Tag Archives: top stories

Tom’s Kitchen: Spaghetti with Butternut Squash, Bacon, and Chickpeas

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

September in Austin is a bit like February in northern climes: months of harsh weather have turned the farmers market into a study in austerity. Here in Texas, tomatoes are mostly gone, done in by the unrelenting heat. Greens are as rare as rain. Eggplant, zucchini, and melons soldier on. And on.

A few weeks ago, one of my favorite vegetables began to appear at farm stands: butternut squash. The trouble was, the idea of whipping up—much less eating—a butternut squash soup on a 100+ degree day had all the appeal of sporting a down parka at a swimming hole.

At a recent Sunday farmers market, I broke down and bought one of the squashes anyway, desperate for new flavors. I figured I’d find something appealing to do with it. And then, fall—or at least a preview of it—arrived in the form of a day-long rainstorm. The temperature barely cracked 80 degrees: a veritable cold front! So I decided to combine that one butternut squash with a little slab of bacon I bought from the excellent Austin butcher Dai Due into an autumnal pasta.

To bring the sweet smokiness of the squash/bacon combination to the fore, I deployed an old Mark Bittman trick: I used half the amount of spaghetti that a typical recipe would call for. If you want to feed more people, you could get away with using a full pound of pasta. Just add additional lashings of olive oil and cheese to ramp up flavor. Substitution note: Try swapping the pasta for farro—see here for more on that excellent grain.

Spaghetti with Butternut Squash, Bacon, and Chickpeas
(Yields three generous portions.)

Extra-virgin olive oil

6 oz. bacon, preferably from pastured hogs, diced into quarter-inch bits

1 large butternut squash, cut into half-inch chunks
Sea salt and freshly ground black pepper

8 oz. spaghetti
4 cloves garlic, mashed flat, peeled, and finely chopped
A pinch or two, to taste, of crushed chili flakes
1 15 oz. can of chickpeas, drained (cannellini beans would also work well)
A wedge of Parmesan, grano padano, or other hard cheese
1 bunch parsley, chopped

Preheat oven to 375 degrees. Place a large, oven-proof skillet—one big enough to hold the squash in one layer—over a medium flame. Add barely enough olive oil to cover the bottom of the skillet. When it’s hot, add the bacon and cook, stirring often, until brown and crisp. Remove with a slotted spoon and set aside, leaving the heat on.

Add the squash to the hot pan and gently toss until it’s sizzling and coated in fat. (If there isn’t enough fat left in the pan from cooking the bacon, add a bit of olive oil.) Add a small pinch of salt—go easy, because bacon is salty—and a generous grinding of pepper. Toss the squash one more time to make sure the pieces are laid out more or less in one layer.

Place the pan in the heated oven. Cook, tossing occasionally, until the squash is tender and lightly browned, 15 to 20 minutes.

Meanwhile, get the pasta going. (I use Harold McGhee’s low-water, high-speed method.)

When the squash is done, take the pan out of the oven and mix in the chopped garlic and crushed chili flakes. Let it sizzle for a minute or two, as the pan’s residual heat cooks the garlic. Now add the drained beans, a ladle of pasta water, the cooked bacon, a good grating of cheese, and toss it all together.

When the pasta is done, drain it and combine with the squash mixture. Add the chopped parsley, and toss until well combined. Taste for seasoning, adding salt, pepper, and chili flakes as needed. If the dish seems a little dry, add a glug of olive oil.

Pass around the block of cheese and the grater as you serve. This dish goes well with a sturdy red wine—maybe one from France’s Rhône region.

Read this article:

Tom’s Kitchen: Spaghetti with Butternut Squash, Bacon, and Chickpeas

Posted in Casio, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tom’s Kitchen: Spaghetti with Butternut Squash, Bacon, and Chickpeas

Roman Mars on the Secret Allure of Highway Stripes and Manhole Covers

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Radio host Roman Mars, creator of the architecture-and-design podcast 99% Invisible, wasn’t always interested in the structures around him—”I found architecture kind of distancing, quite honestly,” he says—until the day he embarked on a boat tour of Chicago. The guide pointed out how one of the Montgomery Ward buildings was explicitly designed without corner offices to prevent squabbling among company vice-presidents over who should get one. It “made me realize I wasn’t invested in the aesthetics of buildings, but I loved the stories of buildings a whole lot.”

In 2010, when an architecture trade group partnered with San Francisco radio station KALW to launch a bite-size design segment, Mars, who’d gotten his start at the station nine years earlier, jumped in to produce. Soon he was doing longer stories about things most if us take for granted: a decrepit bridge in Golden Gate Park, highway stripes, the modern toothbrush, the dark logic of solitary-confinement cells.

Continue Reading »

Source:

Roman Mars on the Secret Allure of Highway Stripes and Manhole Covers

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Roman Mars on the Secret Allure of Highway Stripes and Manhole Covers

Need a New Stadium? Threaten to Move Here

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Nothing rips out a fan’s heart quite like seeing a hometown team pack up and move to another city. (Or, as the case may be, not seeing a hometown team pack up and move to another city.) While there may be legitimate reasons for franchises to relocate—bankruptcy, low ticket sales, Jay-Z buying a stake—many recent threats to move have one common factor: stadium funding. If your local government decided against spending $400 million of public money to add a few more luxury boxes to Xtreme Cola Guzzle The Flavor® Memorial Arena, get ready to hear your team’s owner talking a lot about the following cities. But which threats will have you back in your seat next season, and which will leave you crying into your Houston Oilers jersey? We’ve got you covered:

Los Angeles
LA has been the NFL’s biggest bogeyman ever since the Raiders returned to Oakland in 1995. Most recently, in his push for a new stadium, Raiders owner Mark Davis said that Los Angeles is “always” on his mind. Miami Dolphins CEO Mike Dee raised the specter of relocating Perfectville to LA after Florida opted against giving the team $3 million a year for 30 years for stadium renovations. The City of Angels also looms over teams like the Rams, Jaguars, and Bills, and it served as a believable enough landing place to get Minnesota to agree to a $975 million deal to make sure the Vikings didn’t leave. The threats aren’t empty, though—LA has two proposed stadium sites that are “shovel ready” along with a massive media market without professional football. With no NFL expansion plans, it seems less a question of if a team will move there and more a question of when.
Relocation likelihood: 5/5 moving vans

Toronto
The Buffalo Bills have played at least one home game in Toronto for the past few seasons, but they were able to convince the state and county to agree to a $271 million stadium renovation deal at the end of last year that comes with a 10-year lease (although the team can opt out relatively cheaply after seven). While the Bills enjoy a relatively large fan base in the area, Toronto officials could look elsewhere in the meantime, with Jacksonville and New Orleans getting special mentions. Whether it’s the Bills, Jags, Saints, or another team who likes Scott Pilgrim enough to move, relocating a franchise to Toronto would be a lot easier than moving one to London. Let’s just hope everyone on Twitter gets their “Are they gonna punt on third down?” CFL jokes out of the way quickly.
Relocation likelihood: 3/5 moving vans

London
While Londoners prepare for a barn-burning matchup of winless teams, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has made no secret of his interest in putting a franchise across the pond. It’s a nice bargaining chip for the league and its owners—as the St. Louis Rams tried to get the city to agree to a $700 million stadium deal, the NFL scheduled them for three years of London home games. This year, the Jacksonville Jaguars were scheduled for four straight London games, with the team’s owner calling the Jaguars “the home team for London.” The league is even pushing a fun club called the Union Jax. Despite these moves, there are plenty of obstacles to putting a franchise in the United Kingdom anytime soon, including huge travel times, players reluctant to move overseas, and the potential for incessant football/football jokes during broadcasts. (Not everyone is so pessimistic.) If a team moves to LA soon, expect London to make a nice new bogeyman.
Relocation likelihood: 2/5 moving vans

BONUS NBA/NHL SITE: Seattle
Your favorite football team might be safe, but that doesn’t mean your local basketball or hockey team is sticking around. Fans of the SuperSonics came tantalizingly close to regaining a franchise this year, only to see the Sacramento Kings stay put. The NBA, on the other hand, saw an extremely effective strategy for getting local officials to help pay for a $448 million new arena in downtown Sacramento. As teams like Milwaukee negotiate new stadium deals, expect threats to turn the team into the new Sonics to come early and often. Seattle also sits pretty as a large market without an NHL team, making the strategy just as useful for hockey owners. The Edmonton Oilers management team took a scouting trip out to Seattle after negotiations with Edmonton over a new arena got off to a rocky start. Both leagues have also discussed expansion, however, so it’s possible the Emerald City could see new franchises without having to poach them.
Relocation likelihood: 4/5 moving vans

Link to article: 

Need a New Stadium? Threaten to Move Here

Posted in alo, Dolphin, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Need a New Stadium? Threaten to Move Here

How One of The Biggest Porn Websites Helped Joseph Gordon-Levitt Make "Don Jon"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Don Jon
Relativity Media
90 minutes

So much of this movie is just Joseph Gordon-Levitt masturbating in front of a computer, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt narrating about masturbating in front of a computer.

And it’s a testament to the 32-year-old actor‘s talents that this film, saddled to this premise, still manages to be charming and wholly enjoyable. Don Jon is Gordon-Levitt’s feature directorial debut (he also wrote the picture). It tells the story of Jon “Don Jon” Martello, Jr., a thickly accented New Jersey bartender and ladies’ man. He’s a nice-enough, church-going womanizer who soon finds the woman he believes is the love of his life: the much-coveted Barbara Sugarman, played with heat and attitude by Scarlett Johansson. The problem? Jon is a porn addict. Sure, he thinks sex with gorgeous young women is okay, and all. But the only sexual activity he truly loves is when he’s by himself, drooling over his keyboard, clicking on pornographic websites.

Sounds like a weird, godawful idea for a romantic comedy, right? But the film succeeds as a worthwhile, if forgettable, directing debut for Gordon-Levitt, primarily on the likability of its leads. (The movie also features fine performances from Tony Danza, Julianne Moore, Brie Larson, and Glenne Headly.)

Even prior to his recent years-long streak of critical acclaim, Gordon-Levitt showed himself to be a versatile and promising entertainer (click here to see him as a youngster playing blues guitar and waxing John Lee Hooker on an old clip from the sitcom 3rd Rock from the Sun). And in the director’s chair, he keeps things popping with a hip style and indie spirit. He and his crew apparently also put quite a premium on realism, as evidenced by their depiction of Don Jon’s swirling vortex of web porno. Arguably, the film’s most prominent co-star isn’t a person but a website: Pornhub, which is displayed in virtually every scene in which Jon is vigorously stroking himself. Pornhub is a Montreal-based free porn site started in 2007. It hosts a lot of amateur videos and professionally made content, as well as celebrity sex tapes from time to time. It’s one of the biggest porn websites in the world, and made news last year for marking Breast Cancer Awareness Month by pledging to donate one penny to breast cancer research for every 30 page views of its “Small Tits” and “Big Tits” videos. (This fundraising push was met with scorn by some, and Susan G. Komen for the Cure publicly refused to accept Pornhub’s donations.) At the end of their “Save The Boobs” campaign, Pornhub reportedly split their donation of $75,000 between several organization, including Cancer Sucks Inc.

And the conspicuous appearance of the website’s logo in Don Jon was no accident. It was a carefully coordinated effort by the crew, and one that’s certainly boosting the site’s profile. A representative for Pornhub has yet to confirm to me whether or not they paid for placement, but Corey Price, a vice president at the company, offered a statement outlining the collaboration: “A producer approached us in March 2012 seeking permission to use our brand in a movie starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Scarlett Johansson. The script had already been written and they were in pre-production at the time. After we reviewed the script and discussed the opportunity with the producers we agreed to take part in the movie. We also agreed to help them find adult clips to use in the movie from our content partners like Brazzers, Mofos, Digital Playground and Twistys.”

These were clips that Gordon-Levitt and his team judiciously selected from and edited into rapid-fire, sexually explicit montages in order to tell the story.

Now here’s a trailer for Don Jon:

Don Jon gets a release on Friday, September 27. The film is rated R for strong graphic sexual material and dialogue throughout, nudity, language and some drug use. Click here for local showtimes and tickets.

Click here for more TV and film coverage from Mother Jones.

To read more of Asawin’s reviews, click here.

Link to original:

How One of The Biggest Porn Websites Helped Joseph Gordon-Levitt Make "Don Jon"

Posted in Accent, alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How One of The Biggest Porn Websites Helped Joseph Gordon-Levitt Make "Don Jon"

Can We Finally Have a Serious Talk About Population?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Climate Desk has launched a new science podcast, Inquiring Minds, cohosted by contributing writer Chris Mooney and neuroscientist and musician Indre Viskontas. To subscribe via iTunes, click here. You can also follow the show on Twitter at @inquiringshow, and like us on Facebook.

Today, as the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change releases its latest megareport, averring a 95 percent certainty that humans are heating up the planet, there’s an unavoidable subtext: The growing number of humans on the planet in the first place.

The figures, after all, are staggering: In 1900, there were just 1.65 billion of us; now, there are 7.2 billion. That’s more than two doublings, and the next billion-human increase is expected to occur over the short space of just 12 years. According to projections, meanwhile, by 2050 the Earth will be home to some 9.6 billion people, all living on the same rock, all at once.

So why not talk more about population, and treat it as a serious issue? It’s a topic that Mother Jones has tackled directly in the past, because taboos notwithstanding, it’s a topic that just won’t go away.

The bestselling environmental journalist Alan Weisman agrees. In this episode of Inquiring Minds (click above to stream audio), he explains why, following on his 2007 smash hit The World Without Us, he too decided to centrally take on the issue of human population in his just-published new book book Countdown: Our Last, Best Hope for a Future on Earth?

The new release by Alan Weisman, bestselling author of The World Without Us. Little, Brown & Co.

“Population is a loaded topic, and people who otherwise know better, great environmentalists, often times are very, very timid about going there,” Weisman explains on the podcast. “And I decided as a journalist, I should go there, and find out, is it really a problem, and if so, is there anything acceptable that we can do about it?”

The World Without Us imagined a planet rapidly returning to a natural state in the absence of humans. Where that book represented an ambitious thought experiment, Weisman’s new book is an experience. He traveled to 21 countriesfrom Israel to Mexico, Pakistan to Nigerto report on how different cultures are responding to booming populations and the strain this is putting on their governments and resources.

Strikingly, he found that countries are coping (or not coping) with this problem in vastly different ways. For instance:

Pakistan: Current population: 193 million. “By the year 2030, they’re going to have about 395 million people,” Weisman says. “And they’re the size of Texas.” (Texas’ population? Twenty-six million.)

The Philippines: Current population: nearly 105 million. “As the rest of the planet’s population quadrupled in a century, the head count here quintupled in half that time,” Weisman writes in Countdown.

Iran: Current population: nearly 80 million. Yet unlike Pakistan and the Philippines, Weisman says, Iran managed its population growth with “probably the most humane program ever in the history of the planet. They got down to replacement rate a year faster than China, and it was a totally voluntary program. No coercion at all.” (Note, though, that as Weisman explains in his book, there was one Iranian government “disincentive” to having a large number of children: “elimination of the individual subsidy for food, electricity, telephone, and appliances for any child after the first three.”)

Alan Weisman in Golestan National Park, Iran Beckie Kravetz

Weisman is well aware of the controversy his book invites. In particular, political libertarians are very fond of refuting the concerns of population crusaders, from the Reverend Thomas Malthus to the ecologist and Population Bomb author Paul Ehrlich, with the claim that human ingenuity has a history of proving them wrong. The key episode: the Green Revolution of the late 1960s, led by plant geneticist Norman Borlaug, in which dramatic new agricultural technologies and crop strains were credited with averting what might otherwise have been mass famines.

But Weisman has his response ready (he chronicles Borlaug’s life and triumphs in the book). “Everybody says that Norman Borlaug, the great plant geneticist, he disproved Malthus and Ehrlich forever,” he explains. “It’s kind of cherry-picked, because the part that they neglect to add, Norman Borlaug’s Nobel acceptance speech, he didn’t sit there congratulating himself—as he was congratulated by others—for saving more lives than any other human in history. He said, ‘We have bought the world some time, but unless population control and increased food production go hand in hand, we are going to lose this.'”

So what’s Weisman’s solution? Importantly, he is no supporter of coercive population control measures such as China’s infamous one-child policy. Rather, Weisman makes a powerful case that the best way to manage the global population is by empowering women, through both education and access to contraception—so that they can make more informed choices about family size and the kind of lives they want for themselves and their children.

“The libertarians are going to like the solution that ultimately comes up,” Weisman says. “And that is, letting everybody decide how many children they want, which means giving every woman on Earth—and then every man, because male contraceptives are coming—giving them universal access to contraception, and letting them decide for themselves.”

You can listen to the full show here:

This episode of Inquiring Minds also features a discussion of the latest myths circulating on global warming, and the brave new world of gene therapy that we’re entering—where being rich might be your key ticket to the finest health care.

To catch future shows right when they release, subscribe to Inquiring Minds via iTunes. You can also follow the show on Twitter at @inquiringshow and like us on Facebook.

Continue reading:  

Can We Finally Have a Serious Talk About Population?

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Pines, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Can We Finally Have a Serious Talk About Population?

WTF is the IPCC?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story first appeared on the Grist website and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

You’re going to be hearing a lot about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change during the next couple of weeks. And then again in spurts during the coming year. The IPCC is the world’s foremost authority on—you guessed it—climate change. It’s the top cat, the big cheese, the heavyweight champion of the world community of climate experts.

So, WTF is it?

It’s a scientific group set up in 1988 by two divisions of the United Nations. The goal was to form a body that would provide policymakers with trusted, cutting-edge information about climate change.

Thousands of climate scientists from around the world volunteer their time to analyze and summarize the latest and best science. The result: Big, fat reports.

And now the IPCC is dropping its first big report in six years—a scientific inventory of the combined knowledge of all the brightest minds in climate science. Needless to say, climate skeptics are not too pleased at such a robust body of science coalescing before the world’s eyes.

Who’s running the show?

Continue Reading »

Taken from: 

WTF is the IPCC?

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on WTF is the IPCC?

Yes, Muslims Are Denouncing The Nairobi Terrorist Attack

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Saturday, the popular Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya, was the target of a horrific terrorist attack. Al-Shabaab, an Al Qaeda-affiliated Somali group, claimed responsibility for the assault, which reportedly left over 60 people dead. It is Kenya’s worst terrorist attack since 1998. And Fox News personalities don’t feel as though Muslims, both foreign and domestic, have done enough to condemn the killing.

“They are not the religion of peace…You moderate Muslims out there…the time has come for you to stand up and say something!” Bob Beckel, one of the network’s leading center-left stereotypes, howled on Monday. “And I will repeat what I said before: No Muslim students coming here with visas, no more mosques being built here until you stand up and denounce what’s happened in the name of your prophet…The time has come for Muslims in this country, and for other people around the world, to stand up…and if you can’t, you’re cowards!”

Fox host Bill O’Reilly—a man who has successfully drawn the link between same-sex marriage and dudes marrying small turtles—was similarly annoyed. “What is the Muslim world doing about it? Nothing!” he declared, before talking about Muslims and violence in Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, and elsewhere.

Okay.

First off, it’s bizarre to present the global Muslim community as monolithic, and then shout at Muslims for not doing something. There are a lot of different branches and schools of Islam in a lot of different parts of the world. Angrily asking one kind of “moderate Muslim” in one far corner of the world to stand up to an act of terror in Nairobi is a lot like asking him or her to stand up to the epidemic of gun violence in Chicago. But let’s forget that for a moment, and assume for the sake of argument that you can and should scream at the “Muslim world” about their supposed lack of courage.

The “why won’t Muslims denounce the terrorist attack?” argument is still somewhat undermined by numerous Muslims denouncing the terrorist attack. Here are some particularly prominent instances of Muslims condemning the jihadist violence in Kenya:

CAIR: On Sunday, the Council on American–Islamic Relations—a controversial DC-based Muslim advocacy group that is frequently the target of conservative ire—condemned the Nairobi mall attack. “We strongly condemn this cowardly attack by al-Shabab and offer condolences to the loved ones of those killed or injured,” CAIR announced in a statement. “Our nation should offer whatever assistance we can to Kenyan authorities as they seek to free the hostages and bring to justice all those responsible for this heinous crime.”

Muslim leaders in Kenya: From the Standard, one of Kenya’s biggest newspapers:

Muslim leaders have strongly condemned the terror attack by the Al-Shabaab, terming them barbaric terrorists who do not represent the religion or its faithful.

Leaders of major Muslim organisations said the Somali-based militia was trying to spark sectarian conflict between Kenyans of different faiths by claiming they are acting on behalf of Muslims and Islam.

Secretary-General of the Supreme Council of Kenya Muslims Adan Wachu said the wanton and indiscrimate killings of innocent men, women and children goes against all Islamic teachings and tenets…Al Amin Kimathi, convenor of the National Muslim Human Rights Forum, said the government should pursue the terrorists robustly, terming their actions indefensible and reprehensible.

The article includes a list of several other Muslim leaders who came out to condemn the attack.

The president of Somalia. On Monday, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud delivered a speech at Ohio State University, where he stressed his government’s commitment to waging war on al-Shabaab. “Today, there are clear evidences that al-Shabaab is not a threat to Somalia and Somali people only—they are a threat to the continent of Africa, and the world at large,” he said. (Also, Mohamud allows America to violently drone his country in the hunt for Muslim extremists, so it’s possible that that could be considered the “Muslim world” doing something “about it.”)

A bunch of Somali-Americans. Via NBC News:

In Minnesota—which has the largest concentration of Somalis in the United States—community leaders held a press conference at the Abubakar As-saddique Islamic center in Minneapolis to publicly denounce al Shabaab as Muslims.

“Al Shabaab—they are nothing but criminals,” said imam Ibrahim Baraki. “They are not Muslims. They have deviated from the teaching of Islam. Their main goal is to destabilize and create chaos in the world.”

This website in particular is absolutely loaded with examples of Muslims denouncing and working against Islamic terrorism and extremism. The examples are extraordinarily easy to find.

See the article here:  

Yes, Muslims Are Denouncing The Nairobi Terrorist Attack

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yes, Muslims Are Denouncing The Nairobi Terrorist Attack

The Collected Poems of the Affordable Care Act

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, signed into law by President Obama in 2010, was an attempt by Democratic lawmakers to reform the health care system by creating an individual mandate to purchase insurance. But since then, the law has morphed into a specter seemingly larger. It is alternatively an abomination and a document worthy of adulation; the death of the Democratic party and the yoke by which it will cling to power; the socialization of medicine and a gift-basket to private insurers.

Do these pundits contradict themselves? Very well then, they contradict themselves—Obamcare is fractal; it contains multitudes. As a service to our readers, we have rearranged the most vivid and hyperbolic descriptions of the Affordable Care Act below as a collection of short poems. Read them in your best Donald Berwick voice:

I.

Obamacare is barreling down on us,

like a jet landing into San Francisco,

or a cat with nine lives—

neither alive nor completely dead.

Obamacare is a zombie,

it will nationalize our soul.

Obamacare is a big fucking deal.

II.

Obamacare is a crack pipe.

Obamacare is addictive.

Obamacare is the Titanic.

Obamacare is the iceberg.

Obamacare is the DMV.

Obamacare is slavery.

III.

Obamacare is fascism.

like the Jews boarding the trains to concentration camps,

like a failed rental car reservation,

like pressing the button for the elevator and stepping forward before the car arrives;

Obamacare is a locomotive.

It is a trainwreck.

IV.

Obamacare is Apple.

Obamacare is an iPad.

Obamacare is a broken iPhone app.

Obamacare is a Ford Pinto.

Obamacare is New Coke.

Obamacare is Alex Rodriguez.

Obamacare is a sharknado.

V.

It is an ugly, socially awkward kid who transfers into grade school at mid-year,

and then spends the rest of the semester eating alone in the cafeteria while being giggled about,

by all the other pupils.

Obamacare will question your sex life.

Revolutionary wars have been fought over less.

VI.

Obamacare is like a box of chocolates.

Obamacare is Waterloo.

Obamacare is the Iraq War,

or its domestic equivalent.

Obamacare will kill more people than 9/11.

Obamacare is the War of Yankee Aggression,

Obamacare is the hill to die on,

Obamacare is Gettysburg.

Obamacare is the Fourth of July.

Obamacare is Christmas,

like being forced to purchase a book of cowboy poetry,

or a Barry Manilow album.

Obamcare is like this health insurance/medical aid kind of thing,

like a military draft.

Obamacare is the best bill you could have passed.

Obamacare is here to stay.

Obamacare will survive.

Obamacare is the moon.

VII.

Obamacare is like the inside of a clock.

Obamacare is a malignant tumor.

Obamacare is an abscessed tooth.

Obamacare is like getting teeth pulled without novocain.

Obamacare is 17th-century Britain.

Obamacare is the first thing Hitler did.

Obamacare is a civil rights struggle.

Obamacare is a lemon.

Obamacare is the law of the land.

VIII.

Obamacare is the Right’s worst nightmare.

Obamacare will live in infamy.

Obamacare is like kale.

View original post here: 

The Collected Poems of the Affordable Care Act

Posted in alo, Brita, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Collected Poems of the Affordable Care Act

How Dangerous Is Al-Shabaab, the Group Behind the Kenya Mall Massacre?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Saturday, a popular mall in Nairobi, Kenya, turned into a bloody battleground when a Somali terrorist group seized hostages and killed more than 60 people. As Kenyan troops continue to fight the gunmen and shaken locals attempt to make sense of Kenya’s worst terrorist attack since 1998, Republican lawmakers are insisting the attack is proof that Al Qaeda is growing stronger, contrary to what the Obama administration’s contends. Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) went so far as to argue that the Nairobi assault shows that Al Qaeda is still “extremely powerful.” But is al-Shabaab—the Al Qaeda-affiliated group claiming responsibility for the attacks on the upscale Westgate Mall—as dangerous as the GOP claims? Here’s everything you need to know about the group, its strength, and its motives:

What is al-Shabaab, and what is its relationship with Al Qaeda? Al-Shabaab, also known as “The Youth,” is a designated foreign terrorist group based in Somalia that has been publicly affiliated with Al Qaeda since 2012, according to the US State Department. The group told Al Jazeera on Monday that it considers Al Qaeda a partner in the Nairobi attack and is taking orders directly from their leadership. It’s widely believed that the group’s senior leaders trained with Al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan in the late 1990s and received funding from Osama bin Laden. Al-Shabaab was originally the military workhorse for a political group called the Islamic Courts Union, which in 2006 seized control of most of southern Somalia before the organization was swiftly ousted by Ethiopian troops backing Somalia’s then-transitional federal government. Most of the original ICU members headed to Somalia’s neighboring countries, but al-Shabaab forces stayed in the south of Somalia, where they radicalized and instated Shariah law across the areas they controlled. Since then, they have been engaged in guerilla warfare against the Federal Government of Somalia, which took over from the transitional government in 2012 and is backed by an African peacekeeping alliance that includes Kenya and Ethiopia, plus the United Nations and the United States. The green areas on this Somalia map are currently under al-Shabaab control, according to the BBC:

BBC

Who is al-Shabaab’s leader? Ahmed Abdi Godane took over the group in June after murdering four other top commanders. If you know where he is, the United States will give you $7 million. Here is his identifying information, according to Rewards for Justice:

Why did al-Shabaab attack a mall in Kenya? In October 2011, Kenya sent hundreds of troops into Somalia with the designated purpose of kicking out al-Shabaab. The Kenyan government had become concerned that Kenya could be a target for terrorism after al-Shabaab killed more than 70 civilians in Uganda in 2010. Kenyan forces bombed key al-Shabaab strongholds in Somalia, including a major airport, and cut off al-Shabaab’s economic resources in the port city of Kismayo in 2012. The mall attack in Nairobi reportedly occurred because al-Shabaab wants Kenyan troops out of Somalia. Sheikh Abulaziz Abu Muscab, a spokesman for the terrorist group, told Al Jazeera that the mall is “a place where Kenya’s decision-makers go to relax and enjoy themselves and a place where there are Jewish and American shops. So we have to attack them.â&#128;&#139;”

What does al-Shabaab want? The different factions of al-Shabaab have splintered goals. However, the most vocal members are against the Somali government, any country that backs the Somali government (like Ethiopia, Uganda, and Kenya), Israel, Christians, and the West. In a 2007 statement, the group said it is “seeking to establish an Islamic state along the lines of the Taliban-ruled, by-the-law-of-Allah in the land of Somalia…and seeks to expand the jihad to Somalia’s Christian neighbours, with the intent of driving the infidels out of the Horn of Africa, along the same lines as al-Qaeda has been striving to do under the slogan, ‘expelling the infidels out of the Arabian Peninsula.'”

How big is al-Shabaab? Are there any Americans in it?! There are at least several thousand members of al-Shabaab, as well as a few hundred foreigners, according to NBC News. In 2011, US officials reported that at least 40 Muslim Americans—some of whom were recruited from the vibrant Somali American community in Minnesota—as well as 20 Canadians, were fighting for al-Shabaab. One of the terrorist group’s top leaders, who was killed this summer, was a “rapping Jihadist” from Alabama named Omar Hammami. Al-Shabaab also claims that three of the gunmen who stormed the Nairobi mall over the weekend were Americans, but the FBI is still investigating.

Wait…Somalia? Are members of al-Shabaab the infamous Somali pirates?

Somali pirates. Not al-Shabaab.

No. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, there is no direct connection between al-Shabaab and the Somali pirates, who in the last eight years have hijacked boats from more than 100 countries, held at least 3,740 crewmembers hostage, and thwarted climate change research. In general, the pirates are primarily focused on money, not jihadist ideology. However, as al-Shabaab has become increasingly desperate for funding, it has entered into financial agreements with the pirates.

So where does the group get its money? In 2011, the United Nations reported that al-Shabaab was getting between $70-$100 million per year by collecting taxes from the areas it controls. Until 2012, for example, al-Shabaab ran the port city of Kismayo, and it made a bunch of money from a racketeering business that exploited the city’s thriving coal industry. But after foreign forces kicked the group out of Somalia’s capital and Kismayo, it lost much of this revenue. The BBC says that Eritrea is now the group’s only ally in the region, although the country’s government has denied sending arms to al-Shabaab. (Google: Where is Eritrea?) According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the group also gets funding from kidnapping operations and allied terrorist groups.

What damage has al-Shabaab done in Somalia? In the areas al-Shabaab controls, the government stones women who commit adultery, cuts off the limbs of people who steal, and forces young boys to fight in battle. Somalia is home to one of the world’s most dire food crises, but al-Shabaab has “denied the existence of the famine, diverted water from poor villages, and kept food away from the people who need it most,” according to The New Republic. The group has launched a wave of deadly suicide bombing attacks across Somalia over the last few years—including one earlier this month that killed 15 people in a crowded restaurant. The US State Department notes that al-Shabaab is responsible for the assassination of Somali peace activists, international aid workers, numerous civil society figures, and journalists.

When else has al-Shabaab launched terrorist attacks abroad? Outside of the attack in Nairobi, the group’s biggest terrorist incident abroad occurred in 2010, when al-Shabaab mounted a coordinated wave of suicide bombs that killed more than 70 people in Uganda during the World Cup. Al-Shabaab has been blamed for attacking a bus station and a bar in Nairobi in 2011—injuring more than 20 people—and using grenades to kill at least six people in March at a Nairobi bus station, according to Reuters.

Is al-Shabaab a danger to the United States? The group’s leader, Ahmed Abdi Godaneâ&#128;&#139;, has threatened to attack the United States—but whether it can is debatable. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), the ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee, told CBS’s Face the Nation that Al Qaeda is “on the rise, as you can see from Nairobi.” The American Enterprise Institute’s Katherine Zimmerman testified that “any strategy to counter the Al Qaeda network must recognize the role of these local groups in strengthening the network.”

But foreign policy experts point out that in many ways al-Shabaab is on the decline. The group has been pounded by the Kenyan and Ethiopian militaries and suffers from internal feuding. According to the Combating Terrorism Center at West, “the militant group has transformed from a Sharia-enforcing body to a weakened band of insurgents…It has ceased to be a viable political alternative to the Somali government.” Slate notes that this could mean the group will start turning its focus to foreign targets, rather than attempting to govern a failed state. But for now, the Obama administration is not proposing any further US military action against the group (it’s already doing drone strikes). “It’s not a question of either direct action or playing a supporting role,” National Security Council spokesman Jonathan Lalley told CBC. “Our approach has been to work to enable and support African partners.”

More: 

How Dangerous Is Al-Shabaab, the Group Behind the Kenya Mall Massacre?

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How Dangerous Is Al-Shabaab, the Group Behind the Kenya Mall Massacre?

The Story of Sir Stuffington, The Internet’s Favorite One-Eyed Pirate Cat

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Facebook

He is the cutest one-eyed, disfigured pirate cat you’ve ever seen.

Over the past few days, pictures of Sir Stuffington (pictured above) have been widely shared online, making him the latest in a rich tradition of feline internet obsession. But there’s so much more to Sir Stuffington than his adorable and funny Facebook photos. His story is one of perseverance and love, as well as internet fame.

Earlier this month, the cat and his two brothers were taken into Multnomah County Animal Services, an open-door animal shelter in Troutdale, Oregon. Sir Stuffington wasn’t in good shape—his damaged jaw, his missing eye, his upper respiratory infection, his heart murmur, his body covered in fleas and dirt. (All three were about six weeks old, and came in with calicivirus.) But even before the kittens had been taken to the shelter, local resident Blazer Schaffer had stumbled upon a Facebook photo of Sir Stuffington suffering in the street, and was determined to track him down. Schaffer, an animal lover who has worked with the shelter for a decade, soon found the three kitten there. She promptly took them home as their foster parent, and is taking care of them at least for a couple months until they’re healthy enough for adoption.

Continue Reading »

This article is from:  

The Story of Sir Stuffington, The Internet’s Favorite One-Eyed Pirate Cat

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Story of Sir Stuffington, The Internet’s Favorite One-Eyed Pirate Cat