WHAT A GAME!

As the bad calls piled on the U.S. football team, they never gave up, never stopped believing in themselves, never stopped believing that the game isn’t over until the final whistle blows from the referee. The United States played its best game of the competition against a tough, defensively well organized Algerian team, that was content to counterpunch.

From the start, the United States pushed forward, putting the ball on the ground, opening up the game in the flanks, especially right flank with Cherundolo, playing possession ball and showing the tactical discipline necessary to break down the Algerian defense. The chances came, but the finishing touch kept eluding the players in a nerve-wracking game. The British announcer said redundantly that you could “feel the tension” and recalled a Rolling Stones song, “19th Nervous Breakdown.”



The U.S. team is progressing by leaps and bounds and should play even better in its first round of 16 match, possibly against Germany or Ghana, possibly Serbia or the Aussies. At this point the U.S. doesn’t care: bring ‘em on! Among the notable performances, the defense as a whole was solid. Carlos Bocanegra and Jay DeMerit are two outstanding central defenders who command their territory with physicality and confident touch. DeMerit is emerging as a real “sheriff” in the back line, owning the air game and winning his 50-50 challenges. In the match with England, DeMerit won the duel with British star Wayne Rooney, consolidating his starting role on the team.

Setting aside the obvious standouts -- playmaker Landon Donovan and Clint Dempsey’s plucky opportunism -- Michael Bradley, the coach’s son, is team MVP. The team’s engine, Bradley is the midfield link from defense to offense, through which the U.S. transition game passes. His tireless work, running the length of the pitch and organizing the attack was key to the U.S.’s time of possession and ultimate victory. Up front, Jozy Altidore, the talented 20 year-old striker is the team’s post-up reference in the air and power speed on the ground, counterattacking with danger behind the back of the defense. Finally, Landon Donovan has grown into his role as the team’s go-to guy, its best player and playmaker. This could be his Cup to make a lasting imprint.



It didn’t come easy, but in the last analysis this was no fluke, no “miracle.” From the start the United States was clearly the superior team and unlike, e.g., the French and British, played through adversity and bad referee calls to be rewarded with a first place group finish for the first time since 1930. It just goes to show that hard work, the team’s belief in themselves, and a never-say-die attitude pays off in the end. That’s what separates the winners from losers in any sport.

This was the headline from Brasil’s newspaper, O Globo. Perfect.

Fade Away Time for the General as Rolling Stone Gathers no Moss

The beltway types are all abuzz over the showdown between President Obama and General McChrystal tomorrow concerning statements attributed to the General in a controversial Rolling Stone article, “The Runaway General.” First, kudos to Rolling Stone for showing up and showing that relevant media isn’t dead in this country. The Gray Lady and Washington Post are reduced to reporting about Rolling Stone’s scoop; delicious irony for Jan Wenner who started his anti-establishment rock music magazine with a $7,500 loan from family and friends and a mailing list stolen from a local radio station.

Notably, this is just the latest in a series of hard-hitting articles by Rolling Stone, from Matt Taibbi’s fine reporting lifting the rock on the financial bailout, to BP’s malfeasance. This is Pulitzer territory for Rolling Stone, and I hope they get it. At the very least, Rolling Stone deserves our unofficial Hunter S. Thompson Fear and Loathing in Reporting Award.

To the question at hand: General McChrystal and his staff have not only exercised poor judgment, but worse, behaved with demonstrable insubordination. Whether or not this is an isolated incident within the officer ranks by a “runaway general” or a generalized culture of disdain in the military for President Obama’s leadership, it should be nipped in the bud. General McChrystal’s meeting with the President should be simply a formality to give him the courtesy of offering his resignation rather than be fired outright. Period.

And to those Chicken Little Republicans who will predictably yell and scream that replacing the General would throw Af-Pak policy into disarray, cause dissension in the ranks, etc. –- the usual partisan political sniping masquerading as deep concern over military policy –- civilian authority firing generals is hardly unprecedented. The most famous of these incidents was President Truman’s dismissal of General Douglas McArthur over a military policy dispute at a critical juncture of the Korean War.

General McArthur was, without a doubt, the most accomplished field commander of his time. But he was not irreplaceable. Nor did his “prima donna” ways or failure to salute the President sit well with Harry Truman, who was never impressed with McArthur’s pomposity: “I was ready to kick him into the North China Sea, I was never so put out in my life,” said President Truman. He canned General McArthur and never looked back. Likewise, President Obama should fire General McChrystal in the interest of maintaining intact the civilian chain of command and affirming the commander in chief’s authority.

The Cup Runneth Over

French Team Storms the Bastille –- In the latest development in a week of Cup craziness, the French team refused to train (not itself out of character) after a “dispute” on the field, one day after a player was sent home early for insulting the coach. France team Director Jean-Louis Valentin has resigned leaving his rebellious team leaderless in what seems to be a complete breakdown of authority, with multiple resignations. The French were battling bad Karma ever since their qualifying hand ball scandal by star striker Thierry Henry sent the team to the Cup, as Ireland was unjustly DQ’d.

Commenting on the European sides’ early troubles, the NYT summed it up perfectly: “The Italians can’t win, the English can’t score and now the French won’t even take the field.”

And Then There Were Two (Atrocious Referee Calls) -- Nothing like a bad call to fire up U.S. interest in football … Someone wrote that Koman Coulibaly, the referee who disallowed a good U.S. goal against Slovenia, is probably the only Malian Americans ever heard of. It’s not a name that rolls off the tongue. But most everyone knows of Coulibaly as the generic referee who made that awful call, dashing the American team’s storybook comeback and complicating its passage to the knockout round of 16. How can a guy whose nickname is “sleepy eyes” ever be picked to referee a crucial World Cup match? He may have been born on the Fourth of July but his middle name is Benedict Arnold.

It happened again, in Brasil’s match against the Ivory Coast. (Or Cote D’Ivoire, as they prefer to be called –- I’ll stick with Teabaggers … oops, wrong buffoonish rabble.) Despite a world-class striker in Drogba, the Ivory Coasters are definitely not ready for primetime. As the game progressed, the outclassed Coasters became increasingly frustrated with Brasil and started hitting maliciously.

First it was Elano. After scoring his goal, he took a hard open-cleat hit to the shin, knocking him out of the game. Then it was Lúcio’s turn to be stepped on. And so on. In neither case did the French referee offer a yellow card to tamp down the dirty play. As the game wound down, Kaká got into a shoving match with a Coaster. Yellow card. Then, he wasn’t even looking when a Coaster deliberately collided with Kaká’s back and fell to the ground in a pathetic acting job bought by the French referee. So Kaká got a second yellow and was red carded. Absolutely ridiculous refereeing.

Beautiful Vixen Blamed for Spain’s Loss –- Since it is one of the favorites to win the Cup, naturally Spanish fans were casting about for someone to blame for Spain’s shocking defeat to Switzerland. They settled on goalkeeper Iker Casilla’s beautiful girlfriend accusing her of “distracting” Casillas with her legitimate presence on the sidelines as a reporter. She’s fortunate the days of the Spanish Inquisiton are past, otherwise ... Will girlfriend reporter be at her post when Spain squares off against Honduras in a must-win? Stay tuned.

Abstinence = 0 Goals -- Meanwhile, the English Team has shot blanks through two games, as their coach enforces his no-sex policy with the help of closed-circuit TV. Argentina and Brasil have no such restrictions, and won their first two games by comfortable margins. So much for abstinence.

“Kimmy, What’s the Frequency?” –- After the North Koreans’ historic 7-0 drubbing by Portugal, it seems Dear Leader Kim Jong-Il’s secret psychic communiqués to his team haven’t produced the desired results. Hope the hapless PRK players won’t get sent off to reeducation camp or ten years hard labor upon their early return to Kimmy’s socialist paradise. The guy who cried during the playing of their anthem might get leniency points for good behavior (acting).

Gotta love the Cup!

Shakedown and Shakeup!

First, there was the White House “shakedown” of BP in the best Harry Truman tradition. And to alleviate this toxic British invasion of our shores, enjoy the shakedown song with a little twisting and shouting in the wind thrown in for good measure:



Next came the BP shakeup, followed by a yatching romp around the Isle of Wight. Tony Hayward might have felt entitled after a Republican member of Congress got down on his knees and licked his shoes. Republicans and conservatives can’t help it; they LOVE corporations. They’re really tight with Big Oil. They HATE government. As long as progressives are critical of government’s response to a catastrophe such as the BP Gulf oil volcanic eruption, they are delighted to piggyback on our criticism, if it’s DESTRUCTIVE of government. The moment government does something RIGHT for the victims of this catastrophe, the moment government demonstrates its assertiveness and relevance on behalf of the “small people” -- the Gulf state residents it represents -- Republicans and conservatives GO BALLISTIC.

In short, they show their TRUE COLORS.

Rachel Maddow breaks it all down, dissecting the relationship beween the GOP (Gulf Of Petroleum) and Big Oil:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Taking a page from Harry Truman and JFK versus the steel magnates, Mr. Obama summoned BP Chairman of the Board Carl Henric-Svanberg and CEO Tony Hayward to the White House for (at last!) a Give ‘Em Hell Harry moment. The President read them the Riot Act and told them how it was going to be. They caved on every point. BP’s interest is staving off more dangerous legal challenges to its existence and stock value, including bankruptcy, and as President Obama said, to “remain a viable company.” Significantly, the $20 billion escrow account is not a cap but a floor.

Republicans and the ultra right wing can characterize it as a “Chicago-style shakedown” all they want, but if Harry Truman was in President Obama’s shoes he’d be comfortable with the fit. (And Truman knows from shoes!) He would own the criticism, though he might call it instead a “Missouri shakedown.” As Truman told his staff before taking control of the steel mills, “the President has the power to keep the country from going to hell.”

So when Republicans start bitching that the President is “setting a bad precedent” by negotiating this escrow account, the reverse is actually true. It’s BP and corporate Big Oil government that are distorting our constitutional government “of, for, and by the people”-- not to speak of our national sovereignty. The precedent for President Obama’s executive action exists in the actions taken by his predecessors JFK, Harry Truman, and FDR, among others.

Despite his qualifier, Joe Barton (a former, and current, BP employee) did not go rogue on his GOP colleagues. The day before his stunning public apology to Tony Hayward, the Republican Study Committee accused the White House of “a Chicago-style shakedown” in negotiating the the $20 billion escrow account to compensate victims of BP’s criminal negligence. The only difference is those wingnuts defended BP behind closed doors, while Barton slavishly worshipped his corporate owner before the American people. He forced his leadership’s hand, as a peeved John Boehner threatened to strip Barton’s ranking member status unless he retracted his statement -- or “misconstrued” his “misconstruction” else he be misconscrewed.

Nice to see Republicans twisting themselves into New York pretzels trying unsuccessfully not to appear to kiss corporate ass in front of the voters. The fact is, the party is largely indistinguishable from the Teabaggers, despite admonitions from astroturf Freedomworks supreme leader Dick Armey for Teabagger candidates to avoid using the label “Tea Party.” Good luck tamping down your dirty little secret, Dickie. It should go over as realistically as your “Death in Venice” painted hair. Enquiring minds want to know: Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Tea Party.

The Parochial School Boys Agree!

At last there is something MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and lunatic fringe wingnut Glenn Beck agree on: hatred of the World Cup, football specifically -- they call it “soccer” (whatever that means). Here’s Beck’s rant against the World Cup (he also disses baseball, probably because too many Latinos and Asians play the game):



Keith’s riposte: “And now to discuss Glenn Beck versus the world at large over soccer … Beck, of course, being right, not only does the world tells us we must love soccer, but it tells us we’re too stupid to understand this game in which almost nothing happens, which the referee keeps how much time there’s left a secret. And by the way, vuvuzelas were on sale at Yankee Stadium in 1967, they stole it from us, ladies and gentlemen, here is soccer apologist Rachel Maddow!”

To Glenn Beck I say, beware of the One World conspiracy. The New World Order is coming for you, Beckster. The invading World Cup hordes are plotting your destruction in South Africa, as we speak.

Keith, there’s plenty of action going on, only you’re too stupid, or stubborn, to understand it. Imagine a Martian alighting on a baseball game while Nolan Ryan is striking out the side. What would the alien think of those static people standing in the outfield, arms crossed, picking their fingernails or noses, as one guy on the mound does all the work, tossing a little ball to a masked man past guys who walk up to the plate with a piece of lumber, whiff the air with it three times and walk back to their bunker. Meanwhile, another masked man clad in black yells and makes strange hand signals (which have no apparent connection to the signals from those other guys on the sidelines).

FYI, Keith, nearing the conclusion of the 90 minutes of play, a sideline official with FIFA clearly stamped on his back holds up a large digital board with 3’ or 4’ or however many extra injury and stoppage time minutes the referee has added to the game. The ref communicates this to sideline officials through the magic of that little transmitter device and microphone clipped to one ear. Stoppage time is shown next to regulation time on any TV broadcast football game and some (not all) stadium scoreboards.

And Keith, the vuvuzelas were actually introduced by a Mets plant in Yankee Stadium. It came from a pro-Apartheid Afrikaner who said vuvuzelas were used as instruments of torture.

GOP Stands for GULF OF (BRITISH) PETROLEUM

JOE BARTON KNEELS BEFORE BP:
It didn’t take long. The American people, and even some Republicans are appalled and ashamed at the spectacle of a United States Congressman bowing before BP CEO Tony Hayward and apologizing to Big Oil for what he termed a “shakedown” from the White House and a “slush fund” for the victims of this outlaw corporation. Even Tony Hayward conceded it was not a “slush fund.” Barton, Limbaugh, and the oil patch Republicans hate that President Obama did an end-run around their block of raising the $75 million liability law to $10 billion, and got twice the amount out of BP to boot (on the neck of BP).

Barton’s panicked Caucus forced him to retract his statement (sort of), but not before fellow Republican Joe Miller of Florida calls for him to step down as Ranking Member on the Energy Committee. Barton sounds petulant and envious, as if he’s being cut out of the action. This is a badly-needed escrow fund independently administered by the same person who disbursed the 9/11 victims fund -- Ken Feinberg, of unimpeachable integrity. Here’s Barton whoring for Big Oil money:

“I'm only speaking for myself. I'm not speaking for anyone else, but I apologize. [GET OUT YOUR BARF BAGS] I do not want to live in a county where anytime a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, [it is] subject to some sort of political pressure that, again, in my words, amounts to a shakedown.” [KACHING-KACHING = $1.4 million from the oil and gas industry, including $27,350 from BP.]

Senator Byron Dorgan, Democrat of South Dakota said: “He ought to apologize to the American people. That wasn’t a shakedown, it’s exactly what our government should be saying to BP.”

BP LAUNCHES NEW PR CAMPAIGN AFTER "APOLOGY" FAUX PAS

BP Chairman of the Board Carl-Henric Svanberg caused a furor with his fake apology: “I hear comments sometimes that large oil companies are greedy companies or don't care. But that is not the case indeed. We care about the small people.”

“Purely a translation matter,” said a flustered BP spokesman. “In Swedish ‘small people’ is ‘MUNCHKIN’.” Later, Svanberg apologized for his fake apology: “I spoke clumsily this afternoon, and for that, I am very sorry. I meant to say munchkin, of course. President Obama and I care very much for the munchkins.”

President's Arm-Twisting Gets Results for Gulf Residents

Credit where credit is due. President Obama got a big win today and went a long way toward ameliorating the economic plight of the Gulf state residents ravaged by BP. The government will make BP pay, and he put their money where their mouth is:

1. The escrow fund set aside is for $20 billion initially (not a cap), administered by Ken Feinberg, who has done an outstanding job running the compensation fund for 9/11 victims. It should be noted that the $20 billion is twice the amount of the liability cap raise legislation, from $75 million to $10 billion that all Republicans opposed, including Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Jim Inhofe of of Oklahoma, both of whom are in the pockets of Big Oil and foes of the environment;
2. President Obama further insisted that BP set aside $100 million to compensate deepwater rig workers who may be temporarily unemployed by the 6-month moratorium placed on deep water drilling until the investigation of this disaster and new, tougher regulations to prevent its recurrence are in place; and
3. The President extracted a commitment from BP to monitor the health effects on cleanup workers and the corporation voluntarily agreed to suspend its dividend payments.

This is huge and a big win for the President on the claims processing fund. Republicans in the affected states were quick to give him credit, but those straddling the right wing fringe of anti-Obama discontent continue to play politics with the crisis. Wingnut Michelle Bachmann said:

“If I was the head of BP, I would let the signal get out there -– ‘We're not going to be chumps, and we're not going to be fleeced.’ And they shouldn't be. They shouldn't have to be fleeced and make chumps to have to pay for perpetual unemployment and all the rest -- they've got to be legitimate claims. The other thing we have to remember is that Obama loves to make evil whatever company it is that he wants to get more power from. He makes them evil, and what we've got to ask ourselves is: Do we really want to be paying $9 for a gallon of gas? Because that could be the final result of this.”

Keep talking, you crazy demagogic witch. One thing the President is not, is an anti-corporate populist out to turn them into ‘evildoers.’ Just ask progressives, Michelle. Keep defending BP and you'll find an ally in the President. He said BP is a viable company and will remain so. He has no interest in seeing the company go into bankruptcy; but he's made clear he is on the side of the Gulf oil residents whose livelihoods are threatened. That's where he parts company with Big Oil Republicans.

Now it's on to the cleanup, and several issues have arisen there. Hopefully the mobilization of resources will proceed at a better and more efficient pace. The impact on wildlife is heartbreaking. But this is no Katrina, even though rightard Republicans will try to make it so. As they line up to defend BP and Big Oil they will become increasingly marginalized by the American people.

Talk About Condescending Arrogance, BP Chairman: "We Care About the Small People"

Unbelievable, how tone-deaf this insulting foreign imperial bastard is! BP Chairman Carl Henric Svanberg said, on leaving the White House meeting:

“We care about the SMALL PEOPLE.”

Someone please tell me: How do you say M*R in Swedish! This Swedish M*R better pay EVERY LAST CENT BP OWES THE “SMALL PEOPLE” it is destroying. EVERY. LAST. CENT.

Day 58: We Needed a Populist And got an Elitist

President Obama’s first Oval Office address to the nation was disappointing on so many levels that one has to wonder, again, if he gets it at all, even after all those trips to the region. This is an address that was given for the benefit of regional Republican oil patch governors tittering about the economic impact to their states, claimants whose livelihoods are being decimated by BP, and BP itself. So much so that BP issued a statement associating itself with the President’s remarks:

“We share the President's goal of shutting off the well as quickly as possible, cleaning up the oil and mitigating the impact on the people and environment of the Gulf Coast. We look forward to meeting with President Obama tomorrow for a constructive discussion about how best to achieve these mutual goals.”

That’s what the Brits would sarcastically call “a vote of confidence” from the skunk who crashed the garden party. Where are the specifics of the government’s response? Here are some curios in the President’s report:

• “Tomorrow (today), I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company's recklessness. And this fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent, third party.”

Sounds good, right? But on closer inspection, the President sounds less the commander in chief than a supplicant chief attorney (not to be confused with Attorney General Eric Holder, who has made himself scarce since announcing an investigation of BP). Mr. Obama mentions the loaded, and loathed, legalism -- “legitimate” -- that is the albatross around the neck of every single BP utterance as to its liability. Then, in a lawyerly balancing act, the President uses another legal term --“recklessness”— to characterize BP’s actions in the totality of its response. Significantly, he does not call it criminal behavior, which probably accounts for BP’s chummy (relieved?) reply to the speech.

There is a sense that these carefully crafted words mask an agreement reached with BP a priori of the President’s meeting with its chairman of the board. Hardly a Trumanesque or Rooseveltian response to an outlaw corporation. President Obama’s rhetoric is far removed from Franklin Roosevelt’s crie de guerre against concentrated corporate power: “They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob. … They are unanimous in their hate for me, and I welcome their hatred.”

The President’s speech didn’t quite measure up to FDR and Harry Truman (who summoned steel industrialists to the White House and read them the Riot Act). At best, it was a Clintonesque triangulation of the government-corporate partnership with a mild wrist-slap. The President, it seems, would rather convince corporate CEOs of the advantages of cooperation and compromise on the big issues, such as healthcare and financial reform, in ways that are advantageous to them rather than assume a confrontational populist posture a la Harry Truman.

This would explain President Obama’s curiously anti-progressive behavior, his much too easy concessions to corporations, e.g., ditching the public option; the backroom deals with Big Pharma and other industry sectors; and the White House’s arrogant public dissing of labor unions and netroots progressives for their sacrilegious support of Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter against corporate Democrat Blanche Lincoln. Interestingly, Big Dog Bubba Clinton made a lusty, Palin-like libidinous pitch on Lincoln’s behalf –- with an extra-long, extra-tight hug –- propelling blushing Blanche over the top.

• “I have authorized the deployment of over 17,000 National Guard members along the coast. These servicemen and women are ready to help stop the oil from coming ashore, clean beaches, train response workers, or even help with processing claims –- and I urge the governors in the affected states to activate these troops as soon as possible.”

It’s day 58, Mr. President. Those of us on the outside looking in have been pleading from the very beginning for a more robust, muscular response to this disaster that involves our military. Weeks ago, Florida Senator Bill Nelson asked for military involvement in a letter to you. Why is the National Guard only now being deployed?

• “In the coming days and weeks, these efforts should capture up to 90% of the oil leaking out of the well. This is until the company finishes drilling a relief well later in the summer that is expected to stop the leak completely.”

Really? Based on whose estimate? Because if it comes from BP it’s worth less than a barrel of crude. This is the corporation that has consistently and brazenly lied about the amount of oil spilled, its cleanup, the extent of the damage to the Gulf, and claimed falsely that its latest oil capping attempt would slow the volcanic eruption of oil to a “a trickle.”

• “From the very beginning of this crisis, the federal government has been in charge of the largest environmental cleanup effort in our nation's history.”

Not good enough, Mr. President, not by a long shot. As RFK used to say, “we can do better,” and we must. For starters, our national interest is not aligned with the interests of BP or any profit-making entity, nor should it ever be. Secondly, the effort must match the enormity of the crisis; simply being the “largest” effort in our history when it amounts to plugging holes in a dike sounds like CYA.

• “Now, a mobilization of this speed and magnitude will never be perfect, and new challenges will always arise. I saw and heard evidence of that during this trip. So if something isn't working, we want to hear about it. If there are problems in the operation, we will fix them.”

Okay, Mr. President. Here is the short list (not counting the compensation and claims issues that the escrow fund -- if BP agrees to it -- is supposed to fix):

1. Serious health problems with cleanup workers that amounts to chemical poisoning. BP has not provided necessary protective equipment because the optics of hazmat suits looks bad for the corporate image. The syndrome now has a name -- “Toxicant-Induced Loss of Tolerance”-- and is far more widespread than reported cases, because workers need the BP temporary cleanup jobs to feed their families;
2. The latest offer, from Sweden, to deploy tankers with the capacity to skim millions of gallons off the surface of the ocean, a proven technology, has been rebuffed. The official explanation for not using this technology is that the oil is too dispersed; how can that be if the slicks can be seen from space? Where are the resources from other countries, as well as other oil companies -- tankers, skimmers, etc. -- that are not funnelled through BP? I suspect the reason is economic, and is linked to liability -- out of sight, out of mind -- for BP; the same reason that motivates this criminal entity to cover up the results of its crime (dead animal carcasses) in the middle of the night, and forbid media access to blighted areas that are not sanitized of animal remains;
3. Why are ideas from private entrepreneurs shoved down the BP black hole in a bait-and-switch scam in which bogus phone banks only pretend to take contact information? Where is the government oversight and control of this and multiple other BP scams to limit its liability and protect its investors?
   

The public is still awaiting a report from the “team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation's Secretary of Energy.” Nobel awards, blue ribbon panels, and commissions are no substitutes for effective action. Dr. Chu has so far distinguished himself as the most timidly retiring U.S. government scientist responding to a major technological challenge since J. Robert Oppenheimer actually retired from government after McCarthy accused him of being a communist.

The question, Mr. President, is not one of prayer. It’s one of survival; it’s whether there will be any fleet at all of fishermen to bless next year. Hail Mary is the last resort. Rendering unto Cesar what is Caesar’s –- executive action –- is the first. The night before your speech, Touchdown Jesus was zapped by a bolt of lightning, and burned to the ground. If you believe in the power of prayer, then someone may be trying to tell you something, Mr. President. And we, the people, are way ahead of you. Time to catch up. Quickly. Your presidency depends on it.

Dedicated to Rachel Maddow and World Cup Neophytes (or Snobs) Everywhere

On Monday’s show, Rachel introduced her World Cup segment: “So traditionally, America is less psyched than the rest of the planet about the World Cup. Low-scoring games, no hands, referees in shorts. You can go ahead and ignore this year's World Cup action if you like, but you've got to know if you are ignoring it, you are missing out.”

Rachel, I understand how watching a bad football game (it is football, for the simple reason that it is played about 80 percent with the feet, as opposed to a certain blood sport for big fat guys in pads and helmets) can influence your perception of it for a long, long time. But referees in shorts?

That I don’t get. Is there a rule that says referees must wear long pants in order to be considered authority figures? One of the best aspects of real football is a firm but unobtrusive well-refereed game in which the maximum authority on the field remains practically invisible. That type of refereeing is certainly more dignified than watching guys in zebra outfits making bogus game-changing calls by throwing little yellow flags.

The “low scoring” thing is silly too, when you consider the way games are “scored” … three points for kicking an oblong ball through two poles, two points for dropping a ball through a hoop, three points for an outside shot, and so on. I’m just saying, Rachel. The first baseball game I ever saw, Rick Reuschel a.k.a “Big Daddy” was pitching (Keith knows about him). I remember looking at that portly, pot-bellied dude and thinking, “that’s an athlete”…? He sure didn’t look like this:

But then I overcame my initial impression of pitcher-as-couch potato and came to appreciate and love baseball. It’s got to be good when so many of its stars are Latino! Still, I had to figure it out by myself. I’ll bet you watched your share of thrilling 1-0 games that were far more memorable than 10-zip blowouts.

In World Cup history, as in all sports, not always the best team wins. One of those teams was Brasil’s 1982 squad. This one’s for you, Rachel. This is why it’s called the beautiful game. If you can’t appreciate the majesty of this game, as the old Brasilian song goes, you must be bad in the head, or sick in the foot: (For best results, watch in full-screen mode.):)

Pic of the Day: After U.S. Game, Brits Finally Make Their Mark in South Africa

England’s star forward Wayne Rooney (right) and teammate relieve themselves between rounds of golf after their disastrous World Cup 2010 debut against America.

Best World Cup Headline (So Far) As Brit Tabloids Feast Mercilessly on Goalkeeper: “HAND OF CLOD”

This is a clever take on Dieguito Maradona’s hand ball goal which knocked England out of the 1986 World Cup and went viral throughout the world (before the advent of YouTube, Facebook and Twitter) as “The Hand of God.” Here is today’s winning headline, followed by a pretty funny one from, believe or not, Matt Drudge:

And the video of the goal. You decide:


Poor Robert Green. The guy is taking it all in with characteristic British stoicism, knowing this is something that he’ll carry for the the rest of his life. One feels for the guy, when he says: “I’m 30, I'm a man, and you have hardships in life and prepare for them. I’m strong enough to move on. At a younger point in my life it would have affected me more.”

England’s coach has a decision to make, which is pretty straightforward but not simple: Don’t bench Green for the next game. These things happen, and benching a starter for failing on a single play, especially one that has gained such notoriety, risks burning him as a professional forever. It’s not even good for the team’s psyche. They know this better than anyone, and from their perspective benching Green is a slap on their failure to pick him up by not scoring the go-ahead goal. They had more than a half of football to do it.

So if England’s coach Fabio Capello is a man of honor and character he will not bench Robert Green. Besides, Green’s reserve David James, 39, has problems of his own: The British fans have dubbed him “Calamitous James” for precisely the same type of failure committed by Green against the United States. The News of the World described the game as “Shock ‘N’ Draw.” And the Sunday Times observed laconically that Clint Dempsey’s goal was “one disastrous spill the Yanks won’t complain about.”

Heh. Gotta love the World Cup!

Tea Farty Is a BLAST!

The latest website to mock the Teabaggers’ HOT AIR, complete with orifice-appropriate sound effects is very, very funny … Here ‘tis “retweeting the Tea Party’s hot air.”

World Rivalries, Cultural Diversity, and USA v. England, a World Cup Match With a New Complexion

Black. Paint it black. Black as night, black as coal. Black as oil.

This will not be the first time that politics has intruded upon the world’s most popular game in the world’s largest sports stage: the World Cup. Over the decades, the clash between the four great European powers –- Britain, France, Italy, and Germany –- has had an undercurrent of political and historical enmity, most of it bellicose. With the EU’s formation and globalization of football at the club level, historical rivalries have waned. At least that’s the idea behind the Euro, unless you talk to some old-timers wearing the Croix de Guerre or the DFC.

In South America, football rivalries are no less nationalistic, but with the sport as a symbol of one country’s cultural superiority over another. Mostly, it’s just a way to knock the big guy down a peg or two. Actually, it’s pretty one-sided, with the Bolivarian (Spanish-speaking) countries ganging up in their obsessive fan hatred of Brasil. (Don’t get me wrong, outside of football, the people are as friendly and cordial as can be.)

The biggest rivalry in South America is between Brasil and Argentina. It’s so fiercely competitive that after a century of confrontation on the football pitch and hundreds of games played, the number of victories and defeats among the two great continental rivals is practically even, perhaps with a slight edge to Brasil. Amazing. Just the other day at his South Africa presser, asked about the excessive smiles among his teammates, the great Argentine field general Juan Sebastián Verón mocked Brasil:

“If it’s about smiles, I don’t know that we’d go well but I think Brasil would be champions every year. (Ed – but Verón, the Cup only happens every four years!) It’s good coexistence, it’s good to be well. But once we’re on the field, we’ve got to play ball. We don’t do the samba on the field, otherwise the yellow jerseys would win every time.”

Brasilians are used to the razzing, and don’t really mind it or get angry. When los hermanos Argentinos start trash talking, Brasilians will hold up five fingers on one hand and two on the other. That’s the number of World Cups won by Brasil (five, most by any country) and Argentina (two). Brasil is the only country to win outside its own continental region; in fact Brasil has won in every regional group: the Americas, Europe, and Asia. If Brasil wins the 2010 Cup in South Africa, it will be the one nation to have won in every continent on planet Earth. Not too shabby, and definitely something to shoot for. (The Cup won’t return to Africa for at least another generation.)

Maybe Verón is frustrated because it seems to come too easy for Brasil. That’s just a surface impression, though. Brasil’s got game, lots of it, derived from its cultural African roots, born in thousands of playgrounds for poor kids who learn early in life to be creative and surmount the most difficult obstacles and conditions. They play on dirt and sandy beaches, they play on grass and hard courts. They play with makeshift balls stuffed with rags and old socks, and sometimes goal posts marked by T-shirts. They dream of defending the scarlet and black colors of Flamengo, the world’s most popular football club. And sometimes the lucky few, like American kids playing hoops on inner city courts, they make it to the Big Show.

Brasil and Argentina are two great football traditions. Brasil plays attacking football, with joy and finesse and improvisational art that brings a smile to people’s faces. Because of it Brasil has reached the pinnacle of the sport, but also has had its share of bitter defeats. 1950. 1982. Maybe it’s that devil-may-care attitude Verón touched on, the total joy of playing the game for its own sake. Take that away and Brasil is not Brasil.

Besides, what’s wrong with lots of smiles and samba? Hell, we could all use a smile these days. Argentina has a potent World Cup squad and the world’s best player in Lionel Messi. This might be their year. Or maybe the two great South American rivals will clash in the final. In which case all bets are off.

Despite its high crime rate driven by pockets of poverty, Rio de Janeiro was recently voted the world’s friendliest city. Actually, friendliness is a distinction, a saving grace, Brasilians share with Americans. Both countries are steeped in a democratic spirit that doesn’t exist in Old World democracies with royal traditions and history.

That’s part of it. The other part is the great cultural diversity in both countries, truly a source of strength, not something to be feared. A friend once told me that if anyone looked closely at the children of immigrants in America, they’d realize how silly the alarmist anti-immigrant xenophobia coursing through the body politic is. In less than a generation, no matter how they look, these children of immigrants are totally Americanized. (If there is a silver lining to such extreme attitudes, it’s that it’s not a new phenomenon in American history and politics. In the 1850s and 1860s the “Tea Party” of that turbulent era were the “Know-Nothings” whose major plank was anti-immigrant xenophobia against, at that time, the immigration of large numbers of Irish and German Catholics to this country.)

Brasil is the multicultural colossus of South America, the dominant economic power, more racially and ethnically diverse than its neighbors to the west. Brasil has a distinctly spiced culture that is less Eurocentric than African, in the arts, music, food, all of the good things in life. The European contribution, in large part, has been the white colonial social oligarchy. In South America, cultural contributions must always be viewed through the prism of colonial rule.

Even in North America, where the United States broke free of its colonial shackles in the latter half of the 18th century, asserting its hemispheric supremacy, white Europeans who clamor for their “country back” are really pining for an Old World across the pond that no longer exists. Not after the devastation and redrawn maps of Europe wrought by two world wars. If they took the time to visit New Orleans, the part of our country currently under assault by British oil barons and oligarchs, if they stayed long enough to absorb some of the culture, get a taste of creole food, listen to the lilting sounds of Zydeco in the back roads where country folks speak a form of French, maybe then they’d understand. Maybe then they’d not feel so threatened.

Because tomorrow the United States of America meets England on a green football pitch in South Africa, before thousands of fans. And because tomorrow the United States team will be, for a brief moment in time –- 90 minutes, not counting halftime and injury time --- the most popular World Cup side in the world. Not universally popular, to be sure, but silently and volubly cheered by millions (perhaps billions) of people who love this planet of ours and quietly cry for the wanton destruction a greedy British corporation has inflicted on our shores, on all of us.

It’s nothing personal. It’s not even about the United States, whose popularity waxes and wanes with the venality of its government. It’s not even about the British, a faded shadow of the days when the “sun never set” on its Empire, although Africans have suffered more, and more recently, under the yoke of European colonialism than most oppressed peoples. It is about the power of transnational corporations. America’s hands aren’t clean, but the American people do not deserve to be ravaged by the criminal deregulation of the Bush-Cheney regime.

The United States will take the field as a decided underdog against the mighty British squad. It’s almost like the 1950 World Cup in Brasil all over again. Well, almost. In what has become World Cup lore, a motley crew of working class immigrants recruited from the Italian-American Hill neighborhood of Saint Louis, MO and Irish-Americans from the Corky Row district of Fall River, MA, represented the United States and beat England -- against all odds -- in the game of their lives. To this day, that 1-0 U.S. victory is considered one of the biggest upsets in World Cup history.

Sixty years later Team USA has plenty of world-class talent, with players toughened in the best professional leagues of Europe. They may not be as star-studded as the British Team, but neither is Team USA in the least outclassed. And tomorrow they’ll be riding the positive energy of millions of football fans who love life on this planet and mourn BP’s eco-genocide of the Gulf of Mexico.

Paint it black. No colors anymore, I want them to turn black.
I see people turn their heads and quickly look away.
Maybe then I'll fade away and not have to face the facts.
It's not easy facing up when your whole world is black.
I wanna see it painted, painted, painted black.
No more will my green sea go turn a deeper blue.
I could not foresee this thing happening to you.
If I look hard enough into the setting sun.
My love will laugh with me before the morning comes.
I wanna see it painted, painted black.
Black as night, black as coal.
I wanna see the sun blotted out from the sky.
Painted, painted, painted black …

Black as OIL.

GO USA!

All the world’s a stage, said Shakespeare. Not everyone likes football, or cares who wins or loses in the World Cup. But everyone should celebrate and embrace it as a venue that brings together the rich diversity of the world’s cultures around a beautiful game, in peace and joy and the rich pageant of life.

Chicago Blackhawks Hoist Stanley Cup: Congratulations!

It's been a looong time coming ... so goes the song; not since 1961 have the Blackhawks won Hockey's most coveted trophy. It was a great championship run for Chicago, an intense and competitive series. The Stanley Cup is in good hands. Well done, lads.

Blanche Lincoln's Survival: A Harbinger of the One-Party State?

Hardball’s Chris Matthews truculently declared it a “crushing defeat” for progressives. In an election fraught with Southern-style electioneering dirty tricks, corporate Democrat Blanche Lincoln edged Lt. Governor Bill Halter in Arkansas’s Democratic Senate primary. The party establishment pulled out all the stops to defeat the labor unions in that right-to-work Wal-Mart state.

While the obtuse generational observers were still caught up in the narrow and distorted right-left analysis rather than insider (corporate) vs. outsider (middle class, anti-Wall Street, change voters), the most telling aspect of this race is that the Democratic Party was indistinguishable from the corporate enemies of the people in its unbridled support for Senator Lincoln.

The Big Dog showed he still has political juice left, President Obama made targeted robo-calls, and the proverbial White House “anonymous source” hid behind Lincoln’s skirt to knife Labor in the back. Consider the irony. The Democratic establishment and the White House aligned themselves with the pro-corporate, pro-Republican Chamber of Commerce and the so-called Americans for Job Security –- to beat back Labor and the progressive netroots movement that got President Obama elected.

The Chamber is well-known for its malignant role as a clearinghouse that siphons Big Business money to its clients in the House and Senate, e.g., Senators Lincoln and Landrieu, among many others, including just about every Republican. The AJS is a special interest business group that aired a reprehensible racist ad against Halter. AJS takes the same reactionary anti-regulation positions that resulted in the Gulf oil disaster, hammering talking points that include right wing-pregnant buzzwords: out of control legal system; duplicative and excessive regulations; government control; frivolous lawsuits.

Remarking on the influence of corporate money awash at all levels of government, particularly in the Senate and House, the Nation’s Chris Hayes (the anti-Matthews in terms of political prescience) said corporations have purchased a virtual rule by oligarchy in both chambers, particularly the Senate, which is dysfunctional. The difference in the extent to which each party is beholden to the corporations can be measured only incrementally.

In yet another silly commentary, to which he didn’t seem to devote much thought, Matthews lamented the optical illusion of a bipartisan fracture in the vacuum of 2010, as if it’s 1959 all over again and the GOP has statesmen of the caliber of a Dwight Eisenhower, Nelson Rockefeller, Everett Dirksen, and even Barry Goldwater. His argument:

“So ask why they can‘t get anything done in Washington? Start here. If you can‘t meet and talk, how are you going to find common ground? If you don‘t get the common ground, how are you going to run the country? You want one party rule? Like they have in some developing countries? That‘s what you want? Some party-central committee running the country? Go for it. You‘ll be back begging for a two-party competition so fast it will make your head spin.”

Um Chris, it seems as if that train has already left the station. Take a closer look at the Lincoln election. Review her voting record and her alliances with corporatist Republicans. See what they say and do on behalf of corporations in defiance of the expressed wishes of their constituents. Lincoln had to be rescued big-time by her party establishment against the onslaught of $5, $10, and $30 progressives along with shrinking but reenergized labor unions.

So an anonymous White House hack was resentful that we didn’t genuflect and save our money for their hand-picked candidates? Excuse me, but fuck him. This fight isn’t about “ideological purity.” Far from it. No constituencies, left or right and up or down, have been more pragmatic than the unions and progressive netroots. It’s in the nature of progressives. We’re willing to take the half-loaf, if it moves the ball forward.

But in the wake of the Gulf oil disaster and the SCOTUS Citizens United decision slashing limits on corporate campaign contributions, we’ll be damned if we allow our country to truly descend into one-party rule. This is about ethics in government, and political parties standing for more than shameless corporate shilling.

George Washington lost most of his battles to the British Tories –- the BP/Tony Haywards of the Revolutionary Era –- but won the war and the Revolution. That’s how progressives and Labor view this war against the reactionary right wing politics of corporatism. This was a shot across the Democratic Party establishment’s bow. Consider themselves warned.

In a classic example of political projection, Senator Lincoln declared “loud and clear that the vote of this senator is not for sale.” Well, it all depends which side of the fence Blanche Lincoln is on. Perhaps if she becomes a lame duck in November she’ll be free to vote her conscience. If she digs down far enough.

DAY 49 - Outside the Box Solutions to Oil Disaster Cleanup: BP, Government MIA

Rachel Maddow was on site in Louisiana Friday night, reporting on the utter devastation visited by BP on American shores and territorial waters. Rachel’s closing commentary was the best part of her hour, although there was a surreal quality to some of the cheerfulness. Rachel took unnecessary risks to bring us the “Bird Island” story, with good historical context about the buildup of the island and consequent revival of its pelican population, which is now being destroyed by BP’s eco-genocide. It could have been done remotely without any of the wooziness and “drunk” sensation Rachel reported after so many hours out in the middle of that muck. Prolonged ingestion of airborne chemicals; not a good thing.

Rachel’s no Larry King, nor Richard Engel, much less the corporate PBS Newshour. The Admiral Thad Allen interview was just okay. It could have been less deferential. As much as the Admiral’s spit-and-polish demeanor inspires confidence in a by-the-book chain of command style that allocates resources and manages the crisis response efficiently, there is a lingering unease that the government’s response is still slow to get out of the box. By the time anyone in government gets around to addressing some of the proposed alternative solutions they might not even get to first without being called out. That’s the public perception. Admiral Allen said today, without specifying, that other technological responses to the BP Gulf oil catastrophe are being evaluated.

How long will it take? This is day 49! Perception is reality and, from the public’s perspective, all that can be done to address this crisis is not being done. This disaster is one of those that you throw everything you’ve got at it. And Mr. President, sorry, but the public doesn’t really care if you have a Nobel laureate on your team. As a matter of fact, in reading your history, you’ll know that too many eggheads without a scientist in the mold of a Robert Oppenheimer who speaks their language and pushes them will devolve into endless theoretical “evaluations” that preclude action and urgency.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu (the Nobel laureate) has not stepped up as the Oppenheimer of the BP disaster response. Admiral Allen’s “in situ” techno-speak is getting real old real fast. The public wants a scientist who’s in charge of the technological and scientific aspects of the crisis and can address, with authority, the multiple out-of-the-box alternatives to this disaster, including bioremediation. Where is our Robert Oppenheimer, Mr. President? Even assuming that some alternatives might turn out to be duds, there’s unlimited imperiled coastline where they can be tested and evaluated under real, not laboratory, conditions. The following are just a few of the alternative solutions to the cleanup that have so far disappeared down the BP/government rabbit hole:

• Bioremediation –- why is the U.S. government response seemingly neglecting this option/solution? The science is solid, and LSU’s “Resources - Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill” website lists several faculty professors on hand and on-call, for the government or the media, as bioremediation experts (follow link for contact info -- In response to the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, members of the media may be interested in contacting some of LSU’s research experts for comment or analysis. If you would like assistance finding an expert to speak with, please contact Ashley K Berthelot in the LSU Office of Communications & University Relations.):
  

  -Qianxin Lin: Associate Professor, Oceanography and Coastal Sciences. Areas of Expertise: rates and effects of oil spills in coastal marshes; bioremediation, phytoremediation, in-situ burning and restoration of oil spill-impacted coastal marshes; effects and efficacy of oil dispersants.
  
  -Irving A. Mendelssohn: Professor, Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, School of the Coast and Environment. Areas of Expertise: wetland and barrier island ecology, plant ecology and stress eco-physiology, oil spill impacts and remediation in wetlands. Mendelssohn has assessed impacts of oil spills on wetlands in the U.S. and Canada and has conducted research on factors controlling oil spill impact to wetland vegetation and methods for remediating oiled wetlands, including in-situ burning, phytoremediation and bioremediation.
  
  -Ralph Portier: Professor, Environmental Sciences, School of the Coast and Environment. Areas of Expertise: Aquatic and marine toxicology; bioremediation; oil spills (including Valdez); protocol for assessing bioremediation techniques; wastewater bioremediation.
  

• Another solution proposed by private sector entrepreneurs involves freezing the oil muck as it washes ashore. This demonstration was made for CNN and, apparently, for BP as well, whose standard response is “we’ll get back to you … but don’t count on it.”

DAS CAPITAL - 21st Century BP-Style

Lyapis Trubetskoy - Capital (with English subtitles)

Lyapis Trubetskoy/Ляпис Трубецкой | MySpace Music Videos

Lyapis Trubetskoy (Russian: Ляпис Трубецкой) is a Belarusian rock band. Cool, eh.

Quotable: WMD in South Africa?

“Technology is not everything. Scientists came up with the atom bomb; it doesn’t mean we should have invented it.”

Marcus Hahnemann, reserve goalkeeper for the United States World Cup squad

Days away from the opening kick of the World Cup in South Africa, players gathered from around the world and five continents (six, if you count Australia) to reach a consensus seldom, if ever, found in the United Nations: the new World Cup ball sucks. Big time.

Hahnemann expressed his displeasure with philosophical overstatement; it’s not exactly a weapon of mass destruction, even if you’re a goalkeeper trying to parry, block and defend the adversary’s shots. Maybe that’s why he’s the reserve keeper. Tim Howard, the starter, was fatalistic: “I think we learned a long time ago as goalkeepers, it’s no excuse. You have to figure out the movement of the ball. If it moves too much, then you just get it out of harm’s way and don’t try to be too cute and clever with it. It’s about adapting.”

Goalkeepers, who obsess about taking cheap goals -- in Brasil they’re derisively labeled “chickens”-- were the ball’s biggest critics: Julio César (Brasil), Iker Casillas (Spain), Cláudio Bravo (Chile), Gianluigi Buffon (Italy), David James (England), and Fernando Muslera (Uruguay) have all blasted Adidas’ terrible orb.

Some of Brasil’s players, whose game depends on precision passing, weren’t so happy either. Robinho said whoever invented the ball “never played this game.” Wingback Michel Bastos joked that the ball had transformed him from a mere mortal shooter into Roberto Carlos, who anchored Brasil’s left wingback position the past three Cups.

Roberto Carlos’s free kick against France from 35 m (115 feet) out made him especially famous: “The ball curved so much that the ball boy 10 yards to the right ducked instinctively, thinking that the ball would hit him. Instead, it eventually curled back on target, much to the surprise of goalkeeper Fabien Barthez (a dead ringer for Donald Pleasance), who just stood in place.” If this is what Bastos meant, it should be a surprise-laden, lively Cup competition.



Striker Luís Fabiano, whose task is to score goals for Brasil, sounded like a character from Invasion of the Body Snatchers complaining about his spouse’s odd, “supernatural” behavior. An estrangement between striker and ball in such a relatively short competition with little time for recovery and adapting can have dire consequences. Only the immortal gods of the game like the greatest of them all, Pelé, reserve for themselves the luxury of painting masterpieces of goals not scored:



So the concern with the new ball is we’ll see a whole lot more of this:



The New York Times has a nice interactive feature on the evolution of the World Cup ball. It’s not just in baseball, it seems, that the ball has evolved to become “livelier” and jump off the foot as it has jumped off the bats.

Speaking of baseball, on behalf of sports fans everywhere, memo to Baseball Commissioner, Bud Selig: Give Detroit Tigers pitcher Armando Galarraga his perfect game, you Republican’t jerk! Or does he have to produce his “papers” for a perfect game earned on the field and taken away in the League Office to count?