Democratic NPR Radio Debate

Today, the Democratic Presidential candidates (minus Bill Richardson who was attending a funeral) went at it on a radio only debate on NPR.

This debate was “sound only”; no video. They only dealt with a few issues: Iran, Immigration, and China.

This was the best debate by far as the candidates actually had time to elaborate on the issues.

To see an abridged paraphrased transcript, go here (Part I) and here (Part II)

NPR now has it available for free download. A fact check is available here.

Personally, I found it interesting that Obama took shots at Giuliani; the question was asked “why do so many Muslims in the world hate us” and he brought up Giuliani making remarks about “they are coming here to kill you.” Yes, the terrorists are, but Obama was talking about the whole tenor of the debate, and some sure make it sound like “them” (all Muslims) vs. “us”. Yes, Giuliani did say that Islam was a “great religion” that had been hijacked by fanatics; Obama was referring to the tenor of the debate.

Clinton tried to point out that Obama had said “all is on the table” when it comes to Iran and had suggested surgical air strikes; Obama retorted that she was using an answer to a hypothetical question “what if Iran gets nukes and won’t give them up”.

Personally, I think it was a good performance for most; Clinton didn’t look good in the Iran area but was ok in the others. Obama had a good performance, and as usual, Biden taught me something almost every time he talked. Edwards was passionate, and had a heated exchange with Clinton.

Gravel got in a word here and there and Kucinich, well, he tried really hard to get noticed.

Science A while ago, I mentioned an article in Anthropology.net.

The piece, by Rex Dalton, got me to think about another thing I just recently read on the web, a blog post by a person who goes by ‘Bay Radical’ about the issues surrounding some shellmounds made by native Americans that inhabited the San Francisco Bay Area. The two issues have tangents but aren’t directly related.

That’s beside the point. As noted by Bay Radical, the shellmounds were made by Ohlone natives… or so we think. The two most prominent mounds were in Emeryville, California and Alameda, California. I currently live in Alameda, California, just down the street from one of the sites of the old mounds. I bike over the sites when I do my cycling rounds. And have been to Emeryville more times than I’d like to admit. Since I live in the Bay Area and am interested in past human life, I’m very aware of what these sites were and what they are now.

At times, Bay Radical describes what happened to the shellmounds in an a realistic tone. At other times Bay Radical describes the shellmounds in exotified manner. That’s expected. The writer does go by the nom de plume of radical. So here’s a bit of reclarification…

Shellmounds are a form of midden. Midden is known as a dump for domestic waste. In archaeology, midden provides a lot of information. I spent two years sorting thru midden from a site in Moss Landing, California. saw how native Americans did not live harmoniously with nature as often glorified in popular culture. These people obliterated populations of norther fur seals to the point of extinction. [...]

I got a comment from the blogger who was being quoted and think that his comment deserves to be in the main area of this blog: Felix (aka “bayradical”)

Hey there,

Thanks for the (indirect) link to my blog. I was flattered that anthropology.net linked to me, although I chafe at the accusation that “At other times [I] describe the shellmounds in exotified manner.”

I’m not sure the author read my post closely. I actually link to an article that suggests that local tribes over-hunted bird populations to the point of extinction, and I don’t believe that Indian people are somehow unique or special among human peoples. But I do tend to support the wishes of Indian people, and here in the Bay Area, the majority of surviving local tribal community members treat the shellmounds as burial grounds, and prefer that they are left undisturbed, so yes, my post did support that position.

Also, I think it’s surprising for an anthropologist to assume that the places where very distinct cultural groups leave their wastes would have the same cultural significance in each of those cultures. Perhaps trash dumps are unimportant in our culture, but we can’t assume they lacked spiritual meaning (or were even considered ‘trash’) in another.

Humor I admit that I drive a Prius and that I loved Al Gore’s movie. But no matter what cause you have and no matter how good the cause is, there will be some who support the cause who don’t have both oars in the water. Blogger Different River (who is a conservative, by the way) has fun with one such incident: an Israeli who thinks that Channauka candles are bad for global warming!

In a campaign that has spread like wildfire across the Internet, a group of Israeli environmentalists is encouraging Jews around the world to light at least one less candle this Hanukka to help the environment.

The founders of the Green Hanukkia campaign found that every candle that burns completely produces 15 grams of carbon dioxide. If an estimated one million Israeli households light for eight days, they said, it would do significant damage to the atmosphere.

“The campaign calls for Jews around the world to save the last candle and save the planet, so we won’t need another miracle,” said Liad Ortar, the campaign’s cofounder, who runs the Arkada environmental consulting firm and the Ynet Web site’s environmental forum. “Global warming is a milestone in human evolution that requires us to rethink how we live our lives, and one of the main paradigms of that is religion and how it fits into the current situation.” [...]

I had to chuckle.