Amazon Watch claims Ecuador's not a party to Chevron lawsuit? Think again!

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

In the ongoing legal battle between Chevron and Ecuador (regarding the lawsuit filed against the oil giant for estimated alleged environmental damage done while Chevron Texaco was producing oil in the Amazon until 1992), there is charge made by some Chevron opponents, specifically the activist group Amazon Watch, that Ecuador should not be mentioned as a "party" to the lawsuit.

Before I continue, let's get the definition of "party to a lawsuit" out of the way. It's actually more complicated that the lay reader knows.

The common standard defintion of "party" is the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit. But even then, it depends on the nature of the case. According the Connecticut Supreme Court State of Conneticut v. Ralston Salmon, a "party" definition can be established by a court and is not "fixed", the "swing point" in the determination of who's has the right to be considered a "party" to a case and is "aggrieved".

"Aggrieved" means "Feeling distress or affliction." As I will demonstrate, Ecuador, from President Correa's statements and involvement, has established itself as an aggrieved party.

The actual legal name of the lawsuit commonly referred to as "Chevron v. Ecuador" is "Aguinda v. Chevron Texaco" and was originally filed in 1993. Because of this, Chevron opponents claim that Ecuador should not be written as if it was a party to the lawsuit, as I have done. Amazon Watch representatives have even went so far as to pressure SFGate.com editors to have me change my blogs to reflect their point of view.

Fortunately, the SFGate editors have resisted and asked me to provide this blog post and for good reason.

This is what Amazon Watch claims:

"The government of Ecuador is not the architect of the Chevron lawsuit, is not a party to the lawsuit, and will not be the recipient of any judgment paid by Chevron. This is a civil suit by private citizens."

That very broad and dangerous paragraph leaves much room for error.

President Correa is careful to publicly say that the lawsuit is "private" as in its not filed by the government of Ecuador. But in practice his actions - and those of other political operatives - prove that the Ecuadorian government is very much involved in the lawsuit and could be identified as a party to it in court.

For example, President Rafael Correa is commonly listed as a supporter of the lawsuit in several blogs and news sites, from Forbes, to Latin American Thought, to Gonzalo Raffo to Bob McCarty's Blog, where he reports that plaintiff attorneys visited the palace of President Correa, writing:

A reliable source, whose identity I cannot reveal for his own security, informed me today that at least three ADC principals — Steven R. Donziger, Pablo Fajardo and Luis Yanza, all attorneys — were in the South American nation’s capitol city of Quito Wednesday and met with tinpot dictator Correa at his presidential palace at 4 p.m. local time (same as U.S. Central time zone).

McCarty writes that he obtained the cell phone number of Steve Donziger, the lead lawyer who filed the lawsuit in 1993; Donziger did not return his call. McCarty says that Karen Hinton, who frankly has done a terrific job in this case, did "leave the door open" to confirming the meeting. McCarty writes:

She (Hinton) did, however, leave the door cracked open just a bit regarding whether or not such a meeting took place (i.e., she said she would get back to me with answers).


I’m not, however, going to hold my breath while waiting for it. I would advise you against doing it as well. Nearly two hours have passed since my phone call with Hinton. Don’t really expect a reply anytime soon.

And if one needs another example of Ecuador's involvement and why I and others recognize it as a party to this case, I point to the now famous set of hidden camera videos. But not the one with Judge Juan Nunez in them. No.

The one that refers to President Correa's sister as the one of the recipients of the "bribe" of $3 million for two environmental consultants to get work from the then-anticipated $27 billion award against Chevron.

In this video,



As I wrote after the bribery allegations were issued:

The second part of the video was filmed at Alianza PAIS (which means "Proud and Sovereign Fatherland" according to the Wikipedia listing) Offices June 22, 2009. PAIS is a political movement led by President Correa. Who Patricio Garcia is beyond his appearance in this video and his role in PAIS is still basically unknown as of this writing.


Garcia says that the President's sister Pierina will be helpful (presumably in making sure that the businessmen get their piece of the planned $27 billion pie) and will meet with "The Gringo" (that's Hansen). I checked and "Prierina" is indeed described here as "Pierina Correa, the president's sister and an Alianza PAIS leader in Guayas province". That confirms my assertion that Garcia is tied to the President and his family as he states in the video.

Now someone, perhaps from Amazon Watch, would counter, "That has nothing to do with the lawsuit award," but even that's not true. While the "cover story", as I call it, is that 30,000 indigenous tribes are represented in the lawsuit, the question of who collects the money and how has not been publicly answered. But it has been privately.

The Amazon Defense Coalition has been identified as but one "fiscal agent" of the award, should the court case go against Chevron. And the lawsuit has been paid for by the Philadelphia law firm of Kohn, Swift, and Graf, not "the indigenous tribes" of Ecuador.

Steve Donziger has worked on behalf of Kohn, Swift, and Graf apparently as far back as 2003 in the matter of this lawsuit.

But it's not clear who will get the award money and how it will get to the people of an area that the government has not only supported for oil production but seems clear to have it remain as a place for it. So far, the only clear Ecuadorian-based organization that is likely to be involved is Alianza PAIS, which is led by, again, President Correa, who's claimed the country has been aggrieved by Chevron Texaco.

(Opponents should be very careful here; the challenge statement would be to prove that Ecuador has not been damaged at all.)

Messy.

Now, in fairness, Donziger has met with some of the people in the region, but he's openly stated he is aware that he stands to become a billionaire from this legal fight, even as he's stated he and his team would "likely" take a smaller percentage than the common one-third of the award.

<h3>Ecuador's people lose in the end </h3>

The legal battle obscures the real issue of poor economic development in Ecuador and of a country that's not getting its petrodollars or development investment to the people who need it the most, yet participating in the harm of the region of the country where they live. 

It also masks the more complex issue of class warfare in Ecuador and how its in some cases a life-threatening task to help some of the tribes in the Amazon. But that's another story for another blog post.

Ecuador's involved alright: headfake politics

Ecuador is trying to play both sides of the political economic fence. It wants to gain from a court victory against Chevron but not antagonize the oil industry with an officially public government lawsuit.

It's the perfect "head fake" politics of of the brilliant President Correa, using American activists to do his political dirty work, while leaving the Ecuadorian Amazon region 65 percent zoned for oil production and initiating a government takeover of privately held oil production.

Regardless of words, in reality Ecuador's a party to the lawsuit, alright. Believe it.

Eyes on the Prize :: A call to action

An open letter to activists:

I will stipulate that racism is something to deal with, to confront, when and as you encounter it. It's far more insidious than the misinformation campaigns being waged against specific legislative proposals.

However, progressive activists would do well to remember that the President has three things atop his agenda: improving Education, moving closer to Energy independence (which overlaps many policy areas, from the environment to national security,) and Health Care/Insurance reform. These are issues we can more readily rectify legislatively than the relatively intractable nature of individual bigotry.

So, consider that on a national level, injecting racism into the dialog may distract your attention and diffuse the effectiveness of activists and progressive politicians by redirecting time and energy away from legislative goals. The new administration took office, as they all do, atop a mandate from the voters.  The opposition writes its own mandate, and adopts tactics meant to impede the will of the majority.

In conversation, partly precipitated by former President Carter, President Obama has made it abundantly clear he's not going to allow racism to alter his focus and priorities.

To rail against those they fear is a tactic of the opposition; witness the actions in DC on Saturday. Distraction is surely another component of that "opposition strategy." I'm not by any means condoning racism; I've written at some length about it, how the once anti-slavery Republican Party of Lincoln became the home of the most closed-minded white racists in the U.S. and how that undermines our lives and our communities, in the U.S. and elsewhere around the world. I know that I'm not going to change the hearts and minds of very many (if any) white racists rapidly, and that conversation isn't the key - proof is.

Do you seek change? Advancing constructive alternatives to create or encourage the change you desire is the important use of our time. Politics, as has been observed by wiser men than I, is the art of the possible; the work of enlightened, committed activists enhances the possibilities for those they support.

The necessary response to individual racism "in the room," in our day-to-day lives, isn't the same as a conversation at a national level.

President Obama's skin color doesn't matter at all; it's no more relevant to how he governs than your hair color is to how you pay your bills. There will always be those who distrust somebody who is "not like me" or "not like us."  They are emotionally attached to that belief - and few on either side of such issues bother listening to anything that's not consistent with their mindset.

Demonstrating that a man who's father is from Kenya is working for the greater good of us all without considering ethnic backgrounds, that a politician isn't just working for the rich or those "like him," but for all Americans, is the way to win the hearts and minds of those open to change. There will always be others disagreeing - and adopting whatever tactics they believe will advance their beliefs (or their ratings.)

Are you going to let those who intend to undermine any progress, those whose goal is not merely to voice their opposition but to dictate the topics and tone of our national debates, take your eyes off the prize?

Work to achieve what you prioritize.  I submit that racism is something to deal with, to confront, when and as you encounter it, but like any other hot-button issue that we react to viscerally, it can be used to distract, to dominate the media, and to chase our work out of people's minds. If you think I'm right, let's get the health care insurance reforms passed so we can turn to the other important issues of the day in a timely way.

President Obama's "Jackass" comment on Kanye West scores 89 percent in poll

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



Yesterday, President Barack Obama called Kanye West as "Jackass" before a hot mic regarding his view of Kanye West's interruption of Taylor Swift as she was getting the award for Female Video of the Year at the MTV Video Music Awards.

The President's candid statement was announced by TMZ.com and picked up by other sites, including my blogs. The uproar inspired me to run yet another poll. This one:

What do you think?  Take my poll.

As of this writing, 88.68 percent of the 689 votes agreed with President Obama, in other words, especially when combined with the TMZ poll, the public backs the President's current opinion of Kanye West.

In case you didn't see what West did, here's a video replay:

MTV Shows

Kanye West's actions caused an almost immediate Internet firestorm with a reported 300,000 tweets on Twitter according to Mashable.

In an effort to clean up his image, West first took to his blog to apologize, then appeared on Jay Leno's new show Monday night, saying he was "ashamed" of what he did.

Eventually West called Swift after her appearance on "The View" Tuesday.

Tom Hayes: Fiscal conservatives looking for new dance partners

During the latter part of the 1900s and the Bush years the GOP often seemed one solid, united front of like-minded folks. It's actually nearly as diverse a coalition as the Democratic party, built around a core of old-money, anti-regulation businessmen that, at times, has held its collective fiscally conservative nose to take advantage of voters that just don't feel comfortable with the Democrats (and liked the sound of lower taxes.)

To their great delight at the time, President Lyndon B. Johnson delivered any states that were bastions of white racism in the mid-1960s to the GOP for electoral purposes - largely what we call the "old south." The GOP wielded that sudden influx carefully, and with discipline over the following decades became deft at appealing to this constituency while carefully avoiding any overtly racist public statements.

As Melissa Harris-Lacewell, Professor of Politics and African-American Studies at Princeton University, noted regarding President Carter's recent observations about racism:

"There is something particularly compelling when Southern white men identify, name, and condemn racism. America can never forget what it sounded like..." to hear LBJ say something similar while he was President:

"What happened in Selma is part of a far larger movement which reaches into every section and state of America. It is the effort of American Negroes to secure for themselves the full blessings of American life. Their cause must be our cause too. Because it's not just Negroes, but really it's all of us, who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice.

And we shall overcome."

Nobody noticed more, or denied it more vehemently, than racists themselves. LBJ knowingly drove white racists to abandon the Democratic party en masse, and most turned to the GOP, where many have remained. While there are other factors that lead people to criticize President Obama and/or his initiatives, assuming racism is not a factor for some of Obama's detractors is either naive or self-delusional. For racists to think they've managed to conceal their beliefs from most of the rest of us, that we just plain don't realize what's going on, is hubris so blatant it beggars my descriptive powers.

Where will the GOP go now?

To the consternation of the fiscal conservatives in GOP, the Bush~Cheney administration's actions spending to fund their fruitless hunt for Osama bin Laden and the disingenuous hunt for Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq have driven many moderates out of the party while crippling the financial might of the country, and they are left with the "not ready for TV" tea-baggers and some barely disguised racists as key parts of their voting base in many areas. The various ratings-driven, faux-histrionic "conservative" pundits are not solidifying the GOP power in the coming election cycle any more than the hypocritical shenanigans of Mike "Spanky" Duvall, Larry "Wide Stance" Craig, or Mark "Don't cry for me, Argentina" Sanford, which have yet to fade from the public's memory.

Ironically, fiscal conservatives have to hope for a kindred spirit in President Obama, who is considerably more socially and economically moderate than he is painted by the media. For Obama has no choice but to spend given the state of the U.S. economy as he starts his first term: the impact of the unfunded military spending and the credit and financial crisis will reverberate for years, possibly decades. While Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner takes point in the media limelight, with the President intent on bringing fairness to the Health Insurance industry, the dances taking place off-camera in D.C. must be truly epic.

Kanye West | Kanye West called Jackass by President Obama

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



On YouTube.com

For Kanye West when it rains it pours. Now, after West famously grabbed the mic from country star Taylor Swift at the MTV Video Music Awards, TMZ.com reports that President Obama called the hip hip singer a "jackass" and has the audio recording to prove it.

Apparently Obama was talking before a group of people when he made the statement and in a stream of thought said "He's a jackass." It was funny.

Obama was concerned that the public would come down on him but that doens't seem to be the case at all. TMZ's poll reports 92 percent support for the President as of this writing, so I created my own poll.

At YouTube, one video commenter said that President Obama "sold us (blacks) out."   I strongly disagree.  I don't think I'm supposed to support bad, rude behavior because someone African American like me does it.  Wrong is wrong.  Kanye West was wrong.  Period.  

What do you think?  Take my poll.

More surveys on pollsb.com

Michelle Wie channels Miley Cyrus in new blog

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

The drive for young women to be like Miley Cyrus continues with golf star Michelle Wie and her new blog that's caused quite a stir online.  I received an email tip and had to check out the latest buzz on Wie, which I did with my friends who own the Lake Merritt Cafe in Oakland, CA:



Michelle Wie's  blog, called "A Black Flamingo: a mindless blog about life and the stuff that doesn't quite fit in" is the platform for her many talents, from painting to fashion and modeling:

so i took a calligraphy class in high school and i reallly loved it. i would love to learn how to do asian calligraphy again. classic asian art is beautiful. love

Folks Wie's art work is fantastic. I don't know what it would fetch in the open market, but I'm sure the price tag would be substantial.   She has everything from calligraphy to stencil and her talent's to be seen.   Then there's her modeling career:

 

Here Michelle Wie shows her Miley Cyrus side showing a lot of skin and the color black.  While I'm tempted to make fun of her desire to "show some skin" and do with my Lake Merritt Cafe owner friend in the video, I've got to note that Wie made the clothes she models herself.  By contrast, Miley's modeling what someone created.  Wie reports:

my cousin showed me how to use a sewing machine last week and its sooo awesome! so with my new knowledge, we ran to the fabric store and got some fabric. i got some leather looking material, black jersery fabric, and zippperrs. so i made a dress... i feel like with this one, you can either wear it without anything inside and be uber sexy with the exposed skin, or you can layer it up..

You go girl!

Seriously.  Wie's an amazing genius, who's full range of accomplishments should be on display for all to see.  At the age of (well, she's about to turn) 20, Wie's discovering that she's more than just a golfer, and she's pretty good at that too!

I wonder if Miley would consider sporting the latest in "Wie Wear."  

Hmmm....

Stay tuned.

The problem with polls, and the media (including the blogosphere.)

Polling can always tell us whatever the person who constructs/conducts the poll was investigating - if we're given the raw data and a good description of the sampling procedure. But in practice even the data is usually glossed over in favor of a sound-bite summary tending to support the interests of the person and/or network doing the reporting on it.

Unless you know about how the sample of people was selected you really can't know anything more than what's reported about a poll. You can't know, for instance, if its findings are useful in any logical sense, because you don't know who the sample represents.  I can ask 21 people a question, and come back with really convincing looking numbers, but if I select who 15-20 of those people are it will darn sure tell you what I want you to think I learned.

An example of shaping a poll

Imagine I go to a GOP Town Hall meeting, and survey 15 people wearing shirts or carrying signs that say either "Nobama," or, "Joe Wilson was right!" I'll ask them one simple question:

Are you a) "for" Obama's government takeover of our health care system that he's pushing through the congress under the name of "reform" or b) "against reform" that will make changes that undermine the free market system that has given us the best health care in the world and cost the tax payers even more money?

OK, I've plausibly got 15 "b) against reform" responses now in my hypothetical example.  I'll ask 6 additional people, more or less randomly selected, and let's say they most of them magically favor reform (not likely, is it? But for the sake of argument, I'm getting 4 out of 6 favorable replies.)  I didn't even tack on the line about paying for illegal immigrants.

Now I'll report back for you based on that (fake) survey:

"In a [hypothetical] survey conducted Wednesday, only 19% of those responding favor the proposed reforms to health care, while  nearly 81% said they were 'against change.' That's more than 4 out of 5 in our survey who are hoping their representatives in Congress will stop the President's take-over of business."

If you believe what anybody in the media tells you without understanding both the sample and the data, all you know is what the reporter's boss wants you to believe. If you choose to believe on that basis - which you just might if it agrees with your political leanings - rather than examining the poll itself, then you're gullible indeed.  The good news is: the politicians on your side and the ratings-hungry networks (who are on the side of earning a living from ad revenues) both love you. They'll go out of their way to validate your "wisdom and insight" into the issue.

If the poll isn't conducted on a random sample, but merely open to those who respond...? Well, my friends, that will tell you a bit about the people who responded, of course, but one must be wary of extrapolating to draw any useful conclusions about a larger population. We call it spin. But knowing that they're gaming us doesn't stop the echoes.

How the media deliberately spreads misinformation

In fact, it won't surprise me to find this utterly fake survey example quoted elsewhere within days, if not hours.  Can't you see it, at DIGG maybe, or on another blog, or even on Fox?

A post at a prominent, liberal-leaning blog on Wednesday described a survey which concluded that, quote, "only 19% of those responding favor the proposed reforms to health care, while nearly 81% said they were 'against change.'" In other words, that's more than 4 out of 5 who want their representatives in Congress to stop the President's assault on insurance providers and let capitalism work.  

There you go, it's been lifted carefully out of context, and the quote is nearly character for character what I made up in the "report" above, and then the media echoes will persist even though the numbers are clearly unreal.  You see, now they're not reporting on the survey, they're reporting on the reporting, which is just an excuse to keep repeating the misleading numbers.

Misinformation mars the debate. I could easily have made the example go the opposite way, of course, but I don't want somebody to echo a story that falsely represents support for reform.  In fact, worded carefully surveys do reveal that over 90% favor "at least some reform."  But then, who wouldn't favor "at least some" unless they were making money from the insurance industry? It's like asking who wants lower taxes without considering how you'd pay for those government services you realize you benefit from.

You know that commercial media outlets rely on advertising revenues. So, do you follow the money? Better yet, why do you trust who you always have to report on things you care about?

NCAA College Football week 2 - wrap up

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



NCAA week two was marked by two marque games: Notre Dame v. Michigan and USC v. Ohio State. In the first game, Notre Dame, which was 18th ranked and is now dropped from the rankings, looked to the contest as the "must-win" if The Fighting Irish were to prove to themselves and to America that they were indeed BCS-bound.

They failed.

The reason for their failure could be directly attributed to the fact that they don't have enough talent to beat or even compete with teams that commonly play at the BCS level. As I stated before, Notre Dame's academic requirements prevent it from consistently getting those players and Notre Dame Head Coach Charlie Weis has not demonsrated an ability to "scheme" his way out of that problem.

I still believe it wise to place the game in the hands of the superbly talented sopohmore quarterback Jimmy Clausen, who's an amazing passer and a capable leader. But what he's asked to do from a perspective of play design is my concern.

I contend that if Notre Dame believes it can reach the BCS it has to "scheme' its way there. It doesn't have a defense strong enough to stop, for example, the Michigan running game and that "belly series" from the Spread, which Michigan ran to perfection under freshman quarterback Tate Forceir.

 

Spread "Belly" Triple Option 

That game's not the last time Notre Dame will  see this play.

Rather than focus just on defensing it, Notre Dame needs to move toward a better short passing and roll-out passing game.  Weis spent so much time trying to bomb the Wolverines into submission - and racking up over 400 yards in the process - he left time on the clock for Michigan's offense - its easier to run when the clock's working in your favor.

USC beat Ohio State.  Guess how?

The ability to run was what lifted the then-third ranked USC Trojans over the Ohio State Buckeyes.   And in that game we saw the coming of age of another freshman quaterback, Matt Barkley.

Barkley, who took over for the man who-would-be-the-senior quarterback Mark Sanchez (who won his first game as a rookie quarterback with the New York Jets), came in with a lot of questions because of his youth.  But he answered them all in the Trojans' final drive to win the game, which even though it was driven by a suddenly powerful running attack, saw Matt hit open receivers on time.

While running back Joe McKnight did much of the heaving lifting in the drive, along with the SC offensive line, Barley did his part in completing the passes when they neeeded them the most.  That was something Ohio State could not do. 

What that game demonstrated was that Ohio State has an undisciplined passing attack.  Many of the plays are out of play action and the patterns are some of the most ineffectively unusual I've ever seen.  What I mean is that they call for the receiver to be out of proper position just by their design.

Plus, the passing game lacks the timing necessary to complete passes even with close coverage.  And forget the idea of Ohio State mounting a pass-oriented comeback because they don't seem to practice the two-minute drill. Quarterback Terrell Pryor is an obviously talented athlete, but he's a raw passer who needs a lot of drilling in basic timed throwing; he's not getting it at Ohio State.

Cal steamrolls opponents

With all this, my Cal Golden Bears dropped 50 points on its last two "challengers", Maryland and Eastern Washington. Look out for the 7th ranked Golden Bears.

NY Giants Recap Week 1-By Dr. Bill Chachkes -Football Reporters Online

NY Giants Recap Week 1-By Dr. Bill Chachkes -Football Reporters Online


The Giants came into yesterday’s opening day match up with several questions still unanswered from this summer’s training camp. By 8pm Sunday night, few of those questions remained open for discussion. Among the three biggest concerns had to be how the corps of talented but youthful receivers would do without at least one veteran on the roster as a stabilizing force. Even though first round draft choice Hakeem Nicks sprained his foot, Steve Smith, Mario Manningham, and Tight End Kevin Boss all stepped up and played very well.

There was a reason Coach Tom Coughlin and GM Jerry Reese decided to carry 7 receivers to open the season. Injuries. Nicks’ foot could be worse however, as the x-ray’s were negative. Just how bad the sprain is has yet to be determined. An x-ray can only tell you so much. It could be 2 weeks or 4, as a foot sprain is almost like a bad back, it’s very tricky. One sports medicine expert we speak with who is familiar with lower limb injuries tells us that a severe sprain could sometimes be worse then an actual fractured bone. Now the Giants offense is down to 6 wide outs. The other receiver drafted in 2009, Ramses Barden, was inactive for the game but will most likely now be an active roster move for the next several weeks while Nicks recovers.

The second most important question was how the Giants pass rush would do with the infusion of free agents obtained in the past offseason. We saw that they did just fine up front defensively, putting pressure on Redskins QB Jason Campbell on several long second and third down plays. Osi Umenyiora had a 37yard fumble recovery return for a touchdown, and Justin Tuck, Chris Canty, Rocky Bernard, and the rest of the Giants defense looked like the same unit that has won 22 regular season games over the last two years. The concerns still remain over the secondary however, where there is still work to be done. That being said, Corey Webster’s sideline interception took the “wind out of Washington’s sails” on a key offensive possession.

The final major question was how well Eli Manning deals with the partial turn over in personnel. With the exception of a few skittish moments early in the game’s first half, Manning also looked like the same player who had the fantastic 2007 and most of 2008 seasons. But now, a new set of questions arise like any other Monday morning in the NFL.

Will the Giants continue to have trouble scoring Touchdowns in the “Green” zone? (Something both Coach Coughlin and Eli Manning made note of as needing improvement in the post game press conference). Will Danny Ware’s wrist keep him out of any games? Will Mario Manningham continue to emerge as the big play threat (his 30 yard catch and run touchdown while tight-roping the sideline was a thing of beauty)? Or will Kevin Boss fulfill that role?

While the defense saved the day for NY, there were some shaky moments as we mentioned earlier. Redskins Runningback Clinton Portis seemed to play like a hall of famer at times, running through gaps in the Giants run defense large enough to drive an Abrams tank through. This will need to be corrected at some point if the Giants expect to contend for another trip to the Super Bowl. Overall they played well enough to win and did just that, but they missed out on some scoring chances, leaving at least 14 points on the field, meaning the final score should have been more like 34-17 or 37-17 rather then 23-17.

Next week the Giants will play Dallas on “Sunday Night Football” to open the new Stadium. Dallas beat Tampa Bay 34 21 in Tampa this week, and will pose many more problems then Washington did this week. It won’t be easy for NY to walk away with a victory next week. The fact that Eli Manning was able to spread the football around against the Redskins (Smith 6 catches, Boss, Manningham, and Bradshaw 3 each, Nicks, Jacobs 2 each and Hixon 1) will be the one facet of the Giants offense that the Cowboys have trouble with, and what Coach Coughlin should go after Sunday night.


The other telling stat that signals a problem for the Giants against teams with strong run defenses: Washington held the Giants to just 106 total rushing yards, Plus Danny Ware also left the game with a dislocated elbow and probably won’t play for at least 1-2 weeks. Overall the Giants totaled 351 yards of offense to Washington’s 272, with just 85 of that being on the ground.

JETS IMPRESSIVE IN 24-7 WIN OVER HOUSTON

JETS IMPRESSIVE  IN 24-7 WIN OVER HOUSTON
by TJ Rosenthal for Football Reporters Online

The Jets took the field yesterday in Houston on Sunday ready to prove to naysayers,  that they had a top notch defense, a rookie Quarterback who could handle himself in adverse situations and a receiving corps that could help move the chains. Mission accomplished. The Rex Ryan era was ushered in with rave reviews, as Gang Green played a magnificent complete game that they controlled emotionally from start to finish. Bart Scott punishing lick on Texans QB Matt Schaub on the game's first play from scrimmage set the tone for what was to come all day. A physical complex attack scheme led by Scott , LB David Harris, and NG Kris Jenkins that hit the Texans hard and stopped them behind the line of scrimmage more than I can remember a Jet defense doing.

The Jets led 3-0 after a 24 yard  first quarter Jay Feely field goal.  Offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer gave rookie Mark Sanchez modest plays early to allow him to gain a solid footing yet showed off the USC star's versatility by allowing him to roll out of the pocket in both directions. This keeping the Texan defense and star Mario Williams off balance from the onset. In the second, after a Steve Slaton fumble deep in Jet territory thwarted perhaps the Texnas best and only drive of the day, Sanchez struck. Moving them to the Texan 30, he found Chansi Stuckey all alone as a result of a failed Texans blitz, for a 10-0 lead. 

The only danger came when Sanchez threw an ill advised interception while nursing a 17-0 lead with 12 minutes to go in the fourth. Ryan was quoted today as saying that looking back on it , it should've been "ground and pound." Sanchez and the Jets did not perpetuate a typical JEts trait of the past and  wilt though. In fact, they came out aggressively and when Dustin Keller (94 yards) caught a 40 yard pass after lining up as a WR in single coverage against formr Jet Nick Ferguson, a win was on it's way. The deal sealed when Thomas Jones broke free for a 30 yard TD knock out punch.

The Jets SHOULD feel good. They entered the building of a team many project as a playoff contender and beat them physically and mentally. Their rookie QB showed resiliency and a sense of calm after the int. Their coach made true on a promise that the Jet defense would be an attacking one. Jenkins controlled the line of scrimmage all day. Harris and Scott cleaned the rest up. The maligned receiving corps who many feel is without a true number one threat, answered the bell. They were led by dependable Jerricho Cotchery (6-90yds) the speedy Chansi Stucky (4-64yds) and emerging star TE Dustin Keller (4-94yds).  RB Leon Washington (15-60yds) and Thomas Jones (20-107 yds) will continue to be the primary focus of an offense that will try and move it on the ground while shortened field provided by a stifling defense.

Next week, the Jets take on hated rivals the New England Patriots in the home opener. Rex Ryan entered Jet nation in March, by saying that he didn't come here to kiss Bill Belicheck's rings. We already knew that in week 2 the pressure on rookie Sanchez would come from one of the NFL's masterminds. After Sunday, we also now know that the heat will be on Tom Brady as well: Perhaps for the first time since the Jets after Mo Lewis knocked out Drew Bledsoe back in 2001 in Foxboro. Leaving Belicheck with no choice but to go his unknown backup, Brady. First place is already at stake in what is shaping up to be a big game in September.

Jet notes: A review of the 3 keys to the Texan game.

Sanchez vs Texan defense. Sanchez threw for 1TD 1 int, 256 yds and answered the call often on third down with crisp tight accurate throws. Mario Williams ran Sanchez down but didn't make any game changing plays.

Slaton vs Jets front 8. Slaton was held to 17 yards and was stopped behind the line on more than one ocassion forcing Houston into second and third and long. Chris Brown looked better for the Texans. Enough said.

Darrel Revis vs Andre Johnson. Johnson was held to 4 catches and 35 yards. He di not have one deep ball thrown to him bacuae of the Jets pressure on Schaub. Domination. Double teams helped Revis but in all, a major playmaker was held to a whisper.

"We don't want the government to do anything."

That's the mindset of some folks, despite the fact the U.S. Constitution actually calls for government to manage things such as defense, domestic tranquility, etc. In a way, it's interesting - it's utopian:

I don't need anybody regulating the food I buy, I don't need anybody checking the efficacy of the drugs I use, I'm never going to need a fire-fighter or a policeman, I don't need roads and bridges maintained by some big agency, no not me, I'm fine with private "free market" solutions to everything, including education, defense, and immigration.

Call it a little naive, maybe, but... the sound bites seem appealing until you ponder little things such as: who deals with pollution in the streams you fish in, or how a family living in a hut copes with forest fires, hurricanes, or immigration (at least there'd be no more illegal immigrants.)

Read more... and Digg it!

Miley Cyrus, Susan Boyle, Erin Andrews push Zennie62 on YouTube over 8 million views

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

Thanks to the popularity of Miley Cyrus, the new buzz around Susan Boyle, and the peerhole video scandal around Erin Andrews, and the outspoken Megan Fox, President Obama, politics, celebrities, Oakland, and the NFL Draft, My YouTube channel Zennie62 is now over 8 million video views (not channel views) at 8,133,111 views as of this writing.

Today we are at between 18,000 and 24,000 views a day and earlier this year we hit over 100,000 views daily.  Even at low end of the current view rate, that's 760 video views an hour each day.  It's not my objective - I am aiming for the 100,000 view mark we were at - but its a sign of progress. 

My channel was established in 2006, (and its not the only one I have as I'm on several more video systems thanks to Tubemogul) but its grown by 6 million views in just the last year, with my video "Susan Boyle: Who is Susan Boyle" gaining over 1 million viewers in its first month of life.  Since then my blunt focus on hollywood and scandal (and tracking Miley Cyrus, Susan Boyle, and Erin Andrews) has paid off: we have several videos of over 100,000 views in the last three months alone. 

Zennie62 from 2006 to 2009

All of this growth is due to a decision I made to cover celebrities and Hollywood news and gossip and to the good fortune of having my videos on more blogs like SFGate.com.

My objective has always been to "surf the wave of the Zeitgeist" (or the sprit of the times) and in fact my blog was originally called "Zennie's Zeitgeist".   All of this started because I was trying to get more traffic to promote the sim games I created but it turned into this monster that you see now.  (Ok, well, that's stretching it!) 

But one day in September of last year I elected to move away from that name and to the more easily "brandable" Zennie62. Part of the reason was too many people were misspelling Zeitgeist and the other reason was I wanted to embark on a plan of developing a personal brand.  "Zennie62" at first was a little used name, but as I thought about it, the name defined me and the fact that I'm between many generations at once. 

CoLoursTV

The other main reason was my new TV show "The Blog Report With Zennie62" on Denver-based CoLoursTV that features the use of my videos on their network at DISH Network 9407. I'm proud of my relationship with CoLoursTV and Art Thomas and Damon Purdy and believe we've only scratched the surface of what we can do.



The show takes my videos from online to TV and has really made me pay attention to the craft of storytelling beyond just talking to the camera.  I think our fall shows will refect that.

Zennie62's direction

I want people to think of Zennie62 as following "what's happening" in industrialized culture. As I say on the TV show, we focus on politics, news, sports, and tech.

Now if you consider what I just wrote that's a tall order. But it's the objective. I want to grow my blog network and Zennie62.com and The Blog Report with Zennie62 TV show into a place to go to find out what's happening from my perspective and regardless of country.

Eventually, I want to have bloggers from different languages here and selected videos that have me and someone else who speaks Russian, for example. And what I already have is an integrated media presentation that's video blog, blog, and social network based to carry that content.

Being a YouTube Partner helped

I could not have gotten this far were I not a YouTube Partner. I can't say enough about this program where the video maker is paid for the views generated by their videos. The YouTube staff, from founder Chad Hurley to folks like Hunter and Heather (you know who you are), have been incredible to work with.

It's too bad that out of the millions of videos uploaded on YouTube there are only about 600 YouTube Partners. I crack up whenever someone writes "get a life" as if I'm not generating income from this activity.

It's also a sad statement on our economy that so many people don't "get" how our society is changing and are stuck in a position where they can't get out of their own box of thinking to try something new.

Being a YouTube Partner is that something.

The Vloggers who made me

I have been influenced by many vloggers, starting with Amanda Congdon and Andrew Barron, the founders of Rocketboom who I met in 2006 at Vloggercon:



And my friend Irina Slutsky and Schlomo Rabinowitz who established that "Vloggercon" event:



Of course, I've mentioned Renetto, or Paul Robinett, many times. His simple conversational style made me realize that authenticity of message was better than presentation of message. That is, I really didn't need a studio set like that of Rocketboom; the World was my studio.



Sometimes Paul does things with his camera I would not do..

Others who fall into this "Renetto style" are Kenrg, who I still plan to get together with and make that video...



and who was a co-founder of Vloggerheads.com - the coolest site for hardcore vloggers ever made.

Sarah Austin, who's welcome back party I attended and is here with Ashton Kutcher, has the business of vlogging down and I've learned a lot just observing her...



Another person who influenced my work is Josh Leo, who's video of his trip to San Francisco for the 2006 Vloggercon is still fresh in my mind.

Finally, Michael Buckley of the "What The Buck" show, who's drawing a six-figure salary from vlogging, has great advice for vloggers and I refer others to this video:

On being African American and vlogging

I have to discuss the matter of being a "black vlogger" because let's face it, there aren't a lot of us who do this. There should be, and the number's growing, but it's not reaching critical mass - yet.

I'd like to think CNN's featuring my iReport video work encouraged African Americans to vlog who'd never have considered it before. In fact, I got a call from someone who said just that several months ago. Her 11 year old daughter was happy to "see a smart black man on TV". That made my day.

What disheartens me are those few who just don't want to see someone black stating an opinion in this format. It reminds me of the movie Nixon by Oliver Stone, and a scene where the actor James Woods played HR Haldeman saying "There's that Negro saying those Negro things." I seem to draw the HR Haldeman's of America.

But with that, people have changed and frankly I've done this so much the concern I have for those types diminishes daily. Plus, over the last three years, I've been helped by folks like Owen Thomas, who was editor of Valleywag.com and now runs NBCBayArea.com, and a number of people in the Tech community who just give a "thumbs up" once in a while.

I hope more women, blacks, and minorities become vloggers and get over the "self-promotion" tag that others - who are trying to find work and can't pay the bills - might tag one with.  If you don't stick your neck out there and present yourself to others, you'll go broke waiting for someone else to do it for you. This takes work; do it.

Vlogging's here, but that community...

While vlogging's certainly grown I have the feeling that the once-close community has splintered. I think part of the reason is many just could not make enough money to do it consistently, others didn't want to do what it took to make money, and still another set didn't care to make money. Whatever the reason, we don't have that one yearly gathering that defines the community. We're all just sort of out there doing our thing.

That needs to change, and soon.

The reason is we have a lot to show the sponsorship industry, but we've got to get them to look at us as a viable community. We can't do that if we don't present a united front.