Trailer - Food, Inc.

A friend sent a link to this trailer found on YouTube and it makes me want to eat seasonal and local now more than ever. Check it out. You may decide to do the same.

Scary, huh?

I'm heading out to the farmer's market this afternoon.

More later.

*

Katrina, van Heerden, Army Corps of Engineers, and LSU.

If you need a little background it's HERE.

The saga continues - an in depth report and analysis at Down With Tyranny. This is a sample:

The most lucid and simple thing I have ever heard about Katrina: “The tragedy of Katrina happened because people in power made a decision that other people were going to die.”

Indeed, the chess board is that simple, but the pieces have complex stories.

As a simple boy from Louisiana now spending a little time in the Big Apple, I have found that one way to explain the convoluted mess of Hurricane Katrina to people is to compare some of its features to 9/11.

Both of these events were life-changing for many people, they both created many casualties, they both involved a massive clean-up effort, and they both were completely predictable by anyone who knew anything about intelligence management, communication science, and had half a brain in their head.

They both were, to use the language of Max Bazerman, a “predictable surprise”-- a type of event that is empirically predictable, but psychologically unacceptable to predict. In other words, something that happens because of the human tendency to avoid making a decision that involves incurring significant cost in the present in exchange for the mitigation of theoretically catastrophic cost in the future. You could pay now, but maybe you’ll get lucky and things will just stay the same (Wall Street, anyone?)

It is here that the similarities between 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina end. Hurricane Katrina obviously did not receive the same level of coordinated response as 9/11. More importantly, 9/11 did not take place in Louisiana, a place that is as wonderful and charming as it is backwards and corrupt. At this moment, I am scared for my friends and family in New Orleans and South Louisiana. Hurricane Katrina was The Event for many people because it was like watching a nightmare in slow motion. At this moment I know that it will happen again. It is as predictable as algebra and inevitable as gravity.

Because Louisiana State University has fired Dr. Ivor van Heerden, a research scientist who has criticized the Army Corps of Engineers and their role in the construction of the levees, I worry that the state itself and New Orleans in particular are headed in direction that will make the re-flooding of New Orleans another predictable surprise, again.

Was Louisiana State University professor Dr. van Heerden fired from his position because he dared to criticize the engineering skills of the Army Corps of Engineers? Is LSU worried about their funding from the Feds so much that they are willing to throw out the truth along with their dignity and responsibility towards the citizens of Louisiana? Does this criticism of the ACE put LSU in a position where they have to fire van Heerden because they are dependent on Federal grant money to keep up the status quo? Probably. The facts of the case seem to answer all of these questions in the affirmative.

A message from Mr. [Michael] Ruffner, the vice chancellor for communications [at LSU], to Dr. van Heerden after their meeting stated that the university wanted to be in on helping with the recovery of Louisiana, "not in pointing blame.” In an interview Mr. Ruffner said Dr. van Heerden's training in environmental management did not qualify him to comment on engineering matters. "We don't see him as a viable source to be discussing the engineering aspect of the levees," he said. "I have an advanced degree in communications, but that doesn't qualify me to comment on the New York Philharmonic."

This type of dangerous and infantile argument is repeatedly leveled, both officially and unofficially, against van Heerden and in general anybody who speaks about the Gov’s FUBAR before, during, and after Katrina. Now, despite the dozens of issues with this situation, here’s where things really start to go down the toilet for LSU, because this is the point where LSU officials, true to their style, begin to depart from any semblance of reality. What has to be made clear is that van Heerden has a PhD in marine science. Apparently, Ruffner doesn’t understand that levees that hold back water from drowning cities occasionally have interaction with substances called “water” and “soil,” topics which are covered in monastic detail by marine scientists. In fact, van Heerden is an expert on geotechnical soil issues that pertain to foundational failures. Or, to parse it down a bit for the Ruffner crowd, van Heerden knows a lot about dirt that goes under stuff, stuff like levees. Ruffner admits that he isn’t qualified to conduct the Philharmonic, but omitted in his reasoning is the fact that he isn’t qualified to speak about geotechnical soil issues either. But, his job is to be the chief spin-minister of LSU, so this is to be expected.

(snip)

If you’re from Louisiana, this might not be a surprise for you. Because all of Louisiana’s oil platforms are more 3 miles off our coast, the Federal Government receives all of the oil and gas royalties produced by those facilities, unlike states like Texas and Wyoming that get to keep the money. Louisiana produces between 20 and 25% of all of the oil and natural gas in this country, and so obviously if we got to keep that money, I would not be writing this because the levees would have been made out of gold-reinforced concrete topped with diamonds and therefore still standing. But, because the Feds get all the cash, universities like LSU are almost totally reliant upon them to ration out money, and the Army Corps of Engineers is practically forced to build everything on the cheap. All of this begs the question of who is really at fault-- I would say that the ACE has some responsibility here, but it is really the Feds that want van Heerden to shut up. If everyone woke up to the idea that Louisiana would be the richest state in the Union if we kept our own petro-royalities, the Feds might lose their infinite piggy bank. If people realized that if we had that money we could build levees that would last a thousand years, then the Feds couldn’t keep Louisiana on a leash to maintain its golden goose status. The ACE is not the ultimate problem, the Fed’s greed is, and the ACE is only an agent of that greed.

I know very few people who remain interested in what happened to NOLA and what continues to be washed over, but this piece is comprehensive and can be understood by anyone - with half a brain.

Read it all at DWT.

More later.

*

Steny Hoyer Suddenly Concerned about Wiretapping..

...of members of Congress. Does he have something to hide?

Where was his 'concern' while the rest of us were the subjects of the same thing? I suppose the privacy of some is more important than others. Steny is a DINO (Democrat In Name Only) and shouldn't be leader of the house. A clue to why he is may be found in this story. Coincidence?

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Tuesday he had “great concern” over news reports that Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) was wiretapped during a federal probe into Israeli agents, and he vowed to personally look into whether there should be an investigation into wiretapping of Members of Congress.

“The stories that I’ve read give me great concern. I’m going to be in the process personally of finding out more about it and then, with the Speaker, determining what action, if any, needs to be taken,” Hoyer said Wednesday during a meeting with reporters.

Hoyer’s remarks come as Harman continues to fight allegations — which first appeared in Congressional Quarterly on Sunday — that she was wiretapped in 2005 during conversations with a suspected Israeli agent. The report alleged that the veteran California lawmaker agreed to seek leniency for two accused spies in return for help in lobbying Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for the Intelligence Committee chairmanship.

Harman, who was passed over by Pelosi for the gavel in 2006, was the ranking member on Intelligence at the time of the alleged wiretapped conversations.

More HERE.

And more later.

*

Days of Remembrance

President Obama at the Capital:

"Today, and every day, we have an opportunity, as well as an obligation, to confront these scourges -- to fight the impulse to turn the channel when we see images that disturb us, or wrap ourselves in the false comfort that others' sufferings are not our own," Obama said. "Instead, we have the opportunity to make a habit of empathy; to recognize ourselves in each other; to commit ourselves to resisting injustice and intolerance and indifference in whatever forms they may take."

(snip)

"To this day, there are those who insist the Holocaust never happened - who perpetrate every form of intolerance — racism, antisemitism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, and more — hatred that degrades its victim and diminishes us all. Today, and every day we have an opportunity, as well as an obligation to confront these scourges. To fight the impulse to turn the channel when we see images that disturb us, or wrap ourselves in the false comforts that others' sufferings are not our own... Emphasis mine.

WaPo has this.

The YouTube is here.

More later.
*

Corporate Caturday

More later.
*

Weathering the Storm

A serious response to the NOM Gathering Storm.

More later.

*

A husband's death shows how important marriage is and how accepted same-sex marriage is today

This letter was sent to Americablog by the surviving husband. It made me cry because so of my many friends were treated with anything but respect in the past. Here's just a snippet:

On March 24, I came home after work and found my husband, Peter Dubuque, dead from an unexpected accident. We have been together almost fifteen years and, because we live in Massachusetts, married for four-and-a-half years. In the aftermath of unexpected death, the surviving spouse faces a jumble of legal responsibilities, emotional reactions, and practical considerations. At 42, I never expected to have to plan a memorial service for the 39-year-old love of my life. I am very fortunate to have a strong national and local network of love and support from friends and family. These past few weeks would have been impossible without them.

In 2004 in Massachusetts (as there had been previously in Vermont when it legislated civil unions), opponents of marriage equality predicted social disaster. The destruction of our social fabric never materialized, of course; each argument was merely an rhetorical arrow in a quiver of hateful obstructions. What was surprising, however, is how marriage equality in Massachusetts has quickly blended into the social landscape. Despite a few feeble and ineffectual protests from the extreme right, it has become a non-issue here.

Just how far marriage equality has become a regular component of society here has been made clear to me while interacting with people I didn't know. What was once unheard of is now commonplace and, frankly, ordinary.

In 1994, I was arrested, handcuffed, and spent the night in jail for dancing with another man in suburban Chicago. (Not kissing, not even touching : just dancing.) But on March 24, 2009, the EMTs, police officers, and detectives on the accident scene were extremely professional, respectful, and courteous.

Shortly after Vermont legalized civil unions, debated raged whether newspapers across the country would accept or refuse to acknowledge such partnerships; now many more highly visible newspapers routinely do. The gracious funeral home operators treated me the same as they would any grieving spouse.

Read it all HERE.

We cannot give in to the hatemongers and bigots.

And so it goes.
*

Random Thoughts

Dick Cheney has been on TV more in the past eight weeks than he was in the past eight years. And one has to wonder why his opinion is suddenly relevant?

Right wing pundits are sticking to the same tired old talking points but they are louder and more shrill, hoping if they repeat the same trash louder they may get our attention. They are so 2006!

Adverts featuring African Americans are on the rise - single males, single females, women and children, families, and even pitches to the elderly are filling the airwaves. I wonder why that is...

Things that make you go, hmmmmmmmmmm.

And so it goes.

*

Of Tea Parties and Teabagging...

You'd think they would at least ask, but noooooooo.

More later.
*

Civil Suit Over Katrina Begins

And it's about time. Today's New York Times:

NEW ORLEANS — A groundbreaking civil suit begins in federal court here today to consider claims by property owners that the Army Corps of Engineers amplified the destructive effects of Hurricane Katrina by building a poorly designed navigation channel adjacent to the city.

The Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet, a 76-mile-long channel known locally as MR-GO and pronounced “Mister Go,” was completed in 1968 and created a straight shot to the Gulf of Mexico from New Orleans. The suit claims that the channel was flawed in its design, construction, and operation, and that those flaws intensified the flood damage to the eastern parts of New Orleans and St. Bernard parish.

If they win, the plaintiffs — a local newscaster, Norman Robinson, and five other people whose homes or businesses were destroyed by the 2005 storm — could pave the way for more than 400,000 other plaintiffs who have also filed claims against the government over Katrina’s destruction.

The government has historically enjoyed strong legal protection against lawsuits related to collapsing levees. The Flood Control Act of 1928 bars suits against the United States for damages resulting from floods or flood waters, and in January 2008 Federal District Judge Stanwood R. Duval Jr. ruled that the corps was immune in a different lawsuit related directly to the levee and floodwall failures during Katrina in the city’s major drainage canals.

This case, however, is different, because MR-GO is a navigation canal, not a flood control project. In March, Judge Duval allowed the suit to go forward, over repeated efforts by the Department of Justice to get him to dismiss it, based largely on a a 1971 case, Graci v. United States, that found there is no immunity for flooding caused by a federal project unrelated to flood control.

The Graci decision did warn that the lack of immunity still left a “heavy burden” on plaintiffs to prove that the government was negligent in building its projects, and that this negligence, not a hurricane, was the cause of the damage.

The government will argue that Hurricane Katrina would have devastated the region whether or not the channel had ever been dug. The government’s filings in today’s case state that the plaintiffs’ rationale for federal liability are based on “misguided and internally inconsistent arguments.”

The trial is expected to take four weeks. In his opening comments today, Judge Duval, who is hearing the case without a jury, called it “a significant case” and “the first real trial” about Katrina, the levees and the role of the federal government. He referred to the thousands of pages of depositions and expert testimony, saying “the word ‘voluminous’ doesn’t quite do it.”

The thrust of the case, he said in his opening comments, was “a question of causation” about whether the canal caused damage separate from the levee failures, and, if so, whether the government has valid legal defenses.

The canal has been controversial from the start; critics had long called it a “hurricane highway” and warned it would help carry storm surges into the city.

As you all know, it did just that. Keep the folks involved in this lawsuit in your thoughts and prayers. They have suffered great harm and can rise again, if there is any justice.

The rest is HERE.

And so it goes.

*

Gay Marriage Earned Victory

This was published on Easter - best Easter egg evah - from an unlikely outlet...The New York Post. Yes, Murdoch's trash rag. Amazing.

Uh-oh. Now gays really, legitimately, democratically and completely non-sneakily have won the right to marry, in Vermont. Next thing you know gays preparing to wed will be everywhere, threatening our way of life by picking out china patterns in Bloomingdale's and bickering about where to seat Uncle Floyd at the reception.

News stories about the Vermont decision implicitly recognize that this one really counts, by emphasizing the fact that this is the first state to approve gay marriage through a legislature rather than impose it from the bench, where judges pretend the right has been there all along without previously being detected. Vermont has made the change the proper way, and it ought to be congratulated.

Those who chafe at the decision -- and the passage of Prop. 8 in California, which Obama carried by 24 points, suggests that the opposition is hardly limited to Republicans -- should reexamine their arguments.

Does the Bible forbid gay relationships? Maybe. But if God didn't want there to be gay people, He shouldn't have made them. Who seriously believes that being gay is any more of a choice than being black?

Besides, not even the most fervent Christian would want to live in a Biblocracy. Covet your neighbor's wife, or even his kitchen appliances, and go to jail? If that were government policy, how many informers would it need on the payroll to monitor the neighbors' comments about saucy Serena (or her Sub-Zero?) Does God's idea of civilization look like East Berlin in 1981?

The Bible is about you and your soul, and if you think your neighbor is going to hell you can't stop him. And if you think gay relationships are immoral, surely it's the physical act that bothers you, not the signing of licenses, not the public vows of love and fidelity, not the matching tuxedos. Not the smiling faces. Yet few will make the case for police investigations of what people do between the sheets.

"Same-sex marriage," wrote Maggie Gallagher in National Review, "asks religious Americans," by which she means Christian Americans, "to surrender a core belief -- not only Leviticus (disapproval of gay sexual acts), but Genesis (the idea that God himself made man as male and female and commanded men and women to come together in a special way to image the fruitfulness of God)." But Christians are surrendering nothing. They remain free to disapprove of homosexuality just as they remain free to disapprove of their neighbor's alcoholism or adultery or bad taste in lawn ornaments. They also remain free to move to a country that enforces religious views.

Read it all HERE.

More later.
*

Falsettos/Falsettoland

Combination of two of my favourite off-Broadway shows that, when combined, barely made it a little over a year on Broadway. As you will see the cast is perfectly wonderful. Here's a medley from the Tony Awards performance.

That's it for me today. Hope the rest of your weekend is great.

And so it goes.
*