Why 'Bad Moms' Is Just Plain Bad

[SPOILER ALERT: If you haven’t seen this film, it’s okay. Keep reading because you’re not going to want to see it anyway.]

I have to admit it pains me to write these words because I’m such a huge advocate for Hollywood producing more female-driven stories.

But this movie is everything that is wrong about how they’re going about it.

Now before I rip Bad Moms a new one, I want to give it some credit for a few things that I did like. For one, I liked the story’s overall message – there’s no such thing as perfection so moms can drop the front.

I liked that it promoted friendship between women (part of the time, anyway) and supporting each other through good and bad times.

I liked that the main character, Amy Mitchell played by Mila Kunis, ended up divorcing her douchebag husband, got the hot widower, and received the workplace respect and money she deserved in the end.

But the main problem I had with this movie is I didn’t laugh through the entire film.

Like not once.

And I like to laugh. A lot.

I didn’t laugh – even though I’m literally the prime demographic for this film being a mom, myself – because I couldn’t relate to the characters. They weren’t grounded at all.

They felt like caricatures instead – the worst offender being Kathryn Hahn‘s character, Carla, an extremely horny single mom that will literally sleep with anybody. Although I think Kathryn Hahn is a talented actress, this portrayal felt like I was watching an over-the-top sketch comedy show for far too long.

But Amy’s husband, Mike, played by David Walton, was a close second for the two-dimensional character that was such a doofus I couldn’t even suspend my disbelief for five minutes to accept why she would marry him – even if she was only 20 years old when she did. I also hated how she defended the decision stating he was once a really good guy. Sure, whatever.

But honestly, I think most of the blame for how bad Bad Moms is lies on the shoulders of writer-directors, Jon Lucas and Scott Moore. The same guys that brought us, The Hangover trilogy, which was pretty hilarious (at least the first one, anyway).

Why people in Hollywood would think these guys are the best pick to bring us a story about being a mom, I have no idea. Because what is clear to me is they don’t write women well – at all.

For one, it felt extremely stereotypical that the main antagonist against Amy was an uptight, perfectionist PTA President. You can’t have a movie about women without a catfight, right?

It just reminded me of a recent interview of Tiny Fey I read in Town & Country, where she discusses how frustrating it is that journalists expect women to always be fighting amongst each other. They ask questions like, “Do you and Amy Poehler ever argue?” Questions that male actors like Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg rarely get asked.

I wish I could scream from the top of the Hollywood hills. Believe it or not, but women really don’t fight with each other as much as you’d like us to – especially over men!

Which leads me to my next point…

I didn’t like that the ultimate catalyst for Amy’s character breaking bad was her husband’s internet affair. Again, it may have helped if there was something to miss about this doofus but either way, it just felt so stale and stereotypical to me.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, when she does become a “bad mom,” she does lame things like she wears a strappy dress, brings store bought donut holes to the school bake sale, and has a raging house party that ends at 11pm.

If I could have a conversation with these dudes, I would grab them by the lapels, shake some sense into them and I’d say, “You wrote the Hangover and the best you can do for Bad Moms is a house party that ends at 11pm. WTF?”

But you know what annoys me the most about this missed opportunity for an amazing female-driven movie is that some suit in Hollywood thought these guys would be the best writers to write a movie about being a mom.

I literally went through every movie listed on Fox News ’21 Best Dad Movies Ever’ and found that only one film on the list had been written exclusively by women and it was Mrs. Doubtfire, a story where an out of work actor pretends he’s an elderly woman so he can be his children’s nanny and spend more time with them. The smattering of other female writers I found had to share the credit with two to three men. Even with Sleepless in Seattle, Nora Ephron shared credit with three other men!

It annoys me because it’s movies like this that Hollywood then uses to justify why they shouldn’t produce female-driven stories. It’s like they have these sexist blinders on and they don’t want to confront the fact that if you want to successfully tap into the female audience, you have to do more than write a story about what a man would think a woman would do and say. You have to actually respect the female perspective and hire women!

So please, Hollywood, get this message loud and clear. I changed my mind about going to see Bad Moms opening night not because it was female-driven and I had no interest but because my sister saw it earlier in the day and told me it wasn’t worth the cost of the movie ticket. And when I went to see it a couple weeks later, I wish I’d have continued to listen to her.

So you see how women can stick together?

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Ken Buck's Endorsement of Trump Says a Lot About Ken Buck

Ken Buck called Donald Trump a “fraud” and said that “Trump’s proposal (to ban all Muslims) violates the Constitution, the values of our nation, the Republican Party platform, and my conscience.”

That was in December. Mr. Buck was correct.

But now Congressman Buck expects you to vote for Donald Trump; this fraud, this unconstitutional bigot, this violator of national values.

Ken Buck’s conversion to Trumpism – even as other Republicans are backing away – is further evidence that the former prosecutor’s concerns about the Republican presidential nominee were never about defending the Constitution or our national values. Mr. Buck wants power, or at least access to it. “If I call the White House, and President Clinton is in the oval office, no one is going to take my call,” the Congressman told listeners on KNUS. “If I call the White House with a President Trump, I have a chance of influencing policy in the executive branch.” Ken Buck will defend anything that supports his rather inconsistent sense of justice or his ability to impose his will on others.

Never mind that thus far in his career, Congressman Ken Buck has had very little success influencing policy in the House or even within his own Party, where he is widely regarded as too uncooperative to be effective.

Mr. Buck should stop trying to reign in some imaginary imperial president and start working on resolving real problems. Colorado’s 4th Congressional District needs economic development, including investment in roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. We need trade agreements that work for Americans workers, including farmers and ranchers, and not against them. We have too many families with inadequate health care and too many people who work hard but whose wages are so low that they still qualify for food stamps and Medicaid. We have to find a way to resolve conflicts over water, energy production, and the environment. Ken Buck has addressed none of these issues.

Ken Buck was right when he called Donald Trump a fraud. He was wrong when he decided that being a fraud was OK.

Bob Seay is a candidate for the U.S. House for Colorado’s 4th Congressional District. His website is at BobForColorado.org

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Personality; Not Just For People Anymore – Part II

This is Part II of a two-part story titled “Personality; Not Just for People Anymore.”

2016-08-26-1472236121-7348483-480731_10151565826524863_1086640921_n.jpg

Every wolf, every animal, is different. Credit: Carl Safina

It’s easier to accept that elephants, dolphins, wolves, and dogs have personalities. What’s surprising — until you make individual acquaintances — is how deep and widespread the phenomenon of personality is. When you work with hawks, say, you see that each responds a little differently, each hunts a bit differently.

I define personality as individually differing responses to the same stimuli. My friends the professors Peter and Judy Weis of Rutgers University watched researchers at a lab in Italy present a crab in a jar to each of two octopuses. The first octopus popped off the top and devoured part of its prize. “Then it replaced the cap on the jar as if to save the rest for later,” say my friends. The second octopus had been hungrily slithering back and forth across the glass tank, so the scientists expected an instant pounce. But when the jar splashed in, Octopus Two, apparently frightened, darted behind a rock. “It didn’t care what was in the jar.” Peter said. Judy elaborated: “We really don’t appreciate how much personality most animals have. Even as scientists, we’ve hardly ever thought about that.”

I’m not going to tell you what creatures Darrel Frost is talking about. Try to guess. I’m in his office at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City and he’s introducing me to his pets, saying, “Mud is the larger one with the undershot jaw. Hermes, with the broken back, has epilepsy. Before our secretary, Iris, retired a year ago, they would run down to her office to get goodies from her. She visited yesterday, and even though they hadn’t seen her in months, they still get really excited when she comes into the room. When Mud is really excited, he will almost dance side to side. Likewise when our volunteer, Denny, visits to pamper them — they just light up. I’m the one who feeds them, but I never get that kind of reaction. Iris and Denny lecture me that I don’t talk to them enough.

“Mud is like a little kid, incredibly curious when people are in my office. He wants to come in to see if people are having fun without him. He will scrape at the door until he is let in. Hermes has always been more shy around strangers. Mud loves Mexican music; it gets him running around.

When Mud would start getting out of hand, Iris would just touch his nose with the eraser end of a pencil and he would get very upset, stop what he was doing, and sulk. A soft touch, but he knows who is in charge. He could easily have pushed her out of the room, but her disapproval was clearly hard on him.

“The funniest thing is that they know their names but if you catch them doing something they shouldn’t do and you call their name, they will look away to avoid eye contact. One day Mud extremely quietly came in, and very quietly opened the door of the small refrigerator and was quietly working on a head of lettuce. After I noticed, I watched him for a moment. It was the quietest I had ever seen him. He knew that if he got busted he would have his lettuce taken away, so he was trying to keep from attracting my attention. And, jeez, when I closed the fridge door, was he mad! He had a little tantrum right there, jerking back and forth — and then he ran back into Iris’s office so he could be with her.

“Over and over again, both Mud and Hermes present jealousy, sneakiness, venality, excitement, wanting to belong — behaviors that I associate with two- to three-year-old humans. They have dominance hierarchies and, like big dogs, they develop strong attachments to their ‘masters.'”

I ask what they weigh. Regarding them with a look both affectionate and appraising, Darrel says, “Mud is right at one hundred pounds, and Hermes, because of his health problems I think, is at eighty-five pounds. They’re still young.” The species’ maximum size is around two hundred and fifty pounds, making spur-thighed the largest mainland-dwelling tortoise.

People used to think turtles were deaf. I am beginning to realize how blind we’ve been.

Researchers have now found individual personality differences in monkeys, rats, mice, lemurs, songbirds, sunfish, stickleback fish, killifish, bighorn sheep, domestic goats, blue crabs, rainbow trout, jumping spiders, house crickets. In other words, pretty much everywhere they’ve looked, they’ve found that individuals differ in behavior. Some are more aggressive, bolder, shier, some more active; some fear the new, while others are explorers. Among our chickens, Zorro is the explorer. She’s often alone, out standing in her field, away from cover and companions. Sometimes her independence make me worry like a mother hen.

2016-08-26-1472236613-3795617-IMG_3889.JPG

Zorro the chicken. Credit: Erica Cirino

Dolphins have personality galore. And Killer whales, or orcas, are the largest dolphins; they have the biggest brains. Canadian researcher John Ford started out working in aquarium shows where killer whales impressed him as “incredibly perceptive,” each responding differently to different people. Because they “make a game of changing things,” he found them quite challenging. In subtle ways that he did not sense at first, he eventually realized that his own behavior “was being modified by them.” Another thing he discovered: each whale’s personality is “strikingly different.”

The free-living killer whale known to researchers as L-87 is known for outsized personality. After his mother died a decade ago, L-87 became the only killer whale known to have switched pods. (Three pods — designated J, K, and L — make up the resident killer whales of the waters of Washington State.) He went with K pod for a few years and now usually swims with the Js.

Researcher Ken Balcomb says, “He’s always spy-hopping to look around at the boats. Sometimes suddenly — phoosh!- – here he is with his head up right alongside, obviously playing. He likes the reaction of the people. He has a sense of humor. They’re not all like that.”

2016-08-26-1472236842-4033551-23437_383717159862_3225651_n.jpg

A wild killer whale. Credit: Carl Safina

Two killer whales captured in British Columbia in 1968 and 1969 were shipped to a place called Marineland of the Pacific, near Los Angeles and named Orky and Corky. A young Alexandra Morton (who later became a noted conservationist) watched amazed as they invented complex swimming routines and a morning “ritual.” In the hour or so before the sun finally burst over the stadium rim, they “diligently squirted water at a particular spot on the tank wall, right at the waterline.” When the first shaft of sun struck the wall, it touched the waterline “at the exact spot” the whales had marked. “No one, I thought, is going to believe me.” As the spot moved in response to the earth’s rotation month to month, “the whales always knew just where the first shaft of light would hit the water.” A killer whale Stonehenge? Early killer whale astronomers?

Sun observation was a morning activity, but “Orky was less of a morning whale” and often tried to resume resting. When this happened, Corky sometimes ran the tip of her pectoral fin from the tip of his jaw, down his belly, and over his genital slit. “If this didn’t cause an immediate bulge in the smooth pocket that housed his penis, Corky escalated her tactics…what Corky wanted was sex, and whale sex is a turbulent affair.” With Corky’s genital area “flushed with rosy excitement,” water splashed out of the tank as the whales entwined and spiraled. When Corky was pregnant, Orky would go through all the foreplay but not copulate. That, Morton says, “drove Corky wild.”

But how did the Orky know? Had he been scanning her body with his sonar, his own ultrasound?

Corky’s first baby died. In 1978, Corky gave birth again. The problem was that the small tank required tight circling, and with Corky trying to guide the baby away from hitting the wall, the baby was seldom following in the position that properly presented her mother’s teats for nursing. When this baby too grew thin, Management decided to try force-feeding the baby in a shallower pool. Handlers put the baby in a sling; a crane pulled the sling into the air.

Alexandra Morton was there: “As her baby’s voice left the water and entered the air, the mother threw her enormous body against the tank walls, again and again, causing the entire stadium to shake. I burst into tears. Corky slammed her body for about an hour.”

Morton wrote that the night Corky’s baby was taken, she kept repeating a new and different sound, “guttural, and urgent.” After each breath, Corky returned to the bottom of the tank, resuming her lament. The baby’s father, Orky, occasionally uttered gunshot-like echolocation sounds that might have located a lost baby miles away at sea but were useless in a concrete tank.

Over three days Corky’s calls grew hoarse. At dawn on the fourth day, Corky grew silent, rose, took a breath, and called, Pituuuuuuuu. Her mate returned the same call, and the whales began moving and breathing in unison. Corky ate for the first time since her baby was removed. Grief, mourning, recovering — but not forgetting. After that, Corky began lying by a window with a view of gift-shop merchandise. For hours she’d stay there — viewing a stack of toy stuffed orcas. Did the toys remind her of her lost children? Did she think that somewhere in there were her babies?

Corky got pregnant again. Then one day, she — whose exquisite sonar allowed her to avoid any obstacle — shattered a three-quarters-of an-inch-thick glass window of her tank. The window that she burst was the one adjacent to the stacks of stuffed-toy killer whales. Was she trying to take her unborn baby out of the tank from which her babies disappeared? Toward the place where baby orcas rested undisturbed? The most certain thing we can say is: she knew the tank; she didn’t shatter the glass by accident. A few weeks later her stillborn baby arrived, seven months premature.

Years after Corky shattered the window, a film crew at SeaWorld (where Corky and Orky had been moved after Marineland closed) let Corky hear a recording of free-living whales from her birth pod, her family members. “While her Icelandic pen mates ignored the sounds,” wrote Alexandra Morton, “Corky’s whole body began shuddering terribly. If she wasn’t ‘crying,’ she was doing something terribly similar.”

2016-08-26-1472236888-3391335-23437_383717184862_1623640_n.jpg

Wild killer whales, a male (with larger dorsal fin) and female. Credit: Carl Safina

Researcher Ken Balcomb says that after Keiko — the famously captive Free Willy killer whale — was moved to a facility in Oregon prior to his eventual release, one of the rehab exercises was to play him killer whale movies. “He’d watch them,” Ken says, anticipating my obvious question. Ken’s son Kelley — an accomplished artist — used to take drawings of killer whales to the Vancouver Aquarium and hold them up to the glass for a killer whale named Hyak. Hyak would come and just look the drawings over and over. And, Ken adds, “You could go and open up our ID guide of photos of killer whale fins, and he’d be like” — Ken mimics a whale looking from one photo to another — “just like that. For minutes on end, just looking from photo to photo.” Ken emphasizes his amazement, saying, “They know that these little black-and-white photos of fins are depictions of whales. They have a self-aware concept of abstractions of themselves.” Ken winds up to a point, and the point is: “These are characteristics of creatures who’ve reached the supreme-being stage, who have a lot of time and brainpower to spend beyond the requirements of mere survival.”

Paul Spong, a psychologist who’d worked at the Vancouver Aquarium, has written, “Eventually my respect verged on awe. I concluded that Orcinus orca is an incredibly powerful and capable creature, exquisitely self-controlled and aware of the world around it, a being possessed of a zest for life and a healthy sense of humor and, moreover, a remarkable fondness for and interest in humans.”

If that seems a little, well, anthropomorphic — that’s the point.

# # #

This piece is adapted from Carl Safina’s most recent book, Beyond Words; What Animals Think and Feel, which is newly out in paperback.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

The Tea Party, A Sinkhole In Louisiana, And The Contradictions Of American Political Life

Donald Trump in the Bayou
Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com

[This essay has been adapted from Arlie Hochschild’s new book, Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right (The New Press), which will be published on September 6th.]

Sometimes you have to go a long, long way to discover truths that are distinctly close to home. Over the last five years, I’ve done just that — left my home in iconically liberal Berkeley, California, and traveled to the bayous of Tea Party Louisiana to find another America that, as Donald Trump’s presidential bid has made all too clear, couldn’t be closer to home for us all. From those travels, let me offer a kind of real-life parable about a man I came to admire who sums up many of the contradictions of our distinctly Trumpian world.

So come along with me now, as I turn right on Gumbo Street, left on Jambalaya, pass Sauce Piquant Lane, and scattering a cluster of feral cats, park on Crawfish Street, opposite a yellow wooden home by the edge of waters issuing into Bayou Corne, Louisiana.  The street is deserted, lawns are high, and branches of Satsuma and grapefruit trees hang low with unpicked fruit. Walking toward me along his driveway is Mike Schaff, a tall, powerfully built, balding man in an orange-and-red striped T-shirt, jeans, and sneakers. He’s wearing tan-rimmed glasses and giving a friendly wave.

“Sorry about the grass,” he says as we head inside. “I haven’t kept things up.” On the dining room table, he has set out coffee, cream, sugar, and a jar of homegrown peaches for me to take when I leave.  Around the edges of the living and dining rooms are half-filled cardboard packing boxes. The living room carpet is rolled into a corner, revealing a thin, jagged crack across the floor.  Mike opens the door of the kitchen to go into his garage. “My gas monitor is here,” he explains. “The company drilled a hole in my garage to see if I had gas under it, and I do; twenty percent higher than normal.  I get up nights to check it.”  As we sit down to coffee at the small dining room table, Mike says, “It’ll be seven months this Monday and the last five have been the longest in my life.”

After the disaster struck in August 2012, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal issued an emergency evacuation order to all 350 residents of Bayou Corne — a community of homes facing a canal that flows into an exquisite bayou (a river through wetlands) with white egrets, ibis, and spoonbills soaring across the water.  When I visited in March 2013, Mike was still living in his ruined home.

“I was just starting life with my new wife, but with the methane gas emissions all around us now, it’s not safe. So my wife has moved back to Alexandria, a hundred and eighteen miles north, and commutes to her job from there. I see her on weekends. The grandkids don’t come either, because what if someone lit a match? The house could blow up. I’m still here to guard the place against a break-in and to keep the other stayers company,” he says, adding after a long pause, “Actually, I don’t want to leave.”

I had come to visit Mike Schaff because he seemed to embody an increasingly visible paradox that had brought me to this heartland of the American right.  What would happen, I wondered, if a man who saw “big government” as the main enemy of local community, who felt a visceral dislike of government regulations and celebrated the free market, was suddenly faced with the ruin of his community at the hands of a private company? What if, beyond any doubt, that loss could have been prevented by government regulation?

Because in August 2012, exactly that catastrophe did indeed occur to Mike and his neighbors.

Like many of his conservative white Cajun Catholic neighbors, Mike was a strong Republican and an enthusiastic supporter of the Tea Party.  He wanted to strip the federal government to the bone.  In his ideal world, the Departments of Interior, Education, Health and Human Services, Social Security, and much of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would be gone; as for federal money to the states, much of that, too.  The federal government provides 44% of Louisiana’s state budget — $2,400 per person per year — partly for hurricane relief, which Mike welcomes, but partly for Medicaid and, as he explained, “Most recipients could work if they wanted to and honestly, they’d be better off.”

Louisiana is a classic red state. In 2016, it’s ranked the poorest in the nation and the worst as well in education, health, and the overall welfare of its people.  It also has the second highest male incidence of cancer and is one of the country’s most polluted states. But voters like Mike have twice elected Governor Bobby Jindal who, during his eight years in office, steadfastly refused Medicaid expansion, cut funding for higher education by 44%, and laid off staff in environmental protection. Since 1976, Louisiana has voted Republican in seven out of ten presidential elections and, according to a May 2016 poll, its residents favor Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton by 52% to 36%.

Mike was an intelligent, college-educated man with a sense of stewardship over the land and the waters he loved. Given the ominous crack in his floor and the gas monitor in his garage, could he, I wondered, finally welcome government as a source of help?  And had the disaster he faced altered his views of the presidential candidates?

“Alka Seltzer” in the Rain Puddles

The first sign that something was wrong had been a tiny cluster of bubbles on the surface of Bayou Corne’s waters, and then another.  Had a gas pipe traversing the bottom of the bayou sprung a leak? A man from the local gas company came out to check and declared the pipes fine. At the time, Mike recalls, “We smelled oil, strong.”

Soon after, he and his neighbors were startled when the earth began to shake. “I was walking in the house when I felt like I was either having a stroke or drunk, ten seconds,” Mike recalls. “My balance went all to hell.”

It was then that he noticed that crack in his living room floor and heard a sound like a thunderclap. A single mother of two living in a mobile home a mile from Bayou Corne thought her washing machine was on, and then remembered it had been broken for months. Lawns started to sag and tilt.  Not far from Mike’s home, the earth under the bayou started to tear open, and, as if someone had pulled the plug in a bathtub, the bayou began sucking down brush, water, and pine.

Majestic century-old cypress trees crashed in slow motion and disappeared into the gaping mouth of the sinkhole then forming. Two clean-up workers had cast out booms not far from the sinkhole to contain an area of water shiny with oil.  To steady their boat, they tied it to a nearby tree, which then slid into the sinkhole, as did their boat, though both men were rescued.

In the following weeks, pristine swamp forest was replaced by oily sludge as the earth began to leak natural gas.  “During a rain, the puddles would shine and bubble, like you’d dropped Alka Seltzer tablets in them,” Mike said.  Gradually, gassy sludge infiltrated the aquifer, threatening the local drinking water.

What had caused the sinkhole? The culprit was Texas Brine, a lightly regulated, Houston-based drilling company.  It had drilled a hole 5,600 feet beneath the floor of Bayou Corne to mine intensely concentrated salt, which it sold to companies making chlorine. The drill accidently punctured one wall of an underlying geological formation called the Napoleon Salt Dome, three miles wide and a mile deep, sheathed in a layer of oil and natural gas.  (One hundred twenty-six such domes lie under Louisiana’s land and water and are often mined for brine, with toxic chemicals sometimes being stored in the resulting cavities.)  When the drill accidentally pierced the side of a cavern inside the dome, the wall crumpled under the pressure of surrounding shale, sucking down everything above it.

The sinkhole grew. First, it was the size of one house lot, then five house lots, then the length of Crawfish Street.  By 2016, it covered more than 37 acres.  The pavement of the main road into and out of Bayou Corne began to sink, too. Levees along the bayou, originally built to contain rising waters in times of flood, also began to go down, threatening to extend the oily sludge over nearby grassland and forest. Meanwhile, shell-shocked evacuees doubled up with family members in spare rooms, campers, and motels, turning to each other for news of the expanding sinkhole.

Environmental Protection: Missing in Action

Mike backs his boat into the canal. I climb in. It sputters to life and putts out into the wider bayou. “Around here you pull up bass, catfish, white perch, crawfish, and sac-a-lait,” he says, “at least we used to.”

Mike was a water baby.  He loved to fish and could describe the habits and shapes of a dozen kinds of local fish. He headed for the water as often as he could, although he got little time off. So “environment” wasn’t simply a word to him; it was his passion, his comfort, his way of life.

Mike has long disliked the idea of a strong federal government because “people come to depend on it instead of on each other.” He grew up in a close-knit community not far from Bayou Corne on the Armelise sugarcane plantation, the fifth of seven children of a plumber and a homemaker. As a boy, he tells me, “I went barefoot all summer, and used to shoot crows with my rifle, use the guts for fish bait.”  As an adult, he worked as an estimator, measuring and pricing materials used in constructing the gigantic platforms that house oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico.  As a child of the old South who grew to manhood in an era of big oil, he was for state’s rights and wanted even state government kept to a minimum.

This, however, was the last situation he’d ever imagined being in. “We’re a close community here. We leave our doors unlocked. We help each other rebuild levees during floods. You got the two-beer levee job, or the four-beer one.” He laughs. “We love it here.”

For a man who could lose himself for hours in his garage welding together parts of a two-seater Zenith 701 airplane from a kit, and who described himself as “to myself,” he welcomed the easy sociability of Bayou Corne. It wasn’t the simple absence of government Mike wanted; it was the feeling of being inside a warm, cooperative group. That’s what he thought government replaced: community. And why pay heavy taxes to help the government rob you of what you most prize?

At a distance, we see a sign nailed to the gray trunk of a Tupelo tree: “DANGER, KEEP OUT, HIGHLY FLAMMABLE GAS.” Around it in the water are concentric circles of bubbles, scuttling outward like small bugs. “Methane,” says Mike, matter-of-factly.

By mid-2013, officials had declared Bayou Corne a “sacrifice zone” and most of the 350 residents had fled.  A small group of “stayers” like Mike were now criticized by the “leavers” who feared their presence suggested to Texas Brine that “it wasn’t so bad,” and so might lower the price the refugees could set for their suffering.

Everyone knew that the company’s drill had caused the sinkhole, but that didn’t settle the question of blame.  To begin with, Texas Brine blamed Mother Nature, claiming (falsely) that earthquakes were natural in the area. Then it blamed its insurers and the company from which it rented space in the dome. 

Both those who stayed and those who left were mostly angry at “the government.” For one thing, Governor Bobby Jindal had waited seven months before visiting the victims. And why was his first visit so delayed, he was asked, and why was it announced so abruptly on the morning of a mid-week day when most sinkhole refugees were at work?

Like so many of his neighbors, Mike Schaff had twice voted for Bobby Jindal and, as someone who had worked in oil all his life, approved the governor’s $1.6 billion tax incentive program to lure more of that industry to the state. For three years, it was impossible to tell whether the oil companies had paid a penny to Louisiana since, under Jindal, the job of auditing their payments had been handed over to the Office of Mineral Resources, which has close ties to the industry and between 2010 and 2013 performed no audits at all.

In Louisiana, on-the-books environmental regulations were laxly enforced by conservative state legislators many of whom were oilmen or, like Governor Jindal, took donations from Big Energy. An eye-opening 2003 report from the Inspector General of the EPA ranked Louisiana last in its region when it came to implementing federal environmental mandates. Louisiana’s database on hazardous waste facilities was error-ridden. The state’s Department of Environmental Quality (a title missing the word “protection”) did not know if many of the companies it was supposed to monitor were “in compliance.” Its agents had failed to inspect many plants and even when it did find companies not in compliance with state regulations, it neglected to levy or collect penalties.

The Inspector General was “unable to fully assure the public that Louisiana was operating programs in a way that effectively protects human health and the environment.” According to the state’s own website, 89,787 permits to deposit waste or do other things that affected the environment were requested between January 1967 and July 2015. Of these, only 60 — or .07% — were denied.

The Redder the State, the More the Toxic Waste

Louisiana was, it turned out, in good company. A 2012 study by sociologist Arthur O’Connor showed that residents of red states suffer higher rates of industrial pollution than those of blue states. Voters in the 22 states that went Republican in the five presidential elections between 1992 and 2008 live in more polluted environments.  And what was true for Red States generally and Louisiana in particular was true for Mike himself.  Looking into exposure to toxic waste, my research assistant Rebecca Elliot and I discovered that people who believe Americans “worry too much about the environment,” and that the U.S. already “does enough” to protect that environment were likely to be living in zip codes with high rates of pollution.  As a Tea Party member enmeshed in the Bayou Corne sinkhole disaster, Mike was just an exaggerated version of a haunting national story.

Mike wanted to live in a nearly total free-market society. In a way Louisiana already was exactly that.  Government was barely present at all.  But how, I wondered, did Mike reconcile his deep love of, and desire to protect, Bayou Corne with his strong dislike of government regulation?  As it happened, he did what most of us tend to do when we face a powerful conflict.  He jerrybuilt a new world out of desperate beliefs, becoming what he termed a “Tea Party conservationist.”

Seated at his dining room table surrounded by cardboard boxes filled with his belongings, he composed letter after letter of complaint to members of the Louisiana legislature, demanding that they force companies like Texas Brine to pay victims in a timely way, that they not permit storage of hazardous waste in precarious waterways, or again permit drilling in Lake Peigneur, which had suffered a devastating drilling accident in 1980. By August of 2015, he had written 50 of them to state and federal officials. “This is the closest I’ve come to being a tree-hugger,” he said. “Ninety-nine percent of the environmentalists I meet are liberal. But I’ve had to do something. This bayou will never be the same.”

As we putted around the bayou, I asked, “What has the federal government done for you that you feel grateful for?”

He paused.

“Hurricane relief,” he finally responded.

He paused again. “The I-10…,” he added, referring to a federally funded freeway.

Another long pause. “Okay, unemployment insurance.” (He had once briefly been on it.)

I ask about the Food and Drug Administration inspectors who check the safety of our food.

“Yeah, that too.”

The military in which he’d enlisted?

“Yeah, okay.” 

“Do you know anyone who receives federal government benefits?”  

“Oh sure,” he answers. “And I don’t blame them. Most people I know use available government programs, since they paid for part of them. If the programs are there, why not use them?”

And then the conversation continued about how we don’t need government for this, for that, or for the other thing.

Mike and his wife had recently moved from their ruined home near the sinkhole into a large fixer-upper on a canal flowing into Lake Verret, some 15 miles south of Bayou Corne. At nights, he can hear the two-toned calls of tree frogs and toads. He had jacked up the living room floor, redone the bedroom molding, put in a new deck, and set up his airplane-building kit in the garage.  A recent tornado had ripped the American flag from a pole on that garage, although it hadn’t harmed the Confederate flag hanging from the porch of his neighbor. 

His new home lies near the entrance to the spillway of the magnificent Atchafalaya Basin, an 800,000-acre National Wildlife Refuge — the largest bottomland hardwood swamp in the country — overseen, in part, by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. On my last visit, he took me in his flatboat to fish for perch, pointing out a bald eagle on the bare branch of a tall cypress. “I’ve gone from the frying pan to the fire,” he explained. “They are disposing of millions of gallons of fracking waste — the industry calls it ‘produced water’ — right here in the Basin. It can contain methanol, chloride, sulphates, and radium. And they’re importing it from Pennsylvania and other fracking sites to go into an injection well near here. Salt can corrode the casing of those wells, and it’s not far from our aquifer.”

A Sinkhole of Pride

Mike loves the waters of Louisiana more than anything in the world. A vote for Hillary Clinton would protect the Clean Water Act, secure the EPA, and ensure that government would continue to act as a counterbalance to the Texas Brines of the nation. But there was one thing more important to Mike than clean water: pride in his people.

He had struggled hard to climb out of the world of a poor plumber’s fifth son, to make it to a salary of $70,000 a year with a company that built oil rigs, to a third and at-last-right wife, and to a home he loved that was now wrecked. At the entrance gate to the middle class, he felt he’d been slapped in the face.  For progressive movements from the 1960s on — in support of blacks, women, sexual minorities, immigrants, refugees — the federal government was, he believed, a giant ticket-dispensing machine in an era in which the economy was visiting on middle-class and blue-collar white men the sorts of punishment once more commonly reserved for blacks. Democrats were, he was convinced, continuing to make the government into an instrument of his own marginalization — and media liberals were now ridiculing people like him as ignorant, backward rednecks.  Culturally, demographically, economically, and now environmentally, he felt ever more like a stranger in his own land.

It mattered little to him that Donald Trump would not reduce the big government he so fervently wanted cut, or that The Donald was soft on the pro-life, pro-marriage positions he valued, or that he hadn’t uttered a peep about the national debt. None of it mattered because Trump, he felt, would switch off that marginalization machine and restore the honor of his kind of people, of himself.  Mike knew that liberals favored care for the environment far more than Republicans, Tea Partiers, or Donald Trump.  Yet, despite his lost home in a despoiled land, like others of his older white neighbors back at the Bayou and here in the Basin, Mike was foursquare for Trump; that’s how deeply his pride was injured and a measure of just how much that injury galled him.

What would Trump do to prevent another calamity like Bayou Corne with its methane-drenched mud, its lost forest, its dead fish? He has been vague on many of the policies he might pursue as president, but on one thing he was clear: he would abolish the Environmental Protection Agency.

Arlie Hochschild is the author of many books, including The Second Shift and The Time Bind.  Her latest book, Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right (The New Press), will be published in early September. This essay is adapted for TomDispatch from that book.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Nick Turse’s Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead, and Tom Engelhardt’s latest book, Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World.

Copyright 2016 Arlie Hochschild

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

8 Things to Know Before You Get Lasik

By Jessica Migala

You’ve worn glasses or contacts forever, and frankly, you’re tired of the hassle. You want to see clearly from the second you wake up in the morning till the moment you drift to sleep at night. But if you’re considering Lasik, you probably have some questions like, “Will I be laid up for days?” “Will it hurt?” And: “What are the odds it’ll work?” Before you go under the laser, here are a few things you should know.

How is Lasik done?

After your eye surgeon applies numbing drops, she makes an incision in the cornea and lifts a thin flap. Then a laser reshapes the corneal tissue underneath, and the flap is replaced. “The patient can see very quickly,” says Wilmington, Delaware-based ophthalmologist Robert Abel, Jr., MD, author of The Eye Care Revolution. “You get off the table and think, ‘Wow.'”

Who can get the procedure?

Lasik is used to treat the common vision problems nearsightedness, farsightedness, and astigmatism. To find out if you’re a good candidate for the surgery, see an ophthalmologist for an eye exam. “You need to make sure your cornea is uniform, you don’t have severe dry eye or other eye conditions, and your prescription is stable,” explains Dr. Abel.

Lasik can also be used to fix presbyopia–that maddening effect of aging that makes it harder to focus close-up–but you need to have one eye corrected for near vision and the other for distance. This technique, called Monovision Lasik, affects depth perception and sharpness, so you may still require glasses for visually demanding activities like driving at night, or reading fine print for long periods of time. (The FDA recommends doing a trial with monovision contact lenses first.)

Also know that as you get older, your vision may continue to get worse, so you may need another Lasik procedure or glasses down the road, says Dr. Abel.

What’s the success rate?

According to the American Academy of Ophthalmology, 90% of Lasik patients end up with vision somewhere between 20/20 and 20/40.

There’s chance you will still need to use corrective lenses sometimes: A 2013 survey by the Consumer Reports National Research Center found that more than 50% of people who get Lasik or other laser vision-correction surgery wear glasses or contacts at least occasionally. Still, 80% of the survey respondents reported feeling “completely” or “very satisfied” with their procedure.

According to the FDA, results are usually not as good in people who have very large refractive errors. Make sure you discuss your expectations with your ophthalmologist to see if they’re realistic.

RELATED: The Surprising Effect of Pregnancy and Nursing on Eyesight

What are the risks?

While the thought of a laser boring into your eye may seem, well, terrifying, the procedure is overwhelmingly safe, Dr. Abel says, noting that the risk of problems is about 1%.

That said, it’s important to weigh the risks against the benefits, as the potential complications can be debilitating. The FDA has a list on its site, including severe dry eye syndrome, and a loss in vision that cannot be fixed with eyewear or surgery. Some patients develop symptoms like glare, halos, and double vision that make it especially tough to see at night or in fog.

There are also temporary effects to consider. According to the Consumer Reports survey, many respondents experienced side effects–including dry eyes, halos, and blurry vision–that lasted six months or longer.

One thing you don’t have to worry about: Flinching or blinking during the procedure. A device will keep your eyelids open, while a suction ring prevents your eye from moving.

How long will I be out of commission?

You will need someone to drive you home after the procedure, but you can go back to work the very next day.

How much will this cost?

According to Lasik.com, the cost can range from $299 per eye to more than $4,000 per eye. Geography, technology, and the surgical experience of the doctor all factor into the price. Insurance companies don’t typically cover the surgery, but you can use tax-free funds from your FSA, HSA, or HRA account to pay for it.

RELATED: 5 Foods for Healthy Eyes

Is Lasik the only option?

Epi-LASIK is a similar laser procedure, but it’s done without making a surgical incision, says Dr. Abel. “The risk of complications is even lower than traditional Lasik, and that’s why a lot of people are opting to get Epi-Lasik.” The catch: The recovery takes longer. You’ll need to wait 4 days before you can drive, he says, and 11 days to see really well.

How can I find a good doctor?

With nearly every daily deal site offering discounts on laser eye surgery, it can be tempting to choose the cheapest doc. But it’s important you see someone with a wealth of experience, says Dr. Abel. After all, these are your eyes we’re talking about. Dr. Abel suggests calling your local university hospital and asking an administrative assistant or nurse where they refer their Lasik patients. “You want to go to someone with good follow-up care and an extended warranty or guarantee of at least three years in case you need a correction later in life,” says Dr. Abel.

8 Things to Know Before You Get Lasik originally appeared on Health.com.

More from Health.com:

Jennifer Aniston on Dry Eyes: “I Was Addicted to Eye Drops”

Get Wise About Your Eyes

5 Steps to Wide-Awake Eyes

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Being Presidential 2016 — 6 Attributes And 4 Traits

You know when someone is being Presidential most when they’re not



6 Attributes of TCRALI Leaders — what they cause us to feel that we attribute to them


  1. Trust = we trust him or her to do what they say they’ll do, to not unnecessarily hurt or unfairly take advantage of others
  2. Confidence = we feel confidence in them because they have a track record of making good judgment calls and decisions, getting things done and that they can and will get things done when in office
  3. Respect = we respect them for their integrity and standing up for a noble mission that serves America and for standing up against greedy, devious, selfish or self-serving people that attempt to detract, distract or derail the organization from fulfilling that mission
  4. Admiration = we admire them for how they stand for, stand up for and stand up against anything or anyone that would detract from, distract from or derail that mission (they are unflappable, present, quietly formidable and demonstrate poise under pressure)
  5. Likability = we like them for being enjoyable and enjoying of others, for having a sense of humor and not taking themselves too seriously
  6. Inspiring = we are inspired by them because of having all of the prior attributes and because they both motivate and pump us up and inspire and lift us up

If you disagree with the above, how much would you want to follow a president who triggers distrust instead of trust, doubt instead of confidence, disappointment instead of respect, embarrassment instead of admiration and discouragement instead of inspiration?

To quote Maya Angelou, “People will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel,” especially when you offend, insult, degrade or humiliate them.

4 Traits of TCRALI Leaders — what we see

  1. Unflappable = they are mission centric vs. having personal ego invested in winning or losing. That mission has to serve the people they represent. In the case of the U.S. president, that mission means serving the economic, health and well being and security needs of the common good rather than the “privileged” few. By not ever taking anything personally they never need to act defensively, sullen or reactive in any way.
  2. Present = they communicate heartfelt understanding and compassionate towards the fear, hurt, insecurity and anger of the American people so that people feel cared about, but they remain steadfast in accomplishing the main mission.
  3. Knowledgable = they know what they’re talking about vs. giving pat answers that lack conviction or credibility.
  4. Wise = they know what’s important and worth fighting for and what’s less important and not worth fighting for. And their judgment calls and decisions are guided by that wisdom.

As stated regarding TCRALI leadership, if we don’t think these behaviors are important, consider what they do to your trust, confidence, respect, admiration, liking and feeling inspired when you see someone being thin skinned instead of unflappable, shut down or attacking instead of being present, full of b.s. instead of knowledgable or foolish/clueless instead of being wise.

If you agree with the above characterization, please weigh in with your comments regarding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Sony’s new smartwatch features an e-ink display on the watch *and* the band

Z Sony announced an update to the curious-looking FES Watch with a new design. The FES Watch U features an e-ink display and pairs with your phone. But the surprising part is that the band is also a flexible e-ink display, opening a brand new world of design possibilities — what an exciting time to be alive. Sony is using the FES brand name for this watch as the company wants to emphasize… Read More

In Utero 3D lets you touch your baby before its born

DSC_9928 A Polish company, In Utero 3D, is doing something really sweet. They’re printing 3D models of babies in the womb so blind mothers can feel their children before they’re born and experience the same joy sighted mothers have when viewing ultrasounds. Their project, called Waiting Without Barriers, is based in northern Poland but is available in Europe. For 1PLN or 1 Euro they will… Read More

A Jet Engine-Powered Merry-Go-Round Is the Ultimate Carnival Ride

You’re already accepting some level of risk when you climb aboard any carnival ride, from the Ferris Wheel to the bumper cars, and for little payoff. So if you’re going endanger yourself for some cheap thrills, why not go big aboard a merry-go-round powered by real jet engines rocketing you around in circles.

Read more…

This Is Likely Your Last Chance Ever to Get PlayStation Plus For $37

If you’ve never used Groupon before, or if, uh, you happened to create a new account, you can get a year of PlayStation Plus for $37 today with promo code FIRST.

Read more…