#BoycottESPN for two weeks

That's what I'm doing, officially of last night, over Jemele Hill's two-week suspension by Great Red Satan for telling people they should consider boycotting Dallas Cowboys advertisers. (I'm not rich or even close to it, nor am I that capitalistic, but I'll for it, even though my personal boycott wouldn't make much difference.)

On the big picture, there's other issues involved.

Yes, Hill is not hired as an opiner or commenter. Nonetheless, the "richness" of Red Satan, the sports world equivalent of mainstream media, silencing its own staff is laughable.

And, it's over the NFL. In other words, ESPN doesn't want Hill to risk killing the goose laying its golden eggs. It's not the first time Red Satan's been accused of pulling punches regarding the No Fun League. Some, including this opiner, say that some of its early coverage of the NFL's problems with chronic traumatic encephalopathy were behind the curve. Related to that, this opiner says that ESPN could, if it wanted to, especially in the wake of Aaron Hernandez' suicide, look at CTE in major-college football, too, but that's another golden-egged goose.

Of course, the media in general, when at the big mainstream level, likes to shush its employees at times. Even at medium level, it does. I'll have a post related to that in other ways later this week.

That said, that problem goes beyond the media. Employees' rights to the First Amendment have become ever more folded, spindled and mutilated. And, while the GOP has led the charge to make this happen, the Democrats have generally sat passively by.

If I were a day trader at Goldman Sachs of Hillary Clinton speaking fame, and I Tweeted, even on a personal Twitter account, about boycotting Dallas Cowboys advertisers, I'd get a suspension of two weeks at minimum, if Goddam Sachs has ever done bond offerings or other capital raising for any said advertisers. I might get such a suspension even without it.

Beyond that, when Zack Lowe claims the Cavs are ahead of the Celtics in this year's NBA Eastern Conference, its actual sports coverage is going down hill. Lowe went so far as to hint the depth (? Isaiah Thomas is out how long? Derrick Rose WILL be out at some point and so will Dwyane Wade) the Cavs got in the Kyrie Irving trade could make it competitive in the NBA Finals against the Warriors. I know Woj can't do everything hoopswise there, but maybe more than that?

But "I want to watch my team," you say, and "they're on ESPN."

I don't have cable, and there are Internet workarounds. Figure the rest out for yourself.

And, as far as politicizing? Five Thirty Eight is often centrist dreck.

TX Progessives agree that Trump is a moron

The Texas Progressive Alliance also does not deny that it called Donald Trump a moron — among other things — as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff is glad to see that at least for now, your voter registration info is safe from the clutches of the Trump Commission.

Horwitz, in the Houston Chronicle, asks why the flags shouldn't just be left at half-mast perpetually in this hellish new world of ours.

Cardinals fan SocraticGadfly salutes the success of old NL Central rival Houston Astros, while offering a Redbirds post-mortem and to-do list, including wondering if Giancarlo Stanton is available and at what possible price.

Our Revolution swung through Austin, Houston, San Antonio, and Tyler with Nina Turner and Jim Hightower headlining, and PDiddie at Brains and Eggs cautioned the state's withered Democratic Party that their future lies there (and essentially nowhere else).

Jobsanger offers up some sobering facts about guns in America.

Lewisville Texan Journal notes that Amazon’s second headquarters planning is looking right at that city as one of its options.

Neil at All People Have Value said the bottom line goal of his political activism is to be able to account for himself as we fight Trump and all these lousy people. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

 ========================

 And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

 Adventus fears that smaller communities damaged by Harvey will miss out on recovery funds.

 Offcite looks at the lessons Houston can learn from suburbs that were designed with nature in mind.

 Better Texas Blog insists that insurance coverage for contraception should be a health care standard.

 Mean Green Cougar Red has had enough of the "search for answers" after every mass gun homicide.

 Texas Vox applauds Austin for making solar power more accessible.

 The TSTA Blog compares and contrasts Don Willett and Thurgood Marshall.

Grits for Breakfast looks at the reality of why even innocent people accept plea bargains.

-->

Bernie Sanders, deconstructed

Via a Counterpunch piece I'd read last Saturday, I'd heard that ecosocialist, or communitarian socialist, Murray Bookchin, had deconstructed Bernie Sanders not too long after Sanders became mayor of Burlington, Vermont, and that the piece was relevant to the Bernie of 2016 presidential campaign fame.

Well, I was of course intrigued and did teh Google.

And, yes it is very relevant.

Indeed, some parts of it are relevant to Jane Sanders' tenure as president of Burlington College and her tres brilliant land ideas, now under federal investigation, as I have described in detail.

It's a long read indeed.

But, if you're a Berniecrat and want to know more about him, and about what might be myth and what might be reality on his think-tank/rebranded lobbying group the Sanders Institute, which I tackled a bit more here, and you want more insight than you might find from the knee-jerk angrified Actual Flatticus (Alan Smithee, IRL the late Chris Chopin) any time it is insinuated the feds might find a hint of impropriety in Jane's actions, or indirectly in Bernie's, you've got time to read, don't you?

To whet your appetite, I’ll give you this:

SANDERS’ WATERFRONT PLAN is burdened by a highly convoluted a history that would take an article in itself to unravel. The 24.5-acre property, owned partly by the Vermont Central Railroad, the Alden Corporation (a consortium of wealthy locals), and the city itself, faces one of the most scenic lake and mountain areas in the northeast. Paquette, Sanders’ predecessor, planned to "develop” this spectacular site with highrise condos. Sanders has made the demand for a “waterfront for the people” a cardinal issue in all his campaigns. Civic democracy was ostensibly served when an open meeting was organized by the administration in February, 1983, to formulate priorities which the public felt should be reflected in any design. Broken down by wards in NPA fashion, the meeting’s priorities centered around walkways, open space, public access, restaurants and shops, even a museum and wildlife sanctuary — and, in addition to similar public amenities, mixed housing. Whether these priorities could have been met without a UDAG is highly problematical. What is fascinating about Sanders’ response, even before the UDAG was refused, was the clutter of structures that grossly compromised the whole thrust of the public’s priorities: a second version of a Radisson-type hotel, a retail pavilion that spanned half the length of the city’s pedestrian mall, a 1200-car parking garage, an office building, a narrow public walkway along the lakeside — and an ambiguous promise to provide three hundred mixed housing units, presumably “available for low and moderate income and/or handicapped people:” Even so, this housing proposal was hedged by such caveats as "to the extent feasible” and the need to acquire “below-market financing” and rent-level “subsidies.”

Following the refusal of the UDAG, the plan resurfaced again from City Hall with two notable alterations. Mixed housing disappeared completely even as a promise — to be replaced by 150 to 300 condos priced at $175-300,000 each (a typical Burlington houses sells for $70-80,000) and public space, meager to begin with, was further attenuated. From a residential viewpoint, the “waterfront for the people” had become precisely an “enclave for the rich,” one of the verbal thunderbolts Sanders had directed at the Paquette proposal. 

The privileges accorded by the waterfront plan to moneyed people are a reminder that only token aid has been provided to the poor. The methods employed by Sanders to engineer public consent for the plan have been especially offensive: the blitz of ads favoring the mayor’s and Alden Corporation’s version of the scheme, in which Sanderistas found their names listed with those of the most notorious union-busters in the state, stands in sharp contrast with the relatively weak campaigns launched by City Hall on behalf of rent control and improved housing. 

And that part, indeed, is at least indirectly relevant to Jane as well as Bernie.

The piece includes a response to Bookchin and a counter-response by him.

For Berniecrats pondering foreign policy more than the typical Democrat, the piece, and the two addenda, will further shatter ideas that Sanders is a peace-lover, antiwar in any general way or anything similar.

And, speaking of both Counterpunch and antiwar, since that's a foreign policy issue, Andrew Stewart flailed him in 2015 for not having any foreign policy issues of concern (other than, of course, Hillary Clinton voting for the Iraq War) months after his officially entering the presidential race.

Stewart then pivots back to the Bookchin article above along with the relationship between Bookchin and Sanders, which had gotten pretty frosty by the end of Bernie's mayorality.

Carmelo, Lil Russ, D-Wade, KAT in your fantasy league

Now that Carmelo Anthony has officially been traded, what does this mean for your fantasy league if you, like me, play? ESPN offers a few fantasy thoughts and I have more.

I'm in Yahoo, to be specific. Standard rotisserie. I'd already started editing my pre-draft rankings a couple of weeks ago.

First, I already moved Russell Westbrook out of the top five after the Thunder acquired Paul George. So, I don't have to move him down much more. He is now at No. 11. That could move back up a spot or two, BUT, since both Steph Curry AND Kyrie Irving are PGs, as is James Harden, and Steph and the Beard have a better all-around game, and Kyrie will get better numbers with a fast offense in Boston, no need to rank Lil Russ higher. Plus, all three of them have eligibility at both PG and SG, while Russ does not. Indeed, I may drop him another couple of slots.

That said, I'll move George lower, as he and Melo are going to be fighting for some of the same space. Otherwise, with Enes Kanter gone, Steven Adams is getting more playing time and moves up several spots. Yahoo, though, had him ranked too high at No. 50. I don't have him there even now.

Kanter is a toughie, looking back east. He didn't play a lot of minutes per game last year, splitting time with Adams. The same will be true in New York, with both Joakim Noah and Willy Hernangomez there, barring a trade. So, he stays roughly unchanged.

The Unicorn, Kristaps Porzingis, had already been moved up by Yahoo, expecting improvement from last year. It's his team now, and struggles at times and all, expect definite growth all around. He should definitely be above a Joel Embiid. Embiid has an even higher ceiling, it seems. But, until we see a totally healthy Process in action for a totally healthy long stretch, don't get suckered.

As for Melo himself? With him not being the originator of much of the offense with his new team, on stats, he'll be even lower than the NBA Rank of 63 that ESPN gave him and people bitched about. I'd move him to 70, maybe lower.

Also, regarding that earlier trade, the Kyrie-to-Boston one, I moved Kevin Love up somewhat under the theory that somebody besides LeBron has to score. And, I moved Harden down, though still ahead of Lil Russ, compared to last year since the Rockets now have Chris Paul, which will cut into Harden's assist numbers a lot.

Again, these are fantasy ranks, not real player individual comparison ranks.

Who's my No. 1 right now? I agree with some of the people in this ESPN fantasy discussion — it's KAT, Karl-Anthony Towns. (I'm in a points league.) Expect about as much scoring as last year. Expect more efficient scoring, by a touch. With a new defensive-minded coach and Thibodeau alums Jimmy Butler and Taj Gibson to help with that on the floor, expect the possibility more blocks and more rebounds.

And, if defenses start focusing on him more? Definitely expect an uptick in assists. He is definitely the top big man overall. His only drawback is that he has only single-position eligibility with Yahoo, unlike the Unicorn and Anthony Davis, my no. 2 big, and his running mate, DeMarcus Cousins.

One other early note? Consider moving Kawhi Leonard down a few spots. At a minimum, he's going to miss the entire preseason. Per my note about this year's T-Wolves, and earlier comments about players with multi-position eligibility, Butler is a good alternative.

And, outside of the fantasy world, should we just pencil in the Houston Rockets as this year's Southwest Division champs? The fact that this Leonard has an injury problem that arose last year, and that it's unrelated to his ankle injuries, should be matter for concern.

==

And a sidebar:

Dwyane Wade in your fantasy league?

DON'T.

Read my post about him and the Bulls mutually dumping each other, if you actually are thinking of this.

Well, if you're in a league with 10 or more players, and are looking for depth at the 9 spot or lower, maybe.

==

Sidebar 2: Additional injury news could further change this, of course. I started gathering my ideas a few days back, then saw Kawhi's injury.

Tom Price; Ryan Zinke; Steve Mnuchin; Rick Perry; Hillary Clinton

Yes, this is another of those "tie the threads of the header together" blog posts.

And, trust me, I'll get there soon enough.

Even lighter-level news junkies know that President Trump's former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Tom Price, resigned from that position last week after it came to light he was engaged in tens of thousands of dollars of private charter jet flights, on the taxpayer dime, rather than flying commercial.

More serious political junkies —

And now, the inspector general for the Department of Interior is investigating Secretary Ryan Zinke for a few questionable flights, one in particular.

And NOW, the Treasury's IG is investigating the flight pattern of Eli Miller, chief of staff to Secretary Steve Mnuchin.

Update: Energy Secretary Rick Perry and staff are now in the crosshairs. Maybe Tricky Ricky needs timely back pain meds, so much fly noncommercial for that reason?

OK, we're obviously on "I'll take 'unethical government air travel' for $500, Alex," territory.

And, for people who are nearly my age, if not older, and who are almost as much of political news junkies as me, perhaps your memory, and your sense of snarkiness, have both been stimulated ...

Back to the first of several Hillarygates in the Slickster Clinton White House.

I am, of course, talking about the White House travel office controversy.

The good old Travelgate.

Already long before her private email server, and her "interactions" vis-a-vis that server with former FBI head James Comey, she sounds just the same, per the Wiki link:

Hillary Clinton gradually came under scrutiny for allegedly having played a central role in the firings and making false statements about her involvement therein. In 2000, Independent Counsel Robert Ray issued his final report on Travelgate. He sought no charges against her, saying that while some of Clinton's statements were factually false, there was insufficient evidence that these statements were either knowingly false or that she understood that her statements led to the firings.

She hasn't changed a lick, has she?

That's pretty much exactly what Comey said when he initially closed his investigation a year ago, before Anthony Weiner's weiner got intermingled with "private" Clinton emails on Huma Abedin's cellphone. Remember his "extremely careless" statement, per Wiki's summation of THAT case?

(Speaking of, from last summer, about the time Comey had his initial wrap-up, the Guardian, no wingnut outlet by any means, did a round-up of all the Clinton "-gates." Some, like Gennifer Flowers, turned out to be unproven, if not unprovable, if simply not true. But, on the Bill Clinton "-gates," he had, er, left his pants down.)

And, oh the fun. Harry Thomason and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason and their possible grifting.

And the sadness. The beginnings of Vince Foster's eventually fatal tumble downhill.

And the pettiness. Like the Clintons appearing to throw first White House Chief of Staff Mack McLarty under the bus.

And, the "big reveal." Yes, the phrase may be called sexist, but I've used it before. For the first time since they moved to DC, it was revealed that Hillary Clinton was the one who really wore the pants in the family. In turn, that's part of what animated her Tammy Wynette, I think. Standing by Bill was done in exchange for her relatively free hand on this, on Hillarycare and more.

And, as per the thread of this blog post, since it IS, ultimately, all about Hillary in the end, well, I've made it that way. Thank me later.

HR36 and a few abortion thoughts

I don't blog a lot about abortion. Probably less than gay rights by a fair degree. Maybe less, even, than gay marriage specifically.

But, with the House passing HR 36, the euphemistically titled "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," it's time to do that again.

First, that title. Almost all doctors outside those with a specific pro-life oar they're rowing say fetuses don't feel pain until at least 24 weeks. Therefore, the bill's title, as well as one main premise, are lies.

So too is the lie that Margaret Sanger et al were trying to eliminate the black race.

Next, a few journalism opinion notes.

I don't agree with Ross Douthat, unlike I once did. Roe itself didn't enshrine a "near-absolute" right, and it's been whittled away since then anyway.

I also don't agree with Ted Rall (link to original broken), unlike I also once did. Abortion is not murder for various legal grounds. A, it isn't by constitutional definition. B, Outside of that, even, a woman seeking abortion generally is not acting under the idea she is taking human life. And, on 8 years of further experience with Rall's handiwork, I recognize his stance for the "look at me" semi-trollery that much of his stuff is.

Next, some legal history, and plain history, here. That link will explain the history of abortion in America, what the Bible does and does not say (basically, says nothing) and more.

And from there, to matters biological. As in, spontaneous unconsciously deliberately done abortion happens in the animal world.

Spontaneous (maybe also unconsciously deliberately done, for all we know) abortion happens in at least 20 percent, and probably 30 percent or more, of human conceptions. That's why Francisco Ayala, a renowned biologist and at least nominally a Catholic, says "god is the greatest abortionist of all." That should be no surprise; the allegedly omnipotent god or "intelligent designer" of purportedly orthodox Christianity allows teratomas, chimeras and other abnormal conceptions. The ones that make it to birth should NOT be taken as a pro-life justification, as they ignore the surely more than 30 percent that are aborted, or in the case of most teratomas, only one is actually alive.

And, that leads more directly to theology. Soul ensoulment at conception, as shown in part by teratomas and zygotes, has no medical standing. And, unless one wants to call god "the greatest soul-killer of all," it has no theological standing either.

Please do NOT cite original sin to blame a mythical Adam and Eve for this, either. Let's start with that being offensive even in terms of some Christian doctrines. Let's then go to many Christian wings, including the entire Eastern Orthodox tradition, not believing in original sin. (And, yes, like Ken Ham, some Xns actually will attribute the cause of anything wrong in our world to original sin.)

==

That said, as I noted on Twitter, and up at the top here, I don't blog about abortion a lot.

There's several reasons.

One is that although I no longer agree with Douthat or Rall in semi-major part, even (I never did fully), I still think that neither is totally wrong.

Per Douthat, I do think that some people in the pro-choice movement, just like the majority of the pro-life movement, do engage in some slippery slope thinking.

Per Rall, abortion may not be murder, but, it's "something." Involuntary manslaughter, or some weird halfway equivalent? If we as a society as a whole feel zero moral questioning over the issue, period ...  shouldn't we?

And, that's one other reason I don't blog about it a lot.

I'm a Humean philosopher. I know that his famous "an is does not imply an ought" is very, very, true here. Just because spontaneous abortion happens in humans, and in animals, and perhaps some subconsciously deliberate happening in animals, doesn't mean we should necessary say, "OK, abortion!" We may decide for other reasons to accept a right to abortion in at least some cases, but it neither logically nor ethically follows that we should do so based on those biological facts.

And that is how philosophy works in the real world.

And, without revealing conversational details? Anyone who thinks any of this is "shallow"? I'm sorry, but I'll respectfully say that that's your problem, not mine, whichever "side" you come from.

And, with that, and since we're talking about philosophy on a complex issue (about which I only covered a portion — I didn't claim to be writing an encyclopedia — I simply covered the biology and ethics of the issue, not the availability of abortion providers, insurance or other coverage of costs, or many other issues), let's go to a favorite quote from another philosopher, Idries Shah:

“To 'see both sides' of a problem is the surest way to prevent its complete solution. Because there are always more than two sides.”

That's VERY true on this issue.

That's one big reason I don't write more about it. The fact that it has encyclopedic permutations, philosophically, legally, politically and otherwise is another reason, and a related one.

It's also why I get firmer in looking for the third or fourth side of it as I get older. 

And, on "both" sides of the argument as usually presented, this is also, in my opinion, very much a typical American issue. Black-and-white. Polarities. And, yes, one can find nuances both emotions and thoughts.

Otherwise, I just ask for logical and empirical honesty.

That said, I'll give you one more of mine.

I"ve long felt that Roe, while rightly decided on the result, was wrongly decided on the grounds. It should have been placed under the Ninth Amendment and the court should have used the opportunity to find a right to privacy as one of the amendment's unenumerated rights. Justice Goldberg, in the related Griswold case, and the district court in Roe, both went that way. Rightly, in my opinion.