And that’s about all I have to say.  It’s a lovely country, there are a surprising amount of American expats (at least around backpacker country), and my Spanish needs improvement.  The waters around Utila and the Cays are about as clear and warm as you could wish, and the Mayan ruins around Copan (all of them, there are dozens of sites) let you actually touch Mesoamerican history.  Seriously, you can climb on ancient Mayan temples; I have pictures.  Also, the Mayans loved them some parrots.  However, I would, just once, like to go to an ancient site like Copan (or Chichen Itza, Teotihuacan, Zaculea, etc.) and be able to trust most of what the guide said.  That said, Copan was one of the better sites for having accurate displays and reasonably believable information. At Chichen Itza the guides peddled the “Mayans were Asian” theory, and they weren’t talking about the Bering landbridge.

Anyway, I digress.  Honduras was incredible.  The landscape alone is worth a trip, and the food around Copan was stellar.  Parrots, coffee plantations, boat tours, snorkeling, hikes, ruins, canoeing.  Not a bad way to spend 2 weeks with your wife.  Back to political science and related topics soon.

This just boggles the mind and probably doesn’t thrill those leaders of the Tea Party that don’t want to look like crazy people.  Long story short, a city in Florida (see here) voted to remove fluoride from their drinking water, which is, you know, a bad idea under pressure from local Tea Party activists. Apparently it has something to do with government mind control. Not much you can say about this one.  I certainly don’t agree with any (all) of the Tea Party’s ideological positions, but this is just ridiculous.

Anyway, that’s a nice note to leave on.  I’m heading to Honduras tomorrow for my honeymoon for two weeks, and it’s highly unlikely I’ll be motivated to post.  Unfortunately, Honduras isn’t holding its Presidential election while Rachel and I are there like the last time I was in Guatemala.  I guess I’ll just have to console myself with beautiful beaches and ancient Mayan ruins.

Because apparently it’s what one does on a blog, I feel the need to comment on the political story of the day.  Plus, this particular story deals with two of my favorite things after political science: football and country music.  So, for those who haven’t heard the story, Hank Williams, Jr. was dropped from Monday Night Football because he compared Obama to Hitler.  For a more interesting take on this than “here’s what he said,” check out Slate’s Explainer column for today here.

Couple of things.  Not to defend Hank Williams, Jr. (his political opinions or his music), but what he was seemed to be trying to say was that Obama and Boehner are such ideological opposites that any meeting between them is a fruitless photo-op.  Unfortunately, Williams seems to place Obama in the role of Hilter which is, well, stupid.  Points for knowing Netanyahu though.  Hank is actually dancing around an interesting political point – how do leaders govern when their parties/coalitions are so far apart ideologically? – but seems to be doing that despite himself rather than on purpose. Godwin’s law is irrefutable apparently off the Internet as well.

Secondly, and this is a particular beef of mine, why does any self-respecting news program (and I realize it’s a stretch to call anything on Fox News that) care what Hank Williams, Jr. thinks? This is the same man who wrote a song called “The Coalition to Ban Coalitions,” which was as politically tone-deaf as it was literally tone-deaf.  Case in point, has anyone ever actually advocated using the apparatus of the state to “get rid of electric guitars”?  Plus, even a brief thought would cause one to wonder how you could reconcile representative government with violating the right to peaceably assemble.  Anyway, celebrities, and I suppose Hank qualifies, are obviously entitled to whatever political opinions they see fit to hold, but why is the news station giving this guy’s (seriously, this guy) opinion a platform? If he’s got an opinion, let’em get a Twitter feed.

Last but not least, the quick reaction by ESPN makes me wonder if his departure had not been previously contemplated by the network, who jumped on the opportunity to make it his fault through a boneheaded comment about politics.  Personally, I’m sort of obsessed with the history of country music, and Hank Williams, Jr. is an unfortunate musical footnote. It’s as if he took the worst parts of David Allen Coe (self-entitlement, rascism, faux nostalgia), filtered it through Waylon Jennings, and then borrowed Ray Wylie Hubbard’s stage act.  That said, if you’re trying to connect with a modern audience, Hank Williams, Jr. probably isn’t getting you anyone who wasn’t already watching the game to begin with.

All in all, it’s exactly the sort of ridiculous news story that you need to fill a 24 hr news cycle.  Take aways: the comment was silly, Hank Williams Jr. isn’t a very good country singer, and ESPN might have been thinking of dropping him anyway.

Obviously, just kidding.  However, I found this chat with Justice Stevens really interesting.  The article is a little too thin to call it an “interview.”  What? Someone who was on the high court for 30+ years doesn’t rate a full feature on cnn.com?  Anyway, his quotes on his evolving attitudes towards the death penalty reveal exactly the kind of coherent, critical thought you need in a policymaking (sorry neocons, that’s what the high court is supposed to do) justice.  It helps that I tend to agree with his assessment of the state of that particular policy (and many others) of course.  Additionally, his arguments about the movement of the country/Republican Party are interesting, but hardly surprising.  The Midwest in particular has a long history of progressive politics, from the Teddy Roosevelt-style, trust-busting Republicanism of the early 20th Century, to the agricultural progressive movements that were (still are in the case of Minnesota’s Farm Labor party) active in the region as well.  All to say that Justice Stevens may not be that exceptional a Republican of a given time and place, although he is certainly hard to square with the more prominent Republicans of today.  Anyway, quick interesting read about a longtime member of SCOTUS.