Junk shot/explosion images for the record...

Screen grabs from either the junk shot or unplanned rupture (or both). These are in sequence, from roughly 8:30 ET this morning. Update: It appears, at least judging by the timestamp, that the live feed is back to monitoring the mud, and things look much like they did before...(??) Update II: Now the timestamp has been changed back to 7 am, and it appears to be looped from before the explosion....

"There is no light from the surface at one mile deep. All the lights come from ROVs," says Anonymous, no doubt correctly. It's sure as shit dark now, as they appear[ed] to be inspecting the carnage.
















































...since nobody else seems to have noticed(!), and who knows how long the video will be available (probably another few minutes...then at BP's discretion). An hour later almost every media outlet is still reporting on their BS "success" story fed to us (and the President) despite being completely false, yesterday.

Update: Apparently The Oil Drum (where more knowledgeable folks hang out) noticed this morning as well (though comments are all cautious and speculative).

I've uploaded the video of the occurrence here.

And then it just blows up..

Holy fucking hell.


So much for that. I just watched it live. The whole damn thing just blew. Enormous explosion (and then several more flashes), swirling and raining huge debris, now floating in near black.

It looked terribly just before it blew, clearly under enormous pressure and the ruptures in the top getting visibly worse. It was like watching a brain splitting and hemorrhaging, then the camera rocks and spins with the force of the explosion toward the light near the surface, and then it's a swirling shitstorm for about one or two very long minutes, like being in the middle of an underwater hurricane or typhoon. Large schools of what appears to be rock coming out of nowhere at tremendous speed, swirling oil and mud and bubbles of no doubt that criminally toxic Corexit they banned in the UK for surface use (and now poisons the entire water column and food chain in the Gulf, as BP continues in its corporate quest to disappear the full extent of damages).

Now it's just a deathly swirl of black, floating bubbles and black. No more light is coming from the surface ROVs.

A complete nightmare. Way to go, BP! At least your PR campaign is still working, making liars of the President and General all day yesterday, and the MSM has yet to report anything but your latest "success."

Who knows how long the video will be around. Nobody seems to be reporting on it yet. I've watched it several times now, and gotten lots and lots of screen grabs...

Shocker: this doesn't look so good, as "solutions" go...

Yesterday's news, today:

In the morning, federal officials expressed optimism that all was going well. “The top kill procedure is going as planned, and it is moving along as everyone had hoped,” Adm. Thad W. Allen of the Coast Guard, the leader of the government effort, told CNN.

And Robert Dudley, BP’s managing director, said on the “Today” program on NBC that the top kill “was moving the way we want it to.”

It was not until late afternoon that BP acknowledged that the operation was not succeeding and that pumping had halted at 11 p.m. Wednesday.

So much for transparency or accountability...

That mudbath they've created is obscuring their ability to tell the truth, naturally. BP would prefer to make outright liars of the President and his General, for two nights and one full day, if it better suits their PR operation for the public to remain at least a day behind. Hardly surprising, perhaps, after a full month of being in the dark. Also:

Mud traveling through the riser pipe instead of into the well is a concern not only for the success of the top kill procedure, but also because the mud, which contains solid materials, could erode the pipe, causing more leaks.

The question remains, how much time can BP buy with this latest failure? And can they write off the expenses fast enough to make us pay for it?

Watch live streaming video from wkrg_oil_spill at livestream.com

Adjust the rate to over 3 million gallons/day for a picture of reality based on independent experts, as opposed to PR.

Corexit: banned in the UK for a reason

From an article here (with linked references):

As we’ve reported, Corexit was also used after the Exxon Valdez disaster [8] and was later linked with human health problems including respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders. One of the two Corexit products also contains a compound that, in high doses, is associated with headaches, vomiting and reproductive problems [9].

Given that the dispersants are EPA-approved, the choice of which ones to use was left to BP, which had stockpiled large amounts of Corexit and is now ordering more.

BP has defended its choice to use Corexit. A BP spokesman called the product [5] “pretty effective,” and said it had been “rigorously tested.” It is not testing other dispersants, he said, [5] because it’s focusing on stopping the spill. Mani Ramesh, the chief technology officer for Nalco, which makes Corexit, disputed claims that the product is harmful to the environment [10], telling Reuters that Corexit’s active ingredient is “an emulsifier also found in ice cream.”

Dispersants like Corexit break up oil into droplets that linger longer in the water instead of collecting at the surface. The choice to use them is inherently an environmental tradeoff. Their use in the Gulf spill has limited the instances—and images—of oil-covered seabirds, but has kept the effects of the spill mostly underwater. Scientists have discovered giant plumes of dispersed oil [11] in the deep waters of the Gulf, though the EPA has said “there is no information currently available [12]” to link the dispersants to those deep-sea plumes. The plumes are now fast approaching the Gulf loop current [13], which could spread the oil into the Atlantic Ocean. (read the whole thing)

Also, it turns out that BP owns the company that makes Corexit, so no wonder they don't have time to test or try anything less toxic. Fishermen and brown people, meanwhile, trying to help clean up the mess, are collapsing and getting sick, just like the last time BP's company profited by using Corexit on the Exxon Valez spill.

What Obama should say and do this afternoon

But probably won't. Sadly.

Any independent views on this?

Adjust the rate, unless you believe in BP propaganda.

Several days ago (after having the live feed available for one month) press secretary Robert Gibbs said, "...certainly, the Exxon Valdez was bigger than this [only 11 million gallons]..." Knowing that nobody in that room would effectively call him on it. Somebody needs to loop that clip, and put it side by side with the above....or with the following PR session in which BP openly brags (granted, perhaps lying through his teeth) to have sucked up "22,000 barrels/day" with their insertion tube. (Hey Robert Gibbs, that's almost a million gallons per day, four weeks and counting...not to mention that video showed this same tube barely making a dent in the total flow. Why don't you go work for Sarah Palin.) This thing is 14 times the size of Exxon Valdez already, and worse by-who-knows-what-degree for being underwater. Saving a few birds and beaches means nothing when you kill the entire food chain, assholes.

Obama needs to pull a Bush

In other words...ROLL UP HIS SLEEVES AND CLEAR SOME FUCKING BRUSH:


Carville: "The President needs to tell BP: I'm your daddy."

(Another) top hat, with 50-50 chance of making things worse

Of course if it isn't a complete disaster Wednesday (making the spill immediately, visibly worse) BP will undoubtedly declare victory. But will independent observers agree? The plot thickens...

BP should be forced to publicly apologize and face jail time for not following this guy's advice:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Corexit: all about hiding the evidence

A rare look at the majority of the spill, suspended in the water column and laced with toxic chemicals (banned in the UK).

Or as The Saint Petersburg Times puts it:

"You're making a decision to save your birds at the expense of your larval fish and shellfish population," agreed Henderson. But marine life should be able to bounce back more rapidly, he said.

That's when the dispersants are sprayed on the surface, as their manufacturer recommends. Over the past week, BP has been testing a radical approach, shooting the dispersants at the source of the leaks a mile beneath the surface, even though EPA officials say the effects of underwater use "are still widely unknown."

[...]

"It's all about trade-offs," said Beth McGee, senior water quality scientist with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and one of the authors of the 2005 study. "You look at the resources at risk and you make a choice." While there may be some sickness and fatalities among the fish population, she said, "you hope you're saving some beaches or marshes."

How's that working out...

"It's BP's oil"

Mac McClellan walks the corporate blockade at Louisiana's now crude-based beaches.






Quite a few more protest and otherwise amazing photos from the Greenpeace flickr set, here. Greenpeace also has a boat on scene and very active blog, from whence this adjustable counter (putting the lie to Robert Gibbs' obscene mutterings that the Exxon Valdez was certainly much bigger...someone needs to loop that video from the press conference):



For those paying attention: a very good chance the blowout is already at least ten times larger than the worst spill in U.S. history, the Exxon Valdez. Also, guess who botched the clean-up response to that one?

custom-made wedding board, for signatures...

100,000 barrels/4.2 million gallons per day

wkrg_oil_spill on livestream.com. Broadcast Live Free

Live blowout video feed also here.

The immediate damage from the blowout: already irrevocable. The response of those ostensibly in power: inexcusably, deliberately pathetic. All show, no substance. Don't expect any real pushback from environmental business groups, either.

Anyway, I sure think the world deserves a public explanation of why this guy's advice fell, and continues to fall, on deaf ears:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

hilarious

11 things the White House could be doing on BP blowout

Excellent post on the administration's response to BP spill. Go read the whole thing now.

HR5353: The War is Making You Poor Act

God Bless Alan Grayson:

Wake up, Obama

Wake up, Obama. Robert Redford at least fights the good fight.

A Florida paper lays the blame properly. Update: As does Peter Daou.

Simon Johnson, et. al. on the future of Europe's economies.

going 'round...

GreenRiverWoods.Etsy.Com

A list

• 9 oil disasters waiting to happen

• Conflicts of interest at heart of BP's month-late "study" of its own disastrous mess.

• Vast majority of spill could lurk underwater for months, years. As was known by BP (before they actively encouraged it to happen).

Real News Network video

over 100,000 barrels/day, three weeks and counting...

The environmental disaster of our century. Spill baby spill (live feed):

wkrg_oil_spill on livestream.com. Broadcast Live Free

Predictable, from a moderate Republican President who hates to impede the "functioning of free markets," but still completely inexcusable:

A month after a surge of gas from the undersea well engulfed the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig in flames and triggered the massive leak that now threatens sea life, fisheries and tourist centers in five Gulf coast states, neither BP nor the federal government has tried to measure at the source the amount of crude pouring into the water.

BP and the Obama administration have said they don't want to take the measurements for fear of interfering with efforts to stop the leaks.

That decision, however, runs counter to BP's own regional plan for dealing with offshore leaks. "In the event of a significant release of oil," the 583-page plan says on Page 2, "an accurate estimation of the spill's total volume . . . is essential in providing preliminary data to plan and initiate cleanup operations."

Legal experts said that not having a credible official estimate of the leak's size provides another benefit for BP: The amount of oil spilled is certain to be key evidence in the court battles that are likely to result from the disaster. The size of the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska, for example, was a significant factor that the jury considered when it assessed damages against Exxon.

"If they put off measuring, then it's going to be a battle of dueling experts after the fact trying to extrapolate how much spilled after it has all sunk or has been carried away," said Lloyd Benton Miller, one of the lead plaintiffs' lawyers in the Exxon Valdez spill litigation. "The ability to measure how much oil was released will be impossible."

"It's always a bottom-line issue," said Marilyn Heiman, a former Clinton administration Interior Department official who now heads the Arctic Program for the Pew Environment Group. "Any company wouldn't have an interest in having this kind of measurement if they can help it."

The size of the spill has become a high stakes political controversy that's put the Obama administration and the oil company on the defensive. In congressional testimony Wednesday, an engineering professor from Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind., said that based on videos released Tuesday he estimated that the well was spewing at 95,000 barrels of oil, or 4 million gallons a day into the gulf.

Read more

If it's not a dozen times bigger than the Exxon Valdez already, just wait a couple days. Pretty goddamn clear who owns whom.

Make that 4.4 million gallons/day...

...According to professional independent analysis in testimony before a Congressional hearing, today. The true damage of the BP spill is as bad as 4.4 million gallons, or 104,000 barrels/day. This is week four. You do the fucking math (the networks won't).

From here (see also The Real News Network):

Steve Wereley, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind., earlier this month made simple calculations from a single video BP released on May 12 and calculated a flow of 70,000 barrels a day, NPR reported last week.

On Wednesday, Wereley told a House of Representatives Energy and Commerce subcommittee that his calculations of two leaks that are on videos BP released on Tuesday showed 70,000 barrels from one leak and 25,000 from the other.

He said the margin of error was about 20 percent, making the spill between 76,000 and 104,000 barrels a day. However, Wereley said he'd need to see videos that showed the flow over a longer period to get a better calculation of the mix of oil and gas from the wellhead.

Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who led the hearing, said he'd work to get that information from BP.

"The true extent of this spill remains a mystery," Markey said. He said BP had said that the flow rate was not relevant to the cleanup effort. "This faulty logic that BP is using is . . . raising concerns that they are hiding the full extent of the damage of this leak."

Only the white house gets a live video for weeks now, dangerous chemical dispersants used to keep oil from reaching the surface, blocking journalists from taking pictures of the beach...you think?

About the majority of that spill...

Obama is still actively doing nothing, except lying about a ship that isn't even there (not to mention prohibiting journalists from filming oil-covered beaches–"BP's rules, no cameras"...wtf? Does BP own the water and beach now, too?)) Then again, if we continue to not look for those 50 mile plumes of underwater oil (still growing over 3 million gallons by the day), they'll probably just disappear (to another continent)!

...NOAA officials did not respond to repeated questions from the Huffington Post on Tuesday, and therefore did not explain how they could possibly assess or track underwater oil without having any vessels out taking measurements. Nor did they explain how the Gordon Gunter showed up in an administration press release.

Doug Helton, the emergency response coordinator in Seattle who is NOAA's trajectory expert, answered his phone but wouldn't say much. "It's still a pretty dynamic situation as to what's in the field today, as opposed to yesterday," he hedged, before saying he would call back after getting clearance from NOAA's public affairs office. There was no call back.

"The fact that NOAA has missed the ball catastrophically on the tracking and effects monitoring of this spill is inexcusable," said Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska marine conservationist who recently spent more than a week on the Gulf Coast advising Greenpeace. "They need 20 research ships on this, yesterday."

Steiner explained: "This is probably turning out to be the largest oil spill in U.S. history and the most unique oil spill in world history," on account of it occurring not on or near the surface, but nearly a mile below.

"They should have had a preexisting rapid response plan," he told HuffPost. "They should have had vessels of opportunity -- shrimp vessels, any vessel that can deploy a water-column sampling device -- pre-contracted, on a list, to be called up in an event that this happened. And they blew it. And it's been going on for a month now, and all that information has been lost."

Steiner gave credit to the scientists on the Pelican, but noted that at most they had sampled less than 1 percent of the affected waters. "The Pelican happened to drop some of their sampling devices into a plume and found it, but there have to be plumes elsewhere, and the biological implication are vast."

NOAA officials "haven't picked it up because they haven't looked in the right places," he said. "There have to be dozens of these massive plumes of toxic Deepwater Horizon oil, and they haven't set out to delineate them in any shape or form."

Frank Muller-Karger, an oceanography professor at the University of South Florida who will be testifying before the House Energy Committee on Wednesday, said that testing for oil beneath the surface should be a top priority.

"I think that should be one of our biggest concerns, getting the technology and the research to try to understand how big this amorphous mass of water is, and how it moves," he said.

"It's like an iceberg. Most of it is below the surface. And we just have no instruments below the surface that can help us monitor the size, the concentration and the movement."

Muller-Karger said there are all sorts of implements that researchers should be deploying, including optical sensors and current meters. "I think that now people are really scrambling to get some vessels out there," said Muller-Karger. "I think we're going to need a fleet of research vessels."

In addition to measuring the amount of oil, researchers need to study the effect on fish larvae and bacteria, he said. "Very big fish and very prized fish are moving in to spawn -- it's a critical time of the year," he told HuffPost. "Larvae from the fish may end up eating droplets of oil.

On Tuesday, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla,) released four new videos showing oil billowing out of the Deepwater Horizon blowout site.

Steiner said NOAA is not only failing to fully measure the impact of the spill, but, he said, "if they rationally want to close and open fisheries, then they need to know where this stuff is going."

As it happens, NOAA announced Tuesday that it is doubling its Gulf fishing ban to encompass 19 percent of the federal waters.

But Steiner said it is quite possible, for instance, that some plumes are being carried by a slow deepwater southwest, toward the coast of Texas. More oil than is already visible could be entering the Loop Current, which could carry it past the Florida Keys and up the Atlantic coast.

"And truly, they really need 20 or 30 vessels out there yesterday," Steiner said. "And I think they know that. And so all the spin -- that they have this under control, that there's no oil under the surface to worry about -- they're wrong, and they know it." (read the whole thing)

Sebastian Junger's War Tourism

A fairly devastating review (via).

What is a philosopher?

The London Times having recently decided to fund investigative journalism? The New York Times at least pretending?And philosophy? It seems too good to last (or, maybe they should charge money). Hell, if there's any extra from the bake sale, some one might also like to fund these people on the Pelican!

Class

Awesome. Smoke 'em out of their mansions. About fucking time.

Nice speech by the Pres

...but why is there only one ship looking for and attempting to study what constitutes the vast majority of the spill, i.e. the so-called underwater "plume?"

Update: make that plural, 10 miles long by 3 miles wide, underwater plumes. Not that BP finds it "relevant." An oxygen-free ocean looking about the same from a CNN helicopter as an ocean with life in it, after all.

Beyond Propoganda...3.5 million gallons/day

That's Big Government Business for you, cheating when they can't get handouts (more whistle-blower video here), just a bunch of criminally rich crack fiends. Multiply the above by at least two, and that's just if they're telling the truth, all of a sudden. Update: They were not. The reason for delaying release of this video now seems clear: we're talking more than ten times more oil than they claimed, 84,000 barrels a day (not 5,000), or, an Exxon Valdez spill every four days. It's the third week now, with no end in sight.

They've been using unprecedented amounts of untested chemical compound dispersant to make the spill look smaller on the surface, while nobody knows how much is still moving underwater, or where. Such reckless poisoning and dishonesty alone should be cause for criminal charges.

You have to laugh at all these eggheads trying to figure out the real numbers...from this short video clip, which somehow BP alone controls the rest of but just prefers not to share. Doesn't the government have any submarines, with cameras? That's legally our oil...it's certainly our nation's (and the world's) economy and ecosystem that is at stake...How long do we just keep trusting BP to (mis)handle it? Ridiculous.

Before...After

Courtesy of personal customer tribute, here. More detail here.

Halliburton, corporatist par excellence

The cause of this soon-to-be unprecedented tragedy now understood most likely to have been Halliburton, criminal corporate mafia, blood-sucking monolith, evil failure. Apparently that cement has to be mixed with a very specific amount of water in order to cure properly; who would've thought?!

No time like the present for some blind chemical experiments!

"They're talking about using dispersants in the deep water where the oil is coming out that would prevent it from hitting shore, but would actually put it into the water column and possibly force it to the bottom of the ocean," said Cynthia Sarthou, executive director of the New Orleans-based Gulf Restoration Network.

"The environmental impact of that is totally unknown. It could end up killing everything at the bottom of the ocean."

Patchwork blocks

The real deal, 3" thick:

from university to corporation...

"This is a corporation...We are not trying to develop student's value systems or go in for that 'expand their minds' bullshit."

bloodwood

One of a dozen recent projects...








Custom-made for a kitchen in California, with double mortise-tenon joinery allowing smaller board to be removable from top (with handle), and sit flush when set. And yes, obviously with a hidden cleat.

For more: GreenRiverWoods.Etsy.com

Reading a little Roland Barthes this morning...

From The Eiffel Tower and Other Mythologies (1957-1979), upon going to hear Billy Graham's troup attempt its great "MyCarthyist" "awakening" and "conversion" of "atheist"("Communist") Paris:

Billy Graham makes us wait for him [...] We recognize in this first phase of the ceremony that great sociological recourse of Expectation which Mauss has studied and of which Paris has already had a very up-to-date example in the hypnotism séances of Le Grand Robert. Here, too, the Mage's appearance was postponed as long as possible, and by repeated false starts the public was wrought up to that troubled curiosity which is quite ready to see in fact what it is being made to wait for. Here, from the first minute, Billy Graham is presented as a veritable prophet, into whom we beg the Spirit of God to consent to descend, on this very evening in particular: it is an Inspired Being who will speak, the public is invited to teh spectacle of a possession: we are asked in advance to take Billy Graham's speeches quite literally for divine words.

If God is really speaking through Dr. Graham's mouth, it must be acknowledged that God is quite stupid: the Message stuns us by its platitude, its childishness. In any case, assuredly, God is no longer a Thomist, He shrinks from logic: the Message is constituted by an outburst of discontinuous affirmations, without any kind of link, each of which has no content that is not tautological (God is God). The merest Marist brother, the most academic pastor would figure as decadent intellectuals next to Dr. Graham.[...] Billy Graham's manner breaks with a whole tradition of the sermon, Catholic or Protestant, inherited from ancient culture, a tradition which is that of a requirement to persuade. Western Christianity has always submitted for its exposition to the general context of Aristotelian thought, has always consented to deal with reason, even when accrediting the irrationality of faith. Breaking with centuries of humanism (even if the forms may have been hollow and petrified, the concern for the subjective Other has rarely been absent from Christian didacticism), Dr. Graham brings us a method of magical transformation: he substitutes suggestion for persuasion: the pressure of the delivery, the systematic eviction of any rational content from the proposition, the incessant break of logical links, the verbal repetitions, the grandioloquent designation of the Bible held at arm's length like the universal can opener of a quack peddler, and above all the absence of warmth, the manifest contempt for others, all these operations belong to the classic material of the music-hall hypnotist...(Billy Graham at the Vel' d'Hiv)

Poor tea-baggers...

Blah blah blah. And: haha.

Goldman Sachs is dead

Apparently the "make them eat shit and die" approach to finance just may be illegal. Watch the carnage in real time here. So will Rahm Emanuel have the balls to finally let Eric Holder out of his cage? It's now or never.

Simon Johnson, "Our Pecora Moment:"

We don’t know where and when, but the SEC action points in one direction only: Lloyd Blankfein (CEO of Goldman) in the witness box, while John Paulson (unindicted co-conspirator) waits in the on-deck circle.

Either Blankfein knew what was going on – and is therefore liable before the law – or he was clueless and therefore incompetent. Either way, the much vaunted risk management and control systems of Goldman, i.e., what is supposed to prevent this kind of thing from happening, are exposed to be what we have long here claimed: bunk (as I argued with Gerry Corrigan, former head of the NY Fed and long-time Goldman executive, before the Senate Banking Committee when we both testified on the Volcker Rules in February).

“Too big and complex to manage” is actually the best defense for Goldman’s executives and they should offer to break up the firm into smaller and more transparent pieces as a way to settle the firm’s liability with the SEC. The current management of Goldman – along with the team that ran the firm under Hank Paulson – have destroyed the value of an illustrious franchise. Goldman used to stand for something that customers felt they could trust; now it is just a sophisticated way of ripping them off.

John Paulson obviously knew what he was doing in helping to create the “designed to fail” securities – and the consequences this would have. If he cannot be convicted of conspiracy to commit fraud, then the law in this regard needs to be tightened significantly. (read more)

Update: Genuine populists out there (as opposed to those fringe radical dimwits identifying themselves with the name of a certain gay sex act) who maintain their righteous fury at the criminals in our financial industry (and recognize in decades of corrupt Republican policy the elitist big government corporatism that will never ever begin to resemble the source of any real change), should probably follow this man's advice and make some phone calls now. I did.

, yes.

On Mad Men:

...Mad Men is currently said to be the best and ‘smartest’ show on American TV. We’re doomed.

...The format of the show is to suspend a backstory and subplot from each diminutive stereotype, episode by episode, and sketch some quick pathos around the character to see if it can humanise him or her.

...Whether one finds all of this claustrophobic and ludicrous or tightly wound and compelling depends very heavily on one’s opinion of Don Draper. Draper, as written, is a kind of social savant. He knows how to act in every emergency. He deploys strategic fits of temper to attain his ends. He’s catnip to women. As played by Jon Hamm, though, his manner hardly matches his activities. Hamm looks perpetually wimpy and underslept. His face is powdered and doughy. He lacks command. He is witless. The pose that he’s best at, interestingly, is leaning back in his chair; it ought to be from superiority, but it looks as though he is trying to dodge a blow. Draper is supposed to have a deep secret, but it would make sense only if that secret were his weakness – fearfulness or femininity – instead of the show’s anticlimactic revelation that his mother was a whore and he picked up another man’s identity on the battlefield in Korea: bizarre Gothicisms that belong to some other series. One never sees hunger or anger in Hamm’s eyes, only the misery of the hunted fox. Either he is playing the hero as a schlub in deference to a 21st-century idea of masculinity as fundamentally hollow and sham, or he’s completely underequipped to convey male menace.

The most necessary thing that he can’t do is to justify viscerally why strong women keep falling for him, or why the competitive males in his office accept him as an Alpha. In the classic Hollywood cinema, there was a name for the role Hamm should be playing: the Mug, who seems OK at first but in the end has to give up the girl to Cary Grant or Spencer Tracy (excerpted from the LRB; read the whole thing here).

Without a doubt Mark Greif is one of the best critics writing today in the realm of cultural politics. He does know how to get under the skin of a certain (in my opinion) deserving audience, from which well-intentioned, occasionally complacent and uncritical liberals are certainly not excluded. Unlike some of his more transparently self-serving detractors, his thinking never seems forcibly dressed up or hiding in pedantries, backhanded, or boring. (Those with a less sympathetic politics would of course say just the opposite; they are unconvincing.) He may risk spawning a new class of careerist Bill Buckleys in reaction. I suppose worse things could be happening for our national dialogue (well, and are).

I particularly respect the integrity, intellectual honesty and class of Greif's response to Caleb Crain, regarding Greif's article "On Repressive Sentimentalism" (see the latest issue of n+1, number 9).

Just another woodworker, concerned about the truth of our economy

The "fourteenth banker" speaks out, his name also a reference to this must-read book.