Andrew Sullivan's Blog, page 274

Mother’s Day Without Mom, Ctd

Reflecting on her mother’s death, Ruth Margalit writes, “I now mark Mother’s Day on my private calendar of grief”:

Meghan O’Rourke has a wonderful word for the club of those without mothers. She calls us not motherless but unmothered. It feels right—an ontological word rather than a descriptive one. I had a mother, and now I don’t. This is not a characteristic one can affix, like being paperless, or odorless. The emphasis should be on absence.

Freddie deBoer praises John Dickerson’s piece on his late mother. And Freddie remembers his “own mother, gone 25 years, somehow, this year”:

I am aware that her memory is passing grain by grain with those who loved her and have left us now themselves, I also know that as long as I am alive to feel that loss, her memory will persist, in a manner I neither want nor would wish away. Because for as far away as she seems to me now, memories like smoke, the truth is I still wake up in the night and feel that powerless grasping, reaching around in the dark for some object that I will never find, and it’s like it was yesterday, my father walking in that door, and I know that I will eat forever and not be fed, and within me that cold fire will burn forever.

A few readers share their sorrow:

My mother died on April 12 of this year.

While it was sudden, it was not unexpected, and it was the saddest day of my life. I have many friends who have lost their mothers, much younger than me (I am 56). It is mind-boggling to realize that whatever sympathy I had to offer – truly rang hollow. Not out of any oversight or short sightedness, but because the magnitude of the loss of one’s mother is not understood one iota, until it happens. Then it hits you like a ton of bricks.

My dear mama was one for superlatives; each year any celebration we had as a family was “the best one EVER!” This year Mother’s Day was decidedly the WORST one ever. I am now in a club that no one should ever be in a hurry to join, even though the majority of us will belong to it, eventually.

When someone who is “unmothered” reminds to you call, hug, kiss, and LOVE your mama – do it! I would give anything for one last superlative …

Another:

Your post struck a solid chord for me. My mother died when I was ten years old on the day after Christmas. She had been sick for two years, but nobody prepared my siblings and I. In our minds, people got sick, but then eventually they got better again. It happened 47 years and two stepmothers ago, but we still feel that ache.

For a while after her death, I found some comfort from the smell of her clothes, still hanging in a hall closet. After some hesitation (I was afraid my friends would think I was being maudlin), I posted the attached image on my Facebook page:

I was stunned by how many people it touched. Silly me. The loss of a parent doesn’t hurt any less for an adult. It’s universal.

Another reader:

My mother passed away 14 years ago, and this time of year is always difficult but for some reason, this year has been especially difficult. I don’t ever want to begrudge all my Facebook friends who want to share their love for their moms or my mom friends posting photos of their lovely days with their families. But it is a lonely time for those who are “unmothered” (I love that term!) and especially so when I scroll through my Newsfeed on Mother’s Day.

So to see your acknowledgement of that reality in this thread means the world to me. It is a small comfort knowing that I am not alone and that others understand what it’s like.

Everybody Do The Idaho Stop

Joseph Stromberg encourages other states to allow bikers to roll through stop signs and go on red lights, as Idaho has done since 1982:

Idaho’s rule is pretty straightforward. If a cyclist approaches a stop sign, he or she needs to slow down and look for traffic. If there’s already a pedestrian, car, or another bike there, then the other vehicle has the right of way. If there’s no traffic, however, the cyclist can slowly proceed. Basically, for bikers, a stop sign is a yield sign.

If a cyclist approaches a red light, meanwhile, he or she needs to stop fully. Again, if there’s any oncoming traffic or a pedestrian, it has the right of way. If there’s not, the cyclist can proceed cautiously through the intersection. Put simply, red light is a stop sign.

This doesn’t mean that a cyclist is allowed to blast through an intersection at full speed — which is dangerous for pedestrians, the cyclist, and pretty much everyone involved. This isn’t allowed in Idaho, and it’s a terrible idea everywhere.

Agreed on all counts. As usual, Dan Savage is on my side:

A cop stopped me in the U-District a few years ago after I failed to come to a complete stop at a stop sign.

There was no traffic coming in either direction—and I had slowed down (my days of bombing through intersections are over). But the cop explained as he wrote me a ticket that I had to apply my brakes and come to a complete stop, take one foot off a pedal, and put that foot on the ground. That’s a legal stop. I replied: That would be like telling a driver he had to put his car in park at a stop sign, take the keys out of the ignition, hold them out the window and jangle them. He handed me the ticket.

I’ve continued to roll through stop signs.

Drum is also on board:

I’m convinced. This actually sounds like a perfectly sensible rule to me. Blowing through intersections at top speed is obviously dumb, and you deserve every ticket you get if you do it. But bicycles are a lot slower than cars; a lot less dangerous than cars; and have a way better field of vision than cars. Allowing them to slow down but not stop for stop signs when no one is around makes perfect sense.

On the potato thing, though, Idaho needs to stand down. Let’s all leave the nutritionists alone, OK?

Quote For The Day II

“You know, like everyone was petrified of [Tim Russert]. When he died, Lewis Lapham described him as the overaccommodating head waiter at some really swanky restaurant who’s just really good at ass-kissing every rich person who comes into the door. And that was Tim Russert—which is why they all loved Tim Russert, right? Because the benefit of Tim Russert was that not only did he let them control the message, but he cast the appearance that they were subjected to really rigorous questioning. So it was the extra bonus of propagandizing while convincing the public that they weren’t being propagandized,” – Glenn Greenwald.

Mental Health Break

A bearded ballet that could take your breath away:

Hercules and Love Affair feat. John Grant – I Try To Talk to You from David Wilson on Vimeo.

Amazon’s Hit List

The company is apparently delaying shipments of books published by one of New York’s largest publishing houses, Hachette:

Usually, a customer can log in to Amazon, search for a title and receive the book in just a few days (depending on what shipping option is selected). I just searched for Stephen Colbert’s “America Again: Re-becoming the Greatness We Never Weren’t” and, in red above “add to cart,” was a section of text reading “usually ships within 2 to 3 weeks.”

Dreher, whose book is among those affected, is pissed off:

I’m sorry, but who made Jeff Bezos filthy rich? Writers and readers — the same people he’s treating like crap with this garbage, that’s who. What kind of retailer treats customers that way? What kind of retailer treats his suppliers that way?

Alex Shephard points out that Hachette doesn’t have many options for fighting back:

[W]hat, if anything, can Hachette do? They have little leverage to speak of. This is, after all, a post-U.S. v. Apple world. If other publishers were to step up in defense of Hachette—a reasonable thing to do, considering that the other four “Big Four” publishers could be next up on the firing line—they’d have to fear another antitrust suit. The major publishers made that mistake once and the U.S. government stepped in at Amazon’s behest. They won’t make it again.

But Gobry argues that Hachette’s market share makes it, in some sense, the stronger party:

The very fact that Amazon is resorting to these comparatively small-ball tactics (suggesting other books, delaying shipping) is really a show of weakness. Because both Hachette and Amazon know that Amazon can’t afford to pull Hachette from its shelves. If anybody has a monopoly on this situation, it’s Hachette. …

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying Hachette is the “bad guy” in this story (note: in the vast majority of business stories there is no “good guy” or “bad guy”), or that Amazon should fear Hachette more than Hachette should fear Amazon. Amazon is a very powerful and very audacious company that is clearly going after the publishers on several fronts. But the point is that a hardball fight between a retailer and a supplier is the oldest news in the world, that Hachette, a global multibillion dollar conglomerate, is hardly a helpless flower, and that this is how our economy functions.

Jordan Weissmmann notes that this is not Amazon’s first spat with a publisher:

Amazon has, of course, applied similar hardball tactics in the past. It revoked the “buy” buttons for thousands of books in Macmillan’s catalog when the two companies were in a tiff over e-book prices and removed e-books from the Independent Publishing Group from its site entirely during another contentious negotiation.

This is why many in the book world found it fundamentally unfair that the Justice Department saw fit to bring an antitrust case against publishers and Apple for banding together to force higher pricing on Amazon. Bezos gets to muscle the industry around, yet the publishers—as they would have you believe—are legally bound to sit helpless.

It’s a reminder that, for better or worse, our antitrust laws really have been sculpted with one idea in mind: low, low prices for the consumer. As long as Amazon’s actions seem designed to push down book prices long term, and it’s not colluding with other companies, the law will almost always work in its favor.

Ukraine’s National Insecurity

The US mission to NATO tweets evidence that Putin was lying when he claimed last week that Russian forces had been pulled away from the Ukrainian borders:

New images show no pull-back of Russian forces from Ukraine border. May 7, troops within 75 km. @UKRProgress http://t.co/j3G43kWVMD—
US Mission to NATO (@USNATO) May 09, 2014

Adam Taylor and Gene Thorp explain why eastern Ukraine matters to the Russian military:

Kateryna Choursina and James M. Gomez of Bloomberg Businessweek recently pointed out that more than 50 factories in Ukraine’s southern and eastern regions provide significant amounts of important hardware for Russia’s military, and that the Russian government’s $15 billion agreement with former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych (the agreement that eventually lead to his ousting) aimed to further intertwine the two country’s defense industries.

The map [here], compiled using information from the Royal United Services Institute, shows where some of the most important sites are for Russia, as well as the major sites of Ukraine’s pro-Russian separatist movement. It shows not only how southeast Ukraine provides military hardware for Russia, but also controls oil and uranium, and even the food for the sailors in Sevastopol.

It’s worth bearing this in mind when we consider the Russian military’s buildup on the borders of Ukraine (whether or not they are gone). The troops don’t just threaten Ukraine: They rely on it. too.

Linda Kinstler points out that Ukraine’s army is unequipped to respond to a Russian invasion:

Ukraine inherited the Soviet military machine when it gained independence. At the time, that meant Ukraine had the second-largest standing army in Europe, with some 750,000 troops. But the new government couldn’t afford to keep up such a large force, and began rapidly cutting costs. Since then, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry has been “consistently downsizing to a force of about 120,000, which they thought made sense,” said Steven Pifer, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine (1998-2000). When Russia invaded Crimea, Ukraine was still in the process of downsizing, and had plans to further decrease its forces to 100,000 by 2017.

Soviet-era infrastructure remains the backbone of Ukraine’s army, which means that most military bases are located in the western part of the country, where they could fend off a NATO attack.

David Patrikarakos adds that, in the east, the police aren’t doing much to combat the separatists and in some cases have joined them:

“Yanukovych had especially strong links to the police force,” says Nataliya Gumenyuk, a Ukrainian journalist and co-founder of the independent online TV station Hromadske.TV. “The police in East Ukraine have been the most corrupt sphere of local government for a long time; they are politically controlled and on the payroll.”

Little surprise, then, that despite their numbers (Ukraine has 300,000 policemen compared with 100,000 soldiers, Kyiv mayoral candidate and former heavyweight boxing champion Vitali Klitschko told me), for the most part the police have failed to even try to combat the unrest. It is merely the most egregious example of the truth at the heart of the situation in east Ukraine: What remains of Ukrainian national organizations and loyalties are cracking, dissolving, disintegrating.

Previous Dish on Ukraine’s war preparations here and here.

Cool Ad Watch

A reader writes, “Looks like somebody at Airbnb’s advertising agency is a Dish reader”:

Update from a reader who sends her “view from my airbnb this am:)”:

She adds, “Santa Fe!”

Still No Banks For Bud

German Lopez finds that it remains “very difficult — and potentially dangerous — to operate a marijuana business in Colorado” because “pot shops and producers still can’t work with banks”:

US Attorney General Eric Holder in February issued a memo that attempted to alleviate the banks’ concerns. But the guidance fell flat: it imposed such harsh regulatory and legal standards that banks deemed it too risky to begin loaning to marijuana businesses.

Recently, the Colorado legislature also passed a bill that would establish financial co-ops for marijuana businesses. These co-ops would act much like credit unions, except they wouldn’t get FDIC insurance like other financial institutions. That, state regulators and banks explain, is a death knell: Federal Reserve standards for banks require FDIC insurance, so the co-ops will most likely never muster the federal approval necessary to operate.

As banks and marijuana businesses see it, the issue can only be solved with clear, on-the-books congressional action. And with an issue as politically toxic as marijuana, it’s unlikely a dysfunctional Congress will do anything any time soon.

Earlier Dish on the subject here, here, and here.

Wilmore To Replace Colbert

The Daily Show‘s “senior black correspondent”, Larry Wilmore, has been tapped to step into Stephen’s shoes when he leaves to take over for Letterman next year. To get a sense of Wilmore’s wit, here’s the trailer for a special he did a few years ago:

A more recent clip of Wilmore in action is here. He will host a panel show called The Minority Report:

As the late-night shuffle has taken place over the last few weeks, speculation had ramped up as to whether Comedy Central would mix things up and diversify the predominantly white and male line-up across the late-night TV spectrum. That fact was not lost on the network: “’The Minority Report with Larry Wilmore’ will provide viewers with a distinct point of view and comedic take on the day’s news from a perspective largely missing in the current late night landscape,” the show description reads. “The series will feature a diverse panel of voices currently underrepresented in comedy and television.”

Sharan Shetty is pleased with the network’s choice:

It’s a solid hire, as Wilmore is an accomplished wit with a sterling track record in television: besides his lauded work on The Daily Show, he created the critically-acclaimed Bernie Mac Show, and will also serve as executive producer of forthcoming ABC sitcom Black-ish. The real victory here, of course, is the refreshing addition of a minority voice to the white-male-dominated landscape of late night television. Wilmore is an ideal choice to subvert that genre’s stale perspectives—he’s a thoughtful and compassionate comedian, but one unafraid to confront issues of race, politics, and even Mormonism.

Marlow Stern takes a look at Wilmore’s politics:

As far as where he leans politically goes, Wilmore told Laughspin in 2012: “I call myself a ‘passionate centrist,’ and what that means is that I have opinions, I just don’t care if they’re on the right or the left. Yes, I’ll have an opinion, I’m just not trying to prove either side.”

His stand-up comedy special for Showtime, Race, Religion and Sex, was well-received that same year, and he’s also proven to be a reliable character actor in film and television comedies, appearing in the flicks Dinner for Schmucks and I Love You, Man, as well as a recurring role on the sitcom Happy Endings, playing Brad’s (Damon Wayans Jr.) strict boss, Mr. Forristal.

Matt Willstein wonders if The Minority Report will be successful in addressing the lack of diversity in late night:

On the one hand, Jon Stewart and Comedy Central have declared definitively that they want to produce a show that puts diverse voices in the foreground, giving comedians who may not otherwise get a platform a place where they can share their views on a wide variety of issues. Instead of being the “senior black correspondent” who shows up once every few weeks on The Daily Show, Wilmore will get equal time to Stewart.

But on the other hand, there is a risk that by putting its “minority” talent all together in one place on this show, it actually separates them from the late night mainstream that is still dominated by white guys named Jimmy. By so blatantly making the show about race does Comedy Central risk sending the message to white people that this show isn’t for them?

But, for James Joyner, the bottom line is whether the host can bring the laughs:

I don’t choose my entertainment for the diversity of its viewpoints or a sense of fairness but rather its entertainment value.  More than any of the remaining supporting members of the “Daily Show” cast, Wilmore manages to be consistently funny. Alas, maybe because he lives on the other coast, he’s on far too infrequently. His getting his own vehicle is great news.

Ask Elyn Saks Anything: The Stigma Of Mental Illness

In another video from MacArthur “Genius Grant” winner Elyn Saks, she identifies the ways society often fails those with mental illness, especially when it comes to stereotypes and name-calling:

In a followup, Saks pushes back on the popular idea that mental illness somehow always leads to violent behavior:

More about Saks:

Elyn Saks is an expert in mental health law and a winner of the Mac­Arthur Foundation Fellowship, which she used to create the Saks Institute for Mental Health Law, Policy, and Ethics. She is also Associate Dean and Orrin B. Evans Professor of Law, Psychology, and Psychiatry and the Behavioral Sciences at the University of Southern California Gould Law School. Saks lives with schizophrenia and has chronicled her experience with the illness in her award-winning, best-selling autobiography, The Center Cannot Hold: My Journey Through Madness.

Update from a reader, who points to a transcript of a TED talk by Saks:

Immediately after the appointment with Kaplan, I went to see Dr. Marder, a schizophrenia expert who was following me for medication side effects. He was under the impression that I had a mild psychotic illness. Once in his office, I sat on his couch, folded over, and began muttering. ‘Head explosions and people trying to kill. Is it okay if I totally trash your office?’ ‘You need to leave if you think you’re going to do that,’ said Marder.

(Archive)