I read the following line in a story about one man's lament at having purchased a car that was not made in the USA or by union workers:

[ The shirt I'm wearing right now was made in the Philippines. My pants are from Bangladesh ... I would never even think of buying a Japanese car. For me it's a matter of principle ... as much as I can, I choose to spend my money on products made by union workers in America ... Not only was my new Fusion assembled at Ford's plant in Hermosillo, in the Mexican state of Sonora, where there is no UAW, and auto workers earn less than $5 an hour. What's worse, almost none of the parts that went into it were sourced in the U.S. or even Canada ... ]

You have to look closely to see (I'm guessing the author didn't even see it), but its a belief that is at the core of my problems with lots of the immigration and "outsourcing" complaints.

The author complains that none of the parts were sourced in the US or even Canada.  Think about that.  Only a few short graphs earlier the author states he tries to buy American (read, U.S., unless Mexico isn't a part of the American continent, anymore), union-made cars.  He has also complained about, lets see, his shirt from the Philippines, his Bangladesh-originated pants, and his Mexico-sourced car.  And then he proceeds to say he wanted car parts sourced from "the US or even Canada." [emphasis is mine].  So, parts from US, OK; parts from Canada, OK; car from Mexico, not OK.  

He does note that wages are higher in Canada.  But if higher/highest wages are the sole important factor, doesn't that make presumably even higher U.S. wages the best?  Does the ranking for best vehicle to buy go by wages, and thus US, Canada, X, Y, Z?  No, clearly from his earlier statements it isn't a wage thing, its a unionized, country-of-origin thing. 

Mexico.  Phillippines.  Bangladesh.  Let us take a trip to Seasame Street: What do these three have that the fourth, Canada, doesn't?  Oh, right.

I started prefering black teas, so of course ...

... new links between green tea and cancer prevention come to light.

From the story:
Men with prostate cancer who drank green tea had less prostate tissue inflammation, linked to cancer growth, and other changes than those who didn't drink it, says Susanne M. Henning, PhD, RD, adjunct professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.

''We were able to show the green tea polyphenols (antioxidants) reached the prostate tissue and they did modify inflammation of the prostate," she says. Polyphenols are antioxidants that protect against cell damage.

This is big news for a couple reasons. Despite the "pink" breast cancer push that covers, well, pretty much every square inch of everything, breast cancer rates are stable. Meanwhile, men suffer 30% more incidents of cancer than women.

Anyway, enjoy your greens!

Castling

Either I've reached a plateau, or there is a mighty big step up from level 2 to level 3.

UPDATE: hey I won tonight, so I'm now like 2-11, so that is something.

Two quick thoughts

This article isn't exactly about the downfall of feminism, but how it has changed.  But I've also read other stories (sorry, no links) about the changing face of feminism, especially its apparent splintering and lack of focus.  But doesn't that make sense?  Feminsim largely accomplished many of its immediately pressing goals - sure, you can look around and complain about this inequity, or that stupid law, or this societal belief or factor, but for the most part things are much, much better than they were in the 1950s.  My boss's boss, and even her boss, is a woman.  R is a VP at a financial firm, and until recently reported to a woman.  Maybe not perfect, but this is the real world.  Maybe it splintered because (wait for it) women aren't all the same. My wife, sister and mother share biology, but otherwise enjoy vastly different leisure activites and pasttimes.  In a time of subjegation a movement capturing all three exists.  But today, no umbrella covers all three; let alone all women.  Dressing up goals, calling it feminism and pretending to speak for all of them changes nothing.  Some women are girly girls, some tough as nails; some like purses, some like punches.

Meanwhile, another article notes that while most European countries bar people from questioning the Holocaust, or even investigating it, or denigrating Jews, its open season on Muslims.  It strikes me that this is largely the problem with such laws.  The majority enjoys protecting itself while ignoring the law equally applies to some minority.  I'm not one for bagging on on any group or minority, but if you want to make yourself look like an idiot in my eyes, bag away.  Given that the article is from Slate.com I worried it would come out in favor of such laws.  Thankfully, it argues that we either need to apply them equally, or more likely reject them entirely due to their possible abuse.