A rescuer looks on as hundreds of emergency workers and medics are sent to rescue the surviving workers after a blast in a mine in Shizong county, southwest China's Yunan province, on November 10, 2011. At least 20 workers were killed and another 23 were trapped underground during the mine accident, state media said, in the latest disaster to hit the country's vast mining industry. By STR/AFP/Getty Images.
Ezra Klein feels that Huntsman "has offered the Republican Party a generic conservative platform minus the partisan swagger":
What [the GOP race] doesn’t have is someone saying, “of course I would accept a deal that cut $10 in spending for every $1 in tax increases. Are you kidding me?” What it doesn’t have is someone noting that Senate Republicans introduced the first bill to cut carbon emissions through a cap-and-trade program, John McCain and Sarah Palin had such a plan in their 2008 platform, and it would be irresponsible for the Republican Party to walk away from that position. What it doesn’t have is someone saying, “you know, the deficit is such a big problem that I would be willing to sign the Simpson-Bowles recommendations, or something close to them, into law.”
Amen. There was an opening here for a breakthrough candidacy. But cowardice killed it.
"We need to stop the daintiness and describe the alleged offenses for what they truly are in the vernacular to somehow try to capture the monstrousness. Not anal intercourse or oral sex, which sounds clinical, but butt-fucking and blowjobs and cock-grabbing and pants-groping and other assorted acts that the 67-year-old Sandusky allegedly inflicted on eight minor victims over a 15-year span, according to the 23-page grand-jury report, and resulted in 40 counts of serial sex abuse of minors," – Buzz Bissinger in a must-read.
I might add that using the term "impropriety" to describe what was at issue in legal settlements regarding Herman Cain is also a cop-out. He is charged with sexual abuse of power and sexual assault. And his indifference to these charges springs from the same sense of privileged entitlement that marks the despicable leadership of Penn State's football team.
(Photo: Local artist Michael Pilato paints over former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky that was in his 'Inspiration' Hiester Street mural on November 9, 2011 in University Park, Pennsylvania. Sandusky was replaced with a chair and blue ribbon. The painting contains notable figures of State College. By Patrick Smith/Getty Images)
Some saw this coming. From a column by Mark Madden last April:
Did Penn State not make an issue of Sandusky’s alleged behavior in 1998 in exchange for him walking away from the program at an age premature for most coaches? Did Penn State’s considerable influence help get Sandusky off the hook? Don’t kid yourself. That could happen. Don’t underestimate the power of Paterno and Penn State in central Pennsylvania when it comes to politicians, the police and the media.
Sounds like the Vatican, doesn’t it? There’s more:
Initially accused in 1998. Retires in 1999. Never coaches college football again. Sandusky was very successful at what he did. The architect of Linebacker U. Helped win national championships in 1982 and 1986. Recognized as college football’s top assistant in 1986 and 1999.
Never any stories about Sandusky being pursued for a high-profile job. Never any rumors about him coming out of retirement. But there’s no shortage of stories and rumors about Penn State football sweeping problems under the rug, is there?
Why did college football let an accomplished coach like Sandusky walk away at 55? Why did he disappear into relative anonymity?
Plenty of rumors? It is beginning to look as if many, many people in that community were prepared to allow a child rapist continue his assaults on innocent children because of the cult of a coach.
Brad Plumer is relatively optimistic about solar's future. Tyler Cowen less so. Robin Hanson expects change to occur at a snails pace even as solar gets cheaper:
When solar is cheaper than coal or oil, that will include the cost of supporting infrastructure, such as building power plants. But since we’ll still have lots of old plants and infrastructure, we’ll still use a lot of carbon. And since places vary in the relative attractiveness of using carbon or solar power, we may even build more carbon plants after that point.
The US claims several Arab countries are – on the belief that Assad is finished – offering him asylum in exchange for stepping down, while the Syrian National Council, an exile opposition leadership group, calls for a general strike. Meanwhile, Assad killed "at least" 26 of his own [NYT], a majority of them in Homs and Damascus. Here's a map detailing the different zones of protest in Homs. A video from yesterday of loyalists firing on Damascus protestors:
But, as this extraordinary video from Daraa makes clear, even live fire doesn't always break up the protestors:
What they're standing up to:
And citizens of Hama are waving the flags of Libya, Yemen, and Tunisia during their demonstration:
A reader writes:
Did your first cited reader read Jacobsen's entire account of the meeting? 14 years after the alleged assault in the car, Bialek went up to Cain in a public place surrounded by people and reminded him who she was. Though Jacobsen could not hear Bialek's conversation, nothing implies "speaking closely in his ear." The embrace was described thus: "briefly", "more like she put her arms around him", "boxed him out." Jacobsen also says "there was a smile, and then things got tense," and that Cain was "stone-faced."
Does that sound warm or affectionate? I'm no basketball fan, but even I know that boxing someone out isn't a warm cuddly snuggle, but a tactical move.
And look, I can't speak for every woman out there, but judging by the number of times men I've just met attempt to hug me at work and by their evident surprise when I step away, men hug women socially as some kind of gendered substitute for a business-friendly handshake all the goddamn time. I shouldn't have to say this, but I will: I am neither particularly attractive nor outgoing, and in no case do I initiate co-worker hugs (except when attending one's wedding recently.) There is nothing cute or physically inviting about me: I am not "asking for it" by "the way I dress." I have actively offended men by refusing to be in their arms, even superficially, even momentarily. I work in an industry that wanders between blue- and white-collar. The whiter the collar, the more superficial the hug (though no less unwelcome). Anyone who's ever experienced the discomfort of a business handshake held too long knows the difference between social custom and intimacy. I reject the social custom mainly because of the occasional man who oversteps, since an overly warm hug by a stranger is far creepier than an awkward handshake, and frankly because I resent the custom. But I know the difference.
Tarring Bialek's account based on this "embrace" seems to rely heavily on ignorance of social hugging, as well as on cherry-picking Jacobsen's account.
Another writes:
"You know I have a boyfriend?" This is a standard response by women being "approached" by men who they feel view them as chattel. It's at the level of instinct. Sorry, other reader, if it's not P.C.
Another expands on that point:
I have to write to push back against the reader who wrote about Bialek's response to Cain that she had a boyfriend. In my experience as a woman, this is a very common response to an unwanted advance. It is a way to let that person know that you are unavailable or can be used as a gentle way to let a guy down. It is also a way to deflect the advance without "causing trouble." I say causing trouble, because some people do not take no for answer or they at least do not take it well.
Imagine you are a woman alone with a man who you thought you could trust (especially one who you consider powerful) and he puts his hand up your skirt. You may want to run, scream, even slap him. But he has now shown you that you don't really know the kind of person he is. If you slap him or scream, he could get violent. So, you try to end the incident without increasing the level of risk.
Some readers may think this would require too much thought in the moment, but for many women this response is instinctual. Many of us operate differently in our day to day lives than men do, because we are aware that we are at risk. This doesn't mean we live our lives in fear, but we may choose different jogging routes, we may listen for footsteps behind us, we may be more aware of the way someone is looking at us. Our culture and our personal experiences have taught us ways of trying to manage uncomfortable and potentially dangerous situations. Telling a guy you have a boyfriend is a really basic reaction/strategy.
I have no way of knowing if this woman is telling the truth, but I do not think that this is a "tell" that she is lying.
Another casts more doubt:
You say you find Bialek credible because Jacobson backs up her story. She does not. Jacobson states that she witnessed Bialek interacting with Cain BEFORE he spoke at the Schaumberg event. Bialek states that she met with Cain AFTER he spoke. They can't both be right.
Furthermore, Jacobson's story has changed over time. Initially she described that they hugged like old friends and talked for about two minutes. Later she stated that the meeting was "tense". Two days ago Jacobson said, "They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends." Yesterday:
Jacobson said Bialek "bum rushed" her to get to Cain while backstage at the event. That led to what she described as an intense encounter that you could "cut with a knife." She said Bialek had Cain’s ear for two to three minutes, and after it was over, Bialek "stormed" off. That has led Jacobsen to conclude that Bialek was, in fact, confronting Cain about the alleged encounter.
So two days ago, according to Jacobson, they were best of friends. Now yesterday, after hearing Bialek dispute her account, suddenly it's a tense encounter you could cut with a knife? She's not describing the same incident. Neither one of the women can get their stories straight.
Animals are jerks:
(Hat tip: Donna D)
A reader writes:
As a Pennsylvanian, as a Penn State fan, and as a survivor, I feel strongly compelled to provide some perspective here. What's happening at Penn State is a tragedy of epic proportions. The community is really struggling to reconcile the horror of the actions and inactions with a coach, a program, and a university that have done so much for so many players, students, and communities literally for generations now. As Shakespeare wrote at the end of Romeo and Juliet, "All are punished."
Those who cheer Joe's immediate departure as well as those who insist that he stay are BOTH off key. Given Joe's admission that this is the tragedy of his life, and that he wishes he had done more, the Board of Trustees had no choice but to let him go immediately. But to cast extreme judgment on him and the Penn State community at this very particular, very hurtful, and very confusing moment in time is to be blind to who he has been and what he has done over the past 60+ years. And it's also to be callous to a glorious community about which you apparently know very little, and most importantly, to the victims of Sandusky and all victims, everywhere.
There are countless, non-cultish reasons why Joe Paterno and Penn State are so revered. From his insistence on academic excellence, to a squeaky clean record in terms of abindance to the rules in an era when they are regularly bent and broken, to his investment in his players rather than an exploitation of them, to the millions of ways he has given back to the community, to his loyalty to what was once a sleepy agricultural school to what is now one of the premier universities in the country (which also happens to have the largest alumni membership in the world), Joe Paterno has demonstrated and personified what it is to do things the right way AND win while doing it. If there aren't already, there will be books written about Joe and the fundamental goodness of the Penn State community that he helped build. Joe's example has been without match, which is why this epic mistake is so pointed and devastating to anyone who's ever been impacted by him.
As for the reaction of the students, they are kids – give them time and space to sort through this and process what has happened. If you've never been disappointed by anyone you've ever held in the utmost of esteem, you might not understand. But if you have, try to remember the confusion, disappointment, and compassion you likely felt all at once in that moment of time.
Finally, one thing is for certain, and you can trust me on this: hysteria and self-righteous proclamations from any side in instances like this do NOTHING for the victims. Nothing. They only make it worse. They pick at wounds, and they stunt the healing process that survivors need. Yes – survivors want justice for their perpetrators and greater awareness of a problem that is everywhere. But more than anything, we want calm, compassion, and healing. For everyone. Even the perp and those who could have done more. It's the only way that we as survivors, or as a family, or as a community, can move on positively and constructively.
So if you want to actually do something constructive about this rather than disparage a grieving and confused community as cultists and immoral neanderthals, you can encourage everyone to wear blue – the color of child abuse awareness – this Saturday. It's a start…
Dan Amira doesn’t expect the media blitz to pay off:
[G]ood will can only get you so far. This was far from the first time Perry has demonstrated his less-than-impressive communicative abilities. In fact, the man seems nearly incapable of speaking off-the-cuff with precision and clarity. (Rote cliches that have absolutely nothing to do with the question being asked don’t count.) That doesn’t necessarily mean he’d be a bad president, but it does mean he’d probably be a bad presidential nominee. After last night, everyone knows it, and all the humility in the world can’t change that.
The Dish 