The Top Blogs Of The Internet: Jul 25, 2009

Francesca Biller-Safran: Help! How to Escape the Unexpected Guest, Play Dead if you Have To!
July 23, 2009 at 10:53 pm

1. Tell them your children are very sick and contagious. If they remind you that you don't have children, reply, "You see, you know nothing about my life at all, you are not my friend after all, leave my property at once!"

2. Start yelling and pretending as if you are in a very bad argument on the phone. Make sure to say really embarrassing and inappropriate things that you know would make your guest repulsed and want to leave.

3. Tell them you're in the middle of sex, and if they are rude enough to ask who with, tell them they win the Golden Rude Award for being the nosiest and most obnoxious excuse of a human being of all time.

4. Tell them that you think you have the swine flu and that your doctor said that anyone can catch it in any vicinity that the carrier has walked, breathed or existed in. Remember to intermittingly burst into uncontrollable coughing and hacking as you tell them this.

5. If you are "absolutely" sure they didn't already see you though a window or hear your voice, lie down anywhere they won't be able to spot you, such as behind the couch or even on the floor by the door, and try to breathe as softly as you can and pretend as if you are dead. Just to be safe, stay there for at least 10 minutes, because you can never trust the unexpected guest .Once they arrive, they don't want to leave, ever!

6. Always have what I call the U.G.B. handy, which stands for Unwanted-Guest-Basket. This way you can yell at your uninvited guest through your locked door (of course!) and wait three minutes while you throw miscellaneous clutter from each room into the basket. Remember unexpected guests are often nosy and rude and will simply barge into each room of your house with lines such as, "Have you been re-decorating?" or "Do you have any extra Xanax in your medicine cabinet?"

7. Make sure you also have an extra empty trash at hand can so you don't mix smelly disgusting trash, food and weird things with the semi clean U.G.B. basket items in a panic, forgetting about it later. Put the basket anywhere in some unassuming corner covered by a clean towel, blanket, pillow or mellow pet.

8. Tell them through the door that you have the worst stomach ache of your life and that you ran to the door in the middle of being on the toilet. If that doesn't work, tell them they are a horrible person and that you will obtain a restraining order against them tomorrow.

9. Begin to make terrible animal noises and tell them you have a newly diagnosed panic disorder which specifically recommends against any spontaneous visits, confrontations or communication, especially at your own your residence.

10. If you happen not to like this person or persons anyway, and wish not want to be their friend; and you realize that you actually may even "hate" and "despise" this person, tell them, "Not only can't you not come in, but I never want to see you again, hear your name or want you in my town. Leave now or I will have to call the authorities."

Remember what Stuart Smalley said, now a United States Senator who now calls himself Al Franken, who only became a successful politician against all odds because of his daily affirmations that he continuously told himself in the mirror. Here are some of his inner peace affirmations:

I am a worthy human being
That's just stinking thinking!
You're should-ing all over yourself
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt
I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me
It's easier to put on the slippers than to carpet the world
Whining is anger through a small opening
I deserve good things. I am entitled to my share of happiness. I refuse to beat myself up. I am an attractive person. I am fun to be with.

If Stuart could surpass all of his fears and become a Senator, than certainly you have the strength to decide who comes through your door, without a letter, email of apology or promise of free massage the following day.

And remember that after this traumatic uninvited guest experience to repeat Smalley's words to yourself:
"Trace it, face it and Erase It"

John Brown: A Forgotten Kitchen Debate and American Public Diplomacy
July 23, 2009 at 10:41 pm

If there is one theme at today's impressive conference at George Washington University's "Face-off to Facebook: From the Nixon-Khrushchev Kitchen debate to Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century", it is that US public diplomacy [PD], though its tools of persuasion have changed during the past fifty years, is, above all, about human beings connecting with one another rather than a government "pushing a message" on a "target audience."

Often cited during the conference were the words of Edward R. Murrow, the Director of the United States Information Agency (USIA) during the Kennedy administration, who famously said that USG overseas outreach "is not so much moving information or guidance or policy five or 10,000 miles. ... The real art is to move it the last three feet in face to face conversation."

To be sure, during the Cold War, PD's official message ("telling America's story," the logo of the United States Information Agency) was, on the books, essentially about the United States speaking to, rather than with, the rest of the world.

But as Jack Masey, USIA Chief of Design of the 1959 American National Exhibition in Moscow, pointed out about the exhibition, what really worked best in the case of our Cold War "enemy" was that Russians were able to connect with real-life Americans -- the young US exhibition guides (fluent Russian speakers) with whom Russians talked about a wide variety of subjects, some of which had little to do to do with the exhibition itself.

Exhibition guide George Feifer, in his memorable account of his Moscow stay, stressed how important it was to him to speak with Russians directly and how much he had learned about their post-Stalin society through their one-on-one exchanges.

The second part of the conference dealt with "The New Media in Today's Public Diplomacy." Here too a key word was "connect." The new media make it possible for persons throughout the world to link up on matters of shared interest via cyberspace -- rather than, as was arguably the case -- to be manipulated by centrally-controlled twentieth-century old media, government or CNN.

But a key question, asked by a member of the audience, is how the "connections" made possible by the new media can, in fact, act as a last-three-feet-personal, "human presence."

Dr. Irene S. Levine: Gay/Straight Friendship: Is It Possible?
July 23, 2009 at 9:48 pm

QUESTION

Do you think a friendship can really exist between a straight woman and a lesbian? I want to believe so, but I am finding that maintaining one is difficult. I am a 48-year old gay woman who has a 27-year old straight friend. We met at work about two years ago. Although there is a large age difference between us, Chelsea and I seemed to have a lot in common. She also told me that most of her friends and boyfriends have been older.

The gay/straight thing has caused a bit of a conflict during the course of our friendship. I will admit I have had feelings of jealously regarding her boyfriends but Chelsea never really wanted to talk about it. She would just hang up the phone on me if she didn't like my comments or advice. I treated Chelsea as if she was my girlfriend, paid for dinner, plays, etc. and she liked it.

Recently our friendship has fallen off. An everyday phone call has now become once in a while. She doesn't return my emails for days, if at all, and it seems as if I have to do the asking if I want to see her. Chelsea never asks me to do anything and she has stated she is just too busy with work and her social life in the Hamptons.

What I thought was a solid dynamic friendship is now looking like crap. I truly feel I should just let Chelsea go and if she contacts me in the future, maybe I will respond or maybe not?? I am very hurt and depressed because I do not know what happened or what I did wrong.

Thoughts??? Thank you for your help.

Sandy

ANSWER

Dear Sandy,

You are really asking a broader question: Regardless of gender, can a gay person and a straight person sustain a friendship? The answer: Yes, absolutely yes. Differences in sexual orientation don't necessarily negate the possibility of a close friendship.

There may be a variety of reasons why your friendship with Chelsea isn't working. I can only speculate; you sound somewhat confused but you may have more insight than you think. Could it be that you have less in common than you first thought? Could the age difference be more meaningful than it first appeared to be? Could Chelsea be feeling cautious about mixing work and friendship?

Or - -is it legitimate for Chelsea to feel that you want more than a friendship from her, especially when you were jealous of her boyfriends and treated her like a "girlfriend" rather than a friend? Every friendship depends on two people establishing boundaries that are mutually comfortable. Perhaps, you inadvertently made Chelsea uncomfortable and she's not sure how to end the friendship.

Be upfront with her and ask her if she's uncomfortable with your relationship for any reason. If so, see if it is something that can be discussed and resolved. If not, you will simply need to let go -- but you should feel better knowing that you tried to straighten things out. In the future, you may need to be more honest with yourself and with other women about whether your own feelings with a straight friend are platonic or something more.

Hope this is helpful.

Best,
Irene

Have a question about female friendships? Send it to The Friendship Doctor.

Irene S. Levine, PhD is a freelance journalist and author. She holds an appointment as a professor of psychiatry at the New York University School of Medicine and her book about female friendships, Best Friends Forever: Surviving A Breakup With Your Best Friend, will be published by Overlook Press in September, 2009. She recently co-authored Schizophrenia for Dummies (Wiley, 2008). She also blogs about female friendships at The Friendship Blog.

Dr. Josh Dines and Dr. Rock Positano: Meniscal Tears -- A Common Cause of Knee Pain
July 23, 2009 at 9:46 pm

Meniscal tears are relatively common knee injuries that are encountered in almost every sport. Virtually every young athlete has either personally dealt with a meniscal tear or knows of a teammate that has battled one. Even Mets ace pitcher Johan Santana had left knee surgery for a meniscal tear at the end of last season. While surgical treatments have certainly advanced to treat these injuries in a minimally invasive fashion, the decision-making remains difficult. There is a delicate balance between return-to-play and long-term health of the knee that must be discussed to achieve a mutual consensus between the surgeon and athlete.

Menisci are C-shaped pieces of cartilage in the knee. There are two of them, one in the medial and lateral compartment respectively, that rest between the femur and tibia. While seemingly small, these structures are remarkably important and play a crucial role in shock absorption and load transmission across the knee. The menisci are predominantly made of water and collagen, and function to protect the irreplaceable articular cartilage of the knee joint. Without them, it has been shown that there is a several fold increased risk of predictable degenerative arthritis. Meniscal tears can result from both contact or non-contact, pivoting injuries of the knee, and can occur in isolation or combination with fractures or ligament injuries. Symptomatic tears will present with joint line pain on the side of the tear, and may be accompanied by mechanical locking or catching of torn fragments within the joint. There can often be associated swelling of the knee and secondary weakness of the quadriceps muscle. In more severe cases, they can cause instability in the knee.

Meniscal tears in young athletes can either be repaired or trimmed, but determining which is best is a complex decision-making process. Many factors, both scientific and personal, must be considered. The athlete's age, tear location, associated injuries, and meniscal blood supply must be considered to determine the likelihood that a repaired meniscus tear will heal. In addition, however, the athlete's goals and expectations must also be addressed, including timing in the season and anticipated career changes. In general, it is best for the long-term health of the knee and athlete to repair a meniscus if the tear configuration and biological environment is conducive to healing. While this may delay return-to-play and potentially jeopardize the current season, the long-term benefits to knee health may certainly outweigh the short-term gains. On the other hand, many tear patterns and locations are not amenable to repair or healing, such that a trimming procedure will allow for predictable pain relief and an expeditious return to competitive play. It is best for the treatment and rehabilitation plan to be developed after thoughtful discussions between you and your treating physician. Either way, the procedure is almost always done arthroscopically, using a camera through a small poke hole in the skin. This had made recovery from such injuries much easier than decades ago when a big incision had to be made.

Reyne Haines: Collecting Your Childhood Memories Is Gonna Cost Ya
July 23, 2009 at 9:38 pm

It's not cheap to bring a piece of nostalgia back into your life these days.

If your mom threw out your old comic books, make sure to share this blog with her...

Everyone loves Spiderman. You read the comics, watched the cartoon, or saw the movie. Face it, at some point in time your probably daydreamed about shooting some webbing out the window of your bedroom and swinging off to places unknown.

Heritage Auction Galleries has a near mint copy of the Amazing Spider-Man up for bid. The actual sale is August 14-15th, but they are accepting absentee bids now. The current bid (just in case you were considering it) is $53,000.

Another highlight in the sale (and one of my favorites) is an original work by Charles Schulz. You know, the creator behind the Peanuts comic strip. They have a few of these showing some of the most recognized scenes from the comic. For example, you can bid on a scene of Lucy pulling the football away before Charlie Brown kicks it. I might have to follow this lot. Two weeks before Mr. Schulz died, I sold a pen drawing by him of Snoopy on his doghouse. Where was my crystal ball then???

They also have additional comic art lots by the following artists:

Jim Steranko - Strange Tales artwork
Prince Valiant
Mandrake The Magician
Tarzan
Flash Gordon

To check out the entire sale (or even place a bid!) go to:
www.ha.com/7009

Happy Hunting!

More on Barack Obama

Marshall Goldsmith: Are You Encouraging Suck-ups?
July 23, 2009 at 9:10 pm

Every company claims to discourage suck-ups. Every leader claims to despise suck-ups. If we all hate suck-ups so much, why does so much sucking-up go on?

Sucking-up happens because we all tend to create an environment where people learn to suck-up to us. We can easily see this in others. It is just hard to see in ourselves. You are probably thinking, "Marshall is making a good point. I see others do this all of the time. Of course, I find it to be disgusting!"

As a test of our unconscious tendency to encourage sycophants, I always ask participants in my executive education classes this question, "How many of you own a dog that you love?" Big smiles cross the faces of these leaders as they wave their hands in the air. They beam as they tell me the names of their always faithful hounds. Then we have a little contest. I ask them, "At home, who gets the most unqualified positive recognition? Is it (a) your husband, wife or partner (b) your kids or (c) your dog?" More than 80 percent of the time the winner is the dog.

I next ask these same executives, "Do you really love your dog more than the other members of your family?" They laugh and say no. My next question, "Why does the dog get the most unqualified positive recognition?"

Their replies are always the same: "The dog doesn't talk back." "When I come home the dog is always happy to see me!" "Even if I come home late (or drunk) the dog doesn't care." "The dog gives me unconditional love -- no matter what I do!"

In other words, the dog is a suck-up.

If we aren't careful, we can wind up treating people at work like dogs. We can unconsciously recognize people who recognize us.

The best way to stop this behavior is to recognize that we all have a tendency to fall into this trap -- and the higher we move up in the organization, the bigger the trap gets.

I teach leaders to rank order their direct reports four ways:

1. How much do they like me? I know that you cannot be sure. What matters is what you think. Only bad suck-ups look like they are sucking-up. Great suck-ups appear to be your "true friends."

2. How much are they like me? Some leaders don't favor people who like them; they favor people who remind them of themselves. A common variation from an engineer might be, "He may be a jerk, but he is an engineer." As if people who are not engineers don't have brains.

3. What is their contribution to our company and its customers?

4. How much positive personal recognition do I give them?

If we are honest with ourselves, in a surprisingly large number of cases, we may find that recognition is more influenced by 1 or 2 than it is 3. And that (without meaning to) we may be falling into a trap that we despise in others -- playing favorites.

Make this ranking yourself. After doing a thoughtful review, start monitoring your own behavior. Make sure that you are recognizing people at working for doing what is right for the company -- not for making you feel good about yourself.

Patricia Zohn: Culture Zohn Off the C(H)uff: Dean Valentine sends one our way at the Hammer Museum
July 23, 2009 at 9:03 pm

To hit the street on a Saturday in Los Angeles with Dean Valentine, collector extraordinaire, is no small thing. I had the memory of one afternoon with him in mind while exploring his recent gift of sculpture to the Hammer Museum in its inaugural exhibition Second Nature, which continues through October 4th.

Lioness by Ruby Neri, Photo Credit: Joshua White

Shadowing him a few years ago in and out of a series of galleries, I tried to pick up some pointers. He would nod or say a quick hello at the reception desk, not stopping though, eager to get at the art -- catching up with someone's work he already knew, or getting a fix on a new artist. He would take a beat as he entered the main gallery space, almost as if he was getting the scent.

Usually, the gallerist would quietly make his or her way over to Valentine (he would be immediately recognized but given the space to absorb things at his own pace), ready to answer a few questions or just add a few biographical details to the artist's latest work. He is open and accessible, always ready to discuss.

Valentine is impressive in many ways, not least of all because he is utterly fearless and, like a truly great collector, he does not look over his shoulder. He has a discerning, demanding eye but also an enormous humanity. It is a blessed combination for the artists whose work he acquires -- pieces that speaks to his mind, his funny bone or his heart.

It turns out what he likes and what the contemporary art market likes are often the same thing. Is this because he is leading the pack? Possibly. I prefer to think it's because he asks the hard questions and is really channeling something on behalf of the rest of us, the medium by which we are getting the message.

Swan Cycle by Pentti Monkkonen, Photo Credit: Joshua White

Valentine took some time to be thoughtful about today's art world and his place in it.

Culture Zohn: You have been seriously collecting for the decade I've known you -- not just sculpture but painting as well. How is it that you are so fearless about knowing what you like?

Dean Valentine: It isn't hard being fearless. What's hard is knowing what I like. I've found over and over that when the liking comes too easily, the art usually isn't very good. Its the stuff that gives you a hard time, that makes you look twice, that maybe repels you or puzzles you at first, that's usually where my collecting begins. You have to learn to not trust yourself.

CZ: The market has validated many of your choices, or perhaps it's following your good instincts. How much does it matter that so much of your collection is now in the stratosphere?

DV: Validation by the market or others is always nice, no matter what anyone tells you. But I've never bought a work because I thought it would make money. In fact money is never ever a factor because it leads to bad artistic decisions (unless its the issue of whether I can actually afford something).

CZ: What about the contemporary art scene in Los Angeles? How has the recession affected what is going on? Is it any different in New York? Are the artists in this show in danger of having to wait tables or does the waning of the art market give them needed time to pull back from being as overtly commercial?

DV: For the last 30 years Los Angeles has been the world capital for contemporary art -- not for galleries, or museum or collectors. But it's where the best artists have been making the best and most important work. Again and again the art that is made here gets validated by the rest of the globe -- sometimes it takes a few years, but it always happens -- from the early days of Conceptual Art in the late 60s -- Ed Ruscha, Al Ruppersberg, John Baldessari, Bas Jan Ader, Bruce Nauman, through Mike Kelley and Charlie Ray, all the way to artists like Richard Hawkins, Stephen Rhodes, Nate Hylden, Paul Sietsema, and Sterling Ruby today.

The recession always affects gallerists and collectors, of course. A few galleries have or will shut down. Fewer kids will go to art school Some will indeed have to take on other jobs. But artists make art because they have to, because that's the only way they can live. That never changes, no matter what the economy. LA, which has never had the infrastructure of galleries and collectors that New York does, is less affected. There's a lot more damage in New York.

CZ: What is it about UCLA? The professors there seem uncommonly supportive of their students, many of whom are represented in this show. Does an advanced degree really matter for an artist in 2009?

DV: Its not just UCLA. Its Art Center and Cal Arts and Claremont and Otis and USC. Each of them has amazing artists who also teach. It's about that, that an entire generation of amazing artists were hired by these universities to teach. That hasn't happened in New York very much. Do you really need an academic degree? No, not really. But it sure helps. Think of it as similar to the apprentice system of three or four hundred years ago. An artist has to learn from someone, and what better someone than another great artist?

CZ: Your wife has traditionally left most of the heavy art lifting to you. Does the gift to the Hammer represent the beginning of deaccessioning to make way for the new, or are you onto the Next Big Thing?

DV: It feels great to give things away. But it will never replace the fun of finding and buying it in the first place, much to my wife's (supportive) chagrin.

A few years ago, Annie Philbin snared Valentine for her board at the Hammer Museum where she is director; she has stimulated its transition from being one oil man's plaything to a serious and important reason to come to Los Angeles. Philbin wanted the Hammer to be not only a must-see venue for the public, but also a place for artists to have a chance to be inspired themselves.

Valentine has given the Hammer a core group of 50 sculptures by LA artists, and his open and yet slightly twisted sense of humor is well reflected in this smart and engaging work. It feels vaguely post-Pop, most medium-to-large in scale, sometimes kinetic, sometimes musical, sometimes with video elements, sometimes three dimensional and fixed.

>
MacArthur Park by Martin Kersels, Photo Credit: Joshua White

Philbin hopes the Valentine-Adelson collection (Valentine has given wife Amy Adelson titular recognition but she freely admits she had seen little of it before the work went on display. Valentine's art appetite and the physical limitations of their modest home are not always in perfect synchronicity -- most of his collection is in storage or on loan at various times) will be a cornerstone of her effort to collect contemporary art for the Hammer.

Curators Douglas Fogle and Ali Subotnick have supervised a compelling installation, just the right size for understanding something of Valentine's clever collecting energy.

Amanda Christine Miller: Where to Find the Best Vintage Clothing on the Web
July 23, 2009 at 8:53 pm

To look totally unique, vintage clothing is the way to go and some of the best vintage pieces can be found online at sites run by expert curators who pick through the trash to find real treasure. Wearing vintage clothing sets you apart from the crowd and it's fun to play with pieces from different eras, mixing a Victorian day dress with a hippie fur vest. When you wear vintage, you can be sure you won't look like anyone else. Here is a roundup of some of the best sites.

1960's Long Pucci Dress from Shrimptoncouture.com

www.shrimptoncouture.com is to vintage clothing as net-a-porter.com is to designer duds; and is a well-designed site featuring vintage clothes, "reworked vintage clothes," modern collectibles, and a LookBook highlighting perfect party dresses from all eras. Not only does Shrimpton Couture accept returns (minus a 10% stocking fee or a full store credit), but also generously has a layaway service; the perfect vintage dress only comes around once while a paycheck only comes around once every two weeks. Cherie Federau, who runs the site as an extension of her own closet filled with items she has collected or would purchase, has very high standards. Each item is in flawless condition, the gold standard in a community overrun with moth holes and stains. Federau says 1970's maxi dresses, one shoulder dresses and 1950's "cupcake" silhouettes have been flying out the door. "There is an appeal to girls to have a dress that no one else has, whether it is for daytime or for special events. I try to find dresses that have a very special look and feel to them; that makes them stand out." Clients include Rebecca Romijn, Courtney Love and The Boston Museum. Federau's site is truly unique: you can find a 1960's Geoffrey Beene coat ($975) or a 2006 Alexander McQueen dress ($1,800), believed to be highly collectible in the future.

RSVP Dress made from Civil War era lace lined with ombre silk mousseline and deco era buckle from Shrimptoncouture.com

She also sells reworked vintage by designers such as The Glamourai, RSVP, Lousie Black and Reverie NYC who take period clothes and jewelry that are damaged or otherwise unwearable, and modifies them in a contemporary way. "This is an exciting direction that becomes more relevant as we look at ways to recycle and use resources more efficiently," says Federau. "These designers are committed to either restoring or reworking only pieces that are damaged." The results range from a 1930's beaded dress ($698) by RSVP, who reworks beautiful antique textiles, to a Summer Bouquet Bib ($325) by The Glamourai, whose necklaces capture the eclectic, chunky styles that have been seen on runways from Lanvin to Marni. In early August, Shrimptoncouture will add one more designer's capsule collection to her site, Norwegian Wood, who also designs for Topshop and whose work centers around fringe necklaces and body harnesses.

1970's Black Vinyl Courreges Evening Dress from Enokiworld.com

www.enokiworld.com has been selling vintage clothing and accessories since 1999, the dark ages of online shopping. Madeline Meyerowitz, who owns and runs the site, moved to the Midwest from the East Coast, where she was a professional cook, and started attending garage sales with the intention of collecting mid-century dinnerware. But rather than finding items by Eva Zeisel, she found Hattie Carnegie, Mollie Parnis and Rudi Gernreich. The rest, as they say, is history. Her inventory is now global, coming in from Paris, Spain and Israel, and is expertly curated, ranging from a 1970's black vinyl Courreges evening dress ($1150) to a 1980's monogram Louis Vuitton diaper bag ($795). While most online sales are final, Meyerowitz has a unique return policy that distinguishes her site from the competition, "We have a generous return policy because we completely understand that no matter what the item looks like on paper, it is never final until you get to try it on and see yourself from all angles." Enokiworld's prices are reasonable and her best sellers are designer handbags because, "they're not contingent on how small your waist and hips are."

Gold Deco Dress and Lame Lace Cape from Victorianbedouin1

One of the best places for vintage is www.eBay.com, which can be hard to navigate owing to massive volume. A great seller is Christine Davis, also known by her screen name as "Victorianbedouin1." Davis has been collecting clothing and textiles for twenty-five years and considers her eBay business as a "karmic loop of old things." She specializes in clothes that are both wearable and collectible ranging from 1910 - 1970 and claims, "Everyone looks fantastic in a '50's New Look dress; and always invest in a '50's era coat which never goes out of style." Current items for sale include a 1920's Liberty of London gold lame cocoon coat ($2,200) and a 1960's fuchsia pink lace mini dress ($225). Although all sales are final some of her prices are negotiable. She says the trick to knowing what to buy is to heed the "need it/don't need it balance scales that all women possess." Davis can also be reached at victorianbedouin@gmail.com.

1970's Suede and Leather Gucci Coat from Decades

Gwyneth, J. Lo and Rhianna get their vintage from www.decadesinc.blogspot.com. Items for sale include a 1958 Christian Dior white tulle evening dress to a 1970's suede and leather Gucci coat. Prices are not listed because, explains owner Cameron Silver, "The goal is to create an interactive relationship with each client for a one-on-one shopping experience not dissimilar to shopping in our Decades flagship store in Los Angeles." Silver's collection, often seen at awards shows and movie premieres around the world, come from the closets of some of the chicest women around the world and includes Hermes Birkin bags. Sigh.

All sales are final with both Decades and Victorianbedouin1 on eBay, but the joy of working with renowned dealers and sellers is that they are honest and fair and always have the best stock. They are patient and understand that whether you are purchasing a $3,000 coat or a $125 dress, it's an investment in a rare work of art.

More on Barack Obama

George Mitrovich: White Police Officers and Black Men
July 23, 2009 at 7:29 pm

Jim Parker is a friend of mine. He lives in Weymouth, Massachusetts, a Boston suburb. We met a couple of years ago at a Red Sox Fantasy Baseball Camp in Ft. Meyers, Florida. He's a conservative Republican, a lovely guy, and a favorite of mine. He calls me "Captain" -- I captained the team we played on -- and I call him "JP."

Yesterday he sent me an email concerning the arrest of Dr. Henry Louis Gates by a white Cambridge, Massachusetts,' police officer. Dr. Gates, a world renowned Harvard professor, who happens to be black, was arrested in his home because the police officer believed he had broken into the house, located in an upscale neighborhood near the Harvard campus. The officer refused to believe the house belonged to Dr. Gates, even when the professor showed him his Harvard ID.

Now, that's the rub of the story -- a famous black professor is arrested in his own home by a white police officer. The story is more complicated than that, with the officer alleging Dr. Gates was loud and uncooperative and accused him, the officer, of being a white, racist cop.

The story has been major news, not just in America, but also around the world. Last night President Obama was asked about his reaction to the professor's arrest and his response did not sit well with Jim Parker. So he wrote:

Hey Captain,
I have to tell you, the Commander in Chief was way out of line last night with his comments on the arrest of the Harvard professor in Cambridge. To give a throw away answer to what was most likely a planted question on a local issue was terrible. To admit to not having all the facts and then saying that the Cambridge Police Department acted 'stupidly' was uncalled for.

What's happening to this cop, the same one who gave a dying Reggie Lewis (the late Boston Celtics star) mouth to mouth a few years ago, is appalling. The president should know better.

In response I said this:

Probably the president erred in his choice of language. The question should have been answered in a broader context and not solely as it relates to the Cambridge police officer.

That said, I do believe the officer did act 'stupidly.' And yes, I read of his efforts save Mr. Lewis. I also read that he appears to be a good police officer. And yes, it is unfair that a moment like this can suddenly blow up and become world wide news, with an officer's reputation gravely damaged and his life tossed upside down, and his family, having sought no public notice, becoming the center of 24/7 news.

That's unfair and the president's comments fueled the situation, but in an odd way that will help deflect the attention from the officer and the Cambridge police, and it will become, has become, a question less of what the officer did and more as to whether the president spoke wrongly. The politics of it will take over and it will become about the president (Republicans in the Congress have already assured that).

I have read a half-dozen stories about the 'incident', but in this case and in thousands more, I give the benefit of doubt to people of color. We have a history of racism in America. It is an ugly, awful, evil history, and we live yet in its shadow -- and the election of Barack Obama lessens but does not eliminate the problem.

We took the children of God and made them subjects and slaves rather than giving them the equality God ordained and our Framer's promised. Through much of our history we have lived a lie -- and even today many white people remain in denial.

If either of us were Dr. Gates and had been so treated, while standing in our own home, facing a police officer in our living room uninvited, how might we have reacted? I allow that Dr. Gates was upset, that he was angry, and felt provoked, but the burden was on the police officer to step back, consider what was happening, and how, as a white police office in confrontation with a black man, the situation might spiral our of control -- as spiral out of control it did. You want calm from law enforcement officers in confrontations. It is one of the demands of the job -- and the officer failed it.

I am a liberal person but I do not share the anti-police bias many liberals have. The police, whether in Cambridge or San Diego, have truly difficult and dangerous jobs. Most of them perform honorably and with a high sense of public duty, but there are also those who have been corrupted by the very nature of their jobs, dealing as they so often do with unsavory characters. The mere repetition of such encounters will-hardened officers unless they work hard and have enlightened law enforcement leadership to keep a broader perspective."

I will end with this closing comment:

No white person can ever know what it's like to be a person of color in America. It doesn't matter how liberal you think you, or how enlightened, or progressive. You cannot know that experience; which is why every white person owes to every person of color the element of doubt in situations involving law enforcement.

George Mitrovich is a San Diego civic leader.

Cynthia Boaz: The "Birthers" and Our Ailing Political Culture
July 23, 2009 at 7:24 pm

I went back and forth with myself for awhile as to whether or not I should post my thoughts on the "birther" phenomenon -- the contingency of Americans who insist that Barack Obama was not born in the United States and is therefore not qualified to be president. (By the way, I am told that the term "birther" is derogatory, so in fairness, if you have an equally parsimonious but less offensive word for these folks, send it over.) Although I understand the very compelling reasons for just ignoring the absurdity, my concerns about the cultural sickness that underlies the claims continues to gnaw at me. It's one thing for a handful of misguided conspiracy theorists with too much time on their hands to toss out bizarre claims about the president of the United States, but it's another for mainstream media to give those theories even a shred of credibility. And admittedly, this is at some level personal for me, because I have heard a few of my own family members somberly repeating the questions raised by the birthers in a way that sincerely hurts my heart. So for the record, let me say that I do not take the claims of these folks at all seriously, and if my acknowledgment of their claims lends them legitimacy, then mea culpa a thousand times over.

That said, we have got be frank about what is happening to us -- as a nation, a culture, and as human beings, and what this latest "movement" tells us about those things. These folks represent a small but vocal minority in this country who have somehow failed to grasp that American democracy is rooted in a set of principles, not a set of demographic characteristics.

The "birthers" -- who are being irresponsibly egged on by the likes of Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck -- appear to be immune to both reason and truth. That's nothing new -- every society has its fringe elements. However, what makes them dangerous is that their not-so-thinly-veiled racism (because let's be honest, would the perseverance of this kind of claim be even remotely fathomable if our president were not black?) is tied so overtly to an increasingly fanatical and shallow notion of what it means to be American. When "birthers" -- or those who enable them -- say things like "We have to take our country back," they are not talking about political party control of the branches of government, they are talking much more insidiously about a cultural vision (actually, delusion) of the United States as white, "Christian," and ethnologically monolithic. Everyone who does not fit neatly into the narrow demographic prerequisites of this shallow and amorphous concept of American patriotism (which -- I cannot state emphatically enough -- is pretty much everyone) is a potential scapegoat at best and a target for violence at worst.

When I watched the video of Rep. Castle's town hall meeting in Delaware a few weeks back, I was struck by the degree of fanaticism displayed by the scene -- stealing "birther." That woman is angry. What is it about President Obama that causes her to react with so much rage? I can't help but wonder as I watch: Is there anything that would put this issue to rest for her? What evidence would convince her that Barack Obama is a citizen of the United States? Is there anything...anything at all that would calm her outrage? Would it alter her views to know, for example, that none of first seven presidents of the United States were born in the United States?

Woefully, it appears doubtful. An inflexible unwillingness to update one's beliefs in the face of logic or evidence is the very definition of fanaticism. And as the video demonstrates, that phenomenon is as alive and well in the United States as in any of the countries whose citizens have been systematically demonized by our government and media over the decades. Can you imagine how much satisfaction extremist Taliban leaders must get from displays like this? How gratifying it must be to watch citizens of the world's self-proclaimed beacon of democracy and civilization turning on each other in such vile, primitive ways?

The fact is that there are too many genuine divisions between people for us -- in the world's most advanced democracy -- to spend our time fabricating false ones. American civilization is at a crossroads. We have reached a pivotal historical moment where we are faced with nothing less than the decision to consciously evolve or not. Now is the time when we should be healing ourselves as a culture, not finding new ways to harm one another. It's a time when should be acknowledging our common humanity, not dehumanizing those we don't understand. Now is our opportunity to promote a vision of the future that is rooted in constructive optimism, rather than cynicism. We have the chance to genuinely elevate the well-being of others -- and by extension, ourselves -- rather than continuing to tear them down with indignities. But if we are to take the higher road, we must understand that being patriotic citizens on the one hand and decent human beings on the other are -- in a just and democratic society -- indistinguishable concepts.

Someone please tell the birthers.

More on Barack Obama

Blake Fleetwood: Sale: Exit Row Seats $8.70 per Hour
July 23, 2009 at 3:26 pm

The airlines are getting very desperate ... charging more and more for things that used to be free.

Qantas recently announced plans to start selling exit row seats on its trans-Pacific flights for about $130 extra per seat -- $8.70 per hour for a Sydney to Los Angeles flight.

Hey, if the plane is burning or sinking, you are sure to get out first.

In addition to the safety factor, the extra leg room alone, on a fifteen hour flight, is well worth the additional 2 cents a mile. You also get to sit with other "able bodied" -- not too old and not too young -- who are willing to pay, and avoid being squished in between crying babies and overweight gargancho space squatters oozing onto your seat.

You are guaranteed to arrive rested, calm, and un-cramped -- without paying thousands more for business class or real first class.

Qantas's move is just the latest escalation to squeeze more revenue per passenger. Virgin, United, Air France, and JetBlue have also started charging for extra legroom. But they are only getting $40 or so more per flight in return for saving your knees from getting crushed when the chair in front of you comes careening back.

Pretty soon, airlines will be charging for the privilege of getting any seat at all. There have been recurring reports that two European airlines have asked the airline manufacturers to come up with a plane with no seats -- all the better to stuff more people in.

They would have straps and harnesses on the walls. Michael Ryan, head of Ryanair, one of Europe's biggest airlines -- which carried 5.84 million passengers in June -- said recently,"This makes the idea of standing for an hour or so on an airplane a workable one." Ryan said that many people stand for over an hour on a train, so it should be no problem on an airplane.

He was even prepared to offer free flights to passengers who stood. He said he could squeeze in 50 percent more people and cut costs by 20 percent.

Ryan has also been going back and forth about the idea of asking passengers to pay one euro (around a dollar) to use the toilet. The logic: Ryan said he could remove two toilets and put in extra seats. Furthermore, asking passengers to pay would encourage them to use the toilets at the airports, or hold it until they land.

Ryan even said he'd favor of a "fat tax" on overweight passengers.

Asian copy-cats are jumping on the standing room only bandwagon. Wang Zhenghua, president of China's low-cost Spring Airlines, said he would like to offer bar-stool type seating to pack more people onto its airplanes.

"For a lower price, passengers should be able to get on a plane like catching a bus, with no seat, no luggage consignment, no food, no water...[it will be] very convenient."

Just like a New York subway at rush hour.

What could possibility be next? Why not go the whole way? Airlines could start selling aisle seats for $50 and window seats for $40.

From here the premiums multiply, seats in the front of the plane (you can get off faster) could easily go for $20 extra, and seats at least two rows away from the galley or flushing toilets would be an extra $15. Overhead bins could go for $10 per bag.

Seats in an adult's only section -- over 30, guaranteed to be away from screaming babies and babbling teens -- could easily fetch a $50 premium. And a singles only section might fetch a cover charge of $25.

Airlines could hold some seats back for on-board auctions for already seated travelers who wanted to move in the most desperate way -- body odor, excessive talking, smelly food, or large-sized row mates.

Better yet. Why not why not take pre-boarding to a whole new level with computer match making, so you could see in advance who you are going to be seated next to... and the bidding could start on eBay.

Come on guys. This is the American way.

write: jfleetwood@aol.com

More on Barack Obama

Dr. Johnny Benjamin: Healthcare Reform and Defensive Medicine
July 23, 2009 at 3:20 pm

On July 20th, I wrote an article that amongst several issues emphasized the hidden financial burden created by the current medico-legal climate that exists in most of America. 'The deviation of sound medical practice, induced by the threat of liability is known' as defensive medicine and is practiced by a significant and growing number of high quality physicians throughout the US.

Real doctors from small towns to the ivory towers of academia are screaming for relief. I pray that average Americans heed the warning, before the very real fear of crippling litigation prevents your doctor from dropping everything and sprinting to the emergency room to provide care in your time of need.

If despite my best efforts I have failed to awaken you, maybe my esteemed colleague, Dr. Charles S. Day, the Chief of Hand & Upper Extremity Surgery at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center may be a bit more persuasive.

Medical Liability: Shouldn't we be discussing this?
By Charles S. Day, MD, MBA and Srinidhi Reddy

Access to quality health care has improved drastically, but the cost of health care has spiraled out of control. The reforms proposed by the Obama Administration, while making a concerted effort to maintain the quality of care, do not address one aspect of health care that contributes directly to the cost, medical liability. Tort reform, or the revision of the civil justice system that awards compensation for harm done, is one viable solution that would institute an upper limit on malpractice damages. However, President Obama in his speech to the AMA states specifically that he is "not advocating caps on malpractice awards." This political stance impedes the reform of the health care system by incurring billions of dollars in extraneous costs that result from the threat of medical malpractice.

Malpractice is the most problematic issue for physicians today, as the number of lawsuits and the cost of fighting them continues to rise. With damage payments easily amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars, insurance companies are weary of providing malpractice insurance - evidenced by over 2,000 physician policies being dropped in one summer in California. Insurance premiums have increased four-fold in the last decade, particularly for physicians in specialties with a high number of risky procedures. The rising insurance premiums and increasing malpractice damage costs has motivated physicians to be overly cautious. This mindset results in the ordering of superfluous diagnostic tests and can even drive physicians to avoid certain procedures or patients altogether. This trend in medical practice is referred to as defensive medicine. Though it is practiced to avoid potential lawsuits and payouts, defensive medicine has actually become one of the greatest sources of unnecessary health care costs today.

Defensive medicine is defined as "a deviation from sound medical practice, induced primarily by threat of liability." It is divided into two categories, assurance and avoidance behaviors. Assurance behavior, or positive defensive medicine, is practiced by most physicians and involves the supply of additional services of negligible medical value to reduce adverse outcomes, deter patients from filing malpractice claims, or persuade the legal system that the standard of care was met. Avoidance behavior, also known as negative defensive behavior, reflects physicians' efforts to distance themselves from potential legal risk. They do so by restricting their practice, refusing to perform high-risk procedures, and avoiding patients with complex problems or patients perceived as litigious. This type of behavior usually stems from a fear of uninsured non-monetary costs driving the physician out of business or the view that the downside of malpractice is greater than the upside of treatment. To demonstrate the prevalence of defensive medicine, the Harvard School of Public Health and Columbia Law School surveyed physicians practicing in Pennsylvania, a state infamous for having the highest malpractice insurance premiums in the country. The study, conducted in 2005, received responses from over 800 physicians in six specialties, with approximately 93% of doctors responding affirmatively when asked whether they practiced medicine defensively.

Defensive medicine is accompanied by an unexpectedly high overall cost, masked by the fact that these costs are split between doctors, patients, insurers, and the government. To gauge the burden of defensive medicine, Daniel P. Kessler and Mark B. McClellan compared healthcare costs in the 28 states with laws that limit punitive damages that can be paid out in malpractice lawsuits with states that do not. The effects of malpractice liability reforms were analyzed using data on Medicare beneficiaries treated for serious heart disease in 1984, 1987 and 1990. Kessler and McClellan found that liability reforms could reduce defensive medicine practices. This led to a 5.3% reduction in medical expenditures for acute myocardial infarction patients and a 9.0% reduction for ischemia patients without any effect on mortality or medical complications. States with capping laws had average per capita health expenditure levels that were 3.4% lower than in states without such laws. In the 6+ years these laws were in effect, the mean reduction in health expenditures due to caps was $92 per capita. The savings were even greater for elderly patients with estimated costs of liability-pressure-induced intensive treatment more than $500,000 per year of life saved.

In a similar example, California passed the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 (MICRA), imposing a $250,000 cap on damages deemed to be non-economic such as pain and suffering. The subjective nature of these complaints is difficult to quantify leading to years of litigation. In these cases, attorneys benefit the most while plaintiffs are financially burdened by the length of the case and the legal costs taken out of their award. Since the passing of MICRA, malpractice premium increases have been 75% less than the rest of the nation and plaintiffs received their awards in one-third the time.

The results of Kessler and McClellan's study have been applied to current health care expenditure to approximate the cost of defensive medicine across the nation. These statistics applied to the nation's $1.4 trillion annual health care expenditure in 2005 (estimated to be over $2 trillion this fiscal year by President Obama), show that health care costs could have been reduced by $124 billion overall and government expenses by $50 billion per year. Adding the cost of defending malpractice cases, paying compensation, and covering additional administrative costs (a total of $29.4 billion), the average American family thus pays an additional $2,000 per year in health care just to cover the costs of defensive medicine. With the national health care costs expected to be over $4.5 trillion by 2017, the cost of defensive medicine to the average American could triple in the next 10 years.

Overall, while defensive medicine, particularly assurance behavior, may not seem like a negative trend in medical care, the costs associated with it are. Healthcare in the United States is already a financial burden for many Americans, and the added cost of defensive medicine with no added health benefit exacerbates this problem. Studies have shown that the rising costs associated with malpractice are to blame. Therefore, the solution to reducing the cost of defensive medicine is to reform laws pertaining to malpractice lawsuits. By placing caps on punitive fines for these lawsuits through tort reform and lowering the price of malpractice insurance, the practice of defensive medicine can be reduced, alleviating the burden on the average American while maintaining the high standard of health care in this country. These issues are intrinsically connected to rising health care costs and cannot be ignored in the current political debate.

Articles Referenced:
Hellinger, FJ, WE Encinosa. "The Impact of State Laws Limiting Malpractice Damage Awards on Health Care Expenditures." American Journal of Public Health 96(8)(2006): 1375-81.

Kessler, DP, N Summerton, JR Graham. "Effects of the Medical Liability System in Australia, the UK and the USA." Lancet 368(9531)(2006): 240-6.

Manner, Paul A.. "Practicing defensive medicine--Not good for patients or physicians." AAOS Now (2007).

Studdert, DM, MM Mello, WM Sage, CM DesRoches, J Peugh, K Zapert, TA Brennan. "Defensive Medicine among High-Risk Specialist Physicians in a Volatile Malpractice Environment." The Journal of the American Medical Association 293(21)(2005): 2660-2.

Weinstein, Stuart L.. "The Cost of Defensive Medicine." AAOS Now (2008).

Derek Beres: Hoboken Mayor Peter Cammarano Gets Ground Into Powder
July 23, 2009 at 3:14 pm

While there is certain to be plenty of news to emerge in the following hours around the arrests of some thirty people regarding the money laundering schemes in New Jersey, this quote from Hoboken Mayor Peter Cammarano, taken from the Criminal Complaint, United States of America v. Peter Cammarano III and Michael Schaffer, paints a picture of what was going on during the months of April through July 2009 in terms of his election process.

The Complaint stems around Cammarano's relationship with an undercover FBI agent posing as a real estate agent, in which in exchange for tens of thousands of dollars in cash, the Hoboken mayor, if elected, would help "expedite" his developments in as rapid a manner as possible. The election was already being questioned, as a runoff with Dawn Zimmer in June led to a "found" box with hundreds of votes in favor of Cammarano. Following is the quote regarding Cammarano's political allies. (CW refers to a "cooperating witness" who had been charged with bank fraud in a federal criminal complaint in May 2006.)

"This is the way Mr. Schaffer and I both see the world through the same lens, right. In this election, hopefully, we, we, we, you know, we get to the point where I'm sworn in on July 1st, and we're breaking down the world into three categories at that point. There's the people who were with us, and that's you guys. There's the people who climbed on board in the runoff. They can get in line. . . And then there are the people who were against us the whole way. They get ground . . . They get ground into powder." The CW remarked that the latter group would have to wait for approvals on their projects for "three years," and that they would be consigned to the "bottom of the pile."

Perhaps next up will be the allegations of the others selling organs to transplant patients to coincide with the charges of international money laundering and real estate development fraud.

Janet Ritz: What Health Care Reform Means to the Middle Class (Hint: Jobs)
July 23, 2009 at 12:18 pm

President Obama, at his Wednesday press conference, talked about the job-loss impact of rising health care costs on the middle class. But why the middle class? This recession has hit construction workers, young people, other demographics. It's because the middle class -- and by extension, the overall economy that relies on the middle class (in this case, the middle aged middle class) -- may not be able to recover in the job market without health care reform.

You do the math. You reach thirty, you pay more than when you're in your twenties. You reach forty, still more. You reach fifty and, if you don't get a heart attack from a preexisting condition, you may just get one from the exponential increase in your premiums.

Health care providers argue that as people age they require more health care for which they have to pay. That may very well be true, but in the world of unintended consequences, it also means those fifty-somethings may be paying in other ways -- include forgoing their ability to pay those higher premiums.

What is a potential employer that has to choose between a fifty-something who comes with higher costs for health care, despite being a far better qualified candidate, and a twenty or thirty something less experienced applicant who will cost them far less over time in premiums to do?

The president talked about the "donut hole" that exists for Medicare patients; the requirement to cover all the costs after a certain limit was reached until a far higher limit came into play. This has been a nightmare for many seniors on fixed incomes.

The middle aged may very well have a "donut hole" between their fifties and age sixty-five Medicare eligibility due to the lessening of employment opportunities that come from inflated premiums for their demographic.

But this is important for all demographics. When those in their fifties are passed over for jobs or are let go to save on health care premiums, a vital segment of our economy becomes depressed (and not just emotionally) as America requires a strong middle class that is not passed over for jobs.

Those who argue we should wait to implement reform are arguing to kill it. The will to put through health care reform legislation will not exist in the environment of the 2010 elections. If anyone tries to argue that, ask them their age, whether their health care is secure (i.e. Congress) and if they'd like to be pounding the pavement for jobs when human resources departments are looking at the costs associated with hiring them compared to someone younger.

The employment situation in this country will not improve until there is health care reform leading to increased numbers of the employed and quality of employee, as both are needed for our economy to recover.

More on this topic at THE ENVIRONMENTALIST

More on Barack Obama

Jeff Biggers: Abetting Historicide: Does Nancy Sutley's Regulatory Banter Cover Up Crimes Against Coalfield Residents?
July 23, 2009 at 12:16 pm

Mired in the acrobatics of regulatory doublespeak, the Obama administration's increasing oversight of the unbearable daily toll on Appalachian coalfield residents from mountaintop removal begs the question: Are Obama's well-meaning but irresolute environmental administrators abetting the crimes of human rights violations and historicide?

Whether they are unaware of decades of regulatory circumvention by Big Coal or not, one extraordinary fact about the Obama administration is certain: While American citizens continue to lose their homes, health, jobs and heritage to regulatory manipulations by mountaintop removal operators in Appalachia, not one top level Obama administrator has bothered to visit and see the urgent human rights and health care crisis in the coalfields.

In effect, the mountaineers have been removed from the mountaintop removal debate.

Take Nancy Sutley, whose Council on Environmental Quality recently announced "unprecedented" actions to "regulate" mountaintop removal and "minimize adverse environmental consequences." For all of her good intentions, Sutley has never publicly mentioned or recognized the decades of human suffering, daily rounds of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil blasts, toxic dust, contaminated water, harassment and violence, desecration of cemeteries and national heritage sites, and the de facto forced relocation of American citizens from mountaintop removal operations in Appalachia.

Is it perhaps because she has never been to a mountaintop removal site?

Or that she has never sat in the home of coal miners like Steve and Lora Webb in Boone County, West Virginia, as a 2,000-pound ANFO blast exploded nearby?

Overwhelmed by the blasting of a nearby Massey Energy mountaintop removal operation, the Webbs now have 60 days to leave their beautiful home and century-old roots--their multi-generational heritage and mountain homestead, and extraordinary cultivation of rare medicinal plants.

In a Coal Valley News interview last fall, the Webbs recounted their six-year nightmare of environmental regulatory loopholes and governmental inaction living near a mountaintop removal operation:

"It was like an earthquake," the couple says, describing the deep tremors caused by blasting on the mountain adjacent to their home..."When they set off their explosives, you get a whole storm of dust that covers everything - the cars, the houses, the trees. It looks like ash or a fallout," Steve Webb said, sharing that he has also witnessed rocks hitting trees and the asphalt road. "If a child happened to be out in the road playing when they set the blast off, they would have been injured," Webb said, recalling one particularly strong blast that occurred several months ago.

Legally sanctioned through federal and state environmental regulations, the great American pastoral for the Webb family will be erased from existence in two months.

The complete Coal River News interview is here: http://www.ohvec.org/newsletters/woc_2008_12/index.html

The Webbs are one example of many, many centuries-old families that have been legally hounded out of the mountains by Big Coal manipulations of environmental regulations.

And yet, EPA's Acting Assistant Administrator Michael H. Shapiro, in announcing the EPA's sign-off on 42 of 48 mining permits, wrote last spring: "I understand the importance of coal mining in Appalachia for jobs, the economy and meeting the nation's energy needs."

Environmental protection somehow didn't include the human needs of the coalfield residents.

More so, Shapiro demonstrated an incredible lack of understanding about Appalachian coalfield history, or the reality that mountaintop removal coal accounts for less than 5-7 percent of our national coal production, and that unemployment and poverty rates have skyrocketed in the most heavily strip-mined areas of eastern Kentucky and West Virginia due to mechanization and mountaintop removal operations.

As former West Virginia Congressman Ken Hechler noted in 1971, in his battle against the 1977 Surface Mining Act that granted federal sanctioning to mountaintop removal, the devastation of strip mining on his region's broader economy was inevitable:

"What about the jobs that will be lost if the strippers continue to ruin the tourist industry, wash away priceless topsoil, fill people's yards with the black much which runs off from a strip mine, rip open the bellies of the hills and spill their guts in spoil-banks? This brutal and hideous contempt for valuable land is a far more serious threat to the economy than a few thousand jobs which are easily transferable into the construction industry, or to fill the sharp demand or workers in underground mines."

In truth, strip mining more than strips the land; it strips the traces of any human contact. It results in a form of historical ethnic cleansing. Consider the Kickapoo State Recreation Area, an area today of wooded hills and riparian bottomlands off the Middle Fork of the Vermillion River in eastern Illinois, and the historic place of the birth of commercial strip mining of coal in the United States in the 1850s.

While the recreation site is now lauded by environmental regulators for its reforestation (albeit slight in diversity compared to the virgin forests) and fun recreational sites as the first state park developed from denuded strip-mined pits, it remains a haunting reminder of the removal of the Kickapoo and their ancient settlements, and the historic role of Kennekuk, the Kickapoo diplomat who lived in the area.

The Kickapoo villages were churned into ashes and spoil piles, stagnant mine ponds and pits; the first mechanized strip mining machines rattled their blades across the land cleared of virgin forests, creeks and 1,000-year-old Native settlements until 1939.

Unlike the dogwoods and the duck ponds, the Kickapoo will never return. Even worse, their history has been relegated to the heap pile of a vanished past.

The impact of mountaintop removal on historic and contemporary Appalachian settlements and coalfield communities is no less tragic. It has not only destroyed the natural heritage. It has deracinated the Appalachian culture, depopulated the historic mountain communities, and effectively erased important chapters of Appalachian history from the American experience.

With over 500 mountains destroyed, the central Appalachian coalfields and hollows are systematically being turned into boarded-up ghost towns and overgrown broken cemeteries.

Even the cemeteries are being wiped off the maps. Last weekend in Boone County, West Virginia, Danny Cook and several of his family members discovered access to their family cemeteries on Cook Mountain apparently had been intentionally blocked. Horizon Resources LLC is operating a surface mining operation on the mountain.

According to state law, coal companies mining near cemeteries must allow family members access to those cemeteries. A detailed account of the scene on Cook Mountain, with photos, is online at: http://climategroundzero.org/2009/07/civil-war-era-cemetery-under-direct-threat-from-massey-mtr-site/.

Cook was attempting to visit the grave of his ancestor, Civil War veteran William Chap, who served in the forces to end slavery, including the estimated 3,000 slaves that worked in the coal mines and salt wells in the Kanawha River Valley alone.

The destruction of cemeteries and heritage sites, and historic communities--including the recent decision to take off the strip-mine-threatened Blair Mountain in West Virginia from the National Registry due to regulatory procedures--is part of a process of what some academic observers call "historicide," the eradication of people from history, or at least killing their presence in history.

As one of the last holdouts on Kayford Mountain in West Virginia, an area that has been decimated, Larry Gibson's tenacity to defend his mountain heritage and cemeteries in face of regulatory machinations has become legendary, though not without a price. The story of his hollow's depopulation and destruction, and razed cemeteries, is here: http://www.stopmountaintopremoval.org/larrys-story.html

Historicide sounds over the top to some. But this severe interpretation of history is not easy to disregard when all that remains of your heritage and your family's 200 years of important American history is a shattered cemetery surrounded by out-of-state coal company fences and do-not-enter signs.

In an exclusive interview with Grist last month, Sutley's fuzzy understanding of the human costs of mountaintop removal was painfully clear, as she adhered to Big Coal's marketing phrase of "mountaintop mining" instead of "mountaintop removal" that has been used by residents and writers for three decades. Sutley declared:

"I think everybody acknowledges it, the President has said it, everybody we talk to acknowledges that there are serious impacts associated with mountaintop mining and we have to address that. Going forward we have to look at what we can do under existing authority to strengthen the oversight of these projects and to see that we are using those authorities fully to try to address the environmental impacts of mountaintop removal mining. So, does it mean fewer projects, I don't know the answer to that. But it will mean that we will deal with the environmental impacts of those projects."

Sutley's line is worth repeating: So, does it mean fewer projects, I don't know the answer to that.

Here is the clip of Sutley:

On the heels of Sutley's indecision, Clay's Branch, West Virginia, coalfield resident Bo Webb (no relation to the other Webbs) received notice that the violations noted by federal regulators would be circumvented by a WV state decision. Webb was told on Friday: While operators were ordered to stop blasting in Clay's Branch until they placed all the material, rocks, flyrock, boulders, downed trees and all back on their permitted area, the WV Department of Environmental Protection reviewed solution is to blast down to the next seam of coal, blasting closer to residents so they can get to all the material that is off the permitted area.

In a letter published in the Huffington Post, Webb lamented:

"My family and I live in southern West Virginia, beneath a mountaintop removal site. I am forced to breathe silica dust everyday because of the blasting that is taking place right above me. Fly rock has landed in my garden. A boulder the size of a car hood came off there and stopped just short of my garden. The sediment catch ditches are full, again. The middle of the hollow is sliding in. The beautiful creek where I used to catch fish bait and along its sides dig ramps, mushrooms, and ginseng, is buried with rock, dirt and knocked down trees. The spring that we used to love to get water from is buried. The well water is sunken and muddy.

My house and my nerves rattle each day around 4 o'clock when the out-of-state Massey Energy company sets off yet another series of blast. And every evening I am reminded that my family has been on this mountain since around 1830 -- long before Massey Energy invaded from Richmond, Virginia; it's as simple as that."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/urgent-july-4th-declarati_b_224864.html

For those who know history, Sutley's rhetoric is part of another regulatory story--decades of regulatory circumvention. This is the truth: Until mountaintop removal is abolished, environmental regulations will fail to protect the health and welfare of coalfield residents.

Returning to his own Appalachian woods in the 1970s, environmental writer Edward Abbey concluded:

"Something like a shadow has fallen between the present and past, an abyss as wide as war that cannot be bridged by any tangible connection, so that memory is undermined and the image of our beginnings betrayed, dissolved, rendered not mythical but illusory. We have connived in the murder of our own origins."

Gwen Stefani Shows Off Her Abs (PHOTOS)
July 23, 2009 at 12:12 pm

No Doubt singer Gwen Stefani is showing off a remarkable midriff while on tour.

Stefani has been open with how hard she works to maintain her figure, the results of which were clear at a show at the Gibson Amphitheatre Wednesday night in Universal City, California.

Stefani has two son with Gavin Rossdale, and gave birth to baby Zuma last August 21.

PHOTOS:

Get HuffPo Entertainment On Facebook and Twitter!