“I saw a blog that cited Obama’s preference for organic bottled tea as an indication that he had elitist tastes. I know there are always people looking for opportunities to throw the “E” word around, but there are few words I find more contrary to what Honest Tea stands for. In fact, I would argue it’s elitist to suggest that only rich or highly educated people should have an interest in healthy beverages. From our beginnings ten years ago, we have always strived to offer affordable organic and healthier choices for everyone. In fact, our original $1.19 price point was too low for our own good, especially when most of the competition was out there at $1.69 per bottle for non-organic tea. We lost lots of money in the early years, but we stuck to our lower price because we sold more tea, and we knew we were reaching more people. I know there are stores and restaurants that sell our tea for as much as $6.00 per bottle, but I can assure you that we don’t make any more money on those sales than the stores that carry it at $1.49!

In many ways, the deal we made with Coca-Cola will help ensure that we don’t become an elitist brand. If our tea is only available at higher-end stores, then the pricing and the venues help feed that elitist image. By contrast, if we’re sold wherever Coca-Cola is sold, then we’ve succeeded in democratizing organics. And that’s the kind of democratization all voters can endorse.”

to paraphrase something the Joker says to Batman, “The Dark Knight” has rules, and they are the conventions that no movie of this kind can escape. The climax must be a fight with the villain, during which the symbiosis of good guy and bad guy, implicit throughout, must be articulated. The end must point forward to a sequel, and an aura of moral consequence must be sustained even as the killings, explosions and chases multiply. The allegorical stakes in a superhero are raised — it’s not just good guys fighting bad guys, but Righteousness against Evil, Order against Chaos — precisely to authorize a more intense level of violence.

Actually, I think the true media heir to comic books is series television/video. With 22 episodes, you have time for far more character development, and the requirements of form, like the scene necessaire, take up much less resource, and have more impact, because you have been anticipating it so long.

That isn’t my idea, it’s Joss Whedons. I expect him to develop that idea further in his work, which I eagerly anticipate.

By the way, re: The Hulk and Superman Returns. I find these both to be exceptional films. Exceptionally good. No, really. I know I’m in the minority with that opinion, but box office success is not identical to filmmaking success.

Superman Returns was a great piece of work in that it made Superman more interesting than I ever thought he could be.

The Hulk was everything a Hulk movie ought to be, from character to effects, to the three-panel “comic book” visual format.

Instead of moving to put FM/FM into a more easily understood model–either nationalizing them, or privatising–they’re making the GSEs even weirder, and of course, piling on more debt.

It’s time for Congress to bite the bullet: nationalize them, or take them private. But keeping pet companies on a leash so that you can use them as a sort of housing market slush fund, while pretending that the liabilities you thereby create don’t really affect the government, is the kind of thing one expects to see in a banana republic, not a free and prosperous nation.

The biggest boost for homeowners is a program that would allow the FHA to back the refinancing of as much as $300 billion in home loans for distressed borrowers. Under this plan, the lender or investor holding the mortgage would have to accept at least a 15% write-down in the value of the previous loan. The new mortgage would then receive federal backing.

But lenders wouldn’t be required to participate, and many are likely to conclude that they are better off proceeding with a foreclosure or offering the borrower some other means of trying to catch up on payments. The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that the program would lead to 500,000 borrowers refinancing loans totaling $85 billion.

Thomas Lawler, a housing economist based in Leesburg, Va., said he expects the effect of that program to be minimal. “This is probably low on [lenders'] list of options” of how to work out overdue loans, he said.

I’m skeptical that any of this will help, especially the mortgage writedown/refinance angle – people with problems managing their personal finances are generally (in my experience) bad at it, period. Even though getting their payments lowered might offer permanent help to some, I suspect many are going to get into trouble again at some point in the not-too-distant future, so this provision is probably just kicking the can down the road.

As for the $$$ for local government to buy and fix up abandoned housing, this sounds like a prime opportunity for juiced in friends of various mayors and councilmembers to make some really easy money. We’d be better off if they just piled that $3.9 billion in the middle of the national Mall and let all the political cronies run at it like a smashed pinata and carry off as much as they can stuff in their pockets.

The Civil Rights Era had a natural unifying theme to it, and much was accomplished by that unity. When contemporary citizens stray into issues that don’t affect all blacks equally, it becomes harder to maintain a uniform voice. Even on issues that affect everyone, it is to be expected that there will be a diversity of opinion on how best to resolve the problem. However, it is inescapable that if blacks begin to manifestly voice (and vote) in a way that is diverse, there will be a corresponding decrease in political clout for that disparate grouping called African-Americans. It should come as no surprise, then, that the Civil rights “Old Guard” resents dissenting opinions as disloyal because (perhaps) they see that political clout as something they created. There has to be a tipping point where there is more to be gained by the group by manifesting a diversity of thought than is lost in political clout. Has that tipping point arrived?

It also should come as no surprise that after a few decades of whites hearing a unified African-American voice that those whites are behind the learning curve in perceiving that there is a wide diversity of African-American opinion. And, yes, a bit of cross-cultural exposure (the barber shop, etc.) would certainly speed things along. Keep in mind, though, that there are huge swathes of land and population in this country where there are no black barber shops, etc. A personal example: The 12 years I lived in rural Indiana. You might even argue that a black raised there would be equally out of touch with his counterparts raised in urban ghettos. Before going on to college, my son’s best friend in our lily-white high school was a second-generation Ghanian. Other than his very dark complexion you couldn’t pick him out culturally from any of the other white students. He didn’t “act black,” (I don’t like that phrase, but it suffices here.)

There is also the problem of cultural identity, and cultural evolution. No matter how much naturally occurring diversity of thought there is within any culture, there must be some unifying characteristics with which that culture identifies itself, or else you don’t have a distinct culture. There is no belonging. It is fine for multiple African-American cultures to emerge (or, more accurately, to manifest differences that have been there all along), but all those involved need to feel comfortable in whatever culture they are in and let others do likewise. It should also be acceptable for an individual to choose to adopt themselves into another culture without their former culture seeing that action as disloyal.

I don’t think that bargaining strategy is going to work on Obama. He’s not intimidated by the Clintons.

I’m not sure why the whole party has to be held hostage to her ambitions. People talk about what Obama is going to have to offer her to keep the Clintons satisfied and keep them from using their influence within the party to make trouble for his presidency (like a Supreme Court appointment, Senate majority leader, etc).

I say no one should allow themselves to be bullied by power-hungry politicians. 8 years of that has been quite enough.

It’s a big guessing game at this point, but I still think Hillary’s delegates are well poised to spoil any choice Obama makes.

Obama, especially with his huge fundraising advantage is going to put lots of states in play that aren’t traditional swing states. Even the head of Hillary Clinton’s own polling company she hired to replace Penn (1) says that “Obama goes much further reaching into the independent and Republican vote, and has a greater chance of creating a new electoral map for the Democrats” (2).

Obama already has way more money and way more donors to tap for more. McBush and the GOP will probably have the money to run according to the old paradigm in the few key swing states that Clinton would have to, but they’ll never be able to match Obama’s advantage which is all over an ever changing map. Just like in the primaries where Obama has kicked Hillary’s ass where she couldn’t afford to compete, his general election campaign will run a national effort putting more states in play that McCain & the GOP will never be able to afford to.

I think that dialogue is important because I don’t think that people know how those of another race think or feel about the important issues. How could white people who don’t engage blacks understand their perspective if they’re hearing only the “official” black opinion from Lando or Al Sharpton or even some less ridiculous figure. Us white’s don’t really have official spokesmen the way you all do, but I wouldn’t want my own views to be represented by the Bush’s or Palins or Buchanans of the world (Pat or Tom). I think that by giving up on honest dialogue, you cede the floor to the loudmouths and the influential. This shouldn’t be the extent of the racial conversation in this country.

Moreover, while I agree that we need to talk more about specific policies that may disproportionately affect black people, I hope that Coates is not saying that this should be the extent of any conversation. Limiting the dialogue to this issue is a good way to make white people turn their brains off and go back to football and bud light.