Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

“I never set out to be an action star”: Dolph Lundgren on his career and the toll taken on his body

Dolph Lundgren directs and stars in “Castle Falls,” a diverting action film about Mike (Scott Adkins), a down on his luck fighter. Taking a job preparing the titular building for demolition, he discovers a $100 bill, which leads to him finding a hidden $3 million. As Mike plans to take the money and run, he encounters Richard Ericson (Lundgren), a prison guard who arrives on the scene after getting a tip from an inmate about the stashed cash. Ericson hopes to recover the money to pay for his daughter’s cancer treatment, however, he and Mike must get past a paramilitary group that has broken into the condemned building as well — and they have less than 90 minutes before Castle Falls is imploded. 

As an actor whose resumé includes numerous action films — from old school classics like “Masters of the Universe” and “Universal Soldier,” to the recent franchises, “Aquaman” and “The Expendables” — Lundgren shows real aplomb as a filmmaker with some of the hide-and-seek moments, and during the many fight sequences.

He spoke with Salon about his new film, action scenes and his career trajectory. 

“Castle Falls” is a passion project for you. Why did you decide to both act in it and direct?

I wanted to direct because I hadn’t directed for a while. Scott [Adkins] and I had another film we were going to do and that fell out, so I was looking for a two-hander. I found this and rewrote it to make both characters sympathetic. I wanted [Mike and Erickson] to come up against each other and then be together. I didn’t know how I would like directing again, so I wanted to try a small movie that had some action and drama and see how it went.

RELATED: “Debt Collectors” star Scott Adkins talks brawl that is a “straight rip-off” of “They Live” fight scene

I really got into it. It felt really good to be immersed in all these decisions about music, and cinematography, and acting, and story and locations. We had a tough time in Alabama, because we got shut down the first day of shooting [because of COVID] and had to hold up for seven months. We came back and finished it the end of last year. It was a challenge, but I really enjoyed it. I would love to direct more films. 

What can you say, having made so many action films, about filming the action sequences and working with Scott?

Scott was a big part of it because he is a perfectionist. He is a big fighter and he has a choreographer in Europe that he sent clips to and he would rehearse with the stunt guys.

We had a good operator who is a stunt double, who works on the Marvel franchise. He can anticipate the moves, because he knows how to fight, too. So, we were able to do these longer takes without using doubles, and that’s unusual these days. Not many actors can fight like Scott, so you double and [edit]. In the fight with my character, I did my own fighting, too — save a tackle because I didn’t want to break anything. The idea was the audience would see the actors do their own fights, kicks, and punches. The rest of the action was just a matter of having enough coverage because we only had 17 days of shooting. I had to be clever to get it done fast. 

I like that you are playing an aging hero who gets winded climbing up stairs. What can say about the toll action films have had on your body? 

Yeah, it’s taken its toll for sure. I have had lots of surgeries. I hurt myself in the Swedish army and in my martial arts. I’ve had various injuries — my ankle, broken noses, hip surgeries and a hip replacement. In this picture, I wanted to play a guy who is a dad and prison guard, he is not a top trained athlete. I’d thought I’d rather go in the direction, like Clint Eastwood does; he played his age in “In the Line of Fire.” I think it’s important. I’m still in pretty good shape at my age, but it is good to get the audience to feel sorry for you and worry about you! I used that in this film. We had to walk up and down 10 flights of stairs, so 40 flights a day up and down twice a day. People were tired! 

Did you make a deliberate decision not to shoot in real time? 

It was something like that in the original script — not quite as extreme. The ticking clock plot — the building was always going to blow up. We had limited resources, so to make the second half of the picture more like real time, it would ratchet up the tension. So, we worked on script to layer that in there, and see how much time things would take. So, the time countdown and setting the film mostly in one location hopefully put some extra tension on who was going to make it, and how they would get out.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


They just screened “Rocky vs. Drago,” here in Philadelphia, with Stallone in attendance. This was your breakout role. What thoughts do you have about your career and longevity as an action star? 

It was my first real movie. I had [a small part] in a Bond film. I never expected to be an action star. I never set out to be an action star. I got into acting because it made me feel good. I had done “A View to Kill” and “Rocky IV” when I read an article about John Wayne, who did 100 movies, and I thought, “Oh s**t!, I have 98 to go to be John Wayne!” But now I am at 80 films, so I hung in there! To be honest, my career is more interesting and challenging and satisfying lately. I got a role in the “Aquaman” franchise, and “Creed II,” and the directing. I guess it was meant to be. I came from engineering and martial arts.

Anything you can reveal about your upcoming “Expendables” film and the appeal of that franchise? 

We’re doing No. 4 now. We have new people in it: 50 Cent, Megan Fox, and Andy Garcia and a few others. I think it’s still a strong franchise, but it’s old-school action with shootouts, vehicles and machines. It’s a macho kind of movie. It’s fun to be part of it. Who knows how long it will go on? I enjoy doing both that and “Aquaman.” They are both different movies. One is visual-effects driven, with a huge budget. The other one is souped-up Harley on steroids.

“Castle Falls” is in theaters, on demand and on digital on Friday, Dec. 3. Watch a trailer for it below, via YouTube.

More stories you might like:

Senator Collins comes under fire after SCOTUS signals support for restrictive abortion ban

Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine, is once again facing scrutiny for her support of Donald Trump’s nominees to the Supreme Court in light of this week’s oral arguments in case that threatens the constitutional protection of abortion.

Promoting the bill she co-authored with Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill, which had just passed into law by President Biden this week, Collins was slammed by critics. 

“The U.S. has an unacceptably high maternal mortality rate w/ stark racial disparities, & this crisis impacts women veterans as well.” she wrote on Twitter, “A bill @SenDuckworth & I authored in the Senate aims to change this. Today, @POTUS signed it into law, which will improve veterans’ maternal care.”

https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins/status/1465753319524163584

Instead of praise, Collins was flooded with mention of her past support for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. 

RELATED: Commentators blast Susan Collins for supporting Brett Kavanaugh

“You picked a bad day to express your “concern” about women and maternal mortality,” one user responded, “Your “concern” appears it will lead to increases in maternal mortality in Mississippi.”

https://twitter.com/Scott_ology/status/1466193137349636102

Collins previously said that she did not believe Kavanaugh would overturn Roe v. Wade, as she said he considered the matter to be “settled law.” Asked on Thursday whether or not she believed that Kavanagh still sees Roe as settled law following his line of questioning during this week’s oral arguments in a case about Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban, Collins demurred and simply said, “I think we all need to wait and see what the final decision is.” 

RELATED: Collins on Kavanaugh’s abortion vote: “There is a deliberate misreading of what he actually wrote”

After Judge Kavanaugh had expressed support for a similarly restrictive anti-abortion law in Louisiana, Collins told CNN that Kavanaugh had assured her during his confirmation process that the landmark opinion was safe.

“He said under oath many times, as well as to me personally many times, that he considers Roe to be ‘precedent upon precedent,’ because it had been reaffirmed in the Casey v. Planned Parenthood case.” she said. 

RELATED: Susan Collins still into Brett Kavanaugh, defends his precedent-shattering anti-choice vote

When that law was struck down by the court, with Kavanaugh in the minority supporting it being upheld, Senator Collins again said that his vote was “no indication in his dissenting opinion that he supports overturning Roe.”

If Mississippi’s abortion restrictions are upheld by the Supreme Court, it seems clear that abortion will become a state issue once again. Mississippi currently has only one licensed abortion facility in the state, leaving that healthcare access inaccessible to thousands of women.

RELATED: Collins calls Supreme Court decision on Texas abortion ban “extreme,” stays mum on Kavanaugh support

Former Fox News employee slams network: “Beyond reckless” for enabling conspiracies

A former Fox News political analyst is slamming the network for its prolonged failure to censor host Tucker Carlson as he continues to circulate misinformation and dangerous rhetoric. 

On Friday, December 3, Chris Stirewalt appeared on WV Metro News where he shared his perspective on the Fox News, the departure of Stephen Hayes and Jonah Goldberg as contributors, and the network’s unwavering support of Carlson.

Both Goldberg and Hayes recently opted to part ways with Fox News citing their opposition toward Carlson’s controversial, conspiracy-driven documentary about the Jan. 6 insurrection.

“What Steve and Jonah did in giving up compensation and a high visibility post was to put their money literally where their mouth is,” Stirewalt said, adding, “What Fox allowed in Tucker Carlson’s documentary, which said that January 6 was potentially a false flag operation undertaken by the federal government and that Americans were being put in Guantanomo over pictures of waterboarding, was beyond reckless and is another mile-marker down the road to the kind of Alex Jones-ian, Infowars-ian garbage that makes it impossible to have any kind of conversation.”

He added: “If you can say stuff and not support it — except for with conspiracy theorizing gobbledygook — then that’s no good.”

He went on to note that Hayes and Goldberg’s concerns were focused on Fox News’ dismissal of Carlson’s actions and lack of journalistic integrity. Stirewalt’s remarks come weeks after Carlson’s dangerous documentary aired. The primetime conservative news host faced sharp criticism for the disturbing claims he perpetuated in his segment.

Tremors and “internal vibrations”: Long Covid patients are reporting Parkinson’s-like symptoms

A new study of long Covid patients is shedding light on a combination of underreported symptoms, including Parkinson’s-like tremors and internal vibrations, that are severely impacting the lives of those affected.

A research paper submitted to the journal MedRXiv on Friday aims to raise awareness of a condition that has yet to be defined in people who are still struggling with lingering symptoms months or years after their initial infection with COVID-19. The neologism “long Covid” is an informal term for what doctors call “post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection,” or PASC; it defines to the condition in which those who previously had COVID-19, and no longer test positive, still have lingering symptoms.

The authors of the paper include Diana Berrent, who started Survivor Corps, a support group for those recovering from COVID-19. The paper includes first-person narratives of those who have developed tremors and vibrations while having long Covid.

“Now here at almost 8 months post covid, I have dealt with these horrible tremors daily,” one participant in the study stated. “They are constant, they don’t come and go. They are 24/7. I feel them more when I am still and resting or at night and early morning, or during naps.”

This study was inspired by the suicide of Heidi Ferrer, a screenwriter and Survivor Corps member, who suffered from tremors and vibrations. Ferrer’s husband, Nick Güthe, co-authored the paper and has worked with Survivor Corps to find other people dealing with the same symptoms.

“She [Ferrer] said it was like somebody inserting a cell phone into your chest and turning off the vibration function, but they have the ability to turn it on randomly at any point in the night,” Güthe told Salon. “And so she really couldn’t sleep, even with Ambien, and other sleep medications because the vibrations would wake her up and then it would take her hours to fall back to sleep.”


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


Güthe said his hope is that the story of his wife, and of more long Covid patients suffering from the tremors and vibrations, is the “canary in the coal mine for American medicine.”

“There are many, many people out there suffering with this, and it’s a really dangerous condition because if you cannot sleep you cannot heal,” Güthe said. “If you cannot sleep, you lose hope.”

Survivor Corps collected 140 emails and 450 Facebook comments from members of the support group to identify seven broad themes regarding people’s experiences of the tremors and vibrations, including feeling them on their feet, hands or back. While there were some commonalities in experiences, there was much variety regarding the onset of these symptoms.

“Overall, these patient narratives described intense suffering, and there is still no diagnosis or treatment available,” the authors of the study wrote.

Liza Fisher, a participant in the COVID-19 long-hauler study, was diagnosed with COVID-19 in July, 2020, when she was 36. Fisher was admitted to the intensive care unit and then a rehabilitation hospital, which is when she developed tremors and vibrations.

“I developed severe debilitating tremors and the internal vibrations that people speak of, and my tremors were very heavy Parkinsonian-like, they were my entire body,” Fisher told Salon. “I had lost my ability to walk.”

Over the last 17 months, Fisher has been looking for answers. Recently, doctors implanted a neuromodulation device in her spine, which has reduced the tremors.

Up to 10 percent of those who contract COVID-19 have long-term symptoms long after the virus has cleared their body, according to University of Alabama researchers. 

People who experience long Covid sometimes refer to themselves as “long-haulers.” Some long-haulers eventually experience full recoveries, while others do not. Other long Covid symptoms patients report include (but aren’t limited to) fatigue, brain fog, confusion, shortness of breath, headaches, and chest pain. Notably, not everyone who became a long-hauler had a severe infection or was hospitalized after their COVID-19 diagnosis.

Hannah Davis, who wasn’t involved in the study but co-leads the Patient-Led Research Collaborative, told Salon tremors and vibrations were a common symptom reported in a study the patient-led research group published last December, too.

“We found about 40% experienced tremors, and 30% experienced what we call vibrating sensations, and those are different even though they sound kind of similar,” Davis told Salon. “Tremors, I think can be a broader category and include hand tremors, internal tremors, like seen in Parkinson’s, where the vibrating sensation is truly just a very strange symptom that doesn’t appear commonly in medical literature.”

Davis said she thinks people are often “nervous” to discuss the vibrations, but they have been reported in two separate post-viral illnesses.

One of them, dysautonomia, involves a “dysfunction of the autonomic nerves,” as Davis explained. Autonomic nerves control autonomic functions of the body, including heart rate and digestion. 

“Both the tremors and vibrations happen very often in that category and also in a related category called small fiber neuropathy,” Davis commented.

Davis agreed that raising awareness about these symptoms is “necessary,” along with “everything around long Covid.”

Indeed, the authors of the most recent paper hope these first-hand narratives spur more research into this condition as it relates to long Covid.

“We pursued this study in partnership with patients in the hope that we could stimulate more research, and let those suffering these symptoms know they are not alone,” said Harlan Krumholz, who co-authored the paper. “The inescapable conclusion from this work is that there are a group of people suffering from a common symptom complex that has yet to be understood – and the impact on people’s lives can be catastrophic.”

New report reveals the deep-rooted racism plaguing U.S. military academies

Over the last 70 years, the United States military academies criteria have undergone drastic policy changes to improve diversity. Now, many military academies are opening their doors to both men and women of different ethnicities, creeds, and sexual orientations.

However, racism remains an issue within the United States services’ officer corps — the academies of the U.S. Army, the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Coast Guard, and U.S. Merchant Marine, according to The Associated Press.

In short, all military academy cadets wearing the same uniforms still do not receive equal treatment. Speaking to the AP, multiple service members have recounted their experiences at military academies across the United States. Carlton Shelley II, a football recruit who entered West Point Academy in 2009, detailed the stark difference in his treatment on and off the field.

“On the field, he described the team as ‘a brotherhood,’ where his skin color never impacted how he was treated,” AP News reports. “But off the field, he said, he and other Black classmates too often were treated like the stereotype of the angry Black man – an experience that brought him to tears at the time.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


“I was repeatedly in trouble or being corrected for infractions that were not actually infractions,” Shelley said. “It was a very deliberate choice to dig and to push on certain individuals compared with other cadets — white cadets.”

Shelley also expressed concern about the graduation rate among Black cadets. While he noted that academies have improved where racial diversity is concerned, he also suggested that there is still room for improvement when it comes to retaining and supporting students of color. Ranking inequalities also remain issues for service members of color.

Per the Associated Press:

Only 6% of nominations to the Army, Air Force and Naval academies made by the current members of Congress went to Black candidates, even though 15% of the population aged 18 to 24 is Black, according to a report on the service academies released in March by the Connecticut Veterans’ Legal Center. Eight percent of congressional nominations went to Hispanic students, though they make up 22% of young adults, the report said. …

According to the data provided to the AP, graduation rates between racial groups at the Naval and Coast Guard academies continued to show gaps. At the Naval Academy, for example, Black midshipmen still had the lowest graduation rate of any racial group at 74%, compared to the 2020 school-wide rate of 87%. And the Black graduation rate of 65% at the Coast Guard Academy between 2011 and 2020 lagged about 20 percentage points behind other racial groups.

Xavier Bruce, a 1999 graduate of Air Force Academy, also shed light on the challenges he faced amid his rise to lieutenant colonel in his 24 years of service. “We just feel it, we feel the energy behind it, and it just eats us away,” he said.

More like this:

Even if the U.S. did support mothers — and it doesn’t — there will always be a need for abortion

In a sign of the utter bad faith shot throughout the conservative arguments for abortion bans, the lawyers defending Mississippi’s pre-viability ban in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Clinic are claiming that women don’t need abortion because — wait for it — of all the great social safety net programs supporting mothers that Americans enjoy these days. 

Mississippi’s lawyers argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday that “numerous laws enacted since Roe — addressing pregnancy discrimination, requiring leave time, assisting with child care and more — facilitate the ability of women to pursue both career success and a rich family life.” The Washington Post also gave Mississippi attorney general Lynn Fitch space to make the breathtakingly dishonest argument that women pay no professional or economic penalty for unwanted childbearing. “[I]t has become easier for women to reach the very pinnacle of our success, economically and socially” without abortion, she writes, because, um, “[m]aternity leave and even paternity leave are commonplace.” Just in case you were unsure she is a big, fat liar, she also throws in, “Men and women are sharing responsibilities in the home.” (No, they are not.)

RELATED: Will Supreme Court conservatives overturn Roe? Their casual contempt for women is not a good sign

These arguments are such self-evident nonsense that there’s little chance that the intent is to fool anyone. Rather it’s about propping facile justifications for abortion bans that are, in reality, rooted in a misogynistic desire to punish women for having sex. 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Even having to debunk these arguments feels debasing, so hats off to Claire Cain Miller of the New York Times, who took on the task. “The United States stands out for its absence of national paid leave,” she writes, and child care “is unaffordable for nearly half of American families.” In addition, “access to abortion for young women with unplanned pregnancies led to higher earnings, more education and a higher chance of being a professional or manager than seen in women denied access to abortion.” Studies show, time and again, abortion access materially improves women’s lives

But even if the U.S. were the socialist paradise that Mississippi lawyers are pretending it is, that would not justify abortion bans.

Abortion is not an insurance plan to protect against career derailment. It’s about very basic human rights: To control your body and to make very basic decisions about your life. As Julie Rikelman of the Center for Reproductive Rights argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday, “For a state to take control of a woman’s body and demand that she go through pregnancy and childbirth with all the physical risks and life-altering consequences that brings is a fundamental deprivation of her liberty.” Yes, even if you get to go back to work afterward. 

RELATED: Are women people? Why the Supreme Court just signed off on a Texas law that denies women’s humanity

The abortion debate is contentious not because of inadequate maternity leave, but because it cuts right to the heart of the larger struggle over whether or not women should be regarded as full human beings. It’s why even having this debate over maternity leave and social safety nets feels debasing. It’s undergirded by this assumption that women are too dumb to know what they need and want and so need a little coercion to understand the endless supposed bliss that awaits them after they are forced to give birth. 

Fitch has been heavily promoting the claim that having a baby is always the best thing, and if a pregnant person doesn’t agree, it must be because she’s stupid and needs correction. She even told EWTN Pro-Life Weekly host Catherine Hadro that banning abortion is a gift because “the mothers that will get the chance to really redirect their lives,” and women “can have these beautiful children and you can have your careers.” The premise is that all women are in a permanent state of wanting to have a baby, and if they say otherwise, it must be under duress. 

But this idea that women never truly want an abortion is a total and demonstrable lie.

In the U.S., 6 out of 10 abortion patients have already had a baby. They are fully educated in the joys and challenges of motherhood, and that knowledge is informing their choice to abort this particular pregnancy. In countries that really do have the social safety net that Mississippi is pretending exists here, abortion has not vanished. The abortion rates in countries like France and Sweden are comparable to the United States, even though they have much more generous maternity leave and child care policies. Wealthier countries do have lower abortion rates, but that’s because contraception access leads to lower overall pregnancy rates. But as long as there’s unintended pregnancy, there will be abortion.


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


That’s because a very basic, unchanging fact about human nature: People want to have a lot more sex than they want to have babies. Yes, even women. People have sex when it’s not the right time for a baby. People have sex with partners who aren’t the right fit to have a baby with. People have sex even when they’ve had as many children as they want to have. Contraception makes this safer, but it’s not foolproof. Which is why you can throw as many maternity benefits as you want at women, but they will still need access to abortion. 

Conservatives get away with this bad faith, because of a larger cultural prudery. There’s a general unwillingness, even among a lot of progressives, to defend women’s sexuality without caveat. Conservatives want to prop up this ideal of women as asexual beings who only have sex to please men and/or have babies. Abortion’s popularity, however, exposes the truth: Lots of women have sex with men they don’t want to have a baby with — either right now or ever.

Rather that just let women be, the Christian right wants to use abortion bans to punish women for not adhering to their sexist demands. Progressives should not let red herring arguments about maternity leave or child care distract us from that fact. 

Parents of Michigan school shooter charged after previously being warned of son’s threats

The parents of the accused Oxford High School shooter have been charged following an attack that left four students dead, and six other students and one teacher wounded.

Jennifer and James Crumbley, the parents of accused shooter Ethan Crumbley, have been charged with involuntary manslaughter following the shooting their son allegedly committed on November 30th. 

In 2016, Jennifer Crumbley posted an open letter to then-President-elect Donald Trump thanking him for “protecting the right to bear arms,” according to The Daily Beast. Law enforcement found that the gun used during Tuesday’s shooting had been purchased by James Crumbley on Black Friday, only four days before the deadly shooting took place, and subsequently stored it in an unlocked drawer beside their bed. 

The Crumbley’s had been called into the school hours before the shooting took place to speak with school administrators about Ethan’s behavior in class that they felt was “concerning.” Two videos were found on his phone by law enforcement from the night before the shooting, where he discussed his plans to kill students the next day. One teacher saw Ethan searching ammunition on his phone, and contacted the parents. His mother, Jennifer, texted Ethan in response: “LOL. I’m not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


The Crumbley’s were described by other community members to The Daily Beast as parents that “did not really engage with other parents at the high school.”

Ethan Crumbley has been charged as an adult, on charges including one count of terrorism, four counts of first-degree murder, seven counts of assault with intent to murder, and 12 counts of possession of a firearm. He has pleaded not guilty. He is due back in court on December 13th.

The four students that were killed were 16-year-old Tate Myre, who died attempting to stop the shooting, 14-year-old Hana St. Juliana, who played basketball for the Oxford High team, 17-year-old Madisyn Baldwin, who had three younger siblings she loved, and 17-year-old Justin Shilling, who was remembered by his family, who wrote that We feel the world can’t have too much of Justin.”

You’re 5 ingredients away from the creamiest red pepper pasta sauce ever

If you’ve never had mascarpone cheese, it’s what I imagine biting into a thick stratocumulus cloud would taste like: light and fluffy, but with a glossy heft.. Much like other fresh cheeses, including cottage cheese, queso blanco and cream cheese — which is probably the closest American equivalent to mascarpone — mascarpone is an acid-set cheese, which means it’s coagulated using the milk’s natural lactic acid or naturally-occuring acid. 

In the case of mascarpone, it’s traditionally made by adding a few tablespoons of lemon juice to a pint of heated heavy cream. The resulting flavor is, of course, deeply creamy with a slight citric tang. This makes it ideal for a variety of culinary applications, from spreading it on toasted bagel to whipping it into cheesecake. 

Related: Think chicken is boring? These inspired takes on Italian-American classics will change your mind

But my current favorite usage is adding a tablespoon or two to a batch of pasta sauce for a luxe, velvety touch. The flavors work exceptionally well with roasted vegetables, including roasted red peppers and tomatoes. 

I use a mix of the two in this simply delicious sauce, which has only five ingredients (excluding salt and pepper and cooking oil). Jarred is great, as is the stuff you can buy off the olive bar at your supermarket. For pre-packaged, I like Murray’s or Divina; you can also follow Ina Garten’s recipe here for stellar results. Lightly caramelized shallots and chopped fennel add a real depth of flavor, too. 

Then comes a swirl of mascarpone, which makes the sauce impossibly creamy without it feeling too weighed down. This sauce served over basic pasta is a gorgeous meal in itself, but have fun with some additions. Fresh basil is always a good idea and hot Italian sausage would play really well with the fennel. 
 

***

RECIPE: The Creamiest Red Pepper Pasta Sauce 
Serves 4 to 6 

Ingredients 

  • 1 16-ounce jar of roasted red peppers 
  • 7 ounces of roasted red tomatoes
  • 1 bulb of fennel, roughly chopped
  • 1 shallot, roughly chopped
  • 2 tablespoons of mascarpone 
  • Extra virgin olive oil 
  • Salt and pepper to taste 

Directions 

1. In a saucepan over medium heat, add a glug or two of olive oil — just enough to coat the surface of the pan, and add the shallot and fennel. Cook until the edges are just browning on the fennel and the shallots are a little jammy, about five minutes. 

2. Transfer the fennel and shallots to a food processor, along with the roasted red peppers (including the liquid from the jar) and roasted red tomatoes. Pulse the ingredients until they are fully blended. 

3. Add the mascarpone to the sauce and blend again, until the pasta sauce takes on a smooth, cohesive consistency; color-wise, it will look a little bit like vodka sauce. 

4. From here, add to your pasta of choice. Feel free to add a splash or two of reserved pasta water to the sauce to reach your desired consistency. 

More Italian-American recipes: 

 

Moderate Republicans are quitting as the GOP’s big tent narrows

Moderate Republicans are declining paths toward higher office, or withdrawing from their positions altogether, as the GOP becomes increasingly essentialized by right-wing extremism following Donald Trump’s presidency. 

On Wednesday, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, a two-term governor who is more popular amongst Democrats than Republicans, announced that he will not be running for re-election next year, making the seat especially vulnerable to a Democratic pickup in the deep blue state. Baker, a former healthcare executive, attributed his withdrawal to Massachusetts’ ongoing need for pandemic recovery, calling another campaign of his “a distraction.”

“We want to focus on recovery, not on the grudge matches political campaigns can devolve into,” Baker wrote in a public letter. 

As of November, Massachusetts has seen 852,527 confirmed cases and 19,373 deaths, with roughly half of the latter occurring in nursing homes. Baker came under scrutiny for an outbreak at the Holyoke Soldiers’ Home in Spring of last year, according to The Boston Globe, which took the lives of 67 veterans. Baker was also harshly criticized this February over his decision to cut off the vaccines for local clinics, instead prioritizing mass vaccination sites. 

Meanwhile, other GOP governors such as Chris Sununu of New Hampshire and Phill Scott of Vermont have rebuffed opportunities to pursue U.S. Senate seats. 

Early last month, Sununu announced that he would be bowing out of a potential Senate bid in the midterms, effectively securing another term for incumbent Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H.

“My responsibility is not to the gridlock and politics of Washington,” Sununu told reporters. “It is to the citizens of New Hampshire. I’d rather push myself 120 miles an hour delivering wins for New Hampshire than just slow down and end up on Capitol Hill debating partisan politics without results.”

RELATED: “Recruiting failure”: N.H. Gov. Chris Sununu bails on 2022 Senate race; Republicans mad

His withdrawal – an about-face after months of promises and hype – reportedly shocked and angered many Republicans who considered him the party’s best shot against Hassan. According to POLITICO, and The Hill, some GOP strategists considered Sununu’s withdrawal a “recruiting failure” on part of the GOP, whose conduct and rhetoric has in recent years apparently alienated its more centrist members. 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Just days after Sununu’s decision, Scott officially announced a similar course of action, echoing a long-held promise that he would not run for Senate in 2022, despite the vacancy offered up by the resignation of Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. A spokesperson for the governor said last month that Scott “has been clear that he is not running for the U.S. Senate next year. That has not changed.”

According to Morning Consult, Republican strategists have for the past year been eager to lure Scott into a Senate bid, largely due to his overwhelming popularity. A poll from June to October found that Scott had a whopping 79% approval rating in his state. The Washington Examiner notes that Scott “was seen not just as [sic] Republican’s strongest possible Senate candidate, but perhaps the only Republican who could even in theory win the seat.”

Aside from governors, Republicans in Congress have also made moves to distance themselves from the party. 

RELATED: Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger, vocal Trump critic, says he won’t run for re-election

Back in October, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., revealed that he would not be running for re-election next year. Kinzinger, a six-term congressman and no doubt one the fiercest anti-Trump Republicans, said in a video at the time that “it’s become increasingly obvious to me that in order to break the narrative, I cannot focus on both a reelection to Congress and a broader fight nationwide.”

Meanwhile, in the Senate, moderate Republicans like Sens. Richard Burr, R-N.C., Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and Rob Portman have all announced that they will not be seeking another term.  

Republicans’ anti-abortion crusade won’t stop — even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade

The arguments and questioning in this week’s oral argument before the Supreme Court in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health pretty decisively telegraphed that abortion rights in the United States really are on the chopping block. From the looks of it, the best case scenario will be a free-for-all among the states as to how little time they can give women to decide to have an abortion, and the worst case will be the full overturning of Roe vs Wade. If it is the latter, 17 states that already have laws on the books making abortion totally illegal and will be able to immediately enforce them. All other states run by Republicans will almost certainly follow.

The six conservative justices, three of whom were installed through the Machiavellian manipulations of the self-described Grim Reaper, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, didn’t even attempt to hide the fact that their solemn insistence during their confirmation hearings that they considered Roe to be settled law was the joke we all knew it to be when they said it. They were downright smug about their deception.

The two newest justices, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, seemed especially pleased with themselves, with Kavanaugh fatuously claiming that overturning a constitutional right that’s been in effect for half a century was actually an act of neutrality by the court. Barrett, meanwhile, piously insisted that women forced to endure pregnancy will lose little since they can easily give their children up for adoption these days. I’m sure it was all they could do to refrain from high-fiving each other on the bench. This dark day has been a long time coming.

There had been quite a bit of talk prior to the oral arguments that Chief Justice John Roberts was terribly concerned about the Court’s legitimacy and that recent speeches by Justices Samuel Alito, Barrett and Stephen Breyer indicated some concern about their reputation and possible threats to the institution. Please. The conservatives on the court could not care less about their legitimacy, at least as defined by the general public, and we have known this since at least 2000 when they boldly intervened in the contested presidential election. At the time, the conservatives on the court (two of whom were appointed by the father of the GOP candidate) ruled on a partisan basis to hand George W. Bush the election. They are dancing with those who gave them their lifetime appointments and they have done so for at least the last 20 years.

But just in case any of them might lose their nerve, conservative activists are making it clear that the justices better stiffen their spines.

Last week, the Washington Post published an op-ed by former Attorney General Ed Meese in which he told the six conservative justices that the success or failure of the conservative legal movement of the past four decades rests on the Supreme Court conservatives’ willingness to overturn this precedent:

Roe has stood for years as the prime example of disrespect to our Constitution’s allocation of power and the proper judicial role. It has been the focus of criticism from judges and legal scholars including Robert H. Bork, Alexander Bickel, William H. Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia. And for good reason. To them and the legal movement they inspired, Roe‘s judicial supremacy misconceived the Constitution, ignored the lessons of history and encouraged unaccountable government…

There is a separate “law of abortion,” as Roe‘s author, Justice Harry A. Blackmun, put it, that distorts or ignores ordinary legal rules so to preserve constitutionalized abortion. With that, many other areas of law — from free speech, religious liberty, voting laws, to mundane matters of civil procedure — have been turned into proxy wars over abortion, because Roe and Casey prevent the court from honestly confronting their lacking basis in the Constitution. In short, constitutionalized abortion epitomizes judicial supremacy because it rests on nothing else.

The fact that it saved the lives and futures of millions of people is simply irrelevant. It always has been.

Meese admits in his piece that the greatest disappointment of Ronald Reagan’s presidency was the right’s inability to overturn Roe v. Wade. But it was 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey that really galvanized the conservative legal movement and precipitated the strategy to pack the Supreme Court with right-wing radicals. Conservatives had thought they had it made with eight justices appointed by Republican presidents and one appointed by a Democrat who had dissented in Roe v. Wade. Instead, the court majority found a way to uphold the precedent and conservatives have never gotten over the betrayal.

So even after the very promising oral arguments this week, the right is keeping the pressure on — and in the process revealing just how blatantly political this all really is:

Those comments are actually hilariously hypocritical in light of their shrieking opposition to expanding the court or instituting term limits. But they are nothing if not shameless.

Abortion has long been a political bonanza for conservative politics and they are not going to want to give it up. If Roe is overturned there will immediately be a push to ban abortion nationally through some sort of “fetal personhood” doctrine and there will be attempts to cripple scientific advances by banning stem cell research, eliminating access to abortion medications and certain forms of birth control. Any states that might have exceptions for rape and incest will be challenged, restrictions on travel and laws against crossing state lines to obtain an abortion will be enacted. And at some point, they will have to consider punishment for women who obtain illegal abortions because that’s where this inevitably leads. (Even Donald Trump instinctively understood that before they instructed him how to lie about it for general consumption.) The right has been organized around this issue for 40 years. If Roe is overturned, they will have to keep upping the ante to keep those grassroots activists engaged.

And if they can overturn a constitutional right that’s been in place for 50 years, don’t kid yourself; they’re coming for marriage equality next. Ed Meese signaled that intention in his op-ed:

Dissenting in the same-sex marriage caseObergefell v. Hodges, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., presciently warned about the consequences of imagining that the Constitution contains a right simply because some consider it desirable.

“A lesson that some will take from today’s decision is that preaching about the proper method of interpreting the Constitution or the virtues of judicial self-restraint and humility cannot compete with the temptation to achieve what is viewed as a noble end by any practicable means,” he wrote, joined by Justices Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

The idea that this group of hardcore judicial activists who are, as we speak, considering overturning gun safety laws throughout the country based upon a constitutional right to bear arms that was only decided in 2008, portray themselves to be neutral arbiters and practitioners of judicial self-restraint is insane. But here we are. The judicial revolution these people are preparing to wage is going to turn this country inside out.  

Will omicron – the new coronavirus variant of concern – be more contagious than delta?

A new variant named omicron (B.1.1.529) was reported by researchers in South Africa on Nov. 24, 2021, and designated a “variant of concern” by the World Health Organization two days later. Omicron is very unusual in that it is by far the most heavily mutated variant yet of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

The omicron variant has 50 mutations overall, with 32 mutations on the spike protein alone. The spike protein – which forms protruding knobs on the outside of the SARS-CoV-2 virus – helps the virus adhere to cells so that it can gain entry. It is also the protein that all three vaccines currently available in the U.S. use to induce protective antibodies. For comparison, the delta variant has nine mutations. The larger number of mutations in the omicron variant may mean that it could be more transmissible and/or better at evading immune protection – a prospect that is very concerning.

I am a virologist who studies emerging and zoonotic viruses to better understand how new epidemic or pandemic viruses emerge. My research group has been studying various aspects of the COVID-19 virus, including its spillover into animals.

Why do new SARS-CoV-2 variants continue to emerge?

While the unusually high number of mutations in the omicron variant is surprising, the emergence of yet another SARS-CoV-2 variant is not unexpected.

Through natural selection, random mutations accumulate in any virus. This process is sped up in RNA viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. If and when a set of mutations provides a survival advantage to a variant over its predecessors, the variant will out-compete all other existing virus variants.

Does the omicron variant’s greater number of mutations mean it is more dangerous and transmissible than delta? We simply don’t know yet. The conditions that led to the emergence of the variant are not yet clear, but what is clear is that the shear number and configuration of mutations in omicron is unusual.

One possible explanation for how viral variants with multiple mutations emerge is through prolonged infection in a patient whose immune system is suppressed – a situation that can lead to rapid viral evolution. Researchers have hypothesized that some of the earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants, such as the alpha variant, may have stemmed from a persistently infected patient. However, the unusual constellation and numerous mutations in the omicron variant make it very different from all other SARS-CoV-2 strains, which raises questions about how it came about.

Another possible source of variants could be through animal hosts. The virus that causes COVID-19 can infect several animal species, including mink, tigers, lions, cats and dogs. In a study that is not yet peer-reviewed, an international team that I lead recently reported widespread infection by SARS-CoV-2 in free-living and captive white-tailed deer in the U.S. Therefore, we also cannot rule out the possibility that the omicron variant emerged in an animal host through rapid evolution.

How the delta variant became dominant worldwide

Delta is between 40% and 60% more transmissible than the alpha variant and nearly twice as transmissible as the original SARS-CoV-2 virus first identified in China. The delta variant’s heightened transmissibility is the primary reason why researchers believe it was able to out-compete other variants to become the dominant strain.

A key factor in viral fitness is its replication rate – or how quickly a virus can make more copies of itself. The delta variant replicates faster than previous SARS-CoV-2 variants, and a not-yet-peer-reviewed study estimated that it produces 1,000 times more virus particles than its predecessors.

In addition, people infected with the delta variant are making and shedding more virus, which is another potential mechanism for its increased ability to spread. Research suggests that a possible explanation for the delta variant’s heightened ability to replicate is that mutations in the spike protein led to more efficient binding of the spike protein to its host, via the ACE-2 receptor.

The delta variant has also acquired mutations that would allow it to evade neutralizing antibodies that serve a critical role in the body’s defense against an invading virus. This could explain why, as multiple reports have shown, the COVID-19 vaccines have been somewhat less effective against the delta variant. This combination of high transmissibility and immune evasion could help explain how the delta variant became so successful.

Studies also show that people infected with the delta variant have a higher risk of being hospitalized compared to those infected with the original SARS-CoV-2 and early variants. One particular mutation on the spike protein of the delta variant – the P681R mutation – is thought to be a key contributor to its improved ability to enter cells and to cause more severe disease.

Will omicron replace delta?

It is too early to say if the omicron variant is fitter than delta or if it will become dominant. Omicron shares some mutations with the delta variant but also possesses others that are quite different. But one of the reasons why we in the research community are particularly concerned is that the omicron variant has 10 mutations in the receptor-binding domain – the part of the spike protein that interacts with the ACE-2 receptor and mediates entry into cells – compared with just two for the delta variant.

[Too busy to read another daily email? Get one of The Conversation’s curated weekly newsletters.]

Suppose the combination of all the mutations in omicron makes it either more transmissible or better at immune evasion than delta. In that case, we could see the spread of this variant globally. However, it is also possible that the unusually high number of mutations could be detrimental to the virus and make it unstable.

It is highly likely that the omicron variant is not the endgame and that more SARS-CoV-2 variants will emerge. As SARS-CoV-2 continues to spread among humans, natural selection and adaptation will result in more variants that could plausibly be more transmissible than delta.

We know from influenza viruses that the process of viral adaptation never ends. Lower vaccination rates among many countries means that there are still a lot of susceptible hosts out there for the virus, and that it will continue to circulate and mutate as long as it can spread. The emergence of the omicron variant is yet another reminder of the urgency to vaccinate to stop the further spread and evolution of SARS-CoV-2.


Suresh V. Kuchipudi, Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Dr. Oz’s MAGA campaign: He wants to get “tough on China” — but his products are made there

Dr. Mehmet Oz launched his Senate campaign this week with calls to focus on creating jobs in the United States — but his own company sells products made overseas, largely in China.

Oz this week joined other celebrities like Caitlyn Jenner and former NFL star Herschel Walker hoping to follow in Donald Trump’s footsteps from TV to the halls of power. Oz announced that he will run in the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania currently held by Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who is retiring. It’s unclear whether Oz actually lives in Pennsylvania, although he still has time to address that. Oz, who served on Trump’s Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition and touted Trump’s response to the COVID pandemic in his campaign announcement, is focusing his campaign on public health — although he has been widely criticized for repeatedly pushing unproven medical claims and quack remedies — and on echoing Trump’s “America First” rhetoric about the economy.

Trump made creating manufacturing jobs and boosting goods “made in America” a centerpiece of his platform, but in practice accomplished very little on that issue. His own company manufactures most of its products overseas, often in China.

One of the top issues listed on Oz’s campaign website is getting “tough on China.”

“Dr. Oz believes the United States has failed to respond to the global Chinese threat,” the text reads. “Every year we see more and more companies ship American jobs overseas, while failing to stand up to China as they steal our intellectual property and manipulate their currency. Dr. Oz believes we need to focus on creating jobs here in America.”

But one of the companies relying on China is Oz’s Good Life brand. Oz last year partnered with the consumer goods company Maven to “release a new science-based sleep brand with cutting-edge products aimed to help people sleep better.”

The company sells a variety of bedding products, many of them listed as “imported” on the Macy’s website which appears to be Maven’s primary retail seller. The Macy’s listings do not specify a country of origin, but the Walmart site clarifies that the Dr. Oz Good Life “Safe in Bed Waterproof Mattress pad” is made in China. The company’s mattresses are made in Spain, according to a listing from Hudson’s Bay.

RELATED: Dr. Oz is officially running for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania

Oz’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

“Dr. Oz is a well-established fraud, so it makes perfect sense that he claims to care about creating American jobs but actually has his own licensed products produced overseas,” said Brad Bainum, a spokesperson for the Democratic super PAC American Bridge 21st Century.

Oz, whose net worth is estimated at around $100 million, has long faced criticism from medical professionals for promoting “quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain.” He has repeatedly touted miracle cure products with little scientific evidence of their effectiveness. A 2014 study found that half of the medical advice he dispenses on his show is either baseless or wrong. Last year, Oz promoted the Trump-backed malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID, even though multiple studies have found it is ineffective and potentially dangerous.

The last time Oz went to the Senate, lawmakers chewed him out for promoting a green coffee bean extract as a miracle weight loss supplement, after its makers were fined $3.5 million for making misleading claims.

“I’ve tried to do a lot of research in preparation for this trial and the scientific community is almost monolithic against you,” Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who then chaired the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety and Insurance, told Oz during a 2014 hearing, reciting all of the “miracle” cures he has touted on his show.

“When you feature a product on your show it creates what has become known as the ‘Dr. Oz Effect’ — dramatically boosting sales and driving scam artists to pop up overnight using false and deceptive ads to sell questionable products,” McCaskill said.

Oz disputed that he had misled viewers, although he acknowledged that some of his claims have turned out to be untrue.

“I actually do personally believe in the items I talk about on the show,” he said. “I passionately study them. I recognize they don’t have the scientific muster to present as fact but nevertheless, I would give my audience the advice I give my family all the time and I have given my family these products.”

After announcing his Senate campaign, Oz came under new scrutiny over whether he actually lives in Pennsylvania. He attended both medical school and business school in Philadelphia decades ago, but for much of his adult life has lived in a posh home in Cliffside Park, New Jersey, where he films his TV show. His campaign told the Philadelphia Inquirer that Oz has been renting his in-laws’ home in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, since December 2020, which is when records show he registered to vote in the state. Politico has reported that Oz has recently been shopping for a home in the Philadelphia suburbs.

Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., a New Jersey Democrat, took a swipe at Oz on social media over his alleged recent move. “I want to congratulate my North Jersey constituent Dr. Oz on his run for US Senate in Pennsylvania,” Pascrell wrote on Twitter. “I’m sure this fully genuine candidacy will capture the hearts of Pennsylvanians.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Oz jumped into the race after the abrupt departure of presumed Republican frontrunner Sean Parnell, who had been endorsed by Trump but suspended his campaign after a judge awarded sole custody of the couple’s three children to his estranged wife. His wife alleged that Parnell had assaulted her and one of their children, which he denies.

With Parnell out of the picture, the Republican field competing to fill Toomey’s seat also includes real estate developer Jeff Bartos, who spent much of the race trying to out-Trump Parnell, and Carla Sands, who served as Trump’s ambassador to Denmark and also backed his election lies. Oz’s announcement does not appear to have scared off other potential candidates. Hedge fund millionaire David McCormick, another former Pennsylvania resident and the husband of former Trump adviser Dina Powell, is reportedly planning to jump into the race, as is former Republican congressman Keith Rothfus.

With a crowded field that now includes a controversial TV doctor who hasn’t lived in the state for many years, top Republicans in the Keystone State are trying to steer clear of the messy campaign. The “pretty much universal response has been ‘LOL,'” a Pennsylvania Republican strategist told Politico.

 “I don’t know a single politically involved person in Pennsylvania who’s not being paid who wants to be involved” in the Oz campaign,” the strategist said, adding that there’s “no one who thinks the solution to the Sean Parnell issue is Dr. Oz.”

Read more on Dr. Oz and the celebrity-candidate boom:

AOC co-sponsors bipartisan bill for “immediate relief” on pot convictions

Drug war foes welcomed the introduction Thursday in the House of Representatives of a bipartisan bill to help states expunge cannabis convictions by reducing costs and red tape through a new federal program.

Reps. Dave Joyce, R-Ohio, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., teamed up to introduce the Harnessing Opportunities by Pursuing Expungement (HOPE) Act. If passed, the measure would create a new federal initiative — the State Expungement Opportunity Grant Program — through which the U.S. attorney general could dispense funds to state and local governments “to reduce the financial and administrative burden of expunging convictions for cannabis offenses that are available to individuals who have been convicted,” according to Ocasio-Cortez’s office.

“Goes to show that lawmakers don’t have to agree on everything to find common ground on solutions to the challenges facing everyday Americans,” tweeted Joyce, who earlier this year co-sponsored the first GOP-led legislation to federally decriminalize cannabis.

RELATED: New York Times message to progressives, in translation: Give up on challenging corporate power

“Having been both a public defender and a prosecutor, I have seen firsthand how cannabis law violations can foreclose a lifetime of opportunities ranging from employment to education to housing,” he continued. The collateral damage caused by these missed opportunities is woefully underestimated and has impacted entire families, communities, and regional economies.”

“By helping states establish and improve expungement programs for minor cannabis offenses, the HOPE Act will pave the way for expanded economic opportunities to thrive alongside effective investments to redress the consequences of the War on Drugs,” Joyce added.

Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement that “as we continue to advocate for the decriminalization and legalization of marijuana, this bipartisan bill will provide localities the resources they need to expunge drug charges that continue to hold back Americans, disproportionately people of color, from employment, housing, and other opportunity.”

State Expungement Opportunity Grant Program funding could be used for:

  • Technology to provide cost-effective legal relief at scale;
  • Automation of the process of expunging convictions for cannabis offenses;
  • Clinics, including legal clinics, that assist individuals through the expungement process;
  • Implementation of a notification process for those whose records are expunged;
  • Sealing records of conviction for cannabis offenses if appropriate; and
  • Other innovative partnerships to provide wide-scale relief to individuals who are eligible for the expungement of a conviction for a cannabis offense.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Cannabis legalization advocates welcomed the new bill.

“This bipartisan effort represents the growing consensus to reform marijuana policies in a manner that addresses the harms inflicted by prohibition,” said Justin Strekal, political director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). “There is no justification for continuing to prevent tens of millions of Americans from fully participating in their community and workforce simply because they bear the burden of a past marijuana conviction.”

Maritza Perez, national affairs director for the Drug Policy Alliance, noted that “at this point, most Americans live in a state that has legalized marijuana to some extent.”

RELATED: From AOC to Cara Delevingne, are the Met Gala’s feminist displays meaningful or just performative?

“This bill will provide immediate relief to countless individuals who are still suffering the consequences of the war on drugs,” she contended. “An expungement will allow greater employment, education, and housing opportunities, among other life-changing freedoms. The Drug Policy Alliance is proud to support this bill.”

According to NORML:

Legislatures in over a dozen states have enacted laws explicitly facilitating the expungement of low-level cannabis convictions. State officials have vacated an estimated 2.2 million marijuana-related convictions under these laws over the past two years.

According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, over 350,000 Americans were arrested by state and local law enforcement for marijuana crimes in 2020. Ninety-one percent of those arrested were charged with simple possession. Since 2010, state and local police have arrested an estimated 7.3 million Americans for violating marijuana laws.

“Ultimately, efforts to provide necessary relief to those who carry the scarlet letter of a marijuana conviction must be carried out primarily by state and local officials,” asserted Strekal. “Having this federal incentive available will go a long way toward empowering local leaders and citizens to take these steps to address the past injustices brought about by the failed policy of marijuana prohibition, and will also move us closer toward embracing more reasonable cannabis policies.”

Humility is the Democrats’ Kryptonite 

Would you believe me if I told you that things are better than they look right now for Democrats?

With less than a year until the critical midterm elections, it’s time for a much-needed reality check: President Joe Biden and Democrats in Congress have already made real progress in improving the lives of most Americans. But in order to get any credit at the ballot box next year, they are going to have to stop being humble, brag about what they have done and contrast Republican extremism with a steady drumbeat of accomplishment.  

The simple reality here is President Biden and the Democratic Party saved the country from an out of control despot, a raging deadly virus and a spiraling, closed economy. Now they need to actually remind voters. 

Today, people are working, schools are open, 195 million people are fully vaccinated, vaccines are available for both adults and children, and we provided stimulus funds to help people who lost their jobs during the height of the pandemic.  By the end of this year, Joe Biden will have passed three substantial, transformational bills: The American Rescue Plan, The Infrastructure and Jobs Plan, and The Build Back Better Act. These bills will markedly improve the lives of Americans who are still affected by the challenges of the last two pandemic years and amount to the greatest investment in the American people in modern history.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Case in point, in just 11 months President Biden has created nearly 6 million jobs, people are buying houses, wages are up, home values are up, personal debt is down, and perhaps most astonishingly, unemployment is back below pre-pandemic levels. In November 2021, the number of Americans filing initial unemployment claims fell to 199,000 — the lowest level since November 1969. This marks the eighth straight week of declines, which brings unemployment claims well below pre-pandemic levels. By contrast, this time last year claims were hovering around 700,000. 

Remarkably, Democrats and President Biden have invested so much money into the pockets of the American people, that workers who are not satisfied with their jobs are able to  be choosy about the job they want to work.

Compared to where we were at the beginning of the year, America is heading in the right direction.  

Unfortunately, while our accomplishments are numerous and popular, we have an issue of salience and awareness with voters. While President Biden and Democrats have accomplished so much, voters are largely unaware of these accomplishments. This lack of awareness from voters broadly, and in particular communities of color has been a trend all year and is a real opportunity for improvement heading into 2022. 

An analysis by Simon Rosenberg, a Democratic strategist is clear: voters are not giving Democrats credit on what we have done because we are not seizing opportunities to tell this compelling story.  It is true that every time Democrats pass a major piece of legislation the President and his cabinet do a week of events. Unfortunately, after that week Democrats become subsumed in the next big legislative fight stepping on their own ability to effectively tell the story of how we are helping to improve the lives of voters. Case in point, while the economy was improving and 1 million jobs per month were being created, our GDP growth rate was 6.5% and tens of millions of Americans were receiving enhanced child tax credit payments, the president’s approval rating on FiveThirtyEight.com dropped 17 points. 

The message here is clear: Voters punish politicians who do not provide clear effective messaging about the issues that are salient to their lives. The issue that is most front and center for voters is the economy and vanquishing COVID-19. Yes, gas prices, inflation, and a myriad of other issues are also bubbling up as concerns but all of this is made much worse given voters’ fatigue around COVID. Case in point, look no further than the immediate anxiety spurred by the discovery of the Omicron variant

The irony here is that Democrats have done so much to fight COVID and keep Americans safe in these uncertain times. Democrats have many accomplishments that directly help Americans to run on. They just must be shared in ways that are salient and resonate with the pain points of voters. These legislative victories are both big and complex, so it’s not always clear how they immediately help voters in their day-to-day lives. In order to stave off Mitch McConnell’s return to obstructionist leadership, Democrats need to take the time to show voters how they are making life better while strongly contrasting their steady leadership with the extremism of the Republican Party.     

Republicans have devolved into an anti-vaccination, anti-democracy party beholden to the paranoid delusions of Donald Trump willing to play Russian Roulette with our children’s health. While Democrats would be wise not to make the next election about Trump as he is not on the ballot.  We absolutely must contrast their steady leadership and accomplishment with the extremism of the Republican party. That includes reminding voters of all the support, prosperity, and stability they have gained under the Biden administration. 

President Biden and Democrats have been extremely responsive to Americans’ needs,  delivering unprecedented transformational change at a time of extraordinary challenges. Now we must tell that story of accomplishment or risk losing Congress to the GOP who are in the thrall of a madman. 

Capitol rioter told FBI he was “in the bathroom pooping when the violence occurred”

A Capitol rioter who drove his Tesla Model 3 from Miami to Washington before participating in the Jan. 6 insurrection told FBI agents he was “in the bathroom pooping when the violence occurred.”

Federal prosecutors are seeking a sentence of four months in jail for Felipe Marquez, who pleaded guilty in September to a misdemeanor charge of disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds.

In a sentencing memo filed Thursday, prosecutors said they are seeking jail time for several reasons, including that Marquez “interfered with Capitol police officers trying to protect the building by repeatedly asking them for selfies and fist bumps,” and spent 10 minutes with 20 other rioters inside the office of Democratic Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, which suffered substantial damage.

Marquez also carried a Glock firearm with him from Florida to D.C., although he told authorities he left it in his car during the insurrection.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Inside Merkley’s office, Marquez used his cell phone to film the room, according to the sentencing memo.

“Marquez’s own cell phone video captured other rioters smoking and yelling and banging on the table,” the memo states. “Marquez then held his vape pen up to the camera, as if to capture the arrogance of the rioters (himself included) smoking in a senator’s office during an Electoral College certification proceeding to formally elect the next President of the United States.”

Marquez “evidently thought the whole experience was joyful and celebratory,” according to prosecutors, and he later posted videos of himself inside the Capitol on Snapchat.

RELATED: Jan. 6 rioter starts sobbing in front of FBI agents when asked about Trump calling him to D.C.

During an interview with the FBI at the time of his arrest in January, Marquez said he traveled to the Captiol to protest “communism and prostitution.” According to the sentencing memo, Marquez also stated, “I was in the bathroom pooping when the violence occurred,” adding that he “didn’t see any violence at all.”

In a subsequent interview with CBS Miami, Marquez compared Capitol rioters to heroes from the African-American civil rights movement.

“This is like a Rosa Parks, like Martin Luther King moment for me,” he said.

Marquez’s attorneys are seeking a sentence of probation.

More from Twitter below:

“Bags and bags” of money found stashed in bathroom wall at Joel Osteen’s megachurch: report

A plumbing repair at televangelist Joel Osteen’s megachurch in Houston reportedly led to the discovery of “bags and bags” of cash and checks in a bathroom wall.

The discovery came several years after someone stole $600,000 in cash and checks from a safe at Osteen’s Lakewood Church, according to a report from KRPC Channel 2. The station suggested that whoever stole the money in 2014 may have been hidden it in the bathroom wall.

A plumber named Justin, who works for a large contractor, told the station he got a call about a loose toilet at the church on Nov. 10.

“Justin said he started working on the toilet and had to remove the tile and insulation,” the station reports. “Once he removed the insulation, he discovered about 3,000 envelopes full of checks. Some had cash in it. Justin said he called the church’s maintenance supervisor and had to stay at the church for almost seven hours.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Houston police investigators later questioned Justin and removed the rest of the wall, discovering “bags and bags” of money and checks.

“Justin said the church or HPD never thanked him or reached out to him about $25,000 reward money,” the station reported, referring to the reward that was offered following the 2014 theft. “Justin said he even called Crime Stoppers about reward money, but never heard back. He even tried reaching out to Joel Osteen but hasn’t heard back.”

A representative from the church confirmed the discovery in a statement.

RELATED: Religious Trauma Syndrome: How organized religion can lead to mental health problems

“Recently, while repair work was being done at Lakewood Church, an undisclosed amount of cash and checks were found,” the church representative said. “Lakewood immediately notified the Houston Police Department and is assisting them with their investigation. Lakewood has no further comment at this time.”

In 2014, Houston police said $200,000 in cash and $400,000 worth of checks were stolen from a safe at the church. At the time, the church said the stolen money represented funds that were contributed during one weekend of services.

Watch KPRC’s report below via YouTube:

Chuck Grassley kills gun control measure following Michigan high school shooting

Just hours after a horrifying school shooting in Michigan, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said he got halfway home from the U.S. Capitol before turning around to give an impassioned late-night speech from the Senate floor about the need for gun control measures that have languished for years in the bitterly divided chamber. 

A video of his remarks went viral on Twitter this week, gaining more than 1.5 million views in the first 24 hours after going live. 

“Driving home tonight, I thought about Republicans’ floor speeches today on the “sanctity of life” and how this concern for “life” apparently doesn’t extend to the kids who were shot today in a school in Michigan,” Murphy wrote Tuesday. “So I turned the car around, and went to the Senate floor.”


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Looking to capitalize on this groundswell of apparent support, Murphy attempted to use his powerful position on the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday to advance a House-passed bill called the “Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2021” that would require a number of new restrictions on gun purchases:

  • Guns being transferred between private parties would require a licensed dealer or manufacturer to carry out a background check
  • The bill would also expand a 10-day review both firearm purchases and transfers

In comments to the committee, he acknowledged that the measure might not have prevented the shooting in Michigan, but that it would likely reduce gun violence overall. 

“I want to tell you why I’m making this request. I understand the low likelihood of success, but I hope many of my colleagues took a minute to watch the cellphone video from the school shooting in Michigan,” Murphy said, referring to widely-shared surveillance video that showed 15-year-old Ethan Crumbley shooting at students and staff at Oxford high school in suburban Detroit.

“All of those kids who fled that violence, all of those kids who now don’t think of school as a safe place, they are going through trauma and will go through trauma that will take a lifetime to address.”

RELATED: States that implemented gun control laws after Sandy Hook shooting had lower homicide rates: study

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, however, was having none of it. According to a report in the Guardian, because Murphy had requested the Judiciary Committee forward the bill with unanimous consent, the 88-year-old was able to unilaterally block the measure in favor of promoting a Republican-favored alternative called the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2021, which wouldn’t institute any new requirements but does seek to increase the accuracy with which government agencies report existing criminal records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Following his favored bill’s demise, Murphy blasted Grassley’s manuever, saying that the GOP cares “more about the health of the gun industry and their profits than they do about the health of our kids.”

Far from evil, viruses have driven — and even helped — human evolution

The word “virus” has largely negative connotations. We fear our bodies, or our computers, being infected with viruses; they are, generally, invisible objects to be feared, even obsessed over. Many avid news-readers have, amid the pandemic, become armchair virologists, and the subject of how a virus (primarily, the coronavirus) lives and dies has become everyday conversation. 

But while viruses might seem antithetical to life — and something to avoid — the history of life on Earth does not agree. Indeed, the history of life and the history of viruses are deeply intertwined, such that viruses have helped many animals along their path in the tree of life — including humans. Even today, viruses may be intrinsic to evolution, helping survival genes move between very different lifeforms in subtle ways that scientists are only beginning to understand. 

That suggests that our ideas about viruses as deadly, or pure evil, might be misguided.

The junk we left behind

The popular conception of viruses likens them to unwanted visitors: they arrive, they spread, they do their dirty work in your body before being evicted by the immune system, and the body returns to its pre-viral state. 

Yet this is a misconception. Occasionally, viruses do leave something behind — in fact, a whole lot of something behind — in the form of additional genetic material in your cells. And this isn’t always a bad thing, curiously.

To understand why requires some background knowledge. When viruses invade one’s cells, they divert one’s DNA from its main purpose of being a factory blueprint of their host. Since each virus’ mission is to force one’s cells to create more versions of themselves, they will add their own gene sequences as necessary — like a con man covertly running a side business in his boss’s factory.

While a normal crook would generally cover up such a crime, viruses have no disincentive to leaving those gene sequences behind in our cells. And if those cells are, by chance, used in reproduction (such a man’s sperm or a woman’s ovum), the genes will be passed on to future generations, despite serving no ostensible purpose. 

This type of so-called “junk DNA” has an official label: endogenous viral elements (EVEs). Roughly 8 percent of the human genome is comprised of EVEs, etched into our biological schematics like pencil lines in an errant sketch that never got erased. By contrast, more than 98 percent of our overall genome is considered “junk” on the grounds that the DNA does not make proteins; all of these forms of junk DNA are known as transposons.

While scientists have only begun to scratch the surface of how these codes have influenced our lives, the early research raises intriguing possibilities. Researchers have found that 80 percent of our DNA (including, of course, most of the junk DNA) serves some sort of function, from regulating how DNA is transcribed and translated into proteins to getting transcribed themselves as RNA. In other words, this leftover “junk” is actually useful.

A study last month by scientists at the University of California–Berkeley explored how virus junk in mice DNA guides the animals in processes like embryo implantation and cell proliferation. That study suggested that the virus-based transposon has been “broadly repurposed” by other mammals including humans. Other researchers have argued that there are specific transposons (which have mysterious origins and thus may or may not be viral) that are responsible for the development of the uterus and our opposable thumbs. The end result of all this is that the “junk DNA” can actually help animals develop important biological traits.

The inter-species moving company

In March, geneticists learned that two species of fish whose ancestors diverged more than 250 million years ago both have a near-identical gene sequence. That gene — which appeared in Atlantic herring and smelt — helps these fish, who live in very cold water, stop from freezing; specifically, it codes for anti-freezing proteins so that ice crystals won’t form in their flesh and blood.

This was a puzzling finding. Many fish have independently evolved anti-freezing proteins; that alone isn’t unusual. But the genetic code for the adaptation was near-identical — in two fish that diverged 250 million years ago. 

Something wasn’t adding up. 

The answer, scientists believe, lies in something called horizontal gene transfer: the idea that somehow, something moved one fish’s genes to the other, and with them the helpful adaptation.

How could this happen? Divergent animals can’t just swap DNA in such a science-fictional manner. The answer, it turns out, has to do with viruses. 

As researchers wrote in a 2020 article for the Journal of Virology, horizontal gene transfer — or the transportation of genetic material between organisms in a manner other than reproduction — does not commonly occur directly between viruses and their host cells save for a handful of exceptions (retroviruses, some DNA viruses). That said, viruses may leave fragments of other animals’ DNA in our own cells as they go about their dirty work. For example, public genome databases for a number of organisms reveal many homologs (or a gene that exists in two species through a common ancestor) between genes from certain viruses and the genomes of a number of more complex organisms. The authors believe this suggests a world in which double-stranded RNA viral genes are regularly transferred horizontally among organisms, meaning, in turn, that RNA viruses likely play a major role in evolution.

Does this happen in humans? Almost certainly. The human genome is complex, and not fully understood yet. But biologists who study horizontal gene transfer see it happening all the time in nature, though it is not always easy to spot. That suggests it probably happens in humans, too. Moreover, older examples of horizontal gene transfer may be harder to pick out from the genome given all the mutations that have happened in intervening years.

Viruses aren’t alone in transferring genetic material to unwitting organisms. In 2016, French scientists discovered that a bacteria known as Wolbachia had managed to integrate itself directly onto the genome of a humble species of pillbug, and did so in a way that effectively created a new sex chromosome. As a result, roughly 60% to 70% of the pillbug births in that community had been biologically female, a wildly disproportionate rate in terms of species survival. Some evolutionary biologists argue that horizontal gene transfer could have been used to drive biological transformation in ways that we are only beginning to understand.

In 2016, evolutionary biologist David Enard wrote that 30 percent of all humans’ protein adaptations since they diverged from chimpanzees may have been driven by viruses.

“This constant battle with viruses has shaped us in every aspect — not just the few proteins that fight infections, but everything,”  Enard wrote, adding that the revelation was “profound.” He added that “all organisms have been living with viruses for billions of years; this work shows that those interactions have affected every part of the cell.”


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


The anti-virus viruses

The average human body has 30 trillion cells — but is home to 380 trillion viruses

Indeed, there are 10 times more viruses on or in your body than there are bacteria, meaning we are literally covered in the microorganisms. Known as the virome, this ecosystem of viruses that pervades your very being should not be perceived as automatically hostile. In fact, your virome is so specific to you — a reflection on everything you have done, everywhere you have been and every substance with which you have interacted — that scientists can determine who you live with based on your virome’s distinct traits. Most of these viruses do not harm us, obviously, because many view us as nothing more than a comfortable place to hunt the other organisms that reside in our flesh.

In other words, not all viruses that live in us are trying to infect us. Many of them prey on other microorganisms that have made our body their home. That means that, in an odd way, they are surprise visitors who have come unbidden who, in many cases, are helping protect you.

Take bacteriophages. Bacteriophages are viruses that infect bacteria cells, and there are countless bacteriophages inside our bodies who leave our own cells alone so they can stalk their real prey. The bacteria they infect might emerge from their ordeal stronger against our immune system than they were before; they could also wind up dead. Because bacteriophages often line the mucosal membranes of humans’ stomach, intestines, nose and throat, they in theory may protect us from diseases by killing bacteria that comes toward those organs. Some doctors believe these types of viruses could be used to develop new medicines.

We’re not living in an era in which viruses get much good PR. That’s understandable: coronaviruses, and pretty much all of the viruses we vaccinate against, are irredeemably bad for human health.

Yet their brethren, the millions of other viruses in the virome that you rarely hear about, are often benign — even helpful. That speaks to a selection bias going on in the virus world: the communicable, disease-causing viruses get all the attention, while the harmless ones or even the helpful ones don’t make themselves known.

Trump’s “Kraken” lawyers ordered to pay $175K in sanctions for “profound abuse of judicial process”

A federal judge in Michigan on Thursday ordered former president Donald Trump’s “Kraken” lawyers — including Sidney Powell and L. Lin Wood — to pay more than $175,000 in sanctions for filing a conspiracy theory-laden lawsuit seeking to overturn the state’s 2020 election results.

“This lawsuit represents a historic and profound abuse of the judicial process,” U.S. District Judge Linda V. Parker wrote when she initially approved the sanctions in August.

Parker ordered Trump’s attorneys to pay legal costs incurred by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, and the city of Detroit in defending against their lawsuit, which alleged that an international cabal worked to steal the election away from the former president. Parker gave the defendants 14 days to submit their time and expense records, but Trump’s attorneys later challenged the city’s requested amount of $182,192.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


In her decision Thursday, Parker lowered the city’s amount by roughly $29,000, to $153,285.62. Trump’s lawyers did not challenge the amount of $21,964.75 submitted by Whitmer and Benson, meaning they’ll have to pay a total of $175,250.37 in sanctions.

In her decision, Parker noted that many of Trump’s lawyers “seek donations from the public to fund lawsuits like this one,” adding that they “have the ability to pay this sanction.”

In addition to Powell and Wood, the other Trump lawyers involved in the lawsuit were Howard Kleinhendler, Gregory Rohl, Stefanie Lynn Junttila, Emily Newman, Julia Z. Haller, Brandon Johnson, and Scott Hagerstrom.

The attorneys are “jointly and severally” liable for the sanctions, meaning that while each is on the hook for the full amount, the total to be paid is $175,250.37, regardless of who forks over the money.

Read Parker’s full decision here.

More Salon coverage of the ongoing right-wing assault on American democracy:

Kenny G on his new doc & not paying attention to critics: “Miles Davis liked what I was doing”

Love him or loathe him, Grammy-award winning saxophonist Kenny G has skills. The best-selling instrumental recording artist of all time — he has sold 75 million records — Kenneth Bruce Gorelick’s music has been performed at countless weddings, and his hit, “Going Home,” is used to signal the end of the day in China. But Kenny G has also be for taken to task his appropriation of Black jazz music, his duet with Louis Armstrong (that prompted a hate screed from Pat Metheny), and how he has been derided in popular culture on programs such as “Saturday Night Live” and “South Park.” 

HBO’s “Listening to Kenny G,” the genial, evenhanded documentary by Penny Lane (“Hail Satan?”) gives voice to the polarizing musician (and his critics). In the extended interview scenes, Kenny G comes across as modest, humble and hardworking. When asked how he is feeling, he responds, “Underappreciated.” He gets the joke may be on him, but has in recent years become a bit of an internet sensation for his Twitter posts and that Valentine’s Day video Kayne West arranged of having the musician serenade Kim Kardashian. (Even better is the James Corden/Ray Romano spoof).

None of this was likely in the mind of Gorelick, who grew up playing music in Seattle and being recognized for his ability to hold a note. (Fun Fact: he has a Guinness World Record for playing a note for approximately 45 minutes). His success may be that his form of Jazz has crossover appeal to pop and R&B. At least that’s what record producer Clive Davis realized when he helped Kenny G become a worldwide phenomenon. 

RELATED: Kenny G is driving people away

“Listening to Kenny G” features gushing fans and haters, but it is hard not to watch this film and not come away with appreciation if not admiration, even if his music is not to your taste. Salon spoke with Gorelick about his career, his new documentary, and what may be the best thing anyone ever said to him about his music. 

You talk in the film about practicing, practicing, practicing, and your music shows the value of that dedication and your strong work ethic. Did you ever anticipate this phenomenal career of yours? 

Actually, no. I never thought about it in that way. My goal was to get a record deal and make records. There were only a few saxophone players that made records at that time, such as Grover Washington, Jr. Then I heard some of the greats — John Coltrane, Stan Getz, all those great players. I wanted to do that. I wanted to make a record and sound as good as those guys. I just wanted a record deal. I didn’t think about the sales in the sense that, “Wow! I want to sell so many.” I just wanted to sell enough to keep making records. Every time I was allowed to make a second, or third record, I thought this was going well. I did just good enough, and I get to make another. Lucky me. But once the sales got into the multi-millions, I know that I can make records forever now. This is pretty great. Now it’s the same thing — to always make the best music — but now I don’t have to worry that I won’t be able to make another record. I know I can. 

How many hours a day, or a week, do you practice?

I practice three hours day, which is about 1,100 hours a year. 40 years later that’s 50,000 hours plus shows. I am wired to have a discipline. Hopefully my work ethic doesn’t take away the fun from the people around me. I need my three hours of practicing, and then I’m going to exercise for an hour and after that, I will be all fun and games. But I won’t be all fun and games if I don’t get my three hours of practicing in! All I will think about is get my practicing in, and then I will be a fun guy.

Do you feel you have to be on the defensive or apologize for your success? We see fans gush about your music in the film. We hear from haters. Are you laughing all the way to the bank? I mean, is it tough being Kenny G?

I don’t say I’m laughing all the way to the bank. I’m laughing because it doesn’t faze me what they are saying. It’s not serious to me. It’s just an opinion of a person. If they are a jazz aficionado, and they love Ornette Coleman, or Charlie Parker, or Stan Getz, or John Coltrane, they may not like my music. But I can tell you, Miles Davis liked what I was doing. I opened up shows for him. He told me he likes what I do. Stan Getz and Gerry Mulligan liked my music. I just did some gigs with George Benson, who said I may be the best soprano sax he’s ever heard. But I told him, you knew Coltrane. He said, “Yeah, but there is something about what you do.” I was like, “George, can I get you to sign a legal document? You’re telling me you think I’m as good as Coltrane? Can you sign this really quickly?” I have that inside me. So, when I do hear the critics, of course, they are biased, and I get where they are coming from, and it makes sense that you would criticize it that way, but it isn’t stopping me, and I am liking what I’m doing.

You have been accused of cultural appropriation, as a white artist who has achieved success on the back of Black musicians, (especially from the Louis Armstrong duet). However, you meet this criticism with kindness, as you did with your last answer. You provide “sax education” and will encourage listeners to seek out John Coltrane, Stan Getz, or other musicians. Can you talk about that, and how it impacts you?

When people ask me what I listen to, I first tell them to go back and listen to Miles Davis and Coltrane. But as far as my sound of my songs that’s just me doing what sounds good, I like the way it sounds, so I play the way I play. I think that’s my obligation to reintroduce people to the traditional jazz. In my live shows, we play “Naima” by John Coltrane and “Desafinado” by Stan Getz, which they love. I am leading them to open a new door. As far as the Louis Armstrong thing is concerned, we asked David Foster to produce it, and he was up for it. Clive Davis loved the idea. And we asked the Louis Armstrong Foundation. This is not me trying to profit from Louis Armstrong’s music. I wanted to bring light to it and let all the proceeds go to whatever foundation you want. They were all on board. We got their blessing.

What interests me most is what I think is at the root of your music being so polarizing: You have been accused of playing it safe. My question is: in your effort to be “inoffensive” are you inherently offensive? (Critic Bruce Ratliff acknowledges the craft, even if he dislikes the result).

First, we have to define what is my process, when I make music. Am I calculating? I’m capable of playing 3,000 notes within this 30 second period, and I’m going to play two notes, because that will make people buy my music. That is going to be inoffensive to people, whereas 3,000 is too much, but I really want to play the 3,000. All that is not going on. None of that is going on. What is going on is that I have a melodic sense inside of me, so when I am playing my music, and I play it, I play the melody that I feel is the right melody. It’s not a dumbed down, watered-down melody because it’s going to be less offensive to the listener and I’ll be able to sell records. Before “smooth jazz” radio, there wasn’t any outlet for what I did. It wasn’t like I am calculating that I’m going to do this, and get all this airplay, and make millions of dollars and be this successful guy. I’m making this music that was unheard before; there was no place for it. This is what I hear. 

When you come see me live, you are going to hear a lot more notes. Because I like a live performance that is different than a recorded performance. When I listen to my songs, I want to listen every time and go, I love those notes. I love the way that sounds. Rather than, that was a good take on Wednesday, but now I play it differently. There is no calculated thought process of watering it down to make it inoffensive. But I can understand that people would think that.

When people say that to me, I think: You have no idea what I go through when I make my music. If I was that smart, why am I not selling 10 million copies each time? If I am that smart to know, that if I play this way instead of this way, I’m going to sell millions of records. I wish I was that smart, but I am not that smart. It just comes from here. [Kenny G touches his heart]. This is the melody. It sounds right to me. There are a lot of people in the world — and I know that folks don’t want to hear this — but that when they hear my music, it connects with them. I’ll tell you a story, Larry King told me that Stan Getz got such criticism when he did those bossa nova songs, like “Girl from Ipanema.” The jazz community said he was going commercial, watering it down. He was vibing with that bossa nova beat. So, if people say that about me, they would have said that about Getz. But people would never criticize Getz. It doesn’t go through process, and if it did, then I would have to cop to the fact that I am just appealing to the masses. But that’s not the way it is. Not at all. 

I like that you resist labels. It is too easy to put a song in a box and call it jazz, or smooth jazz, or pop, or R&B. You are working on albums that tweak or ideas of or assumptions about jazz, or standards, or classical music. Why play with forms, given that you have created a unique style of music? People want to make you one-note but you’re not.

The categorization is tough. It’s good and bad. When you go to a restaurant, what are they serving? The labels are there for people to help them buy what they think that they want to buy. If they label my music jazz, they may say “Well, I never liked jazz.” If they label it smooth jazz, “Well, what is that?” But we can label it smooth jazz, and people can figure out if they like it, or not like it. I never liked any of that. When people ask me what I do, I say, I’m a sax player. If they ask me what kind of music I play, I say I’m a jazz musician. That might offend people and it might not offend people. I get the categorization. I just wish we didn’t have to. I see no need for it. I try not to do it. There’s no good answer on that one. What is Heavy Metal music? What does that mean? Is it only Metallica or Megadeth? What happens if there are no vocals? 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


What music would folks be surprised to know you listen to?

I listen to old jazz, which is not surprising. My new record coming out soon is “New Standards.” It’s not like my other records in the sense of the melodic compositions, but it’s still me. It’s like if I was born in ’50s, and playing that kind of jazz, how would I play it? But it’s all original. That’s why it’s “new standards.”

I was pleasantly surprised to learn that you are a pilot, that you are a champion golfer, and that you were an early investor in a little company called Starbucks. Were all of these interests you pursued as a result of the money and fame you earned? I mean, you are not following the typical sex, drugs, jail, and music arc of most musicians!

I started golfing when I was 10. I’ve always loved golfing. Pilot, was, if I do not have to work 9-5, which thankfully, I’ve never had to do, you do get to pursue things you are interested in. I was very interested to know how does an airplane fly? I took a few lessons and got me hooked. I flew a little plane all across the country to the Toronto International Film Festival. It took me three days to get here!

What is the most awkward or jaw-dropping thing a fan has ever told you? 

Well, you know, I’ve heard it all. It’s not going to make my jaw drop. But here’s a fun memory. I was in New York, promoting one of my records, and I was outside, and a guy walks up to me — and at my gigs, I don’t have much security; I’m an easy access. And this guy comes up to me and he says, “I just want to tell you, I make love just like you play your sax. When you go low, I go low. When you go high, I go high. When you hold your note, I hold my note. You finish, I finish!” 

And how do you respond to that?

I just laughed. I said, “Man, thank you for telling that. That was the greatest thing you could have told me.” I immediately went to go find the guys in my band and tell them this, and they were just loving it!

“Listening to Kenny G” premieres Thursday, Dec. 2 at 8 p.m. on HBO, and will be available to stream on HBO Max. Watch a trailer for it below, via YouTube.

More stories you might like:

How to roast potatoes like my 91-year-old grandma

Big Little Recipe has the smallest-possible ingredient list and big everything else: flavor, creativity, wow factor. That means five ingredients or fewer — not including water, salt, black pepper, and certain fats (like oil and butter), since we’re guessing you have those covered. Inspired by the column, the Big Little Recipes cookbook is available now. Like, right now.


My grandma, Jolly, has been making these potatoes for 72 years. She knows this because that was when she got married, the first time, when she was 19, and when you get married, the first time, when you’re 19, you have to learn all sorts of things, like how to make potatoes.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Because even though in my family we call them Grandma Potatoes — not Grandma’s Potatoes, the apostrophe-s was dropped decades ago — they actually started with her mom, my great-grandmother, Ethel.

Raising two kids in the 1930s, Ethel used canned potatoes. She tossed them in oil and spices, then roasted them in a roaring oven until they became as crispy as a drive-through hash brown. Ever since, they have been my family’s most-requested holiday side, one that just so happens to be easy enough to make on a weeknight when a craving strikes (which it will).

It was Grandma who pivoted from the canned convenience, opting instead for fresh potatoes, in all their dirty glory. Sometimes peels them, sometimes doesn’t, depending on her mood. But what she always does, in homage to her mom, in order to mimic that canned-potato softness, is parcook them.

Parcook is culinary-school-speak for partially cooking an ingredient, so it can be finished later on. This is useful in restaurants, when an order comes in and you only have a few minutes to make it. And with potatoes, it’s even more useful, whether you’re in a restaurant or at home.

As food science authority J. Kenji López-Alt puts it on Serious Eats, “The boiling and roughing-up steps are the real key. They create a thin slurry of mashed potato that clings to the surface of the potato chunks, which ends up crisping beautifully in the oven as the potatoes roast.”

Beyond better texture, the flavor is better, too. Because the water is aggressively salted — I eyeball 1 tablespoon of kosher salt per quart of boiling water — the potatoes are properly seasoned even before they’re, well, seasoned. Which makes them happier, which makes Grandma happier, which makes me happier.

Once they’re almost fork-tender, they are drained and dumped onto a sheet pan, where they are tossed with a lot of olive oil, sweet paprika, garlic powder, dried rosemary, salt, and pepper. It’s this humble spice mixture that’s signature Grandma. Swapping in fresh garlic or rosemary would ruin the effect, so don’t you dare.

Likewise, measuring is not welcome here. Even though she’s made these potatoes hundreds of times, Grandma has never measured the oil or the spices. “Never!” And while she gave me permission “to measure it out, you know, if you want to write a recipe” — for once, I opted not to. That just isn’t how they’re made.

***

Recipe: Grandma Potatoes

Prep time: 10 minutes
Cook time: 35 minutes
Serves: 3 to 4

Ingredients

  • Potatoes (“I don’t care what kind”)
  • Salt and black pepper (“a heavy hand”)
  • Extra-virgin olive oil (“enough to coat”)
  • Sweet paprika (“a lot!”)
  • Garlic powder (“never fresh”)
  • Dried rosemary (“just a little”)

Directions

  1. Bring a pot of water to a boil. While that’s working, peel the potatoes or don’t, “whatever you feel like doing.” Chop them into chunks: “not small cubes, bigger are better.”
  2. Salt the boiling water like you mean it and boil the potatoes until a fork inserted meets just a little resistance.
  3. Drain the potatoes, transfer to a rimmed sheet pan, and let them cool while you get the oven really hot (say, 400°F or 425°F). 
  4. Drench the cooled potatoes in oil — enough to coat, plus some excess pooling on the sheet pan. Season with a ton of paprika, a lot of salt and pepper, and, yeah, a lot of garlic powder, too. Crinkle some rosemary between your fingers and sprinkle all over. Toss everything together. The seasoned oil should taste good to you, so adjust however you want. Spread out the potatoes so they’re in an even layer, cut side facing down.
  5. Roast until they’re really browned and really crispy, stirring with a spatula halfway through. These are best hot, but you can serve them warm, too.

Is this the prettiest salad you’ve ever seen?

Every week in Genius Recipes — often with your help! — Food52 Founding Editor and lifelong Genius-hunter Kristen Miglore is unearthing recipes that will change the way you cook.


Egg yolk singed with a glowing lump of charcoal. Homemade almond tahini. Grilled cabbage with chile garlic butter.

Paging through Sarit Packer and Itamar Srulovich’s latest cookbook, “Chasing Smoke,” there were plenty of moments that made me pause, admire, and add yet another bookmark.

But this is the one — a burst of ombré purple, like a proud dahlia upturned to face the sun — that I just couldn’t move past.

Beyond its alien beauty, there was also the delight of roasting walnuts in a skillet right on the grill. Of fresh sage not fried crisp or stewed into beans, but left furry and fresh to underpin a simple, earthy dressing. Of eating with your hands, not unlike scooping up a nacho. Of charring onions unrecognizable, then pulling flower petals from their ashes.

And all of it started from the scent that accompanied Sarit and Itamar through Turkey, Greece, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel (and beyond) in 2018 and 2019 as they put together their newest cookbook, “Chasing Smoke”: the sweet-savory smoke of a halved onion, hissing and charring, as cooks used it to clean the grates of a hot grill. “In lots of places in the Middle East, pretty much everywhere we traveled, people use half an onion to clean their grill. And so the first thing you smell,” Itamar told me in the video you see above, “will be that charred onion, and it’s a very mouthwatering smell.”

They also knew about onion’s greater potential, from the tinier ones nestled onto kebabs, “And then there will always be an onion on a skewer on your grill,” Itamar continued. “It’s often the tastiest bit.”

So why treat that onion, effective as it might be, as only a cleaning supply, when it had so much goodness still inside? Sarit and Itamar opted to leave the onion on the grill to blacken thoroughly — but only on the surface.

As the onion becomes near-fossilized on the outside, smoke and steam shoot up through its inner layers, mellowing and sweetening them without causing them to lose their structure. Unfurled, only a thin rim of visible char is left behind, and the onion petals cup dressings admirably without tasting raw. Here, the dressing is an earthy-bright scoop of sage, honey, and walnuts, but it could just as well be baba ghanoush (Sarit’s suggestion) or blue cheese sauce (Itamar’s idea).

In a season of more outdoor gathering, I see this as the ideal side dish: unfussy (the advance prep is: cut an onion in half; don’t peel!); communal; memorable.

Please note: On October 20, 2021, there was a CDC food safety alert on onions distributed from Chihuahua, Mexico, on August 27, 2021 — please double-check the origins of any onions you source for this recipe (and compost any old ones in your pantry that are suspect). For more information, head here.

***

Recipe: Whole Grilled Red Onions with Sage, Honey, and Walnuts from Sarit Packer and Itamar Srulovich

Prep time: 5 minutes
Cook time: 30 minutes
Serves: 6 to 8 as a starter or side salad

Ingredients

For the salad:

  • 4 large red onions, skin on
  • Olive oil, for brushing
  • Flaky sea salt, to finish

For the dressing:

  • 80 grams (2 3/4 ounces) walnuts (about 2/3 cup)
  • 10 sage leaves, rolled up and cut into really thin strips
  • 1 tablespoon honey
  • 2 tablespoons white wine vinegar
  • 2 tablespoons boiling water
  • 1 teaspoon mild chile flakes
  • 1/2 teaspoon salt
  • A little freshly ground black pepper
  • 3 tablespoons olive oil
  • A few sprigs of mint, leaves picked (about 15 grams, or 1/2 ounce)

Directions

  1. Halve the red onions through the core, keeping the skin on. Brush the cut faces with oil and place cut side down on a hot grill. Grill for about 12 minutes, until the cut surface is black and charred, then flip to skin side down and let cook for 5 minutes more. You should be able to insert a dinner knife, but with a little resistance — you want them slightly softened, but still with a little crunch. Remove to a plate to chill until they are cool enough to handle. 
  2. Make the dressing while you wait. Roast the walnuts over the fire for about 8 minutes in an old sieve or dry frying pan, stirring occasionally. Slightly crush them and mix with all the other dressing ingredients apart from the mint leaves. 
  3. Break the cooled onion halves into petals, discarding the outer skins. Set the petals with their charred rims upwards on a large serving plate. Just before serving, thinly shred the mint leaves and mix into the dressing. Drizzle all over the onion petals and sprinkle with a little sea salt to finish.
  4. To cook without a grill: Use a lightly oiled, heated griddle pan on your stove top and cook just as you would on the fire, but beware, your house will get pretty smoky.

Bet your bottom dollar that NBC’s “Annie Live!” will usher in a new inclusive era for an old classic

Traditionally, and for better or worse, this time of year reinvigorates our devotion to, um, tradition. Much of this is as benign as a cookie recipe that you only dig out in December. Even that presumes a shared sentimentality, like the annual broadcasts of classic animated specials and movies like “It’s a Wonderful Life.”

Enter “Annie Live!” NBC’s first live musical broadcast since 2018’s “Jesus Christ Superstar Live in Concert,” starring John Legend as Mr. Christ. Out of all the productions executive producers Robert Greenblatt and Neil Meron could have chosen to return Broadway to primetime, “Annie” may be the safest.

Family-friendly and kid-centered, “Annie” hooks into an inter-generational nostalgia and enjoyed hundreds of productions in community theaters and schools across the country each year prior to the pandemic.

Related: What a friend we have in Black Jesus: “Jesus Christ Superstar Live”

Its rags-to-riches plot about an adorable, eternally optimistic orphan who melts the frozen heart of a billionaire while outwitting her orphanage’s scheming, resentful matron marries the Cinderella tale with the ethos of American striving. The showstopper “It’s the Hard Knock Life” has bounded through commercials, sitcoms and was sampled in a hit by Jay-Z.

There’s a chance this live production will draw viewers inspired to reconnect to musical theater in the wake of Stephen Sondheim’s death, although “Annie” is decidedly not a Sondheim work.

Melodically and lyrically, Charles Strouse composed its bouncy score to be a catchy and universally appealing. Thanks to the 1982 film’s soundtrack a healthy slice of Generation X memorized Martin Charnin’s lyrics for “Tomorrow” and “Maybe.”

And while the story is set during the Great Depression, the fantasy it spins is timeless. The only risk one could possibly perceive in NBC’s production would be in the casting of Celina Smith as Annie – and based on her press appearances and snippets of her singing voice that’s not a risk at all.

Scratch that: It’s not a risk to anyone who doesn’t have a death clutch on “tradition.”

At 12 years old, Smith is the second Black actor to play Annie, and the first to win the role in a nationwide casting search. That’s significant, because for many years the same circumstances always culminated in a white lead.

The New York Times’ coverage of “Annie”‘s 1977 Broadway debut lamely explains why that is. After the writer effuses that the cast looks like “a cross‐section of the white ethnic population living in New York City in 1933, the year the show takes place,” she quotes the production’s director Martin Charnin.

“The kids had to be super real, not show business types,” he says. “The kids who turned us off were precocious kids, super professional kids. The reason these girls got the job is they still have some peach fuzz — they were not totally polished actors.”

Then came this paragraph.

There are no black girls in the group, he said, “because we did our research, and found that black children were totally segregated in those days, and not allowed in the same orphanages with whites.”

Uh huh. Because musicals are truly known for their absolute fealty to historic accuracy. (For his part, Strouse told Vanity Fair in 2014 that he always envisioned that Annie would be played by a Black girl.)

Another obvious if not specified truth is that in the various high-profile productions mounted over the years, the relatively or completely unknown leads were surrounded by famous stars who often outshone them. That’s why most people remember Carol Burnett’s raucous portrayal of Miss Hannigan from the 1982 movie as opposed to most of what Aileen Quinn brought to Annie. In 1999 Kathy Bates took on the role for a made-for-TV movie that aired on ABC and drew an audience of more than 26 million.

This time the fabulous Taraji P. Henson gets ham up Miss Hannigan’s solo “Little Girls,” and Harry Connick Jr. plays the emotionally closed-off billionaire Oliver “Daddy” Warbucks. Nicole Scherzinger portrays Grace Farrell, Daddy Warbucks’ personal secretary and Annie’s eventual adoptive mom. Tituss Burgess and Megan Hilty round out the cast. Will they steal the scenes they’re in? Probably. All of these parts are made to chew scenery.

Nevertheless, Smith is a talent to watch for the same reason Oscar-nominated Quvenzhané Wallis generated excitement when she was cast as “Annie” in a 2014 movie.

That version plucked the story out of Herbert Hoover’s time and plopped it into the Obama years. It was also a flop, but for reasons unrelated to Wallis’ performance – mainly because it changed a few too many things. Daddy Warbucks, for one.

He’s an iconic character with a name that only makes sense in a musical or the 1920s comic strip it was based on. Director and screenwriter Will Gluck’s decision to rename him Will Stacks probably didn’t endear the movie to purists, even ones who didn’t have a problem with Wallis’ casting.

Predictably some people did. “‘Annie’ Is Black and Racists Go F*cking Crazy” screamed a headline on The Daily Kos. The Guardian was more conservative: “Annie remake: casting of black lead provokes negative Twitter posts” it peeped.

Wallis was 11 when Twitter users heaped racist invective upon her for daring to take a role that previously had only been played by white performers – among them Sarah Jessica Parker, Sophie McShera (“Downton Abbey”)  and “Stranger Things” star Sadie Sink.  Amandla Stenberg’s casting as Rue in “The Hunger Games” and Zendaya being tapped to play MJ beside Tom Holland’s Peter Parker in “Spider-Man” provoked a similarly ignorant outcry.

A few months ago Smith’s announced casting was met with a relatively muted backlash, but probably because the vilest trolls are busy plotting the overthrow of democracy. Then again, finding snide remarks is easy enough if you decide to look for them. We live in a time of amplified white grievance, after all.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Many bitterly toss around the term “woke” and adultify Smith, complaining that she looks much older than she is. But many more people seem excited to hear Smith soar through “Tomorrow” and simply enjoy a new take of a classic, in a format that’s spent a few years off the air.

Viewing the history of NBC’s musical, tapping Smith to star in “Annie” makes sense. The network’s second most popular live musical telecast was its 2015 production of “The Wiz Live!,” which drew nearly 11.5 million viewers. Only its first live musical production, 2013’s “The Sound of Music Live!” was more popular with a viewership of 18.6 million.

The other side of all of this is that in a cast led by a Black actor flanked by other actors of color, the billionaire is still played by a white guy. A most likeable white guy, but still – it’s bound to remind some viewers of a retro TV trope that hasn’t worn well. Screen and stage chemistry can compensate for a lot, of course. More to the point, this isn’t “Diff’rent Strokes.” It’s “Annie.”   

In 2012 one of the revival’s producers explained that its female fans, adults and children alike, “want Annie as they remember her, intact, and they don’t want us to change the show much at all because they’re excited to share her with their friends and family.”

From what we can tell NBC is taking that to heart by enabling Smith to realize a dream once thought impossible by Black, brown and Asian girls on live TV. In doing so, she proves some tomorrow needn’t be permanently elusive. For once the sun is shining on her today.

“Annie Live!” airs Thursday, Dec. 2 at 8 p.m. on NBC. Watch a trailer for it below, via YouTube.

More stories like this:

 

Georgia election workers sue far-right website The Gateway Pundit, citing “campaign of lies”

A far-right website known for spreading 2020 election conspiracies is being sued by election workers in Georgia who say they became the target of harassment and death threats as a result of the outlet’s campaign to sow doubt about the legitimacy of President Joe Biden’s victory. 

The Gateway Pundit, a fringe political site run by two brothers named Jim and Joe Hoft, falsely claimed last year that Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Shayne Moss, had manipulated ballots last November as part of their duties as poll workers for the Fulton County elections board, which covers the Atlanta metropolitan area. The conspiracies quickly spread after then President Donald Trump himself called them out by name last December — mentioning Freeman at least 18 times during his infamous call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. 

Now, the pair is suing the outlet for running the evidence-free claims — following similar lawsuits by election equipment companies against right-wing publications, including Fox News, Newsmax and One America News. Freeman and Moss, both of whom are Black, are two of the first individuals to take on the influential and oftentimes conspiratorial far-right media machine that gained outsize power during Donald Trump’s time in the White House.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


“I want the defendants to know that my daughter and I are real people who deserve justice, and I never want them to do this to anyone else,” Ms. Freeman said in a statement to The New York Times.

The pair outlined the way their lives have been upended by The Gateway Pundit’s conspiracies in a lengthy report published by Reuters Wednesday, claiming that they had been deluged with threatening phone calls and even people showing up at their doors late at night in an apparent attempt to intimidate them. The wire service cited several 911 calls Freeman made after these incidents:

Freeman made a series of 911 emergency calls in the days after she was publicly identified in early December by the president’s camp. In a Dec. 4 call, she told the dispatcher she’d gotten a flood of “threats and phone calls and racial slurs,” adding: “It’s scary because they’re saying stuff like, ‘We’re coming to get you. We are coming to get you.'”

Two days later, a panicked Freeman called 911 again, after hearing loud banging on her door just before 10 p.m. Strangers had come the night before, too. She begged the dispatcher for assistance. “Lord Jesus, where’s the police?” she asked, according to the recording, obtained by Reuters in a records request. “I don’t know who keeps coming to my door.”

“Please help me.”

According to the lawsuit, a large group of Trump supporters even surrounded Freeman’s Georgia home on Jan. 6 — just as another group was storming the U.S. Capitol building in a last-ditch attempt to stop the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory. Luckily Freeman had already fled her home on the advice of FBI agents, who predicted accurately that the day would become volatile. She apparently did not return home for more than two months following the incident.

Freeman and Moss’ lawsuit was filed Thursday in a Missouri circuit court in St. Louis, where Jim Hoft maintains a residence. According to the Times, the pair is being represented by a nonprofit called Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group “focused on resisting authoritarianism in the United States.”

The lawsuit does not indicate a sum Freeman or Moss is seeking — instead, they are asking for damages to be “determined at trial.”

More Salon coverage of the ongoing right-wing assault on American democracy: