"I had a good time. Thank you. Good night."
--Leo Kottke
(My way of saying the bar is open, and so is the thread. Enjoy. And thanks for all the fish.)
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
I'll be short
This won't be.
There's been a plethora of diaries at Kos' on the subject of election 2004 fra . . . frau . . . um, irregularities. This is the best one I've read to date.
Go.
There's been a plethora of diaries at Kos' on the subject of election 2004 fra . . . frau . . . um, irregularities. This is the best one I've read to date.
Go.
Throw Yourself Like Seed
~Scowls Meaningfully at Blogger~
Roger Housden sometimes has some interesting things to say about poetry. This week, I’m reading “Ten Poems to Set You Free” and, in honor of Atrios’ trip to Spain, thought I’d share with you what Housden says about the Spanish poet Miguel de Unamuno.
*****
When the fascist General Milan-Astray stormed into the University of Salamanca to confront the elderly professor and poet-philosopher Miguel de Unamuno over his criticism of Franco and the fascist cause, Unamuno said to him: “At times to be silent is to lie. You will win because you have enough brute force. But you will not convince. For to convince you need to persuade. And in order to persuade you would need what you lack: reason and right.”
The general shouted, “Death to intelligence! Long live death!” and drove the ailing poet out of the university at gunpoint. The poet suffered a heart attack and died within the week.
*****
Here is Unamuno’s poem “Throw Yourself Like Seed.” I’m still working on what I think the last verse is really all about.
Shake off this sadness, and recover your spirit;
Sluggish you will never see the wheel of fate
That brushes your heel as it turns going by,
The man who wants to live is the man in whom life is abundant.
Now you are only giving food to that final pain
Which is slowly winding you in the nets of death,
But to live is to work, and the only thing which lasts
Is the work; start there, turn to the work.
Throw yourself like seed as you walk, and into your own field,
Don’t turn your face for that would be to turn it to death,
And do not let the past weigh down your motion.
Leave what’s alive in the furrow, what’s dead in yourself,
For life does not move in the same way as a group of clouds;
From your work you will be able one day to gather yourself.
Roger Housden sometimes has some interesting things to say about poetry. This week, I’m reading “Ten Poems to Set You Free” and, in honor of Atrios’ trip to Spain, thought I’d share with you what Housden says about the Spanish poet Miguel de Unamuno.
*****
When the fascist General Milan-Astray stormed into the University of Salamanca to confront the elderly professor and poet-philosopher Miguel de Unamuno over his criticism of Franco and the fascist cause, Unamuno said to him: “At times to be silent is to lie. You will win because you have enough brute force. But you will not convince. For to convince you need to persuade. And in order to persuade you would need what you lack: reason and right.”
The general shouted, “Death to intelligence! Long live death!” and drove the ailing poet out of the university at gunpoint. The poet suffered a heart attack and died within the week.
*****
Here is Unamuno’s poem “Throw Yourself Like Seed.” I’m still working on what I think the last verse is really all about.
Shake off this sadness, and recover your spirit;
Sluggish you will never see the wheel of fate
That brushes your heel as it turns going by,
The man who wants to live is the man in whom life is abundant.
Now you are only giving food to that final pain
Which is slowly winding you in the nets of death,
But to live is to work, and the only thing which lasts
Is the work; start there, turn to the work.
Throw yourself like seed as you walk, and into your own field,
Don’t turn your face for that would be to turn it to death,
And do not let the past weigh down your motion.
Leave what’s alive in the furrow, what’s dead in yourself,
For life does not move in the same way as a group of clouds;
From your work you will be able one day to gather yourself.
Frances Newton
Frances Newton is scheduled to be executed in Texas on December 1st, 2004. Newton’s conviction was another product of the infamous Houston Police Department Crime Lab, a lab which has been notorious in sloppy DNA work that has resulted in numerous false convictions. Newton's attorneys have requested a 120 day reprieve so her attorneys can investigate some of the holes in the forensic evidence that were the basis of her conviction. Prosecutors, however, oppose giving Newton any time even though technological developments would allow new testing to differentiate between gunpowder residue (as the Prosecutors insist was found on Newton’s clothes) or garden manure (which is what Newton insists it was).
There are also serious effectiveness of counsel issues here, as there seem to be in virtually every Texas death penalty case.
Whatever you think about the death penalty, there is no reason not to grant this woman 120 days to determine for sure whether, in fact, the forensic evidence really supports the conviction. Amnesty International can help you send a letter to Governor Perry and Rissie L. Owens, Presiding Officer of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, here.
(via blogAmy)
There are also serious effectiveness of counsel issues here, as there seem to be in virtually every Texas death penalty case.
Whatever you think about the death penalty, there is no reason not to grant this woman 120 days to determine for sure whether, in fact, the forensic evidence really supports the conviction. Amnesty International can help you send a letter to Governor Perry and Rissie L. Owens, Presiding Officer of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, here.
(via blogAmy)
at least?
Under the headline U.S. Death Toll in Iraq Ties Record, Yahoo reports that:
(Note: quoting Yahoo news is dangerous because they regularly rewrite their articles, often erasing the bits I quote. As of 2:04 p.m., this is what their article says)
the U.S. military death toll for November equalled the highest for any month of the war, according to casualty reports available Tuesday. At least 135 U.S. troops died in November. That is the same number as last April, when the insurgence flared in Fallujah and elsewhere in the so-called Sunni Triangle where U.S. forces and their Iraqi allies lost a large measure of control.In other words, the number of U.S. deaths actually probably exceeds the number killed April. It only equals April if you don't count the last quarter of the month. Not a very fair comparison if you want to measure the increase or decrease of deaths among U.S. forces in the country.
On Nov. 8, U.S. forces launched an offensive to retake Fallujah, and they have engaged in tough fighting in other cities since then. More than 50 U.S. troops have been killed in Fallujah since then, although the Pentagon has not provided a casualty count for Fallujah for more than a week.
(Note: quoting Yahoo news is dangerous because they regularly rewrite their articles, often erasing the bits I quote. As of 2:04 p.m., this is what their article says)
Scary Shit
filkertom has a terrifying video up on his blog. The pictures are seriously terrifying and should not be looked at by children. This month's Vanity Fair has an article on the same topic. The US has been using depleted uranium (DU) in Iraq. The results, for people in Iraq and American soldiers, are truly terrifying. We're dispersing this stuff into Iraq's air, earth, water. It has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. And last time I checked, the air over Iraq and water in Iraq don't stay in Iraq for 4.5 billion years, so we can expect at some point to, rather literally, reap what we've sown.
I was going to end with a joke, like: Hey, gay people holding hands at a baseball game!, but this topic makes even me unable to joke around.
I was going to end with a joke, like: Hey, gay people holding hands at a baseball game!, but this topic makes even me unable to joke around.
Good News
Except, um, you didn't actually have one before?
-
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the incoming Senate minority leader, said Monday he is forming a communications "war room" to promote Democrats' messages and respond to Republican criticism.
Reid continued to put his stamp on the Senate leadership when he announced creation of a Senate Democratic Communications Center that will aim to keep the party in the public eye. The center will be launched Jan. 4, when the Senate convenes for its 2005 session.
Jim Manley, press secretary for Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., has been hired as staff director for the center, which will be located in the U.S. Capitol.
Phil Singer, a former media adviser to Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., will be communications director, handling "rapid response" as Democrats seek to keep their messages on pace with the White House and Republicans in Congress. Singer also worked as national spokesman for the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.
A 15-member message team will include press aides who will publicize Democratic activities to Internet news organizations and bloggers, Reid said. Tessa Hafen, Reid's press secretary, will focus on Nevada media and regional news outlets.
Ridge Resigns
Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge steps down - AP By Carla Mozee
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has resigned, the Associated Press reported Tuesday.
Details to follow.
********
NYT reports: In an e-mail circulated to senior Homeland Security officials, Ridge praised the department as "an extraordinary organization that each day contributes to keeping America safe and free." He also said he was privileged to work with the department's 180,000 employees "who go to work every day dedicated to making our company better and more secure."
A news conference has been set for 2:45 p.m.
Goddess knows what company he's talking about. But I do begin to understand why he hasn't done anything to make American any safer if he's been working for some company all this time.
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has resigned, the Associated Press reported Tuesday.
Details to follow.
********
NYT reports: In an e-mail circulated to senior Homeland Security officials, Ridge praised the department as "an extraordinary organization that each day contributes to keeping America safe and free." He also said he was privileged to work with the department's 180,000 employees "who go to work every day dedicated to making our company better and more secure."
A news conference has been set for 2:45 p.m.
Goddess knows what company he's talking about. But I do begin to understand why he hasn't done anything to make American any safer if he's been working for some company all this time.
Drinking Liberally
For any local people, Drinking Liberally is tonight at Ten Stone, 21st and South Streets. It starts at 6:00 p.m. and goes until everyone leaves. Maybe I'll see you there.
...and as some pointed out in the comments, I neglected to say where "local" is. I'm in Philadelphia, but there are DLs all over the country (albeit at different dates and times). Click the above link to find one near you.
...and as some pointed out in the comments, I neglected to say where "local" is. I'm in Philadelphia, but there are DLs all over the country (albeit at different dates and times). Click the above link to find one near you.
Idiots Leading the Idiots
Oh Lord help us. Brokaw:
Leaving aside the not insiginficant issue that Friedman is currently a columnist, not a reporter...Brokaw believes that no one that he knows "covering national politics and the international policies that are of such great concern today know as much about them as Tom Friedman does"?
If that's true, we're dooooomed...
-
"The idea that this White House has not given Tom Friedman a long, in-depth interview is astonishing to me. I have had a very good relationship with them, I have gotten to interview the President a lot. I have had access on the phone and other areas and I have been very vigorous in my discussions with them. But no reporter that I know covering national politics and the international policies that are of such great concern today know as much about them as Tom Friedman does and they have completely shut out the NEW YORK TIMES."
Leaving aside the not insiginficant issue that Friedman is currently a columnist, not a reporter...Brokaw believes that no one that he knows "covering national politics and the international policies that are of such great concern today know as much about them as Tom Friedman does"?
If that's true, we're dooooomed...
Moral Immunodeficiency
Some constructive rhetoric from the Vatican:
-
The Vatican on Tuesday blamed the spread of AIDS on an "immunodeficiency" of moral values among other factors and called for education, abstinence and greater access to drugs to fight the disease.
On the eve of World AIDS Day, the head of the Vatican's pontifical health council quoted Pope John Paul as calling AIDS a "pathology of the spirit" that must be combated with "correct sexual practice" and "education of sacred values".
"I highlight his thoughts regarding the immunodeficiency of moral and spiritual values," Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan added in a speech prepared for World AIDS Day on Wednesday.
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."--Thoreau
Molly Ivins points me in the direction of a new trend: people outliving the terms of their labor contracts. Apparently, per the WSJ, some companies want to limit pension benefits to the "lifetime" of the labor contract, not the "lifetime" of the employee. As cold-hearted as this clearly is, it points to a problem in American life, one we have never faced before, and so don't seem to be recognizing as more important and fundamental than almost any other:
People are living longer than ever before.
This is neither a surprise, nor as elementary as it may first appear. One of the fundamentals of society was that it changed, however slowly, as the elderly died off and the young took positions of responsibility. But in politics, at least, the elderly tend to be very conservative, and tend to vote in larger numbers. That affects politics very directly.
But there's also the spiritual, or psychological, if you prefer, aspect to this. What do we do with all these people? The average age in America is going up, rapidly. I know individuals who have survived multiple heart attacks and heart surgeries. Years ago, they would have been long dead. Now they are living into their 70s, 80s, 90s. This is an economic problem, too. When do we force them "out of the way" to make way for younger workers? Should we force them? Should we even encourage their retirement?
There are other effects, as well. This is the unacknowledged issue that will be at the root of most others. The elderly who don't relinguish control to the young; the elderly who demand resources from the society; the elderly who deserve our respect and care; the elderly who have much to teach us, if we will learn. The elderly simply as fellow human beings. But we have to recognize this fact: this is not a demographic "bulge" in the python. This is a fundamentally changed situation. This is, truly, unlike anything we have ever seen in human history. How does our economy, our political structure, our culture, respond? And how are our economy, our political structure, our culture, affected by this?
People are living longer than ever before.
This is neither a surprise, nor as elementary as it may first appear. One of the fundamentals of society was that it changed, however slowly, as the elderly died off and the young took positions of responsibility. But in politics, at least, the elderly tend to be very conservative, and tend to vote in larger numbers. That affects politics very directly.
But there's also the spiritual, or psychological, if you prefer, aspect to this. What do we do with all these people? The average age in America is going up, rapidly. I know individuals who have survived multiple heart attacks and heart surgeries. Years ago, they would have been long dead. Now they are living into their 70s, 80s, 90s. This is an economic problem, too. When do we force them "out of the way" to make way for younger workers? Should we force them? Should we even encourage their retirement?
There are other effects, as well. This is the unacknowledged issue that will be at the root of most others. The elderly who don't relinguish control to the young; the elderly who demand resources from the society; the elderly who deserve our respect and care; the elderly who have much to teach us, if we will learn. The elderly simply as fellow human beings. But we have to recognize this fact: this is not a demographic "bulge" in the python. This is a fundamentally changed situation. This is, truly, unlike anything we have ever seen in human history. How does our economy, our political structure, our culture, respond? And how are our economy, our political structure, our culture, affected by this?
Good times are comin', but they're sure comin' slow....
As Lord Acton said, power corrupts.
The International Committee of the Red Cross has charged in confidential reports to the United States government that the American military has intentionally used psychological and sometimes physical coercion "tantamount to torture" on prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
The finding that the handling of prisoners detained and interrogated at Guantánamo amounted to torture came after a visit by a Red Cross inspection team that spent most of last June in Guantánamo.
The team of humanitarian workers, which included experienced medical personnel, also asserted that some doctors and other medical workers at Guantánamo were participating in planning for interrogations, in what the report called "a flagrant violation of medical ethics."
Doctors and medical personnel conveyed information about prisoners' mental health and vulnerabilities to interrogators, the report said, sometimes directly, but usually through a group called the Behavioral Science Consultation Team, or B.S.C.T. The team, known informally as Biscuit, is composed of psychologists and psychological workers who advise the interrogators, the report said.
As this is an Administration guided by ethics, I'd hate to see what an unethical Administration would do to this country.
The International Committee of the Red Cross has charged in confidential reports to the United States government that the American military has intentionally used psychological and sometimes physical coercion "tantamount to torture" on prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
The finding that the handling of prisoners detained and interrogated at Guantánamo amounted to torture came after a visit by a Red Cross inspection team that spent most of last June in Guantánamo.
The team of humanitarian workers, which included experienced medical personnel, also asserted that some doctors and other medical workers at Guantánamo were participating in planning for interrogations, in what the report called "a flagrant violation of medical ethics."
Doctors and medical personnel conveyed information about prisoners' mental health and vulnerabilities to interrogators, the report said, sometimes directly, but usually through a group called the Behavioral Science Consultation Team, or B.S.C.T. The team, known informally as Biscuit, is composed of psychologists and psychological workers who advise the interrogators, the report said.
As this is an Administration guided by ethics, I'd hate to see what an unethical Administration would do to this country.
More Social Security
Don't have time to go into great detail, but a lot of people wrote in arguing that social security benefits only went up by a COLA every year. This is true and not true. Initial benefit levels upon retirement for any particular lifetime income path increase every year according to a wage index. Then, each year, your benefits go up by a COLA. Wages tend to grow faster than the cost of living, so this initial level grows faster than the COLA...
Monday, November 29, 2004
CNN reports that bin Laden aide al-Zawahiri continues to threaten the US:
****
"You can elect Bush, Kerry or Satan himself, it doesn't matter to us," he said. "What's important to us is the U.S. policies toward Muslims."
Al-Zawahiri said the United States was "playing the game of elections" along with Afghanistan and Iraq.
Both U.S. candidates, he said, were fighting over "the acceptance of Israel. This proves there is no reasoning with America, but to force them to accept our position by force."
CIA officials were analyzing the tape to assess its authenticity, a spokesman said.
*****
What is the U.S. policy towards Muslims? And now that our election is over, even Pakistan has announced that it's no longer looking for bin Laden. Will he become the new Loch Ness monster? Will future generations wonder whether or not he even existed? And, yes, I do think that bin Laden uses Israel rather cynically. As does Bush.
****
"You can elect Bush, Kerry or Satan himself, it doesn't matter to us," he said. "What's important to us is the U.S. policies toward Muslims."
Al-Zawahiri said the United States was "playing the game of elections" along with Afghanistan and Iraq.
Both U.S. candidates, he said, were fighting over "the acceptance of Israel. This proves there is no reasoning with America, but to force them to accept our position by force."
CIA officials were analyzing the tape to assess its authenticity, a spokesman said.
*****
What is the U.S. policy towards Muslims? And now that our election is over, even Pakistan has announced that it's no longer looking for bin Laden. Will he become the new Loch Ness monster? Will future generations wonder whether or not he even existed? And, yes, I do think that bin Laden uses Israel rather cynically. As does Bush.
Who do you say I am?
The question of identity. How do we know who we are? Where does our "sense of self," come from? Not in the Western philosophical tradition sense, but in the everyday, walking around talking, sense. Phenomena, but not phenomenology (there is a time and place for everything). Here is what's on offer.
Identity comes from those around us, and who we surround ourselves with. We identify with our group, and shape our personal identities from the group we accept, and which accepts us. When that group betrays signs of change in its identity, we either accept it, or are threatened by it. Witness the animosity last night as one example. Trolls are the other. They're identity is formed either in argument with others here, or just in opposition. Or, probably more correctly, they are threatened by our community, since it calls into question their community, and their identity. When identity is threatened, we attack.
So some are threatened by gay marriage; or identify with religious fundamentalism; or even with materialism, logical positivism, what-have-you. It can be understood in terms of threat response, or identity acceptance. Some think it explains the roots of violence in the world: "we" are attacked, and "we" must respond, in order to remain who "we" are. Verbal or physical, it's all a matter of degree.
This is the scenario being painted now, between the "red" and the "blue" states: us v. them, where "they" are against everything "we" stand for. But the question for us is: who are we? Democrats? Progressives? Liberals? Right (as in correct, true, sounder in our thinking than "they" are?). It is our identity that is under challenge. Is there a response better than: "Destroy them. They are the problem?" In the battle over identity, when do we declare victory? When our identity is the only one permitted? Isn't that what we accuse them of wanting to do?
Identity comes from those around us, and who we surround ourselves with. We identify with our group, and shape our personal identities from the group we accept, and which accepts us. When that group betrays signs of change in its identity, we either accept it, or are threatened by it. Witness the animosity last night as one example. Trolls are the other. They're identity is formed either in argument with others here, or just in opposition. Or, probably more correctly, they are threatened by our community, since it calls into question their community, and their identity. When identity is threatened, we attack.
So some are threatened by gay marriage; or identify with religious fundamentalism; or even with materialism, logical positivism, what-have-you. It can be understood in terms of threat response, or identity acceptance. Some think it explains the roots of violence in the world: "we" are attacked, and "we" must respond, in order to remain who "we" are. Verbal or physical, it's all a matter of degree.
This is the scenario being painted now, between the "red" and the "blue" states: us v. them, where "they" are against everything "we" stand for. But the question for us is: who are we? Democrats? Progressives? Liberals? Right (as in correct, true, sounder in our thinking than "they" are?). It is our identity that is under challenge. Is there a response better than: "Destroy them. They are the problem?" In the battle over identity, when do we declare victory? When our identity is the only one permitted? Isn't that what we accuse them of wanting to do?
Here we go again; It's the economy, stupid.
First off I agree with upyernoz that protesters should absolutely be allowed access to quasi-public spaces such as malls. The proprietors of these malls are shooting themselves in both feet if they think this is the way to deal with harmless street theater protesters (I would have offered them store coupons). Someone seriously needs to sit management down and explain a little public relations to them before the local news decides to do a number on them under the header of Human Interest.
So here I was, reading along as the comments predictably ran into another rehash of the weekend's point/counterpoint debate over the more commercialized aspects of the holiday season, fully intending to get back to work without commenting, until reading the following comment by Hecate (who I still hold dear to my heart):
Can you imagine if, for one month, Americans decided to stop buying anything except necessities?
Yes. As a matter of fact I can clearly imagine what it would be like if Americans decided to stop buying anything except necessities because it actually happened during the week of January 17, 1991.
We were in the middle of a large marketing campaign, clocking in with a response rate of almost 3% (excellent by industry standards) and receiving an average of 5-6 calls an hour from retail stores around the country that we were heavily direct marketing to. So what happened January 17, 1991? Why Gulf War I had just officially begun. Literally as soon as the shooting started, and continuing for roughly a week, you would have thought the phones went unplugged. I actually found myself picking up the receiver to make sure the phone company hadn't shut us off. America sat riveted to their TVs for the better part of a week transfixed on America's first actual, televised, live coverage war. At this moment Hecate's dream of Americans ending all non-essential buying was realized. Unfortunately the bad news turned to worse news as the ripple effects lasted for much longer than that week's buying freeze. Retail stores, shocked by the sudden cessation of consumer buying, responded by running store inventories way down before ordering and remaining lean on inventory and personnel for the remainder of the year. Our amazing pre-attack response rate of 3% dropped overnight to less than 1/10th of a percent. Shortly thereafter several of our largest customers and distributors, the supposedly "safe" accounts (Federated Dept Stores among them) started filing bankruptcy on us. Other good accounts significantly delayed and reduced their normal seasonal orders. Before 2000, the previous US record for assets going into bankruptcy was $93.6 billion and the largest previous number of publicly traded companies filing for bankruptcy was 123. And both of these previous records were set in . . . 1991. Coincidence?
Economists can and will argue over what contributed to 1991 being such a banner year for business bankruptcies but I still vividly recall what I witnessed the week our consumer driven economy sat quietly in awe as the bombs dropped. It took well over a year (and a new president) for the economy to get back on its feet.
Imagine if Americans decided to stop buying anything except necessities? Been there. Barely survived it. Many didn't survive it. There has to be a smarter strategy than cutting off our noses to spite our faces.
[Update: 11:10pm] So I leave for a few hours, uncertain what trouble I've started, and return to a comments section that makes me feel as if I'm viewing my post through a kaleidoscope. I got as far as this comment by Fielding Mellish before I felt I should clarify a few things:
The message "buy stuff because it's good for the country" has the same resonance with me as the message "get along with Republicans because it's good for the country." None.
First, I understand that Federated was being set up to be fleeced even before the original Gulf war freeze (it made a handy cover) and I am aware that the moribund economy that followed gave a needed boost to Clinton. It only goes to follow that the party on the outside benefits when things go sour. But we have to be more sophisticated than curing the disease through blood-letting. I'm suggesting economic reverse kemo-therapy. Starve the obvious Republican connected companies, not our natural allies in your local markets. So you're not going to buy dumb gifts. No problem. Are you going to buy a card? Would it be worth an extra $2 to know it was hand made by someone in your state? I stay very conscious of who, where and how much I spend regardless of whether it's food and clothing related or if it's stupid Kotchkies. Note: Anyone incurring needless debt right now needs their head examined.
We can make a difference, but as Wyatt Urp once said, "[A]lways take the extra part of a second to aim."
So here I was, reading along as the comments predictably ran into another rehash of the weekend's point/counterpoint debate over the more commercialized aspects of the holiday season, fully intending to get back to work without commenting, until reading the following comment by Hecate (who I still hold dear to my heart):
Can you imagine if, for one month, Americans decided to stop buying anything except necessities?
Yes. As a matter of fact I can clearly imagine what it would be like if Americans decided to stop buying anything except necessities because it actually happened during the week of January 17, 1991.
We were in the middle of a large marketing campaign, clocking in with a response rate of almost 3% (excellent by industry standards) and receiving an average of 5-6 calls an hour from retail stores around the country that we were heavily direct marketing to. So what happened January 17, 1991? Why Gulf War I had just officially begun. Literally as soon as the shooting started, and continuing for roughly a week, you would have thought the phones went unplugged. I actually found myself picking up the receiver to make sure the phone company hadn't shut us off. America sat riveted to their TVs for the better part of a week transfixed on America's first actual, televised, live coverage war. At this moment Hecate's dream of Americans ending all non-essential buying was realized. Unfortunately the bad news turned to worse news as the ripple effects lasted for much longer than that week's buying freeze. Retail stores, shocked by the sudden cessation of consumer buying, responded by running store inventories way down before ordering and remaining lean on inventory and personnel for the remainder of the year. Our amazing pre-attack response rate of 3% dropped overnight to less than 1/10th of a percent. Shortly thereafter several of our largest customers and distributors, the supposedly "safe" accounts (Federated Dept Stores among them) started filing bankruptcy on us. Other good accounts significantly delayed and reduced their normal seasonal orders. Before 2000, the previous US record for assets going into bankruptcy was $93.6 billion and the largest previous number of publicly traded companies filing for bankruptcy was 123. And both of these previous records were set in . . . 1991. Coincidence?
Economists can and will argue over what contributed to 1991 being such a banner year for business bankruptcies but I still vividly recall what I witnessed the week our consumer driven economy sat quietly in awe as the bombs dropped. It took well over a year (and a new president) for the economy to get back on its feet.
Imagine if Americans decided to stop buying anything except necessities? Been there. Barely survived it. Many didn't survive it. There has to be a smarter strategy than cutting off our noses to spite our faces.
[Update: 11:10pm] So I leave for a few hours, uncertain what trouble I've started, and return to a comments section that makes me feel as if I'm viewing my post through a kaleidoscope. I got as far as this comment by Fielding Mellish before I felt I should clarify a few things:
The message "buy stuff because it's good for the country" has the same resonance with me as the message "get along with Republicans because it's good for the country." None.
First, I understand that Federated was being set up to be fleeced even before the original Gulf war freeze (it made a handy cover) and I am aware that the moribund economy that followed gave a needed boost to Clinton. It only goes to follow that the party on the outside benefits when things go sour. But we have to be more sophisticated than curing the disease through blood-letting. I'm suggesting economic reverse kemo-therapy. Starve the obvious Republican connected companies, not our natural allies in your local markets. So you're not going to buy dumb gifts. No problem. Are you going to buy a card? Would it be worth an extra $2 to know it was hand made by someone in your state? I stay very conscious of who, where and how much I spend regardless of whether it's food and clothing related or if it's stupid Kotchkies. Note: Anyone incurring needless debt right now needs their head examined.
We can make a difference, but as Wyatt Urp once said, "[A]lways take the extra part of a second to aim."
Soliciting Nothing
It's a good thing that John Ashcroft fixed that pesky terrorism problem so that police now have time to arrest four people for soliciting nothing.
As it happens, this story comes from my home town. A friend of mine, Hydro, forwarded me an email from Anna White, one of the arrestees. Anna tells her story as follows (I've edited the email, but its still pretty long... sorry):
Personally, I have mixed feelings about the merits of "Buy Nothing Day," but for me it's a free speech issue. Some States, including New Jersey and Pennsylvania (both of which are only a short drive from the Christiana Mall) have ruled that malls are the modern equivalent of a public square and ruled that rights to free speech must be respected in shopping centers that are open to the general public. Delaware, as far as I can tell, has not. (check out the links under the heading "Rights to Petition in Private Malls and Quasi-Public Places" for more information) Even though the Delaware Supreme Court has not ruled whether free speech exists in private shopping malls, we can still complain about the treatment of the White sisters by the Christiana Mall.
The Wilmington News Journal (the local Delaware newspaper) also picked up the story of Anna and her sisters. Letters to the editor concerning the arrest can be submitted online here (scroll down).
As it happens, this story comes from my home town. A friend of mine, Hydro, forwarded me an email from Anna White, one of the arrestees. Anna tells her story as follows (I've edited the email, but its still pretty long... sorry):
For the past five or so years, we have marked Buy Nothing Day with a trip to our local shopping mecca, Christiana Mall. Instead of shopping lists and credit cards, we bring humor, ideas, and theatre. Early on we dressed up as Santa Clause and his elves, wearing signs like "More Joy, Less Stuff!" "Santa needs a Break" and "Unplug the Christmas Machine" and carrying a sack of alternative gift ideas (our Santa was once kicked out of the mall for "impersonating Santa Claus"). Two years ago, we decided it was time for a new act. And thus, the product NOTHING was born.
The act was simple. We dressed up as marketers for the product NOTHING. We wore black pants and white t-shirts with the slogan "NOTHING What you've been looking for!" on the front and "Ask me about NOTHING" on the back. Key to costumes were big shopping bags labeled "NOTHING" and "FREE SAMPLES". To top off the costume, we wore the season-appropriate Santa hats.
...
While shoppers have been overwhelmingly positive toward our little act, mall management has not. Each year, very soon after entering the mall, security guards begin to trail us. Usually after 10-15 minutes they surround us and try to make us leave, at which point we argue that we are not violating the law or any of their policies. They in turn accuse us of "soliciting" to which we reply that we're "soliciting nothing." This never fails to elicit a detailed discourse over the definition of soliciting.
...
This year, just like others, a security guard began following us as we made our way down the crowded mall corridor from JCPenny's towards Lord & Taylor giving away samples of NOTHING. In front of Lord & Taylor, a posse of five or so security guards were waiting for us. They asked us what we were doing. We explained that we were promoting NOTHING. They told us that we were soliciting "something" and would have to leave the mall premises. We asked the head of the mall's security to clarify exactly what we were soliciting, to which he replied, "You are soliciting a reaction from people." (One year, during a different Buy Nothing Action, we were accused of no less than "soliciting ideas.")
The standard conversation about soliciting ensued and the state police were once again called in to help deal with the situation. This year, a small army of mall security and state police told us that we were not allowed to even carry the shopping bags that said "FREE SAMPLES NOTHING" on them or we would be arrested. Only the t-shirts and Santa hats were permissible. While we felt that the order was completely ridiculous, we also had not come to the mall that day to be arrested, so we agreed to take the bags out of the mall. Terri Maurer-Carter, who had come with us to shoot footage for a local public access television station was told that she was not allowed to have a videocamera in the mall and would be arrested as well if she did not leave.
...
The three of us headed off to our car, with Terri and another friend trailing behind. Just as we were walking through the parking lot in front of one of entrances to JCPenny's (but still far from our car), a police van swerved around in front of us and another in back of us. We were surrounded by policemen who told us we were under arrest for failing to obey their orders to leave the mall. We tried to explain that that was what we were trying to do, but they were already putting metal handcuffs on us and warning us not to resist arrest. At the same time, our friend with the video camera, was being arrested by another set of police officers.
As we were being arrested, we shouted out to mall patrons that we were being arrested for promoting NOTHING and loudly decried the lack of freedom of speech at the mall. As the police drove us to the other side of the mall to be processed, our driver informed us that we needed to study freedom of speech laws a bit more, because "they don't apply on private property."
...
The police took Polaroid mug shots of each of us, complete with our Santa hats and NOTHING t-shirts. We were told we were being charged with "criminal trespassing" and given an arraignment date of January 15, 2005. After being fingerprinted, processed, and given a document banning us from the mall for a period of six months, we were told we could leave. We asked how we could get to our cars without violating mall rules once again. The police actually instructed us to walk through the mall, "FREE SAMPLES NOTHING" bags and all, to get to the mall entrance close to our car, basically the same exact thing that we had been doing when they had arrested us. But whatever.
...
Our small action and the drastic response to it raises a variety of important questions and issues, such as: What is so very dangerous about a humorous promotion of purchasing NOTHING? In an era of declining public spaces and the rise of malls as the new "town centers" (and many actually naming themselves such), should not "freedom of speech" extend to these quasi-public commercial spaces? Why are taxpayer-funded state police protecting private commercial interests from citizens' free speech? How much longer can the devastating environmental and social impact of voracious American-style consumerism be ignored?
Personally, I have mixed feelings about the merits of "Buy Nothing Day," but for me it's a free speech issue. Some States, including New Jersey and Pennsylvania (both of which are only a short drive from the Christiana Mall) have ruled that malls are the modern equivalent of a public square and ruled that rights to free speech must be respected in shopping centers that are open to the general public. Delaware, as far as I can tell, has not. (check out the links under the heading "Rights to Petition in Private Malls and Quasi-Public Places" for more information) Even though the Delaware Supreme Court has not ruled whether free speech exists in private shopping malls, we can still complain about the treatment of the White sisters by the Christiana Mall.
The Wilmington News Journal (the local Delaware newspaper) also picked up the story of Anna and her sisters. Letters to the editor concerning the arrest can be submitted online here (scroll down).
Social Insecurity
Big Media Matt is right - the first graph here is all you really need to know about the social security 'crisis.' Even once it goes "bankrupt" - only having the money to pay out roughly 75% of promised benefits assuming the general fund isn't tapped, the amount of benefits that can be paid out will still be greater in real terms than the benefits paid today. The reason this happens is that social security benefit levels don't just rise with cost of living increases, they rise with general standard of living increases as time goes up. Productivity goes up, wages go up, benefits go up.
So, even if no changes are made at all the system is currently projected to pay out a higher level of benefits in real dollar terms than it does now. Clearly this rather odd benefit-level curve cries out for some tweaking, and such tweaking could indeed be called "reducing prommised benefit levels," but the point is that such changes are hardly catastrophic.
So, even if no changes are made at all the system is currently projected to pay out a higher level of benefits in real dollar terms than it does now. Clearly this rather odd benefit-level curve cries out for some tweaking, and such tweaking could indeed be called "reducing prommised benefit levels," but the point is that such changes are hardly catastrophic.
Values
Wait. I'm confused. Cokie and the gang told us this "values" stuff was all about "preserving the institution of marriage" and noble things like that. Apparently, it's about banning gay people from baseball games. Or something. I'm really not sure.
Actually, shame on that reporter for writing that paragraph. Cass is a bigot, but I imagine even he is smart enough to understand that "outlawing gay marriage" will not be enough to stop gay people from appearingneglectto ask the obvious question - what does Cass want the government do about "homosexuals showing affection for one another" at baseball games?
-
Cass wants a U.S. Supreme Court that will outlaw abortion and gay marriage. "Do you want to take your children to a National League baseball game for instance and have homosexuals showing affection to one another? I don't want my kids to see that," he said.
Actually, shame on that reporter for writing that paragraph. Cass is a bigot, but I imagine even he is smart enough to understand that "outlawing gay marriage" will not be enough to stop gay people from appearingneglectto ask the obvious question - what does Cass want the government do about "homosexuals showing affection for one another" at baseball games?
Radical Clerics
Frank Rich has some interesting things to say about censorship.
*****
It's beginning to look a lot like "Groundhog Day." Ever since 22 percent of the country's voters said on Nov. 2 that they cared most about "moral values," opportunistic ayatollahs on the right have been working overtime to inflate this nonmandate into a landslide by ginning up cultural controversies that might induce censorship by a compliant F.C.C. and, failing that, self-censorship by TV networks. Seizing on a single overhyped poll result, they exaggerate their clout, hoping to grab power over the culture.
The mainstream press, itself in love with the "moral values" story line and traumatized by the visual exaggerations of the red-blue map, is too cowed to challenge the likes of the American Family Association. So are politicians of both parties. It took a British publication, The Economist, to point out that the percentage of American voters citing moral and ethical values as their prime concern is actually down from 2000 (35 percent) and 1996 (40 percent).
*****
Why are the Democrats not pointing this out? Are they so terrified that a Racist Radical Cleric like Dobson or Fallwell will call them "unchristian" that they can't even point out facts? Let's be clear about this. In 1996, when 40 percent of Americans based their votes on "moral values," they re-elected Bill Clinton. Now that the number of Americans who base their votes on "moral values" has been cut almost in half, they selected George Bush. And this gives the Racist Radical Clerics the ability to force their "religion" down everyone's throats?
And where's the discussion over what "moral values" means to different people? I've never thought that lining your own pocket at the public's expense, lying America into a war, or stirring up hate against minority groups were American values.
Oh, and Rich notes one very telling statistic: "Desperate Housewives is hardly a blue-state phenomenon. A hit everywhere, it is even a bigger hit in Oklahoma City than it is in Los Angeles, bigger in Kansas City than it is in New York."
*****
It's beginning to look a lot like "Groundhog Day." Ever since 22 percent of the country's voters said on Nov. 2 that they cared most about "moral values," opportunistic ayatollahs on the right have been working overtime to inflate this nonmandate into a landslide by ginning up cultural controversies that might induce censorship by a compliant F.C.C. and, failing that, self-censorship by TV networks. Seizing on a single overhyped poll result, they exaggerate their clout, hoping to grab power over the culture.
The mainstream press, itself in love with the "moral values" story line and traumatized by the visual exaggerations of the red-blue map, is too cowed to challenge the likes of the American Family Association. So are politicians of both parties. It took a British publication, The Economist, to point out that the percentage of American voters citing moral and ethical values as their prime concern is actually down from 2000 (35 percent) and 1996 (40 percent).
*****
Why are the Democrats not pointing this out? Are they so terrified that a Racist Radical Cleric like Dobson or Fallwell will call them "unchristian" that they can't even point out facts? Let's be clear about this. In 1996, when 40 percent of Americans based their votes on "moral values," they re-elected Bill Clinton. Now that the number of Americans who base their votes on "moral values" has been cut almost in half, they selected George Bush. And this gives the Racist Radical Clerics the ability to force their "religion" down everyone's throats?
And where's the discussion over what "moral values" means to different people? I've never thought that lining your own pocket at the public's expense, lying America into a war, or stirring up hate against minority groups were American values.
Oh, and Rich notes one very telling statistic: "Desperate Housewives is hardly a blue-state phenomenon. A hit everywhere, it is even a bigger hit in Oklahoma City than it is in Los Angeles, bigger in Kansas City than it is in New York."
Sunday, November 28, 2004
First Sunday of Advent
One of the perils of guest-blogging is abusing your host's hospitality; but then guest-bloggers are invited for what else they bring to the party. So, it is the First Sunday of Advent, which means something.
In the world, that means precious little; frantic for Christmas to come and go, the world is in a hurry. To the liturgical church, though, Christmas doesn't begin until December 24th, and it doesn't end until January 6th, on Epiphany. And before it ends, it will include two days of death: the Massacre of the Innocents, and the first Christian Martyr, St. Stephen. I mention that because Advent is actually akin to Lent, not to "December" on the American calendar. It is a time of preparation for shattering change, not for celebration of consumer excess.
When I had a church, I used to include the following reading on the First Sunday of Advent, whenever I could. Mostly, I wanted to share it with you, too. But it highlights a distinction I think needs to be made, between Christianity, and Christendom. It's an old distinction, but, like the Massacre of the Innocents and the death of Stephen right after Christmas, little acknowledged or its importance understood.
As I type this, I'm listening to a Christmas mix of my own devising, and Joni Mitchell is singing "River." That's the tone I'm going for, if it helps.
This text means many things, but for my purposes here it means the point where Christendom fails, and Christianity continues; continues into something unknown and frightening. Some have complained here that "liberal" Christians don't speak enough about their beliefs; others think religion has no place in politics. In El Salvador, at one time, religion was politics.
This is from Memory of Fire: Volume III, Century of the Wind, by Eduardo Galeano, tr. Cedric Balfrage, Pantheon, 1988.
"ARCHBISHOP Romero offers her a chair. Marianela prefers to talk standing up. She always comes for others, but this time Marianela comes for herself. Marianela Garda Vilas, attorney for the tortured and disappeared of EI Sal-vador, does not come this time to ask the archbishop's solidarity with one of the victims of D' Aubuisson, Captain Torch, who burns your body with a blowtorch, or of some other military horror specialist. Marianela doesn't come to ask help for anyone else's investigation or denunciation. This time she has something personal to say to him. As mildly as she can, she tells him that the police have kid-napped her, bound, beat, humiliated, stripped her-and that they raped her. She tells it without tears or agitation, with her usual calm, but Archbishop Romero has never before heard in Marianela's voice these vibrations of hatred, echoes of disgust, calls for vengeance. When Marianela finishes, the archbishop, astounded, falls silent too.
"After a long silence, he begins to tell her that the church does not hate or have enemies, that every infamy and every action against God forms part of a divine order, that criminals are also our brothers and must be prayed for, that one must forgive one's persecutors, one must accept pain, one must. . . Suddenly, Archbishop Romero stops.
"He lowers his glance, buries his head in his hands. He shakes his head, denying it all, and says: 'No, I don't want to know.'
" '1 don't want to know,' he says, and his voice cracks.
"Archbishop Romero, who always gives advice and comfort, is weeping like a child without mother or home. Archbishop Romero, who always gives assurances, the tranquilizing assurance of a neutral God who knows all and embraces all-Archbishop Romero doubts.
"Romero weeps and doubts and Marianela strokes his head."
This is the First Sunday of Advent. In Christianity, we are told to watch. Watch for what, is always the question we don't quite want to contemplate
In the world, that means precious little; frantic for Christmas to come and go, the world is in a hurry. To the liturgical church, though, Christmas doesn't begin until December 24th, and it doesn't end until January 6th, on Epiphany. And before it ends, it will include two days of death: the Massacre of the Innocents, and the first Christian Martyr, St. Stephen. I mention that because Advent is actually akin to Lent, not to "December" on the American calendar. It is a time of preparation for shattering change, not for celebration of consumer excess.
When I had a church, I used to include the following reading on the First Sunday of Advent, whenever I could. Mostly, I wanted to share it with you, too. But it highlights a distinction I think needs to be made, between Christianity, and Christendom. It's an old distinction, but, like the Massacre of the Innocents and the death of Stephen right after Christmas, little acknowledged or its importance understood.
As I type this, I'm listening to a Christmas mix of my own devising, and Joni Mitchell is singing "River." That's the tone I'm going for, if it helps.
This text means many things, but for my purposes here it means the point where Christendom fails, and Christianity continues; continues into something unknown and frightening. Some have complained here that "liberal" Christians don't speak enough about their beliefs; others think religion has no place in politics. In El Salvador, at one time, religion was politics.
This is from Memory of Fire: Volume III, Century of the Wind, by Eduardo Galeano, tr. Cedric Balfrage, Pantheon, 1988.
"ARCHBISHOP Romero offers her a chair. Marianela prefers to talk standing up. She always comes for others, but this time Marianela comes for herself. Marianela Garda Vilas, attorney for the tortured and disappeared of EI Sal-vador, does not come this time to ask the archbishop's solidarity with one of the victims of D' Aubuisson, Captain Torch, who burns your body with a blowtorch, or of some other military horror specialist. Marianela doesn't come to ask help for anyone else's investigation or denunciation. This time she has something personal to say to him. As mildly as she can, she tells him that the police have kid-napped her, bound, beat, humiliated, stripped her-and that they raped her. She tells it without tears or agitation, with her usual calm, but Archbishop Romero has never before heard in Marianela's voice these vibrations of hatred, echoes of disgust, calls for vengeance. When Marianela finishes, the archbishop, astounded, falls silent too.
"After a long silence, he begins to tell her that the church does not hate or have enemies, that every infamy and every action against God forms part of a divine order, that criminals are also our brothers and must be prayed for, that one must forgive one's persecutors, one must accept pain, one must. . . Suddenly, Archbishop Romero stops.
"He lowers his glance, buries his head in his hands. He shakes his head, denying it all, and says: 'No, I don't want to know.'
" '1 don't want to know,' he says, and his voice cracks.
"Archbishop Romero, who always gives advice and comfort, is weeping like a child without mother or home. Archbishop Romero, who always gives assurances, the tranquilizing assurance of a neutral God who knows all and embraces all-Archbishop Romero doubts.
"Romero weeps and doubts and Marianela strokes his head."
This is the First Sunday of Advent. In Christianity, we are told to watch. Watch for what, is always the question we don't quite want to contemplate
Man Date
Most people don't think George is getting much hot man-on-man action after all. Weird -- I swear Cokie and the gang told me he was.
-
BLITZER: Does President Bush have a mandate to advance the Republican agenda? Twenty-nine percent of the respondents in this CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll said yes. Sixty-three percent said no.
He Only Hits Me Because He Loves Me
Usually, I try not to step on others' posts by posting my own too soon after theirs. Upyernoz and I just posted threads, but this is too good to keep. Dr. Pendant points to Matthew Gross' discussion of liberals as abused spouses.
**********
Watch Dan Rather apologize for not getting his facts straight, humiliated before the eyes of America, voluntarily undermining his credibility and career of over thirty years. Observe Donna Brazille squirm as she is ridiculed by Bay Buchanan, and pronounced irrelevant and nearly non-existent. Listen as Donna and Nancy Pelosi and Senator Charles Schumer take to the airwaves saying that they have to go back to the drawing board and learn from their mistakes and try to be better, more likable, more appealing, have a stronger message, speak to morality. Watch them awkwardly quote the bible, trying to speak the new language of America. Surf the blogs, and read the comments of dismayed, discombobulated, confused individuals trying to figure out what they did wrong. Hear the cacophony of voices, crying out, “Why did they beat me?”
And then ask anyone who has ever worked in a domestic violence shelter if they have heard this before.
They will tell you, every single day.
***************
Go. Read the whole thing. E-mail it to everyone you know. It's spot on.
**********
Watch Dan Rather apologize for not getting his facts straight, humiliated before the eyes of America, voluntarily undermining his credibility and career of over thirty years. Observe Donna Brazille squirm as she is ridiculed by Bay Buchanan, and pronounced irrelevant and nearly non-existent. Listen as Donna and Nancy Pelosi and Senator Charles Schumer take to the airwaves saying that they have to go back to the drawing board and learn from their mistakes and try to be better, more likable, more appealing, have a stronger message, speak to morality. Watch them awkwardly quote the bible, trying to speak the new language of America. Surf the blogs, and read the comments of dismayed, discombobulated, confused individuals trying to figure out what they did wrong. Hear the cacophony of voices, crying out, “Why did they beat me?”
And then ask anyone who has ever worked in a domestic violence shelter if they have heard this before.
They will tell you, every single day.
***************
Go. Read the whole thing. E-mail it to everyone you know. It's spot on.
I don't get it
I don't understand why people expect Bush in his second term to "revert to the moderate mainstream." He's given no sign of it. If anything, the signs have been pointing farther to the right since election day. And yet there seems to be this stubborn faith that Bush will choose the reasonable option even though it often directly contradicts his public pronouncements.
For a President who's supposed appeal is that "you know where he stands" on issues, why are so many Reagan-era conservatives like Edward Luttwak hinting of their hope for a more moderate Bush in his second term?
For a President who's supposed appeal is that "you know where he stands" on issues, why are so many Reagan-era conservatives like Edward Luttwak hinting of their hope for a more moderate Bush in his second term?
Who Said Condi's Area of Expertise Was Irrelevant
Today's NYT asks the question:
*****
So has a Ukrainian political standoff escalated to a Russian-American confrontation out of the cold war, "captive nations" and all?
Mr. Putin does appear to be insisting that the lines defining Moscow's sphere influence in eastern Europe - which have been retreating steadily over the last 15 years - will hold firm at Ukraine's western border.
Pointing to the horrors of the past, Western leaders believe that democracy itself best guarantees their own security, and Russia's. Mr. Putin appears to think that democracy is good, but that control - within Russia and over Russia's closest neighbors - is better.
So while there are no Russian tanks massed at the border and no danger of nuclear bombers flying, as there were in the cold war crises in Poland, East Germany, Budapest and Prague, there is a profound east-west gulf nonetheless. It is simply that the character of this divide is entirely new. In Mr. Putin's view, the outcome of the vote in Ukraine was "perfectly clear" - 49.46 percent for Prime Minister Viktor F. Yanukovich, President Leonid D. Kuchma's handpicked successor, and 46.61 percent for the opposition candidate, Viktor A. Yushchenko. Mr. Kuchma certified the results despite warnings from Europe and the United States that to do so would be a mistake. Mediation attempts, led by Javier Solana of the European Union, began in Kiev on Friday, with Mr. Kuchma and the two candidates agreeing to keep talking as thousands from each camp squared off in the streets.
********
And, here it is, just on cue, the return of the Cold War! Hmmm, who told Mr. Putin that our armed forces were already over-extended in Iraq?
*****
So has a Ukrainian political standoff escalated to a Russian-American confrontation out of the cold war, "captive nations" and all?
Mr. Putin does appear to be insisting that the lines defining Moscow's sphere influence in eastern Europe - which have been retreating steadily over the last 15 years - will hold firm at Ukraine's western border.
Pointing to the horrors of the past, Western leaders believe that democracy itself best guarantees their own security, and Russia's. Mr. Putin appears to think that democracy is good, but that control - within Russia and over Russia's closest neighbors - is better.
So while there are no Russian tanks massed at the border and no danger of nuclear bombers flying, as there were in the cold war crises in Poland, East Germany, Budapest and Prague, there is a profound east-west gulf nonetheless. It is simply that the character of this divide is entirely new. In Mr. Putin's view, the outcome of the vote in Ukraine was "perfectly clear" - 49.46 percent for Prime Minister Viktor F. Yanukovich, President Leonid D. Kuchma's handpicked successor, and 46.61 percent for the opposition candidate, Viktor A. Yushchenko. Mr. Kuchma certified the results despite warnings from Europe and the United States that to do so would be a mistake. Mediation attempts, led by Javier Solana of the European Union, began in Kiev on Friday, with Mr. Kuchma and the two candidates agreeing to keep talking as thousands from each camp squared off in the streets.
********
And, here it is, just on cue, the return of the Cold War! Hmmm, who told Mr. Putin that our armed forces were already over-extended in Iraq?
At least we can be comforted that
"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."--John Ashcroft
"Number of U.S. terror trials brought before a jury since September 11, 2001: 1
Number of terrorism convictions resulting: 2
Number of them dismissed due to a 'pattern of mistakes' by the prosecution: 2"
Source: Harper's Index.
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.....
"Number of U.S. terror trials brought before a jury since September 11, 2001: 1
Number of terrorism convictions resulting: 2
Number of them dismissed due to a 'pattern of mistakes' by the prosecution: 2"
Source: Harper's Index.
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.....
Rep. Hostettler Hates America
Believes he is above the law. Thinks that if he doesn't like a court decision then he and congress can tell them to fuck off.
Saturday, November 27, 2004
"Whooee, the dam is bust!"--Churchy LaFemme
To prevent even the appearance of impediments to the free flow of anger, anxiety, and anticipation of better times ahead, an early evening late night open thread, for your posting pleasure.
Remember, Xmas is just around the corner. Time to start warming up: "Good King Winklehof looks out, on his feets uneven...."
Remember, Xmas is just around the corner. Time to start warming up: "Good King Winklehof looks out, on his feets uneven...."
Things fall apart....
Reading the newest Harper's (December issue; not on-line yet, more's the pity). A review by Greg Grandin of Niall Ferguson's Colossus: The Price of America's Empire. According to Grandin, there's quite a price to be paid.
Ferguson's argument is that we (Americans) just aren't ruthless enough, yet. Which means, yes, we could have won in Vietnam, if we'd just had the belly for it. Now America faces "the growing power of liberalism" (don't you all feel better now?), which prevents us from exercising our true authority as the benevolent Empire the Romans...oh, sorry, the British, once were.
How to overcome this and other obstacles to the Pax Americana? Apparently by reining in the deficit by cutting Social Security and Medicare spending. The "less privileged" (Grandin's words, now) would be made: "leaner and meaner, more willing to shoulder the burdens of empire. Just as poverty drove the Irish and Scots into Britain's colonial army, 'illegal immigrants, the jobless,' and 'convicts' could help fill the ranks of Washington's imperial legion." (Apparently Jonathan Swift and Jeremiah were both wrong: poverty is good for sovereigns!). "Ferguson is especially enthusiastic that African Americans might become 'the Celts of the American Empire.' And once he dispense with what here passes for social democracy, he sets his sights on political democracy. Successful empires, Ferguson writes, require 'the resolve of the masters and the consent of the subjects.'"
According to Grandin, Ferguson is the "darling of the American media." Great. Wolf Blitzer's late night reading, I suppose. Makes one glad Bush isn't much of a reader; but he's surrounded by people who are, and who would take this half-baked crock of "thought" seriously. Which is what worries me. The "fringe" is moving more and more toward the center; which means, indeed, that the center cannot hold.
Ferguson's argument is that we (Americans) just aren't ruthless enough, yet. Which means, yes, we could have won in Vietnam, if we'd just had the belly for it. Now America faces "the growing power of liberalism" (don't you all feel better now?), which prevents us from exercising our true authority as the benevolent Empire the Romans...oh, sorry, the British, once were.
How to overcome this and other obstacles to the Pax Americana? Apparently by reining in the deficit by cutting Social Security and Medicare spending. The "less privileged" (Grandin's words, now) would be made: "leaner and meaner, more willing to shoulder the burdens of empire. Just as poverty drove the Irish and Scots into Britain's colonial army, 'illegal immigrants, the jobless,' and 'convicts' could help fill the ranks of Washington's imperial legion." (Apparently Jonathan Swift and Jeremiah were both wrong: poverty is good for sovereigns!). "Ferguson is especially enthusiastic that African Americans might become 'the Celts of the American Empire.' And once he dispense with what here passes for social democracy, he sets his sights on political democracy. Successful empires, Ferguson writes, require 'the resolve of the masters and the consent of the subjects.'"
According to Grandin, Ferguson is the "darling of the American media." Great. Wolf Blitzer's late night reading, I suppose. Makes one glad Bush isn't much of a reader; but he's surrounded by people who are, and who would take this half-baked crock of "thought" seriously. Which is what worries me. The "fringe" is moving more and more toward the center; which means, indeed, that the center cannot hold.
Loving Life in an Oil Dependent Country
Atrios, You might want to bring home some drinking water from Spain. Of course, more regulation would be anti-business. And allowing suits from those harmed would be anti-business. What we probably need, in fact, are more tax cuts. For oil tankers. And for SUVs. Heard on the radio while driving home that the captain says this is the first time this ship has had a leak. So, ok, no problems.
A Disgusting Way to Make Money -- Part The Ten Millionth
David E.’s Fablog has a good post about the recent 20/20 program that gave Matthew Shepard's killers a chance to tell "their side" of the story. ABC has clearly decided that there’s money to be made in revisionist history -- at least as long as the victim is gay.
****
THE ART OF HATE
It would be ever so nice to pass over the whole wretched thing in silence. But when a major television network makes as much noise as ABC -- currently in full crow over its twin dramatic hits Desperate Housewives and Lost -- it's pretty hard to avoid the latest puff pastry from its news division, inedible though it may be. The 20/20 "investigation" of the murder of Matthew Shepard, claiming that it's characterization as "Hate Crime" was off-the mark, while offering up all manner of hearsay and obfuscation of the historical record is easily exposed as the piece of shoddy homophobic tripe that it is by the most cursory of Google searches of the original story, not to mention more contemporary reports, and statements of the Shepard family in response to this attack on their brutally murdered son.
Not that ABC cares. It got what it wanted -- a tabloid TV "golden oldie" to fill in the "sensation slot" now that Scott Peterson is no longer news, and the Michael Jackson trial has yet to get underway.
"Ms. Vargas, the striking brunette who replaced Barbara Walters as co-host of the show in September, has wasted no time before taking on a risky story: the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard," notes the New York Times. But it's hard to see the "risk" the presumably intrepid Ms. Vargas ( the new replacement for Roy Cohn's beard) incurred in scrupulously supervised jailhouse interviews with the killers.
*****
Send 20/20 a piece of your mind. If that link gives you an error message, Reader Anthony suggest trying: 2020@abc.com.
****
THE ART OF HATE
It would be ever so nice to pass over the whole wretched thing in silence. But when a major television network makes as much noise as ABC -- currently in full crow over its twin dramatic hits Desperate Housewives and Lost -- it's pretty hard to avoid the latest puff pastry from its news division, inedible though it may be. The 20/20 "investigation" of the murder of Matthew Shepard, claiming that it's characterization as "Hate Crime" was off-the mark, while offering up all manner of hearsay and obfuscation of the historical record is easily exposed as the piece of shoddy homophobic tripe that it is by the most cursory of Google searches of the original story, not to mention more contemporary reports, and statements of the Shepard family in response to this attack on their brutally murdered son.
Not that ABC cares. It got what it wanted -- a tabloid TV "golden oldie" to fill in the "sensation slot" now that Scott Peterson is no longer news, and the Michael Jackson trial has yet to get underway.
"Ms. Vargas, the striking brunette who replaced Barbara Walters as co-host of the show in September, has wasted no time before taking on a risky story: the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard," notes the New York Times. But it's hard to see the "risk" the presumably intrepid Ms. Vargas ( the new replacement for Roy Cohn's beard) incurred in scrupulously supervised jailhouse interviews with the killers.
*****
Send 20/20 a piece of your mind. If that link gives you an error message, Reader Anthony suggest trying: 2020@abc.com.
"Bang bang! You're dead." Feel the rush!
Is it just me or has it become difficult to distinguish between commercials for kids' video games and those for military recruitment?
[Update: 10:45pm Central time. Just returned from a long day away from the computer and read the comments for the first time.]
Well this post certainly turned into a Rorschach test. In retrospect I should have dropped the word "kids'" from my query. I know adults are a significant segment of the gaming audience and I think its inclusion side tracked too much from my central observation, which I was careful to write as a circular thought so as not to automatically suggest causation over correlation. I've just always had a thing for marketing and advertising and so normally when I see commercials out of habit I always try and guess what type of product is being advertised before it's obvious in the commercial. I've just been noticing lately that it's become more difficult to know if I'm watching the latest ad for the Army or Tom Clancy.
For the record I'm not making a statement that I think kids are being primed to kill by militaristic games any more now than when GI Joe ruled the day. I have no doubt that for the better part of human existence boys have played militaristic games. That mankind has also been in pretty much an ongoing militaristic state of affairs this whole time is probably just a wild coincidence.
Toy soldiers. War. Chicken. Egg.
[Update: 10:45pm Central time. Just returned from a long day away from the computer and read the comments for the first time.]
Well this post certainly turned into a Rorschach test. In retrospect I should have dropped the word "kids'" from my query. I know adults are a significant segment of the gaming audience and I think its inclusion side tracked too much from my central observation, which I was careful to write as a circular thought so as not to automatically suggest causation over correlation. I've just always had a thing for marketing and advertising and so normally when I see commercials out of habit I always try and guess what type of product is being advertised before it's obvious in the commercial. I've just been noticing lately that it's become more difficult to know if I'm watching the latest ad for the Army or Tom Clancy.
For the record I'm not making a statement that I think kids are being primed to kill by militaristic games any more now than when GI Joe ruled the day. I have no doubt that for the better part of human existence boys have played militaristic games. That mankind has also been in pretty much an ongoing militaristic state of affairs this whole time is probably just a wild coincidence.
Toy soldiers. War. Chicken. Egg.
Nonsense
So, it's okay to borrow a bunch of money and raise taxes to "save" social security by demolishing it but not okay to borrow not so much money or raise taxes a wee bit to save it for real.
I think we're seeing how this is going to unfold - a combination of putting it off budget and raising taxes on people earning not too much money. The tax increase will be offset by what will be called a "tax cut" - your shiny new personal social security account. So, they'll add a few percentage points onto your income taxes and "cut" your payroll tax, but force you to save the money.
Sane people will try to point out what they're doing, Ted Koppel will declare it oh so complicated, pundits will pontificate that no one really understands all these numbers...
I think we're seeing how this is going to unfold - a combination of putting it off budget and raising taxes on people earning not too much money. The tax increase will be offset by what will be called a "tax cut" - your shiny new personal social security account. So, they'll add a few percentage points onto your income taxes and "cut" your payroll tax, but force you to save the money.
Sane people will try to point out what they're doing, Ted Koppel will declare it oh so complicated, pundits will pontificate that no one really understands all these numbers...
Moral Man and Immoral Society
It appears our host is enjoying Barcelona now, and Hecate is in the house! So an ancillary post to keep us going through the morning (hopefully).
Trying to formulate some thoughts on the subject of the thought of Reinhold Niebuhr. Probably most famous for being the "anonymous" author of the "Serenity Prayer" ("God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other." Yes, Viriginia, that prayer does have an author; and that's the "authorized" version), Niebuhr was on the cutting edge of politics and religion his entire adult life.
He wrote an interesting book on the intersection of the two, Moral Man and Immoral Society. His argument, basically, was that while individuals could be expected to make moral decisions that might affect them adversely ("If someone strikes you, turn and offer him the other cheek also."), societies could not do so because the society cannot make the decision for individuals as to who lives, and who dies. It can only ask for sacrifices that protect the society at large, not sacrifices that preserve a moral ideal.
The duty of a society, in other words, is to insure the survival of its constituency. Niebuhr was arguing against the "Social Gospel," which taught that society itself had to be transformed, not the individual. Niebuhr's argument was that society cannot be expected to fundamentally transform (especially into the "kingdom of God, " where the first are last and the last first), because society cannot violate the fundamental tenet: protect the constituency.
Which brings us to the political question: can we change the world? Or only ourselves? And which one do we start with?
Trying to formulate some thoughts on the subject of the thought of Reinhold Niebuhr. Probably most famous for being the "anonymous" author of the "Serenity Prayer" ("God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other." Yes, Viriginia, that prayer does have an author; and that's the "authorized" version), Niebuhr was on the cutting edge of politics and religion his entire adult life.
He wrote an interesting book on the intersection of the two, Moral Man and Immoral Society. His argument, basically, was that while individuals could be expected to make moral decisions that might affect them adversely ("If someone strikes you, turn and offer him the other cheek also."), societies could not do so because the society cannot make the decision for individuals as to who lives, and who dies. It can only ask for sacrifices that protect the society at large, not sacrifices that preserve a moral ideal.
The duty of a society, in other words, is to insure the survival of its constituency. Niebuhr was arguing against the "Social Gospel," which taught that society itself had to be transformed, not the individual. Niebuhr's argument was that society cannot be expected to fundamentally transform (especially into the "kingdom of God, " where the first are last and the last first), because society cannot violate the fundamental tenet: protect the constituency.
Which brings us to the political question: can we change the world? Or only ourselves? And which one do we start with?
Now, Are the Fundies the Walrus, and the Corporatists the Oysters? Or Is It the Other Way Around?
'The time has come,' the Walrus said,
'To talk of many things:
Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax -
Of cabbages - and kings -
And why the sea is boiling hot -
And whether pigs have wings.'
'But wait a bit,' the Oysters cried,
'Before we have our chat;
For some of us are out of breath,
And all of us are fat!'
'No hurry,' said the Carpenter.
They thanked him much for that.
'A loaf of bread,' the Walrus said,
'Is what we chiefly need:
Pepper and vinegar besides
Are very good indeed -
Now if you're ready, Oysters dear,
We can begin to feed.'
'But not on us!' the Oysters cried,
Turning a little blue.
'After such kindness, that would be
A dismal thing to do!'
'The night is fine,' the Walrus said.
'Do you admire the view?
It was so kind of you to come!
And you are very nice!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'Cut us another slice:
I wish you were not quite so deaf -
I've had to ask you twice!'
'It seems a shame,' the Walrus said,
'To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'The butter's spread too thick!'
'I weep for you,' the Walrus said:
'I deeply sympathize.'
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
'O Oysters,' said the Carpenter,
'You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none -
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.
-L. Carroll
In other words, which group will prevail within the Republican Party? I think that for years the corporatists have believed that they could use the fundies, throw them a bone or two by pretending to want to criminalize abortion or gay sex, and then rape them (and the rest of us) financially. Now, thanks largely to the fact that our lazy media have seized upon the not-exactly-correct meme that the fundies "gave" Lame Duckie this election, the fundies are feeling empowered and are demaning their "due." Will the corporatists continue to play them like the cheap violin that they are? Or will the fundies now play the corporatists? What happens when it becomes clear that the fundie agenda will harm corporate profits? Chat away!
'To talk of many things:
Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax -
Of cabbages - and kings -
And why the sea is boiling hot -
And whether pigs have wings.'
'But wait a bit,' the Oysters cried,
'Before we have our chat;
For some of us are out of breath,
And all of us are fat!'
'No hurry,' said the Carpenter.
They thanked him much for that.
'A loaf of bread,' the Walrus said,
'Is what we chiefly need:
Pepper and vinegar besides
Are very good indeed -
Now if you're ready, Oysters dear,
We can begin to feed.'
'But not on us!' the Oysters cried,
Turning a little blue.
'After such kindness, that would be
A dismal thing to do!'
'The night is fine,' the Walrus said.
'Do you admire the view?
It was so kind of you to come!
And you are very nice!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'Cut us another slice:
I wish you were not quite so deaf -
I've had to ask you twice!'
'It seems a shame,' the Walrus said,
'To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'The butter's spread too thick!'
'I weep for you,' the Walrus said:
'I deeply sympathize.'
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
'O Oysters,' said the Carpenter,
'You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none -
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.
-L. Carroll
In other words, which group will prevail within the Republican Party? I think that for years the corporatists have believed that they could use the fundies, throw them a bone or two by pretending to want to criminalize abortion or gay sex, and then rape them (and the rest of us) financially. Now, thanks largely to the fact that our lazy media have seized upon the not-exactly-correct meme that the fundies "gave" Lame Duckie this election, the fundies are feeling empowered and are demaning their "due." Will the corporatists continue to play them like the cheap violin that they are? Or will the fundies now play the corporatists? What happens when it becomes clear that the fundie agenda will harm corporate profits? Chat away!
Very Slowly
Just because I may believe that there exist some potential abuses of our legal system does not mean I believe that, say, a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages in malpractice suits is a particular good idea.
"This lawsuit threat is stupid" does not equal "I hate our current tort system" any more than "I hate General Motors automobiles" equals "I believe driving should be outlawed."
"This lawsuit threat is stupid" does not equal "I hate our current tort system" any more than "I hate General Motors automobiles" equals "I believe driving should be outlawed."
Bubble Boy
Poor Kristof. There are always these well-meaning liberals doing and saying things he doesn't like. Frequently they're unnamed. Now, it is true of course that there are perhaps some well-meaning liberals who are calling for a troop withdrawal. There are also probably some well-meaning conservatives calling for the same. And, there are also some batshit crazy conservatives who got us into this mess in the first place who still actually have some power and influence over our foreign policy who are... calling for a troop withdrawal.
Now, if you had a column in the Times which would you write about? Unnamed, unspecified "well-meaning liberals" who, as always seems to be the case, are causing serious death and suffering according to Kristof. Or, you know, the people actually responsible.
Now, if you had a column in the Times which would you write about? Unnamed, unspecified "well-meaning liberals" who, as always seems to be the case, are causing serious death and suffering according to Kristof. Or, you know, the people actually responsible.
Friday, November 26, 2004
So this is how it's done....
Posting to a blog for the first time is rather like standing behind the props on a stage or movie set. The first thing you want to do is to pay attention to all the stuff going on that you never see....
But this is not the time for such reflections. Perhaps I should start again (once the agog sensation has passed)
And now for something completely different....
John Dewey (per John Updike, whom I've been reading recently; his "Early Stories" collection, which is really quite good), said God is the marriage of the actual and the ideal. We've had a surfeit of the actual lately, and consequently we're despairing lately of the ideal. Leaving out the religious issues (is this truly the nature of God? Could such a God exist?), can we consider that our "god" (the political/social vision that "calls" us here together) can be seen again, in a marriage of the actual and the ideal? And what actual? and which ideal?'
One more word, from Updike, that might either set the tone or blur the distinctions beyond recognition; a general and genial observation on the American scene: "We have explored, on behalf of all mankind, this paradox: the more matter is outwardly mastered, the more it overwhelms us in our hearts." Are these things right, or wrong?
But this is not the time for such reflections. Perhaps I should start again (once the agog sensation has passed)
And now for something completely different....
John Dewey (per John Updike, whom I've been reading recently; his "Early Stories" collection, which is really quite good), said God is the marriage of the actual and the ideal. We've had a surfeit of the actual lately, and consequently we're despairing lately of the ideal. Leaving out the religious issues (is this truly the nature of God? Could such a God exist?), can we consider that our "god" (the political/social vision that "calls" us here together) can be seen again, in a marriage of the actual and the ideal? And what actual? and which ideal?'
One more word, from Updike, that might either set the tone or blur the distinctions beyond recognition; a general and genial observation on the American scene: "We have explored, on behalf of all mankind, this paradox: the more matter is outwardly mastered, the more it overwhelms us in our hearts." Are these things right, or wrong?
The Red-Blue Trap
This rant is late, but the issue isn’t going away so here goes anyway.
I am really sick of the “blue staters” hostility towards “red staters” thing. It has become the dominant way to frame almost any sociopolitical discussion since the election but it annoys me to no end. I suppose I asked for it, my last post on this site could be construed as a criticism of Texas rather than a criticism of what certain politicians are doing in Texas. And so, I watched as some anti-”morons living in the red state” remarks showed up in the comments. I urge you not to fall into the blue-red trap for the following reasons:
(1) It isn’t true. A county-by-county breakdown of election results reveals there are only 3 red states and 2 blue states (3 if you count DC as a state). The other 45 have some counties that went for Bush and some that went for Kerry. The state-by-state maps are necessary for determining the winner of an election given our screwed-up electoral vote system, but not an accurate reflection of the mood of the country. Even the county-by-county breakdown is misleading. There were Kerry voters in each red county, just as people voted for Bush in the bluest of the blue locales.
(2) It isn’t smart. If liberals want to win in national elections, we should stop gratuitously insulting potential allies simply on the basis of where they live. Put another way, if you thought you felt isolated and alienated from the rest of the country sitting in your blue state on November 3rd, how do you think liberals in Alabama felt? Even in Oklahoma, one of the few “all red” states where Bush won every county, has Alex still fighting the good fight. He should be supported, not insulted. We frankly need more like him. There are liberals all over the country, even in "authentic" places sitting in the middle of the country. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
(3) It’s falling into their trap. The red state-blue state divide "discovered" after the 2004 elections is nothing more than a rebranding of David Brooks’ Bobos in Paradise argument that there are two competing and incompatible cultures in America today. But when a reporter tried to verify the facts underlying Brooks’ thesis they didn’t check out. The post-2004 election version of the "Bobo" theory is on just as flimsy grounds.
The modern conservative movement sells itself as “a revolt of the little people against a high and mighty liberal elite.”. It feeds on a feeling of victimization and resentment that many "red staters" feel right now. And the ability of the right to play into that feeling of victimization rests on the premise of a divided america: us versus them, red versus blue. There is no reason we have to adopt their framework. It only works to the conservatives' advantage anyway.
Besides, as a yeti named Matthew” wisely counseled just after the election:
P.S. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
I am really sick of the “blue staters” hostility towards “red staters” thing. It has become the dominant way to frame almost any sociopolitical discussion since the election but it annoys me to no end. I suppose I asked for it, my last post on this site could be construed as a criticism of Texas rather than a criticism of what certain politicians are doing in Texas. And so, I watched as some anti-”morons living in the red state” remarks showed up in the comments. I urge you not to fall into the blue-red trap for the following reasons:
(1) It isn’t true. A county-by-county breakdown of election results reveals there are only 3 red states and 2 blue states (3 if you count DC as a state). The other 45 have some counties that went for Bush and some that went for Kerry. The state-by-state maps are necessary for determining the winner of an election given our screwed-up electoral vote system, but not an accurate reflection of the mood of the country. Even the county-by-county breakdown is misleading. There were Kerry voters in each red county, just as people voted for Bush in the bluest of the blue locales.
(2) It isn’t smart. If liberals want to win in national elections, we should stop gratuitously insulting potential allies simply on the basis of where they live. Put another way, if you thought you felt isolated and alienated from the rest of the country sitting in your blue state on November 3rd, how do you think liberals in Alabama felt? Even in Oklahoma, one of the few “all red” states where Bush won every county, has Alex still fighting the good fight. He should be supported, not insulted. We frankly need more like him. There are liberals all over the country, even in "authentic" places sitting in the middle of the country. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
(3) It’s falling into their trap. The red state-blue state divide "discovered" after the 2004 elections is nothing more than a rebranding of David Brooks’ Bobos in Paradise argument that there are two competing and incompatible cultures in America today. But when a reporter tried to verify the facts underlying Brooks’ thesis they didn’t check out. The post-2004 election version of the "Bobo" theory is on just as flimsy grounds.
The modern conservative movement sells itself as “a revolt of the little people against a high and mighty liberal elite.”. It feeds on a feeling of victimization and resentment that many "red staters" feel right now. And the ability of the right to play into that feeling of victimization rests on the premise of a divided america: us versus them, red versus blue. There is no reason we have to adopt their framework. It only works to the conservatives' advantage anyway.
Besides, as a yeti named Matthew” wisely counseled just after the election:
A lot of progressives are joking about "moving to Canada" -- myself included . But if you're one of those folks who insists that they are really, really considering it, please: do us all a favor and go. The Republicans will be happy to see you leave, and the rest of us don't really need you hanging around and reinforcing the stereotype that liberals (a) are so unpatriotic that they will ditch their nation in a time of need, and (b) feel entitled to the benefits of a government (like, Canada's) without having to work for it. If you're "totally serious" about moving this time, then pack up and head for the border, compadre. Otherwise, dig in your heels, roll up your sleeves, gird your loins and get ready to fight, like the rest of us intend to do.
P.S. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
Let the holiday shopping season begin!
[Note: I had already outlined most of this post last night, well before Hecate’s post before this. I believe Hecate’s comments on the election to be spot on. Anything else I say to contradict Hecate is merely incidental]
Start here. (Props to my man Willis)
When I first noticed Willis begin this Brand Democrat campaign and that tremendous “since 1794” donkey logo I was so excited I almost, well, we won’t go there. Having been self-employed for most of the last twenty years following a career arc that, with the exception of not being in the music industry, makes the movie Spinal Tap a painfully accurate biography (though fortunately we’ve been entering the coveted and profitable “casino tour“ stage of our Spinal Tap existence) I hold the concepts and power of brand identity close to my heart. As Democrats we suffer too often as intellectuals in a world defined by simple images, and as a brand the Democrats have done little to push a simple, defining distinction between them and the emerging aristocracy/theocracy movement that is the modern GOP. This is a great place to start the re-imaging process. Got Liberty? Got Rights? Gotta love it.
Now as to Hecate’s call to boycott the materialism of the holidays, I’d just like to say I would prefer not to cut off my nose, my face deals with enough spite already thank you very much. One of my biggest peeves with many Democrats and the Democratic Party in general has been how overlooked small businesses have been. I’ve often felt like the ugly stepchild of both parties. Too often I have to correct well-meaning people who disparage all business people (and call for general boycotts, grrr) as being a part of “Them,” while on the other side Republicans pay us lip service (and we get tons of that from them) while ignoring our real needs as they rig the system for the largest 10% of any given industry. Ironically most of all the business owners I deal with (the exceptions seem to be those who inherited their families business – go figure) are Democratic supporters. One of the new economic realities is that more and more people are responding to unemployment and underemployment by starting micro-businesses (I say micro because by definition a “small” business can have as many as 50 employees and generate many millions of dollars a year). These are the independent service people (from plumbers to lawn care to web design), the small restaurants, the retail stores not owned by Wal-mart or Target and small manufacturers [like me] that make up a growing and important segment of our economy. Boycotting all businesses is counter intuitive – though I still won’t patronize any business with a NFIB [National Federation of Independent Businesses] sign because of their campaign tactics against Paul Wellstone. Spend only what you can afford but be creative and useful with those gift ideas. And please focus on non-chain stores. Independent retail stores are considerably more likely to be getting their inventory from domestic sources than the big box retailers. And it doesn’t even have to be a product to be a gift. We get my honey’s parents prepaid lawn care. We’ve given out certificates for favorite local restaurants and small bookstores. Give someone golf or yoga lessons, maybe a certificate for a massage (I can guarantee you those will be micro-business people).
For better or worse we’re a consumer-based economy and much of that is based on how strong the holiday shopping season runs. The best impact we can have is not through starving the beast (because it will cannibalize us first); it’s through determining on whom we spend our money.
Small businesses are our friends.
Start here. (Props to my man Willis)
When I first noticed Willis begin this Brand Democrat campaign and that tremendous “since 1794” donkey logo I was so excited I almost, well, we won’t go there. Having been self-employed for most of the last twenty years following a career arc that, with the exception of not being in the music industry, makes the movie Spinal Tap a painfully accurate biography (though fortunately we’ve been entering the coveted and profitable “casino tour“ stage of our Spinal Tap existence) I hold the concepts and power of brand identity close to my heart. As Democrats we suffer too often as intellectuals in a world defined by simple images, and as a brand the Democrats have done little to push a simple, defining distinction between them and the emerging aristocracy/theocracy movement that is the modern GOP. This is a great place to start the re-imaging process. Got Liberty? Got Rights? Gotta love it.
Now as to Hecate’s call to boycott the materialism of the holidays, I’d just like to say I would prefer not to cut off my nose, my face deals with enough spite already thank you very much. One of my biggest peeves with many Democrats and the Democratic Party in general has been how overlooked small businesses have been. I’ve often felt like the ugly stepchild of both parties. Too often I have to correct well-meaning people who disparage all business people (and call for general boycotts, grrr) as being a part of “Them,” while on the other side Republicans pay us lip service (and we get tons of that from them) while ignoring our real needs as they rig the system for the largest 10% of any given industry. Ironically most of all the business owners I deal with (the exceptions seem to be those who inherited their families business – go figure) are Democratic supporters. One of the new economic realities is that more and more people are responding to unemployment and underemployment by starting micro-businesses (I say micro because by definition a “small” business can have as many as 50 employees and generate many millions of dollars a year). These are the independent service people (from plumbers to lawn care to web design), the small restaurants, the retail stores not owned by Wal-mart or Target and small manufacturers [like me] that make up a growing and important segment of our economy. Boycotting all businesses is counter intuitive – though I still won’t patronize any business with a NFIB [National Federation of Independent Businesses] sign because of their campaign tactics against Paul Wellstone. Spend only what you can afford but be creative and useful with those gift ideas. And please focus on non-chain stores. Independent retail stores are considerably more likely to be getting their inventory from domestic sources than the big box retailers. And it doesn’t even have to be a product to be a gift. We get my honey’s parents prepaid lawn care. We’ve given out certificates for favorite local restaurants and small bookstores. Give someone golf or yoga lessons, maybe a certificate for a massage (I can guarantee you those will be micro-business people).
For better or worse we’re a consumer-based economy and much of that is based on how strong the holiday shopping season runs. The best impact we can have is not through starving the beast (because it will cannibalize us first); it’s through determining on whom we spend our money.
Small businesses are our friends.
Stupid AP Reporter
I am really not optimistic that our media is going to get any better. When someone gives you a quote which actually has nothing to do with the issue at hand, you should either leave it out or point out that the quote is irrelevant, rather than positioning it high up in the article to give it any credibility.
Example:
The issue is not of course whether actual abstinence will reduce STD and pregnancy for those who follow that path, but whether abstinence programs generally or any particular abstinence education program will lead to... actual abstinence.
If, on the other hand, abstinence education has little impact on teen sex rates, it will likely lead to increases in STDs and unwanted pregnancies.
arrrrgh
(via americablog)
He commits another sin by concluding the article this way:
Is that true? Is abstinence-only education something parents and children (!!) have been clamoring for in great numbers? Do a majority of parents and children want abstinence-only education? I have no idea, but I doubt Horn does and I know the AP reporter who wrote the article doesn't.
Don't let people just make stuff up because they're "administration officials."
Example:
-
Congress last weekend included more than $131 million for abstinence programs in a $388 billion spending bill, an increase of $30 million but about $100 million less than Bush requested. Meanwhile, a national evaluation of abstinence programs has been delayed, with a final report not expected until 2006.
Ten state evaluations, compiled by a group that opposes abstinence-only education, showed little change in teens' behavior since the start of abstinence programs in 1997.
The president has been a strong proponent of school-based sexual education that focuses on abstinence, but does not include instruction on safe sex.
"We don't need a study, if I remember my biology correctly, to show us that those people who are sexually abstinent have a zero chance of becoming pregnant or getting someone pregnant or contracting a sexually transmitted disease," said Wade Horn, the assistant secretary of Health and Human Services (news - web sites) in charge of federal abstinence funding.
The issue is not of course whether actual abstinence will reduce STD and pregnancy for those who follow that path, but whether abstinence programs generally or any particular abstinence education program will lead to... actual abstinence.
If, on the other hand, abstinence education has little impact on teen sex rates, it will likely lead to increases in STDs and unwanted pregnancies.
arrrrgh
(via americablog)
He commits another sin by concluding the article this way:
-
Horn and Unruh acknowledged a paucity of data. "So many of our programs are in their infancy. The jury is still out," Unruh said.
Horn said, "The research is not as adequate as it needs to be."
Still, he is not willing to wait for more evaluations, calling abstinence education "something that parents and children want."
Is that true? Is abstinence-only education something parents and children (!!) have been clamoring for in great numbers? Do a majority of parents and children want abstinence-only education? I have no idea, but I doubt Horn does and I know the AP reporter who wrote the article doesn't.
Don't let people just make stuff up because they're "administration officials."
Congratulations!
You have been apointed Lord High Overseer of American Iraq policy. You have the military and a decent chunk of money from the Treasury at your disposal. You are of course saddled with a boss who has spent all of his diplomatic capital and then some.
What do you do?
What do you do?
All I Want for Xmas Is Fair and Verifiable Elections
So it’s black Friday, the day when retailers plan on making really big bucks selling people Xmas presents. Lately, I’ve been thinking quite a bit about our consumerist society and wondering to what extent the pervasive nature of consumerism may have influenced the recent election. Clearly, the fact that the news is now simply a way to sell product has harmed our society and, as Jon Stewart so eloquently explained to Tucker Carlson, the pitch to the lowest common denominator, where even political discourse is sold as a form of TV wrestling, has hurt America. Even war is sold to Americans as a product and, if the ad campaign constantly changes with new and different rationales for why we should buy this product, well, we’re all used to that from frequently-changing commercials for everything from heartburn medicine to SUVs. Do Americans really need or even want all the crap that they’ll buy over the next few weeks?
I’ve also been thinking about the role of protests in a situation such as the current one in America. I grew up on protest marches; my dad took me to some of the great Viet Nam war protests and just this past April I marched with friends and family in the March for Women’s Lives. Watching what’s been happening in Ukraine, I wonder why Americans haven’t taken to the streets, as well. And yet, I wonder if large protests are still effective in America. The March for Women’s Lives was huge -- over a million people. The protests at the Republican convention in NYC this summer were huge, too. Both got a fair amount of news coverage. Neither seemed to help -- Roe’s dead within the next year and Lame Duckie has proclaimed himself the winner of the election. Finally, I doubt Lame Duckie will allow much of any protest at his coronation -- protestors will be kept out for "security" reasons. If he didn’t need to allow protestors in when he was ostensibly running for re-election, he sure doesn’t need to allow them now.
So, if there’s a big protest march, I’ll be there, just because I like to put my body where it may do some good and be counted. But I also think we need to consider other ways to make our displeasure known. And that’s where economics come in.
I don’t know for sure if this last election was stolen, although I know what my gut tells me. This study certainly gives me pause. However, the point of this thread isn’t to restart the why-did-Kerry-concede-why-isn’t-Atrios-screaming-about-Diebold debate. Here’s what I do know for sure and think everyone can agree upon: it’s important for all Americans, including those whose candidate didn’t prevail, to be able to have faith that our elections are carried out fairly and honestly. And the current situation doesn’t allow us to have that faith. Instead, what we have is a patchwork of fallible systems that appears designed more for the purpose of allowing skullduggery than for the purpose of ensuring fair elections. And that, I believe, is worth an economic protest.
This year, I’m urging everyone I know to refuse to spend money for Xmas as a protest. Stay out of the stores. For Goddess sake, don’t run up credit card debt. Give your family and friends the gift of your time and attention rather than a new sweater that they won’t wear or some object to clutter-up an already over-cluttered life. But just not buying isn’t enough. You’ve got to contact the retailers and credit card companies and tell them: I’m not going to be buying Xmas stuff and I’m not going to be charging Xmas stuff until this country has a system in place that ensures fair and verifiable elections. Reader Kate has done the research and discovered that The National Retail Federation “is the world’s largest retail trade association . . . .” Write to Their Vice President for Legislative and Political Affairs, Katherine Lugar. Here’s her contact info:
National Retail Federation
325 7th Street, N.W.
Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: 1-800-NRF-HOW2
Fax (202) 727-2849
Write to your credit card companies and tell them the same thing. You can find the address on the back of your latest bill. And, heck if you’re really angry about this last election, write to the large department stores that you patronize, or at least cc them on your letter to the National Retail Federation. CC your Senators and Congressman or Congresswoman as well.
Do it for my friend Arlo, who reminded us that there’s strength in numbers:
You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may think it's a movement. And that's what it is, the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar.
And pass the idea on to everyone you know. Merry Xmas.
Thanks, Kate!
I’ve also been thinking about the role of protests in a situation such as the current one in America. I grew up on protest marches; my dad took me to some of the great Viet Nam war protests and just this past April I marched with friends and family in the March for Women’s Lives. Watching what’s been happening in Ukraine, I wonder why Americans haven’t taken to the streets, as well. And yet, I wonder if large protests are still effective in America. The March for Women’s Lives was huge -- over a million people. The protests at the Republican convention in NYC this summer were huge, too. Both got a fair amount of news coverage. Neither seemed to help -- Roe’s dead within the next year and Lame Duckie has proclaimed himself the winner of the election. Finally, I doubt Lame Duckie will allow much of any protest at his coronation -- protestors will be kept out for "security" reasons. If he didn’t need to allow protestors in when he was ostensibly running for re-election, he sure doesn’t need to allow them now.
So, if there’s a big protest march, I’ll be there, just because I like to put my body where it may do some good and be counted. But I also think we need to consider other ways to make our displeasure known. And that’s where economics come in.
I don’t know for sure if this last election was stolen, although I know what my gut tells me. This study certainly gives me pause. However, the point of this thread isn’t to restart the why-did-Kerry-concede-why-isn’t-Atrios-screaming-about-Diebold debate. Here’s what I do know for sure and think everyone can agree upon: it’s important for all Americans, including those whose candidate didn’t prevail, to be able to have faith that our elections are carried out fairly and honestly. And the current situation doesn’t allow us to have that faith. Instead, what we have is a patchwork of fallible systems that appears designed more for the purpose of allowing skullduggery than for the purpose of ensuring fair elections. And that, I believe, is worth an economic protest.
This year, I’m urging everyone I know to refuse to spend money for Xmas as a protest. Stay out of the stores. For Goddess sake, don’t run up credit card debt. Give your family and friends the gift of your time and attention rather than a new sweater that they won’t wear or some object to clutter-up an already over-cluttered life. But just not buying isn’t enough. You’ve got to contact the retailers and credit card companies and tell them: I’m not going to be buying Xmas stuff and I’m not going to be charging Xmas stuff until this country has a system in place that ensures fair and verifiable elections. Reader Kate has done the research and discovered that The National Retail Federation “is the world’s largest retail trade association . . . .” Write to Their Vice President for Legislative and Political Affairs, Katherine Lugar. Here’s her contact info:
National Retail Federation
325 7th Street, N.W.
Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: 1-800-NRF-HOW2
Fax (202) 727-2849
Write to your credit card companies and tell them the same thing. You can find the address on the back of your latest bill. And, heck if you’re really angry about this last election, write to the large department stores that you patronize, or at least cc them on your letter to the National Retail Federation. CC your Senators and Congressman or Congresswoman as well.
Do it for my friend Arlo, who reminded us that there’s strength in numbers:
You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may think it's a movement. And that's what it is, the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar.
And pass the idea on to everyone you know. Merry Xmas.
Thanks, Kate!
Thursday, November 25, 2004
First Annual Eschatonian Recipe Exhange
Pour some vermouth in a glass. Swish it around to coat the inside of the glass. Pour out the vermouth. Put two olives and two cocktail onions in the glass. Pour in a lot of Stoli.
OK, now you share your favorite recipe.
OK, now you share your favorite recipe.
Commuhealth
Mrs. Atrios and I spent two months in Barcelona in summer 2003. You may remember the good old days when the corrente crowd was posting. While we were there Mrs. Atrios had a wee stomach bug, enough to necessitate a trip to the doctor. After a bit of hunting we found a local health clinic. After a bit of discussion they took her passport number at reception, sat us down, and a half hour or so later she saw a doctor. The doctor inquired about her insurance. My wife explained that we had travel insurance, and the way it worked was that we'd just cover any costs and then submit them upon our return. This troubled the doctor greatly, not because of the cost of the exam, which turned out to be free, but because of concern about the cost of the drugs which were to be prescribed.
We took the prescription, went to our local pharmacy, and had it filled.
Cost?
About 3 bucks.
Spain spends about 7.5% of its GDP on health care. We spend about 13.9%. About 4% of our GDP is spent on a subset of health care called... "health care administration."
This raises the obvious question -- why do they hate freedom?
We took the prescription, went to our local pharmacy, and had it filled.
Cost?
About 3 bucks.
Spain spends about 7.5% of its GDP on health care. We spend about 13.9%. About 4% of our GDP is spent on a subset of health care called... "health care administration."
This raises the obvious question -- why do they hate freedom?
So, you're dealing with your Fundie relatives today
Shorter Thumb:
Eat some bird, watch some game, ignore them.
Less shorter Thumb:
If you're like me you no doubt have a few Family Fundies that you can't get around dealing with this time of year. Generally in these situations I take the lead of my apolitical father and plant myself in front of the Big Game and grunt and hoop on cue like a good little entertainment consumer. Maybe my better nature will prevail and I won't start trouble [50/50], but if one of them starts any partisan skewing of what we have to be thankful for, I'm going off. I fully intend to remind people that the reason the first pilgrims came over here was to escape the Catholic and Protestant absolutist monarchies and King Henry?s union of Church and State. Then I?ll probably ask [I always mask an attack as an innocent question], ?What?s the deal with consolidated wealth and organized religion anyway? Why does it always seem that through out history they find a way to team up and say, ?You can have all their money if we can have all their souls??? I?ll probably close with, ?Doesn?t it bother you that the money changers have taken over the Temple??
Such a line of question will only go one of two directions; either Your Favorite Fundie will dismiss you as the wiseass nephew you really are or they?ll fall back on some Scripture that proves how unaware you are. Caution: Do not enter this debate lightly. You cannot, will not, make any ground trying to toss out a few memorized embarrassing Leviticus quotes. For those of you with the time and/or motivation there was an excellent essay last week by pasterdan in the Kos diaries titled How to Use the Bible in Your Political Arguments.
Considering that we?re now into the season when many of us are going to be forced to deal with Family Fundies this might be a good primer.
(Additional note: If the issue of abortion comes up I'm at the ready with a line of question I've had some recent successes with: Ask them to guess where the US ranks in infant mortality rate. Tell them Sweden, with the lowest infant mortality rate, ranks #1. Press them to guess where the US falls after that. Really, get their best guess. The correct and highly embarrassing answer for these self-righteous, Holier Than Thou, save the babies at all costs crusaders is . . . 41st. Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate. Let them chew on that.)
[Update 8:22pm] I'm back, fat and happy. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that for most of the last year mom would send me the GOP chain emails she got from these same relatives spouting off the latest Rush Limbaugh or Paul Harvey nonsense and in return send them my pointed responses that made them think twice about going political, but it was a happy family gathering free of any partisan tones [whew!]. The closest we came to a political/religious topic was when I started talking about how much I enjoyed the movie You Don't Know *Bleep* and the other was my latest response to the "When are you two going to get married" question that comes up every year (I told them we're a heterosexual couple in a gay marriage). Now it's time to sleep off some bird.
Eat some bird, watch some game, ignore them.
Less shorter Thumb:
If you're like me you no doubt have a few Family Fundies that you can't get around dealing with this time of year. Generally in these situations I take the lead of my apolitical father and plant myself in front of the Big Game and grunt and hoop on cue like a good little entertainment consumer. Maybe my better nature will prevail and I won't start trouble [50/50], but if one of them starts any partisan skewing of what we have to be thankful for, I'm going off. I fully intend to remind people that the reason the first pilgrims came over here was to escape the Catholic and Protestant absolutist monarchies and King Henry?s union of Church and State. Then I?ll probably ask [I always mask an attack as an innocent question], ?What?s the deal with consolidated wealth and organized religion anyway? Why does it always seem that through out history they find a way to team up and say, ?You can have all their money if we can have all their souls??? I?ll probably close with, ?Doesn?t it bother you that the money changers have taken over the Temple??
Such a line of question will only go one of two directions; either Your Favorite Fundie will dismiss you as the wiseass nephew you really are or they?ll fall back on some Scripture that proves how unaware you are. Caution: Do not enter this debate lightly. You cannot, will not, make any ground trying to toss out a few memorized embarrassing Leviticus quotes. For those of you with the time and/or motivation there was an excellent essay last week by pasterdan in the Kos diaries titled How to Use the Bible in Your Political Arguments.
Considering that we?re now into the season when many of us are going to be forced to deal with Family Fundies this might be a good primer.
(Additional note: If the issue of abortion comes up I'm at the ready with a line of question I've had some recent successes with: Ask them to guess where the US ranks in infant mortality rate. Tell them Sweden, with the lowest infant mortality rate, ranks #1. Press them to guess where the US falls after that. Really, get their best guess. The correct and highly embarrassing answer for these self-righteous, Holier Than Thou, save the babies at all costs crusaders is . . . 41st. Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate. Let them chew on that.)
[Update 8:22pm] I'm back, fat and happy. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that for most of the last year mom would send me the GOP chain emails she got from these same relatives spouting off the latest Rush Limbaugh or Paul Harvey nonsense and in return send them my pointed responses that made them think twice about going political, but it was a happy family gathering free of any partisan tones [whew!]. The closest we came to a political/religious topic was when I started talking about how much I enjoyed the movie You Don't Know *Bleep* and the other was my latest response to the "When are you two going to get married" question that comes up every year (I told them we're a heterosexual couple in a gay marriage). Now it's time to sleep off some bird.
My Family Didn't Get Here Until the Turn of the Century -- Honest!
Thanksgiving has traditionally been the one holiday when Americans acknowledge that there were thriving societies here when the Europeans arrived. (OK, the Native Americans have forced us to remember this fact on Columbus Day, as well, but Thanksgiving has historically been the only time when we bothered to acknowledge Native Americans). It’s gotten trite, but no less true, to begin any discussion of Native Americans with an acknowledgement of the fact that it took the European settlers very little time to decimate the Native American cultures in both North and South America. Often in the name of brining xianity to “godless heathens” the European Americans were pretty shitty to the Native Americans -- sending them smallpox-infested blankets, stealing their land and forcing them onto “reservations” in strange and undesirable locations, taking their children away from them and sending them to church schools where the children were forbidden to speak their own language or learn about their own rich spirituality. Just recently, Lame Duckie found himself completely unable to articulate the relationship between America and the sovereign nations within our shores.
When I was in school, I was fascinated by the Native Americans (whom we called Indians -- I know I’m dating myself), their culture, history, art, languages, religions. It’s not surprising that I wound up in an Earth-centered religion, albeit one based upon a European pantheon. One of the women in my coven is part Native American, and we’ve had some fascinating discussions concerning Native American spirituality and religion. America went through a period in the late 80s and early 90s where it was fashionable to adopt certain aspects of Native American spirituality. Most Native Americans consider this appropriation and don't appreciate it; so unless it's actually a part of your religion, stop already with the "sweat lodges" and "vision quests" -- and don't ask us to call you White Eagle, either.
One of the most interesting books I’ve read recently concerning, inter alia, how Native Americans came to North and South America was The Seven Daughters of Eve by Brian Sykes. Definitely worth a read if you get a chance. Here in Washington, D.C., we’ve just opened the National Museum of the American Indian. It’s amazing, gorgeous, beautiful -- none of those words really do it justice. In a city of beautiful fountains, this museum has the most incredible fountain that I’ve ever seen. If you're coming to D.C., contact them and get tickets ahead of time; it’s still impossible to just walk up and get in. And, as my friend Sarah pointed out when we walked around this endlessly fascinating building, if you have a picnic there, show some respect and don’t eat it in the garden area where Native Americans have taken to leaving offerings. Sheesh!
Anyway, for Thanksgiving 2004, I thought I’d check out some Native American blogs. Here are a few you might want to check out on a day when we remember a brief moment in American history when the Native Americans and the European settlers sat down together to express their gratitude for the abundance of the land.
News and Views by Native American Students can be found at Rez Net
Bad Eagle is a conservative blog by an “American Indian patriot.”
Brown Chick is a more personal blog by a Native American student who writes: “Plea to liberal/cool white people: Please do not flee the country. I am Native American and do not have the option of moving to another country to escape Bush and his neonazi Republican minions. This, in the deepest sense possible, is my country. And so we need cool white people here more than ever. Please don't leave, please don't give up. Fight!!!!!!
Plea to Bush's neonazi Republican minions: Go back to where you came from. And if you're Native American, you need to have some sense bitchslapped into you. I will gladly oblige.”
Reflections of an Outlaw Indian Lawyer has an interesting story about Ronald Reagan who is, let us give thanks on this day of thanks, still dead.
Finally, check out Blue Corn Comic Books for some interesting art work and story lines.
Happy Thanksgiving!
When I was in school, I was fascinated by the Native Americans (whom we called Indians -- I know I’m dating myself), their culture, history, art, languages, religions. It’s not surprising that I wound up in an Earth-centered religion, albeit one based upon a European pantheon. One of the women in my coven is part Native American, and we’ve had some fascinating discussions concerning Native American spirituality and religion. America went through a period in the late 80s and early 90s where it was fashionable to adopt certain aspects of Native American spirituality. Most Native Americans consider this appropriation and don't appreciate it; so unless it's actually a part of your religion, stop already with the "sweat lodges" and "vision quests" -- and don't ask us to call you White Eagle, either.
One of the most interesting books I’ve read recently concerning, inter alia, how Native Americans came to North and South America was The Seven Daughters of Eve by Brian Sykes. Definitely worth a read if you get a chance. Here in Washington, D.C., we’ve just opened the National Museum of the American Indian. It’s amazing, gorgeous, beautiful -- none of those words really do it justice. In a city of beautiful fountains, this museum has the most incredible fountain that I’ve ever seen. If you're coming to D.C., contact them and get tickets ahead of time; it’s still impossible to just walk up and get in. And, as my friend Sarah pointed out when we walked around this endlessly fascinating building, if you have a picnic there, show some respect and don’t eat it in the garden area where Native Americans have taken to leaving offerings. Sheesh!
Anyway, for Thanksgiving 2004, I thought I’d check out some Native American blogs. Here are a few you might want to check out on a day when we remember a brief moment in American history when the Native Americans and the European settlers sat down together to express their gratitude for the abundance of the land.
News and Views by Native American Students can be found at Rez Net
Bad Eagle is a conservative blog by an “American Indian patriot.”
Brown Chick is a more personal blog by a Native American student who writes: “Plea to liberal/cool white people: Please do not flee the country. I am Native American and do not have the option of moving to another country to escape Bush and his neonazi Republican minions. This, in the deepest sense possible, is my country. And so we need cool white people here more than ever. Please don't leave, please don't give up. Fight!!!!!!
Plea to Bush's neonazi Republican minions: Go back to where you came from. And if you're Native American, you need to have some sense bitchslapped into you. I will gladly oblige.”
Reflections of an Outlaw Indian Lawyer has an interesting story about Ronald Reagan who is, let us give thanks on this day of thanks, still dead.
Finally, check out Blue Corn Comic Books for some interesting art work and story lines.
Happy Thanksgiving!
"Right to Rule"
Hey, ever wonder what happens when a democrat narrowly wins an election over the republican incumbent in a local Texas race?
It's not pretty.
It's not pretty.
Thanks, George
My vacation gets more expensive every second. We even attempted to prepay our hotel, with no luck. Bummer.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
Mmmm...
So far, the jackbooted thug of socialism has been fairly benign. Good food and eats. The Celtic fans had invaded the city en masse. They were a bit disappointed in their tie, but so far have failed to blame it on the writings of Karl Marx. Apparently jackbooted islamofascist socialism manages to provide great food and great wine at good prices, even with the sadly declining dollar. Weird.
border control
There are two sides to every border. If U.S. forces can't stop the infiltration of foreign fighters crossing between Syria and Iraq, why does the Bush Administration think that Syria can?
When Red State Values Collide
CBS MarketWatch reports:
Bosses Fret Okla. Law Allows Guns in Cars
11/24/2004 7:16:00 PM
OKLAHOMA CITY, Nov 24, 2004 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- A new state law allowing employees to keep guns in their locked cars on company property has alarmed some of Oklahoma's biggest corporations and pitted them against gun enthusiasts.
The law was passed by the Legislature earlier this year and was scheduled to go into effect Nov. 1, but a federal judge blocked its enforcement while he considers a challenge brought by companies fearful that guns at work could lead to bloodshed.
Employers say the law interferes with their right to restrict what happens on company property.
Williams Cos., the Tulsa-based energy company, and oil giant ConocoPhillips Inc., with offices in Bartlesville and a refinery in Ponca City, are suing to stop the law from taking effect. The State Chamber, which represents some 2,000 businesses in Oklahoma and 26 other states, has also filed briefs against the law.
"We have cases all the time where there are fights on the property. That's where we're coming from," said David Strecker, attorney for the State Chamber. He added: "If somebody got mad they wouldn't have far to go."
The measure was adopted after a paper company in Oklahoma fired several employees when guns were found in their vehicles during a drug sweep. Workplaces can still prohibit people from entering businesses with guns.
Democratic state Sen. Frank Shurden, a co-author the law, said Oklahomans need guns for protection. "You get out in the dark in rural Oklahoma, you better be armed and ready for action," he said. "There's no telling what's going to happen."
As for the potential for workplace shootings, he said: "These are decent and responsible people. "We aren't going to have any shoot-outs like the Old West every time someone gets mad."
Whirlpool Corp., which employs 1,500 at a Tulsa plant, was the original plaintiff in the case. The appliance maker said it asked to withdraw this week after being assured by the state attorney general that the new law would not override an Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation or Whirlpool's existing ban on weapons on company property.
U.S. District Judge Sven Erik Holmes has heard arguments in the case, but said Tuesday said a higher court must first decide whether the penalty for violating the law is criminal or civil.
******************
Bwhahahhaha!
Bosses Fret Okla. Law Allows Guns in Cars
11/24/2004 7:16:00 PM
OKLAHOMA CITY, Nov 24, 2004 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- A new state law allowing employees to keep guns in their locked cars on company property has alarmed some of Oklahoma's biggest corporations and pitted them against gun enthusiasts.
The law was passed by the Legislature earlier this year and was scheduled to go into effect Nov. 1, but a federal judge blocked its enforcement while he considers a challenge brought by companies fearful that guns at work could lead to bloodshed.
Employers say the law interferes with their right to restrict what happens on company property.
Williams Cos., the Tulsa-based energy company, and oil giant ConocoPhillips Inc., with offices in Bartlesville and a refinery in Ponca City, are suing to stop the law from taking effect. The State Chamber, which represents some 2,000 businesses in Oklahoma and 26 other states, has also filed briefs against the law.
"We have cases all the time where there are fights on the property. That's where we're coming from," said David Strecker, attorney for the State Chamber. He added: "If somebody got mad they wouldn't have far to go."
The measure was adopted after a paper company in Oklahoma fired several employees when guns were found in their vehicles during a drug sweep. Workplaces can still prohibit people from entering businesses with guns.
Democratic state Sen. Frank Shurden, a co-author the law, said Oklahomans need guns for protection. "You get out in the dark in rural Oklahoma, you better be armed and ready for action," he said. "There's no telling what's going to happen."
As for the potential for workplace shootings, he said: "These are decent and responsible people. "We aren't going to have any shoot-outs like the Old West every time someone gets mad."
Whirlpool Corp., which employs 1,500 at a Tulsa plant, was the original plaintiff in the case. The appliance maker said it asked to withdraw this week after being assured by the state attorney general that the new law would not override an Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation or Whirlpool's existing ban on weapons on company property.
U.S. District Judge Sven Erik Holmes has heard arguments in the case, but said Tuesday said a higher court must first decide whether the penalty for violating the law is criminal or civil.
******************
Bwhahahhaha!
At the Movies
So at my house on Thanksgiving, after we eat ourselves silly, we go to the movies. This year, I'm thinking about going to see Finding Neverland or National Treasure . Any recommendations?
No Liberal Media
While the WaPo may be able to find justifications for printing it's anti-gay supplement (which was filled with things which were explicitly untrue, and any time false propaganda is served up in support of bigotry, red lights should go off), but the degree of cluelessness they show in defending their decision should put to rest the notion that any of these liberal media titans have given more than 3 seconds of thought to the issue of gay rights.
Continue writing. Calling. Screaming. It's sadly the only they listen to obviously. Well, other than money.
Continue writing. Calling. Screaming. It's sadly the only they listen to obviously. Well, other than money.
Sorry to Report
But the death of Irony has now been officially confirmed. Please bow your heads for a moment of silence .
Third Day of Protests
Sounds as if they take election fraud seriously in Ukraine
Interesting discussion concerning whether any position of power is worth a single human life. Too bad Lame Duckie made exactly the wrong decision on this issue. In fact, his seizure of power has been based on the expenditure of human lives, both American and foreign. I believe we call people like that sociopaths.
"Shortly after his rival's offer, Yanukovich also hinted at compromise by saying that he was not interested in a "fictitious" victory and that "no position of authority, no matter how important, is worth a single human life." "
Interesting discussion concerning whether any position of power is worth a single human life. Too bad Lame Duckie made exactly the wrong decision on this issue. In fact, his seizure of power has been based on the expenditure of human lives, both American and foreign. I believe we call people like that sociopaths.
"Shortly after his rival's offer, Yanukovich also hinted at compromise by saying that he was not interested in a "fictitious" victory and that "no position of authority, no matter how important, is worth a single human life." "
Haters of Freedom
Well, I've arrived here in Barcelona. Free WiFi in the hotel room, so I won't be entirely absent. I plan to spend my time here learning about what it's like to live under the jackboot of socialism in a country which hates freedom, loves islamofascism, and embraces gay rights.
Or something like that.
Or something like that.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
MEMRI SLAPPS Cole
MEMRI, an organization I am mostly familiar with because of its inaccurate arabic translations, sent a SLAPP letter to Juan Cole.
Professor Cole reprinted the letter on his site. Go read the letter and Professor Cole's response to the letter. If you are so moved, send a polite letter protesting their threats to memri@memri.org.
Hell, if Duncan gives me a big megaphone, I might as well use it.
Professor Cole reprinted the letter on his site. Go read the letter and Professor Cole's response to the letter. If you are so moved, send a polite letter protesting their threats to memri@memri.org.
Hell, if Duncan gives me a big megaphone, I might as well use it.
Chat Away My Sweet Bitches
Sometimes things don’t go, after all,
from bad to worse. Some years, muscadel
faces down frost; green thrives; the crops don’t fail,
sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.
A people sometimes will step back from war;
elect an honest man; decide they care
enough, that they can’t leave some stranger poor.
Some men become what they were born for.
Sometimes our best efforts do not go
amiss; sometimes we do as we meant to.
The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow
that seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.
-- Sheenagh Pugh, “Sometimes”
from bad to worse. Some years, muscadel
faces down frost; green thrives; the crops don’t fail,
sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.
A people sometimes will step back from war;
elect an honest man; decide they care
enough, that they can’t leave some stranger poor.
Some men become what they were born for.
Sometimes our best efforts do not go
amiss; sometimes we do as we meant to.
The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow
that seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.
-- Sheenagh Pugh, “Sometimes”
CSIS report
The Center for Strategic and International Studies has issued an updated report on progress in Iraq (the original report is here).
The CSIS evaluated the progress of the U.S. and the Iraqi provision government in six different areas and sounded a dismal note for every single one: security ("far from the tipping point"), governance ("not reached the tipping point"), economic opportunity ("overall, the U.S. efforts to improve the economic situation in Iraq have made little positive impact"), services (noting improvement in transportation, "a downward trend" for communications, fuel supplies and water services, and no noticeable change for electrical power. Sanitation also registered no change, remaining in "dire condition"), education ("not yet passed the tipping point"), and health care ("regressed considerably"). The problems mostly are attributed to the insurgency against the U.S. occupation of the country.
At some point we will have to address whether our presence in Iraq is really helping or hindering the country.
(study and graphic found via ntodd)
Fins Aviat
Off to Barcelona for a bit. I've recruited a couple of new guest bloggers who will be popping in and out, holiday time and other conflicts permitting, and I'll be dropping by now and then as well. For all of my former guest bloggers who still have access, feel free to chime in if you have something to say...
National Organization of Witches
Since no one in the media pays much attention to the kind of values that the good Reverend Falwell preaches week after week, Media Matters has decided to do the Lord's work and pay attention.
Bye Bye Dan Rather
Maybe some day someone will explain how the "liberal media" thought Rather's guard doc screwup was more important than the deliberate fabrications of Gerth, Vlasto, Myers, Greenfield...
Free Market Follies
This is funny. Though not actually "ha ha" funny.
-
Homeowners say a Brevard County homebuilding company is bullying, threatening and even suing homeowners for complaining about inferior construction.
A NewsChannel 2 investigation -- part of our Building Homes: Building Problems series -- found Mercedes Homes actually filed a lawsuit against a woman for telling her neighbors about severe leaks in her home.
Jay Ann Contardi couldn't imagine a problem any worse than the deluge of rainwater pouring into her leaking home. That is, until she ran afoul of the aggressive lawyers representing her builder, Mercedes Homes.
"It has changed my life. I'm afraid to talk to my neighbors. I'm afraid to walk my daughter to the bus stop. I'm afraid to talk to you right now," she told NewsChannel 2 reporter Dan Billow.
She's not the only one. Other Mercedes homeowners asked us to protect their identities.
"I feel like I'm in a police state. I can't do anything. I have no avenues. I have nowhere to turn," one homeowner said.
That's what it feels like when you're sued for talking to your neighbor.
In the company's plush corporate offices, executives hatched a plan to make buyers sign away their First Amendment rights.
"It's there in black and white. The customer should read his or her contract thoroughly before they enter into it," said Patrick Roche, Mercedes Attorney.
Max Speak
Max has more on crazy Republican budgeting plans. He makes important points:
-
For academics, this will be a grand experiment in neo-classical fiscal policy, founded on the premise that anything that doesn't change inter-temporal budget constraints has no effect on behavior. Yuk yuk. By this logic, if the Gov borrows to pay me a billion dollars today and simultaneouly passes the Revenue 3000 tax act, which levies a wealth tax on the inhabitants of Jupiter in the year 3000 to offset the accumulated debt, everything is hunky-dory. Don't laugh. These people are running the country!
There is verbiage -- don't call it argument -- that this is acceptable because the borrowing is an investment that pays for itself. I recall similar arguments made for the Reagan tax cuts, defense spending, and the savings and loan bailout. There were allusions to the business-like logic of capital budgeting.
EPI recently published a study on the benefits of early childhood health and education. Similarly there is literature on the merits of public investment in infrastructure, and in research and development. The only problem with the capital budgeting talk, aside from the fact that it is idiotic, is that it is not applied to actual investment in public capital.
A Cunning Plan
I do believe Baldrick is running things:
It's "good" so we don't have to count it. These people are crazy. We are truly fucked. The scary thing is that in order for this to work in the short term they're going to have to do double-secret-stupid accounting. Money borrowed from the trust fund will be used to reduce the deficit, as it is now, but then reductions in money borrowed from the trust fund to fund their fantasy plan will not be counted as increases in the deficit.
-
Republican budget writers say they may have found a way to cut the federal deficit even if they borrow hundreds of billions more to overhaul the Social Security system: Don't count all that new borrowing.
As they lay the groundwork for what will probably be a controversial fight over Social Security, Republican lawmakers and the Bush administration are examining a number of accounting strategies that would allow the expensive transition to a partially privatized Social Security system without -- at least on paper -- expanding the country's record annual budget deficits. The strategies include, for example, moving the costs of Social Security reform "off-budget" so they are not counted against the government's yearly shortfall.
It's "good" so we don't have to count it. These people are crazy. We are truly fucked. The scary thing is that in order for this to work in the short term they're going to have to do double-secret-stupid accounting. Money borrowed from the trust fund will be used to reduce the deficit, as it is now, but then reductions in money borrowed from the trust fund to fund their fantasy plan will not be counted as increases in the deficit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)