckily, I figured that the show would be popular, so I went early, almost an hour before what I thought would be the show time but, when I got there, it turned out that the show actually started at 8:00, significantly earlier than any show I’ve seen there. I didn’t understand why until I went in and, instead of a crowded house of drunken cowboys, it appeared that they raided the retirement communities around town to fill the show. The over-70 set was out in full force, calmly viewing the performance and clapping politely. For the first time there, I was significantly younger than anyone there, which put me a little out of place, and the music did so even more.

I don’t know exactly what I was expecting, but it wasn’t what I got. I even call him a balladeer above, so who knows. I guess I was taking the best of what I knew of Watson’s music and combined that with the usual crowd and style at the bar, to assume an outcome that did not happen. It was Branson all the way, and it took me completely off guard. With his balding mullet/perm and his sport coat covering his sweater covering his huge belly, Watson crooned his most famous songs (including “Love in the Hot Afternoon” and “Paper Rosie,” a couple of classics) and a bunch of songs off his new album. He performed them very well, perfectly polished and timed with a completely competent band, but there was very little heart and energy. Every song was “going out to the ladies in the audience,” though I didn’t notice anyone throwing underwear at him. This was clearly a case of somebody doing it for the money, which is fine, but it begs the question of why he’d be performing at Dan’s in front of sixty people instead of in a place like Branson where he’d fit in perfectly, but here he was. The one point of energy on stage at all was completely out of place. The bass player, who was by far the youngest member of the band, was playing his strict 4/4 time and very limited notes popping and jerking with every not, posturing his face in bizarre ways that made me wonder how frustrating it must be for a crack addict to play for Gene Watson.

In the end, he didn’t play very long and, when he left the stage, it was probably 10:00, when most of the shows here generally start. But everybody was filing (slowly) out the doors immediately without staying for an encore. But there was another act, wasn’t there? The place was essentially deserted; maybe twenty people remained. Apparently, this show wasn’t set to start until 11:00, giving them an hour to drive off attendees. I stuck around with the people I was with and, when the clock rolled around, there was maybe ten other people there and Jimi Tunnell finally came up on stage with his band. I had never heard Tunnell before and, from his website, couldn’t clearly discern whether he played country or jazz. I assumed country because of Watson, but I was wrong. It was, in fact, electric jazz, nearly the antithesis of country. The band was a saxophone, bass, drums, and Tunnell on guitar and a Frampton-style talk box. He was a very good guitar player, and the effect of the vocals through the guitar and the ultra-heavy choir effects he had on his system was a jarringly loud, and very interesting experience. Unfortunately, it was also very difficult given the contrast with Gene Watson’s silky songs. We ended up staying for one set; it was already quite late and one of us was not the biggest jazz fusion fan, so we took off.

It was good fun, but not the same kind of time I’m used to going to the country shows at this place. It did teach me two things, though: when I’m going to see artists of the older variety, make sure of what time the show starts and be prepared to get glared at by elderly cowboys who, apparently, believe I’m trying to steal their elderly wives. Both are quality lessons.

Indians-Yankees, Game 1

Jeez, Sabathia - 30 pitches already in the first inning, and he can't find the strike zone. Not good...


.....oh, thank god for Groundzilla....

....great, and then we take a 1st pitch HBP and turn it into a double play. Glad I'm going to the movies in a half hour...

The Good News/Bad News of Palm Oil as an Alternate Fuel

We'll outsource to Randy on most of this, but two points of his are worth re-emphasizing here. First, it is great that palm oil is emerging as a possible source of alternate fuel, given the ease and low cost with which it can be produced. Second, such a gain will be useless if Asia continues (and Latin America starts) to just slash and burn existing forests to produce palm oil. To me, this is probably the greatest hazard of the temptation of alternate fuels, and perhaps one of the most unstated errors - destroying current natural environmental conditions to cash in on the alternate fuels craze is as damaging as continuing to rape the earth for fossil fuels. I'm not holding my breath in Asia, but hopefully, should Latin American countries (in this case, Brazil, plus whomever else may jump on board) will look to Asia's mistakes and not repeat them (though I may be futilely holding my breath on that one, too...)

Effects of the Total Abortion Ban in Nicaragua

With little surprise to me, Daniel Ortega's support of banning all forms of abortion in Nicaragua (all in the name of getting the conservative and religious vote in Nicaragua last year) has had disastrous results. A Human Rights Watch report puts the number of women dead at at least 80 since last year's ban, implemented in November, shortly after Ortega's election. The law, banning any form of abortion (even if the mother's life is in danger) has not only doubtlessly increased the number of deaths and injuries from illegal abortions; as the Human Rights Watch points out, it has also led to women becoming fearful of seeing doctors even in totally legal cases of women's health, for fear of prosecution. Likewise, doctors remain fearful of offering legal health services to women, again for fear of prosecution. Thus, pregnant women will continue to die in Nicaragua as long as this law remains in effect, not just through clandestine abortions, but through the failure to get the basic (legal) medical attention they need, due to women's and doctors' fears of prosecution, even if their needs and care are legal.

That Nicaragua passed such a law is incredible; that Ortega so heavily sponsored it is unforgiveable. For all those who insist that banning abortion anywhere will lead to positive results, Nicaragua is now tragically a damning indictment of how terrible such laws are.

(via The Latin Americanist)

NFL 2007 Week 4: NFC Edition

NFC East: The Cowboys seem to look better every week. Given, though, that their competition thus far has been poor at best (the combined record of their opponents, including next week’s Bills matchup is 4-16), I don’t know that there’s cause for commotion. When they finally play a real football team, then we’ll see how well they do. The Redskins are in second place by virtue of the fact that they’ve only played three games. Their game against the Lions this week is winnable if they can keep the points down, but they’re going to have a hard time putting up the numbers to match Detroit’s potential. Wait, now that I think of it, Washington did just sign Keenan McCardell, so watch out world. The Giants could be 0-4 right now so easily, but they’ve managed two wins. If the Eagles had shown up at all last week, New York’s pathetic offense would have failed again, but they decided to stay in Philly. I didn’t think Westbrook was so integral to the Eagles’ offense, but he clearly is. McNabb looked like he’d never seen any of his receivers before, or maybe he realized how much he enjoyed getting tackled by huge men. Either way, he spent most of the game on his back.

NFC North: I think the NFC North is some kind of transplant from Bizarro NFL and, if Roger Goodell would inspect the locker rooms, he would undoubtedly find the pods. The Commish also needs to check Favre for HGH, which is proven to slow aging. There is no reason, with the team they have, that they should be so successful, but they’re undefeated. All the hype is for nothing, though, they’re going to plummet soon, and it’ll be a hard fall. For the Lions to score 34 points in the fourth quarter, they must still be blessed by Kitna’s concussion. They were getting beaten up for three quarters and scored on by an inept Chicago offense. Then Jesus said “Enough” and the Lions began scoring at will. That Griese looked so bad doesn’t explain away Grossman’s crappiness (believe me, he still sucks), but they clearly have more problems than just at quarterback. How the vaunted Bears defense allows that many points in one quarter is explained by divine intervention, but they clearly have a lot of work to do to gain back some of their respect. The Vikings are better than the record indicates, but three losses in a row is really bad at this point in the season. The defense is performing, and Peterson has real Rookie of the Year potential, but they just aren’t putting it together. It seems strange to say, but Jackson’s return could be the piece to the puzzle.

NFC South: The Buick is gone from Tampa, probably for good. Michael Pittman has really performed better than Williams last year and this year, but they’ve stuck with Cadillac. Now, they probably won’t go back to him if he can come back next season. He’s essentially a bust with little more than four or five good games in his career. The defense looks as good as it has in years, and they’re winning the games. It doesn’t hurt that Garcia hasn’t thrown an interception yet, but he hasn’t thrown for a lot of touchdowns, either. I was always pretty sympathetic toward David Carr and thought he was unjustly blamed for the Texans’ troubles. I was wrong; David Carr is bad and has been taken apart every second he’s on the field. Carolina is struggling, Steve Smith isn’t happy, and the defense stops nothing. They will continue their slide, at least until Delhomme gets back. And, in the NFC’s version of the battle to remain defeated, the Falcons took a step backward and finally won a game. Harrington has actually looked decent these last two weeks, and it translated to a modicum of success on Sunday. The running game is worthless, and so is the rest of the team, but at least they aren’t the Saints. These guys just look terrible; all the smugness on Sean Peyton’s face after last year’s Dallas blowout has finally been wiped away, and now he looks as sad as his team plays. There’s just nothing good to say here; they’ve done nothing right in three games. They may beat a Carr-led Panthers this week, but that wouldn’t be saying a lot. They don’t have a lot of games against teams this beaten up, so they’d better get crackin’ here.

NFC West: The West is the only division this year with a clear distinction of means and extremes. The Seahawks don’t look great, but they are the undisputed best in the division. Shaun Alexander needs more production if they’ll continue their success since, as usual, the receivers are some of the biggest underachievers in the league. When his arm gets healthy again, he’ll do better. For now, they have to hope he does enough. The next two teams are converses of each other. The Cardinals were touted to be bad, and looked bad coming into the season, but are on the way up fast. The win over the Steelers is a big step for them. On the other hand, everyone was ready to hand the division over to the ‘Niners and they’ve wound up looking worse and worse every week. The worst offense in the league is punctuated by the season loss of Alex Smith but hey, look on the bright side San Fran fans, now you have a Super Bowl winning quarterback in Dilfer. That’d be great if they had that Ravens defense, but they have this San Francisco defense, so it’s really not so great. There’s nothing to say about the Rams, just a mouth open in wonder. It’s easy to see the importance of a regular offensive line, but it’s amazing that they haven’t been able to produce anything, even by a stroke of luck. I have to think that they’ll get back on track but, based on how they’re doing right now, they could be 0-7 by the time they get to Cleveland, which I hope is the CBS game of the week for the sheer comedy of it all.

Domenici Retiring

Huge news!!! Pete Domenici will be announcing his retirement tomorrow. This represents an excellent chance for a Democratic pickup. Kos correctly picks the 4 most likely candidates to win the Democratic nomination, assuming Bill Richardson doesn't drop out of the presidential race.

In order I prefer:
1. Tom Udall
2. Diane Denish
3. Patricia Madrid
4. Martin Chavez

Udall should be a very solid Democrat in the Senate. He's pretty liberal but I doubt too liberal to win, particularly with the sorry state of the Republican Party. Diane Denish I've always found rather nondescript, but she'd be fine. Madrid ran a terrible campaign against Heather Wilson. Martin Chavez is the super-DINO. I'm sure him and Joe Lieberman would have plenty to talk about. He's the worst kind of Democrat. He's also incredibly ambitious so I suspect he will run.

Heather Wilson is the most likely candidate for the Republicans. She's very tough and a masterful campaigner. She is very unlikable on a personal level but always manages to squeeze out another close victory. She's also Domenici's protege. But they were both caught up the federal attorney scandal and she's now quite tainted. Steve Pearce is the other likely Republican candidate. He's from southern New Mexico and I know less about him but he's a pretty typical wingnut from what I can tell and is the kind of candidate likely to lose a state election in this climate.

This is all quite exciting.

More Medved

I can't let Medved's pro-slavery defense go. I want to compare Medved to the quotes about Jack Johnson I discussed last week.

What is worse, Medved in 2007 saying slavery wasn't so bad or the New York Times saying this circa 1906:

"Even those who have an absurdly exaggerated horror of prize fighting as a 'brutal' sport should gently warm in their sensitive minds a little hope that the white man may not lose, while the rest of us will wait in open anxiety the news that he [Jim Jeffries] has licked the--well, since it must be in print, let us say the negro, even though it is not the first word that comes to the tongue's tip."

I always talk to my students about the importance of context. I think it's generally OK to condemn people in the past for their actions, but to do so we must understand the context of the times they lived in. So we can attack Jefferson for owning slaves, but we must understand the place and time he lived in to know if we are being reasonable.

We must do the same for the present. In a direct comparison between Medved and the Times article Medved doesn't come out looking quite so bad. But the arguments are made 100 years apart. What the Times said was horrible, but lots of people made similarly awful arguments in the early 20th century. But for his time, Medved has shown himself a leading figure in American racism. No one can legitimately make the argument in 2007 that slavery wasn't that bad and that the United States doesn't really have any responsibility for it. Such an argument basically paints you as a racist of the highest order.

I was discussing the Jack Johnson quotes with a colleague of mine. I was saying that even though I knew what was coming, I was still shocked. She pointed out the importance of maintaining the ability to be shocked. What Michael Medved argued is truly shocking. If Congress can pass a resolution condemning MoveOn for the General Betrayus ad, shouldn't they do the same for Medved. Isn't defending slavery far, far worse than attacking a general for sugarcoating an unpopular war? I sure think so.

Historical Image of the Day

Artist rendition of the Middle Passage

NFL 2007 Week 4: AFC Edition

AFC East: The Patriots rolled over their opponent once again. They seem unstoppable, but I’ll believe all this undefeated hype when I see it. The reporters hope for it every year, but it never happens. They won’t lose to Cleveland next week, but they might have a tough time in Dallas if the Cowboys’ defense stays healthy. In the ongoing battle for which team will have the fewest wins, the Dolphins took the big plunge against the lowly Raiders. A team has to try hard to allow three rushing touchdowns to Daunte Culpepper, but Miami’s really giving it their all. Hopefully, they don’t get too confident because the Bills and the Jets are gunning for it as well. After their seriously underwhelming performances from both squads, the Jets were able to eke out a loss and keep the Bills from continuing their defeated streak. After this coming week, the bottom three of the AFC East could have a combined record of 2-13, which is the best case of all that New England could go undefeated.

AFC North: While the Steelers are no longer undefeated, they have no match in the division. They got beat by Kurt Warner, it’s true, but they are significantly better than the Bengals or the Ravens, and the Browns are still a joke. Their offense makes Cincinnati looks way better than their record indicates, but their defense is terrible. The Pats didn’t even have that many yards, yet still scored 34 on them. It surprises me that the Ravens gave up 27 to the Browns, but I guess they’re getting older and slower. Could they be old enough and slow enough to give up those numbers to the Browns, though? That seems crazy to me because, unless I’m the dense one, Derek Anderson still sucks.

AFC South: The South is working out to be a far tougher division than anyone had anticipated. The Colts will definitely lose a couple of division games this year, and it could be to any of the teams here. Next year, especially, is a different story, and there could be some potential usurpers to the Colts’ throne. Not this year though. With the Titans coming off their bye week, they should tear the Falcons apart and taking control of second place in the division. The Jags and the Texans will fight it out for third, but the Texans are a team on an upswing, and I see them taking it decisively at this point, although the playoffs are still a ways away.

AFC West: Last, and definitely least, the lowly West, they’ve become the laughing stock of the AFC. I still think that Denver’s clearly the best in the division, but they have San Diego next week. The Broncos’ abysmal run defense is a good sign for a breakout game for L.T., no matter how much I hate to think it. If the Chargers can manage to pull out the win, their season can continue. If they lose, San Diego will be interviewing for new coaches already. The Raiders are all smoke and mirrors. Their defense is showing a lot of improvement, but any trust in that offense and Daunte Culpepper is crazy.

Texas Curiosities

It has come to my attention that Paris, Texas has a replica of the Eiffel Tower with a cowboy hat on top.

1. Is this in fact true?

2. Why has this not come to my attention before?

I can add this to the massive number of weird places to visit in Texas before I leave, including Huntsville, ie., Executionville, the Confederate Reunion Grounds State Park, and the Texas Rangers museum in Waco.

John Tierney REALLY Doesn't Want To Admit Global Warming Is A Problem, And Other Depressing Climate Change News

John Tierney is just desperate to find an easy solution to climate change. He doesn't want to admit that humans have created a global disaster. It could implicate his version of "free-market economics" and that's just not acceptable. So today, he writes in the Times that geoengineering is the answer. Like most of his articles, Tierney finds one person who is doing something he likes and latches on to it like a hungry baby to its mother. He wants the world to put 100 meter pipes in the ocean to mix water from the surface with water from the deep to create carbon dioxide absorbing algae blooms. He won't suggest what would really help--massive changes in our system of production and consumption, so he's looking for the easy way out. Not going to happen John.

But of course nothing is being done at all. Here we have this extremely depressing report with graphics about the surprisingly rapid decline of the Arctic ice this summer.

What's most depressing to me is this link from a writer at Kos showing the top 9 issues for voters right now. They are as follows:

1. Iraq
2. Health Care
3. Economy
4. Immigration
5. Terrorism
6. Frustration with Government
7. Education
8. Gas Prices
9. Taxes

At least some of those issues are really important to me too, but the fact that global warming is nowhere to be found shows how far we are as a nation from taking even baby steps toward addressing it. It's simply not on our radar screen. The right simply doesn't care while progressives are almost singularly focused on Iraq. But even if the war wasn't going on, I doubt climate change would spring to the top of everyone's list of concerns.

Meanwhile, climate change continues to grow everyday. We do nothing and the future of the planet is in serious doubt.

Have a happy day!

Historical Image of the Day

Albert Thayer, "Indiana Crazy House," 1880s

Michael Medved Defends Slavery

Yep, that's right. Here's the link.

He says he's exposing myths about slavery. Here are his six talking points, which Medved actually calls his Six Inconvenient Truths.

1. Slavery was an ancient and universal institution, not a distinctively American innovation.
2. Slavery existed only briefly, and in limited locales, in the history of the republic - involving only a tiny percentage of the ancestors of today’s Americans.
3. Though brutal, slavery wasn’t genocidal: live slaves were valuable but dead captives brought no profit.
4. It’s not true that the U.S. became a wealthy nation through the abuse of slave labor: the most prosperous states in the country were those that first freed their slaves.
5. While America deserves no unique blame for the existence of slavery, the United States merits special credit for its rapid abolition.
6. There is no reason to believe that today’s African Americans would be better off if their ancestors had remained behind in Africa.

I hate to waste my time, and God knows I have other things I should be doing this evening. But I can't let this slide. So here we go.

1. Slavery was an ancient and universal institution, not a distinctively American innovation.

And that makes it OK? Fine, let's see where this game takes us. Oh, here's one! "Anti-Semitism was an ancient and universal institution, not a distinctively German innovation." Hell, why don't we just kill all our Jews? I mean, everyone else once did it!!!

2. Slavery existed only briefly, and in limited locales, in the history of the republic - involving only a tiny percentage of the ancestors of today’s Americans.

Medved simply has no understanding of American history. First, slavery was very common in the North at the time of the Revolution. There were slaves in New York as late as the mid 1830s. He plays a tricky little game too. By claiming that slavery existed only "briefly" in the history of the republic, he's trying to marginalize it in American history. But of course, his definition of "briefly" happens to be a mere 79 years (1776-1865). Plus, he simply ignores the 147 years before that. Totally irrelevant of course.

The idea of slavery existed only in "limited locales" made me laugh out loud. Oh, you mean only the entire American South? Is that all? And not the South narrowly defined like today, but also Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky, and Delaware. And again, there were many slaves in the North.

The argument that only a tiny percentage of the ancestors of today's Americans gets thrown out all the time by right-wingers. It serves to deny the existence of white privilege that even today makes life easier for whites. Medved says, " Of course, a hundred years of Jim Crow laws, economic oppression and indefensible discrimination followed the theoretical emancipation of the slaves, but those harsh realities raise different issues from those connected to the long-ago history of bondage. " Well, not really. They are closely related. Medved uses this to sever the history of racism in America from the issue of reparations, which is at least part of what he's trying to attack here. Is reparations even an issue these days? I think Medved is trying to relive the Republican glory days of the late 90s.

3. Though brutal, slavery wasn’t genocidal: live slaves were valuable but dead captives brought no profit. Like Point 1, I say, so what? It's entirely unclear to me what point Medved is trying to make. But what he doesn't say is that this was not the choice of American slaveholders. Rather, they had to keep their slaves alive because they were too poor to afford more. In other parts of the New World, particularly in the sugar plantations of the Caribbean and Brazil, slaves were so cheap that they were treated like dogs. If they died, no one cared. Plantation owners could just buy another boatload. All that makes Americans different is that they lived in an economic backwater of the New World and could not grow a product that made them enough money to treat slaves like they really wanted. Where North Americans got the closest, on the rice plantations of South Carolina, slaves were treated worse than in Virginia and the tobacco regions.

4. It’s not true that the U.S. became a wealthy nation through the abuse of slave labor: the most prosperous states in the country were those that first freed their slaves.

Now this is just stupid. Medved either is ignorant of US history or is just lying. First of all, there was great wealth in the South. It may have been concentrated in a few hands, but those with lots of slaves made a tremendous amount of money for the time. Second, he completely ignores American economic history and the first years of the Industrial Revolution. For the North made tons of money off slave labor too. It's just that they bought the cotton that southern slaves grew and turned it into profits in their textile mills. They could not have done so without those big cotton plantations in the South and they made few if any complaints over the fact that their profits came from slave labor. The North and South were intricately connected in these years. They were far from the two distinct societies many claim. I could go on about northern owned slave ships or yet again discuss slaves in the North, but I'm going to scream if I write about this much longer.

5. While America deserves no unique blame for the existence of slavery, the United States merits special credit for its rapid abolition.

Ha Ha Ha Ha. That's really funny. This comes from the AMERICA IS THE GREATEST NATION IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT YOU ARE A DIRTY COMMIE theory of American history. While I agree that the US does not deserve "unique blame for the existence of slavery," it does deserve some blame for allowing an institution to flourish that directly contradicted its founding principle. But the idea that the US "merits special credit for its rapid abolition just makes no sense." I would say the nation that deserves said credit in Britain. The British abolished slavery 32 years before the US. The British went out of their way to suppress the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Meanwhile, Americans were trying all they could to smuggle fresh slaves into the country to get around the 1808 constitutional abolition of the slave trade that Southerners bitterly regretted soon after they agreed to it.

6. There is no reason to believe that today’s African Americans would be better off if their ancestors had remained behind in Africa.

Wow. I have nothing but contempt for Medved, but even I'm surprised he pulled this out. This is nothing but racism. Medved is rehashing the old slavery-is-good-for-the-savages argument that was really popular during the years of slavery. Of course, it remained popular after too, just with "colonialism" replacing "slavery." Medved is a racist. I really wonder if Medved would do anything but wave the flag if the United States or Europe were to recolonize Africa. This is just disgusting.

It's a real wonder the Republican Party is increasingly strictly the party of white people with characters like Medved speaking for them. Racism runs in a powerful current through the heart of the Republican Party. The fact is that lots of right-wingers are reading this and loving it. They agree with everything Medved, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Colter, Malkin, and the rest say. Thank God history and demographics are against these racists. I would like to personally thank all of these people for driving every non-white person in this nation into the hands of the Democratic Party.

Via Nicole Belle.

Historical Image of the Day

Bisbee, Arizona, 1905