miguelitoh2o's songs to be written tomorrow.

Don't talk to me about the efficiency of the market he cried, as he drew the automatic weapon from his waistband, and advanced on the Customer Service Department.

Is Mexico Safe?

As an American living in Mexico, I get asked about this a lot, and more often than not, I have to listen to the opinions of many Americans who've never been to Mexico, but have been spoon-fed the conventional wisdom of the MSM regarding drug cartel murders in Mexico.  In short, the reality on the ground here is so at odds with the MSM narrative of Mexico as a failed state controlled by the cartels, that narrative seems ludicrous.  That's not to say that the drug cartels aren't insanely violent, or that mutilated bodies of cartel targets don't turn up on an almost daily basis, and I don't mean to suggest that bad things don't happen to innocent travelers here, as they do as they do around the world.  Over at Adventurerider.com, there's a thread with the same title as this post which now has over 550 pages of 8000+ comments from experienced Mexico motorcycle riders.  Most of the comments are common sense tempered with experience traveling in Mexico, and every so often someone who has never been to Mexico, and has no intention of ever coming to Mexico pops onto the thread to admonish the other readers that no matter what our own experiences dictate, we are not safe traveling here, and in fact are more at risk here than just about anywhere else on the planet.  Meanwhile, I've logged over 35k miles of solo travel here, and some with my blonde girlfriend on the back of my motorcycle with nothing but good stories to tell of a friendly, happy people who will pitch in to help you at the drop of a hat when you are in need.  That narrative does not sell advertising so well as the bodies suspended from bridges or heads-in-sacks on the highway stories do however. 

 

From a Huff Post/Lonely Planet blog

What you don't get from most reports in the US [about Mexico] is statistical evidence that Americans are less likely to face violence in Mexico than at home, particularly when you zero in on Mexico's most popular travel destinations. For example, the gateway to Disney World, Orlando, saw 7.5 murders per 100,000 residents in 2010 according to the FBI; this is higher than Cancun or Puerto Vallarta, with rates of 1.83 and 5.9 respectively, per a Stanford University report (see data visualization here, summarized on this chart, page 21). Yet in March, the Texas Department of Public Safety advised against "spring break" travel anywhere in Mexico, a country the size of the UK, France, Germany, Spain and Italy combined. Never mind that popular destinations like the Bahamas, Belize and Jamaica have far higher homicide rates (36, 42 and 52 per 100,000). Why the singular focus?

1. Mexico may be more dangerous than the US overall, but not for Americans.

According to FBI crime statistics, 4.8 Americans per 100,000 were murdered in the US in 2010. The US State Department reports that 120 Americans of the 5.7 million who visited Mexico last year were murdered, which is a rate of 2.1 of 100,000 visitors. Regardless of whether they were or weren't connected to drug trafficking, which is often not clear, it's less than half the US national rate.

 

In closing, I note that It's more than interesting to see how the conventional US perception of the adjacent country to its south has been formed by a media that focuses largely on the salacious, titillating, and macabre.  That the reality of living in Mexico is so at odds with the narrative spun by the MSM, only makes me wonder, and fear, what other perceptions held by Americans captive to gathering their information from these mainstream sources are being seriously manipulated.

 

 

Read the article:  Are You Safer In Mexico Or America?

Filed under  //   MSM   US   danger   is mexico safe?  
Posted May 19, 2012

Reverse the Citizen's United SCOTUS decision

While this may not solve all of our problems, without reversing the SCOTUS decision through law we stand little chance of inculcating public policy that benefits society as a whole.  I really think this is the crux of the problem facing us in having a government that represents the people of the United States rather than the special interests of the corporations and the moneyed few.  Unless the Citizen United case is countermanded by law, I believe it will be the death knell to democracy in the United States, and every politician who either has not supported a new law prohibiting these kinds of corporate funds in American politics, or stalled such a law from passing will live in ignominy for all posterity to see, and hold in shame.  Join the people and support such an amendment to return political power to the people where it rightfully belongs.

That was my message to my political representatives when I signed the petition. Feel free to copy and paste.   At present, only 100,000 signatures have been garnered.  That number should be in the millions. 

Sign the petition:

http://pol.moveon.org/amend/?id=41692-11386970-ACjVqlx&t=2

Filed under  //   citizen's united   move to amend   petition  
Posted May 18, 2012

An Obama-appointed judge rules its indefinite detention provisions likely violate the 1st and 5th Amendments

Media_httpmediasalonc_zdguk

 

From Glen Greenwald, (This is huge, and long overdue):

A federal district judge today, the newly-appointed Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York, issued an amazing ruling: one which preliminarily enjoins enforcement of the highly controversial indefinite provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act, enacted by Congress and signed into law by President Obama last December. This afternoon’s ruling came as part of a lawsuit brought by seven dissident plaintiffs — including Chris Hedges, Dan Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Birgitta Jonsdottir — alleging that the NDAA violates ”both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as well as due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

The ruling was a sweeping victory for the plaintiffs, as it rejected each of the Obama DOJ’s three arguments: (1) because none of the plaintiffs has yet been indefinitely detained, they lack “standing” to challenge the statute; (2) even if they have standing, the lack of imminent enforcement against them renders injunctive relief unnecessary; and (3) the NDAA creates no new detention powers beyond what the 2001 AUMF already provides.

 

 

h/t Nick

Filed under  //   chris hedges   glenn greenwald   ndaa overturned  
Posted May 18, 2012

Student Debt VS TBTF Banks

Ellen Brown says it all in these two paragraphs of her most recent blog, "Indentured Servitude for Seniors: Social Security Garnished for Student Debts"

 

It is obviously not a good time to raise interest rates on student debt, but they are set to double on July 1, 2012, to 6.8%.  Many lawmakers in both parties agree that the current 3.4% rates should be extended for another year, but they can’t agree on how to find the $6 billion that this would cost.  Republicans want to take the money from a health care fund that promotes preventive care; Democrats want to eliminate some tax benefits for small business owners.

Congress cannot agree on $6 billion to save the students, yet they managed to agree in a matter of days in September 2008 to come up with $700 billion to save the banks; and the Federal Reserve found many trillions more.  Estimates are that tuition could be provided free to students for a mere $30 billion annually.  The government has the power to find $30 billion — or $300 billion or $3 trillion — in the same place the Federal Reserve found it: it can simply issue the money.

 

But hey, those banks are necessary to the functioning of our society.  An educated non-debt-laden populace, apparently not so much.

Filed under  //   ellen brown   student debt  
Posted May 12, 2012

Whitehouse Don't Love Me No Mo?

I was referred to sign a Whitehouse.gov petition a couple of days ago through Dkos.  I've registered comments there before, especially during the healthcare "debate" which were critical of the president's actions.  The last time I replied to an Email from the Prez's campaign I was very critical as I explained why I would not be contributing this time around, due to his failure to promote progressive policy.  That was in reply to an Email from his campaign, which is presumably separate from whitehouse.gov.  So getting back to the petition, I was unable to login.  When I clicked "can't remember password?" I filled out the info, but have yet to receive a communique from whitehouse.gov.  I also tried to register there anew, and was informed I would receive an Email soon, which I would have to reply to before I could comment at whitehouse.gov.  24+ hours later, I'm still waiting for that Email, and yes, I've checked my SPAM folder.  So my question is: Have I made it onto some Whitehouse  "Enemies" list?  Have they yanked my right to even comment here in cyberspace, where they've always ignored me and my impact is nil anyway? 

 

I also ponder whether all my references to whitehouse.gov, and the Prez has flagged this post for special consideration by Homeland Security.  Now I've done it and mentioned "Homeland Security", and this post is definitely flagged.  Anyone who thinks the power of an Imperial President regardless of political stripe, and all the circumvention of civil rights by the Prez and the courts such as we have now, is not dangerous, even antithetical to a functioning democracy is fooling his/herself.

 

Media_httpwwwelespect_jkhbd

Posted May 3, 2012

Disconnected

From today's New York Times:

Ever since the financial crisis started, we’ve heard plenty from the 1 percent. We’ve heard them giving defensive testimony in Congressional hearings or issuing anodyne statements flanked by lawyers and image consultants. They typically repeat platitudes about investment, risk-taking and job creation with the veiled contempt that the nation doesn’t understand their contribution. You get the sense that they’re afraid to say what they really believe. What do the superrich say when the cameras aren’t there?

Mitt Romney's former employee and card carrying member of the 0,1%, Edward Conard has spent the last four years writing a book that he hopes will forever change the way we view the superrich’s role in our society. “Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You’ve Been Told About the Economy Is Wrong,” to be published in hardcover next month by Portfolio, aggressively argues that the enormous and growing income inequality in the United States is not a sign that the system is rigged. On the contrary, Conard writes, it is a sign that our economy is working. And if we had a little more of it, then everyone, particularly the 99 percent, would be better off.

The world Conard describes too often feels grim and soulless, one in which art and romance and the nonremunerative satisfactions of a simpler life are invisible. And that, I realized, really is Conard’s world. “God didn’t create the universe so that talented people would be happy,” he said. “It’s not beautiful. It’s hard work. It’s responsibility and deadlines, working till 11 o’clock at night when you want to watch your baby and be with your wife. It’s not serenity and beauty.”

The NYT took six pages before getting around to challenging Conard's premises.  Up till that point the article reads almost like a fluff piece designed to lend crednce to his ideas.

And the Renegade Economist has already documented the mentality of Conard in his interview with the world's best banker, Scott Walker:

 

How have these asshats not been beaten up, and thrown naked into the street  before they reached this point in their lives is a mystery to me.

Filed under  //   New York Times   Scott Walker   edward conard   renegade economist  
Posted May 2, 2012

San Miguel de Allende

I've been helping a friend out with a project and made a video of San Miguel de Allende, Mexico.  Here it is.

 

Filed under  //   San Miguel de allende   mexico   robert de gast   rodrigo and gabriela  

I could write you a love letter.

Kick-ass song and performance by one of the great, under-sung singer-songwriters of the past two decades.  Jen Trynin is one of my favorite singer-songwriters, and that she remains relatively unknown and unsung is our loss. Still, she graced us with two CDs under her own name, (Cockamamie in 1994, and 1997s "Gun Shy, Trigger Happy"), and recorded with the band "Loveless", which released the album "Gift to the World" in 2003. All three albums are solid Rock and Roll balladeering with an alternative twist. Her two albums under her own name remain my favorites of the three, and as there are few videos featuring her work, I thought I'd put this out there for those of you who've never heard of her. Her albums and songs are available on Itunes for those of you with whom the music strikes a chord.  The images in the video are just some of those human beans to whom I could write a love letter.

 

Filed under  //   jen trynin   love letter  

Color my world.

The moon outside my window. Is usually the same moon, But as soon as there are plum flowers. It becomes a different moon. - Zen poem c. 15th century.

 

I love this time of year in Mexico when the jacaranda or Santa Lucia trees are in blossom. 

 

Media_httpi759photobu_dmbnl

 

Media_httpi759photobu_drvhs

 

Media_httpi759photobu_mzuuk

 

Media_httpi759photobu_ggcxw

 

Media_httpi759photobu_igneg

 

Crossposted at Miguelitoh2o's Mexico.

Filed under  //   jacarandas   san miguel de allende   springtime  

Our Special Place

I just bumped into the band The Heavy and this song, "Our Special Place" recently.  It's got a funky cool that trips my trigger, so I made a video of the song.  Per Wikipedia: "The Heavy are an indie rock band who claim to be from Noid, England, allegedly a small hamlet near Bath. However, no such place appears to exist."

A cool band with another cool song currently available for free download at their website, http://theheavy.co.uk/ .

 

 

(download)

Filed under  //   our special place   the heavy  
Posted April 6, 2012