Helen H. Moore's Blog, page 824

A new treatment for head trauma: Inducing deep sleep may protect our brains

Last week a senior National Football League official acknowledged for the first time the link between head injuries in professional football and a degenerative brain disease called chronic traumatic encephalopathy. The admission—which has been compared with Big Tobacco’s 1997 disclosure that smoking causes cancer—comes at a time when the dangers of less severe traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), including concussions, have also been making headlines. Scientists do not yet understand the biological mechanisms underlying the detrimental effects of TBI—and as a result, effective treatments remain elusive. In fact, how to deal with even a mild concussion is the subject of debate: Some doctors prescribe rest for several weeks whereas others claim this may have negative consequences and urge patients to stay active. Now it turns out that the type of rest patients get may be key. In a study on rats published this week in The Journal of Neuroscience a team of researchers at University Hospital Zurich (UHZ) found that enhancing the slow-wave cycle of sleep after a traumatic head injury preserves brain function and minimizes damage to axons, the long projections from neurons that send signals to other cells in the brain. Previous research has shown that TBIs cause axonal damage as well as the buildup of neurotoxic molecular waste products that result from injury. In the new study the researchers examined two different methods of inducing a slow-wave sleep state—the deepest sleep stage characterized by low-frequency, high-amplitude waves. During this stage, the brain clears out protein buildup, leading the researchers to question whether it could help treat rats that had suffered a brain injury. The team first dealt a blow to the prefrontal cortex in 25 rats. They then divided the animals into three groups, treating the first group with sodium oxybate, a drug used to produce slow-wave brain function in people suffering from narcolepsy. (The exact mechanism for this drug’s effect is unclear but the prevalent hypothesis is that sodium oxybate improves daytime vigilance by inducing deep sleep when people rest.) In the second group the researchers restricted sleep by gently handling the rats—keeping them awake for long periods of time. Previous research has shown that after sleep deprivation, slow-wave activity increases during a period of “rebound sleep.” Meanwhile, the third group received a placebo injection. The researchers used electroencephalography, a method for recording electrical activity in the brain, to confirm that they had successfully enhanced slow-wave sleep in the rats in the first two groups. They then assessed the rats’ cognition based on the animals' ability to recognize a novel object, and found that both groups of rats receiving the enhanced sleep treatments performed better on the object-recognition tests than the untreated rats. The deep sleeping rats also showed less memory impairment. The team then tested for brain damage in the cortex and hippocampus by staining the rats’ brains for amyloid precursor protein, a biomarker used to detect axonal injury. The rats whose sleep had been modulated had significantly reduced levels of the protein—nearly 80 percent less, as compared with the control group. The team concluded that immediate treatment with slow-wave sleep—using both a physiological and pharmacological method—had helped preserve brain function and prevent axonal damage in rats suffering from a TBI. The findings are promising but many questions need to be answered before they can be translated to possible human treatments. For one, determining an underlying mechanism for the effects the researchers observed requires further research. “These results could have something to do with enhancing the clearance of metabolites,” says Marta Morawska, a PhD candidate in neurology at UHZ and one of the study’s authors. “Or it could be preventing further accumulation of these metabolites. More studies are needed to untangle this.” The researchers plan on tackling this distinction in future research. They are also collaborating with other institutions to find another nonsurgical technique for further improving slow-wave sleep—one that would not depend on sleep deprivation or sodium oxybate. (The compound, although used off-label for several disorders such as cluster headaches and fibromyalgia, is not used for trauma patients because it can also induce a sleeplike state during which patients cannot be neurologically monitored.) “[We’re working based on] the increasingly confirmed hypothesis that slow-wave activity is in fact essential for clearing the brain of waste products, including amyloids,” Morawska says. Uzma Samadani, a neurosurgeon at the Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, who is not affiliated with this study and is taking a different approach to researching treatment for TBI patients, says Morawska’s findings are interesting but maintains that we must remain cognizant of the research's limitations. “The study is an interesting one, supporting the idea that sleep modulation may be important for recovery from brain injury,” she says. “But I’d caution overinterpretation of the study’s importance. Often in neuroscience studies in rodents do not translate to humans.” In particular, rats’ metabolic rates and sleep patterns, including the proportion of time spent in slow-wave sleep, differ significantly from those of humans. Morawska agrees. “I’d like to highlight that this is not a cure,” she says. “It needs to be developed more for use in clinical practice.” Even so, she has high hopes for the possibilities her team’s findings may open up, given more research directed at humans. “We strongly believe that this study will stimulate human research in this direction, and that inducing slow-wave sleep will prove beneficial for human trauma patients,” she says. “It could be used as a noninvasive treatment in pretty much any disease that’s primarily due to protein or metabolite accumulation, including Alzheimer’s disease.” Last week a senior National Football League official acknowledged for the first time the link between head injuries in professional football and a degenerative brain disease called chronic traumatic encephalopathy. The admission—which has been compared with Big Tobacco’s 1997 disclosure that smoking causes cancer—comes at a time when the dangers of less severe traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), including concussions, have also been making headlines. Scientists do not yet understand the biological mechanisms underlying the detrimental effects of TBI—and as a result, effective treatments remain elusive. In fact, how to deal with even a mild concussion is the subject of debate: Some doctors prescribe rest for several weeks whereas others claim this may have negative consequences and urge patients to stay active. Now it turns out that the type of rest patients get may be key. In a study on rats published this week in The Journal of Neuroscience a team of researchers at University Hospital Zurich (UHZ) found that enhancing the slow-wave cycle of sleep after a traumatic head injury preserves brain function and minimizes damage to axons, the long projections from neurons that send signals to other cells in the brain. Previous research has shown that TBIs cause axonal damage as well as the buildup of neurotoxic molecular waste products that result from injury. In the new study the researchers examined two different methods of inducing a slow-wave sleep state—the deepest sleep stage characterized by low-frequency, high-amplitude waves. During this stage, the brain clears out protein buildup, leading the researchers to question whether it could help treat rats that had suffered a brain injury. The team first dealt a blow to the prefrontal cortex in 25 rats. They then divided the animals into three groups, treating the first group with sodium oxybate, a drug used to produce slow-wave brain function in people suffering from narcolepsy. (The exact mechanism for this drug’s effect is unclear but the prevalent hypothesis is that sodium oxybate improves daytime vigilance by inducing deep sleep when people rest.) In the second group the researchers restricted sleep by gently handling the rats—keeping them awake for long periods of time. Previous research has shown that after sleep deprivation, slow-wave activity increases during a period of “rebound sleep.” Meanwhile, the third group received a placebo injection. The researchers used electroencephalography, a method for recording electrical activity in the brain, to confirm that they had successfully enhanced slow-wave sleep in the rats in the first two groups. They then assessed the rats’ cognition based on the animals' ability to recognize a novel object, and found that both groups of rats receiving the enhanced sleep treatments performed better on the object-recognition tests than the untreated rats. The deep sleeping rats also showed less memory impairment. The team then tested for brain damage in the cortex and hippocampus by staining the rats’ brains for amyloid precursor protein, a biomarker used to detect axonal injury. The rats whose sleep had been modulated had significantly reduced levels of the protein—nearly 80 percent less, as compared with the control group. The team concluded that immediate treatment with slow-wave sleep—using both a physiological and pharmacological method—had helped preserve brain function and prevent axonal damage in rats suffering from a TBI. The findings are promising but many questions need to be answered before they can be translated to possible human treatments. For one, determining an underlying mechanism for the effects the researchers observed requires further research. “These results could have something to do with enhancing the clearance of metabolites,” says Marta Morawska, a PhD candidate in neurology at UHZ and one of the study’s authors. “Or it could be preventing further accumulation of these metabolites. More studies are needed to untangle this.” The researchers plan on tackling this distinction in future research. They are also collaborating with other institutions to find another nonsurgical technique for further improving slow-wave sleep—one that would not depend on sleep deprivation or sodium oxybate. (The compound, although used off-label for several disorders such as cluster headaches and fibromyalgia, is not used for trauma patients because it can also induce a sleeplike state during which patients cannot be neurologically monitored.) “[We’re working based on] the increasingly confirmed hypothesis that slow-wave activity is in fact essential for clearing the brain of waste products, including amyloids,” Morawska says. Uzma Samadani, a neurosurgeon at the Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, who is not affiliated with this study and is taking a different approach to researching treatment for TBI patients, says Morawska’s findings are interesting but maintains that we must remain cognizant of the research's limitations. “The study is an interesting one, supporting the idea that sleep modulation may be important for recovery from brain injury,” she says. “But I’d caution overinterpretation of the study’s importance. Often in neuroscience studies in rodents do not translate to humans.” In particular, rats’ metabolic rates and sleep patterns, including the proportion of time spent in slow-wave sleep, differ significantly from those of humans. Morawska agrees. “I’d like to highlight that this is not a cure,” she says. “It needs to be developed more for use in clinical practice.” Even so, she has high hopes for the possibilities her team’s findings may open up, given more research directed at humans. “We strongly believe that this study will stimulate human research in this direction, and that inducing slow-wave sleep will prove beneficial for human trauma patients,” she says. “It could be used as a noninvasive treatment in pretty much any disease that’s primarily due to protein or metabolite accumulation, including Alzheimer’s disease.”

Continue Reading...

What if Batman wasn’t a jerk? The Dark Knight should be more like Yoda, less like Kylo Ren

In “Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice,” the Dark Knight is darker than ever: he’s an angry, vengeful wacko who gets off on torturing criminals and himself. Taking a cue from Frank Miller's version of Batman as a semi-fascist Clint Eastwood type who enjoys crippling punks, the Ben Affleck Batman is the scowliest ever, which is really saying something. He's even scowlier than the current angst-ridden version of Superman, who is about as far removed from any recognizable version of Superman as can be, but that's another story. In a world of mass shooters, Men's Rights activists, Donald Trump supporters and Internet commenters, the last thing we need is another angry dude. But does Batman have to be an angry jerk? Is the only alternative the goofy Adam West version or (admittedly awesome) LEGO Batman? Nope and nope. As seen in a tremendous run by Scottish writer Grant Morrison from 2006-2012, Batman doesn't have to be an emotionally stunted man-baby or goofy cartoon. Morrison had the rare insight that someone with the experience, martial arts training and intelligence of Batman would be very unlikely to still be lashing out at the world like a high-school sophomore. Morrison's Batman proves that even the most angsty hero can grow up and become an adult. If only Batman movies (not to mention the rest of the world) would do the same. Morrison’s grown-up Batman—who appeared in several titles such as “Batman,” Batman and Robin” and “Batman Incorporated”—evolved from a unique approach to continuity. Comic-book continuity is notoriously a snakepit of contradictory, repetitive and inane details that pile up for decades. While continuity trivia appeals to the Cliff Clavin types who have dominated comic book fandom for too long, appeasing such fans rarely makes for the best stories. This is why so many of the best comics stories take place in alternate universes or elseworlds, which have given us great stores like “Kingdom Come” and “Superman: Red Son” and great characters like Spider-Gwen and Miles Morales as Spider-Man. Good things tend to happen when you ignore continuity. But Morrison took the opposite approach: He decided that every Batman story, in every medium, counted. As Morrison put it in the introduction to "Batman: The Black Casebook": “I imagined a rough timeline that allowed me to compress 70 years’ worth of Batman’s adventures into a frantic 15 years in the life of an extraordinary man.” That meant Morrison’s Batman has not only seen Bane break his back and the Joker kill Jason Todd, but he had encountered bizarre characters from previously ignored stories like the Rainbow Creature and fifth-dimensional imp Bat-Mite. This all-encompassing approach led to many fresh and enjoyable stories and situations, such as the inclusion of Lord Death Man (a villain from Japan’s "Batmanga") and even some nods to the Adam West Batman (such ridiculous adventures were explained by too much exposure to villainous gases and poisons). But giving Batman his whole history demanded someone who could handle it: a wise Batman who’s grown beyond his issues. One of Morrison’s most adultifying moves was giving Batman a son: Damian Wayne, whose mother was femme fatale Talia al Ghul, daughter of immortal ecoterrorist Ra’s al Ghul. Morrison discovered the possibility of a child between Batman and Talia in 1987’s “Son of the Demon,” another story that didn’t “count” to that point. Damian was one of many Morrison revivals, but likely the best. Batman finds out about the existence of Damian when the kid is 10—Damian has been raised by the League of Assassins, and he’s an angry killer who beheads a criminal and almost murders Robin in his first appearances. Damian’s presence allows Batman to mature in a few ways. There’s nothing like having a kid to make people grow up: parenthood and mopey self-absorption don’t pair well. Damian’s very existence embodies Batman’s long history while pointing out something many comics still skirt around: holy intimacy, Batman has had sex! Also, Damian’s initial angry whining is a perfect satire of how Batman (including the glowering Batffleck) all too often acts. Having an angry child helped Batman stop being one. Such stories went against the tide of post-Miller comics that portrayed Batman as a semi-deranged loner who pushed away friends and constantly fought his own demons. Morrison found this unconvincing given Batman’s training. As he said in an interview with io9: "I never really subscribed to the idea that Bruce was insane or unhealthy… Bruce Wayne's physical and psychological training regimes (including advanced meditation techniques) would tend to encourage a fairly balanced and healthy personality." In other words, Batman’s demeanor should be much closer to Yoda than Kylo Ren. Refreshingly, Morrison’s Batman gets to show a greater degree of wisdom and wider range of emotions than usual. Far from a grumpy loner, this Batman has friends and allies around the world. He actually enjoys being Bruce Wayne, taking a page from the (as Morrison puts it) “hairy-chested love-god” Batman stories illustrated by Neal Adams in the seventies. Even fighting the madness of the Joker is approached practically. Morrison mines a 1963 story called “Robin Dies at Dawn,” in which Batman participates in an isolation experiment meant to study the stresses placed on astronauts. In the Morrison version, Batman went to an extreme mental place just to figure out the Joker. This Batman thinks of everything; even when he loses his marbles, it’s part of a plan. Since Morrison’s run ended, Batman has unfortunately gotten dumber and angrier in the Scott Snyder/Greg Capullo comics, losing his history and maturity. As his run ended, Morrison saw this return to form happening in other comics, as he mentioned in a Newsarama interview: “The stuff that Scott [Snyder] is doing, that John Layman is doing, everyone is starting to get bleak again. You cannot bring Batman into the light, is basically what I’ve learned. So we wanted to acknowledge that in this last issue – it’s quite nightmarish in a way.” At the end of his run, Morrison killed off Damian and Talia, leaving Batman with two fresh deaths that mirror his parents’ deaths. A six-year run of comics built on history and progress ended up back at bleak, mopey, angry square one. Such reversion to the status quo is inevitable in comics, which are marketed to teenagers of all ages. For Batman to become a real adult permanently would be like Archie definitively choosing Betty or Veronica: it’s not going to happen. But even though Morrison’s run didn’t leave Batman in wise adulthood, it showed the power of a non-psycho, emotionally mature Batman. Another part of Morrison’s legacy is Damian, who has since returned from the dead and matured quite a bit himself. These kinds of small changes to the massive mythology of comics are hopeful in a way that clown-punching and Bat-moping can never be. The real world is overflowing with immature, angry fellas. It seems like the top superhero should have better emotional balance than the average Twitter harasser or Trump rally brawler. After all, if Bruce Wayne can travel the world for years learning the most dangerous martial arts and precise deductive skills, surely he can spare an hour a week for therapy.

Continue Reading...

The myth of the good victim: As an American facing street harassment abroad, I wondered what it meant to be a “good victim”

On the margins of the Santa Maria Novella section of Florence, past the train station and toward the Parco delle Cascine, lived a pervert. The first time I encountered him, I was walking to the local market for some blood oranges. As I glanced across the street before crossing, I saw a man pull his penis out, stare right at me, and furiously start to masturbate. I shrieked and bolted back to my host family’s apartment, which was literally around the corner. In my fractured Italian, I managed to convey that there was a man jerking off down the street and that we should call the police. My hosts shrugged their shoulders, apparently familiar with this sex offender. “He is harmless,” they said. “He did the same thing to our daughter when she was parking the car.”

Since that day, I have seen other men masturbate in public, but this was my first encounter. It was also my first glimpse into the Italian cultural response toward sex crime: nonchalance and acceptance. After this confrontation, I became aware of my vulnerability as a woman on the street, and it was a nasty epiphany.

I suppose I was lucky; I had made it pretty far without encountering serious street harassment – both in America and in Italy. Maybe I should just be thankful.

But I noticed my behavior start to change. I became hyper vigilant and anxious. I developed strategies to fend off sexually aggressive men who honed in on my dazed and confused American abroad-ness: wearing cheap, dark sunglasses to avoid eye contact and plugging my ears with headphones to ignore catcalls.

The moment that man took his penis out, my fantasies of an ideal study abroad experience in Florence disappeared. The grim reality? I was isolated on the other side of town while fellow classmates lived in close proximity to each other and the University. I didn’t have a phone that consistently worked, let alone Internet access (it was 2004, after all). A notoriously poor navigator, either I got on the wrong bus or missed the last bus; I was constantly getting lost and crying into my map. I spent most of my time alone, depressed, and disillusioned.

Maybe that’s why I find the Ashley Ann Olsen story so compelling. Olsen, 35, Florida born and Florence transplanted, seemed to be living the expatriate dream. In 2012, the artist moved to Italy to be close to her father, a professor of architecture and design at Bianca Cappello Art Academy. Olsen became part of a close-knit group of artists and by all accounts was a kind, generous person, well-loved by her friends and family. Though her life was not without its ordinary troubles – problems with an ex-husband, quarrels with her boyfriend – she seemed to embrace Florence and flourished as a bohemian socialite. When Olsen was found murdered in her apartment in early January, shock and sadness echoed through the international community.

The story of Olsen’s death reminds me of the awful awakening I had while living in The Eternal City: that women’s bodies are vulnerable to public commentary or worse. But Olsen’s Florence – the Florence of extravagant gestures, glamorous sunglasses, and starving-but-not-really artists – also reminds me of my old dreams of Italy and its potential to transform me into a more interesting, cosmopolitan person. On Olsen’s Instagram account, she looks exactly like my idea of that person – Edie Sedgwick of the Arno, or a Free People or Anthropologie advertisement. Her motto was even “Live Free or Die.” These pictures of Olsen’s exuberant, expatriate life, existing on the Internet as if she were still alive, make her violent death all the more jarring.

.…

It could have been anyone’s night out on the town. On Friday, January 8, Ashley Ann Olsen went to the Montecarla club with friends. They went home, she stayed behind. She eventually left the club with Cheik Tidiane Diaw, later identified as an undocumented Senegalese immigrant, and the two went back to her apartment. They had sex and argued. Somehow during the argument, Diaw allegedly killed Olsen. Diaw, who has since been arrested as a suspect, then stole and used Olsen’s smartphone, replacing the sim card. Olsen’s naked body was discovered by her boyfriend and landlady on January 9. She had bruises on her neck indicating strangulation.

The same investigator who handled the infamous 2007 Amanda Knox case, Domenico Profazio, is currently in charge of the Olsen investigation. Whether or not you agree with the Knox verdict or how the case was handled, one thing is clear: sex was an integral component in how the media reported on that crime. Knox was painted as a nymphomaniac, someone whose insatiable need for kinky sex caused her to murder her roommate, Meredith Kercher.

Much like with the Knox case, Olsen’s sex life is at the forefront of her crime story. In particular, Olsen’s Instagram account has transformed from a collection of artistic images of life in Florence to a disturbing forum of misogyny, racism and victim-blaming. Here, amidst photographs of Olsen walking her dog and shopping in the market, loving remembrances and sympathies struggle against violent, hateful rhetoric. Many comments fall into comfortable patterns of slut-shaming and victim blaming, such as “Wow I hope cheating on your boyfriend for a one night stand with a scumbag was worth it” and “It's sad but fuck her, cheating on her boyfriend with a negro, she got what was coming to her.” The disturbing message is that Olsen deserved to die because her behavior transgressed the bounds of how a woman should comport herself both in her public and private life – that her murder was the logical conclusion of her existence.

The fall from good victim to deserving victim happens fast. In an article for The Daily Beast, Barbie Latza Nadeau writes how quickly opinions about Olsen’s reputation shifted over the course of two weeks: “When Olsen’s death was first reported, she was described as a pretty, well known ‘Americana’ who everyone loved and who walked her beagle around the Bohemian neighborhood of Oltrarno in Florence. But as the days and weeks have worn on, she has been increasingly described in the oft-repeated stereotypic terms of a ‘wild American abroad’ and a ‘socialite’ whose late-night carousing didn’t go unnoticed by the conservative Florentines.”

This characterization of the wild American isn’t new; in fact, there’s a rich literary tradition constructed around the idea of women carelessly causing their own deaths by misadventure. For example, in Henry James’ 1878 novella "Daisy Miller," the titular character is described as a flirtatious American with a zest for life and a romantic spirit. Daisy is chatty, vivacious, and ultimately cast as a careless or dismissive reader of social cues. She becomes involved with an Italian man of questionable social standing, which causes a scandal and ruins her chances of making a triumphant debut in expatriate society. After staying out late with her Italian beau one night, Daisy contracts “Roman Fever” (malaria) and dies. It’s telling that she makes the choice to stay out past the appropriate time, despite the risk: “‘I don’t care,” said Daisy in a little strange tone, ‘whether I have Roman fever or not!’” After her death, friends and family shake their heads at what they consider Daisy’s recklessness: “'It's going round at night…that’s what made her sick. She's always going round at night. I shouldn't think she'd want to, it's so plaguey dark.’”

…

About a month into my study abroad experience, I made plans to sleep over at a friend’s apartment. We were going dancing at a trashy discoteca with a group of people from school. I don’t particularly enjoy clubs, but I was excited to have the opportunity to finally see what nightlife in Florence was like. 

As I expected, the discoteca was smelly and hot, and the music was awful. But after weeks of feeling disconnected, I was grateful to experience this slightly seedy part of Florentine culture that I had been missing out on. My friend and I danced ourselves stupid and drank until three. At the end of the night, exhausted and slightly tipsy, we linked arms and started the 20-minute trek to her apartment. As we walked from the pulsing heart of downtown, joking about our night and wondering how we would wake up in time to get to our lecture at Santa Croce early the next morning, the street grew more residential. Houses were separated by arches and gates. It was dark and quiet, a beautiful, brisk night. I felt alive.

Suddenly, a few feet in front of us, a figure slowly leaned out from one of the archways – like in a horror movie. It was a man, and he was totally naked. Then, he slowly leaned back in, like he was being pulled by a string. My friend and I ran. Later, we decided that it wouldn’t matter if we told anyone; men pulling out their genitals in public would be something we’d just have to get used to. And after all, we’d been out late at night instead of tucked tightly into bed.

Living in a foreign culture that either doesn’t respect a woman’s sexual and physical boundaries or that has a different conception of those boundaries can be unnerving, especially if you’ve been warned that the men are “forward” and expect American women to be “sexually adventurous.” And while America is still far from being a country that takes sexual harassment seriously, we have made important strides that give me optimism about the future. I like to think that this shift is the result of insistent, persistent demands to take street harassment, slut shaming, and victim blaming as the microaggressions that they are. But when we recognize the pervasive sexual violence women experience worldwide, American complaints sometimes seem almost quaint in comparison to a rape victim being honor-killed in Afghanistan, a teenage girl enduring a forced clitoridectomy in Somalia, and the recent organized, mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve. We need to recognize that although violence against women exists on a spectrum, there is one commonality: the persistent conception that women are objects meant to be owned or possessed, either through language or physical force.

Living with these microaggressions – street harassment, sexual harassment in the workplace, sexist language and other forms of emotional violence – affects a woman’s psychology and her sense of self. While street harassment obviously doesn’t cause the same kind of catastrophic damage as being raped or assaulted, each time I am catcalled, told to smile, or threatened with male genitalia, I am forced to confront my status as an object. Even though I’ve become more resilient (and why should I have to be resilient?), I still experience feelings of simultaneous worthlessness and rage. There have even been days where I question my choice of attire depending on where I will be traveling to: Is this shirt too see-through? Is my eyeliner too dark? Am I setting myself up for commentary? Am I setting myself up for assault?

…

What does it mean to be a “good victim”? As I thought back on my street harassment experiences in Florence and Ashley Ann Olsen’s public shaming on the Internet, I came to the conclusion that the concept of the good victim is a myth. In a culture that obsessively champions a warped concept of personal responsibility, there are only deserving victims – and they are usually women. Women who are in the wrong place at the wrong time are punished. Women who behave in ways that threaten the status quo are punished. Women who make mistakes are punished. Not only they are punished but they are subject to vitriolic commentary that further violates them and perpetuates the fallacious distinction between deserving and non-deserving victims.

A few months ago, I was traveling from Bensonhurst toting a large bag of Sicilian pastries for dad’s birthday party that night. Oddly enough, the subway was virtually empty for a weekend afternoon. I put on my headphones, took out a book, and settled in for the ride. About two stops in, a man boarded and sat directly in front of me, despite having his pick of seats. I prickled but continued reading, scolding myself for being paranoid. After a few minutes passed, I glanced up. The man was smiling at me. His hand was moving underneath his coat. “Oh no,” I thought. “Not this again.” Sure enough, he parted his coat to reveal his penis.

I had a few options. I could get out at the next stop and move to the next car. I could scream so the elderly woman at the other end of the car would notice, but what would she be able to do? I could take a picture of the man with my phone and report him to the police.

Instead, I got out and moved at the next stop.

Later, at my dad’s birthday party, I told the guests about what happened on my quest to procure their cannolis and cassatina cakes. I don’t know what I expected – maybe outrage or sympathy. One of my dad’s friends turned to me and shook his head: “Next time, don’t take the subway alone.”

Continue Reading...

The only addiction “that hasn’t tried to kill me”: Melissa Broder on confessional writing, anxiety, and how much honesty is too much

Melissa Broder is easy to talk to. The poet and author of “So Sad Today,” a book of essays that expand on the themes she mulled over in her popular Twitter account of the same name, is “a sharer,” she says, a natural at self-confession who invites the same in others. Within seconds of getting her on the phone, we were talking about my rescue dog’s personality issues, and her dog's as well. “He’s definitely got anxiety,” Broder said of her dog, adding that she hasn’t yet shared her anxiety drugs with him. “So Sad Today” contains essays about sex and death, anxiety and depression, addiction and meditation – the same concerns that animate her three poetry collections, “Scarecrone,” “Meat Heart” and “When You Say One Thing But Mean Your Mother.” (A fourth poetry collection, “Last Sext,” is forthcoming this summer.) Broder writes with the kind of honesty that can make you cringe and laugh, and then catch your breath, brought up short by a kind of existential dread. Your book takes its title from the Twitter account that you started anonymously. Why did you decide to do that? I’d gone through periods of anxiety in my life, where the panic attacks were more intense or less intense, basically I would get into these cycles. I was going through a particularly harrowing cycle of anxiety – it was fall 2012 – and I would go into work and I would be afraid that I literally couldn’t even sit there. I’m kind of a perfectionist, and I catastrophize, so I was like, well, if I can’t sit here, how am I going to come back in tomorrow, and if I can’t come back in tomorrow how am I going to work, and if I can’t work, then how am I going to support myself – it would sort of spin out into the ultimate worst-case scenario. I was just really scared. And I also had a lot of depression under that, which I didn’t even realize was depression. My anxiety was such a nice cover for it. I feel that’s one way that anxiety can sort of serve us, like it can protect us from other feelings that maybe we’re not able or willing to handle. Because anxiety can feel so bad – in my mind it’s my worst enemy – but there’s probably part of me that must prefer feeling anxiety to depression or other emotions. Because it's sort of where I default. Is it that perhaps anxiety’s also a little more entertaining than depression, like you can share it more with others? Well, it’s more active. So where, even though anxiety can feel like a captor, I think there’s a lot going on and you can also harness anxiety to kind of propel yourself forward, whereas I feel like with depression, I feel more buried by it. It’s scarier for me to feel buried than to feel whipped. It’s funny: We call these things depression, or anxiety disorder, but there’s probably just this huge range. People experience depression in all different ways. I wouldn’t even say that mine is necessarily sadness; for me it’s more like terror. We compartmentalize these things into neat little pockets, or we try to. We give them diagnoses. So at that time, I was going through these cycles. All the things I normally did to get out of this place were not working. And my mind was like, you’re going to be in this forever. So I found this creative solution. It was going to be a place where I felt like I was going to be compulsively tweeting, as a repository for all this shit. I didn’t have any followers at first, was just tweeting out into this abyss, and then gradually people started following. I stayed anonymous from 2012 to 2015. So I was anonymous for the bulk of the time. How did that process – having this account that’s anonymous, but you're sharing real, intimate feelings – what does that do to your anxiety levels? Did that dispel your anxiety, that you could share, or was it scary in its own way? Well, it just gave me an outlet. Therapy has never felt anonymous enough to me. Lately I’ve been better about this, but it’s always been hard for me to drop that need to perform. It’s like, I’m okay until someone sees that I’m not okay, and once somebody recognizes that I’m not okay, then I’m really not okay. Right, because you also want your therapist to like you – you don’t want your therapist to be alarmed about how you’re doing. Yeah. Totally. And I’ve had so many panic attacks in therapy, but I never tell them, because I don’t want them to feel like something’s wrong with them. Why would I have a panic attack in therapy? It’s supposed to be a safe space – But don’t they know? Wouldn’t a good therapist recognize that you’re having a panic attack? No, that’s the thing! Actually I get kind of sad when they don’t; it’s just another way of feeling separate from humanity, right, like I’m like “oh my god, they totally didn’t know!” That’s so sad if they can’t tell. It’s like you’re faking an orgasm and your partner doesn’t even know…  Exactly. But the thing is, I’ve been having panic attacks for 15 years so I’ve gotten really good at nobody knowing I’m having one. I can be in throes – all the symptoms can be happening, the rapid heartbeat, the suffocating sensation. For me it really centers a lot in my breathing. I feel like I’m suffocating, my throat is closing in, I start to feel dizzy. The scariest one is when it kind of progresses and I get a sense of unreality, like I’m looking at the person and it’s sort of like I’m on acid, there’s a hyper realness, or an unrealness, like I’m looking at them and I feel very dissociative. And that’s when it gets very existential. Like Camus said, at any moment, at any time, the absurdity of the world can slap a man on the face – I’m paraphrasing – or when Burroughs talks about seeing the lunch on the end of your spoon. It’s like when your context shifts and you’re like, what is all this, what are we doing? But you can be feeling all that and nobody knows? You have that kind of a poker face? That’s amazing, it’s impressive… I was telling my therapist last week that I’d had a panic attack with her the week before. This is one of the first times I’ve come clean; I have a new therapist, and I like her a lot. And then a few weeks into it, I had a panic attack in her office. It was really because I hadn’t eaten yet that day, my blood sugar was really low, I hadn’t slept the night before, I’d been up writing. And who knows what the topic was that we’d been talking about. But I just got one of the sensations and my mind was like, “What’s wrong? Are you dying? Yes, you’re dying.” And the next week I told her – I didn’t want to tell her – I felt like kind of disappointed in myself that I hadn’t told her as it was happening, because I kind of made a new rule, like, if you’re not going to be honest with the therapist, then why are you there? But it’s hard, when you’re going through it, it’s a very isolating experience. You feel super alone in it. I don’t really want to voice it, because if I voice it, then it’s really happening. As much as I tweet about it, in real life I still have a lot of shame about it, even after all these years. So I told her, and she was like, I had no idea. Having this anonymous So Sad Today account, did that enable you to express anxiety in a way that felt safe? Yeah. I mean, that’s what it was. In my everyday construct of my identity, my social life, my professional life – there was a need to keep a mask on. So Twitter felt like a place where I could be really, really, really real. But I had to be totally anonymous. That’s the only way I felt safe to be really true and real. And so you unveiled yourself a few months back, and now this book is out and it’s got your name on it, and you’re sharing stuff that feels really intimate. I mean, how scary is that? Well, I mean I’ve definitely talked about it in therapy! For about two and a half years I didn’t tell anyone and it’s like really the only secret I’ve kept. I’m not a good secret keeper. I’m a sharer. I’m not exactly like buttoned up. So then I told one person and it was weird because the difference between it being totally anonymous and one – that was like a big deal. Suddenly I knew one person knew and I felt like I could be judged. And then I was nervous to tell, I was really nervous, I was afraid that I would be a disappointment, that the fans of the account would be like, “oh….” The thing I have the most anxiety around now is that, like, my parents are not allowed to read this book. But how can you stop them? I mean, not to scare you, but someday your parents, or your parents’ friends, or someone you know will read that chapter on your vomit fetish. That was the one chapter that after the galleys came out I had cold feet and I talked to my editor and agent and I was as like, OK, this is too much, too much honesty. That was the scariest chapter for me to write. That was like a secret since I was a little kid. It’s like those old secrets that you have, that might not be the biggest deal, or filthiest thing about you, or the most fucked up thing about you, but for some reason it has like this youthful shame to it. You just don’t need to know everything about your child. I mean, people don’t need to know everything about you. So, why was I so confessional in this book? And I think it was almost like an exercise in some way – to confess everything, or a lot of everything. It’s funny, because what we confess is still controlled. You’re still wearing a mask. Do we ever take our mask off, even for ourselves? I don’t know that we do. I don’t know that we could handle it. It’s a lot, that much self-realization at once. If it’s even possible. It’s like, if one believes in God to see all of God at once. Or like, in "Moby-Dick," to see the whole whale. And so it was sort of an exercise in – in the same vein that if I worry about something, I have this illusion of control about it, like it won’t happen if I worry about it. So like, if I can confess something, and not be judged, then maybe I can accept this in myself. It may not be a logical thing. But I was challenging myself. It wasn’t until it was in galleys until I was like, oh shit. What’s your poetry like? Are you as confessional in that work as you are here? My poetry contends with a lot of the same themes as “So Sad Today.” Very obsessed with sex, death, longing, filling the existential voids of our lives. Our obsessions are our obsessions; we can’t really escape them. But I really like to use language that’s very primal. I don’t like using language that’s in any way pop-cultural or disposable. I like language that’s very timeless. I have this book coming out this summer from Tin House, called “Last Sext,” and it’s a very poppy title but the only word in the entire book that I think you wouldn’t have been able to understand 100 years ago. Are you working on more stuff? New poems? New essays? Well, I always considered myself a poet, and I’m always writing poems. When I lived in New York, my practice of writing poetry was that I wrote a lot on long walks, I wrote on the subway, I wrote using my phone. I like to write in motion; I don’t like to sit at my desk and write; it feels too formal. I like to write when I’m not supposed to be writing. Actually I’m working on a very long piece that’s fictional. That is contending with those same obsessions but through a different medium. It might be a piece of shit. It might be horrific. I’m always writing. I kind of feel like I have to. It’s something to live for. So that’s where the meaning is. If life is a well of meaninglessness, then maybe writing is the meaning. Yeah. I think it just – the nonfiction helps me feel like I have some control over my narrative. I could be going through shit and kind of write my way out of it, or share it with others and it makes me feel like I have some control, if only to put it into my own words. And poetry, that feels like alchemy. It’s a way for me to access the magic of life – I mean the thing that I want, which is to always feel like I’m in some kind of flow. You know, I’m an addict; I always want to feel high. I have trouble with the mundane. It doesn’t feel like enough to me. There’s other things you can do when life doesn’t feel like enough – you can drink, you can have sex, you can get high, you can overindulge in food, you can go shopping for shit you don’t need. There are all these things we do to as life enhancers. But the longer I’ve been sober, the narrower the road gets in terms of things I can do and still kind of – and not be aware that that’s what I’m doing. Do you think writing is an addiction then? Well, for me, it’s the only one that hasn’t tried to kill me.Melissa Broder is easy to talk to. The poet and author of “So Sad Today,” a book of essays that expand on the themes she mulled over in her popular Twitter account of the same name, is “a sharer,” she says, a natural at self-confession who invites the same in others. Within seconds of getting her on the phone, we were talking about my rescue dog’s personality issues, and her dog's as well. “He’s definitely got anxiety,” Broder said of her dog, adding that she hasn’t yet shared her anxiety drugs with him. “So Sad Today” contains essays about sex and death, anxiety and depression, addiction and meditation – the same concerns that animate her three poetry collections, “Scarecrone,” “Meat Heart” and “When You Say One Thing But Mean Your Mother.” (A fourth poetry collection, “Last Sext,” is forthcoming this summer.) Broder writes with the kind of honesty that can make you cringe and laugh, and then catch your breath, brought up short by a kind of existential dread. Your book takes its title from the Twitter account that you started anonymously. Why did you decide to do that? I’d gone through periods of anxiety in my life, where the panic attacks were more intense or less intense, basically I would get into these cycles. I was going through a particularly harrowing cycle of anxiety – it was fall 2012 – and I would go into work and I would be afraid that I literally couldn’t even sit there. I’m kind of a perfectionist, and I catastrophize, so I was like, well, if I can’t sit here, how am I going to come back in tomorrow, and if I can’t come back in tomorrow how am I going to work, and if I can’t work, then how am I going to support myself – it would sort of spin out into the ultimate worst-case scenario. I was just really scared. And I also had a lot of depression under that, which I didn’t even realize was depression. My anxiety was such a nice cover for it. I feel that’s one way that anxiety can sort of serve us, like it can protect us from other feelings that maybe we’re not able or willing to handle. Because anxiety can feel so bad – in my mind it’s my worst enemy – but there’s probably part of me that must prefer feeling anxiety to depression or other emotions. Because it's sort of where I default. Is it that perhaps anxiety’s also a little more entertaining than depression, like you can share it more with others? Well, it’s more active. So where, even though anxiety can feel like a captor, I think there’s a lot going on and you can also harness anxiety to kind of propel yourself forward, whereas I feel like with depression, I feel more buried by it. It’s scarier for me to feel buried than to feel whipped. It’s funny: We call these things depression, or anxiety disorder, but there’s probably just this huge range. People experience depression in all different ways. I wouldn’t even say that mine is necessarily sadness; for me it’s more like terror. We compartmentalize these things into neat little pockets, or we try to. We give them diagnoses. So at that time, I was going through these cycles. All the things I normally did to get out of this place were not working. And my mind was like, you’re going to be in this forever. So I found this creative solution. It was going to be a place where I felt like I was going to be compulsively tweeting, as a repository for all this shit. I didn’t have any followers at first, was just tweeting out into this abyss, and then gradually people started following. I stayed anonymous from 2012 to 2015. So I was anonymous for the bulk of the time. How did that process – having this account that’s anonymous, but you're sharing real, intimate feelings – what does that do to your anxiety levels? Did that dispel your anxiety, that you could share, or was it scary in its own way? Well, it just gave me an outlet. Therapy has never felt anonymous enough to me. Lately I’ve been better about this, but it’s always been hard for me to drop that need to perform. It’s like, I’m okay until someone sees that I’m not okay, and once somebody recognizes that I’m not okay, then I’m really not okay. Right, because you also want your therapist to like you – you don’t want your therapist to be alarmed about how you’re doing. Yeah. Totally. And I’ve had so many panic attacks in therapy, but I never tell them, because I don’t want them to feel like something’s wrong with them. Why would I have a panic attack in therapy? It’s supposed to be a safe space – But don’t they know? Wouldn’t a good therapist recognize that you’re having a panic attack? No, that’s the thing! Actually I get kind of sad when they don’t; it’s just another way of feeling separate from humanity, right, like I’m like “oh my god, they totally didn’t know!” That’s so sad if they can’t tell. It’s like you’re faking an orgasm and your partner doesn’t even know…  Exactly. But the thing is, I’ve been having panic attacks for 15 years so I’ve gotten really good at nobody knowing I’m having one. I can be in throes – all the symptoms can be happening, the rapid heartbeat, the suffocating sensation. For me it really centers a lot in my breathing. I feel like I’m suffocating, my throat is closing in, I start to feel dizzy. The scariest one is when it kind of progresses and I get a sense of unreality, like I’m looking at the person and it’s sort of like I’m on acid, there’s a hyper realness, or an unrealness, like I’m looking at them and I feel very dissociative. And that’s when it gets very existential. Like Camus said, at any moment, at any time, the absurdity of the world can slap a man on the face – I’m paraphrasing – or when Burroughs talks about seeing the lunch on the end of your spoon. It’s like when your context shifts and you’re like, what is all this, what are we doing? But you can be feeling all that and nobody knows? You have that kind of a poker face? That’s amazing, it’s impressive… I was telling my therapist last week that I’d had a panic attack with her the week before. This is one of the first times I’ve come clean; I have a new therapist, and I like her a lot. And then a few weeks into it, I had a panic attack in her office. It was really because I hadn’t eaten yet that day, my blood sugar was really low, I hadn’t slept the night before, I’d been up writing. And who knows what the topic was that we’d been talking about. But I just got one of the sensations and my mind was like, “What’s wrong? Are you dying? Yes, you’re dying.” And the next week I told her – I didn’t want to tell her – I felt like kind of disappointed in myself that I hadn’t told her as it was happening, because I kind of made a new rule, like, if you’re not going to be honest with the therapist, then why are you there? But it’s hard, when you’re going through it, it’s a very isolating experience. You feel super alone in it. I don’t really want to voice it, because if I voice it, then it’s really happening. As much as I tweet about it, in real life I still have a lot of shame about it, even after all these years. So I told her, and she was like, I had no idea. Having this anonymous So Sad Today account, did that enable you to express anxiety in a way that felt safe? Yeah. I mean, that’s what it was. In my everyday construct of my identity, my social life, my professional life – there was a need to keep a mask on. So Twitter felt like a place where I could be really, really, really real. But I had to be totally anonymous. That’s the only way I felt safe to be really true and real. And so you unveiled yourself a few months back, and now this book is out and it’s got your name on it, and you’re sharing stuff that feels really intimate. I mean, how scary is that? Well, I mean I’ve definitely talked about it in therapy! For about two and a half years I didn’t tell anyone and it’s like really the only secret I’ve kept. I’m not a good secret keeper. I’m a sharer. I’m not exactly like buttoned up. So then I told one person and it was weird because the difference between it being totally anonymous and one – that was like a big deal. Suddenly I knew one person knew and I felt like I could be judged. And then I was nervous to tell, I was really nervous, I was afraid that I would be a disappointment, that the fans of the account would be like, “oh….” The thing I have the most anxiety around now is that, like, my parents are not allowed to read this book. But how can you stop them? I mean, not to scare you, but someday your parents, or your parents’ friends, or someone you know will read that chapter on your vomit fetish. That was the one chapter that after the galleys came out I had cold feet and I talked to my editor and agent and I was as like, OK, this is too much, too much honesty. That was the scariest chapter for me to write. That was like a secret since I was a little kid. It’s like those old secrets that you have, that might not be the biggest deal, or filthiest thing about you, or the most fucked up thing about you, but for some reason it has like this youthful shame to it. You just don’t need to know everything about your child. I mean, people don’t need to know everything about you. So, why was I so confessional in this book? And I think it was almost like an exercise in some way – to confess everything, or a lot of everything. It’s funny, because what we confess is still controlled. You’re still wearing a mask. Do we ever take our mask off, even for ourselves? I don’t know that we do. I don’t know that we could handle it. It’s a lot, that much self-realization at once. If it’s even possible. It’s like, if one believes in God to see all of God at once. Or like, in "Moby-Dick," to see the whole whale. And so it was sort of an exercise in – in the same vein that if I worry about something, I have this illusion of control about it, like it won’t happen if I worry about it. So like, if I can confess something, and not be judged, then maybe I can accept this in myself. It may not be a logical thing. But I was challenging myself. It wasn’t until it was in galleys until I was like, oh shit. What’s your poetry like? Are you as confessional in that work as you are here? My poetry contends with a lot of the same themes as “So Sad Today.” Very obsessed with sex, death, longing, filling the existential voids of our lives. Our obsessions are our obsessions; we can’t really escape them. But I really like to use language that’s very primal. I don’t like using language that’s in any way pop-cultural or disposable. I like language that’s very timeless. I have this book coming out this summer from Tin House, called “Last Sext,” and it’s a very poppy title but the only word in the entire book that I think you wouldn’t have been able to understand 100 years ago. Are you working on more stuff? New poems? New essays? Well, I always considered myself a poet, and I’m always writing poems. When I lived in New York, my practice of writing poetry was that I wrote a lot on long walks, I wrote on the subway, I wrote using my phone. I like to write in motion; I don’t like to sit at my desk and write; it feels too formal. I like to write when I’m not supposed to be writing. Actually I’m working on a very long piece that’s fictional. That is contending with those same obsessions but through a different medium. It might be a piece of shit. It might be horrific. I’m always writing. I kind of feel like I have to. It’s something to live for. So that’s where the meaning is. If life is a well of meaninglessness, then maybe writing is the meaning. Yeah. I think it just – the nonfiction helps me feel like I have some control over my narrative. I could be going through shit and kind of write my way out of it, or share it with others and it makes me feel like I have some control, if only to put it into my own words. And poetry, that feels like alchemy. It’s a way for me to access the magic of life – I mean the thing that I want, which is to always feel like I’m in some kind of flow. You know, I’m an addict; I always want to feel high. I have trouble with the mundane. It doesn’t feel like enough to me. There’s other things you can do when life doesn’t feel like enough – you can drink, you can have sex, you can get high, you can overindulge in food, you can go shopping for shit you don’t need. There are all these things we do to as life enhancers. But the longer I’ve been sober, the narrower the road gets in terms of things I can do and still kind of – and not be aware that that’s what I’m doing. Do you think writing is an addiction then? Well, for me, it’s the only one that hasn’t tried to kill me.

Continue Reading...

The National Enquirer’s 5 most outrageous political “scoops”

The National Enquirer unexpectedly thrust itself into national relevance Friday morning when it published a story claiming that Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz has had affairs with at least five women. Cruz angrily denied the report and blamed GOP frontrunner Donald Trump for orchestrating the smear with "his friends at the National Enquirer and his political henchmen." In a Facebook post, Trump denied any involvement with the story but suggested that if the National Enquirer reported it, well, it's probably true: "Ted Cruz’s problem with the National Enquirer is his and his alone, and while they were right about O.J. Simpson, John Edwards, and many others, I certainly hope they are not right about Lyin’ Ted Cruz." The National Enquirer is often the butt of jokes, but Trump isn't entirely wrong — the paper's sensational stories have, on occasion, crossed over into the mainstream. The Pulitzer Prize Board declared the tabloid eligible for journalism's most prestigious prize in 2010 after it broke the news that presidential candidate John Edwards had fathered a daughter out of wedlock with a campaign staffer. The Enquirer also published photos of O.J. Simpson wearing shoes that matched footprints found at the scene where Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman were murdered. The photos were later used as evidence in the Goldman family's civil suit against Simpson. Those cases aside, the National Enquirer has often earned its reputation as perhaps our nation's least respected news source. Here are five of the most outlandish political scoops ever published by the granddaddy of all supermarket tabloids: 1. Supreme Court Justice Scalia — Murdered By A Hooker In a "bombshell world exclusive," the Enquirer claimed that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's March 2016 death involved foul play. According to the Enquirer, Scalia was assassinated by a "$2,000-a-night hooker" hired by the CIA to "inject Scalia with a needle filled with poison in his buttocks." 2. CLINTON SEX ROMP CAUGHT ON VIDEO! In 2003, the National Enquirer reported that Hillary Clinton's political foes were desperately trying to acquire a secret videotape that supposedly showed her husband Bill Clinton "having sex in a pickup truck with a department store clerk." Simply imagining Bill Clinton having sex in a pickup truck is terrifying enough, so it's probably for the best that actual video has never surfaced. 3. ‘Family Man’ Marco Rubio’s Love Child Stunner! A December 2015 Enquirer story repeated claims made in Buzzfeed reporter McKay Coppins' book "The Wilderness" that former presidential hopeful Marco Rubio spent $40,000 on opposition research to find out whether his fellow candidates knew about a Florida woman that "had supposedly been impregnated by Rubio, and then went on to have an abortion.” The Enquirer also reported a "rumor" that Marco Rubio was supporting a "secret second family." 4. Jeb Bush Snorted Cocaine On Night His Dad Became President! Republican operative Roger Stone was quoted in the Cruz story as saying of the Texas senator, "I believe where there is smoke there is fire." But this wasn't the first time Stone has gotten involved in a scandalous National Enquirer story. In February 2016, the tabloid reported the following claims made in a book authored by Stone: “Jeb had snorted lines of cocaine at the vice president’s residence at the Naval Observatory on the night of Vice President George H.W. Bush’s election to the presidency.” 5. 

David Brooks, sad and deluded, just keeps trying: Bless his heart, but he lost his mind again today

The Republican Party was never based on science. It never accumulated data or drew conclusions from it. Like all political parties, its positions are sewn together from various pieces of found cloth, each meant to attract various possible constituencies. Though party stalwarts like Paul Ryan and David Brooks dress up those constituencies in what appear to be this thoughtfully designed clothing, the truth of the matter is that there is nothing intellectual about their tailoring. Essentially, they merely stitch together the rags of a racist base and the cast-offs of affluent contributors to create what look like new suits that, though they may applaud them, cover about as much of the wearer as does the emperor’s proud new clothes. Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions has been influential on intellectual thought from more than half a century, so it is not surprising that David Brooks, today, has picked it up as a thread for sewing back together what even he has finally come to see as the remnants of the Republican Party. After watching the institution he has dedicated his life to supporting fall into tatters with a speed no one imagined, Brooks is trying desperately to envision some way of saving at least a little of the material being ripped away from what is left of the outfit. At the same time, he is trying to convince himself that, at one point (the Reagan years), his creations were the height of fashion. Fashion, he implies, has intellectual heft. Brooks writes that “Reaganism was very economic, built around tax policies, enterprise zones and the conception of the human being as a rational, utility-driven individual.” Even amid the myriad disasters spawned by those very policies, Brooks still wants to claim that they were expertly tailored by diligent craftspeople, that something more was going on than pandering to style. Of course, there was never any real conception of “the human being as a rational, utility-driven individual.” You can’t sell rational people the illusion that they are going to be rich. That’s a con, and cons are built around avarice, not rational thought. That really is ‘the emperor’s new clothes.’ Reaganism, if there ever really was such a thing, has failed. The crumbling infrastructure of Flint is just one of the first obvious holes in the fabric. Our bridges and tunnels and highways and airports are falling away like shoes whose flapping soles and broken laces can no longer protect our feet. There are going to be more bridge collapses, water and sewage problems, railroad accidents and airport incidents all because “we” decided we look better in the cheap suits the Reagan hucksters convinced us to buy at the high price of ignoring our shoes, our underwear and our overcoats. Not only that, but it left us with holes in our pockets and at the mercy of pickpockets and muggers. The Reaganites outfitted us with a cane that turns into a sword along with a brace of pistols, but these can’t protect us from the hands reaching out from everywhere and tearing at our vestments. Donald Trump promises to replace the Reagan tatters with a suit of armor, though armor stopped working centuries ago. The people Brooks helped fool are being fooled again. This time, though, the con artists are leaving Brooks—and Ryan—with an almost empty shop. Brooks has a needle in his hand and what he thinks is a viable spool of thread and even a bit of strong (he thinks) cloth, but no one is paying attention—no one is interested in buying the nice new necktie he says he can make. He doesn’t even know what it will look like, he says, but he’s excited about it. He’s going to make “Émile Durkheim neckties” to replace the “Adam Smith necktie” that, he claims was the emblem of Reaganism. He thinks his new neckties will “relate to binding a fragmenting society, reweaving family and social connections, relating across the diversity of a globalized world.” Let’s be serious here: The real necktie of the base of the Republican Party since the creation of the “Southern strategy” 50 years ago has been a noose. Metaphorically, it has tightened around the necks of the new right-wing “base” to the point where, finally feeling strangled, they are throwing it off in favor of Trump’s promised armor. Literally, it is the noose of the lynch mob, the mob that the conservative movement turned to in the sixties to augment its minority positions, creating a new and unstable majority that, frankly speaking, never could have lasted and that, today, is finally falling apart. Kuhn was writing about the paths of real scientific and intellectual progress. We’ve had none of that from conservative circles, certainly not since the success of Brooks’s mentor’s God and Man at Yale in 1951. William F. Buckley, Jr. was as much the elitist as Brooks, and would also be trying to see the rise of Trump (and, as Brooks presumes, the coming fall) as a means for regaining control of the sewing machine. Even in the face of their failure, nothing changes in their beliefs. Brooks ends by saying “it’s exciting to be present at the re-creation” of the Republican Party. Maybe so, but he’s going to have to be offering something more than threadbare rags.The Republican Party was never based on science. It never accumulated data or drew conclusions from it. Like all political parties, its positions are sewn together from various pieces of found cloth, each meant to attract various possible constituencies. Though party stalwarts like Paul Ryan and David Brooks dress up those constituencies in what appear to be this thoughtfully designed clothing, the truth of the matter is that there is nothing intellectual about their tailoring. Essentially, they merely stitch together the rags of a racist base and the cast-offs of affluent contributors to create what look like new suits that, though they may applaud them, cover about as much of the wearer as does the emperor’s proud new clothes. Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions has been influential on intellectual thought from more than half a century, so it is not surprising that David Brooks, today, has picked it up as a thread for sewing back together what even he has finally come to see as the remnants of the Republican Party. After watching the institution he has dedicated his life to supporting fall into tatters with a speed no one imagined, Brooks is trying desperately to envision some way of saving at least a little of the material being ripped away from what is left of the outfit. At the same time, he is trying to convince himself that, at one point (the Reagan years), his creations were the height of fashion. Fashion, he implies, has intellectual heft. Brooks writes that “Reaganism was very economic, built around tax policies, enterprise zones and the conception of the human being as a rational, utility-driven individual.” Even amid the myriad disasters spawned by those very policies, Brooks still wants to claim that they were expertly tailored by diligent craftspeople, that something more was going on than pandering to style. Of course, there was never any real conception of “the human being as a rational, utility-driven individual.” You can’t sell rational people the illusion that they are going to be rich. That’s a con, and cons are built around avarice, not rational thought. That really is ‘the emperor’s new clothes.’ Reaganism, if there ever really was such a thing, has failed. The crumbling infrastructure of Flint is just one of the first obvious holes in the fabric. Our bridges and tunnels and highways and airports are falling away like shoes whose flapping soles and broken laces can no longer protect our feet. There are going to be more bridge collapses, water and sewage problems, railroad accidents and airport incidents all because “we” decided we look better in the cheap suits the Reagan hucksters convinced us to buy at the high price of ignoring our shoes, our underwear and our overcoats. Not only that, but it left us with holes in our pockets and at the mercy of pickpockets and muggers. The Reaganites outfitted us with a cane that turns into a sword along with a brace of pistols, but these can’t protect us from the hands reaching out from everywhere and tearing at our vestments. Donald Trump promises to replace the Reagan tatters with a suit of armor, though armor stopped working centuries ago. The people Brooks helped fool are being fooled again. This time, though, the con artists are leaving Brooks—and Ryan—with an almost empty shop. Brooks has a needle in his hand and what he thinks is a viable spool of thread and even a bit of strong (he thinks) cloth, but no one is paying attention—no one is interested in buying the nice new necktie he says he can make. He doesn’t even know what it will look like, he says, but he’s excited about it. He’s going to make “Émile Durkheim neckties” to replace the “Adam Smith necktie” that, he claims was the emblem of Reaganism. He thinks his new neckties will “relate to binding a fragmenting society, reweaving family and social connections, relating across the diversity of a globalized world.” Let’s be serious here: The real necktie of the base of the Republican Party since the creation of the “Southern strategy” 50 years ago has been a noose. Metaphorically, it has tightened around the necks of the new right-wing “base” to the point where, finally feeling strangled, they are throwing it off in favor of Trump’s promised armor. Literally, it is the noose of the lynch mob, the mob that the conservative movement turned to in the sixties to augment its minority positions, creating a new and unstable majority that, frankly speaking, never could have lasted and that, today, is finally falling apart. Kuhn was writing about the paths of real scientific and intellectual progress. We’ve had none of that from conservative circles, certainly not since the success of Brooks’s mentor’s God and Man at Yale in 1951. William F. Buckley, Jr. was as much the elitist as Brooks, and would also be trying to see the rise of Trump (and, as Brooks presumes, the coming fall) as a means for regaining control of the sewing machine. Even in the face of their failure, nothing changes in their beliefs. Brooks ends by saying “it’s exciting to be present at the re-creation” of the Republican Party. Maybe so, but he’s going to have to be offering something more than threadbare rags.

Continue Reading...

Ted Cruz sex scandal story leaked to National Enquirer by Marco Rubio “ally,” not Donald Trump, report says

Maybe Donald Trump isn't behind the Ted Cruz "sex scandal" story leak to the National Enquirer after all. According to The Daily Beast, "for months and months, anti-Cruz operatives have pitched a variety of #CruzSexScandal stories to a host of prominent national publications." One such outlet was Breitbart News, which was shown "a compilation video of Cruz and a woman other than his wife coming out of the Capitol Grille restaurant and a hotel on Tuesdays and Thursdays," a source inside the publication told The Daily Beast. (Leave it to a politician to keep a standardized booty call schedule.) The Breibart source confirmed that they'd received the video from "a Rubio ally," but ultimately decided against running the story because, "There was no way to verify the claims." Cruz today issued a statement more or less implying Trump and "his political henchmen" planted the Enquirer expose. Trump, for his part, denied Cruz's counter-allegations, maintaining his ignorance of the whole thing while ham-handedly throwing jabs at "Lyin' Ted Cruz." "I have nothing to do with the National Enquirer," Trump wrote in a statement posted to his Facebook page, "and unlike Lyin’ Ted Cruz I do not surround myself with political hacks and henchman and then pretend total innocence." Absent in this still-unfolding story is a motive for a Rubio "ally" — whatever that means — to run a smear campaign against Cruz, unless it's true and the suspended Rubio campaign anointed itself the role of morality police. Read the full report over at The Daily Beast.Maybe Donald Trump isn't behind the Ted Cruz "sex scandal" story leak to the National Enquirer after all. According to The Daily Beast, "for months and months, anti-Cruz operatives have pitched a variety of #CruzSexScandal stories to a host of prominent national publications." One such outlet was Breitbart News, which was shown "a compilation video of Cruz and a woman other than his wife coming out of the Capitol Grille restaurant and a hotel on Tuesdays and Thursdays," a source inside the publication told The Daily Beast. (Leave it to a politician to keep a standardized booty call schedule.) The Breibart source confirmed that they'd received the video from "a Rubio ally," but ultimately decided against running the story because, "There was no way to verify the claims." Cruz today issued a statement more or less implying Trump and "his political henchmen" planted the Enquirer expose. Trump, for his part, denied Cruz's counter-allegations, maintaining his ignorance of the whole thing while ham-handedly throwing jabs at "Lyin' Ted Cruz." "I have nothing to do with the National Enquirer," Trump wrote in a statement posted to his Facebook page, "and unlike Lyin’ Ted Cruz I do not surround myself with political hacks and henchman and then pretend total innocence." Absent in this still-unfolding story is a motive for a Rubio "ally" — whatever that means — to run a smear campaign against Cruz, unless it's true and the suspended Rubio campaign anointed itself the role of morality police. Read the full report over at The Daily Beast.

Continue Reading...

U.S. ally Saudi Arabia sentences journalist to 5 years in prison for tweets defending women’s rights, activists

Close U.S. ally Saudi Arabia sentenced prominent journalist Alaa Brinji to five years in prison for a series of pro-human rights tweets, according to a report by Amnesty International. The Saudi absolute monarchy found the journalist guilty on March 24 of "insulting the rulers," "inciting public opinion," "ridiculing Islamic religious figures" and "accusing security officers of killing protestors." Brinji faced numerous charges for tweeting in support of human rights advocates and prisoners of conscience, and for calling for the right of Saudi women to drive cars. The Western-allied theocratic Saudi regime, which governs according to an extremist, sectarian interpretation of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism, does not allow women basic rights such a driving cars or traveling without the accompaniment of a male guardian. Amnesty says Brinji, who has worked for several respected Saudi newspapers, is a prisoner of conscience, "imprisoned solely for peacefully expressing his views." The sentencing "is a clear violation of international law and the latest demonstration of the Saudi Arabian authorities’ deep-seated intolerance of the right to peaceful expression," the leading human rights organization remarked in a statement. Saudi Arabia convicted the journalist in its notorious so-called "counterterrorism" court, the Specialized Criminal Court, or SCC. Amnesty notes that, since 2014, "the SCC has sentenced many activists and dissidents to lengthy prison terms, and even to death, after grossly unfair trials." In addition to the five years in prison, the Saudi "counterterrorism" court also sentenced Brinji to an eight-year travel ban and a fine of 50,000 Saudi Arabian riyals (approximately U.S. $13,300). The Saudi dictatorship arrested Brinji on May 12, 2014. The regime has detained him since, initially in solitary confinement, and has not given him access to a lawyer. James Lynch, deputy director of Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Program, blasted the Saudi regime for its draconian punishment. "The sentencing of Alaa Brinji to a five-year prison term is utterly shameful," Lynch said. "He is the latest victim of Saudi Arabia’s ruthless crackdown on peaceful dissent, where the aim appears to be to completely wipe out any and all voices of criticism." “Putting someone behind bars for peacefully exercising his legitimate right to freedom of expression, and defending the rights of others to do so, is a complete distortion of the very notion of justice," Lynch added. "The authorities must ensure his conviction is quashed and release him immediately and unconditionally." In early March, the Saudi regime sentenced writer and Islamic scholar Mohanna Abdulaziz al-Hubail in absentia to six years in prison and a travel ban for his tweets. The Saudi "counterterrorism" court charged al-Hubail with "insulting the state and its rulers" and "being in solidarity with imprisoned members of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association" on Twitter, as well as inciting and taking part in demonstrations and calling for the release of prisoners of conscience. These punishments are relatively light compared to those typically meted out to dissidents, whom Saudi Arabia regularly beheads. The regime kicked off the new year by killing 47 people in a series of mass executions on Jan. 2. Among those killed were renowned Saudi activist Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a leader in the regime's minority Shia Muslim religious community, which faces intense discrimination. Salon interviewed Mohammed al-Nimr, the son of the executed Saudi dissident, who shared his story about fighting for democracy and justice in the oil-rich dictatorship. In November, Palestinian poet Ashraf Fayadh was sentenced to death by a Saudi court for "renouncing Islam." Liberal Saudi journalist and blogger Raif Badawi was also imprisoned for “insulting Islam through electronic channels” in 2012, before being sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes in 2014. Moreover, at least three young Saudi activists who were arrested as teenagers currently sit on death row in Saudi Arabia, having been sentenced to beheading for attending peaceful anti-regime protests. They have allegedly been tortured, and at least one was also sentenced to crucifixion. Critics have compared the theocratic Saudi monarchy's religious extremism to that of violent groups like ISIS. The Saudi regime has spent more than $100 billion in recent decades spreading its fundamentalist Wahhabi interpretation of Islam around the world, particularly in poor Muslim-majority countries. Meanwhile, the U.S. considers the Saudi regime, which sits on the world's second-largest oil reserves and has approximately $100 billion in active weapons deals with the U.S., a "close ally." In early March, the U.S. State Department released its new fact sheet on Saudi Arabia, which insists the theocratic sectarian regime "plays a crucial role in maintaining security in the Middle East, due to its economic, political, and cultural importance and its strategic location." The department said it works "with Saudi Arabia to support counterterrorism efforts and a shared interest in regional stability." At the same moment, the U.S. State Department has also internally admitted that its Saudi ally "remains a critical financial support base for al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, LeT, and other terrorist groups." A classified 2009 memo signed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acknowledged that "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." The European Parliament has likewise noted that "Saudi Arabia has been a major source of financing to rebel and terrorist organisations since the 1970s," reporting that "countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait do too little to stop rich and conservative donors from financing terrorist organisations through charitable and religious institutions." As Saudi Arabia imprisons yet another critic, Amnesty International once again condemned the regime for another politically motivated imprisonment. "Saudi Arabia must be held accountable for its gross and systematic violations of human rights," James Lynch said. The human rights official continued, emphasizing that the Saudi monarchy's "international allies, who seek to collaborate on security and intelligence, have to confront the fact that using the pretext of 'counterterrorism' the government's draconian crackdown has eradicated virtually all forms of peaceful dissent in the country."Close U.S. ally Saudi Arabia sentenced prominent journalist Alaa Brinji to five years in prison for a series of pro-human rights tweets, according to a report by Amnesty International. The Saudi absolute monarchy found the journalist guilty on March 24 of "insulting the rulers," "inciting public opinion," "ridiculing Islamic religious figures" and "accusing security officers of killing protestors." Brinji faced numerous charges for tweeting in support of human rights advocates and prisoners of conscience, and for calling for the right of Saudi women to drive cars. The Western-allied theocratic Saudi regime, which governs according to an extremist, sectarian interpretation of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism, does not allow women basic rights such a driving cars or traveling without the accompaniment of a male guardian. Amnesty says Brinji, who has worked for several respected Saudi newspapers, is a prisoner of conscience, "imprisoned solely for peacefully expressing his views." The sentencing "is a clear violation of international law and the latest demonstration of the Saudi Arabian authorities’ deep-seated intolerance of the right to peaceful expression," the leading human rights organization remarked in a statement. Saudi Arabia convicted the journalist in its notorious so-called "counterterrorism" court, the Specialized Criminal Court, or SCC. Amnesty notes that, since 2014, "the SCC has sentenced many activists and dissidents to lengthy prison terms, and even to death, after grossly unfair trials." In addition to the five years in prison, the Saudi "counterterrorism" court also sentenced Brinji to an eight-year travel ban and a fine of 50,000 Saudi Arabian riyals (approximately U.S. $13,300). The Saudi dictatorship arrested Brinji on May 12, 2014. The regime has detained him since, initially in solitary confinement, and has not given him access to a lawyer. James Lynch, deputy director of Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Program, blasted the Saudi regime for its draconian punishment. "The sentencing of Alaa Brinji to a five-year prison term is utterly shameful," Lynch said. "He is the latest victim of Saudi Arabia’s ruthless crackdown on peaceful dissent, where the aim appears to be to completely wipe out any and all voices of criticism." “Putting someone behind bars for peacefully exercising his legitimate right to freedom of expression, and defending the rights of others to do so, is a complete distortion of the very notion of justice," Lynch added. "The authorities must ensure his conviction is quashed and release him immediately and unconditionally." In early March, the Saudi regime sentenced writer and Islamic scholar Mohanna Abdulaziz al-Hubail in absentia to six years in prison and a travel ban for his tweets. The Saudi "counterterrorism" court charged al-Hubail with "insulting the state and its rulers" and "being in solidarity with imprisoned members of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association" on Twitter, as well as inciting and taking part in demonstrations and calling for the release of prisoners of conscience. These punishments are relatively light compared to those typically meted out to dissidents, whom Saudi Arabia regularly beheads. The regime kicked off the new year by killing 47 people in a series of mass executions on Jan. 2. Among those killed were renowned Saudi activist Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a leader in the regime's minority Shia Muslim religious community, which faces intense discrimination. Salon interviewed Mohammed al-Nimr, the son of the executed Saudi dissident, who shared his story about fighting for democracy and justice in the oil-rich dictatorship. In November, Palestinian poet Ashraf Fayadh was sentenced to death by a Saudi court for "renouncing Islam." Liberal Saudi journalist and blogger Raif Badawi was also imprisoned for “insulting Islam through electronic channels” in 2012, before being sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes in 2014. Moreover, at least three young Saudi activists who were arrested as teenagers currently sit on death row in Saudi Arabia, having been sentenced to beheading for attending peaceful anti-regime protests. They have allegedly been tortured, and at least one was also sentenced to crucifixion. Critics have compared the theocratic Saudi monarchy's religious extremism to that of violent groups like ISIS. The Saudi regime has spent more than $100 billion in recent decades spreading its fundamentalist Wahhabi interpretation of Islam around the world, particularly in poor Muslim-majority countries. Meanwhile, the U.S. considers the Saudi regime, which sits on the world's second-largest oil reserves and has approximately $100 billion in active weapons deals with the U.S., a "close ally." In early March, the U.S. State Department released its new fact sheet on Saudi Arabia, which insists the theocratic sectarian regime "plays a crucial role in maintaining security in the Middle East, due to its economic, political, and cultural importance and its strategic location." The department said it works "with Saudi Arabia to support counterterrorism efforts and a shared interest in regional stability." At the same moment, the U.S. State Department has also internally admitted that its Saudi ally "remains a critical financial support base for al-Qa'ida, the Taliban, LeT, and other terrorist groups." A classified 2009 memo signed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acknowledged that "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." The European Parliament has likewise noted that "Saudi Arabia has been a major source of financing to rebel and terrorist organisations since the 1970s," reporting that "countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait do too little to stop rich and conservative donors from financing terrorist organisations through charitable and religious institutions." As Saudi Arabia imprisons yet another critic, Amnesty International once again condemned the regime for another politically motivated imprisonment. "Saudi Arabia must be held accountable for its gross and systematic violations of human rights," James Lynch said. The human rights official continued, emphasizing that the Saudi monarchy's "international allies, who seek to collaborate on security and intelligence, have to confront the fact that using the pretext of 'counterterrorism' the government's draconian crackdown has eradicated virtually all forms of peaceful dissent in the country."

Continue Reading...

Hillary Clinton’s “dirty politics”: Bernie Sanders is experiencing the same nasty tricks that Clinton’s campaign dealt Obama in 2008

With allegations of voter suppression in Arizona, as well as questions about the Clinton campaign’s tactics in Iowa, Nevada, and other states, some historical context is needed. In 2008, The Atlantic published an article explaining "dirty politics" and voting "irregularities" titled "Obama Manager Accuses Clintons of Widespread Dirty Politics":

"David Plouffe, in a succinct statement appended to a released quotation from his boss, Barack Obama, said the Obama campaign was investigating more than 200 reporters of irregularities in Nevada.

'We currently have reports of over 200 separate incidents of trouble at caucus sites, including doors being closed up to thirty minutes early, registration forms running out so people were turned away, and ID being requested and checked in a non-uniform fashion. This is in addition to the Clinton campaign’s efforts to confuse voters and call into question the at-large caucus sites which clearly had an affect on turnout at these locations. These kinds of Clinton campaign tactics were part of an entire week’s worth of false, divisive, attacks designed to mislead caucus-goers and discredit the caucus itself.'

Plouffe asks Nevadans to call a toll-free number... and report any other problems."

Sound familiar? Every single one of the voting irregularities Plouffe complained about in 2008 have been experienced by the Bernie Sanders campaign.

History is repeating itself in 2016.

While Plouffe complained of “200 separate incidents of trouble at caucus sites,” Bernie Sanders has also witnessed the same Clinton campaign strategy, without the support of anyone within the Democratic Party. At least Barack Obama had part of the Democratic establishment backing him, while Bernie Sanders is viewed as an outsider to many establishment Democrats.

Furthermore, The Washington Post also quotes David Plouffe complaining about Clinton “misleading caucus-goers” in a 2008 article titled "Obama, Edwards React to Nevada Outcome":

"Barack Obama said he is 'proud' of the campaign he ran in Nevada...

But his campaign manger, David Plouffe, said the campaign has reports of more than 200 incidents of 'trouble' at caucus sites that may have kept Obama’s supporters from offering their support at the caucus. He blamed the incidents on premeditated 'Clinton campaign tactics' that he said 'were part of an entire week’s worth of false, divisive, attacks designed to mislead caucus-goers and discredit the caucus itself.'"

Voters in 2016 should remember that Clinton’s campaign tactics were once described as “false, divisive, attacks designed to mislead caucus-goers and discredit the caucus itself.”

What was that again about Hillary Clinton’s admiration for Barack Obama?

In addition to voting irregularities and 200 incidents of “trouble,” the Clinton campaign exhibited other examples of “dirty politics.” As stated in a 2008 Guardian article titled "Clinton aides claim Obama photo wasn’t intended as a smear," "Barack Obama’s campaign team today accused Hillary Clinton’s beleaguered staff of mounting a desperate dirty tricks operation by circulating a picture of him in African dress, feeding into false claims on US websites that he is a Muslim." Looking back, there’s simply no way to deny Clinton used racism against Barack Obama.

Yes, racism was used against Barack Obama in 2008, and Clinton’s 3 a.m. ad (that Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson believed contained a "racist sub-message") and Bill Clinton’s claim that "I’m not a racist" weren’t the only elements of a Republican-style strategy against America’s first black president.

President Obama’s campaign manager David Plouffe explained that the controversial photo represented “the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election.”

The words “from either party” speak volumes.

Plouffe also believed the picture was part of "a disturbing pattern" and stated “It’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties.”

As a testament to Democratic politics, most in the Democratic establishment have endorsed Hillary Clinton. These endorsement, in light of “dirty tricks” and “dirty politics” exhibited by Clinton’s campaign against Barack Obama, are also bizarre considering even “the kitchen sink” was thrown at Obama.

This “kitchen sink” is described in a 2008 New York Times piece titled "Clinton Campaign Starts 5-Point Attack on Obama":

"After struggling for months to dent Senator Barack Obama’s candidacy, the campaign of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is now unleashing what one Clinton aide called a 'kitchen sink' fusillade against Mr. Obama, pursuing five lines of attack since Saturday in hopes of stopping his political momentum...

'Enough,' Ms. Williams’s statement began. 'If Barack Obama’s campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed. Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely.'"

As stated in the article regarding the photo of Obama in African attire, Clinton’s spokesperson believed Obama’s campaign "should be ashamed" of their criticism. Essentially, the Clinton campaign justified a blatant attempt at deceiving voters, knowing very well that myths regarding Obama’s religion or birthplace would translate into votes for Hillary Clinton.

While Sanders has refrained from even mentioning the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s emails (Clinton would never have returned the favor if the shoe were on the other foot), his opponent has had no problems painting Sanders as the liberal Ted Nugent on guns, or too extreme on healthcare and other issues.

Regarding the emails, I explain in this YouTube segment why Hillary Clinton likely faces FBI and Justice Department indictments and why Democrats must rally around Bernie Sanders.

As for the secrecy behind these emails, David Axelrod stated his viewpoint of Hillary Clinton in a 2008 CNN piece titled "Obama camp slams Clinton for secrecy":

"WASHINGTON (CNN) - Barack Obama’s campaign stepped up its effort Friday to target Hillary Clinton for delaying the release of her income tax returns, saying the New York senator has a 'pattern of secrecy' and has yet to be fully vetted by the American people.

'Senator Clinton is one of the most secretive politicians in America today,' Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe said in a conference call with reporters. 'She has consistently refused to release her tax returns. They have said they are going to release them around [April] 15, but there is no reason why the prior six years of tax returns couldn’t be released right now.'

...Obama strategist David Axelrod said Clinton is the least-vetted candidate in the presidential field because of her refusal to disclose the documents...

'Considering the huge amounts of money they have made in recent years, they’ve contributed their money to the campaign, some of those relationships financially have been with individuals who have come under quite a bit of scrutiny for possible ethics transgressions, its essential to know where the American people are getting there money from,' Plouffe said Thursday."

The righteous indignation from Hillary supporters would be heard throughout the universe if the Sanders campaign stated “Senator Clinton is one of the most secretive politicians in America today.”

Furthermore, the same “dirty politics” exhibited eight years ago are evident in this year’s Democratic primary. The difference, however, is that many Democrats are just fine with voting irregularities and various forms of suppression, primarily because winning is all that matters to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Even the FBI investigating Clinton and her associates (the FBI isn’t granting immunity to servers) isn’t enough to fill her supporters with the slightest concern.

In contrast, ideals bolster Bernie’s campaign. Bernie Sanders is absolutely correct in saying that “what happened in Arizona is a disgrace,” especially since many voters waited in line for 5 hours and there were over 140 less polling stations than 2012.

What better way to defeat an opponent who benefits from high voter turnout than voter suppression?

If loyal Democrats believe Sanders supporters who refuse to vote for Clinton will eventually come around if Clinton wins (like Clinton supporters did in 2008), they should reevaluate their optimism. I state the case for writing-in Bernie Sanders, if Clinton wins, in this YouTube segment. Rest assured that more attempts at blatant voter suppression and “dirty politics” will result in far more than 33% of Bernie Sanders supporters refusing to vote for Clinton. I explain in this appearance on CNN International with John Vause that Clinton could get indicted, and in another appearance on CNN International that none of Trump’s schemes would pass Congress. If we see more attempts at voter suppression in the future, even the fear of Donald Trump won’t be enough to sway millions of voters, disenchanted with Clinton’s “dirty politics.”

(This article first appeared on The Huffington Post)

Continue Reading...

Our porn double standard: Bree Olson slut-shamed after leaving adult industry while James Deen gets more work than ever

“When I go out I feel as if I’m wearing ‘slut’ across my forehead,” says ex-porn actress and former Charlie Sheen “goddess” Bree Olson in a new video, part of the Real Women, Real Stories YouTube video series. Her stark description of the ways she’s been slut shamed and shunned by society because of her former career in porn are chilling. Olsen, who has also dabbled in comedy after leaving porn, breaks down in tears in the video when asked how she’d like to be treated, because she’s so used to being seen as a pariah. “I have really gotten to the point where there are days to weeks at a time where I don’t leave my house because I don’t feel like facing the world of what has been created out there for me,” she says in the video. “I get so disappointed when I go out and I meet a new friend and it turns out they don’t want to be my friend anymore…People treat me as if I am a pedophile. They don’t treat me like an ex sex worker. They treat me like I would somehow be damaging to children.” She says that she gave up making $30,000 to $60,000 a month, and could make $20,000 in a week if she returned to porn, but she’s now looking to find work and a life away from the porn industry. She also posted today on her Twitter account and Facebook page, along with screenshots of Reddit message boards about nurses losing their jobs because of involvement in the adult industry, that “Every time I consider going back to school, I Google sex workers experience and am so discouraged. Back to the drawing board.” For a taste of just how harsh the wrath Olson is describing is, one of the first responses to her Facebook post read: “Should have looked into it a bit better before you chose the quick cash taking dicks. Sorry, but thats how the world works... stop fishing for sympathy...your not worthy” Olson elaborated on the ways she’s been barred from mainstream society, socially and professionally, in an essay at The Daily Dot, writing, ”People look at me as if I am the same as a sex offender. They look at me as though I am less than in every way, and they assume the absolute worst in every way. I had never realized how progressive my mind was and how scared people were of sexuality until this. I also realized I could never go back and be a nurse or a teacher, or work for any company really that can fire me under morality clauses for making customers feel ‘uncomfortable’ because of who I am.” On Twitter, Olson received support from porn stars such as jessica drake, who thanked her for not denouncing the porn industry as a whole—even though Olson has warned young women not to go into porn in light of her experiences—but instead, blamed the sexist, judgmental ways she’s been treated. https://twitter.com/thejessicadrake/s... https://twitter.com/thejessicadrake/s... This is an important distinction, one that has gotten lost in translation for some media outlets, such as The Hollywood Gossip. It’s not that, as their headline puts it, Olson “regrets her career choice,” but that she’s lamenting the way she will seemingly be negatively judged by her porn past for the rest of her life. Olson’s story echoes what adult performer Gauge told Salon in 2013 about her attempts to get work outside the porn industry. While working in a hospital as a surgical tech, she was recognized and bore the brunt of her coworkers’ simultaneous fascination and disdain. Gauge said, “Everybody wanted me in their room, but they started treating me like shit. They made me feel like I was contaminating everything.” In contrast, male porn star James Deen, who’s been accused of rape by ex-girlfriend Stoya and eight other women (and called a “sadist” by Olson), is even more popular these days, according to Vocativ, which said that searches for him on an adult movie site spiked in December 2015, the month following the accusations and that 7 more films (45 vs. 38) were released in the 100 days following the first allegation than the 100 days prior to it. Deen also won two AVN Awards earlier this year at the prestigious industry ceremony and, after a hiatus from social media, is back posting on Twitter and Instagram as if the allegations never happened. As porn performer Zak Smith wrote in an insightful piece about Deen’s longevity at Medium, “Deen was less predator than parasite — he played a long game — and a porn world where justice could only come from fingers pointed by Toris, Bonnies, Nickis, Ambers, Ashleys and Lilys no-one takes seriously was a perfect host. Deen’s popularity gave him power.” The sex work stigma Olson is facing as a former porn star is part of a larger worldview that equates a woman taking her clothes off—for money or pleasure—as an erasure of her status as a human being worthy of respect. We see this every time Kim Kardashian or the rest of her family are mentioned—in the specious “they’re only famous because of Kim’s sex tape” argument—or when a teacher is fired for having nude photos on her personal cell phone and a student exposes them. It’s the same sentiment that makes slut-shaming Melania Trump in a recent political ad somehow seem acceptable. A scantily clad woman, a nude woman or a woman in porn are all treated with similar levels of scorn. Although the ante is upped for porn stars and sex workers, it’s still coming from the same place: a desire to relegate women to status of purely being sex objects, rather than women with full lives that extend beyond their most risqué action. That Deen, who’s been accused of multiple crimes, has a thriving career, despite being ditched by porn companies like Kink.com and Evil Angel, while Olson, whose work was done legally, feels like she can’t leave her house, tells a lot about how sexism plays into our ideas about sex workers. Yet while women bear the brunt of our culture’s hatred of those working in porn, men can also be held to similar levels of judgment. Case in point: in 2009, a Fort Myers Beach town manager was fired because his wife was a porn star. As long as we allow ourselves to sit in moral judgment of the likes of not just Olson and other former or current porn stars or sex workers, but anyone who’s dabbled in the sex industry, whatever the reason, we will still maintain this false, destructive social hierarchy. Part of why Deen has been able to coast on his fame is that too many people equate porn with violence, which erases the actual harm Deen’s been accused of. Porn consumers need to put the health and safety of the workers in the industry ahead of their fandom, and more porn companies need to take a stand, even if it costs them money in the short run. All that being said, it’s also important to look at how Olson’s story is being framed. While she is the one on camera exposing her pain and suffering, the way it’s been edited and presented is also telling its own story, one seemingly at odds with Olson’s point of view. On the Real Women, Real Stories Facebook page, the post with her video opens with this sentence: “Many believe the widespread fairy tale that #women enjoy making porn #movies but in reality there are no happy endings for the women of porn.” The series’ creator, Matan Uziel, has written at The Huffington Post that “each episode focuses on a woman who has overcome subjugation and stigmatization in her given profession.” We can simultaneously care about the working conditions for women who both choose to work in porn and those who do so out of economic necessity and about women like Olson who’ve either left the porn industry or are looking to leave it. It’s not an either/or proposition, and by stating, no pun intended, that there’s “no happy endings for the women of porn,” the project is setting Olson up as an object of pity, despite the fact that Uziel also wrote, “It is important to say, that despite the obstacles that they have faced, the women featured in our miniseries are not victims; they are heroines.” By buying into the lie that no women enjoy making porn, Real Women, Real Stories has lost the opportunity to truly advocate for more options for women contemplating leaving the adult industry. We’ll only change how porn stars, current, former and future, are perceived and treated, if we don’t look down on them simply by the nature of their profession and making sweeping assumptions about their motivations, just as we’ll only take the rape allegations against Deen seriously if we stop conflating consensual porn and consensual rough sex with assault or brushing off the widespread accusations. Regardless of the paternalistic motivations behind the video, Olson’s words offer us a chance to reflect on how we treat the people behind our porn, and why there mere act of having sex on camera is cause for social and professional ostracization. One can only hope that Olson’s neighbors and community also take her words to heart.“When I go out I feel as if I’m wearing ‘slut’ across my forehead,” says ex-porn actress and former Charlie Sheen “goddess” Bree Olson in a new video, part of the Real Women, Real Stories YouTube video series. Her stark description of the ways she’s been slut shamed and shunned by society because of her former career in porn are chilling. Olsen, who has also dabbled in comedy after leaving porn, breaks down in tears in the video when asked how she’d like to be treated, because she’s so used to being seen as a pariah. “I have really gotten to the point where there are days to weeks at a time where I don’t leave my house because I don’t feel like facing the world of what has been created out there for me,” she says in the video. “I get so disappointed when I go out and I meet a new friend and it turns out they don’t want to be my friend anymore…People treat me as if I am a pedophile. They don’t treat me like an ex sex worker. They treat me like I would somehow be damaging to children.” She says that she gave up making $30,000 to $60,000 a month, and could make $20,000 in a week if she returned to porn, but she’s now looking to find work and a life away from the porn industry. She also posted today on her Twitter account and Facebook page, along with screenshots of Reddit message boards about nurses losing their jobs because of involvement in the adult industry, that “Every time I consider going back to school, I Google sex workers experience and am so discouraged. Back to the drawing board.” For a taste of just how harsh the wrath Olson is describing is, one of the first responses to her Facebook post read: “Should have looked into it a bit better before you chose the quick cash taking dicks. Sorry, but thats how the world works... stop fishing for sympathy...your not worthy” Olson elaborated on the ways she’s been barred from mainstream society, socially and professionally, in an essay at The Daily Dot, writing, ”People look at me as if I am the same as a sex offender. They look at me as though I am less than in every way, and they assume the absolute worst in every way. I had never realized how progressive my mind was and how scared people were of sexuality until this. I also realized I could never go back and be a nurse or a teacher, or work for any company really that can fire me under morality clauses for making customers feel ‘uncomfortable’ because of who I am.” On Twitter, Olson received support from porn stars such as jessica drake, who thanked her for not denouncing the porn industry as a whole—even though Olson has warned young women not to go into porn in light of her experiences—but instead, blamed the sexist, judgmental ways she’s been treated. https://twitter.com/thejessicadrake/s... https://twitter.com/thejessicadrake/s... This is an important distinction, one that has gotten lost in translation for some media outlets, such as The Hollywood Gossip. It’s not that, as their headline puts it, Olson “regrets her career choice,” but that she’s lamenting the way she will seemingly be negatively judged by her porn past for the rest of her life. Olson’s story echoes what adult performer Gauge told Salon in 2013 about her attempts to get work outside the porn industry. While working in a hospital as a surgical tech, she was recognized and bore the brunt of her coworkers’ simultaneous fascination and disdain. Gauge said, “Everybody wanted me in their room, but they started treating me like shit. They made me feel like I was contaminating everything.” In contrast, male porn star James Deen, who’s been accused of rape by ex-girlfriend Stoya and eight other women (and called a “sadist” by Olson), is even more popular these days, according to Vocativ, which said that searches for him on an adult movie site spiked in December 2015, the month following the accusations and that 7 more films (45 vs. 38) were released in the 100 days following the first allegation than the 100 days prior to it. Deen also won two AVN Awards earlier this year at the prestigious industry ceremony and, after a hiatus from social media, is back posting on Twitter and Instagram as if the allegations never happened. As porn performer Zak Smith wrote in an insightful piece about Deen’s longevity at Medium, “Deen was less predator than parasite — he played a long game — and a porn world where justice could only come from fingers pointed by Toris, Bonnies, Nickis, Ambers, Ashleys and Lilys no-one takes seriously was a perfect host. Deen’s popularity gave him power.” The sex work stigma Olson is facing as a former porn star is part of a larger worldview that equates a woman taking her clothes off—for money or pleasure—as an erasure of her status as a human being worthy of respect. We see this every time Kim Kardashian or the rest of her family are mentioned—in the specious “they’re only famous because of Kim’s sex tape” argument—or when a teacher is fired for having nude photos on her personal cell phone and a student exposes them. It’s the same sentiment that makes slut-shaming Melania Trump in a recent political ad somehow seem acceptable. A scantily clad woman, a nude woman or a woman in porn are all treated with similar levels of scorn. Although the ante is upped for porn stars and sex workers, it’s still coming from the same place: a desire to relegate women to status of purely being sex objects, rather than women with full lives that extend beyond their most risqué action. That Deen, who’s been accused of multiple crimes, has a thriving career, despite being ditched by porn companies like Kink.com and Evil Angel, while Olson, whose work was done legally, feels like she can’t leave her house, tells a lot about how sexism plays into our ideas about sex workers. Yet while women bear the brunt of our culture’s hatred of those working in porn, men can also be held to similar levels of judgment. Case in point: in 2009, a Fort Myers Beach town manager was fired because his wife was a porn star. As long as we allow ourselves to sit in moral judgment of the likes of not just Olson and other former or current porn stars or sex workers, but anyone who’s dabbled in the sex industry, whatever the reason, we will still maintain this false, destructive social hierarchy. Part of why Deen has been able to coast on his fame is that too many people equate porn with violence, which erases the actual harm Deen’s been accused of. Porn consumers need to put the health and safety of the workers in the industry ahead of their fandom, and more porn companies need to take a stand, even if it costs them money in the short run. All that being said, it’s also important to look at how Olson’s story is being framed. While she is the one on camera exposing her pain and suffering, the way it’s been edited and presented is also telling its own story, one seemingly at odds with Olson’s point of view. On the Real Women, Real Stories Facebook page, the post with her video opens with this sentence: “Many believe the widespread fairy tale that #women enjoy making porn #movies but in reality there are no happy endings for the women of porn.” The series’ creator, Matan Uziel, has written at The Huffington Post that “each episode focuses on a woman who has overcome subjugation and stigmatization in her given profession.” We can simultaneously care about the working conditions for women who both choose to work in porn and those who do so out of economic necessity and about women like Olson who’ve either left the porn industry or are looking to leave it. It’s not an either/or proposition, and by stating, no pun intended, that there’s “no happy endings for the women of porn,” the project is setting Olson up as an object of pity, despite the fact that Uziel also wrote, “It is important to say, that despite the obstacles that they have faced, the women featured in our miniseries are not victims; they are heroines.” By buying into the lie that no women enjoy making porn, Real Women, Real Stories has lost the opportunity to truly advocate for more options for women contemplating leaving the adult industry. We’ll only change how porn stars, current, former and future, are perceived and treated, if we don’t look down on them simply by the nature of their profession and making sweeping assumptions about their motivations, just as we’ll only take the rape allegations against Deen seriously if we stop conflating consensual porn and consensual rough sex with assault or brushing off the widespread accusations. Regardless of the paternalistic motivations behind the video, Olson’s words offer us a chance to reflect on how we treat the people behind our porn, and why there mere act of having sex on camera is cause for social and professional ostracization. One can only hope that Olson’s neighbors and community also take her words to heart.

Continue Reading...