Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
October 1, 2009
By JAMES DAO
SANTA CLARA, Calif. — On the day Ray R. Moreno came home from Vietnam, the day antiwar protestors called him a baby killer, he decided to pack away his Army uniform for good. Memories and nightmares still intruded, but he rarely discussed them. Battle buddies were forgotten.
Until, that is, he started attending annual reunions of his armored cavalry troop a few years ago. Suddenly, a door reopened. “They were there, they understand,” Mr. Moreno, 58, said. “If we want to cry, we do. If we don’t, we don’t.”
For many members of his unit, Alpha Troop of the 11th Armored Cavalry, the annual reunions for veterans of Vietnam and Cambodia have become a form of therapy: a chance to reconnect, salve wounds and share bonds forged in an unpopular war.
But this year’s reunion was special for another reason.
At a hotel ballroom here this month, Alpha Troop unveiled a Presidential Unit Citation, the highest military honor for a unit, it received this year from the Army for “extraordinary heroism” in rescuing more than 70 soldiers from a larger North Vietnamese force on March 26, 1970. In the coming weeks, the veterans hope, President Obama himself will formally bestow the citation at a White House ceremony.
For the veterans at this year’s reunion, most in their late 50s and early 60s, the citation was a powerful bit of validation for actions some had tried to forget. “The hurt, the memories, they’re never going to go away,” said Mr. Moreno, of Orosi, Calif. “But it does make it feel a little better that you are recognized for something you did.”
The citation ended a six-year campaign by Alpha Troops’ former commander, John Poindexter, to win recognition for the rescue mission. The quest began, Mr. Poindexter said, after he read a history of the war in which a veteran complained that Alpha Troop soldiers had not received any medals.
“It was an epiphany,” Mr. Poindexter said. “I felt I had to right a wrong.”
He began a drive to petition the Army for individual awards and a unit citation, organizing a team of assistants to gather after-action reports, casualty records, historical photographs and first-person accounts.
Eventually Mr. Poindexter, a wealthy businessman from Texas, compiled it all into a 4-inch-thick dossier that he sent to the Army. He also self-published a glossy book titled “The Anonymous Battle,” based on an account of the rescue mission he had written 30 years before.
The documentation helped the troop win not only the presidential citation but also individual medals for 14 members.
But the process of reconstructing the battle did more than garner awards. Several veterans say that after Mr. Poindexter contacted them, their interest in Vietnam was revived. Some began looking up Army friends they had not talked to in decades. Others began attending 11th Cavalry reunions for the first time.
Romeo Martin, for example, said that for 33 years, he did not talk about the war, even to his wife. But Mr. Martin, 60, a mailman near Hartford, said reading Mr. Poindexter’s manuscript “got my juices going.”
He located his old tank commander and rekindled their friendship. Another troop member contacted him and they started attending reunions together. “They helped me a lot,” he said of the annual events. “I was in a shell. There are guys who still are in their shells.”
Pasqual Gutierrez, 60, recalled that when he returned from the war, his neighborhood of East Los Angeles was torn by civil rights and antiwar protests. It was as if, he said, the soldiers were “re-entering society through the back door.”
“There wasn’t any hoopla and there wasn’t any fanfare,” he said. “There was just this hush-hush about serving in Vietnam, because it wasn’t a very popular thing.”
Mr. Gutierrez became a successful architect, a part owner of a firm with 10 branches in California. But others from Alpha Troop did not fare so well. One died of a drug overdose, and several others received diagnoses of post-traumatic stress syndrome.
“The war took a deep, deep toll on them,” Mr. Gutierrez said. “Even to this day, it is held up as the bad example.”
Partly for that reason, Mr. Gutierrez initially refused to contribute to Mr. Poindexter’s book. But after prodding, he wrote a detailed recollection of the battle. And then, at Mr. Martin’s invitation, he started attending reunions.
“A little network started brewing,” he said. “It was amazing to see these guys and realize we had this experience in life that’s unmatchable.”
For the veterans at the reunion, the battle was mostly a haze of adrenaline-fueled chaos. It began, as so many things in Vietnam did, with a call for help. An airborne company had stumbled onto a sprawling North Vietnamese bunker complex near the Cambodian border. They were nearly surrounded and dense jungle had made evacuation by helicopter impossible. Come dark, the Americans seemed sure to be overrun.
“I had no options, no where to retreat,” said George Hobson, the commander of that beleaguered unit, Charlie Company.
But Mr. Poindexter, then a 25-year-old captain, volunteered to bring Charlie Company out. The night before, a mortar round had accidentally exploded inside one his troop’s vehicles, killing several men and keeping soldiers up all night. But by that afternoon, Alpha Troop was on its Sheridan tanks and armored personnel carriers, breaking brush so thick that drivers could barely see vehicles in front of them.
A fierce firefight ensued when they reached Charlie Company. American planes tried to help, but nearly hit them with a bomb. North Vietnamese soldiers would pop out of bunkers, only to be driven back by machine-gun fire. Finally at dusk, the Americans, realizing night would favor the enemy, loaded up the dead, the wounded and the exhausted, and withdrew.
The casualty count was never clearly recorded, but Mr. Poindexter estimates that, including the mortar accident, seven men died and about 70 more were wounded in the battle and its prelude.
Mr. Hobson says he believes Charlie Company would have been “wiped out” if Alpha Troop had not arrived when it did. But at the time, it was just another day in Vietnam. A few weeks later, Alpha Troop joined the invasion of Cambodia. And the battle became a footnote to history — or less.
One troop member, August Whitlock, recalled that when he left Vietnam, the soldier processing his papers asked if he had been in any major battles. When Mr. Whitlock mentioned the rescue mission and day-long firefight near the Cambodian border, the soldier scanned a list.
No, the soldier told Mr. Whitlock, there was no such battle on that date.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Winners of Video Challenge Create Videos on the Meaning of Democracy
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
By Deborah Block
Washington
24 September 2009
What is democracy? That is the question more than 900 people from 95 countries answered by submitting original, short videos to the first Democracy Video Challenge. The competition was sponsored by several private groups in the United States as well as the U.S. State Department. Six winners were selected from different regions of the world.
Chansa Tembo accepts an award from US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton
Chansa Tembo accepts an award from US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton
The videos that won the Democracy Video Challenge show that democracy can be interpreted in many ways, such as by fruits blended together, or a tree planted in the desert.
The winners come from Zambia, Brazil, Nepal, Poland, Philippines and the United Arab Emirates.
Zambian Chansa Tembo owns a small video production business. He compares democracy to a blend of different fruits called a smoothie. "And I thought about democracy, and I thought we all have to get along somehow. You might not like an orange, you might not like a banana by itself, but if you combine different fruits together, you might actually be able to produce something which is consumable by the whole society," he states.
In Washington, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton handed out the awards and quoted some of the words about democracy in the videos. "It is fueled by the voice of the masses. It empowers the individual to make the individual powerful. It's a smoothie, 'I like that,' blending philosophical ideas, cultural norms and aesthetic values," Mrs. Clinton said.
Rodin Hamidi illustrates democracy by planting a tree in the desert
Rodin Hamidi illustrates democracy by planting a tree in the desert
Photographer Rodin Hamidi lives in the United Arab Emirates. He left his native Iran three years ago because of a lack of creative freedom. His video shows that democracy requires persistence, even when others try to destroy it.
"Everywhere you can plant this tree of democracy, which I use as a symbol. The guy is the symbol of intellectuals, people who believe in democracy. He's responsible for planting a plant, even if there are so many obstacles in his way," Hamidi states.
Lukasz Szozda is a video animator from Poland. His video maintains that democracy incorporates many ideas. "There are some simple truths in it that can be used for good like tolerance, freedom of speech and," he says, "freedom of decision."
Anna Carolina does Santos Israel from Brazil borrowed a non-professional camera to create her video. She used her 13 year old sister as a model and shot different parts of her body to show that democracy is about working together.
"Society has all these different parts which are made up of different people who want different things. Democracy should be a dialogue among all these parts, so they can reach a consensus," Carolina states.
The winners from Nepal and the Philippines examine the problems of democracy.
Filipino filmmaker Aissa Penafiel looks at what she believes is the abuse of democracy by her country's government. She portrays a man isolated in the darkness. "Even if there's a movement of the people, the ones in power still use democracy for their own sake, not for the sake of the people," she says, "which is completely the opposite of what democracy should be."
Magazine editor Tsering Choden from Nepal says democracy in her country is in chaos. "Because of everybody trying to move together but having different ideologies and opinions. And that chaos I thought would be shown perfectly through the traffic and the movement we have," she explains.
The winners received a free trip to the United States, and are meeting with film directors, public officials, and democracy advocates.
By Deborah Block
Washington
24 September 2009
What is democracy? That is the question more than 900 people from 95 countries answered by submitting original, short videos to the first Democracy Video Challenge. The competition was sponsored by several private groups in the United States as well as the U.S. State Department. Six winners were selected from different regions of the world.
Chansa Tembo accepts an award from US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton
Chansa Tembo accepts an award from US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton
The videos that won the Democracy Video Challenge show that democracy can be interpreted in many ways, such as by fruits blended together, or a tree planted in the desert.
The winners come from Zambia, Brazil, Nepal, Poland, Philippines and the United Arab Emirates.
Zambian Chansa Tembo owns a small video production business. He compares democracy to a blend of different fruits called a smoothie. "And I thought about democracy, and I thought we all have to get along somehow. You might not like an orange, you might not like a banana by itself, but if you combine different fruits together, you might actually be able to produce something which is consumable by the whole society," he states.
In Washington, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton handed out the awards and quoted some of the words about democracy in the videos. "It is fueled by the voice of the masses. It empowers the individual to make the individual powerful. It's a smoothie, 'I like that,' blending philosophical ideas, cultural norms and aesthetic values," Mrs. Clinton said.
Rodin Hamidi illustrates democracy by planting a tree in the desert
Rodin Hamidi illustrates democracy by planting a tree in the desert
Photographer Rodin Hamidi lives in the United Arab Emirates. He left his native Iran three years ago because of a lack of creative freedom. His video shows that democracy requires persistence, even when others try to destroy it.
"Everywhere you can plant this tree of democracy, which I use as a symbol. The guy is the symbol of intellectuals, people who believe in democracy. He's responsible for planting a plant, even if there are so many obstacles in his way," Hamidi states.
Lukasz Szozda is a video animator from Poland. His video maintains that democracy incorporates many ideas. "There are some simple truths in it that can be used for good like tolerance, freedom of speech and," he says, "freedom of decision."
Anna Carolina does Santos Israel from Brazil borrowed a non-professional camera to create her video. She used her 13 year old sister as a model and shot different parts of her body to show that democracy is about working together.
"Society has all these different parts which are made up of different people who want different things. Democracy should be a dialogue among all these parts, so they can reach a consensus," Carolina states.
The winners from Nepal and the Philippines examine the problems of democracy.
Filipino filmmaker Aissa Penafiel looks at what she believes is the abuse of democracy by her country's government. She portrays a man isolated in the darkness. "Even if there's a movement of the people, the ones in power still use democracy for their own sake, not for the sake of the people," she says, "which is completely the opposite of what democracy should be."
Magazine editor Tsering Choden from Nepal says democracy in her country is in chaos. "Because of everybody trying to move together but having different ideologies and opinions. And that chaos I thought would be shown perfectly through the traffic and the movement we have," she explains.
The winners received a free trip to the United States, and are meeting with film directors, public officials, and democracy advocates.
Today's Reading
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 30, 2009
Wednesday of the Twenty-sixth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 457
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Neh 2:1-8
In the month Nisan of the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes,
when the wine was in my charge,
I took some and offered it to the king.
As I had never before been sad in his presence,
the king asked me, “Why do you look sad?
If you are not sick, you must be sad at heart.”
Though I was seized with great fear, I answered the king:
“May the king live forever!
How could I not look sad
when the city where my ancestors are buried lies in ruins,
and its gates have been eaten out by fire?”
The king asked me, “What is it, then, that you wish?”
I prayed to the God of heaven and then answered the king:
“If it please the king,
and if your servant is deserving of your favor,
send me to Judah, to the city of my ancestors’ graves,
to rebuild it.”
Then the king, and the queen seated beside him,
asked me how long my journey would take
and when I would return.
I set a date that was acceptable to him,
and the king agreed that I might go.
I asked the king further: “If it please the king,
let letters be given to me for the governors
of West-of-Euphrates,
that they may afford me safe-conduct until I arrive in Judah;
also a letter for Asaph, the keeper of the royal park,
that he may give me wood for timbering the gates
of the temple-citadel and for the city wall
and the house that I shall occupy.”
The king granted my requests,
for the favoring hand of my God was upon me.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 137:1-2, 3, 4-5, 6
R. (6ab) Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
By the streams of Babylon
we sat and wept
when we remembered Zion.
On the aspens of that land
we hung up our harps.
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
Though there our captors asked of us
the lyrics of our songs,
And our despoilers urged us to be joyous:
“Sing for us the songs of Zion!”
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
How could we sing a song of the LORD
in a foreign land?
If I forget you, Jerusalem,
may my right hand be forgotten!
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
May my tongue cleave to my palate
if I remember you not,
If I place not Jerusalem
ahead of my joy.
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
Gospel
Lk 9:57-62
As Jesus and his disciples were proceeding
on their journey, someone said to him,
“I will follow you wherever you go.”
Jesus answered him,
“Foxes have dens and birds of the sky have nests,
but the Son of Man has nowhere to rest his head.”
And to another he said, “Follow me.”
But he replied, “Lord, let me go first and bury my father.”
But he answered him, “Let the dead bury their dead.
But you, go and proclaim the Kingdom of God.”
And another said, “I will follow you, Lord,
but first let me say farewell to my family at home.”
Jesus answered him, “No one who sets a hand to the plow
and looks to what was left behind is fit for the Kingdom of God.”
September 30, 2009
Wednesday of the Twenty-sixth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 457
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Neh 2:1-8
In the month Nisan of the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes,
when the wine was in my charge,
I took some and offered it to the king.
As I had never before been sad in his presence,
the king asked me, “Why do you look sad?
If you are not sick, you must be sad at heart.”
Though I was seized with great fear, I answered the king:
“May the king live forever!
How could I not look sad
when the city where my ancestors are buried lies in ruins,
and its gates have been eaten out by fire?”
The king asked me, “What is it, then, that you wish?”
I prayed to the God of heaven and then answered the king:
“If it please the king,
and if your servant is deserving of your favor,
send me to Judah, to the city of my ancestors’ graves,
to rebuild it.”
Then the king, and the queen seated beside him,
asked me how long my journey would take
and when I would return.
I set a date that was acceptable to him,
and the king agreed that I might go.
I asked the king further: “If it please the king,
let letters be given to me for the governors
of West-of-Euphrates,
that they may afford me safe-conduct until I arrive in Judah;
also a letter for Asaph, the keeper of the royal park,
that he may give me wood for timbering the gates
of the temple-citadel and for the city wall
and the house that I shall occupy.”
The king granted my requests,
for the favoring hand of my God was upon me.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 137:1-2, 3, 4-5, 6
R. (6ab) Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
By the streams of Babylon
we sat and wept
when we remembered Zion.
On the aspens of that land
we hung up our harps.
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
Though there our captors asked of us
the lyrics of our songs,
And our despoilers urged us to be joyous:
“Sing for us the songs of Zion!”
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
How could we sing a song of the LORD
in a foreign land?
If I forget you, Jerusalem,
may my right hand be forgotten!
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
May my tongue cleave to my palate
if I remember you not,
If I place not Jerusalem
ahead of my joy.
R. Let my tongue be silenced if I ever forget you!
Gospel
Lk 9:57-62
As Jesus and his disciples were proceeding
on their journey, someone said to him,
“I will follow you wherever you go.”
Jesus answered him,
“Foxes have dens and birds of the sky have nests,
but the Son of Man has nowhere to rest his head.”
And to another he said, “Follow me.”
But he replied, “Lord, let me go first and bury my father.”
But he answered him, “Let the dead bury their dead.
But you, go and proclaim the Kingdom of God.”
And another said, “I will follow you, Lord,
but first let me say farewell to my family at home.”
Jesus answered him, “No one who sets a hand to the plow
and looks to what was left behind is fit for the Kingdom of God.”
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Obama’s Olympic Moment
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 29, 2009, 6:33 pm
By Eric Etheridge
President Obama announced yesterday that he would go to Copenhagen at the end of the week to plead Chicago’s case for the 2016 Summer Olympics. And just like that, the Olympics became blogger fodder.
Most of the action has been on the right, where commentators have put the White House’s Olympian effort to use in a variety of ways. At Commentary, Jennifer Rubin sees the trip as just another effort on the president’s part to avoid having to make any tough decisions: “Obama is going to plead his case for the 2016 Olympics — because he can’t imagine any better use of his time, one supposes.”
In the swarm of speeches, pronouncements, legislative gambits (how’s cap-and-trade doing these days?), and endless appearances, Obama has become omnipresent but ineffectual. He talks about everything but accomplishes virtually nothing. He has a single domestic “achievement”— a failed stimulus plan. His foreign policy is in disarray. Maybe he is everywhere on TV because that’s what he knows how to do — with no follow-through, hard decision-making, or consensus-building required. If he didn’t do all that TV, he might have to govern.
At the Weekly Standard, Jonathan V. Last says that president’s trip will provide us with a “clear data point” on the effectiveness of Obama’s use of “smart power” — or “iPower,” as Last calls it — in his foreign policy.
Either the IOC will give the Olympics to Chicago, as Obama will ask them to, of they will not. The question is, what happens if they don’t?
If Obama’s iPower isn’t enough to convince the IOC to render a trivial decision that is utterly painless to them, then why should anyone believe that he can coax a hostile regime to take actions they deem contrary to their self-interest?
Last colleague’s Jonathan Goldfarb is worried that Obama and Chicago might actually prevail. That would be bad, he says, because it risks damaging our relationship with Brazil, another 2016 contestant:
So far unremarked upon in Obama’s about face in deciding to go to Copenhagen to press for Chicago’s Olympic bid is the potential fallout for U.S. relations with Brazil. Brazil is an emerging regional power (one of the BRIC countries), and critical for efforts to balance the subversive leftism of Chavez and his ilk with the electorally-based leftism of President Lula. Brazil, the most populous country in South America, is important for the U.S. over a wide range of issues–energy (nearly self-sufficient in ethanol), economics, environment, and security. By virtually all accounts, Chicago and Rio de Janeiro are the finalists for the 2016 Olympics. South America has never hosted an Olympics and there is huge national and regional pride behind Brazil’s bid. President Lula himself is going to Copenhagen and has been heavily involved in making the case for 2016.
By deciding to personally intervene on behalf of the Chicago machine’s Olympic bid, if successful, Obama threatens to damage a critical relationship in Latin America. I doubt if Lula and 200 million Brazilians would be too pleased if the Yankee colossus derailed their Olympic bid at the last minute.
In a third post on the Weekly Standard blog on the issue, William Kristol offers the theory that the trip is but a ruse to get the president close enough to Afghanistan so he can make a surprise visit there:
The president and his advisers must realize, in Mark McKinnon’s words, that “people elected Obama to be president — not the head of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce,” that a large part of being president is being commander-in-chief, and that it’s not good that Obama appears to have plenty of time for everything — David Letterman, Democratic fundraisers, Olympics-lobbying jaunts — except Afghanistan, just as he’s about to decide whether to commit tens of thousands more troops there. In addition, Obama’s never been to Afghanistan as president, and — we now know — apparently has spoken to General Stanley McChrystal only once by video-teleconference since McChrystal assumed command there.
David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel aren’t stupid: Expect to see Barack Obama get on the plane after his session with the International Olympics Committee at mid-day Friday Copenhagen time, and be in Afghanistan with our troops five hours later, in time for the evening news Friday here in the U.S.
At National Review, both Jim Geraghty and Ramesh Ponruru see a different ruse: If the president is going, then Chicago already has the games in hand. Ponnuru writes:
Some people seem to think that the president is taking time away from more important things to go to Copenhagen to lobby for Chicago to get the 2016 games. They’re wrong. He is taking time away from more important things to go get the credit for bringing the Olympics to Chicago. Does anyone seriously believe that the president would take a quick trip to Copenhagen with the possibility of coming back empty-handed? If the president is going, it’s because he knows that Chicago has already won. He’s going.
There’s not so much love for the president’s move on the other side of the aisle, though lefty responses lack the dramatic flair of their counterparts. At the New Republic, Jason Zengerle lists three reasons he doesn’t like the trip. Like some above, Zengerle doesn’t care for the “optics” of the president jetting off to Copenhagen what with the fights for health care and Afghanistan needing his attention. He also wonders what the upside is if Chicago takes the prize:
Well, to quote one-time U.S. men’s basketball national team member Derrick Coleman, “Whoop-dee-damn-do.” Sure, people in Chicago will be happy, but will anybody in the rest of the country care? I certainly don’t remember much dancing in the streets of anywhere other than Atlanta and Salt Lake City when those two cities locked down their Olympic bids.
His third reason: “What’s the point of hosting the Olympics anyway?”
There’s plenty of reasons to doubt the supposed economic benefits of hosting the games. (Just go take a stroll around Atlanta’s Centennial Park if you doubt these sorts of studies.) And while I’m sure Obama would enjoy using the 2016 games in his adopted city as a sort of victory lap at the end of what would be his second term, he first has to win that second term. I think health care reform and the war in Afghanistan are going to be a lot more determinative on that count than the I.O.C.
That last point is especially popular among the wonky set. “Hosting the Olympics is like building a regional sports stadium, writes John Robb. “A few people benefit but almost everyone else is worse off for the experience.”
“Is there any reason to think these events are actually beneficial?,” asks Matthew Yglesias.
The main sense in which you can imagine a city being made better off by hosting an Olympics is that the hosting duties may cause it to invest in some useful infrastructure that pays off. But if that’s the case the infrastructure investments would have paid off even if there had been no Olympics. The name of the game is to identify useful infrastructure opportunities and build what’s worth building. If anything, pegging the investments to a one-off multination sporting event seems likely to cloud thinking about what is and isn’t truly needed.
At his blog The Bellows, Ryan Avent counters Ygelsias, saying, “Sure, in an ideal world leaders would evaluate infrastructure needs and build the things that are worth building, but as Matt well knows, we don’t live in an ideal world.”
The Olympics can help to align the interests of fractious local governments and increase public acceptance of tax increases. And it can fix the time problem of infrastructure investment. Infrastructure benefits begin appearing years down the road and last for decades beyond that, while many of the costs — the political headaches, the need to put together financing, the disruption of construction, and so on — are relatively immediate. Winning the Olympics ties an immediate benefit to the immediate costs — we’re facing all these headaches, but it’s worth it because we won the Olympics. The games give a short-sighted electorate a reason to invest for the long-run.
September 29, 2009, 6:33 pm
By Eric Etheridge
President Obama announced yesterday that he would go to Copenhagen at the end of the week to plead Chicago’s case for the 2016 Summer Olympics. And just like that, the Olympics became blogger fodder.
Most of the action has been on the right, where commentators have put the White House’s Olympian effort to use in a variety of ways. At Commentary, Jennifer Rubin sees the trip as just another effort on the president’s part to avoid having to make any tough decisions: “Obama is going to plead his case for the 2016 Olympics — because he can’t imagine any better use of his time, one supposes.”
In the swarm of speeches, pronouncements, legislative gambits (how’s cap-and-trade doing these days?), and endless appearances, Obama has become omnipresent but ineffectual. He talks about everything but accomplishes virtually nothing. He has a single domestic “achievement”— a failed stimulus plan. His foreign policy is in disarray. Maybe he is everywhere on TV because that’s what he knows how to do — with no follow-through, hard decision-making, or consensus-building required. If he didn’t do all that TV, he might have to govern.
At the Weekly Standard, Jonathan V. Last says that president’s trip will provide us with a “clear data point” on the effectiveness of Obama’s use of “smart power” — or “iPower,” as Last calls it — in his foreign policy.
Either the IOC will give the Olympics to Chicago, as Obama will ask them to, of they will not. The question is, what happens if they don’t?
If Obama’s iPower isn’t enough to convince the IOC to render a trivial decision that is utterly painless to them, then why should anyone believe that he can coax a hostile regime to take actions they deem contrary to their self-interest?
Last colleague’s Jonathan Goldfarb is worried that Obama and Chicago might actually prevail. That would be bad, he says, because it risks damaging our relationship with Brazil, another 2016 contestant:
So far unremarked upon in Obama’s about face in deciding to go to Copenhagen to press for Chicago’s Olympic bid is the potential fallout for U.S. relations with Brazil. Brazil is an emerging regional power (one of the BRIC countries), and critical for efforts to balance the subversive leftism of Chavez and his ilk with the electorally-based leftism of President Lula. Brazil, the most populous country in South America, is important for the U.S. over a wide range of issues–energy (nearly self-sufficient in ethanol), economics, environment, and security. By virtually all accounts, Chicago and Rio de Janeiro are the finalists for the 2016 Olympics. South America has never hosted an Olympics and there is huge national and regional pride behind Brazil’s bid. President Lula himself is going to Copenhagen and has been heavily involved in making the case for 2016.
By deciding to personally intervene on behalf of the Chicago machine’s Olympic bid, if successful, Obama threatens to damage a critical relationship in Latin America. I doubt if Lula and 200 million Brazilians would be too pleased if the Yankee colossus derailed their Olympic bid at the last minute.
In a third post on the Weekly Standard blog on the issue, William Kristol offers the theory that the trip is but a ruse to get the president close enough to Afghanistan so he can make a surprise visit there:
The president and his advisers must realize, in Mark McKinnon’s words, that “people elected Obama to be president — not the head of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce,” that a large part of being president is being commander-in-chief, and that it’s not good that Obama appears to have plenty of time for everything — David Letterman, Democratic fundraisers, Olympics-lobbying jaunts — except Afghanistan, just as he’s about to decide whether to commit tens of thousands more troops there. In addition, Obama’s never been to Afghanistan as president, and — we now know — apparently has spoken to General Stanley McChrystal only once by video-teleconference since McChrystal assumed command there.
David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel aren’t stupid: Expect to see Barack Obama get on the plane after his session with the International Olympics Committee at mid-day Friday Copenhagen time, and be in Afghanistan with our troops five hours later, in time for the evening news Friday here in the U.S.
At National Review, both Jim Geraghty and Ramesh Ponruru see a different ruse: If the president is going, then Chicago already has the games in hand. Ponnuru writes:
Some people seem to think that the president is taking time away from more important things to go to Copenhagen to lobby for Chicago to get the 2016 games. They’re wrong. He is taking time away from more important things to go get the credit for bringing the Olympics to Chicago. Does anyone seriously believe that the president would take a quick trip to Copenhagen with the possibility of coming back empty-handed? If the president is going, it’s because he knows that Chicago has already won. He’s going.
There’s not so much love for the president’s move on the other side of the aisle, though lefty responses lack the dramatic flair of their counterparts. At the New Republic, Jason Zengerle lists three reasons he doesn’t like the trip. Like some above, Zengerle doesn’t care for the “optics” of the president jetting off to Copenhagen what with the fights for health care and Afghanistan needing his attention. He also wonders what the upside is if Chicago takes the prize:
Well, to quote one-time U.S. men’s basketball national team member Derrick Coleman, “Whoop-dee-damn-do.” Sure, people in Chicago will be happy, but will anybody in the rest of the country care? I certainly don’t remember much dancing in the streets of anywhere other than Atlanta and Salt Lake City when those two cities locked down their Olympic bids.
His third reason: “What’s the point of hosting the Olympics anyway?”
There’s plenty of reasons to doubt the supposed economic benefits of hosting the games. (Just go take a stroll around Atlanta’s Centennial Park if you doubt these sorts of studies.) And while I’m sure Obama would enjoy using the 2016 games in his adopted city as a sort of victory lap at the end of what would be his second term, he first has to win that second term. I think health care reform and the war in Afghanistan are going to be a lot more determinative on that count than the I.O.C.
That last point is especially popular among the wonky set. “Hosting the Olympics is like building a regional sports stadium, writes John Robb. “A few people benefit but almost everyone else is worse off for the experience.”
“Is there any reason to think these events are actually beneficial?,” asks Matthew Yglesias.
The main sense in which you can imagine a city being made better off by hosting an Olympics is that the hosting duties may cause it to invest in some useful infrastructure that pays off. But if that’s the case the infrastructure investments would have paid off even if there had been no Olympics. The name of the game is to identify useful infrastructure opportunities and build what’s worth building. If anything, pegging the investments to a one-off multination sporting event seems likely to cloud thinking about what is and isn’t truly needed.
At his blog The Bellows, Ryan Avent counters Ygelsias, saying, “Sure, in an ideal world leaders would evaluate infrastructure needs and build the things that are worth building, but as Matt well knows, we don’t live in an ideal world.”
The Olympics can help to align the interests of fractious local governments and increase public acceptance of tax increases. And it can fix the time problem of infrastructure investment. Infrastructure benefits begin appearing years down the road and last for decades beyond that, while many of the costs — the political headaches, the need to put together financing, the disruption of construction, and so on — are relatively immediate. Winning the Olympics ties an immediate benefit to the immediate costs — we’re facing all these headaches, but it’s worth it because we won the Olympics. The games give a short-sighted electorate a reason to invest for the long-run.
Should You Give to Harvard?
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
By Randy Cohen
Shane Lavalette Statue of John Harvard at Harvard University.
The Issue
The fiscal year for major university endowments ended June 30, and schools have been reporting their results: not good. In the Harvard-Yale portfolio game, the latter was down 24.6 percent, while its rival lost even more, 27.3 percent. If you are an Ivy alum, this might seem a good moment to donate to your alma mater, to help rebuild its battered portfolio. But should you, given the power of education to improve people’s lives?
The Argument
Do not donate to Harvard. To do so is to offer more pie to a portly fellow while the gaunt and hungry press their faces to the window (at some sort of metaphoric college cafeteria, anyway). Even after last year’s losses, Harvard’s endowment exceeds $26 billion, the largest of any American university, greater than the G.D.P. of Estonia. By contrast, among historically black colleges and universities, Howard has the largest endowment, about $420 million, a mere 1.6 percent the size of Harvard’s. (Donors gave Harvard more than $600 million just this fiscal year.) The best-endowed community college, Valencia, in Orlando, Fla., has around $67 million, or 0.26 percent of Harvard’s wealth. This is not to deny that Harvard does fine work or could find ways to spend the money but to assert that other schools have a greater need and a greater moral claim to your benevolence.
Consider the students served by the two sorts of schools. An applicant who falls just shy of getting into Harvard is likely to go elsewhere. He or she will endure little suffering for having to muddle along at Brown or U.N.C. But for many other students, it is community college or nothing. At the Borough of Manhattan Community College, for example, a high percentage of those enrolled are the first in their families to attend college. Eighty percent of them work while going to school; 78 percent of them come from households with incomes of $25,000 or less. A lack of financing for these schools means higher tuition and fewer scholarships, which are serious obstacles to potential students. And while the Ivies do reach out to low-income students, Harvard’s sliding scale for tuition includes a bracket for families earning $120,000 to $180,000 a year, something that doesn’t come up much at B.M.C.C. It is fair to say that these schools enroll different constituencies.
And the well endowed serve a smaller constituency: nearly half of all college students attend community colleges, institutions that help keep alive the American promise of economic opportunity. On average, a male college graduate will earn significantly more in his lifetime than a nongraduate, a big thing to most families. Indeed, for many young people, community college is what stands between them and a life spent working a minimum-wage job or something not much better. Acknowledging the value of such schools, President Obama has proposed a community-college initiative. Support them, and you change people’s lives.
Support Harvard? The student paper, the Crimson, reported that in 2008 40 percent of the college’s graduates flocked “to lucrative jobs in business, consulting and finance.” For those who go on to Harvard Business School, the future is even rosier. Or at least greener. The median base salary for the B-school’s class of 2009 is currently $115,000; the median signing bonus adds another $20,000. These are starting salaries, during an economic downturn, for people who have never had an adult job (As some earlybird readers pointed out, B-school students do have work experience before enrolling.) Thus begins the next generation of wealthy alums with the wherewithal to give generously, perpetuating the status quo. Which might not be a bad slogan for the next fund drive. If you favor truth in advertising. And unsuccessful fund drives.
If we esteem higher education as a source of national prosperity, we should regard it as a public expense, like roads or national parks or the U.S.S. George H. W. Bush, the Navy’s newest aircraft carrier. (Cost: $6.2 billion. With a slight up-tick in the stock market, Harvard can buy four. And pay cash. And take no guff from Yale.) Many countries do just that. France has 81 universities that charge very little tuition. Some Belgian universities are setting tuition at 500 euros.
Until that happy day, private donors will play their part, but they need not make the rich schools richer, the poor (comparatively) poorer. Instead, we could continue to encourage individual generosity with approbation and tax breaks, but add this stricture: only a portion of any donation may be earmarked for a particular school; the remainder will be distributed to needier institutions. That is, half of your donation could be pledged to Harvard, the rest would go to Howard and Valencia and the like. We’ll experiment with the proportions to find the sweet spot that aids the most students while discouraging the fewest donors. This reform need not be written into law. It should be accepted voluntarily by every donor and embraced by every university with a substantial endowment and a concern for an egalitarian society.
There is no imperative to shut down Harvard until B.M.C.C. matches its endowment; after all, we don’t ban donations to orchestras or animal shelters until all human disease has been eradicated. There are many kinds of good to be done in the world. But if you wish to promote education as a force for social justice, there are better and worse ways to do it. Ethics is not just intentions; it’s also effectiveness. We can frame the question as a conflict between two goods: donate to Harvard or donate elsewhere? Under the current circumstances, the more honorable course is to write that check to a community college or a historically black college or a small Catholic college or other modest institution that genuinely and profoundly transforms the lives of its graduates.
By Randy Cohen
Shane Lavalette Statue of John Harvard at Harvard University.
The Issue
The fiscal year for major university endowments ended June 30, and schools have been reporting their results: not good. In the Harvard-Yale portfolio game, the latter was down 24.6 percent, while its rival lost even more, 27.3 percent. If you are an Ivy alum, this might seem a good moment to donate to your alma mater, to help rebuild its battered portfolio. But should you, given the power of education to improve people’s lives?
The Argument
Do not donate to Harvard. To do so is to offer more pie to a portly fellow while the gaunt and hungry press their faces to the window (at some sort of metaphoric college cafeteria, anyway). Even after last year’s losses, Harvard’s endowment exceeds $26 billion, the largest of any American university, greater than the G.D.P. of Estonia. By contrast, among historically black colleges and universities, Howard has the largest endowment, about $420 million, a mere 1.6 percent the size of Harvard’s. (Donors gave Harvard more than $600 million just this fiscal year.) The best-endowed community college, Valencia, in Orlando, Fla., has around $67 million, or 0.26 percent of Harvard’s wealth. This is not to deny that Harvard does fine work or could find ways to spend the money but to assert that other schools have a greater need and a greater moral claim to your benevolence.
Consider the students served by the two sorts of schools. An applicant who falls just shy of getting into Harvard is likely to go elsewhere. He or she will endure little suffering for having to muddle along at Brown or U.N.C. But for many other students, it is community college or nothing. At the Borough of Manhattan Community College, for example, a high percentage of those enrolled are the first in their families to attend college. Eighty percent of them work while going to school; 78 percent of them come from households with incomes of $25,000 or less. A lack of financing for these schools means higher tuition and fewer scholarships, which are serious obstacles to potential students. And while the Ivies do reach out to low-income students, Harvard’s sliding scale for tuition includes a bracket for families earning $120,000 to $180,000 a year, something that doesn’t come up much at B.M.C.C. It is fair to say that these schools enroll different constituencies.
And the well endowed serve a smaller constituency: nearly half of all college students attend community colleges, institutions that help keep alive the American promise of economic opportunity. On average, a male college graduate will earn significantly more in his lifetime than a nongraduate, a big thing to most families. Indeed, for many young people, community college is what stands between them and a life spent working a minimum-wage job or something not much better. Acknowledging the value of such schools, President Obama has proposed a community-college initiative. Support them, and you change people’s lives.
Support Harvard? The student paper, the Crimson, reported that in 2008 40 percent of the college’s graduates flocked “to lucrative jobs in business, consulting and finance.” For those who go on to Harvard Business School, the future is even rosier. Or at least greener. The median base salary for the B-school’s class of 2009 is currently $115,000; the median signing bonus adds another $20,000. These are starting salaries, during an economic downturn, for people who have never had an adult job (As some earlybird readers pointed out, B-school students do have work experience before enrolling.) Thus begins the next generation of wealthy alums with the wherewithal to give generously, perpetuating the status quo. Which might not be a bad slogan for the next fund drive. If you favor truth in advertising. And unsuccessful fund drives.
If we esteem higher education as a source of national prosperity, we should regard it as a public expense, like roads or national parks or the U.S.S. George H. W. Bush, the Navy’s newest aircraft carrier. (Cost: $6.2 billion. With a slight up-tick in the stock market, Harvard can buy four. And pay cash. And take no guff from Yale.) Many countries do just that. France has 81 universities that charge very little tuition. Some Belgian universities are setting tuition at 500 euros.
Until that happy day, private donors will play their part, but they need not make the rich schools richer, the poor (comparatively) poorer. Instead, we could continue to encourage individual generosity with approbation and tax breaks, but add this stricture: only a portion of any donation may be earmarked for a particular school; the remainder will be distributed to needier institutions. That is, half of your donation could be pledged to Harvard, the rest would go to Howard and Valencia and the like. We’ll experiment with the proportions to find the sweet spot that aids the most students while discouraging the fewest donors. This reform need not be written into law. It should be accepted voluntarily by every donor and embraced by every university with a substantial endowment and a concern for an egalitarian society.
There is no imperative to shut down Harvard until B.M.C.C. matches its endowment; after all, we don’t ban donations to orchestras or animal shelters until all human disease has been eradicated. There are many kinds of good to be done in the world. But if you wish to promote education as a force for social justice, there are better and worse ways to do it. Ethics is not just intentions; it’s also effectiveness. We can frame the question as a conflict between two goods: donate to Harvard or donate elsewhere? Under the current circumstances, the more honorable course is to write that check to a community college or a historically black college or a small Catholic college or other modest institution that genuinely and profoundly transforms the lives of its graduates.
The Next Culture War
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
By DAVID BROOKS
Centuries ago, historians came up with a classic theory to explain the rise and decline of nations. The theory was that great nations start out tough-minded and energetic. Toughness and energy lead to wealth and power. Wealth and power lead to affluence and luxury. Affluence and luxury lead to decadence, corruption and decline.
“Human nature, in no form of it, could ever bear prosperity,” John Adams wrote in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, warning against the coming corruption of his country.
Yet despite its amazing wealth, the United States has generally remained immune to this cycle. American living standards surpassed European living standards as early as 1740. But in the U.S., affluence did not lead to indulgence and decline.
That’s because despite the country’s notorious materialism, there has always been a countervailing stream of sound economic values. The early settlers believed in Calvinist restraint. The pioneers volunteered for brutal hardship during their treks out west. Waves of immigrant parents worked hard and practiced self-denial so their children could succeed. Government was limited and did not protect people from the consequences of their actions, thus enforcing discipline and restraint.
When economic values did erode, the ruling establishment tried to restore balance. After the Gilded Age, Theodore Roosevelt (who ventured west to counteract the softness of his upbringing) led a crackdown on financial self-indulgence. The Protestant establishment had many failings, but it was not decadent. The old WASPs were notoriously cheap, sent their children to Spartan boarding schools, and insisted on financial sobriety.
Over the past few years, however, there clearly has been an erosion in the country’s financial values. This erosion has happened at a time when the country’s cultural monitors were busy with other things. They were off fighting a culture war about prayer in schools, “Piss Christ” and the theory of evolution. They were arguing about sex and the separation of church and state, oblivious to the large erosion of economic values happening under their feet.
Evidence of this shift in values is all around. Some of the signs are seemingly innocuous. States around the country began sponsoring lotteries: government-approved gambling that extracts its largest toll from the poor. Executives and hedge fund managers began bragging about compensation packages that would have been considered shameful a few decades before. Chain restaurants went into supersize mode, offering gigantic portions that would have been considered socially unacceptable to an earlier generation.
Other signs are bigger. As William Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, in the three decades between 1950 and 1980, personal consumption was remarkably stable, amounting to about 62 percent of G.D.P. In the next three decades, it shot upward, reaching 70 percent of G.D.P. in 2008.
During this period, debt exploded. In 1960, Americans’ personal debt amounted to about 55 percent of national income. By 2007, Americans’ personal debt had surged to 133 percent of national income.
Over the past few months, those debt levels have begun to come down. But that doesn’t mean we’ve re-established standards of personal restraint. We’ve simply shifted from private debt to public debt. By 2019, federal debt will amount to an amazing 83 percent of G.D.P. (before counting the costs of health reform and everything else). By that year, interest payments alone on the federal debt will cost $803 billion.
These may seem like dry numbers, mostly of concern to budget wonks. But these numbers are the outward sign of a values shift. If there is to be a correction, it will require a moral and cultural movement.
Our current cultural politics are organized by the obsolete culture war, which has put secular liberals on one side and religious conservatives on the other. But the slide in economic morality afflicted Red and Blue America equally.
If there is to be a movement to restore economic values, it will have to cut across the current taxonomies. Its goal will be to make the U.S. again a producer economy, not a consumer economy. It will champion a return to financial self-restraint, large and small.
It will have to take on what you might call the lobbyist ethos — the righteous conviction held by everybody from AARP to the agribusinesses that their groups are entitled to every possible appropriation, regardless of the larger public cost. It will have to take on the self-indulgent popular demand for low taxes and high spending.
A crusade for economic self-restraint would have to rearrange the current alliances and embrace policies like energy taxes and spending cuts that are now deemed politically impossible. But this sort of moral revival is what the country actually needs.
By DAVID BROOKS
Centuries ago, historians came up with a classic theory to explain the rise and decline of nations. The theory was that great nations start out tough-minded and energetic. Toughness and energy lead to wealth and power. Wealth and power lead to affluence and luxury. Affluence and luxury lead to decadence, corruption and decline.
“Human nature, in no form of it, could ever bear prosperity,” John Adams wrote in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, warning against the coming corruption of his country.
Yet despite its amazing wealth, the United States has generally remained immune to this cycle. American living standards surpassed European living standards as early as 1740. But in the U.S., affluence did not lead to indulgence and decline.
That’s because despite the country’s notorious materialism, there has always been a countervailing stream of sound economic values. The early settlers believed in Calvinist restraint. The pioneers volunteered for brutal hardship during their treks out west. Waves of immigrant parents worked hard and practiced self-denial so their children could succeed. Government was limited and did not protect people from the consequences of their actions, thus enforcing discipline and restraint.
When economic values did erode, the ruling establishment tried to restore balance. After the Gilded Age, Theodore Roosevelt (who ventured west to counteract the softness of his upbringing) led a crackdown on financial self-indulgence. The Protestant establishment had many failings, but it was not decadent. The old WASPs were notoriously cheap, sent their children to Spartan boarding schools, and insisted on financial sobriety.
Over the past few years, however, there clearly has been an erosion in the country’s financial values. This erosion has happened at a time when the country’s cultural monitors were busy with other things. They were off fighting a culture war about prayer in schools, “Piss Christ” and the theory of evolution. They were arguing about sex and the separation of church and state, oblivious to the large erosion of economic values happening under their feet.
Evidence of this shift in values is all around. Some of the signs are seemingly innocuous. States around the country began sponsoring lotteries: government-approved gambling that extracts its largest toll from the poor. Executives and hedge fund managers began bragging about compensation packages that would have been considered shameful a few decades before. Chain restaurants went into supersize mode, offering gigantic portions that would have been considered socially unacceptable to an earlier generation.
Other signs are bigger. As William Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, in the three decades between 1950 and 1980, personal consumption was remarkably stable, amounting to about 62 percent of G.D.P. In the next three decades, it shot upward, reaching 70 percent of G.D.P. in 2008.
During this period, debt exploded. In 1960, Americans’ personal debt amounted to about 55 percent of national income. By 2007, Americans’ personal debt had surged to 133 percent of national income.
Over the past few months, those debt levels have begun to come down. But that doesn’t mean we’ve re-established standards of personal restraint. We’ve simply shifted from private debt to public debt. By 2019, federal debt will amount to an amazing 83 percent of G.D.P. (before counting the costs of health reform and everything else). By that year, interest payments alone on the federal debt will cost $803 billion.
These may seem like dry numbers, mostly of concern to budget wonks. But these numbers are the outward sign of a values shift. If there is to be a correction, it will require a moral and cultural movement.
Our current cultural politics are organized by the obsolete culture war, which has put secular liberals on one side and religious conservatives on the other. But the slide in economic morality afflicted Red and Blue America equally.
If there is to be a movement to restore economic values, it will have to cut across the current taxonomies. Its goal will be to make the U.S. again a producer economy, not a consumer economy. It will champion a return to financial self-restraint, large and small.
It will have to take on what you might call the lobbyist ethos — the righteous conviction held by everybody from AARP to the agribusinesses that their groups are entitled to every possible appropriation, regardless of the larger public cost. It will have to take on the self-indulgent popular demand for low taxes and high spending.
A crusade for economic self-restraint would have to rearrange the current alliances and embrace policies like energy taxes and spending cuts that are now deemed politically impossible. But this sort of moral revival is what the country actually needs.
Feast of Saints Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael, archangels
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 29, 2009
Lectionary: 647
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Dn 7:9-10, 13-14 or Rv 12:7-12ab
Dn 7:9-10, 13-14
As I watched:
Thrones were set up
and the Ancient One took his throne.
His clothing was bright as snow,
and the hair on his head as white as wool;
His throne was flames of fire,
with wheels of burning fire.
A surging stream of fire
flowed out from where he sat;
Thousands upon thousands were ministering to him,
and myriads upon myriads attended him.
The court was convened, and the books were opened.
As the visions during the night continued, I saw
One like a son of man coming,
on the clouds of heaven;
When he reached the Ancient One
and was presented before him,
He received dominion, glory, and kingship;
nations and peoples of every language serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
that shall not be taken away,
his kingship shall not be destroyed.
or
Rv 12:7-12ab
War broke out in heaven;
Michael and his angels battled against the dragon.
The dragon and its angels fought back,
but they did not prevail
and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.
The huge dragon, the ancient serpent,
who is called the Devil and Satan,
who deceived the whole world,
was thrown down to earth,
and its angels were thrown down with it.
Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say:
“Now have salvation and power come,
and the Kingdom of our God
and the authority of his Anointed.
For the accuser of our brothers is cast out,
who accuses them before our God day and night.
They conquered him by the Blood of the Lamb
and by the word of their testimony;
love for life did not deter them from death.
Therefore, rejoice, you heavens,
and you who dwell in them.”
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 138:1-2ab, 2cde-3, 4-5
R. (1) In the sight of the angels I will sing your praises, Lord.
I will give thanks to you, O LORD, with all my heart,
for you have heard the words of my mouth;
in the presence of the angels I will sing your praise;
I will worship at your holy temple
and give thanks to your name.
R. In the sight of the angels I will sing your praises, Lord.
Because of your kindness and your truth;
for you have made great above all things
your name and your promise.
When I called, you answered me;
you built up strength within me.
R. In the sight of the angels I will sing your praises, Lord.
All the kings of the earth shall give thanks to you, O LORD
when they hear the words of your mouth;
And they shall sing of the ways of the LORD
“Great is the glory of the LORD
R. In the sight of the angels I will sing your praises, Lord.
Gospel
Jn 1:47-51
Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him,
“Here is a true child of Israel.
There is no duplicity in him.”
Nathanael said to him, “How do you know me?”
Jesus answered and said to him,
“Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree.”
Nathanael answered him,
“Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel.”
Jesus answered and said to him,
“Do you believe
because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree?
You will see greater things than this.”
And he said to him, “Amen, amen, I say to you,
you will see heaven opened
and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”
Monday, September 28, 2009
36 Hours in Bermuda
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
By DAVID LAHUTA
BERMUDA has lots to celebrate in 2009. Four hundred years ago, an English sailing vessel was shipwrecked on this mid-Atlantic archipelago, giving birth to the island nation of Bermuda, one that is now in full-swing party mode. With regattas decked out in Christmas lights, folk dance performances and star-studded music festivals (Quincy Jones and John Legend anyone?), it’s a gala four centuries in the making. Yes, the quirky charms are still there — men in namesake shorts and knee-high socks, pink sand beaches, folks zipping around on scooters — but with 400 years of maturity, Bermuda wouldn’t have it any other way.
Friday
4 p.m.
1) TEA IN SHORTS
In a country with a Union Jack on its flag, it’s no surprise that many British traditions endure. Tuck in for tea at Heritage Court (76 Pitts Bay Road; 441-295-3000; www.fairmont.com/hamilton), a white-tablecloth dining room in the Fairmont Hamilton Princess, a 124-year-old hotel where guests nibble on cucumber sandwiches, petits fours, and fresh baked apricot and fig scones served with kumquat jam and Devonshire clotted cream (34 dollars; Bermuda dollars are pegged to the U.S. dollar, and both are widely accepted).
6 p.m.
2) HAPPIEST HOUR
Bermudans are serious about Friday happy hour, when the island clocks out and rum-punches in for the weekend. Well-dressed locals make their way to the Newstead Belmont Hills Golf Resort & Spa (27 Harbour Road; 441-236-6060; www.newsteadbelmonthills.com), which hosts a weekly outdoor fiesta, live band and all, on its harbor front patio. Try a dark ’n’ stormy: rum and Bermuda stone ginger beer.
9 p.m.
3) FISH ON FRONT STREET
Most guests at Port O Call (87 Front Street; 441-295-5373; www.portocall.bm) stick to the specials — fresh local fish simply pan-seared and served with a citrus vinaigrette. From September through March, try the spiny lobster, split, and finished on the grill. After a recent renovation, this Front Street favorite is looking smarter than ever with half-moon banquettes, wood-paneled walls and a granite-topped bar jammed with island power brokers. Dinner for two, about $70 not including wine.
Saturday
8 a.m.
4) DIVE A WRECK
When Peter Benchley was researching his novel “The Deep,” he found inspiration underwater from the Constellation, a four-masted schooner that sank off Bermuda in 1943. Even neophytes can explore the well-preserved wreck in a mere 30 feet of water with an introductory dive given by Bluewater Divers & Watersports (Robinson’s Marina, Somerset Bridge; 441-234-1034; www.divebermuda.com; $165). In a great two-for-one deal, about 50 feet from the Constellation is the wreck of the Montana, an English steamer that sank 80 years earlier. Spot pieces of its cargo like shattered china, glass bottles, even a pool table, among thick schools of damsel fish, grouper and barracuda.
1 p.m.
5) CHOWDER SHOWDOWN
It’s hard to find a restaurant that doesn’t serve Bermuda fish chowder, a spicy seafood-and-vegetable stew traditionally eaten with a dash of Gosling’s Black Seal rum and Outerbridge’s Original Sherry Pepper sauce. Two of the island’s favorites, both in Hamilton, are the Hog Penny Restaurant & Pub (5 Burnaby Hill; 441-292-2534; www.hogpennypub.com; $6.50), a classic English pub, and the Lobster Pot (6 Bermudiana Road; 441-292-6898; www.bermuda.com/lobsterpot; $6.75), a nautically themed cafe with a new outdoor patio. When you’re done, catch some rays at sweeping Elbow Beach, minutes away in Paget Parish.
3 p.m.
6) ISLAND ARTISTS
The arts community was abuzz when the Masterworks Museum of Bermuda Art (183 South Road; 441-236-2950; www.bermudamasterworks.com) opened at the Bermuda Botanical Gardens last spring to show its collection of island-inspired paintings, including works by Georgia O’Keeffe and Mardsen Hartley. Its latest exhibition, “We Are Sailing,” examines Bermuda’s connection with the sea, and includes Winslow Homer’s watercolor “S.S. Trinidad.”
4 p.m.
7) GRAB A GIFT
For designer handbags and shiny baubles, bring your wallet to Hamilton, Bermuda’s port capital. For authentic Bermudiana, however, head to quieter St. George, on the island’s east end. The Book Cellar (Tucker House Basement, Water Street; 441-297-0448) specializes in historical, nautical and architectural books about Bermuda. Sniff handmade scents at the Bermuda Perfumery (5 Queen Street; 441-293-0627; www.bermuda-perfumery.com) housed in an 18th-century cottage with coral stone walls and exposed cedar beams. And buy authentic Bermuda shorts at the English Sports Shop (30 Water Street; 441-297-0142), where you’ll find all colors of the rainbow (from $39.95).
8 p.m.
8) OUTDOORS OR IN?
If it’s dining with sea spray you’re after, head to Mickey’s Beach Bistro & Bar (60 South Shore Road; 441-236-9107; www.mandarinoriental.com/bermuda) an open-air restaurant at the Elbow Beach Hotel in Paget Parish, which serves pasta and seafood (dinner for two about $60, not including wine). Prefer dining indoors? Sit near the window at Ocean Echo in the Reefs Hotel (56 South Shore Road; 441-238-0222; www.thereefs.com). Perched on a cliff in Southampton Parish, the restaurant features inventive spins on local favorites like Bermuda fish cake in black plum sauce ($16.50) and pan-fried rockfish with apple beurre blanc ($37.50).
11 p.m.
9) MARTINI TIME
There are plenty of hotel bars for after-dinner cocktails. But for more local action, make your way to a tree-lined stretch of Hamilton known as restaurant row. There you’ll find LV’s (12 Bermudiana Road; 441-296-3330; www.lv.bm), with dim mood lighting, low-slung sofas and nooks for canoodling. When you’re done checking out the handsome 30-something crowd, head next door to Opus Café & Lounge (4 Bermudiana Road; 441-292-3500; www.opus.bm) a thumping one-room cocktail bar that plays pop and R & B.
Sunday
7:30 a.m.
10) WATER HAZARDS
Reopened in June following a $14 million renovation, Port Royal (5 Port Royal Drive; 441-234-0974; www.portroyalgolf.bm; green fees, $165) is arguably Bermuda’s finest golf course, with water views from nearly every hole. Don’t forget your camera on the 16th. The 235-yard, crescent-shaped par three hugs the coast with nothing but ocean between tee and pin.
11 a.m.
11) GO TO CHURCH
Church Bay, that is, a small cove with some of the island’s prettiest snorkeling, with blue angels, parrotfish and thriving coral just 100 yards offshore. Rent gear from the dive shop at nearby Fairmont Southampton Hotel & Resort (101 South Shore Road; 441-238-2332; www.fairmont.com/southampton, $20 for two hours). When you’re done, avoid the cruise ship crowds at Horseshoe Beach and head for quieter Warwick Long Bay. With over a half-mile stretch of fine pink sand, you’re bound to find a slice to call your own.
THE BASICS
Several airlines fly nonstop from New York to Bermuda. A recent Web search found round-trip fares in October starting at $308.
Tourists cannot rent cars on Bermuda, so take a $30 (Bermuda and U.S. dollars, of equal value, are both accepted) taxi from the airport to Hamilton city, where a scooter can be rented. A reliable place is Smatt’s Cycle Livery (74 Pitts Bay Road; 441-295-1180; www.smattscyclelivery.com)with rentals starting at $80 for the first day, $45 after. Rather not drive on the left? Consider the bus, which departs Hamilton frequently and covers much of the island ($3).
The elegant Fairmont Southampton (101 South Shore Road; 441-238-8000; www.fairmont.com/southampton) has amenities galore including a par three golf course, 31,000-square-foot Willow Stream spa and a free ferry to the Hamilton Princess, its sister property in Hamilton. Doubles from $189. Reopened in spring 2008 as an all-suites hotel, Newstead Belmont Hills Golf Resort & Spa (27 Harbour Road; 441-236-6060; www.newsteadbelmonthills.com) has tastefully decorated rooms with granite countertops, sisal rugs and harbor view balconies or patios. Doubles from $290. Tucker’s Point Hotel & Spa (60 Tucker’s Point Club Drive; 866-604-3764; www.tuckerspoint.com) is Bermuda’s newest resort, a luxurious east end retreat that opened in April with an 18-hole golf course, tennis courts and a trendy whitewashed beach club. Doubles from $340.
Where Maine Comes Out of Its Other Shell
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
Explorer
By PORTER FOX
ON an overcast morning in late July, high above the swirling current of the Damariscotta River in Maine, Barb Scully stood in her roadside kiosk to sell her catch. A steady procession of summer folk, road trippers and locals cruised down River Road and stopped to browse the coolers and say hello. Every few minutes, a cordless phone would ring, and she would rattle off a list of prices, times, weights and tides.
Ms. Scully fits the image of the Maine fisherwoman well. Her tawny biceps and burly Muck boots contrast with a pearly smile and sea-green eyes. Her clapboard home along the rock-ribbed shore of the Damariscotta, a 15-mile bolt of the Atlantic that juts into midcoast Maine, completes the sketch. There is a derelict Chevrolet Nova in the backyard, and the forest leading down to the riverbank is strewn with buoys, wire traps and spools of rope.
The likeness, however, ended at Ms. Scully’s pier. Dangling from her dock were 100 plastic mesh cages that didn’t look anything like the iconic metal traps found on nearly every lobster boat in Maine. Her cages were shorter and squatter, and the shellfish her two children had just cleaned didn’t look anything like the clawed, red critters adorning some of the state’s license plates. They were oysters, and on the last Saturday of July at Ms. Scully’s stand, they were outselling Maine’s celebrity crustacean 50 to 1.
“I shipped 17,000 oysters last week,” Ms. Scully said, passing a plastic bag of freshly plucked oysters to a summer resident from New York City. Ms. Scully, who founded the Glidden Point Oyster Sea Farm in 1987 and runs it with the help of her two children, said it took a while to get the hang of oyster farming. “The first year I killed 90 percent of them,” she said. “It took 12 years to break even.”
People have been shucking oysters on the Damariscotta River for more than 2,000 years, evidenced by quarter-mile-long piles of shells, or middens, left by Native Americans on the riverbanks. But overfishing and pollution in the 19th and 20th centuries wiped out almost all of the oyster beds along the Eastern Seaboard, and it took until the late 1970s for marine biologists at the Darling Marine Center, University of Maine’s marine biology laboratory on the shores of the Damariscotta, to discover that the river was prime for replanting.
As it turns out, the same cold, nutrient-rich water that made Maine the kingpin of the lobster industry also produces perfect oysters. The Damariscotta’s water is some of the cleanest in the Northeast and gives the oysters their distinctively briny taste. Because Maine oysters take two to four years to grow to maturity, compared with a year or two in warmer waters, they also develop firmer meat, a deep cup and a thick shell that makes for easier shucking.
These days there are 12 ma-and-pa farms like Glidden Point scattered along the banks of the river. Every year, they ship more than two million oysters to restaurants like the Tabard Inn in Washington and the raw bars at Balthazar and Craftsteak in New York City.
If the Darling center was the birthplace of the oyster’s resurgence, then the port villages of Newcastle and Damariscotta are the shellfish’s hometowns. They share the Main Street Bridge that spans the river’s headwaters and edge a crescent harbor filled with wooden day-sailers and classic 1960s fishing boats. From the mid-18th century to the early 20th century, the towns were among the busiest shipbuilding centers in New England — with 30 shipyards turning out 400 boats in that time. But with the demise of the shipyards, the pride of the towns comes these days in a long, bony shell.
On a recent Friday, tourist shops selling oyster T-shirts, mugs and cocktail napkins lined Main Street in Damariscotta, the bigger of the two towns. At King Eider’s Pub, the host waltzed around a tiny oyster bar carved into the second floor, passing out a self-published magazine that described the intricacies of oyster farming.
By sundown, the center of all-things-oyster had hit full swing across the street at Schooner Landing’s dockside bar. All summer, the restaurant hosts free-oyster Fridays, and an hour into the event, Larry Sidelinger, the shucker, had pried open a half bushel of freshly harvested oysters from the Pemaquid Oyster Company, just a mile and a half down the river.
Several dozen motorcyclists, yachtsmen and tourists crowded around the tented bar. When someone asked Mr. Sidelinger how he had become so good with the knife, he hollered in a thick Downeast accent, “Dumb and dumbah!” Then he flashed his “Oysters Make You Moyster” T-shirt and slid two meaty half shells down the bar.
Oyster farmers on the Damariscotta all grow the same species of oyster, yet each farm has developed surprisingly different strains and tastes by planting in different depths and locations.
The closer the farms are to the mouth of the river, where the water is saltier, the brinier the meat. Plots closer to the riverhead tend to produce a slightly mellower, sweeter flavor. Pemaquids, like Ms. Scully’s Glidden Point oysters, are farmed near the riverhead then submerged at the river mouth for a week to purge river bottom sediment that collects during harvesting. The extra measure ensures the meat will be clean and adds a saltier finish.
Chris Davis founded the Pemaquid Oyster Company in 1986 with five friends and was among the first to adapt research at the Darling center for commercial use. He was starting his doctorate at the center when he first began farming, and he said that many of the Damariscotta’s aquaculturists had studied there at one time or another.
Mr. Davis and his partners forged many of the tools that oyster farmers now use, including plastic cages to incubate seedlings and drum sifters to separate mature oysters from smaller ones. With a recent spike in fuel costs and last summer’s drop in lobster prices because of shrinking demand, he added, even lobstermen are starting to grow oysters to bolster their bottom line. At last count, more than 25 oyster farms had popped up along the Maine coast in the last decade, Mr. Davis said.
Of all the oyster farmers working the Damariscotta, perhaps none have refined their technique as Ms. Scully has. Before going into business, she was a marine biologist for 12 years with the state Marine Resources Department.
Like most farmers, Ms. Scully, 46, gets her seedlings from local fisheries and grows them in cages for a year until they are almost an inch long. Then she plants them in water at least 40 feet deep to make the shells extra thick for easy prying and to add a touch of sweetness to the meat. She waits four years before harvesting them — usually by donning a wetsuit and diving to the river bed to collect them by hand.
Ms. Scully is among the few farmers who still dive for their oysters. She says the technique is less disruptive for the shellfish and ensures superior taste. When she brings them up, her children, Morgan, 15, and Benn, 13, chip barnacles off the shells on a wet storage dock where the oysters wait for shipping.
The extra care Ms. Scully takes adds hundreds of hours to the process, but the result is a uniform shell and a buttery, briny taste that Sean Rembold, the chef at Marlow & Sons, a cafe and raw bar in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, describes as “majestic and beautiful.” Rowan Jacobsen, who wrote “A Geography of Oysters: The Connoisseur’s Guide to Oyster Eating in America” (Bloomsbury USA, 2007) even calls it “one of the world’s great oysters.”
For Ms. Scully, there was never any other way. “I don’t care to spend my life doing something I know I can do better,” she said. “I might be the most picky aquaculturist in the state of Maine. Maybe in the world.”
MAINE OYSTER CULT
GETTING THERE
Visitors can fly to Portland, Me., and drive the 60 miles north on Interstate 295 and Route 1, which can take up to two hours in the summer. You can also fly Cape Air from Boston to Rockland, Me., then drive 26 miles on Route 1, west to Damariscotta. Rental cars are available at both airports.
HOW TO GET AROUND
The best way to see the Damariscotta River is from the water. Midcoast Kayak (47 Main Street, Damariscotta; 207-563-5732; www.midcoastkayak.com) leads river tours and rents sea kayaks that visitors can paddle to some of the middens.
The Damariscotta River Association (207-563-1393; www.draclt.org) maintains riverside trails with access to several middens.
WHERE TO EAT
The Glidden Point Oyster Sea Farm (707 River Road, Edgecomb; 207-633-3599; www.oysterfarm.com) sells its catch on site.
The copper bar at the Damariscotta River Grill (155 Main Street, Damariscotta; 207-563-2992; www.damariscottarivergrill.com) is a great spot to taste half shells on ice, local fish and produce. A half-dozen Pemaquids run $11.
The oyster bar at King Eider’s Pub (2 Elm Street, Damariscott; 207-563-6008; www.kingeiderspub.com) serves oysters and traditional pub fare. Fresh-picked native crabs, $9.
Schooner Landing (40 Main Street, Damariscotta; 207-563-7447) serves Maine classics like lobster stew, $9, and the fried-clam rolls are $12.
WHERE TO STAY
The Flying Cloud Bed and Breakfast (45 River Road, Newcastle; 207-563-2484; www.theflyingcloud.com) overlooks the river and has five rooms with private baths, starting at $85.
The Newcastle Inn (60 River Road; 207-563-5685; www.newcastleinn.com) is a slightly larger, spiffier variation, with 14 rooms, starting at $135.
Explorer
By PORTER FOX
ON an overcast morning in late July, high above the swirling current of the Damariscotta River in Maine, Barb Scully stood in her roadside kiosk to sell her catch. A steady procession of summer folk, road trippers and locals cruised down River Road and stopped to browse the coolers and say hello. Every few minutes, a cordless phone would ring, and she would rattle off a list of prices, times, weights and tides.
Ms. Scully fits the image of the Maine fisherwoman well. Her tawny biceps and burly Muck boots contrast with a pearly smile and sea-green eyes. Her clapboard home along the rock-ribbed shore of the Damariscotta, a 15-mile bolt of the Atlantic that juts into midcoast Maine, completes the sketch. There is a derelict Chevrolet Nova in the backyard, and the forest leading down to the riverbank is strewn with buoys, wire traps and spools of rope.
The likeness, however, ended at Ms. Scully’s pier. Dangling from her dock were 100 plastic mesh cages that didn’t look anything like the iconic metal traps found on nearly every lobster boat in Maine. Her cages were shorter and squatter, and the shellfish her two children had just cleaned didn’t look anything like the clawed, red critters adorning some of the state’s license plates. They were oysters, and on the last Saturday of July at Ms. Scully’s stand, they were outselling Maine’s celebrity crustacean 50 to 1.
“I shipped 17,000 oysters last week,” Ms. Scully said, passing a plastic bag of freshly plucked oysters to a summer resident from New York City. Ms. Scully, who founded the Glidden Point Oyster Sea Farm in 1987 and runs it with the help of her two children, said it took a while to get the hang of oyster farming. “The first year I killed 90 percent of them,” she said. “It took 12 years to break even.”
People have been shucking oysters on the Damariscotta River for more than 2,000 years, evidenced by quarter-mile-long piles of shells, or middens, left by Native Americans on the riverbanks. But overfishing and pollution in the 19th and 20th centuries wiped out almost all of the oyster beds along the Eastern Seaboard, and it took until the late 1970s for marine biologists at the Darling Marine Center, University of Maine’s marine biology laboratory on the shores of the Damariscotta, to discover that the river was prime for replanting.
As it turns out, the same cold, nutrient-rich water that made Maine the kingpin of the lobster industry also produces perfect oysters. The Damariscotta’s water is some of the cleanest in the Northeast and gives the oysters their distinctively briny taste. Because Maine oysters take two to four years to grow to maturity, compared with a year or two in warmer waters, they also develop firmer meat, a deep cup and a thick shell that makes for easier shucking.
These days there are 12 ma-and-pa farms like Glidden Point scattered along the banks of the river. Every year, they ship more than two million oysters to restaurants like the Tabard Inn in Washington and the raw bars at Balthazar and Craftsteak in New York City.
If the Darling center was the birthplace of the oyster’s resurgence, then the port villages of Newcastle and Damariscotta are the shellfish’s hometowns. They share the Main Street Bridge that spans the river’s headwaters and edge a crescent harbor filled with wooden day-sailers and classic 1960s fishing boats. From the mid-18th century to the early 20th century, the towns were among the busiest shipbuilding centers in New England — with 30 shipyards turning out 400 boats in that time. But with the demise of the shipyards, the pride of the towns comes these days in a long, bony shell.
On a recent Friday, tourist shops selling oyster T-shirts, mugs and cocktail napkins lined Main Street in Damariscotta, the bigger of the two towns. At King Eider’s Pub, the host waltzed around a tiny oyster bar carved into the second floor, passing out a self-published magazine that described the intricacies of oyster farming.
By sundown, the center of all-things-oyster had hit full swing across the street at Schooner Landing’s dockside bar. All summer, the restaurant hosts free-oyster Fridays, and an hour into the event, Larry Sidelinger, the shucker, had pried open a half bushel of freshly harvested oysters from the Pemaquid Oyster Company, just a mile and a half down the river.
Several dozen motorcyclists, yachtsmen and tourists crowded around the tented bar. When someone asked Mr. Sidelinger how he had become so good with the knife, he hollered in a thick Downeast accent, “Dumb and dumbah!” Then he flashed his “Oysters Make You Moyster” T-shirt and slid two meaty half shells down the bar.
Oyster farmers on the Damariscotta all grow the same species of oyster, yet each farm has developed surprisingly different strains and tastes by planting in different depths and locations.
The closer the farms are to the mouth of the river, where the water is saltier, the brinier the meat. Plots closer to the riverhead tend to produce a slightly mellower, sweeter flavor. Pemaquids, like Ms. Scully’s Glidden Point oysters, are farmed near the riverhead then submerged at the river mouth for a week to purge river bottom sediment that collects during harvesting. The extra measure ensures the meat will be clean and adds a saltier finish.
Chris Davis founded the Pemaquid Oyster Company in 1986 with five friends and was among the first to adapt research at the Darling center for commercial use. He was starting his doctorate at the center when he first began farming, and he said that many of the Damariscotta’s aquaculturists had studied there at one time or another.
Mr. Davis and his partners forged many of the tools that oyster farmers now use, including plastic cages to incubate seedlings and drum sifters to separate mature oysters from smaller ones. With a recent spike in fuel costs and last summer’s drop in lobster prices because of shrinking demand, he added, even lobstermen are starting to grow oysters to bolster their bottom line. At last count, more than 25 oyster farms had popped up along the Maine coast in the last decade, Mr. Davis said.
Of all the oyster farmers working the Damariscotta, perhaps none have refined their technique as Ms. Scully has. Before going into business, she was a marine biologist for 12 years with the state Marine Resources Department.
Like most farmers, Ms. Scully, 46, gets her seedlings from local fisheries and grows them in cages for a year until they are almost an inch long. Then she plants them in water at least 40 feet deep to make the shells extra thick for easy prying and to add a touch of sweetness to the meat. She waits four years before harvesting them — usually by donning a wetsuit and diving to the river bed to collect them by hand.
Ms. Scully is among the few farmers who still dive for their oysters. She says the technique is less disruptive for the shellfish and ensures superior taste. When she brings them up, her children, Morgan, 15, and Benn, 13, chip barnacles off the shells on a wet storage dock where the oysters wait for shipping.
The extra care Ms. Scully takes adds hundreds of hours to the process, but the result is a uniform shell and a buttery, briny taste that Sean Rembold, the chef at Marlow & Sons, a cafe and raw bar in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, describes as “majestic and beautiful.” Rowan Jacobsen, who wrote “A Geography of Oysters: The Connoisseur’s Guide to Oyster Eating in America” (Bloomsbury USA, 2007) even calls it “one of the world’s great oysters.”
For Ms. Scully, there was never any other way. “I don’t care to spend my life doing something I know I can do better,” she said. “I might be the most picky aquaculturist in the state of Maine. Maybe in the world.”
MAINE OYSTER CULT
GETTING THERE
Visitors can fly to Portland, Me., and drive the 60 miles north on Interstate 295 and Route 1, which can take up to two hours in the summer. You can also fly Cape Air from Boston to Rockland, Me., then drive 26 miles on Route 1, west to Damariscotta. Rental cars are available at both airports.
HOW TO GET AROUND
The best way to see the Damariscotta River is from the water. Midcoast Kayak (47 Main Street, Damariscotta; 207-563-5732; www.midcoastkayak.com) leads river tours and rents sea kayaks that visitors can paddle to some of the middens.
The Damariscotta River Association (207-563-1393; www.draclt.org) maintains riverside trails with access to several middens.
WHERE TO EAT
The Glidden Point Oyster Sea Farm (707 River Road, Edgecomb; 207-633-3599; www.oysterfarm.com) sells its catch on site.
The copper bar at the Damariscotta River Grill (155 Main Street, Damariscotta; 207-563-2992; www.damariscottarivergrill.com) is a great spot to taste half shells on ice, local fish and produce. A half-dozen Pemaquids run $11.
The oyster bar at King Eider’s Pub (2 Elm Street, Damariscott; 207-563-6008; www.kingeiderspub.com) serves oysters and traditional pub fare. Fresh-picked native crabs, $9.
Schooner Landing (40 Main Street, Damariscotta; 207-563-7447) serves Maine classics like lobster stew, $9, and the fried-clam rolls are $12.
WHERE TO STAY
The Flying Cloud Bed and Breakfast (45 River Road, Newcastle; 207-563-2484; www.theflyingcloud.com) overlooks the river and has five rooms with private baths, starting at $85.
The Newcastle Inn (60 River Road; 207-563-5685; www.newcastleinn.com) is a slightly larger, spiffier variation, with 14 rooms, starting at $135.
Cuts Meet a Culture of Spending at Condé Nast
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
By STEPHANIE CLIFFORD
At Condé Nast, it is consultants versus car service.
A three-month McKinsey & Company project advising the publisher how to reduce costs is drawing to a close, and several magazines have been told to cut about 25 percent from their budgets. The company’s editors and publishers have already been under pressure to reduce costs this year, as advertising has plunged, and Condé Nast has closed two magazines in 2009, Domino and Condé Nast Portfolio.
But cost-cutting at Condé Nast is not quite like cost-cutting at other publishers. For example, on Oct. 13, the men’s magazine GQ will host a party in Washington to promote its list of powerful capital players, to appear in its November issue. The party is upscale: it will be held at the 701 Restaurant, known for its caviar and live piano music.
That is not the only expense involved. Several editorial employees will travel from New York for the evening. And they received an e-mail message recently reminding them to limit their expenses for the night — to $1,000 a person.
That culture of spending at Condé Nast explains some of the fascination with the place, which incites a mix of envy and scorn among employees at other magazines. Condé Nast’s top editors and publishers have drivers on call, staff members can be reimbursed for $15 a day for lunches they order in, and even freelance writers stay at hotels like the W when they are on assignment.
Those perks would be unremarkable at any investment bank or law firm, at least before the recession. But magazine companies other than Condé Nast have become grim places to work in recent years.
Time Inc. outlined layoffs of 600 employees last October, almost all of which were completed by the end of last year, Dawn Bridges, a spokeswoman for Time Inc., said in an e-mail message. The company has also put strict limits on expense accounts.
Hearst laid off some employees at the end of last year. And BusinessWeek, as it tries to find a buyer, has proposed a 20 percent staff layoff, along with cutting costs on art and illustrations, research, marketing and events.
Now Condé Nast is finally making some serious changes to its business, and life inside the 4 Times Square headquarters is about to change — a little.
“They’ve been shielded a little bit,” said Audrey Siegel, executive vice president and director of client services at the media firm TargetCast tcm. “But I think Condé Nast will feel it now.”
Teams of McKinsey consultants have been in the Condé Nast headquarters for the last three months, meeting with editors, publishers and other executives to review how they spend their money. Their recommendations are in: In addition to the overall cost cuts of about 25 percent, budgets for 2010 must assume that sales will be flat, said several executives, who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the issue. The magnitude of the cuts was first reported in The New York Observer.
Some magazines are subject to different rules, including The New Yorker, where the editorial side is exempt from cutbacks.
It is up to the publishers and editors how to reduce their budgets. It is unlikely that prominent editors like Anna Wintour of Vogue or Graydon Carter of Vanity Fair will cancel their town-car service: their magazines sell luxury, and Ms. Wintour’s swiping her 30-day MetroCard and jostling with Times Square commuters would hardly enhance that position.
Executives said there were some obvious places where they could cut, like contracts with contributors. (That is one explanation for the company’s letting details of the McKinsey process leak, one executive suggested — it allows Condé Nast to blame the consultants for budget reductions and renegotiate contracts with well-known photographers, writers and stylists without alienating them.)
Other cuts executives mentioned included magazine promotional items, photo shoots that stretch for several days, the high “kill fees” paid for completed photographs that do not make it into the magazines and the near-daily lunch orders from Balthazar. Another obvious way to cut costs is through layoffs. While Condé Nast has been in a virtual hiring freeze for about a year, with most magazines declining to fill empty positions, no widespread layoffs have been announced.
Some magazines are considering reducing their frequency. However, Ms. Siegel cautioned, this could have long-term effects. “There are very few advertisers that buy 12 issues of a monthly, so does it matter to me that it might be 10? Not in the short term, but it might matter if it affects the overall readership,” for instance, if readers cancel subscriptions because they receive fewer issues, or if measures of readers’ interest in the magazines decline. Condé Nast is a private company and does not publicly report financial results. Maurie Perl, a Condé Nast spokeswoman, declined to comment on the reports.
But a look at some measures suggests how hard the company has been hit.
For instance, while Condé Nast has been moving away from its dependence on newsstand sales, the high-price newsstand copies still bring in significant revenue. But Condé Nast’s newsstand sales brought in $2 million less in the first six months of this year than they did a year earlier, according to Audit Bureau of Circulations data.
That revenue is shared with distributors, and the drop was calculated using newsstand prices for the most recent period. However, every Condé Nast magazine except Bon Appétit increased its subscriptions in the same period.
Still, advertising, where Condé Nast makes most of its money, has been hammered. Condé Nast magazines have lost about 8,000 ad pages through the October issues compared with last year, according to Media Industry Newsletter. Those figures exclude the company’s bridal magazines. That is a decline of about one-third.
Ms. Siegel said some cost controls were appropriate but she hoped they would not affect the quality of the magazines.
“I love their magazines — I think they’re pretty, I like the way they feel, and I think the reproduction is lovely,” she said. “That’s why I would hope that one of the things their consultants will not tell them is to, in any way, diminish the quality of what they’re offering, because that is something that makes those titles valuable.”
By STEPHANIE CLIFFORD
At Condé Nast, it is consultants versus car service.
A three-month McKinsey & Company project advising the publisher how to reduce costs is drawing to a close, and several magazines have been told to cut about 25 percent from their budgets. The company’s editors and publishers have already been under pressure to reduce costs this year, as advertising has plunged, and Condé Nast has closed two magazines in 2009, Domino and Condé Nast Portfolio.
But cost-cutting at Condé Nast is not quite like cost-cutting at other publishers. For example, on Oct. 13, the men’s magazine GQ will host a party in Washington to promote its list of powerful capital players, to appear in its November issue. The party is upscale: it will be held at the 701 Restaurant, known for its caviar and live piano music.
That is not the only expense involved. Several editorial employees will travel from New York for the evening. And they received an e-mail message recently reminding them to limit their expenses for the night — to $1,000 a person.
That culture of spending at Condé Nast explains some of the fascination with the place, which incites a mix of envy and scorn among employees at other magazines. Condé Nast’s top editors and publishers have drivers on call, staff members can be reimbursed for $15 a day for lunches they order in, and even freelance writers stay at hotels like the W when they are on assignment.
Those perks would be unremarkable at any investment bank or law firm, at least before the recession. But magazine companies other than Condé Nast have become grim places to work in recent years.
Time Inc. outlined layoffs of 600 employees last October, almost all of which were completed by the end of last year, Dawn Bridges, a spokeswoman for Time Inc., said in an e-mail message. The company has also put strict limits on expense accounts.
Hearst laid off some employees at the end of last year. And BusinessWeek, as it tries to find a buyer, has proposed a 20 percent staff layoff, along with cutting costs on art and illustrations, research, marketing and events.
Now Condé Nast is finally making some serious changes to its business, and life inside the 4 Times Square headquarters is about to change — a little.
“They’ve been shielded a little bit,” said Audrey Siegel, executive vice president and director of client services at the media firm TargetCast tcm. “But I think Condé Nast will feel it now.”
Teams of McKinsey consultants have been in the Condé Nast headquarters for the last three months, meeting with editors, publishers and other executives to review how they spend their money. Their recommendations are in: In addition to the overall cost cuts of about 25 percent, budgets for 2010 must assume that sales will be flat, said several executives, who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the issue. The magnitude of the cuts was first reported in The New York Observer.
Some magazines are subject to different rules, including The New Yorker, where the editorial side is exempt from cutbacks.
It is up to the publishers and editors how to reduce their budgets. It is unlikely that prominent editors like Anna Wintour of Vogue or Graydon Carter of Vanity Fair will cancel their town-car service: their magazines sell luxury, and Ms. Wintour’s swiping her 30-day MetroCard and jostling with Times Square commuters would hardly enhance that position.
Executives said there were some obvious places where they could cut, like contracts with contributors. (That is one explanation for the company’s letting details of the McKinsey process leak, one executive suggested — it allows Condé Nast to blame the consultants for budget reductions and renegotiate contracts with well-known photographers, writers and stylists without alienating them.)
Other cuts executives mentioned included magazine promotional items, photo shoots that stretch for several days, the high “kill fees” paid for completed photographs that do not make it into the magazines and the near-daily lunch orders from Balthazar. Another obvious way to cut costs is through layoffs. While Condé Nast has been in a virtual hiring freeze for about a year, with most magazines declining to fill empty positions, no widespread layoffs have been announced.
Some magazines are considering reducing their frequency. However, Ms. Siegel cautioned, this could have long-term effects. “There are very few advertisers that buy 12 issues of a monthly, so does it matter to me that it might be 10? Not in the short term, but it might matter if it affects the overall readership,” for instance, if readers cancel subscriptions because they receive fewer issues, or if measures of readers’ interest in the magazines decline. Condé Nast is a private company and does not publicly report financial results. Maurie Perl, a Condé Nast spokeswoman, declined to comment on the reports.
But a look at some measures suggests how hard the company has been hit.
For instance, while Condé Nast has been moving away from its dependence on newsstand sales, the high-price newsstand copies still bring in significant revenue. But Condé Nast’s newsstand sales brought in $2 million less in the first six months of this year than they did a year earlier, according to Audit Bureau of Circulations data.
That revenue is shared with distributors, and the drop was calculated using newsstand prices for the most recent period. However, every Condé Nast magazine except Bon Appétit increased its subscriptions in the same period.
Still, advertising, where Condé Nast makes most of its money, has been hammered. Condé Nast magazines have lost about 8,000 ad pages through the October issues compared with last year, according to Media Industry Newsletter. Those figures exclude the company’s bridal magazines. That is a decline of about one-third.
Ms. Siegel said some cost controls were appropriate but she hoped they would not affect the quality of the magazines.
“I love their magazines — I think they’re pretty, I like the way they feel, and I think the reproduction is lovely,” she said. “That’s why I would hope that one of the things their consultants will not tell them is to, in any way, diminish the quality of what they’re offering, because that is something that makes those titles valuable.”
Today's Reading
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 28, 2009
Monday of the Twenty-sixth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 455
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Zec 8:1-8
This word of the LORD of hosts came:
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
I am intensely jealous for Zion,
stirred to jealous wrath for her.
Thus says the LORD:
I will return to Zion,
and I will dwell within Jerusalem;
Jerusalem shall be called the faithful city,
and the mountain of the LORD of hosts,
the holy mountain.
Thus says the LORD of hosts: Old men and old women,
each with staff in hand because of old age,
shall again sit in the streets of Jerusalem.
The city shall be filled with boys and girls playing in its streets.
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Even if this should seem impossible
in the eyes of the remnant of this people,
shall it in those days be impossible in my eyes also,
says the LORD of hosts?
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Lo, I will rescue my people from the land of the rising sun,
and from the land of the setting sun.
I will bring them back to dwell within Jerusalem.
They shall be my people, and I will be their God,
with faithfulness and justice.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 102:16-18, 19-21, 29 and 22-23
R. (17) The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
The nations shall revere your name, O LORD,
and all the kings of the earth your glory,
When the LORD has rebuilt Zion
and appeared in his glory;
When he has regarded the prayer of the destitute,
and not despised their prayer.
R. The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
Let this be written for the generation to come,
and let his future creatures praise the Lord:
“The LORD looked down from his holy height,
from heaven he beheld the earth,
To hear the groaning of the prisoners,
to release those doomed to die.”
R. The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
The children of your servants shall abide,
and their posterity shall continue in your presence.
That the name of the LORD may be declared in Zion;
and his praise, in Jerusalem,
When the peoples gather together,
and the kingdoms, to serve the LORD.
R. The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
Gospel
Lk 9:46-50
An argument arose among the disciples
about which of them was the greatest.
Jesus realized the intention of their hearts and took a child
and placed it by his side and said to them,
“Whoever receives this child in my name receives me,
and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.
For the one who is least among all of you
is the one who is the greatest.”
Then John said in reply,
“Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name
and we tried to prevent him
because he does not follow in our company.”
Jesus said to him,
“Do not prevent him, for whoever is not against you is for you.”
September 28, 2009
Monday of the Twenty-sixth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 455
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Zec 8:1-8
This word of the LORD of hosts came:
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
I am intensely jealous for Zion,
stirred to jealous wrath for her.
Thus says the LORD:
I will return to Zion,
and I will dwell within Jerusalem;
Jerusalem shall be called the faithful city,
and the mountain of the LORD of hosts,
the holy mountain.
Thus says the LORD of hosts: Old men and old women,
each with staff in hand because of old age,
shall again sit in the streets of Jerusalem.
The city shall be filled with boys and girls playing in its streets.
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Even if this should seem impossible
in the eyes of the remnant of this people,
shall it in those days be impossible in my eyes also,
says the LORD of hosts?
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Lo, I will rescue my people from the land of the rising sun,
and from the land of the setting sun.
I will bring them back to dwell within Jerusalem.
They shall be my people, and I will be their God,
with faithfulness and justice.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 102:16-18, 19-21, 29 and 22-23
R. (17) The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
The nations shall revere your name, O LORD,
and all the kings of the earth your glory,
When the LORD has rebuilt Zion
and appeared in his glory;
When he has regarded the prayer of the destitute,
and not despised their prayer.
R. The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
Let this be written for the generation to come,
and let his future creatures praise the Lord:
“The LORD looked down from his holy height,
from heaven he beheld the earth,
To hear the groaning of the prisoners,
to release those doomed to die.”
R. The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
The children of your servants shall abide,
and their posterity shall continue in your presence.
That the name of the LORD may be declared in Zion;
and his praise, in Jerusalem,
When the peoples gather together,
and the kingdoms, to serve the LORD.
R. The Lord will build up Zion again, and appear in all his glory.
Gospel
Lk 9:46-50
An argument arose among the disciples
about which of them was the greatest.
Jesus realized the intention of their hearts and took a child
and placed it by his side and said to them,
“Whoever receives this child in my name receives me,
and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.
For the one who is least among all of you
is the one who is the greatest.”
Then John said in reply,
“Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name
and we tried to prevent him
because he does not follow in our company.”
Jesus said to him,
“Do not prevent him, for whoever is not against you is for you.”
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The textbook economics of cap-and-trade
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 27, 2009, 10:16 am
The textbook economics of cap-and-trade
I realized, after the last post, that it might be useful to write down just what the Econ 101 version of cap and trade looks like; as it happens, this also helps explain the intellectual sins of Glenn Beck and Martin Feldstein.
So here we go. Bear in mind that something like what follows can be found in just about every intro textbook.
Think of the benefits to the private sector from pollution. Yes, benefits — in the sense that it’s cheaper to pollute than not to, or that it’s easier to produce goods if you don’t worry about whatever emissions result as a byproduct. So we can think of drawing a curve representing the private marginal benefit of emissions, as in this figure:
In the absence of government action, the private sector will increase emissions up to the point where there is no further marginal benefit. That is, emissions will rise to whatever level is implied by profit-maximization, paying no attention to the effects on the environment.
A cap-and-trade system puts a limit on overall emissions, so that emitters have to pay a price for emitting. This price will, as shown in the figure above, equal the marginal benefit of the last unit of emissions allowed.
Now, the cost to the economy of this limit is the benefit the private sector would have gotten by emitting more than is allowed under the cap. It’s shown in the figure as the red triangle labeled “deadweight loss”. CBO puts these losses under Waxman-Markey at 0.2-0.7 percent of GDP in 2020, 1.1 to 3.4 percent in 2050. These costs have to be set against the environmental benefits.
In addition to this overall economic cost, there’s a distributional effect. The creation of cap and trade means that emission permits command a market price, and the value of these permits — the blue rectangle — goes to someone. Under Waxman-Markey, some of it (a growing fraction over time) would be captured by the government through auctions, and used to cut or avoid increases in other taxes — in effect, recycled to consumers. The rest would be passed on to industry — but because the biggest recipients would be regulated utilities, much of this would also be passed on to consumers.
OK, now let’s send in Beck and Feldstein.
Beck got his number from someone who learned about a guesstimate of what the auction value of permits might be (way higher than current estimates, by the way), divided by the number of households, and proclaimed this the cost of the bill. In effect, he looked at a guess about the size of the blue rectangle, which does not represent an economic cost, and called that the cost to the economy.
In a way, though, what Martin Feldstein did was worse. He took the CBO’s estimate of “compliance costs”, which was $1600 per household in an early report (it’s now down to $900, but who’s counting?), and implied that this was the economic cost of the legislation. But “compliance costs” are basically the sum of the blue rectangle and the red triangle; the true economic costs are just the triangle, and are much smaller.
Another way to say this is that under the Feldstein method, any time you try to correct an externality, which necessarily means changing relative prices, all of the negative effects of the price change will be counted as a cost — but none of the positive effects will be counted as a benefit.
Bad stuff. And what you should bear in mind is that all I’m doing here is conventional neoclassical economics, quite literally basic textbook material. What does it say when the people who claim to believe in this stuff throw it out the window as soon as it leads to policy conclusions they don’t like?
September 27, 2009, 10:16 am
The textbook economics of cap-and-trade
I realized, after the last post, that it might be useful to write down just what the Econ 101 version of cap and trade looks like; as it happens, this also helps explain the intellectual sins of Glenn Beck and Martin Feldstein.
So here we go. Bear in mind that something like what follows can be found in just about every intro textbook.
Think of the benefits to the private sector from pollution. Yes, benefits — in the sense that it’s cheaper to pollute than not to, or that it’s easier to produce goods if you don’t worry about whatever emissions result as a byproduct. So we can think of drawing a curve representing the private marginal benefit of emissions, as in this figure:
In the absence of government action, the private sector will increase emissions up to the point where there is no further marginal benefit. That is, emissions will rise to whatever level is implied by profit-maximization, paying no attention to the effects on the environment.
A cap-and-trade system puts a limit on overall emissions, so that emitters have to pay a price for emitting. This price will, as shown in the figure above, equal the marginal benefit of the last unit of emissions allowed.
Now, the cost to the economy of this limit is the benefit the private sector would have gotten by emitting more than is allowed under the cap. It’s shown in the figure as the red triangle labeled “deadweight loss”. CBO puts these losses under Waxman-Markey at 0.2-0.7 percent of GDP in 2020, 1.1 to 3.4 percent in 2050. These costs have to be set against the environmental benefits.
In addition to this overall economic cost, there’s a distributional effect. The creation of cap and trade means that emission permits command a market price, and the value of these permits — the blue rectangle — goes to someone. Under Waxman-Markey, some of it (a growing fraction over time) would be captured by the government through auctions, and used to cut or avoid increases in other taxes — in effect, recycled to consumers. The rest would be passed on to industry — but because the biggest recipients would be regulated utilities, much of this would also be passed on to consumers.
OK, now let’s send in Beck and Feldstein.
Beck got his number from someone who learned about a guesstimate of what the auction value of permits might be (way higher than current estimates, by the way), divided by the number of households, and proclaimed this the cost of the bill. In effect, he looked at a guess about the size of the blue rectangle, which does not represent an economic cost, and called that the cost to the economy.
In a way, though, what Martin Feldstein did was worse. He took the CBO’s estimate of “compliance costs”, which was $1600 per household in an early report (it’s now down to $900, but who’s counting?), and implied that this was the economic cost of the legislation. But “compliance costs” are basically the sum of the blue rectangle and the red triangle; the true economic costs are just the triangle, and are much smaller.
Another way to say this is that under the Feldstein method, any time you try to correct an externality, which necessarily means changing relative prices, all of the negative effects of the price change will be counted as a cost — but none of the positive effects will be counted as a benefit.
Bad stuff. And what you should bear in mind is that all I’m doing here is conventional neoclassical economics, quite literally basic textbook material. What does it say when the people who claim to believe in this stuff throw it out the window as soon as it leads to policy conclusions they don’t like?
Today's Reading
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 27, 2009
Twenty-sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 137
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Reading 2
Gospel
Reading 1
Nm 11:25-29
The LORD came down in the cloud and spoke to Moses.
Taking some of the spirit that was on Moses,
the LORD bestowed it on the seventy elders;
and as the spirit came to rest on them, they prophesied.
Now two men, one named Eldad and the other Medad,
were not in the gathering but had been left in the camp.
They too had been on the list, but had not gone out to the tent;
yet the spirit came to rest on them also,
and they prophesied in the camp.
So, when a young man quickly told Moses,
"Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp, "
Joshua, son of Nun, who from his youth had been Moses’aide, said,
"Moses, my lord, stop them."
But Moses answered him,
"Are you jealous for my sake?
Would that all the people of the LORD were prophets!
Would that the LORD might bestow his spirit on them all!"
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 19:8, 10, 12-13, 14
R. (9a) The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
The law of the LORD is perfect,
refreshing the soul;
the decree of the LORD is trustworthy,
giving wisdom to the simple.
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
The fear of the LORD is pure,
enduring forever;
the ordinances of the LORD are true,
all of them just.
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
Though your servant is careful of them,
very diligent in keeping them,
Yet who can detect failings?
Cleanse me from my unknown faults!
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
From wanton sin especially, restrain your servant;
let it not rule over me.
Then shall I be blameless and innocent
of serious sin.
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
Reading II
Jas 5:1-6
Come now, you rich, weep and wail over your impending miseries.
Your wealth has rotted away, your clothes have become moth-eaten,
your gold and silver have corroded,
and that corrosion will be a testimony against you;
it will devour your flesh like a fire.
You have stored up treasure for the last days.
Behold, the wages you withheld from the workers
who harvested your fields are crying aloud;
and the cries of the harvesters
have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.
You have lived on earth in luxury and pleasure;
you have fattened your hearts for the day of slaughter.
You have condemned;
you have murdered the righteous one;
he offers you no resistance.
Gospel
Mk 9:38-43, 45, 47-48
At that time, John said to Jesus,
"Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name,
and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us."
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him.
There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name
who can at the same time speak ill of me.
For whoever is not against us is for us.
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink
because you belong to Christ,
amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him if a great millstone
were put around his neck
and he were thrown into the sea.
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.
It is better for you to enter into life maimed
than with two hands to go into Gehenna,
into the unquenchable fire.
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut if off.
It is better for you to enter into life crippled
than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out.
Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye
than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'"
September 27, 2009
Twenty-sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 137
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Reading 2
Gospel
Reading 1
Nm 11:25-29
The LORD came down in the cloud and spoke to Moses.
Taking some of the spirit that was on Moses,
the LORD bestowed it on the seventy elders;
and as the spirit came to rest on them, they prophesied.
Now two men, one named Eldad and the other Medad,
were not in the gathering but had been left in the camp.
They too had been on the list, but had not gone out to the tent;
yet the spirit came to rest on them also,
and they prophesied in the camp.
So, when a young man quickly told Moses,
"Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp, "
Joshua, son of Nun, who from his youth had been Moses’aide, said,
"Moses, my lord, stop them."
But Moses answered him,
"Are you jealous for my sake?
Would that all the people of the LORD were prophets!
Would that the LORD might bestow his spirit on them all!"
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 19:8, 10, 12-13, 14
R. (9a) The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
The law of the LORD is perfect,
refreshing the soul;
the decree of the LORD is trustworthy,
giving wisdom to the simple.
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
The fear of the LORD is pure,
enduring forever;
the ordinances of the LORD are true,
all of them just.
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
Though your servant is careful of them,
very diligent in keeping them,
Yet who can detect failings?
Cleanse me from my unknown faults!
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
From wanton sin especially, restrain your servant;
let it not rule over me.
Then shall I be blameless and innocent
of serious sin.
R. The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.
Reading II
Jas 5:1-6
Come now, you rich, weep and wail over your impending miseries.
Your wealth has rotted away, your clothes have become moth-eaten,
your gold and silver have corroded,
and that corrosion will be a testimony against you;
it will devour your flesh like a fire.
You have stored up treasure for the last days.
Behold, the wages you withheld from the workers
who harvested your fields are crying aloud;
and the cries of the harvesters
have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.
You have lived on earth in luxury and pleasure;
you have fattened your hearts for the day of slaughter.
You have condemned;
you have murdered the righteous one;
he offers you no resistance.
Gospel
Mk 9:38-43, 45, 47-48
At that time, John said to Jesus,
"Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name,
and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us."
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him.
There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name
who can at the same time speak ill of me.
For whoever is not against us is for us.
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink
because you belong to Christ,
amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him if a great millstone
were put around his neck
and he were thrown into the sea.
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.
It is better for you to enter into life maimed
than with two hands to go into Gehenna,
into the unquenchable fire.
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut if off.
It is better for you to enter into life crippled
than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out.
Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye
than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'"
Saturday, September 26, 2009
The Claim: Lack of Sleep Increases the Risk of Catching a Cold.
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 22, 2009
Really?
The Claim: Lack of Sleep Increases the Risk of Catching a Cold.
By ANAHAD O’CONNOR
THE FACTS As cold season approaches, many Americans stock up on their vitamin C and echinacea. But heeding the age-old advice about catching up on sleep might be more important.
Studies have demonstrated that poor sleep and susceptibility to colds go hand in hand, and scientists think it could be a reflection of the role sleep plays in maintaining the body’s defenses.
In a recent study for The Archives of Internal Medicine, scientists followed 153 men and women for two weeks, keeping track of their quality and duration of sleep. Then, during a five-day period, they quarantined the subjects and exposed them to cold viruses. Those who slept an average of fewer than seven hours a night, it turned out, were three times as likely to get sick as those who averaged at least eight hours.
Sleep and immunity, it seems, are tightly linked. Studies have found that mammals that require the most sleep also produce greater levels of disease-fighting white blood cells — but not red blood cells, even though both are produced in bone marrow and stem from the same precursor. And researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology have shown that species that sleep more have greater resistance against pathogens.
“Species that have evolved longer sleep durations,” the Planck scientists wrote, “appear to be able to increase investment in their immune systems and be better protected.”
THE BOTTOM LINE Research suggests that poor sleep can increase susceptibility to colds.
September 22, 2009
Really?
The Claim: Lack of Sleep Increases the Risk of Catching a Cold.
By ANAHAD O’CONNOR
THE FACTS As cold season approaches, many Americans stock up on their vitamin C and echinacea. But heeding the age-old advice about catching up on sleep might be more important.
Studies have demonstrated that poor sleep and susceptibility to colds go hand in hand, and scientists think it could be a reflection of the role sleep plays in maintaining the body’s defenses.
In a recent study for The Archives of Internal Medicine, scientists followed 153 men and women for two weeks, keeping track of their quality and duration of sleep. Then, during a five-day period, they quarantined the subjects and exposed them to cold viruses. Those who slept an average of fewer than seven hours a night, it turned out, were three times as likely to get sick as those who averaged at least eight hours.
Sleep and immunity, it seems, are tightly linked. Studies have found that mammals that require the most sleep also produce greater levels of disease-fighting white blood cells — but not red blood cells, even though both are produced in bone marrow and stem from the same precursor. And researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology have shown that species that sleep more have greater resistance against pathogens.
“Species that have evolved longer sleep durations,” the Planck scientists wrote, “appear to be able to increase investment in their immune systems and be better protected.”
THE BOTTOM LINE Research suggests that poor sleep can increase susceptibility to colds.
Today's Reading
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 26, 2009
Saturday of the Twenty-fifth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 454
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Zec 2:5-9, 14-15a
I, Zechariah, raised my eyes and looked:
there was a man with a measuring line in his hand.
I asked, “Where are you going?”
He answered, “To measure Jerusalem,
to see how great is its width and how great its length.”
Then the angel who spoke with me advanced,
and another angel came out to meet him and said to him,
“Run, tell this to that young man:
People will live in Jerusalem as though in open country,
because of the multitude of men and beasts in her midst.
But I will be for her an encircling wall of fire, says the LORD,
and I will be the glory in her midst.”
Sing and rejoice, O daughter Zion!
See, I am coming to dwell among you, says the LORD.
Many nations shall join themselves to the LORD on that day,
and they shall be his people and he will dwell among you.
Responsorial Psalm
Jeremiah 31:10, 11-12ab, 13
R. (see 10d) The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
Hear the word of the LORD, O nations,
proclaim it on distant isles, and say:
He who scattered Israel, now gathers them together,
he guards them as a shepherd guards his flock.
R. The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
The LORD shall ransom Jacob,
he shall redeem him from the hand of his conqueror.
Shouting, they shall mount the heights of Zion,
they shall come streaming to the LORD’s blessings.
R. The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
Then the virgins shall make merry and dance,
and young men and old as well.
I will turn their mourning into joy,
I will console and gladden them after their sorrows.
R. The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
Gospel
Lk 9:43b-45
While they were all amazed at his every deed,
Jesus said to his disciples,
“Pay attention to what I am telling you.
The Son of Man is to be handed over to men.”
But they did not understand this saying;
its meaning was hidden from them
so that they should not understand it,
and they were afraid to ask him about this saying.
September 26, 2009
Saturday of the Twenty-fifth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 454
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Zec 2:5-9, 14-15a
I, Zechariah, raised my eyes and looked:
there was a man with a measuring line in his hand.
I asked, “Where are you going?”
He answered, “To measure Jerusalem,
to see how great is its width and how great its length.”
Then the angel who spoke with me advanced,
and another angel came out to meet him and said to him,
“Run, tell this to that young man:
People will live in Jerusalem as though in open country,
because of the multitude of men and beasts in her midst.
But I will be for her an encircling wall of fire, says the LORD,
and I will be the glory in her midst.”
Sing and rejoice, O daughter Zion!
See, I am coming to dwell among you, says the LORD.
Many nations shall join themselves to the LORD on that day,
and they shall be his people and he will dwell among you.
Responsorial Psalm
Jeremiah 31:10, 11-12ab, 13
R. (see 10d) The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
Hear the word of the LORD, O nations,
proclaim it on distant isles, and say:
He who scattered Israel, now gathers them together,
he guards them as a shepherd guards his flock.
R. The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
The LORD shall ransom Jacob,
he shall redeem him from the hand of his conqueror.
Shouting, they shall mount the heights of Zion,
they shall come streaming to the LORD’s blessings.
R. The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
Then the virgins shall make merry and dance,
and young men and old as well.
I will turn their mourning into joy,
I will console and gladden them after their sorrows.
R. The Lord will guard us as a shepherd guards his flock.
Gospel
Lk 9:43b-45
While they were all amazed at his every deed,
Jesus said to his disciples,
“Pay attention to what I am telling you.
The Son of Man is to be handed over to men.”
But they did not understand this saying;
its meaning was hidden from them
so that they should not understand it,
and they were afraid to ask him about this saying.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
today's reading
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 24, 2009
Thursday of the Twenty-fifth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 452
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Hg 1:1-8
On the first day of the sixth month in the second year of King Darius,
The word of the LORD came through the prophet Haggai
to the governor of Judah, Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel,
and to the high priest Joshua, son of Jehozadak:
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
This people says:
“The time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the LORD.”
(Then this word of the LORD came through Haggai, the prophet:)
Is it time for you to dwell in your own paneled houses,
while this house lies in ruins?
Now thus says the LORD of hosts:
Consider your ways!
You have sown much, but have brought in little;
you have eaten, but have not been satisfied;
You have drunk, but have not been exhilarated;
have clothed yourselves, but not been warmed;
And whoever earned wages
earned them for a bag with holes in it.
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Consider your ways!
Go up into the hill country;
bring timber, and build the house
That I may take pleasure in it
and receive my glory, says the LORD.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 149:1b-2, 3-4, 5-6a and 9b
R. (see 4a) The Lord takes delight in his people.
Sing to the LORD a new song
of praise in the assembly of the faithful.
Let Israel be glad in their maker,
let the children of Zion rejoice in their king.
R. The Lord takes delight in his people.
Let them praise his name in the festive dance,
let them sing praise to him with timbrel and harp.
For the LORD loves his people,
and he adorns the lowly with victory.
R. The Lord takes delight in his people.
Let the faithful exult in glory;
let them sing for joy upon their couches;
Let the high praises of God be in their throats.
This is the glory of all his faithful. Alleluia.
R. The Lord takes delight in his people.
Gospel
Lk 9:7-9
Herod the tetrarch heard about all that was happening,
and he was greatly perplexed because some were saying,
“John has been raised from the dead”;
others were saying, “Elijah has appeared”;
still others, “One of the ancient prophets has arisen.”
But Herod said, “John I beheaded.
Who then is this about whom I hear such things?”
And he kept trying to see him.
September 24, 2009
Thursday of the Twenty-fifth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 452
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Hg 1:1-8
On the first day of the sixth month in the second year of King Darius,
The word of the LORD came through the prophet Haggai
to the governor of Judah, Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel,
and to the high priest Joshua, son of Jehozadak:
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
This people says:
“The time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the LORD.”
(Then this word of the LORD came through Haggai, the prophet:)
Is it time for you to dwell in your own paneled houses,
while this house lies in ruins?
Now thus says the LORD of hosts:
Consider your ways!
You have sown much, but have brought in little;
you have eaten, but have not been satisfied;
You have drunk, but have not been exhilarated;
have clothed yourselves, but not been warmed;
And whoever earned wages
earned them for a bag with holes in it.
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Consider your ways!
Go up into the hill country;
bring timber, and build the house
That I may take pleasure in it
and receive my glory, says the LORD.
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 149:1b-2, 3-4, 5-6a and 9b
R. (see 4a) The Lord takes delight in his people.
Sing to the LORD a new song
of praise in the assembly of the faithful.
Let Israel be glad in their maker,
let the children of Zion rejoice in their king.
R. The Lord takes delight in his people.
Let them praise his name in the festive dance,
let them sing praise to him with timbrel and harp.
For the LORD loves his people,
and he adorns the lowly with victory.
R. The Lord takes delight in his people.
Let the faithful exult in glory;
let them sing for joy upon their couches;
Let the high praises of God be in their throats.
This is the glory of all his faithful. Alleluia.
R. The Lord takes delight in his people.
Gospel
Lk 9:7-9
Herod the tetrarch heard about all that was happening,
and he was greatly perplexed because some were saying,
“John has been raised from the dead”;
others were saying, “Elijah has appeared”;
still others, “One of the ancient prophets has arisen.”
But Herod said, “John I beheaded.
Who then is this about whom I hear such things?”
And he kept trying to see him.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
At MSB, Economic Council Chief Urges Broader Market Regulation
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
At MSB, Economic Council Chief Urges Broader Market Regulation
Lawrence Summers, director of the National Economic Council, spoke in the Rafik B. Hariri Building on Friday about the necessity of increased financial regulation as the United States emerges from the recession.
Summers began his address at the recently opened Hariri Building by describing how the government’s recovery plans and stimulus program have led to an economic rebound. He warned that immediate recovery would not last, however, without serious alterations to how the government oversees financial institutions.
“New regulatory approaches are critical because a failure to change the rules of the road will result in future crises that will adversely affect the lives of millions and cost taxpayers untold sums,” Summers said.
Summers outlined several potential changes to the regulatory system. He said that the government plans to require financial institutions to acquire more capital before they begin to lend and borrow freely, and that institutions must be forced to prepare backup plans in case they encounter financial trouble.
“Our financial system will not be fail-safe until it is safe for failure,” Summers said.
Financial regulations must also be uniformly applied to all institutions based on the nature of the institutions, Summers said. “Financial stability is not attainable so long as institutions can choose their own regulator and play regulators against one another,” he said.
Along with regulations for major financial institutions, Summers explained that while the government will not be directly involved in overseeing small businesses that lend credit to consumers, it would look for an independent consumer protection agency.
“Contrary to some advertisements you may have seen, we have no desire to interfere with Main Street retailers’ ability to provide credit to their customers,” Summers said.
Summers’ remarks come as President Barack Obama and his advisers look to tighten government control over the nation’s largest financial institutions. In the next week, the president will attend meetings at the United Nations in New York City and the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh to discuss global regulation reform.
“We believe that this is the year — after all that has happened — to overhaul our system of financial regulation and put in place a structure that can respond to contemporary challenges,” Summers said.
Olga Sologub (MSB ’12), who attended the lecture with her business law class, said she felt that Summers’ message about emerging from the recession was both cautious and optimistic.
“He said that this is not going to be an instantaneous occurrence. But he made it sound like it was possible and that we are moving in the right direction,” Sologub said.
Solugub also said that she found the lecture relevant as reports are just beginning to surface about the end of the recession.
“Because [the economic rebound] is occurring right now, it is wonderful to be the first recipients of this information,” Sologub said.
The National Economic Council, created in 1993 by President Bill Clinton (SFS ’68), is an advisory agency composed of high-level administration officials and Cabinet members that coordinates White House economic policy. Summers, the council’s eighth director, previously served as secretary of the Treasury under Clinton and president of Harvard University.
At MSB, Economic Council Chief Urges Broader Market Regulation
Lawrence Summers, director of the National Economic Council, spoke in the Rafik B. Hariri Building on Friday about the necessity of increased financial regulation as the United States emerges from the recession.
Summers began his address at the recently opened Hariri Building by describing how the government’s recovery plans and stimulus program have led to an economic rebound. He warned that immediate recovery would not last, however, without serious alterations to how the government oversees financial institutions.
“New regulatory approaches are critical because a failure to change the rules of the road will result in future crises that will adversely affect the lives of millions and cost taxpayers untold sums,” Summers said.
Summers outlined several potential changes to the regulatory system. He said that the government plans to require financial institutions to acquire more capital before they begin to lend and borrow freely, and that institutions must be forced to prepare backup plans in case they encounter financial trouble.
“Our financial system will not be fail-safe until it is safe for failure,” Summers said.
Financial regulations must also be uniformly applied to all institutions based on the nature of the institutions, Summers said. “Financial stability is not attainable so long as institutions can choose their own regulator and play regulators against one another,” he said.
Along with regulations for major financial institutions, Summers explained that while the government will not be directly involved in overseeing small businesses that lend credit to consumers, it would look for an independent consumer protection agency.
“Contrary to some advertisements you may have seen, we have no desire to interfere with Main Street retailers’ ability to provide credit to their customers,” Summers said.
Summers’ remarks come as President Barack Obama and his advisers look to tighten government control over the nation’s largest financial institutions. In the next week, the president will attend meetings at the United Nations in New York City and the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh to discuss global regulation reform.
“We believe that this is the year — after all that has happened — to overhaul our system of financial regulation and put in place a structure that can respond to contemporary challenges,” Summers said.
Olga Sologub (MSB ’12), who attended the lecture with her business law class, said she felt that Summers’ message about emerging from the recession was both cautious and optimistic.
“He said that this is not going to be an instantaneous occurrence. But he made it sound like it was possible and that we are moving in the right direction,” Sologub said.
Solugub also said that she found the lecture relevant as reports are just beginning to surface about the end of the recession.
“Because [the economic rebound] is occurring right now, it is wonderful to be the first recipients of this information,” Sologub said.
The National Economic Council, created in 1993 by President Bill Clinton (SFS ’68), is an advisory agency composed of high-level administration officials and Cabinet members that coordinates White House economic policy. Summers, the council’s eighth director, previously served as secretary of the Treasury under Clinton and president of Harvard University.
Mayor Doesn’t Always Live by His Health Rules
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
Mayor Doesn’t Always Live by His Health Rules
By MICHAEL BARBARO
HE dumps salt on almost everything, even saltine crackers. He devours burnt bacon and peanut butter sandwiches. He has a weakness for hot dogs, cheeseburgers, and fried chicken, washing them down with a glass of merlot.
And his snack of choice? Cheez-Its.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has become New York City’s nutritional nag, banning the use of trans fats, forcing chain restaurants to post calorie counts and exhorting diners to consume less salt. Now he is at it again, directing his wrath at sugary drinks in a new series of arresting advertisements that ask subway riders: “Are you pouring on the pounds?”
But an examination of what enters the mayoral mouth reveals that Mr. Bloomberg is an omnivore with his own glaring indulgences, many of them at odds with his own policies. And he struggles mightily to restrain his appetite.
As a billionaire in one of the dining capitals of the world, he can eat anything he wants. But he is obsessed with his weight — so much so that the sight of an unflattering photo of himself can trigger weeks of intense dieting and crankiness, according to friends and aides.
His food issues have become New York City’s. Although he has described his battle against unhealthy foods as common-sense public policy that will shed pounds (and save lives), many of his targets overlap with his own cravings.
“I like a Big Mac like everybody else,” he confessed the other day, explaining the city’s warts-and-all approach to fast food. “I just want to know how many calories are in it.”
Under his watch, the city has declared sodium an enemy, asking restaurants and food manufacturers to voluntarily cut the salt in their dishes by 20 percent or more, and encouraging diners to “shake the habit” by asking waiters for food without added salt.
But Mr. Bloomberg, 67, likes his popcorn so salty that it burns others’ lips. (At Gracie Mansion, the cooks deliver it to him with a salt shaker.) He sprinkles so much salt on his morning bagel “that it’s like a pretzel,” said the manager at Viand, a Greek diner near Mr. Bloomberg’s Upper East Side town house.
Not even pizza is spared a coat of sodium. When the mayor sat down to eat a slice at Denino’s Pizzeria Tavern on Staten Island recently, this reporter spotted him applying six dashes of salt to it.
A health tip sheet from the mayor’s office tells New Yorkers to “drink smart” by choosing water, even though Mr. Bloomberg has a three- to four-cup-a-day coffee habit.
“I can count on two hands the number of times I have seen him drink water,” said one dining companion, who spoke on condition of anonymity, so as not to offend the mayor (who likes his coffee weak, and with milk).
Friends of the mayor said that, like most New Yorkers overwhelmed with food choices, he swings between two dietary poles: indulgence and abstemiousness. After a dinner loaded with fat and salt, they said, he will consume a grapefruit for breakfast, then a bowl of soup for lunch. He keeps a running calorie count in his head, and rarely exceeds 2,000 a day, they said.
Mr. Bloomberg declined to be interviewed for this article, and his aides advised at least one Manhattan restaurant owner not to speak about what’s on the mayor’s plate.
But the mayor’s press secretary, Stu Loeser, said Mr. Bloomberg “works as hard as any New Yorker at keeping off extra pounds, and he has trimmed himself down to his college weight, which isn’t at all easy for a 67-year-old.” The mayor, he said “has days when he eats more than he should.” But, he added, “unlike most of us, he has the discipline to even it out the next day.”
As for his apparent policy of salt as I say, not as I do? Friends note that the mayor smoked cigarettes for years before he banned the practice in restaurants across the city, and besides, it’s the salt in processed foods, not in shakers, that poses the greatest health risk.
Many public health officials applaud the mayor’s dietary crusades, and even pals who object to them express grudging respect for his convictions. The writer Nora Ephron, who has shared a burger with the mayor at JG Melon (“he relished it,” she said) hates the new calorie counts. “It takes the fun out of everything,” she said.
“But the mayor’s concerns,” she added, “are larger than mine.”
Food has always loomed large in Mr. Bloomberg’s life. He speaks fondly of his childhood dinner table in Medford, Mass. — which he would meticulously set himself — where the day’s news was digested alongside a steaming plate of baked chicken and vegetables. His mother was an uneager chef, who passed on a taste for basic fare.
“The food itself wasn’t that big of a deal,” he told one interviewer. “Peas were Del Monte out of a can, cooked in the sauce and the water that it came in.”
The city’s eater-in-chief dines out nearly every night of the week, deliberately popping up at restaurants across the five boroughs. And with his campaign for a third term in full swing, he eats out up to three times a day, as he solicits endorsements and meets voters.
A middle-class kid who became rich in midlife, he seems equally at ease with diner grub and haute cuisine.
In the span of a few days, he is known to eat dinner at Post House, off Madison Avenue, where the beef Wellington costs $49, and the Scobee Grill, on Northern Boulevard in Queens, where the turkey wrap, with a side, is $10.
“He orders what he wants to eat, not what he thinks he is supposed to,” said Danny Meyer, whose Union Square Hospitality Group owns the Union Square Cafe, Eleven Madison Park and Gramercy Tavern.
At Union Square Cafe, Mr. Bloomberg bypasses crispy duck confit in favor of safer staples, like salmon, chicken and pasta. “If we had meatloaf on the menu, I’m sure he would order that,” Mr. Meyer said. “He is not a fancy eater.”
Several weeks ago, when the mayor and a group of friends stopped at Angelina’s, an Italian restaurant on Staten Island, the chef whipped up an off-the-menu feast of bronzini, duck and steak. But Mr. Bloomberg ordered a simple tomato salad and shrimp cocktail ($15), telling the staff he was watching his waistline. (He eventually snuck a taste of the main courses.)
His tastes may be diverse, but he relishes the clubby atmosphere of several Manhattan restaurants. He is a regular at Nippon, a high-end Japanese restaurant in Midtown, where he asks for the beef negimayaki ($29), thin slices of broiled rib-eye steak, rolled with scallions in a teriyaki sauce.
At Quatorze Bis, a cozy French bistro on East 79th Street, the staff has memorized his order: half chicken with herbs, served with fries ($27). “It’s his favorite dish,” said an owner, Mark DiGiulio.
At Shun Lee Palace, where the plates are flecked with gold leaf, the mayor favors Sichuan shrimp ($23). “He likes very spicy Chinese food,” said the owner Michael Tong.
When he does not like the food, he rarely holds back. After dining at Blue Smoke, Mr. Meyer’s barbecue restaurant on East 27th Street, the mayor told Mr. Meyer, “I just don’t like it.”
Mr. Meyer tried inviting him back, but the mayor would not budge. “It never feels good when somebody tells you they don’t like your restaurant, but it’s nice when a politician does not pander,” he said, adding that the mayor has heaped praise on Union Square Cafe.
His obsession with food extends to its preparation. Unsatisfied with the performance of standard toasters, he asked the waiters at a favorite diner to find the industrial machine that produced his order of perfectly burnt bread. Then he bought a few and placed one of the units near his City Hall desk.
For New York City’s richest man, his table manners are surprisingly relaxed: he is known to grab food off the plates of aides and, occasionally, even strangers. (“Delicious,” he declared recently, after swiping a piece of fried calamari from an unsuspecting diner in Staten Island.)
Still, he hates to be fussed over, no matter how much the meal costs. One dinner companion recalled that after Mr. Bloomberg asked for the best bottle of red wine in the house, the restaurant’s manager wanted to describe the wine to the mayor, have him taste it and smell the cork.
The mayor politely interrupted. “Is this your best bottle?” he asked. The manager said yes. “O.K., then pour it,” he said.
Mayor Doesn’t Always Live by His Health Rules
By MICHAEL BARBARO
HE dumps salt on almost everything, even saltine crackers. He devours burnt bacon and peanut butter sandwiches. He has a weakness for hot dogs, cheeseburgers, and fried chicken, washing them down with a glass of merlot.
And his snack of choice? Cheez-Its.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has become New York City’s nutritional nag, banning the use of trans fats, forcing chain restaurants to post calorie counts and exhorting diners to consume less salt. Now he is at it again, directing his wrath at sugary drinks in a new series of arresting advertisements that ask subway riders: “Are you pouring on the pounds?”
But an examination of what enters the mayoral mouth reveals that Mr. Bloomberg is an omnivore with his own glaring indulgences, many of them at odds with his own policies. And he struggles mightily to restrain his appetite.
As a billionaire in one of the dining capitals of the world, he can eat anything he wants. But he is obsessed with his weight — so much so that the sight of an unflattering photo of himself can trigger weeks of intense dieting and crankiness, according to friends and aides.
His food issues have become New York City’s. Although he has described his battle against unhealthy foods as common-sense public policy that will shed pounds (and save lives), many of his targets overlap with his own cravings.
“I like a Big Mac like everybody else,” he confessed the other day, explaining the city’s warts-and-all approach to fast food. “I just want to know how many calories are in it.”
Under his watch, the city has declared sodium an enemy, asking restaurants and food manufacturers to voluntarily cut the salt in their dishes by 20 percent or more, and encouraging diners to “shake the habit” by asking waiters for food without added salt.
But Mr. Bloomberg, 67, likes his popcorn so salty that it burns others’ lips. (At Gracie Mansion, the cooks deliver it to him with a salt shaker.) He sprinkles so much salt on his morning bagel “that it’s like a pretzel,” said the manager at Viand, a Greek diner near Mr. Bloomberg’s Upper East Side town house.
Not even pizza is spared a coat of sodium. When the mayor sat down to eat a slice at Denino’s Pizzeria Tavern on Staten Island recently, this reporter spotted him applying six dashes of salt to it.
A health tip sheet from the mayor’s office tells New Yorkers to “drink smart” by choosing water, even though Mr. Bloomberg has a three- to four-cup-a-day coffee habit.
“I can count on two hands the number of times I have seen him drink water,” said one dining companion, who spoke on condition of anonymity, so as not to offend the mayor (who likes his coffee weak, and with milk).
Friends of the mayor said that, like most New Yorkers overwhelmed with food choices, he swings between two dietary poles: indulgence and abstemiousness. After a dinner loaded with fat and salt, they said, he will consume a grapefruit for breakfast, then a bowl of soup for lunch. He keeps a running calorie count in his head, and rarely exceeds 2,000 a day, they said.
Mr. Bloomberg declined to be interviewed for this article, and his aides advised at least one Manhattan restaurant owner not to speak about what’s on the mayor’s plate.
But the mayor’s press secretary, Stu Loeser, said Mr. Bloomberg “works as hard as any New Yorker at keeping off extra pounds, and he has trimmed himself down to his college weight, which isn’t at all easy for a 67-year-old.” The mayor, he said “has days when he eats more than he should.” But, he added, “unlike most of us, he has the discipline to even it out the next day.”
As for his apparent policy of salt as I say, not as I do? Friends note that the mayor smoked cigarettes for years before he banned the practice in restaurants across the city, and besides, it’s the salt in processed foods, not in shakers, that poses the greatest health risk.
Many public health officials applaud the mayor’s dietary crusades, and even pals who object to them express grudging respect for his convictions. The writer Nora Ephron, who has shared a burger with the mayor at JG Melon (“he relished it,” she said) hates the new calorie counts. “It takes the fun out of everything,” she said.
“But the mayor’s concerns,” she added, “are larger than mine.”
Food has always loomed large in Mr. Bloomberg’s life. He speaks fondly of his childhood dinner table in Medford, Mass. — which he would meticulously set himself — where the day’s news was digested alongside a steaming plate of baked chicken and vegetables. His mother was an uneager chef, who passed on a taste for basic fare.
“The food itself wasn’t that big of a deal,” he told one interviewer. “Peas were Del Monte out of a can, cooked in the sauce and the water that it came in.”
The city’s eater-in-chief dines out nearly every night of the week, deliberately popping up at restaurants across the five boroughs. And with his campaign for a third term in full swing, he eats out up to three times a day, as he solicits endorsements and meets voters.
A middle-class kid who became rich in midlife, he seems equally at ease with diner grub and haute cuisine.
In the span of a few days, he is known to eat dinner at Post House, off Madison Avenue, where the beef Wellington costs $49, and the Scobee Grill, on Northern Boulevard in Queens, where the turkey wrap, with a side, is $10.
“He orders what he wants to eat, not what he thinks he is supposed to,” said Danny Meyer, whose Union Square Hospitality Group owns the Union Square Cafe, Eleven Madison Park and Gramercy Tavern.
At Union Square Cafe, Mr. Bloomberg bypasses crispy duck confit in favor of safer staples, like salmon, chicken and pasta. “If we had meatloaf on the menu, I’m sure he would order that,” Mr. Meyer said. “He is not a fancy eater.”
Several weeks ago, when the mayor and a group of friends stopped at Angelina’s, an Italian restaurant on Staten Island, the chef whipped up an off-the-menu feast of bronzini, duck and steak. But Mr. Bloomberg ordered a simple tomato salad and shrimp cocktail ($15), telling the staff he was watching his waistline. (He eventually snuck a taste of the main courses.)
His tastes may be diverse, but he relishes the clubby atmosphere of several Manhattan restaurants. He is a regular at Nippon, a high-end Japanese restaurant in Midtown, where he asks for the beef negimayaki ($29), thin slices of broiled rib-eye steak, rolled with scallions in a teriyaki sauce.
At Quatorze Bis, a cozy French bistro on East 79th Street, the staff has memorized his order: half chicken with herbs, served with fries ($27). “It’s his favorite dish,” said an owner, Mark DiGiulio.
At Shun Lee Palace, where the plates are flecked with gold leaf, the mayor favors Sichuan shrimp ($23). “He likes very spicy Chinese food,” said the owner Michael Tong.
When he does not like the food, he rarely holds back. After dining at Blue Smoke, Mr. Meyer’s barbecue restaurant on East 27th Street, the mayor told Mr. Meyer, “I just don’t like it.”
Mr. Meyer tried inviting him back, but the mayor would not budge. “It never feels good when somebody tells you they don’t like your restaurant, but it’s nice when a politician does not pander,” he said, adding that the mayor has heaped praise on Union Square Cafe.
His obsession with food extends to its preparation. Unsatisfied with the performance of standard toasters, he asked the waiters at a favorite diner to find the industrial machine that produced his order of perfectly burnt bread. Then he bought a few and placed one of the units near his City Hall desk.
For New York City’s richest man, his table manners are surprisingly relaxed: he is known to grab food off the plates of aides and, occasionally, even strangers. (“Delicious,” he declared recently, after swiping a piece of fried calamari from an unsuspecting diner in Staten Island.)
Still, he hates to be fussed over, no matter how much the meal costs. One dinner companion recalled that after Mr. Bloomberg asked for the best bottle of red wine in the house, the restaurant’s manager wanted to describe the wine to the mayor, have him taste it and smell the cork.
The mayor politely interrupted. “Is this your best bottle?” he asked. The manager said yes. “O.K., then pour it,” he said.
Today's Reading
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 23, 2009
Wednesday of the Twenty-fifth Week in Ordinary Time
Lectionary: 451
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Ez 9:5-9
At the time of the evening sacrifice, I, Ezra, rose in my wretchedness,
and with cloak and mantle torn I fell on my knees,
stretching out my hands to the LORD, my God.
I said: “My God, I am too ashamed and confounded to raise my face to you,
O my God, for our wicked deeds are heaped up above our heads
and our guilt reaches up to heaven.
From the time of our fathers even to this day
great has been our guilt,
and for our wicked deeds we have been delivered up,
we and our kings and our priests,
to the will of the kings of foreign lands,
to the sword, to captivity, to pillage, and to disgrace,
as is the case today.
“And now, but a short time ago, mercy came to us from the LORD, our God,
who left us a remnant and gave us a stake in his holy place;
thus our God has brightened our eyes
and given us relief in our servitude.
For slaves we are, but in our servitude our God has not abandoned us;
rather, he has turned the good will
of the kings of Persia toward us.
Thus he has given us new life
to raise again the house of our God and restore its ruins,
and has granted us a fence in Judah and Jerusalem.”
Responsorial Psalm
Tobit 13:2, 3-4a, 4befghn, 7-8
R. (1b) Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
He scourges and then has mercy;
he casts down to the depths of the nether world,
and he brings up from the great abyss.
No one can escape his hand.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
Praise him, you children of Israel, before the Gentiles,
for though he has scattered you among them,
he has shown you his greatness even there.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
So now consider what he has done for you,
and praise him with full voice.
Bless the Lord of righteousness,
and exalt the King of ages.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
In the land of my exile I praise him
and show his power and majesty to a sinful nation.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
Bless the Lord, all you his chosen ones,
and may all of you praise his majesty.
Celebrate days of gladness, and give him praise.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
Gospel
Lk 9:1-6
Jesus summoned the Twelve and gave them power and authority
over all demons and to cure diseases,
and he sent them to proclaim the Kingdom of God
and to heal the sick.
He said to them, “Take nothing for the journey,
neither walking stick, nor sack, nor food, nor money,
and let no one take a second tunic.
Whatever house you enter, stay there and leave from there.
And as for those who do not welcome you,
when you leave that town,
shake the dust from your feet in testimony against them.”
Then they set out and went from village to village
proclaiming the good news and curing diseases everywhere.
September 23, 2009
Wednesday of the Twenty-fifth Week in Ordinary Time
Lectionary: 451
Reading 1
Responsorial Psalm
Gospel
Reading 1
Ez 9:5-9
At the time of the evening sacrifice, I, Ezra, rose in my wretchedness,
and with cloak and mantle torn I fell on my knees,
stretching out my hands to the LORD, my God.
I said: “My God, I am too ashamed and confounded to raise my face to you,
O my God, for our wicked deeds are heaped up above our heads
and our guilt reaches up to heaven.
From the time of our fathers even to this day
great has been our guilt,
and for our wicked deeds we have been delivered up,
we and our kings and our priests,
to the will of the kings of foreign lands,
to the sword, to captivity, to pillage, and to disgrace,
as is the case today.
“And now, but a short time ago, mercy came to us from the LORD, our God,
who left us a remnant and gave us a stake in his holy place;
thus our God has brightened our eyes
and given us relief in our servitude.
For slaves we are, but in our servitude our God has not abandoned us;
rather, he has turned the good will
of the kings of Persia toward us.
Thus he has given us new life
to raise again the house of our God and restore its ruins,
and has granted us a fence in Judah and Jerusalem.”
Responsorial Psalm
Tobit 13:2, 3-4a, 4befghn, 7-8
R. (1b) Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
He scourges and then has mercy;
he casts down to the depths of the nether world,
and he brings up from the great abyss.
No one can escape his hand.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
Praise him, you children of Israel, before the Gentiles,
for though he has scattered you among them,
he has shown you his greatness even there.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
So now consider what he has done for you,
and praise him with full voice.
Bless the Lord of righteousness,
and exalt the King of ages.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
In the land of my exile I praise him
and show his power and majesty to a sinful nation.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
Bless the Lord, all you his chosen ones,
and may all of you praise his majesty.
Celebrate days of gladness, and give him praise.
R. Blessed be God, who lives for ever.
Gospel
Lk 9:1-6
Jesus summoned the Twelve and gave them power and authority
over all demons and to cure diseases,
and he sent them to proclaim the Kingdom of God
and to heal the sick.
He said to them, “Take nothing for the journey,
neither walking stick, nor sack, nor food, nor money,
and let no one take a second tunic.
Whatever house you enter, stay there and leave from there.
And as for those who do not welcome you,
when you leave that town,
shake the dust from your feet in testimony against them.”
Then they set out and went from village to village
proclaiming the good news and curing diseases everywhere.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Letters: Women and the Pursuit of Happiness
Thank you for your time with my blogs and welcome back in the near future.
September 22, 2009
Letters
Women and the Pursuit of Happiness
To the Editor:
Re “Blue Is the New Black,” by Maureen Dowd (column, Sept. 20):
Ms. Dowd, in her discussion of why women are generally unhappier than they were just a few decades ago, identifies an aspect of the “feminist revolution” that often goes unnoticed.
Women have made tremendous material and emotional strides, but they feel torn among competing demands in a way that few men seem to feel torn.
All professionals have to make decisions — sometimes hard decisions — in the course of pursuing a career and raising a family at the same time. But women tend to perceive these decisions not only as time-management choices but also as existential choices.
Every hour spent at work or at home is not simply an hour, but a testament to what makes one happy — and what one is willing to sacrifice for that happiness. As long as women feel that their decisions carry such freight, it won’t be surprising if they continue to feel uneasy about making them.
Zaahira Wyne
Fredericksburg, Va., Sept. 20, 2009
•
To the Editor:
As long as women accept our cultural denigration of the value of nurture, their happiness will continue to slide.
What could be more important than creating a home and raising the next generation, all in balance with a career that gives a feeling of self-worth and financial independence? Yet increasingly we shun the notion of work-life balance as inefficient and impractical. Have we given up on the pursuit of happiness?
Elizabeth Cox
Redding, Conn., Sept. 20, 2009
•
To the Editor:
Maureen Dowd’s column caused me great concern. How could women in general be unhappier now than they were in the ’70s? We have much more compared with then, like wealth, better jobs and more freedom in our choices.
What’s missing? I have some ideas to perhaps bring up the mood of those suffering.
As women we possess a high dignity, whether we are single or married. We have a great capacity for love, and not just those we are close to, but all people, especially those who are in pain. We empathize with those less fortunate and very often change our plans to be there to help someone else in need.
Any amount of material possessions will not necessarily make anyone happier. It’s how you use them that counts.
As Pope John Paul II stated, “Emphasis should be placed on the ‘genius of women’ by considering ... those ordinary women who reveal the gift of their womanhood by placing themselves at the service of others in their everyday lives.” And: “Perhaps more than men, women acknowledge the person, because they see persons with their heart.”
We are happier the more we truly serve others instead of seeking self-satisfaction. With our “genius” we can change the culture for the better and therefore be very happy.
Jeanne Hennessey
Closter, N.J., Sept. 21, 2009
•
To the Editor:
Maureen Dowd reports on studies showing that women are less happy than they were 40 years ago. I wonder what the respondents truly meant when they endorsed unhappiness. It is so easy to confuse happiness with ease, security, comfort or effortlessness. But combining work and family life may increase stress.
At the same time, nothing we have discovered in our modern experience prevents confrontations with the big issues — fear, uncertainty, disappointment and loss. But I don’t know too many who, given the option, would cut the kids out of their life in order to be happier.
Indeed, I am not sure how I would answer a survey about happiness. I know that I am grateful for a life that is full, complex, challenging and real.
Heidi M. Feldman
Palo Alto, Calif., Sept. 20, 2009
The writer, a doctor, is a professor of developmental and behavioral pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine.
•
To the Editor:
Maureen Dowd’s column about the reasons women tend to be unhappy misses something that brings much happiness to many: the joy of being a grandmother.
Mona Levenstein
Hamilton, Ontario, Sept. 20, 2009
September 22, 2009
Letters
Women and the Pursuit of Happiness
To the Editor:
Re “Blue Is the New Black,” by Maureen Dowd (column, Sept. 20):
Ms. Dowd, in her discussion of why women are generally unhappier than they were just a few decades ago, identifies an aspect of the “feminist revolution” that often goes unnoticed.
Women have made tremendous material and emotional strides, but they feel torn among competing demands in a way that few men seem to feel torn.
All professionals have to make decisions — sometimes hard decisions — in the course of pursuing a career and raising a family at the same time. But women tend to perceive these decisions not only as time-management choices but also as existential choices.
Every hour spent at work or at home is not simply an hour, but a testament to what makes one happy — and what one is willing to sacrifice for that happiness. As long as women feel that their decisions carry such freight, it won’t be surprising if they continue to feel uneasy about making them.
Zaahira Wyne
Fredericksburg, Va., Sept. 20, 2009
•
To the Editor:
As long as women accept our cultural denigration of the value of nurture, their happiness will continue to slide.
What could be more important than creating a home and raising the next generation, all in balance with a career that gives a feeling of self-worth and financial independence? Yet increasingly we shun the notion of work-life balance as inefficient and impractical. Have we given up on the pursuit of happiness?
Elizabeth Cox
Redding, Conn., Sept. 20, 2009
•
To the Editor:
Maureen Dowd’s column caused me great concern. How could women in general be unhappier now than they were in the ’70s? We have much more compared with then, like wealth, better jobs and more freedom in our choices.
What’s missing? I have some ideas to perhaps bring up the mood of those suffering.
As women we possess a high dignity, whether we are single or married. We have a great capacity for love, and not just those we are close to, but all people, especially those who are in pain. We empathize with those less fortunate and very often change our plans to be there to help someone else in need.
Any amount of material possessions will not necessarily make anyone happier. It’s how you use them that counts.
As Pope John Paul II stated, “Emphasis should be placed on the ‘genius of women’ by considering ... those ordinary women who reveal the gift of their womanhood by placing themselves at the service of others in their everyday lives.” And: “Perhaps more than men, women acknowledge the person, because they see persons with their heart.”
We are happier the more we truly serve others instead of seeking self-satisfaction. With our “genius” we can change the culture for the better and therefore be very happy.
Jeanne Hennessey
Closter, N.J., Sept. 21, 2009
•
To the Editor:
Maureen Dowd reports on studies showing that women are less happy than they were 40 years ago. I wonder what the respondents truly meant when they endorsed unhappiness. It is so easy to confuse happiness with ease, security, comfort or effortlessness. But combining work and family life may increase stress.
At the same time, nothing we have discovered in our modern experience prevents confrontations with the big issues — fear, uncertainty, disappointment and loss. But I don’t know too many who, given the option, would cut the kids out of their life in order to be happier.
Indeed, I am not sure how I would answer a survey about happiness. I know that I am grateful for a life that is full, complex, challenging and real.
Heidi M. Feldman
Palo Alto, Calif., Sept. 20, 2009
The writer, a doctor, is a professor of developmental and behavioral pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine.
•
To the Editor:
Maureen Dowd’s column about the reasons women tend to be unhappy misses something that brings much happiness to many: the joy of being a grandmother.
Mona Levenstein
Hamilton, Ontario, Sept. 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
