October 2009 Archives

Lab rats in Chicago were deliberately hooked on junk to see how they'd behave with increasing doses of the stuff. Only the junk in question wasn't heroin, but food -- specifically a diet of sausage, pound cake, bacon, cheesecake and Ho Hos.

The rats ate and ate and ate, and when they'd grown obese, they continued eating. Even when they'd consumed thousands of calories in high-fat, zero-nutrition crap, the rats were insatiable. Eventually, the researchers began electrocuting the rats each time they ate the junk food, and each time the rats came back for more. The obese rats had to eat increasingly larger quantities in order to feel satisfied.

After a period of time, the researchers cut off their supply of junk food and offered them healthy alternatives instead -- the human equivalent of a salad option -- and the rats simply refused to eat.

This wasn't just wanton cruelty. The study aimed to find a link between overeating and drug addiction, to determine if the same neurological reward system is engaged while eating certain foods as when abusing narcotics.

"This is the most complete evidence to date that suggests obesity and drug addiction have common neuro-biological underpinnings," says one of the study's co-authors, Paul Johnson of the Scripps Research Institute in Jupiter, Fla.

This makes a great deal of sense to me. In my part-time job at a restaurant, I regularly see people consume thousands of calories in a single meal: mac and cheese, hush puppies, full racks of pork ribs slathered in sauce, as many as eight Diet Cokes. Then, to top it off, a hot fudge brownie sundae or slice of banana cream pie. They are slothful and tired-looking people, yet they continue to consume. It makes me think of the tongue-in-cheek blog This is Why You're Fat, which recently became a book as well.

The blog's tagline, "Where Dreams Become Heart Attacks," could be the marketing slogan for countless purveyors of food in this country and I'll wager people would still eat what they're selling. After all, everyone knows heroin is deadly, and yet, every single day people choose to try it. When will the American food industry be held accountable for what it's pushing in our nation's supermarkets and restaurants?

[Image: Inge Habex from Wikimedia Commons]

Is Bravo's "Top Chef" guilty of dietary bigotry? Is there even such a thing?

I was so looking forward to this week's Top Chef's episode. Although not a full-throttle vegetarian myself, some of my amateur culinary specialties -- pumpkin soup a' la Ron and a little something-something I like to call Salad Mwangaguhunga (a liberal dose of dried cranberries, kalamata olives and cashews added to the usual suspects) -- are entirely without meat. More often than not I am just not in the mood for a meal as existentially heavy as, say, a marinated beef brisket. Ron Mwangaguhunga doesn't do beef briskets. Quite frankly, if I had a choice between the perfect salad or the best meat dish I would probably, really and truly, go in for the salad.

So -- why do I love Top Chef? It's a dysfunctional relationship, really. Any regular viewer of the show can tell you that they are very meat-centric in that neck of the woods. Vegetable dishes on Top Chef are relegated to side dish status or addendum to the main meat course that rarely, if ever, sinks or raises a contestant in the ranks. It's almost as if vegetarian fare is considered second-class by the culinary elite. Still, as head judge Tom Colicchio often reminds the viewer (in his sternest paternal voice,of course) that the "Top Chef" should be able to handle all kinds of cooking, including, presumably, a request for some upscale veggie fare. Surprisingly, it took the show's producers six seasons to figure out this gaping hole in their method of chef testing. I was excited when last week's teaser hinted that celebrity guest Natalie Portman -- a known vegetarian -- wanted the contestants to prepare the meal for her dinner party. Unfortunately, the episode didn't live up to the buildup. From Ecorazzi:

As a vegan Top Chef watcher I often feel conflicted - inspired by the artistry, but grossed out by just about everything else. So you can imagine how excited I was when I heard that Natalie Portman would be appearing on the show with a super special vegetarian challenge.

Well, the episode premiered Wednesday night and I was must say...I was totally disappointed. Portman (who is currently vegan) was vegetarian when the episode was taped and had one simple request: make a delicious herbivore meal.

While some chefs moaned and groaned, others seemed excited for the challenge and left me curiously awaiting their plant-based masterpieces.

. . . When the meals were finally completed, I shook my head with frustration. Each dish appeared more like an uninspired vegetable medley than a fine dining entrée. Vegan cuisine is dynamic and bold, not soggy and simple.

Ecorazzi blogger Michael Parrish DuDell isn't alone. Regular judge Gail Simmons, who was a pescetarian (pescetarian) for over eight years, wrote on the Top Chef blog, "(The dishes) were just so much less imaginative than I had hoped for and expected." The comments section expressed a similar disappointment. "Those plates lacked the heartiness of entrees," wrote amy NB, summing up the sentiment on the board.

What did you think of the vegetarian challenge? Do you think that "Top Chef" is anti-vegetarian? Would you want to eat any of the dishes served on this week's episode?

"Unnatural Causes looks at what's making us sick in the first place, investigating startling new findings that suggest there is much more to poor health than bad habits, inadequate health care or unlucky genes. The series circles in on a slow killer in plain view: the social circumstances in which we are born, live and work that can affect our risk for disease as surely as germs and viruses."

This week's segment, "Not Just a Paycheck," takes a look at how job insecurity and unemployment affect health. This is certainly a timely issue, given the rising unemployment rate in America and the continuing signs of malaise in sectors critical for future economic growth.

The show airs from 10:00-11:00pm on PBS on Friday, October 30.

[image: Producers Larry Ademan and Llew Smith courtesy of PBS]

What kid hasn't fantasized about escaping the tyranny of parents, the shackles of school, and the general feeling that your life is not your own? When I was 10, I'd tie a handkerchief around the end of a branch and parade around the block with it propped up on my shoulder as if I were a young boxcar bandit, off to start a new life.

But then, like Max grown weary of the Wild Things, I'd come home for dinner. The fantasy was enough to keep me from actually doing it, and frankly, I didn't have much reason to run away.

Sadly, this isn't the case for as many as 1.6 million American youth. (It's impossible to know the exact figure because homeless people -- especially youth -- are often hard to locate.) For them, life on the street or in the woods is a grim reality, often accompanied by violence, prostitution and drugs. What's worse, such a life is sometimes preferable to what they left behind: parents who beat them, starved them, or simply ignored them.

The New York Times published two front-page stories this week on the plight of homeless teens and pre-teens. The first offers a harrowing look at why these kids run away, citing the economic crisis as a key factor in their unhappiness at home. As an ex-girlfriend's father once warned me during a period of unemployment: "When hunger knocks on the door, love flies out the window."

He was right, and his daughter and I broke up within three months - but we were just dating. I shudder to think that the maxim holds for actual kin, but that very well might be the case.

The second Times story focuses on prostitution, relating the stories of teenage girls who were seduced by men who promised to care for them but wound up selling their bodies. The girls, meanwhile, didn't leave because the men provided basic needs: shelter, food, and companionship. A basic sense of security and belonging -- strong medicine for a scared teen on the lam.

On a related note, more than 700 arrests were made this week in a nationwide sting on child prostitution, rescuing 56 girls -- some as young as I was when I pretended to be a hobo. The investigation spanned 36 cities and involved 1,600 agents and officers from the FBI, local law enforcement agencies and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.

Very Young Girls, a documentary released in 2007, focuses on this phenomenon in New York City, profiling a group of girls who entered "the life," in some cases, as young as 12 years old. Lacking strong parental figures, many of them were preyed upon by pimps who became their fathers, boyfriends and bosses all at once. The saddest part is that some of the girls won't leave because they've never known such security, even after people try to rescue them.

In My Shoes is another recent documentary that attempts to show teen homelessness from the teens' perspective. The point being that if we can understand why these kids run away, maybe we can actually help them instead of merely rounding them up and sending them home to lives that may be more dangerous than what they find in our nation's bus depots and alleyways.

I think back on a film I saw when I was 18, Where the Day Takes You, about a group of runaway teens in Los Angeles. The 1992 movie stars Dermot Mulroney and Will Smith, and while it does depict the hardships of life on the street, it also makes the life look kind of awesome. I even knew a guy in high school who was so inspired by the film that he resolved to move to LA and live among homeless teens for a year so he could write a Hunter S. Thompson-esque book about it later. (I don't believe he followed through.)

Teen homelessness is a crisis, the harrowing realities of which no Hollywood movie can capture. Perhaps with stories like those in the Times this week and documentaries like the ones mentioned above, we can begin imagining some real solutions. Clearly, lives depend on it.

[Image: Monica Almeida for the New York Times]

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was greeted in Islamabad at the start of her 3-day mission on Wednesday by a massive car bomb which killed at least 90 people in a crowded market. "These attacks on innocent people are cowardly; they are not courageous; they are cowardly," Clinton, showing visible anger, told reporters, emphasizing that last word. Later in the day, Clinton initiated U.S. assistance program for Pakistan's energy sector -- strikingly contrasted against the nihilism of the bomb attack -- aimed at reducing electricity shortages. It is a perfect articulation of "smart power"; as one side seeks to annihilate, the other seeks to build Pakistan's economy. The Secretary has signalled that her foreign policy focus will be on women and children, the unsung victims of wars (and the majority of the planet's population). The first phase of Clinton's program, the centerpiece of the Secretary's first day in Pakistan, involves $125 million of American funding to Pakistan's beleaguered power sector.

Let's face it: Things thus far are not going well in Pakistan. The U.S.-encouraged offensive by the Pakistan military in South Waziristan has set off retaliatory bomb strikes -- like the one greeting the Secretary's arrival -- testing the resolve of non-combatants bearing the brunt of the casualties. For years the South Asian nation has greedily devoured American aid and funneled it towards, among other things, military action. The previous administration was almost entirely ensorcelled by a quixotic war in Mesopotamia.

The current administration, by contrast, has placed "AfPak" -- the so-called graveyard of Empires -- at the center of its foreign policy objectives. As President Obama deliberates over the shape of his Afghanistan policy, still weeks away, Hillary Clinton's moral anger, if only for a moment, seemed particularly well-placed. Whether or not one agrees with the war as one of necessity, we can all share some collective outrage over the killing of innocents in a marketplace. Though the United States is not "dithering" -- Dick Cheney's clumsy characterization -- we do appear to be at what can only be properly considered a standstill. That flash of moral anger by Hillary Clinton, not seen since those hot Tuesdays last summer in the thick of the Democrat primaries, reminds us that standstill or not, the United States is still capable of moral anger at the murder of innocents.

[Image: Wikimedia]

Despite the rise of women attending college and becoming the majority of the workforce, one area that continues to be ignored by women and girls is computer science.

There are many theories as to why girls love using computers (women are the majority of social media users) but don't want to learn how to program or build computers. There are those who chalk it up to gender differences plain and simple. Some believe it is because girls are repelled by geek or hacker culture. Universities and companies who hire computer scientists are constantly recruiting girls and trying to show them why computer science is a great option.

One part of the theory why girls are excluded from hacker culture is that it is too "frattish" and misogynistic. That is why I find the lap dances at a recent Yahoo! event (Yahoo! paid for women to dance in skimpy clothing at a "brainstorming session") to be especially atrocious.

Sure, the Yahoo! folks said they were sorry, but no apology will erase the damage done and the way this incident adds to a stereotype about women's place in the tech world. Instead of a forced apology, I would like to see Yahoo! increase their outreach to girls in high schools. I know they already make some effort, but incidents like this lapdancing fest demand a higher response. Yahoo!, please increase scholarships, internships, summer camps around the country and anything else you can think of. There are plenty of organizations working on this issue. Yup, it's throw in the kitchen sink time!

Many people might scoff at this, laugh it off or even excuse it as "boys will be boys." But incidents like this leave lasting impressions. They reinforce a stereotype about not just a company, but an entire field. Yahoo! isn't the only organization who has suffered from bad public relations due to a frat boy mentality, after all.

Earlier this year at a Flash developer conference the poop hit the fan when a keynote speaker used graphic photos and crude language that was utterly unprofessional. The organizers, Dave Schroeder and Hoss Gifford, did apologize, thanks to some organizing by the Geek Girls. his apology The first apology, Schroeder's, allows us to peer into the mentality that occurs, even to men, when we allow a "boys will be boys" mentality to rule:

How did this happen? There is no long exhaustive answer. I made a terrible error in judgment. I knew there was potential for this to occur and I blew it. And for that I deserve to on the hot seat for this. Hot seat accepted. Which I think raises a good point about the gender issues addressed above. Even a guy like me, who knows what is appropriate and what is inappropriate can be lazy at times, or even appear to be in a mild coma when inappropriate behavior occurs. It's important keep your own values close and online all the time. I'll certainly be working to improve this aspect of myself.

Dave admits that he messed up and it is a wonderful apology, but it also allows us to see that even a self-professed feminist can buckle under the pressure to not rock the boat in this industry and just see what happens. From what I can tell here from his own words, he gambled and lost.

Hoss on the other hand used the "I can't be sexist, I'm a husband and father!" line. Um, yes you can. I'm sure we could rally a ballroom full of women who can attest to their father's sexism.

But this isn't about Yahoo! or Hoss or any other dude who thinks he needs to wow a tech audience with porn and offensive language. Honestly, if that's your M.O. you might want to look into your raising the ante of your content and reassessing the IQ level of the audience. What this is about is that these separate incidents set a TONE for the entire industry.

This is why an innocent enough comment about sparkling pasties can offend. It's not that we are hypersensitive, but rather that we are tired of having to endure a Tailhook gauntlet at tech conferences, whether physically or environmentally.

And then back to girls. Girls are online, they are reading our blogs and seeing how adults act at our professional meetings. Not too many girls are going to see all of this evidence and say, "Hey! I want to be a computer science major and develop the next Flash."

So dudes, keep the frat boy antics in your head. If you are father, ask yourself, "Would you want your daughter to see this power point?" Because in the world we live in, chances are she will, as will her friends. If you aren't a father, just say no to porn in your presentation, plain and simple.

To the young women reading this...Not all of the tech industry is a frat party. Check out the Grace Hopper Celebration or your local She's Geeky events.

[Image: Wikimedia]

President Obama will sign a new bill into law today that expands the definition of "hate crime" to include violent acts committed on someone because of his or her sexual orientation or sexual identity. Previously, hate crimes were limited to acts committed because of a person's nationality, religion, race, ethnicity or political affiliation.

This isn't the first time such a bill was proposed. The late senator Edward Kennedy proposed the legislation repeatedly, but then-President George W. Bush vowed to veto it if it ever reached his desk. Fortunately it's not his desk anymore.

The new bill is named for Matthew Shepard, a gay 21-year-old college student from Wyoming who was brutally beaten and left for dead 11 years ago this month. The Matthew Shepard Act was passed last week by a landslide Senate vote of 68 to 29, proving that tolerance is more the norm than the exception on Capitol Hill.

Of course, tolerance isn't the norm in much of America. Some right-wing Christians are concerned that the bill will infringe on their right to speak out about their religious views. Matt Barber, of the conservative religious blog Liberty Counsel, echoes the sentiment of many conservatives that the new bill is merely an example of Obama's pandering to the gay community by "throwing a bone to homosexual activists because they have been breathing down his neck...and this is a way to hold them off."

Not surprisingly, this is the aspect of the story Fox News chose to focus on in its coverage of the bill's approval. Quoting Alabama senator Jeff Sessions, a Republican, the article leads with this: "The inclusion of the controversial language of the hate crimes legislation, which is unrelated to our national defense, is deeply troubling."

But the law is very clear: it protects individuals against acts, not language or, as Fox puts it, "thought crimes." This is not about policing intellectual freedom, it's about protecting people from being brutalized or killed for their sexuality. The Right will just have to deal with it.

[Image: President Obama with Judy and Dennis Shepard, The Matthew Shepard Foundation]

When Barack Obama was a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, he specialized in Constitutional law. As editor of the Harvard Law Review, he had to be on top of then-current law scholarship and the goings-on of the Supreme Court. After all, he was responsible for keeping thousands of people abreast of the issues.

So when a blogger supposedly unearthed Obama's college thesis from Columbia University, in which the young Obama expressed disdain for the Constitution, and Joe Klein of Time magazine reported on it, people were duly surprised. Not least of all, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, who jumped at the chance to skewer Obama for yet more evidence of his being as un-American as crunchy n'dizi, a Kenyan dessert made from bananas.

Titled "Aristocracy Revisited," the thesis contained all sorts of ideas that would thrill many an Obama detractor, such as "doubts" about the "so-called" founding fathers. Mr Limbaugh spoke of the surprising undergraduate paper on his radio show last Friday, and then an even bigger bomb dropped: it was a hoax.

When Limbaugh learned the truth midway through his show, he refused to admit fault -- indeed, he merely said "we have to hold out the possibility that [the news about Obama's thesis] is not accurate."

And then, quintessential Limbaugh: "However, I have had this happen to me recently. I have had quotes attributed to me that were made up. And when it was pointed out to the media that the quotes were made up, they said, 'It doesn't matter. We know Limbaugh thinks it anyway.'"

This seemed to give him even greater fuel for his fire: "So I don't care if these quotes are made up," he concluded. "I know Obama thinks it. You know why I know Obama thinks it? Because I've heard him say it. Not about the Constitution but about the Supreme Court."

Wha?

[Image: Daily News]

What do the Barney theme song, the cloying Meow Mix jingle (see above) and Matchbox Twenty's musical oeuvre have in common? All were used as punishment against detainees at U.S. military detention centers, including Guantanamo Bay, according to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the National Security Archive. Former detainees confirmed a list of at least 35 songs and musicians mentioned in the request that were used as interrogation devices. On behalf of a coalition of musicians, including R.E.M., Rage Against the Machine, Pearl Jam, and Billy Bragg, the Washington-based National Security Archive filed the FOIA petition seeking the declassification of all records related to the use of music played at high decibels in the futility method interrogation practices. "It seems so obvious," Rosanne Cash told the LATimes. said. "Music should never be used as torture."

It was probably a bad strategy for the United States military to use the work of a politically radical band like Rage Against the Machine and not expect blowback. "The fact that music I helped create was used as a tactic against humanity sickens me," guitarist Tom Morello of Rage, whose music is said to have been used at Guantanamo, told The Daily Mail. This raises all sorts of questions, like: Could a musician sue the U.S. government for the use of their music in torture? And, of course: Should they?

On June 13, 2009, thousands of people in Melbourne rallied for action on climate change. On that cold and bleak winter day they gathered at the State Library to hear from Greens Senator Bob Brown and Climate Code Red author and climate activist David Spratt (both pictured), among others. Leaving the State Library, the crowd marched down Swanston Street to the front of the Melbourne Town Hall to participate in a sit-down protest for climate change.

Inside the Town Hall was a meeting of the Victorian State Conference of the Australian Labor Party. A woman from Tuvalu spoke to the conference on the threat that rising seas pose to her country and other low-lying nations. Damien Lawson, National Climate Change Coordinator for Friends of the Earth, spoke on the need for a campaign of popular civil disobedience if politicians continue taking no action or ineffectual action to rapidly decrease carbon emissions.

For further information on this and other climate change action see my full report at Australia Indymedia.

What says capitalist greed and selfishness better than a pillbox hat, black pumps and a dowdy overcoat? If you're familiar with the dubious fashion sense of Ayn Rand, nothing. The Russian émigré, who became a relentless champion of free market capitalism and the supremacy of the individual through novels like Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, wasn't exactly known for her looks or her threads. But suddenly, 27 years after her death, some of the world's most successful designers are finding inspiration in her mid-20th century frocks.

The Daily Beast's Rebecca Dana suggests that the newfound interest in Rand's fashion comes from two new biographies on the philosopher-writer. Ralph Lauren, Shipley & Halmos, and Ritu Beri have Rand-inspired designs in their new lines. Kimberly Ovitz, a Los Angeles-based designer, told Dana that she discovered Rand three years ago and her favorite book is The Virtue of Selfishness, a nonfiction work extolling, well, the virtues of selfishness.

I too loved that book once, as well as everything else Rand wrote. Except I was 17 years old at the time, and Rand reinforced my teenage hunch that I was the only one in the world who saw things clearly. See, that's her genius: She makes everyone who reads her identify with the idea that everyone else is a drone; the only problem is, if everyone who reads her thinks that they're the only ones who "get it," doesn't that create something of a paradox?

By the time I was 18, I'd decided that Ayn Rand is a good writer but a terrible philosopher. Not only that, she's a dangerous person to hitch your ideological wagon to if you expect to live in a society that requires a little give-and-take.

But whether or not you follow her hackneyed, problematic theories is beside the point. The question at hand is, why would anyone want to look like her?

[Image: Ayn Rand testifying before the House Un-American Affairs Committee in 1947]

It is ironic that even as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton puts the issues of women and children at the center of her agenda, rape -- especially on the continent of Africa -- is increasing in use as a weapon of war. In the Congo, in particular, both sexes have been the victims. Sienna Miller's trip to the Congo earlier this spring is has been chronicled in a short video called "8 Minutes," documenting the stories of rape survivors:

The movie tells the story of three days spent in the heart of a war zone. Miller made the documentary with the International Medical Corps, a group that recently hosted a visit by Secretary Clinton. Miller also blogged her trip and this entry, from her final day, is particularly evocative:

The journey was everything we had been warned about and more: muddy roads that could swallow a truck, flat tires, makeshift bridges, military checkpoints, very young men with very large weapons. It was a six-hour drive through Kahuzi Biega National Park and north to Chambucha. The scenery was breathtaking. Thick dense jungle, bamboo trees and wild orchids, monkeys, every shade of green you could possibly imagine. Enormous spider webs and their equally enormous creators, such a change from the urban feel of Bukavu. There were children swimming in the river that borders the forest where the FDLR (Rwandan rebel group) are in hiding, and where the FARDC (Congolese government troops) have taken positions along the road, weapons trained at their sides. And that's what's so confusing about this place...utter purity and beauty juxtaposed with brutal violence.

Find out how you can get involved here.

Silvio Berlusconi could be tossed aside lightly if he weren't the Prime Minister of Italy. Unfortunately, his boorish behavior cannot be dismissed as the rantings of a right-wing caveman. Berlusconi's political gaffes are legendary and thoroughly unbecoming of a head of state. At a G20 photo shoot, Berlusconi's aggressive greeting of President Barack Obama drew the ire of the Queen of England. "What is it? Why does he have to shout?" the visibly annoyed royal asked as world leaders surrounding her chuckled. Berlusconi has also made crass jokes about the President's skin color -- twice -- but he seems to be immune from any kind of domestic political consequences. So he continues to act the fool.

Silvio Berlusconi's bad behavior is not new. Upon meeting him, President Clinton thought he was less sophisticated than Ross Perot (and that's saying something). This week he narrowly avoided a rebuke by the European Union regarding press freedoms in Italy (the final vote in European Parliament was 338 for, 338 against). His latest gaffe, however, reveals an ingrained chauvinism that might not be so easy to shake. From the BBC:

Mr Berlusconi said the woman, 58-year-old Rosy Bindi, was "more beautiful than intelligent".

The prime minister says his comments were a joke, but he has been accused of chauvinism.

... "You are more beautiful than intelligent," he told her, in a sarcastic swipe at her looks and intellect.

"I am not a woman at your disposal," Ms Bindi replied ...

Although there are too few women in Italian politics, they make up 51.4% of the population and 55.8% of university students. This gaffe, we cannot fail to note, occurs at a time that he and his wife, Veronica Lario, are in the midst of a contentious divorce. Italy's Senator Patrizia Bugnano summed up the general feeling about the Prime Minister's remarks nicely: "Someone tell Berlusconi he is no George Clooney."

[Image: Cafebabel]

In April of this year, 86-year-old WWII veteran Philip Schooner stood before the Maine legislature and made a moving statement in support of gay marriage.

"I'm here today because of a conversation I had last June when I was voting. A woman at my polling place asked me, 'Do you believe in equality for gay and lesbian people?' I was pretty surprised to be asked that. It made no sense to me. Finally I asked her, 'What do you think our boys fought for at Omaha Beach?' I have seen so much blood and guts, so much suffering, so much sacrifice. For what? For freedom and equality. These are the values that make America a great nation, one worth dying for.

This is what we fought for: that idea that we can be different and still be equal. My wife and I did not raise four sons with the idea that three of them would have a certain set of rights but our gay child would be left out. Everybody is supposed to be equal in this country. Let gay people have the right to marry."

On Nov. 3, Maine will once again vote on same-sex marriage -- but this time the vote will be on whether to keep it legal or ban it, similar to California's Proposition 8. Visit Equality Maine to learn more about the situation and how you can get involved.

In 2004, when Cameron Todd Willingham (right) was executed in Texas for the murder of his three children, the state's governor, Rick Perry, no doubt believed he was doing a hero's work by sanctioning the punishment. Texas has a thirst for revenge, and in that state, the expression "an eye for an eye" seems to be taken literally.

"Willingham was a monster," Perry has said. "Here's a guy who murdered his three children and tried to beat his wife into an abortion so he wouldn't have those kids."

But there's a problem: That statement was made after evidence came out suggesting that Willingham might not have set the fire that killed his children. Experts revisited the crime scene and determined that the original investigation was seriously flawed, establishing reasonable doubt after Willingham was put to death, and Perry is now accused of hindering the new investigation that threatened to prove Willingham's innocence.

Governor Perry has been criticized by former Texas governor Mark White for his unwavering position. White, who supported the death penalty when he was governor from 1983 to 1987, says that Texas should reconsider the law, largely because the risk of executing an innocent man or woman is simply too great.

The New York Times reports that Perry's rival in the upcoming Republican gubernatorial primary, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, is even using Perry's actions against him. "The only thing Rick Perry's actions have accomplished is giving liberals an argument to discredit the death penalty," she said in a statement. "We should never do anything to create a cloud of controversy over [capital punishment] with actions that look like a cover-up."

I'm glad to hear someone in Perry's own party criticize him for what he may have done, but I certainly hope Hutchinson doesn't become the next governor of Texas. If this statement is any indication, she's a step in the wrong direction.

[Image: ExecutedToday.com]

Spike Jonze's new film, Where the Wild Things Are, introduces its young protagonist, Max, with a scream. The 9-year-old boy proceeds to somersault down the stairs in hot pursuit of his pet dog. (Or was it a cat? It doesn't really matter.) The point is that Max is a hellion, until he's not. One second a brat, the other a sensitive and lonely child, Max is boyhood incarnate.

But in Jonze's respectful adaptation of Maurice Sendak's children's book, Max is also civilization incarnate, and the land of the Wild Things is at once alien and familiar. The creatures fight, make up, hold grudges, feel bad, and generally act like the people you know. When Max arrives and declares himself king to avoid being eaten, jubilation ensues, followed by a period of peace and unprecedented development in the primitive habitat.

Strife, of course, eventually returns to the island. After all, Max is no king, and the Wild Things are like children themselves. Some are mopey, others manipulative, and at least one is as imaginative as Max. But none of them, Max included, can "keep the sadness out," as one of the Wild Things asks him to when he arrives.

Sendak's book is only 10 sentences long, and while those sentences brilliantly convey the story of Max's journey, they can't do what a feature-length film can. On the other hand, a feature-length film might easily miss the mark of such a perfectly tight little story by trying to make more of it than it should be. Jonze's film manages to stay within the lines of the original text, but he also expands them very gently to make Where the Wild Things Are something more.

It is not an overt political allegory, nor does it represent a specific agenda. That would be too easy, and surely a less creative director might have succumbed to such a temptation. Instead, the film transports the adult mind back to childhood, to a world where anything is possible and feelings dictate reality. And I, for one, left the theater seeing more of a connection between that world -- with all its wonder and pain -- and the adult world I now inhabit than I'd ever seen before.

[Image: Warner Bros. Studios via aceshowbiz.com]

"In the devastating aftermath of the economic meltdown, FRONTLINE sifts through the ashes for clues about why it happened and examines critical moments when it might have gone much differently. Looking back into the 1990s, veteran FRONTLINE producer/director Michael Kirk (Inside the Meltdown, Breaking the Bank) discovers early warnings of the crash, reveals an intense battle among high-ranking members of the Clinton administration and uncovers a concerted effort not to regulate the emerging, highly-complex and lucrative derivatives markets that would become the ticking time bomb within the American economy."

If you've ever wondered how and why the global financial crisis played out like it did, be sure to tune in to PBS at 9pm.

[image: "The Warning" via PBS Pressroom]

President Obama's dramatic foreign policy shift from sticks to carrots ("incentives") as an approach to the crisis in Sudan is drawing fire from human rights activists. And rightly so. How can the world's most powerful democracy soften its approach to Khartoum, a regime guilty of genocide? How can we break bread with Sudan's President, who, on March 4, was issued an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court on counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity? Is this the administration's definition of "Smart Power"?

Sudan is not the only instance of wavering on human rights by the Obama administration. President Obama, who was elected on a mandate of sweeping change, appears to have embraced a largely realist foreign policy, the type that was in clear evidence during the latter half of the 20th century during the Cold War. President Obama's snubbing of the Dalai Lama to please the mandarins of Beijing reeks of the old realpolitik. Maureen Dowd, one of the President's earliest champions, called out this irony in a New York Times Op-Ed this weekend, pointing out that, "The tyro American president got the Nobel for the mere anticipation that he would provide bold moral leadership for the world at the very moment he was caving to Chinese dictators." Dowd's conclusion? "Awkward." That awkwardness, to be sure, extends further eastward geographically to a meeting with the junta in Myanmar, one of the world's most repressive regimes.

Granted, Obama promised on the campaign trail to speak to our enemies. The president is not guilty of false advertising. There was, however, an implication in candidate Obama's declaration that his foreign policy approach would further American values through diplomacy while aiming after maximum human rights around the world. Obama's predecessor was idealistic -- neoconservative, to be precise -- while simultaneously dismissive of the benefits of diplomacy and soft power. The aforementioned troubling instances -- Sudan, China and Myanmar -- suggest that the Obama administration is willing to overlook human rights violations in favor of minor diplomatic achievements. That's not a good thing.

The Obama Presidency, clearly, is at a pivotal moment. The discredited neocons are howling "decline." On this week's "Amanpour," -- one of the best shows on human rights around the world -- Human Rights Watch advocacy director Tom Malinowski and Louise Arbour, president of the International Crisis Group, discussed with Christiane Amanpour the U.S. administration's record on human rights ten months into the Obama administration. As you can see from the above video, they share my concerns. America must stand for human rights. If we don't, who will?

Sarah Palin has opened an account on LinkedIn, the professional networking site that launched in 2003 and has since become a sleeping giant in a space dominated by its flashier counterpart, Facebook. What is she doing there? Presumably the same thing that most of the site's other 50 million registered users are -- looking for new gigs or staying in touch with former colleagues.

But how many of those 50 million users are former governors and vice presidential candidates? Palin's online resume doesn't tell us anything we don't know: She has shockingly limited experience for a former veep candidate. But there's something about the way her resume appears on the site that reinforces just how limited her background really is. Her longest stretch in any given job was six years, as mayor of Wasilla. Prior to that, she served on that city's council for three years. Since 2006, her longest gig was two years and seven months, when she was governor.

Call me cynical, but my view of networking events -- whether virtual or non -- is that they're only attended by people who are looking for work. This makes them inherently useless from a practical standpoint. If everyone's looking for work, how is anyone really helping anyone else?

Sarah Palin doesn't need any more publicity or to vie for jobs like the rest of us. She can easily ride the wave she landed on face-first last fall and make a mint just by being the CEO of Sarah Palin, Inc. So I wonder, is this latest move just a ploy to get people like me to write blog posts about it? I suspect that it is.

[Image: Sarah Palin's LinkedIn profile photo]

Halloween is a time when children imagine themselves as fanciful, storybook characters: princesses, pirates, ghouls and warlocks. For adults, it's a chance to outwit your friends, make a political statement or simply dress a lot more salaciously then you'd normally feel comfortable doing -- Wonder Women and cowgirls appear by the thousands every October 31st.

It's also a time to walk the fine line between humor and bad taste. This year, a favorite costume is expected to be Bernie Madoff, and last year Heath Ledger's Joker made countless appearances just three month's after the actor's posthumously released last film, The Dark Knight.

Those might offend some people -- Ledger's onetime fiancée Michelle Williams, for one, and anyone who might still care about Bernie Madoff. But if bad taste is measured in the number of people offended, surely one new costume is in very bad taste indeed.

Still two weeks from Halloween, the "Illegal Alien Adult Costume," produced by Forum Novelties, has already raised the ire of immigration activists, immigrants both legal and non, and many others who simply feel that donning an alien mask and an orange jumpsuit with "Illegal Immigrant" printed on the back is going too far. Did I mention that the costume also comes with a plastic green card?

For my money, the best Halloween costumes are so innocuous they're silly. Two years ago, I was a giant carrot; three years ago I was the Bald Lebowski (I wore a bathrobe with a carton of milk stuck in the pocket and carried a virgin White Russian around all night -- the "bald" part is self-explanatory). What's more, they took a little ingenuity.

Perhaps those out there who are inclined to drop $40 on a pre-made illegal immigrant costume should save their pennies and give their cobwebbed imaginations a workout instead.

[Image: CNN]

On August 4, 2009, we attended a community-based anti-gun violence mural project in our neighborhood of Crown Heights, Brooklyn. Just a few days earlier there had been a shooting in the neighborhood--while the mural was not in direct response to that shooting, the shooting helped to contextualize the need for such projects, even when crime in the neighborhood is near an all-time low.

Scores of residents came together to contribute to the 100 foot "Piece Out, Peace In" mural, demonstrating that virtues of the 1st Amendment can prevail over misuses of the 2nd. This project was spearheaded by Crown Heights Community Mediation Center, Groundswell Community Mural Project, American Friends Service Committee, New Yorkers Against Gun Violence and Assemblyman Karim Camara.

An interracial couple in Hammond, Louisiana was denied a marriage license because the justice of the peace there doesn't think interracial marriages are a good idea.

Justice Keith Bardwell claims he's not racist because he does "ceremonies for black couples right here in my house." His issue is concern for the fate of mixed-race children. "I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."

Suffer? Tell that to Barack Obama. Besides, if they do suffer -- and granted, sometimes they do -- it's because of people like Bardwell.

The couple intends to file a discrimination complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice, and the ACLU is preparing a letter for the Louisiana Supreme Court to investigate Bardwell and see if he can be removed from office.

"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzman. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."

Astonishing indeed. Anti-miscegenation laws, shamefully, began with our nation's founding but were eliminated in all states by 1967. They were also a cornerstone of Nazi Germany. But such a damning association hasn't prevented numerous people in the U.S. from renouncing interracial marriage as "unnatural" and indicating a "breakdown in society." This PDF from Vermont Freedom to Marry provides several other "reasons" against interracial unions.

I'm in an interracial relationship myself, and when we're at home in Brooklyn, we never seem to turn a head or raise an eyebrow. But when we travel, like to western Illinois where I grew up, it's like we're behind glass for all the townsfolk to gawk at. The troubling thing is, most of America isn't like Brooklyn, and despite the backlash over this situation in Hammond, or the obvious fact that we have an biracial president, we still have a long way to go before interracial couples are accepted in these United States.

[Image: Interracial Dating Central via Examiner.com]

And I love it!

I have a six-year-old daughter and she's been quite the green cop for the past couple of years. It started off innocently enough when recycling was implemented in her day care. The teachers always included the kids in their activities. It really is a hoot to see 2-year-olds toddling down the hall pulling a garbage bag. So when recycling came to daycare, the kids were asked to rinse out plastic items and told why they were doing it. Soon the kid started to tell us to rinse our plastic and ask why we didn't recycle at home.*

Then came Happy Feet with its tale of overfishing. A peek at viewer comments and you see that some people thought that Happy Feet went overboard with the environmental message.

I can only imagine what they thought of Wall-E and its literal message that we're throwing Earth away as we sit on our La-Z-Boys getting fat. Last weekend my husband took our daughter to see Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs which has its own climate change message.

Don't think that kid's movies are the only place where they are getting the "Go Green!" message. In the past week we have read Judy Moody Saves the World and Nancy Drew and the Clue Crew - Earth Day Escapade, both obviously with green plots.

Last night as we read Nancy Drew, the mystery partly unraveled in the girls restroom when a character flushed the toilet three times, used a wad of paper towels and left the faucet running. The horror!! And for a six-year-old with a budding sense of the environmental justice it was a horror. Her face got that "OMG" look. It was pretty cute.

I know there are people out there who will complain that we are allowing schools and entertainment to brainwash our kids about climate change. But you know what? Climate change is real, it is happening and they will be the ones who will have to truly deal with the ramifications. I do worry that by teaching her so young, she'll come to me one day and ask why i didn't do more to stop it all. Keeping her ignorant might buy me a few years, but that's not how I want to raise her.

The best part of the greening of my daughter? Each time she leaves her bedroom light on, I get to say, "If you're going to be green, you need to turn off your light!" It's a twist on the old "You're wasting energy" line. She still keeps us on our greening toes by reminding us to rinse out plastic and asking if this or that is recyclable. And I really love that.

For a list of great environmental websites for kids, check out more4kids.info.

*We live in Chicago and didn't have any real home recycling programs until this past February. We did paper recycling because we had a collection site nearby, but not much for glass and plastic.

[Image: Moreforkids.info]

I fancy myself a blogger, so I wasn't going to take a pass on Blog Action Day! This year, the BAD topic is "Climate Change." We are called to "mobilize millions of people around expressing support for finding a sustainable solution to the climate crisis.'
Whoa! That's a little intimidating, and my confidence wavers. What can I contribute to the cause of climate change? What exactly is climate change? I know it comes under category: environment...as opposed to unemployment, or healthcare reform, but that's huge! How exactly am I qualified to blog about it?

You can google for lots of information on the scientific and political perspectives. I certainly cannot enlist as a global warming activist or climate change evangelist, so I will have to report from the perspective of the work in progress that is my inner conservationist.

I reassess my efforts in reducing my carbon foot print...mostly standard stuff -- reusable shopping bags are a bona fide habit now- I've changed some light bulbs...but what else? What else? Surely I'm doing more than that?!

Finally, I realize the biggest stride I've made lately is that I am paying much more attention -- as are many of us -- and not simply to debates, but to the constructive ways we can make change.

What's remarkable is that it is not necessarily all intentional. I do not deliberately seek out opportunities to change. There seems to be a natural evolution in my daily intake that inspires and enables change without conscious effort on my part. And for that I credit journalists of every medium who keep me informed and inspired on many levels...by kindling my interest and curiosity.

Recent thought provoking, interesting and inspiring info that has made its way to me:

• An episode on GRITtv re: gas drilling and its effects on NYC drinking water. (You are offered a link to comment directly to the Dept. of Environmental Conservation).

• A very informative article in Edible Jersey about the peril of the honeybees. (One beehive in your back yard can have an impact!)

• Creative ideas (and directions) for re-using and recycling everyday objects at Design Sponge.

Whether you participate in the Kill the Drill campaign, redesign your garden in consideration of the honeybees or simply create a nightstand from furniture found at the curbside, you are participating, you are mobilizing and you are expressing support that in its own way is incorporating change into our collective consciousness.

I look forward to all I will learn on Blog Action Day, and I would like to celebrate it with a big "Thank You!" to journalists of all media who inspire and effect change via information shared in an intelligent, interesting and inspiring way.

[Image: Flowers made from recycled quilts, by Jane Joss]

As global climate change continues, major changes will happen to our ecosystems, agriculture, personal health, weather patterns, coastlines, natural resources and air quality, among other things. Every aspect of life will be affected.

The United Nation Foundation's new campaign, "It's Getting Personal" is asking us to share what we will miss most. The goal is to have people tell the story of how the things they love are being impacted by climate change, and connect with others who also care about this important issue.

Some entries:

"What I will miss most is the Milky Way, the spectacular band of stars stretching across the sky. Now I look up and see a milky orange haze and sometimes I cry."

"I have always wanted to go to Alaska.... With all of the ice melting and oil drilling that is proposed, I am unsure if there will be much Alaska left to visit."

"I am very concerned about the rising sea level and will miss the Everglades if they are covered over."

You can upload images as well as text.

[Image: Wikimedia Commons]

Two weeks ago I went to see David Mamet's phenomenal play Oleanna during previews at the Golden Theater in Times Square. Written in 1992, this two-person tour de force might inspire debate, but not until after it slaps you in the face. I first saw the play in college, and the actors were people I knew, but it still left an indelible mark. I've found myself invoking its themes in conversation ever since.

Here's the basic story: A middle-aged university professor has an impromptu meeting with a female student, who claims she doesn't understand anything in his class. The meeting becomes a debate over the point of a college education: He suggests it's "systematic hazing," while she demands to know how he can say such a thing about people who have sacrificed so much to attend that school.

The professor is supposed to meet with his wife and to close on a house that they are buying in anticipation of getting tenure. But he puts the meeting aside to talk with his troubled student, and when emotions erupt and he tries to comfort her with an embrace, she recoils. End of Act I.

Act II finds the tables turned: She has lodged a complaint of sexual harassment with the tenure committee, and he is on the verge of losing his job. By Act III, the complaint has become an accusation of rape, and the professor's life is all but ruined.

Ben Brantley, in his review for the New York Times, points out that the play causes its audience to question what it saw during Act I. What looked like comfort may really have been salacious behavior, and perhaps the student's complaint was valid. But as Brantley also points out, David Mamet is a "man's man among playwrights," and if you look at the play on the page, what you see is clear sympathy for the unjustly maligned professor.

But this play isn't just about academia. Written on the tails of the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill scandal of 1991, Oleanna can easily be read as an indictment of political correctness in the workplace. In situations of alleged sexual harassment, it's often hard to know what exactly happened. All you have is a "he said/she said" scenario. Oleanna questions whether society has become too quick to side with the supposed victim.

In the 90s, Oleanna resonated as the product of a politically correct culture of fear. Today it serves to remind us of the traps such a culture can set, and the politics of academia it conveys are even more relevant today than in 1992. I don't think it's too strong to call the play prophetic, making the current staging of Oleanna less of a revival than a living thing. But perhaps that's what great theater should always strive to be.

[Image: Oleanna]

Hillary Clinton, alas, has ruled out another Presidential run in 2016. So much the worse for us. In an interview on NBC's "Today" show Monday, the Secretary of State, who put 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling in 2008, disavowed any plans for a second presidential bid, adding that she would be too old to run again after a second Obama administration.

However, Vice President Joe Biden, who will be 73 years old in 2016 (Clinton will be 69), has not ruled out a run, despite his distant finish in 2008.

Clinton's may feel that, as Secretary of State, it would be unbecoming, especially at this early date, to stir the political waters about a future run, leapfrogging ahead of the number two on the ticket. But her disinclination towards running again is a loss to all of us. The example she set for millions of women around the world fell just short of victory. The second time might be the charm.

The Clinton-Obama race for the Democrat party nomination was must-watch television for most of the summer of 2008. Those big-state summer primaries, clustered thickly around Tuesday nights, were political Clashes of the Titans. By comparison, the GOP primary -- McCain versus Romney versus Huckabee -- was a magnum of chloroform (Zzzzzz). Sixty-nine is hardly ancient. President Reagan won re-election in 1984 at 73. John McCain, who was less successful, was 72. Age was a factor in both those candidacies, but it also plays into Hillary's strength: experience. Finally, Biden excepted, looking at the current crop of 2016 possibilities -- Webb, Warner, Bayh, Andrew Cuomo -- none of them has remotely as much experience as our Hillary.

Let's hope she changes her mind. She's got seven years to think it over.

Rush Limbaugh wants to own a sports team. But what kind of sports team will it be if it has no players?

That's the prospect America's most famous right-winger faces as he attempts to purchase the St. Louis Rams. You see, the Rams are a pretty typical NFL team: Most of players are black.

So Limbaugh shouldn't have been too surprised when some of the sport's most coveted players announced that they'd never play for a team he owns, citing the numerous racially charged remarks he's made over the years. Jets linebacker Bart Scott told the Daily News that Limbaugh's recent comment about "Obama's America," where "little white kids now get beat up by little black kids cheering, 'yeah, right on, right on,'" reflects a pattern of "consistent disrespect and just a complete misunderstanding of a culture that I am a part of."

To be fair, plenty of NFL teams are owned by individuals who may not be famous for their political views, but whose views are nevertheless a lot like Rush Limbaugh's. After all, it's a very monied and very white group. But when that money is actually made with bigotry, as it is for Mr. Limbaugh, what self-respecting athlete would want to be a part of it?

[Image: Eric Risberg/AP]

During the recent G-20 Protest Marches in Pittsburgh I had the opportunity to spend over six hours walking, talking, and listening to many who had remarkably different opinions than my own. While the protesters attracted quite a bit of attention, the voices that were nearly lost and often silent during much of the press coverage were those that felt differently than the majority of the protesters in the streets.

Thousands of hard working people in Pittsburgh, many of whom overcame many challenging obstacles to get educations, develop their skills, and make a better life for themselves and their families, stood in stark contrast to the protesters. I think few would agree with the gentleman in the photo that a "job was a right", but rather consider a job something to be earned and valued.

Many of the protesters advocated anarchy, taking the resources of others, and determining, in contrast to our free market enterprise system, how those resources should be allocated. Despite some of the people describing the protests as a noble demonstration of free speech, I had a difficult time finding much to admire in the rhetoric or behavior of some of the crowd. No one advocated hard work, personal responsibility, or obtaining an education - values that might actually lead some in the crowd to find the employment they indicate that they were seeking. Sadly, much of the protests could be described as little more than "the blame game". As a result, I thought to express some opinions that were often in stark contrast with those of the protesters.

With time, I hope to expand my photography skills and along the way, perhaps cause some people to question their beliefs and assumptions via my writing.

The conviction of Anthony "Tony" Marshall last week was the boiling operatic conclusion to the Brooke Astor trial. The 85-year-old son of the socialite of the century was found guilty of an orgy of excess, plundering his own mother's fortune to enrich himself even as the great lady descended into Alzheimer's in a tattered nightgown. The dramatic courtroom event at Manhattan's 100 Centre Street courthouse contained many of the all-too-human psychological forces that one expects from Wagner at his darkest: greed, sloth, wrath, envy. As Ralph Gardner, Jr. put it in The Daily Beast: "What made the Brooke Astor trial, which ended Thursday with a guilty verdict for the socialite's son and his lawyer, riveting to the very end was that it seemed to hit on almost all seven deadly sins--perhaps even coining an eighth: stupidity."

In my humble opinion Anthony Marshall's spectacular Ring Cycle-ish fall bears a striking resemblance to the economic crisis and our own financial industry's vice-like grip on our government. Bear with me. While the analogy might not be a perfect fit, the world's oldest democracy's decline over the past decade or two parallels that of the now-deceased centenarian philanthropist. Like Astor, captive in her own apartment, big finance exerts an undue influence over America. As the financial sector rose and manufacturing declined, America's robust economic health went sideways. How ironic that the Astor fortune -- primarily built on the sweat-of-one's-brow industry that is fur-trapping -- was plundered by a lazy ne'er do well "investment advisor." How curious, finally, that the impatience of Wall Street's go-getters in search of their short-term bonuses at the expense -- as we now know -- of the American taxpayer coincides, tragically, with Marshall's looting.

Let's hope, historical coincidences notwithstanding, that a better fate befalls America than that of its philanthropic icon Brooke Astor.

[Image: Estatevaults]

President Obama reacted just as he should have when news broke Friday morning that he'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009. He expressed gratitude tempered with humility, acknowledging that he hasn't yet earned such a high honor. I agree.

The President has extended a hand of friendship to the Arab world and shown many abroad that America isn't necessarily a rich, white nation with an imperialist agenda. But he hasn't accomplished anything major diplomatically, including promises he built his campaign around, such as closing Guantanamo Bay and taking nuclear weapons off alert. That's why a lot of people -- both arch conservatives and Obama supporters -- were taken aback by this development.

I look at it this way: Obama has a lot on his plate, more than anyone could accomplish in nine months, and he's not giving up. According to this "Obameter" from PolitiFact.com, President Obama has broken just seven of the 500+ promises he made during his campaign, fulfilled 47, compromised on 12, and either stalled, taken some action, or temporarily shelved the rest.

Obama himself conceded that he "doesn't deserve" the prize, and said he accepts it as a call to action. "I know that throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement," he said Friday. "It's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes."

Regardless of the the Nobel committee's reasons for choosing Obama for this prestigious honor, I'm glad that we have a president who believes in rising to the challenge it presents.

[Image: Barack Obama in Cairo with Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak]

The Guinea junta's horrific crackdown this week, which included murders and mass rapes in a stadium, cannot be denied. Adam Nossiter of The New York Times viewed three anonymously-circulated cell phone pictures which depict women in varying stages of undress with Guinean soldiers. "I can't sleep at night, after what I saw," a woman who claims she herself was sexually abused told The New York Times. "And I am afraid. I saw lots of women raped, and lots of dead." More than 150 Guineans were murdered by the military as the protest disintegrated into a killing field. Although thirty women have given testimonies to human rights activists corroborating the mass rapes, Guinea's health minister -- one Colonel Cherif Abdoulaye Diaby -- said that he didn't believe any rapes had occurred.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has made advocacy for women's issues the centerpiece of her diplomatic agenda. Madame Secretary recently chaired a Security Council meeting that unanimously adopted a resolution condemning sexual violence in war zones. Of Guinea, she said on Tuesday that "The indiscriminate killing and raping that took place under government control by government troops was a vile violation of the rights of the people of that country." Guinea is ruled by 45-year old Captain Moussa Dadis Camara's junta, which seized power of the mineral-rich predominately Muslim nation last December in a bloodless coup. Camera, says Clinton, "cannot remain in power."

Bloodless no longer.

[Image: Flickr]

Michael David Barrett has been arrested for videotaping and stalking ESPN reporter Erin Andrews.

If you haven't heard, an illegal videotape of Ms. Andrews was made as she was undressing in a hotel room and then leaked on the internet. Andrews was the victim of a crime.

A little background: Erin Andrews is often not taken seriously by other journalists. They believe that Andrews relies far too heavily on her sexiness rather than her skills. USA Today sports columnist Christine Brennan was caught on Facebook and Twitter essentially blaming Andrews for what happened, writing "I wish it didn't happen to Erin, but I also would suggest to her if she asked (and she hasn't) that she rely on her talent and brains and not succumb to the lowest common denominator in sports media by playing to the frat house." I can't read Brennan's Facebook page, so I can't verify. But that statement is pretty sad--and I normally love Brennan. Of course, Brennan tried to reframe her comments, saying she was speaking generically, but the damage was done. Only Carol Slezak of the Chicago Sun-Times stepped up to defend Andrews, decry the emphasis on her looks and tsk people who think this is all a joke.

It's not about how Andrews looks. It's not even about whether she is a good reporter or not. The ramifications of this case are huge and go beyond her appearance: A hotel employee aided Barrett by putting Andrews in a secluded room and giving him a room next door. He may have taped other women.

All women are vulnerable to this type of invasion of privacy--which could easily have turned into an assault. I seriously cannot believe that in this day one can call up a hotel and request a room next to someone and get it. And get it in a tucked away corner of the hotel! What else could have happened? Does this hotel have no security?

As someone who travels a lot, I am floored. 100% floored that my safety and privacy can so easily be compromised. Yeah, I figure that people might figure out where I am staying, but next door? ACK!

So I'll be watching this story closely. Not to mention my back the next time I'm at a hotel. And if anything horrible does happen, I hope that catching the person who did it is what makes headlines.

[Image: Publicity photo courtesy ESPN]

College is dirty. You don't have to bathe, change your clothes, or shave unless you want to. That's the fun of it. But most of the filth from those halcyon days of youth can be washed away upon graduation. Except one, argues the Sierra Club in a new campaign to stop campuses from using coal to generate power on campus.

Universities in eleven states across the country still rely on coal, the Sierra Club reports, despite the efforts of environmentalists and politicians to curb carbon emissions. The Campuses Beyond Coal campaign has organizers lobbying for clean air at 60 schools nationwide, and it aims to recruit more through its 2Dirty4College commercials and online petition. Here's the first one, with two more to follow in the coming weeks:

Nuclear proliferation is the most pressing national security issue facing the United States. That is why the recently revealed Qum facility in Iran was a shock to diplomats when it was revealed as they were gathering for the opening of the UN General Assembly two weeks ago.

Clearly it is in the interest of the America to prevent Iran -- or at least this present untrustworthy regime -- from acquiring the ability to make the bomb. The current regime supports militias and terrorist groups hostile to the United States. Such an acquisition might spark an arms race among moderate Arab states fearful of a nuclearized Iran in an already volatile Middle East.

But, as Fareed Zakaria says in his powerful Newsweek International piece on Iran, perhaps we are overstating the threat and thus giving Iran a bigger bargaining chip than they really deserve to have. Zakaria, arguing for a "containment and determent" approach to Iran's nuclear ambition, instead of military force or diplomatic engagement, points out that all is not lost if Iran gets nuclear weapons capabilities:

The Middle East has been home to nuclear weapons for decades. If Israel's estimated -arsenal of 200 warheads, including a "second-strike capacity," has not prompted Egypt to develop its own nukes, it's not clear that one Iranian bomb would do so. (Recall that Egypt has fought and lost three wars against Israel, so it should be far more concerned about an Israeli bomb than an Iranian one.) More crucially, Israel's massive nuclear force will deter Iran from ever contemplating using or giving away its own (hypothetical) weapon. Deterrence worked with madmen like Mao, and with thugs like Stalin, and it will work with the calculating autocrats of Tehran.

It's almost heretical to suggest that we can live with a nuclear Iran, yet Zakaria is not the first to suggest it. Perhaps if we can confront this scary prospect with open eyes, we can better determine how to proceed.

What are the steps that are needed to lift the world's poor out of poverty? PBS has collaborated with noteworthy Peruvian economist and author Hernando de Soto on "The Power of the Poor", a new one-hour program that takes an in-depth look at the problems - like corruption and bureaucracy - that nations such as Peru must overcome if its people are to be lifted out of poverty. Solving these problems through a program of systematic reform of both the political and legal system could be a way to unlock over $10 trillion in economic value worldwide:

"Filmed in Peru and featuring award-winning Peruvian economist and author Hernando de Soto, the program relates how corruption and bureaucracy have locked two thirds of the world's population out of national and global economies. Forced to operate outside the rule of law, they have created their own parallel, but extremely limited, extralegal systems. De Soto and his team have proven that the world's hard-working poor entrepreneurs have created far more wealth than anyone had ever imagined. He believes that the value of their homes and businesses worldwide is almost $10 trillion."

Watch "The Power of the Poor" tonight, October 8 at 10PM EST.

[image: The Power of the Poor via PBS]

One border. Two instances of authorities showing little interest in finding justice on behalf of Latinas. In each case, an artistic response keeps their memories alive.

In Juarez, Mexico, hundreds of women have been murdered since 1993, with little response from the government. Artist Andrea Arroyo brings to light the plight of families of the victims in her project,"Flor de Tierra." The installation of 200 drawings reflects the large scale of the murders, with each piece serving as an abstract tribute to one of the victims, many of whom remain unidentified. The drawings, white on black paper, depict fragments of women's bodies--a hand or a braid. This is to represent the fact that the bodies were dismembered, says Arroyo.

Four hours away, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where the bodies of 11 Latina women were found in February, hand drawn portraits mark where their bodies were discovered. The families believe that the police worked too slow to investigate the missing person reports. Lori Gallegos, whose best friend was among the slain women, has been a driving force to create a memorial for the victims. The developer who owns land where the bodies were found, KB Home, has agreed to provide space for a memorial on the site.

Two crime scenes. Two different art memorials. And countless families touched.

[Images: Andrea Arroyo and Laura Paskus.

Awearness is excited to once again be participating in Blog Action Day, which will be next Thursday, October 15th.

The goal of Blog Action Day is to raise awareness about an issue by getting bloggers all over the world to post about it on the same day. This year's topic is Climate Change.

Check back with us on October 15th to see all of our posts on this important subject!

Keira Knightley is a lovely woman. But, she apparently wasn't lovely enough for the promoters of her 2004 movie, "King Arthur," so they gave her bigger breasts in the promotional photos. Knightley protested, publicly, and has since banned digital breast enhancement on any publicity materials she is featured in.

Now some British and French politicians are pushing legislation that would force advertisers to disclose when images have been altered. Both bills have fines for advertisers who do not comply. The French bill also covers editorial images. The British bill, introduced by MP Jo Swinson, prohibits any alteration of images aimed at children under 16. Ms. Swinson is quoted in the New York Times, saying "When teenagers and women look at these pictures in magazines, they end up feeling unhappy with themselves."

There seems to be a growing insistence from the public that they be presented with accurate, not "idealized" images for consumption. The blog Jezebel created a stir in 2007 when they published an unretouched Redbook cover along with the version that was on newsstands, and many other magazines and advertisers have come under criticism for the practice.

Check out this Dove advertisement showing the enhancement process.

You won't believe your eyes. But wouldn't it be nice to be able to?

[Image: Daily Telegraph]

The United Nation's number two official in Afghanistan, Peter Galbraith, was fired last week. Galbraith, who was the highest ranking American working for the UN in Afghanistan, had disagreements with his boss, Ambassador Kai Eide, over how to handle fraud accusations in the recent Afghan election.

"The Secretary-General has decided to recall Mr. Peter Galbraith from Afghanistan and to end his appointment as the Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan," read the UN statement. "The Secretary-General has made this decision in the best interest of the mission. He reaffirms his full support for his Special Representative, Kai Eide."

Peter Galbraith should not have been fired. He was fully within his job duties in wanting an uncontested election. "The notion that we had no interest in whether the voting and counting is fair is illogical to me," Galbraith, a Vermonter, told the Vermont Press Bureau. His recommendation that the UN disregard votes from "ghost" polling stations strikes me as sound.

As a result of ignoring Galbraith's recommendation we have now what looks to be a power vacuum in an already unsteady country next door to a nuclear power pending conclusive results of the election. Have we learned nothing from the Iranian elections?

Prior to his station in Afghanistan, Galbraith served as United States Ambassador to Croatia, was a staff member for the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, where he specialized in Iraq, and worked for the UN in East Timor. The Biden-Gelb-Galbraith plan, which dominated thoughtful foreign policy discussions during the 2008 election season, recommended a tripartite ethnic division of Iraq. He has dedicated his life to promoting peace and democracy in areas of conflict. He deserved better.

[Image: Diplopundit]

September 27 marked the second annual National Gay Men's HIV Awareness Day, and we were again reminded that gay and bisexual men - and men who have sex with men (MSM), who may not identify as gay or bisexual - account for nearly half of the 1.1 million people living with HIV in the United States. In fact, MSM are the only major group in the U.S. for whom the annual number of new HIV infections is increasing.

What can you do to help? You can support NAPWA (The National Association of People with AIDS), which sponsors the day, and you can get the facts about HIV education and prevention. Start here, at the official Facebook page for National Gay Men's HIV Awareness Day.

And visit the amfAR site to see how amfAR, The Foundation for AIDS Research, is working with MSM populations around the world.

[Image: Stylized rendering of a cross-section of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus from Wikimedia Commons]