Three Things: Arsenal Fail to Score at Home for Third Game Running

Arsenal lined up for their midweek game against Sunderland tonight knowing a point was probably good enough to guarantee third place for the season, though three would put some pressure on Man City for second place going into the final game. For Sunderland, a loss today meant there was still a chance they could be relegated in Week 38, while a draw would see them stave off that fate by a whisker for a second straight year. In the early going, Arsenal were on the front foot, but not creating many real chances and Sunderland came close to getting a man free on goal on two occasions. Two nice Bellerin crosses came to naught, a couple of corners were cleared and Wilshere lost out one on one with Sunderland keeper Pantillimon, before a weak shot from Cazorla on 23 minutes ended another threat. On the stroke of 30 minutes, Wilshere sent a lofted pass to Ozil, who should have done better, but shot over. Arsenal were dominating with 64 percent possession, but the play around the box was below par and minus a shot that just missed the far corner from Giroud and a couple of wild shots by Ozil, little was done with the possession for the third game running, leading to a 0-0 halftime score.

Sunderland manager Dick Advocaat brought on Steven Fletcher and forgotten prospect Jack Rodwell to start the second half and the shifts seemed to have an impact as Sunderland fashioned two good chances in quick succession, though both were kept out by fine Ospina saves. Arsenal continued to look languid and uninterested, with the possible exception of the always passionate Alexis Sanchez, though Giroud almost put a cross in from a crazy angle, hitting the top corner of the bar, before an excellent save from Pantillimon of the Frenchman’s volley kept him out a second time on 56 minutes. Arsenal were increasing the pressure on the Sunderland goal, but Steven Fletcher was free and in on goal yet again on a 59th minute counter, only denied by an Ospina finger as he tried to clip it over.

With 30 minutes to go, neither team seemed as satisfied with the draw as earlier in the game. Arsenal earned a corner on 63 minutes, but Ozil failed to clear the first defender, and groans were heard across the Emirates. Three minutes later, Ozil sent in a cross from the opposite end, but Giroud appeared to be held back by a shirt pull as he was unable to connect effectively with the ball. On 67 minutes, Wenger made his move to change the dynamics of the game, bringing on Walcott for Wilshere, but Fletcher almost opened the scoring with a toe-poked volley that went just over. Arsenal started a flurry of passes around the box that went on for well over a minute without a cross or shot (70’). And even as they were dominating possession, it is fair to say that Sunderland had the better chances to score, particularly in the second half.

Ramsey sent a beautiful through ball to Walcott, just as he had against United, but Walcott was unable to finish the chance (for not the first time since his return from injury). On 74 minutes, Arsenal just missed out on an own goal, as Jones almost headed it in from a cross. Johnson came on right after, replaced by Will Buckley and in the 81st minute, Rosicky came on for a relatively ineffective Ozil. Within a minute, a nice exchange between Rosicky and Walcott almost led to a goal, though what should have been a corner was incorrectly called a goal kick. Ramsey tried his luck with five minutes left, but too close to the Sunderland keeper and the Gunners soon had another corner, though it again led to nothing and Sunderland had a dangerous counter on before an offsides call on Fletcher. Walcott fired a fine shot from inside the box on 87 minutes that should have been in but for a fine save, and the rebound failed to find a Gunner (as they reached their 28th shot of the game).

Yet another cross went long from Ramsey and led to renewed boos from a crowd that looked likely to see a third home game in a row without a goal for the home side (the first time in six and a half years that has happened). The clock hit 90 minutes with only three additional to come, even with the fair bit of time wasting Sunderland had been engaging in throughout the second half. The visitors were able to hold on for the draw and life in the Premier League for at least one more year.

1. Giroud Dip: Giroud was in fine fiddle after returning from injury, scoring 14 goals and adding 3 assists in 25 games in the EPL (and adding 4 more goals and an assist in all competitions). But he has failed to find the net in the last 7, including the scoreless draw today (since scoring on April 4 in a 4-1 win over Liverpool). Rather than powering toward the net as he had been during his run (11 goals in 12 games during a long winning streak for the Gunners), he seemed to be too intent on the one-twos that Arsenal loves, but that rarely work when their opponent is playing 9 in two flanks at the back, and a little off the pace. While he has improved dramatically as a striker, it seems clear that Arsenal still need another quality finisher if they are truly to compete for a title next year, particularly if we look at the dearth of goals during Giroud’s decline (7 goals in 7 games, with 3 of those coming away at Hull City). Some might look to Welbeck, but I think the knock on him of not being a great finisher has continued through most of his first season with Arsenal and Walcott has reverted to form by failing to finish most of his chances (even the goal last week was a diverted cross).

2. Coquelin Importance: Francis Coquelin was given a rest for the first time in 2015 and one could see what the team was missing without him standing in front of the back four. Sunderland weren’t providing much of a threat in the first half, but they did send a few long balls over the top that were mere inches from providing a potential reward, and had at least four quality chances to score in the second, getting through the Gunner defense on the counter with relative ease. These chances showed the importance of Coquelin’s phoenix like renaissance and also, I believe, the need to add a second enforcer DM this summer, to give the Frenchman the occasional break, back him up if he gets injured or to stand beside him when facing the elite offensive teams of the league or Europe.

3. Arsenal Fizzle: the past few years, the Gunners have had to go on late runs to save their perennial participation in the Champions League, including last year when they went from first to fifth in a torpid spell before finishing the season on the up. This year, a fine winning streak after the loss to Tottenham meant they climbed all the way up to second for a time. But over the past few weeks, the results have started going against them, as their offense flounders. They had the 0-0 draw with Chelsea that ended their slim chances of a late charge to the title, a disappointing 1-0 loss at home to Swansea when second place was still in their control, the 1-1 draw with Unite and the listless draw at home today. Has the positive momentum of the winning streak been lost in this run of offensive malaise? It is hard to say, particularly as they could still win the FA Cup for the second year running, but it is pretty disappointing after second place was fully within their grasp. Wenger will get another year, but I really think it should be his last if he can’t mount a true title challenge that persists throughout an entire season. Sure the difference between second and third is of little real consequence, but it would have been a step forward for the Gunners. And the “wait until next year” incantation is really growing tired a decade in.

Sunderland, on the other hand, can celebrate having saved themselves from the drop for the second year running, though this year more comfortably then the incredible run-in required in 2013-14. They can be proud of their defensive shape, but also of the threat they provided on the counter. When Dick Advocaat took over, many maligned the choice, but the veteran manager has done his job, keeping Sunderland in the League for another year after most thought they were among the most likely to finish in the bottom three. Sunderland now has a meaningless final game, while Arsenal will hope to get back to their winning ways against West Brom before the FA Cup Final on the 30th.

A Solution to the Social Security "Crisis"

The True Costs of our Continued Oil Addiction

When we speak of our addiction to oil, the costs are usually measured in terms of our engagement in the Middle East and climate change. The continuing problems in Syria, Iraq, Iran and Israel are the most acute examples of the ongoing costs of our fealty to OPEC while, just today, another study emerged showing that the tropical atmosphere is warming 80 percent faster than the Earth’s surface (The Guardian), providing further fodder for the oil company sponsored climate change deniers to try to manipulate into a liberal conspiracy. But a more startling cost has just emerged, thanks to the one of the key engines of neoliberal ideology, the International Monetary Fund.

What the IMF found is that fossil fuel companies are benefitting from global subsidies to the tune of $5.3 trillion a year (or almost $10 million a day). In composite, the total is greater than the total health spending of all governments in the world. The vast sum is largely predicated on polluters not paying the costs imposed on governments by the burning of coal, oil and gas, including health related problem cause by air pollution and the floods, droughts and storms being driven by climate change. It is a startling number that puts a more acute focus on the real costs of environmental degradation and our unwillingness to curb carbon emissions.

It also points to the real costs of not pursuing renewable energy sources. If governments took a fraction of that cost and used it to invest in green companies, we could start to address global warming, weaken the political impact of the Middle East and actually live in a world that is less polluted and prone to ecological disaster. On top of that, those diverted government funds could then be used to address pressing issues like health, hunger, poverty and the diminishing quality of life for far too many global citizens. Of course that would mean the diminishing of profits for big oil and gas companies, who are not surprisingly at the UN Climate Change talks this week, arguing their case to continue destroying the planet one drilling site, factory and car at a time (RTCC).

The 10 Biggest Disappointments in European Football This Season

In a few weeks, we can look at the players and teams that had the most success this season, including Chelsea winning back the EPL title with the leadership of Mourinho and inspiration of Costa and Fabergas, Barcelona with a shot at the treble (and fine seasons for the deadly front line of Neymar, Sanchez and, of course, Messi), Ronaldo continuing to break records on the individual level and Juventus adding a Champions League final to another league victory. But before doing that, why not take a look at some of the biggest disappointments of the 2014-15 season …

Angel di Maria

One expected big things from the most expensive player in Premier League history, particularly after a bright start to a season that came on the back of leading Europe in assists last season in helping Real to their 10th European title and a fine World Cup cut short by injury. But after a few highlight reel goals and assists, something appeared to happen to the Argentine, who maybe never wanted the move to United to begin with. His passing started going askew, he got a red against hated Arsenal in an FA Cup loss and gave the ball away time and time again while exposing the defenders behind him. The ignominy has hit new heights as he sits on the bench with only two games left in the season, having played 19 games and scored 3 goals for his 60 million pound fee. Like Ozil the year before, leading Real in assists doesn’t appear to guarantee a seamless transition to the EPL the following year. Ozil has improved dramatically since returning from injury though, and one assumes di Maria will be back to his best next season, though probably not with United.

Gareth Bale

Another Real player who is suffering a year after his heroics played a key role in Copa del Rey and UCL finals, Bale could find himself replacing di Maria at United next year. He started the season in fine form and has scored 19 goals and added 11 assists in all competitions this season, following 22 goals and 16 last term. But he has only scored only 3 goals in his last 19 games (with 5 assists), only 1 in his last 9, and was abject in the two leg loss to Juve, faltering on three chances to send them back to the final in the second half of the second leg alone. The negativity from an unforgiving Madrid crowd appeared to take a minor drop in form and transformed it into a crisis of confidence that appears to mean the most expensive transfer in football history might be back on the market two years after arriving in Spain. I don’t think he can be considered another U.K. failure “down under” after a blistering first season, but might be yet another warning to British players thinking about moving on to Spain in the future.

Radamel Falcoa

Staying with United, we have one of the biggest striker flops in recent memory; a player United pays 265,000 pound a week (along with a loan fee of 6 million pounds) for four goals and more misses than a 10-minute lowlight reel could assemble. Falcoa will be moving on after this forgettable season, seemingly a shell of the player that built a world-class resume with Porto, Atletico and then Monaco before a knee injury appears to have diminished his talent and confidence possibly beyond repair. At 29, the right coach might be able to rejuvenate his flailing career, but one assumes that will not be Van Gaal and the clock is ticking.

Yaya Toure

Toure was one of the main reasons Man City won the title last season, and played a key role in their first title two years earlier. Yesterday, he scored a brace to push City into more firm control over second place in a 4-2 win over Swansea City. But it is clear that his form has declined this season, along with the rest of the team (except maybe Aguero and Silva), and that charges of lack of effort seem most aimed at the Ivory Coast international who finally saw his stacked team win an elusive African Cup of Nations title in January. His absence might have played a part in City’s inability to defend their title as well, though that problem seems to relate more to the failure of Brazilian duo Fernando and Fernandinho to shore up the space in front of a more porous back four.

Vincent Kompany

That porous back four includes a very disappointing Mangala, who cost City 31.8 million pounds last summer, but also a Belgian who has experienced a surprising decline in form. Kompany was arguably one of the best defenders in the world over the past few seasons, impressive on both sides of the pitch by chipping in with key goals on occasion (ala John Terry). But this season the mistakes that showed up a little last term have become more common and there are real questions emerging of whether his best days are behind him. His positioning seems off, he is beaten one on one a little too frequently and seems to have lost the dominance that once made him so great. Toure and he are just two examples of an aging squad that clearly needs youth injections next season.

Borussia Dortmund

The Klopp project at Dortmund had been in decline over the past couple of years, after winning two Bundesliga titles in a row (2010-12), the DFB-Pokal (2012) and Supercup (2013, 14), as well as just missing out to rival Bayern Munich in the finals of the 2013 Champions League final. Two many of their best players have left, mainly for rival Bayern, and injuries decimated the squad early. They have since moved up from the relegation zone, but will miss out at Champions League football next year, probably lose more stars and be without the coach that led their rise to the cream of Europe. Money is arguably the biggest reason for the decline, though one could also argue that teams adapted to their press and counter strategy, making it less effective over time. One assumes Klopp will be fielding offers across the continent, though it is unclear where he will end up at the moment.

Liverpool

But for a Gerrard slip. That iconic image of one of the most iconic figures in English football history cost Liverpool their 20th league title last year, but there was great hope they would again challenge for the title. After the “bite felt round the world” at the World Cup this summer, the time had finally come to move on Suarez and Brendan Rodgers was then charged with turning that big fee from Barcelona into the sort of replacements that could push the Reds forward. Instead players including the three-Ls (Lallana, Lambert and Lovren), Markovich and, most auspiciously, Balotelli, failed to live up to the hype and the team took several steps backwards this term. The declining form of their star, the ongoing injury saga of Sturridge and defensive lapses at key moments all contributed to the fall after a good middle-season run saw them on the cusp of claiming fourth place. Two years without a trophy means Rodgers now finds himself on the hot seat and needing to locate reinforcements that can push them above one of the four teams in front of them.

Pep Guardiola

Can one call a season winning the league a failure? Well, when you are the coach of a Bayern team that won the treble two years ago, the answer appears to be a resounding yes. For the second year running, Guardiola’s team was smashed by Spanish opponents in the semifinals of the UCL, this time by the team he called home from his playing days until his departure three years ago. The fact the medical team for the past 30 years stormed off in protest only adds to the sense that Guardiola has one more season at most before he departs for Greener pastures, quite possibly the Powder Blue variety of Manchester. Injuries have clearly played a role in the underperformance, but their inability to match up against Real and Barcelona in successive years has to at least partially come down to the coach.

Carlo Ancelotti

As the New Year started, Real Madrid had just ended a long winning streak, were ahead in the league, undefeated in the Group Stage of the Champions League and looked set for more glory in May. A slipup in January and early February pushed a resurgent Barca above them in the table before a tight 2-1 loss in the latest El Classico meant they would need help to win the league. A Barcelona draw gave them hope but a draw of their own last week meant they needed to make up four points and a goal difference deficit in two games. Bad went to worse as an equalizer from Juve in the second half pushed them out of the UCL Final and a chance at repeating. And then the likely became the reality, as Barcelona sewed up the title at a team Real just can’t beat this year – Atletico – cancelling out a 4-1 win for Los Blancos over Espanyol. The team did win the UEFA Super Cup and Club World Cup in the first half of the season, but will add no more silverware this year and one assumes the Italian will be back on the market come the summer, not least for his inability to beat the team Barcelona just took down.

League Title Race Drama

Chelsea and Man City were tied at the top of the EPL as the New Year began only for City to fade as Chelsea solidified their lead. Arsenal snuck into the race in April heading into a key matchup with their crosstown rivals at the Emirates, but their hopes were slim from the onset and ended with a drab 0-0 draw. In La Liga, the El Classico between Real and Barcelona on March 22 appeared to be the match of the season, with the winner likely to take the crown. And that is exactly what happened with Barcelona winning 2-1 on the way to securing the title with a game left in hand. Real will look back on a few head scratching results costing them the title for the second year running (in the very unforgiving La Liga race, where one draw can make all the difference). Bayern Munich and Juventus ran away with their league titles for the third year running (in Germany and Italy, of course) and PSG did the same, after a tight race with Lyon for most of the season. Teams are still fighting for positions in the Champions League, the Europa League or to stave off elimination, but it is a rather anticlimactic end to a scintillating season.

Dishonorable Mentions

Adebayor (Tottenham)
Roberto Martinez and the Everton Defense
Newcastle Post-Pardew
Roy Keane (as Aston Villa Assistant)
The Entire QPR Team (including Rio’s sayonara and ‘Arry’s knees)
Hull City Newbies (Hernandez, Ramirez, Ben Arfa)
Robin Van Persie (though injuries played a role)
Munich Injury List

Three Things: Manchester United 1 Arsenal 1

Whenever Manchester United and Arsenal meet, you expect a quality game with plenty of excitement and open play. That doesn’t always happen, of course, but players on both sides seem to up their games for this one, though United’s stars more often in the last decade. Arsenal started brightly in this game at Old Trafford, but United quickly stole the momentum and created several half chances within the first minutes before the opener by Herrera from a cross by resurgent Ashley Young on 30 minutes. From here, United largely dominated the game, pressing high and attacking with verve. Arsenal went into the locker room down 1-0 and without a single shot on goal. The second half started much as the first with United in the ascendancy and the Gunners having trouble scrapping together more than three passes at a time.

Around the hour mark, Arsenal appeared to wake up and had several corners in quick succession, but their finishing was suspect for the second game running. In the 73rd minute, De Gea went off, for possibly the last time at Old Trafford, replaced by Victor Valdez – just as Wilshere and Walcott came on for Bellerin and Walcott (with Coquelin moving to right back). Arsenal were pushing hard for the equalizer, with Walcott marginally offsides with his first touch followed by a poor pass by Wilshere that led to a United corner. Walcott then gave up the ball two more times in quick succession and the Arsenal momentum seemed to temper considerably. Just when I was thinking Wenger had made the wrong move in a key game yet again, Walcott snatched a beautiful long pass, curled around Blackwell and scored on a deflection off the United defender who had come in less than ten minutes earlier (adjudged to be an own goal on 82’). Arsenal were suddenly rampant and had a couple of chance to pull ahead, with Giroud just missing the far post and then Smalling intervening on another chance for the Frenchman a minute later. Van Persie almost scored in the 88th minute off a nice header pass from Fellaini, but his shot was just high (it would have been his 4th for United in six games against his old club, but might very well be the last time we see him in red). Sanchez had a shot right at Valdez before being taken off in the 90th minute for Flamini, with five minutes of extra time still in the balance. Both teams had chances in that final flurry, but the game ended in a draw that was a better result for Arsenal in the race for third place.

Three thoughts on the game, as the season stands one week from its conclusion:

1. Young Renaissance Continues; Herrera Impresses: After 13 straight games without giving up a goal in the first half, Arsenal finally conceded, as Monreal left Herrera free behind him, where he was able to finish a nice lofted cross from Ashley Young. It was Herrera’s sixth of the season, on exactly six shots on goal! Bellerin, the surprise of the season according to Wenger (though Coquelin has to be strong competition for that title, given that most didn’t think he would ever play for Arsenal again), was beaten by a rejuvenated Young, reminding the youngster that he still has things to learn in his nascent career at the top level. And one could say that it again showed two players that have been key to United reentering the Top 4 – Ashley Young was rampant down the left and Herrera scored the goal and was impressive with his passing and defensive pressing throughout. One expects many changes at United in the offseason, with Van Persie, Falcoa, De Gea and the most expensive player in EPL history (Di Maria) all likely to go, but these two would be expected to return after real questions about both earlier in the season.

2. Sanchez Shrinking: there’s no getting around how important Alexis Sanchez has been to Arsenal in his first season with the club, scoring the only goal in a two leg battle with Besiktas that got them into the main draw of the Champions League, keeping them near the top during the injury crisis of the first half and having many game winners in their winning streak. But one thing he does need to work on is giving the ball away, particularly on the defensive end. In the first 13 minutes of the game, Sanchez gave the ball to United on five occasions, twice just outside the box leading to United chances and twice killing decent counters. As the game wore on, he continued to give the ball away through poor passes and over dribbling. No one can fault his effort, drive to win or finishing, but he does need to make slightly better decisions in some cases – mainly getting rid of the ball more quickly rather than constantly taking on two or three defenders (one of the biggest problems with Wilshere’s game, by the way) and improving his passing on the counter.

The same could be said of Giroud in this game, seemingly past his purple patch and looking a little off his best for the third or fourth game running, his first touch failing him, his movement out of sync, his pace failing him and his passing somewhere between poor and abject (in line with the rest of the team). Even given that form, he was a fine De Gea save away from equalizing in the 62nd minute, after tracking back to snag an Ozil cut back that was behind him and almost put Arsenal ahead on 84 minutes with a shot that was just wide of the far post. He may need a rest before the FA Cup final in a fortnight.

3. Wenger United Woes Waning: Arsenal have won only one of the last 12 in the league against United, at the heart of the critique of Wenger over the past decade. And it is not just losing, but the inability to play their best in the biggest games. Even when United is struggling, they still seem to find a way to get the best of Arsenal, as they did in both games last year. This year, Arsenal have shown some new resolve, beating United at Old Trafford in the FA Cup and City 2-0 in an impressive display; as well as beating Liverpool soundly. But even in the positive 2015, they lost to Southampton on New Years Day, to hated Tottenham 2-1 at White Hart Lane, could only draw 0-0 with Chelsea at the Emirates and blew a very winnable tie against Monaco by losing the first leg 3-1. When Arsenal are playing poorly, they give up the ball too often, try to beat defenders dribbling and send imprecise passes past charging players. It is often the case that pressing them can break up their momentum and cause them to then look shaky on the defensive end. United was playing that strategy to perfection, but hadn’t kept a clean sheet for 7 games, and that continued in this game – as Arsenal played much better over the final 30 minutes, getting the equalizer and unlucky not to claim the victory. The draw all but sewed up third place for Arsenal (who only really need a point from their final two games, barring a United scoring explosion in their finale) and means that the Gunners can avoid the perilous and early season interrupting two-leg qualifying round next August.

Overall, Arsenal will be disappointed to lose out at a strong chance at second place by drawing with Chelsea, losing to Swansea and drawing with United after a long winning streak, but can take some gratification in besting their great rivals twice on the road in four months and moving up to third place for the first time since 2012, while still having the FA Cup final to contest in two short weeks. Manchester United will also feel bittersweet content in meeting the minimum goal for next year – ensuring a Top Four finish and return to the Champions League – though this will be the second year running without any silverware to a team that had become rather accustomed to it over the past two decades. They will be worried, I assume, about the goalkeeping situation, with De Gea looking likely to leave and the recognition that he is probably the single most important reason they will finish above Liverpool this season. And more changes appear in the offing for a team still in post-Fergie transition. But as Seneca once said, every new beginning comes from some other beginning’s end. New beginnings are on offer for both teams next season, along with the other 18 Premier League Teams.

The Nation Attacks Clinton: Should We Listen?

These are not easy days for the left, and the once venerated The Nation is suffering right along with the rest of the marginalized gang. One of the many successful strategies conservatives have pursued to undermine their ideological enemies in recent years is either decreasing funding (ala PBS and NPR) or increasing the costs of postage for magazines, often forcing lower circulation publications to seek funding beyond their traditional base. PBS and NPR have responded by looking to corporate sponsors to make up the shortfall, pushing their content more to the center in the process and undermining the idea of “public” media in the process. The Nation hasn’t yet undermined their political resolve, but they appear to have raised the stakes in their own funding battle by sending out an email to all their subscribers shilling the latest Clinton attack book, Clinton Cash.

The book, written by conservative Peter Schweizer, has been heavily criticized by the Clinton team and other media outlets as littered with errors and outright lies, leading Schweizer to make some corrections. But why would The Nation being pushing the book in the first place? Some, appear to be arguing The Nation has turned away from its liberal/progressive roots, even as they played an instrumental role in the rise and ultimate victory of Bill de Blasio in the Mayoral race less than 18 months ago. The reality is probably completely different, however, as The Nation has been consistently pushing for a more progressive alternative to the Clinton candidacy before she even announced.

To me, the email really sums up the conundrum for the left ever since Ronald Reagan took office in 1981. Should they support a truly “liberal,” or I guess one should say “progressive,” candidate and most likely lose the election or moderate their ideological position to win the battle of the “lesser of two evils.” It was obviously the first Clinton that best demonstrated the dilemma. He finally broke the 12-year stranglehold of the Presidency by Republicans (a trend that actually stretched back to 1968, and controlling the highest office in the land for 20 of 24 years). But what did Clinton do during his eight years in charge? As he and his DLCers promised, they followed more conservative economic policies while being more progressive on the social issues (arguably pushing the social conservatives to numerous victories ever since). Given his ideological leanings, one would not be surprised to discover that beyond overseeing a decade of economic growth (though partially based on the Internet bubble), he also became the most effective purveyor of conservative (neoliberal) policy ever, including the following “achievements”: 1. Tough on crime legislation that dramatically increased the number of minorities in prison for minor drug offenses (the total incarcerated population stands at 2.2 million today), 2. Deregulation of media that now allows five companies to control more than 90 percent of what we see, hear and read, 3. Deregulation of the banking industry (arguably directly increasing personal debt and contributing to the 2007 financial crisis), 4. Increasing income inequality, and 5. Expanding free trade (through NAFTA, most famously) spreading the neoliberal ideology across the globe as never before.

The prospect of another Clinton, who may be even more conservative than her husband, in the Oval Office is a proposition largely overshadowed by the sense that she could march to a relatively easy victory and finally smash the political glass ceiling; at least at the top. But what will this mean for the progressive agenda? Will it mean at least another four years of fealty before Wall Street and the corporate agenda for America? Will it imply continued disinterest in addressing the growing climate change perils? Will it lead to purely rhetorical answers to the continued accumulation of wealth and income in the hands of the few? And will it ultimately be continuation of the neoliberal policies that have essentially made the quality of life of the average citizen on the globe worse?

These are important questions that go beyond one advertisement and whether The Nation is a turncoat to the liberal cause. They are questions about the very future of the country and its citizens. And many of us might then stand beside The Nation and demand better for our nation than another Clinton or, god forbid, Bush in the highest office in the land.

Arsenal Lose to Swansea Again

Arsenal started brightly in their evening match with Swansea at the Emirates tonight, and Olivier Giroud had a header to take the lead after only three minutes, but Ramsey’s clever cross from inside the box was a few inches behind the Frenchman, and he sent it just over. Swansea were clearly playing deep and on the counter right from the onset and had a half chance of their own on 7 minutes, though Rangel tried to beat Ospina from an acute angle at the near post, to no avail. Shelvy then ambitiously tried his hand at a Charlie Adams hail mary imitation, though from much closer, with Ospina seemingly comfortable watching the ball float over the post. Then a long pass almost found a charging Dyer, but Ospina came to the edge of the box to collect it.

Arsenal were dominating possession, to the tune of 86 percent over the first 20 minutes, but without any real threat of old goalkeeper, anything-but-Fab-ianski (until tonight, that is). In fact, even with their metronomic possession reminiscent of the Barcelona team of the late aughts, it was Swansea that had the better chances to score, with Shelvy, in particular, looking lively and dangerous. Two questionable offsides calls in a row, one against each team, makes me wonder why line judges don’t give the benefit of a centimeter to the offensive side. On 25 minutes, Giroud was left rolling around in pain after being kneed in the back, only 10 minutes after a knee-to-knee clash with Ashley Williams and then Sanchez was grabbed twice to elicit a rather half-hearted penalty appeal. Halfway through the half, there was little to separate Swansea’s organize defense and occasional forays forward from Arsenal’s possession-first approach.

Arsenal earned their first corner of the game on 33 minutes, after a lofted pass from Ramsey to a charging Sanchez, but a Bellerin foul led to a Fabianski goal kick. The Gunners began to pick up the pace of their passing, but the crosses were below par and they continued to offer no threat on the Swansea goal. Shelvy was the first one in the book, with an overzealous tackle on Sanchez near midfield on 37 minutes, before another errant pass from Ramsey. A Giroud whipping shot from just outside the box on 42 minutes went just wide, the closest the Gunners came to scoring since the third minute. On the stroke of 45 minutes, Sanchez sent a long ball over the top, just out of the reach of Ramsey. Montero got in on goal for the Swans two minutes later, but shot wide of the near left post and the half ended soon after.

Swansea were clearly the happier of the two sides after 45 minutes, poised at nil-nil, but Arsenal could take hope from the fact that 21 of the last 22 goals between the two have come in the second half. On the other hand, it was two second half goals from Swansea in November that saw the Gunners fall to a 2-1 defeat. And those fears would, of course, come to fruition again here. The second half went much like the first, with an organized Swansea keeping Arsenal largely at bay. At the hour mark, some nice exchanges between Ozil, Sanchez and Monreal led to a snap shot from Giroud too close to Fabianski, who easily collected it. A minute later, Ramsey charged forward on the counter and was given a perfect pass in the box from Ozil, before a series of twists led to a shot just wide of the near post. On 64 minutes, a nice spell of possession around the box, led by Ozil (who had three successful tackles/interceptions in short order), concluded with a Cazorla shot across goal, well saved by Fabianski.

On 66 minutes, Wilshere came on for Coquelin, for his first home appearance in the league since way back in November; the day Arsenal suffered their only other home defeat of the league season, 2-1 to United, in a game much like this one, that they dominated for long stretches only to drop all three points in the end. His first touch on the offensive side came in the box, where he got off a weak shot from an acute angle that was easily caught by Fab. Three minutes later, Walcott came on for Olivier Giroud, and actually lined up as the centre forward. Wilshere earned a corner a moment later, but it was headed out by the first defender. Cazorla had a shot to the far corner soon after, but Williams cleared it for another corner.

The pressure was mounting, and Walcott should have made it 1-0 at 72 minutes, when Bellerin drove into the box and then sent a shot that was toed out by Williams, right into the path of the English international. Ki was replaced by the striker Gomis on 73 minutes and his first action was to clear a weak free kick from Cazorla. He has five goals in an injury-plagued season where he played second fiddle to Bony for the first half but certainly added a threat the Gunners would have to account for (this could be foreshadowing of what’s to come). Fabianski had his fourth save of the night as Monreal got free on goal a moment later, before catching the resulting corner. There was a second appeal for a penalty as Monreal appeared to be fouled, but his failure to fall before the shot probably made up Friend’s mind. Ramsey sent a decent shot across goal, but without enough power to really trouble Fab, as time began to run out on the Gunners. In the 78th minute, Sanchez found himself free on goal from 10 yards out, but somehow hit it right at Fabianski, and the resultant rebound fell to Walcott, who should have scored but again shot it right into what appeared to be hidden magnets in the Swansea keeper’s gloves. Within 30 seconds, Ozil had a third chance, again right at the Swansea keeper and it began to see like this wasn’t Arsenal’s night.

Sanchez earned a corner in the 83rd minute, but it came to naught and one had to consider the substitution of Giroud partially implicated in this loss, as a number of fine crosses late in the game found no one to finish them. As Wenger might have been contemplating that mistake, Swansea got forward on the right wing in what appeared to be a relatively innocuous counter on 86 minutes. The cross from the right wing went whipping across goal where it was collected by Montero, the winger who caused Calum Chambers such headaches in the reverse fixture and who helped Swansea win the first three of the six points they now took from the Gunners this year. He crossed it back toward Gomis, just back from injury, who headed it toward the far corner. Ospina came across and appeared to keep the ball out, as Gomis started to celebrate. No one, including the announcers, seemed to know why – until goal line technology solved the not-worthy-of-Hercule-Poirot mystery. Swansea were up 1-0, completely against the run of play, and while Arsenal fought valiantly to equalize in the remaining seven minutes of the game (including four minutes of extra time), a chance to draw even with Man City was gone.

And so the curse of Swansea continued, made worse this year by two losses that are both head scratchers. Arsenal had 70 percent possession and countless chances to score over the last 20 minutes, but instead gave up a goal on the only Swansea attack of note in the entire second half. Walcott missed two gild-edged chances, Sanchez maybe the best of the night, Ramsey had several chances himself and they played the first half without the energy we have become accustomed to this year. It was the sort of lax defending so reminiscent of the past few years that was ultimately to blame for a disappointing loss that could derail all the positive momentum building since January.

The good news is that Arsenal are guaranteed of Champions League football for an 18th year in a row, after the Liverpool draw with Chelsea Sunday, still have a chance to snatch second place from City, with a game in hand against Sunderland but a far inferior goal difference (9 behind City), and can end the season with a second FA Cup in a row. They have only lost four times this year, but those losses all mattered – first a New Years Day defeat to Southampton when the Top 4 was still very much in the balance, then 2-1 in the North London Derby before the biggest defeat of the year – the 3-1 loss at the Emirates to Monaco in the first leg of the UCL Round of 16. Losses like these remind fans of the tendency for defensive lapses and poor finishing undermining chances at titles, cups and advancement in the Champions League over the past decade (and each of those games included a combination of the two problems that beset post-Invincible Arsenal teams a little too often for comfort). In fact, one only needs to look to the two wins in the first eight games of the season as the main reason Chelsea is celebrating the title early. Arsenal fans will hope this was a one off before four wins to end yet another season that could have been so much more.

Education Today ...

McLuhan’s Prescience and the Death of Science & Reason

Marshall McLuhan was truly a man ahead of his time. Starting in the late 50s, he foresaw the sea change that the “electronic age” was hearkening; moving us from he called the “literate man” (cool, detached, rationale and individualistic) to the “post-literate man” (engaged, tribal). McLuhan believed new electronic technologies like the radio, telephone, television, record player and the like were fundamentally changing our lives. And without even knowing of the cell phone or Internet, or even personal computers, he suggested that we were moving toward a “global village” where the entire world would be connected culturally, economically and politically. This suggestion, of course, became reality as globalization accelerated in the 70s and then exploded in the 90s. His notion of the implosion of space and time is particularly relevant here, as the internet, 24-hour news cycle and smart phones have truly shrunk the world down to the filters you use and your download speed. And he also argued that television would force us to take sides in the ongoing struggles of the time, rather than sitting back coolly, which turned out to be true with the Civil Rights Movement, Vietnam and the host of political issues that have emerged ever since (including, of course, the shooting of unarmed black men today).

He claimed a lot of these changes occurred because different mediums demanded different ratios of sensory perception, over time fundamentally changing the way we “sense the world” and thus “live in the world.” These sense ratios come to define our relationship to each other and ourselves. And today those sense ratios demand almost instantaneous reaction to constant sensual stimuli, arguably meaning less time to contemplate, consider and compare. In other words, in a world where action and reaction are almost simultaneous, we rely more on external cues of how to think and act in particular situations. Given this new reality, McLuhan then made some of his most radical claims about a future where the spread of mysticism, spirituality and retribalization would fundamentally change our lives. And it is those claims that I’d like to briefly consider today.

The first claim was that contemporary life was pushing us away from individualism and toward group membership, what he called “retribalizing.” The idea was that readily available and compelling images of different lifestyles and the reduction in the time to think and react led people to act more like teenagers than adolescents, seeking group affiliation and conformity. This was, of course, the norm in the 50s and early 60s, as he wrote the book, but after the cultural revolutions of the 60s and 70s, we appear to find ourselves more tribal than at any point in recent memory. Sure there are more choices than in the past, but really the genius of the modern advertising spectacle is the way it sells nonconformity through conformity itself. Buy this product and you will be cool and unique, even though we are selling it to a bunch of other people at the same time. Worship this celebrity for their lifestyle and then buy the products that move you closer to them. And, of course, there is social networking, which allows one to create and then interact with networks of similar minded people (in their taste preferences, political views, etc.) and to isolate yourself from those who don’t agree with your values, beliefs, political ideologies or even musical choices.

This ability to insulate yourself to ideas and people that disagree with you, or are not like you, is one of the odd byproducts of the “electronic” or “digital” age we live in. Rather than opening the world up to us, as the Internet, social networking and new media can, many use these technologies to create a new insularity very much like the old tribal cultures of the past. In fact, one could argue that the political partisanship we experience today is a perfect example of this new tribalism, along with the radical fundamentalism we see in the U.S. and across the globe. Looking to the news, we can quickly find endless examples of these trends, including the two men who attempted to attack an art show in Texas that featured cartoons of the prophet Muhammad (ISIS has now taken credit for the attack, though it is unclear whether that is in fact true)

One of the byproducts of tribal mentality is a tendency to blindly believe what adherents and leaders tell you and to question, or simply reject, the ideas of those outside your tribe (there is even a psychological term for this: “inside group cognitive bias”). This is the great danger of political insularity, not only leading people toward fundamentalist ideologies (which are always a danger to democracy, but to discount truth in deference to chosen fictions. And thus, as McLuhan argued, it could be that the “electronic age” ushered in a period where we moved away from reason and science and back toward mysticism and faith. We can certainly see examples of both of these trends at work in the U.S. today. The first is the constant battle that is waged to undermine long held shibboleths about scientific truth and separation of church and state. In fact, we can see three Republican Presidential Candidates who perfect embody this anti-science position. Retired doctor Ben Carson, who believes the human brain is too complex to have been created by anyone but God, Rand Paul (the ophthalmologist), who questions the age of the earth and Ted Cruz (the Harvard alum) who continues to argue against evolution and for creationist, are just three of the slate of candidate who also question global warming, spread junk science on vaccines and seem willing to consider any outlandish theory that mobilizes their base.

The fading line between truth and fiction is, of course, one of the central themes of postmodernism but the striking ways that it has influence the political arena in America over the past 20 years is hard to ignore. From the justification for the Iraq War and the belief by many that we did, in fact, find weapons of mass destruction to the many falsified Clinton scandals (both Bill and now Hillary) and the endless debates about a host of issues that are easily resolved with simple research, we are mired in a world where the truth is in the eye of the beholder, not attached in any way to the world, and debates go on endlessly about issues that are long resolved. The intense partisanship in America, the rise in conspiracy theories, the evangelical call to reinsert religion into our politics and schools, the battles over gay marriage and birth control, the war on terror (that the conservative party in Canada is about to ramp up) and the war on democracy all relate in some ways to the world McLuhan envisioned over 50 years ago. Mysticism, spirituality and tribalism. None are terrible on the surface, but when they become the defining memes of an epoch, truth, science and reason are just bygone ideals of a forgotten world.

Arsenal Win Game; Chelsea Win League

Yesterday Chelsea accomplished what many predicted they would before the first ball of the season was even kicked – winning the league (with three games to spare) by beating Crystal Palace 1-0 at the Bridge. Today Arsenal essentially clinched their Top 4 place with a 3-1 win over Hull, as they are now nine points clear of Liverpool with a game in hand, only three games left for Liverpool and a goal difference advantage of 22. Liverpool did beat QPR 2-1, after losses to Aston Villa and Hull sandwiching a draw at West Brom that many thought had sealed their fate. And Manchester United gave them a glimmer of hope, losing their third game on the bounce, to West Brom at Old Trafford, after the 1-0 loss to Chelsea (does that score sound familiar of late?) and 3-0 loss to Everton. They now stand only four points above the Meyerside club with three games to play. The good news for United is that Liverpool must win all three of their remaining fixtures (against Chelsea (A), Crystal Palace and Stoke (A)) and they simply need to win two of their three games to make the matter moot. If they do draw against Crystal or Hull and lose to Arsenal, however, Liverpool could draw even, but the 13-goal gap in GD seems to be another stumbling block for the stumbling Reds.

On the other end of the table, it looks clear that QPR and Burnley are now going down (barring a miracle), as I have predicted for weeks, but the third spot is still open for the taking. Sunderland is currently camping there, but they have the advantage of a game in hand. On the other hand, their four remaining fixtures are against an improving Everton, a suddenly hot Leicester and then Arsenal and Chelsea (with three of the four on the road). They actually look the most likely to drop at present, unless they beat Leicester at home and hope someone else loses out. One team that certainly could accomplish that rather dubious feat is Newcastle, who might feel comfortable on 35 points, but should note it is only two above the drop zone and that they have lost eight straight, dropping from a comfortable 13th under Pardew. There is no guarantee they can win the three points they probably need from games against West Brom, QPR and West Ham, even as the latter two might have little to play for. Leicester and Hull are still far from safety as well, even after decent form in recent weeks. It should be exciting at the bottom, even as the top four is all but solidified.

As to the game this evening, Arsenal came out attacking from the start though the game was back and forth in the early going with Hull having a strong chance to go ahead with a header from in close that was scuffed right into the feet of an Arsenal defender. On 27 minutes, Ozil jumped in front of Huddlestone, stole the ball and then pushed it forward to Sanchez, who was fouled by Livermore a few yards outside the box. He lined up his free kick and had the fortune of it hitting Dawson on its way in (is it just me, or is this starting to sound like a North London derby from a few years back?), sending the Hull GK Steve Harper the wrong way and Arsenal to a 1-0 lead. Five minutes later it was 2-0 as Aaron Ramsey continued his comeback with a nice touch, turn and shot from a lovely 40-yard lofted pass from Cazorla, with the shot again benefitted from a deflection by a Hull defender. Just before halftime, after Hull missed a couple of decent chances to pull one back, Ramsey sent a perfect through ball to Sanchez, who rounded the keeper and scored his second of the half.

Arsenal were cruising 3-0 as the second half began to take shape, when Hull suddenly scored on a powerful header by Steven Quinn from a perfect lofted cross from Ahmed Elmohamady, though there were real questions of whether Koscielny was fouled before the goal. From here, Arsenal started to control the game and really should have scored a couple more goals, though they settled for a relatively comfortable 3-1 win. Ozil played a wonderful game, Sanchez scored a brace, Ramsey added a goal and an assist, Cazorla was strong on both sides of the pitch and the defense was decent, except for the goal. Jack Wilshere came on for the first time in months, replacing Ramsey in the 68th minute, and went on a decent run two minutes later that end up with a free kick just outside the box, after a lovely pass was negated by the whistle. He then cut in on the right and earned a corner and generally played at a high level throughout his 20 plus minutes on the pitch, almost scoring on 85 minutes but for what appeared to be a hand ball by Hull in the box. Walcott also came on in the 86th minute, but one wonders if he will be wearing the red and white next year.

In the end it was another three points for an Arsenal team that is making that a habit, having not lost since February 25 (the 3-1 defeat to Monaco). They have now won 10 of their last 11 (with only the draw against Chelsea last week marring their perfect form), are all but guaranteed to stay in the Top 4 and play Champions League football again next year and head into the offseason knowing they should be in the title race next year. However, with a chance to win out and secure second place AND an FA Cup Final to contest, the season is far from over. Their final five fixtures of the year are as follows: Swansea (H), United (A), Sunderland (H), West Brom (H) and Aston Villa in the Cup final on May 30. It could be the best finish to a season since 2004, even though the title won’t be part of the package.

It's Dinner Again in America

Kansas as a Microcosm of Regressive Taxation in America

One of the less reported trends in America over the past 20 years or so is the indirect establishment of a flat tax, when one aggregates federal, state and local taxes. This has been accomplished by reducing the marginal tax rates on capital (capital gains taxes) and income (progressive taxation) and replacing the lost income with increased regressive taxation (sales and excise taxes). Income tax, of course, is a progressive tax system in the U.S. where those who make more pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes. Capital gains taxes relate to investments, and generally thus influence the middle class and wealthy, who have more money invested, than the working class and poor. Sales taxes, however, are equal for everyone, and thus regressive – in the sense that the taxes are a lower percentage of total income for those who make more. This is amplified by the fact that the poor tend to spend more of their money on products that are taxed, thus placing the sales tax onus more on their shoulders.

Overall, it is a clever backhand approach to imposing the flat tax that some advocates, like Steve Forbes, pushed hard for back in 1996. The idea was that it was unfair for those who made more money to have to pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes. Of course, this idea has been attacked since progressive taxation was first established, and accelerated under the presidency of Reagan, who cut the highest tax bracket from 70 to 28 percent within six years (along with lowering capital gains taxes). Under Bush we also saw the elimination of the federal inheritance tax (coined the “death tax” by clever conservative rhetoricians) and further reduction in federal taxes. At the state and local levels, tax rate reductions have been a staple for conservative legislatures for over three decades.

The real trick is a bit more nefarious. Given the reduction in state and federal revenue, state and local government tend to run deficits whenever the economy slows even a little. This creates a “crisis,” which means reduction in spending and, rather than adjusting the tax rates back to their previous levels, increasing what are generally called “consumption taxes” (sales tax, toll rates, etc.). Given that this is a shift from progressive to regressive taxation, it disproportionately hurts the poor and working class (as they necessarily spend a larger proportion of their income on consumption). Thus the shift is a key part of the “war on the poor” many progressive journalists discuss in two ways: 1. Reductions in marginal income tax rates lead to lower revenue, which is used as the key excuse for reduced funding for social services that the poor and working class tend to count on, and 2. Rather than increase income taxes, they tend to increase sales taxes to make up these deficits, again hurting those at the bottom of the income ladder more than the middle and the middle more than the top.

Kansas is a hyperbolic exemplar of this trend, with the rich actually paying a lower percentage of their income than the poor by a relatively wide margin. A major overhaul of the Kansas tax code was completed by Republican Governor Sam Brownback a few years ago, cutting the tax rate for the wealthy to stimulate the economy, bring more revenue into the state’s coffers and close the budget deficit. This is, of course, the supply side (“trickle down”) economic approach that has proven itself to be both “funnel up” and “deficit generating” (facilitating the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich in the history of the world). So it is not terribly surprising that the tax cuts did not stimulate the economy to the extent promised and that instead Kansas is sputtering along at the national economic growth rate and poised for a $143 million budget shortfall next year. Rather than reforming the failed policy and asking the wealthy to chip in their fair share, the legislature instead passed a bill that banned welfare recipients from using their benefits to swim or watch movies and are close to increasing sales and excise taxes yet again.

The progressive Kansas Center for Economic Growth argues that the state's deficit can't be eliminated without reversing some of the income tax cuts Brownback made in 2012, but instead the legislature seems ready to further punish the poor for their own profligacy. Kansas is already among the worst places to be poor in the country, as they actually tax all food (some can get a rebate of this tax, but not those who make no money or too little to earn a return, i.e., the poorest citizens of the state). To put it in numbers, among the fifth of the Kansas population with the lowest income, the average person pays 11.1 percent of what they make in state and local taxes, including sales taxes. Among the wealthiest one in every 100 Kansans, the average tax bill is just 3.6 percent of annual income. The proposal is to increase the sales tax from 6.15 to 6.3 percent. While that doesn’t sound like much, most of the pain will be felt by the poor and working class already food insecure in far too many cases.

The plan for increasing these taxes is defended by economists that argue people should be taxed on what they spend, not what they make, so as not to penalize them for earning more but instead encourage them to save and invest their money. The problem, of course, is that the average American has little to no savings, increasing debt, and thus is punished by these policies without the ability to take advantage of the increased incentive to save and invest. On top of that, given the low interest rates people get at the bank, it makes little sense to save money rather than pay off debts with substantially higher interest rates accruing on outstanding balances. In the end, it is a gift for the rich sold as an economically-sound alternative to progressive taxation and yet another example of the radical GOP agenda to transfer income and democratic power from the majority of the country to its rich minority and corporate sponsors.

And while Kansas is the most obvious and egregious example of regressive taxation policy, one can see the results across the country, including in Los Angeles County where recent estimates claim 1.5 million people are food insecure today. Not that the unofficial state flat taxation trend has stopped calls for an official flat tax at the federal level; two candidates for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, are leading the charge to give this misguided proposal a comeback from its 20-year nap.

Hillary 2016 in the Eyes of Cartoonists

Political Cartoonists on Baltimore

Warning, some of these are racist ...