Sunday, February 28, 2010


History Has Not Absolved Them
Neither Should We

Below is a list -- largely courtesy of Humberto Fontova and Glenn Garvin articles -- of famous people with documented sympathy for evil as opposed to people like Orlando Zapata Tamayo. I don't bother to ask how they can say and do such things. They do so because of some combination of political ideology, hate [of the Right] and a deeply unrealistic desire to be taken seriously.

But the actions of those listed below are not my concern. Reminding those of us who do care about their actions until the day they are buried [and beyond] is a concern of mine. Like minded readers of this post who have, or will, support those on this list with their entertainment dollars or viewing habits probably could benefit from the reminder. A fair question to ask those of us who know better is, How could we?

From Garvin's article in Reason magazine:

As DePalma gently observes, the foreign correspondents of the last century who wrote with the greatest passion-Richard Harding Davis on the Spanish-American War, John Reed on the Russian Revolution, Ernest Hemingway on the Spanish Civil War, Edgar Snow on Mao's Long March, Norman Mailer on Vietnam-were "not necessarily those most anchored to the truth." To turn Fidel Castro's favorite phrase on its head, history has not absolved them. Neither should their readers.
Almodovar, Pedro
Belafonte, Harry
Bender, Lawrence
Camhe, Beverly
Campbell, Naomi
Chase, Chevy
Clift, Eleanor
Costner, Kevin
Couric, Katie
Del Toro Sanchez, Benicio Monserrate Rafael
De Niro, Robert
DiCaprio, Leonardo
Dillon, Matt
Ford, Katie
Garcia Marquez, Gabriel
Gilmore, Geoffrey
Graham, Nicholas
Hewitt, Don d. 2009
Jackson, Jesse
Lollobrigida, Gina
Mankiewicz, Frank
Matthews, Herbert d. 1977 - see Anthony Depalma book
Morissette, Alanis
Moss, Kate
Nicholson, Jack
Penn, Sean
Rather, Dan
Sawyer, Diane
Schub, Elizabeth
Soderbergh, Steven
Spielberg, Stephen
Stone, Oliver
Taber, Robert
Theron, Charlize
Walken, Christopher
Walters, Barbara


Read more!

Tuesday, February 23, 2010


Striding Out With A Dionysian Yea-Saying

Over at one of my favorite blogs, Marginal Revolution, they draw a contrast between the strutting of a Red-capped Manakin vs that of Indian and Pakistani border closing displays. Silly walks vs. moon walks. Manakin vs. Manichaeism.

Before I laugh too hard at the silly walks, I need to consider how a border closing at Guantanamo would unfurl if we Cuban-Americans settled in Miami were given the chance to put on a similar display.

It would probably look like some birthday party at Crandon Park for someone who just hit on a Fantasy Five drawing. There would be a Benny Moret tribute act playing live alongside The 540's, perfectly capturing our varied influences. Andy Garcia would be narrating a documentary in the background. Rumors about an appearance of our queen, Gloria Estefan, would circulate constantly. There should be an unarmed guard procession. Uniforms being white guayaberas and linen pants with the gold chain in the chest hair accessory look. Naturally, there should be a matching gold bracelet which would fit loosely just below the Metacarpal bone of the right [nothing on the left side ever again] wrist. A mock tribute booth to the supposed Cuban 'New Man' would be my contribution, 'meet the New Man, same as the Old Man,' with copyright apologies to The Who.

But seriously, how great is it that we get to move over fingers over a keyboard and mouse and get to see all this.... Granted it's strutalicious, but what is it? Two thoughts come to mind. First Tom Wolfe's advice to modern day novelists:

... they've wasted their careers by not engaging the life around them, by turning their backs on the rich material of an amazing country at a fabulous time in history. Instead of going out into the world, instead of plunging into the irresistibly lurid carnival of American life today in the here and now, instead of striding out with a Dionysian yea-saying, as Nietzsche would have put it, into the raw, raucous, lust-soaked rout that throbs with amped-up octophonic tympanum all around them, our old lions had withdrawn, retreated, shielding their eyes against the light, and turned inward to such subject matter as their own little crevice, i.e., the literary world.
The other is the Paul Harvey quote about what he thought his job was:
I don't think of myself as a profound journalist. I think of myself as a professional parade watcher who can't wait to get out of bed every morning and rush down to the Teletypes and pan for gold.


Read more!

Monday, February 22, 2010


Calling Pam and Bob Tebow

I think the E-Trade baby commercials are very funny. However, it would not take much imagination to foresee that the kid is probably destined for type of reality show freak existence. There is hope of course. Perhaps his parents are people of faith.


Read more!

Sunday, February 21, 2010


Shudder Island

Spoiler alert - I recommend you watch [and even pay for] the movie Shutter Island, but this blog post will give away parts of the story.

I am a fan of Martin Scorsese's movies. So it has been disconcerting over the past few months to have periodically seen the preview of his new film, Shutter Island. Those previews were about things that go boo in the night, complete with young children with the whole mortuary-look slash wisdom beyond their years gaze. Oh no, not Scorsese. I tried to make sense of it. Had he filed for bankruptcy lately? Divorced? Had the George Harrison project turn into a money pit?

Undaunted, I made my trek to a matinee showing - a poor man's version of a private screening. I would like to extend my apologies to Mr. Scorsese for having even momentarily doubted him. Intensity-wise, it would fall somewhere between a pro golfer's apology and how a teenager expresses regrets to their parents for anything.

The Story

It was Scorsese movie-worthy. There are not too many good things to be said about not reading enough, but one one them is that you can come to see a new movie based on a best selling novel and have no idea where the story is going. The author of Shutter Island is Dennis Lehane. By my count, this is now the 3rd great movie based on Mr Lehane's novels. The other two were Mystic River and Gone, Baby, Gone. In my book, Mr. Lehane has now crossed over into the Tom Wolfe, Richard Price zone of writers whose work should not be missed, even if it means knowing where the story is going in the next great film.

The Character Actors

A number of the actors are immediately recognizable. Not in a distracting way of 'their not believable here,' but rather actors who trigger the 'confidence in this movie' mindset. It's the movie version of a benzodiazepine derivative drug. As you watch this movie, you'll worry about who administers the drugs you take. Then again, by the end of the movie you should have had a Richard Pryor-type epiphany -- as in 'thank God we got jails' -- about drugs and those who administer them.
  • Robin Bartlett - Sophie's Choice, Moonstruck, Dangerous Minds
  • Patricia Clarkson - The Untouchables, The Green Mile, Good Night, and Good Luck
  • Jackie Earle Haley - Breaking Away - OK, I didn't really recognize the guy, but I loved Breaking Away and it was nice to realize that Moocher went on to have a good career. It's the Anthony Michael Hall syndrome [I invented the syndrome, so I get to name it].
  • Elias Koteas - Crash, Thin Red Line, Zodiac
  • Ted Levine - Silence of the Lambs, Heat, From the Earth to the Moon.
  • John Carroll Lynch - Fargo [Norm], Gran Torino, Zodiac [this movie was like a Zodiac reunion; Koteas, Lynch & Mark Ruffalo]
  • Emily Mortimer - Notting Hill, Lovely & Amazing
  • Max von Sydow - Poor guy, I first saw him in the Exorcist, so I kind of assume he's been stuck in his 70's since 1972 [he's 81 now]. I also assumed he was scary because I associated him with fighting the devil in Regan's room, but by now I know that the brother just got some skills, as Tim Hardaway might say.

The Camera

Martin Scorsese is a great director. Martin Scorsese loves to move the camera. Why don't more directors try and move the camera? In Shutter Island, the camera movement is a little disorienting, which fits in perfectly with the story. Scorsese takes ordinary scenes which are needed to provide key facts, as in, 'Hey that's the dangerous building' and makes it unique by actually swiveling the camera back and forth from the main characters point of view. In the beginning of the movie, as the story arrives on Shutter Island, we are given a panoramic camera angle which swoops in from sky all the way into a jeep. You'll think you're Soarin'®.

The Music

From the appropriately eerie 'Fog Tropes' to the maddeningly appropriate 'This Bitter Earth,' the music in this movie is kind of like an insurance policy. It makes sure you are alerted and in the correct mood, even if you are not too sure about what is happening in the movie. When the movie opens in 1954, knowing Scorsese, I wondered if Presley or Miles Davis would be making an appearance. As with all my initial thoughts on the movie, I was wrong.

The music in the the film consists mainly of contemporary classical pieces. Turns out that a movie in which the action mostly takes place in Massachusetts' Outer Harbor and Dachau, does not lend itself to rock n roll. Then again, it couldn't have been easy for Scorsese to keep 'Sympathy for the Devil' out of this film. Lyrics from 'This Bitter Earth:'
This bitter earth
Well, what fruit it bears
What good is love
mmmm that no one shares
And if my life is like the dust
oooh that hides the glow of a rose
What good am I
Heaven only knows
After watching this movie, your only complaint could be that those lyrics aren't dark enough.

The Politics

Scorsese is usually more concerned with making a larger statements about the human condition or issues than scoring liberal points. So even though I'm fairly certain he's a lefty -- given his industry and cash contributions -- he has not used his entertainment figure status to bash the other side. In short, I respect his politics.

Imagine my dismay when early in the movie one of the plot lines centered around the House on Un-American Activities Committee [HUAC]. HUAC is mostly mis-remembered for involving the first of many awful Wisconsin senators, Joseph McCarthy, the all-time liberal pinup.

[For the record, McCathy did more damage to a core conservative belief than any liberal ever did. He delegitimized a serious national security issue -- see Alger Hiss, Owen Lattimore, Henry Wallace -- the sharing of critical information about producing nuclear weapons with Russians by those within the US government who sympathized with their cause. As they say in the movies, you can look it up].

So I'm sitting in the movie with this sense of dread. [The feeling was like having parked at a meter in the City of Coral Gables and realized that your metered time expired 3 minutes ago, which means that there are likely 6 parking police ready to write you a ticket and impound your vehicle for the sake of their absurdly generous public employee pension plans]. Not only am I worried about this not being up to Scorsese standards, now I have to worry about having paid good [well, matinee] money for the umpteenth hokey storyline about how much of an over-reaction Americans had against Communism. Edward Daniels nightmares were secondary to mine at this point. Fortunately, in this case the movie mimicked real-life, as the evil HUAC conspiracy angle, proved to be fiction.

When I came to realize that, I wanted to turn off my thoughts about where this movie was going and just enjoy wherever it went -- partly because of my sub-Mendoza line accuracy I admit -- which has to be the best compliment I can give a director. That and the fact that there were unforgettable scenes, images and lines.

Unforgettable Scenes

A number of flash back scenes were based a character's experience as an American soldier who was part of the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp in Germany on 29 April 1945. Few would bemoan violence against Nazi personnel, especially those at concentration camps, but Scorsese's mad skills take a serious swipe at the concept. First we watch approvingly as a Nazi officer is allowed to bleed to death slowly, instead of being given a quicker exit. But after we see the scene of the mass execution of Nazi's at the Dachau camp, we pause. Pause partly because it was a sit up in your seat I just watched another Sofia Coppola getting baptized or Travis Bickle getting angry, i.e. a classic scene in a great movie. We also partly pause because of an earlier admonition from the Warden, now becomes clearer, "can my violence conquer yours?" I'm still paused on the issue of what violence is justified as retribution. It was a solid yes in certain cases before the movie. I may not end up changing my mind, but in my case the position clearly needs fortification.

The movie ends dismayingly -- dismaying that it ended, not how it ended -- with another great question. Is it better to "live like a monster or die a good man?" I find my inclinations at odds with my faith in both questions posed during the movie. Maybe I secretly wish that Tarantino would direct the sequel to Shutter Island, 'Kill Teddy & Eddie & Nazi's.' Shudder that thought.

Maybe Scorsese is trying to give voice to the types of beliefs which give us reason to pause. Read the ending lyrics to the music he ended his movie with - again from 'This Bitter Earth:'
Lord, this bitter earth
Yes, can be so cold
Today youre young
Too soon, youre old
But while a voice within me cries
Im sure someone may answer my call
And this bitter earth
Ooooo may not
Oh be so bitter after all
Great movie from a great director.


Read more!

Monday, February 15, 2010


The Latest Miami Herald Dirty Trick

What is the Herald's latest dirty trick? They are giving conservative views and writers a fair amount of coverage. I would have loved to add 'recently' to that initial sentence, but I can't even remember the last time I had a real issue with their editorials regarding Cuba. How's a blogger supposed to keep up with who's in or out of the MSM Cone of Sameness [see Don Adams]?

As a way of just rubbing their fairness in our faces, lately they have given Glenn Garvin a serious amount of space to give his well informed reporter / libertarian perspective on how other poor countries in the hemisphere have dealt with natural disasters.

Since Miami Herald article links expire, the article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disaster x 2: Managua a model of how not to rebuild after quake
Feb 15, 2010


BY GLENN GARVIN
ggarvin@MiamiHerald.com

When Eduardo Chamorro visited Haiti nine days after the earthquake, it all looked horribly, heart-breakingly familiar: the precarious heaps of rubble, the bodies strewn about like broken dolls, the faces dazed with fear and incomprehension.

"It was total desolation," the Nicaraguan architect says quietly. "It looked like no hope -- the pessimism, the dust, the corpses. It looked like 1972 Managua, multiplied by 10."

No country in the hemisphere has been as transfixed by the harrowing images of Haitian death and destruction as Nicaragua, which suffered its own cataclysmic earthquake in 1972. And no country knows better that the aftermath could be even more terrible than the quake itself if relief and reconstruction efforts are mishandled.

"Our country suffered two civil wars, a decade of Marxist dictatorship and political instability that continues to this day," says Chamorro, echoing a widely shared sentiment in Nicaragua. "And you can trace it all back to the Managua earthquake of 1972."

Like Haiti in 2010, Nicaragua in 1972 was a poor and politically polarized country; like Haiti, it suffered overwhelming loss of life and property when the quake struck; and like Haiti, it found itself awash in international aid to help rebuild.

But Nicaragua squandered the world's generosity in an orgy of government corruption and political power plays. Swollen by national outrage, what had been a tiny, almost ludicrous insurgency in the far reaches of the country's jungles turned into a full-scale revolution that toppled the government and was quickly followed by a counterrevolution.

Nicaragua hemorrhaged money and people to its neighbors as citizens of every socioeconomic stripe fled the chaos and bloodshed -- the country lost as much as 10 percent of its population and virtually all its economic capital. Instead of moving forward past the earthquake, the country reeled backward for the next two decades.

"I think we lost much more than 20 years," corrects Nicaraguan historian Aldo Diaz. "I think we're still losing ground to this very day."

The tremor that destroyed Managua a little past midnight on Dec. 23, 1972, wasn't that powerful -- a magnitude of 5.6, compared to the 7.0 quake in Haiti. But with the epicenter so close to the Earth's surface -- less than four miles underground, compared to 25 or more for the average quake -- Managua shook like a mouse trapped in the teeth of a predator cat.

Moments later, much of the city burst into flames as broken gas lines ignited. With the water system wrecked, the fire department buried in rubble and an eerily unseasonable wind pushing the blaze forward, Managua burned for days. By the time U.S. Marines flown in from Panama brought the fire under control by dynamiting hundreds of buildings, the city was a bleak panorama of destruction.

More than 74,000 homes, about three-quarters of Managua's housing supply, had been obliterated. Eleven major factories, 18 churches and four hospitals were gone. So were the presidential palace and the U.S. Embassy. Managua's modern, bustling downtown was little more than a massive open grave marked by the haunted ruins of the city's 300-year-old cathedral, where a tower clock was forever stopped at 12:35 a.m.

The word grave is anything but metaphoric. The quake's official death toll was around 11,000, but many believe it was much higher.

Danilo Lacayo, general manager of Managua's mostly undamaged Esso petroleum refinery, had rushed to work that night to dispatch tanker trucks out to fuel emergency vehicles. As he drove home at daybreak, he was greeted by a macabre sight: long lines of cars and trucks stacked high with corpses. "I'll bet there were 5,000 burials that morning before the government even started counting," Lacayo recalls. "It looked like the whole city was dying."

Another thing that made a precise count of the dead difficult was that so many people fled Managua. Nearby cities doubled and tripled in size overnight as refugees abandoned the devastated capital. By January, more than a third of Managua's 420,000 residents were dead or gone, many of them pushed out by the government's decision to close off 640 blocks of the city center.

With the city hopelessly wrecked and shrinking by the day, Nicaraguan officials thought the unthinkable: Perhaps they should shut down Managua and rebuild it somewhere else. Criss-crossed by at least five major seismic faults and nearly a score of minor ones, Managua had already been destroyed by earthquakes twice before, in 1881 and 1931.

Some foreign experts counseled Nicaragua to give up Managua: "The entire city must be blown up," urged a Venezuelan seismologist brought in as a consultant.

Instead, the government made a fateful decision: Managua would be rebuilt, but the 640 square blocks downtown lying along the major faults would be razed and left empty.

Coupled with the growing success of relief efforts -- half a million people were receiving emergency rations, the water system was pumping 20 million gallons a day, and the city's army of unemployed had been put to work clearing rubble -- the government's seemingly plucky refusal to be cowed by the forces of nature won almost universal applause.

"The most tragic days were the first 15," remembers Lacayo, who became co-chairman of a private-sector relief and reconstruction operation. "But eventually, the fires were put out, the looting was controlled. Optimism took over. 'We are back to normal,' people started saying at our meetings. There was a real note of optimism, more than was justified."

The foreign press was even sunnier in its appraisal. Typical was a Miami Herald story headlined Hope, Faith Replace Despair In Managua that said of Nicaragua's military strongman Anastasio Somoza: "He appears to have emerged stronger than ever and, in the eyes of some, could go down as a national hero." As history would show, the only accurate words in that sentence were "go down."

Anastasio Somoza was third member of his family to rule Nicaragua. For nearly five decades, the Somozas and their puppets had run Nicaragua like a family farm, sometimes from the presidential palace and sometimes from the headquarters of the National Guard.

With American support -- ``He may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch,'' Franklin Roosevelt supposedly said of the first Somoza -- they governed with a canny mixture of political skill and military might, keeping their civic opponents off balance and crushing any number of banana-republic coup attempts and insurrectionary movements.

But in 1972, it appeared that the Somozas might be in their political twilight. Anastasio Somoza had resigned the presidency, turning power over to a three-man committee -- though Somoza still retained a huge share of power through his command of the National Guard, the country's army.

But Nicaragua's nascent dreams of a Somoza-free future were buried in the rubble of the quake. His control of the Guard and its logistical capabilities put Somoza back in control.

Somoza began directing reconstruction efforts from a family estate on the outskirts of Managua. Cabinet ministers, businessmen, foreign officials and international relief bosses -- many of them addressing Somoza as "Mr. President" -- trooped in and out all day long. It was Somoza with whom foreign diplomats negotiated aid packages; it was Somoza who decided Managua would be rebuilt.

Yet there were signs of discontent from the first moments of the earthquake. Managua's National Guard units, rather than joining rescue efforts, dissolved as soldiers ran off to aid their own families. Worse yet, they joined mobs of looters.

"The National Guard looted everything," remembers Frank Arana, who owned a chain of radio stations. "After the mobs of poor people grabbed all the food, the National Guard came in big trucks and took things like refrigerators and stoves. Later you would see a lot of it for sale."

Seeing looted goods for sale in the market -- including cartons of milk clearly marked DONATED BY USAID -- roused quiet but furious anger among Nicaraguans.

"People who never before had thought of opposing Somoza said, 'This guy is profiting on donated milk for poor children,' " said Marta Sacasa, vice president of Channel 2, Managua's leading television station. "Donated milk for poor children! It changed everything."

The pilfering of donated goods was probably much less common than Nicaraguans believed at the time. Later, 28 major audits, two congressional staff investigations and a GAO report had all concluded that there had been no significant theft or diversions from $143 million in international aid. And Somoza himself almost certainly played no role in any looting.: He fired four senior National Guard officers who confessed to pillaging damaged buildings.

But one of the important lessons Nicaraguans drew from the earthquake was that it magnified everything, especially corruption.

"It's bad enough to steal money from a rich country,'' says Nicaraguan banker and former presidential candidate Eduardo Montealegre. ``It's worse to steal from a poor country. And the worst of all is to steal from a poor country in dire need, which is what Somoza did."

And he made off with a lot more than some cartons of milk.

It is hard to find a single architect or construction engineer or seismologist or urban planner or even just plain person in Nicaragua these days who believes the decision to leave Managua's downtown vacant was either wise or necessary.

"We are less than two miles from the fault that caused the earthquake,'' said Jaime Incer Barquero, a retired official of Nicaragua's government seismic agency, tapping the walls of his home in Managua's Los Robles neighborhood. ``And this house came through it just fine. It's not a very heavy house, and it didn't suffer much damage. . . . The refrigerator banged open and the contents flew out; there was a crack in one wall. And that's all. It's all in how you build."

Most of the buildings destroyed in 1972 were adobe-and-wood structures built following Managua's 1931 earthquake. Most of those that employed more modern seismic construction codes -- including, notably, the 14-story Bank of America building designed by architect Eduardo Chamorro -- survived.

Chamorro, along with most experts, believes downtown Managua could have been safely rebuilt using a better construction code.

"The center of Managua was the pivotal issue in reconstruction. The new Managua is linear. They should have concentrated on centralizing utilities and water and transportation," he said. Instead, Managua's public utilities and roads meander inefficiently and expensively around a city that resembles an elongated doughnut with a hole in the center.

But the reconstruction unquestionably benefited one family: the Somozas.

As the city sprawled south, (Lake Managua blocks development to the north), it grew onto land owned by Somozas. Millions of paving stones were needed for the new roads to the south -- and the only Nicaraguan factory producing them was owned by the Somozas. Much of the rebuilding there was done by the Somozas' construction business, which got favorable terms from the Somozas' cement factory, the only one in the country. The company in turn gave its business to the Somozas' new bank and mortgage company.

"The reconstruction of Managua came to be the most dynamic sector of the economy," says Edmundo Jarquin, a former Nicaraguan diplomat and presidential candidate. "And Somoza tried to monopolize all sectors of the reconstruction. It created conflict -- with the private sector, with the middle class, with the Catholic church. For the first time, everybody was allied against Somoza. . . . People began to believe there was no political option in Nicaragua, only an armed option."

And there was an armed option. Since the early 1960s, a small band of Marxist college students calling themselves the Sandinista National Liberation Front had been stumbling around in the jungle, continually betrayed by the hostile peasants they hoped to lead in revolution.

But the widespread animosity toward the government following the earthquake provided the Sandinistas with an immediate infusion of money, guns and troops. Within two years, the Sandinistas had brought their war into the cities; within seven, they had toppled Somoza.

"When the earthquake destroyed Managua, we knew immediately it was our moment," says Aldo Diaz, the Sandinista historian. "An earthquake reveals what's been covered up and buried. . . . In normal conditions, the injustice of the system seemed 'tolerable.' But in the face of the earthquake, it became intolerable. And it caused the population to explode."

Many of the groups that supported the Sandinistas were soon appalled by the Marxist direction of the new government. By 1982, with U.S. government backing, they had launched a counterrevolution that would last until the Sandinistas lost internationally supervised elections in 1990.

"And by the end of it all," shrugs Lacayo, who after the quake became co-chairman of a private-sector relief and reconstruction operation, "there was nothing left of Nicaragua."

***

When Nicaraguans talk about Haiti, as they often do these days, they feel a little bit like the Ghost of Christmas Future in A Christmas Carol, warning about shadows of things that might be if their warnings aren't heeded. The most important, they all agree, is that corruption is potentially poisonous, coloring every public perception. "Even a little bit will grow giant in the public eye after a disaster," says broadcaster Sacasa.

More broadly, they argue that Caribbean countries must learn to accept earthquakes as a fact of life and work to minimize their impact, just as they have with hurricanes. "You have to learn to live with earthquakes," says Chamorro. "Managua should never have abandoned its downtown. Cities like Tokyo build on seismic faults; so can we. So can Port-au-Prince."

Managua's 640-block forbidden zone decreed by Somoza outlived his government by decades. Only in the past five or six years has the city's empty center started to fill in with government buildings and a few low-cost housing projects. And even now, derelict buildings that somehow escaped the National Guard's dynamite dot the landscape, homes to hordes of squatters living on pirated electricity and water.

"The truth is, it's very dangerous here," says Karen Gard, 36, a sometimes-street-vendor who's the unofficial mayor of 24 squatter families living in a tottering five-story office building left standing -- barely -- by the quake.

Gard has been living in the building 19 years and can't believe it's still here. ``I don't know why they don't tear it down -- it's completely ruined, inside and out,'' she says, eyeing the open airshafts and shattered stairwells. ``If another earthquake comes, a lot of kids will be at risk.''

On a clear day, Gard's fractured building is just barely visible from the seventh-floor office of Lacayo, the man who 37 years ago helped run the private-sector reconstruction effort.

In the weeks after the earthquake, Lacayo was bullish on the prospects for a rebuilt Managua. It could be, he thought, a Central American version of Los Angeles or Miami. "We are trying to tell people that this is not a catastrophe but an opportunity," he told a reporter back then.

This month, as he fingered a yellowed copy of the newspaper story brimming with his optimistic quotes, Lacayo gazed out his window toward the blighted remnants of downtown Managua. What, he was asked, had Nicaragua made of its opportunity? "Oh, man", he replied wistfully. "Not so much. Not so much."
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Read more!

Saturday, February 13, 2010


Now That's a Bunch of Lard

My love of Cuban Bread can survive knowledge of it's ingredients, but why can't food products have a spoiler alert?

We could call the anti-spoiler law the IZ Alert. The IZ Alert law would acknowledge the inherent limitations of potentially useful data. It would recognize that people frequently disregard what others are convinced would be best for them. It would be a rejection of the Nanny State and its rectal-thermometer-like minions. It would implicitly recognize that there are worse things than failing to maximize this life.

Most prominently is leading this life -- despite a normal BMI weight range, a low carbon footprint, aggressive recycling, no fur clothing and no offensive language -- in such a way that guarantees eternity at the side of the Enemy. It would reinforce the C.S. Lewis thought that 'we were made for another world:'
If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world. If none of my earthly pleasures satisfy it, that does not prove that the universe is a fraud. Probably earthly pleasures were never meant to satisfy it, but only to arouse it, to suggest the real thing.


Read more!

Friday, February 12, 2010


The Rest Of The Story

No mention of 'the rest of the story' should fail to note the late great American broadcaster Paul Harvey. This from a Time article which noted his death last Feb 28, 2009:

"This is Paul Harvey." That clarion Midwestern voice was its own time machine; it carried listeners back to radio days of yore, when a distinctive vocal performance was as important as good looks are in TV news today. The opinions Harvey expressed were old-fashioned as well: politically and socially conservative, the musings of a grandpa who's seen it all — or, as he put it, "In times like these, it helps to recall that there have always been times like these."
...
Less a maker of news than a conduit for popular sentiment about the news, Harvey told King, "I don't think of myself as a profound journalist. I think of myself as a professional parade watcher who can't wait to get out of bed every morning and rush down to the Teletypes and pan for gold."
Proper homage having been paid to the master of introducing a twist to a story we thought we knew, we move on to a current version of a story with a twist.

It begins with a quote from a Senator:
"I mean, the fact of the matter is, is the President has been on his tour, and everywhere he goes the numbers just get worse. The American people have essentially voted on this proposal and really what you have is a situation now where I think that the President and the Congress are going to need to figure out a way to save face and -- and step back a little bit."
Then an editorial from a major newspaper on that same President:
After listening to the president talk of little else during his term, the American people understand quite well what he is proposing and by wide margins reject it. In fact, the polls show that the more they learn about his reforms, the less they like it. And with good reason.

So when Congressional leaders tell the President that the reforms are a nonstarter, they are conveying the informed views of their constituents.

The President has reacted by railing against the opposition for obstruction -- as if they are duty-bound to breathe life into his agenda and, even sillier, as if opposing a plan that the people do not want is an illegitimate tactic for an opposition party.
The quotes -- which I edited slightly to avoid names and parties -- could easily represent conservatives criticizing President Obama over his Health Care reform legislation.

But in fact the president being referred to was Bush 43 and the issue was the privatization of Social Security. The initial quote is from then-Sen. Obama and the editorial was from the New York Times.

Let's not waste time wondering if they are bothered by such irony. They most certainly are not because to them -- and all others in the game -- it's not irony, it's an occupational hazard. The thing to remember about people in the game of politics is that they spend their careers taking positions which may prove to be contradictory.

The good ones explain it away with a straight face. The great ones get us to nod with empathy and understanding at their plight. It's only after we walk away that we are left to decide on our own on which occasion they truly believed their remarks. People in the game would laugh at that last sentence and ask, when you say 'believed' ...

Credit to the Real Clear Politics and Megan McArdle's blog for the information.


Read more!

Wednesday, February 10, 2010


One Possible Response to Tebow Super Bowl Ad

The fact that there are people in our society who take offense to the Tebow family story being a part of the Super Bowl made me think. Who or what would constitute the flip side to the Tim Tebow story?

Dear Potential Parental Unit:

Hey, I know you're cringing at the thought of ever getting a letter or anything else from me. Thanks for having the courage to read it. I know you're feeling guilty, but this won't be that type of letter, trust us. I know you'll always feel conflicted about me and as you'll learn, that's not bad. I'm limited in what I can share, but I can tell you that if you're not conflicted at least part of the time in your world, you're not doing it right.

Let me get straight to my point. Turns out I have a soul and that soul remained untouched by sin. In a very real way, you were responsible for my existence and guaranteed where I got to spend eternity. The price for that need not be our eternal separation. That's the one thing I most want to tell you. The Enemy wants to keep that thought out of your head. To quote the chatty Polish dude among us lately, "don't be afraid." Nothing about eternity is ordained as long as you can take a breath in your world.

This place is indescribable, so I won't try. But here is where tragedies come to morph into something else, something good. Which is why even our separation can have a blessed ending. You won't truly know this until it's too late to do something about it. But like the kid from Dublin sings, this is a "place that has to be believed to be seen." The smart move [Tessio notwithstanding] is believing.

Peace
While I am not aware of the existence of any such letter, I pray as to the the accuracy of its content.

For a good recap of the Tebow controversy, check out Robert Molleda's blog post.


Read more!

Saturday, February 6, 2010


Isiah Thomas: Failing Upwards and Onwards



The good news for FIU is that Isiah Thomas probably wasn't destined to coach here for a long period of time. I didn't like the hire [see here], but will concede that Thomas' key recruits won't see the floor until next year [maybe]. However, how many of Thomas supporters would have expected the team to regress this year?

But wonder of wonders, the Los Angeles Clippers are apparently interested in hiring Thomas. That last sentence could only have been written with the name of one NBA team, we would hope. The only plausible explanation is that Mike Dunleavy has decided that the only way to salvage his coaching reputation is to bring in someone who would make him look better in comparison.

One has to wonder about Thomas' motivation at this point. I mean failing to turn around yet another team can't hold that much appeal to a man who has the destruction of an entire league on his resume. David Stern needs to find his inner Goodell and get Mr Thomas in the right job.

Hey aren't we going to be in a war with China in about 30 years? Hey aren't the Chinese coming on in basketball? Hey isn't Stephon Xavier Marbury already in China?

If America were to get serious about the destruction of Chinese basketball, Marbury would represent our opening [and vicious] salvo and Thomas ... Thomas would mean that America is getting serious about inflicting pain in our rivals ... Dear BHO, hear me out on this one, you're looking a little light in the loafers lately and I got [yet] another Chicago lad that could really help out ... the beauty of this is that you look like you're doing him a favor, but in reality ... I'm just saying ...

Article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Report: Clippers contact FIU coach Isiah Thomas
By PETE PELEGRIN
ppelegrin@MiamiHerald.com

FIU men's basketball coach Isiah Thomas has been contacted by the Los Angeles Clippers to be their coach, general manager and president, according to a report by Fox Sports.

Fox Sports' Jeff Goodman reported a source close to the situation said the Clippers have reached out to Thomas.

ESPN.com reported that two unidentified senior executives with the Clippers have denied that Thomas was contacted, with one saying the report was ``ridiculous'' and ``irresponsible.''

Telephone calls placed by The Miami Herald to Thomas and FIU athletic director Pete Garcia were not returned.

Mike Dunleavy stepped down as coach of the Clippers on Thursday, but remains the team's general manager. Dunleavy was 215-325 in six-plus seasons as the Clippers' coach.

Thomas is in his first season with the Golden Panthers and has a 7-18 record, but signed a 2010 class that has been ranked as high as 17th in the nation by hoopscoop.com.

Thomas, a Hall of Fame point guard with the Detroit Pistons, previously coached the Indiana Pacers and New York Knicks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Read more!