Charlatans and Cynics

Jill Lepore on George and Mitt...

Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:11:00 -0400

Jill Lepore on George and Mitt Romney: http://nyr.kr/OQQywo

I’ve discussed the growing extremism in the Republican Party before, and how much it has changed. The party of Lincoln is now the party of Limbaugh. However, it is still shocking to actually see the change. This clip of George Romney fully illuminates the decline of the party into madness. His claims about improving programs for the poor, sick, and elderly, improving conditions for workers (including public employees, he notes), and cleaning up water and air pollution are the complete opposite of today’s G.O.P talking points. Granted, this is a political ad, I do not know if Romney’s claims are true. Yet, this video is still indicative of how much the rhetoric and character of the party has changed. - Brandon

kohenari: I haven’t seen a whole lot of discussion about this...

Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:23:26 -0400

kohenari:

I haven’t seen a whole lot of discussion about this story over the past week — in part, I suppose, because we’ve been trying to figure out why in the world people in the Middle East might have attacked our embassies and consulates. It seems to me to be precisely the sort of story we ought to spend our time discussing:

A prisoner who died in his cell at the Guantanamo Bay naval base during the weekend was a suicidal and mentally ill Yemeni who had won a U.S. court order for his release, only to have it overturned on appeal, according to his lawyer and court records.

[…]

[Adnan] Latif was captured near the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan in late 2001.

Administrative review boards at Guantanamo recommended he be transferred to his homeland in 2006 and again in 2008, recommendations that were never carried out.

Latif challenged his detention in the U.S. District Court in Washington, which ruled in July 2010 that he should go free. His lawyers argued that Latif had gone to Pakistan and then Afghanistan to seek medical treatment from an aid group for a severe head injury suffered in a car crash.

The U.S. government, which says Latif was an al Qaeda fighter recruited and trained in Afghanistan by the Taliban, successfully appealed against the District Court ruling and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Latif’s appeal without comment in June.

Latif was among the Yemenis cleared for transfer by President Barack Obama’s Guantanamo Review Task Force in 2009, Remes said.

“He was never a threat to the United States and should never have been brought to Guantanamo,” Remes said. “He should have been released long ago not just because he was innocent of any wrongdoing but because humanitarian considerations cried out for his release.”

Obama imposed a moratorium on returning Guantanamo captives to Yemen after a Yemeni-trained Nigerian, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, tried to blow up a Detroit-bound plane with a bomb in his underpants on Christmas Day 2009.

More here and here.

"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there..."

Mon, 17 Sep 2012 19:45:33 -0400

“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.”

- Winston Churchill (via politicalprof)

america-wakiewakie: motherjones: We learned something new...

Mon, 17 Sep 2012 19:45:28 -0400

america-wakiewakie:

motherjones:

We learned something new today. Er.

what do you think of Facebook?

Fri, 14 Sep 2012 03:30:37 -0400

At its best, it is a way for people to easily communicate with each other and for artists & musicians to promote their work.

At its worst, it is a complete waste of time and essentially a web of spies. Ordinary people spy on each other, businesses collect personal information in order to better market their products, and governments (primarily the U.S.) are using social media increasingly as a means of spying on the public.

And quite frankly, I think it atomizes people rather than brings them together. Think of family members staring at their phones rather than talking to each other.

The bad far outweighs the good. It is a vapid, Orwellian distraction that passes for “entertainment” among people yet is clandestinely being used to subjugate them.

thepeoplesrecord: Eleven years later, we are still at...

Wed, 12 Sep 2012 00:42:17 -0400

thepeoplesrecord:

Eleven years later, we are still at war
September 11, 2012

Eleven years later, we are still at war. Bullets, mortars and drones are still extracting payment. Thousands, tens of thousands, millions have paid in full. Children and even those yet to be born will continue to pay for decades to come.

On a single day in Iraq last week there were 29 bombing attacks in 19 cities, killing 111 civilians and wounding another 235. On Sept 9th, reports indicate 88 people were killed and another 270 injured in 30 attacks all across the country. Iraq continues in a seemingly endless death spiral into chaos. In his acceptance speech for the Democratic nomination for President, Obama claimed he ended the war in Iraq, well… not quite.

The city of Fallujah remains under siege. Not from U.S. troops, but from a deluge of birth defects that have plagued families since the use of depleted uranium and white phosphorus by U.S. forces in 2004. No government studies have provided a direct link to the use of these weapons because no government studies have been undertaken, and none are contemplated.

Dr. Samira Alani, a pediatric specialist at Fallujah General Hospital, told Al Jazeera, “We have all kinds of defects now, ranging from congenital heart disease to severe physical abnormalities, both in numbers you cannot imagine. There are not even medical terms to describe some of these conditions because we’ve never seen them until now.” The photographs are available on line if you can bear to look at what we have wrought. George W. Bush will loudly proclaim his “Pro-life” bona fides, and he’ll tell you he believes “that every child, born and unborn, ought to be protected in law and welcomed into life.” Apparently, “every child” doesn’t apply to the children of Fallujah, and the “law” doesn’t apply to George W. Bush.

Our soldiers, some physically damaged by IED’s, some mentally destroyed by PTSD, will pay for these wars for the rest of their days. Drug and alcohol abuse is out of control. Suicide among the troops is an epidemic. 2,916 Americans were lost in the towers on that fateful day, many, many more have perished in the intervening years.

Today we will be asked to honor the men and woman of our armed forces, but what does honoring the veterans entail? In its most recent report, The Veterans Administration estimates about 107,000 veterans are homeless on any given night. Mental illness plagues 45% of homeless vets and 70% suffer from some kind of substance abuse. So how do you honor our veterans? Are “Support Our Troops” ribbons still in vogue? How does our government honor our veterans other than use them as political pawns in stump speeches and cannon fodder for their wars?

84,000 American troops remain in Afghanistan. While the occupation is rarely mentioned in the U.S. mainstream media, that doesn’t mean the killing has stopped. On average, one U.S. soldier dies everyday. Not an enormous sum, unless it is your mother, father, son or daughter that has perished. Few Americans notice. Afghan loses are not reported. They have loved ones who grieve as well.

Source

peaceandphilosophy: REMEMBER SEPTEMBER 11TH “In the years...

Wed, 12 Sep 2012 00:42:13 -0400

peaceandphilosophy:

REMEMBER SEPTEMBER 11TH

“In the years leading up to the coup, U.S. trainers, many from the CIA, had whipped the Chilean military into an anti-communist frenzy, persuading them that socialists were de facto Russian spies, a force alien to Chilean society—a homegrown ‘enemy within’. In fact, it was the military that had become the true domestic enemy, ready to turn its weapons on the population it was sworn to protect. With Allende dead, his cabinet in captivity and no mass resistance in evidence, the junta’s grand battle was over by mid-afternoon…Killing and locking up the government was not enough for Chile’s new junta government, however. The generals knew that their hold on power depended on Chileans being truly terrified, as the people had been in Indonesia. In the days that followed, roughly 13,500 Chileans were arrested, loaded onto trucks and imprisoned, according to a declassified CIA report. Thousands ended up in the two main football stadiums…death replaced football as the public spectacle. Soldiers prowled the bleachers with hooded collaborators who pointed out “subversives”; the ones who were selected were hauled off to locker rooms and skyboxes transformed into makeshift torture chambers. Hundreds were executed. Lifeless bodies started showing up on the side of major highways or floating in murky urban canals.” (92-93) Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine

The single mother myth

Tue, 11 Sep 2012 18:31:51 -0400

The single mother myth:

“Women’s inequality is a persistent feature of U.S. society—but contrary to the New York Times, the answer doesn’t lie in turning back the clock, writes Jen Roesch”

War Drums Beat Ever More Loudly Over Iran by Noam Chomsky

Tue, 11 Sep 2012 18:31:47 -0400

War Drums Beat Ever More Loudly Over Iran by Noam Chomsky:

when-will-you-fight-back:

It is not easy to escape from one’s skin, to see the world differently from the way it is presented to us day after day. But it is useful to try. Let’s take a few examples.

The war drums are beating ever more loudly over Iran. Imagine the situation to be reversed.

Iran is carrying out a murderous and destructive low-level war against Israel with great-power participation. Its leaders announce that negotiations are going nowhere. Israel refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow inspections, as Iran has done. Israel continues to defy the overwhelming international call for a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region. Throughout, Iran enjoys the support of its superpower patron.

Iranian leaders are therefore announcing their intention to bomb Israel, and prominent Iranian military analysts report that the attack may happen before the U.S. elections.

Iran can use its powerful air force and new submarines sent by Germany, armed with nuclear missiles and stationed off the coast of Israel. Whatever the timetable, Iran is counting on its superpower backer to join if not lead the assault. U.S. defense secretary Leon Panetta says that while we do not favor such an attack, as a sovereign country Iran will act in its best interests.

All unimaginable, of course, though it is actually happening, with the cast of characters reversed. True, analogies are never exact, and this one is unfair - to Iran.

Like its patron, Israel resorts to violence at will. It persists in illegal settlement in occupied territory, some annexed, all in brazen defiance of international law and the U.N. Security Council. It has repeatedly carried out brutal attacks against Lebanon and the imprisoned people of Gaza, killing tens of thousands without credible pretext.

Thirty years ago Israel destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor, an act that has recently been praised, avoiding the strong evidence, even from U.S. intelligence, that the bombing did not end Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons program but rather initiated it. Bombing of Iran might have the same effect.

Iran too has carried out aggression - but during the past several hundred years, only under the U.S.-backed regime of the shah, when it conquered Arab islands in the Persian Gulf.

Iran engaged in nuclear development programs under the shah, with the strong support of official Washington. The Iranian government is brutal and repressive, as are Washington’s allies in the region. The most important ally, Saudi Arabia, is the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist regime, and spends enormous funds spreading its radical Wahhabist doctrines elsewhere. The gulf dictatorships, also favored U.S. allies, have harshly repressed any popular effort to join the Arab Spring.

The Nonaligned Movement - the governments of most of the world’s population - is now meeting in Teheran. The group has vigorously endorsed Iran’s right to enrich uranium, and some members - India, for example - adhere to the harsh U.S. sanctions program only partially and reluctantly.

The NAM delegates doubtless recognize the threat that dominates discussion in the West, lucidly articulated by Gen. Lee Butler, former head of the U.S. Strategic Command: “It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East,” one nation should arm itself with nuclear weapons, which “inspires other nations to do so.”

Butler is not referring to Iran, but to Israel, which is regarded in the Arab countries and in Europe as posing the greatest threat to peace. In the Arab world, the United States is ranked second as a threat, while Iran, though disliked, is far less feared. Indeed in many polls majorities hold that the region would be more secure if Iran had nuclear weapons to balance the threats they perceive.

If Iran is indeed moving toward nuclear-weapons capability - this is still unknown to U.S. intelligence - that may be because it is “inspired to do so” by the U.S.-Israeli threats, regularly issued in explicit violation of the U.N. Charter.

Why then is Iran the greatest threat to world peace, as seen in official Western discourse? The primary reason is acknowledged by U.S. military and intelligence and their Israeli counterparts: Iran might deter the resort to force by the United States and Israel.

Furthermore Iran must be punished for its “successful defiance,” which was Washington’s charge against Cuba half a century ago, and still the driving force for the U.S. assault against Cuba that continues despite international condemnation.

Other events featured on the front pages might also benefit from a different perspective. Suppose that Julian Assange had leaked Russian documents revealing important information that Moscow wanted to conceal from the public, and that circumstances were otherwise identical.

Sweden would not hesitate to pursue its sole announced concern, accepting the offer to interrogate Assange in London. It would declare that if Assange returned to Sweden (as he has agreed to do), he would not be extradited to Russia, where chances of a fair trial would be slight.

Sweden would be honored for this principled stand. Assange would be praised for performing a public service - which, of course, would not obviate the need to take the accusations against him as seriously as in all such cases.

The most prominent news story of the day here is the U.S. election. An appropriate perspective was provided by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who held that “We may have democracy in this country, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.”

Guided by that insight, coverage of the election should focus on the impact of wealth on policy, extensively analyzed in the recent study “Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America” by Martin Gilens. He found that the vast majority are “powerless to shape government policy” when their preferences diverge from the affluent, who pretty much get what they want when it matters to them.

Small wonder, then, that in a recent ranking of the 31 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in terms of social justice, the United States placed 27th, despite its extraordinary advantages.

Or that rational treatment of issues tends to evaporate in the electoral campaign, in ways sometimes verging on comedy.

To take one case, Paul Krugman reports that the much-admired Big Thinker of the Republican Party, Paul Ryan, declares that he derives his ideas about the financial system from a character in a fantasy novel - “Atlas Shrugged” - who calls for the use of gold coins instead of paper currency.

It only remains to draw from a really distinguished writer, Jonathan Swift. In “Gulliver’s Travels,” his sages of Lagado carry all their goods with them in packs on their backs, and thus could use them for barter without the encumbrance of gold. Then the economy and democracy could truly flourish - and best of all, inequality would sharply decline, a gift to the spirit of Justice Brandeis.

Source

"The Katrina experience pointed to a larger conclusion about United States policy - that while..."

Mon, 10 Sep 2012 01:12:05 -0400

““The Katrina experience pointed to a larger conclusion about United States policy - that while millions of people in Africa and Asia, and even poor people in the United States, were dying of malnutrition and sickness, while natural disasters were taking huge tolls of life all over the world…the United States government was pouring its enormous wealth into war and the building of empire.””

- Howard Zinn, The Unraveling of the Bush Presidency

Stanford Scientists Shockingly Reckless on Health Risk And Organics

Mon, 10 Sep 2012 01:12:01 -0400

Stanford Scientists Shockingly Reckless on Health Risk And Organics:

when-will-you-fight-back:

I first heard about a new Stanford “study” downplaying the value of organics when this blogheadline cried out from my inbox: “Expensive organic food isn’t healthier and no safer than produce grown with pesticides, finds biggest study of its kind.”

What?

Does the actual study say this?

No, but authors of the study — “Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives? A Systematic Review” — surely are responsible for its misinterpretation and more. Their study actually reports that ¨Consumption of organic foods may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and antibiotic-resistant bacteria.”

The authors’ tentative wording — “may reduce” — belies their own data: The report’s opening statement says the tested organic produce carried a 30 percent lower risk of exposure to pesticide residues. And, the report itself also says that “detectable pesticide residues were found in 7% of organic produce samples…and 38% of conventional produce samples.” Isn’t that’s a greater than 80% exposure reduction?

In any case, the Stanford report’s unorthodox measure “makes little practical or clinical sense,” notes Charles Benbrook — formerly Executive Director, Board on Agriculture of the National Academy of Sciences: What people “should be concerned about [is]… not just the number of [pesticide] residues they are exposed to” but the “health risk they face.” Benbrook notes “a 94% reduction in health risk” from pesticides when eating organic foods.

Assessing pesticide-driven health risks weighs the toxicity of the particular pesticide. For example the widely-used pesticide atrazine, banned in Europe, is known to be “a risk factorin endocrine disruption in wildlife and reproductive cancers in laboratory rodents and humans.”

“Very few studies” included by the Stanford researchers, notes Benbrook, “are designed or conducted in a way that could isolate the impact or contribution of a switch to organic food from the many other factors that influence a given individual’s health.” They “would be very expensive, and to date, none have been carried out in the U.S.” [emphasis added].

In other words, simple prudence should have prevented these scientists from using “evidence” not designed to capture what they wanted to know.

Moreover, buried in the Stanford study is this all-critical fact: It includes no long-term studies of people consuming organic compared to chemically produced food: The studies included ranged from just two days to two years. Yet, it is well established that chemical exposure often takes decades to show up, for example, in cancer or neurological disorders.

Consider these studies not included: The New York Times notes three 2011 studies by scientists at Columbia University, the University of California, Berkeley, and Mount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan that studied pregnant women exposed to higher amounts of an organophosphate pesticide. Once their children reached elementary school they “had, on average, I.Q.’s several points lower than those of their peers.”

Thus, it is reprehensible for the authors of this overview to even leave open to possible interpretation that their compilation of short-term studies can determine anything about the human-health impact of pesticides.

What also disturbs me is that neither in their journal article nor in media interviews do the Stanford authors suggest that concern about “safer and healthier” might extend beyond consumers to the people who grow our food. They have health concerns, too!

Many choose organic to decrease chemicals in food production because of the horrific consequences farm workers and farmers suffer from pesticide exposure. U.S. farming communities are shown to be afflicted with, for example, higher rates of: “leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and soft tissue sarcoma” — in addition to skin, lip, stomach, brain and prostate cancers,” reports the National Cancer Institute. And, at a global level, “an estimated 3 million acute pesticide poisonings occur worldwide each year,” reports the World Health Organization. Another health hazard of pesticides, not hinted at in the report, comes from water contamination by pesticides. They have made the water supply for4.3 million Americans unsafe for drinking.

Finally, are organic foods more nutritious?

In their report, Crystal Smith-Spangler, MD, and co-authors say only that “published literature lacks strong evidence that organic foods are significantly more nutritious than conventional foods.” Yet, the most comprehensive meta-analysis comparing organic and non-organic, led by scientist Kirsten Brandt, a Scientist at the Human Nutrition Research Center at the UK’s Newcastle University found organic fruits and vegetables, to have on “average 12% higher nutrient levels.”

Bottom line for me? What we do know is that the rates of critical illnesses, many food-related —from allergies to Crohn’s Disease — are spiking and no one knows why. What we do know is that pesticide poisoning is real and lethal — and not just for humans. In such a world is it not the height of irresponsibility to downplay the risks of exposure to known toxins?

Rachel Carson would be crying. Or, I hope, shouting until — finally — we all listen. “Simple precaution! Is that not commonsense?”

Source

"America is the only country in the world"

Mon, 10 Sep 2012 01:12:00 -0400

All of the Republican party’s talking points against Obama are related to his domestic agenda and accomplishments. These critiques are misrepresentations of facts and reality, and are therefore easy to dismiss. However, they still offer a potent narrative. Republicans have gained traction by creating a fictional Obama. They haven’t posed a viable alternative to his policies (think Bill Clinton’s “arithmetic” quote), but have simply rejected them. Many have wryly pointed to Clint Eastwood’s talking to an empty chair as a perfect metaphor for the party. Yet, it seems that a lot is missing from the debate. After all, more has happened in the last three and a half years besides the “failed stimulus” and “Obamacare”.

Republicans don’t mention the fact that the Afghanistan War has now killed 2,000 U.S. troops after 10 years, and even worse, 1,271 civilians were killed in the first six months of 2010. They don’t mention that whistle blower Bradley Manning has been in solitary confinement for the last two years, facing life in prison. They don’t mention the “kill lists”. They don’t mention the administration’s policy of deeming all males over the age of 18 as “enemy combatants” until proven otherwise after they have been killed. They don’t mention the unprecedented use of the Espionage Act to prosecute whistle blowers. They don’t mention FAA’s approval of drones for domestic air use. They don’t press Obama over civilian casualties in Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. They’re not concerned about the assassinations of U.S. citizens without trial. They don’t question why Guantanamo Bay is still open, and they don’t fret over the NDAA.

Much to my disgust, there are plenty on the left who list these facts as accomplishments of Obama’s presidency. To be fair, it is grossly erroneous of Republicans to assert that Obama is “soft on terror” (by their definition of “soft” of course) and that his administration is run by the ACLU. But when I see Democratic pundits correcting Republicans on this, they do so far too gleefully. Democrats that were appalled by the atrocities of the Bush years now fully support those same, and oftentimes worse, actions under the Obama presidency. In a true case of Orwellian double think, they’re glad that Obama has taken these “tough” actions, under the dim and short-sighted idea that they will give him an electoral advantage (they likely won’t). This hypocrisy of the left is unsettling. Indeed, the anti-war left of the 60’s now looks far too slim.

It’s quite simple, Republicans and Democrats both agree with these draconian measures. There are two parties, but only one foreign policy. That policy is war, greed, control, and hegemony.

For there to be true democracy in this country, there has to be a genuine struggle of ideas. Not a tacit acceptance of a narrowly defined political spectrum, not a moral compass guided by the whims of changing party positions. With a Republican party that refuses to critique Obama on foreign policy, the left will either have to take control of the Democratic party and hold the President accountable, or form a new, genuinely left wing party.

Contrary to the main debates of this election, the U.S. is not the only country in the world. We’re not alone, it’s time to have a genuine debate about foreign policy.

- Brandon

"Other events featured on the front pages might also benefit from a different perspective. Suppose..."

Wed, 05 Sep 2012 20:47:32 -0400

““Other events featured on the front pages might also benefit from a different perspective. Suppose that Julian Assange had leaked Russian documents revealing important information that Moscow wanted to conceal from the public, and that circumstances were otherwise identical.””

- Noam Chomsky (via noam-chomsky)

…..or Chinese documents that Beijing wanted hidden from the public.

On the late Howard Zinn’s 90th Birthday: A new biography gives insight into his life and activism

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:58:50 -0400

On the late Howard Zinn’s 90th Birthday: A new biography gives insight into his life and activism:

The book is more about Zinn’s activism, organizing, and protest than his writing, however. Ardently averse to the stodgy academic, Zinn was arrested multiple times during direct actions in desegregation and civil rights organizing in the south. His regular arrests and organizing, as well as his subversive teaching style, caused constant clash with both his major tenures, Spelman (a black women’s college in Atlanta), and Boston College. While his later time in Boston was marked by a malicious conservative university president denouncing him at every turn (and once accusing him of trying to set a university building on fire), his clashes during his first position are almost more interesting. While Spelman obviously pushed for improvement in the socioeconomic standing of Southern black communities, the college did not advocate breaking the law. At one point, the president of Spelman accuses Zinn of a sexual relationship with a student, on the basis of giving her a ride. It’s under this sort of scrutiny and fear that Zinn continued to break the law in the name of social justice, and remain an ardent radical in spite of the benefits he would have received from compromising as a fair weather liberal.

Liberals Need to Start Holding Obama Responsible for His Policies

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:54:26 -0400

Liberals Need to Start Holding Obama Responsible for His Policies:

“If liberals like Auster think that President Obama is preferable to Mitt Romney, even given all his flaws, they’ve got a plausible argument. But when liberals who describe the right’s transgressions against civil liberties during the Bush era as horrific — a label that is absolutely justified — and nevertheless describe Obama as man with “knighted” notions, think his major problem is political ineptness, talk of respect for him, and desperately want him to win, I can’t understand it.”

thepeoplesrecord: Who is the top recipient of US foreign...

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:54:23 -0400

thepeoplesrecord:

Who is the top recipient of US foreign aid?

Israel with nearly $3.1 billion in 2012.

The United States is quite literally continuing to fund the Israeli apartheid to demolish Palestinian towns, destroy wells & farms, terrorize families, ruthlessly arrest children & imprison Palestinian citizens. All under President Obama’s watch.

Yet somehow, the US doesn’t have money to build schools, house the homeless, feed the hungry, provide adequate healthcare, improve infrastructure & the list goes on…

A brief note on the Republican convention....

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:49:00 -0400

So, the tagline for the convention, “we built it”, is actually based around an Obama quote taken out of context. A quote that by the way, reiterates the basic foundation of Adam Smith’s theory of capitalism.

So not only is the slogan based upon a lie, it also foolishly goes against the economic theory that Republicans have traditionally espoused.

It almost sounds like a comedy, the sad thing is, it isn’t.

- Brandon

"I don’t like this expression ‘First World problems.’ It is false and it is condescending. Yes,..."

Thu, 30 Aug 2012 18:37:57 -0400

“I don’t like this expression ‘First World problems.’ It is false and it is condescending. Yes, Nigerians struggle with floods or infant mortality. But these same Nigerians also deal with mundane and seemingly luxurious hassles. Connectivity issues on your BlackBerry, cost of car repair, how to sync your iPad, what brand of noodles to buy: Third World problems. All the silly stuff of life doesn’t disappear just because you’re black and live in a poorer country. People in the richer nations need a more robust sense of the lives being lived in the darker nations. Here’s a First World problem: the inability to see that others are as fully complex and as keen on technology and pleasure as you are.”

- Teju Cole (via semperes)

Politicalprof: The "This Time Is Different" Exception

Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:11:00 -0400

Politicalprof: The "This Time Is Different" Exception:

politicalprof:

So in response to a snarky post I made on Sunday, asking whether tea party loving, federal government hating Florida Governor Rick Scott would violate his ideology and ask for federal disaster aid after Hurricane Isaac comes to shore in the next few days, one of my respondents insisted that…

Excellent piece, the pervasive rhetoric of states’ rights leads some to the delusion that states can act with complete sovereignty. As Politicalprof points out, this is not only antithetical to the idea of the “United” states but is also mathematically impossible.

"Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cosy indoor warmth of..."

Fri, 24 Aug 2012 01:48:50 -0400

““Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cosy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigour, and the great spaces have a splendour of their own.””

- Bertrand Russell, What I Believe