<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > David Sirota</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/david_sirota/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 06:12:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Democrats&#8217; gay marriage excuse</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/25/democrats_gay_marriage_excuse/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/25/democrats_gay_marriage_excuse/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 14:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gay Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12927268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are Democratic politicians, like Andrew Cuomo, using social issues to distract from the economic status quo?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Headlines transmit information in its rawest form -- and the best of headlines crystallize indelible truths. Such was the case this week when the New York Daily News blared this simple but iconic headline: "Cuomo: Minimum Wage Harder to Get Than Gay Marriage."</p><p>The story quoted New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) claiming that the effort to raise wages for the poorest of his constituents represents a "broader and deeper" divide than the recent successful fight to legalize same-sex matrimony in the Empire State. Though the piece quickly dissolved into the ether, it should have received more attention because it is an important Rosetta Stone -- one that translates this era's inscrutable political rhetoric into a clear admission that money trumps everything else.</p><p>Decoding this Rosetta Stone requires just a bit of contextual information from Siena College. According to the school's surveys, only 58 percent of New Yorkers support legalizing gay marriage, while a whopping 78 percent support raising the minimum wage from $7.25 to $8.50.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/25/democrats_gay_marriage_excuse/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/25/democrats_gay_marriage_excuse/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t take the Bain bait</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/dont_take_the_bain_bait/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/dont_take_the_bain_bait/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 18:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bain Capital]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12925931</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Obama campaign hopes the focus on Romney's firm will keep attention away from systemic political corruption]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>"They made as much money off it as they could, and they closed (the plant) down and filed for bankruptcy without any concern for the families or the communities." -- Joe Soptik, laid off steelworker, in a <a href="http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/17801/romney-thrown-on-defensive-over-bain-capital-factory-closings">new ad</a> supporting President Obama's re-election.</em></p><p>Regardless of whether the Obama campaign's attack <a href="http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/17801/romney-thrown-on-defensive-over-bain-capital-factory-closings">ad</a> on Bain Capital is <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/romney-and-bain-capital-the-obama-campaigns-newest-ad/2012/05/14/gIQAxCP3PU_blog.html">100-percent accurate</a>, its overarching message -- and that of <a href="http://www.gazette.com/articles/romney-138783-mitt-springs.html">similar ads</a> -- is crystal clear. As embodied by Joe Soptik's quote, the basic argument is that Mitt Romney is a particularly bad guy for laying off workers, ruining communities and making bank as a private equity magnate at Bain Capital.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/dont_take_the_bain_bait/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/dont_take_the_bain_bait/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt&#8217;s favorite new dodge</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/mitts_favorite_new_dodge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/mitts_favorite_new_dodge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 19:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12922863</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Romney and the GOP insist the economy is more important than social issues. Why can't we address both?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the most overused metaphors in a writer’s arsenal is the one about “walking and chewing gum at the same time.” As a hiker and Big League Chew enthusiast, I particularly hate this cliché. Nonetheless, I feel it is fitting right now because it so perfectly summarizes the argument being made by Republicans. They now insist that America cannot simultaneously walk the walk on equal rights and also chew economic gum.</p><p>In the last week, Colorado was the testing ground for this talking point. At the presidential level, Republican nominee Mitt Romney criticized a Denver television reporter for daring to ask about his position on, among other issues, same-sex marriage. Before restating his opposition, he scoffed at the question, asking: “Aren’t there issues of significance that you’d like to talk about [like] the economy? The growth of jobs? The need to put people back to work?”</p><p>At the same time, Colorado's Republican House Speaker Frank McNulty twice blocked a vote on a bill to legalize civil unions. His rationale? “We should not be spending time on divisive social issues when unemployment remains far too high and [when] far too many Coloradans remain out of work,” he said. Echoing that sentiment, the shadowy Republican front group Compass Colorado financed an automated telephone call telling thousands of voters that the push for civil unions was unacceptable because it is “promoting [a] divisive social agenda over Colorado job creation.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/mitts_favorite_new_dodge/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/mitts_favorite_new_dodge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Colorado congressman: &#8220;Obama&#8217;s not an American&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/17/colorado_congressman_obamas_not_an_american/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/17/colorado_congressman_obamas_not_an_american/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 19:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12922188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A congressman renews the GOP's big lie, and reveals the party's true ideal: Male, rich, straight, white]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Twenty-four hour news cycles are messy and chaotic, almost never fully summarizing the zeitgeist of the moment. But today is one of those rare days where the news cycle perfectly embodies the tectonic shifts in American politics -- and the friction that comes from such shifts.</p><p>In the last day, we’ve learned that America has reached a demographic tipping point. For the <a href="”http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gy8c6FcXAW_nRvwGkx5HZaX8C_lQ?docId=b20a27dc535544e79c7b9815d7ef2b6b”">first time in history</a>, there are more minority births than white births in the United States, meaning we’re closer than ever to becoming a majority minority nation.</p><p>At almost exactly the same time these numbers were being released, a top Republican lawmaker, U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo., was making national headlines with a leaked audio recording of him publicly declaring that the first African-American president is “not an American.” Here’s the <a href="”http://media.ccomrcdn.com/media/station_content/650/Mike_Coffman_Obama_not_American_1337258151_10616.mp3”">audio</a> and full quote from Coffman’s remarks at a Republican fundraiser:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/17/colorado_congressman_obamas_not_an_american/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/17/colorado_congressman_obamas_not_an_american/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>97</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://media.ccomrcdn.com/media/station_content/650/Mike_Coffman_Obama_not_American_1337258151_10616.mp3" length="68180" type="audio/mpeg" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Beating back obesity</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/beating_back_obesity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/beating_back_obesity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 20:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obesity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12921651</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[America's weight problem is only getting worse. Here's how we can fix it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Benjamin Franklin was writing his famous letter to Jean-Baptiste Leroy today, his famous aphorism might read: "In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and the obesity crisis." It seems no matter the year or the season, that crisis inexorably continues, with experts now saying <a href="http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-08/news/31630229_1_obesity-related-eric-finkelstein-people-with-severe-obesity">42 percent of Americans will be obese by 2030</a>. And whether you are one of the 42 percent or not, that trend is going to affect you, because it is expected to cost the country roughly half a trillion (yes, <em>trillion</em>) in additional healthcare costs.</p><p>And yet, as relentless as the obesity crisis appears to be, its expansion doesn't have to be a foregone conclusion. That's because, unlike a naturally occurring epidemic, it's almost completely human created -- a reality that allows for the possibility of a human-directed reversal.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/beating_back_obesity/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/beating_back_obesity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is it ethical to drive stick?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/is_it_ethical_to_drive_stick/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/is_it_ethical_to_drive_stick/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 15:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumerism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12920113</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[More drivers are buying manual transmissions -- a boon for auto sentimentalists but bad news for the environment]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ever since I first watched my dad drive his chocolate brown Datsun 280 ZX back in the early 1980s, I've been inculcated to believe that driving -- true driving -- can only be performed with a stick shift. From that childhood experience, I came to see the manual transmission as a birthright passed down from my grandfather, to my father, and eventually to me via a series of tense, stall-filled lessons when I turned 16. In my case, after ripping apart the transmission one too many times, my dad went barking drill sergeant on me, eventually teaching me that a stick requires a special kind of focus, and that I needed to ease up more slowly on the clutch in order to get into first gear on those damn inclines. Through the experience, I learned to consider my stick-shifting skill a special talent with transcendent value.</p><p>Yes, of course, in the intervening years I've had the chance to drive an automatic transmission. But that has always felt a bit like playing a post-<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konami_Code">Konami Code</a> game of Contra -- a bit too easy, a bit too idiot proof, a bit too, shall we say, inauthentic. On top of that, the automatic always seemed like a wasteful luxury because it always was more expensive and less fuel-efficient. That difference consequently added an ascetic populism to the inherent machismo of the engine-revving manual transmission.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/is_it_ethical_to_drive_stick/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/is_it_ethical_to_drive_stick/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>137</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Our guns and butter economy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/our_guns_and_butter_economy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/our_guns_and_butter_economy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 13:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obesity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12919036</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[America has two favorite new exports: Firearms and obesity]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the economy still struggling and the debates over how to fix the problem more intense than ever, one word still evokes bipartisan consensus: exports. “I want us to sell stuff,” said President Obama, summing up the bipartisan sentiment.</p><p>That nebulous word "stuff" is significant. It asks us to see all exports as the same and to refrain from making nuanced value judgments about what exactly we're shipping overseas. In this coldblooded view, a job-creating export is a job-creating export, and that's as far as any conversation should go.</p><p>At first glance, such reductionism seems logical, rational, even boringly uncontroversial. But two recent news items highlight how in a globalized economy, there are troubling consequences that come from the particular kind of export economy we're building.</p><p>The first bit of news came from the Washington Post, which this week reported that "the Obama administration is crafting a proposal that could make it easier to export firearms and other weapons." Though the Homeland Security and Justice Departments say the new rules could make it easier for terrorist and drug cartels to further arm themselves, the White House is nonetheless citing the "stuff" theory of exports to ignore the objections.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/our_guns_and_butter_economy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/our_guns_and_butter_economy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#8217;s marriage apologists</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/obamas_marriage_apologists/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/obamas_marriage_apologists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 17:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gay Marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12917455</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If the president reverses his position today, we can thank activists -- not the pundits who gave him a pass]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week, Gallup's <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/154529/Half-Americans-Support-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx?utm_source=google&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=syndication">poll</a> showed that half of all Americans now support legalizing same sex marriage. This same week, President Obama had his spokesperson <a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/05/jay-carney-has-lot-not-answer-gay-marriage/52060/">reiterate</a> his opposition to such a move. That's right, in the face of near-majority public support for equality, the official position of the Democratic administration is that its "feelings about this are constantly evolving" -- a direct quote from the president in 2010.</p><p>In light of Obama's past support for gay marriage as a state legislator and his recent refusal to sign an order barring federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, it would be logical to assume that -- sans a full-scale reversal (which <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/09/obama-gay-marriage-interview-robin-roberts-abc-news_n_1503311.html">may be in the works tonight</a>) -- the president's position has been "evolving" toward more entrenched opposition to equality.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/obamas_marriage_apologists/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/obamas_marriage_apologists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can beer save America?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/07/can_beer_save_america/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/07/can_beer_save_america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 15:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumerism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12915998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The redemption of the economy may start with the type of brew you keep in your fridge]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The grand unifying theory of the American consumer has been that we are, first and foremost, low price fetishists. There’s <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cheap-High-Cost-Discount-Culture/dp/159420215X">ample evidence</a> supporting this view: From Wal-Mart’s prominence to the fast food industry’s ongoing success, vast swaths of the economy are indeed built on the premise that buyers will prioritize discounts and quantity over premium prices and quality.</p><p>But ever so quietly, we are starting to see the rise and success of a competing vision, one that turns the old assumption on its head. In the technology arena, for instance, Apple is successfully challenging the PC world with a business model that convinces consumers to pay higher prices in exchange for better reliability, durability, efficiency and customer service. Likewise in the transportation world, more and more consumers are willing to pay higher prices upfront for hybrid and electric vehicles in exchange for the promise of lower long-term energy costs. This has encouraged companies like Philips to introduce <a href="http://www.slashgear.com/you-can-buy-a-20-year-light-bulb-for-as-low-as-25-22224061/">more expensive light bulbs</a>, in hopes that consumers will pay more for illumination that promises to use less electricity and last 20 years.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/07/can_beer_save_america/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/07/can_beer_save_america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>61</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who owns the cloud?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/04/who_owns_the_cloud/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/04/who_owns_the_cloud/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 12:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Culture]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12914415</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Google claims users retain intellectual property rights, but the terms of service tell a more complex story]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When you hear the phrase “property rights,” you probably think of farmers fighting environmental regulators and homeowners arguing with oil drillers. But in the Information Age, you should also be thinking about your computer – and asking, how much of you is really yours? It’s not a navel-gazing rumination from a college Intro to Existentialism class – it’s an increasingly pressing question in the brave new world of social networking and cloud computing.</p><p>Last week’s big technology announcement spotlighted the thorny issue. As the Los Angeles Times reported, Google’s announcement of its “Google Drive” came with the promise that users will “retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content.” But when you save files to Google’s new hard-drive folder in the cloud, the terms of service you are required to agree to gives Google “a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute (your) content” as the company sees fit.</p><p>When asked about this, Google argued that its provisions merely “enable us to give you the services you want - so if you decide to share a document with someone, or open it on a different device, you can.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/04/who_owns_the_cloud/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/04/who_owns_the_cloud/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Blood on the ice</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/02/blood_on_the_ice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/02/blood_on_the_ice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 19:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hockey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12913710</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hockey has sunk to new levels of brutality -- and fans are excitedly cheering it on]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Out of all the sports that try to shroud hardcore violence in the veneer of athleticism -- and there are many -- none has a closer relationship to bloodshed than professional hockey. This is an institution that goes beyond professional football in that it doesn’t merely permit bone-crushing hits as a part of the game itself -- it all but condones players halting a game in progress to break out into fisticuffs.</p><p>In the past, when anyone has aired criticism of hockey’s connection to violence, the typical response is that it’s part of the sport’s tradition. In much the same way it has been used in politics to pretend problems are unfixable, this “culture” argument in hockey has served as a flippant conversation ender -- one that short-circuits any frank discussion of what fuels such a culture and whether it should be changed. As the logic goes, the culture has always defined the sport, and always will -- so why judge its value or lack thereof?</p><p>Left unexplored is <em>why</em> such a culture exists? That topic is avoided because it might make the violence seem like a symptom of something bigger rather than an isolated problem. That is, it might turn the mirror away from the game and onto its fans -- in the process reflecting back the image of a violence-glorifying society that all-too-eagerly condones brutality as a matter of principle.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/02/blood_on_the_ice/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/02/blood_on_the_ice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>129</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kenneth Cole gets schooled</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/30/kenneth_cole_gets_schooled/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/30/kenneth_cole_gets_schooled/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fashion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12912159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Updated: The fashion mogul has backed off his assault on schoolteachers after a public outcry]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>[UPDATE BELOW]</strong></p><p>It was always bound to go there, but few likely expected it would be so blatant. I'm talking about the ongoing campaign against organized labor; for decades deeply rooted in American political culture, the crusade has been periodically amplified in popular culture as well, from 1954's "On the Waterfront" all the way to the Sopranos' depiction of mob-controlled unions (and sometimes pop culture and political culture have even <a href="http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/08/antiunion_group_enlists_sopran.html">fused</a>). So it was only a matter of time before vilifying rank-and-file union members would be commodified into a consumer brand by a company looking for an edge in the high-end retail market.</p><p>That's where Kenneth Cole now comes in. The clothing designer has just launched a new crusade to tie his expensive clothing and shoes line to the elite's movement du jour: the fight to demonize public schoolteachers and their unions. In a <a href="http://wheredoyoustand.awearness.com/system/billboards/56/original/wellred_WDYS_2.png?1331736329">billboard</a> and <a href="http://www.awearness.com/#Page_WDYSNewsPage">Web-based campaign</a>, Cole's foundation portrays the national debate over education as one that supposedly pits "Teachers' Rights vs. Students' Rights."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/30/kenneth_cole_gets_schooled/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/30/kenneth_cole_gets_schooled/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Horrors we hide</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/27/horrors_we_hide/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/27/horrors_we_hide/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poverty]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12910344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From slaughterhouses to sweatshops, modern society is constructed to let us ignore atrocities]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Would Americans eat less meat, and would animals be treated more humanely, if slaughterhouses were made with glass walls and we all could see the monstrous killing apparatus at work? This is the query at the heart of Timothy Pachirat's new book, <a href="http://click.linksynergy.com/deeplink?mid=36889&id=FYUtulI7nw4&murl=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.barnesandnoble.com%2Fbooksearch%2FISBNInquiry.asp%3FEAN%3D9780300152678%26">"Every Twelve Seconds"</a> -- the title a reference to the typical slaughterhouse's cattle-killing rate.</p><p>Before you think this is a column merely about food, recognize that Pachirat's question isn't (only) about the immorality of the cheeseburger you had for lunch. It’s about the larger phenomenon whereby modern society has reconstructed itself to hide so many horrific consequences from view.</p><p>Calling this the "politics of sight," Pachirat's blood-soaked experience inside a slaughterhouse spotlights only the most illustrative example of how we've divorced ourselves from the means of producing violence -- and how, in doing so, we have made it psychologically easier to support such brutality. Sadly, billions of factory-farmed animals dying barbaric deaths are just one subset of casualties in that larger process.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/27/horrors_we_hide/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/27/horrors_we_hide/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>29</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fracking&#8217;s best friends</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/25/frackings_best_friends/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/25/frackings_best_friends/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 01:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oil Industry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12909544</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State politicians in Colo. and Pa. are blocking local communities from fighting back against Big Energy]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the ongoing battle over the development of domestic fossil fuel resources, there is no shortage of unanswered questions. Is hydraulic fracking perfectly safe? How toxic are the chemicals used in that controversial oil and gas extraction technique? To protect the environment, do we need to better regulate the process?</p><p>These are questions that can be answered -- and, in fact, are <a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/does-an-old-epa-fracking-study-provide-proof-of-contamination">already</a> <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2011/0509/Fracking-for-natural-gas-is-polluting-ground-water-study-concludes">answered</a> -- most accurately by dispassionate scientists. But in a country whose public policymaking apparatus is so dominated by money, the scientific questions may ultimately be less important than a set of key political questions: namely, which level of government gets to decide whether drilling moves forward -- state or local?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/25/frackings_best_friends/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/25/frackings_best_friends/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America&#8217;s true tax rate</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/23/americas_true_tax_rate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/23/americas_true_tax_rate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 17:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12908211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. already has flat taxes. But conservatives, like Pat Tiberi, are still clamoring for cuts for the rich]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A week after Tax Day, the incessant drumbeat <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/18/465999/tiberi-defends-tax-hike-poor/?mobile=nc">continues</a>: conservatives are, as usual, insisting that the wealthy pay too much in taxes, and that middle- and lower-income Americans should therefore pay more. The idea is that the U.S. tax code is so intensely progressive, that it not only punishes the so-called "job creators," but also allows millions of supposed loafers to not "have skin in the game," as <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/18/465999/tiberi-defends-tax-hike-poor/?mobile=nc">Rep. Pat Tiberi</a> (R-OH) insisted.</p><p>Tiberi, like so many of his conservative colleagues, argues that millions of the loafers "don't pay taxes" - a fantasy that effectively reimagines GOP opposition to, say, the Buffet Rule as an honorable attempt to prevent a supposedly progressive tax system from becoming more progressive. That opposition is portrayed as part of a larger effort to push the system toward flatness. And, of course, flatness in tax rates is the conservative vision of pure fairness, with the right going so far as to label its flat tax initiatives a <a href="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer">"fair tax"</a> campaign.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/23/americas_true_tax_rate/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/23/americas_true_tax_rate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>29</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America&#8217;s Christian hypocrisy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/20/americas_christian_hypocrisy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/20/americas_christian_hypocrisy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12891961</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Bible preaches tolerance and liberal economics. So why do its proponents embrace right-wing politics?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here’s a newspaper headline that might induce a disbelieving double take: “Christians ‘More Likely to Be Leftwing’ and Have Liberal Views on Immigration and Equality.” Sounds too hard to believe, right? Well, it’s true -- only not here in America, but in the United Kingdom.</p><p>That headline, from London’s Daily Mail, summed up the two-tiered conclusion of a new report from the British think tank Demos, which found that in England 1) “religious people are more active citizens (who) volunteer more, donate more to charity and are more likely to campaign on political issues,” and 2) “religious people are more likely to be politically progressive (people who) put a greater value on equality than the non-religious, are more likely to be welcoming of immigrants as neighbors (and) more likely to put themselves on the left of the political spectrum.”</p><p>These findings are important to America for two reasons.</p><p>First, they tell us that, contrary to evidence in the United States, the intersection of religion and politics doesn’t have to be fraught with hypocrisy. Britain is a Christian-dominated country, and the Christian Bible is filled with liberal economic sentiment. It makes perfect sense, then, that the more devoutly loyal to that Bible one is, the more progressive one would be on economics.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/20/americas_christian_hypocrisy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/20/americas_christian_hypocrisy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>268</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are all mega-chains the same?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/18/are_all_mega_chains_the_same/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/18/are_all_mega_chains_the_same/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumerism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12882361</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why an ethical consumer can trust Trader Joe's over Target]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two bursts of recent headlines here in Colorado had me feeling more than a wee bit conflicted. First came the news that the much-celebrated <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_19768633">Trader Joe's is coming to our state</a>. Then came word that the Denver City Council had been <a href="http://kdvr.com/2012/02/29/target-wants-5-million-from-denver-or-it-will-abandon-tamarac-square-project/">threatened</a> into ponying up <a href="http://kdvr.com/2012/03/20/58663/">$5 million</a> in public funds to bring yet another Target to the Front Range.</p><p>Between my exuberant reaction to the first story and my disgust at hearing the second story, I wondered: Why did I feel psyched about one mega-chain coming to my area but disgusted at the news of another coming to the same locale? As someone aspiring to be an "ethical consumer" who cares about my community (if that's not, unto itself, an oxymoron), aren't I supposed to hate both bits of news? Or is it possible that not all national chains are created equal? Is it possible, in fact, that some are better than others?</p><p>Upon some hearty investigation, I think the answer is yes, some are better than others -- and I'm not saying that (only) because it helps me avoid feeling like a complete sellout to the corporate machine.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/18/are_all_mega_chains_the_same/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/18/are_all_mega_chains_the_same/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>93</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scrap the lotto</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/16/scrap_the_lotto/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/16/scrap_the_lotto/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 18:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12873621</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Politicians encourage irresponsible gambling in order to avoid facing America's desperate need to raise taxes]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the days following the historic Mega Millions lottery, there’s been no shortage of drama. Rather than capping off a crescendo of excitement, the drawing ignited an explosion of <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57410358/mega-millions-winners-still-a-mystery/">who-won-it speculation</a>. News organizations breathlessly reported the stories of false victors, <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501363_162-57410647/alleged-mega-millions-winner-says-she-lost-ticket/">lost tickets</a><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57410358/mega-millions-winners-still-a-mystery/"> and state officials</a> <a href="http://www.governing.com/blogs/view/three-states-mega-millions-jackpot.html">envisioning</a><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57410358/mega-millions-winners-still-a-mystery/"> a revenue windfall</a> from possible winners in their income-tax jurisdiction. Almost completely ignored in the hysteria was any examination of America’s problematic obsession with lottery mania.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/16/scrap_the_lotto/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/16/scrap_the_lotto/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>74</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sports activism&#8217;s welcome rebirth</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/sports_activisms_welcome_rebirth/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/sports_activisms_welcome_rebirth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Labor Movement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12858501</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From LeBron James to Tim Tebow, sports stars are getting involved in politics again -- and that's a good thing]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As high-profile events periodically prove, politics and athletics have long had a love-hate relationship, the affinity ebbing and flowing with the cultural tides. In the tumultuous 1960s, for instance, stars like Muhammed Ali, Arthur Ashe and John Carlos used their notoriety to embolden the major social movements of the time. Then came the 1980s and 1990s, which saw the sports world depoliticized in an age of “Just Do It” and “greed is good.” For every Charles Barkley using Nike commercials to forward social messages about role models, there were far more Michael Jordans who avoided any political statements whatsoever.</p><p>Skip forward to 2012 -- a superheated moment primed by seething protest campaigns and a divisive presidential election. Not surprisingly, the sports world has again shifted, becoming just as politically fraught as the society it entertains -- and whether or not you agree with a particular sports icon’s opinion, the larger change is a welcome development for participatory democracy.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/sports_activisms_welcome_rebirth/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/13/sports_activisms_welcome_rebirth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How the drug war hurts everyone</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/12/how_the_drug_war_hurts_everyone/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/12/how_the_drug_war_hurts_everyone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War on Drugs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12856671</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Wall Street to Oakland, recent events prove the campaign isn't just futile. It's a deadly waste of resources]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Something as massive and amorphous as America's War on Drugs can be difficult to imagine in concrete terms. This web of failed policies is so huge, so persistent and so deeply woven into the fabric of our nation that it's hard to envision an alternative -- or even appreciate what the conflict is currently siphoning resources away from.</p><p>That's why the past week has been so important for the cause of ending the drug war -- because it has provided three tragic examples of how that war harms not only its dead and/or incarcerated victims, but also how it makes society as a whole more susceptible to horrific crimes.</p><p>In Boulder, Colo., for example, the <a href="http://www.dailycamera.com/cu-news/ci_20315090/cu-boulder-police-will-ticket-marijuana-smokers-at">Daily Camera</a> reports that "the University of Colorado announced a new plan to snuff out the Boulder campus's 4/20 smoke-out, warning that police will ticket pot smokers at this month's event." In a state whose police forces have faced <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14303473">serious budget cuts</a>, this decision clearly reflects a hardcore War on Drugs ideology by removing finite police resources from safety and security operations and instead focusing them on punishing pot use.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/12/how_the_drug_war_hurts_everyone/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/12/how_the_drug_war_hurts_everyone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>86</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

