January 2010 Archives

It must be very hard to be Barack Obama. He's constantly being pressed for definitive answers, resolute plans, and swift follow-through. But rarely can he deliver on all three, as we've seen in the past year, and it's no fault of his own.

The political apparatus is forever getting clogged with Senatorial bickering, Supreme Court legislations, public dissent, and an endless list of other obstacles that make Obama the idealist look more like Obama the deceiver.

Take a look at how General Patraeus tries to move the goal posts set by the president just a few months ago, when he said that we would be out of Afghanistan by July of 2011. Again, I am sympathetic to Obama here: He may have had every reason to believe this would be possible when he set that date. If the date gets pushed back, which it surely will, I blame the junky machinery of Washington D.C. Unfortunately, it'll be Obama who ends up taking the blame.

I've heard it been said that a great leader leads but also gets others to do some leading. During the State of the Union address last night, President Obama, I hope, made it clear that if we are going to get this country back on track, it is going to take all of us.

He took the Republicans to task for being obstructionist on most bills in the Congress. "Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership." But also reminded the Democrats to use their majority: "I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills." He also took blame for not selling the health insurance reform bill better to the American people.

President Obama proposed a lot of things, some progressive like a cap on student loan repayments and forgiveness after 20 years (which I have no idea how that would be paid) but also some not so much like new offshore drilling (Drill, Baby, Drill?).

Even the most progressive ideas sometimes are implemented in a way that doesn't fulfill the intent. Top universities are giving more aid to wealthier families. Mortgage modifications aren't addressing the fact that homes are underwater and include balloon payments.

And that is where we come in.

I truly believe that President Obama has a progressive streak, but that is all it is, a streak. He also has conservative bend. President Obama said that the Congress and he were voted in to serve the people and the people need to remind them all of what we want. We need to remind them of what that is by pushing them on health care, education funding, jobs and anything else we hold dear.

Do we really want failing schools to be closed and communities disrupted in order to ship students around like cogs in some machine?

Will we really read the earmarks online before the vote in order to voice our opinion?

Will "Don't Ask Don't Tell" really be repealed?

One year after the Lily Ledbetter Act, will we finally push the Senate to pass its partner bill, the Paycheck Fairness Act?

Which way will you push them?

It seems to me that one of the most interesting and relevant free speech issues is whether or not satellite radio flourishes. Everything, at present, conspires against its continued success. The auto industry -- a cash center for satellite radios -- is in deep turmoil. And paying for radio in this Great Recession economy is a luxury that not too many can afford. Still, satellite radio is a marvelous medium in which nearly anything goes. You'll remember, of course, that shock jock Howard Stern jackrabbited there from the now moribund terrestrial radio medium after Viacom's Sumner Redstone failed to defend him from the slings and arrows of the overly censorious FCC at the height of the Bush administration.

But that was then, this is now. Currently, satellite radio's biggest draw -- whether you love or hate his potty mouth -- is the libertine libertarian Howard Stern. But Stern's contract expires at the end of 2010, which has led to a lot of speculation among the chattering classes. Whatever decision Howard Stern reaches, he would probably not be getting $80 million a year. From Bloomberg's BusinessWeek:

Sirius XM, which averted bankruptcy last year after John Malone's Liberty Media Corp. bought a 40% stake in exchange for $530 million in loans, may not be able to afford to renew the radio talk-show host's existing contract, worth $500 million, said Tuna Amobi, an analyst at Standard & Poor's. "Even if (a new contract) were half of what it was before, it would still be a major financial burden for Sirius," Amobi says. "It's a totally different game."

For realsies! Stern is now in the early stages of contract negotiations. I do not envy Sirius-XM CEO Mel Karmazin, who is going to have one hell of a time navigating Stern's impending free agent status. Howard doesn't strike me as the type of guy who relishes a pay cut. There has already been some high profile courting from terrestrial radio, to which he might return. "We would be the most logical company for him to optimize his exposure and financial return," Clear Channel CEO John Hogan told Bloomberg's BusinessWeek. "We clearly have both the willingness and the financial wherewithal to consider high-profile talent."

If Stern were to bolt back to terrestrial radio, could satellite radio survive in his absence? Howard brought with him more than seven million listeners/subscribers/hard core fans to the new medium -- how many would stay? How many of those loyalists have been impressed enough with satellite radio that they would pay the subscription fees -- or, possibly, a la carte -- sans Howard Stern. Would enough stay that Sirius-XM could remain not only profitable, but the interesting experiment in the outer limits of free speech that it is right now?

[Image: Wikimedia Commons]

I didn't plan to write a wrap-up of January's notable deaths, but when each time I heard of one of these deaths, I thought, "Oh, a good idea for AWEARNESS!" And before I could get to my computer, another one happened. I'm sure I missed some, but leave them in the comments.

Trendsetter
Ebony Fashion Fair Producer and Director Eunice W. Johnson. She was the widow of Johnson Publishing Company founder John H. Johnson, gave Ebony magazine its name and was also the driving force behind the creation of the Fashion Fair makeup line, one of the first makeup lines for women of color. [NPR]

Entertainers
Art Clokey, the creator of Gumby and Pokey, and "Davey and Goliath." Clokey modeled his most famous character, Gumby, after his father, Arthur Farrington, who died in a car accident when Art was 9. [Boston.com]

Soul singer Teddy Pendergrass, who was paralyzed in 1982, a moment in history I remember intensely as my aunts use to play his music and talk about him all the time. He died of a protracted illness that followed a diagnosis of colon cancer last year. [Philly.com]

Enrich Segal, author of the iconic 1970s book and film Love Story. According to The New York Times, Erich Segal, who had suffered with Parkinson's disease for 25 years, died of a heart attack at home in London.[January Magazine]

Robert Parker, creator of "Spencer for Hire." Beginning with "The Gudwulf Manuscript" in 1973 and running through 2009's "The Professional," the Spencer series included almost 40 books. But don't fret, two more books are forthcoming. [LA Times]

Foodies
Glen W. Bell Jr. named our favorite fast food taco place after himself: Taco Bell. He had failed to break into the hamburger business, but found his love of Mexican food rewarded him. [NYTimes]

Al Bernardin, former dean of McDonald's Hamburger University (the fast-food chain's training center) and inventor of the legendary Quarter Pounder. He was instrumental in the birth of the company's Filet-o-Fish sandwich, french fries and hot apple and cherry pies as well. [SlashFood]

Donald Goerke, creator of SpaghettiOs. More than 150 million cans of SpaghettiOs are sold each year. Mr. Goerke also created the company's Chunky soup line.[NYTimes]

Considering the variety in these deaths, any tribute would be hard to pull off. At least it would have an excellent soundtrack, a buffet of food and a barrel of laughs and tears.

(Note: I wrote separately about Mary Daly, who died in January, and the late December passings of Brittany Murphy and Vic Chesnutt were also covered on the blog.)

"In the first of four primetime specials that examine some of the country's defining moments, noted broadcaster Tavis Smiley accompanies Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on a diplomatic mission abroad, to meetings on Capitol Hill and within the State Department itself, to give the American public a candid and incisive view of the inner workings of U.S. diplomacy and international relations."

The one-hour program airs on PBS on Wednesday, January 27, from 8:00 - 9:00 pm EST.

[image: One on One With Hillary Clinton courtesy of Tavis Smiley Reports]

A school district in Menifee, California has banned a book because of its racy content. But we're not talking about an erotic novel by Henry Miller, a ribald politico-sexual romp by Philip Roth, or a smutty piece of "urban fiction" here.

Nope, the text on the outs is none other than the Merriam-Webster dictionary. All because it contains a definition for the term "oral sex."

Of course, it also contains a lot of other words and terms, some even more lascivious than "oral sex." For example: "lascivious" itself, which Merriam-Webster defines as "lewd" or "lustful" -- also words that might rouse the libidos of young people throughout Menifee and across the country, if those youngsters bothered to look them up. Which they won't: Apparently they're too busy gettin' busy.

How can such a misguided ban be good for anyone, least of all the kids it's meant to protect? You don't need a dictionary to know what oral sex is, and banning the book that defines it only perpetuates the notion that such an act is taboo (and therefore something kids will want to try, whether they know the proper terminology or not).

The point is, kids are going to learn about sex one way or another. Isn't it better they learn about it above-board, along with safe practices?

[Image: Elkhart Public Library]

Betty White has been old almost my entire life. It's been 25 years since The Golden Girls premiered on NBC prime time, when I was 10. And while I was never a die-hard fan, I've come to appreciate its undeniable significance.

A sit-com about retired women rooming together in a Florida house, after their marriages had dissolved or their husbands had died, The Golden Girls has become an icon of the 1980s. Not only did it introduce a whole new generation to some of TV's biggest female stars of decades past; it did so in a way that revolutionized the way many people view elderly people -- especially elderly women.

The Girls were spunky, sexual, witty, and utterly independent. They showed that life goes on after marriage, and that friendship really is stronger than romance.

Betty White, whose character, Rose Nylund, made the name of my college -- St. Olaf -- a household joke, isn't as dumb as the Norwegian dingbat she played on the show. And she proved it at the Screen Actors Guild awards ceremony Saturday night. This is good, clean fun -- with just a touch of Rose Nylund-style dirty for good measure:

Sanyu Nakyeyune, a Ugandan AIDS orphan, is a LEAD Uganda student. LEAD Uganda is an educational leadership initiative for the hundreds of children affected by AIDS, Uganda's civil wars and poverty. Sanyu's parents died of AIDS when she was ten years old. Uganda and Sanyu have been through a lot, but things are looking up. From CNN:

"Everyone has a dream," she [Sanyu] said. "But if you don't study you can't accomplish your goal. When you are out there not studying it's useless."

She hopes that her experiences will help other children who find themselves in desperate circumstances.

"Tell the world about AIDS," she said, "and support programs like LEAD Uganda. Help us join schools so that we can become the leaders of the future."

"I'm trying to teach people to be strong, to be brave, to believe in themselves." They are qualities that Sanyu clearly has in abundance.

Twenty years ago she would have been in dire straits. Now, however, Sanyu's chances of becoming a doctor are quite good.

In case Google hasn't made it easy enough for you to donate some funds to the Haiti relief effort -- by allowing you to give by texting "HAITI" to 90999 -- restaurants across the country are going to make it impossible for their patrons not to give.

Lest that sound like a threat from the participating eateries in the Dine Out for Haiti initiative, don't worry: All you have to do is eat a meal, like you would anyway. The restaurants will take care of the rest.

Donating 10% of their proceeds from January 24th, this Sunday, the participating restaurants stand to make a sizable contribution to the effort. In New York City alone, more than 50 restaurants are getting involved, including several where the average meal can run well over $100, and where reservations must be made weeks in advance.

It's a gracious gesture, and not uncommon. Restaurateurs often donate proceeds and food to charity efforts like Share Our Strength, which feeds hungry children; homeless shelters; and hospice programs. When Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, restaurants across the country rallied to give through the Dine For America campaign.

The devastation in Haiti is worse, and the time it will take to rebuild is impossible to gauge, if rebuilding is even an option. But every little bit helps. And what easier -- and more pleasant -- way to help than having another glass of Pinot?

[Image: Kirti Poddar from Wikimedia Commons]

Do you remember the pregnancy pact story? A group of teen girls in one high school decided to get pregnant at the same time? I do. I also remember it turned out to be a myth, a hoax, a lie. That didn't deter Lifetime though.

Just in time for Blog for Choice celebrations, Lifetime will premiere a movie "based on" the fictional events about the pregnancy pact. Lifetime responded to criticism by saying that the movie is about raising awareness about teen pregnancy. But how, really? Making a fictional movie about something that was a hoax to raise awareness about a real problem? What's next? A movie about Balloon Boy to raise awareness about Amber Alerts?

That's not to diminish the cost and impact of teen pregnancy. Teen pregnancy is a serious issue that requires serious solutions, including supporting teen parents with child care and access to further education. But by basing a movie on a hoax that played on the idea that our teens are all running wild with the sex, well, it seems to miss the point. Chances are that a lot of concerned parents will end up watching and I do hope they take the chance to learn more about the issue and talk to their children, sons and daughters, about preventing pregnancy, teens access to contraception and the status of sex education in schools.

That said, I'll be tuning in to watch. Look for my tweets!

Not all American efforts abroad are met with protest and scorn. In this video, emailed to reporters by White House staff with the subject line "AMAZING VIDEO," we see members of an American rescue team pulling a woman from the wreckage of last Tuesday's earthquake. Outside, they are cheered on by Haitians, shouting "U.S.A! U.S.A!"

I am a natural-born American, and that's a chant I've only voiced ironically, to make fun of misguided patriotic fervor. But in this instance, it seems to reflect sincere gratitude for the outpouring of support this country has shown the people of Haiti in the past week. And that's something we can be proud of, patriotism notwithstanding.

Mobile giving has achieved acute relevance in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake. Hundreds of thousands of people have have texted "HAITI" to 90999 since last week. Social networking has blossomed, even in the midst of the greatest economic crisis to hit the West since The Great Depression. Over $20 million -- or roughly one-tenth of total contributions to Haiti -- have been via mobile giving. From MSNBC:

A number of other relief groups were added to the accepted list of organizations that can receive text message donations from customers of the four main wireless carriers in the United States: Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile, said Jim Manis, chairman and CEO of the Mobile Giving Foundation.

The foundation said within the first 36 hours after the Jan. 12 quake, "donations made via mobile phones for Haiti earthquake relief ... surpassed $7 million" to several relief organizations.

According to the Mobile Giving Foundation's website: " 100% of each donation is remitted directly from the wireless operators to the Mobile Giving Foundation, which in turns gives 100% to the recipient charity."

In 2008 -- the height of The Great Recession -- foundation assets fell by an estimated 22 percent. The good news: e-Philanthropy social networking sites and now mobile giving is on the rise, filling the philanthropy recession gap quicker and more efficiently. Fueled by the generation who voted for Obama's change mandate, Philanthropy 2.0 is rising to the challenge.

For anyone who equates the green movement with white, yoga mat-toting liberals, Markese Bryant has a message: "My president's black but he's going green/My president's black but he's going green/I got my president's back gonna do the same thing."

Born in East Oakland, California, Bryant lost his parents when he was just six years old: his mother to the streets, his father to prison. As a teenager, he nearly followed dad's footsteps when he got caught dealing crack cocaine, but instead he was given an opportunity to turn his life around. Bryant enrolled in community college, where he learned about the Civil Rights movement and current efforts to save the Earth through green initiatives. Seeing a connection, he became a college ambassador with Green for All, which helped him produce this video for his song, "The Dream Reborn: My President is Green."

The United States Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for 47 years was turned over to Republican Scott Brown last night, with Brown earning 52 percent of the Massachusetts vote. Although Massachusetts is considered a true blue state in Presidential election years, most of the voters in the state are independents. Scott Brown, a State Senator who ran a gritty populist campaign, proved highly attractive to that segment of the electorate. Martha Coakley, the Democratic Attorney General, is widely considered to have squandered her lead -- up 15 points from a week ago -- by not pressing the advantage in her campaign, shaking hands, kissing babies. @BarackObama, whose last four tweets have been regarding this race, tweeted yesterday afternoon: "The #MASen race is in a dead heat. Polls close in 4 hours & every vote is crucial."

At stake, as you've undoubtedly heard by now, is the present form of the health care legislation now being finalized. The Coakley loss is considered a damning referendum on the Obama Presidency, which had hoped to have health care wrapped up next week in time to make the State of the Union Address. With Brown's win, the Democrats have lost their 60-40 filibuster-proof majority in the United States Senate (hence the cries of "41" in the acceptance video above; Brown is the 41st Republican Senator). The Democrats now have to consider some very hard options, including paring down the Senate bill to get Senator Olympia Snowe on board or, less likely and more difficult, the House could conceivably just accept the Senate version. Either way, there will be health care legislation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters in California Monday. "Just the question of how we would proceed. But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill. Let's remove all doubt,'' she added. "We will have health care one way or another.'' But now that Scott Brown has won, the bill will need to be pretty radically altered (which is not good news for frustrated progressives)

Former Speaker -- and Massachusetts resident -- Tip O'Neal famously used to say "all politics is local." National political figures and organizations, however, were deeply involved in this particular Massachusetts race. Bill Clinton, Victoria Reggie Kennedy (Ted Kennedy's widow) and President Obama all campaigned for Martha Coakley in recent days. Scott Brown was endorsed by the Tea Party and Rudy Giuliani. Turnout was high and hash tags like #MaSen, #Coakley and #ScottBrown were trending high on Twitter all day, giving #Haiti a run. It was the first mid-term referendum on the Obama Presidency from a blue state and its consequences were watched by all in both Houses of Congress. Unfortunately for those in favor of Health Care Reform (like the late Senator Ted Kennedy himself so famously was), the news is not what we'd hoped.

If you live in New York, or have just visited any time in the past several years, you've no doubt seen the subway ad campaign promising to make you happier than any other ad on the train. It's not for weight loss, or a better storage facility, or a bangin' new pair of jeans. It's for something far less tangible, and more suspicious: practical philosophy.

I've always scoffed at these ads for the School of Practical Philosophy, which assure strap-hangers of every stripe that a 10-session course will help them focus and find meaning in their lives. One thing's for sure: the ads know their market. Promise inner peace to a few million people who live in a stressful, cramped city where status reigns supreme, and you're bound to get a few takers. I have no problem with such a promise, but to call it philosophy?

I'm not a philosopher, but I've taken numerous courses in the field at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. I'd hardly equate the serious study of philosophy with inner peace; indeed, I even have a few friends with PhDs in the field, and they're among the grumpiest, most pensive people I know.

So when I learned yesterday that a bartender friend of mine, who has struggled with alcoholism and finding his purpose in life for years, was enrolling in the School of Practical Philosophy, I was torn. On one hand, I was happy to hear that he's seeking to be enlightened and get out of the rut he's in. On the other, I wondered just how enlightening the curriculum could be. And on the third (yes, I have three hands), I worried that he'd be scammed.

As luck would have it, the New York Times published a "City Critic" piece on Sunday about the school from the first-person perspective of someone as skeptical of it as I am. By her account, the school is less about philosophy, as those of us who've taken classes on Heidegger or Foucault or Nietzche might define the term, and more about intentional living. With centering exercises and mantras about devoting your full attention to whatever it is you're doing at any given time, the program sounds almost like a New Age retreat center in Massachusetts.

Except it's one that attracts, by the author's account, every conceivable type of New Yorker, which is to say, every type of person. Maybe my bartender friend will find what he's looking for after all.

[Image: NYTimes.com]

Progressive radio talk show host Ed Schultz would make a fine United States Senator for the state of North Dakota. Unfortunately, thus far he has said he is not interested. He had to say so publicly after the National Republican Senatorial Committee sent a letter to MSNBC President Phil Griffin questioning Schultz's on-air role in the 2010 Senate races.

How did we get to the point of the National Republican Senatorial Committee going all legal against a lowly progressive Air America radio host? After North Dakota Democrats announced last week that they are actively pursuing Schultz as a possible replacement for retiring Senator Byron Dorgan, Schultz said "I'm in a different place than politics right now. We're a long way from any consideration. And we're a long way from any kind of decision."

Schultz loves his new MSNBC talking heads gig -- the job of a lifetime for leftish political pundits -- and, of course there is his radio show on Air America. He has spent his entire vocational life building up to this moment. He is hugely relevant within the Democrat party and is considered the progressive Rush Limbaugh, the heavyweight liberal champion in a medium known more for right-wing talk. Ed Schultz and his wife and assistant producer Wendy Schultz (see picture) have earned their wealth by defending and fighting for the working class. "I'm gonna represent the guy who takes a shower after work," Ed says often on his show. But couldn't Ed Schultz affect more people as one voice of the 100 united States Senators as opposed to just being a well-paid advocate? The current holder of the seat, Byron Dorgan, doesn't think Ed will run. From AlterNet:

"Ed is not going to run for the Senate," Dorgan said during an appearance on The Bill Press Show. "He is a good guy. I like Ed. He is a friend. He has a great show. I'm proud that he is on MSNBC. I understand that [North Dakota Democratic-NPL Party leader Merle] Boucher from state legislature called him. But I don't think Ed is going to be running for the Senate."

There is an urgency to an Ed Schultz campaign for the Senate. Dorgan's seat is particularly vulnerable to a Republican pick-up in Novemver. North Dakota generally votes Republican in Presidential elections, and popular Republican Governor John Hoeven will likely be their candidate for Dorgan's now-vacant seat. Also, a recent Rassmussen Report reminds us that "Opposition to the health care plan is higher in North Dakota than it is nationally." A single change in the composition of the Senate--now a filibuster proof 60-40--would force President Obama even further toward the political center. Halfway into President Clinton's first term, a similar political calculus resulted in an less-than-progressive welfare reform package and the Defense of Marriage Act, among other things.

Ed would be an extraordinarily strong Democrat in a very red state. He hunts, he fishes, he owns guns, drinks beer and -- mirabile dictu -- cares passionately about labor unions, health care and the minimum wage. There is, quite frankly, no Democrat in North Dakota with better name recognition than Ed Schultz. He's been a broadcaster in the state for two decades with two businesses, so he brings a great name recognition which is better than money in North Dakota politics. There is a precedent for radio broadcasters in the United States Senate. If he won he would join original Air America host Al Franken. What progressives might lose in a daily, kick-ass radio broadcaster and MSNBC host, they would gain, in Ed, a voice in the United States Senate--the most aristocratic body in the world--for the cause of the working men and women.

[Image: BigeddieRadio]

"In the spring and summer of 1918, a new flu outbreak, dubbed Spanish Influenza, moved with soldiers from the European battlefields of World War I to the homefront. By September, the flu began to exact a toll on the civilian population; in the month of October alone, 195,000 Americans died of the disease. In total, more than 500,000 Americans succumbed to the flu that year, more than all the combat casualties in all the wars of the 20th century. Globally, the death toll has been estimated at anywhere between 20 and 40 million people."

As one of television's best-known history series, AMERICAN EXPERIENCE has been hailed
as "peerless" (Wall Street Journal), "the most consistently enriching program on
television" (Chicago Tribune) and "a beacon of intelligence and purpose" (Houston Chronicle). Learn more about the Spanish Influenza outbreak of 1918 on Monday, January 18 from 9:00 - 10:00 EST.

[image: American Experience "Influenza 1918" via American Red Cross]

Across the country and around the world, people are flocking to see Avatar, James Cameron's 3-D mega-movie about a fantastical planet not entirely unlike our own. Except better. And with high-tech wizardry that lifts the film off the screen and envelopes you in its fantasy world, viewers get more than a movie experience: they get what feels like a real experience.

Then they wake up, and it's back to the hum-drum grind of their flat, gray, depressing lives. Those aren't my words, but rather the words of people across the U.S. who have logged onto chat rooms to find help for a growing phenomenon: post-Avatar depression. One in particular offers advice on how to cope with "the dream of Pandora being intangible." This report from CNN has more.

When disaster strikes another country, the way you react to it often depends on how connected you feel to the region. Calamities are easy to shrug off when they occur in lands far away, with cultures totally unlike your own. Even Hurricane Katrina didn't really hit home, for me, until I went to New Orleans five months after it happened. On September 11th, 2001, I remember turning on the TV at about 9 a.m. to get the weather, and when I saw a smoldering building on the screen, my first half-awake thought was, "Huh... I wonder what country is under attack now..." It took about one minute for me to realize the building on fire was less than a mile away.

So it was on Tuesday night when I first heard about the earthquake in Haiti, the damage from which is still being determined. That evening, media affiliates in the capital city of Port-au-Prince were unreachable, and what footage we had here in the U.S. was spotty. One thing was immediately clear, though: the situation there is bad. Now, the story is everywhere as the estimated death toll tops 100,000.

Still, when I first heard about the disaster, I didn't feel much except for a general concern for human life and suffering. But general concern doesn't grab hold of you and make you want to do something; it just makes you shake your head and think, "What a pity."

Then I received an email from a friend, a New Yorker with Haitian roots. Her email began with a prayer, and then a thank you: "For all of you that have family or friends there my thoughts and prayers are with you," she wrote. "Thank you very much for all of you who have reached out to inquire about my family there. Your thoughts and prayers are really appreciated."


I was struck by her primary concern being for others. The order of her comments, most likely unintentional, is proof of her compassion. But she didn't waste time on personal sentiment, choosing instead to make her email a call to action.

"I would like to ask you to take the time out and donate, in any way, in any amount, to help Haiti's cause right now," she continued. "One person can make a difference and when you multiply that by many... well, you get the idea."

She suggested three organizations through which people can donate money or resources to the people of Haiti: The White House, Yele Haiti Earthquake Fund, and the Red Cross. These are just a few of the countless relief efforts that are currently rushing to the devastated region around Port-au-Prince.


"Check your local news sources as I know there are a lot of food, clothing and supplies drives going on at the local level to send over to Haiti," she wrote, bringing her email to a close. "Thank you very much. -- One love. M"

My friend's note brought the disaster home. Suddenly I imagined her, not a faceless mass, and the earthquake was no longer in a foreign land. It became something that could happen to any of us, including the people we care about.

[Image: Financial Times]

For a county with 3,800 homeless people and only 125 beds at shelters, you'd think that San Luis Obispo, in California, would welcome any efforts to provide homes to those without. But when Dan de Vaul, a 66-year-old rancher with 72 acres all to himself, started allowing the homeless to crash on his property back in the 1980s, the authorities were nonplussed.

About 10 years ago, when he welcomed a few dozen more to set up camp in old shacks, tents and even his farmhouse, the San Luis Obispo sheriff's office decided de Vaul had gone too far. Now, Mr. de Vaul faces jail time and a $1,000 fine for his deed, which only some people perceive as "good."

Turns out that de Vaul charges his tenants $300 per month in rent and often requires them to work five hours per week doing random jobs around the property, from splitting wood to housework. But some of them also have more domestic digs than the ranch's owner, living in the 101-year-old farmhouse where Mr. de Vaul grew up, while Mr. de Vaul lives in the attic of his barn among tools and stacks of hay.

De Vaul, who is apparently a recovering drug addict and alcoholic, also requires his tenants to attend Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous meetings, and maintains a clean and sober facility. Clean himself for two decades, you could argue that de Vaul simply understands what it takes to stay that way: hard work, responsibility, and a sense of belonging.

The authorities, meanwhile, are claiming that de Vaul's housing facilities are in shambles, and that he's in violation of numerous residential codes. Maybe so, but if the home he provides is helping keep 30-some people off the street, work for their hands, a substance-free environment, and most of all, a community, why wouldn't the county offer to help Mr. de Vaul?

With a little support, instead of prosecution, Dan de Vaul could inspire others with sprawling tracts of land to lend a hand themselves.

[Image: NYTimes.com]

Stephen Colbert and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have more in common than you might think. Both have smashing heads of hair. Reid, a Mormon, was chosen by Times and Seasons as the 2009 Mormon of the Year; Colbert, a Roman Catholic, won the 2009 Boggs-Doniphan Award for the non-Mormon with the biggest impact on Mormonism. They both love talking politics, and they have both fielded criticism for things they've said in the political arena. So when Reid took a hit for his awkward and archaic use of "negro dialect," Colbert may have felt the need to inject himself into the situation (or he may have just injected himself there because he loves political conflict).

Conservative organizations, predictably, played politics with the remark. Progressives, eager to hold onto the seat, dismissed the remark without scrutiny.

On Monday, Colbert sought to exhaust the word "negro," rob it of its power to rasp. Colbert went about this with the best intentions. Morgan Freeman, who recently replaced Walter Cronkite as the voice of "The CBS Evening News," apparently didn't buy it.

What do you think? Can a word like "negro" ever lose its power? Was Colbert making a good point, or just going for laughs?

2010 is here and it's time to get back to the health care debate in Washington, DC. When we last left our health care heroes, they were compromising to "win" the support of Senators Lieberman and Nelson yet throwing women's reproductive health care under the bus. Being thrown under the bus was the inspiration of the name of Not Under the Bus, a project from the Women's Media Center whose focus is on keeping the pressure on Congress to include all of women's health care needs in any health care reform package:

Not Under the Bus is your one stop shop for all things Stupak-related. Everyone knows it's going to be a tough fight, but it's one that must be fought. Head on over to Not Under the Bus to find out the latest information from different sources including what the heck is the manager's amendment. You can also sign petitions, get a Twibbon, and see if your Senator threw you under the bus or not.

But you don't have to just get information from NUtB. Oh no, they have tips for how YOU can make your voice heard on what is happening. And that information will come in handy as January 13th (today) is a Take Action Day!

On January 13th, NUtB is asking women everywhere to take action against the discriminatory, anti-choice language that exists in both the House and Senate health care bills. These bills would effectively roll back women's health care coverage in the area of reproductive rights and it is up to all of us to make sure we don't get thrown under the bus by politicians in Washington.

Here's how you can TAKE ACTION on Wednesday, January 13th:

Tweet:
Take Action today with @NotUnderTheBus. Demand that women's rights be protected in #HCR: http://bit.ly/7u15IG #underthebus

Post the Take Action video to your Facebook page, blog, or other website:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUtLTB6zKbo

Donate your Facebook status to raise awareness:
"Today is Take Action Day with NotUnderTheBus.com. What are you doing to demand pro-choice, fair health care? http://bit.ly/7u15IG Take Action. Write an op-ed, call your Senator, sign a petition. Demand that women's rights be protected in health care reform."

Visit the Take Action page for more ideas! It's time to Take Action!

The commodification of the world's water supply -- aka, "blue gold" -- presents an existential problem in that it is not only necessary for human existence, but water is also in increasingly short supply (thanks, global warming). Our bodies are estimated to be about 60 to 70 percent water; dehydration can cause death within just 48 to 72 hours. The importance of water, fundamental to human life, and its increasing scarcity is leading to conflicts around the world -- some soft, others, like Darfur, harder. It is not inconceivable that water wars might become as prevalent the wars surrounding oil, which has already been the cause of several sanguinary conflicts this decade.

Amateur falconer and legendary environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., founder and president of the Waterkeeper Alliance, was on CNN's "Amanpour" this Sunday speaking on the subject.

"(Water is) intrinsically a government function. It has to remain in the hands of the government. The government has a responsibility to all the people, and that this is part of the commons," Kennedy said. "And the law of the commons is that whether you're rich or poor, everybody has the right to the public trust asset. Nobody has the right to use it in a way that will diminish or injure its use and enjoyment by others."

I couldn't agree more. It is strange, in America, to think of safe water as a human right. Tap water is generally safe and as a society we are wealthy enough that bottled water sales are doing well (though not as well pre-Great Recession). Dehydration is not something we are used to. But in developing nations, the struggle for water dominates the daily struggle for existence. "It is scandalous that poor people in poor countries have to pay more than us for their water," said Julia Häusermann, President of Rights and Humanity. "Slum dwellers often have to pay five to ten times more than wealthy people just to get access to water. Rural people are often forced to walk for many hours a day just to secure this basic necessity."

British troops have been bogged down in Afghanistan since 2001. As we enter the second decade of the 21st century there appears to be no end to this unwinnable war. Students block the street outside the UK Parliament calling for the troops to be brought home.

I've been fascinated by elephants my whole life, from the time I was a child in Uganda to this present moment. The contrast between their massive size and their intense emotionality is captivating. Who hasn't been moved, for example, by the images of elephants confronting death? They always remind me -- don't ask me why -- of Hamlet. If elephants are conscious of their mortality, then how terrible is it that we have hunted them for sport?

So it was a pleasant surprise to see Bob Simon of "60 Minutes" doing a story on researchers listening to elephant sounds and observing their behavior to compile an elephant dictionary. The American scientist Andrea Turkalo has spent 19 years observing a particular population of elephants in a remote clearing in Central Africa by the Sangha River. After nearly two decades she began noticing patterns in the elephants' vocalizations. Talking to Bob Simon, Turkalo heard some elephants. I'll let the CBSNews.com site pick things up:

When she heard the roar of nearby elephants, Turkalo knew it was the Penelope family. "It's their way of saying hello," she explained.

Turkalo knows it's the Penelope family because she named them and nearly a thousand other elephants. She also recognizes them by their voices, voices researchers are trying to translate into what could someday become an elephant dictionary.

...Turkalo's expertise brought her to the attention of Cornell University. Peter Wrege, a behavioral biologist from Cornell, says the dictionary is still in its early stages.

"We're in kindergarten. We're just learning the very first few words. And Andrea, in a sense, is the person who, I feel, is going to help us put those words together," Wrege explained.

But they can match elephant sounds with behavior they can see, and classify those sounds into distinct categories.

Right now researchers are compiling data and exchanging information in America through the Internet to compile the work. If all goes well, we may soon have an elephant's dictionary. How cool is that?

Portugal's parliament voted today to legalize same-sex marriage, a pleasantly surprising move for a country that is heavily Catholic and traditionally socially conservative.

The 125-99 vote went mostly along party lines after a debate that lasted less than three hours. There was limited public controversy, a sign that Portugal has come a long way in just a few decades. Until 1982, homosexuality was illegal there.

The legislation, proposed by Prime Minister Jose Socrates, will now be reviewed in committee before parliament must pass it a final time. Conservative President Anibal Cavaco Silva could still veto the bill, and parliament could then override the veto. However, Silva is not expected to stand in the way of the legislation.

Legal same-sex marriage could begin in Portugal as early as April, one month before a scheduled visit from Pope Benedict XVI.

Portugal would join fellow European nations Belgium, Sweden, Spain, the Netherlands, and Norway in granting civil marriage rights to same-sex couples. Other European countries, including Britain, France, and Germany, currently offer civil partnerships to same-sex couples.

In sad news, New Jersey has failed to be as progressive as Portugal, as that state's senate recently voted down a bill that would have legalized same-sex marriage. The senate rejected the bill, which Gov. John Corzine promised to sign into law, by a vote of 20-14. Only one Republican, Sen. Bill Baroni, voted for the bill, and six Democrats voted against it. Marriage equality advocates have vowed to take the issue to state court, though, as they say the state's civil union law, enacted in 2006, has dramatic flaws, with some same-sex couples being denied health insurance and hospital visitation.

The New York state senate also rejected a bill last month that would have made same-sex marriage legal in that state. The Washington, D.C., city council, however, recently approved a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the District. Congress, however, has 30 days from the day it passed to intervene.

We're proud of Portugal today, but ashamed of the lawmakers in the United States who continue to classify their gay and lesbian constituents as second-class citizens.

Video courtesy of NJ.com.

As my colleage Ron Mwangaguhunga pointed out on Wednesday, exercise has been proven to reduce the risks of developing cancer. The study he cited showed that men who have been diagnosed with nonmetastatic cancers are less than half as likely to die as those who do not exercise.

As Ron suggested, it's another reason to get out there and, to borrow the marketing slogan of a fairly major sports brand, "just do it."

But from the perspective of someone who gets out there and "does it" six days a week, logging miles and miles in my local Brooklyn park, and then wrapping up my regimen with a trip to the YMCA, I'm not so sure most others will keep on doing it once the novelty of the new year wears off.

Every January, I see an enormous spike in the number of people at my gym. They line up from morning until night to use treadmills, elliptical machines, and stationary bikes. They jockey for space in the free-weight room and put their names on waiting lists for yoga classes. Their enthusiasm to get healthy is cute, in a way, because I know that it will pass right along with the freshly fallen snow that welcomed us in 2010 here in the New York area.

Of the top 13 New Year's resolutions listed on USA.gov, at least five can be accomplished, in part, by regular visits to the gym: lose weight, get fit, reduce stress, quit smoking, and drink less.

But New Year's resolutions are notoriously hard to keep. This is largely because you spend the rest of the year developing different habits, and habits are, well, habits. And because the only way to make a resolution stick is to make it a habit, I suspect it's counter-productive to even call these declarations "New Year's resolutions." To associate them with a specific date, in my view, only dooms them to fall by the wayside once the "new year" is no longer new.

The only way to actually get healthy, or save more money, or spend less time at work and more with your family, is to do it, every single day, whether you feel like it or not. Then, by 2011, you can join me in looking with skepticism at the sudden crowds at your local gym, or wherever else you may see a bunch of people trying in vain to become someone new literally overnight.

[Image: U.S. Air Force, via Wikimedia Commons]

Everything is not all bad in the world. Last year, granted, was a terrible year for the economy. But it was also a good year for the protection of animals. For example, ten states passed laws in 2009 addressing the practices of puppy mills and Michigan and Maine passed animal welfare laws in 2009 to phase out confinement practices in factory farms. There was also some good news for pets waiting for a good home over the holidays. The Hallmark Hall of Fame movie "A Dog Named Christmas" actually boosted pet adoptions in Charlottesvile, Virginia. "We've always had a great foster program,'' Susanne Kogut of the Charlottesville - Albemarle SPCA told USA Today. "But after people saw the movie, we got over 30 requests." Aww.

The Peninsula Humane Society in California also had a record in the seven days before Christmas. In the run-up to the holiday, more than 110 animals were adopted. "This absolutely made our holiday season," Humane society President Ken White told KGO-AM. Of course, one doesn't have to wait until the holidays to adopt a furry, non-judgemental pal from an animal shelter.

Now that the holidays are now over, there are pets that still need adoption. California, for example, has an overpopulation of Chihuahuas! This week Virgin America donated space on a flight to transport the adorable dogs from San Francisco Animal Care and Control to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in New York City under "Operation Chihuahua Airlift."

Adopting an animal from a shelter is tantamount to rescuing it from an untimely death. And they will thank you for the rest of their lives.

[Image: Los Angeles Times]

That is the burning question ever since the collapse of Wall Street. Women are supposedly more cooperative, less likely to take big risks and less power hungry. Good, right?

"There now are a record 15 Fortune 500 companies with a female CEO, seven of them megacorporations in the largest 100 as measured by annual revenue." This is a good thing (though 15 out of 500 is still a mighty small percentage). But right now we are all risk averse, aren't we? We aren't using our credit cards as much, we didn't buy as many gifts over the holidays, basically we aren't spending the way we used to spend or are expected to spend - because we got our behinds burned. So of course women leaders who seem safer are looking especially good at the moment.

But what happens when times are good? Will women leaders start to look wimpy? Will we hear stories about how a "go get 'em" woman boss is really a diva? A peek at how The Washington Post categorizes women political leaders gives one a better idea of how we look at women as leaders. We're characters, not individuals.

I'm not a "typical woman" nor was I a "typical girl" growing up, so my gut reaction is to reject any overwhelming theory that says "women are X and men are Z." I find there are more variations within women as bosses than between women and men bosses.

If women are less likely to take big chances, is that why we get less venture capital? Are we safe bets or under-performing bets? Who decides? Are we better leaders or leaders in growing fields? In the end, the definition of "better leader" changes with the times, which might not always be a good thing for women.

The cover of the Sunday Chicago Sun-Times screamed "Abortions in Illinois reach 10-year high." "Oh, no," is what I thought.

As I suspected, anti-choice activists took the data release as an opportunity to complain about supposed-lax abortion laws in Illinois including the still unenforced parental notification law. Thankfully the Sun-Times also discussed the impact of The Great Recession on how women and their families make tough decisions. The Guttmacher Institute reported in 2008 that 61% of women who have abortions already have children. Thus, women know what they are doing when they make the choice to terminate a pregnancy: They are making a tough decision between an unplanned pregnancy and the lives of the children who already depend on them.

A Chicago Tribune article from March 2009 outlined how the economy is impacting family planning and its trickle down effect. First women and/or their partners can't afford their birth control, then they become pregnant and then they need to decide what to do. In the Tribune article, not only were abortions already on the rise, but inquires to adoption agencies were rising also.

Anti-choice activists also point to a new Planned Parenthood clinic that opened in late 2007. I worked on their blog during that opening. What I learned during that short time was that Planned Parenthood's phones were ringing off the hook at the new branch. The need was already there (though it's important to keep in mind that Planned Parenthood provides many health services beyond abortion). So yes, the activists' point is partially true. But there is more to it than that, as the popularity of the clinic speaks to the need for services in the area as well as the need for greater access. And the need for publicly funded services increased by more than one million (7%) between 2000 and 2006.

The down economy impacts our lives in every way. Why should we be surprised that families who are barely making their mortgage payments or recent college grads moving back into their parents' home might choose to delay parenthood or adding to the family in this tough time?

The ushering in of a new year always brings a certain hope, a sense that we get to start anew and that yesterday's problems will not be tomorrow's. Ushering in a new decade, well, that just makes us downright giddy with optimism.

But before you hoist that champagne flute, take a minute to ponder the realities we're still facing. After all, not only are we not out of the woods, we may not even know which forest we're in.

Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but it's not just me who's concerned about the coming decade. On New Year's Day, NPR aired a discussion about predicting the economic future, and revealed that the field's most expert professionals are still trying to understand the past. As one of the hosts put it, "We're calling you to ask what 2010 is going to be like, and what I'm hearing is, if we're lucky, by summertime you can tell us what 2007 was like."

Paul Krugman warns in an Op/Ed piece for the New York Times on Monday against allowing unchecked optimism from turning 2010 into another 1937, the year that Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Fed declared the Great Depression to be over, resulting in another bout of economic turmoil. Krugman explains why we sometimes see signs of growth when, in fact, the economy is still in the pits, meaning that those "blips," as he calls them, are nothing to bet the farm on. Otherwise, " 2010 will be a year that began in false economic hope and ended in grief."

Meanwhile (and directly beneath Krugman on the Op/Ed page), the more conservative and much younger Ross Douthat argues that we are still reeling from the party of the 1990s, presided over by Bill Clinton. While the argument that the past decade was really just a correction to the inflated economy produced by the Clinton years has some merit -- I've even made it a number of times -- I have to wonder: Aren't we far enough beyond the gay 90s now that whatever problems we're facing are largely new problems, brought on by the decisions of a more recent two-term administration?

I'm no economist, so I'll leave the answer to that question to those who are more qualified to speculate, predict, and make estimates about it. But I will say that I feel about 2010 kind of like I do about credit cards: If I can't see its value and hold it with my own hands, I just don't believe in it. In other words, faith won't end a recession. As Krugman might say, 1937 taught us at least that much.

[Image: EarthFirst.com]

In the life and death issue that is American health care legislation, people of good faith on both sides of the argument can get overheated. Yes, there are bad parts of the Senate health care bill that was somewhat Lieberman-ized but passed -- dramatically -- on Christmas Eve. And yes, the compromises made to Blue Dog Democrats to assure their votes watered down the bill from what it ideally could have been (read: a public option). Let's put this into context of the history of major American legislative milestones (which, considering that it restructures 1/6 of the American economy, it is). In order to get the Voting Rights Act of 1965, we had to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So we couldn't get the public option this time, having to settle for the exchange. We are now one step closer to that public option.

There is also some good news about the Senate and House bills, about to be merged:

1) The final health care plan would probably cover about tens of millions of uninsured people (36 million people are covered under the Senate plan and 37 million under the House plan). How can anyone say that's a bad thing? How can Progressives stand against this?

2) Dependents could remain on their parents' plan until the age of 27 in the House bill, or 26 in the Senate bill. Considering youth unemployment in this Great Recession, that is a significant development (219,000 in the 16-to-24 age range have become discouraged and given up on finding a job).

3) The final bill, in whatever form it takes, will lower premium costs and cap health care spending for millions of struggling families.

So, regardless of your political leanings, you have to admit that those are good things and that the new plan isn't all bad. Right?

[Image: Reid.Senate.Gov]

A lone gunman opened fire this morning outside a Las Vegas courthouse, killing one court officer and wounding another before he was shot to death by police. The shooting spree began shortly after 8 a.m. and lasted for more than a minute. So far, no motive has been established.

An AP reporter, who was on the eighth floor of a nearby building at the time, reported hearing more than 20 rounds altogether. This amateur video captures how surreal the scene must have felt to anyone in the area who had no idea what was happening. Just a series of gunshots, on an otherwise quiet and bright Las Vegas morning.

Warning: The following video contains gun violence and may be triggering for some viewers.

Frank Capra made some of the most American movies of the 20th Century. He captured the zeitgeist in his tales of men like George Bailey, the owner of a small town building and loan company played by Jimmy Stewart. It's a Wonderful Life came out in 1946, and as this mash-up from the Move Your Money Project shows, its relevance couldn't be greater in 2010.

*Interesting note: apparently, the idea for the video developed at a dinner party attended by Arianna Huffington and friends.