In the 1964 Winter Olympics in Innsbruck, Austria, six-time medalist Eugenio Monti from Italy was favored to win the gold medal in the bobsledding pair event. After his team’s last run, it looked like they were going to make it.
The British team, led by Tony Nash Jr., still had a chance, but before their final run, Nash discovered a critical axle bolt had broken on their sled. They were done.
Without hesitation, Monti removed the bolt from his sled and rushed it up to Nash’s team. They were able to continue, and their run was so strong they won the gold medal.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Gene Policinski: When First Amendment freedoms conflict, which would you pick?
Balancing — or pitting — First Amendment freedoms against each other is tough work. Akin to asking a parent which child is the favorite, seeking to favor one or two of the five freedoms — religion, speech, press, assembly or petition — over the others creates an inherent contradiction.
But that’s exactly the dilemma for First Amendment advocates, along with the U.S. Supreme Court and Washington state lawmakers, presented by a lawsuit and legislative debate over whether or not names on a petition ought to be made public. And unlike parents, nobody gets to resolve the question by saying, “I love them all equally.”
The issue involved is itself especially controversial: the proposed repeal of Washington’s law that extends to domestic partners most of the legal rights of married couples. Supporters of repeal gathered nearly 140,000 signatures, but the move failed last year at the ballot box.
But that’s exactly the dilemma for First Amendment advocates, along with the U.S. Supreme Court and Washington state lawmakers, presented by a lawsuit and legislative debate over whether or not names on a petition ought to be made public. And unlike parents, nobody gets to resolve the question by saying, “I love them all equally.”
The issue involved is itself especially controversial: the proposed repeal of Washington’s law that extends to domestic partners most of the legal rights of married couples. Supporters of repeal gathered nearly 140,000 signatures, but the move failed last year at the ballot box.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Joe Bageant: Round midnight: Tortillas and the corporate state
Ajijic, Mexico
Near midnight and I am making tortillas on an iron skillet over a gas flame. Some three thousand miles to the north, my wife and dog nestle in sleep in the wake of a 34-inch snowstorm, while the dogs of Ajijic are barking at the witching hour and roosters crow all too early for the dawn… while my good Mexican neighbors along Zaragoza Street sleep.
Yet here I am awake and patting out tortillas, haunted by the empire that I have called home most of my life.
I like to think that, for the most part, I no longer live up there in the Unites States, but southward of its ticking social, political and economic bombs. Because the U.S. debt bomb has not yet gone off, Social Security still exists, and the occasional royalty check or book advance still comes in, allowing me to remain here. And so long as America's perverse commodities economy keeps stumbling along and making lifelike noises, so long as the American people accept permanent debt subjugation -- I can drink, think and burn tortillas. Believe me, I take no smugness in this irony.
Near midnight and I am making tortillas on an iron skillet over a gas flame. Some three thousand miles to the north, my wife and dog nestle in sleep in the wake of a 34-inch snowstorm, while the dogs of Ajijic are barking at the witching hour and roosters crow all too early for the dawn… while my good Mexican neighbors along Zaragoza Street sleep.
Yet here I am awake and patting out tortillas, haunted by the empire that I have called home most of my life.
I like to think that, for the most part, I no longer live up there in the Unites States, but southward of its ticking social, political and economic bombs. Because the U.S. debt bomb has not yet gone off, Social Security still exists, and the occasional royalty check or book advance still comes in, allowing me to remain here. And so long as America's perverse commodities economy keeps stumbling along and making lifelike noises, so long as the American people accept permanent debt subjugation -- I can drink, think and burn tortillas. Believe me, I take no smugness in this irony.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Gary Palmer: Controversial ad is ultimate “feel good” story
An unusual thing happened in the weeks prior to the 44th Super Bowl. As you know, Super Bowl ads have become just about as anticipated as the game itself. But this year, one ad in particular created a level of controversy unlike any other Super Bowl ad.
It was a serious ad about a choice a mother made to go against her doctors’ advice to have an abortion to protect her health. Instead, she had her baby. That baby was Tim Tebow, the Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback for the University of Florida and perhaps the most recognizable collegiate athlete in sports history.
Tebow and his mother Pam were featured in the ad sponsored by Focus on the Family, a Colorado Springs, Colorado-based Christian family ministry. It sparked responses from so-called pro-choice and feminist groups that offended even members of the liberal media.
It was a serious ad about a choice a mother made to go against her doctors’ advice to have an abortion to protect her health. Instead, she had her baby. That baby was Tim Tebow, the Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback for the University of Florida and perhaps the most recognizable collegiate athlete in sports history.
Tebow and his mother Pam were featured in the ad sponsored by Focus on the Family, a Colorado Springs, Colorado-based Christian family ministry. It sparked responses from so-called pro-choice and feminist groups that offended even members of the liberal media.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Joseph O. Patton: Don’t cry for me, Sarah Palin
Typically I can deal with any situation by mucking it up with some humor. It simply makes everything more palatable. But I can no longer suffer the incessant, hypocritical whining of Sarah Palin.
I supposed it started with the fabricated “sexism” issue. Running as the vice presidential nominee of the Republican Party in 2008, every time any well-meaning citizen, media pundit or damn near anyone brave enough to open their mouth, questioned any of her positions on various issues or dared to share even the most innocuous observation of her, she and her cohorts all joined hands, flashed their fangs and started screaming that everyone under the sun was being “sexist” towards her.
Asked a question about her view of the role of the vice president - sexist! Asked where she attended school - sexist! Asked about her tenure as governor of Alaska (all two and a half years of it) - sexist! Asked what she had for breakfast - sexist!
I supposed it started with the fabricated “sexism” issue. Running as the vice presidential nominee of the Republican Party in 2008, every time any well-meaning citizen, media pundit or damn near anyone brave enough to open their mouth, questioned any of her positions on various issues or dared to share even the most innocuous observation of her, she and her cohorts all joined hands, flashed their fangs and started screaming that everyone under the sun was being “sexist” towards her.
Asked a question about her view of the role of the vice president - sexist! Asked where she attended school - sexist! Asked about her tenure as governor of Alaska (all two and a half years of it) - sexist! Asked what she had for breakfast - sexist!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Joseph O. Patton: The FaceBook hangover
Navigating FaceBook always seems to hold the strangest surprises, occurrences of inexplicable behavior and bizarre postings as well as photographs which would shame many Mommas throughout the world. I sincerely value the avenue of communication FaceBook provides along with its astounding technological shits and giggles, but you have to wonder what some FaceBook users think they’re accomplishing through their strange actions.
I, therefore, humbly beg the following questions and offer these unsolicited opinions on the phenomenon known as FaceBook… and it’s apparently neurotic users.
-No one really gives a damn about your fish, farm, stinky cross-eyes weasels, Guido Jersey Shore mafia, panting chinchillas in heat or other games you play on that website. It’s like masturbating--such activities are intended for yourself and no one else. Some things you just don’t need to share… like a fart for example.
I, therefore, humbly beg the following questions and offer these unsolicited opinions on the phenomenon known as FaceBook… and it’s apparently neurotic users.
-No one really gives a damn about your fish, farm, stinky cross-eyes weasels, Guido Jersey Shore mafia, panting chinchillas in heat or other games you play on that website. It’s like masturbating--such activities are intended for yourself and no one else. Some things you just don’t need to share… like a fart for example.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Gary Palmer: Questions that need to be asked
According to some of the latest polls, a majority of Alabamians have decided that legalizing bingo casinos is now a good idea. Interestingly, according to one recent poll, only 2.5 percent of Alabamians rank legalizing bingo casinos as a top priority for the 2010 Alabama State Legislative Session.
Accurate polling results depend on eliminating biases that could possibly skew the results. For example, bias can be introduced into a poll by directing a majority of calls to a certain group that the pollster knows will lean in a certain direction. Bias can also be introduced in the type questions that are asked, how they are asked and even the order the questions are asked.
On the issue of legalizing gambling, if the question is phrased in the context of taxing and regulating an activity that is already taking place or the entire issue is framed as a matter of jobs and revenues, the response could be biased.
Accurate polling results depend on eliminating biases that could possibly skew the results. For example, bias can be introduced into a poll by directing a majority of calls to a certain group that the pollster knows will lean in a certain direction. Bias can also be introduced in the type questions that are asked, how they are asked and even the order the questions are asked.
On the issue of legalizing gambling, if the question is phrased in the context of taxing and regulating an activity that is already taking place or the entire issue is framed as a matter of jobs and revenues, the response could be biased.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Saul Landau: A Really inconvenient truth
Al Gore didn't even touch upon what the world needs to do to avert a global warming catastrophe.
This op-ed was originally published in Progreso Weekly on February 3:
“The decade ending in 2009 was the warmest on record, new surface temperature figures released Thursday by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration show… 2009 was the second warmest year since 1880, when modern temperature measurement began. The warmest year was 2005. The other hottest recorded years have all occurred since 1998, NASA said.”
This op-ed was originally published in Progreso Weekly on February 3:
“The decade ending in 2009 was the warmest on record, new surface temperature figures released Thursday by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration show… 2009 was the second warmest year since 1880, when modern temperature measurement began. The warmest year was 2005. The other hottest recorded years have all occurred since 1998, NASA said.”
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Nina Hachigian: Stop already with the China hysteria
The news coverage of the U.S.-China relationship is getting more hysterical by the day. The Washington Post last week ran an editorial accusing the Obama administration of spending its first year “going out of its way” to “cater” to Beijing. Moreover, the editorial concluded, this approach backfired, and now China is more aggressive than ever, “busting with hubris,” and testing to see how far it can push the new U.S. president.
The Economist’s coverage was nuanced, but its cover this week shows a giant, smoking dragon looming over a tiny Barack Obama, who appears to be pleading for a rational chat. The New York Times has run a series of pieces suggesting the administration is kowtowing to Beijing, and Robert Kagan and other conservative commentators accuse the Obama administration of appeasing dictatorships and abandoning democracies.
The Economist’s coverage was nuanced, but its cover this week shows a giant, smoking dragon looming over a tiny Barack Obama, who appears to be pleading for a rational chat. The New York Times has run a series of pieces suggesting the administration is kowtowing to Beijing, and Robert Kagan and other conservative commentators accuse the Obama administration of appeasing dictatorships and abandoning democracies.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Jacob G. Hornberger: When the military serves as police
What happens when the military is used in a police capacity? You get a “war on terrorism,” one in which people think that the laws of war now apply to the situation. But in actuality, nothing could be further from the truth. What you actually get is a criminal-justice problem that inevitably goes horribly awry, causing the problem to escalate into a deadly and destructive horror story.
Consider the war on drugs. Most everyone concedes that drug dealing and drug possession are federal criminal offenses. Drug offenses are listed as crimes in the U.S. Code. People who are caught violating them are arrested, indicted by a federal grand jury, and prosecuted in U.S. District Court. The Bill of Rights requires the government to accord drug defendants all the rights and guarantees of the Bill of Rights, including trial by jury and due process of law. Incompetent, irrelevant, and illegally acquired evidence is excluded from the trial. The defendant is presumed innocent and must be found not guilty unless the government provides sufficient evidence to convince the jury that the defendant is guilty. Cruel and unusual punishments are prohibited. The defendant has the right to remain completely silent, before, during, and after the proceeding.
Consider the war on drugs. Most everyone concedes that drug dealing and drug possession are federal criminal offenses. Drug offenses are listed as crimes in the U.S. Code. People who are caught violating them are arrested, indicted by a federal grand jury, and prosecuted in U.S. District Court. The Bill of Rights requires the government to accord drug defendants all the rights and guarantees of the Bill of Rights, including trial by jury and due process of law. Incompetent, irrelevant, and illegally acquired evidence is excluded from the trial. The defendant is presumed innocent and must be found not guilty unless the government provides sufficient evidence to convince the jury that the defendant is guilty. Cruel and unusual punishments are prohibited. The defendant has the right to remain completely silent, before, during, and after the proceeding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
