Over the last month, momentum has picked up by my classmates who graduated with me in 1993 from high school, to hold a 25th anniversary reunion. I got invited by some of the FaceBook group organizers to join the group so that I didn't miss out on planning updates. It was kind of exciting to see familiar faces (albeit older) file in to this virtual meeting place, many of them I hadn't friended either because we weren't close in high school, or because I just forgot that they were part of my life for four years.
I would like to think I got along with most of my classmates even though I was a year younger than the majority of them. The thought of reconnecting in the real world was both intriguing and scary. Is this something I would like to do? I keep in decent touch with a number of friends from that time in my life thanks to FaceBook, so I don't really feel like I don't make an effort. This reunion would just, potentially, increase the number of people "friending" me, but probably wouldn't amount to any significant reconnections.
And then, today, there was a post about a boy who died while we were in school together. If I remember correctly, the story was that he was in a car, filled with others our age, being driven by a teenager, that was speeding down a road until it hit a speed bump and launched itself into a phone pole. And that was that. I don't remember if the other boys died too. I do remember him though. Why? He bullied me terribly my freshman year, specifically in gym class. As I said, I was smaller and younger than most around me. I tried to avoid him, but when he and his friends needed a laugh, they would "catch" me and put me into any number of WWF wrestling moves: suplex, body slam, etc. on the mats in the weight room. It was extremely painful, and relentless for about four consecutive weeks when the teacher allowed students to do free lifting, largely unsupervised.
The post today spoke about honoring him with a tribute at the reunion. At least 30 or so people in this FB group immediately wrote about how much they missed him...and how many good times they had with him in elementary, middle school and high school. All I can think about is how horrible he was to me and how I haven't gotten over the abuse I took during that relatively short time where our paths crossed. I've mentioned this story to two or three others who knew us both over the years, but never had any real need to take it further than that. I mean, the place in the Venn diagram where this information is even relevant is so infinitesimally small that there was (nearly) literally no one who could relate. Until now.
Instinct is screaming for me to write how negatively he impacted my life and my memories of him in that group. Luckily, judgement is keeping me from writing anything ill of the long deceased. What good would it do? I'm sure I'm not the only one who he treated like this. Writing that group with my thoughts would clearly alienate me amongst the group. Any tribute to this boy at our reunion is enough to keep me away from it...and that's probably what I will wind up doing. FaceBook has facilitated my ability to rebuild connections with the people I cared about in high school. For those not on FB, I've also re-found long lost friends on Instagram and Linked-In. I don't need this reunion. I don't need those memories.
And, this must be what it feels like for all of those women who have come out indicating that they too were assaulted. In my case, it's really easy to justify staying quiet. My aggressor has long been dead. For the women coming out and indicating that they were unfairly taken advantage of, the public court of judgement is still out. The potential for ridicule and embarrassment is tremendous. I didn't intentionally write this post so that it could tie in to what is happening now, but the more I thought about it, the more I felt that there was overlap. What many of those women have experienced is magnitudes more severe than what happened to me, and we as a society need to be addressing this with open ears and open minds.
This isn't to say that you should immediately believe everything you hear. However, ask yourself "by coming forward with their stories, what is it that they hope to gain?" For me, I just wanted the people who are actively eulogizing this boy to know that there was another side, a side that inflicted both physical and emotional scars that have lasted 25 years. I want them to understand. However, it's not like I could get him removed from the group or fired or prosecuted. I just wanted them to know my story, my experience, before they make up their minds...just as the majority of woman who have been coming forward with "allegations" of sexual assault. They aren't doing so for financial or political gain. They just want you to know about their experience with people who get off on hurting others with their power. Whether it's their physical size, or the position they hold, these power-play acts are unacceptable.
Due to a peripherally related unfortunate event, I feel strongly that these stories need to be told and that society needs to right itself and breed out the brutal machinations and patterns of abuse. I, for one, am listening.
Wednesday, December 20, 2017
Friday, December 8, 2017
It's not a war
Let me be clear, there's no war on Christmas.
I've seen this claim on bumper stickers and headlines about politicians and evangelicals calling out majors enterprises who use "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." The President has made comments about it's resurrection after decades of supposed obscurity:
"Remember I said we're bringing Christmas back? Christmas is back, bigger and better than ever before. We're bringing Christmas back."
And, he's not the only one who believes that it's been missing. My question is, where do people like this think it's gone?
The President hails from New York, and I can't think of any one place more in tune with the season than Manhattan. It starts with the Thanksgiving Day Parade (affectionately called the 'Macy's Day Parade' in my house) where the event is capped with Santa Claus as the official end of the parade...every year since 1924! Technically, Santa was crowned "King of the Kiddies" in 1924 and was permanently stationed at 34th street; he didn't march...but that's semantics.
It's been long known that Thanksgiving officially begins the Christmas season, though stores begin prepping for it as soon as the Halloween rush is over on November 1st. That said, store-fronts all across the United States begin their holiday push by decorating every inch in Christmas-specific decorations. Up and down 5th Avenue in New York, the major department stores provide Christmas-centric themed decorative windows to both advertise their wares as well as dazzle passers-by with (now) feats of technologically assisted stories full of animatronic characters and special effects.
But, that's just New York. I dare you to walk into any chain retail store or restaurant where Christmas music isn't blaring. I dare you to shop on the Internet without seeing Christmas-inspired advertisements. I dare you to turn on your TV without seeing Christmas specials, or decorations on morning talk-shows or commercial after commercial for the previously mentioned retail stores. It's impossible to escape.
Now, what the President and people like him are likely referencing in their belief that there's a war on Christmas is that many large institutions have taken to wishing people a Happy Holidays instead of a Merry Christmas. Duh. Multi-national corporations, who want to appeal to people of varied ethnicities, will and should adopt a generic holiday greeting so as to not exclude anyone. It's called capitalism. Also, as a method of cost savings, it makes the most sense to have this phrase on products that cross into regions where Christianity isn't the dominant religion. Again, see Capitalism: 101.
As a Jew, I appreciate it when a person doesn’t immediately think I celebrate Christ. I respect others holidays, but, as previously stated, we minorities can’t easily escape the capitalistic juggernaut that is Christmas. It’s nice to know that many of our neighbors and friends respect us enough to not further shove it down our throats when they wish us a "Happy Holidays." I love how impassioned people can get about the Christmas holiday, but as you weigh the war on Christmas, remember that there are many holidays this time of year. Out of respect, I believe it's appropriate to wish you a "Happy Holidays" regardless of your level of faith. That way, you can take it to mean whatever it means to you, and celebrate the concept and intention of well wishing to the fullest...because maybe, just maybe, nobody is waging a war on your belief system. It's quite possible that they're merely trying to be kind and compassionate, and hope that you too will have a very healthy and happy holiday season, however you choose to celebrate it.
I've seen this claim on bumper stickers and headlines about politicians and evangelicals calling out majors enterprises who use "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas." The President has made comments about it's resurrection after decades of supposed obscurity:
"Remember I said we're bringing Christmas back? Christmas is back, bigger and better than ever before. We're bringing Christmas back."
And, he's not the only one who believes that it's been missing. My question is, where do people like this think it's gone?
The President hails from New York, and I can't think of any one place more in tune with the season than Manhattan. It starts with the Thanksgiving Day Parade (affectionately called the 'Macy's Day Parade' in my house) where the event is capped with Santa Claus as the official end of the parade...every year since 1924! Technically, Santa was crowned "King of the Kiddies" in 1924 and was permanently stationed at 34th street; he didn't march...but that's semantics.
It's been long known that Thanksgiving officially begins the Christmas season, though stores begin prepping for it as soon as the Halloween rush is over on November 1st. That said, store-fronts all across the United States begin their holiday push by decorating every inch in Christmas-specific decorations. Up and down 5th Avenue in New York, the major department stores provide Christmas-centric themed decorative windows to both advertise their wares as well as dazzle passers-by with (now) feats of technologically assisted stories full of animatronic characters and special effects.
But, that's just New York. I dare you to walk into any chain retail store or restaurant where Christmas music isn't blaring. I dare you to shop on the Internet without seeing Christmas-inspired advertisements. I dare you to turn on your TV without seeing Christmas specials, or decorations on morning talk-shows or commercial after commercial for the previously mentioned retail stores. It's impossible to escape.
Now, what the President and people like him are likely referencing in their belief that there's a war on Christmas is that many large institutions have taken to wishing people a Happy Holidays instead of a Merry Christmas. Duh. Multi-national corporations, who want to appeal to people of varied ethnicities, will and should adopt a generic holiday greeting so as to not exclude anyone. It's called capitalism. Also, as a method of cost savings, it makes the most sense to have this phrase on products that cross into regions where Christianity isn't the dominant religion. Again, see Capitalism: 101.
As a Jew, I appreciate it when a person doesn’t immediately think I celebrate Christ. I respect others holidays, but, as previously stated, we minorities can’t easily escape the capitalistic juggernaut that is Christmas. It’s nice to know that many of our neighbors and friends respect us enough to not further shove it down our throats when they wish us a "Happy Holidays." I love how impassioned people can get about the Christmas holiday, but as you weigh the war on Christmas, remember that there are many holidays this time of year. Out of respect, I believe it's appropriate to wish you a "Happy Holidays" regardless of your level of faith. That way, you can take it to mean whatever it means to you, and celebrate the concept and intention of well wishing to the fullest...because maybe, just maybe, nobody is waging a war on your belief system. It's quite possible that they're merely trying to be kind and compassionate, and hope that you too will have a very healthy and happy holiday season, however you choose to celebrate it.
Thursday, November 30, 2017
Well, there's no place like the Internet for the Holidays
I didn't post last week because of Thanksgiving. And, I'm having real issue posting this week because I really would like to step away from the doom and gloom of everyday news: celebrities being outed as power-hungry misogynistic abusers, the President's off-color and off-base remarks, and the looming threat of a nuclear apocalypse.
No, this week I'd prefer to highlight gifts for the people in your life who have everything. Note: these purchases, like so many others this holiday season, are completely unnecessary, but totally cool, and we need them! So, without further ado, my wishlist:
You have a job. You have kids or cats or dogs (or Hawaiian turtles). You have a life, and life is hard. You need to feed yourself, those things, and when you're done, you need to prep for the next day. And you're tired. Oh, so tired. How many times have you started your bed-time clean-up ritual and accidentally taken too little or too much floss? How much is the right amount? Well, thank god there's something we can suction to our bathroom mirrors and put a battery in. Yes, it's FLOSSTIME, the auto floss dispenser that you've been missing in your life. Just press a button and you get the perfect amount of floss every time. You can even decorate it with a cover of a small woodland animal so that it appeals to kids. And, as it obstructs your view of the actual mirror, it stands as a reminder to press that button, tear the floss and commit to dental hygiene. Never mind that their proprietary floss cartridges costs twice as much as what you can get at CVS...that you have to wait for them to deliver it. How the hell do they know how much you'll need...for two people, for a family of four? Never mind. This is a stupid present. Don't buy this for me.
Instead, I need this! These days, scientists and doctors say your health depends on what you put in your mouth. (Oh, those scientists and their theories.) Don't eat this. Do eat that. What's a modern family to do with all of the flood of do's and don'ts? We need an easy source of protein. One that's not fried or over-seasoned. One that you can take on the go, and eat at nearly every meal. What's like that? How about, a hard-boiled incredible, edible egg! Our family goes through at least two dozen eggs a week. Typically, we hard-boil a dozen, and then keep a dozen for other eggy dishes such as omelettes, scrambles, and, maybe on the weekends, French toast! But that takes time, and I need egg now! I need an egg on the go, and hard-boiled eggs are perfect for grabbing and snacking. But, you say, aren't they too round? I mean, they might roll onto the floor before you can eat it, and then it's a complete waste of an egg! Enter the Eddington Egg Cuber! Just put a freshly, hot, boiled egg into the cuber, set it in the fridge, and in 10 minutes, you too can have CUBED BOILED EGGS! They don't roll. It's tons of fun to freak out your kids, and, with one Egg Cuber for $12.99 on Amazon, you can cube an entire dozen eggs in 2 hours! That's...that's terrible. What the hell is wrong with people. I've changed my mind. This too is stupid.
I guess gift shopping is really hard, especially all of the moving your fingers need to do in order to get something from Amazon. It's exhausting. If only there was a way for me to nap comfortably at my desk. It would have to be well cushioned, and help to darken my immediate environment. I would also want space for my hands, and if I'm slumped over in my chair, I don't want to crush my nose...so there's got to be room for that too. Well, friend, if these are your problems, and you know they are, look no further than the OSTRICHPILLOW! Push your head up the narrow, um, neck line and, poof! Instant darkness! It's cushy. It's got room for your mouth. Perfect for the narcoleptic in your life. Sleep at your desk at work! Are you a student? Sleep at the library while studying! Bring it on the plane with you! Never mind that it looks like a giant plush uterus! Stick your head in there and get the best rest of your life for only $99! And now, it comes in both Midnight Gray and Sleepy
Blue! "Welcome to the napping revolution!" is their slogan, which seems a little ridiculous since, revolution implies action, and napping is, well...napping. And if you don't want to wear something that makes you look like a stuffed cephalopod, they've got cushy mittens and gauntlets you can rest your weary head on so that you can laze off and nap that way. I don't know. I'm rethinking this, and I can't imagine carting around a $100 stuffed vagina to work or on the plane for a power nap. I mean, as a valued employee, it's probably bad to advertise that I plan on drifting off during the work day. Yeah, I guess this is kind of dumb too.
I don't know. I guess I need to re-think the logic of gifts this year. It's probably best to stick with something universally loved and at the same time, absolutely functional. Something that serves a purpose but is stylish and current and something that the kids can relate to. OK, forget all of the above, and just get me this. Happy holiday shopping every one. And remember, when in doubt, send cash.
No, this week I'd prefer to highlight gifts for the people in your life who have everything. Note: these purchases, like so many others this holiday season, are completely unnecessary, but totally cool, and we need them! So, without further ado, my wishlist:
Instead, I need this! These days, scientists and doctors say your health depends on what you put in your mouth. (Oh, those scientists and their theories.) Don't eat this. Do eat that. What's a modern family to do with all of the flood of do's and don'ts? We need an easy source of protein. One that's not fried or over-seasoned. One that you can take on the go, and eat at nearly every meal. What's like that? How about, a hard-boiled incredible, edible egg! Our family goes through at least two dozen eggs a week. Typically, we hard-boil a dozen, and then keep a dozen for other eggy dishes such as omelettes, scrambles, and, maybe on the weekends, French toast! But that takes time, and I need egg now! I need an egg on the go, and hard-boiled eggs are perfect for grabbing and snacking. But, you say, aren't they too round? I mean, they might roll onto the floor before you can eat it, and then it's a complete waste of an egg! Enter the Eddington Egg Cuber! Just put a freshly, hot, boiled egg into the cuber, set it in the fridge, and in 10 minutes, you too can have CUBED BOILED EGGS! They don't roll. It's tons of fun to freak out your kids, and, with one Egg Cuber for $12.99 on Amazon, you can cube an entire dozen eggs in 2 hours! That's...that's terrible. What the hell is wrong with people. I've changed my mind. This too is stupid.I guess gift shopping is really hard, especially all of the moving your fingers need to do in order to get something from Amazon. It's exhausting. If only there was a way for me to nap comfortably at my desk. It would have to be well cushioned, and help to darken my immediate environment. I would also want space for my hands, and if I'm slumped over in my chair, I don't want to crush my nose...so there's got to be room for that too. Well, friend, if these are your problems, and you know they are, look no further than the OSTRICHPILLOW! Push your head up the narrow, um, neck line and, poof! Instant darkness! It's cushy. It's got room for your mouth. Perfect for the narcoleptic in your life. Sleep at your desk at work! Are you a student? Sleep at the library while studying! Bring it on the plane with you! Never mind that it looks like a giant plush uterus! Stick your head in there and get the best rest of your life for only $99! And now, it comes in both Midnight Gray and Sleepy
Blue! "Welcome to the napping revolution!" is their slogan, which seems a little ridiculous since, revolution implies action, and napping is, well...napping. And if you don't want to wear something that makes you look like a stuffed cephalopod, they've got cushy mittens and gauntlets you can rest your weary head on so that you can laze off and nap that way. I don't know. I'm rethinking this, and I can't imagine carting around a $100 stuffed vagina to work or on the plane for a power nap. I mean, as a valued employee, it's probably bad to advertise that I plan on drifting off during the work day. Yeah, I guess this is kind of dumb too. I don't know. I guess I need to re-think the logic of gifts this year. It's probably best to stick with something universally loved and at the same time, absolutely functional. Something that serves a purpose but is stylish and current and something that the kids can relate to. OK, forget all of the above, and just get me this. Happy holiday shopping every one. And remember, when in doubt, send cash.
Thursday, November 16, 2017
Empower
I wasn't able to blog last week, and this week I'm feeling overwhelmed. As you are already aware, I have an opinion. This week it pertains to the litany of allegations against men in power by women who were placed in uncomfortable and compromising positions. In the most recent examples, it's people who I've held in fairly high regard.
To start, I was a huge fan of Louis C.K. While people on the inside have been dealing with the rumors that he more-than-exposed himself to women, I wasn't aware. Women who looked up to him and his success. Me too. I watched his FX show and sympathized with his real-world characters. I watched his comedy specials and recommended the one where it's a conversation between him, Seinfeld, Chris Rock and Ricky Gervais and thought it was one of the best looks inside comedy I've ever seen. And, Sara and I went to see him perform at the Newark PAC and thought he was hilarious.
Today, at least in my news feed, a picture of Senator Al Franken groping a female reporter during a USO trip to Afghanistan reared its ugly head. As the now-Senator looks into the camera, grinning, his hands are outstretched towards her breasts in a suggestive act of inappropriate behaviour. Why did he do this? Clearly he knew it was wrong and thought it would be funny. Did he actually touch her? A closer examination of the photo suggests no as the shadows of his fingers are clearly visible on the one hand and the other is too far away to have made contact. Honestly, I believe that, while this picture is not in good taste, it's not terribly incriminating for a man who made his living saying borderline inappropriate things for a laugh. However, and this is huge, the victim in this photograph suggests that this act was far from the only questionable one Franken initiated. By her count, he forcibly and inappropriately took advantage of a sketch they were performing where a kiss was written into the script.
So, what to do now? How does a consumer move forward knowing that the product is severely tainted? Until recently, we didn't know how bad it was.
For those of us fans, it's a tough break. I can't go back in time and question Franken's actions back-stage or actively campaign against him. I can't get my money back or make the choice to turn off the TV when they were being interviewed on the Daily Show. I can make the choice to avoid them in the future. Why would I read Franken's book now that I know what I do about his motivations years ago? I'm certainly not interested in a "fictional" Louis C.K. movie where a character exposes and then masturbates in front of other people. How long did we shun Paul Reubens for masturbating in an adult theater? That seems fairly pedestrian by comparison these days.
I suppose it's a reminder that our societal heroes are still people, people with deep faults. And, when those faults are exposed for what they are, it's up to us to determine whether they're forgivable or not. Certainly, as they admit the wrongdoing, we need to also focus on the blameless victims. Make sure, though, to empower them rather than pity and label lest they fall victim to our collective societal apathy a second time. As these things come to light, we also need to understand that the wrongdoing isn't legally punishable due to expired statutes of limitations. Another reason to support these victims of sexual misconduct, physical and emotional abuse. I believe you and I'm listening.
To start, I was a huge fan of Louis C.K. While people on the inside have been dealing with the rumors that he more-than-exposed himself to women, I wasn't aware. Women who looked up to him and his success. Me too. I watched his FX show and sympathized with his real-world characters. I watched his comedy specials and recommended the one where it's a conversation between him, Seinfeld, Chris Rock and Ricky Gervais and thought it was one of the best looks inside comedy I've ever seen. And, Sara and I went to see him perform at the Newark PAC and thought he was hilarious.
Today, at least in my news feed, a picture of Senator Al Franken groping a female reporter during a USO trip to Afghanistan reared its ugly head. As the now-Senator looks into the camera, grinning, his hands are outstretched towards her breasts in a suggestive act of inappropriate behaviour. Why did he do this? Clearly he knew it was wrong and thought it would be funny. Did he actually touch her? A closer examination of the photo suggests no as the shadows of his fingers are clearly visible on the one hand and the other is too far away to have made contact. Honestly, I believe that, while this picture is not in good taste, it's not terribly incriminating for a man who made his living saying borderline inappropriate things for a laugh. However, and this is huge, the victim in this photograph suggests that this act was far from the only questionable one Franken initiated. By her count, he forcibly and inappropriately took advantage of a sketch they were performing where a kiss was written into the script.
So, what to do now? How does a consumer move forward knowing that the product is severely tainted? Until recently, we didn't know how bad it was.
For those of us fans, it's a tough break. I can't go back in time and question Franken's actions back-stage or actively campaign against him. I can't get my money back or make the choice to turn off the TV when they were being interviewed on the Daily Show. I can make the choice to avoid them in the future. Why would I read Franken's book now that I know what I do about his motivations years ago? I'm certainly not interested in a "fictional" Louis C.K. movie where a character exposes and then masturbates in front of other people. How long did we shun Paul Reubens for masturbating in an adult theater? That seems fairly pedestrian by comparison these days.
I suppose it's a reminder that our societal heroes are still people, people with deep faults. And, when those faults are exposed for what they are, it's up to us to determine whether they're forgivable or not. Certainly, as they admit the wrongdoing, we need to also focus on the blameless victims. Make sure, though, to empower them rather than pity and label lest they fall victim to our collective societal apathy a second time. As these things come to light, we also need to understand that the wrongdoing isn't legally punishable due to expired statutes of limitations. Another reason to support these victims of sexual misconduct, physical and emotional abuse. I believe you and I'm listening.
Thursday, November 2, 2017
The Wrong Swamp
I have a bunch of disjointed thoughts this week, most of them political in nature, so bear with me.
Governor Christie, the Trump Administration's leading authority on the opioid crisis, had his commision released a report with 56 recommendations...and no budget. This comes a week after, when questioned "where will the money come from for your soon-to-be-released program, the Governor said that Congress will be held accountable for appropriating money. Don't you think, Governor, that it would be great if you hinted to how much that might be? When I heard his statement, I knew then that this administration is, once again, all talk, no show on the opioid crisis.
Bump stocks, not only are they not yet illegal, but they're back in business, Baby! According to Bloomberg, the devices that convert a semi-automatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon are for sale, and selling big. Why wouldn't they be? Well, thanks to delays in Congress actually doing something, advocates and would-be consumers are rushing to buy them before any anticipated legislation is passed. By the way, due to the fact that a large number of legislators are in the NRA's back pockets, my prediction is that this issue is dead. The NRA's strategy of laying low during periods following dramatic gun violence is working in their favor again. Thoughts and prayers are shit when it comes to gun violence, but it looks like this time thoughts and prayers are all we're going to get.
Unless you live under a rock, you know that a terrorist with brown skin drove onto a bike path in Lower Manhattan killing 8 and wounding many more. The President immediately called out Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer, blaming him for an immigration lottery that allowed the alleged perpetrator into this country. He called it a "Schumer Beauty." Funny though that the law was executed by a republican president, and that Schumer and the bipartisan "Gang of 8" tried to kill it in 2013 in an immigration reform bill after seeing that the 1990 lottery program had serious problems. Senate Republicans blocked it in a 68-32 vote. Well done, morons. (note: the Presidents travel ban wouldn't have stopped this attack...or the attack by the white terrorist in Las Vegas, or the one by white terrorist Dylann Roof, or white terrorist Cliven Bundy in Nevada and then his sons in Oregon.)
For $200, you too can create advertisements on FaceBook, create nationalist or religious groups...or both, and inspire them to parade/protest each other in order to create some long-distance chaos as Russians did in 2016 in Houston. Right, they remotely started a riot. Well done. It's time, folks, that advertisements on social media should be monitored by the same agencies that monitor advertisements in print and on TV. However, we need to be mindful about two things: 1) as much as the tech giants point out that this flew under their radar, they took the ad revenues all the same. To FaceBook and Twitter, money is money, and as long as these ads were paid for, social media platforms were all too happy to pocked the money; 2) we need to be careful about banning these purposed propaganda campaigns. Why? First Amendment. It would be a slippery slope to go from banning these ideas to banning any and all opposing and contrasting views.
Suffice it to say, we have problems, and while I am the first one to point at the Cheeto-in-Chief, many, if not all of the above, have Congressional implications. It's time to get angry again people, angry at Congress for politicizing our lives, and acting only in ways that get them reelected through rhetoric and inaction. The President is right. As terrible as we, the people may think he is, Congress is worse. Maybe we were focusing on the wrong swamp?
Governor Christie, the Trump Administration's leading authority on the opioid crisis, had his commision released a report with 56 recommendations...and no budget. This comes a week after, when questioned "where will the money come from for your soon-to-be-released program, the Governor said that Congress will be held accountable for appropriating money. Don't you think, Governor, that it would be great if you hinted to how much that might be? When I heard his statement, I knew then that this administration is, once again, all talk, no show on the opioid crisis.
Bump stocks, not only are they not yet illegal, but they're back in business, Baby! According to Bloomberg, the devices that convert a semi-automatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon are for sale, and selling big. Why wouldn't they be? Well, thanks to delays in Congress actually doing something, advocates and would-be consumers are rushing to buy them before any anticipated legislation is passed. By the way, due to the fact that a large number of legislators are in the NRA's back pockets, my prediction is that this issue is dead. The NRA's strategy of laying low during periods following dramatic gun violence is working in their favor again. Thoughts and prayers are shit when it comes to gun violence, but it looks like this time thoughts and prayers are all we're going to get.
Unless you live under a rock, you know that a terrorist with brown skin drove onto a bike path in Lower Manhattan killing 8 and wounding many more. The President immediately called out Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer, blaming him for an immigration lottery that allowed the alleged perpetrator into this country. He called it a "Schumer Beauty." Funny though that the law was executed by a republican president, and that Schumer and the bipartisan "Gang of 8" tried to kill it in 2013 in an immigration reform bill after seeing that the 1990 lottery program had serious problems. Senate Republicans blocked it in a 68-32 vote. Well done, morons. (note: the Presidents travel ban wouldn't have stopped this attack...or the attack by the white terrorist in Las Vegas, or the one by white terrorist Dylann Roof, or white terrorist Cliven Bundy in Nevada and then his sons in Oregon.)
For $200, you too can create advertisements on FaceBook, create nationalist or religious groups...or both, and inspire them to parade/protest each other in order to create some long-distance chaos as Russians did in 2016 in Houston. Right, they remotely started a riot. Well done. It's time, folks, that advertisements on social media should be monitored by the same agencies that monitor advertisements in print and on TV. However, we need to be mindful about two things: 1) as much as the tech giants point out that this flew under their radar, they took the ad revenues all the same. To FaceBook and Twitter, money is money, and as long as these ads were paid for, social media platforms were all too happy to pocked the money; 2) we need to be careful about banning these purposed propaganda campaigns. Why? First Amendment. It would be a slippery slope to go from banning these ideas to banning any and all opposing and contrasting views.
Suffice it to say, we have problems, and while I am the first one to point at the Cheeto-in-Chief, many, if not all of the above, have Congressional implications. It's time to get angry again people, angry at Congress for politicizing our lives, and acting only in ways that get them reelected through rhetoric and inaction. The President is right. As terrible as we, the people may think he is, Congress is worse. Maybe we were focusing on the wrong swamp?
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
NPS Fees for Me?
So, the latest information out of Washington is that the National Park Service is considering an increase in fees associated with private vehicles, starting in 2018. Why all of a sudden. Certainly, as I've written about before, our parks are getting quite popular to the point where they're considering requiring reservations for entry. I get it. Too many people in the park ruins the experience for everyone. That said, they're also looking to increase the fee from $30/car to $70 at the most popular parks, and beginning Monday, they've opened a comment portal so that the public can weigh in.
Why such a dramatic hike?
Math. The reason is math. Trump's proposed budget cuts about $1.5 Billion (with a B) from the Department of the Interior. Also, the Trump Administration is considering the removal of approximately 4,000 jobs from the Department. That's not to say that the work won't get done, but like many businesses, there's a theory that if you hire contractors for the same work that used to be performed by salaried employees, it'll cost you less in the long run because you're not paying benefits. That is, until the contractors start bending the government over and start charging them through the...well, let's keep this polite.
Here's the math. The National Park Service releases annual visitor information for the top 10 most visited parks. The following qualify: Acadia, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, Rocky Mountain, Olympic, Yellowstone, Yosemite and Zion. Using data from 2014-2016, each park has averaged a 112% increase over the previous year. It's safe to assume 2017 will look similarly. For those playing the home game, and for these 10 parks, that's 33.1 million visitors in 2014, 36.9 million in 2015, and 4.14 million in 2016.
Now, the Trump Administration plans to reduce funding to DoI from $13.2 Billion to $11.7 Billion. Using the 112% to extrapolate both 2017 and then to 2018 (when increases should hit), assuming that 90% of visitors use private vehicles (some estimates are higher than that), the jump from $30/car to $70/car would increase Park revenues by $1.66 in just those parks...more than the proposed cut by the White House.
So, the question is, do they need it. Arguably, yes, in my estimation we can't spend enough on our National Parks. And this data is just from the 10 most visited. Revenues will be far higher than what I'm back-of-the-napkin calculating here. However, there are some questions: is it fair to me and am I being billed twice? That depends. We as Americans have always financed our National Park system through a mix of local spending and Federal taxes. And, as the new Tax plan rears its ugly head, and NJ residents look to take it on the chin based on our ridiculous property taxes (Thank you Love Gov for not helping with that!), then, technically, paying more Federal taxes and then paying a higher entrance fee does mean that you're paying twice. That's a personal gripe. What's more, I can afford it, and the price hike won't deter me and my family from visiting. Take my money. National Parks rule! But what about lower income Americans? Will this price them out from a visit? We won't know until 2018 demographic information is released...sometime in 2020. National Geographic reports that there has been, in recent years, increased diversity in both the employee and visitor populations. Will this decline? Only time will tell.
In the meantime, you as the American public have an opportunity to put your two cents in. The NPS has activated a comment portal, and if this is important to you, I would encourage you to weigh in...especially since the White House plans on reducing the size of National Monuments or using them for non-renewable resource exploration. And, places like Glacier may have to change their name after Global Warming is through with them, because that's a thing and signs cost money.
The National Park formally known as Glacier? Doesn't have the same ring and is way longer.
Why such a dramatic hike?
Math. The reason is math. Trump's proposed budget cuts about $1.5 Billion (with a B) from the Department of the Interior. Also, the Trump Administration is considering the removal of approximately 4,000 jobs from the Department. That's not to say that the work won't get done, but like many businesses, there's a theory that if you hire contractors for the same work that used to be performed by salaried employees, it'll cost you less in the long run because you're not paying benefits. That is, until the contractors start bending the government over and start charging them through the...well, let's keep this polite.
Here's the math. The National Park Service releases annual visitor information for the top 10 most visited parks. The following qualify: Acadia, Glacier, Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, Rocky Mountain, Olympic, Yellowstone, Yosemite and Zion. Using data from 2014-2016, each park has averaged a 112% increase over the previous year. It's safe to assume 2017 will look similarly. For those playing the home game, and for these 10 parks, that's 33.1 million visitors in 2014, 36.9 million in 2015, and 4.14 million in 2016.
Now, the Trump Administration plans to reduce funding to DoI from $13.2 Billion to $11.7 Billion. Using the 112% to extrapolate both 2017 and then to 2018 (when increases should hit), assuming that 90% of visitors use private vehicles (some estimates are higher than that), the jump from $30/car to $70/car would increase Park revenues by $1.66 in just those parks...more than the proposed cut by the White House.
So, the question is, do they need it. Arguably, yes, in my estimation we can't spend enough on our National Parks. And this data is just from the 10 most visited. Revenues will be far higher than what I'm back-of-the-napkin calculating here. However, there are some questions: is it fair to me and am I being billed twice? That depends. We as Americans have always financed our National Park system through a mix of local spending and Federal taxes. And, as the new Tax plan rears its ugly head, and NJ residents look to take it on the chin based on our ridiculous property taxes (Thank you Love Gov for not helping with that!), then, technically, paying more Federal taxes and then paying a higher entrance fee does mean that you're paying twice. That's a personal gripe. What's more, I can afford it, and the price hike won't deter me and my family from visiting. Take my money. National Parks rule! But what about lower income Americans? Will this price them out from a visit? We won't know until 2018 demographic information is released...sometime in 2020. National Geographic reports that there has been, in recent years, increased diversity in both the employee and visitor populations. Will this decline? Only time will tell.
In the meantime, you as the American public have an opportunity to put your two cents in. The NPS has activated a comment portal, and if this is important to you, I would encourage you to weigh in...especially since the White House plans on reducing the size of National Monuments or using them for non-renewable resource exploration. And, places like Glacier may have to change their name after Global Warming is through with them, because that's a thing and signs cost money.
The National Park formally known as Glacier? Doesn't have the same ring and is way longer.
Friday, October 20, 2017
It's a gas gas gas.
I will admit to taking advantage of fossil fuels. My house is heated with oil. We have a gas range. I don't own a hybrid car and so am dependent on gasoline to get from A to B. I use plastics. But, despite my habits, I fully understand that fossil fuels are a limited resource. How can they not be? We are finding and exploiting materials that are absolutely finite in the short term. We are using way too much of it too quickly for it to be sustainable, and scientists agree that it takes thousands of years if not hundreds of thousands of years to replenish the supply cache we are already tapped into. That's just science.
It makes sense to find an alternative. And, luckily that riddle has been solved. With the expectation that "nothing is perfect" we are getting better and better at harnessing wind and solar power. There have been advances at using the tides to generate energy, and also technologies which are making geothermal heating a reality.
Why does this matter? There's a couple of reasons. Economically, it would be great to be energy independent. As our current President makes trading with the United States less palatable, our dependencies on foreign energy suppliers exposes a weakness, one that can be used to manipulate markets. During Obama's presidency, and likely due to policies adopted by his predecessors as well, Forbes reported that U.S. dependence on foreign oil has hit a 30-year low. Unfortunately, this isn't because we're using less of it, but more of a fact that we're producing more of our own at a steep environmental cost. Yesterday, this:
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Democrats on Thursday failed to pass a measure to block oil and gas drilling in part of the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, losing to Republicans who believe production there would provide jobs and wealth."
Our government will likely subsidize exploration, i.e. pay a private firm to dig up one of our last undisturbed wildernesses. Those companies will reap huge economic benefits through the sale of this finite resource, and we'll be more heavily contributing to global warming. Oh, you're unfamiliar? Certainly, industry heads are more interested in making a buck than sustainable business practices. But, now they have friends in congress (read: recipients of reelection dollars) and the White House who are helping them achieve their goals.
I think it's clear that humans are impacting the temperature of the earth. It's been widely reported that 97% of scientists believe that global warming is our fault, or that we're exacerbating the problem. Our President thinks that it's a conspiracy against business, and as a businessman where regulations impact his bottom line (no thanks to the emoluments clause) I can understand not being happy with rules that prevent him from making more money. However, I am flabbergasted about anyone coming right out and saying, "nope, it's not us and it's not as bad as you think."
In support of that false narrative, our government is doing its best to scrub all mentions of climate change from federal websites. Most recently, the EPA is removing climate change information related to the increase of "natural disasters." It's impossible to believe that they think that the mere removal of the science will mean that it will go away. If anything, between the California wildfires, and the most recent hurricane to hit Ireland, these are examples of climate influenced events, and they are clearly getting worse. It seems that the last outpost of climate science on a federal website is at NASA where they clearly link the burning of fossil fuels with the increase of greenhouse gasses and the direct impact on the global temperature thereby increasing the chance for more destructive natural disasters. It's science.
I don't have a suggestion of how to stop it other than voting in people who believe scientific fact. However, change your daily habits and do what's within your control to pollute less and become more energy efficient. I do know that cities all over the United States have vowed to continue to follow protocols set forth in the Paris Climate Agreement in hopes of slowing down the potential effects of increased drilling and utilization of fossil fuels by our government and their allies. We need to be loud and supportive of those politicians advancing the science. We need to protect irrefutable science from big business and overall nutjob TV show celebrities who have ascended into a high-powered governmental position (no, not you Mr. Franken). And we need to strive to keep the planet habitable for as long as possible, for our children and our children's children.
If 97 out of 100 doctors told you that you had cancer, why would you ignore them?
It makes sense to find an alternative. And, luckily that riddle has been solved. With the expectation that "nothing is perfect" we are getting better and better at harnessing wind and solar power. There have been advances at using the tides to generate energy, and also technologies which are making geothermal heating a reality.
Why does this matter? There's a couple of reasons. Economically, it would be great to be energy independent. As our current President makes trading with the United States less palatable, our dependencies on foreign energy suppliers exposes a weakness, one that can be used to manipulate markets. During Obama's presidency, and likely due to policies adopted by his predecessors as well, Forbes reported that U.S. dependence on foreign oil has hit a 30-year low. Unfortunately, this isn't because we're using less of it, but more of a fact that we're producing more of our own at a steep environmental cost. Yesterday, this:
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Democrats on Thursday failed to pass a measure to block oil and gas drilling in part of the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, losing to Republicans who believe production there would provide jobs and wealth."
Our government will likely subsidize exploration, i.e. pay a private firm to dig up one of our last undisturbed wildernesses. Those companies will reap huge economic benefits through the sale of this finite resource, and we'll be more heavily contributing to global warming. Oh, you're unfamiliar? Certainly, industry heads are more interested in making a buck than sustainable business practices. But, now they have friends in congress (read: recipients of reelection dollars) and the White House who are helping them achieve their goals.
I think it's clear that humans are impacting the temperature of the earth. It's been widely reported that 97% of scientists believe that global warming is our fault, or that we're exacerbating the problem. Our President thinks that it's a conspiracy against business, and as a businessman where regulations impact his bottom line (no thanks to the emoluments clause) I can understand not being happy with rules that prevent him from making more money. However, I am flabbergasted about anyone coming right out and saying, "nope, it's not us and it's not as bad as you think."
In support of that false narrative, our government is doing its best to scrub all mentions of climate change from federal websites. Most recently, the EPA is removing climate change information related to the increase of "natural disasters." It's impossible to believe that they think that the mere removal of the science will mean that it will go away. If anything, between the California wildfires, and the most recent hurricane to hit Ireland, these are examples of climate influenced events, and they are clearly getting worse. It seems that the last outpost of climate science on a federal website is at NASA where they clearly link the burning of fossil fuels with the increase of greenhouse gasses and the direct impact on the global temperature thereby increasing the chance for more destructive natural disasters. It's science.
I don't have a suggestion of how to stop it other than voting in people who believe scientific fact. However, change your daily habits and do what's within your control to pollute less and become more energy efficient. I do know that cities all over the United States have vowed to continue to follow protocols set forth in the Paris Climate Agreement in hopes of slowing down the potential effects of increased drilling and utilization of fossil fuels by our government and their allies. We need to be loud and supportive of those politicians advancing the science. We need to protect irrefutable science from big business and overall nutjob TV show celebrities who have ascended into a high-powered governmental position (no, not you Mr. Franken). And we need to strive to keep the planet habitable for as long as possible, for our children and our children's children.
If 97 out of 100 doctors told you that you had cancer, why would you ignore them?
Friday, October 13, 2017
Run the World
A short opinion about the Boy Scouts of America decision to allow girls into the program.
If you're new to this story which broke a couple of days ago, the BSA Board of Directors have made a decision to allow girls first into the Cub Scouts starting next year and then, eventually (2019?), into the "Boy" Scouts so that they too can attain the BSA's highest award of Eagle Scout.
Needless to say that the Girl Scouts of America is nonplussed.
However, there are a couple of facts that needs to be considered:
The United Kingdom has had coed scouting since 1991.
The German Association of Guides and Scouts has groups of scouts that have been coed since 1976.
The Federation of French Scouting has groups of scouts that have been coed since 1971.
We are grossly late to the game.
Next, and I think that the Girl Scouts of America will agree, the two organizations offer completely different programs and attract parents and children for completely different reasons. I believe that there is sufficient room for an all-girl Scouting experience as well as a co-educational Scouting experience.
That said, the conversation through the years that I've overheard is one of: "I didn't do Girl Scouts because they sold cookies and I wanted to go camping." Obviously, this is a matter of optics. Girl Scouts and Brownies go hiking and camping. Do they go with the frequency of the Cub Scouts? I guess that depends on the troop leaders of both organizations. However, you can't blame people for having that bias...on their own page for the Brownie Scouts, selling cookies is prominently featured:
"At Girl Scouts, she'll take that first hike in the great outdoors, visit a science museum, and band together as a mighty Brownie team to sell cookies (and use some of the money to help others). Life is good when you’re a Brownie!"
What kid wants to sell cookies? Eat cookies, yes, but sell them? I understand it's a means to an end, let's raise money to allow our organization to fund the other activities and give charitable donations. But if service is your goal, remove selling cookies as your primary function! Change your optics. By contrast the Cub Scouts web site says:
"Some of the best things about Cub Scouting are the activities you get to do: camping, hiking, racing model cars, going on field trips, or doing projects that help your hometown and the people who live there. Cub Scouting means 'doing.'"
Yes, the Cub Scouts do sales as well, but those efforts aren't the focus of the boys responsibilities.
The long and the short of it is this, in my mind: if we integrate girls into Cub Scouting and then Scouting overall, it serves as an opportunity to get kids to recognize that both sexes at that early age and beyond can do everything the other does. Boys, get used to it, girls are here to stay and they are just as strong and willing to do/accomplish everything you can do/accomplish. I don't see this as a pilfering of girls who want to become part of the Girl Scouts of America, but more of an option for those girls turned off by the optics of a group whose focus is in fundraising and sedentary activities rather than hiking and camping. That may not be the truth, but it is a common misconception.
Instead of striking out at the Boy Scouts for a long overdue incorporation of girls, the Girl Scouts need to raise their game, change their optics and be proud of their program, a program that the Boy Scouts isn't looking to replicate or replace.
If you're new to this story which broke a couple of days ago, the BSA Board of Directors have made a decision to allow girls first into the Cub Scouts starting next year and then, eventually (2019?), into the "Boy" Scouts so that they too can attain the BSA's highest award of Eagle Scout.
Needless to say that the Girl Scouts of America is nonplussed.
However, there are a couple of facts that needs to be considered:
The United Kingdom has had coed scouting since 1991.
The German Association of Guides and Scouts has groups of scouts that have been coed since 1976.
The Federation of French Scouting has groups of scouts that have been coed since 1971.
We are grossly late to the game.
Next, and I think that the Girl Scouts of America will agree, the two organizations offer completely different programs and attract parents and children for completely different reasons. I believe that there is sufficient room for an all-girl Scouting experience as well as a co-educational Scouting experience.
That said, the conversation through the years that I've overheard is one of: "I didn't do Girl Scouts because they sold cookies and I wanted to go camping." Obviously, this is a matter of optics. Girl Scouts and Brownies go hiking and camping. Do they go with the frequency of the Cub Scouts? I guess that depends on the troop leaders of both organizations. However, you can't blame people for having that bias...on their own page for the Brownie Scouts, selling cookies is prominently featured:
"At Girl Scouts, she'll take that first hike in the great outdoors, visit a science museum, and band together as a mighty Brownie team to sell cookies (and use some of the money to help others). Life is good when you’re a Brownie!"
What kid wants to sell cookies? Eat cookies, yes, but sell them? I understand it's a means to an end, let's raise money to allow our organization to fund the other activities and give charitable donations. But if service is your goal, remove selling cookies as your primary function! Change your optics. By contrast the Cub Scouts web site says:
"Some of the best things about Cub Scouting are the activities you get to do: camping, hiking, racing model cars, going on field trips, or doing projects that help your hometown and the people who live there. Cub Scouting means 'doing.'"
Yes, the Cub Scouts do sales as well, but those efforts aren't the focus of the boys responsibilities.
The long and the short of it is this, in my mind: if we integrate girls into Cub Scouting and then Scouting overall, it serves as an opportunity to get kids to recognize that both sexes at that early age and beyond can do everything the other does. Boys, get used to it, girls are here to stay and they are just as strong and willing to do/accomplish everything you can do/accomplish. I don't see this as a pilfering of girls who want to become part of the Girl Scouts of America, but more of an option for those girls turned off by the optics of a group whose focus is in fundraising and sedentary activities rather than hiking and camping. That may not be the truth, but it is a common misconception.
Instead of striking out at the Boy Scouts for a long overdue incorporation of girls, the Girl Scouts need to raise their game, change their optics and be proud of their program, a program that the Boy Scouts isn't looking to replicate or replace.
Thursday, October 5, 2017
No static at all
Before I start on this week's diatribe, I'd like to acknowledge the tragedy in Las Vegas. I learned about it in the early hours of Monday morning as most did. I've listened to countless hours of NPR as they interviewed survivors and families of the murdered concert goers. I am deeply saddened about the event and fear that this will set a precedent for my own concert-going, habits. I've written about how I believe that politicians who call for prayers while not changing legislation are cowards and that there's a special place in hell for them. More words on how we need to reform our gun laws can be found here, here and here.
Now, let me sum up the crisis in Puerto Rico in a few words: people are suffering without electricity, regular influx of food and clean drinking water, and communications are down...on an entire island. Roads are blocked, and even if they weren't, nobody knows where to go to help themselves, or who is coming (and when they're coming) to provide aid. This is especially true when you consider the communities not adjacent to ports or major cities.
Puerto Rican internet message boards are filled with tips of where people can go to get cellular service...however, getting that information has been all word-of-mouth on the island as, well, they have insufficient power for computers and internet...so they can't really read those message boards. And, it's clear that direction to help from the U.S. Government has been slow. I've got some questions:
Why can't we have major LTE providers establish portable cell signal boats around the island to temporarily provide some cellular service? According to the Washington Post, tower range is highly variable and based not just on the strength of the signal, but also the geography it covers where signals get blocked and bounced based on buildings and topography. But, the general consensus is that it is possible to project a cell signal 20 miles. Puerto Rico is 40 miles at its thickest point, granted, it's not flat, but I would believe that, in this modern age, we could easily establish floating cell points to be used in instances such as this.
It appears that San Juan has limited power. However, even just after the Maria hit, NPR was able to communicate with FM radio stations on the island to get updates as to the conditions. Why? Some of those stations had generators to keep them up and running. That's good. Anyone with a battery- operated FM radio could, potentially, get life-saving information from the radio. The problem is that nobody buys new FM radios. I mean, we have them in our cars, and from the looks of it, most cars on Puerto Rico after the storm were...compromised. Still, an FM broadcast signal has the potential (at 100,000 watts) to reach a maximum distance of 100 miles...in all directions. Wouldn't it be great if there was a modern technology we already owned that had an FM receiver in it?
Well, as it turns out, most iPhones and some Android phones have disabled FM receivers in them! Wait, what? Why are they disabled? Here's a complete hypothetical, but I believe it's in line with Apple's responsibilities to the carriers that support their devices, namely wireless providers: AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. You see, if you give away something for free, like the ability to listen to the radio on your phone without using data, that's a potential revenue source gone. Mobile carriers would much rather you front-load your wireless contracts so that you're constantly streaming data (hello TuneIn Radio and I Heart Radio apps). So which phones have it? Well, there are too many Android phones to name, but Apple's iPhone, at least since the 4s have had this technology...including the recently introduced iPhone 8.
So, as you seethe while watching the President Jack-Ass throw paper towels to desperate American citizens that live on an island that was slammed by one of the worst hurricanes on record...save some of your anger for wireless carriers who insist that your cell phones be dumbed down for their profit, and to the detriment of desperate and dying Americans who could have used that technology that they already own, to improve their lives after a severe catastrophic tragedy.
Now, let me sum up the crisis in Puerto Rico in a few words: people are suffering without electricity, regular influx of food and clean drinking water, and communications are down...on an entire island. Roads are blocked, and even if they weren't, nobody knows where to go to help themselves, or who is coming (and when they're coming) to provide aid. This is especially true when you consider the communities not adjacent to ports or major cities.
Puerto Rican internet message boards are filled with tips of where people can go to get cellular service...however, getting that information has been all word-of-mouth on the island as, well, they have insufficient power for computers and internet...so they can't really read those message boards. And, it's clear that direction to help from the U.S. Government has been slow. I've got some questions:
Why can't we have major LTE providers establish portable cell signal boats around the island to temporarily provide some cellular service? According to the Washington Post, tower range is highly variable and based not just on the strength of the signal, but also the geography it covers where signals get blocked and bounced based on buildings and topography. But, the general consensus is that it is possible to project a cell signal 20 miles. Puerto Rico is 40 miles at its thickest point, granted, it's not flat, but I would believe that, in this modern age, we could easily establish floating cell points to be used in instances such as this.
It appears that San Juan has limited power. However, even just after the Maria hit, NPR was able to communicate with FM radio stations on the island to get updates as to the conditions. Why? Some of those stations had generators to keep them up and running. That's good. Anyone with a battery- operated FM radio could, potentially, get life-saving information from the radio. The problem is that nobody buys new FM radios. I mean, we have them in our cars, and from the looks of it, most cars on Puerto Rico after the storm were...compromised. Still, an FM broadcast signal has the potential (at 100,000 watts) to reach a maximum distance of 100 miles...in all directions. Wouldn't it be great if there was a modern technology we already owned that had an FM receiver in it?
Well, as it turns out, most iPhones and some Android phones have disabled FM receivers in them! Wait, what? Why are they disabled? Here's a complete hypothetical, but I believe it's in line with Apple's responsibilities to the carriers that support their devices, namely wireless providers: AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. You see, if you give away something for free, like the ability to listen to the radio on your phone without using data, that's a potential revenue source gone. Mobile carriers would much rather you front-load your wireless contracts so that you're constantly streaming data (hello TuneIn Radio and I Heart Radio apps). So which phones have it? Well, there are too many Android phones to name, but Apple's iPhone, at least since the 4s have had this technology...including the recently introduced iPhone 8.
So, as you seethe while watching the President Jack-Ass throw paper towels to desperate American citizens that live on an island that was slammed by one of the worst hurricanes on record...save some of your anger for wireless carriers who insist that your cell phones be dumbed down for their profit, and to the detriment of desperate and dying Americans who could have used that technology that they already own, to improve their lives after a severe catastrophic tragedy.
Thursday, September 28, 2017
Park-ing Safely
The headline this morning is that an “apartment building”size piece of granite cleaved from the side of El Capitan in the middle of the
afternoon yesterday, immediately killing one visitor and severely injuring
another. Reports from visitors indicate
that others, who were hiking at the base of the popular mountain face, may be
buried under tons of rubble.
Most terrifying is that, I’ve been on that path at the mountain's base. In February of 2010, I
specifically sought out that trail as it has a magnificent view at 6:30am
toward Eagle Peak…and due to global warming, there was enough snowmelt that it created...wait, rather than waste 1,000 words...
In this shot, El Capitan is just to the left of us. So, it's alarming to hear that people, no more or less experienced than me, suffered at the completely random rock-fall in a place that I visited.
And I'd go back in a heartbeat.
If you have been following this story from yesterday's news, or you merely Googled it now, you'll know that almost every media agency is covering what happened in one of the most visited National Parks in the United States. But let me tell you what they're not: you have a far greater chance of being struck by lightning than dying in this fashion.
In a recent article in Outside Magazine, Yosemite isn't even the most deadly of our National Parks. That title goes to Lake Mead. The added attraction of a navigable lake adds drownings to the total of people who bit the big one there. Also, for some reason, Lake Mead has the highest number of homicides in the National Park system, and that's just creepy. But, drownings are the number one killer in National Parks according to the WashPo, followed by our own idiot piloting of vehicles. The Post credits our rubber-necking at the scenic views as the cause for 27% of fatal auto accidents in the parks.
The long and the short of it is that deaths in National Parks is largely due to our own stupidity, whether it's because we're ignoring signs to stay on the path, or because we need to get the perfect shot and slip. To combat this, here's some advice:
The long and the short of it is that deaths in National Parks is largely due to our own stupidity, whether it's because we're ignoring signs to stay on the path, or because we need to get the perfect shot and slip. To combat this, here's some advice:
- Practice safe boating and only swim in designated areas by the Parks. There's a reason why you shouldn't just go off and do your own thing without life jackets. If they recommend safety devices, take a hint.
- If it's a truly scenic view, the Park knows this, and usually provides decent pull-offs convenient for getting out and stretching your legs and taking a quick shot or glance. If the first one is full, drive to the next one, or be patient and wait. Don't worry, the scenery isn't going anywhere.
- Know your Park and read up on paths/trails that may be dangerous or outside of your comfort zone. Sure the Precipice Trail in Acadia seems like a good idea, but don't expect guard rails and stairs built into the rock-face. The wilderness is not necessarily ADA accessible, and shouldn't be.
- Hike, travel, boat at your own pace. As the NY Times puts it, we are reaching near capacity of visitors at some of our parks, but don't let them push you up the hill or down. Do your own thing, and stay safe.
- And, maybe the best advice of all, go off season. Our park system is beautiful year-round. However, if you decide to visit, avoid months of high travel. That usually means August in the U.S., but can also bleed into seasons that boast fall foliage. Since the parks never close, there will be basic amenities 365 days a year like restaurants and lodging. Take advantage of that. And, if you do wind up at a park during peak season, be the first person in that park in the AM. If you can get in before the crowds, you'll avoid the pushing and shoving at the more common points-of-interest.
Most of all, don't let headlines like the recent ones in Yosemite cause you to change your plans. If anything, due to global warming, these resources are in the midst of change, and not for the better. The best time to visit the National Parks is whenever you have the ability to get there. I dread the day when I may have to tell my children that they used to have glaciers in Glacier National Park. So, go now, and be safe!
Thursday, September 21, 2017
Unnatural Disasters
So, I've been confused for a long time. It started with reports that school districts in the U.S. were considering and even teaching creationism in the classroom, as opposed to evolution. That was upsetting on multiple fronts. First, I'm a huge believer in separation of church and state. I know that the crossover happens much more often than should be allowed, but, in the most Republican way, I believe that the government should stay out of people's lives, i.e. my religious beliefs. While tolerance is often preached as being an integral part of the Declaration of Independence and religious freedoms being part of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution, it would make the most sense to include all or none. Creationism, while popular, is certainly taught from a singular perspective.
Fast forward to the last ten or twenty years when scientists who measure climate statistics started noticing an uneasy trend. Things are getting warmer. In fact, on maybe the only U.S. Government page left, NASA reports that approximately 97% of scientists agree: climate warming trends are almost certainly due to human activities. And, while most Americans agree that Climate Change is a thing...most don't think it will affect them in any way.
Wait, what?
That's like saying, yeah, I know I'm spending more every day, but it's really not going to hit me in the bank account. It just doesn't make sense.
Well, I've got good news and bad news. The good news is that there's some definitive proof that climate change can and will impact you and your families. The bad news is that...hey, how about all of them hurricanes?
That's right, global warming is linked to the recent devastating hurricanes to hit Caribbean, Mexican and American shores. A 2007 article in Scientific American explains it best: atmospheric disturbances off of the west coast of central Africa set up by temperature differences between inland desert and forested coastal regions combined with warm (i.e. late summer in the Northern Hemisphere) sea surface temperatures determine the size and intensity of hurricanes as those systems cross the Atlantic. As previously stated, humans have been releasing additional CO2 from fossil fuels and water vapor which elevates the potential for deadlier storms. The warmer it is, the more potentially dangerous the hurricane.
And we've been on an upward trajectory with global temperatures for the last 200 years, or since the industrial revolution.
What bothers me are the people who discount the science. I mean, climate science is so easy to research. Things like rainfall and daily temperatures have been recorded for well over 150 years. The number of intense hurricanes has been tracked since the 1970s, and all have been reported on in local and regional papers. Climate change isn't a conspiracy, because, by definition, conspiracies are secretive acts, and in the case for Global Warming, we've been living the data for years and years.
The same people who deny climate change are the same ones who take Advil for a headache, a medication based on clinical scientific tests and an understanding of physiology, drive cars that use heat-resistant materials for internal combustion engines, and cell phones that send and receive radio signals, invisible to the naked eye that can transmit photos to and from anywhere in the world!
Here are the indisputable facts: humans are making things warmer which in turn results in not only stronger hurricanes, but proclivity for wild fires and droughts (see: California). But, what can you do? It turns out, you can do quite a bit. Here's some suggestions:
Collectively, if we all are cognizant of our own unsustainable habits, we may be able to significantly curtail our contributions to greenhouse gas emissions, which in turn may be able to help stabilize the global temperatures and, possibly reduce the possibility of these destructive natural disasters, which, are clearly, no longer "natural."
Fast forward to the last ten or twenty years when scientists who measure climate statistics started noticing an uneasy trend. Things are getting warmer. In fact, on maybe the only U.S. Government page left, NASA reports that approximately 97% of scientists agree: climate warming trends are almost certainly due to human activities. And, while most Americans agree that Climate Change is a thing...most don't think it will affect them in any way.
Wait, what?
That's like saying, yeah, I know I'm spending more every day, but it's really not going to hit me in the bank account. It just doesn't make sense.
Well, I've got good news and bad news. The good news is that there's some definitive proof that climate change can and will impact you and your families. The bad news is that...hey, how about all of them hurricanes?
That's right, global warming is linked to the recent devastating hurricanes to hit Caribbean, Mexican and American shores. A 2007 article in Scientific American explains it best: atmospheric disturbances off of the west coast of central Africa set up by temperature differences between inland desert and forested coastal regions combined with warm (i.e. late summer in the Northern Hemisphere) sea surface temperatures determine the size and intensity of hurricanes as those systems cross the Atlantic. As previously stated, humans have been releasing additional CO2 from fossil fuels and water vapor which elevates the potential for deadlier storms. The warmer it is, the more potentially dangerous the hurricane.
And we've been on an upward trajectory with global temperatures for the last 200 years, or since the industrial revolution.
What bothers me are the people who discount the science. I mean, climate science is so easy to research. Things like rainfall and daily temperatures have been recorded for well over 150 years. The number of intense hurricanes has been tracked since the 1970s, and all have been reported on in local and regional papers. Climate change isn't a conspiracy, because, by definition, conspiracies are secretive acts, and in the case for Global Warming, we've been living the data for years and years.
The same people who deny climate change are the same ones who take Advil for a headache, a medication based on clinical scientific tests and an understanding of physiology, drive cars that use heat-resistant materials for internal combustion engines, and cell phones that send and receive radio signals, invisible to the naked eye that can transmit photos to and from anywhere in the world!
Here are the indisputable facts: humans are making things warmer which in turn results in not only stronger hurricanes, but proclivity for wild fires and droughts (see: California). But, what can you do? It turns out, you can do quite a bit. Here's some suggestions:
- Eat less meat...or no meat at all. Beef production alone is responsible for 2.2% of greenhouse gas production in the US (read: cow farts)
- Change your lightbulbs to energy efficient LEDs. They're finally affordable and recyclable.
- Invest in renewable energy production. You have a choice. Here in PSE&G you can choose to pay for the CleanPower Choice program. Yes, slightly higher bill, but you're reducing your footprint.
- Drive a more fuel efficient vehicle, or take mass transit. Duh.
- Wash clothes in cold water and do not use the heat setting on your dishwasher. Hot = energy.
- And, recycle. Stop throwing away any containers with a number on it. In my town, they take recycle numbers 1-6 which covers 99% of all plastic refuse. And just stop taking plastic bags when you go shopping. Bring your own.
Collectively, if we all are cognizant of our own unsustainable habits, we may be able to significantly curtail our contributions to greenhouse gas emissions, which in turn may be able to help stabilize the global temperatures and, possibly reduce the possibility of these destructive natural disasters, which, are clearly, no longer "natural."
Friday, September 8, 2017
Sportsing with the Pats
(Note: the following is 100% football. If that's not your thing you should probably tune out in 3...2...1...)
It's really difficult to focus on Don Jr.'s weak reasoning for lying about why he met the Russians last Summer when there's football on TV. Say what you want about a sport where each team plays a measly 16 regular season games over 4 months and then (most of them) are done until next September, I'm hooked. But, maybe that's why American Football is so damn alluring and popular as a sport: every meeting matters.
Which is why last night's game was so satisfying. It's easy to dislike the Patriots when you're from the New York metropolitan area. Frankly, any team that's been to the "big game" as often should draw ire and consternation from those (read: Philadelphia, et. al.) who have never been and won. So, unless you're from New England, it makes sense that last night, during the regular season's first game between the Patriots and the Chiefs, that most people would be rooting for the Chiefs...but picking the Patriots to win due to history.
Except for me. I picked the Chiefs. I was right, and oh, and how sweet it was.
I didn't really care what the score was as long as the Pats lost. Why? Every year, a player who was a fantastic performer last season gets featured on the Madden videogame cover. This year Madden was adorned with an image of Tom Brady...the G.O.A.T. edition: Greatest Of All Time. That's a pretty bold statement. I understand that only one other player has been on five Super Bowl winning teams...and he's the only one to do that on the same team. He's been named MVP of the Super Bowl four times...more than anyone else, ever. And, in the post-season, he's 25 wins, 9 losses for the best record ever.
The team has never lost their first game back after a Super Bowl win...until last night.
So, why am I so happy with last night's result? First, Tom's been to 2 more Bowl games than he won...both times defeated by the NY Giants, so he's a natural enemy to both New York teams as the JETS are in the same AFC East division with the Pats. Second, they made such a huge deal before the game started last night, having Mark Wahlberg narrate scenes from last February's game where they came back from the largest deficit to win, ever. They wheeled out 5 massive replicas of the Super Bowl trophies, and they unveiled a fifth banner to hang in the stadium representing the unlikely win. The crowd was foaming at the mouth, waiting for their Football God to take the field and rip the Chiefs a new one.
Early in the game, it looked as if that was going to happen. Chiefs fumbled on their first possession setting the Pats up for another quick score (which didn't happen, thanks to Kansas City's stalwart defense). But the Patriots were driving and moving the ball well in the first half. They went to the locker room with a 3 point lead at 17-14. However, when they came back, Tom was largely impotent with nary a touchdown pass thrown. The final score of the game was 42-27, Chiefs. Alex Smith, rookie Kareem Hunt and his wide receiver, Tyreek Hill were able to maul the Patriots defense late in the third quarter and early in the fourth. The Patriots defense was porous at best. And thanks to sub-standard play by the Super Bowl champions, the Chiefs won. "Where is your messiah now?"
I believe each player going into that game last night, Pats and Chiefs, were not exclusively thinking of their last year's performance. No coach would encourage their players to coast on previous successes, and each player should have been living in the moment. But, with the fanfare before the game, and the public expectation of greatness, I'm sure the Patriots embodied some lingering expectation of greatness, it was fantastic that they crashed and burned. Oh, I'm sure that they'll recover. Coach Belichick will fix what's broken, that's what he does. However, the team will have to start week two preparations with one more record for the record books, thanks to the Chiefs: most points scored against the Patriots in a regular season game under Coach Belichick's purview.
G.O.A.T. indeed.
It's really difficult to focus on Don Jr.'s weak reasoning for lying about why he met the Russians last Summer when there's football on TV. Say what you want about a sport where each team plays a measly 16 regular season games over 4 months and then (most of them) are done until next September, I'm hooked. But, maybe that's why American Football is so damn alluring and popular as a sport: every meeting matters.
Which is why last night's game was so satisfying. It's easy to dislike the Patriots when you're from the New York metropolitan area. Frankly, any team that's been to the "big game" as often should draw ire and consternation from those (read: Philadelphia, et. al.) who have never been and won. So, unless you're from New England, it makes sense that last night, during the regular season's first game between the Patriots and the Chiefs, that most people would be rooting for the Chiefs...but picking the Patriots to win due to history.
Except for me. I picked the Chiefs. I was right, and oh, and how sweet it was.
I didn't really care what the score was as long as the Pats lost. Why? Every year, a player who was a fantastic performer last season gets featured on the Madden videogame cover. This year Madden was adorned with an image of Tom Brady...the G.O.A.T. edition: Greatest Of All Time. That's a pretty bold statement. I understand that only one other player has been on five Super Bowl winning teams...and he's the only one to do that on the same team. He's been named MVP of the Super Bowl four times...more than anyone else, ever. And, in the post-season, he's 25 wins, 9 losses for the best record ever.
The team has never lost their first game back after a Super Bowl win...until last night.
So, why am I so happy with last night's result? First, Tom's been to 2 more Bowl games than he won...both times defeated by the NY Giants, so he's a natural enemy to both New York teams as the JETS are in the same AFC East division with the Pats. Second, they made such a huge deal before the game started last night, having Mark Wahlberg narrate scenes from last February's game where they came back from the largest deficit to win, ever. They wheeled out 5 massive replicas of the Super Bowl trophies, and they unveiled a fifth banner to hang in the stadium representing the unlikely win. The crowd was foaming at the mouth, waiting for their Football God to take the field and rip the Chiefs a new one.
Early in the game, it looked as if that was going to happen. Chiefs fumbled on their first possession setting the Pats up for another quick score (which didn't happen, thanks to Kansas City's stalwart defense). But the Patriots were driving and moving the ball well in the first half. They went to the locker room with a 3 point lead at 17-14. However, when they came back, Tom was largely impotent with nary a touchdown pass thrown. The final score of the game was 42-27, Chiefs. Alex Smith, rookie Kareem Hunt and his wide receiver, Tyreek Hill were able to maul the Patriots defense late in the third quarter and early in the fourth. The Patriots defense was porous at best. And thanks to sub-standard play by the Super Bowl champions, the Chiefs won. "Where is your messiah now?"
I believe each player going into that game last night, Pats and Chiefs, were not exclusively thinking of their last year's performance. No coach would encourage their players to coast on previous successes, and each player should have been living in the moment. But, with the fanfare before the game, and the public expectation of greatness, I'm sure the Patriots embodied some lingering expectation of greatness, it was fantastic that they crashed and burned. Oh, I'm sure that they'll recover. Coach Belichick will fix what's broken, that's what he does. However, the team will have to start week two preparations with one more record for the record books, thanks to the Chiefs: most points scored against the Patriots in a regular season game under Coach Belichick's purview.
G.O.A.T. indeed.
Thursday, August 31, 2017
Thoughts
I would like to post about how the President's tax plan is nothing more than a tax-break for the filthy rich.
I would like to post about how even George Bush wrapped up all other pending business in the wake of Katrina so that he could focus on disaster.
I would like to criticize those who asked "Where was Obama during Katrina." In Chicago, you morons. He wasn't President.
Instead, I'd like to point you to a charity I believe in, the J.J. Watt Foundation.
Sometimes professional sports players exceed all expectations. Michael Strahan used to build playgrounds for kids in need on HGTV before he left the Giants for his Fox/GMA career. Brandon Marshall started Project Borderline to support people with personality disorders. Jay Cutler's foundation helps treat children with Type 1 Diabetes. The Drew Brees Foundation helps children with pediatric cancer. And J.J. Watt's Foundation was to help develop life skills for middle-school students in athletic programs. That was, until Harvey.
Now J.J. Watt of the Houston Texans has set up a Houston Flood Relief Fund through YouCaring.org. Initially, he was looking to crowd-fund $1 million. When they hit that, he asked for $5 million. The Houston Texans jumped in with a $1 Million contribution, making the $5 seem like it was possible. They blew by the $5 million mark, so they raised the stakes to $6. Blew by that number, and then Ellen DeGeneres and Walmart dumped another Million into the bucket. The goal is now up to $10,000,000...and in a matter of hours, they will hit that number as well.
As of this writing, they're up to $9,982,673.
The thing is, with this President and his bluster, you don't know if he means it when he promises aid to Texas and Louisiana. The man is filled with empty promises and bravado. As his overall budget plans to gut FEMA and other flood-response agencies, it's hard to believe that adequate help will come to the people who need it most. And these people can't wait.
You don't need to donate to the J.J. Watt foundation to make an impact. There are plenty of other charities that will try to help get the victims of Harvey back on their feet. Find one. Donate. The people on the ground, the volunteers and the professionals helping, all need to eat. Food isn't free. Medicine isn't free. Transporting livestock and pets out of the flood area isn't free. Gas isn't free.
$10 million will be a drop in the bucket, and like Ike and Katrina before it, Harvey will have extremely long-lasting effects on the communities it's ruined. Please consider contributing, and if you have the time, visit Houston and Louisiana to help those communities that need it most.
https://www.youcaring.com/victimsofhurricaneharvey-915053
P.S. Since starting to write this, they blew past the $10,000,000 mark. Do your part to help them shatter the next goal.
I would like to post about how even George Bush wrapped up all other pending business in the wake of Katrina so that he could focus on disaster.
I would like to criticize those who asked "Where was Obama during Katrina." In Chicago, you morons. He wasn't President.
Instead, I'd like to point you to a charity I believe in, the J.J. Watt Foundation.
Sometimes professional sports players exceed all expectations. Michael Strahan used to build playgrounds for kids in need on HGTV before he left the Giants for his Fox/GMA career. Brandon Marshall started Project Borderline to support people with personality disorders. Jay Cutler's foundation helps treat children with Type 1 Diabetes. The Drew Brees Foundation helps children with pediatric cancer. And J.J. Watt's Foundation was to help develop life skills for middle-school students in athletic programs. That was, until Harvey.
Now J.J. Watt of the Houston Texans has set up a Houston Flood Relief Fund through YouCaring.org. Initially, he was looking to crowd-fund $1 million. When they hit that, he asked for $5 million. The Houston Texans jumped in with a $1 Million contribution, making the $5 seem like it was possible. They blew by the $5 million mark, so they raised the stakes to $6. Blew by that number, and then Ellen DeGeneres and Walmart dumped another Million into the bucket. The goal is now up to $10,000,000...and in a matter of hours, they will hit that number as well.
As of this writing, they're up to $9,982,673.
The thing is, with this President and his bluster, you don't know if he means it when he promises aid to Texas and Louisiana. The man is filled with empty promises and bravado. As his overall budget plans to gut FEMA and other flood-response agencies, it's hard to believe that adequate help will come to the people who need it most. And these people can't wait.
You don't need to donate to the J.J. Watt foundation to make an impact. There are plenty of other charities that will try to help get the victims of Harvey back on their feet. Find one. Donate. The people on the ground, the volunteers and the professionals helping, all need to eat. Food isn't free. Medicine isn't free. Transporting livestock and pets out of the flood area isn't free. Gas isn't free.
$10 million will be a drop in the bucket, and like Ike and Katrina before it, Harvey will have extremely long-lasting effects on the communities it's ruined. Please consider contributing, and if you have the time, visit Houston and Louisiana to help those communities that need it most.
https://www.youcaring.com/victimsofhurricaneharvey-915053
P.S. Since starting to write this, they blew past the $10,000,000 mark. Do your part to help them shatter the next goal.
Thursday, August 24, 2017
Pipe Dreams and Nightmares
It's easy to pick on our President. Lately, it's been his white-supremacy undertones (overtones?) that we've been able to easily key in on. But, I'd like to remind you that before he was being anti-Semitic and racist...he was bashing the indigenous peoples of North Dakota.
“I’m pleased to announce that the Dakota Access Pipeline … is now officially open for business, a $3.8 billion investment in American infrastructure that was stalled and nobody thought any politician would have the guts to approve that final leg,” President Dump said.
“I just close my eyes and said ‘do it.'”
The action (and description of the action) was moronic on many levels. First, as previously explained, this was less an action of Trump and more of U.S. environmental process in action. The Army Corps of Engineers did an environmental analysis with several alternatives and chose a route which had the fewest impacts to cultural and environmental resources...AND, Obama's EPA approved it.
However, for those of us paying attention, a judge, on June 14 of this year, "has ruled that permits authorized by the Trump administration to fast-track the completion of the Dakota Access Pipeline violated the law." In a 91-page ruling, the court ruled that the Army Corps of Engineers “did not adequately consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controversial.”
Duh, that's what the peaceful protesters said. You remember them, right? The Native Americans who rallied on Federal land without firearms (albeit without permits) to bring to light the potential consequences of a spill on cultural (read: people, fishing, etc.) and environmental resources down-stream.
This is a bit after the fact, though, as pumping had begun several weeks before this decision. A request by the Tribes to halt pumping while this was being considered was denied. To make things more bitter, a counter-suit was filed in Federal court against the protesters. Shooting them with rubber bullets and water canons wasn't enough. "Energy Transfer Partners of Dallas, Texas, listed the lawsuit's defendants as Greenpeace International, Earth First!, BankTrack, and other organizations and individuals." They're claiming eco-terrorism. To say the suit is punitive is an understatement. Regardless of the outcome, Energy Transfer Partners wasn't being held back for completion by the protestors...it was held back by Obama. Secondly, they got their wish through Trump and completed the pipeline, and began pumping oil into it. Third, who paid for the enforcement (i.e. shooting innocent people) at Standing Rock? Why, the good people of North Dakota did, to the tune of $38 million...and, according to their whining to the Feds, they're only asking that they be reimbursed $14 million by the Federal Government. Trump's administration approved $10 million, to make them go away. We'll see if that works.
What's next? Based on the judge's decision, there needs to be public input/comments into the allegations that President Small Hands' maneuver was, in fact, illegal and didn't consider the down-stream impacts of a spill. That public meeting has already been delayed at the request of Energy Transfer Partners who may or may not have also removed too many trees and improperly handled contaminated soil, thereby violating State Law. Also, at issue is another security firm is being sued for providing "security services" (read: mercenary enforcement against protesters). They're looking to get it thrown out claiming that they only provided consulting. B.S. There's video everywhere, and this time it is the State of North Dakota bringing the charges against a firm not licensed to do business of that sort in the State.
So, a muddy picture of how this moves forward. It's possible and likely that all of this is frivolous and that the pipeline will continue to pump oil until a severe accident occurs, which will likely get swept under the carpet by an administration who picks and chooses the environmental facts that best suit its purpose. It will impact some of the poorest people in the United States, practically confined to the Reservation. The only black and white outcome from this is that, if DAPL continues to operate, there's only one real winner, and that's Kelcy Warren, chief executive of Energy Transfer who tripled his net worth at the stroke of Trump's pen.
I'm beginning to feel like I need to keep a list akin to Arya's from Game of Thrones, of things we have to remember to undo once Agent Orange has left the building. But, it's clear that we need to pay attention to the successes and failures of opposing this project along with the President's apparent bigotry, the raping our National Monuments for fossil fuel reclamation, climate change, and, of course Russian interference in our political processes. I realize that equates to many sticks in the fire, but if we don't mind them all, our culture, our environment and our democracy may burn down around us.
“I’m pleased to announce that the Dakota Access Pipeline … is now officially open for business, a $3.8 billion investment in American infrastructure that was stalled and nobody thought any politician would have the guts to approve that final leg,” President Dump said.
“I just close my eyes and said ‘do it.'”
The action (and description of the action) was moronic on many levels. First, as previously explained, this was less an action of Trump and more of U.S. environmental process in action. The Army Corps of Engineers did an environmental analysis with several alternatives and chose a route which had the fewest impacts to cultural and environmental resources...AND, Obama's EPA approved it.
However, for those of us paying attention, a judge, on June 14 of this year, "has ruled that permits authorized by the Trump administration to fast-track the completion of the Dakota Access Pipeline violated the law." In a 91-page ruling, the court ruled that the Army Corps of Engineers “did not adequately consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controversial.”
Duh, that's what the peaceful protesters said. You remember them, right? The Native Americans who rallied on Federal land without firearms (albeit without permits) to bring to light the potential consequences of a spill on cultural (read: people, fishing, etc.) and environmental resources down-stream.
This is a bit after the fact, though, as pumping had begun several weeks before this decision. A request by the Tribes to halt pumping while this was being considered was denied. To make things more bitter, a counter-suit was filed in Federal court against the protesters. Shooting them with rubber bullets and water canons wasn't enough. "Energy Transfer Partners of Dallas, Texas, listed the lawsuit's defendants as Greenpeace International, Earth First!, BankTrack, and other organizations and individuals." They're claiming eco-terrorism. To say the suit is punitive is an understatement. Regardless of the outcome, Energy Transfer Partners wasn't being held back for completion by the protestors...it was held back by Obama. Secondly, they got their wish through Trump and completed the pipeline, and began pumping oil into it. Third, who paid for the enforcement (i.e. shooting innocent people) at Standing Rock? Why, the good people of North Dakota did, to the tune of $38 million...and, according to their whining to the Feds, they're only asking that they be reimbursed $14 million by the Federal Government. Trump's administration approved $10 million, to make them go away. We'll see if that works.
What's next? Based on the judge's decision, there needs to be public input/comments into the allegations that President Small Hands' maneuver was, in fact, illegal and didn't consider the down-stream impacts of a spill. That public meeting has already been delayed at the request of Energy Transfer Partners who may or may not have also removed too many trees and improperly handled contaminated soil, thereby violating State Law. Also, at issue is another security firm is being sued for providing "security services" (read: mercenary enforcement against protesters). They're looking to get it thrown out claiming that they only provided consulting. B.S. There's video everywhere, and this time it is the State of North Dakota bringing the charges against a firm not licensed to do business of that sort in the State.
So, a muddy picture of how this moves forward. It's possible and likely that all of this is frivolous and that the pipeline will continue to pump oil until a severe accident occurs, which will likely get swept under the carpet by an administration who picks and chooses the environmental facts that best suit its purpose. It will impact some of the poorest people in the United States, practically confined to the Reservation. The only black and white outcome from this is that, if DAPL continues to operate, there's only one real winner, and that's Kelcy Warren, chief executive of Energy Transfer who tripled his net worth at the stroke of Trump's pen.
I'm beginning to feel like I need to keep a list akin to Arya's from Game of Thrones, of things we have to remember to undo once Agent Orange has left the building. But, it's clear that we need to pay attention to the successes and failures of opposing this project along with the President's apparent bigotry, the raping our National Monuments for fossil fuel reclamation, climate change, and, of course Russian interference in our political processes. I realize that equates to many sticks in the fire, but if we don't mind them all, our culture, our environment and our democracy may burn down around us.
Thursday, August 17, 2017
Charity and Action
To be fair, I didn't want to go.
My wife's father co-organizes a group from his synagogue to go, each month, to staff and supply a soup kitchen using donations from congregants. They go the second Saturday of each month, and he had asked Sara to go and to bring Jude. At the time, we didn't have any conflicts, and she was set to go. That was, until she all of a sudden had a conflict and asked me to step in, bring Jude and go.
In our relationship, it's my job to temper expectations of all we can get done in one Saturday and one Sunday. Mentally, I had filled the time she and Jude were expected to be away with quiet alone time with Johanna. Maybe, based on the weather, a trip to the playground, but super low-key. Now she was taking Jojo to an event and I was thrust into taking Jude to a parish in Orange, NJ to help out.
Needless to say, after much griping, I got over my bullshit laziness quickly. It was clearly the right thing to do, which didn't matter because I was irritated at having my weekend dictated to me. We don't volunteer as much as we should (but we talk a big game), and it would be great for Jude, as my father-in-law reminded us, to see and help people who needed help.
As soon as we got there around 11am we started helping in the kitchen, getting desserts plated and making sure hot food was warm, being warmed, or being cooked. Slowly, more and more congregants from the synagogue showed up to help, and a line started forming outside by those people looking to come and eat. The congregation prepared quite a spread of (mostly) healthy foods including some lovely salads, rotisserie chicken, meatballs, veggie medley, pasta, bread and a light dessert comprised of cookies.
When the doors opened at noon, we had a steady stream for about an hour and a half of people of all ages and nationalities. It was mostly single adults, but occasionally, there would be a mom and her kids, dad and his kids, or just a teenager alone. I was on chicken duty and Jude was in charge of bread. As I watched him, he did his job like a champ and with no adult help. He didn't flinch away from people, even those with fewer teeth than him, or those who smelled differently. He greeted everyone, and allowed them to tell him what it was they wanted...and then he gave it to them.
He and I estimated that we served more than 100 people that morning. He never questioned why we were giving them food. He understood that this is what we do: they were hungry and we helped with feeding them. That was it. This is what you do. There was no talk about race. There was no talk about why they were less fortunate or why they needed to come to the church. They were hungry so we fed them. I wish my mind was so accepting. I have prejudice. As I saw them, I insisted that the mother with twin little girls take more food because the three of them were thin. While they weren't necessarily supposed to come back for seconds, we had more than enough, and I definitely doubled up on portions for those who asked, even some who didn't. A girl, who came by herself and couldn't have been older than 11 or 12 came without the voucher to eat. When we asked for it, she turned around as if to leave. We quickly called after her and insisted she make a plate. That's why we were there. She came back again to make a plate to take with her, and we made sure she had enough before we let her go. It's just the right thing to do.
After we were all done, my father-in-law, sister-in-law, Jude and I went out to get a bite to eat at the Millburn Deli, just 20 minutes away from Orange. It couldn't have been a more stark contrast to what we had just been doing. I don't think it hit Jude as much as it hit me, but we had just gone from the extreme have-nots to the extreme haves in the blink of an eye. How many of these people donate...anything? Who thinks about the fact that we are so geographically close to such poverty, yet we hardly ever see it.
I am a privileged white male who grew up in an middle-class house with food always on my table, clothes to wear and luxury items like CDs and stereo equipment and computers and the Internet...and books. Yet, I'm no different than the people we helped. I know some of them work, maybe most of them. I know they're trying because they made a conscious decision to get help that morning.
The bigger question is, are we trying? Are you trying? It cost my family $15 in vegetables and 3 hours of time. Do you have that? What have you donated last? When was that? Could you do a little more? My excuse for not wanting to go was complete and utter laziness. Facebook this week is filled with posts about racial equality and denouncing hate. Posts don't do shit. Praying doesn't do shit. Put your time and money where your mouth is, and donate the clothes that don't fit. Go give blood. Go help at a soup kitchen. Volunteer at an animal shelter or rehab. Become a better steward of this earth and its inhabitants...and do it at a meager $15 and/or 3 hours per month.
If you're reading this on FaceBook, I know you have time to burn and money to blow. Why not do it responsibly. While I don't know if we'll go every second Saturday, I'm fairly certain that we'll go again. There is no shortage of people who need help, and we (you included) are uniquely capable of helping.
My wife's father co-organizes a group from his synagogue to go, each month, to staff and supply a soup kitchen using donations from congregants. They go the second Saturday of each month, and he had asked Sara to go and to bring Jude. At the time, we didn't have any conflicts, and she was set to go. That was, until she all of a sudden had a conflict and asked me to step in, bring Jude and go.
In our relationship, it's my job to temper expectations of all we can get done in one Saturday and one Sunday. Mentally, I had filled the time she and Jude were expected to be away with quiet alone time with Johanna. Maybe, based on the weather, a trip to the playground, but super low-key. Now she was taking Jojo to an event and I was thrust into taking Jude to a parish in Orange, NJ to help out.
Needless to say, after much griping, I got over my bullshit laziness quickly. It was clearly the right thing to do, which didn't matter because I was irritated at having my weekend dictated to me. We don't volunteer as much as we should (but we talk a big game), and it would be great for Jude, as my father-in-law reminded us, to see and help people who needed help.
As soon as we got there around 11am we started helping in the kitchen, getting desserts plated and making sure hot food was warm, being warmed, or being cooked. Slowly, more and more congregants from the synagogue showed up to help, and a line started forming outside by those people looking to come and eat. The congregation prepared quite a spread of (mostly) healthy foods including some lovely salads, rotisserie chicken, meatballs, veggie medley, pasta, bread and a light dessert comprised of cookies.
When the doors opened at noon, we had a steady stream for about an hour and a half of people of all ages and nationalities. It was mostly single adults, but occasionally, there would be a mom and her kids, dad and his kids, or just a teenager alone. I was on chicken duty and Jude was in charge of bread. As I watched him, he did his job like a champ and with no adult help. He didn't flinch away from people, even those with fewer teeth than him, or those who smelled differently. He greeted everyone, and allowed them to tell him what it was they wanted...and then he gave it to them.
He and I estimated that we served more than 100 people that morning. He never questioned why we were giving them food. He understood that this is what we do: they were hungry and we helped with feeding them. That was it. This is what you do. There was no talk about race. There was no talk about why they were less fortunate or why they needed to come to the church. They were hungry so we fed them. I wish my mind was so accepting. I have prejudice. As I saw them, I insisted that the mother with twin little girls take more food because the three of them were thin. While they weren't necessarily supposed to come back for seconds, we had more than enough, and I definitely doubled up on portions for those who asked, even some who didn't. A girl, who came by herself and couldn't have been older than 11 or 12 came without the voucher to eat. When we asked for it, she turned around as if to leave. We quickly called after her and insisted she make a plate. That's why we were there. She came back again to make a plate to take with her, and we made sure she had enough before we let her go. It's just the right thing to do.
After we were all done, my father-in-law, sister-in-law, Jude and I went out to get a bite to eat at the Millburn Deli, just 20 minutes away from Orange. It couldn't have been a more stark contrast to what we had just been doing. I don't think it hit Jude as much as it hit me, but we had just gone from the extreme have-nots to the extreme haves in the blink of an eye. How many of these people donate...anything? Who thinks about the fact that we are so geographically close to such poverty, yet we hardly ever see it.
I am a privileged white male who grew up in an middle-class house with food always on my table, clothes to wear and luxury items like CDs and stereo equipment and computers and the Internet...and books. Yet, I'm no different than the people we helped. I know some of them work, maybe most of them. I know they're trying because they made a conscious decision to get help that morning.
The bigger question is, are we trying? Are you trying? It cost my family $15 in vegetables and 3 hours of time. Do you have that? What have you donated last? When was that? Could you do a little more? My excuse for not wanting to go was complete and utter laziness. Facebook this week is filled with posts about racial equality and denouncing hate. Posts don't do shit. Praying doesn't do shit. Put your time and money where your mouth is, and donate the clothes that don't fit. Go give blood. Go help at a soup kitchen. Volunteer at an animal shelter or rehab. Become a better steward of this earth and its inhabitants...and do it at a meager $15 and/or 3 hours per month.
If you're reading this on FaceBook, I know you have time to burn and money to blow. Why not do it responsibly. While I don't know if we'll go every second Saturday, I'm fairly certain that we'll go again. There is no shortage of people who need help, and we (you included) are uniquely capable of helping.
Friday, August 11, 2017
Simply Orange
Another short blog today, this one about the President. And, I think I have him figured out. This week, unless you live in a cave, you've heard the President threaten (multiple times) North Korea. It's been a literal war of words between the Trump White House and Pyongyang.
“They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
Questions by the media in subsequent interviews, from Bedminster, NJ, yielded nearly no specifics or definitive answers. What does he mean? "You'll see," was the response. "North Korea better get their act together or they're going to be in trouble, like few nations have ever been in trouble in this world."
Really? Are you scolding Barron or Eric or Donald Jr.? Is North Korea going to have to go to their room to think about what they did, and they're definitely not getting dessert tonight.
Sorry, mom, when I was 9, you threatened me much like the President is doing to grown-ups of a foreign nation.
And that's what I understand. NPR is in Iowa at their State Fair this week, interviewing citizens about their appreciation for the President now that he's done nothing but sign legislation penalizing Russia, something that I'm sure pained him greatly.
"I support him still. He's doing everything he says he'd do. He's definitely a common-man president."
Add to the previous statement a slight mid-west/southern accent, and there you have it: the reason why Trump is still polling well in the mid-US. He's like them. Say what you want about his level of intelligence, he's speaking in such layman's terms, that it's laughable, but he's understood universally. Why? His use of language is so "very very" basic and without imagination. He rants seem childish. His use of short words goes beyond his affinity for Twitter. He throws in statements about "bad hombres" and "they're going to be sorry" and phrases you wouldn't even belittle your kids with, or use in a middle-school term paper.
In short, the man is simple, which also, if you were sick of the old regime, is refreshing. Here's a guy, who's just trying to do his job, and the bad media is making it hard for him. He talks like us. All he wants to do is work, and they keep digging up stories about what he may have done. Can't they just let him be?
We on the coasts (including the Great Lakes) frequently forget that, in addition to the highest costs of living, we are also some of the most educated citizens, including those who don't have a degree. Why? Due to ports, not only do we live at a higher density (more people), but also greater ethnic diversity. Our world views are bigger. Even if that just means that you overheard someone speaking another language on the subway platform, its a global awareness that someone without a similar living environment doesn't have.
And ignorance breeds fear. And Trump is still selling that fear. And he has buyers of his rhetoric. How do you combat that? Not with fancy graphics or detailed reports about how climate change is real, or how mexicans aren't stealing your jobs (Want to pick crops? You're desperately needed in California). I don't have the answer, but if we want to be able to reach certain Trump voters, we need to start at the lowest common denominator, which he is lowering daily, and try to make connections with the people who sympathize with him most.
“They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
Questions by the media in subsequent interviews, from Bedminster, NJ, yielded nearly no specifics or definitive answers. What does he mean? "You'll see," was the response. "North Korea better get their act together or they're going to be in trouble, like few nations have ever been in trouble in this world."
Really? Are you scolding Barron or Eric or Donald Jr.? Is North Korea going to have to go to their room to think about what they did, and they're definitely not getting dessert tonight.
Sorry, mom, when I was 9, you threatened me much like the President is doing to grown-ups of a foreign nation.
And that's what I understand. NPR is in Iowa at their State Fair this week, interviewing citizens about their appreciation for the President now that he's done nothing but sign legislation penalizing Russia, something that I'm sure pained him greatly.
"I support him still. He's doing everything he says he'd do. He's definitely a common-man president."
Add to the previous statement a slight mid-west/southern accent, and there you have it: the reason why Trump is still polling well in the mid-US. He's like them. Say what you want about his level of intelligence, he's speaking in such layman's terms, that it's laughable, but he's understood universally. Why? His use of language is so "very very" basic and without imagination. He rants seem childish. His use of short words goes beyond his affinity for Twitter. He throws in statements about "bad hombres" and "they're going to be sorry" and phrases you wouldn't even belittle your kids with, or use in a middle-school term paper.
In short, the man is simple, which also, if you were sick of the old regime, is refreshing. Here's a guy, who's just trying to do his job, and the bad media is making it hard for him. He talks like us. All he wants to do is work, and they keep digging up stories about what he may have done. Can't they just let him be?
We on the coasts (including the Great Lakes) frequently forget that, in addition to the highest costs of living, we are also some of the most educated citizens, including those who don't have a degree. Why? Due to ports, not only do we live at a higher density (more people), but also greater ethnic diversity. Our world views are bigger. Even if that just means that you overheard someone speaking another language on the subway platform, its a global awareness that someone without a similar living environment doesn't have.
And ignorance breeds fear. And Trump is still selling that fear. And he has buyers of his rhetoric. How do you combat that? Not with fancy graphics or detailed reports about how climate change is real, or how mexicans aren't stealing your jobs (Want to pick crops? You're desperately needed in California). I don't have the answer, but if we want to be able to reach certain Trump voters, we need to start at the lowest common denominator, which he is lowering daily, and try to make connections with the people who sympathize with him most.
Friday, July 28, 2017
Just a meme before I go
Next week, unless something spectacular happens, I'll be taking a week off from blogging. I know this isn't necessarily earth-shattering news, but I've been religiously blogging weekly since September 2013. If you've been following since then, you know a couple of things: I'm obsessive about my coffee, I believe in common sense gun control, I'm in love with our National Parks and photographing them, music is the best, and I'm not a fan of the bombastic, loud-mouthed stylings of the NJ's governor.
It's that last point that I'll quickly touch upon. If you're following NJ politics, even remotely, you'll know that our Governor was slated to be the resident 'loud-mouth' of the Republican candidates for President before Agent Orange tossed his hate into the ring (not a typo). Trump took Christie's rhetoric to epically insane proportion, and out Christie'd Christie. The result: a bitter (mentally) deflated governor who immediately took it out on a populace that hates him. Currently, he enjoys a 15% approval rating, according to Politico, and "doesn't care."
“You guys care much more about that stuff than I do. I’ve said to you over and over and over again: Poll numbers matter when you’re running for something. When you’re not running for something, they don’t matter a bit. And I don’t care.”
Fine.
What does he care about? His kids, and he's claiming that they are terribly hurt by the criticisms that have erupted by his insistence of using a State beach when he closed them off to everyone else during the government's early July shut-down. According to NJ.Com, he is quoted as saying: "They [the kids] came to me and said, 'It's our fault [the criticism], we should have just told you that we would have just told all of our friends to go away.' And I said to them, no, this was my decision. You're not the adult. I am."
Can't someone please think of the children???
I call bullshit. It's much easier to say "I'm not offended at all by the criticism, but my kids..." than it is to take ownership of a really bad execution of a worse idea. Governor, have you never been to the beach before? Did you not realize that advertisers/people/photographers can charter a plane? Are you so stupid and unaware that telephoto lenses exist?
And, so, with that, here is a small collection of my favorite Christie Beach Memes. Is it fair to keep making fun of the Love Gov? Yes. His political career is defined by his bombastic loud speaking style where he not only talks over constituents with opposing views, but engages in name-calling and taunting rhetoric. He's been dishing it out to the State's citizens since day one in office, it's time for him to grow a thick skin, stop throwing his kids under the bus, and take it, like an adult.
Dude, you're gonna need a bigger boat.
It's that last point that I'll quickly touch upon. If you're following NJ politics, even remotely, you'll know that our Governor was slated to be the resident 'loud-mouth' of the Republican candidates for President before Agent Orange tossed his hate into the ring (not a typo). Trump took Christie's rhetoric to epically insane proportion, and out Christie'd Christie. The result: a bitter (mentally) deflated governor who immediately took it out on a populace that hates him. Currently, he enjoys a 15% approval rating, according to Politico, and "doesn't care."
“You guys care much more about that stuff than I do. I’ve said to you over and over and over again: Poll numbers matter when you’re running for something. When you’re not running for something, they don’t matter a bit. And I don’t care.”
Fine.
What does he care about? His kids, and he's claiming that they are terribly hurt by the criticisms that have erupted by his insistence of using a State beach when he closed them off to everyone else during the government's early July shut-down. According to NJ.Com, he is quoted as saying: "They [the kids] came to me and said, 'It's our fault [the criticism], we should have just told you that we would have just told all of our friends to go away.' And I said to them, no, this was my decision. You're not the adult. I am."
Can't someone please think of the children???I call bullshit. It's much easier to say "I'm not offended at all by the criticism, but my kids..." than it is to take ownership of a really bad execution of a worse idea. Governor, have you never been to the beach before? Did you not realize that advertisers/people/photographers can charter a plane? Are you so stupid and unaware that telephoto lenses exist?
And, so, with that, here is a small collection of my favorite Christie Beach Memes. Is it fair to keep making fun of the Love Gov? Yes. His political career is defined by his bombastic loud speaking style where he not only talks over constituents with opposing views, but engages in name-calling and taunting rhetoric. He's been dishing it out to the State's citizens since day one in office, it's time for him to grow a thick skin, stop throwing his kids under the bus, and take it, like an adult.
Dude, you're gonna need a bigger boat.
Thursday, July 20, 2017
Noro Reason to Bail?
This week, it was widely reported that 13 customers of the Sterling, VA Chipotle store exhibited symptoms of food poisoning. And, in fact, one tested positively for norovirus. What is norovirus?
"Norovirus is a stomach bug that causes inflammation of the stomach or intestines. As a result, symptoms include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain and fever. According to the Mayo Clinic, symptoms usually come on between 12 and 48 hours after exposure to the virus and last between one and three days. While contagion is low after a couple of days, you could continue to shed the virus for up to eight weeks."
Thanks Time Magazine. That sounds great! In short, it's bad...really bad food poisoning. You may need medical attention, if for no other reason than to rehydrate yourself. As you could probably imagine, it would likely be most dangerous to those in our population with compromised or under-developed immune systems: young children and our senior population. And, what's worse is that it's easily transmitted. In addition to eating tainted foods, you can also catch it by touching a contaminated surface and then touching your eyes, mouth or nose. Frequent hand-washing, with soap, is the answer, as it is for many of these preventable diseases. In the case of the Sterling location, it's extremely likely that a carrier for the virus (employee?) touched something that 13 people ordered and it just spread.
That doesn't mean that you should stop eating at Chipotle restaurants all across the United States. Actually, they're one of the better "fast food" chains as they have made it a mission to use locally sourced ingredients. CNBC reported in December of 2015 that locally sourced produce accounts for around 10% of the total produce used at Chipotle locations. That's hard to do. Why? Because in order to run a successful national chain, you need to provide customers with identical dining experiences between franchises. Introduce a variable like multiple local suppliers and then you have a massive added cost in order to maintain consistency and safety practices. In turn, it increases prices somewhat for these added steps, but customers seem to have embraced it. The Harvard Business Review describes it this way:
"Number one: If you are doing local sourcing, you have to bake into your cost structure a higher percentage of sales allowance for food safety and ingredient testing than if you are sourcing nationally from a few big suppliers. Obviously, that can have a bearing on your retail price, but, in general, consumers expect to pay more for locally-sourced products, particularly if they have other attributes, such as being organic or natural."
While not specifically noted, this may be one of the reasons McDonald's parted ways with their holdings in Chipotle. Business Insider reported in 2015 "The chief executive, Steve Easterbrook, said Chipotle was a distraction." It's also the reason why Taco Bell's 2006 e coli outbreak was far, far worse. It led to 71 cases in 5 states. The distribution of contaminated lettuce from a single supplier located in the "western United States" (read: California) was the culprit.
The lesson, eat more locally. The other take-away, this outbreak at Chipotle was very well geographically contained. Your favorite Chipotle wasn't affected. So, go, order a burrito today with confidence. Actually, the reason not to eat Chipotle was never because of what you could catch, but more about watching what you eat. A ton of "healthy" ingredients in obscene portions still makes for bad habits. Examples of single 2,000 calorie meals at fast food chains can be found here and here. And, yes, Chipotle makes the list.
Bon Appétit
"Norovirus is a stomach bug that causes inflammation of the stomach or intestines. As a result, symptoms include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain and fever. According to the Mayo Clinic, symptoms usually come on between 12 and 48 hours after exposure to the virus and last between one and three days. While contagion is low after a couple of days, you could continue to shed the virus for up to eight weeks."
Thanks Time Magazine. That sounds great! In short, it's bad...really bad food poisoning. You may need medical attention, if for no other reason than to rehydrate yourself. As you could probably imagine, it would likely be most dangerous to those in our population with compromised or under-developed immune systems: young children and our senior population. And, what's worse is that it's easily transmitted. In addition to eating tainted foods, you can also catch it by touching a contaminated surface and then touching your eyes, mouth or nose. Frequent hand-washing, with soap, is the answer, as it is for many of these preventable diseases. In the case of the Sterling location, it's extremely likely that a carrier for the virus (employee?) touched something that 13 people ordered and it just spread.
That doesn't mean that you should stop eating at Chipotle restaurants all across the United States. Actually, they're one of the better "fast food" chains as they have made it a mission to use locally sourced ingredients. CNBC reported in December of 2015 that locally sourced produce accounts for around 10% of the total produce used at Chipotle locations. That's hard to do. Why? Because in order to run a successful national chain, you need to provide customers with identical dining experiences between franchises. Introduce a variable like multiple local suppliers and then you have a massive added cost in order to maintain consistency and safety practices. In turn, it increases prices somewhat for these added steps, but customers seem to have embraced it. The Harvard Business Review describes it this way:
"Number one: If you are doing local sourcing, you have to bake into your cost structure a higher percentage of sales allowance for food safety and ingredient testing than if you are sourcing nationally from a few big suppliers. Obviously, that can have a bearing on your retail price, but, in general, consumers expect to pay more for locally-sourced products, particularly if they have other attributes, such as being organic or natural."
While not specifically noted, this may be one of the reasons McDonald's parted ways with their holdings in Chipotle. Business Insider reported in 2015 "The chief executive, Steve Easterbrook, said Chipotle was a distraction." It's also the reason why Taco Bell's 2006 e coli outbreak was far, far worse. It led to 71 cases in 5 states. The distribution of contaminated lettuce from a single supplier located in the "western United States" (read: California) was the culprit.
The lesson, eat more locally. The other take-away, this outbreak at Chipotle was very well geographically contained. Your favorite Chipotle wasn't affected. So, go, order a burrito today with confidence. Actually, the reason not to eat Chipotle was never because of what you could catch, but more about watching what you eat. A ton of "healthy" ingredients in obscene portions still makes for bad habits. Examples of single 2,000 calorie meals at fast food chains can be found here and here. And, yes, Chipotle makes the list.
Bon Appétit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)