Wow.
No "I'll be home for Christmas" for me, it seems, since this is my route back to Maryland...
Good wishes to the heroic MoCo rescue workers, and to all those surely-shaken-up motorists.
And a sobering thought that infrastructure is in such a sorry state (per Bethesda councilman Roger Berliner in the Washington Business Journal, “We have long known we are in a dangerous situation. We know that, without the federal government’s help, there are future incidents similar to today’s that are waiting to happen.”) in one of the top ten wealthiest counties in America.
Public works stimulus projects on the '09 agenda, anyone?
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Brown paper packages tied up with string
A few great reads to honor the best part of the season: cookies.
Slate's foodies debate the cookie in a seven part series. Absolutely excessive? Without a doubt. And also a total pleasure to read - these writers are to the cookie what Dahlia Lithwick is to SCOTUS: reverent of their subject while still being funny, highly personal, and thoroughly entertaining.
A must-read for holiday bakers: a treatise on butter in the NYT. I love baking wit
h quality butter, but mostly just because it satisfies my pretensions of being more sophisticated in the kitchen than I am. Vindication here, though: apparently butter is not simply an ingredient in, but the foundational element of, a good cookie. And nota bene, my fellow soften-in-the-microwavers, apparently when butter reaches 68 degrees (just a precious few degrees past its ideal softened state), that water-fat emulsion that gives a cookie its perfect texture breaks down past the point of no return.
and a recipe recommendation:
despite her irritating near-pornographic programming, Giada de Laurentiis does a mean holiday biscotti offering for Food Network - I had a lot of success with it this weekend. Skip the red and green sprinkles and go premium with the ingredients for a classy take on the cookie as Christmas gift.
Happy eating, and happy holidays!
Slate's foodies debate the cookie in a seven part series. Absolutely excessive? Without a doubt. And also a total pleasure to read - these writers are to the cookie what Dahlia Lithwick is to SCOTUS: reverent of their subject while still being funny, highly personal, and thoroughly entertaining.
A must-read for holiday bakers: a treatise on butter in the NYT. I love baking wit
h quality butter, but mostly just because it satisfies my pretensions of being more sophisticated in the kitchen than I am. Vindication here, though: apparently butter is not simply an ingredient in, but the foundational element of, a good cookie. And nota bene, my fellow soften-in-the-microwavers, apparently when butter reaches 68 degrees (just a precious few degrees past its ideal softened state), that water-fat emulsion that gives a cookie its perfect texture breaks down past the point of no return.
and a recipe recommendation:
despite her irritating near-pornographic programming, Giada de Laurentiis does a mean holiday biscotti offering for Food Network - I had a lot of success with it this weekend. Skip the red and green sprinkles and go premium with the ingredients for a classy take on the cookie as Christmas gift.
Happy eating, and happy holidays!
A brief review of the newly reopened Museum of American History
American History was always my favorite of the Smithsonians growing up, and while I was saddened to see it close for renovation the September before I moved back to the city, I eagerly looked forward to seeing the museum post-facelift. Even discounting my DC chauvinism, the NAMH is like, the granddaddy of American History museums; I pictured dozens of respected and innovative curators and designers salivating to bring the landmark into the 21st century, and anticipated the fruits of their imaginations with baited breath.
I shouldn't have.
While many of the classic exhibits - Julia Child's kitchen, the 200 year old Boston house - have remained, others - the First Ladies' dresses, the artifacts representing American sport and the arts - are dramatically truncated, shells of once impressive displays. It is no exaggeration to say that the new or expanded exhibits lack any hint of creativity; each room seems a barely tweaked version of the one before it. It hardly helps that more than half of the exhibits could be accurately titled "War! Soldiers Were Brave!" or "Industrialization! It Works!" (or some combination thereof).
A visitor gets very little sense of any kind of complexity or conflict in this inexorable march of progress - particularly laughable is the tiny display box in the Paean to the Automobile exhibit containing a battered copy of The Feminine Mystique and noting that not everyone loved the suburbs... but wait, look at that silly early-model Honda Civic!
Compounding the failure to think at all creatively about what artifacts or narratives might represent America or Americans through time, the architecture and design are deeply uninspired - high ceilings seem not grandiose but airplane hangar-esque, and the overwhelming grayness of the whole aesthetic suggests nothing so much as the Holocaust Museum. Is there no joy, no light, no color to the American Experience?
I can't imagine this is what the curators meant to suggest, but coupled with the limited scope of its contents, the new NMAH gives the distinct impression that one is visiting the National Museum of the American Military Industrial Complex.
I shouldn't have.
While many of the classic exhibits - Julia Child's kitchen, the 200 year old Boston house - have remained, others - the First Ladies' dresses, the artifacts representing American sport and the arts - are dramatically truncated, shells of once impressive displays. It is no exaggeration to say that the new or expanded exhibits lack any hint of creativity; each room seems a barely tweaked version of the one before it. It hardly helps that more than half of the exhibits could be accurately titled "War! Soldiers Were Brave!" or "Industrialization! It Works!" (or some combination thereof).
A visitor gets very little sense of any kind of complexity or conflict in this inexorable march of progress - particularly laughable is the tiny display box in the Paean to the Automobile exhibit containing a battered copy of The Feminine Mystique and noting that not everyone loved the suburbs... but wait, look at that silly early-model Honda Civic!Compounding the failure to think at all creatively about what artifacts or narratives might represent America or Americans through time, the architecture and design are deeply uninspired - high ceilings seem not grandiose but airplane hangar-esque, and the overwhelming grayness of the whole aesthetic suggests nothing so much as the Holocaust Museum. Is there no joy, no light, no color to the American Experience?
I can't imagine this is what the curators meant to suggest, but coupled with the limited scope of its contents, the new NMAH gives the distinct impression that one is visiting the National Museum of the American Military Industrial Complex.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Ya'll stay down here, you hear?
A good read in this week's Newsweek about "The Second Auto Industry" of foreign carmakers who have invested heavily in plants in the American South over the past two decades. It's kind of bizarre to read about Southern Senators voting as a bloc (there's a jarring throwback) against the Big 3 Bailout, but the story of how companies like Toyota and BMW have transformed the economies of small Southern towns is remarkable.
I was skeptical of what sounded like the article's boosterism - I'm not particularly inclined to see Southern right-to-work laws as real economic solutions - but the consequences of foreign automakers' (writer Daniel Gross tags them "The Little Eight") investment in Dixie communities are stunning. Most notably, job creation: Gross cites a figure from the Alabama's Development Office that these foreign auto companies supported a payroll of $5.2 billion in the state last year, and quotes a DC economist that "every job in auto production supports five other jobs in the economy in steel, tires, rubber, programmers and auto dealers."
And those jobs are in much better shape now than those in the Detroit footprint. Obviously, the lack of legacy costs gives Toyota, BMW, et al a financial edge over their Big 3 competitors (not to mention the huge investments made by these Southern communities to attract them in the first place), but other innovation factors, like plants designed with production flexibility, have put them on more stable footing.
The most striking anecdote in the article cites the case of the San Antonio Toyota Tundra plant, which has laid in fallow for the past few months. Rather than than terminate the plant's workers, however, Toyota has kept them on and offered their services to the city. According to Richard Perez, president and CEO of the city's Chamber of Commerce, San Antonio has put the Toyota employees to work on beautification projects. I can't shake that remarkable image- a 21st century WPA, but funded by a foreign firm!- out of my head.
I was skeptical of what sounded like the article's boosterism - I'm not particularly inclined to see Southern right-to-work laws as real economic solutions - but the consequences of foreign automakers' (writer Daniel Gross tags them "The Little Eight") investment in Dixie communities are stunning. Most notably, job creation: Gross cites a figure from the Alabama's Development Office that these foreign auto companies supported a payroll of $5.2 billion in the state last year, and quotes a DC economist that "every job in auto production supports five other jobs in the economy in steel, tires, rubber, programmers and auto dealers."
And those jobs are in much better shape now than those in the Detroit footprint. Obviously, the lack of legacy costs gives Toyota, BMW, et al a financial edge over their Big 3 competitors (not to mention the huge investments made by these Southern communities to attract them in the first place), but other innovation factors, like plants designed with production flexibility, have put them on more stable footing.
The most striking anecdote in the article cites the case of the San Antonio Toyota Tundra plant, which has laid in fallow for the past few months. Rather than than terminate the plant's workers, however, Toyota has kept them on and offered their services to the city. According to Richard Perez, president and CEO of the city's Chamber of Commerce, San Antonio has put the Toyota employees to work on beautification projects. I can't shake that remarkable image- a 21st century WPA, but funded by a foreign firm!- out of my head.
"At least when you marry an African-American, you're getting someone who already understands Passover"
Ta-Nehisi Coates and Jeff Goldberg are two of the top five reasons I'm proud to be associated with The Atlantic, * and the two of them, together, talking about interracial/interfaith dating - be still, my heart.
I'm vacillating on whether I feel deserving of or want Jeff Goldberg's pity, as a Jewish woman with a non-MOT ("member of the tribe," in Goldberg parlance) mate -
I do wonder if this point isn't more true among African-American couples, though. As Ta-Nehisi puts it, "there is, in the black mind, this stereotype that black dudes can somehow get away with more dealing with white women," and it's not difficult to envision how this might be true. It would be a lot easier, I think, for a non-Jewish girlfriend to give her Jewish mate a hard time for acting lazy or immature, for example, than it would for a white girlfriend to use those (racially loaded) terms with a black partner.
The most interesting part of the conversation, though, is whether it's become gauche in certain circles "to advocate for in-marriage." Jeff says yes among Jews, Ta-Nehisi says that it's geographical for blacks - no in Atlanta or DC, yes in New York or LA - which seems like a fascinating area to be mined on the matter of the black community in the North vs. in the South.
As far as my personal life goes, I think the nut of it is what Ta-Nehisi has articulated so well in the past:
*Number one, as always, is Caitlan Flanagan. Go read her December issue piece on the Twilight phenomenon - her remarkable gift for collective psychoanalysis applied to girlhood narcissism and the insatiable appetitite for dramatic novels.
I'm vacillating on whether I feel deserving of or want Jeff Goldberg's pity, as a Jewish woman with a non-MOT ("member of the tribe," in Goldberg parlance) mate -
"I guess I felt sorry for the Jewish women who intermarried, because I sensed that they tried, and failed, to convince Jewish men that they weren't, in fact, their mothers, that they were intelligent and sexy and all the rest. Jewish men who go outside, I think - and this is not everyone, obviously - are looking beyond the tribe not because they really think they're going to end up marrying their mothers if they find a Jewish woman, but because they're scared of Jewish women, especially the intense sort my friends and I all seemed to marry."- and ask whether the issue isn't the bigger, third-wave feminist question of exactly how many young men want to date "intense," ambitious young women, of any religion. My roommate and I talked at length on Monday, after her visit to her boyfriend's naval base, about this phenomenon among young military officers, among which Jewish men aren't exactly known for being overrepresented.
I do wonder if this point isn't more true among African-American couples, though. As Ta-Nehisi puts it, "there is, in the black mind, this stereotype that black dudes can somehow get away with more dealing with white women," and it's not difficult to envision how this might be true. It would be a lot easier, I think, for a non-Jewish girlfriend to give her Jewish mate a hard time for acting lazy or immature, for example, than it would for a white girlfriend to use those (racially loaded) terms with a black partner.
The most interesting part of the conversation, though, is whether it's become gauche in certain circles "to advocate for in-marriage." Jeff says yes among Jews, Ta-Nehisi says that it's geographical for blacks - no in Atlanta or DC, yes in New York or LA - which seems like a fascinating area to be mined on the matter of the black community in the North vs. in the South.
As far as my personal life goes, I think the nut of it is what Ta-Nehisi has articulated so well in the past:
"Look, it's hard enough to satisfy the basic carnal needs--it's even harder to satisfy those needs, and satisfy the basic emotional and mental ones too. There is a good chance that your long-term relationship will one day fail. A great way to up the chances of truly epic fail, hot grits, I'm talking hot grits fail, burn down the mansion fail, is to shrink the pool of your potential partners."This is what I've found, at least (and what I'm always trying (unsuccessfully) to communicate to my grandmother): it's hard enough to find someone who shares your values, intellectual passions, and appreciation for LOLcats without artificially limiting the search to last names that end in -berg, -man, or -stein.
*Number one, as always, is Caitlan Flanagan. Go read her December issue piece on the Twilight phenomenon - her remarkable gift for collective psychoanalysis applied to girlhood narcissism and the insatiable appetitite for dramatic novels.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Tiddly winks
Say it ain't so!Here I've been thinking that the notorious VIP-debate wink was so obnoxious because it was Sarah Palin winking, but perhaps it was Sarah Palin winking that was the problem all along?
Jezebel has mini-essay up on whether it's ever appropriate for a woman to wink. I'll forgive them the irritating "can a women ever... " set-up, because I know the Jezzies have unimpeachable feminist cred and probably authored the headline with tongue firmly in cheek, but:
"Winking tends to be ridiculous by nature: patronizing, bizarre, old-man roguish.... Winking, for all its conspiratorial overtones, is inherently divisive: it places the winker in a position of secret-sharer; the wink-ee, by contrast, has no say in whether or not he wants to be in on the joke. As such, it's somehow embarrassing for both parties."Untrue, ladies! At least, I certainly hope so. I remain an ardent partisan (and frequent perpetrator) of The Wink. It's always struck me as a friendly gesture of support, high spirits, even solidarity, not to mention an appealingly co-opted old-fashioned masculine gesture that indicates confidence and mischeviousness on the part of the female winker. You know, like wearing a secondhand man's corduroy blazer. But "patronizing," "embarassing," and "inherently divisive"? My. Guess I should watch my mixed signals!
To be fair, no one expected pirates
This is a fun retrospective:
Foreign Policy magazine remembers what Bill Kristol, Jim Kramer, and others might like to forget in its look at the "10 Worst Predictions for 2008."
My favorite is that Great Font of Arrogance, Charles Krauthammer, getting the Georgia/Russia showdown spectacularly wrong. On Fox News, no less.
Foreign Policy magazine remembers what Bill Kristol, Jim Kramer, and others might like to forget in its look at the "10 Worst Predictions for 2008."
My favorite is that Great Font of Arrogance, Charles Krauthammer, getting the Georgia/Russia showdown spectacularly wrong. On Fox News, no less.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Madison Avenue, NW
Here's fascinating food for thought:
Advertising Age points out today that, once appointed, Bush's "Car Czar" will oversees all of the Big Three's expeditures, including $7.3 billion in advertising and marketing in the U.S. market alone.
All management and budget issues aside, President Bush is about to appoint the most powerful marketing exec in America, who will manage more marketing dollars than almost all the rest of the top 5 American advertisers combined.
Will marketers and sales teams suddenly be flooding into DC, currying favor with the Czar and his under-Czars with expensive lunches and glossy presentations? There's a lasting legacy for Bush - transforming some lowly government agency block into the epicenter of the ad world.
Advertising Age points out today that, once appointed, Bush's "Car Czar" will oversees all of the Big Three's expeditures, including $7.3 billion in advertising and marketing in the U.S. market alone.
All management and budget issues aside, President Bush is about to appoint the most powerful marketing exec in America, who will manage more marketing dollars than almost all the rest of the top 5 American advertisers combined.
Will marketers and sales teams suddenly be flooding into DC, currying favor with the Czar and his under-Czars with expensive lunches and glossy presentations? There's a lasting legacy for Bush - transforming some lowly government agency block into the epicenter of the ad world.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Hands, touching hands, reaching out....
An admission that will surprise no one: I love Caroline Kennedy.
Love her writing/editing, love the crucial early Barack endorsement, love the not giving her kids WASPY verb-present-tense nicknames, damaging a yacht in a drug-addled stupor, having an affair with the teenage babysitter, or any of the other Kennedy-cousin shenanigans that seem to plague the male members of the bloodline. I admire her shiny, shiny hair and her lifetime of public service with equal ardor, and I very much want her to be appointed to the U.S. Senate (David Patterson, I know you can't see it, so trust me: very shiny hair.)
And I think this kerfuffle about her wee upper-arm tattoo is awesome. Badass. Go, Caroline, with your terrible Asian butterfly-splotch thing. You are an example to those of us young women aspiring publicy to public leadership (and not-so-publicly to the ranks of the be-tatt'ed) everywhere.
Love her writing/editing, love the crucial early Barack endorsement, love the not giving her kids WASPY verb-present-tense nicknames, damaging a yacht in a drug-addled stupor, having an affair with the teenage babysitter, or any of the other Kennedy-cousin shenanigans that seem to plague the male members of the bloodline. I admire her shiny, shiny hair and her lifetime of public service with equal ardor, and I very much want her to be appointed to the U.S. Senate (David Patterson, I know you can't see it, so trust me: very shiny hair.)
And I think this kerfuffle about her wee upper-arm tattoo is awesome. Badass. Go, Caroline, with your terrible Asian butterfly-splotch thing. You are an example to those of us young women aspiring publicy to public leadership (and not-so-publicly to the ranks of the be-tatt'ed) everywhere.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Truth in dubbing
With full disclosure that I actually like David Gergen, I've watched far too much CNN for this not to be a hilarious send-up of most of the expert appearances. Courtesy Megan McArdle:
Daddy Issues
I'm not sure I've ever heard the term "sugar baby" outside the context of the favorite childhood candy (do they still make those? they were fantastic), but the mademoiselle writing under the nom de plume Melissa Beech seems to have brought the original meaning back into vogue, lighting up the blogosphere with her recent, unapologetic post at the Daily Beast, "My Sugar Daddy."
"Melissa" is a college senior and daughter of Philadelphia privilege who has discovered a shortcut to the lush life and - the more interesting part, here - career advancement in the form of a wealthy benefactor about ten years her senior who provides these benefits in exchange for sex and companionship. Shocking, of course, that our wee Pretty Woman has not been particularly well-received. Her grating tone and excessive self-pride - the bratty "how many other college students are wearing Christian Louboutins to class?" alone is enough to merit most of the vitriol directed her way in the comments - do seem to invite censure.
But her Cinderella story is sticking with me in a way that, say, Ashley Dupre certainly didn't, and I'm starting to think that maybe Melissa seems more identifiable, a little more acceptable, because she's speaking my language - she's not a prostitute, she's a networker (or at worst, a short-term prostitute networking for her future career.) After all, in addition to providing her with an AmEx Black, Melissa's sugar daddy has put her in a position to make contacts in the PR world (her chosen field) and helped her line up multiple internships. Her confidence about her job prospects post-graduation is enviable, given the financial climate that has most nearly-graduates trembling, and reminds me acutely of the budding old-boys-clubbers I knew at UVA.
And that's exactly it. It's a farce to pretend that all, or even most, hypersuccessful young people have "earned it" through hard work. The capital for a start-up, the connections to a position that leapfrogs all the menial stepping-stone jobs - those things are hereditary. How is Melissa's sugar daddy different, really, than a Congressman daddy, or a Chairman-of-the-Board daddy?
It's easy to dismiss her as a gold-digger when she's harping on the manicures and tanning, but then there's the line about the $12,000 that she's saved to start out her career, and suddenly the moral tut-tutting gets clouded by... jealousy? Not that I'd trade grilled cheese sandwiches with my debt-burdened law student for well, anyone, but I do know plenty of my peers who work jobs they loathe to save much less than that, or waste away in uninspiring positions in the mere hope of making those types of valuable connections. Our correspondent does, after all, enjoy the company of her patron, which is far more than most young people can say about their jobs.
Is this really such an immoral arrangement, or are we just angry that, like those privileged rich kids, it's all come so easy to her?
"Melissa" is a college senior and daughter of Philadelphia privilege who has discovered a shortcut to the lush life and - the more interesting part, here - career advancement in the form of a wealthy benefactor about ten years her senior who provides these benefits in exchange for sex and companionship. Shocking, of course, that our wee Pretty Woman has not been particularly well-received. Her grating tone and excessive self-pride - the bratty "how many other college students are wearing Christian Louboutins to class?" alone is enough to merit most of the vitriol directed her way in the comments - do seem to invite censure.
But her Cinderella story is sticking with me in a way that, say, Ashley Dupre certainly didn't, and I'm starting to think that maybe Melissa seems more identifiable, a little more acceptable, because she's speaking my language - she's not a prostitute, she's a networker (or at worst, a short-term prostitute networking for her future career.) After all, in addition to providing her with an AmEx Black, Melissa's sugar daddy has put her in a position to make contacts in the PR world (her chosen field) and helped her line up multiple internships. Her confidence about her job prospects post-graduation is enviable, given the financial climate that has most nearly-graduates trembling, and reminds me acutely of the budding old-boys-clubbers I knew at UVA.
And that's exactly it. It's a farce to pretend that all, or even most, hypersuccessful young people have "earned it" through hard work. The capital for a start-up, the connections to a position that leapfrogs all the menial stepping-stone jobs - those things are hereditary. How is Melissa's sugar daddy different, really, than a Congressman daddy, or a Chairman-of-the-Board daddy?
It's easy to dismiss her as a gold-digger when she's harping on the manicures and tanning, but then there's the line about the $12,000 that she's saved to start out her career, and suddenly the moral tut-tutting gets clouded by... jealousy? Not that I'd trade grilled cheese sandwiches with my debt-burdened law student for well, anyone, but I do know plenty of my peers who work jobs they loathe to save much less than that, or waste away in uninspiring positions in the mere hope of making those types of valuable connections. Our correspondent does, after all, enjoy the company of her patron, which is far more than most young people can say about their jobs.
Is this really such an immoral arrangement, or are we just angry that, like those privileged rich kids, it's all come so easy to her?
how true.
Ross Douthat on the word additions/removals to the updated edition of the Oxford children's dictionary:
"There's something awfully depressing about the idea that the word "database" is more relevant to your average British ten-year-old than the word "guinea pig.""
"There's something awfully depressing about the idea that the word "database" is more relevant to your average British ten-year-old than the word "guinea pig.""
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Aren't we, nation, battered just like this pup?
So, The Defenders of Wildlife video (the one where the wolves have "nowhere to hide") has now made the rounds, informing us all that Sarah Palin signed a bill to pay aerial hunters a bounty of $150 for the severed foreleg of a grey wolf.
Picture the exact opposite of that political move. Would it be something like cradling a wounded, three-legged puppy? To spread awareness about the cruelty of puppy mills? Say, on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial?
Because BARACK OBAMA DID THAT.
I can't believe I missed this story the first time around, but I caught the link in context of the Human Society Legislative Fund's endorsement of the Democratic ticket (their first ever presidential endorsement). It seems that Baby, a ten-year-old poodle, was rescued from a California puppy mill, where "her leg had been so badly mangled in her former cage that it had to be amputated, and her vocal cords had been cut so the puppy mill owners did not have to listen to the dog's constant cries to be let out of her cage," and her new owner has written a book about the evils of the industry, photographing Baby with celebrities and visting Capitol Hill to lobby for legislation.
You cannot make up stuff like this. In addition to the best. photo. ever, check out the caption, courtesy of HSLF's President, Michael Markarian:
"The solemn setting is a reminder of causes that are worth fighting for, and the image of battered Baby safe in Obama’s embrace sends the message that change is possible for these creatures, too."
Picture the exact opposite of that political move. Would it be something like cradling a wounded, three-legged puppy? To spread awareness about the cruelty of puppy mills? Say, on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial?
Because BARACK OBAMA DID THAT.
I can't believe I missed this story the first time around, but I caught the link in context of the Human Society Legislative Fund's endorsement of the Democratic ticket (their first ever presidential endorsement). It seems that Baby, a ten-year-old poodle, was rescued from a California puppy mill, where "her leg had been so badly mangled in her former cage that it had to be amputated, and her vocal cords had been cut so the puppy mill owners did not have to listen to the dog's constant cries to be let out of her cage," and her new owner has written a book about the evils of the industry, photographing Baby with celebrities and visting Capitol Hill to lobby for legislation.
You cannot make up stuff like this. In addition to the best. photo. ever, check out the caption, courtesy of HSLF's President, Michael Markarian:
"The solemn setting is a reminder of causes that are worth fighting for, and the image of battered Baby safe in Obama’s embrace sends the message that change is possible for these creatures, too."
Monday, October 6, 2008
Regarding my silence
To friends and readers-
A few of you have asked about my lack of posts in recent weeks, to which I wanted to respond:
a) It warms my heart that you noticed! Thanks for reading!
b) I'm currently in the thick of that fall rite of passage - studying for the GREs and applying to graduate schools. Lunch breaks and spare moments at work (and recently, there haven't been many) are, for the time being, spent doing polynomial practice sets and researching for my policy proposal. I hope to be back posting about such critical topics as lipstick and new Metrobuses sometime in the next month or two. In the meantime, thanks for stopping by. I'll pipe up again soon.
-Katie
A few of you have asked about my lack of posts in recent weeks, to which I wanted to respond:
a) It warms my heart that you noticed! Thanks for reading!
b) I'm currently in the thick of that fall rite of passage - studying for the GREs and applying to graduate schools. Lunch breaks and spare moments at work (and recently, there haven't been many) are, for the time being, spent doing polynomial practice sets and researching for my policy proposal. I hope to be back posting about such critical topics as lipstick and new Metrobuses sometime in the next month or two. In the meantime, thanks for stopping by. I'll pipe up again soon.
-Katie
Thursday, September 11, 2008
On rape kits and Sarah Palin
I caught wind of the 'Mayor Palin charging women for their own rape kits' story on Feministing a couple days ago, but wasn't entirely convinced by the 2000 article in question that Palin was involved in the passage of the statute forcing rape victims to cover the cost of a forensic kit or even had it brought to her attention during her tenure as governor.
So I figured I'd hold my tongue since the evidence wasn't all there - you know, the whole "the difference between us and our enemies is how we treat our enemies" principle that keeps leading Democrats to noble defeat? But (former Alaska Gov.) Tony Knowles is out there on the press circuit now and happy to make the association, and since he's the guy that actually overturned the abhorrent law, I'm going to follow his lead and say, at least, the following:
How blessed is Sarah Palin's life that every single woman and girl in her life has remained untouched by sexual violence? To my mind, there is no other possible explanation for how Mayor Palin could have countenced this sort of victim-blaming travesty of a law. No woman (and, I'd hope, no man) who counted a survivor among their relatives, friends, or even aquaintances could allow this to stand.
When I used to give sexual assault awareness presentations in college, we'd describe the process of a rape kit to our skeptical peers who believed in the myth of the regretful girl who woke up the next morning and called consensual sex rape. No "faker" would endure the evidence collection, we'd explain, because there exists no forensic procedure more invasive or humiliating to a crime victim, who is stripped, photographed, inspected, and subjected to the swabbing, scraping, and plucking of her most intimate areas - all this after she's survived the most violating crime imaginable. The idea that a woman could survive a rape, survive a rape kit, and then be slapped with the bill for the privilege makes me ill.
I can't begin to fathom how Sarah Palin could have lived with this law. I afford her the courtesy of my initial assumption of her ignorance for no reason other than I can't stomach the alternate possibility.
So I figured I'd hold my tongue since the evidence wasn't all there - you know, the whole "the difference between us and our enemies is how we treat our enemies" principle that keeps leading Democrats to noble defeat? But (former Alaska Gov.) Tony Knowles is out there on the press circuit now and happy to make the association, and since he's the guy that actually overturned the abhorrent law, I'm going to follow his lead and say, at least, the following:
How blessed is Sarah Palin's life that every single woman and girl in her life has remained untouched by sexual violence? To my mind, there is no other possible explanation for how Mayor Palin could have countenced this sort of victim-blaming travesty of a law. No woman (and, I'd hope, no man) who counted a survivor among their relatives, friends, or even aquaintances could allow this to stand.
When I used to give sexual assault awareness presentations in college, we'd describe the process of a rape kit to our skeptical peers who believed in the myth of the regretful girl who woke up the next morning and called consensual sex rape. No "faker" would endure the evidence collection, we'd explain, because there exists no forensic procedure more invasive or humiliating to a crime victim, who is stripped, photographed, inspected, and subjected to the swabbing, scraping, and plucking of her most intimate areas - all this after she's survived the most violating crime imaginable. The idea that a woman could survive a rape, survive a rape kit, and then be slapped with the bill for the privilege makes me ill.
I can't begin to fathom how Sarah Palin could have lived with this law. I afford her the courtesy of my initial assumption of her ignorance for no reason other than I can't stomach the alternate possibility.
The Pentagon Memorial
Officially dedicated this morning, open to the public starting this evening.
The Washington Post has a nice microsite with stories, video, and a virtual tour of the memorial. My impression is of a thoughtful and understated tribute; a lot of the concepts behind the design of the space and the spare-looking benches are elegant and very, very moving. I look forward to seeing it for myself.
I was startled to read "seven years ago" in describing today's anniversary. Not to indulge the 'how quickly time passes' cliché, especially given how much has transpired since 2001, but the memory does seem fresh enough that I'm floored to realize that three of the Pentagon memorial's youngest honorees, the eleven-year-old passengers on Flight 77, would have just started college.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
I know not how I was wrong, only how wrong I was
Most disappointing revelation of the political season?
It seems I've been laboring under a delusion (for years!) about the true identity of my favorite rhetorical apparatus! Chiasmus, I hardly knew ye.
It seems I've been laboring under a delusion (for years!) about the true identity of my favorite rhetorical apparatus! Chiasmus, I hardly knew ye.
Costofwar.com + Vanity Snark =
I love it.
goodness knows when Vanity Fair started carrying water for the Daily Kos set, but those rascals over at VF's "Politics and Power" blog took the now-infamous tab of Cindy's convention look and ran with it, resulting in this fun little balance sheet:
goodness knows when Vanity Fair started carrying water for the Daily Kos set, but those rascals over at VF's "Politics and Power" blog took the now-infamous tab of Cindy's convention look and ran with it, resulting in this fun little balance sheet:
"That got us thinking: what does $300,000 mean to Americans who don't have the luxury of inheriting a gargantuan beer fortune?To Cindy McCain, $300,000 is the price of an outfit.
To most Americans, $300,000 buys ...
... one and a half houses, given the national median home price of $206,500.
... a year's worth of health care for 750 people.
... the full array of back-to-school supplies and clothes for 500 kids.
... enough gas to drive cross-country 543 times.
... 365 round-trip flights from Washington, D.C., to Anchorage, Alaska. (John McCain should have splurged on at least one.)
... a three-course steak dinner (at Mat-su Resort) and a movie ticket (for the Mat-su Cinema) for every man, woman, and child in Wasilla, Alaska.
... enough money for three Troopergate investigations."
Friday, August 29, 2008
Harriet Palin
Watching Sarah Palin introduce herself to the world, all I could think about was Harriet Miers.
That same, eye-goggling effrontery of George Bush announcing to everyone that his White House counsel was the "best he could find for the job," the job, of course, being the nation's highest court. And more so, that same infuriating insinuation that choosing a woman necessitates a compromise in caliber - "sorry, folks, but we needed a lady, so we'll just have to make some sacrifices on the qualifications."
Palin is just so utterly unready for prime time. Inexperience is one thing, but the giddy demeanor and deeply unseriousness posture towards the challenges of the vice presidency (especially the role as second in command to an elderly cancer survivor) turns her into a punch line. She "promised her husband a surprise on their anniversary"? She never saw herself in public service, since she was always "just a hockey mom"? Part of me wishes Barack had picked Hillary Clinton after all - I would pay good money to watch HRC dismantle this twinkie in the debates.
Oh, and Sarah? It's pronounced nuCLEE-er.
That same, eye-goggling effrontery of George Bush announcing to everyone that his White House counsel was the "best he could find for the job," the job, of course, being the nation's highest court. And more so, that same infuriating insinuation that choosing a woman necessitates a compromise in caliber - "sorry, folks, but we needed a lady, so we'll just have to make some sacrifices on the qualifications."
Palin is just so utterly unready for prime time. Inexperience is one thing, but the giddy demeanor and deeply unseriousness posture towards the challenges of the vice presidency (especially the role as second in command to an elderly cancer survivor) turns her into a punch line. She "promised her husband a surprise on their anniversary"? She never saw herself in public service, since she was always "just a hockey mom"? Part of me wishes Barack had picked Hillary Clinton after all - I would pay good money to watch HRC dismantle this twinkie in the debates.
Oh, and Sarah? It's pronounced nuCLEE-er.
Happy 72nd Birthday, John McCain!
Slate mischeviously suggests that McCain's timing in announcing his veep today (chatter I'm hearing says Mittens* despite the fake-outs) might have the "side benefit" of "taking attention away from the fact that McCain turns 72 today."
*Scratch that - sounds like Palin's the pick. I'll grudgingly admit that's a good choice for McCain: a play to angry PUMAs without selling out the pro-life voters, hard for Biden to rough up in a debate (as Ambinder points out)... not exactly an intellectual heavyweight, but since it ruffles my feathers when that charge is leveled at my favorite Senator, I'll bite my tongue for the time being.
*Scratch that - sounds like Palin's the pick. I'll grudgingly admit that's a good choice for McCain: a play to angry PUMAs without selling out the pro-life voters, hard for Biden to rough up in a debate (as Ambinder points out)... not exactly an intellectual heavyweight, but since it ruffles my feathers when that charge is leveled at my favorite Senator, I'll bite my tongue for the time being.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Make it work, Cindy.
Tim Gunn turns his trademark pursued-lipped disapproval on Cindy McCain:
"I'm just not a fan. I don't know who her advisers are, but it's the whole look — her clothes have to be fixed too... I just don't think she's capable of improving the look."
"I'm just not a fan. I don't know who her advisers are, but it's the whole look — her clothes have to be fixed too... I just don't think she's capable of improving the look."
Blood brothers in the stormy night with a vow to defend
I'm with Karen Tumulty: John Kerry's speech last night was masterful. Self-aware and even self-deprecating throughout, frank and uplifting in his case for Barack, incisive and electrifying on the case against McCain. There was no doubt in my mind that this is a speech he has been waiting to give since November 3rd, 2004.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
"We dream of dying blue-collar towns blooming as green-collar meccas..."
While not nearly so treasured a memory as my ride in the Aspen's 4th of July parade, I had a chance encounter working the Ideas Festival last month that really made the experience for me-
Catching up on the May issue of Fast Company on the plane ride to Colorado, I had read this article about a larger-than-life activist named Van Jones and his crusade to lift the boats of the urban poor on the rising tide of eco-consciousness. His plan for training low-income workers in Oakland, and eventually nationally, as skilled laborers in fields like green retro-fitting and renewable energy production - and the reporter's breathless account of Jones' boundless energy- was an uplifting reminder that there does exist such a thing as win-win public policy.
Long story short, it seems the Aspen Institute had learned about Jones' work long before I, and had invited him to speak at the Festival, which is how I ended up just a few feet from him in a parking lot, enthusing - okay, gushing- about my appreciation for the work he was doing. (He was, for the record, unexpectedly friendly and self-deprecating, despite his obvious exhaustion. hooray, Van Jones!)
I had been thinking about Jones' campaign in the weeks since in small ball terms - my own policy interests, the Ideas Festival - but was reminded of his efforts last night listening to last night's convention speakers talk about expanding green jobs to rural and impoverished communities. I'm so heartened to see this party rally around great policy ideas - this sort of thing seems exemplary of "government as a force for good" progressivism.
And relatedly, the whole thematic build of "Renewing America's Promise" was capped off very well by Mark Warner, in my opinion. I'm increasingly convinced that Warner's real value to this party is brand ambassador - by dint of both his biography and his evangelism for technology, he is a powerful representation of the Democratic brand as innovation and (as he put it) The Future. This is terrific framing, I think - even more visceral and compelling than "change," not to mention a substantive way to bring up McCain's age without being gratuitous.
Oh, and go read that Van Jones article. I believe we'll be hearing that name again.
Catching up on the May issue of Fast Company on the plane ride to Colorado, I had read this article about a larger-than-life activist named Van Jones and his crusade to lift the boats of the urban poor on the rising tide of eco-consciousness. His plan for training low-income workers in Oakland, and eventually nationally, as skilled laborers in fields like green retro-fitting and renewable energy production - and the reporter's breathless account of Jones' boundless energy- was an uplifting reminder that there does exist such a thing as win-win public policy.
Long story short, it seems the Aspen Institute had learned about Jones' work long before I, and had invited him to speak at the Festival, which is how I ended up just a few feet from him in a parking lot, enthusing - okay, gushing- about my appreciation for the work he was doing. (He was, for the record, unexpectedly friendly and self-deprecating, despite his obvious exhaustion. hooray, Van Jones!)
I had been thinking about Jones' campaign in the weeks since in small ball terms - my own policy interests, the Ideas Festival - but was reminded of his efforts last night listening to last night's convention speakers talk about expanding green jobs to rural and impoverished communities. I'm so heartened to see this party rally around great policy ideas - this sort of thing seems exemplary of "government as a force for good" progressivism.
And relatedly, the whole thematic build of "Renewing America's Promise" was capped off very well by Mark Warner, in my opinion. I'm increasingly convinced that Warner's real value to this party is brand ambassador - by dint of both his biography and his evangelism for technology, he is a powerful representation of the Democratic brand as innovation and (as he put it) The Future. This is terrific framing, I think - even more visceral and compelling than "change," not to mention a substantive way to bring up McCain's age without being gratuitous.
Oh, and go read that Van Jones article. I believe we'll be hearing that name again.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Popcorn for dinner!
I couldn't be more heartily aboard the Sarah Haskins fan train, which is why I was delighted to see her newest installment of "Target: Women" :
I would like Ken Burns to make a documentary about my family, please.
I'll say this about last night's convention's proceedings: the Democrats have been incontrovertibly established as the Party of Glossy Hair:
I thought Michelle was pitch-perfect (although I could have done with about five minutes less of her older brother- seriously with the basketball metaphors for leading the free world?) and delivered the exact speech called for by the occasion. Hearing such a bright and accomplished woman talk exclusively about her role as a wife and mother is a little demoralizing, but given the demands on her to prove her family's apple pie credentials, I understand the political necessity.
I'm more than a little cranky with CNN, though - after three hours of yammering through every convention speaker, Wolf, Anderson & Co. pronounced the evening's events disappointing. Lucky that I have them to tell me so! Goodness knows I wouldn't have been able to make that call myself, having heard neither Claire McCaskill, Jim Leach, nor hardly any of the other prime time speakers.
I would agree, though, with their analysis that we need to see a lot more Bush-McCain baiting red meat. A lot of what I did see last night left me with a sinking feeling of deja-vu of 2004's convention, when the "Sunshine Boys" put the kibbosh on Bush-bashing, creating a feel-good uplift promptly shattered by the GOP orgy of negativity in New York City a few weeks later. Fightin' Joe, we're counting on you...
I thought Michelle was pitch-perfect (although I could have done with about five minutes less of her older brother- seriously with the basketball metaphors for leading the free world?) and delivered the exact speech called for by the occasion. Hearing such a bright and accomplished woman talk exclusively about her role as a wife and mother is a little demoralizing, but given the demands on her to prove her family's apple pie credentials, I understand the political necessity.
I'm more than a little cranky with CNN, though - after three hours of yammering through every convention speaker, Wolf, Anderson & Co. pronounced the evening's events disappointing. Lucky that I have them to tell me so! Goodness knows I wouldn't have been able to make that call myself, having heard neither Claire McCaskill, Jim Leach, nor hardly any of the other prime time speakers.
I would agree, though, with their analysis that we need to see a lot more Bush-McCain baiting red meat. A lot of what I did see last night left me with a sinking feeling of deja-vu of 2004's convention, when the "Sunshine Boys" put the kibbosh on Bush-bashing, creating a feel-good uplift promptly shattered by the GOP orgy of negativity in New York City a few weeks later. Fightin' Joe, we're counting on you...
Friday, August 15, 2008
"Cake in the conference room at 4, no occasion"
Yet another reason (besides voyeurism, schadenfreude, and sheer roadside gawking) to read the Hillary Memos:
Jeff Goldberg's hilarious "discovery" of the secret Obama emails.
Definitely read the former first.
Jeff Goldberg's hilarious "discovery" of the secret Obama emails.
Definitely read the former first.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Read anything good lately?
The desperately-awaited vacation starts this weekend, and, of course, weather.com predicts thunderstorms from Monday to Thursday. (Right, right, I know, North Carolina in hurricane season, no one's fault but mine, I got it.)
So. I'm armed with Jhumpa Lahiri's new book of stories, an essay collection I've purchased based solely on the title, and a couple back issues of Paste magazine. Help! Any recommendations for goodbeach overstuffed-chair-indoors reading?
So. I'm armed with Jhumpa Lahiri's new book of stories, an essay collection I've purchased based solely on the title, and a couple back issues of Paste magazine. Help! Any recommendations for good
No kidding
Apparently Greyhound had rolled out an ad campaign earlier this year based on the tagline: "There's a reason you've never heard of bus rage." The ads were running only in Canada.
I kind of feel for those ad guys. It must have seemed so perfect at the time...
The Hillaryland Chronicles
"The Frontrunner's Fall" - the most highly anticipated article I've seen since arriving at The Atlantic - is now live on the site. Josh Green's investigation, and more damningly, a dump of nearly two dozen internal memos, seems to confirm that politics' biggest victim was undone not by a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, media bias, or even the Obama campaign, but by the bickering incompetents on her own payroll.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Delta Blues
All right, I get few enough comments on my blog that I can take requests-
The Nikki Tinker thing was a total embarrassment, Blair, especially for EMILY's List, which is how I, at least, became a cheerleader for her in 2006. And especially given that Steve Cohen seems like a hell of a good guy and totally determined to represent his constituency, which is probably why he demolished her by 60 points yesterday.
As far as the antisemitism thing, though, I defer to Ta-Nehisi Coates' (our newest blogger on TheAtlantic.com!) explanation:
The Nikki Tinker thing was a total embarrassment, Blair, especially for EMILY's List, which is how I, at least, became a cheerleader for her in 2006. And especially given that Steve Cohen seems like a hell of a good guy and totally determined to represent his constituency, which is probably why he demolished her by 60 points yesterday.
As far as the antisemitism thing, though, I defer to Ta-Nehisi Coates' (our newest blogger on TheAtlantic.com!) explanation:
"Frankly, I've always doubted the power of Jew-baiting as a method of scaring up votes in any black community outside ofthe tri-state areaGotham. That's not because blacks aren't antisemetic, it's because--in the words of the great Jimmy Baldwin--they're antiwhite. Jew-baiting against a white Jewish guy in a majority black district, is like attempting a 360 dunk. Why go through all that when the the plain-old race-baiting layup will suffice?"
From the department of "get in line."
I saw this story on Jezebel and had to laugh:
"A Muslim teen in Oklahoma is alleging that a manager at an Oklahoma Abercrombie & Fitch refused to hire her because her head scarf "didn't fit the chain's image." A Muslim civil rights group has filed a federal complaint on the girl's behalf, citing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states that an employer must reasonably accomodate employees' religious practices."
Hmmm. Dear Muslim civil rights group - I, uh, don't want to seem dismissive of your grievances or whatever, but you guys, I promise this one really ain't about you.
"A Muslim teen in Oklahoma is alleging that a manager at an Oklahoma Abercrombie & Fitch refused to hire her because her head scarf "didn't fit the chain's image." A Muslim civil rights group has filed a federal complaint on the girl's behalf, citing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states that an employer must reasonably accomodate employees' religious practices."
Hmmm. Dear Muslim civil rights group - I, uh, don't want to seem dismissive of your grievances or whatever, but you guys, I promise this one really ain't about you.
Compounding the sleaziness...
... is the certainty that he waited until the first day of the Olympics (I'm being generous here and assuming not "until war broke out in South Ossetia," but really only because I don't think the overlap between salacious-gossip-consumers and followers-of-Georgian-military-action is that great), in the hopes that the story would get buried.
He is truly pathetic.
He is truly pathetic.
A platform to stand behind
With the heady days after the 2006 election now a distant memory, I'm not frequently given to thinking about my identity as a Democrat - an Obama supporter, maybe, but not so much as a member of the party. But Marc Ambinder has a draft of the official platform document today - available in PDF here- and the following, in the plank on Criminal Justice, is a nice reminder of why I am:
"Ending violence against women must be a top priority. We will create a special advisor to the president regarding violence against women. We will increase funding to domestic violence and sexual assault prevention programs. We will strengthen sexual assault and domestic violence laws, support the Violence Against Women Act, and provide job security to survivors. Our foreign policy will be sensitive to issues of aggression against women around the world."
dum DA de de duh duh duh, duh duh de duh...
The big day has already dawned and set in Beijing - and, according to James Fallows, all hope for favorable winds from Mongolia have been dashed:
"I simply do not have the heart to show what it looks like today -- August 8, the magical 08/08/08 chosen for its positive auspices for the Olympics. I'll just say, it looks very much like this view from six weeks ago. This is a disaster...'Citius, Altius, Fortius,' nonetheless, I guess. And the whole human-rights-violations piece aside, my heart does go out to the Chinese a bit - the West wouldn't have looked so hot hosting The Olympics during our industrial revolution, either.
I suppose there's also a one-percent possibility that the international embarrassment will be a Chernobyl-type stimulus toward truly radical environmental action in China and around the world. But maybe that's fooling myself too."
Bigger than the bodega
Even in my frenzied, web-skipping hyper-consumption of news, I'm still occasionally struck by the kind of story that bears out Whitman's praise that "the true poem is the daily paper," and induces pangs of mourning for the decline of the medium.
The LA Times has that sort of story today, a profile of an East Harlem bodega run by a Dominican George Bailey and crushed - like its owner, customers, and neighborhood - by the weight of rising rent and food prices. It's a heartbreaking, exceptionally well-written piece, and even the "Julio must make $3,300 today - can he do it?" throughline, which sounds kind of gimmicky, actually proves to be a captivating narrative.
What really caught me are the consumer goods haikus of throughout the story ("toilet paper, masking tape, plastic toy dolls, paintbrushes and barbecue lighters..." "Advil PM, flashlights, cigars, Fixodent, Midol.."). In other words, the stirring details that are the casualty of a brave new media world where everyone and no one is a journalist. Present company, of course, included.
The LA Times has that sort of story today, a profile of an East Harlem bodega run by a Dominican George Bailey and crushed - like its owner, customers, and neighborhood - by the weight of rising rent and food prices. It's a heartbreaking, exceptionally well-written piece, and even the "Julio must make $3,300 today - can he do it?" throughline, which sounds kind of gimmicky, actually proves to be a captivating narrative.
What really caught me are the consumer goods haikus of throughout the story ("toilet paper, masking tape, plastic toy dolls, paintbrushes and barbecue lighters..." "Advil PM, flashlights, cigars, Fixodent, Midol.."). In other words, the stirring details that are the casualty of a brave new media world where everyone and no one is a journalist. Present company, of course, included.
Monday, August 4, 2008
She'd like her money back, please.
My reactions to the asinine Paris/Britney attack ad have been pretty much covered elsewhere.
I would just like to add, however, that when Kathy Hilton is chastising you for wasting money and people's attention, well, that's just game, set, match.
I would just like to add, however, that when Kathy Hilton is chastising you for wasting money and people's attention, well, that's just game, set, match.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Rinse and repeat
I can almost hear the strains of celebrations on the Hill over the indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens- by all accounts a real snake of a man - on seven (!) counts of corruption.
Also spells good news for Mark Begich, Stevens' Dem challenger, whose campaign fortuitously launched this cheeky ad last week:
Also spells good news for Mark Begich, Stevens' Dem challenger, whose campaign fortuitously launched this cheeky ad last week:
Goodlings Gone Wild
Admittedly, I link to Ruth Marcus' column today partly because of its perfect Shakespearean title - "Goodlings Amok" - but mainly because she captures the infuriated disgust I felt reading yesterday's stories about the DOJ hiring debacles and fashions it into a coherent diagnosis of the Bush administration's congenital contempt for government:
"Every administration has its Goodlings, inexperienced punks who flaunt their authority as conspicuously as a West Wing badge.Most administrations find ways to keep the Goodlings under control and the grown-ups in charge. The trouble with this one is that it is riddled with Goodlings Gone Wild, incapable of or unwilling to distinguish between the proper pursuit of political aims and the responsible administration of government."
Monday, July 28, 2008
Who needs a Maserati when there's WMATA?
Oooo, "aerodynamic look... sleeker with more curves."
DCist says new Metrobuses roll out next month! Fingers crossed that WMATA starts with the 30 series - my commute is going to be so fly.
Couldn't make him any LESS popular...
Via Politico, this too-good-to-be-true wire story - an Ohio political-swag manufacturer charged with printing buttons for Idaho Senate candidate Larry Larocco accidentally subbed in the image of another Larry - the state's sitting (and foot-tapping) Senator Craig.
A collector's item for certain!
Credit-taking feminism
The more I think on it, the more I find myself really liking Megan McArdle's post this morning on movement feminism's agency problem (much more so than the fellow commentor she quotes, so I recommend scrolling past that lengthy gray quote box).
And I actually attach to it even more as a critique of liberalism in general. Obviously I find her thoughts appealing because they're caveated with a long concession to the liberal case against bootstraps thinking, but even more so, I think it isolates a clear problem with the "we are all products of our society" argument without devolving into conservative blather about self-reliance.
In her words:
And I actually attach to it even more as a critique of liberalism in general. Obviously I find her thoughts appealing because they're caveated with a long concession to the liberal case against bootstraps thinking, but even more so, I think it isolates a clear problem with the "we are all products of our society" argument without devolving into conservative blather about self-reliance.
In her words:
"I think that conservatives tend to give themselves too much credit for doing things that were enabled by a solid middle-class upbringing. As I wrote a number of years ago, it's easy and true to point out that poor teenagers wouldn't stay poor if they finished school, didn't have babies out of wedlock, and eschewed criminal activity--but how many of us had the courage to defy our parents and peers, drop out of high school, and sell drugs? Every time I think about how much my parents did for me just by choosing a peer group that valued college, I close my eyes and thank my lucky stars.The problem of poverty is not that it's impossible to get out of -- lots of people do. It isn't even that you need to be some sort of superhero. The problem is that poor kids have no margin for error. I got to be a screw up who nearly flunked out of college, and thanks to parents and schools that cared desperately about my fate, nonetheless turn it all around, pull a 4.0 in my major, and graduate on time. The first time a poor kid pulls that kind of crap, he's back at home looking for minimum wage work.
But if the right goes too far in congratulating people for pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps, I think the left often goes too far in crediting nebulous social forces over individual agency. It's not only incorrect, but also, it seems dangerously passive....
... it seems to me that celebrating your courage and hard work is a fundamentally feminist action. You don't need to deny the concept of privilege to recognize that we are not only products of society--that, in the words of Scout Finch, virtuous people are those who do the most, but those who do the best they can with what they have. When you say I did this, you send the most important feminist message at all--that women have the power, and the right, to improve their lives."
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Recession Mauve
I had an Econ201 flashback in the drugstore on my lunch break today, having decided to treat myself to a new lipstick (or, more accurately, the experience of buying a new lipstick, since the cosmetic aisle of the drugstore remains among my ultimate guilty pleasures) and remembering Professor Elzinga's example of lipstick as an "inferior good." As in, consumption goes up when the economy goes south, and consumers are looking to substitute cheap pleasures for bigger luxuries.
At the (boom)time of my class, it seemed like a quirky Econ tidbit, but it's apparently playing out - to some degree - in today's miserable financial climate.
Turns out that the NYT did a story on the phenomenon at the beginning of the summer, and while the Lipstick Theory is a little less Market Economics and a little more Marketing Cosmetics, plenty of anecdotal and sales evidence suggests that its alive and well in the 2008 slowdown.
Also something of a personal mile marker, as I've started realizing in recent weeks that the economic slump/recession (depending on where you get your news), seems to have finally trickled down to my humble bank account, and my climbing gas and grocery bills have made it increasingly difficult to sock away any significant part of my paycheck.
Anyway, my $8.99 Color Riche in Gilded Pink is an excellent barely-there late summer shade.
McCain veep choice announcement forthcoming?
I don't know how I missed this bulletin from Monday, but apparently campaign sources slipped Bob "Leaky Wheel Gets the Grease" Novak the word that John McCain will be naming his ticketmate later this week...
in other Novak News, apparently the old codger hit a pedestrian this morning and didn't even notice! He told Politico that "I didn't know I hit anybody... a bicycle rider stopped me and said I had hit someone."
7/28 Addendum:
Okay, now I just sort of feel like a jerk.
in other Novak News, apparently the old codger hit a pedestrian this morning and didn't even notice! He told Politico that "I didn't know I hit anybody... a bicycle rider stopped me and said I had hit someone."
7/28 Addendum:
Okay, now I just sort of feel like a jerk.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Also known as love
Via Daily Candy, an absolutely stunning story of a 15 year old Liberian refugee who makes jewelry from bullets fired during the country's civil war. Truly lovely - the necklaces and the young woman both. The sort of thing that renews your faith in the power of earnestness and hope; read more about Lovetta and Akawelle jewelry here.
I have seen the future of college, and it is handmade sleigh beds
From the NYT, a critical look at massive university endowments. The lens on the subject is tiny Berea College in Kentucky:
In short, an insightful investigation of whether the era of endowments existing above public scrutiny might be coming to a close. Unexpectedly, Amherst "$1 million per student endowment" College president puts it really well:
"Berea’s $1.1 billion endowment, which puts the college among the nation’s wealthiest. But unlike most well-endowed colleges, Berea has no football team, coed dorms, hot tubs or climbing walls. Instead, it has a no-frills budget, with food from the college farm, handmade furniture from the college crafts workshops, and 10-hour-a-week campus jobs for every student."So the "traditional mountain crafts" might be a little much, but the Berea model ends up sounding less like Amish U and more like a progressive future for higher ed, especially compared to its consumerist counterparts and their hoarded endowment wealth.
In short, an insightful investigation of whether the era of endowments existing above public scrutiny might be coming to a close. Unexpectedly, Amherst "$1 million per student endowment" College president puts it really well:
“Congress, the media, the public all have an interest in knowing whether we’re using our resources to make sure the best students have access to the best education,” he said. “They should be asking, are we really affordable? Are we offering the highest quality education? Are we directing graduates to think about their social responsibilities?”
Monday, July 21, 2008
Samantha Power's back!
And better -
"I don’t feel inclined to revise my [Iraq withdrawl] frame out of deference to this manifestly moribund discourse that the administration and its supporters inflicted upon us in the course of the last few years."
- than ever!
"I don’t feel inclined to revise my [Iraq withdrawl] frame out of deference to this manifestly moribund discourse that the administration and its supporters inflicted upon us in the course of the last few years."
- than ever!
"A culture war among men"
I like Jewel Wood's editorial on TheRoot today. The asinine title is actually misleading - he has some trenchant things to say about Obama and masculinity.
I have a pet academic interest in America's cultural transition from JFK's preppy virility to LBJ's crass swagger in the '60s, and the related class issues. I'm convinced that the pendulum shift between the two models over the last four decades has had an outsized impact on our political climate (see Kerry, John, subsection "windsurfing"). I think Wood's argument is really insightful in this context, and hopeful, that an intellect-based masculinity need not be a classist masculinity:
I have a pet academic interest in America's cultural transition from JFK's preppy virility to LBJ's crass swagger in the '60s, and the related class issues. I'm convinced that the pendulum shift between the two models over the last four decades has had an outsized impact on our political climate (see Kerry, John, subsection "windsurfing"). I think Wood's argument is really insightful in this context, and hopeful, that an intellect-based masculinity need not be a classist masculinity:
"This seamless melding of white- and blue-collar achievement has rendered Obama the embodiment of smooth... The result is that Obama has accomplished what men like Sen. John Kerry and former Vice President Al Gore were not able to accomplish; he has brought sexy back to white-collar masculinity."
Friday, July 18, 2008
"No customers were hobos."
A little summer Friday fun from New York magazine -
a hard-hitting feature on the city's lemonade proprietors. My money's on the savviest of the young marketers, the Brothers Schiller, a.ka. Stand #3:
a hard-hitting feature on the city's lemonade proprietors. My money's on the savviest of the young marketers, the Brothers Schiller, a.ka. Stand #3:
Stand 3
SAM SCHILLER, 10, AND WILL SCHILLER, 8, BROTHERS.
Location: On their stoop outside their Upper West Side apartment.
Price per cup: 25 cents.
How did you lure customers? WILL: We made up a word that was Oreo and lemonade: OREONADEOL!
Does it work? WILL: Sort of. We have a lot of customers, and a few were hobos. SAM: No customers were hobos.
How did you know what to charge? SAM: My personal financial advice is 25 cents, because everyone can afford it. Even if your allowance is $1, you will be able to afford four glasses. Also, you can make a classy combo with Oreos, or do three glasses for 50 cents.
Do you have advice about giving good customer service? SAM: You might want to joke with them. WILL: But not a lot. Sam does it too much. SAM: You know it’s good if they point their finger at you, “Ahahahaha.” Laughing is contagious.
Do you enjoy having lemonade stands? SAM: If there’s a definition of fun, that would be the definition of it.
Earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . .$20 to $30
Rowlr.
Although she apparently had a brief appearance in the spring, Daily Show correspondent Kristen Schaal was new to me as of last night's "Cougars" segment, and I'm completely smitten. She has that equal parts naivete and smugness shtick so nailed. I desperately hope we'll see more of her.
This week especially, it's a welcome reminder that good satire isn't about just making a point - it's actually funny.
This week especially, it's a welcome reminder that good satire isn't about just making a point - it's actually funny.
Wall-E: obesity discrimination? and really innovative product placement
So, I loved Wall-E, of course - personal responsibility, obligations of environmental stewardship, and a protagonist evolved wholly out of the awwww-inspiring intersection of Cute or Sad, what's not to adore?
I thought Daniel Engber's critique in Slate, was thought-provoking, though; I'm paraphrasing, but his argument is basically that Wall-E perpetuates some awfully nasty stereotypes about the obese as lazy, helpless, and stupid. He points out that many of the myths about obesity (some of which I was guilty of believing) are not only unkind but untrue, and not only untrue but actually kind of classist:
"The desire to link obesity and environmental collapse seems to have more to do with politics than science. Eco-liberals put down their Nalgene bottles and wring their hands over the fat slobs in Middle America. It's these red-staters who are screwing things up with their shopping malls and their fast food."Food for thought, if you'll forgive the pun, but I think my friend Lindsey has it right that the satire was so extreme that it seemed less a condemnation of the obese and more just plain hyperbole. But I'm also kind of with her on that "I might have been embarrassed to walk out of the theater had I been an obese adult or (really sad) kid. "
On a more or less unrelated Wall-E point, Ad Age has a piece this morning suggesting that the Apple-esque Eve "might well be the [product placement] model of the future," in that the seamless, gleaming-white object of Wall-E's affection represents a "product homage" to the sleek ubiquitous Apple designs. Quoting a technology marketing analyst, Ad Age suggests:
"Subliminal might be the key here. Some people will pick up on some of it, but most of it works as subliminal in the way that says this is the coolest and latest stuff. It reinforces the look and feel of Apple."Fascinating, and far more sophisticated (and less obtrusive) than standard product placement.
Bottom line, if you haven't already, go cheer the little guy on in theaters.
Triumphant post-Aspen return
Back from my blogging hiatus working the Aspen Ideas Festival (and then catching up on my actual job), and posting again.
While my personal intellectual pursuits at the Festival consisted entirely of procuring sold-out event tickets for Altria muckity-mucks and ensuring that the JPMorgan logo was placed prominently behind the climate change speaker, you should visit The Atlantic's coverage of the events. Our dynamic web duo, Jennie and Terrence, did an exceptional job capturing video highlights from a staggering sea of panels, sessions, and high-profile appearances. One of the most compelling moments was Jeffrey Goldberg interviewing Michael Chertoff, whose measured thoughtfulness certainly surprised me.
Not to be confused with the best moment of the nine days, however, as that honor belongs undisputedly to riding in a Chevron-branded rickshaw through the Aspen 4th of July parade:
While my personal intellectual pursuits at the Festival consisted entirely of procuring sold-out event tickets for Altria muckity-mucks and ensuring that the JPMorgan logo was placed prominently behind the climate change speaker, you should visit The Atlantic's coverage of the events. Our dynamic web duo, Jennie and Terrence, did an exceptional job capturing video highlights from a staggering sea of panels, sessions, and high-profile appearances. One of the most compelling moments was Jeffrey Goldberg interviewing Michael Chertoff, whose measured thoughtfulness certainly surprised me.
Not to be confused with the best moment of the nine days, however, as that honor belongs undisputedly to riding in a Chevron-branded rickshaw through the Aspen 4th of July parade:
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Hold the raisins
Blechh.
Slate's Jurisprudence blogger Arin Greenwood goes test-kitchen to investigate whether "Nutraloaf" violates the 8th Amendment.
Given her culinary account -
"I mixed canned spinach in with baked beans, tomato paste, margarine, applesauce, bread crumbs, and garlic powder. Together the ingredients became a thick, odorous, brown paste, which I spread into a loaf pan and put in the oven."
- I'm inclined to think yes.
Slate's Jurisprudence blogger Arin Greenwood goes test-kitchen to investigate whether "Nutraloaf" violates the 8th Amendment.
Given her culinary account -
"I mixed canned spinach in with baked beans, tomato paste, margarine, applesauce, bread crumbs, and garlic powder. Together the ingredients became a thick, odorous, brown paste, which I spread into a loaf pan and put in the oven."
- I'm inclined to think yes.
Friday, June 20, 2008
The White House gets a bump from Michelle
The Jackie O. comparisons might be overblown, but in seven years of Oscar de la Renta, Laura Bush never caused a run on his ready-to-wear line...
Call me Laura Ingraham
A blogosphere debate, abridged:
Foxnews.com says that viewing hardcore pornography is akin to cheating. Libertarian blogginghead says that's absurd. The Atlantic bloggers weigh in - Ross Douthat says that actually it's not so far-fetched here, here, and here, and Andrew Sullivan says Ross is wrong here.
I share twenty minutes worth of links because I'm suprised to find myself so aligned with the conservative argument here. Pornography's made for strange pairings on the far right and far left for decades, and I've always been sympathetic to the feminist case against an industry that, on the whole, has been so exploitative of women, but I'm usually content to agree to live and let live.
But Ross' point that watching pornography (meaning of the hardcore variety, not fuzzily-lit Playboy pictures) doesn't equate to cheating but exists on the same continuum seems almost knee-jerk to me. He explains:
The response, at least from one corner, is pretty harsh - the assumption being that only a Puritan with Stone-Age views about sex could see this connection. So here I sit, trying to quell my inner Wendy Shalit, and wondering when desiring a partner's sexual attention undivided by videorecorded gang-bangs became the exclusive province of repressed conservatives?
Foxnews.com says that viewing hardcore pornography is akin to cheating. Libertarian blogginghead says that's absurd. The Atlantic bloggers weigh in - Ross Douthat says that actually it's not so far-fetched here, here, and here, and Andrew Sullivan says Ross is wrong here.
I share twenty minutes worth of links because I'm suprised to find myself so aligned with the conservative argument here. Pornography's made for strange pairings on the far right and far left for decades, and I've always been sympathetic to the feminist case against an industry that, on the whole, has been so exploitative of women, but I'm usually content to agree to live and let live.
But Ross' point that watching pornography (meaning of the hardcore variety, not fuzzily-lit Playboy pictures) doesn't equate to cheating but exists on the same continuum seems almost knee-jerk to me. He explains:
"I don't think all that many spouses would be inclined to forgive their husbands (or wives) if they explained that they only liked to watch the prostitute they'd hired. And hard-core porn, in turn, is nothing more than an indirect way of paying someone to fulfill the same sort of voyeuristic fantasies: It's prostitution in all but name, filtered through middlemen, magazine editors, and high-speed internet connections."
The response, at least from one corner, is pretty harsh - the assumption being that only a Puritan with Stone-Age views about sex could see this connection. So here I sit, trying to quell my inner Wendy Shalit, and wondering when desiring a partner's sexual attention undivided by videorecorded gang-bangs became the exclusive province of repressed conservatives?
Thursday, June 19, 2008
"Evil laugh preferred."
time-wasting find of the day: best of Craiglist.
my favorite:
Date: 2008-05-07, 2:49PM PDT
I've been trying to think of ways to spice up my life. I'm 35 years old, happily married with two kids and I have a good job in insurance. But somethings missing. I feel like I'm old before my time. I need to inject some excitement into my daily routine through my arm before its too late. I need a challenge, something to get the adrenaline pumping again. An addiction would be nice, but, in short, I need a nemesis. I'm willing to pay $350 up front for you services as an arch enemy over the next six months. Nothing crazy. Steal my parking space, knock my coffee over, trip me when Im running to catch the BART and occasionaly whisper in my ear, "Ahha, we meet again". That kind of thing. Just keep me on my toes. Complacency will be the death of me. You need to have an evil streak and be blessed with innate guile and cunning. You should also be adept at inconsicuous pursuit. Evil laugh preferred. Send me a photo and a brief explanation why you would be a good nemesis.
British accent preferred.
my favorite:
Nemesis required. 6-month project with possibilty to extend
Date: 2008-05-07, 2:49PM PDT
I've been trying to think of ways to spice up my life. I'm 35 years old, happily married with two kids and I have a good job in insurance. But somethings missing. I feel like I'm old before my time. I need to inject some excitement into my daily routine through my arm before its too late. I need a challenge, something to get the adrenaline pumping again. An addiction would be nice, but, in short, I need a nemesis. I'm willing to pay $350 up front for you services as an arch enemy over the next six months. Nothing crazy. Steal my parking space, knock my coffee over, trip me when Im running to catch the BART and occasionaly whisper in my ear, "Ahha, we meet again". That kind of thing. Just keep me on my toes. Complacency will be the death of me. You need to have an evil streak and be blessed with innate guile and cunning. You should also be adept at inconsicuous pursuit. Evil laugh preferred. Send me a photo and a brief explanation why you would be a good nemesis.
British accent preferred.
The "all-black issue"
An interest-piquing feature in NYT today on the upcoming issue of Italian Vogue, featuring the work of photographer Steven Meisel:
"For the July issue of Italian Vogue, Mr. Meisel has photographed only black models. In a reverse of the general pattern of fashion magazines, all the faces are black, and all the feature topics are related to black women in the arts and entertainment."
I'm of a conflicted mind here: certainly celebrating a challenge to the status quo (near exclusive whiteness) of the fashion industry, but something about the black-only issue seems amiss. Like it's in the vein of "separate but equal," giving these women their own issue to make up for their exclusion the rest of the year (although Italian Vogue's editor does sound more progressive than her American counterparts in the article.) Or, at worst, even fetishization - "all the faces are black"?
Is the goal of a seamlessly diverse fashion world really so far-fetched? And then we could just get back to focusing on how they're all too skinny.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
some important things you should know about Barack Obama
Or, "an email I won't be getting from my grandma."
Banana bummer
Here's a downer:
The author of "Banana: The Fate of the Fruit That Changed the World" says in today's NYT that bananas could soon "slip out of reach" as a result of a imminent banana-destroying fungus approaching the Latin American crop with intent to kill.
And not only, according to Mssr. Koeppel, has the Breakfast Fruit of Champions deccimated the sociopolitics of the continent, but it's not even as delicious as the bananas our great-grandparents ate!
This is seriously terrible.
The author of "Banana: The Fate of the Fruit That Changed the World" says in today's NYT that bananas could soon "slip out of reach" as a result of a imminent banana-destroying fungus approaching the Latin American crop with intent to kill.
And not only, according to Mssr. Koeppel, has the Breakfast Fruit of Champions deccimated the sociopolitics of the continent, but it's not even as delicious as the bananas our great-grandparents ate!
This is seriously terrible.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Good for business
 | ||
Love this quick hit on Portfolio, "Cashing in on Same-Sex Wedding Bells," about the boon to the CA wedding and tourism industries resulting from the May 15 decision. Sort of a common theme for coverage today, as same-sex wedding season officially begins - above, today's full-page Macy's "congratulations, and buy our flatware!" ad in the LA Times. Also this gem in the same paper: "gay marriage ruling boosts firm that sells interchangeable figures for wedding cakes."
So the Portfolio piece parses the UCLA Law Williams' Institute study about the nature of this windfall (the one being referenced everywhere). The upshot:
"The Institute thinks same-sex marriage should generate 2,200 jobs in California, bring in $8 million in marriage-license fees, and increase sales and occupancy tax revenues by $55 million. A 2005 study showed that if same-sex marriage was legalized nationally, the wedding industry could generate another $2 billion annually."
State revenue, job creation and equality? Cheers!
You heard it here first: gay weddings. The clear solution to low consumer confidence and economic doldrums.
Monday, June 16, 2008
"He always asked the question we hoped he wouldn't"
The Hotline ran a moving tribute to Tim Russert today, rounding up recollections and reflections from all corners of this city (including the above, from Mitch McConnell, which I imagine to be the kind of high praise the guy would have loved.)
I'm struck by the timing of this loss, right before Father's Day - of a man so devoted and so frequently given to mentioning his own family that my first thought was of Big Russ and of Russert's son my age. And so closely associated in my mind with my own father that my second thought was whether Dad had heard the news.
If it was Sunday, it was in fact Meet the Press in my house, as it had been for my dad and his dad. By college, it was just me watching - my father had grown exhausted, he said, with Russert's "gotcha" line of questioning- but for awhile it was a small ritual shared between the two of us while the other half of the family slept. And while Russert's style could be tedious at times (cue his eye-roll-inducing insistence that Clinton properly pronounce Dmitry Medvedev's last name at an April Democratic debate), I can no more imagine this 2008 election without his pointed interrogations than I could without my dad's grousing about Obama's anticipated tax-and-spendism.
And here's a confession that I'd wager isn't unique among the more ambitious of our generation - for as long as I've been envisioning my Senate campaign (and I am now, for the record, in my second term of that daydream), whenever I imagined myself making compelling arguments and graceful rebuttals on the Sunday morning talk programs, it was always, but always, Tim Russert on the other side of the table.
No small thing to say that he will be missed.
I'm struck by the timing of this loss, right before Father's Day - of a man so devoted and so frequently given to mentioning his own family that my first thought was of Big Russ and of Russert's son my age. And so closely associated in my mind with my own father that my second thought was whether Dad had heard the news.
If it was Sunday, it was in fact Meet the Press in my house, as it had been for my dad and his dad. By college, it was just me watching - my father had grown exhausted, he said, with Russert's "gotcha" line of questioning- but for awhile it was a small ritual shared between the two of us while the other half of the family slept. And while Russert's style could be tedious at times (cue his eye-roll-inducing insistence that Clinton properly pronounce Dmitry Medvedev's last name at an April Democratic debate), I can no more imagine this 2008 election without his pointed interrogations than I could without my dad's grousing about Obama's anticipated tax-and-spendism.
And here's a confession that I'd wager isn't unique among the more ambitious of our generation - for as long as I've been envisioning my Senate campaign (and I am now, for the record, in my second term of that daydream), whenever I imagined myself making compelling arguments and graceful rebuttals on the Sunday morning talk programs, it was always, but always, Tim Russert on the other side of the table.
No small thing to say that he will be missed.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
"A technical requirement invites a technical solution"
I was horrified to see a header on Slate trumpeting the case for virginity-restoration surgery, but as it turns out, Human Nature columnist William Saletan not only expresses the requisite disgust for hymen-fetishizing fundementalists, but makes the surprisingly subversive (maybe even feminist?) argument for cheap, legal "virginity restoration" surgery.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Friday, May 23, 2008
Read this.
Since last June, I've become a devotee of Fast Company's giddy boosterism for creativity in the world of commerce; their all-star line up of quirky columnists and irreverent cover stories make for a thoroughly fun monthly read.
It is, in other words, an unlikely home for hard-hitting investigative reporting. Certainly not the place for that rare sucker punch of a story, the kind that leaves you unmoored, reeling, and horrified. And yet, Richard Behar's June special report on China in Africa is exactly that.
Read it. Seriously. Read all of it, all six parts exhaustively documenting "the scene of one of the most bare-knuckled resource grabs the world has ever seen," and one of the most sobering realities of environmental and human degradation you didn't know you didn't know.
It is, in other words, an unlikely home for hard-hitting investigative reporting. Certainly not the place for that rare sucker punch of a story, the kind that leaves you unmoored, reeling, and horrified. And yet, Richard Behar's June special report on China in Africa is exactly that.
Read it. Seriously. Read all of it, all six parts exhaustively documenting "the scene of one of the most bare-knuckled resource grabs the world has ever seen," and one of the most sobering realities of environmental and human degradation you didn't know you didn't know.
A primer on the mortgage crisis
Tuttle suggests that "readers of your blog (there are others besides me, right?) [ed. note: yes. sometimes my mother logs on] who didn't quite understand everything going on with the credit crisis might be interested in these:
http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=1242 An episode of This American Life that follows mortages from the lender to the borrower to the brokerage firm that packages them to the investors who buy and sell them. "
He's right... interesting background, both.
And frustrating that the bond rating services are passing the buck to "the mortgage holders who turned out to be deadbeats." Since the fault, of course, lies with the folks who were offered something too good to be true and (oh! terrible unethical act!) took it. Where are the economists preaching the gospel of The Rational Actor when you need them?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/magazine/27Credit-t.html A NY Times magazine article by Roger Lowenstein about the credit rating agencies, and why all those CDOs blew up.
He's right... interesting background, both.
And frustrating that the bond rating services are passing the buck to "the mortgage holders who turned out to be deadbeats." Since the fault, of course, lies with the folks who were offered something too good to be true and (oh! terrible unethical act!) took it. Where are the economists preaching the gospel of The Rational Actor when you need them?
Monday, May 19, 2008
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
"Colleges of last resort"
Hot off the internets!
The Atlantic's most incisive piece so far this year, in my opinion, is now live.
The Atlantic's most incisive piece so far this year, in my opinion, is now live.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
EMILY's Gift
I rarely meet an Andrew Sullivan campaign-related post with anything other than a vigorous head nod. But I do take exception to his recent characterization of EMILY's List founder Ellen Malcom as building a career upon "identity politics and the big money politics."
I don't particularly agree with Malcolm's op-ed about Clinton being a "champion" who has "shown us that winners never quit and quitters never win," but Andrew's dismissive tone makes me worry that we're throwing the baby out with the bathwater - and not for the first time in this campaign.
The influence that EMILY's List has had on politics is undeniable - and even if I hadn't done an intern stint there, I would still argue that influence has been undeniably for the good.
The organization started the year I was born, when no woman had ever been elected to the Senate in her own right, and there were only twenty three women in the House. Hardly rooted in "big money politics," EMILY's List began as a handful of women in Malcom's basement writing checks to help get other women elected. Today, with sixteen women senators, and 87 congresswomen, including the Speaker, (to say nothing of state legislatures and governor's mansions) it is all but impossible to find a history or account of this sea change that doesn't reference the work of EL in achieving it.
And to the question of why we should even be so essentialist as to view the sheer number of women office-holders as a victory, I'm reminded of Karen O'Connor's exceptional paper on the topic of "Do Women Matter?" The answer is a resounding yes- in substance, in style, on the issues that matter to women voters, and in constituent work, women have made an outsized impact for the better.
An impact that Democratic women could not have had without EMILY's List. An impact that they will continue to make in partnering with a (markedly pro-choice, pro-equal pay, and pro-child care) President Obama. Which is exactly the point that Andrew doesn't see about Ellen Malcom - it is in part because of her work that I can vote my preference rather than my gender. Women are represented at nearly every level of government, and, because of the remarkable pipeline that EL has built, will almost assuredly find their way to the White House in the next few election cycles.
And because Hillary is not a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, the gift that Ellen Malcolm has given me, and all female Obama supporters, is the freedom from identity politics. Whether or not Ellen herself would agree with how we choose to exercise it.
I don't particularly agree with Malcolm's op-ed about Clinton being a "champion" who has "shown us that winners never quit and quitters never win," but Andrew's dismissive tone makes me worry that we're throwing the baby out with the bathwater - and not for the first time in this campaign.
The influence that EMILY's List has had on politics is undeniable - and even if I hadn't done an intern stint there, I would still argue that influence has been undeniably for the good.
The organization started the year I was born, when no woman had ever been elected to the Senate in her own right, and there were only twenty three women in the House. Hardly rooted in "big money politics," EMILY's List began as a handful of women in Malcom's basement writing checks to help get other women elected. Today, with sixteen women senators, and 87 congresswomen, including the Speaker, (to say nothing of state legislatures and governor's mansions) it is all but impossible to find a history or account of this sea change that doesn't reference the work of EL in achieving it.
And to the question of why we should even be so essentialist as to view the sheer number of women office-holders as a victory, I'm reminded of Karen O'Connor's exceptional paper on the topic of "Do Women Matter?" The answer is a resounding yes- in substance, in style, on the issues that matter to women voters, and in constituent work, women have made an outsized impact for the better.
An impact that Democratic women could not have had without EMILY's List. An impact that they will continue to make in partnering with a (markedly pro-choice, pro-equal pay, and pro-child care) President Obama. Which is exactly the point that Andrew doesn't see about Ellen Malcom - it is in part because of her work that I can vote my preference rather than my gender. Women are represented at nearly every level of government, and, because of the remarkable pipeline that EL has built, will almost assuredly find their way to the White House in the next few election cycles.
And because Hillary is not a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, the gift that Ellen Malcolm has given me, and all female Obama supporters, is the freedom from identity politics. Whether or not Ellen herself would agree with how we choose to exercise it.
Rockin' the Naval Observatory
Courtesy Melissa, an excellent tidbit from TheHill, which asked every member of the U.S. Senate whether they'd accept the VP nomination. I think the answers reveal an awful lot about the respondents (namely, that Claire McCaskill has the self-esteem of a middle schooler with new braces). A few gems...
The hilarious:
Barbara Mikulski's "Absolutely. Absolutely. I think I would be great. First of all, I know how to behave at weddings and funerals. And I know how to be commander in chief. I’d bring a lot of fun to the job. We would rock the Naval Observatory."
The awkward:
Chuck Hagel's "“I’m not here to talk about that."
And the bizarre:
Patty "Dr. Seuss" Murray: "“Any American citizen, large or small, would be honored to be asked"
The hilarious:
Barbara Mikulski's "Absolutely. Absolutely. I think I would be great. First of all, I know how to behave at weddings and funerals. And I know how to be commander in chief. I’d bring a lot of fun to the job. We would rock the Naval Observatory."
The awkward:
Chuck Hagel's "“I’m not here to talk about that."
And the bizarre:
Patty "Dr. Seuss" Murray: "“Any American citizen, large or small, would be honored to be asked"
Monday, May 12, 2008
You stay classy, Jenna
I'm not too proud to admit that my browser found its way to whitehouse.gov this morning to check out the Jenna wedding pictures (the verdict: lovely. and I want hair that looks like that in 90 degree humid heat).
At risk of sounding like a GOP-daughter fetishist, I've been increasingly thinking lately that the newly minted Mrs. Hager might be one of her father's few decent contributions to this country. She's been promoting her newest children's book - a joint project with her mom - recently, which means news outlets have been repeating her resume, and truly, the girl has chosen an admirable path teaching in Columbia Heights, with "leaves of absence" to work at UNICEF shelters in Panama. Especially in light of the opportunity costs - using her privilege to say, make six figures at a hedge fund (not to make too gratuitous a dig at Chelsea; if I'd spent my preteen years being called a dog on national television, I wouldn't be half the poised young woman she appears to be) - I can't help but feel a real respect for her.
Respect compounded by her utterly low-key nuptials this weekend. Sister could have totally pulled a Luci Baines, and opted instead for Shiner Bock and a single bridesmaid (her sister). You always hear about how W. ended up in the White House twice because he's the kind of candidate "folks want to have a beer with." I think I'd prefer his daughter.
At risk of sounding like a GOP-daughter fetishist, I've been increasingly thinking lately that the newly minted Mrs. Hager might be one of her father's few decent contributions to this country. She's been promoting her newest children's book - a joint project with her mom - recently, which means news outlets have been repeating her resume, and truly, the girl has chosen an admirable path teaching in Columbia Heights, with "leaves of absence" to work at UNICEF shelters in Panama. Especially in light of the opportunity costs - using her privilege to say, make six figures at a hedge fund (not to make too gratuitous a dig at Chelsea; if I'd spent my preteen years being called a dog on national television, I wouldn't be half the poised young woman she appears to be) - I can't help but feel a real respect for her.
Respect compounded by her utterly low-key nuptials this weekend. Sister could have totally pulled a Luci Baines, and opted instead for Shiner Bock and a single bridesmaid (her sister). You always hear about how W. ended up in the White House twice because he's the kind of candidate "folks want to have a beer with." I think I'd prefer his daughter.
Mixed news from Myanmar
According to the Times, Myanmar's junta has allowed a US military plane - carrying not only relief supplies but also the US military's Pacific commander - to land in the stricken nation, which sounds encouraging, but only without the qualifier from the UN authorities "that the distribution of most deliveries of international relief supplies were still being blocked to the most badly affected parts of the country. They say help is reaching fewer than one-third of those in need."
Meaning that the question still hangs in the air; as TIME/CNN asks it, "Is It Time to Invade Burma?" Romesh Ratnesar seems to think a qualified yes, evoking the specter of Somalia and reminding of the diplomatic options via China, Thailand, and Indonesia that remain to be exhausted first.
The latter two points representing, I suppose, why we don't make foreign policy decisions based on emotion. Because truly, I find it next to impossible to read about this man-made anguish without wanting to carpet-bomb the junta's compounds - and not with energy-dense biscuits, either. The Times quotes a military academic in Singapore who assesses that "the four pillars of [Myanmar's ruling] military’s world view are nationalism, paranoia, self-reliance and ethnocentrism. " It is obscene to me that so many thousands will starve, drown, and suffer to preserve this perverted episteme.
Meaning that the question still hangs in the air; as TIME/CNN asks it, "Is It Time to Invade Burma?" Romesh Ratnesar seems to think a qualified yes, evoking the specter of Somalia and reminding of the diplomatic options via China, Thailand, and Indonesia that remain to be exhausted first.
The latter two points representing, I suppose, why we don't make foreign policy decisions based on emotion. Because truly, I find it next to impossible to read about this man-made anguish without wanting to carpet-bomb the junta's compounds - and not with energy-dense biscuits, either. The Times quotes a military academic in Singapore who assesses that "the four pillars of [Myanmar's ruling] military’s world view are nationalism, paranoia, self-reliance and ethnocentrism. " It is obscene to me that so many thousands will starve, drown, and suffer to preserve this perverted episteme.
Friday, May 9, 2008
PS bacon is life
Webfind of the day. Because you're not the only one with strained interpersonal relationships, there's passiveaggressivenotes.com.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
"The Five Mistakes Clinton Made"
Karen Tumulty has a clear-eyed post mortem on Time.com this morning.
Digitally remastered
The upcoming New Yorker has a feature on a fellow named Pascal Dangin, apparently "the premier retoucher of fashion photographs." The piece is long on the details of his technical gifts and digital toolbox - admittedly compelling stuff - and short on the politics of manipulating bodies for media consumption.
Not unfairly so, of course (it's still good writing) but the lack of explicit mention of retouching's consequences doesn't make the industry sound any less depressing. By far the worst revelation:
Not unfairly so, of course (it's still good writing) but the lack of explicit mention of retouching's consequences doesn't make the industry sound any less depressing. By far the worst revelation:
"I mentioned the Dove ad campaign that proudly featured lumpier-than-usual “real women” in their undergarments. It turned out that it was a Dangin job. “Do you know how much retouching was on that?” he asked."
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Ad campaign catch of the day
"It's OUR party, Paul."
I finally tracked down video of Donna Brazile's dressing down of Paula Begala last night on CNN - plus blogger Jason Linkins' editorializing wisecracks - on Huffington Post.
I tend to wear my reactions to television (and books, and magazines, and blogs. I'm an engaged media consumer, what?) on my sleeve, but I can't remember the last time I cheered this loudly for someone who couldn't hear me. I'm left, as always, wondering why Brazile herself doesn't run for office.
Encouraging to have someone call out Begala on doing the GOP's work when he cleaves the "eggheads" from "the little guys." Such an important reminder, too, that an awful lot of black people also wear blue collars. Oh, and that Donna has "drank more beers with Joe Sixpack and Jane Sixpack than most white Democrats."
Snap.
I tend to wear my reactions to television (and books, and magazines, and blogs. I'm an engaged media consumer, what?) on my sleeve, but I can't remember the last time I cheered this loudly for someone who couldn't hear me. I'm left, as always, wondering why Brazile herself doesn't run for office.
Encouraging to have someone call out Begala on doing the GOP's work when he cleaves the "eggheads" from "the little guys." Such an important reminder, too, that an awful lot of black people also wear blue collars. Oh, and that Donna has "drank more beers with Joe Sixpack and Jane Sixpack than most white Democrats."
Snap.
Sensible wine-ing for the district
An unlikely pairing of clauses:
Good call, Marion Berry.
Per DCist, the City Council, led by Berry and Kwame Brown, just voted to allow restaurant patrons to cork and carry unfinished bottles of wine home. Good policy - as the district's perennial voice of moderation himself puts it, forcing patrons to finish, rather than waste, an expensive bottle, has got to cause more alcohol-related problems than it fixes - and, of course, stellar news for my fellow area lightweight cheapskates.
Good call, Marion Berry.
Per DCist, the City Council, led by Berry and Kwame Brown, just voted to allow restaurant patrons to cork and carry unfinished bottles of wine home. Good policy - as the district's perennial voice of moderation himself puts it, forcing patrons to finish, rather than waste, an expensive bottle, has got to cause more alcohol-related problems than it fixes - and, of course, stellar news for my fellow area lightweight cheapskates.
Run, Kay, run
Fabulous not-quite-national news out of North Carolina last night: state senator Kay Hagan trounced four opponents in a once-competitive primary to take on Senator Elizabeth Dole in November.
Coming out of my field research on Liddy Dole's campaign a couple summers ago, I found myself begrudgingly admiring her biography and campaign style, but her politics and record of representing North Carolina have been disastrous. (although, to be fair, her also-disastrous leadership of the NRSC in 2006 was a huge boon to Dems).
It's excellent to see Hagan emerge as her challenger. She'll be a strong competitor- a Daily Kos poll has her within striking distance of Dole after a bruising primary and with seven months still to go ; her exceptional website indicates that she "gets" the technological element, no doubt the critical piece of the 2008 puzzle ; and my anecdotal evidence of conversations in her home base of Greensboro this past weekend suggests that she'll have a powerful grassroots operation.
And, personally, I'm delighted by the thought that Dole can be shown the door out of the Senate without diminishing the numbers of my favorite caucus in that body: the Southern women.
Coming out of my field research on Liddy Dole's campaign a couple summers ago, I found myself begrudgingly admiring her biography and campaign style, but her politics and record of representing North Carolina have been disastrous. (although, to be fair, her also-disastrous leadership of the NRSC in 2006 was a huge boon to Dems).
It's excellent to see Hagan emerge as her challenger. She'll be a strong competitor- a Daily Kos poll has her within striking distance of Dole after a bruising primary and with seven months still to go ; her exceptional website indicates that she "gets" the technological element, no doubt the critical piece of the 2008 puzzle ; and my anecdotal evidence of conversations in her home base of Greensboro this past weekend suggests that she'll have a powerful grassroots operation.
And, personally, I'm delighted by the thought that Dole can be shown the door out of the Senate without diminishing the numbers of my favorite caucus in that body: the Southern women.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Christianity in the "spiritual marketplace"
Hanna Rosin has a great quick read on Slate this week, discussing Christian pop culture in context of Rapture Ready!, a new book on the subject.
The highlights are certainly the descriptions of pop-lite evangelical alternatives -
("There are Christian raves and Christian rappers and Christian techno, which is somehow more Christian even though there are no words. There are Christian comedians who put on a Christian version of Punk'd, called Prank 3:16."). There's no doubt, though, that Rosin takes this subject matter seriously, and what's more interesting, to my mind, is her argument about how the lack of authenticity in Christian pop (in all its multimedia forms) actually does more harm than good to the Christian "brand."
The highlights are certainly the descriptions of pop-lite evangelical alternatives -
("There are Christian raves and Christian rappers and Christian techno, which is somehow more Christian even though there are no words. There are Christian comedians who put on a Christian version of Punk'd, called Prank 3:16."). There's no doubt, though, that Rosin takes this subject matter seriously, and what's more interesting, to my mind, is her argument about how the lack of authenticity in Christian pop (in all its multimedia forms) actually does more harm than good to the Christian "brand."
Friday, May 2, 2008
Sanctimonious gas(tax)-bag
HRC line of the week:
"Do [other members of Congress] stand with hard pressed Americans who are trying to pay their gas bills at the gas station or do they once again stand with the big oil companies? That’s a vote I’m going to try to get, because I want to know where they stand and I want them to tell us - are they with us or against us?” (NYT)
Seriously? Big Oil is licking its chops at the thought of this McCain-Clinton pandermonium. Even this kid, who barely squeaked through Econ201, understands that removing the tax increases demand which leads to higher prices and bigger profits for gas companies.
So if "us" stands for "gas at $4 a gallon (still) with no money going to highway funds and extra profits to the oil industry," then "against us" seems like a good place to be.
And really? "With us or against us?" I cringe for her.
"Do [other members of Congress] stand with hard pressed Americans who are trying to pay their gas bills at the gas station or do they once again stand with the big oil companies? That’s a vote I’m going to try to get, because I want to know where they stand and I want them to tell us - are they with us or against us?” (NYT)
Seriously? Big Oil is licking its chops at the thought of this McCain-Clinton pandermonium. Even this kid, who barely squeaked through Econ201, understands that removing the tax increases demand which leads to higher prices and bigger profits for gas companies.
So if "us" stands for "gas at $4 a gallon (still) with no money going to highway funds and extra profits to the oil industry," then "against us" seems like a good place to be.
And really? "With us or against us?" I cringe for her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
