text stringlengths 0 100k |
|---|
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play. Advertisement By Michael Cockerell BBC News The Home Office has long had a reputation as a glittering coffin for political careers. Many recent home secretaries have, as one of them put it to me, left the place feet first. There have been six New Labour home secretaries in the past 13 years - three of whom were forced to go. The Home Office was born out of the barrel of a gun. It was created to prevent public disorder after troops shot dead nearly 300 people after rioting... in 1780 It was known last summer, when I began making a new TV series about the Great Offices of State that the Home Office was about to have a new political master. I had a hunch it would be Alan Johnson, whom I knew quite well. I asked if he got the job, whether we could film him taking over. To my agreeable surprise he agreed - but one of his special advisers told me: "We haven't been given a heads up from Number 10. So we are not necessarily expecting anything." Poisoned chalice Of course what we now know - though we did not know then - was that Gordon Brown apparently wanted to move Alistair Darling from the Treasury to the Home Office, and make Ed Balls the Chancellor. But "move over Darling" didn't happen, as the Chancellor dug his heels in. And Johnson got the poisoned chalice. As he arrived to take up his new post, we were in the basement car park of the Home Office - where the department's top official, Sir David Normington was waiting to greet his new political master. Michael Cockerell got unprecedented access behind the scenes in Whitehall It had been agreed that Johnson would be dropped there to avoid the media pack waiting at the front door. Johnson swept up in his new official armour-plated Jaguar and Special Branch bodyguard. He was to be given the official line before he uttered publicly in his new role. Our camera was running as he received his first briefing from the Home Office's Head of News, Simon Wren, a bear of a man with the confidential manner of a Scotland Yard detective. "They're not expecting you to know anything," were his reassuring words. As one TV previewer observes: "It's the real 'Thick of It' without the swearing." Thus armed, Alan Johnson strode out to meet the hacks. The former postman is not short of self-confidence, mixed with a nice line in self-irony. Asked later by his new department's house magazine who he would like to see play himself in any feature film of his life, Johnson replied: "George Clooney, but he would have to smarten himself up a bit." He was now on the front line in the most hazardous job in government. Queen's peace The Home Office was born out of the barrel of a gun. It was created to prevent public disorder after troops shot dead nearly 300 people after rioting and looting on the streets of London in 1780. Over two centuries later, keeping the Queen's peace remains the Home Office's Number one priority. As well as Alan Johnson and his Sir Humphrey, Sir David Normington, I interviewed many previous home secretaries and their top mandarins. Our aim was to capture the DNA and culture of the Home Office. Its job is to fight crime and terrorism and control immigration. Life at the Home Office for its officials and ministers is always filled with jeopardy partly because as one former home secretary John Reid put it: "You haven't got the ideal client list." And as another former Home Secretary wrote in a memo to his Sir Humphrey 50 years ago: "Poor old Home Office, we don't always get it wrong. But we always get the blame." Michael Cockerell uncovers the secret world of the Home Office, Foreign Office and Treasury in Great Offices of State on BBC Four at 9pm on Thursdays from 11th February, repeated Mondays at 8pm and afterwards on BBC iPlayer Bookmark with: Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon What are these? E-mail this to a friend Printable version |
This article is an excerpt from Atomic Habits, my New York Times bestselling book. Change is hard. You've probably noticed that. We all want to become better people — stronger and healthier, more creative and more skilled, a better friend or family member. But even if we get really inspired and start doing things better, it's tough to actually stick to new behaviors. It's more likely that this time next year you'll be doing the same thing than performing a new habit with ease. Why is that? And is there anything you can do to make change easier? How to Be Good at Remembering People’s Names My wife is great at remembering people’s names. Recently, she told me a story that happened when she was in high school. She went to a large high school and it was the first day of class. Many of the students had never met before that day. The teacher went around the room and asked each person to introduce themselves. At the end, the teacher asked if anyone could remember everyone’s name. My wife raised her hand and proceeded to go around the room and accurately name all 30 or so people. The rest of the room was stunned. The guy next to her looked over and said, “I couldn’t even remember your name.” She said that moment was an affirming experience for her. After that she felt like, “I’m the type of person who is good at remembering people’s names.” Even today, she's great at remembering the names of anyone we come across. Here's what I learned from that story: In order to believe in a new identity, we have to prove it to ourselves. Identity-Based Habits The key to building lasting habits is focusing on creating a new identity first. Your current behaviors are simply a reflection of your current identity. What you do now is a mirror image of the type of person you believe that you are (either consciously or subconsciously). To change your behavior for good, you need to start believing new things about yourself. You need to build identity-based habits. Imagine how we typically set goals. We might start by saying “I want to lose weight” or “I want to get stronger.” If you're lucky, someone might say, “That's great, but you should be more specific.” So then you say, “I want to lose 20 pounds” or “I want to squat 300 pounds.” These goals are centered around outcomes, not identity. To understand what I mean, consider that there are three levels at which change can occur. You can imagine them like the layers of an onion. 1 The first layer is changing your outcomes. This level is concerned with changing your results: losing weight, publishing a book, winning a championship. Most of the goals you set are associated with this level of change. The second layer is changing your process. This level is concerned with changing your habits and systems: implementing a new routine at the gym, decluttering your desk for better workflow, developing a meditation practice. Most of the habits you build are associated with this level. The third and deepest layer is changing your identity. This level is concerned with changing your beliefs: your worldview, your self-image, your judgments about yourself and others. Most of the beliefs, assumptions, and biases you hold are associated with this level. Outcomes are about what you get. Processes are about what you do. Identity is about what you believe. When it comes to building habits that last—when it comes to building a system of 1 percent improvements—the problem is not that one level is “better” or “worse” than another. All levels of change are useful in their own way. The problem is the direction of change. Many people begin the process of changing their habits by focusing on what they want to achieve. This leads us to outcome-based habits. The alternative is to build identity-based habits. With this approach, we start by focusing on who we wish to become. The Recipe for Sustained Success Changing your beliefs isn’t nearly as hard as you might think. There are two steps. 1. Decide the type of person you want to be. 2. Prove it to yourself with small wins. First, decide who you want to be. This holds at any level—as an individual, as a team, as a community, as a nation. What do you want to stand for? What are your principles and values? Who do you wish to become? These are big questions, and many people aren’t sure where to begin—but they do know what kind of results they want: to get six-pack abs or to feel less anxious or to double their salary. That’s fine; start there and work backward from the results you want to the type of person who could get those results. Ask yourself, “Who is the type of person that could get the outcome I want?” Here are five examples of how you can make this work in real life. Want to lose weight? Identity: Become the type of person who moves more every day. Small win: Buy a pedometer. Walk 50 steps when you get home from work. Tomorrow, walk 100 steps. The day after that, 150 steps. If you do this 5 days per week and add 50 steps each day, then by the end of the year, you’ll be walking over 10,000 steps per day. Want to become a better writer? Identity: Become the type of person who writes 1,000 words every day. Small win: Write one paragraph each day this week. Want to become strong? Identity: Become the type of person who never misses a workout. Small win: Do pushups every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Want to be a better friend? Identity: Become the type of person who always stays in touch. Small win: Call one friend every Saturday. If you repeat the same people every 3 months, you’ll stay close with 12 old friends throughout the year. Want to be taken seriously at work? Identity: become the type of person who is always on time. Small win: Schedule meetings with an additional 15–minute gap between them so that you can go from meeting to meeting and always show up early. What is your identity? In my experience, when you want to become better at something, proving your identity to yourself is far more important than getting amazing results. This is especially true at first. If you want to get motivated and inspired, then feel free to watch a YouTube video, listen to your favorite song, and do P90X. But don't be surprised if you burn out after a week. You can't rely on being motivated. You have to become the type of person you want to be, and that starts with proving your new identity to yourself. Most people (myself included) will want to become better this year. Many of us, however, will set performance- and appearance-based goals in hopes that they will drive us to do things differently. If you're looking to make a change, then I say stop worrying about results and start worrying about your identity. Become the type of person who can achieve the things you want to achieve. Build identity-based habits now. The results can come later. This article is an excerpt from Chapter 2 of my New York Times bestselling book Atomic Habits. Read more here. |
Top 10 Currencies By Total Value Of Notes & Coins In Circulation Last week we wrote about how Bitcoin Now Worth More Than All UK Pound Banknotes & Coins In Circulation. At the time Bitcoin was worth more than all banknotes and coins of every currency in the world except the US Dollar, Euro, Chinese Yuan, Japanese Yen, and Indian Rupee. However, since Bitcoin’s price increase above $15,000, it now has a market cap of around $260 billion, or around $10 billion more than the estimated value of all Rupee notes and coins in circulation. Making it the world’s 5th most valuable currency. Here are a few other things that have changed since our original report: Ethereum remains the 17th most valuable currency , ahead of the Turkish Lira and Singapore Dollar remains the , ahead of the Turkish Lira and Singapore Dollar Bitcoin Cash (20th most valuable) and IOTA (21st most valuable) are worth more than all Swedish Krona banknotes and coins. (20th most valuable) and (21st most valuable) are worth more than all Swedish Krona banknotes and coins. Ripple (23rd) and Litecoin (24th) are worth more than all South African Rand banknotes and coins. (23rd) and (24th) are worth more than all South African Rand banknotes and coins. Currently 71% of the world’s population live in countries with currencies in circulation worth less than the value of Bitcoin. Market Cap of Top 6 Cryptocurrencies Full Data: Rank Currency Name Value of Banknotes and Coins in Circulation (Billion USD) 1 US Dollar $1,424 2 Euro $1,210 3 Chinese Yuan $1,000 4 Japanese Yen $856 5 Bitcoin $260 6 Indian Rupee $250 7 Russian Ruble $117 8 Pound Sterling $103 9 Swiss Franc $76 10 South Korean Won $74 11 Mexican Peso $72 12 Canadian Dollar $59 13 Brazilian Real $58 14 Australian Dollar $55 15 Saudi Riyal $53 16 Hong Kong Dollar $48 17 Ethereum $43 18 Turkish Lira $36 19 Singapore Dollar $27 20 Bitcoin Cash $22 21 IOTA $11 22 Swedish Krona $9 23 Ripple $9 24 Litecoin $8 25 South African Rand $6 Notes about the data: The data for current cryptocurrency prices and total market cap come from Coinmarketcap.com. The data for the value of various currencies in circulation comes from the Bank for International Settlements’ Statistics on payment, clearing and settlement systems in the CPMI countries report, published in September 2016. The data is from 2015, so may no longer be 100% correct today. The value for China is an estimate only, and comes from Wikipedia. It should also be noted that the value of banknotes and coins in circulation is only a small fraction of the total value of a currency. Depending on the country this can the same as the M0 Money Supply. For more about these measurements you can read our previous report here. Other popular small business topics: |
Rauner's administration minimized the significance of the downgrade, the first since he took office in January, blaming Democratic legislators who have stymied his attempts to include business-friendly reforms in the budget. "Fitch points out that the Illinois economy lags other states' and has major structural challenges," Rauner spokeswoman Catherine Kelly said in a statement. "Governor Rauner continues to fight for structural reforms that will put the state on a path to fiscal health, but the legislature continues to protect the failed status quo." Senate President John Cullerton, a Chicago Democrat, called on Rauner to drop his "corporate class agenda." "This lowered credit rating is just one way that we can calculate the true cost of doing business the Rauner way," said Cullerton spokeswoman Rikeesha Phelon. "It's time to hit the reset button and move toward a resolution." Rauner's top political nemesis, Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan, said it is time to focus solely on a state budget. "The lack of a resolution on the state budget and today's downgrade are direct results of the governor's continued focus on issues other than solving our budget crisis," Madigan said in a statement. More downgrades possible Illinois' last bond sale was in May 2014. The governor's office has said the state intends to return to the U.S. municipal bond market this fiscal year. Illinois continues to pay a hefty market penalty for its fiscal woes, which include the worst-funded pensions among the 50 states. Its so-called credit spread over Municipal Market Data's benchmark yield scale for AAA-rated debt has widened from 140 basis points at the beginning of 2015 to 190 basis points on Monday. |
Humdrum asked nearly 20 of Hong Kong’s house and techno DJs to share their five favorite tracks of 2012. Below are the year’s big tunes, secret weapons and floor-fillers that defined the sound of Hong Kong’s electronic underground in a year that it diversified and accelerated greatly. Listen and navigate on the embedded YouTube playlist below, or view the full playlist on YouTube. While browsing, click on the song title or album artwork to listen to any track, starting the playlist at that point. Hong Kong DJs Top Tracks of 2012 Ocean Lam [Humdrum / Foxtrot] Martin Dawson & Glimpse Our Friends [Pets Recordings] Ben La Desh You Gotta [Dirt Crew Recordings] Genius Of Time Tuffa Trummor Med Röst (soundcloud) [Aniara Recordings] Kid Culture Visions feat. Rene Engel [Sincopat] Hauschka Radar (Michael Mayer Remix) [FatCat Records] Casey Anderson [Humdrum] Matthew Dekay & Lee Burridge Lost In A Moment (Dixon Rework) [Innervisions] Deniz Kurtel & Tanner Ross I Knew This Would Happen (feat. PillowTalk) [Wolf + Lamb] Tin Man Futurist Acid [Exprezoo] Todd Terje Inspector Norse [Smalltown Supersound] Maceo Plex Under The Sheets [No. 19 Music] Honorable Mention Barker & Baumecker – Schlang Bang [Ostgut Ton] AKW [PUSH] Matthew Dekay and Lee Burridge Fur Die Liebe [All Day I Dream] A duo who’ve produced some forward-thinking dancefloor material, and the strings on this track get me every time. Ry Cumin & Frank Wiedermann Howling (Âme Remix) [Innervisions] I don’t usually go for big vocal tracks, but there’s something quite stirring about this guy’s singing – plus the track comes to a pretty powerful conclusion. Barnt Geffen [Cómeme] It was always fun watching the crowd when dropping this weird little number. Geffen is really nothing more than a beat and a fun little octave-driven synth line, but it drove people crazy every single time. Maetrik The Poem [Ellum Audio] I still prefer the stuff Eric Estornel produces as Maetrik over his Maceo Plex guise, and this track really sums up why: rib-shaking beats and simple but devastating basslines. Massive. Ian Pooley CompuRhythm (Dixon 4/4 Treatment) [Innervisions] Have such good memories of catching Dixon at Barcelona in Sonar this year, and he’s fast become one of my favourites. This is his best remix yet, maybe after the 2011 Singing rerubs. DJ Ball [Intermix] Andrade My Time (Beatport) [Overall Music] Kriece After Dark (Beatport) [Arabica] Thomas Gandey & Zeb Wayne Pounce [Southern Fried Records] Lee Curtiss feat. Debbie Rennalds Body Twitch [Visionquest] Francesco Grant Everybody Love Me (Soundcloud) [AFU] DJ Darka Hot Chip Flutes (Sasha Remix) [Last Night On Earth] LCD Soundsystem You Wanted A Hit [DFA Records] Dark Soul Project & Solar Sphere Sunshine Night (Santiago Garcia Remix) [Baires] HVOB Dogs [Stil Vor Talent] Tomomi Ukumori Scenario (Henry Saiz‘s Cerulean Tower Tokyo Hotel 34th floor Remix) [Humble & Radiant] Dee Montero [Montero Grooves/fmr. KEE Club] Pachanga Boys Time [Hippie Dance] Hunter/Game Feel The Presence [Hot Creations] Ry & Frank Wiedermann Howling (Âme Remix) [Innervisions] Betoko Raining Again [Diynamic] Maetrik The Poem [Ellum Audio] Frankie Lam [PUSH] Nicolas Jaar Mi Mujer [Wolf + Lamb] Nina Kraviz Love or Go (Kink mix) [Rekids] Kasper Bjorke Lose Yourself To Jenny (Rebolledo Remix) [HFN Music] Lemos Nice Day (Kreons Extended Reconstruction) (Soundcloud) [Resopal Red] Makam What Ya Doin’ [Dekmantel] Honorable Mentions Alex Niggemann – Street Therapy [Poker Flat] Hrdvsion – Right and Tight [International DeeJay Gigolo] Dosem – Replicants [Suara] Davide Squillace – Pieces of You [Manifesto] Death On The Balcony – Them 3 Words (Eat Everything More Than Friends Remix) [Pets] Fresh Funky S [Now Is The Time] Ornette Crazy (Nôze Remix) [Get Physical Music] Adana Twins Strange [Exploited] Monkey Safari Hi Life (Ole Biege Remix) [Monaberry] Maxxi Soundsystem Regrets We Have No Use For feat. Name One [Hypercolour] Charles Ramirez & Stan Garac The Pianist [Hall of Fame Records] Imai Fukutaro [Intermix / Synchro Records] A-Inc Calumet Pass [CARIZMA] Marvin & Guy Town [Let’s Get Lost] Elvis.T INTRO 2010 (DJ Sodeyama Remix) (Beatport) [Acupuncture Records] Levon Vincent Stereo Systems [Novel Sound] Imai Fukutaro The Invisible Dog [Synchro] Jacko Joao [SL/NT] Chloe Distant (Magda Remix) (Soundcloud) [Kill The DJ] DJ T. feat. Khan Leavin’ Me (Clockwork Remix) [Get Physical Music] Nina Kraviz Aus feat. King Aus On The Mic [Rekids] Sollmy Claustrophobia (Soundcloud) [Tools & Stuff] Reset Robot Tinto [Intacto] DJ Jeremy [This Is Music] Guy Gerber The Mirror Game [Visionquest] Barnt Geffen [Cómeme] Paperclip People Throw (Slam’s RTM Remix) [Planet E Communications] Catz ‘N Dogz They Frontin’ feat. Monty Luke [Get Physical Music] Hot Chip How Do You Do? (Todd Terje Remix) [Domino] Juan Martínez Gregorio [Deeper Sounds HK] Audision Yellow Sunset (Robag Wruhme Stoylago Edit) [&nd] Asaf Avidan One Day/Reckoning Song (Wankelmut Remix) (Day Version) [Four Music] Cio D’or Uhr [Telrae] Dürerstuben Sonnenblut am Platz der Perlen [Laut & Luise] Kollektiv Turmstrasse Lapacha (Alex Q’s Wir Geben Nicht Auf Mix) [Musik Gewinnt Freunde] Honorable Mentions Norken & Deer – Remember That Feeling [Laut & Luise] Nu & Jo Ke – Who Loves the Sun [Bar25] Kerri Monk [Foxtrot] Vincenzo Battaglia Darkness Island (Soundcloud) [Prisma Record] FakeOb Beehive [Avenue Recordings] Johnny S Get Down Xavi Dee & David Sure Black Mamba (Clem Remix) (Soundcloud) [Electrofraise Records] M.A.I.K. Eat The Flow (Maitycally Remix) (Beatport) [Clubstream] M@i [Foxtrot] Shadow Dancer It’s The Everything [BNR Trax] Craig Pettigrew Allergy (Beaport) [Zenbi Recordings] Ricardo Esposito & Michael Nadje Vivantes (Beatport) [BTAIM] Dosem Replicants (Edu Imbernon & Coyu Remix) [Suara] Ryoh Mitomi Suzunari (Soundcloud) [Carizma] Miko Van Chong [Mamoz] SBTRKT Hold On [Young Turks] Todd Terje Inspector Norse [Smalltown Supersound] Disclosure Latch feat. Sam Smith [PMR Records] Tensnake feat. Syron Mainline [Defected] Nina Kraviz Ghetto Kraviz [Rekids] Simon Templa [Now Is The Time] Oliver $ Doin’ Ya Thang [Play It Down] Zakes Bantwini Wasting My Time (Franck Roger Remix) [Realtone Records] Luis Radio & Raffa Scoccia Organismo (Traxsource) [BBE] Maceo Plex Can’t Leave You [Crosstown Rebels] Wendy Wenn [Small & Tall / W2 / Foxtrot] Barnt Geffen [Cómeme] Worthy & Eats Everything Tric Trac [Dirtybird] Dream 2 Science Breathe Deep [Rush Hour Records] Luca M Pufarine [Area Remote] David Labeij Rolling Back [Mobilee] Top Artists 1st: Maetrik / Maceo Plex (a.k.a. Eric Estornel) 2nd: Dixon, Barnt, Nina Kraviz, Todd Terje 3rd: Âme, Hot Chip, Matthew Dekay & Lee Burridge, Ry Cuming & Frank Wiedemann Top Record Labels 1st: Innervsions 2nd: Rekids, Cómeme, Get Physical Music 3rd: Visionquest, Wolf + Lamb, Ellum Audio Like Humdrum Hong Kong on Facebook for more articles like this in the future. Thanks for all the support in 2012 and happy New Year! |
Pancrase: Yes, We Are Hybrid Wrestlers 1 was the first mixed martial arts event held by Pancrase Hybrid Wrestling. It took place at the Tokyo Bay NK Hall in Urayasu, Chiba, Japan on September 21, 1993.[1] The card featured many future MMA champions. History [ edit ] Pancrase: Yes, We Are Hybrid Wrestlers 1 was the inaugural event of the mixed martial arts promotion Pancrase, which was founded by professional wrestlers Masakatsu Funaki and Minoru Suzuki in 1993. The background of the formation of the organization took place in the pro wrestling organization Fujiwara Gumi. In 1992, a rare legitimate match was booked where "Wayne" (Ken) Shamrock faced international kickboxing champion Don Nakaya Nielsen. Shamrock took Nielsen down immediately and submitted him with an arm lock in 45 seconds.[2] The success of this match made young pro wrestlers Shamrock, Masakatsu Funaki and Minoru Suzuki question what they had been told since breaking into predetermined wrestling: that nobody would ever pay to see real matches.[2] Shamrock, Funaki and Suzuki then spearheaded a group of pro wrestlers and decided to abandon everything people had told them about real matches not being marketable.[2]/ They formed a promotion called Pancrase, named by ’60s wrestling star Karl Gotch after the sport of Pankration in the ancient Olympics, which combined all different forms of fighting into one sport.[2] Using pro wrestling rules – no closed fist punching to the face (closed fisted punches were allowed to the body), breaks on the ropes, but fighting for real – Shamrock beat Funaki via choke in 6:15 in the main event of the first of what was billed as an all-shoot match pro wrestling show.[2] The show drew an enthusiastic sellout crowd of 7,000 fans, who did not know what they would be seeing, but when it was over, both the fans and media heavily praised this new form of fighting.[2] The main event featured Pancrase founder and future King of Pancrase Masakatsu Funaki fighting against future UFC Hall of Famer Ken Shamrock. The fight between Shamrock and Funaki was intriguing because Funaki was Shamrock's teacher and trainer. Shamrock ultimately submitted Funaki with an arm triangle choke. The event also saw victories by future MMA champions Minoru Suzuki, and Bas Rutten. Kazuo Takahashi and Takaku Fuke also won, with Fuke defeating future King of the Cage Light Heavyweight champion Vernon White. Results [ edit ] See also [ edit ] |
The “bigger”, the better. Credit to the filmmakers for not making the same film twice. Instead of a drama, we get a road-trip movie. No Matthew McConaughey, Alex Pettyfer, or Cody Horn. Now we get Jada Pinkett Smith, Elizabeth Banks, and Donald Glover. Okay, Pinkett Smith is pretty good. And I’m always happy to see the Childish Gambino. But there’s no dramatic push. The pacing is weak and halfway through the movie, it’s clear there was no story left to tell. “Stripped” of “Magic”. I’m one of the few heterosexual males that admits to liking Magic Mike [2012]. It wasn’t a movie about male stripping, but actually a drama about male strippers. This is about male stripping all the way through. And to be fair, the stripping scenes are nicely shot with complex choreography. If you thought the first film was too much talking and not enough stripping, then step right up. There’s some nice eye candy for the people who want to see all those abs and muscles. Just don’t expect anything with substance. I got nothing. And the puns stop here. It’s hard to review this film because it wasn’t made for me. I’m not aching to see Channing Tatum or Matt Bomer strip down to a thong. This is the “Girls Night!” people expected from the first film, but didn’t get. And if that’s what you want, then go for it. You’ll probably like it more the second time around. It doesn’t offer what the first movie had, but then again, it’s a completely different movie. |
BAGHDAD — American military units fired on insurgents while supporting Iraqi troops northeast of the capital on Sunday, Iraqi officials said. It was the second such episode since the United States declared an end to its combat operations in Iraq less than two weeks ago. There were no American casualties in the fighting in Hudaidy, a village about 50 miles from Baghdad that has long harbored members of the Sunni insurgent group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Iraqi security officials said three people were killed: an Iraqi soldier, an Iraqi police officer and an insurgent. Ten people were wounded. The United States military did not confirm its role in the fighting. An American military spokeswoman said Sunday in an e-mail that she was awaiting “releasable information.” Advertisement Continue reading the main story But Iraqi military and civilian officials said American helicopters and some ground troops had taken part after Iraqi forces requested assistance. The Iraqis had come under fire while raiding Sunni insurgent hide-outs in the agricultural area. |
It says a lot about Leonard Nimoy that everything he did in relation to his beloved Spock — the TV shows, the movies, the animated series — barely scratches the surface of what he accomplished throughout his decades-long career. The late actor spent much of his time playing the half-Vulcan, yes, but he also had memorable roles in dozens of other TV shows and films over the years, as well as side gigs as a director, poet, singer and photographer. It seemed that there was nothing the man couldn't do — including being a proud supporter of feminism. Although it might come as a surprise to some, Nimoy was actually a staunch feminist during his life, standing up for women's rights through both his artistic pursuits and his actions as a human being. His work on the matter was remarkable, especially considering the times he lived in; when Nimoy grew famous, feminism and equal rights were hugely controversial topics. For an actor as famous as Nimoy to stand up for what he believed in, despite the potential for criticism, was extraordinary. In celebration of the actor's incredible life, let's take a look back at his biggest achievements for feminism: The Full Body Project In 2007, Nimoy published a book of photographs called The Full Body Project , filled with provocative (and often nude) images of plus-size women. According to the author, the aim of the book was to showcase the average American a woman, someone who “weighs 25 percent more than the models selling the clothes," and to go against Hollywood's "fantasy" ideal of what females should look like. The collection received rave reviews, with critics applauding Nimoy's respectful approach to the photographs and his sincere attempt in demanding change within the industry. Shekhina Five years earlier, Nimoy published Shekhina , a book of photographs that focused on femininity within Judaism. Although reactions were mixed — some readers felt that the photos, many showing religious Jewish women in the nude, were immodest — Nimoy stood by his work, saying that he was "saddened" by the critics' "attempt to control thought." His Fight For His Co-Star's Equal Pay MARK RALSTON/AFP/Getty Images In an interview last year, Nimoy confirmed a report that he'd been responsible for helping get Nichelle Nichols of Star Trek equal pay as her male co-stars. When he was told by fellow cast member Walter Koenig that Nichols wasn't receiving the same salary as the others, Nimoy took the issue to the people in charge and ensured that she was paid fairly. A bold move for any actor, but especially one in the 1960s. Three Men and a Baby Although some critics saw Three Men and a Baby, the Nimoy-directed 1987 hit, as an example of Hollywood's backlash to feminism, others viewed it as the exact opposite. I tend to side with the latter; the movie's main point — that men, too, could be attentive parents — is entirely supportive of the movement's goal of equality. Yes, it was about men, but that doesn't mean it didn't contain a wonderfully feminist message. Image: Buena Vista |
As the governor of Texas, Rick Perry is currently banned from raising campaign money from Wall Street executives managing his state's pension funds. But if the GOP has its way, that won't be the case for long. (Kate Spalla / Flickr / Creative Commons) Republicans are arguing that Wall Street should have the right to influence politicians’ investment decisions. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulators originally passed the rule to make sure retirees' money wasn't being handed out based on politicians' desire to pay back their campaign donors. Wall Street is one of the biggest sources of funding for presidential campaigns, and many of the Republican Party's potential 2016 contenders are governors, from Chris Christie of New Jersey and Rick Perry of Texas to Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. And so, last week, the GOP filed a federal lawsuit aimed at overturning the pay-to-play law that bars those governors from raising campaign money from Wall Street executives who manage their states' pension funds. In the case, New York and Tennessee's Republican parties are represented by two former Bush administration officials, one of whose firms just won the Supreme Court case invalidating campaign contribution limits on large donors. In their complaint, the parties argue that people managing state pension money have a First Amendment right to make large donations to state officials who award those lucrative money management contracts. With the $3 trillion public pension system controlled by elected officials now generating billions of dollars worth of annual management fees for Wall Street, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulators originally passed the rule to make sure retirees' money wasn't being handed out based on politicians' desire to pay back their campaign donors. “Elected officials who allow political contributions to play a role in the management of these assets and who use these assets to reward contributors violate the public trust,” says the preamble of the rule, which restricts not only campaign donations directly to state officials, but also contributions to political parties. In the complaint aiming to overturn that rule, the GOP plaintiffs argue that the SEC does not have the campaign finance expertise to properly enforce the rule. The complaint further argues that the rule itself creates an “impermissible choice” between “exercising a First Amendment right and retaining the ability to engage in professional activities.” The existing rule could limit governors' ability to raise money from Wall Street in any presidential race. In an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, a spokesman for one of the Republican plaintiffs suggested that in order to compete for campaign resources, his party's elected officials need to be able to raise money from the Wall Street managers who receive contracts from those officials. “We see (the current SEC rule) as something that has been a great detriment to our ability to help out candidates,” said Jason Weingarten of the Republican Party of New York—the state whose pay-to-play pension scandal in 2010 originally prompted the SEC rule. The suit comes only a few weeks after the SEC issued its first fines under the rule—against a firm whose executives made campaign donations to Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican, and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, a Democrat. The company in question was managing Pennsylvania and Philadelphia pension money. In a statement on that case, the SEC promised more enforcement of the pay-to-play rule in the future. “We will use all available enforcement tools to ensure that public pension funds are protected from any potential corrupting influences,” said Andrew Ceresney, director of the SEC Enforcement Division. “As we have done with broker-dealers, we will hold investment advisers strictly liable for pay-to-play violations.” The GOP lawsuit aims to stop that promise from becoming a reality. In predicating that suit on a First Amendment argument, those Republicans are forwarding a disturbing legal theory: Essentially, they are arguing that Wall Street has a constitutional right to influence politicians and the investment decisions those politicians make on behalf of pensioners. If that theory is upheld by the courts, it will no doubt help Republican presidential candidates raise lots of financial-industry cash—but it could also mean that public pension contracts will now be for sale to the highest bidder. |
Homelessness among English households has risen 54 per cent since 2010, according to government figures. A report, released by the Department for Communities and Local Government, reveals there were 57,750 acceptances in financial year 2015-16 – a rise from 54,430 (6 per cent) from 2014-15. This represents the sixth consecutive annual rise, with households becoming homeless in London increasing to 17,530 (9 per cent) in the last year alone and 58,000 households across the whole of England. We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view. From 15p €0.18 $0.18 $0.27 a day, more exclusives, analysis and extras. Campbell Robb, Shelter’s chief executive, called the statistics “shocking”. He said in a statement: “Sky high housing costs mean that every day at Shelter we hear from families struggling to keep their heads above water, knowing that just a small change in income could send them spiralling towards homelessness. “We’re here to help people when the worst happens, but we can’t do this alone. Sadly, it is those already living on a financial knife-edge who suffer the most when the country hits uncertain times, so it’s vital the government makes sure families can get the support they need to keep a roof over their heads.” John Healey, former Shadow Secretary of State for Housing and Planning, underlined the role of the housing crisis in the UK's vote to leave the EU. He told The Independent: “The gap between haves and have-nots was the breeding ground for Brexit, and these new figures today show that the number of homeless households has risen by an astonishing 54% since 2010. “If Conservative leadership candidates want to prove their one nation credentials, they can start by making clear that homelessness hostels and other supported accommodation will be excluded from George Osborne’s crude housing benefit cuts, which are set to make the scandal of high homelessness worse by bankrupting thousands of hostels across the country.” Temporary accommodation also came under further strain, with the number of households forced into uncertain living conditions rising to 71,540, or a 49 per cent increase since 2010. At the same time, the number of preventative measures taken by local authorities dropped by 6,900 in the last year. Jon Sparkes, chief executive of Crisis, warned a reduced level of prevention could have long term consequences. He added: “We are also concerned by the fall in the number of people prevented from becoming homeless in the first place. These trends should be going in the opposite direction. “Prevention is always better than cure, and for homeless people this is especially so. It has already been shown to work in Wales, where it has dramatically reduced the need for people to be re-housed. “According to the latest figures, where councils intervened to prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place, they were successful in two thirds of cases.” Shape Created with Sketch. The world's least affordable cities for housing Show all 10 left Created with Sketch. right Created with Sketch. Shape Created with Sketch. The world's least affordable cities for housing 1/10 Hong Kong 2/10 Sydney 3/10 Vancouver 4/10 Auckland 5/10 Melbourne 6/10 San Jose 7/10 San Francisco 8/10 London 9/10 San Diego 10/10 Los Angeles 1/10 Hong Kong 2/10 Sydney 3/10 Vancouver 4/10 Auckland 5/10 Melbourne 6/10 San Jose 7/10 San Francisco 8/10 London 9/10 San Diego 10/10 Los Angeles Bob Blackman, a backbench Conservative MP, tabled the Homelessness Reduction Bill on Wednesday. If passed, it will force councils to clearly demonstrate they have offered meaningful advice, and may also introduce a 56-day period before someone is made homeless. Dominic Williamson, St Mungo’s Executive Director of Strategy and Policy, said it was “a momentous opportunity” to improve the current legislation. Earlier this year, it was revealed rough sleeping on London’s night buses has increased 121 per cent in the past four years. A person is defined as "statutorily homeless" by the government if they no longer have a legal right to occupy their accommodation, or if, for example, they are at risk of violence. We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view. At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads. Subscribe now |
OCOEE – The family had just sat down to eat lunch when they heard somebody enter their front yard. As usual, the family’s two dogs, Minnie and Duke, ran out through the doggie door and into the front yard to investigate the noise. But unlike times before, only one dog returned. Charlie Brooks, the dogs’ owner, followed the dogs outside, but as he opened the door, the Ocoee police officer in his front yard already had shot his 11-year-old dog, Duke. Duke was a 65-pound Catahoula hound dog mixed breed. “I didn’t have any time to react,” Brooks said. “I couldn’t say, ‘No,’ or, ‘What are you doing’ — it just happened so fast that as I was coming out through the door, the officer had already had his gun drawn and was shooting. It was probably 15 or 20 feet away from the door.” At first, Brooks said, he didn’t fully understand what had just happened. It wasn’t until he saw Duke lying on the ground in a pool of blood that he realized the male officer had fired his gun. “He wasn’t very apologetic. … He didn’t seem remorseful at all,” Brooks said. “I didn’t comprehend that he actually shot my dog until I saw blood. I thought it was a Taser, and he was just trying to subdue my dog because he was just so nonchalant about it. I didn’t even comprehend until I saw blood pouring out of his head that he actually shot my dog.” Ocoee Police Deputy Chief Steve McCosker said an investigation into the officer-involved dog shooting is currently underway, but he will not be releasing the officer’s name until the investigation is complete. McCosker added that Ocoee’s police officers receive training in police and dog encounters with a program developed by the Department of Justice. According to McCosker, the officer who shot Duke has been working with the department for six years and has not been involved in any other cases involving a discharged firearm. The officer, McCosker said, was in the area conducting a boat check. “How it happened is that we were doing an area check in reference to a vessel that appeared to have been beached or abandoned in his immediate area,” he said. “The officer had called out from outside the front gate and the owners didn’t answer. And when the officers knocked on the door a small dog and a mid-sized dog had left through the doggie door and ran toward the officer. The officer believed that the dog was going to bite him.” Brooks said when he called the Ocoee Police Department, he asked what was going to happen to the officer and was informed that whenever a firearm is discharged, the officer is put on leave until an investigation occurs. However, when Brooks called back on Tuesday to ask for the report of the incident, he was told that the officer was back at work and would need to call back to receive the report. “So then I started getting upset,” Brooks said. “At first, I thought that our justice system would take care of it and the officer would be punished or something would happen. So we started to get angry when we learned he was back to work the next day.” A week has now gone and passed, but Brooks said he has yet to receive the report, leading Brooks and his family to wonder if the department intends to prevent the incident from gaining too much attention. Brooks said his family currently is considering legal action, but they are doubtful of their chances because of a similar incident that happened in Ocoee in 2012. In that case, he said, another police officer had fatally shot a dog in front of a family with kids present. The family reportedly tried to sue, but the case was dismissed. ––– Contact Gabby Baquero at [email protected]r.com |
From 1991 to present, Columbia’s Bob Dylan Bootleg Series has graciously bestowed upon us 13 volumes, varying in length, of what must be approaching every presentable live recording in Dylan’s archive, spanning from his inception as a musician in 1961 all the way up to the last decade or so. The quality of these collections, relative to the sheer quantity of music they contain, perhaps separates Dylan from any other artist in the bootleg game: show me another for whom it would be anything but madness to curate an 18 CD compilation of cuts from recording sessions (one of these discs consisting solely of 20 takes of his timeless number Like a Rolling Stone) as was done for the volume 12 in this series, The Cutting Edge, released in 2015. The subsequent and latest instalment in the series, Trouble No More: The Bootleg Series Vol. 13 / 1979-1981 traces Dylan’s unforeseen devotion to God and the Christian faith, a progression that completely defined the records released in these years. Dylan’s evangelisation was somewhat controversial at the time: some took it as a business move (namely the Rolling Stones’ Keith Richards, who labeled Dylan ‘the prophet of profit’), and others concluded that the Rock ‘n’ Roll legend had gone stark mad. Opposition to Dylan’s ‘born again’ demeanor developed when he refused to play anything but his new material on tour. In hindsight, his preoccupation with the counter-cultural Jesus movement can now be seen for what is was: an innocent source of reinvention in his music, and a fine reinvention at that. The most expansive version of Trouble No More is a 9-disc box set that offers a comprehensive selection of Dylan’s live performances from 1979 to 1981 – including full live performances in Toronto and London – and graces us with a total of 14 otherwise unreleased songs. As it turns out, many of the tracks Dylan offered up in these years are enhanced by the immediacy of the live performances that make up this release: the triumphant moments are all the more triumphant, and the more subdued moments seem to take on deeper significance in their increased corporeality. ‘Trouble No More’ highlights the musical potency of a lyrically inspired Dylan infusing his ballads with gospel, and is by all accounts a superior representation of Dylan’s peculiar artistic direction than any other of his studio recordings. Dylan’s flexibility is something which cannot be questioned here: his soulful, husky voice, punctuated by female vocalists, builds up to many a punchy, catchy chorus. His mastery of this style of music almost suggests that he has been singing Christian praise music throughout his career. Live renditions of tracks such as When You Gonna Wake Up? and Solid Rock are as impactive as any Dylan performance. Ain’t gonna go to hell for anybody works as a profession of defiance against everyday evils that almost transcends religion and appeals to faithfulness as a raw emotion. Despite the bold, polarising assertions that a few tracks undoubtedly contain, the general feel of Dylan’s music at this time was one of introspection and inquisition. The more exuberant tracks are juxtaposed with low-key songs in which he elaborates on what could be taken as the true cause of his rebirth in the Church: fear and disillusionment. In the beautiful piano ballad ‘When He Returns’, Dylan ponders, ‘How long can you hate yourself for the weakness you conceal?’. The heartfelt ode ‘Covenant woman’ conveys his crestfallen mood in the lines ‘I’ve been broken, shattered like an empty cup, I’m just waiting on the Lord to rebuild and fill me up’. It is perhaps in these tracks that Dylan’s sentiments are at their most resonating; we come to share his fear and join him in his quest for divine fulfilment. Dylan was no stranger to breaking the expectations people placed on him; Trouble No More gives an opportunity to appreciate him for the dynamic and resolute artist he is. Regardless of subject matter, Dylan was and is ever-capable of creating viscerally-affecting music, bringing us with him on his journey towards understanding. Advertisements |
CHENNAI: Taking a strong exception to the unauthorized visit by a Kerala MLA and a group of journalists and subsequent damage to the structure of the baby dam, Tamil Nadu on Wednesday moved the Supreme Court seeking directions to the Centre to depute the Central Industrial Security Force ( CISF ) to ensure the safety of the dam and its appurtenant structures.The dam, situated in the Idukki district of Kerala, is owned and operated by Tamil Nadu.“Kerala MLA Bijimol, representing Peerumedu, had without any permission, entered the dam area with a group of journalists, and started pocking the downstream face of the baby dam at mortar joints, causing damage to the structure of the baby dam,” the petition said.It said the MLA, a public servant, breached the constitutional mandate that all authorities should act in support of implementing the Supreme Court order to raise the water storage level to 142 feet.The petition alleged that the local police remained a silent spectator and failed to prevent people from damaging the baby dam. “It is imperative that the CISF be deployed immediately, which should be directed to function under the Supreme Court-appointed supervisory committee,” the petition said.Tamil Nadu moved the apex court with a similar petition in 2011. However, that was disposed of, following an assurance from Kerala that it would do all that was necessary to protect the dam and all facilities and properties belonging to Tamil Nadu.About 25 engineers from Tamil Nadu had been stationed at the dam for the last ten days, monitoring the storage level, which is building up rapidly.“The safety of dam and personnel is at risk, with people making force entry,” PWD executive engineer R Madhavan told TOI from dam site.The officer, who was allegedly manhandled by journalists on Monday, is also member of a sub-committee (technical) under the supervisory committee set by the Supreme Court. “When we complained to police, they simply told us to protect ourselves and that they cannot do anything,” the officer said.Quoting the officer, the petition said police had refused to even register an FIR on his complaint.Anticipating a threat to the safety of the SC-appointed panel, the Tamil Nadu government on Tuesday shot off a letter to panel chief LAV Nathan to seek protection of the CISF or any other central security for the ensuing inspection of the dam slated for November 24.Tamil Nadu chief secretary Mohan Verghese Chunkath too lodged protest with his Kerala counterpart on the latest security breach.“Although the committee is empowered to look into the structural safety of the dam, lack of security could also impact its safety,” Nathan told TOI over phone from New Delhi.Nathan is chief engineer (dam safety) of Central Water Commission, a premier water agency of the Union ministry of water resources.The officer said according to the reports he received, the seepage reported in the masonry dam was insignificant. “But our panel will check that too during our next inspection,” he said.The storage level stood at 141.6 on Wednesday morning, as against the permissible level of 142 feet. |
Miss Fame talks 'RuPaul's Drag Race' elimination Kennedy Davenport, Dallas, TX. April 25 at South Beach nightclub. Kennedy Davenport, Dallas, TX. April 25 at South Beach nightclub. Photo: Mathu Andersen Photo: Mathu Andersen Image 1 of / 89 Caption Close Miss Fame talks 'RuPaul's Drag Race' elimination 1 / 89 Back to Gallery Miss Fame sashayed onto "RuPaul's Drag Race" with arguably the biggest fanbase among the Season 7 queens. The Templeton, CA native was an established male model and makeup artist before creating his "super model drag queen" persona. Behind the gag-worthy glamour, Kurtis Dam-Mikkelsen is one of six siblings who grew up on a farm and raised cows, rabbits and, yes, chickens (a fact he proudly declared during the show). There's much more to this queen than fierce fashion. Read for yourself in our often-fascinating, in-depth conversation. What we got on "Drag Race" was just surface level. Do you feel like you were able to truly show who you are as a performer and personality? We got to see fragments of me that I really am proud of. Different people that know me said differently. My cousin called me last night. She's like, 'You're such a bright light. I don't know why they didn't get that.' I went into it. I gave my heart. There are a lot of conversations that are on the cutting room floor. That's editing. It happens to all of us who do reality television. That's fine. If they wanted to focus on me being 'Super Soul Sunday' Oprah Winfrey of drag every day. I was always trying to be that: stay positive, be loving to your fellow man. I know it's a competition, but these are still people. We are still struggling to get through the day. It probably got in the way of the competition aspect of things. But I did the best I could. I fought really hard. I worked really hard. And that's the best you can do. What was the toughest part of the competition? It was really a lot of information for me to take in every day. It was a barrage of, 'Here's what we have to memorize,' and I feel like I have the brain of a goldfish, so I was struggling with retaining and being able to project. That is totally my childhood, high-school traumas of not being able to do well on tests or even do well in any class other than my art class. I had such a hard time obtaining and holding information because I was trying to survive my life. We were watching the struggle being very real, and I wasn't the only one. We all were going through it at varying degrees in the show. Were you surprised at being criticized for not having an ugly enough dress on the runway? I still think you can make ugly beautiful. That's what fashion does all the time. That was actually a dress from a 'Cinderella' opera from one of the wicked stepsisters. The story behind that dress was based on an ugly character. That's the way I looked at that challenge. It's all based on interpretation. Maybe I overthought the ugly dress. Who did you find yourself bonding with over the course of the show? Violet (Chachki). We've seen each other since the show and spent some time together. On the flipside, who was the most challenging to deal with? There's a lot of personalities in that room. It's a situational thing. My feelings are pretty transparent. I spoke what I felt. I never would have said anything I wouldn't have said to somebody's face. With that said, I'm not going to drop names. My life and my career are swaying in a different direction. I love those girls. I'm so glad I got to work it out with them. My life has changed forever because I was a contestant on 'Drag Race.' You're the first person so far who hasn't singled someone out. Let somebody else play the drama card that does it better than me. I'm not that kind of bad bitch. I actually do care about people. The bigger picture is we are all going to be successful for something if we want it to be. But it's gonna take work. The show ended, and I went straight to work, because I knew that people were going to criticize and have opinions. I booked. I showed up. I brought dancers. I choreographed. And I'm growing because I didn't wanna rest on, 'Oh, I'm just a pretty queen.' I've worked my entire life, and I've always had nothing. How did that funnel into your work ethic and creation of the Miss Fame character? The idea of Miss Fame looking that way and looking expensive was the idea I created coming from the middle of nowhere and literally never having anything. I've been a starving artist my entire career. With a dollar in my pocket, for real, three years ago before I met my husband, I was walking the streets of New York, hoping that I was able to afford those two donuts at 7-11. The struggle was real. I could barely pay my rent. I came to New York, and I lost it all. But I didn't leave when it got hard. I started go-go dancing on top of working at MAC. I made money, I worked it out, and then Miss Fame was born, and she gave me opportunities. I worked for that, too. A lot of free work, a lot of 'Please photograph me' so that I could have a portfolio as a drag queen because I think that there's a modeling opportunity as a character. I think because I look like that, people had opinions about who I was internally. 'Oh, she must have it all. It must be easy.' Girl, I might look expensive, but this came from a lot of hard work and determination and building relationships and working for free to get myself connected. You released your first single and video, 'Rubber Doll,' immediately following the elimination. I've got a full story of videos and songs ready to blast for the world to see, because that's what it's about – evolution and never quitting. That's one of the few uptempo songs on the album. It's kind of an ambient pop album. It's really smooth. It's got a lot of beautiful tones. I'm proud of it. I love it. When you look like Miss Fame, it attracts a certain type of person. I was attracting men that were drawn to gorgeous dolls, gorgeous drag queens. They were able to afford the finer things in life. It's this personal story of these men that are kind of idolizing Miss Fame for her beauty, but I still have control over my world. This experience kind of helped me learn a lot more about the power that I have working and presenting myself as Miss Fame. It is indeed a lot of eleganza. But what's the most unglamorous thing in your closet? Oh my God, you should see what I'm wearing right now. I'm not glamorous. Miss Fame is glamour. My friend was over here yesterday. He looked at me on my couch and said, 'You're such a boy.' I'm sitting there with a snapback cap on, tank top down to the knees, cutoff shorts, barefoot. I'm a country boy, and I will always be a country boy. I've owned the shorts I'm wearing now for five years. They're torn up, and they look crazy. I'm stubbly. I'm like the Matthew McConaughey of drag. I have to ask: Miss Fame, how's your head? Well, it's fantastic. I mean, come on, I've got a husband, so it worked out for me, girl. I was talking to my mom about it, and she said, 'Tell them that your mom has better head.' I'm like, 'Girl, that is disgusting.' My mother is like a drag queen. (That joke) is an Elvira thing (from the film 'Mistress of the Dark'). We watched the movie while we were at 'Drag Race.' I wasn't the only one they were asking that question to. But I was probably the one that didn't get it the most, and so they capitalized on that. I was literally thinking that RuPaul was trying to have a real conversation with me about my mental state. On that question, and on that note, medications have been filled. My head's great. |
Hitman’s past has been as cold and calculated as its murderous anti-hero, each game cloned from the last to create a technically better sequel with technically better mechanics. Absolution defies this tradition. It’s a sexy, stylish Hitman game, where groups of leather-clad nun assassins sport cool crew names like “The Saints,” and southern tycoons speak in soundbites and say things like “Yeehaw” before slapping their knee and spitting out chewing tobacco. It’s as if Quentin Tarantino made a Hitman game--so thick with pulp that you’ll struggle to swallow, but so sweet and delicious that you’ll have a hard time giving it up. Agent 47 began his previous missions in a finely-pressed suit and tie, sleuthing down hallways and splattering brain matter in every direction before dusting off his suit (or whatever outfit he had acquired) and continuing his hit. In Absolution, he’s taken the tie off and undone the top button, assuming a more casual appearance that better fits the attitude of the entire game. Bloody bandage over his signature barcode tattoo, he finds himself in a different sort of experience than fans are used to, with varied missions that dance between traditional assassinations and stealth action segments. This mix works together to tell a more complete story, one that sees Agent 47 unraveling a conspiracy involving a slew of interesting, memorable characters--and a bunch of walking dead men. Check out our Hitman Absolution video review Though the cartoonish personas Agent 47 comes into contact with are unanimously interesting, the story struggles at times, often failing to make cohesive connections between missions. Some make sense, weaving into the narrative well, but others seemingly come out of nowhere, feeling like side jobs as opposed to actual plot progression. This being the case, the plot can be confusing and muddled if taken one segment at a time. On the whole, though, once the credits roll you'll likely have no problems connecting the blood-soaked dots. Not that you’ll mind when you’re actually in the act of hunting a target. When it comes to proving why Agent 47 is the best in the business, the missions in Absolution are as varied and strong as they’ve ever been. Whether you’re marching through the crowded streets of Chinatown or sneaking through a millionaire's well-guarded penthouse, you’re frequently given a large number of options when it comes to approaching a target. Absolution continues Hitman’s tradition of open-ended gameplay, accommodating the silent assassins and blatant sociopaths among you. Many levels present multiple targets that you’re able to take on and take out in any order. How you execute the mission affects the small sandbox worlds they inhabit, creating multiple paths with each assassination. Do you use explosives to blow up a car and kill a dozen bystanders, or do you meticulously plan out every move to make sure your only bullet is spent between the eyes of your target? Or do you just murder everyone? Absolution rewards you with points based on your execution, and though earning points unlocks passive upgrades, they’re never important enough as to deter you from playing the way you want. Other missions are more akin to what you’d expect to find in other stealth series, giving you multi-staged arenas with a focus on infiltration as opposed to outright assassination. This was a risky move, threatening to provide a disjointed feel, but instead the varied mission types expand Absolution’s scope, allowing it to be more than your typical murder simulation. Sure, killing a strip club owner is fun and all, but so is sneaking through a crowded train station, or running across police-covered rooftops. That said, you’ll likely wish for more assassination missions and less stealth segments by the time the game’s over. Both types of levels are upgraded by a suite of changes and improvements to the basic fabric of Hitman, enhancing the gameplay in almost every way. Being able to feign surrender, crawl through vents, and take cover behind nearly every object adds more tools to the Hitman’s arsenal, but the largest change comes with the addition of Instinct Mode. Agent 47 can use his enhanced senses to survey the surrounding area, showing silhouettes of obscured guards and nearby objects of interest. It’s a large shift away from how Hitman games have played in the past, but should allow those who haven’t been able to get into the series before to slide in unencumbered. Also folding into Instinct Mode is Point Shooting, an element that allows Agent 47 to freeze time and tag enemies for quick execution. It’s remarkably useful, and extremely satisfying when you’re able to clear an area of foes in a quick ballet of death--there’s nothing more badass than seeing Agent 47 standing in a room full of fresh corpses. Watch this Pop-up Demo to find out cool information about the game These tools are even more useful when playing the asynchronous multiplayer mode, Contracts. You’re tasked with killing anyone you want in any of the game’s missions to set a bar, and then others are invited to attempt to replicate--or best--your attempt. It’s a dark, murderous game of H.O.R.S.E., scoring you on your actions and ability to be the best possible Hitman. One-upping friends or strangers on leaderboards and creating challenges is extremely fulfilling, and should give you plenty to do once you’ve finished the campaign. Hitman’s temporary hiatus did worlds of good for the franchise, and Absolution is one of the strongest entries in the series to date. It shows true evolution, moving Agent 47 forward and playing up his enhanced abilities well, both when it comes to hitting a well-placed shot to the head of a scummy target or stealthily moving through a building full of police. The changes to the formula could have spelled disaster if they were executed poorly, but that’s not an issue--execution has never been an issue for Agent 47, has it? |
Despite negative sentiment towards Windows 10 because of Microsoft's shady upgrade tactics, it is actually a wonderful operating system. It is fast, secure, and compatible with many hardware configurations. Its Windows Store, which first debuted in Windows 8, allows users to easily download content -- both paid and free. When it comes to apps and games, there is a lot of garbage in the Windows Store -- more crap than not. With that said, there are quite a few gems too. Today, Microsoft announces a special summer sale, delivering big discounts for shoppers in the store. Even the super-popular Minecraft gets a whopping 50 percent discount! However, not everything seems to be getting a reduction in price. "Summer is almost here. To help people get ready to have fun, today we are announcing the Ready, Set, Summer Collection, a promotion which is live in the Windows Store now and runs through June 6th. As part of the collection, we are offering more than a hundred deals on our most popular games, music, movies and TV shows, and of course top-rated apps", says Mollie Ruiz-Hopper, Editor-in-Chief, Windows Blog. Ruiz-Hopper uses the opportunity to further promote Windows 10. She says, "don't let the deals slip away. And remember time is running out to take advantage of the free offer for Windows 10. Upgrade to Windows 10 for free by July 29 and get a true digital assistant with Cortana that works with over 1,000 apps today, use a safe and secure modern browser with Microsoft Edge and get ready for the Anniversary Update coming this summer". There is actually quite a lot of great stuff being offered. First and foremost, as I said previously, the Windows 10 version of Minecraft sees a 50 percent reduction, while Radiohead's iconic OK Computer album sees a discount too. Fans of hip-hop can get the already-classic 2014 Forest Hills Drive album by J. Cole for just $6.99. Besides games and music, there are also apps and movies available. I highly recommend KVADPhoto+ PRO, a wonderful touch-friendly photo editor, but the discount does not seem to be active yet. It, and other apps in the promotion, are currently being offered at full price. Hopefully Microsoft fixes this soon. The films seem to be pre-orders or rentals, but they too do not seem to be discounted. Damn, Microsoft, this promotion is very disappointing so far! I have reached out to the Windows-maker to get more information as to why full-priced downloads are being marketed as a promotion. If you want to peruse the full list of Microsoft's summer sale, you can do so here. If you do manage to score a discounted app, game, music, or movie download, tell me in the comments. |
If you find someone in your New Tampa home, they might not be a burglar or robber, but rather a “gypsy,” the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) says. According to an April 8 press release from HCSO, in law enforcement, the word “gypsy” refers to people who travel in small groups across the country, perpetrating crimes of theft, burglary and fraud — and these types of crimes increase throughout the Tampa Bay area each spring and summer. “Gypsy scams are incidents that often occur in daylight hours, in which a suspect will literally walk right into someone’s home for the purpose of stealing jewelry or money,” said HCSO spokesperson Larry McKinnon in the release. “Very often, the homeowner is either in or near the home.” McKinnon explains that when these individuals are caught, they make up excuses as to why they’re in the home or on the property. To prevent this, HCSO recommends always keeping the doors to your home locked and your garage doors closed, even when your kids aren’t home alone. HCSO also warns of another type of crime that is common at this time of the year, involving “Travelers,” also sometimes referred to as “Irish Travelers,” or groups of traveling home improvement workers, who prey upon unsuspecting homeowners, especially the elderly. These groups go door-to-door, offering to pave and seal driveways at a cheap price. The release says that the groups perform “shoddy” work with cheap materials. When the homeowners try to locate the workers to repair the job, they can’t be located. Or, they’ll call to cancel the check they paid with, but it’s already been cashed. HCSO says that if a deal sounds too good to be true, homeowners should try to find the company online through the Better Business Bureau and never pay for a job in advance. If you have any info about any individuals who may be involved in construction or home repair fraud or any other “gypsy crimes,” contact HCSO Construction Fraud Unit at 247-8622. — MW |
1 Warriors The Warriors got better. It seems a salary cap, a CBA and roster-structure rules would prevent a 67-win team with four All-NBA players and fresh off a second title in three years from getting better. Yet they added quality (Nick Young, Omri Casspi) and kept Shaun Livingston, Zaza Pachulia and, most important, Andre Iguodala. It was already unfair. Their summer makes it double-dog-super-unfair. -- 43-17 2 Cavaliers They let the GM (David Griffin) who built their championship roster go, then swung and missed on his replacement (Chauncey Billups) by reportedly offering him less than he's paid for broadcasting. Their big upgrades are Jose Calderon and Jeff Green. Rumors continue to swirl like a tornado that LeBron James could be gone in 2018. The Cavs are perplexing, full of drama and the league's second-best team. So everything's normal. 11 14-47 3 Spurs Very small moves this summer, adding Rudy Gay and re-signing Patty Mills. They're undecided about whether Jonathon Simmons will return and Dewayne Dedmon is assumed to be gone. But they're here because they're the Spurs and still have Kawhi Leonard. Rumored offseason target Chris Paul went to division rival Houston and LaMarcus Aldridge's status and fit remain mysteries. Could this season be like 2015 when they slipped a bit? 1 33-29 4 Rockets Can Chris Paul and James Harden share the ball enough for this to work? Will Paul adapt and embrace Mike D'Antoni's style, central to Houston's success but does not mesh with CP3's instincts? Will the depth they traded (or may still trade if they land Carmelo Anthony) weaken them overall? We don't know the answers to those questions, but landing Chris Paul -- at the very least -- puts them ahead of the Celtics. 3 35-25 5 Celtics Gordon Hayward is the athletic wing they needed, and before the Avery Bradley trade they were No. 4 here. Nonetheless, this starting five and terrific young reserves -- Jayson Tatum is tearing up the summer league -- could challenge Cleveland. The question: How serious is that challenge when remembering how the Cavs clobbered the Celts in the Eastern Conference finals? 1 37-23 6 Thunder Paul George wasn't just a daring deal under cover of darkness by Sam Presti, it may produce the best fit next to Russell Westbrook outside of, say, a fella who just won Finals MVP out by the Bay. George is a terrific off-ball weapon. If he and Westbrook click, look out. And the Thunder didn't stop there. They added Patrick Patterson (on a steal of a contract) and Raymond Felton, who will make lineups more versatile and improve depth. 2 38-21 7 Raptors They're not as good as last season because they lost depth, including starting forward DeMarre Carroll (regardless of his injury issues). Adding C.J. Miles helps. And young players like Norman Powell and Bebe Nogueira can fill in gaps. The question remains: Can this team close on the Cavs or is being "regular-season good" good enough? 4 44-17 8 Wizards The Wizards were one crazy Kelly Olynyk game from reaching the conference finals. But they made no key additions, leaving their bench unimproved. They must bank on improved chemistry and factors like Ian Mahinmi's improved health and Kelly Oubre's development to make a leap. John Wall's 2019 free agency is on the distant horizon; he has not signed a max extension. 2 24-36 9 Timberwolves This seems high for a team so brutally young, but the Wolves upgraded at several key positions and added Jimmy Bulter, who becomes their best player. So expectations are sky high. However, with similar expectations last season, they fell on their faces. Are they primed to make a jump? Or will the cursed anchor of inexperience again weigh them down? 17 29-31 10 Bucks They found an identity last season. The Bucks may have to adjust defensively after Toronto solved their trap in the playoffs, but they still almost took out the Raptors in that first-round series. Giannis Antetokounmpo gets better every day, and their young core is only scratching its potential. 1 46-14 11 Grizzlies Grit-N-Grind is dead with Zach Randolph going to Sacramento (and Tony Allen's future in doubt), as Memphis adapts to today's perimeter game. They return a talented club led by Mike Conley and Marc Gasol, and some of the young talent is intriguing. If RFA JaMychal Green does not return, they will drop considerably next time we rank teams. 3 24-38 12 Clippers Back in 2014, a club with Blake Griffin, Danilo Gallinari and DeAndre Jordan would be among league's better teams. But Griffin's slip because of injuries, Chris Paul's departure and their iffy bench make these Clippers just another West playoff team. This is Griffin's opportunity to show everyone how good he is, because expectations are shrinking every minute. 8 34-28 13 Hornets This one may boggle the mind, considering their 2017 finish, lack of upgrades and teams behind them. But most close regular-season games are considered coin-flips by coaches, players and execs, and Charlotte was 0-9 in 3-point games last season. They are better than their record showed. A small bounce-back puts them in the weak East playoff picture. 6 28-32 14 Heat Couldn't land a marquee free agent but had oodles of cap space after the Chris Bosh buyout. Went all in on a team that got hot for two months then fell apart when Dion Waiters went down. Committed four-year deals to players considered replaceable on the East's No. 9 (one spot out of the playoffs) seed. A gamble, but this may become an East playoff team, whatever that means. 4 26-33 15 Nuggets Denver added Paul Millsap, its best free agent signing since Kenyon Martin a decade ago (seriously) and can count on improvement from Nikola Jokic, Gary Harris and Jamal Murray. The big question for this team? How will the improved offense look now that key assistant Chris Finch left for New Orleans? 2 41-18 16 Trail Blazers Portland's chances depend on whether you believe in Jusuf Nurkic. If you think Nurkic fever is sustainable and he can stay healthy, go all in on a talented team with Damian Lillard and C.J. McCollum. But you should remember that before the Nurkic surge, the Blazers weren't mediocre. They were bad. There's a lot to fix, even with Nurkic. 5 37-23 17 Pelicans With Alvin Gentry at the helm, the Pels figured to struggle defensively, yet they finished ninth per 100 possessions last season. The offense never found a rhythm with DeMarcus Cousins because of suspensions (shocker) and injuries. Will a full camp, some new coaching and development lift them? Better hope so. Cousins is a free agent in less than a year. 6 27-35 18 Jazz This is no incompetent team that fumbled away its star (Gordon Hayward). They did everything right and showed Hayward love by matching a max deal (but not the full five-year max) in 2014, yet he walked. They have talent. They got Ricky Rubio, but need leaps from Rodney Hood and Dante Exum to remain a playoff team in the toughest division in the toughest conference in the NBA. 13 33-26 19 76ers Yes, Joel Embiid is dominant. Markelle Fultz (despite an ankle sprain) and Ben Simmons should be good. But young teams must learn to win, and it takes time. Free agent vets J.J. Redick and Amir Johnson can't show them the ropes in only one season. They may make the playoffs, but winning must be learned on a squad where many key players aren't old enough to rent a car. 9 39-22 20 Mavericks They are almost certain to re-sign Nerlens Noel since they have his restricted free agent rights. Beyond that, not many upgrades. Dennis Smith Jr. is generating Rookie of the Year buzz, but we'll have to see how he does with Rick Carlisle, who is notoriously tough on point guards. They could be better than last season, but have done little to make headway in the West. 1 26-34 21 Kings Signed vets George Hill and Zach Randolph to big-money deals. They'll take minutes away from youngsters who need development (Dave Joerger does not like playing youngsters while sacrificing wins), but the team will improve. And they add De'Aaron Fox to a good mix of veterans and young talent. The Kings look like a competent franchise for the first time in a while. 9 31-29 22 Pistons Trading for Avery Bradley is a clear upgade over Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, but the broken mechanisms of Stan Van Gundy's timepiece remain in place. Unless Reggie Jackson bounces back and Andre Drummond finds consistency, it's hard to see Detroit back in the playoff picture, an arc seemed to be riding back in 2016. 2 29-30 23 Lakers They're "not as bad," or somewhere between "could be good" and "definitely bad." Lonzo Ball is exciting, but rookie point guards have a lot to learn, and there's no telling if Brandon Ingram or Julius Randle make necessary leaps. They wisely didn't waste cap space while waiting for Paul George, yet don't have a player among the 10 best under 22 in the league. 2 29-31 24 Knicks They didn't trade Kristaps Porzingis. That's good. But they gave Tim Hardaway Jr. -- perhaps an underrated RFA -- a four-year, $71M deal after trading him two seasons ago. That's bad. Looks like Carmelo Anthony will be traded before the season starts. Could be good and bad. But you can be sure the Knicks will not be good in 2018, barring something unforseen. 3 12-48 25 Suns They have a lot of young talent, and this is the season to figure out their core, and possibly trade Eric Bledsoe. A young is no sure thing, but Devin Booker, Josh Jackson, Marquese Chriss and Dragan Bender is among the best kiddo combos in the league. It's just going to take time and working out systems at both ends of the court. 4 12-50 26 Nets Yeah, that's right. The Nets won't be the worst team in the league. They were pesky last season, yet lost and lost. They also hung in a lot of games ... and won a few. Jeremy Lin also was out most of the season. They added D'Angelo Russell and DeMarre Carroll, but lost Brook Lopez. There's enough here to be bad but not awful. 4 32-30 27 Pacers May seem high for a team that lost its Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6 players in Value Over Replacement player via Basketball Reference, but they threw enough money at decent replacements like Darren Collison and Bojan Bogdanovic to think they won't be abysmal. At the same time, no one should be surprised if they become the worst team in the league. 12 40-21 28 Magic They wisely sat out free agency instead trying to manufacture wins by overpaying veterans. Jonathan Isaac could be the steal of the draft. But this roster remains a mess and it's not easy to identify the best player. Aaron Gordon needs a bounce-back season, hopefully with more time at power forward, and better health. 4 28-33 29 Bulls The longer one looks at this roster, the worse it gets. If Dwyane Wade and the Bulls reacy a buyout agreement, does that make Robin Lopez their best player on opening night -- given Zach LaVine's injury? Think about that. We're in horror territory here. 13 16-45 |
Hullabaloo Tuesday, March 16, 2010 The Best Political Team On Television by digby The other day I noted that Wolf Blitzer thinks Erick Erickson of Red State is a "good guy," which seemed a little bit odd considering that he is actually an obnoxious, right wing propagandist. Now we know why: he was a soon-to-be member of the "the best political team on television." I'm sure he'll add much to the conventional wisdom that spews forth on their political shows. For instance: Erickson defends Beck's statement that Obama is "racist" and lashes out at "Obama Brownshirts." At Red State, Erickson defended Glenn Beck's assertion that President Obama is a "racist." Erickson stated, "A while back, Glenn Beck called Barack Obama a 'racist.' Given all the terrorists, thugs, and racists Barack Obama has chosen as close personal friends (see e.g. Rev. Wright), it's not a stretch to say it." Erickson went on to call for a boycott of companies that have pulled out of Beck's show and are, according to Erickson, "kowtowing to Barack Obama's worshippers, brownshirts, goons, and thugs." Erickson calls Michelle Obama a "marxist harpy wife." In a blog post headlined, "Is Obama Shagging Hookers Behind the Media's Back?" Erickson stated, "I assume not. I assume that Obama's marxist harpy wife would go Lorena Bobbit on him should he even think about it, but I ask the question to make one simple point: Barack Obama, like Elliott Spitzer, is a creation of the liberal media and, as a result, could be a serial killing transvestite and the media would turn a blind eye." Erickson calls Souter a "goat fucking child molester." On his Twitter account, Erickson responded to Souter's retirement from the Supreme Court by stating, "The nation loses the only goat fucking child molester ever to serve on the Supreme Court." Erickson: "At what point do the people ... march down to their state legislator's house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp?" In a March 31, 2009, post on RedState.com discussing a Washington county's ban on certain kinds of dishwasher detergent, Erickson wrote: "At what point do the people tell the politicians to go to hell? At what point do they get off the couch, march down to their state legislator's house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp for being an idiot?" Later in the post, Erickson added: "Were I in Washington State, I'd be cleaning my gun right about now waiting to protect my property from the coming riots or the government apparatchiks coming to enforce nonsensical legislation." Erickson: Purpose of Bachmann rally is "to tell Nancy Pelosi and the Congress to send Obama to a death panel." In a post on RedState.com, Erickson wrote: "Today, thousands will pour into Washington to tell Nancy Pelosi and the Congress to send Obama to a death panel (that's section 1233 of the original legislation). If you need details on where to go in D.C. or if you can't go, but want to show up at your Congresscritter's local office, go here." Erickson later "[c]larifi[ed]" that "Americans are sending Obamacare," not Obama, "to a death panel" Erickson on Obama's Nobel Peace Prize: "I did not realize the Nobel Peace Prize had an affirmative action quota." In a RedState post discussing Obama's Nobel Peace Prize, Erickson wrote, "I did not realize the Nobel Peace Prize had an affirmative action quota for it, but that is the only thing I can think of for this news. There is no way Barack Obama earned it in the nominations period." There's more. Lots more. What in the hell is CNN thinking? And John King? Is he harboring a grudge against Glenn Greenwald and to get back at him has employed someone who would be more at home in the hate talk ghetto? It's probably important to remember that they incubated the Beck ouvre as well, so perhaps they are just training him for his natural home on FOX. Generous of them. Update: This too. I wonder how Campbell Brown, Gloria Borger and Donna Brazile feel about their new colleague's tweets: Not only is he so gorgeous that he's commonly mistaken for George Clooney, he's a comedian too? It's going to be Erickmania outside those CNN studios... . digby 3/16/2010 01:30:00 PM |
If Donald Trump wins the presidential election, he will take the 75 pending lawsuits he has with him to the Oval Office. According to a USA Today analysis, there have been more than 4,000 lawsuits involving Trump and his businesses over the years. Seventy-five of them are still open, which could create an awkward situation in which the president of the United States is forced to testify either in a closed session or perhaps even in a public setting on multiple occasions. In recent days, Trump has threatened to sue the women who have accused him of sexual misconduct. If he goes through with those lawsuits, they would be added to his tally. Alan Garten, who works as the general counsel for Trump and his businesses, said Trump serving in the White House would not change anything about the open lawsuits. "The reality is we're an operating company," Garten told USA Today. "We'll treat all cases the same way if he's elected or not — and the results shouldn't be different in the eyes of the law." Garten added that 30 of the 75 open cases are significant. The rest are lower-level claims, some of which could be dismissed. With two weeks left before the Nov. 8 election, the polls tell different stories about where Trump stands in the race for president. The RealClear Politics polling average gives Democrat Hillary Clinton a 5.1-point lead, while a Rasmussen poll shows Trump up two points. An Investors Business Daily survey, meanwhile, concluded the race is a dead heat. |
I’ve been returning to the Glen Major Forest over the last few years, in winter with snowshoes or on hot summer days in sneakers. North of Pickering, it’s just 45 minutes from Yonge and Bloor in good traffic, but is an expanse of wilderness that seems much farther away from the city. Though the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority is installing new way finding signs and maps, the meandering trails make it easy to get lost in the forest. Or at least feel lost; no southern Ontario woodlot is so extensive you’ll be lost for long. Walk in a relatively straight line, and you’ll hit a concession road soon enough. The vast-for-the-GTA wilderness of the Glen Major Forest, north of Pickering, is renaturalized, formerly an aggregate quarry and farmland. As the trails become more familiar, it starts to feel more like home, columnist Shawn Micallef writes. ( Shawn Micallef / SPECIAL TO THE STAR ) However even as more of Glen Major and adjacent Walker Woods are revealed on subsequent walks, the trails are becoming familiar, and I don’t always look at the maps to help choose a direction at a fork. Glen Major feels a bit like home, like these are my woods now. Feeling a connection to a place where one doesn’t have roots can be tricky. Some people go through their entire lives in an adopted city or town without truly feeling at home. As a Toronto émigré, like many others, it’s taken work to make this place home. Though I was born in Ontario, both my parents emigrated from elsewhere, so my people here only go back to the 1960s. And yet, I can’t fathom thinking of another place as home. Noticing when things change, and remembering what was, is a way into feeling at home. It could be as small an area as a single urban block. Change is just about the only constant in a city; shops come and go, as do the people running them and walking the sidewalks. That cozy familiarity is why change can also make people nervous, and there’s a lot of change in a city like Toronto. Article Continued Below The attachment many people had to Honest Ed’s is part of this. I never really understood the ferocity of the love: a big box store selling a lot of cheaply made items, albeit a quirky one, run by a benevolent family who seemed to have a genuine affection for the city. Though Ed’s didn’t define home to me, the creaks in the old wood floors were intimate ones to many people as were the byzantine passages between the buildings, and its sheer block-long size embedded its place in the emotional landscape of thousands of Torontonians, something that has to be respected even as the addition of rental apartments at a busy corner is a good thing. The ravines that snake their way through the GTA change much slower than the rest of the city, and they follow natural cycles. Repeated walks down a favourite trail in each of the four seasons can reveal a pattern that is comforting: things fall apart, but then they come back in the spring. They lend a sense of permanence and predictability to the city. It doesn’t take much knowledge of local history to create an attachment either. Up at Glen Major I’ve seen old aerial photos that show it used to be farmland, and have read that part of it used to be an old aggregate quarry that’s been re-naturalized. There’s also a nearby Canadian Pacific Railway line where a long-gone Glen Major Station once stood, a rural stop where passengers had to flag down the train. On walks I look for signs of all this, or imagine it. None of this is my personal history, but knowing it is a kind of respect for the place and that creates a connection. Finding home in Toronto remains a work in progress for me, and digging into the neglected, at least in my experience, First Nations history, is a part of this. I’ve only begun to scratch the surface of this deep history, but here are three relatively recent books that are helping. Overturning the notion that Toronto is merely a couple centuries old is Toronto: An Illustrated History of Its First 12,000 Years, detailing the full breadth of human history here. Another archeologically minded book, Before Ontario: The Archeology of a Province, does similar for the 15,000 years of human presence in the province. The third book is We Share Our Matters: Two Centuries of Writing and Resistance at Six Nations of the Grand River. Not exactly part of the GTA, it’s an important hinterland that is deeply connected to this city. Just three books of many others that help make this city and province richer and seem part of something much older than I was led to believe. Though not my history, or anyone I’m related to directly, learning it makes Toronto feel even more like home. Shawn Micallef writes every Saturday about where and how we live in the GTA. Wander the streets with him on Twitter @shawnmicallef |
SCR-270 SCR-270: Similar to the model that detected the attacking Pearl Harbor planes (the actual Opana antenna was nine dipoles high by four wide, instead of the eight-by-four configuration shown here). The scale for reading the direction the antenna is pointing to can be seen at the base. Country of origin United States Introduced 1940 Type 2D air-search Frequency 106 MHz PRF 621 Hz Pulsewidth 10 to 25 microseconds RPM 1 RPM Range 150 miles (240 km) Diameter 8 by 4 dipole array typical Azimuth 0-360° Precision 4 mi, 2 deg[1] Power 100 kW peak The SCR-270 (Signal Corps Radio model 270) was one of the first operational early-warning radars. It was the U.S. Army's primary long-distance radar throughout World War II and was deployed around the world. Its also known as the Pearl Harbor Radar, since it was an SCR-270 set that detected the incoming raid about 45 minutes before the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor commenced. Two versions were produced, the mobile SCR-270, and the fixed SCR-271 which used the same electronics but used an antenna with somewhat greater resolution. An upgraded version, the SCR-289, was also produced, but saw little use. The -270 versions were eventually replaced by newer microwave units based on cavity magnetron that was introduced to the US during the Tizard Mission. The only early warning system of the sort to see action in World War II was the AN/CPS-1, which was available in mid-1944, in time for D-day.[2] Building of the radar [ edit ] The Signal Corps had been experimenting with some radar concepts as early as the late 1920s, under the direction of Colonel William R. Blair, director of the Signal Corps Laboratories at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. Although the Army focused primarily on infra-red detection systems (a popular idea at the time), in 1935 work turned to radar again when one of Blair's recent arrivals, Roger B. Colton, convinced him to send another engineer to investigate the US Navy's CXAM radar project. William D. Hershberger went to see what they had, and returned a positive report. Gaining the support of James B. Allison, the Chief Signal Officer, they managed to gather a small amount of funding and diverted some from other projects. A research team was organized under the direction of civilian engineer Paul E. Watson. By December 1936 Watson's group had a working prototype, which they continued to improve. By May 1937 they were able to demonstrate the set, detecting a bomber at night. This demonstration turned out to be particularly convincing by mistake; the Martin B-10 bomber had originally been instructed to fly to a known point for the radar to find it, but could not be located at the agreed upon time. The radar operators then searched for the bomber and located it about ten miles (16 km) from its intended position. It was later learned that winds had blown the bomber off course, so what was to be a simple demonstration turned into an example of real-world radar location and tracking. Development of this system continued as the SCR-268, which eventually evolved into an excellent short-to-medium range gun laying system. In April 1937 a LtC. Davis, an officer in an Army Air Corps Pursuit Squadron in the Panama Canal Zone (CZ), sent a request for a "Means of Radio Detection of Aircraft" to the US Army's Chief Signal Officer (CSig.), bypassing normal channels of command. The SCR-268 was not really suited to this need, and after its demonstration in May they again received a request for a long-range unit, this time from "Hap" Arnold who wrote to them June 3, 1937. Shortly thereafter the Signal Corps became alarmed that their radar work was being observed by German spies, and moved development to Sandy Hook at Fort Hancock, the coast artillery defense site for Lower New York Bay. After the move, work immediately started on the Air Corps request for what was to become known (in 1940) as the "Radio Set SCR-270". Parts of the SCR-268 were diverted to this new project, delaying the completion of the -268. Deployment and Incomprehension [ edit ] [3] Non portable version: the SCR-271 at Camp Evans SCR-270 at Opana, Oahu, that detected the Japanese attack aircraft The non portable version, the SCR-271-A, s/n 1 was delivered to the Canal Zone and began operation in October 1940 at Fort Sherman on the Atlantic end of the Panama Canal. It picked up airliners at 117 miles (188 km) in its initial test run. The second set was set up on Fort Grant's Taboga Island on the Pacific end of the Canal by December 1940, thus giving radar coverage to the vitally important but vulnerable Panama Canal. Westinghouse quickly ramped up production, and produced 100 by the end of 1941. Operators of sets that were sent to the Panama canal, the Philippines, Hawaii and other strategic locations were all gathered for an air defense school at Mitchel Field, New York in April 1941. The school was the culmination of efforts begun in 1940, when the War Department created the Air Defense Command headed by Brig. Gen. James E. Chaney.[4] Chaney was tasked by Hap Arnold to collect all information on the British air defense system and transfer the knowledge as quickly as possible to the US military. Air Marshal Dowding, one of the designers of the Ground-controlled interception (GCI) air defense system used during the Battle of Britain, was at the school and discussed with the American generals the design and urgency of establishing the Hawaiian system, in particular emphasizing the need for thorough radar site coverage along the coasts.[5] Despite the high level attention and the excellence of the school in training on the use of the SCR-270 and its integration and coordination with fighter intercepts, the army did not follow through on supporting the junior officers who were trained at this session. Air defense required direct control of assets spread out over disparate units; anti aircraft guns, radars, and interceptor aircraft were not under a unified command. This had been one of the primary problems identified by Robert Watson-Watt prior to the war, when a demonstration of an early radar system had gone comically wrong even though the radar system itself had worked perfectly. Dowding was well aware of the importance of a unified command, but this knowledge did not result in changes within the U.S. Army structure. SCR-270 radars on Hawaii prior to the Pearl Harbor attack [ edit ] Army Major Kenneth Bergquist returned to Hawaii after attending the Mitchel Field school intending to set up a coordinated system, but when he arrived he found the local Army leadership was uninterested in the system, and he was reassigned to his former fighter unit. Only when incomprehensible equipment began appearing did the army return Bergquist from his fighter unit and tell him his job was to assemble the equipment when it arrived. The commander in charge of defending Hawaii, General Walter Short, had a faint grasp of the weapons and tactics that Army technologists (led by Hap Arnold) were aggressively pushing them to adopt. Except in rare cases, there was little interest in assisting or even cooperating with the goal of setting up the air defense system. On his own initiative, Bergquist along with some other motivated junior officers built a makeshift control center without authorization, and only by scrounging. The first SR-270's became functional in July 1941 and, by November, Bergquist had only assembled a small team, but they were able to build a ring of four SCR-270-B's around Oahu, with one unit in reserve. The radars were placed on the central north shore (Haleiwa), Opana Point (northern tip), in the northwest at the highest point- Mount Kaala, and one in the southeast corner at Koko Head. However, initially was no real communications system or reporting chain set up. At one point the operators of one of the sets were instructed to phone in reports from a gas station some distance away. Although communications were eventually improved, the chain of command was not. And by explicit order of General Short, the radar stations were to only be operated for four hours per day and to shut down by 7am each day. The one operational radar set in the Philippines, by contrast, was put on continuous watch in three shifts in response to the war warning sent to all overseas commands in late November.[6] Use on the morning of the Pearl Harbor attack [ edit ] Plot made early on December 7, 1941 by SCR-270 operators at Opana SCR-270 serial number 012 was installed at Opana Point, Hawaii on the morning of December 7, 1941, manned by two privates, George Elliot and Joseph Lockard. Though the set was supposed to shut down at 7 that morning, the soldiers decided to get additional training time since the truck scheduled to take them to breakfast was late. At 7:02 they detected aircraft approaching Oahu at a distance of 130 miles (210 km) and Lockard telephoned the information center at Fort Shafter and reported "Large number of planes coming in from the north, three points east". The operator taking his report passed on the information repeating that the operator emphasized he had never seen anything like it, and it was "an awful big flight." SCR-270 display showing Japanese planes approaching Oahu on December 7, 1941 The report was passed on to an inexperienced and incompletely trained officer, Kermit Tyler, who had arrived only a week earlier. He thought they had detected a flight of B-17s arriving that morning from the US. There were only six B-17s in the group, so this could not account for the large size of the radar echo. The officer had little grasp of the technology, the radar operators were unaware of the B-17 flight (nor its size), and the B-17's had no IFF (Identification friend or foe) system, nor any alternative procedure for identifying distant friendlies such as the British had developed during the Battle of Britain. The Japanese aircraft they detected attacked Pearl Harbor 55 minutes later, precipitating the United States' formal entry into World War II. The northerly bearing of the inbound flight was not passed along in time to be of use.[7] The US fleet instead fruitlessly searched to the southwest of Hawaii, believing the attack to have been launched from that direction. In retrospect this may have been fortuitous, since they might have met the same fate as the ships in Pearl Harbor had they attempted to engage the superior Japanese carrier fleet, with potentially enormous casualties. Aftermath [ edit ] The radars on Oahu were put on round-the-clock operation immediately after the attack.[7] After the Japanese attack, the RAF agreed to send Watson-Watt to the United States to advise the military on air defense technology. In particular Watson-Watt directed attention to the general lack of understanding at all levels of command of the capabilities of radar- with it often being regarded as a freak gadget "producing snap observations on targets which may or may not be aircraft." General Gordon P. Saville, director of Air Defense at the Army Air Force headquarters referred to the Watson-Watt report as "a damning indictment of our whole warning service". Use of SCR-270 radar elsewhere in World War II [ edit ] In the Philippines, the Far East Air Force did not fare much better than the defending air force at Pearl Harbor. Though FEAF had five SR-270Bs, only two were functioning on 8 December 1941, one by a detachment of the 4th Marine Regiment to protect Cavite Naval Base. On 29 November, in response to the war warning sent to all overseas commands, the radar detachment went on continuous watch in three shifts.[8] Even with correct detection of enemy flights from the AAF's operational radar at Iba, command disorganization resulted in many of the defending fighters in the Philippines being also caught on the ground and destroyed, as was the largest concentration of B-17's (19) outside of the continental US.[1] The Iba set was destroyed in the initial attack on Iba on 8 December. After the first day, the effective striking power of the Far East Air Force had been destroyed, and the fighter strength seriously reduced. The Marine unit was withdrawn to Bataan in January 1942, where it was successfully employed in conjunction with an SCR-268 antiaircraft gun-laying radar to provide air warning to a small detachment of P-40s operating from primitive fields. Key commanders responsible for the defense of installations vulnerable to air attack did not appreciate the need for and capabilities of the air defense assets they had, and how vital radar was to those defenses. The vulnerability was well demonstrated in war games- in particular those of United States Navy Fleet Problem IX that annihilated the locks on the Panama canal, and Fleet Problem XIII, when the Pearl Harbor fleet was destroyed in a mock attack by 150 planes in 1932.[2] At Midway Island in June 1942, an SCR-270 antenna and shack [3] were located at the western end of Sand Island [4]. During the Battle of Midway, this radar was used to warn the island of incoming Japanese air attacks [5] and to successfully direct the fighter interception that followed, but the island's radar did not play any significant part in the main carrier-action portion of the battle that followed. Technical description [ edit ] SCR-270 operations van components Key to the SCR-270's operation was the primary water-cooled 8 kW continuous/100 kW pulsed transmitting tube. Early examples were hand-built, but a contract was let to Westinghouse in October 1938 to provide production versions under the Westinghouse designation "WL-530" and the Signal Corps type number "VT-122". A pair of these arrived in January 1939, and were incorporated into the first SCR-270 in time to be used in the Army's maneuvers that summer. Several improved components followed as the Army offered additional contracts for eventual production. The original -270 consisted of a four-vehicle package including a K-30 operations van for the radio equipment and oscilloscope, a K-31 gasoline-fueled power-generating truck, a K-22B flatbed trailer, and a K-32 prime mover. The antenna folding mount was derived from a well-drilling derrick, and was mounted on the trailer for movement. When opened it was 55 feet (17 m) tall, mounted on an 8-foot (2.4 m) wide base containing motors for rotating the antenna. The antenna itself consisted of a series of 36 half wave dipoles backed with reflectors, arranged in three bays, each bay with twelve dipoles arranged in a three-high four-wide stack. (Later production versions of the SCR-270 used 32 dipoles and reflectors, either eight wide by four high (fixed) or four wide by eight high (mobile)). In use, the antenna was swung (rotated) by command from the operations van, the azimuth angle being read by observing with binoculars the numbers painted on the antenna turntable. The maximum rotation rate was one revolution per minute. The radar operated at 106 MHz, using a pulse width from 10 to 25 microseconds, and a pulse repetition frequency of 621 Hz. With a wavelength of about 3 meters (nine feet), the SRC-270 was comparable to the contemporary Chain Home system being developed in England, but not to the more advanced UHF Würzburg radars being developed in Germany. This wavelength did turn out to be useful, as it is roughly the size of an airplane's propeller, and provided strong returns from them depending on the angle. Generally it had an operational range of about 150 miles (240 km), and consistently picked up aircraft at that range. A nine-man field operating crew consisted of a shift chief, two oscilloscope operators, two plotters, two technicians, and two electricians. The declassified US military document "U.S. Radar -- Operational Characteristics of Available Equipment Classified by Tactical Application" gives performance statistics for the SCR-270-D, namely "maximum range on a single bomber flying at indicated heights, when set is on a flat sea level site": Maximum range at indicated height of aircraft Altitude 1,000 ft (300 m) 5,000 ft (1,500 m) 20,000 ft (6,100 m) 25,000 ft (7,600 m) Range 20 mi (32 km) 50 mi (80 km) 100 mi (160 km) 110 mi (180 km) Components [ edit ] Components of the SCR-270 system included the following:[9] Transmitter BC-785 [ edit ] The transmitter used dual WL530 water-cooled triodes configured as a high power push-pull resonant-line oscillator.[10] The grids of the WL530s were connected to the keyer output which provided a high negative bias voltage that was interrupted by 621 Hz pulses which drove the WL530s’ grids to conduction, thereby allowing a pulse of RF to be produced. The transmission line to the antenna was connected to taps on the filament resonant lines. Keyer BC-738 [ edit ] As described above, the keyer/modulator produced a grid bias voltage for the transmitter tubes that keeps them in cutoff except for brief positive pulses the keyer produces 621 times a second, The 621 HZ frequency is derived either from an internal oscillator or an external source, typically the oscilloscope. The keyed output stages consisted of two 450TH power triodes in series, with the final stage configured as a cathode follower. Receiver BC-404 [ edit ] The receiver is a superheterodyne design, with a high-power 832 dual tetrode as its first RF amplifier and a RCA 1630 orbital-beam hexode electron-multiplier amplifier tube[11] as the second RF amplifier stage. The local oscillator included a front panel tuning adjustment. The receiver sensitivity control was remotely located on the oscilloscope. The two RF and four 20 MHz IF amplifier stages could produce enough gain to fill the oscilloscope display screen with noise.:106 Transmit-receive (TR) switch [ edit ] BC-403-C oscilloscope A key innovation in the SCR-270 was a transmit-receive (TR) switch. The SCR-268 searchlight control radar, which shared much technology with the SCR-270, used separate antennas for transmit and receive, For maximum antenna gain at a given size it is desirable to use the same antenna for both functions. One obstacle is the need to protect the receiver from the high power pulses produced by the transmitter. This was solved by placing a spark gap across a “trombone” tuned section of transmission line. The high-voltage power pulses would create a spark, short circuiting the line and creating a resonant stub that prevented most of the pulse energy from reaching the receiver. Oscilloscope display BC-403 [ edit ] The oscilloscope (A-scope) display employed a five-inch diameter 5BP4 cathode ray tube, the same type used in the first commercial RCA television set, the TRK-5, introduced in 1939. The sweep was normally generated from an internal 621 Hz oscillator that also drove the keyer, but an external source could be used. The sweep signal passed through a calibrated phase shifter controlled by a large hand wheel on the front panel. The delay between the transmitted and received pulses could be measured accurately by placing the transmit pulse under a hairline on the screen and then adjusting the hand wheel so that the received pulse was under the line. High Voltage rectifier RA60-A [ edit ] Two high power WL-531 rectifier tubes provided adjustable plate voltage, up to 15 kV at 0.5 A, to the transmitter. Because of pulsed nature of the transmitter, the small amount of filtration was needed. Water cooler RU-4A [ edit ] The RU-4 circulated triple-distilled cooling water through the WL530 high power triodes and cooled the return water with a blower. Triple-distilled water was used to minimize leakage current from the high voltage on the tubes’ anodes. Antenna control unit BC-1011 [ edit ] Later units incorporated an antenna steering control system that could sweep a sector repetitively. Still later systems added additional controls to rotate the antenna at 5 RPM for use with a plan position indicator, like modern radars. Generator [ edit ] The generator was driven by a LeRoi gasoline engine and could produce 15 KVA of electric power. Preservation [ edit ] After its use by the military, the Pearl Harbor unit (s/n 012) was loaned to the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon (along with a second unit to the National Research Council in Ottawa), who, unaware of its history, used it to image aurora for the first time in 1949. The technique was published in 1950 in Nature, and was a field of active research for some time. In 1990, after the radar had sat derelict for years, they received a phone call informing them of the historical nature of the radar, and requesting it be sent back to the US for preservation. It is now located at the National Electronics Museum near Baltimore.[12] See also [ edit ] References [ edit ] TM 11-1510, 11-1570, 11-1033, 11-1100, 11-1114, 11-1310, 11-1370, 11-1410, 11-1470 FM 11-25 SNL G703, antenna trailers, K-22, K-64, SNL G511, truck/van K-30, K-31, K-62 The SCR-268 RADAR, Electronics magazine, September 1945. A detailed description of a closely related radar. Bartsch, William H. (2003). December 8, 1941: MacArthur's Pearl Harbor. Texas A&M University Press. ISBN 1-58544-246-1. 1942 view of an SCR-271 at the [Radar Installation and Maintenance School at Camp Evans] http://www.campevans.org/history/radar/wwii-radar-array-scr-270-and-scr-271-cs-2005-12-08l, Wall, NJ |
In the past decade, Peter Walker has seen a fundamental change in London, the city in which he lives. In that time, Walker, a writer for The Guardian who has for years penned the paper’s popular bike blog, says people on bikes have gone from a marginal place on the city’s streets (he says he was once viewed as a “bit of an oddball” for using his bike to get around the city) to one that’s clearly in the mainstream — during peak hours on some London roads, cyclists are now the most common road user. Despite that, he says cycling has not moved into mainstream consciousness like it has in the world’s great cycling cities, such as Copenhagen or Amsterdam. And now, after a bike-infrastructure building boom under former mayor Boris Johnson, Walker fears the entire movement has stalled. Part of that fear is what drove him to write How Cycling Can Save the World, his new title that reads like a book-length argument in favour of two-wheeled urban transportation. Covering aspects as diverse as health and safety to equality, the book lays out, in rational and precise terms, all the benefits that cycling brings to society. And they are myriad. The title of the book is not an exaggeration. I chatted with Walker from his flat in London. Here are some of the aspects of our conversation that struck me. Health It’s a bit of a no-brainer, but the health benefits of cycling are sometimes forgotten in the battles with motorists over road space. In detailing some of those astonishing benefits, Walker makes a pretty good case that your doctor might be well advised to prescribe a bike commute after your next physical. A scheme to encourage people to ride in the small Danish city of Odense, Denmark, for example, added five months to the life of the average citizen. Another study of Danes found those who rode a bike to work were 40 per cent less likely to die during the study. Other studies have found that countries with the highest rates of cycling have the lowest rates of obesity, and even that simply riding a bike leads people to more healthy diets. “If there’s any one factor that will get cyclists riding more and more . . . it’s that developed nations are facing this public-health crisis from people living these sedentary lives,” Walker told me. “People in public health service are completely frank: if more is not done to encourage active transportation, the public health system will collapse.” Suburban options Much has been made over the years about the importance of distance in encouraging people to ride bikes. A five-kilometre ride to work or the supermarket is certainly more palatable to many people than what we see in most North American cities, where suburban growth patterns have stretched those distances to sometimes absurd lengths. Walker, however, sees ways to bridge those distances. The proliferation of e-bikes in Europe and China may be a precursor to their popularization in the U.K. and North America as a way of more easily spanning longer distances. “With the Dutch, it’s something like a third of bikes sold new are e-bikes, it’s something that’s definitely going to come,” he said. He’s also seen success with cycling “highways,” in which well-built, direct bike routes are extended out to suburbs. Cargo bikes are also making inroads as practical suburban transportation options, particularly for those hauling kids to school every day. There is also much success when transit systems are mixed with bike-sharing programs, the latter relied upon by people to cover the distance to and from the bus or train. “The really been an explosion of Chinese bike-sharing schemes … and having these bike share systems, such that people can pick up a (bike) to a metro stop and finish their trip, are really working,” he said. “There are all these ways that the bike can work with other forms of transportation.” Happiness Bikes make people happier. This isn’t just your annoying bike-riding co-worker crowing about being energized after a morning ride. There’s science behind it. Walker devotes an entire chapter to the ways in which cycling increases happiness, most of it related to the well-documented mental-health benefits of regular exercise, particularly when that exercise is simply part of getting around every day. Most inspiringly, Walker dives into an Italian study that examined the lives of people, between the ages of 52 and 84, who rode several times a week. All were in great physical shape, seemingly years younger than their non-bike-riding peers, and seemed giddy about the mental-health benefits of such exercise. “It makes you feel good, both mentally and physically,” reported one 61-year-old in the study. “It is no small thing, to feel well with oneself.” The stigma It ain’t all roses. Walker doesn’t shy away from the negative bits associated with cycling, especially around the corrosive political discourse that still pervades the conversation in the U.K. and North America. Walker pushes this argument farther than I’ve seen before, detailing how the stereotyping of cyclists has serious negative consequences. While he stops short of drawing parallels between the insidiousness of racism or sexism and the way cyclists are treated, he’s clear that he thinks it comes from the same space. “I compare to really old-fashioned things, like making jokes about vegetarians or mothers-in-law,” he says. “It just feels a bit dated.” What’s worse, Walker quotes studies that draw links between negative portrayals of cyclists in the media and public discourse and increased danger to cyclists on the roads. It’s not a difficult mental leap to make — if drivers are pummelled with negative images of people on bikes, they are less likely to treat them with respect on the road. It’s a serious problem that needs to be overcome if cycling is to become accepted as a rational, everyday form of transportation. The future With so much talk about the future of urban transportation, particularly around the looming disruption of autonomous vehicles, Walker also has a rather optimistic view of the future. While’s he’s as skeptical as the next bike blogger (ahem) about the ways self-driving cars will impact the bike environment in cities, he’s looking at the bigger picture. “Anyone who tries to predict what cities will look like in 50 years is wrong,” he said. “People are very keen to live in a place that’s seen as liveable. Even if they are electric cars, and they’re autonomous, they’ll still have an impact on the livability of cities.” As far as the future goes, I’m keen to align with Walker’s vision of a future in which scores of people assess their lives and make a decision to ride a bike for the same reasons he does: “I live in this very congested city where getting around is quite tricky,” he said. “When I get on a bike I know I will arrive within a few minutes of when I expected, with a smile on my face.” Also published on Medium. |
The Bucks have have only 16 national TV games and a budding superstar in Giannis Antetokounmpo. Fans will be dying to see more of him soon. Add in the youth and potential on the roster and there is a lot to be excited about with this team. Everybody is excited to see the culmination 76ers' Process. Joel Embiid looked like a future face of the league last season. They have the past two overall No. 1 picks (Markelle Fultz, Ben Simmons), and they signed veterans (J.J. Redick, Amir Johnson) to help them win. Philly could make a playoff run in the weak East (SportsLine projects 40.2 wins, good for the No. 7 seed). It's hard to go wrong with Anthony Davis and DeMarcus Cousins. The Pelicans could be good, but even if they're not there's always the potential for something combustible. They're only on national TV 14 times, so they're well worth the time and money. No matter what happens with the Pelicans, it will be interesting. The Nuggets are interesting, with a prolific offense featuring Nikola Jokic. Add youngsters Jamal Murray and Gary Harris to veteran free agent signee Paul Millsap, and it only gets better. Denver will be entertaining, and a factor in the race for a postseason spot in the competitive West (SportsLine projects the seventh seed with 41.7 wins). Minnesota disappointed last season, but pairing Jimmy Butler (through a trade) with Karl-Anthony Towns should make the Wolves should be pretty good this season (SportsLine projects MIN as the No. 5 West seed, wiith 46.6 wins). There's also a fascinating narrative questioning Andrew Wiggins' value. This will be one of the more entertaining teams to follow. The Blazers have Damian Lillard, C.J. McCollum and added Jusuf Nurkic last season. Their defense was a train wreck, but the offense always has been a blast. They've dug themselves out of early season holes two seasons in a row. If they stumble early will they be able to do it again (SportsLine projects Portland at No. 9 in the West, at 39.2 wins)? They're on national TV 21 times. They came within one win of reaching the Eastern Conference finals last season and John Wall looked like an MVP candidate. They rely on the strong core of Wall, Bradley Beal, and Marcin Gortat. Despite regular national TV appearances, Washington is always worth watching. The Kings are young enough to be interesting and added enough veterans (George Hill, Zach Randolph, Vince Carter) to stay competitive. They have an excellent coach in Dave Joerger, who keeps them competitive most nights. Sacramento is one of the best late-night League Pass options. The Raptors re-signed Kyle Lowry and Serge Ibaka to run this whole thing back. In the weak East, there's never been a better chance to grab the one seed. However, the Raptors can't afford to take a step back after passing on the chance to hit the reset button. All that makes them compelling. The Rockets break the national TV rule with 40 games, but there is just too much going on here to skip over Houston. Chris Paul, James Harden, Mike D'Antoni, and they've been central to Carmelo Anthony trade rumors. This figures to result in the one of the great offenses or a colossal failure. The Thunder also are too compelling to fall further down the list. Russell Westbrook and newly acquired Paul George can opt out of their contracts next summer. No team us under more pressure to achieve immediate results. Westbrook alone was worth the LP experience last season. Adding George makes this group OK-must see. The Hornets are usually drama free, but Dwight Howard changes that. Charlotte took a risk on a player who has been known to blow everything up when he's unhappy. If it works out, the Hornets could reach new heights. They shoot a lot of 3-pointers, play great defense, and Kemba Walker is a blast. There were two versions of the Heat last season -- one red hot and the other ... not so much after Dion Waiters was lost to injury. They should be competing for a playoff spot. With only 10 national TV games they're worth a look. The Jazz lost Gordon Hayward, but added some nice pieces. They traded for Ricky Rubio and drafted Donovan Mitchell. It will be interesting to see just how much they miss Hayward, and if Rudy Gobert can help lead them back into the playoffs. They're only on national TV 10 times. The Celtics added Hayward and Isaiah Thomas is in a contract year. Boston again will contend for the one seed in the East (SportsLine projections: 53.7 wins, 2 seed). The Celtics on national TV a lot (25 times!), but they figure to be one of the league's more compelling teams most every night with Hayward looking to prove himself and Thomas looking to get paid. The Nets were awful last season, but they were fun for a bad team. Nobody played faster and they chucked 3-pointers. Now, they've added D'Angelo Russell, Allen Crabbe and DeMarre Carroll. Brooklyn may have a playoff shot, but even if it comes up short, their style alone should be worth a watch. Their two national TV games are on NBA TV, making them LP-friendly. The Suns haven't decided if they're going to rebuild or go after Kyrie Irving, but they've got enough young pieces to stay interesting. Devin Booker scored 70 points in a game at Boston last season and Josh Jackson is a rookie everybody is excited to see. The champs have 43 national TV games, which means more than half their games aren't available on League Pass. However, their playing style makes them worth watching when they are on. The games often are blowouts, but that two- to five-minute stint of domination is worth it every time. The Cavaliers are a hard sell. LeBron James makes them LP-friendly, but fans have no idea which Cavs team they'll get. Are they actually going to put forth an effort, or just cruise? They're on national TV 39 times, so there is no shortage of chances to see them -- League Pass or not. The Lakers are young, and play a fun style. Is this the season they take a step forward? Probably not, but there's enough young talent (Lonzo Ball!) on this roster to make them watchable -- and you can see them plenty; L.A. is on national TV 35 times. The Spurs are always ultra-efficient and Kawhi Leonard always swallows somebody up on defense. And San Antonio is always scare bood, but unless they're in a race at the end of the season they typically rest players by February. Not only that, they're on national TV 32 times. The Clippers are going to be incredibly painful to watch. They already shot a lot of free throws, but with the addition of Danilo Gallinari they may shoot more. Some nights, the Clips will remind everyone of Lob City. But in between those dunks with be a whole lot of free throws. Watch something else. Catch the highlights later or see them in one of their 31 national TV games. Grit n Grind may be gone with Randolph's departure, but are they going to continue their slow-paced style or will head in a new direction with youth and 3-point shooting? David Fizdale took steps toward the latter last season, but at this point the Grizzlies can't be trusted with your League Pass dollars. The Knicks figure to be a hilarious off the court like always. However, when contemplating the best use of your LP dollars, the basketball part won't be worth watching. Not even Kristaps Porzingis can make them entertaining. The Mavericks have fun moments, but they played the second-slowest pace in the NBA last season and their watchable moments lean heavilly on Dirk Nowitzki summoning a vintage performance. It's worth catching a Mavs game every once in awhile, but they aren't appointment viewing. The Pistons were incredibly disappointing last season. Turning that around rests on Andre Drummond and Reggie Jackson having bounce-back seasons with help from Avery Bradley -- acquired in a trade with Boston. Easier said than won. Don't bother until the Pistons prove something. The Pacers were perfectly average last season, but now their best part Myles Turner. As fun as it is to watch Turner work, there are just too many questions to recommend ponying up for Indy. They didn't play a particuarly fun style last season, and there's little reason to believe Victor Oladipo or Domantas Sabonis will change that. Few teams have been less compelling the past few seasons than the Magic. They may have exciting youngsters like Jonathan Isaac on the roster, but there is no reason to believe in Orlando right now. They have no 3-point shooting, too many centers, and their style of play is just brutal. The Bulls traded their most entertaining player in Butler. The main prize of that trade, Zach Lavine, may miss the beginning of the season with an injury. Dwyane Wade is seeking a buyout. Rajon Rondo is gone. Don't pay extra to watch the Bulls -- if you watch them at all. |
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets opened this weekend with (as of this writing) a $17 million Fri-Sun frame. That's relatively lousy and immediately puts it in the company of the likes of King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, Jupiter Ascending, Pan, John Carter, Battleship and 47 Ronin as a very expensive movie ($150m after rebates) that couldn't remotely pull its weight in North America. Now Luc Besson movies tend to do very well overseas, and prior to Lucy the director never had a movie earn more than $64m domestic. Back when overseas blow-outs were less common, The Fifth Element earned just $63.8 million in North America and another $200m overseas, making it a relative hit at $90m budget. But it's a domestic miss, even if A) 90% of the film's production budget was covered via foreign pre-sales, B) it's STX Entertainment's second-biggest debut and C) STX was only on the hook for a few million bucks as this is a straight EuropaCorp distribution deal. Yes, STX may well make money from the Cara Delevingne/Dane Dehaan film, but unless it goes nuts overseas various investors will lose money, which will make it that much harder to fund the next Valerian. With the caveat that STX did what they could (plentiful marketing, solid trailers, an early drop for the review embargo, etc.), the film was arguably doomed by its release date. I wrote back in November that Valerian if it were good, should take the August 4th slot vacated by Fox's Alien: Covenant and I stand by that. Yes, Sony eventually took that slot for The Dark Tower, but I still maintain that Valerian would have been better served by that date. Here are three reasons why... 1. It would have positioned Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets as the last big movie of the summer. As you know, going last can have its advantages, as August tends to be a leggy month as summer dies out and becomes Fall and kids slowly go back to school. As we've seen with The Fugitive, The Sixth Sense, Guardians of the Galaxy and Suicide Squad, being the last biggie of the season can allow you to more-or-less be the only game in town. Now The Dark Tower (which cost a third of what Valerian did and looks it) gets to be that offering. 2. It would have gotten the film away from SDCC. While the San Diego Comic Convention isn't necessarily the all-consuming thing the media would have you believe, there were many folks who were in San Diego this weekend who otherwise might have taken in a paid showing of Valerian. Moreover, the media was dominated this weekend by the various SDCC-related news bites and trailer drops, which meant a sci-fi release like Valerian was going to get lost in the shuffle. Going out this weekend was a self-inflicted wound in terms of maximizing the opening weekend even if it weren't the same weekend as Chris Nolan's Dunkirk. But that was the real problem since Dunkirk essentially stole Valerian's thunder in almost every way. 3. Dunkirk stole all of Valerian's talking points. What were the selling points for Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets? It was from a noted visionary filmmaker. It offered something that audiences hadn't seen before. It offered a unique cinematic experience explicitly served by seeing it on the biggest movie screen possible. It was a break from franchise reboots, revamps and sequels, offering a story that wasn't necessarily original but was a new-to-cinema adventure. Now, pop quiz hotshot, am I talking about Valerian or am I talking about Dunkirk? Dunkirk not only monopolized all of the IMAX screens and most of the Premium Large Format auditoriums but also the "You must see this movie on a giant movie screen!" narrative. The run up to release was filled with posts about Chris Nolan, not Luc Besson. We got tons of articles about the right way to see Dunkirk, but few on the right way to see Valerian (in 3D, in the biggest auditorium you could find). Dunkirk got to be "the one you've been waiting for," a break from sequels and reboots, and something that demanded to be seen on the big screen. Absent great reviews (they were mixed-positive) and absent movie stars, Valerian's trump cards were all variables that also applied to the well-reviewed, more accessible and more-publicized Dunkirk. Epilogue Now that's not to say that Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets would have opened at $40 million had it debuted on Aug. 4, 2017. It still may well have lost out on the IMAX screens and the PLF theaters to a still relatively "new" Dunkirk, and the whole "no movie stars" (Rihanna fans didn't show up the way Harry Styles fans did) and "obscure source material" thing still would have been a handicap. But opening away from the Chris Nolan war drama would have allowed Valerian to stake its claim in terms of what it had to offer as the summer wound down. I mostly enjoyed Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets and I sincerely hope that it kicks butt overseas (C'mon, China, pull another Billy Lynn and show you have better taste than we do). Moreover, I hope that folks who would enjoy seeing it in theaters make time to do so. You'll regret waiting for VOD on this one. Dunkirk is a fine movie and I'm thrilled for its success, and that presumably goes double for Girls Trip (my wife loved it and I'm going to try to catch it tomorrow). But I will still mourn the gorgeous and uncommonly optimistic sci-fi fantasy adventure that got lost in the shuffle. I was right when I argued that Valerian should have opened in early August. I really do wish I was wrong. |
He hated the Pope, smeared Mother Teresa viciously. He even published a book four years ago defending his militant atheism called God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. Then Christopher Hitchens debated around the world on that very topic. Then he co-wrote and edited a book about the debates. In between those two books, there was a third one, about the war in Iraq and his support of it - which had caused him to break with many of the friends of his youth. All in all, Christopher Hitchens wrote 17 books, including his collected essays, Arguably, which was re-issued this year. He was 61. I believe Hitchens' good deeds -- and if Hitchens was right, the only thing left of him now are his deeds -- more than compensated for his militant atheism and his occasional bad manners. Usually he was bitingly funny, even coruscating. Sometimes he was a good deal more than that. Perhaps the best defense might be to say with Walt Whitman in Leaves of Grass: Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. (I am large, I contain multitudes.) First, there was the man's work ethic, already mentioned above. In fact, the book total doesn't do full justice to Christopher Hitchens' output. He was, for many years, a working journalist too. And a weekly columnist. After his move to the United States in 1981 -- and especially after the emergence of cable -- Hitchens also became a TV regular. Then there's the quality of his stuff. Christopher Hitchens was, in the best sense, a public intellectual -- but he was also un homme engage. Hitchens took part in the public controversies of his time. As an occasional foreign correspondent, he also went out and got himself shot at. On his last trip to Beirut, he nearly got kidnapped and probably tortured and killed. At the height of the Bill Clinton impeachment investigation, Christopher Hitchens wrote and walked into the offices of the House Judiciary Committee an evidentiary affidavit supporting the President's impeachment. After that was all over, of course, he wrote a book about it. The title? No One Left to Lie to: the Values of the Worst Family. Now that Chelsea Clinton has made her debut on network television, you might want to get it out again and re-read it. One might say the man thought, read, talked, acted, thought and wrote. In that order -- usually while drinking and smoking. Unsurprisingly, therefore, Christopher Hitchens didn't blink at the idea of turning his own final illness into clear, cool prose. As such, rather than Joan Didion's two recent books chronicling, in effect, two deaths (those of her husband and her adult daughter) observed, Hitchens gives us a chronicle of his own death, observed. The precedent, I suppose, is Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy. It was written while that sixth-century Roman politician was in jail, awaiting execution. At the high mid-point of his career, Christopher Hitchens suddenly found himself in a similar situation. His deeply-moving last essay in the current issue of Vanity Fair has been widely discussed - especially after Hitchens' weekly column for Slate failed to appear last week. It offers an unflinching look at how his spiritual and emotional experience of intense suffering with terminal cancer has disproved the truth of Nietzsche's philosophy. VF was the venue for Christopher Hitchens' serious journalism for many years, while the books poured forth. His political stuff appeared in the Nation, for Hitchens - son of a British WW II --naval officer -- was also a man of the left from his Oxford University days. He began as a soixante-huitard. By the '70's, he was a full-blown Trotskyite. Along the way he accumulated many arrests. This pattern continued after Hitchens set off as a foreign correspondent to report on fascism in Spain, Portugal and Greece. Hitch's political odyssey -- carried out in public -- was the third thing I admired. He thought and experienced his way to what I view as the valid side of many important public issues. And he carried more than a few people with him. The course of his personal life may have influenced him too. By the time of the Clinton impeachment, Hitchens had been living and working in the States for many years. He had also married an American and started a second family with her. Fourth, of course, was the fascinating Hitchens family itself. Christopher Hitchens' brother, Peter, is a columnist for London's Daily Mail . He's likewise a writer of several political books. The Abolition of Britain is probably the best known in this country. Enduring public school together, the two brothers thereafter parted political company. Peter is a practicing Anglican and a man of the right. Indeed, Peter Hitchens is to the right of the British Conservative Party, especially as embodied in the current Prime Minister, David Cameron -- whom he reviles, regularly, on Sundays. Thus, as some have remarked, there are actually two Hitches. And as I say, neither of them pull their punches. The Hitchens' boys were a nest of stinging birds. After his mother's suicide (in the midst of a family scandal which she caused), Hitchens discovered that his mother had been Jewish. That revelation -- and the break with the Clintons and their allies -- started him on a course of self-examination. The ultimate result was the autobiography. Next, Christopher Hitchens was -- like his brother -- a polemicist. He loved a good fight, especially a public controversy. This, in some ways, made Hitchens akin to an earlier controversialist and journalist, H.L. Mencken -- although Hitchens' range was not so broad. It was of Mencken that Walter Lippman, wrote: "[he] is splendidly and exultantly and contagiously alive. He calls you a swine and an imbecile and it increases your will to live." Christopher Hitchens appears to have had that effect on many of his targets too. Although certainly not Holy Mother Church or the Clintons (what an odd pairing!). Or the Islamists. Not to mention the Dali Lama. Finally, and perhaps most shockingly in a former Trotskyite (although, of course, one remembers Whittaker Chambers), Hitchens came to realize that he loved the United States. After we were attacked on 9/11, he became an American citizen. Hitchens also took up the ideological cudgels against the anti-American left. He joined another British émigré who was making a spiritual and political journey -- Andrew Sullivan -- in supporting the American military response to 9/11. In doing so, he was forced by his former comrades-in-arms on the left -- such as Gore Vidal, who used to call Hitchens "my Dauphin" -- to choose a side. Hitchens did. Ours -- mostly. Like Michael Kelly -- the Atlantic Magazine editor-in-chief and brilliant columnist who became the first American war correspondent killed in action in Iraq -- Christopher Hitchens believed that regimes who subjected their peoples to living life with their "face under a boot" were worthy targets for American power. He left the Nation. It was while on tour in 2010 promoting his autobiography, Hitch-22, that Hitchens first learned he had the most severe form of esophagal cancer. It was a death sentence and he knew it. Hitchens' own father had died of the same thing. Hitchens publicly vowed to be true to his atheism. A public appeal by his old friend and sometime partner in crime and debauchery, the author Martin Amis, that Hitchens reconsider and become an agnostic went, so far as been reported, unanswered. Instead, Hitchens said to an interviewer that if, after his death, it's reported that the militant atheist Christopher Hitchens experienced a deathbed conversion -- a la Brideshead Revisited -- we are to know that his mind gave way at the end. I am not one of those who take an interest in a man's last moments. And anyway, of the dead, said the ancient Romans, say nothing but good. Hitchens was a proud bohemian, who loved his booze and cigarettes. They, and his genetic inheritance, killed him too. Nevertheless, one item about Christopher Hitchens which made the blogs must be told here. I thought of it when I first learned of Hitchens' cancer diagnosis in 2010. During his 2007 book tour for God Is Not Great, a confrontation occurred between Christopher Hitchens and Fr. George Rutler at the Union League of New York. There were a lot of witnesses and the whole thing was later never really denied by Hitchens. Fr. Rutler is an Oxford graduate himself -- and no coward. He was with Fr. Michal Judge at Ground Zero. Under verbal attack by Hitchens but still urging his conversion, George Rutler told Hitchens that "he would either die a Catholic or a madman..." It's an ugly story, one which even the fact that there appears to have been drink taken (by Hitchens) can't excuse. So, there you have the militant atheist in full flower. I guess if you can't get by that, you're stuck -- if you want to follow that old Roman maxim -- with saying about Christopher Hitchens that, like the Thane of Cawdor in Macbeth, "nothing in his life became him like the leaving it." But if you do, you'll have missed my point. Nothing so became Christopher Hitchens as his life. And his life was writing and reading and talking and arguing. To borrow the epitaph of another Christopher - Sir Christopher Wren, architect of London's St. Paul's Cathedral: for the man whose friends called him Hitch, "if you wish to see his monument, look around you." It'll be in all the bookstores - or on You Tube. Fitting indeed that Christopher Hitchens' death came on the day America's war in Iraq ended. |
First look at the first Olympic course, it's a frickin' monster! Phone footage emerges showing the crash that gave Norway's Torstein Horgmo a broken collarbone and took him out of the Olympic Slopestyle in Sochi. Xavier de le Rue is set to follow up his epic movie with Sam Anthamatten, Mission Antarctic , with this trailer for new series, Mission Steep. There’s little we can say here, other than it looks sick. Some of the lines just seem gravitationally impossible – it’s practically base jumping with a snowboard on your feet, but somehow Xavier pulls it off. After watching this, it’ll make you never want to moan about a measly icy black run ever again. Join O'Neill and friends to watch the action from Sochi on the big screen and enjoy free drinks at the after-party. First look at the first Olympic course, it's a frickin' monster! Phone footage emerges showing the crash that gave Norway's Torstein Horgmo a broken collarbone and took him out of the Olympic Slopestyle in Sochi. Newsletter Terms & Conditions Please enter your email so we can keep you updated with news, features and the latest offers. If you are not interested you can unsubscribe at any time. We will never sell your data and you'll only get messages from us and our partners whose products and services we think you'll enjoy. Read our full Privacy Policy as well as Terms & Conditions. |
"To maximise efficiency you need to have collaboration and the head coach will still be part of the decision-making process," Pascoe said. Tigers coach: Jason Taylor. Credit:Wolter Peeters "But in saying that the very nature of a head coach is to worry about the short term, where the general manager would have a broader vision and make decisions based on what's best for the sustainability and longevity of the club. That will ensure we don't fall into a similar position with the salary cap that this club has in the past. "I want someone who comes into my office every single day demanding we should be chasing this player or that player and coming up with solutions and proposals for how that can happen. It will be very similar to the American sport general manager role." The Tigers have found themselves in sticky situations in recent years paying big dollars for players with a short-sighted view of winning football games. Given the ruthless nature of coaching in the modern era, most head coaches are so desperate to avoid being punted that they fail to look to the future. However Pascoe is looking for someone to fulfil a role similar to what Phil Gould does at the Penrith Panthers, working with Panthers Group boss Warren Wilson. While Gould has no input in game-day tactics or selections, he works with the head coach to determine which players to recruit or let go. He also oversees the coaching department, recently deciding to part ways with Ivan Cleary to bring in former Broncos coach Anthony Griffin. "Anyone who harbors coaching aspirations wouldn't be considered," Pascoe said. |
Alison Redford, like Kathy Dunderdale before her, learned the hard way what happens when the nervous Nellies in caucus lose faith in a leader's ability to turn it around. Before Ms. Redford's resignation as premier, Alberta's Progressive Conservatives were dangerously close to slipping below the provincial Liberals and New Democrats in the polls. Like Ms. Redford, Ms. Dunderdale inherited the premiership, then faced electors and won a majority government. Before reaching the midpoint of their mandates, both leaders faced terrible poll numbers and caucus revolts. But should that have been enough to end their political careers? One wonders what might have happened had they been men instead of their respective provinces' first female premiers. Would they have given in as easily, sacrificing themselves for the greater good of party unity? Instead, they chose flight rather than fight, which may not send the best message to aspiring women leaders. Story continues below advertisement What just happened in Alberta hardly amounts to democracy in action. Mob rule comes to mind. Mostly it is an illustration of the self-preservation instinct that drives sitting legislators. For all the recent chatter about democratic reform, sparked in part by the Senate scandal and Conservative Michael Chong's private member's bill aimed at giving individual MPs more power, modern political parties are professional outfits with the singular mission of winning elections. Ms. Redford's biggest failure lay in her inability to control her caucus, stroke backbencher egos and inspire confidence that she could win the next election. Her fate only reinforces the need for successful leaders to lay down the law before the mob takes matters into its own hands. Federal Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is discovering just how hard that is. His decision to prevent Christine Innes from becoming the Liberal candidate in an upcoming by-election in the Toronto riding of Trinity-Spadina belies his oft-uttered promise of holding open nomination contests. Mr. Trudeau insists Ms. Innes was blocked only because of "bullying" by her team, which includes her husband, former Trinity-Spadina Liberal MP Tony Ianno. But that's not the way others see it. The head of the local Liberal riding association released a statement saying "there was absolutely no due or fair process" in Ms. Innes's disqualification. In solidarity, prospective candidate Zach Paikin pulled out of his nomination race, saying: "To block a candidacy, in effect, is to prevent someone from running for Parliament. That's not fair and it's not democratic." Mr. Trudeau should just admit that open nominations are overrated in an era where party discipline is Job 1. Candidates must be scrupulously vetted for any minor skeletons and loose cannons can ruin an otherwise perfectly executed campaign. Social media is as much a nightmare as a gift for modern campaigns, as past tweets, Facebook posts, even sexts live on eternally. The truth is, Mr. Trudeau has his preferred candidate for Trinity-Spadina's successor riding (current Toronto Centre MP Chrystia Freeland) and Ms. Innes threatened to upset the grand plan. All his sweet talk of party democracy is merely the velvet glove encasing his iron fist. Story continues below advertisement Story continues below advertisement I've got news for all those eager recruits who became Liberals to back Mr. Trudeau's 2013 leadership bid: You were being used. Your ideas were being taken seriously only to the extent that the campaign pros can make personal pitches to you for money and your vote in 2015. Algorithms might even be used to "shape" Mr. Trudeau's message for maximum effect. Apparently talking about the "troubling" plight of the middle class is polling well these days. Party conventions are nominally an opportunity for the rank-and-file to put their stamp on policy by passing countless resolutions, which are systematically ignored by strategists who shape the electoral platform. Prospective MPs go to "candidates' school," where they're trained to repeat talking points and stay out of trouble. Most don't complain as long as their party is winning. While all of this suggests our politics could be healthier, it's not as sick or cynical as it looks. Political parties are just one ingredient of a robust democracy. We hold our governments and politicians to account in all sorts of ways that have nothing to do with elections or legislatures. The media (which are freer than ever) and the courts (see Justice Marc Nadon) are just two examples. In the end, Ms. Redford may not have had the stomach for it all. Mr. Trudeau obviously does. |
(Recasts with proponents declaring victory) By Jonathan Kaminsky OLYMPIA, Wash., Nov 5 (Reuters) - A ballot initiative to enact a $15 hourly minimum wage for many workers in a working-class Seattle suburb that houses the region’s main international airport was leading on Tuesday, with proponents declaring victory in their fight for a livable wage. The measure would mandate that some 6,300 workers at Sea-Tac International Airport and nearby hotels, car rental agencies and parking lots receive a minimum hourly wage of $15, a rate more than double the federal minimum wage of $7.25. After a hard-fought battle in the city of SeaTac that highlighted a broader debate over income inequality in America, the measure was leading on Tuesday evening by 54 percent to 46 percent with 3,283 votes counted in the mail-in ballot. But initiative opponents said it was too early to concede defeat in a city with 12,000 registered voters, with more results expected to trickle in over the next few days. Washington state already has a higher minimum wage than any other U.S. state, at $9.19 an hour, and the SeaTac wage would be among the nation’s highest, just below a $15.38 rate mandated for city workers and contractors in Sonoma, California. But the measure would apply only to workers in the travel and hospitality industries - from parking lot attendants to hotel maids and airport vendors - and would exempt small firms, airlines and unionized work forces. The wage campaign, funded by labor and community groups, comes during a push for more livable wages for lower-skilled workers that extends far beyond SeaTac, an ethnic hodgepodge of roughly 28,000 people that was incorporated in 1990. ECONOMIC IMPACT Backers of the wage ordinance see it as an opportunity to help local workers while encouraging other communities - particularly cities with progressive tendencies and smaller voting pools - to take similar action. “This win in SeaTac gives hope to thousands of people working for record-profit making corporations at the airport,” Heather Weiner, spokeswoman for the Yes For SeaTac campaign, said in a statement. “Voters in other cities may be soon demanding new approaches like this one to create good jobs that rebuild the economy from the middle out.” Opponents complain that the measure would slow the region’s economy, and could put the jobs of less skilled workers at risk as the higher wage attracts better qualified applicants. They said they were still hopeful that ballots counted in coming days might swing the contest in their favor. “We believe that voters got the message that it’s going to be very costly for the city and fundamentally unfair to younger people and people starting out in the labor force,” said Don Stark, a spokesman for Common Sense SeaTac, the business-backed campaign opposing the measure. “We hope that more of those votes show up in the next couple days.” Opponents have said that fewer than 20 percent of the workers covered under the initiative live in SeaTac, leaving city government to police a set of rules that mostly benefit non residents. While organized labor hopes SeaTac will act as a catalyst for similar efforts elsewhere, the initiative is not without precedent. Since 1994, when Baltimore instituted the country’s first so-called living wage ordinance, more than 120 local governments have followed suit, according to the National Employment Law Project. Four major California airports operate under ordinances similar to the SeaTac measure, including one guaranteeing workers at San Jose airport $13.82 an hour plus health insurance, and another mandating that Los Angeles airport workers earn $10.91 per hour plus health insurance benefits. (Reporting by Jonathan Kaminsky in Olympia, Washington; Editing by Cynthia Johnston and Elizabeth Piper) |
A Muslim student has been removed from a college basketball team in Kansas for shooting baskets during the playing of the national anthem. The student claims he has a “religious objection” to the anthem. The student, 19-year-old Rasool Samir, is now saying that his civil rights were violated when Garden City Community College, in Garden City, Kansas, removed him from the team, the Associated Press reported. School officials said that Samir was removed from the team because he didn’t follow a team rule that players must leave the court before the anthem plays, not over his religious beliefs. Samir, who is no longer a student at the college, filed a complaint with the ACLU claiming that the school violated his First Amendment rights. “We believe any disciplinary action by GCCC against Mr. Samir for abstaining from the anthem is antithetical to our American values and a violation of his First Amendment rights,” the ACLU said in a statement. Since being removed from the team, Samir insisted he was not being “disrespectful” toward the national anthem. The student claimed he did not “mean any disrespect at all to the fans or the flag at last night’s game. I am truly sorry to anyone that felt disrespected, and I am also sorry to the school. I apologize for what happened.” The ACLU sent a letter to the school on November 9 demanding that the school answer for its actions. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston. |
A Denver police officer and a woman arrested in connection with a sexual assault investigation will not be charged, authorities said Friday. Officer Davin Munk, 31, and Angiella Arnot, 47, have been released from custody, a police news release said. Denver police say the development is “based on new evidence that was obtained during the course of this complex investigation.” Officials did not elaborate. Investigators say an internal affairs investigation will determine if Munk violated any police department policies. He remains suspended, now with pay, pending the review’s outcome of the internal investigation, the release said. Det. Mary McIver, a police spokeswoman, said Friday she could not comment further on the case because it remains under internal investigation. Munk was being held in lieu of $650,000 bail at the city’s downtown jail in the case. He has worked for the department since 2013 and was most recently assigned to a post in northeast Denver. An investigation into Munk began after police were contacted by another Colorado law enforcement agency on Monday about an alleged sex assault that happened in Denver in late April. “After receiving the information from the outside agency, Denver police contacted the alleged victim, who provided a statement regarding the incident,” police said in a statement. An arrest warrant for Munk was issued after the alleged victim’s interview, and he was taken into custody on Tuesday night. Authorities have declined to release court records in the case. Munk has faced discipline several times over his career, including a four-day unpaid suspension in February 2015 for providing inaccurate information about an assault in a report, records show. He was also issued a written reprimand for a January 2015 incident in which he carelessly handled city property and was counseled in April 2015 over his ability to obey department rules. There is also a pending internal investigation into an allegation made against Munk of inappropriate force in December 2015, according to his disciplinary file. Jesse Paul: 303-954-1733, jpaul@denverpost.com or @JesseAPaul |
'Twitch' enough? What happens next? After weeks of positive preview buzz, Right Square Bracket Left Square Bracket's hallucinogenic racerhas just released on the PlayStation Network to a widely warm critical reception in the consumer press. There's something funny about the reviews, though.I've read the reaction from several prominent sites, and most of them have something in common: The writer hastening to inform readers that, which uses bright colors and abstract imagery, is not, in fact, the kind of liquidy visual experiment players might expect from an indie game. Joystiq notes that the "outside observer" might look at the game and see "little more than a rhythmic, psychedelic mishmash," Game Informer is also concerned about "onlookers," and explains that the game is still "mesmerizing" to play, though it might look like some weird audio visualizer.In a thorough review, Polygon's Arthur Gies gives the most elaborate prescription against presupposition, writing that players would be forgiven for assumingwas "the latest sort of, well, let's say, experiential experiment" launched on PSN, and that it'd be "wrong" to assume this finely-honed arcade-style racer has anything in common with Thatgamecompany'sor, which Gies characterizes as games that succeed as conceptual experiments, less so when it comes to "mechanics and design."Some writers on games believe that a review should be a pure account of one's own impressions and experiences, devoid of context or comparison. Others feel that points of reference -- like whether a title resembles others in its genre, or whether the experience of playing it resembles what first impressions would suggest -- are essential to gamers wondering whether or not they'll like something.What's interesting about thereviews isn't the fact that the writers went into it with preconceptions. At least, that's not interesting to me, since all consumers and critics alike have preconceptions, and examining them can be an interesting, even necessary part of the review process.It's that the critical reception is peppered with words like "hardcore," references to leaderboards, scoring and mechanics, as if to assuage the worry that a game with such pretty pictures couldn't be "twitch" enough. Critics and audiences now have defined ideas of what they expect from the artistic indie community, and this has interesting implications for the tiny teams of today.One of the primary gains in being independent is the freedom to innovate, but approaches to innovation lately seem to squarely divide into recognizable camps more often than not.Some revisit older design forms in the hopes of evolving or honing them: The appeal of recent popular games likeandis that they're whip-smart evolutions on aesthetics and experiences people remember from when they were younger. That means cute sprites, unforgiving difficulty and familiar mechanics, like platforming and treasure-hunting.Games like this often implement the scaffolding of older games -- things like lives, coins and other conventions abandoned by newer and more intuitive designs -- both as nostalgic touchstones and because they are effective constraints under the right circumstances.uses iconic constructs, like whimsical creatures and green pipes, to subvert expectations. It's kind of like, except for the part where you can control time.Then there are those hoping to use the language of games to try something mostly never seen before: Thatgamecompany'sandGies points to, or titles like Tale of Tales', Dan Pinchbeck's, or any number of others that prize emotion or storytelling over ensuring the player feels "hooked" or mechanically challenged.Although these titles and others like it have provoked much discussion on what is and isn't a "video game," they also have incredible cultural staying power: While the consumer press and the traditional core audience may still be trying to find the vocabulary to contextualize games like these in the broader landscape, they're the ones designers reference often as experiences that changed the way they work with more traditional ideas. And that's not to say these games arecommercially viable or relevant to the everyday player: All of them find their fanbases.These are obviously highly-simplified polarities in a spectrum that includes all kinds of games that fall somewhere in between:isn't the first game to combine arcade-style mechanics with modern abstract visuals. In fact, that's a popular approach games likeor thegame family have found great success with.The treatment ofhas one interesting takeaway for indies: Reviewers don't view experimental games or artsy-looking stuff the same way they do "pure arcade" titles -- or, at least, they believe their readership doesn't.It's always been possible to loosely group together the work of indie designers with similar values, but are genres emerging more strongly now?One positive in the indie scene is cultural closeness: Young developers help raise one another up and network; one's work inspires another, and cross-collaborations are frequent. Now indies have had the entire back half of a very long console generation to establish major audiences on traditional platforms and to develop an implicit sort of vocabulary and set of rules for itself.Just a handful of years ago, colleagues and I wondered if XBLA and PSN games could "count" on year-end top lists -- often, we'd end up relegating them to their own lists. This year, the most talked-about and beloved releases are games likeandandlooks enough-loved to join them, too. In 2012, many sites will surely have game of the year lists dominated by indies.The fact the consumer audience now has established ideas of what to expect from indie games might suggest a sort of cultural maturation in progress for the indie community, and it'll be interesting to see what happens next. |
Susan B. Glasser is POLITICO’s chief international affairs columnist. Her new podcast, The Global Politico, comes out Mondays. Subscribe here. Follow her on Twitter @sbg1. Subscribe to The Global POLITICO on Apple Podcasts here. | Subscribe via Stitcher here. Last year, Eliot Cohen rallied dozens of fellow veterans of Republican administrations, people like him who had served in the upper reaches of the Pentagon, State Department and National Security Council, to warn against Donald Trump winning the White House. He would become, the group open letter Cohen organized said, “the most reckless president in American history.” Story Continued Below A year later, Cohen, a top official in President George W. Bush’s administration, and another charter #NeverTrump proselytizer, his fellow conservative Max Boot, hardly back down when asked whether their predictions of global gloom and doom had been proven right in the first year of the Trump presidency. Both men, lifelong Republicans and historically minded policy intellectuals, offered unequivocal yeses in a joint interview for this week’s Global Politico podcast – and castigated former friends inside the party they’ve both now renounced as “Vichy Republicans” for collaborating with a president they believe is not fit to hold office. Boot pronounced Trump both “incredibly erratic and unpredictable,” though he allowed that “some of the worst-case scenarios that we imagined have yet, mercifully, come to pass.” Just because Trump has not yet destroyed NATO, launched a trade war with China or torn up NAFTA, lifted sanctions on Russia in a grand bargain with Vladimir Putin, or started a war with North Korea, Boot argued, does not mean he won’t. “It’s true, they haven’t started World War III yet,” Cohen added. “That’s a pretty low bar.” If anything, I found the two even more terrified about the Trump presidency at the end of Year One – filled with the sort of to-the-barricades warnings I’m still not used to hearing from learned defense wonks like Boot, who’s spent a career advising politicians like Republican Senator John McCain from establishment precincts like the Wall Street Journal op-ed page and the Council on Foreign Relations. “In many ways,” Boot said, “the damage he’s doing at home is even worse, where he’s undermining the rule of law. He’s obstructing justice. He’s lending the support of the presidency to monsters like Roy Moore. He is exacerbating race relations. He is engaging in the most blatant xenophobia, racism and general bigotry that we have seen from the White House.” “All these things,” he added, “are very corrosive to the future of American democracy.” Throughout the wide-ranging conversation, they addressed the toll – personal as well as political – that Trump’s takeover of their party has had, from broken friendships” and Republican officeholders “who have permanently sullied themselves” to a GOP unmoored from basic principles like free trade and promotion of democracy that were long seen as its bedrock precepts. Cohen talked of his own “permanently ruptured” relationships as a consequence of Trump, not to mention the sad spectacle of “spineless” careerists taking jobs with a man they don’t believe in, while Boot elaborated on the “disorienting experience” of having close friends who’ve “gone off the rails” – a split worse than any, he argued, since the Vietnam war. Cohen disagreed, but only because he saw the divide caused by Trump hearkening back even further, to the foreign policy debates of the inward-looking 1920s and 30s that caused America to be dangerously unprepared on the brink of World War II. Weren’t they being just a bit hysterical about the negative consequences of Trump, I pressed Boot? “Look,” he responded, “the good news story of the first year of the Trump presidency is that there are checks and balances…. Trump as a personality type is probably no different from a Mussolini, a Peron, a Chavez. And if you were operating in Argentina or Italy, he would probably be a dictator by now. But luckily, he’s not operating in those countries.” It’s not exactly an upbeat portrait of the world after a year of Trump, but I found it to be a bracing discussion with two of the president’s most incisive – and relentless – critics, and you can read the rest of our conversation below. Susan Glasser: I’m Susan Glasser, and welcome back to The Global POLITICO. Once again, our guests this week are the original #NeverTrumpers, at least from the foreign policy division of the Republican resistance. On my left here, I have the fantastic Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations. And on my right, sitting here at the Slate studios in downtown Washington, I have Eliot Cohen. Max Boot: I think Eliot rates a fantastic too. Glasser: Well, I was going to say the great Eliot Cohen. That’s one “L” by the way. Eliot Cohen: Yes. Glasser: No, but seriously, you know, both of them are prolific writers. They’re authors. They’re experts on their subject. And over the last couple years have taken this dramatic turn into being the very public face of the Trump resistance inside the Republican Party. And now we can talk about their feelings about the Republican Party going forward. In the foreign policy and national security world—Eliot, I want to start with you—there was unusually vociferous resistance from this part of the Republican Party, even during the primaries. You helped to organize these letters by national security types who’d served in Republican administrations. You got a lot of people to sign. Why do you think people spoke up more in the national security world than in the more general Republican political world, and why didn’t it make a difference? Cohen: Well, it’s easy to explain why it didn’t make a difference. You know, I don’t think average voters pay a whole lot of attention to what people who’ve been in the State Department, or Defense Department, or who write about these things have to say. The thing that was at the center of the—there were actually two letters, one of which I helped write, the other which I helped organize. The criticism of Trump was fundamentally a criticism of character. I mean, yes, there are policy issues which were raised, but I think that was at the heart of the critique. And why was it that there was such a reaction from that community? I’d like to think that some of it is, you know, when you’re in that community—and particularly, you’ve served in government, or you’ve been intimately involved in it, and seen it up close, say the way Max has—is you realize this is life and death. This is about putting lives on the line. These are enormously consequential kinds of decisions that a president makes. And character really trumps, so to speak, everything else. And so you may have a keener appreciation of the importance of character than, perhaps, if you’re more involved in domestic issues. I don’t know what Max was going to say. Glasser: You know, it’s interesting. I went back and reread those letters before our conversation today. The one from August 2016 said that Donald Trump, if he were elected president—which my guess is you guys didn’t think was all that likely at that point in time—but that if he we were elected, he would become “the most reckless president in American history.” Do you still agree with that, Max? Boot: Without a doubt. I mean, he is still incredibly erratic and unpredictable. And you see that now with the saber-rattling that he’s engaged in with North Korea. I mean, I can actually approve of some of his North Korea policy, the sanctions, for example, doing things that other presidents would have done. But it’s impossible to imagine any other president going before the U.N. General Assembly and referring to the dictator of North Korea as “Rocket Man,” or issuing this series of blustery threats, which, frankly, are terrifying, and are raising the risk of a needless war. And so that’s an example, I think, of the kind of erratic behavior that many of us feared once Trump came into office. And I think you’re seeing evidence of that, even though, you know, some of the worst-case scenarios that we imagined have not yet, mercifully, come to pass. I mean, for example, he has not destroyed NATO. He has not launched a trade war with China. He has not lifted sanctions on Russia. In all those cases, in part, because his hands had been tied. And of course, it’s only a year in, so he’s still got time to go. But what I think what we’ve seen has been pretty bad, and pretty terrifying, and confirms the case that those of us who were #NeverTrumpers were making prior to the election. Cohen: And I would just add to that that even those cases where he hasn’t, say, you know, taken the United States out of NATO, the damage that’s been done is extremely serious. His refusal to reaffirm in a serious way our commitment to protect our European allies under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which says an attack against one is an attack against all. His continued— Glasser: Which came from him personally. Cohen: Yes. Glasser: When I was doing that reporting, and it turned out that his advisors had put the sentence in his speech and he took it out himself. Cohen: In some ways the most appalling thing of all, that he continues to question the fact of a very serious Russian attack on the core of our political system. I mean, I don’t know how you get more reckless and dangerous than that. And you know, the president’s first obligation is to defend the country. And in this respect, he doesn’t seem to be interested in doing that. Glasser: Okay. So if you believe that the premise of your letter was right, tactically was it the right thing? It clearly got under Donald Trump’s skin, and he issued a diktat once he became president that no one who signed that letter could participate in the administration. Do you think that we would be better off if more of the signatories were allowed in? Boot: Just quickly, it also had another unintended consequence that we can see in hindsight, because the criticism of him from the foreign policy community caused him to round up some kind of foreign policy advisers, so he could put together a team to address the concerns that he didn’t have advisers. And who did he get in the team? He wound up with people like Carter Page, George— Glasser: George Papadopoulos. Boot: —Papadopoulos, and Mike Flynn. And so a lot of the problems that he’s experiencing now are in part because of the shady characters that he signed up to deflect that criticism. Cohen: Yeah. Well, look, just as a matter of fact, it’s not just that they wouldn’t approach the people who signed the letters, they have—and I know of a number of cases personally—they’ve disbarred all kinds of people, you know, for retweeting something that was even mildly critical. But these were people who’d not signed the letter. So I think this is a man who is hypersensitive, has no idea what magnanimity means, and all that. But look, I do think this is a crisis for our country. And at that moment, you know, there are certain times in politics where you have to be politic, and you have to be careful of what you say. Then there are other times where the most important thing to do is to speak the truth as you understand it. And you know, Max and I are both intellectuals. I’m not embarrassed about that. And part of our job is to speak the truth as we understand it. And I think that everybody who signed those letters had that basic feeling. You know, we didn’t expect that Trump would win, but I think all of us realized that there was a serious chance that he might. Glasser: That’s interesting. I remember running into someone who signed your letter early on, and running into him on an airplane. And he said, “You know, I still think there’s actually a chance that Trump could win.” This was at a time when people thought he wasn’t going to win. He said, “But I found it kind of a calming and clarifying moment for me. It’s so fundamental. It’s actually very revealing for me to see who’s not signing this. And so rather than feeling like it’s a divisive thing, I find I’m quite happy to have signed this, and I feel like it’s just one of those moments where you have to pick a team.” Cohen: Honestly and truly, the moment when I decided to do this, we’d had my kids over to the house and my grandchildren. I was looking at my little granddaughter and I was just thinking, “What’s going to happen when she comes back home on spring break, you know, 15, 16 years from now, and she says, ‘Grandpa, I’ve been reading about this crazy period and I guess you were around there. I know you wrote a lot, but what did you do when this was happening?’” And I just thought, “I have to be able to give her a decent answer.” Boot: Yes. I mean, I was just outraged about Trump from day one, when he rode down that damn escalator at the Trump Tower and started bashing Mexicans. I mean, I could not believe this was a mainstream political candidate in the United States. I was just—like everybody else, I kind of assumed that he was going to be a flash in the pan; that the Republican Party could never possibly nominate him. And once he was nominated, I kind of assumed that he would never be elected. And of course, I was dead wrong about his electoral prospects. But I think I was dead right in my judgment that this is somebody who is not fit to hold office, and I think he has shown that pretty much every single day that he has been in office. And I think one of the shocking, if not entirely surprising, things is the extent to which he has not changed one iota. He has not become one degree more presidential in the year since he took office. So needless to say, he has not actually achieved, as he claimed that he would be more presidential than anybody since the great Abraham Lincoln. Glasser: He often compares himself to Abraham Lincoln. Just the other day, I noticed that he said it was he and Abraham Lincoln who’d gotten rid of the most government regulations. I want to keep on this theme of both this decisive moment that you both chose to take action on. What have been the consequences? Both of you were long-time Republicans. I’m curious how much you think that this rift reflects something that was a broader rift in the party, or is it really just a breakup over Trump himself? Cohen: I think there are two rifts, actually. One is within the party. I think George W. Bush is reported to have worried that he might be the last Republican president. And he understood, I think, that there were elements in the party which were really completely at odds with his version of what it is to be a conservative; that there was this populist, nativist element there, which Trump has been effective at tapping. So that’s a rift within the Republican Party. Since then, there has been a rift, I think, within—it’s not just the foreign policy establishment, but a certain political establishment more broadly between those who said, “Ugh, well, I don’t particularly like him, but we’ve got to get along, and hold your nose. It’s really important to get the tax cut,” or, “Okay, you made your point. Now everybody should go to work for this guy.” Those of us who really just say, “No, we’re going to continue to say what we think he is, and not yield,” and that rift is a much more personal one. I’m sure Max has had the experience. I know I’ve had the experience of people with whom I wouldn’t say were very close friends, but who were friends of a sort, where those relationships are permanently ruptured, I think. Boot: It’s a disorienting experience to have people that you’ve thought of as your friends and comrades in arms for years, you know, think that you’ve gone off the rails. And at the same time, you think they’ve gone off the rails. I mean, this was the kind of split in American politics we probably have not had since the Vietnam War days. I mean, this is not a normal partisan disagreement. It’s a political realignment. I mean, I spent my entire adult life as a Republican. I worked as an adviser on three Republican presidential campaigns, but now I’m actively rooting for Republicans to lose the congressional elections next year, because the Republicans have shown they are unwilling to uphold their oaths of office. They are unwilling to defend the Constitution against the nonstop threats emanating from Donald J. Trump. And that, to me, trumps, so to speak, anything else, including concerns about tax cuts, or any of these other issues that a lot of Republicans tell themselves are the most important thing in the world. Glasser: So it’s had a personal effect on relationships here in Washington. There’s also the question of what do you make of those who’ve chosen to serve? A lot of people say, “Well, you know, thank God for Jim Mattis and H. R. McMaster because if not for them, who knows? We might already be in that war in North Korea.” Do you think they’re there to save the country, or to enable Trump? Cohen: Well, I’ve written a little bit about this in some things I do in The Atlantic. And I try not to be personally too judgmental of them. I think human beings are complicated, and they do the things they do for mixed motives. And sometimes those motives are not always entirely apparent to themselves. And sometimes the motives change over time. I think in the case of Mattis, McMaster, probably Kelly too, you know, they didn’t volunteer for the jobs they got. They were asked to take them, and I think they took them, in part—in part—understanding who Trump was, and desiring to contain him. My view—and I know all three, those three in particular, quite well. I think Mattis has done not only the best job, but a pretty fine job of maintaining his integrity as a human being and as kind of a loyal servant to the Constitution. I think the others have been more challenged. Glasser: Do you agree with that, Max? Boot: Yeah. I think it’s much harder when you’re actually in the White House. I mean, again, like Eliot, I know all those guys, and have admired them for years. And I think that Mattis has been masterful in the way that he has kept his distance from the White House, from the craziness emanating from Donald Trump, but he hasn’t alienated Trump in the way that Tillerson, for example, has done, in a way that’s undercut Tillerson’s effectiveness. So I think Mattis has done exactly what everybody expected him to do, which is to be a responsible steward over our armed forces. You know, I’m also an admirer, by and large, of what H. R. McMaster and John Kelly have done. But I think it’s much harder for them because they are in much closer proximity to Trump, and he demands much more from those around him, that they have to be constantly obsequious. He expects people to lie on his behalf. And I’m sure they’ve—you know, nine-tenths of the demands that he makes on them, they’ve probably resisted, and they’ve probably felt compelled to give in, in a few instances. But on the whole, I think that I’m very glad that they are there. I sleep much more soundly at night, for example, knowing that H. R. McMaster’s the national security advisor rather than Mike Flynn. Cohen: I agree with that. But I also think—I’m just saying this as an observer. Again, I don’t pass judgment on them—that you pay a price doing that, and you pay a price in terms of who you are at the end of the process. You know, you have to be careful about analogies. But I do sometimes think about senior civil servants during the Vichy period in France where, you know, there were perfectly principled people. They didn’t want Philippe Petain running what was left of France. But they felt, “Well, if not me, who else, and I can make it better.” But the problem is it does lead you down—it can lead you down a slippery slope— Glasser: Well, that’s right. And that’s, of course, the Washington sort of political mindset anyways, right, is that mixture of careerism, and patriotism, and also conflating your own interests with those of the job. And you’ve written about this. Cohen: Yeah. I’ve called it “low-grade Shakespeare,” and it is. Glasser: Right. Well, maybe we haven’t built up to high-grade Shakespeare yet. It’s dramatic, but maybe we’re still waiting for something even more dramatic, like the finale. Cohen: Well, Trump doesn’t rise to the level of Richard III. You know, he’s just not that deep a character. Glasser: Well, we’ll see. We don’t know how the play ends yet, do we? Boot: I mean, I think he’s done quite a bit of damage in the first year, but there’s far more damage he could have done, and there’s far more damage he may still do with his— Glasser: Okay. I want to get into this, this question. You hear this increasingly from people who are defending Trump, or at least trying to defend, say, the McMaster team. You hear this even from them now, right? Increasingly this case of, okay, A, the world isn’t on fire. We haven’t started any new wars. The policy is good. You have this, I think, very awkward and almost unsustainably schizophrenic situation of John Kelly saying, “Well, I don’t pay attention to the tweets.” They won’t answer questions about Trump himself, and they say, “Well, look at our policy.” And I’m wondering how you both deal with what I see as the increasing cognitive dissonance of a national security team that wants us to believe that their policy is all well and good as long as you don’t count Donald Trump. Boot: I think, you know, they’re making the best case they possibly can from their positions. It’s just not very convincing to anybody from the outside because the tweets and pronouncements of Donald Trump matter, in the end, quite a bit because he is the president of the United States. He is the commander in chief. And you know, it’s often at odds with their message of continuity, and stability, and responsible foreign policy because he’s anything but responsible. And I think, you know, it goes beyond—I know we’re supposed to be talking about foreign policy, but I think it goes well beyond foreign policy. You know, for example, the way that he kowtows to dictators and undermines American support for freedom and democracy around the world. But looking at home, I mean, I think, in many ways, the damage he’s doing at home is even worse, where he’s undermining the rule of law. He’s actively obstructing justice. He’s backing—he’s lending the support of the presidency to monsters like Roy Moore. He is exacerbating race relations. He is engaging in the most blatant xenophobia, racism, and general bigotry that we have seen from the White House. I mean, all these things, I think, are very corrosive for the future of American democracy. Glasser: Max, I feel like if I had just given that speech, somebody would say to me, “Well, you’re just hysterical.” I’m sure you’ve had people push back on you, and say, “Come on.” Boot: I’m reflecting what I’m seeing. I would have been perfectly happy if I had been proved wrong about what kind of president Donald Trump would be, but unfortunately, a lot of the predictions are coming true. Cohen: I think that’s right. You know, it’s true, they haven’t started World War III yet. That’s a pretty low bar, I have to say, for an American administration. Max made the point earlier, which I quite agree with, is they could get us into a really nasty war that’s not necessary in Korea. They could do something similar in the Persian Gulf. But I also think the word “corrosive” is right; that a lot of what they’ve done is to kind of rot out a lot of the American—or to begin the process of rotting out the American position in the world with things that are not particularly dramatic. But when you talk, as I often do, to leaders in Germany, or France, or Canada, or Australia, I mean, their view of the United States is changing. And they understand that, yes, Trump may have been a bit of an anomaly, but you guys elected him. And that damage is serious. The damage that’s done when he cuddles up to someone like President Duterte in the Philippines, who is a murderer and a thug, these things do really long-term damage. So that’s real. I’d also say that if the people in the administration—I served in a couple of administrations. And what happens when you’re in—particularly in the White House -- is you go into the bunker, and you get incredibly defensive, but you also get, I believe, increasingly detached from reality. And you become incapable of seeing the world as people from the outside see it. I’m sure that given the psychic pressures that all these people are under, given the fact that deep down in their hearts they know what an awful guy he is, they really are, at some level, I’m sure, headcases. You know, that they are really ending up with a lot of psychic burdens in addition to kind of a distorted view of the world. Glasser: Max, you made the point that we’re undergoing kind of a political realignment; that it’s not just Trump, but there’ s also Trumpism, and that it’s challenging in many ways some of the basic—what we all probably thought of as settled, established principles of America and its leadership role in the world. Where do you see us coming out of that? I mean, are Republicans going to no longer be the party of free trade? Are they, as a party, going to end support for American engagement in places like Afghanistan and the Middle East? Boot: Well, those are very good questions. I think Republicans are very confused on those issues, as is Donald Trump himself. I mean, I think that what’s happened in the last year is that the Republican Party has really undermined any moral credibility it might once have had. I mean, remember, this is the party of Lincoln. Now, unfortunately, it’s the party of Donald Trump. I think Republican office holders have permanently sullied themselves by not standing up against Donald Trump’s assaults on the rule of law and basic decency, and in fact, making excuses for him, and doing his bidding, as they’re doing now, for example, by aiding and abetting his attempts to obstruct justice by undermining Robert Mueller and his special counsel investigation. I think that, you know, makes it hard for me to imagine that, personally, for example, I’m going to become a Republican again. I mean, maybe things will change dramatically, and maybe, you know, the party will be eradicated in its current form, and reborn under the leadership of Jeff Flake and John Kasich. I think that’s unlikely to happen. If it were to happen, I would have to reassess the Republican Party. But at the moment, I have to say, I feel pretty homeless because I’m not a Republican, but I’m not a Democrat either because I’m still worried about folks like Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, and they don’t really speak for where I am either. And I think what we really need in this country is a new center-right party, but unfortunately, that doesn’t seem very likely to happen. Glasser: You have to move to France and sign up for Macron. Boot: Well, I’ve said that before. I think we need a Macron moment here, because we need to break through this duopoly of the Republicans and Democrats. I think we need a fresh face. And I think there is a possibility to do that, but I don’t know who that’s going to be. Cohen: And Macron himself, you know, demonstrates that this is part of a larger crisis. It’s a crisis of political parties. It’s a crisis of elites, which I think we’re seeing. I completely agree with Max. I find it hard to imagine the Republicans reconstituting themselves as a genuinely conservative party. I mean, just look at, say, the tax cuts that they’re about to have. I mean, I vaguely remember when the Republicans were the party of fiscal conservatism, which is what conservatives are supposed to stand for. That’s clearly gone. Glasser: Why have you guys not been more effective as a resistance in bringing more people around to this point of view? You mentioned Jeff Flake. Obviously, there was not a huge stampede of people following Jeff Flake, and Bob Corker—both of them, by the way, very national security, foreign policy-oriented, Republicans. They haven’t created a stampede in the Senate or elsewhere. Boot: I’ve been shocked by the willingness of the vast majority—vast, vast majority—of Republicans to go along with Donald Trump because I was extremely naïve, I think, about the Republican Party last year because, you know, I was a life-long Republican, pretty solid conservative, and I couldn’t imagine voting for Donald Trump. So I imagined, “Well, most Republicans couldn’t possibly imagine voting for this guy because they’re real conservatives in this race, like Jeb Bush and others, John Kasich, et cetera, and one of those guys will win.” And of course, that is not what happened. Now that Trump has won, the party has fallen into line behind him. And you can—whether it’s the cult of personality, tribalism, expediency, cynicism, in some cases just fanaticism and prejudice, I mean, there’s multiple explanations. But what it adds up to is a party that, I think, is intellectually and morally bankrupt. Cohen: I think also they’re different functions. I don’t actually use the term “resistance” because, you know, I don’t worry about the government spying on me. I don’t worry about being dragged off in the middle of the night. It’s not like that. And also, fundamentally what I am is a teacher. So I spend a lot of time talking to students about, you know, should you go into government service, and things of that nature, which I encourage them to do in the kind of career professional branches of, say, the military, or diplomacy, or the intelligence world. I do think that what, you know, the national security intellectuals are doing is laying down a record, and documenting things, and putting it down, so when this comes crashing down, as I really do believe it will, nobody’s going to be able to say, “Well, we didn’t know. It didn’t occur to us. Nobody told us.” That record will be out there, and it will be clear that people were warned, were told. And in a way, the crisis that impends will also be an opportunity for, as Max said, a kind of shake up of the political system. Glasser: Are you surprised that there aren’t more people, though? Cohen: Well, this is Washington, D.C. You know, I don’t know whether if I was in some other part of the country I would feel that way. I think, you know, this is a town where people want to make their way. Again, it’s low-order Shakespeare, so you see ambition, and lack of spine, and so on. It doesn’t really take a whole lot of heroism to stake out these positions. I mean, nobody’s going to lose their jobs, or go to jail, or anything like that. What’s striking is the amount of spinelessness, and people’s willingness to compromise what we thought were their principles. Boot: I think the ascendancy of Trump has revealed two very unflattering things about the Republican Party. One of which Eliot is referring to when he talks about the spinelessness and pusillanimity of the Republicans in Washington. But it also reveals something about the Republican grassroots, which is something even uglier, I think, because there is a lot of prejudice, racism, homophobia, all sorts of dark impulses out there, that I think were largely kept cloaked when you had leaders of the party like Mitt Romney and John McCain, who were fine individuals who did not appeal to the dark side of human nature. But Donald Trump is not a fine individual and he appeals to that dark side, and he has shown how much of the support for Republican candidates around the country is based on some of these dark impulses. And frankly, to me, it’s been unnerving. It’s been deeply disturbing as somebody who was a life-long Republican, because what I see happening is that a lot of the criticisms the Democrats have made about Republicans—and which I resisted for years—have actually been vindicated. Cohen: I’m a little bit less disturbed than Max is, I think, because—I mean, I feel that I was naïve. I didn’t realize the extent of some of the dark stuff that’s out there. But you know, I’ve been recently reading a lot about the ’20s and ’30s. And boy, that was much darker. And so, okay, what I’m realizing is, yes, these forces have always been here. They do periodically go underground, and they reemerge. But even to the extent they’ve reemerged, they haven’t reemerged the way they were in the ’20s and ’30s. Okay, that means that this is our turn, and it’s our responsibility to point them out, and stand up against them. Glasser: Right. But things could get worse instead of better. I mean, some of the premise of this conversation, right, is that, okay, we’re in Trump, and then they’ll be an after Trump. But the after Trump could be worse— Cohen: I’m actually—you know, in the long run, I’m optimistic. In the long run—and again, maybe I’m being naïve. I just have this faith in the resilience of the United States, and American institutions, and the American people. I’ve confidence in the action and directions that demography is going among other things. But more importantly, it’s the faith in our institutions. The challenge, I think, is we could be in for a very turbulent 3, 10, 12 years, or something like that. I worry what happens when things finally settle down, and there’s some sort of new equilibrium, and there will be a new equilibrium when we peer out of over the parapet, and see what’s happened to the world while we’ve been internally engaged. That actually disturbs me a lot. Boot: I’m a little less optimistic that Eliot. And I should preface that by saying that, for most of my life, I’ve been cockeyed optimist about America. I’ve very much believed in that Reaganesque vision of America as a city on a shining hill. I mean, I was not born in this country. I’m an immigrant, so I had maybe this kind of starry-eyed affection for America, and its place in the world. I think it’s been the greatest force for good in world history over the last 100 years. But this has really shaken me to the core. Referring to something that Eliot said in the past, I think it’s also shaken our allies. And for our allies, I think it will be very difficult, if it’s even possible in the future, to trust America in the same way they did before. Even if we have a successor to Trump who is completely different from him in every respect, they will know that these impulses are still here, and it’s quite possible that the American electorate will choose somebody like Trump, or somebody even worse that Trump. You know, maybe somebody who was more disciplined in their assault on our Constitution than Donald Trump is. And you know, frankly, I share some of those misgivings. I mean, I feel like this is perhaps not quite the country I thought it was. Glasser: So do you think there was anything that we got wrong, or that has turned out better than we thought? Cohen: You mean, better— Glasser: With Trump. The economy is better in some ways than we thought. Cohen: The economy is doing—look, I think it’s very important to understand that there are pieces of what he’s doing, which are Republican-normal, whether or not you like Republican-normal. You know, more charter schools. Okay, I can understand why some people don’t like that idea. Getting the corporate tax rate down to, I guess now it will be 21 percent,, which is within global norms. That’s basically—I think that sort of thing is basically okay. So there are going to be some things which are fine. I mean, some of the judicial appointments, if you’d like, that judicial philosophy are—you know, the Neil Gorsuchs of this world, not a madman, is committed to the Constitution. If I could, I’d like to just go back for a moment to what Max said, because I’m not an immigrant, but I’m the grandchild of immigrants. All of my grandparents were. The day after the election, I was talking to my students, who were kind of shocked, and I said, “Look, here’s what I think about when I think about this. I think my parents lived through the Great Depression, and World War II, and the Cold War, and Joe McCarthy, and Korea, and Vietnam, and the cities going up in flames. And my grandparents, who immigrated here, lived through all that, plus pogroms, World War I, and the influenza epidemic. So who says we get off free?” And I guess that colors my reaction to this. And I would also say, you know the great story about the Constitutional Convention, which meets in secret, and after they’re done, Benjamin Franklin is leaving the hall, and somebody says, “What kind of government have you given us, Dr. Franklin,” and he said, “A republic, if you can keep it.” Which means that it’s always up to us. It’s always in peril at some level. You know, Reagan said, “Liberty is always one generation away from extinction.” So all this means is it’s on us, and that’s why I think it’s so important for those of us who feel this way to continue to speak out, even when other people say, “Well, you’re not being helpful.” Glasser: Max, has he made you feel better? Do you feel better listening to him? Boot: Well— Glasser: He’s a professor, after all. Boot: Maybe a little. Look, I think the good news story of the first year of the Trump presidency is that there are checks and balances. I mean, I think that Trump, as a personality type, is probably not that different from a Mussolini, a Peron, a Chavez. And if you were operating in Argentina or Italy, he would probably be a dictator by now. But luckily, he’s not operating in those countries. He’s operating in a country that’s had a constitutional government for more than 200 years. And we’re seeing the courts step up. We’re seeing elements of the bureaucracy step up. Congress even occasionally steps up, for example, by passing Russia sanctions. And I think the media has done a tremendous job of holding his feet to the fire, and exposing all of the crazy machinations of this administration. So, I mean, that’s what gives me faith in America. I mean, I’m downcast because we could elect somebody as unqualified and unfit for the office as Donald Trump, but you know, to the extent that my faith in American is reaffirmed, it’s reaffirmed by people like Robert Mueller, and the investigative teams of The Washington Post, and New York Times, and elsewhere, who are working to keep his excesses in check. Glasser: So as we stare out at the parapet, at what the world looks like this year, not at the end of Trump, whenever that comes, looking into 2018, just quickly, what do you guys see as things that are worrisome, or developments that will really test Trump in a way that he hasn’t been tested. By the way, that’s the striking thing about 2017 is that actually there hasn’t been an external crisis. It’s all been an internal crisis. Cohen: He got off really easy. I would say the biggest one is Korea. Because the truth is, he inherited a very difficult situation. Let’s stipulate that. But the Chinese are not going to bail us out of this one, and there’s basically a binary choice. And the binary choice is either he backs down on things that he and his subordinates have said about, you know, that we’re going to denuclearize the peninsula. And that, by the way, would be a bigger climb down than Obama’s red line in Syria, which was a debacle in itself. A bigger debacle here because those nukes are pointed at us. Or we go to war. And that is—I tend to agree with Max, that that would be an unnecessary war, and it could also be both extraordinarily destructive in the immediate sense of civilians getting killed and whatnot, but also in terms of international politics in the region, and all over the globe. So that’s the one that I’m going to be paying most attention to. Boot: I agree with Eliot that that’s the biggest short-term risk. I think there’s also a risk of war with Iran. And Trump needs to figure out what he’s actually going to do with the Iran nuclear deal because he basically put it on pause. But he’s going to have put-up-or-shut-up time coming pretty soon, where he’s got to figure out is he actually going to pull out of it or not, and what are the consequences of pulling out of it. But beyond that, I think there is also going to be a moment of truth for him on trade, because, I mean, he has talked a big game on protectionism, and he hasn’t followed through so far. But that doesn’t mean he’s not going to in the next year. And there’s been a sense, I think, that advisors have been holding him in check, but it’s pretty clear that he’s desperate to destroy NAFTA. He may well destroy the U.S.-Korea free trade agreement. He may launch a trade war with China. These are all things that he is clearly itching to do, and he has been restrained from doing in his first year. But we can’t expect that that kind of restraint will continue indefinitely because, after all, he is the commander in chief. I mean, he has vast inherent power and he can exercise it. Glasser: Do you think he really has like the character, though, to launch a war? I mean, you know, somebody you both know well said to me, a Pentagon veteran, “He’s a classic chicken hawk.” Boot: Right. Glasser: “He loves to talk full blast.” Boot: Yeah, I think he’s a bully. He likes to beat up on people who are weaker than him. And so, you know, he tweets against Gold Star families, and Mika Brzezinski, and others, but when he meets somebody like Putin, or Xi Jinping, he’s kowtowing to them. He’s almost simpering to them in his obsequiousness. I think there is certainly an element with Kim Jong Un that he knows that this is a guy who could only be pushed so far, and I don’t think he wants to get into a nuclear war, mercifully. But that doesn’t mean he’s not going to blunder into one. Because he also has very little—I mean, he’s very ignorant, and he has very little idea of what his rhetoric can do. And I think, you know, there’s a chance that we will actually launch a preemptive strike on North Korea, but I think the greater chance of war with North Korea is accidental; where we use a very aggressive military posture against them, have military aircraft flying very close to the North Korean border. They panic. They try to shoot down an airplane. Trump decides to respond. He issues tweets saying he’s going to end Kim Jong Un. They decide that this is all-out war. So you can see like a World War I-like scenario. You know, sleepwalking into the abyss. I think that’s the biggest danger that we face. Cohen: I think accidental war, in the way that Max described, is quite possible. I also think—I’m more pessimistic than he is, because I think some of his advisors may, in fact, be in favor of something like this. But there are two other issues with him. One is, he is both ignorant of the military and intoxicated by it. And— Boot: He loves military parades. Glasser: Yeah. Cohen: He loves military parades. And he’s got— Glasser: But he hates the war in Iraq that you both supported. Cohen: He—well, let me just finish the thought. He has an adolescent male fascination with the military. So that’s one problem. The other thing is, because he is a narcissist, he really lacks empathy. I mean, I think you can—there’s something about, you know, if he sees a picture of a kid who’s been gassed in Syria, that somehow strikes a chord with him. But overall, if you tell him Seoul is going to be devastated, I don’t think he’s going to be horror-struck by that because I don’t think he can really sort of place himself in that position. On Iraq, I mean, that’s a separate podcast. But the truth is, he was in favor of it— Glasser: No, I know. But it’s interesting how he cites it all the time, right? It is very interesting that he is as much of an Iraq War, kind of Bush foreign policy basher as he is an Obama foreign policy basher. Cohen: I think it’s a way of being a Bush basher and of appealing to kind of the Ron Paul strain in the Republican Party. I mean, I don’t think it has anything to do with actual-- Boot: Yeah. Here’s a newsflash: he’s confused. He doesn’t have consistent beliefs. He has soundbites. He doesn’t have deep thoughts. Glasser: All right. So we’ve made it to the end of the year, almost, knock wood here on our metaphorical table. Boot: Don’t jinx it. Glasser: I’m not. That’s what I said. I’m knocking wood. I’m knocking wood. Our listeners are knocking wood. We’re close to the end of 2017. Let’s put it that way. What are you going to keep doing as part of the #NeverTrump resistance next year? You going to keep writing, keep speaking out? Boot: Of course. I mean, every day I wake up and I’m outraged by something that Trump has done. And I guess I could keep silent, but I choose not to because I think those of us who see what’s going on have an obligation to call him out, and to analyze it, and to use our critical faculties as best we can. You know, if he does something positive, I’ll say that too, but most of what he does, I think, is very harmful to American democracy, and to America’s position in the world. If that continues to be the case, I will continue to call him out on it. Glasser: Eliot, you’re doing yoga in addition to your speaking out. Has that made you more at peace with the situation? Cohen: No, but I think it’s marginally lowered my blood pressure. So there’s that. I think the—I actually try to write about other things, but he’s always doing something that provokes it. I think in addition to the moral outrage, which is fine, but as you say, people get tired of that, I think simply pointing out the consequences of what’s happening is actually very important. To make it clear that—you see a lot of the people who are kind of apologizing for him say, “Oh, well, that’s just tweets. That’s just noise. That’s just a speech. It really doesn’t make a difference.” But I think it’s very important to show people, no, actually, there are things happening, and words have consequences, and policies have consequences, and to lay those out. I mean, again, you’re establishing a record. And things will change. Political tides turn, and it’s very important to have that out there for when there is actually a decisive shift, whether it’s within the Republican Party, or if the Republicans get thrown out of Congress in 2018, so the people have something to work with. Boot: And you know, I don’t think the situation is hopeless. I mean, I don’t want to seem overly pessimistic here because we’ve seen in elections in New Jersey, and Virginia, and Alabama that voters have turned their backs on the Trumpite candidates. And we see in the country at large that 60 percent of the country is opposed to Trump. And so I think we need to continue speaking to that majority, and to try to convince people who are still his supporters why they should change their minds. Glasser: All right. Max Boot, Eliot Cohen, the heart of the #NeverTrump foreign policy resistance. Really, this has been a great conversation, and I’m extremely grateful to both of you. I will not jinx us successfully making it to the end of 2017, but we’re almost there. And thank you, of course, to all of our listeners at The Global POLITICO, who’ve been with us through this wild ride through Trump in the world. This is our last new episode of 2017. So thank you both for participating in that. When we come back, who knows what 2018 will bring. But in the meantime, hopefully, you can keep listening to The Global POLITICO on iTunes or whatever is your favorite podcast platform. And you can email me any time at SGlasser@Politico.com. Thank you, Eliot, and thank you, Max. Cohen: Thank you. Boot: Thank you. |
If you’ve ever wondered what the layout of your favorite fictional character’s apartment looked like, interior designer Iaki Aliste Lizarralde may have hand drawn exactly what you’re looking for. The Spain-based artist, who also goes by nikneuk, has colorfully illustrated a number of aerial diagrams mapping out the layout of popular TV and film homes for his Floorplans series. We finally get to see just how big and spacious many of these supposedly tiny apartments are. The artist’s scaled blueprints account for everything from architectural design to interior furnishings. The illustrations consist of anything he’s witnessed from each respective show or film, from the famed couch in The Simpsons to the Carrie Bradshaw’s roomy walk-in closet on Sex and the City. The artist even includes minute, iconic details like the half-bathtub sofa in Holly Golightly’s fairly empty party pad in Breakfast at Tiffany’s. Lizarralde’s carefully sketched floor plans even accommodate for slight discrepancies in size he’s taken note of, especially in the Up house. He explains: “For it [to] seem more real the designers made a house as small as possible. The result is that this house is bigger inside than the outside… I have tried to reconcile these two aspects in this floorplan.” Above: The Simpsons Friends Seinfeld Dexter The Big Bang Theory Sex and the City The Golden Girls Three’s Company I Love Lucy Breakfast at Tiffany’s Frasier Will & Grace How I Met Your Mother Up My Neighbor Totoro This post is presented by groupleme Iaki Aliste Lizarralde: Tumblr | deviantART via [Laughing Squid] |
Hello Force and Destiny™ beta testers, This week, we’re bringing you our fourth round of errata updates (pdf, 310 KB) for the Force and Destiny beta, and we’re introducing some changes to weapons and gear. One issue we’ve been hearing a lot about is that Player Characters are having a hard time customizing their lightsabers. This is a fair complaint. Generally, modifying weapons and armor is the purview of tech-focused PCs. However, a Force user’s lightsaber is an intensely personal weapon, and turning it over to someone with a better skill level for some tweaks and added mods feels inappropriate. In addition, we wanted to add rules that emphasize the mystical bond between a Force user and his or her lightsaber crystal. Thus, we introduced a pair of changes: one for modifying any attachments on lightsabers, and one specifically for modifying lightsaber crystal attachments. These new rules “stack” with some of the Artisan’s abilities, so that specialization will still be the best at tweaking a lightsaber to peak performance. However, now all would-be Jedi can enhance and modify their personal weapons to a reasonable extent. Meanwhile, we want to start looking more closely at adversaries as we prepare for our next update. We have some changes already in mind, but we’d like to hear how the different adversaries play in combat or narrative encounters against your Player Characters. If you use these adversaries in encounters and have some feedback on their performances, please also include the XP level and Careers and Specializations of the PCs involved in the encounter. As we examine the results of an encounter, the nature of the group against whom the adversary is squaring off against is vitally important toward understanding those results. Thanks everyone, and as always, we look forward to hearing your feedback! |
Oh God. Am I a sucker for punishment. Am I in fact a masochist? Maybe I should spend my evenings dripping melted candle wax onto my nipples instead of watching these bloody debates. It would be less painful and probably more productive, and it might even improve my chances of finding a date even if it was one of the 50 shades of grey variety, instead of being stuck indoors having no life and watching bleedin’ leaders’ debates. Oh God. Seemingly this debate isn’t going out live, despite the BBC announcing it would be live. This gives the BBC plenty of time to edit out any false moustaches and heckling women wearing a dead sheep as a waistcoat, which are generally the only interesting things about these affairs. It also gives time to add the laugh track. Contrary to suspicious mutterings on social media, the delay is not at the behest of MI5, or even the Scottish accounting unit of the Labour party, it’s not even in case Patrick Harvie calls David Coburn a racist twankmonkey – which would only be fair and entirely reasonable – it’s all down to the BBC keeching itself in case any audience members heckle that that BBC is biased crap and demand Ken MacQuarrie’s head on a plate. The BBC did this during the independence referendum with their “Big Debate” with 16 and 17 year olds. That was shite too. This doesn’t bode well. The debate hasn’t even started and I’m bored already. This is shaping up to be one of those shouty and uniforming “Let’s disengage the punters from politics programmes” which Scottish broadcasters do so well. This time it’s the same four suspects as last night, but with added greenery from Patrick Harvie and purplish populist apoplexy courtesy of UKIP’s David Coburn, otherwise known as Jibberjabber the Hutt. I strongly suspect that Coburn is a masochist, after all he belongs to a party that wants to slash the Scottish budget and send our public services back to the stone age. He loves it when Nigel is strict. I can sense a theme for this blog post developing already. After last night’s starring appearance from False Moustache Guy, the only way the party leaders can recover the initiative tonight would be to appear dressed as the cast of the Rocky Horror Show. Jim Murphy BA Politics (failed) has a natural advantage there, what with being a horror show all by himself, although the sight of Jim in a basque and fishnet stockings would probably make an entire nation rush off and drip melted candle wax on their nipples in an effort to purge the image from their minds. Still, it might suit him better than a Scotland strip, and it would certainly be a whole lot more believable than his claims to be a socialist. Rumour has it that chiropodists’ clinics all over Scotland were packed out today by people begging for their toes to be straightened after watching Jim last night. Turned BBC1 on ready for the debate. Masterchef is still on. Oh My God it’s False Moustache Man with pan fried gnocchi! Right, here we go. At last. It’s going to be shouty. There are rumours that David Coburn goes off in a huff after someone pan fried his doughy balls. We can but hope. First question – is it responsible to spend our way out of debt. Jim’s up first, looking stary. His eyebrows are running riot and he’s only just started. He’s promising to end austerity by not undoing anything in George Osborne’s budget. Has Jim cleared this with Ed Balls? Nicla points out that the austerity programme has failed even on its own terms. Austerity has pushed a million children into poverty. Good answer from Nicla. Ruth claims we’re the fastest growing economy. Are we? Is that an actual fact or is that a Ruthie fact? Wullie says austerity is working. David Coburn calls Alicsammin terrifying. He can do that because he doesn’t have any mirrors in his house. He says he wants to keep Barnett but that Alicsammin wants to abolish the Barnett formula and he’s the leader of the SNP. An audience member points out Nigel Farage said on the telly today that he wanted to abolish it. David Coburn is a moron, it’s official. Nicla says if we try to spend too much time looking for consistency in UKIP’s answers we’ll never get anywhere at all. So she sticks the boot into Ruthie instead. Gets cheer from audience. They’re all shouting over one another now. Jim says he just wants to be honest. Well there’s a first. And they’re all shouting over the top of one another again. Why does David Coburn sound like a toad? He wants to stop foreign aid. It’s all the fault of foreigners. He gets booed. Patrick Harvie says Coburn wants to cancel Britain’s membership of the civilised world. He points out that every person on that stage could and should pay more in tax. He’d like to see a Scandinavian approach to both taxes and public services. When Patrick’s being honest you can be sure he’s honest. This is what distinguishes him from Jim. That and the absence of mad staring eyes and incontinent eyebrows. Nicla says she wants to end austerity so we can invest in industries and grow the economy. Then there’s some shouting about Full Fiscal Autonomy and I’m none the wiser. Jim Murphy says we don’t need Full Fiscal Autonomy because we can tax rich houses in London. Scotland’s too wee and too poor. This debate is turning into a rerun of the BBC’s independence referendum debates. The Unionists are going on about the state pension now and how it needs to be protected. None of them are pointing out that the UK has one of the lowest state pensions in Europe. Not much protection there then is there. Nicla points out that Scotland is not a petroeconomy. Even without the oil our GDP is the same as the rest of the UK’s. This is about taking responsibility for our own resources and our own economy. She’s on fire here. Someone brings up fracking. I’m not sure who over all the shoutiness. Jim says that local communities should decide on fracking. This is the man whose party didn’t vote for a moratorium on fracking. Now he’s changed the subject and he’s going back to FFA. His eyes are still staring. This feels like we’re in an independence referendum debate. All shoutiness and screaming, heat and no light. Seems the Unionist parties just can’t accept that they won that vote and move on. It’s like Unionist groundhog day. An audience member asks what the panellists can’t compromise on. Patrick Harvie says he could never support the renewal of nuclear weapons. He can’t support the demonisation of the poor. He makes a call for a new and better electoral system. Coalitions, he says, don’t need to be as dishonest as the one we had for the past five years. Scotland deserves a genuine multiparty democracy. Wee Wullie Rennie gets asked. He says he’ll only support nice things. Good things. Fluffy things. Like bunnies, and kittens, and ickle chicks. Is there a point to Wullie Rennie? Does anyone know? Ruthie says she won’t compromise on anything that will put the union at risk. She’s still fighting last year’s campaign. She demands that Nicla will rule out another referendum forever and a day. Nicla says that she’s not even thought about the 2016 manifesto but she’ll only consider another referendum if there is a material change in circumstances. But the basic issue is that the people decide, not politicians. Jim comes out with one of his rehearsed soundbites. He name checks the Daily Record. James Cook asks him if he remembers what the question is. Jim doesn’t. He’s too busy trying not to blink. Apart from the red tie he looks like an undertaker. Which is in fact not that far from the truth, Jim’s burying the Labour party. Nicla says that she wants an end to austerity and promises that the SNP will never ever vote for the renewal of Trident. Ruth demands clarification, would the SNP vote against or just abstain? Nicla says they’ll vote against – is that clear enough for you Ruth? This is all very shouty. It’s hard to keep up. Even the moderator is shouty. I thought he was supposed to be keeping the rest of them in check and not adding to it? David Coburn’s red line is Europe, surprise surprise. His red line is any compromise with separatism. Nicla says she’s really very pleased about that. My god the man is thick. He starts to go on about immigration depressing wages. Jim Murphy demands that Coburn stops demonising people. Which is a bit rich coming from Jim Murphy, but there ye go. It’s still all very shouty. Nicla says the most depressing thing about the evening is the xenophobic attitude of Coburn, he’s a disgrace. Gets a big cheer for that. Not just from the audience but from me as well. Well that was rubbish. No clear winners there was far too much shouting. But David Coburn was the clear loser, and we can all be grateful for that. Still, thank god that’s over. Donate to the Dug This blog relies on your support and donations to keep going – I need to make a living, and have bills to pay. Clicking the donate button will allow you to make a payment directly to my Paypal account. You do not need a Paypal account yourself to make a donation. You can donate as little, or as much, as you want. Many thanks. |
The price differences show that industrial electricity users are not or only marginally taxed in nearly all countries, while household taxes on electricity usually range between 10% to 35%. The analysis of energy sources show that: 1) countries with a 35% or higher share of natural gas in the electricity mix have the highest industrial electricity prices, 2) Countries with a diversified electricity mix are in the mid-range of electricity prices, 3) No general price level was found for countries with a high share of nuclear, coal, or both in their electricity mix. In this post an overview is given of electricity prices in a large number of countries, mainly members of the OECD. This shows how prices vary between households and industry due to tax differences, and by analyzing the sources of electricity per country, it also leads to a better understanding how different energy sources affect the price of electricity. Comparisons between households and industrial electricity prices The quarterly Energy Prices & Taxes publication of the International Energy Agency is one of the best sources for energy price data. I took a dataset from it of 2009 household and industrial electricity prices including and excluding taxes for 26 countries, mainly member states of the OECD except Kazakhstan, Israel, and Slovenia. Taxes can include value transfer added (VAT), general excise taxes, and renewable energy taxes or feed-in tariffs. An overview of this data is shown in figure 1 and 2 below. Astute readers will notice that Germany is missing in the overview. The IEA does not include electricity price data in its Energy Prices & Taxes publication for Germany. The EU energy portal shows that Germany's electricity price including taxes is in the upper range in Europe, both for industry and households. The following observations were made for this dataset: 1) The price of electricity for households and industry in this set differs by more than 50% on average. For the 26 countries the average household electricity price was 19 US dollar cents per kWh, while the industrial price was 12 cents per kWh. Many countries therefore have a clear industrial policy to try to keep their industries as competitive as possible, at least regarding energy inputs. 2) In general industry is only marginally taxed for energy ranging from a 0% up to 10% level, except in Italy (27% tax), Netherlands (15% tax), France (12% tax), Turkey (23% tax), and Norway (26% tax). 3) In most countries households have to pay a 10-35% tax rate on top of their energy bill. Exceptions on the upside include Denmark, which has an extremely high household tax on electricity (122%) to support its renewable energy feed-in system, Norway (50% tax), Sweden (60% tax). Exceptions on the downside include Israel (0% tax), Japan (7% tax), and the United States, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and Portugal (all 5% tax). 4) Only two countries have lower household electricity prices than industry. Industrial electricity users in Mexico pay 8% more than households, and industrial electricity users in Costa Rica pay 1% more than households. Figure 1 & 2 – Household & industry electricity prices including and excluding taxes in 2009 for a selected number of countries. Prices excluding taxes in blue and taxes added in red. Data obtained from IEA (2010). Click here for a large version. How the electricity generation mix affects industrial user electricity prices To look at effects of energy sources on electricity prices I took another dataset of 25 countries from the Energy Prices & Taxes publication, excluding countries which have large shares of hydro power. The countries are mainly member states of the OECD, except Israel, El Salvador, Kazakhstan, South Korea. An overview of the data can be found in figure 3 below.Although many other factors play a role in electricity price formation, include market structure, regulation, and interconnection between countries, I ignored these factors in this analysis due to time constraints. In such a manner only the cost differences between energy sources are analysed, but these already give interesting insights. The following observations were made regarding industrial electricity prices including taxes: 1)The highest industrial electricity prices, above 13 US dollar cents per kWh, are found in countries that are more than 35% dependent on natural gas for electricity. For example, Italy has the highest industrial electricity costs in Europe and is 50% dependent on natural gas imports for its electricity. The country paid the highest price for natural gas pipeline imports in 2009 at 9.05 dollars per Million Btu and also the highest price for LNG imports in at 7.86 dollars per million Btu. Similar to Italy are Slovak Republic, Ireland, Japan, Turkey, Luxembourg, and Hungary. Doing slightly better are the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands as they are also producers of natural gas. • El Salvador’s Electricity price is one of the highest in the dataset found because the country relies to a large extent on oil for electricity production. Last estimates found for the energy mix is a 45% oil share in electricity production in 2007. 2)Medium industrial electricity prices, between 9 and 13 US dollar cents per kWh, are found in countries that have a highly diversified energy mix including coal, natural gas, renewable energy and sometimes also nuclear (Portugal, Spain, Finland). 3)The lowest industrial electricity prices, below 9 US dollar cents per kWh, are found in countries that have a diversified mix including nuclear, natural gas, and coal, and are reliant on the North American market for natural gas and (Mexico, USA), and in case of Kazakhstan rely 90% on domestically produced coal and 10% on hydro power. No pattern of industrial electricity prices, are found in countries dependent mainly on nuclear, coal, or a combination of both for electricity generation. • High electricity prices, above 13 cents per kWh, are found in Slovenia (59% coal, 32% Nuclear), the Slovak Republic (39% Nuclear, 32% Coal), and Czech republic (59% Coal, 32 Nuclear). • Medium electricity prices, between 9 and 13 cents per kWh, are found in Greece (52% coal), Poland (90% coal), Israel (63% Nuclear), Denmark (48% coal), and France (77% nuclear). • Low electricity prices, below 9 cents per kWh, are found in Taiwan (49% coal, 22% nuclear), South Korea (34% nuclear, 38% coal), and Kazakhstan (90% coal). Especially interesting is the difference in electricity prices of Poland and Kazakhstan (both 90% dependent on domestically produced Coal). Respectively these are 4 US dollar cents per kWh for Kazakhstan and 12 US dollar cents per kWh for Poland. Possible differences would be regulation, differences in quality of mined coal, and efficiency of coal thermal power plants. Figure 3 – Household electricity prices including taxes in 2009 for a selected number of countries. Industry prices in blue and household prices in red shown as an added price above the industrial level. Data obtained from IEA (2010). Overview of countries with a large share of hydropower in the electricity mix The dataset on countries with large hydropower shares in electricity generation includes 9 countries. Costs ranged from a low of 5 to a high of 12 US dollar cents per kWh in respectively Paraguay and Brazil. Difference can probably be explained by difference in infrastructure costs to transport electricity. For example, Norway and Brazil depend nearly entirely on hydro power but prices differ at respectively 6 to 12 US dollar cents per kWh. Norway has a fairly simple electricity transport infrastructure, and Brazil a highly complex one, due to country size and population differences. Figure 4 – Industry and household electricity prices including taxes in 2009 for countries with a large share of hydro power. Industry prices in blue and household prices in red shown as an added price above the industry level. Data obtained from IEA (2010). Discussion question How can differences in electricity price be explained between countries with a large share of coal, nuclear, or both in the energy mix? References IEA, 2010. Energy Prices and Taxes: Quarterly Statistics 3rd quarter 2010. IEA Publications: Paris. |
A Northbridge bar has answered vulgar signs posted above a hotel earlier today with one of their own. Mechanics’ Institute Small Bar posted this photo to their Facebook page in answer to the signs put up by the Brass Monkey Hotel today. Earlier... Northbridge’s Brass Monkey hotel has been on the end of a social media smashing after hanging sexually suggestive and sexist signage to promote a New Year’s Eve Frat Party. Among the milder suggestions were signs saying “daughter drop-off point” and “we want your freshmen daughters”, with a “we want your freshmen sons, too” apparently thrown in as some kind of counterpoint. The signs are similar to those erected at a United States university last year, which also caused outrage at the time. Camera Icon The crass signage has infuriated social media. People reacted furiously to the signs, taking to social media to vent their disappointment at the venue. Posts by customers on the hotel’s Facebook page called for the signs to be taken down. Camera Icon The crass signage has infuriated social media. "You've lost my and my friends' business until you permanently take down the misogynistic banners and publicly apologise for putting them up,” said one post. Customers said they had contacted the manager of the hotel to complain about the signs, and he informed them the offensive ones had been removed. The hotel’s page then posted this apology, which has so far received 134 comments and 11 shares. Camera Icon The apology posted by the hotel. The rating of the hotel’s page has already dropped 0.6 points, from 3.7 to 3.1 out of five. The number of one star reviews now outweighs the number of five star reviews. The manager declined to comment to The West Australian. A spokesman for ALH Group, the owners of The Brass Monkey, apologised for any offence caused. He said an ALH Group representative had spoken to hotel management. “The banners were inappropriate,” the spokesman said. “We had some complaints about them, upon getting those complaints the banners were removed and an apology was posted on the Facebook page. “The content wasn’t appropriate and they were immediately removed.” The Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor declined to comment. Camera Icon The crass signage has infuriated social media. |
It’s forty degrees, the icicles are dripping snowmelt off the roof, and it’s snowing out. Today seems to be a perfect example of the paradox of the season. March starts tomorrow, and the end of winter is in sight. But there’s a pretty solid likelihood of getting a bunch more snow, as well as days and nights that are bitterly cold. This, for me, is often the toughest time of the year. I’m still enjoying the winter skiing and snowshoeing, as well as the sight of the white woods. But as we get deeper into March and closer to my birthday, I start getting antsy for spring to be here. Last year, there wasn’t really a part of the winter like this, seeing as it was so warm and light on snow. I mean, I went canoeing on my birthday in late March last year. That was definitely a first for me. The driveway is a hot mess now too. I’m still able to drive up to the cabin and haven’t had to hike in since the middle of January. But as the snow that’s on the ground gets heavier and wetter, it’s harder and harder to stay on the tracks I’ve made. I’ve slid off the tracks a few times and always have to back up a little bit before getting back on them and driving up to the yard. It won’t be long before I’m complaining about the mud at the top of the driveway, but for now, I’ll have to complain about the snow. Pico and I took a nice long walk down the road this afternoon. I don’t keep him on a leash out here, as he has never shown an inclination to take off on me. He wanders a hundred yards ahead of me and sometimes if he finds something especially interesting to smell, I may even get ahead of him a little bit. Today was the first time all winter when someone came down the road as we were walking though. I grabbed Pico’s collar and held on as the pickup truck drove by us to the end of the road, turned around and came back by. I recognized the truck as one of my “neighbors” from down the road about two miles. His little dog was sticking its head out the window as they went past and the little dog and Pico shared a hello bark as the driver and I shared the obligatory half wave. I think what makes this time of year something that I think about is that it’s warm and nice and perfect weather for going out and doing my favorite activities, but due to the overcast sky and chance of rain, I find it hard to be motivated to go skiing. The days are longer and warmer but there’s always the feeling that I can go tomorrow. Without having to drive anywhere to go skiing, it’s easy for me to throw on some clothes and boots and head out right from the front door. Even though I am looking forward to the warm days of spring there’s also the dread that the snow coming down could turn to rain, and kill the snowpack that’s already on the ground. Then there won’t be any skiing tomorrow or anytime soon. It’s the differences in these two attitudes that makes March interesting. I can’t wait to go skiing again, and I also can’t wait to be able to walk around the woods without snowshoes or skis. This sums up my attitude about living out here as well. I love the life and simple pleasures my lifestyle provides. But I’m torn when I want to take a hot shower or just veg out and watch TV. The paradox of the season is representative of my lifestyle. Looking forward to polar opposite desires brings me down and motivates me at the same time. I’d like to take a hot shower whenever I want, but I also don’t want to pay for utilities or live in some dumpy apartment. I just have to weigh my desires and decide which is best for me, just like anyone else. After all, the hard decision of moving out here has already been made. Now it’s up to me to make it work. Be sure to like Middle of the Trail on Facebook for more pictures and daily updates and follow @JustinALevine for whatever it is I do on Twitter. Share this: Twitter Facebook Google Tumblr Reddit LinkedIn Pinterest Print |
Supreme Court justices make the sign of the cross Feb. 19 during prayers at a private ceremony in the Great Hall of the Supreme Court in Washington where late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia lies in repose. Credit: Associated Press SHARE By of the Madison — Having the U.S. Supreme Court short one justice for the foreseeable future could affect Wisconsin cases dealing with voter ID, abortion, an investigation of Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and how legislative districts are drawn. The high-stakes case that could see the most immediate effect is the one dealing with how Republican lawmakers drew district maps to favor their party in 2011. A panel of three federal judges will hold a trial in May, and any appeals will go directly to the Supreme Court instead of an appeals court. If the high court splits 4-4 — as could happen after the death in February of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia — the ruling of the panel would hold. That puts more power than usual in the hands of the three-judge panel, which consists of two Republican appointees and one Democratic appointee. This month it handed a victory to those challenging the maps, agreeing to hold a trial and expressing an openness to the plaintiffs' claims that the maps were drawn so favorably for the GOP as to be unconstitutional. Other cases could also be affected by the death of Scalia and the refusal of Republicans who control the U.S. Senate to hold a vote on President Barack Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, until after the Nov. 8 presidential election. Among them is one over the challenge to the investigation — now shut down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court — into whether Walker's campaign illegally worked with political groups. Other legal challenges on voter ID and abortion are pending and could eventually wend their way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Similar laws in other states are also being challenged, and those cases may have a better chance at making it to the high court than the cases from Wisconsin. Here's a look at where the Wisconsin cases stand. Redistricting. A group of 12 Democrats last year sued over the way Republican lawmakers drew legislative maps, arguing they violated the voting rights of Democrats because they so heavily favored Republicans. Lawmakers have to draw new maps every 10 years to account for changes in population. Republicans controlled all of state government in 2011 and were able to put in place legislative and congressional maps that greatly helped them. The U.S. Supreme Court has said maps can be so partisan that they violate voters' rights, but the justices have not been able to agree on a standard for measuring when maps amount to improper political gerrymandering. The Democrats who brought the suit have proposed a way to make such calculations so courts can rule when politicians go too far in drawing district lines to favor them. The lawsuit was designed to try to win the vote of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has disagreed with conservatives who contend there is no way courts can determine how much is too much when it comes to partisan gerrymandering. "He essentially issued an invitation. Our case, the Whitford case, responds to that invitation," said Sachin Chheda, director of the Fair Elections Project, which is assisting with the litigation. Lester Pines, a Madison attorney not involved in the litigation, said early rulings in the case have shown those bringing the lawsuit have a shot at winning. A Democrat, Pines has been active in challenging limits on collective bargaining and other laws approved by Republicans. "While they didn't give the plaintiffs a road map, there's a lot of hints there," Pines said of the judges hearing the redistricting case. But Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, said he doesn't see how the criteria proposed by the challengers in this case differ significantly from ones the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected in others. "It looks to me like it isn't that much different than other methodologies that have been tried and defeated," he said. Handing a victory to those challenging the law, the panel agreed to hold a four-day trial starting May 24. Once the panel issues its decision, attention will shift to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the justices split 4-4, the panel's ruling will be upheld. Voter ID. State and federal courts have upheld Wisconsin's 2011 voter ID law, but litigation continues. Last week, a panel of appeals judges raised the possibility of finding a way to vote for those who have severe challenges in getting photo IDs. The unanimous panel of 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judges sent the case to U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman in Milwaukee for further proceedings. The case could move quickly because primaries are slated for Aug. 9. In another case, U.S. District Judge James Peterson in Madison threw out in December a challenge to the voter ID law itself, but determined the liberal group One Wisconsin Now and others who brought the lawsuit could keep alive their arguments that voters should be able to use a broader range of IDs for voting. A trial is set to begin May 16. Under Wisconsin's voter ID law, only certain types of photo IDs can be used at the polls, such as driver's licenses and state-issued ID cards. The lawsuit also challenges limits on early voting approved by Republicans in recent years. Challenges are also pending against voter ID laws in other states, such as Texas and North Carolina. The issue from one of the states could eventually get to the U.S. Supreme Court so it can revisit a 2008 ruling that upheld Indiana's voter ID law. If the Supreme Court were to take one of those cases and split 4-4, the ruling of the lower court would remain in place. That would mean different parts of the country could have different rules on what types of voter ID laws are allowed. Abortion. Wisconsin Republicans approved a law in 2013 requiring doctors who provide abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of where they perform the procedure. U.S. District Judge William Conley in Madison ruled the law violated the right to abortion. In a 2-1 ruling, a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals panel agreed with that finding. Attorney General Brad Schimel last month asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case. The nation's high court showed divisions in March when it heard arguments over a Texas law that requires admitting privileges and places other restrictions on abortion that critics say would force the closure of three-quarters of Texas' abortion clinics. If the court split 4-4 on the Texas case, it would leave in place a 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision largely upholding those abortion restrictions. But a similar split in the Wisconsin case would cause the opposite result because of the 7th Circuit's ruling. It is also possible the U.S. Supreme Court would send the Texas case back to lower courts for further proceedings. John Doe. Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm plans to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision by two Wisconsin Supreme Court justices to stay on a case over a John Doe investigation into whether the Republican governor's campaign illegally worked with political groups. The state court shut down the investigation last year, finding nothing illegal occurred. The Democratic district attorney maintains Justices David Prosser and Michael Gableman shouldn't have participated in the decision because their campaigns benefited from heavy spending by groups that were under investigation. The U.S. Supreme Court in 2009 found in a 5-4 decision that political spending could force judges off cases, but it emphasized the circumstances in the case it was considering — in which a coal executive spent about $3 million to help elect a West Virginia judge — were rare. If the U.S. Supreme Court took the Wisconsin case and ruled Prosser and Gableman shouldn't have participated in it, it would reopen the underlying questions over when candidates and political groups can coordinate their activities. A 4-4 split would leave in place Prosser and Gableman's decision to stay on the case, as well as the ruling ending the investigation. |
In previous posts in this blog we have seen how gender stereotypes play a big role in the narrative of many transitioners. Liking stereotypically feminine things or wanting long hair is seen as significant markers of internal “gender” rather than aspects of personality. There are other types of narratives that lead to someone deciding they are trans. One we will call the sexual narrative, the other one we will call the jealousy narrative. The sexual narrative will be described in more detail in later posts. Being jealous of women and girls is something that comes up often in the narratives of transitioners. Sometimes the jealousy focuses on physical aspects of being female, such as breasts, genitals or being “allowed” to act and dress in specific ways. This poster even gets angry with women for being women: Another poster assures OP that it’s common to feel this way! Another jealous poster. (note the abundance of stereotypes in this post) Jealousy about pregnancy: Another poster asks, “does the jealousy ever go away“? There is a lot of anger directed at women: Another common cause of jealousy is that women are perceived to have it “better” or “easier”. This attitude, which is prevalent among people who call themselves “men’s rights activists”, is also not uncommon among transgender people online. Women have it better: Being a “pretty girl” is like playing on “easy mode”: Male privilege is nothing, when you’re a girl people open doors for you! Males are the ones who are oppressed, females have tons of advantages! There are many people spending a lot of time in online trans communities who do not have an emotionally healthy or mature perspective on what it means to be female. Regardless of whether one agrees with a lot of the transgender politics, most people would agree that someone who is unable to leave the house because seeing women makes them too angry are not in a healthy place, whether they decide to transition or not. |
On today’s show your hosts look at the LA Galaxy’s entrance into the 4th round of the US Open Cup. CoG Studios, CA – With the LA Galaxy’s two week break from MLS play almost complete, your hosts Josh Guesman and LA Galaxy Insider Adam Serrano quickly shift gears to look at the US Open Cup. They’ll talk a bit about the oldest ongoing national soccer tournament in the United States and about the LA Galaxy’s role in some of that history. Winners in 2001 and 2005 and runners up in 2002 and 2006, LA is not stranger to the tournament. But does Bruce Arena and the rest of the team take this tournament seriously? Did the quarterfinal loss to Real Salt Lake last year prove to you that the Galaxy are interested in taking home the top prize and getting a free pass into the CONCACAF Champions League? To make things really interesting, Tuesday nights game will be against an amateur side. Not a ton is known about La Máquina, but one of the joys of any tournament is to watch the professional teams take on the unknown sides. The LA Galaxy have struggled with some lower level professional teams in the past, but against an amateur side is anyone really expecting a challenge? Your hosts will throw out some names that might make an appearance and what that means for the Galaxy. Does a team filled with senior team players who’ve spent most of their time with LA Galaxy II mean that LA doesn’t care about winning? Its a great primer to what should be a fun night at StubHub Center. Tickets are $10 and parking is free. So we’ll see everyone there. Music Provided by Back Pocket Memory SHOW INFO CORNER OF THE GALAXY ITUNESSTITCHERSOUNDCLOUDYOUTUBE MUSIC PROVIDED BY BACK POCKET MEMORY ITUNESFACEBOOKTWITTERINSTAGRAM Comments comments |
Accounting for the Revolution™ Thomas Jay Rush Blocked Unblock Follow Following Mar 12, 2017 In recent weeks, the price of ether has risen from around $10.00 US dollars per ether to hovering around $20.00 US in recent days. Needless to say, this has caused a lot of discussion. We wondered if this increase in price meant that the Ethereum community was all of a sudden spending thousands of dollars more per day on gas. Or was it hundreds of dollars more per day? Or was it one dollar per day? Or even one penny? We had no basis to answer that question, so we set out to find the answer for ourselves. Before we began our search, we imposed a self-imposed rule. This rule was that we could only get the data in a fully-decentralized way. This means we could use no external web APIs or rely on any third parties. We could only use data directly from the a locally running Ethereum node. If you’ve ever tried to do this, you know that this means you should sit back and relax. Can you say: “slooooow”? Over the past year, we’ve been working on speeding up this data access in a fully-decentralized manner. We call our solution QuickBlocks.io. The word “quick” being operative. Written in C++, QuickBlocks is able to achieve speeds more than 200 times faster than the RPC. This allows us to efficiently produce answers to these questions (and many other things). The easiest way to explain QuickBlocks is to show you some code, and I will do that shortly, but first, I wanted to talk about… Blockchain on a Stick™ QuickBlocks scrapes, parses, pre-digests, and caches the entire Ethereum blockchain in a fully-decentralized manner. We make the claim that our work is so decentralized that we can store the entire chain — fully parsed and heavily optimized — on an external drive. We call this “Blockchain on a Stick™,” and we carry it around with us in our backpack wherever we go. BlockChain on a Stick™ BlockChain on a Stick™ allows us to prove to potential clients that our solution is decentralized. We can, if we wish, disconnect from the Internet, and while QuickBlocks cannot access the latest blocks, it still works perfectly. That’s decentralized. QuickBlocks uses the node’s RPC in the same way that web3.js does. After pre-processing the received data, we store each block, every transaction, every receipt, and every log in a local database. Before storing the data, we optimize the crap out of it in every way we can think. Our goal is this: quick! We retrieve each block and then, if it has transactions, we spin through each transaction asking for the transaction’s receipt. Given the receipt, we make a determination if the transaction needs to be traced. We trace transactions that may have finished in error. Additionally, we identify internal transactions that were initiated by the transaction and parse the input data field and the receipt’s logs. We do all of this pre-processing prior to storing the data, and because the blockchain is immutable, we only need to do this once. (This is not technically true because of chain re-organizations, but we won’t complicate matters by explaining how we handle this.) Every time we access the data thereafter, we are reading highly-optimized data intended specifically to be retrieved quickly. Another thing QuickBlocks does while storing the data is to store various levels of detail. (Yes. It uses more disc space, but it’s significantly faster.) This allows the developer to choose between higher speed given less detail verses lower speed if more detail is required. It’s the programmer’s choice. For the analysis below we chose the half-speed / half-detail version. Programming QuickBlocks™ QuickBlocks is a C++ library and a series of applications. Below we show you the application code we wrote that gathered the data we needed to do our analysis. Below is the actual code. It’s pretty simple. As with all C++ code, we start with the main function: A basic QuickBlocks program This function first initializes the QuickBlocks library and then decides on the start block and the number of blocks to visit. We chose to start at block 2,912,407 (the closest block to January 1, 2017). The function getLatestBlock returns the node’s latest block. Next, we create a data structure that will store the result of visiting each block. This structure may be of any type — whatever is appropriate for your application. The code then calls into the QuickBlocks library function forEveryNonEmptyBlockOnDisc and finishes by making a final report. QuickBlocks has a number of interfaces for traversing blocks. For our purposes, we used the middle-of-the-road forEveryNonEmptyBlockOnDisc . This function gives full detail, but skips over blocks with no transactions (about 37% of all blocks). A similar function called forEveryBlock visits every block (including empty ones) in full detail. On the other end of the spectrum is the function forEveryMiniBlockInMemory which is super-fast but delivers a lot less data than the other methods. The function one uses depends on ones application. Visiting Every Non-Empty Block If you’re familiar with C++, you’ve noticed that the bulk of the work is completed in the function visitBlock . Here is that function: The visitBlock function gets called for each non-empty block in the range At each non-empty block, the pointer to the arbitrary data is retrieved. In this case, it’s a pointer to the instance of CGasTracker from main . The function first figures out when the block occurred. The function then determines if this is a new day. If it is, a report on the previous day is made. In this way, we accumulate and report on statistics once per day (see the data tables below). The function then grabs the price of ether in US dollars at the time of this block, that is, it grabs the block’s spot price. QuickBlocks gets this data from the Poloniex price API. (Okay — we admit it — we broke our own self-imposed rule! But we cache the price data so it still works when unplugged.) The function then spins through each transaction and prices the gas consumed by that transaction. Note, that we do not distinguish between in-error and successful transactions. Even if the transaction ended in error, the gas was expended, so we want to account for it. CGasTracker simply accumulates the data each day, holds the Ethereum price data, and reports the results. How Much More is the Community Paying for Gas? What effect has the recent price increase had on the Ethereum community as a whole? The chart below shows the amount of Ether and US dollars spent each day during January of 2017: Expenditures in US dollars and Ether for January 2017 On average, the Ethereum community spent slightly more than 34 ether per day during the month of January. Most of that month, the spot price hovered around $10.00 US per ether, it figures, then, that the average number of US dollars spent per day on gas was about $340 US dollars. Looking at it from the perspective of an average transaction, one can see that this translates to between 7/10 of a penny and 8/10 of a penny per transaction. (Note: we use finneys and cents as opposed to ethers and dollars because the numbers are too small otherwise. A finney is 1/1000 of an ether.) This seemed low, but we checked it against EtherScan and this posting from Bok, and our code reports identical numbers. (Yes, we know, more external data — but this time we’re just double checking.) Over the entire month of January, the community spent nearly $10,700 US dollars on gas. How about February? Expenditures in US dollars and Ether for February 2017 Three things are changing here: The number of transactions per day (50,359) rose by about 10.1% over January. More people made more transactions. The amount of ether spent per day (on average) rose by more than 10 ether per day (or a little over 30%). Part of that is due, obviously, to more transactions per day, but also the gasPrice in wei may have risen. The amount of US dollars spent per day on average rose by nearly $200 dollars (57.97%) per day. Clearly, this has to do with both of the previous things plus the increased price of ether. It’s hard to untangle these three components, but you can get a glimpse of what’s going on by focusing on the Finneys and cents columns. While we leave it to the reader as an exercise to figure out why on the 13th, the 15th, and the 22nd finneys per transaction rose above 1.0000, one can see that the average number of finneys per transaction over the month remained relatively stable. In other words, the price (in ether) that miners accepted to process transactions didn’t adjust too much even though the amount of total income taken by all miners ($15,250.26 vs. $10,688.16) increased by nearly 42.68%. One may see the price in US dollars increasing per transaction in the cents column. At the start of the month, the price per transaction in cents was around 0.9 pennies. By the end of the month, the price in cents had risen to around 1.3 pennies per transaction. So what happened in March? Obviously, the expectation is that we will see an even more profound effect on the per transaction cost given the skyrocketing price of ether this month (the last day we analyzed was Saturday, March 11th). Expenditures in US dollars and Ether for March 2017 Here we see an even more marked rise in the ‘penny’ price of a transaction. At the start of January, a transaction cost on average about 1/2 of one penny per transactions. Today, the price per transaction (in US dollars) is three times higher. The average price per transaction in finneys rises over the same time period, but not by three times over. This makes sense given the significant increase in the price of ether. Let’s Look at a Chart I think you can see from the chart that through the month of January and into mid-February the price of a transaction in both ether (finneys) and dollars (cents) tracked each other quite closely. Near the end of February, we see the prices starting to diverge. We at QuickBlocks believe this is because the price of ether per US dollar changes much faster than the gasPrice miners are willing to accept to process a transaction. Furthermore, while both Parity and Mist allow the user to adjust the provided gasPrice, we don’t believe their default gasPrice changes effectively (although what the word ‘effectively’ means here is hard to say). One can see the cost of gas per transaction in finneys lowering in recent days, but that price is not lowering as quickly as the price of ether vs. US dollar is rising, thus the divergence. I am tempted to say that this implies an imperfect market, but I think that would be a mistake. If one looks at the gasPrice market (that is the price miners will accept to process transactions) in terms of US dollars, then it does seem in-efficient. But I think one must view the market from the perspective of the “realm of ether.” One would think that, if it were a perfect market, some miners would accept lower gas prices (because ether is worth more), and therefore the price of a transaction in ether would lessen as quickly as the price of ether per dollar rises, but this is not happening. I live in America. I use US dollars every day. I don’t use ether every day. When I think of ether, I automatically translate it into US dollars. But if I enter into a “realm of ether” mind set — if I try to force myself into thinking about ether only — then I can see that there is no real intrinsic reason for it to change simply because the price per ether changes. Certainly there is no reason for it to change as fast as the price of ether per US dollars. Conclusion We are developing QuickBlocks because we want to Account for the Revolution™. We have a thousand ideas of what that might mean. Other people have done this sort of analysis before, however, many of those analyses suffer from one of two problems: (1) they are slow, or (2) the are centralized. QuickBlocks is both fast and fully decentralized. We know of an analysis that took more than 20 hours to scan just 15 days worth of DAO related data. (We confirmed this on our own machines). QuickBlocks ran through the above 70 days of data in less than four minutes. 20 hours for 15 days vs. 4 minutes for 70 days. Them is some quick blocks! If you like our work, please support us by sending a few ether (or parts of an ether) to our tip jar: 0xB97073B754660BB356DfE12f78aE366D77DBc80f. We offer all types of blockchain consulting, especially analysis and accounting services. Please find contact information on our website: http://quickblocks.io. |
Felipe Andres Coronel (born February 19, 1978), better known by the stage name Immortal Technique, is a Peruvian American hip hop recording artist and activist. Most of his lyrics focus on controversial issues in global politics. His lyrics are largely commentary on issues such as politics, socialism, class struggle, poverty, religion, government, imperialism, economics, institutional racism, and government conspiracies. Immortal Technique seeks to retain control over his production,[1] and has stated in his music that record companies, not artists themselves, profit the most from mass production and marketing of music. He claimed in an interview to have sold close to a combined total of 200,000 copies of his first three official releases.[2] Early life Coronel is Peruvian and was born in a military hospital in Lima.[3] He is of mostly Amerindian descent, although also has Spanish, French and African ancestry.[4] His family emigrated to Harlem, New York in 1980 to escape the Peruvian Civil War.[5][6] During his teenage years, he was arrested multiple times due in part to what he has said was "selfish and childish" behavior. He attended Hunter College High School on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, where his classmates included Chris Hayes[7] and Lin-Manuel Miranda, who he bullied, although the two later became friends.[8][9] Shortly after enrolling in Pennsylvania State University, he was arrested and charged with assault-related offenses due to his involvement in an altercation between fellow students; the charges stemming from this incident led to him being incarcerated for a year.[3][10] After being paroled, he took political science classes at Baruch College in New York City for two semesters at the behest of his father, who allowed Coronel to live with him on the condition that he went to school.[11] Honing his rapping skills in jail, and unable to find decent wage-paying employment after his release, he began selling his music on the streets of New York and battling with other MCs.[12][13][14] This, coupled with his victories in numerous freestyle rap competitions of the New York underground hip hop scene such as Rocksteady Anniversary and Braggin Rites, led to his reputation as a ferocious Battle MC.[15] Musical career 2000–2005: Revolutionary Vol. 1 and Revolutionary Vol. 2 In 2001, Immortal Technique released his first album Revolutionary Vol. 1 without the help of a record label or distribution, instead using money earned from his rap battle triumphs.[15] He also battled but lost to Posta Boy in 106 & Park's Freestyle Friday. Revolutionary Vol. 1 also contained the underground classic Dance With The Devil. In November 2002, he was listed by The Source in its "Unsigned Hype" column, highlighting artists that are not signed to a record label. The following year, in September 2003, he received the coveted "Hip Hop Quotable" in The Source for a song entitled "Industrial Revolution" from his second album. Immortal Technique is the only rapper in history to have a "Hip Hop Quotable" while being unsigned.[15] He released his second album Revolutionary Vol. 2 in 2003. In 2004, Viper Records and, in 2005, Babygrande Records re-released Immortal Technique's debut, Revolutionary Vol. 1, to make it available to a wider audience. "Point of No Return" from Revolutionary Vol 2 was used as the entrance theme for Rashad Evans during the UFC 88 Main Event between Chuck Liddell and Rashad Evans. 2005–present: The 3rd World, The Martyr and The Middle Passage Between 2005 and 2007 Immortal Technique began working on The Middle Passage and The 3rd World, the two albums that would serve a follow up to Revolutionary Vol. 2 and complete the series. He was also featured on several movie soundtracks and video game soundtracks, all the while touring relentlessly. In October 2011, Immortal Technique released The Martyr, a free compilation album of previously unreleased material and new tracks. [16] Collaborations The summer of 2005 saw the release of "Bin Laden", a vinyl single 12" featuring Mos Def and DJ Green Lantern. The single also contained a remix of the song featured Chuck D of Public Enemy and KRS-One. In early 2006, the song "Impeach the President", featuring Dead Prez and Saigon turned up in the mixtape "Alive on Arrival" DJ Green Lantern. This is a simple version of The Honeydrippers, 1973, in which Immortal Technique urged fans to organize a vote of censure against George W. Bush. In April 2009, a new song leaked on the internet named "Democratie Fasciste (Article 4)" by Brazilian-French rapper Rockin' Squat which featured Immortal Technique. The official release of the song and Rockin' Squat's album Confessions D'un Enfant Du Siècle Volume 2 was on May 12, 2009. The instrumental from the song was sampled from Wendy Rene's "After Laughter". The song expresses the inequalities of the Third World and revolutionary events throughout history against tyranny and oppression. The song contains lyrics in English (Immortal Technique), French (Rockin' Squat) and brief shout outs in Spanish (Immortal Technique). This song is Immortal Technique's first official international collaboration.[17] In early 2009, it was announced that there would be a collaboration between Technique and UK underground artist Lowkey, on a single called "Voices of the Voiceless". On September 11, 2009, a "snippet" of the song was released on YouTube.[18] The preview was released ahead of its September 21 launch on iTunes, as part of a web-campaign that included updates, promotion and links on forums, E-Magazines and several social networking sites. The song's lyrics cover a broad range of issues that are familiar to listeners of both artists – racism, world revolution, war, socialism, government control, rape, famine, colonialism, Classism, self-determination and the war in Iraq.[19] Activism Charitable work Immortal Technique performing in March 2010. Immortal Technique visits prisons to speak to youth and working with immigrant rights activists, and raising money for children’s hospitals overseas. He created a writing grant program for high school students as well.[citation needed] In June 2008, Immortal Technique partnered with Omeid International, a non–profit human rights organization, and dubbed the work as "The Green Light Project". With the profits of the album The 3rd World, he traveled to Kabul, Afghanistan, to help Omeid build an orphanage without any corporate or external funding. The orphanage, having been successfully established, currently houses over 20 orphaned children from Kabul.[20] Other work Films Immortal Technique featured in Ice-T's documentary Something from Nothing: The Art of Rap. The (R)evolution of Immortal Technique A documentary about Immortal Technique was released in September 2011 and premiered at the Harlem Film Festival.[21] It was released on DVD on July 10, 2012. This Revolution Immortal Technique appeared as himself in a docudrama film entitled This Revolution, which was recorded during the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York. The tape contains the protests surrounding the convention in the form of a documentary. It also featured Viper Records affiliates Akir and producer SouthPaw in roles. Since then Immortal Technique has taken control of Viper Records and has signed a distribution deal with Babygrande Records / E1 Entertainment to vent to their next album. SouthPaw has managed to establish himself as A&R of Viper Records. Discography Studio albums Compilation album Year Title 2011 The Martyr Release Date: October 27, 2011 Label: Viper Records Format: CD, digital download, cassette Singles |
An open letter to Nintendo: Dear Nintendo (umm Pokémon division?) My friend and I are Pokémon fans, Pokéfans if you will. Adult Pokémon fans. Is there a sadder thing? Probably. People who are into team sports. All those people who invested their money in property instead of your series of children’s videogames (at least I still have my Marshstomp hah!). But we’re not going to make any excuses for our sad sorry selves. Not to you. Of course we could argue that the whole series should be championed by gamers for it’s visionary approach to RPGs and the ability to take your favourite characters into games that span a number of console generations. For fellow RPG fans how nice would it be to be able to keep transferring your favourite characters from one game to the next without having to start over from scratch? Well Pokémon lets you do that (kinda) and we are grateful to you. Also, we could take this opportunity to praise the series for interweaving the games with the TV series with the film. Not in an awful spin-off way but seamlessly, all set in the same universe with recurring characters and elements and no other series has done that that we can think off. A novel version of the storylines told through the games, anime series and films would rival the greatest works of epic storytelling literature (in terms of length anyway). We could even brow-beat non-Pokémon fans into looking at the series by describing the deep levels of strategy and stat management that lies centimetres below the fluffy friendly façade of those lovable pocket monsters that can only say their own name. If we were desperate we might even eschew the educational benefit of the series going into depth about the comprehensive parody of modern taxonomy and biodiversity which most players are unaware of merely because biological education through the conventional school system doesn’t even touch the range of organisms that have been cutified for the Pokémon series of games. However, we won’t be doing that here. We won’t even be going on about how we still cry like little girls get a nasty bout of our fake allergies at the end of Pokémon: The First Movie. Even now. Just last week in fact. No, that is not the purpose of this letter. Suffice to say, the Pokémon franchise has been firmly and permanently lodged in our brain making us addicted to every piece of tat with that familiar blue and yellow lettering on it. Salivating over screenshots of the next game in the series (essentially another remake of the first three Game Boy games) in the same way that junkies do for drugs, winos do over alcohol and catholic priests, PE teachers and scout leaders do over the little boys that society has unwittingly put into their care. The only difference being the only downside to being a Pokémon fan is spending £40 once or twice a year and having to hide the deep shame to everyone you know (in some communities Pokémon fans form underground clubs to engage in hardcore EV training, trading and dancing contests). In short, Nintendo, we are sold on the series. We are your demographic. Release it and we will buy it. But today we don’t just write to bather in the glory of the franchise that pays for your nice suit, the water coolers, and your office. Today we show our fanatacism, by bitching about the whole series we enjoy. Way back since the Precambrian, you have been cranking out Pokémon games. Even Jesus was a fan: “And the Lord said unto them, cast out bug/flying types for they are weak to everything” (Ludicolo 11:16). Hitler also had a penchant for the series (he favoured Fighting type Pokémon which explains why we won the Battle of Britain) and rumour has it that the Dalai Lama invented the now banned SkarmBliss combination. And ever since the beginning the series has been accompanied by the “Gotta Catch ‘em all!” tagline. The phrase is so widely recognisable it made the cover of Time magazine in 2001, accompanying images of the Taliban masteminds behind the 9/11 tragedy. You no doubt know all this, but it is important to state because it underpins the whole point in this letter. Ever since the beginning it has been literally impossible to legitimately catch them all. Pokémon Red, Blue and Green kick started the whole phenomenon initially with 151 of the little blighters to collect. Except Pokémon number 151: Mew, wasn’t catchable*. Then Pokémon Silver and Gold introduced a hundred more critters, the kicker being that you could only catch 99 of them in the games. Pokémon number 251: Celebi was unavailable*. Then, unhappy with the money you made from the first two generations of the game (including the release of the money spinning tweaked remakes Pokémon Yellow and Pokémon Crystal), you decided to start it all over again. So, although we could transfer the Pokémon that we spent hundreds of hours levelling up, dreaming of and drawing unsavoury pictures of from Blue, Red and Yellow to Silver Gold and Crystal (but not back again!) and to the okayish N64 battle games, Stadium and Stadium 2**, the release of Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire meant we had to start again, again. From scratch. This time you gave us 360? 800? More? To catch. By this time we could tell the creativity pool was running a bit dry and more and more of the pokedex became filler rather than genuine contenders for competitive play. What the fuck were you thinking with Luvdisc? Whismur? Spinda? These are the only three I can remember from that generation. Still, as with previous generations there were still a bunch of legendaries we couldn’t get and even if we had managed to go to one of the Pokémon events to get Mew or Celebi for B/R/Y or S/G/C there was no way of getting them off the Game Boy games to the Game Boy Advance games. So now the pokedex ran from 1 to 2780 and I still had gaps at 151, a gap at 251 and some new gaps in the shape of Deoxys number 989. In addition to this, you furthered the barefaced cheekery of it all by re-releasing the first games in the series, albeit with a slight tart up. Make no bones about it Pokémon Fire Red and Pokémon Leaf Green were almost pixel for pixel remakes of Red and Blue. You know it, and we know it. You may be lost at the moment so here is a quick recap for you. I have played Yellow and Silver to completion and caught all the Pokémon possible, 248 out of 250. I then started all over again and bought Ruby and Leaf Green and played through those to completion. But what’s this? I still have 60 missing, I can only get 300 odd out of 360 odd? Oh yeah that’s right, I now need to start buying the Gamecube versions to get the last 60. 60 Pokémon which, by the way, I have previously caught on Silver with no problems. Another problem was that Pokémon Colosseum for the Gamecube was very very slow and very very boring and the multiplayer was very very poor. The unlocking requirements for the legendary Ho-oh were unnecessarily high and now I have accumulated a bunch of hardware that is totally useless when the next generation of Pokémon games came along: the Game Boy-N64 adapter, GBA-Gamecube cables, the Game Boy Advance wi-fi adaptor. Expensive. Expensive and pointless after you used them once. And I can’t even sell them because no other Nintendo games used them. Then because the die hard fan that I am hadn’t quite spent enough money in the vain attempt to catch them all, the dire Pokémon XD: Gale of Darkness and Pokémon Channel were released for the Gamecube. Pokémon XD is practically the same as Pokémon Colosseum although a fraction less unforgiving, some of the colosseum-only Pokémon were one chance and one chance only to catch, so thanks for that. The only incentive to buy XD was to catch the legendary Pokémon Lugia (also easily available in Silver and Gold, forever stuck on the Game Boy Color). Getting Lugia is indeed an exercise in RPG grinding, the unlock requirements even MMORPGs wouldn’t dare ask yet I did that. I played fourty hours of that game, aimlessly collecting Pokémon I already had on four other games, fighting all those slow fights in a row etc. etc. As for Pokémon channel, also for the Gamecube, what a bizarre game. So I have to play a game WATCHING TV WITH PIKACHU. But this isn’t real TV this is Pokémon land TV. So I have to unlock channels. But I also have to keep Pikachu happy. Except Pikachu is a demented retard who wants to watch one channel over and over and over again and gets pissed off if I, say, want to watch something I haven’t already seen eight times in the last four hours. Anyway, once again, the only incentive to buy and play this bizarre mental game was to unlock Jirachi, the so-called wishmaker, one of the new ones, generously available only through Pokémon channel. I now have 100 or so Pokémon games. Five different consoles to play on, a bunch of useless hardware and a bunch of gaps that are event-only bullshit Pokémon to collect. Event Pokémon are fine if you live next door to the Pokémon Centre in New York. Not fine if you live in Europe. Also, being able to download Pokémon at the cinema! Brilliant, except the films never came out here at the cinema. Which is a double shame because I am the kind of mug who would pay money to see the film. I probably would have booed my eyes out to Pokémon 4ever at the cinema like I did with the DVD except it wasn’t on a cinema within travelling distance of where I lived. I was done, Nintendo. I was out. Destined to not catch them all despite the psychological need to and despite the hundreds of pounds spent trying. Then Pokémon Diamond and Pearl came out for the DS. So now there are 20,000+ Pokémon to catch. And I have to catch a gazillion of ones I already have again again again as well as some by now totally uninspired Pokémon. Instead of being based on real life plants and animals there are now Pokémon based on kitchen appliances, an old man’s face and Pokémon based on other earlier Pokémon. Fortunately, I could (after playing through Diamond or Pearl once) easily transfer Pokémon from my GBA versions. I said easily; I could transfer six every 24 hours. Gee thanks Ninty. Thanks for putting a limit on me, a fan of the series, who has paid you good money over the years. Thanks for putting some complete bullshit time limit on how many of MY Pokémon I can transfer from MY Pokémon game to MY Pokémon game. Why did you do this? Did the marketing folks decide that players were just having too much fun in testing? So I’ve bought Red, Yellow, Silver, Stadium, Stadium 2, Ruby, Leaf Green, XD, Colosseum, Channel and Diamond. It’s cost me (or a parent if you are at the age you should be to play these games) hundreds of pounds. It’s taken me multiple hundreds of hours on the main games and about 100 hours on all the other ones to unlock the one or two you can’t get elsewhere. They have been painstakingly transferred to the latest version, all 400,000 of them, six at a time every 24 hours. Yet there are still Mew, Celebi, Deoxys, Manaphy, Phione, Darkrai, Arceus and Shaymin missing. Their empty slots in the pokedex taunting me every second of every day. It says “You, a grown man! Can’t catch them all? Loser. Child in an adult’s body loser”. And then timelilily you release Pokémon Ranger. £40, shit game which broke my DS touch screen and 20 hours later and I now have Manaphy and Phione. Woop de doo! Two more legendary Pokémon which have cost me time and money that I can put in a box and never ever use again. Which brings us to today. I’m still five short. A year ago there was an event to get Mew which wasn’t a hundred million miles from where I lived. Attending the event was degrading, horribly organised and literally physically painful. Last week there was some event to get Shaymin, which came and went. I missed the twenty four hour window to go and get it because I was working in another country at the time. Oh well. Boo for me. Maybe you’ll run another event in ten years when I may have a chance to get it. With Diamond and Pearl you added a pretty nifty Global Trade Service which allows you to trade with literally thousands of Pokémon players around the world! Great. Now I could legitimately acquire hacked event-only legendaries. Except you can’t because you can only request Pokémon YOU ALREADY HAVE in a trade. Didn’t think that through did you dicklips? Making the entire service useless. The joke is well and truly on me, reader of this letter, I could have bought an action replay a zillion years ago and just got all these legendary Pokémon without wasting hours of my life or travelling around the continent hanging out in shitty car parks and shops to get a whiff of some ridiculous Pokémon I’m not ever going to use. But that is wrong Ninty, using an Action replay is cheating. I’m one of the good guys. I’ve paid my dues. I’m trying to catch them all, I really am. It’s just you are not playing fair. Which is the reason for this letter. If you could please be so kind as to send me Shaymin, Darkrai, Arceus, Deoxys and Celebi I promise, cross my heart and hope to die, that I won’t commit a very public suicide outside your head office wearing a placard reading “Couldn’t catch ‘em all” spelled out in my fresh wrist blood. Regards, Cunzy1 1 P.S Could I get two sets, one for me one for my friend Richie? Otherwise is wristy-bloods time yeah? *This isn’t strictly true as these were available at special Nintendo events in Japan and probably America. Over the years there have been events in the UK making some of these legendary uncatchable ones available but they are often advertised 45 minutes before they start, are held in the ass end of nowhere and the event lasts for a total of 10 seconds. Even as people in their mid-late twenties with an active interest in the bloody games and an unhealthy amount of time spent on the internet, these events can often come and go before we’ve even had a chance to book a train ticket to the ‘alley by the car park at Nowhereham’. Quite how young children with no money who don’t spend all day on the internet find out about and then coerce their parents into taking them to these events is beyond us. Do you have a marketing department? This is like the DLC from hell. If you can find out about it, get there in time, pay for a train ticket, find the obscure venue and queue up with a hundred 10 year olds without getting arrested then you can download some stupid fucking thing which IS ALREADY ON THE CART ANYWAY. ** The minigames on Pokémon Stadium and Pokémon Stadium 2 were particularly entertaining. Good work. The decision to make your own Pokémon as playable characters in Stadium 2 was inspired. The sad ending to this story is that the battery on some of the first edition Silver and Gold games was decidedly dodgy, meaning I’ve lost all of my data. THAT IS MY LIFE WASTED THANKS NINTENDO and I have nothing to show for it. |
A former veteran Chicago police officer was sentenced to 19 years in prison Friday for stealing drugs, cash and guns for the Latin Kings street gang often while on-duty. Alex Guerrero, 42, faced up to life in prison, but Rudy Lozano, a U.S. District judge in Hammond, agreed to the 19-year term after prosecutors spoke of the former officer’s extensive cooperation. Assistant U.S. Attorney David Nozick said Guerrero, a former tactical officer, has been assisting the FBI in several investigations. When questioned by the judge if Guerrero’s cooperation led to any arrests, Nozick said he couldn't point to any specific ones and "cannot make a prediction. "Even if none are made, he has given extensive information that will be used," the prosecutor said. As about three dozen relatives and friends looked on, Guerrero softly apologized "to my children, to my wife and to my parents and to my sister and to the rest of my family and to the men and women of the Chicago Police Department." Guerrero pleaded guilty in August to taking part in seven robberies or burglaries of Latin King rivals between 2004 and 2006 with Officer Antonio C. Martinez Jr. in Hammond, East Chicago and Highland. Martinez also pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing In addition to crediting Guerrero for the 13 months he has already served, the judge said he would recommend that Guerrero be enrolled in an alcohol-treatment program in prison. Attorney Kevin Milner, who he has known Guerrero for 10 years, said the former officer felt true remorse for his misconduct and believed there "was no defense" for his actions. "It's been difficult, but he's a strong man," Milner said. |
Newsen via NateChoa, "Honestly and speaking candidly, our digital rank isn't that great right now. But it's because we were on such a long break. I consider this album a way to help the people who forgot about us remember us again. Our fans are liking it though because it's a new concept we haven't tried and they enjoy our two title tracks."On Seolhyun, "One thing I'd like to clarify is something that has been a hot topic lately. Our Seolhyun said that she completely divides her income with everyone but when I asked her what she meant by that, I think she was too young to really understand her contract terms because it isn't true. I can't go into detail about her contract terms but I don't want any more controversy over it. We know that Seolhyun works hard for that money and it wouldn't be fair to have to divide it."1. [+714, -14] FNC's weird media play is pitting the members against each other ㅋㅋㅋ2. [+494, -26] FNC probably thought people would be like "wow! so loyal!" if they media played about Seolhyun sharing her income but all they got was a ton of criticism so they're forcing Choa to clarify3. [+442, -34] Choa fighting4. [+79, -8] But isn't it obvious that there's something fishy if Seolhyun hasn't been able to afford a house by now when she's shot so many CFs? It's either she's sharing with the members or the agency is taking most of it5. [+63, -8] I remember on 'Knowing Bros' that Seolhyun said she didn't care about dividing her income because she was happy to help her members and smiled and the other members looked really pissed about it... maybe that's why she's clarifying?6. [+58, -4] Then how come she can't afford a house yet? CF modeling makes big bucks ㅡㅡ this clarification makes even less sense ㅋㅋㅋ7. [+51, -0] Basically means the agency is taking most if then8. [+42, -4] Let's not forget that Choa was the breadwinner for AOA in the beginning...9. [+37, -3] Everything aside, their agency is the worst ㅋㅋㅋ Choa and Seolhyun are working so hard and Jimin has had some individual work done, I think it's time that they discuss their contract terms again10. [+35, -1] Their agency is so trash...11. [+24, -16] Honestly Seolhyun should keep her mouth shut because she causes misunderstandings every time she opens her mouth. No wonder the other members are always frustrated with her, she makes them into bad guys all th etime.12. [+23, -2] Why does Mina's facial expression look so surprised at her clarification though ㅋㅋㅋ13. [+22, -3] Maybe they do share Seolhyun's income but it's not divided equally between all of them?14. [+20, -0] Well you still have Sungso who's feeding 12 members all on her own right now15. [+17, -3] FNC probably forced Choa to clarify... but you have to admit that Seolhyun's pulling all the weight right now, like Suzy and miss A16. [+16, -3] I remember on 'Knowing Bros' they asked Seolhyun if she was happy and she said she was but she didn't look happy at all, nearly looked like she was about to cry17. [+15, -2] What nonsense is this? Everyone knows that groups divide income and even Seolhyun herself said that they did so who is Choa to ignore what Seolhyun said "just because she's young and doesn't know anything"?18. [+15, -4] I think it's true that they do divide income since Choa refuses to go into detail about it19. [+14, -0] Normally idol groups do divide income until their next contract renewal where they can discuss their own terms. Seolhyun may have made a lot in income but you have to consider how much the agency takes, their flop albums, and their training expenses, on top of dividing with the rest of the members...20. [+13, -1] Doesn't her clarification basically mean FNC takes everything if Seolhyun shot all those CFs and still can't afford a house and yet she doesn't share her income with the members? |
PHILADELPHIA, Dec. 12, 2016—This year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) saw an unprecedented decline in the percentage of universities maintaining written policies that severely restrict students’ free speech rights. This is the ninth year in a row that the percentage has dropped. Released today, Spotlight on Speech Codes 2017: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation’s Campuses reports on written policies at 449 of America’s largest and most prestigious colleges and universities, all of which are accessible online in FIRE’s searchable Spotlight speech code database. FIRE rates schools as “red light,” “yellow light,” or “green light” institutions based on how much, if any, protected speech their policies restrict. The report’s findings were first featured in an editorial in this weekend’s Wall Street Journal. Major findings from Spotlight on Speech Codes 2017 include: 39.6 percent of surveyed institutions maintain severely restrictive, red light speech codes—a nearly 10 percentage point drop from last year’s 49.3 percent. Of the 449 schools surveyed, 27 received FIRE’s highest, green light rating for free speech. This number is up from 22 schools as of last year’s report . Twenty schools or faculty bodies in FIRE’s Spotlight database adopted statements in support of free speech modeled after the one adopted by the University of Chicago in January 2015. “The precipitous decline in restrictive speech codes means thousands of current and future students and faculty members will not be subject to policies that clearly violate their basic rights,” said FIRE Vice President of Policy Research Samantha Harris. “Over the past year, FIRE used all the resources at our disposal to achieve this result. We’ve worked collaboratively with college administrators and even members of Congress to reform policies, and litigated against speech codes when necessary. FIRE will continue our reform efforts until the last speech code is eliminated.” As the report details, however, there are still serious threats to free speech on campus: 237 schools surveyed received a yellow light rating (52.8%). Yellow light policies restrict narrower categories of speech than red light policies do, or are vaguely worded in a way that could too easily be used to suppress protected speech, and are unconstitutional at public universities. Of the institutions surveyed for this report, roughly 1 in 10 have “free speech zone” policies—policies limiting student demonstrations and other expressive activities to small and/or out-of-the-way areas on campus. Hundreds of colleges have implemented bias reporting systems to solicit reports of bias on campus, which most universities explicitly define to encompass speech protected by the First Amendment. FIRE will release detailed metrics on these systems in the coming days. “There are positive developments, but in many ways the climate for free speech on campus is more troubling than ever,” said Harris. “There are increasing demands from students for censorship, yellow light speech codes that don’t pass First Amendment muster are still a serious problem, and bias reporting systems are growing in popularity. It’s important that free speech advocates not rest on their laurels and remain diligent in defending this core civil right.” Spotlight on Speech Codes 2017: The State of Free Speech on Our Nation’s Campuses can be read in full on FIRE’s website. FIRE also released a Google Chrome extension that will notify visitors to college websites of FIRE’s speech code ratings. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending liberty, freedom of speech, due process, academic freedom, legal equality, and freedom of conscience on America’s college campuses. CONTACT: Nico Perrino, Director of Communications, FIRE: 215-717-3473; media@thefire.org |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.