The 10 Best Rollercoasters on Earth

The 10 Best Rollercoasters on Earth

101 Simple Appetizers in 20 Minutes or Less

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/dining/19mini.html

THE REGRESSIVE ANTIDOTE

I write articles each week with titles like “Everything I Need to Know About the Regressive Right I Learned In Junior High”, or “Conservatism Is Politics For Kindergartners”, or “Schadenfreude Is My Middle Name”.

I regret doing so very much. Believe it or not, I really don’t like spewing venom, sarcasm and rage all over my computer keyboard.

I particularly don’t like it because I have friends who are conservative, and it’s not my nature to trash-talk anybody, let alone friends.

Indeed, none of this is in my nature. I don’t start fights and I don’t go looking for them. I’m not an angry, bitter or mean-spirited person. But I can understand how I might be seen as such in the absence of the appropriate context, and it truly chagrins me that I might be so misperceived, and so negatively.

But I don’t intend to change, and I don’t intend to stop making the arguments contained in my rants. I’m angry for a very good set of reasons, and I’m angry because I care about my country just the way conservatives claim to. I’m angry, in short, because I’m a patriot and defender of the ideas that America is supposed to stand for. And what I really want to know is why those on the right aren’t equally outraged?

I was a teenager when Nixon was being Nixon, destroying democracy at home, napalming civilians in Vietnam, conducting secret wars in Laos and Cambodia, employing racism to win elections. At that age I knew enough to dislike what I saw (and what I learned of what Nixon and McCarthy had done to innocent Americans even earlier, before I was born, in order to serve their political ambitions), but I didn’t know enough yet to feel genuine rage at what regressives were doing to my country and to the world.

I began to experience those feelings in my twenties, first as truly sociopathically insane gun laws in this country helped to claim the life of John Lennon, and then as Ronald Reagan began to systematically turn his back on the poor and the middle-class in order to further enrich the country’s already wealthy economic elites. I also felt deep shame and outrage that America – the country that had supported if not literally created every two-bit dictator in Latin America, ‘our backyard’, (and well beyond) for a century – began to murder Nicaraguan peasants in order to halt their struggle to free themselves from the economic and political tyranny of one of those Washington-run caudillo clients, the sickening Somoza regime.

Then I watched in disgust as Newt Gingrich and his merry band of infantile hypocrites impeached a president for lying about a consensual sexual affair, while they were themselves all doing worse, like dumping a wife while she was lying in her hospital bed recovering from cancer surgery, or fathering children with a mistress, or carrying on many years-long affairs.

All of this was truly noxious. Nothing to that point had prepared me, however, for the regressive politics of our time. And they have turned me very angry indeed.

Regressives like to call people like me Bush-haters, and so it is important to address that claim before proceeding, because the entire intent of hurling that label at the president’s critics is to undermine their credibility. If you simply hate the man, they imply, you’re not rational, and your critiques can be dismissed. But it isn’t that simple – not by a long shot. First, it should be noted that the regressive right is far wider a phenomenon than just one person. It currently includes an entire executive branch administration, almost (and, just a year ago, more than) half of Congress, a majority of the Supreme Court and probably a majority of the lower federal courts, a biased-to-the-point-of-being-a-joke mainstream media, and tons of lobbyists, think tanks and profitable industries.

But as to George W. Bush, himself, I suspect it’s quite fair to say that most Americans and even most progressives did not originally despise or loathe him. I didn’t. I certainly didn’t admire the guy, nor did I think he was remotely prepared to be president of the United States. (Nor, by the way, was I particularly impressed with Al Gore in 2000.) Bush campaigned as a center-right pragmatist (a “compassionate conservative”, in his words), much as his father had been, and I expected that’s how he would govern if elected. You know, more embarrassing most of the time than truly destructive.

I mention all this because it is important to note what has – and what has not – been responsible for my/our anger, and to make clear that attempts to dismiss that anger as some Bush-hating bias or predisposition are false, a ploy to destroy the messenger when one doesn’t care for the message he’s carrying. If Bush had governed like he campaigned I’m sure I would have disliked him, but neither hated him nor his policies, nor experienced the rage that I feel about what he’s done to the country and the world. Frankly, my feelings toward another center-right Bush presidency would have likely been largely the same as my feelings toward the center-right Clinton presidency which preceded it.

But he hasn’t governed anywhere near to how he campaigned, and he wasn’t even elected properly, and I do in fact feel huge anger at the damage done. Moreover, I cannot for the life of me imagine how anyone – even conservatives – could feel differently. Even the wealthy, to whose interests this presidency is so wholly devoted, have to sleep at night. Even they have children who will inherit a broken country existing in an environmentally and politically hostile world, though no doubt they figure that big enough fences, mean enough private armies, and loads of central air conditioning will insulate them from the damage.

I don’t mind that the Bush campaign fought hard to win the 2000 election. That was certainly a legitimate goal for them to pursue. But it nauseates me beyond belief that their agents in the Florida government disenfranchised tens of thousands of African Americans in order to keep them from voting Democratic. And it sickens me that they gathered up a bunch of congressional staffers pretending to be an angry local mob and stormed election canvassers, using pure Gestapo techniques to shut down the most fundamental act of democracy, counting the votes.

I don’t mind that the Bush campaign took the election to the Supreme Court, even though they were simultaneously accusing the Gore folks of being litigious. What disgusts me beyond words is that a regressive majority of the Court anointed Bush president in a sheer act of partisan politics. And that they were so anxious to achieve that end that they repudiated all their own judicial politics previously espoused in case after case – from states’ rights, to equal protection, to judicial restraint. And that they were so conscious of what they were actually doing that they took the unprecedented step of stating that no lasting principles were involved in the matter, that their decision would forever apply to this case and this case only.

Once in office, there was still the possibility that the administration would govern as it had campaigned, as a rather centrist, status quo-style government, perhaps especially tempered from arrogance and overstretch by the knowledge that the country was deeply divided and that Bush had in fact actually lost the popular vote. In fact, though, they did precisely the opposite.

The first order of business, certainly the top priority for the administration, and arguably the only thing they were ever completely seriously about, was their tax restructuring program. It was grim enough that the tax cuts, as under Reagan, where dramatically tilted in favor of the wealthy. But what made them especially disgusting was that – again, as under Reagan – these wholesale revenue reductions were not only not accompanied by expenditure cuts, but in fact were coupled with increased spending. Can you say “voodoo economics”? Bush’s father once had, before he treasonously changed his tune to win the vice presidency (leading to the presidency) for himself. But he was right the first time, before he put personal ambition and transparent insecurity ahead of the national interest. And thus we’ve witnessed the only possible result of the combination of massive revenue cuts and continuing spending increases: astronomical debt, now well over nine trillion dollars in total, and rapidly growing. What I want to know is how can we – especially so-called family-oriented, so-called fiscal conservatives – not be outraged, not be scandalized, not be boiling with anger at the debt we have transferred to our own children, all so that we could avoid paying our own way, like every generation before us has?

I am outraged as well at how the administration polarized the country in the wake of one of the greatest traumas it had ever experienced. Let us leave aside the ample evidence demonstrating that the Bush team was asleep at the wheel before 9/11 – or perhaps far, far worse – a set of facts which is noteworthy in part because progressives did not use them to attack the president and score cheap but easy political points. But the administration did precisely that. It is disgusting – and it fills me with anger – how they used a national security crisis to win partisan political contests. How they scheduled a vote on the Iraq war resolution right before the midterm elections of 2002, thus politicizing the gravest decision a country can make by forcing Democrats to choose between voting their conscience and campaign accusations of being soft on national security.

It boils my blood that these chickenhawks – almost none of whom showed up for duty in Vietnam when it was their turn – could dare to accuse Max Cleland of being weak on national security, a guy who gave three of his four limbs to that very cause on the battlefields of Southeast Asia. How could they run ads morphing his face into Saddam’s or bin Laden’s, when his opponent – of course – took Vietnam deferments, just like Cheney and Ashcroft and the rest? And how could they accuse him of being weak on national defense because he opposed the bureaucratic reshuffling to create the Homeland Security Department, when Bush himself had also opposed it? That is, before Rove politicized it by inserting union-busting language applying to tens of thousands of civil servants covered by the act.

It nauseates me beyond words that this president could use the tragedy of 9/11 to justify invading a country which had nothing to do with that attack whatsoever. It enrages me that those who had the courage to oppose this policy so transparently deceitful (and it truly was – from the proof of the Downing Street Memos, to Colin Powell’s charade at the UN, to the assurances that the US knew where the WMD were, to the rejection of the weapons inspectors’ request to have two more months to finish the job) were labeled as traitors and worse for telling the truth. And that 4,000 Americans and over a million Iraqis have died for these lies.

And speaking of treason, what sort of looking glass have we all fallen through when the government of the United States exposes its own CIA undercover agent in order to punish her spouse for revealing administration lies about the war? When did that cease to be a cause of outrage, especially among our super-patriotic friends on the right?

How is it possible not to be angry looking at the destruction of Hurricane Katrina, and the bungled response of the government before, during and after that tragedy? Indeed, even journalists who had spent so many years licking government boots that their tongues had long ago turned black were moved to outrage at the magnitude of that failure, with the president meanwhile on a stage in San Diego pretending to play guitar at a Republican fundraiser.

I am outraged, as well, by one of the most insane and avoidable tragedies of all human history, the slow-motion holocaust of global warming. How can anyone not be angry at a political movement and a government that puts the short-term profits of one or two industries ahead of the viability of the entire planet? How can anyone not be mortified as we one-twentieth of the world’s population, who generate one-fourth of the greenhouse gases causing the problem, not only do nothing about the problem, but actively block the rest of the world from saving all of us from this folly?

I’m furious because the Bush administration and its ideological allies have shredded the Constitution at every turn, destroying the institutional gift of those they pretend to revere (but only when it’s convenient to upholding their own depredations). This president, who has gotten virtually everything he has ever wanted throughout his life and his presidency, once privately exclaimed in frustration at not getting something he wanted when he wanted it, “It’s just a goddam piece of paper!”, and that is precisely how he has treated America’s founding document. His signing statements – probably over a thousand in count now – completely obliterate the checks and balances principle of the Constitution, its most central idea. His admitted spying on Americans without warrant smashes the Fourth Amendment. His fiasco in Guantánamo and beyond mocks due process and habeas corpus guarantees. His invasion of Iraq against the international law codified in the UN Charter, to which the United States is a signatory, violates the Constitutional requirement to hold such treaties as the highest law of the land. Altogether, Americans have never seen a presidency with such imperial ambitions, and anyone who cares about the Constitution should be furious. A year from now, it is quite possible that Hillary Clinton will be president of the United States (ugh). Would our conservative friends silently countenance, let alone viciously support, such a monarchy in the White House if it belonged to Queen Hillary rather than King George? I think not.

We could go on and on from here. This administration and the movement it fronts at least gets high marks for consistency. Everything they touch turns to stone. There’s Pat Tillman and Terri Schiavo. There’s the politicization of the US Attorneys and the corruption of DeLay and Abramoff. There’s North Korea, Pakistan and the Middle East. There’s the shame of torture and rendition. There’s the wrecking of the American military and of the country’s reputation abroad. There’s Afghanistan and the failure to capture bin Laden. And much, much more. But above all, and driving all, there’s the kleptocracy – the doing of everything in every way to facilitate the looting of the national fisc.

What an unbelievable record of deceit, destruction, hypocrisy, incompetence, treason and greed. What a tragic tale of debt, lost wars, stolen elections, environmental crises, Constitution shredding, national shame and diminished security.

All done by the very most pious amongst us, of course. Merry Christmas, eh? I guess those are our presents, all carefully wrapped in spin, contempt, and preemptive attacks on any of us impertinent enough to say “No thanks, Santa”.

So, yeah, you’re goddam right I’m angry about what’s been done to my country, and what’s been done by my country in my name.

How could anyone who claims to care about America not be?

gethuman 500 database

http://gethuman.com/

Mark Hertsgaard has written hundreds of articles over the last two decades for newspapers and magazines across the world. Publications include Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, The Nation, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, The Atlantic, Rolling Stone, Der Spiegel, Der Zeit, The Guardian, La Repubblica, NRC Handelsblad, Yomiuri Shimbum, Le nouvel observateur, Ha'aretz, and the Daily Star.

http://www.markhertsgaard.com/articles

Two new words for your health vocabulary

Nutricide = eating oneself to death
Iatrogenesis = death by medication

makes you wonder

www.regressiveantidote.net

Sore Losermen

The last time the American public was so disenchanted with the state of national politics, there was a war going on and near civil war at home.

Indeed, so surly is the current public mood about the country being on the wrong track that you’d almost think there is a war going on now! But, of course, since there’s no draft, no tax increase, and no pictures of battle, or of bodies coming back to Dover Air Force Base, I’m sure I must be mistaken about that.

So what gives? Why are people so dissatisfied, telling pollsters in record numbers that the country has gone astray?

There’s a simple answer, but the regressive right is desperate that you not hear it or think about it. You see, there’s been an ideological revolution going on in America. It began in the 1980s with Reagan kleptocracy (in that sense, it’s been a bit of an evolutionary revolution – however oxymoronic (or just plain moronic) that idea may be), but has really hit stride in the seven tortuous years of the Little Bush regime.

And the thing is, people don’t like it.

Indeed, one could explain the public mood quite succinctly, as follows: The right sought power in America. They got it. They implemented their agenda. Unfettered. It sucked. People hate it.

That’s really just about it.

And what kills me is how these guys are both such lousy winners and lousy losers. Maybe they’re just lousy, period. All I know is that they had it all – Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court. They had a national trauma which gave legitimacy to a stolen presidency and immediately jacked it up from its 50 percent approval rating and rapidly descending trajectory into stratospheric levels of support. They had the world loving America for the first time in a long time, and they had international support for attacking the country’s purported enemies.

Now it’s all gone. And, while you’ll hear rumblings about Dan Rather this, and Tom Daschle that, the simple truth is that the policies of the regressive agenda failed precisely because of the political success of the regressive movement.

That’s right. (Very right, actually.) These folks are very good at campaigning and complaining, and especially so in an environment in which no one pushes back. They can demonize like nobody’s business (except Wall Street’s business, of course). They can fearmonger better than any dimestore preacher or fire-and-brimstone pope. They can bully just like Tailgunner Joe McCarthy taught them so well how to do. All of which means that if the press is too fearful to call them on it, and the ‘opposition party’ is hardly worthy of either word in that label, they can win elections.

But when they transition from the disloyal opposition to actually governing, they run into a small problem, which is that people don’t happen to like their policies.

I know, it’s amazing isn’t it? I mean, what’s not to like about deceit, death and incompetence?

They were (minimally) asleep at the wheel during America’s most severe domestic military attack in history, and are surprised that we might find that troubling.

They identify an enemy and claim that this person and his movement attacked the country, then they fail to come close to defeating this enemy in six years of war. Who’s ready to sign-up for that?

They bring us another war, based on lies, which turns into a quagmire based on lies, and which has nothing remotely to do with American security other than to radically diminish it. Then they belittle us as disloyal for opposing the moral, fiscal and humanitarian disasters they’ve made.

They polarize the country economically in the name of their radical (supposed) free market ideas, which turn out to have a lot more to do with privileging certain elites than with privileging nobody, as per the theory. Then, as we are being gouged paying for gas, food and mortgages, they are astonished that we don’t give them credit for the wonderful state of the economy. Hey, the Dow’s up! What’s wrong with you people?

They offer us record-setting deficits in place of record-setting surpluses, and are shocked that we aren’t interested in such a golden opportunity to go broke.

They create a giant new government benefit structured to enrich insurance and pharmaceutical industries, while maybe incidentally also helping seniors once in a while, and they wonder why we’re not enthusiastic.

They attempt to destroy Social Security, one of the most successful government programs of all time, in order to further enrich the already fabulously wealthy, and can’t imagine that we wouldn’t be all over that.

They allow us to suffer and die from diseases which might well have been cured by now, were it not for the fact that the religious radicals to which they cater have imposed their extreme fundamentalist views on the entire country. Then they’re astonished that we choose health and longevity over blastocysts in petri dishes.

They legislate by an act of Congress intervention into a personal family tragedy, and are amazed that we aren’t all clamoring to be treated like the Terri Schiavo family.

They block health care for children while uninhibitedly enriching crony contractors in Iraq and wonder why we don’t celebrate their twisted values.

They demonize gays and minorities and immigrants and liberals in order to divert attention from their real kleptocracy agenda, and we’re supposed to feel good about how they’ve restored dignity to American politics.

They imagine that good governance involves poor preparation before a natural disaster, criminal negligence during it, and shameful disinterest afterwards, and can’t quite fathom why even an embarrassingly intimidated American press can no longer withhold its criticisms.

They not only stand by and do nothing about the planet’s most serious environmental crisis ever, but they actually block other countries from rescuing themselves, all in order to maintain fossil fuel industry profits. And they wonder why we don’t beg for more of that.

They turn our country into a hated international bully, proud to be an aggressor, a torturer and a hypocrite, and then they’re shocked that we don’t find that a compelling self-image.

They trample the Constitution in every way imaginable, from checks and balances to separation of church and state to due process to illegal search and seizure to stealing elections. After constantly telling us how much we should revere the Founders, they are somehow surprised that we don’t approve of seeing their creation being trashed.

And this is just for starters...

The only thing really surprising about any of this reaction is that anyone would be surprised about it at all.

Imagine if George W. Bush had campaigned on a platform of decreased national security, massive debt, environmental catastrophe, economic disparity, political polarization, national shame, Constitution shredding, withholding healthcare from children, killing Social Security, negligence in preventing a major attack, more negligence as a major city drowned, needless and endless wars based on lies, and massive human rights violations. A real winning agenda, eh? Who wouldn’t want to vote for that?

This is why the success of the regressive movement has proved to be its undoing. They got control of every institution in American government (which is still mostly true, and will continue to be true of the Supreme Court regardless of what happens next November). They did everything they wanted to do to satisfy their kleptocratic little (stone) hearts. It hasn’t exactly been popular, and they are thus being shown to the door. And if Democrats could ever take the unimaginably courageous leap of actually standing for something on principle, regressives would not only be getting shown to the door, they’d be getting picked up by the scruff of their Brooks Brothers collars and tossed right through it. (For my money, the most shocking thing about the 2008 election is that Republicans have any reason to be even showing up. They can certainly thank the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for that.)

In November and December of 2000, the right did something very clever, which undoubtedly resulted in them being able to shove their candidate across the finish line in that (s)election. They got Bush to be declared the presumptive winner, then they made ‘resolving’ the Florida problem seem like an urgent crisis that needed quick attention. This turned the clock into their friend as the meter ran down, and it made the Gore-Lieberman campaign appear to be petulantly trying to undo valid election results. Among their ranks, a very clever, though disgustingly cynical sign appeared at that time, mimicking in language and design the Democratic election banner. It said “Sore Loserman”, and it helped win the battle of perceptions that got Bush into the White House. Cute, eh?

Ah, but now the tables have turned. The right won, but winning has turned into losing. And the depth of the political price ultimately to be paid for supporting eight years of Bushism is still unknown. Virtually everyone, domestically and internationally, who associated themselves with this monster has paid for it in the form of political suicide. It is quite possible that the Republican Party itself could go down that same path, especially as the price and crimes of the administration become clearer over time, when they’re more exposed, least protected from investigation and prosecution, and when long deferred costs come slamming upside the body politic with a real vengeance in the coming decade.

If regressives whine about their disintegration in the face of an angry public, I’ll be there, big smile on my face, just silently waving a little sign in my hand.

Can you guess what it will say?

Nation's Largest Retailers Accused of Organic Fraud

Seattle - In a scandal now ensnaring some of the nations leading retailers, a series of lawsuits have been filed accusing Wal-Mart, Costco, Target, Safeway, and Wild Oats of consumer fraud for marketing suspect organic milk.

The legal filings in federal courts in Seattle, Denver, and in Minneapolis, against the retailers, come on the heels of class action lawsuits against Aurora Dairy Corporation, based in Boulder, Colorado. The suits against Aurora and the grocery chains allege consumer fraud, negligence, and unjust enrichment concerning the sale of organic milk. This past April, Aurora officials received a notice from the USDA detailing multiple and "willful" violations of federal organic law that were found by federal investigators.

"This is the largest scandal in the history of the organic industry," said Mark Kastel of The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group. Cornucopia's own investigations in 2005 first alerted USDA of Aurora's improprieties.

Five lawsuits against the retailers have been filed so far. And law firms based in Seattle, St. Louis, New York and other cities have filed at least eight lawsuits against Aurora, representing plaintiffs in over 30 states.