Mark Halperin.
What a loser.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Lies and the Lying Liars
Thomas Sowell edition.
Shameless dishonesty is all that the conservative movement has left. Expect them to employ it even more often than usual.
Sowell isn't some asshole on the radio, he's a fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution. I hope Stanford's proud.
Shameless dishonesty is all that the conservative movement has left. Expect them to employ it even more often than usual.
Sowell isn't some asshole on the radio, he's a fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution. I hope Stanford's proud.
An Accurate Lede
Mark this one on your calendars.
A Democratic activist who verbally confronted U.S. Sen. George Allen at a campaign rally in Charlottesville yesterday was shoved, put into a headlock and thrown against a window by three men wearing Allen stickers, according to a widely disseminated video of the incident.
Cowards
Of the many disgusting things this administration has done, the regular deflection of criticism of them onto the people actually serving in the military has to rank pretty highly.
Mike Stark Attacked
Mike Stark of Calling all Wingnuts was attacked and assaulted by by George Felix Allen Jr. staffers.
...adding, contra the news report Stark was not protesting, but a constituent who was asking his senator a question after a campaign event. There was no attempt to interrupt or disrupt the event itself.
...adding, contra the news report Stark was not protesting, but a constituent who was asking his senator a question after a campaign event. There was no attempt to interrupt or disrupt the event itself.
Rebels and Revolutionaries
Yglesias writes about Crazy Andy's new book:
This elite-consensus-without-a-constituency is also what's behind all of the various third party, above the fray, unity presidential ticket notions. They blame the existing political parties for somehow failing to cater to their personal politics, which they imagine to be so unquestionably right as to not require actually obtaining a consensus.
Weird people.
Which brings us to the real problem here, such as it is. Though billed as "one of today's most provocative social and political commentators" on his book jacket, Sullivan's substantive views are almost frighteningly banal. Far from "bold and provocative," Sullivan offers up an unusually colorful expression of what is, in fact, the bland conventional wisdom of the Anglo-American elite. In foreign affairs he's hawkish, chastened by Iraq but not so chastened as to revisit any of the empirical or theoretical premises that led America into its current quagmire. In economics, he's disdainful of European social democracy, a supporter of balanced budgets and sound money while dismissive of concerns about inequality. On cultural matters, he's generally progressive, but doesn't much care for feminists. He loathes academic postmodernists but doesn't seem to actually know anything about them.
These elite consensus views have, in the way that only an elite consensus can, an enormous amount of political power behind them already. What the elite consensus lacks is what it's always lacked -- a serious electoral constituency -- the very problem that led it to increasingly ally itself with the very forces of more populist right-wingery that Sullivan deplores. This, though, is hardly a new story; from the Red Scare and McCarthyism to Nixon's Southern Strategy, "respectable" conservatism has long found a need to ally itself with base demagoguery to obtain power. As a gay man, Sullivan finds the current configuration of this alliance unusually obnoxious, to an extent he doesn't seem to have minded, say, Ronald Reagan's implicit appeals to segregationist sentiment. So far as that goes, good for him. But the conservatism of doubt -- which is to say the conservatism of elite complacency -- as a mass political movement is an impossible dream, and always will be.
This elite-consensus-without-a-constituency is also what's behind all of the various third party, above the fray, unity presidential ticket notions. They blame the existing political parties for somehow failing to cater to their personal politics, which they imagine to be so unquestionably right as to not require actually obtaining a consensus.
Weird people.
Meanwhile
Iraq continues to be just like Manhattan.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - A suicide car bomber struck a wedding party in Baghdad on Tuesday, killing 11 people and wounding 21 outside the bride’s home, police said.
The bomber drove an explosives-rigged sedan into a crowd of Shiite celebrants in the northeastern Shaab neighborhood, police Lt. Ahmed Mohamed said.
Media Wars
I assume no one in the mainstream media will bother getting a bit annoyed that Mark Halperin says they all hate the military.
This is getting absurd, but you guys gotta stand up for yourselves.
This is getting absurd, but you guys gotta stand up for yourselves.
Great Moments in Punditry
Bill Kristol, on 09/03/20006:
To be fair, we have 3 more days to find the pony.
It may be that things will look a little better in the next two months in Iraq.
To be fair, we have 3 more days to find the pony.
Stand Up Stand Up Stand Stand Down
We keep training Iraqi troops, and yet still we stay.
And, yes, both Henley and I spent the year saying that at the end of the year there would basically be the same number of troops in Iraq. We were a bit wrong. There are actually more troops in Iraq. Still, the basic point stands.
And, yes, both Henley and I spent the year saying that at the end of the year there would basically be the same number of troops in Iraq. We were a bit wrong. There are actually more troops in Iraq. Still, the basic point stands.
Hating Democracy
Joe hates the voters, and hates an honest vote.
Pathetic.
It's truly bizarre that reporters are miraculously unconcerned with Joe's $400,000 in unaccounted for petty cash expenditures.
Pathetic.
It's truly bizarre that reporters are miraculously unconcerned with Joe's $400,000 in unaccounted for petty cash expenditures.
Shorter Anne Applebaum
Because leaders did dumb stuff in the past, we can't blame Bush for anything.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Some Crappy Blog
I still think pulling clips from Youtube is kind of a dumbass thing to do, but at least they just claimed on the Daily Show that they'd be posting up full shows on their site.
They have the legal right to object to such clips, but I tend to think such things provide for free the kind of marketing they pay a lot of money for.
They have the legal right to object to such clips, but I tend to think such things provide for free the kind of marketing they pay a lot of money for.
Stupid Pundit Tricks
David Gergen just now on Larry King:
So, apparently, over the last 3 and half years of all Republican control their hands were tied and they were unable to commit to "some type of escalation" which would magically "get this finished." However, if Democrats are there we won't "get this finished" but will instead "disengage" which would not be getting anything finished.
8 more days...
If the Republicans hold on - a surprise big victory - there's some type of escalation in Iraq to get this finished. If the Democrats come in there's a lot more pressure to disengage.
So, apparently, over the last 3 and half years of all Republican control their hands were tied and they were unable to commit to "some type of escalation" which would magically "get this finished." However, if Democrats are there we won't "get this finished" but will instead "disengage" which would not be getting anything finished.
8 more days...
They Write Letters
Public Campaign Action Fund writes to Joe Lieberman.
In response, Dangerstein plans to shoot their dog.
In response, Dangerstein plans to shoot their dog.
WTF?
Yeah, what the hell? Apparently we're in opposite land now.
...adding, the notion that "old timers" appear to be more optimistic than "net rooters" has some empirical support, but as for strategery it's completely wrong. I think pessimism by people like me is causing us to encourage support for as many candidates as possible, recognizing that some magical wave isn't going to push them over the edge. Most of us have always pushed the "support every candidate possible" and continue to do so.
...adding, the notion that "old timers" appear to be more optimistic than "net rooters" has some empirical support, but as for strategery it's completely wrong. I think pessimism by people like me is causing us to encourage support for as many candidates as possible, recognizing that some magical wave isn't going to push them over the edge. Most of us have always pushed the "support every candidate possible" and continue to do so.
Prediction Time
Oh, well, I guess it's about time to pull some numbers out of the air. If I'm right you can all proclaim me a genius and if I'm wrong you can call me an idiot. But, yes, the pulled from nowhere numbers are: Dems +18 in the House, with the possibility of an orgy of party switching on both sides making the final outcome in the House uncertain.
Senate: Dems +4.
Senate: Dems +4.
I'm Hellbound
But does Amy Sullivan think so?
Snark aside, I think Yglesias hits on an often overlooked point:
Yes. It's one thing to believe to the core of your being that in the Grand Plan established by God that accepting Jesus is a necessary step to avoid eternal torment, but that belief walks hand in hand with the one which says that God's Grand Plan is a Just and Wonderful Plan.
And, no, I'm not going to STFU and stop telling people that if they think that then I think their moral universe is pretty messed up.
Snark aside, I think Yglesias hits on an often overlooked point:
On this view, a person who led an entirely exemplary life in terms of his impact on the world (would an example help? Gandhi, maybe?) but who didn't accept Jesus as his personal savior would be subjected to a life of eternal torment after his death and we're supposed to understand that as a right and just outcome. That, I think, is seriously messed up.
Yes. It's one thing to believe to the core of your being that in the Grand Plan established by God that accepting Jesus is a necessary step to avoid eternal torment, but that belief walks hand in hand with the one which says that God's Grand Plan is a Just and Wonderful Plan.
And, no, I'm not going to STFU and stop telling people that if they think that then I think their moral universe is pretty messed up.
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Still bouncing.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's popularity has not been buoyed by a series of public events in recent days, a new CNN poll has found.
Bush's approval rating still hovers in the high 30s, where it has been throughout October.
The poll, conducted by Opinion Research Corp., found that 37 percent of Americans approve of how Bush is handling his job as president; 58 percent disapprove.
Party On
On election night I'll be joining the fun with CNN and the blog babes.
CNN is trying to incorporate bloggers directly into its coverage of next week's midterm elections by inviting them to an "E-lection Nite Blog Party," an event aimed at corralling some of the top online opinion makers in one place to provide instant reaction as the results come in.
The cable news network plans to host more than two dozen bloggers from across the political spectrum — including sites like RedState and Daily Kos — at a Washington Internet lounge where they can monitor the election returns on a slew of flat-screen televisions. (Each blogger will get his or her own monitor, which can be tuned to any channel.) There will be free wireless access — and plenty of food and beverages, natch.
Nuking Casey from the Left
I've been waiting for this to happen, wondering how Little Ricky and his supporters would be so stupid as to not try this strategy. Someone's sending out mailers attacking Casey from the left.
Too little too late fortunately, I expect, but I've been really puzzled why there hasn't been more of this. Not that I want there to be, just that it was such an obvious thing to do.
Too little too late fortunately, I expect, but I've been really puzzled why there hasn't been more of this. Not that I want there to be, just that it was such an obvious thing to do.
Put Your Faith In the Ruling Class
The real problem with Mallaby's column today isn't actually the throwaway bit about Iraq. The real issue is the message that he's sending, and the little rhetorical trickery with which he leads us there. He starts with the basic premise that well-functioning societies require a degree of trust, something I agree with:
But then he moves from the issue of shared social capital - trusting each other - to the need for people to have faith in the ruling class:
Mallaby's arguing that society functions much better when the ruling class is unfettered by the pesky masses. Yes, yes, the ruling class shouldn't abuse its trust - that would be wrong - but when it does the real tragedy is that then they get subjected to pesky oversight from the dirty fucking hippies which prevents them from achieving their true awesomeness as our unaccountable overlords.
I really don't understand these people.
In 1995 Francis Fukuyama came out with a book called "Trust," in which he argued that a society's capacity for cooperation underpins its prosperity. The same year, Robert Putnam's famous article, "Bowling Alone," lamented that the United States was depleting its stock of precious social capital.
But then he moves from the issue of shared social capital - trusting each other - to the need for people to have faith in the ruling class:
Meanwhile President Bush had enormous foreign policy momentum in 2002-03 because Americans trusted him. Thanks to the Iraq mess, Americans are now focused on holding Bush accountable, and his options are limited.
There are powerful reasons trust tends to decline and accountability advances. Mobile societies tend to have weak bonds; the Internet makes it easier to hold people accountable and encourages acerbic negativity. And the absence of trust can feed on itself. Leaders function under stifling oversight; this causes them to perform sluggishly, so trust continues to stagnate. But occasionally there is a chance to escape this trap: A shock causes trust to rise, leaders have a chance to lead and there's an opportunity to boost trust still further.
We've recently had a double opportunity. The boom of the 1990s boosted trust in business; the 2001 terrorist attacks boosted trust in government. But CEOs and politicians abused these gifts with scandals and incompetence. Such is the cost of corporate malfeasance and the Iraq war: Precious social capital is destroyed by leaders' avarice and hubris.
Mallaby's arguing that society functions much better when the ruling class is unfettered by the pesky masses. Yes, yes, the ruling class shouldn't abuse its trust - that would be wrong - but when it does the real tragedy is that then they get subjected to pesky oversight from the dirty fucking hippies which prevents them from achieving their true awesomeness as our unaccountable overlords.
I really don't understand these people.
Hubris
To be fair to Mallaby, like all sensible beloved centrists he had some sensible things to say throughout the runup to the war. He furrowed his brow and fretted that maybe the Bush administration on rebuilding Afghanistan wasn't so hot, and maybe that should make us think twice about our excellent Iraqi adventure. He offered up some other concerns about the whole thing. But, really, the money quote is the one below:
There, in one neat paragraph, sums up the attitude of the Wise Old Men of Washington at the time. Yes, well, maybe the Bush administration is a bit blinkered. And, yes, I, as a Beloved Centrist in Good Standing, have a license to furrow my brow a bit in print. My criticisms and concerns are measured and serious, you see. But the real problem is, as it always is, those dirty fucking hippies who oppose the war.
All that said, however, the worst silliness in the Iraq debate comes from those who write off the war talk as an example of Bush's blinkered attitude to foreign policy. It is the critics who are blinkered, for it is they who refuse to see a real threat. And it is the critics, in many cases, who have called repeatedly upon the administration to engage in the world -- and who now pout and sulk because their calls have been answered.
There, in one neat paragraph, sums up the attitude of the Wise Old Men of Washington at the time. Yes, well, maybe the Bush administration is a bit blinkered. And, yes, I, as a Beloved Centrist in Good Standing, have a license to furrow my brow a bit in print. My criticisms and concerns are measured and serious, you see. But the real problem is, as it always is, those dirty fucking hippies who oppose the war.
Hubris
Sebastian Mallaby, 05/06/02:
Mallaby, 09/09/2002:
Mallaby, 08/21/2002:
And the Quiet American (well, Brit, actually) offers up his mea culpa, 04/12/04:
This is pretty strange. The charge that the prime minister is Washington's poodle is nonsense: He differs with the Bush folk on global warming and steel trade; his terrific aid minister has traded public insults with the U.S. Treasury; last week his foreign secretary differed with the Pentagon on biological and chemical weapons. Many Britons preemptively complain that Blair is backing Bush's ambition to unseat Iraq's dictator. But Blair hasn't promised his support yet and won't until he sees a plan of action. Besides, if Bush can come up with a way to rid the world of a prime menace, why should Britons object?
The answer is there's no good reason, beyond that wretched sulkiness. And yet, though there is still too much of this in Britain, there's probably less than there once was. The staid old Britain lives alongside pockets of entrepreneurial energy; the country is more a meritocracy and more a melting pot. And Blair, after all, enjoys record poll ratings, despite the gripes one hears about him. As his campaign slogan said five years ago, the success of New Labor perhaps portends a New Britain.
Mallaby, 09/09/2002:
Now consider the challenge of Iraq. Pretending that Saddam Hussein does not pose a threat is like pretending that global warming or global poverty poses no threat: It involves ignoring the evidence. Hussein has amassed biological and chemical weapons and seeks nuclear ones. He has proven his willingness to use this arsenal against Iran and against the Kurds. He has demonstrated his massive attachment to massively destructive weaponry by withstanding a decade of international pressure to get rid of it. The threshold question on Iraq is the same as the threshold question on climate change: Are you willing to acknowledge the threat and do something about it?
The Bush administration, again to its enormous credit, is willing to engage this problem. And engagement means facing up to the next point: All responses short of war have been attempted. The Clinton administration tried diplomacy, sanctions, air strikes and support for the internal opposition; none of this stopped Saddam Hussein from keeping his weapons. If you take the Iraqi threat seriously, it's hard to avoid the unpleasant conclusion that war may well be necessary.
This doesn't clinch the case for war. If you think Hussein's successor will be just as bad, it doesn't make sense to sacrifice thousands of lives in an effort to unseat him. If you think new concentrations of al Qaeda in Iran pose a more immediate threat, it doesn't make sense to tie up military resources in an Iraqi venture. What's more, the administration has handled the Iraq issue badly. It should have been clear from the start that it would seek the support of Congress and its allies.
All that said, however, the worst silliness in the Iraq debate comes from those who write off the war talk as an example of Bush's blinkered attitude to foreign policy. It is the critics who are blinkered, for it is they who refuse to see a real threat. And it is the critics, in many cases, who have called repeatedly upon the administration to engage in the world -- and who now pout and sulk because their calls have been answered.
Mallaby, 08/21/2002:
Creating such a fund is worth the trouble because Iraq won't be the last challenge in the wars of preemption.
And the Quiet American (well, Brit, actually) offers up his mea culpa, 04/12/04:
Which brings us to Iraq. In a technocratic sense, the war was right: Saddam Hussein was an America-hating monster. But the war, unfortunately, enjoys little legitimacy. We are not back in the Vietnam era, when demonstrating students enthusiastically waved posters of America's enemy, Ho Chi Minh. But there's a sense that the Iraq war violated the principles America is admired for. This country stands for the rule of law, but the Bush policy of unilateral preemption appears lawless. This country stands for the democratic conviction that a broad cacophony of voices must be heard, however much that slows the wheels of government. But in the lead-up to Iraq, the Bush team treated international opinion contemptuously. And in assembling the provisional authority in Iraq, it thought it could sideline awkward but powerful voices such as that of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani.
This was a mistake. The lesson the aid people learned applies to global strategy as well: Legitimacy is crucial. Precisely because American ideals have triumphed and authoritarianism has been discredited -- precisely because no demonstrating students wave posters of Hussein -- America needs broad popular consent for its actions.
Everyone should pray for American success in Iraq, and it's too early to pronounce success impossible. But our troubles there are paradoxically the product of our success. America won the contest against communism because its ambition is not to rule the world but to create a world of rules; it is not simply to be right but to stand up for the rights of others. You cannot win the Cold War on the strength of these ideals, then expect to win in Iraq by ignoring them.
Hubris
Oh Lordy, I guess Monday's gonna have to be Sebastian Mallaby Day. Teaser:
As the kids say... heh, indeed.
We've recently had a double opportunity. The boom of the 1990s boosted trust in business; the 2001 terrorist attacks boosted trust in government. But CEOs and politicians abused these gifts with scandals and incompetence. Such is the cost of corporate malfeasance and the Iraq war: Precious social capital is destroyed by leaders' avarice and hubris.
As the kids say... heh, indeed.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Meanwhile
Over there:
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Suspected Sunni Arab gunmen killed 23 policemen Sunday, including 17 in one attack in the predominantly Shiite southern city of Basra, signaling the possible start of an intensified insurgent campaign against Iraq’s predominantly Shiite Muslim security forces.
Political tension deepened in Baghdad when Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, the country’s highest-ranking Sunni politician, threatened to resign if Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki did not act quickly to eradicate two feared Shiite militias.
Shrill
Joe Galloway is shrill:
This unseemly circus and its clowns in Congress can't go away fast enough and with enough dishonor and disgrace to suit the circumstances. Their place in America's history is secure: They will go down as the worst administration and the worst Congress we've ever had. Period.
They deserve to lose both the House and the Senate on Nov. 7, and the White House in 2008. They bullied their way into a war that they thought would be a slam-dunk and then so bungled things that the only superpower left in the world has been humbled and hobbled in a world that they've made more dangerous for us.
Thanks, guys. You've done a heckuva job. We won't forget it.
Fresh Thread
I think molasses got into my internets today, or maybe the truck driver is on vacation or sumthin'.
Serious
The guy the bullshit moose thinks is a serious foreign policy thinker would still vote for the Iraq war.
God's War
Garry Wills:
(via Howie Klein)
There is a particular danger with a war that God commands. What if God should lose? That is unthinkable to the evangelicals. They cannot accept the idea of second-guessing God, and he was the one who led them into war. Thus, in 2006, when two thirds of the American people told pollsters that the war in Iraq was a mistake, the third of those still standing behind it were mainly evangelicals (who make up about one third of the population). It was a faith-based certitude.
(via Howie Klein)
This Doesn't Sound Good
Denver Post:
On an autumn day two years ago, Colorado issued a warrant to arrest Taiwan Lee, a state prisoner who had vanished on parole.
He hadn't gone far. While police looked for him, he bought three houses at inflated prices in Arapahoe County with the help of lenders who put up the entire $1.9 million.
After he was caught and jailed, he managed to buy two more. Until the foreclosures commenced, Lee owned five villas in an affluent gated community while living behind prison bars 150 miles away.
...
Critics say mortgage companies have little incentive to ferret out inflated sales because they bundle and resell their home loans to Wall Street investors, taking their profits and diluting fraud losses in large pools of mortgage-backed bonds.
These securities get "sold in little pieces all over the world," said Lou Barnes, a Colorado mortgage bank owner. "It makes it very difficult to figure out who, if anyone, bears any responsibility for the flow of Colorado's foreclosures."
Marc Loewenthal, a senior vice president of New Century Financial Corp., says his industry cares about the loans it sells.
Because You Keep Cancelling Them
Turning now to the very important stuff, I imagine a big reason why people aren't rushing to start watching many new serialized dramas is that the networks have a tendency to to cancel them after a few episodes. If something's good, and it isn't canceled, people can catch up later with DVDs or by using the internets.
And I imagine those of us with lovely Tivos can do what I did - just set the damn thing to record all the episodes of anything which looks decent. If something manages to survive and still sounds interesting I can just start watching.
And I imagine those of us with lovely Tivos can do what I did - just set the damn thing to record all the episodes of anything which looks decent. If something manages to survive and still sounds interesting I can just start watching.
The Man
Not so long after 9/11 I was in an airport, and a group of 3-4 young, probably college-aged, guys were walking by. One of them saw George Bush on the teevee and loudly and enthusiastically shouted "he's The Man!" His companions looked at him slightly quizzically, and he backpedaled a bit, amending his proclamation by saying, "Well, he'd better be..."
After 9/11 George Bush had a chance to be The Man, and too many people wrongly assumed that because he'd better be The Man, that he would be The Man.
We know how that worked out.
After 9/11 George Bush had a chance to be The Man, and too many people wrongly assumed that because he'd better be The Man, that he would be The Man.
We know how that worked out.
Serious
While attempting to make a rather nonsensical comparison between Iraq and WWII, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Dumbass) just said about Iraq:
It's only been a short amount of time.
Oh Ricky
I have to say I've been quite puzzled with Little Ricky's campaign, which according to polls hasn't been helping him
It isn't over yet, of course, but I thought his ideal election strategy would've been pretty obvious - play to his base in those parts of the state where they live, be the distinguished longterm senator in general ad campaigns, and either directly or through the use of surrogates go at Casey from the left in suburban Philadelphia to confuse the hell out of the swing voters there.
If nothing else it looks like we'll be able to say goodbye to Senator Man on Dog 9 days from now.
It isn't over yet, of course, but I thought his ideal election strategy would've been pretty obvious - play to his base in those parts of the state where they live, be the distinguished longterm senator in general ad campaigns, and either directly or through the use of surrogates go at Casey from the left in suburban Philadelphia to confuse the hell out of the swing voters there.
If nothing else it looks like we'll be able to say goodbye to Senator Man on Dog 9 days from now.
Hussein Verdict
Well, leave it to old Saddam to say what everyone knows to be true but which no one is talking about. According to CNN he asserts that his Nov. 5 verdict is for propaganda purposes for the US election. Well, duhh.
Meanwhile
Over there:
* FALLUJA - Police found four bodies bearing signs of torture and bullet wounds in a deserted area near Falluja, 50 km (32 miles) west of Baghdad, police said. The bullet-riddled body of a kidnapped policeman was found, dumped in the town.
BAGHDAD - Police found 25 bodies with signs of torture and bullet wounds in different parts of Baghdad over the last 24 hours, Interior Ministry sources said.
BAGHDAD - A sports presenter at the state television station Iraqiya was killed with her driver in Baghdad, police said. The bodies were among six found in different parts of the city.
BAGHDAD - A bodyguard of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was shot and wounded in a government car on Saturday in Baghdad, government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said. Maliki was absent. Gunmen in a car also killed two policemen in central Baghdad.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Still, this must be good for Republicans.
Oct. 28, 2006 - As the race for Congress enters the homestretch, the Republicans find themselves limping to the finish line, according to the new NEWSWEEK Poll. President Bush's approval rating continues a slow but steady climb—from an all-time NEWSWEEK-poll low of 33 percent three weeks ago to 37 percent today. But it may be too little, too late: if the midterm elections were held today, 53 percent of those likely to go to the polls would vote for the Democratic candidate in their Congressional district versus just 39 percent who would vote for the Republican.
News to Brian Ross
Poor guy, scooped by Drudge according to the Post:
This is an absurd characterization designed to make Drudge seem like a neutral scandal-pusher, instead of a conservative operative.
Your liberal media, at work again. Mark Halperin was right about one thing:
Indeed he does. Though only a member in good standing of the Gang of 500, could simultaneously believe that the media is overwhelmingly liberal and is ruled by Matt Drudge.
Allen campaign officials provided excerpts from the books -- some of them depicting acts of incest and graphic sexuality -- to the Drudge Report Web site Thursday night. Matt Drudge's Internet blog often breaks or promotes stories with sensational angles, most recently the scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.).
This is an absurd characterization designed to make Drudge seem like a neutral scandal-pusher, instead of a conservative operative.
Your liberal media, at work again. Mark Halperin was right about one thing:
Matt Drudge rules our world.
Indeed he does. Though only a member in good standing of the Gang of 500, could simultaneously believe that the media is overwhelmingly liberal and is ruled by Matt Drudge.
The Big Money
Didn't quite track it exactly here, but it was about $35+ grand. Kos and the gang had about $300K.
Whatever happens this election - it could be bad, ok, as good as it gets - I do hope that everyone who has given over this cycle commits to giving earlier, giving smarter, giving faster. I'm really not a blog triumphalist, but it's difficult to see how blogs aren't a nontrivial part of where we are right now for a variety of reasons. This isn't about glorifying individual bloggers, but about a way forward for forging a new grand coalition.
Whatever happens this election - it could be bad, ok, as good as it gets - I do hope that everyone who has given over this cycle commits to giving earlier, giving smarter, giving faster. I'm really not a blog triumphalist, but it's difficult to see how blogs aren't a nontrivial part of where we are right now for a variety of reasons. This isn't about glorifying individual bloggers, but about a way forward for forging a new grand coalition.
Friday, October 27, 2006
Stupid Polling Tricks
Why would there be a poll just out about the Murphy/Fitzpatrick race which included the name of a guy who withdrew from the race in August? Franklin and Marshall just polled a 3-way race which doesn't exist. Maybe we need a poller's ethics conference.
So, to clear up some of Hotline's confusion - the reason why different polls are getting such different results is that one of those polls is polling about a named candidate who isn't on the ballot.
Here's the question.
Murphy's been trending well in ever other poll I've seen. He's still got a tough battle, but this particular poll can be somewhat discounted.
So, to clear up some of Hotline's confusion - the reason why different polls are getting such different results is that one of those polls is polling about a named candidate who isn't on the ballot.
Here's the question.
Vote_CD. If the election for the US House of Representatives was being held today and the candidates were MICHAEL FITZPATRICK, the Republican, PATRICK MURPHY, the Democrat, AND TOM LINGENFELTER, the Independent candidate, would you vote for...
47% MICHAEL FITZPATRICK
38% PATRICK MURPHY
3% TOM LINGENFELTER
12% Do not know
Murphy's been trending well in ever other poll I've seen. He's still got a tough battle, but this particular poll can be somewhat discounted.
Expanding
Perhaps the Army and Marine Corps are like balloons - if you blow into them they'll expand! John McCain again comes out with his plan for ponies:
Blow into that balloon Senator McCain!
A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, McCain said increasing U.S. forces would require expanding the standing Army and Marine Corps - a step the Bush administration has resisted. He also reiterated his opposition to a hasty U.S. withdrawal.
"If we leave ... the fighting will evolve into chaos there," McCain told reporters after speaking at an event for local Republican candidates.
Reporters asked him to elaborate on his statement last week in Iowa that more combat troops are needed in Iraq to quell a "classic insurgency."
"Another 20,000 troops in Iraq, but that means expanding the Army and the Marine Corps," he said.
"It's not just a set number."
Blow into that balloon Senator McCain!
Give a Little, Give a Lot
Looks like around 70 people have contributed through the link today. How about a few more? Don't feel bad if you can't. I know not everyone has extra.
Go See a Movie
New York people can see Shut up and Sing at Loews Village 7 or Loews Lincoln Square.
LA people can go to AMC Century City 15. Buy tickets here.
LA people can go to AMC Century City 15. Buy tickets here.
Assholes
Was out and overheard a conversation involving an elderly, apparently less than rich, Southern-born African-American man who was having to jump through hoops to prove his Medicare eligibility because, like many of his race, class, and generation, he was born at home and had no birth certificate.
They're really just sadistic.
They're really just sadistic.
Pr0n
Stu Rothenberg:
I'm really not ready to buy it. Never underestimate the capacity for spite voting by the lizard brains. So, help out.
With only a couple of weeks until Election Day, we know there will be a Democratic wave on Nov. 7. And we can be fairly certain that by historical standards it will be high - possibly very high. But we still don’t know how many Republicans once considered safe will be swept out of office.
The national political environment currently is worse than it was in 1994, when the Democrats lost 52 House seats, eight Senate seats and 10 governorships, and when Republicans won GOP control of the House for the first time in decades.
You heard me right: It’s worse this year than it was in 1994, when voters were dissatisfied with the first two years of the Bill Clinton presidency.
I'm really not ready to buy it. Never underestimate the capacity for spite voting by the lizard brains. So, help out.
Staying is Winning
Froomkin:
With the body counts soaring, the country descending deeper into civil war and the central government consistently unable to assert itself, how can he call this winning?
The answer: It's becoming increasingly clear that Bush sees the war in Iraq in very simple terms. As he himself said, he believes that the only way to lose is to leave. Therefore anything else is winning -- anything else at all.
Even if no progress is being made -- even if things are getting worse, rather than better -- simply staying is winning.
So we're winning.
Final
Today really is the last day for your political contribution to make a difference. I've modified the Eschaton list a bit, and added a few more last minute candidates. Or no need to listen to me, choose our own. One last push.
Lies and the Lying Liars
For some reason Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick likes to lie about veterans. Call his congressional office and ask him why he likes to lie about Patrick Murphy.
Call his campaign office and ask the same:
Debate report:
1516 Longworth H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515
(202)225-4276
(202) 225-9511 Fax
Doylestown Office
60 N. Main Street
Doylestown, PA 18901
(215) 348-7511
(215) 348-7658 Fax
Langhorne Office
One Oxford Valley
Suite 800
Langhorne, PA 19047
(215) 752-7711
(215) 750-8014 Fax
Call his campaign office and ask the same:
267.880.1250
Debate report:
The campaign rhetoric spiked in the Eighth District congressional race yesterday as Democrat Patrick Murphy called the incumbent "a liar and a coward" during a debate in Fairless Hills.
A rumble went through the crowd of about 100 businesspeople at the Lower Bucks Chamber of Commerce debate as Murphy used his opening statement to confront Republican Mike Fitzpatrick about televised ads that questioned his prosecution record.
Fitzpatrick's ad questions Murphy's contention that he did work for the U.S. Justice Department and that, as an attorney with the Army, he prosecuted some of the toughest criminals in New York.
"Mike, you are a liar and a coward," Murphy said.
He later offered reporters an affidavit of his appointment as a special assistant U.S. attorney in New York in 2001.
Your Liberal Media
Still not liberal.
The best revenge is to go see Shut up and Sing when it opens near you.
And, I suggest all that leftover advertising money be spent to advertise on fine liberal blogs everywhere.
The best revenge is to go see Shut up and Sing when it opens near you.
And, I suggest all that leftover advertising money be spent to advertise on fine liberal blogs everywhere.
Tears
Digby:
Well, not tears, so much as white hot anger.
I was a wee bit annoyed when Fox ran ads for Specter, thinking that it was a big picture counterproductive act, but christ it never occurred to me that anyone would go after him.
The conservative movement is sick, and I don't think there's anyone around willing to try to heal it.
- The portion of the interview they broadcast was quite decent. But you can see the whole interview here --- and listen to Katie Couric push him over and over again on the burning question of whether he manipulated his medication and ask him whether he should have re-scheduled the shoot when his symptoms were manifested as they were. And she does it while she's sitting directly across from him watching him shake like crazy. Her questions imply that it was in poor taste or manipulative as if he can magically conjure a film crew to catch him in on of the fleeting moments where he doesn't appear too symptomatic. The press seems to truly believe that it is reasonable to be suspicious of him showing symptoms of a disease that has him so severely in its clutches that if he doesn't take his medication his face becomes a frozen mask and he cannot even talk.
Well, not tears, so much as white hot anger.
I was a wee bit annoyed when Fox ran ads for Specter, thinking that it was a big picture counterproductive act, but christ it never occurred to me that anyone would go after him.
The conservative movement is sick, and I don't think there's anyone around willing to try to heal it.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Saint McCain on Webb's Novel Lost Soldiers
- “James Webb’s new novel paints a portrait of a modern Vietnam charged with hopes for the future but haunted by the ghosts of its war-torn past. It captures well the lingering scars of the war, and exposes the tension between the dynamism of a new generation and the invisible bondage of an older generation for whom wartime allegiances, and animosities, are rendered no less vivid by the passage of time. A novel of revenge and redemption that tells us much about both where Vietnam is headed and where it has been.”
— Senator John McCain
Denny Hastert's Gonna Throw Victoria Wulsin Jail
Jean Schmidt really is a very stupid person. She's very proudly sent Wulsin two letters on the premise that somehow House Rules apply to a person not actually serving in Congress. In the second one she threatens to tattle to Dead Man Walking himself. Read it here (.pdf)
Heartless, Useless, Creeps
Yeah, for some reason my ability to be surprised by these conscienceless freaks never ends.
Lies and the Lying Liars
Mike Fitzpatrick edition.
Mike Fitzpatrick. Just another Republican liar.
Here's a copy of Murphy's appointment letter.
This stuff really pisses you off when you actually know the person involved.
A new television ad paid for by the campaign of Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick, R-8, claims that Democrat Patrick Murphy has lied about his employment as a federal prosecutor in New York.
Murphy called the ad “a lie” and “shameful” and demanded that his political opponent pull the ad from the airwaves; Mike Conallen, Fitzpatrick’s chief of staff, refused.
“It’s a desperate and false ad from a flailing campaign,” Murphy said Tuesday. “Mike Fitzpatrick is a liar and a coward.”
According to court documents provided by Murphy’s campaign and an interview with one of Murphy’s former superiors, Murphy did prosecute cases in New York involving drugs, theft, assault and sexual molestation.
The ad, which features the standard deep-voiced narration and ominous music, claims Murphy’s frequent statement that he “prosecuted some of the toughest criminals in New York” is untrue.
“He claims he was a U.S. attorney, but the Justice Department confirms he never worked there,” the ad said. “Murphy says he prosecuted some of New York’s toughest criminals. Court records prove he never did.”
Mike Fitzpatrick. Just another Republican liar.
Here's a copy of Murphy's appointment letter.
This stuff really pisses you off when you actually know the person involved.
They Write Letters
Barack Obama writes a letter.
This is no small thing given Lieberman was who he chose as his mentor in the Senate.
Not the hugest thing, but still.
This is no small thing given Lieberman was who he chose as his mentor in the Senate.
Not the hugest thing, but still.
Oh My
Chris Shays has a problem.
But, while Shays may want his constituents to know about his first--and most daring--trip to Iraq, he apparently doesn't want them to know how he got there. Shays's moment of triumph in Iraq came about because he happened to already be in the Middle East--attending the third Qatar-American Conference on Free Markets and Democracy in the tiny oil-rich nation of Qatar. Shays's visit was paid for by The Islamic Free Market Institute, a nonprofit group founded by GOP ally Grover Norquist and run by a protégé of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff to help bring Muslims into the Republican fold. Days before he snuck across the border to cheer on Operation Iraqi Freedom, Shays was at the Doha Ritz Carlton, comparing Connecticut, a centuries-old, economically diverse democracy, to Qatar, a monarchy ruled by a single family since its independence in 1971. "This nation, like my small state, has always played a large role in advancing participatory democracy, civil discourse, and stable commerce," Shays told a well-heeled audience of Qatari politicians and businessmen over lunch.
Shays has been a strong advocate for public-disclosure rules over the years. "As public servants, we have a responsibility to uphold the ethics process, not weaken it," he told The Houston Chronicle in 2005, objecting to an effort to defang House ethics rules in the wake of revelations about Tom DeLay's overseas travels and ties to Abramoff. Those travel rules require members of Congress to file forms revealing all travel expenses paid by outside sources. But, despite his record of pushing for meticulous record-keeping, Shays's privately sponsored trip to Qatar was notably absent from his own annual federal financial disclosure form, filed in May 2004, in violation of House rules. Nor did he submit an amendment disclosing the sponsor of his Qatar trip until confronted in mid-October 2006 by The New Republic with internal Islamic Institute receipts for his plane tickets, which were provided by an Arab American source upset with Shays's foreign policy positions. Given his reputation and perennially contested district, it was a particularly foolhardy move.
Wanker of the Day
Jean Schmidt.
I think she took her eye of the ball.
Anyway, please open up your wallets and empty them into the campaign account of your favorite candidates. Just do it.
I think she took her eye of the ball.
Anyway, please open up your wallets and empty them into the campaign account of your favorite candidates. Just do it.
Tragic
As I just said on the Sam Seder show, what's tragic is that the conversation we're having about Iraq right now is just about the same one we're going to be having two years from now on the eve of the presidential election. It's very depressing.
Delusional
Bush to his media sycophants:
As Greg points out, a strong majority support getting out. But more than that, we weren't attacked by Iraq.
No wonder they hate us.
My attitude about our – look, I'm into campaigning out there: People want to know, can you win? That's what they want to know. I mean, there's – look, there's some 25 percent or so that want us to get out, shouldn't have been out there in the first place – and that's fine. They're wrong. But you can understand why they feel that way. They just don't believe in war, and – at any cost. I believe when you get attacked and somebody declares war on you, you fight back. And that's what we're doing.
As Greg points out, a strong majority support getting out. But more than that, we weren't attacked by Iraq.
No wonder they hate us.
Derision
One thing our side has never embraced very well is the political power of derision, of turning a political opponent into a national joke. Obviously it helps if someone like Senator Man on Dog provides lots of ammunition, but my guess is that if Santorum does indeed lose this election it'll be in large part because a few years of sustained mocking reached into the brains of independents and low information voters (mostly the same group in my opinion). They may not know exactly why Santorum's a joke, but they know he is one, and that's enough to keep them from voting for him.
Along those lines, kudos to Casey's person for probably understanding this:
Along those lines, kudos to Casey's person for probably understanding this:
"The people of Pennsylvania are smart enough to see through this," Smar said. "Rick Santorum said North Korea isn't a threat, because Kim Jong Il just wants to watch NBA basketball. He's the same Rick Santorum who compared the war in Iraq to 'The Lord of the Rings.' This isn't the person to take foreign policy advice from."
Nada
Conservative ABC News continues to chastize Democrats for things they have no evidence they're doing.
Aside from the absurdity of Halperin's belief that the media are liberal, what's actually more troubling is his belief that if he bends over backwards to kiss the ass of conservatives they'll support him. There's nothing you can do to please conservatives, short of imitating Fox. And Fox already exists.
Aside from the absurdity of Halperin's belief that the media are liberal, what's actually more troubling is his belief that if he bends over backwards to kiss the ass of conservatives they'll support him. There's nothing you can do to please conservatives, short of imitating Fox. And Fox already exists.
Meanwhile
Over there:
BAGHDAD, Oct 26 (Reuters) - The military said on Thursday five more American troops were killed in Iraq, bringing the U.S. death toll for October to 96, as President George W. Bush sought to deflect mounting election-year pressure over the war.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Shut Up and Sing
Even though I'm the Biggest Fan Evah, no one thought to send me a screener of the new documentary about the Dixie Chicks. I have heard from a couple of people who have said it is really great, so check it out. I've heard it really captures the bizarro world which was the 2002-2003 political/media climate really well.
Yes, there's a big paid ad for this movie to the left. No I was under no obligation to write this.
Yes, there's a big paid ad for this movie to the left. No I was under no obligation to write this.
Jealous Much?
Joe Klein on Joe Scar last night:
KLEIN: You know, I just can‘t get over Rush Limbaugh. Boy—you know, people who live in glass pillboxes shouldn‘t throw spitballs, right? I mean, this is the guy—the guy least in the country who should be criticizing an ad like this, given his own history of addiction.
And I got to say that, you know, for the vice president of the United States to legitimize a guy like Rush Limbaugh is every bit as bad as all those Democrats who went out to Las Vegas to kiss the ring of the Daily Kos and the left-wing bloggers. I mean, can‘t we—can‘t we just stop this crap?
Mindless Jerks
Conservative news network ABC is now pre-emptively chastizing Democrats for things they haven't even done.
Racism North and South
One always gets in trouble making simple observations about regional differences about anything, though I think the difference in the race-baiting tactics in the Tennessee senate race and the Mass. governor's race offer up a wee lesson on the differences in regional racist thinking.
In the Northeast the appeal to racism involves a general association between being black and urban criminality.
In the South it apparently involves the notion that black men are jungle animals who are going to sleep with all "your" white women, who will all be overcome by their animal magnetism.
In the Northeast the appeal to racism involves a general association between being black and urban criminality.
In the South it apparently involves the notion that black men are jungle animals who are going to sleep with all "your" white women, who will all be overcome by their animal magnetism.
Fabulous
Had to hunt for it, but here it is:
...reading through, the majority decision seems to be that the state doesn't have to let gay people get married, just has to grant them the option to have all of the rights and benefits conferred by marriage.
(...apparently this is an ESCHATON EXCLUSIVE, as the link from their front page points to a file which doesn't exist and no one else seems to have found the right file yet)
HELD: Denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married
heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. The Court holds
that under the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, committed samesex
couples must be afforded on equal terms the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the
civil marriage statutes. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to samesex
couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process.
...reading through, the majority decision seems to be that the state doesn't have to let gay people get married, just has to grant them the option to have all of the rights and benefits conferred by marriage.
(...apparently this is an ESCHATON EXCLUSIVE, as the link from their front page points to a file which doesn't exist and no one else seems to have found the right file yet)
Shrill
It sounds like Ackerman got canned because he was too shrill. Funny. And I mean that literally, as Foer basically says he agrees with Ackerman about everything but suggests there was just something wrong with his tone.
A concern troll editing TNR. Perfect.
A concern troll editing TNR. Perfect.
Simple Answers to Simple Questions
Not stumped this time. Media Matters asks:
No.
This has been another edition of simple answers to simple questions.
Will news organizations that obligingly aired the RNC ad free of charge treat the Democrats' ad the same way?
No.
This has been another edition of simple answers to simple questions.
Wanker of the Day
Mindless jerk Mark Halperin:
And that, folks, is your liberal media hard at work being conservative.
MARK HALPERIN, POLITICAL DIRECTOR, ABC NEWS: Well, Bill, as you know in this country, we’ve got these old news organizations. The major networks, ABC, where you used to work, The New York Times, The Washington Post.
These organizations have been around a long time. And for 40 years, conservatives have looked with suspicion at them. I think we’ve got a chance in these last two weeks to prove to conservatives that we understand their grievances. We’re going to try to do better, but these organizations still have incredible sway. And conservatives are certain that we’re going to be out to get them. We’ve got to fix that.
And that, folks, is your liberal media hard at work being conservative.
Out
54% of Americans want out of Iraq within a year, and they arrived at that conclusion all by themselves. It's certainly not an opinion ever expressed by members of the "beloved center."
Presser
Mercifully I was away from the teevee, but I gather that was up to the usual high standards of these things.
Eastercrapp
Probably the stupidest person in professional pundtry is Gregg Easterbrook. He's exhibit A for "too stupid to know he's stupid" and more than that he's too stupid to understand that there are people who know things that he doesn't, and more than that he's so stupid that he sets himself up as an authority about things he has absolutely zero comprehension of. It'd be comical except he's helping to make even more people as stupid as he is and what we don't need right now is even more stupid people.
The fact that something appears in an elite peer reviewed academic journal doesn't mean that it's necessarily flawless, or beyond criticism. Academic research is a process, and few things are ever definitive. And valid criticisms of a study do not necessarily invalidate a study, they just suggest further improvements. They may cast some doubt on the findings, and suggest further research is needed, but methodological imperfections are inevitable. Again, it's a process. No study, especially ones involving survey data, can be perfect. But it's fair to assume that the authors of such a study are not as stupid as Gregg Easterbrook is, that they have some vague understanding of basic statistics. Or, you know, maybe even an advanced degree requiring a lot of knowledge of such things.
The fact that something appears in an elite peer reviewed academic journal doesn't mean that it's necessarily flawless, or beyond criticism. Academic research is a process, and few things are ever definitive. And valid criticisms of a study do not necessarily invalidate a study, they just suggest further improvements. They may cast some doubt on the findings, and suggest further research is needed, but methodological imperfections are inevitable. Again, it's a process. No study, especially ones involving survey data, can be perfect. But it's fair to assume that the authors of such a study are not as stupid as Gregg Easterbrook is, that they have some vague understanding of basic statistics. Or, you know, maybe even an advanced degree requiring a lot of knowledge of such things.
More Nuggets of Wisdom From the Beloved Center
Ignatius, 10/18/2002:
Ignatius, 11/01/02:
Ignatius, 11/08/02:
A war in Iraq could trigger a new economic boom or a deeper slump. But most of the downside risk is already built into oil prices. So if forced to wager where prices will be in a year, a sensible gambler would bet on a price decline -- and a corresponding boost to the global economy.
Ignatius, 11/01/02:
If President Bush is going to lead the country into battle, he needs to begin by convincing his own national security bureaucracy. The effects of Iraq, like Vietnam, could last a generation. It's crucial to get it right -- and to have a united country that will stay the course behind the president, even when things turn nasty and optimistic assumptions prove wrong.
Ignatius, 11/08/02:
But nobody in Hussein's inner circle is thought to be advocating compliance, and for a simple reason: They know that if he reversed course and gave up the weapons he has secretly been accumulating for so many years, it would amount to a disastrous loss of face. The regime's authority would crumble -- and Hussein, his family and inner circle would be more vulnerable than ever to attack. That's why Saddam Hussein is likely to seek a defiant and probably suicidal last stand, like the famous American battle of the Alamo. He has few other viable choices. He is damned if he doesn't capitulate to the U.N. inspectors and damned if he does.
...
Keep your eye on Saddam Hussein as he is pushed inexorably toward the corner. I suspect that once the U.N. inspection regime is in place, he's a loser -- either way he moves.
The danger is, how many Americans, Israelis and Arabs will he take down with him? The Iraqi leader has an endgame strategy, too. We just don't know what it is.
Listening to the Wise Old Men of Washington
David Ignatius, 10/06/02:
That's where Ignatius's "beloved center," which is punditspeak for "what my pals and I think about stuff," got us. Thanks.
Many analysts warn of the disasters that await in this postwar Iraq, but frankly I'm not convinced. Yes, Iraq is a country with many ethnic groups that don't always get along. And, yes, there will be a risk of revenge killings and general mayhem as the millions of Iraqis who suffered from Hussein's torturers seek to settle scores.
But these strike me as manageable problems, especially if people think carefully about them beforehand. Maintaining order will be essential in the first weeks and months after Hussein and his secret police are gone, and Washington should be training military police who will keep the peace, even as it drills the soldiers who will do the fighting. Yet we hear little of these plans -- even though they would encourage Iraqis and other Arabs, and even Europeans, to feel that the war is worth fighting.
In truth, Iraq is probably more ready for democracy than any nation in the Arab world. That's partly because its people have suffered so much from the cruelty of the current regime. But it's also because the Iraqis are the most likely Arabs to build a truly modern nation. For centuries, Baghdad has been a center of learning, and the Iraqis gained a reputation as the Prussians of the Arab world. It was no accident that Iraq was the only Arab country with the scientific brainpower to mount a serious nuclear weapons program.
And the talk of Iraq's internecine strife is overblown, too. The long-repressed Shiite community forms a majority of its population, which leads some analysts to fear Shiites will create a radical Muslim regime. But the Shiites of Iraq are Arabs who stayed loyal to Hussein through nearly a decade of war against the Persians of Iran. Iraq's Shiite elite has been the country's leading modernizers, supplying more than their share of scientists and engineers.
One Iraqi who is planning for the future is Kanan Makiya, who is heading a project to draft a new constitution, under the sponsorship of the opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress. I first talked with Makiya more than a decade ago, after he bravely published a book called "Republic of Fear," which documented the vicious torture and repression that sustained Hussein and his cronies in power.
Makiya and other Iraqi dissidents describe scenes of unimaginable cruelty -- children thrown from helicopters to force their parents to confess to crimes against the regime, for example. "Hope itself has been killed," he once wrote.
It's strange that liberals haven't paid more attention to the egregious human rights abuses of the Iraqi regime. To quote one horrific passage from the recent (widely ignored) British government report on Iraq: "Prisoners at the Qurtiyya Prison in Baghdad and elsewhere are kept in metal boxes the size of tea chests. If they do not confess they are left to die."
That's where Ignatius's "beloved center," which is punditspeak for "what my pals and I think about stuff," got us. Thanks.
The Wise Old Men of Washington
I think everything which is wrong with our elite political discourse is captured fairly well in the last paragraph of Ignatius's column:
Of course, I remember what happened the last time the Wise Old Men of Washington got together and came up with a cunning plan.
The real opportunity presented by the Baker-Hamilton process is that it's bipartisan. To get most American troops out of Iraq over the next year will require more patience at home, and a lot less partisan bickering. And our politicians will need strong stomachs: They must manage an orderly retreat under fire. There is a path out of this mess, but we will be lying if we call it victory.
If only we get the Wise Old Men of Washington in the room together, and have them put politics aside, then all will be well. The problems we've had, in an era where one party controls everything, are all due to partisan bickering. If only sensible voices, like Ignatius's, who are unfettered by the petty concerns of politics - you know, getting the support of voters, the consent of governed - could rise up above the fray and politicians could have the "strong stomachs" to listen to them, then we'd eventually find the pony.Of course, I remember what happened the last time the Wise Old Men of Washington got together and came up with a cunning plan.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Grand Unified Theory of GOP Corruption
Oh my.
Anyway, only about 15 more hours to get this stuff out there before the media becomes obsessed with the fact that gay people in New Jersey no longer have to travel to Mass. to get married.
Anyway, only about 15 more hours to get this stuff out there before the media becomes obsessed with the fact that gay people in New Jersey no longer have to travel to Mass. to get married.
"Made Her Hide In The Basement"
Republican Jim Gibbons, running for governor in Nevada, has an illegal nanny problem.
Bring on the Band
Tommy Yum:
Hey y’all,
Me, Kenny and Rickie Lee are going on a three day bus tour November 2-4 with Ned Lamont, performing “Have You Had Enough.”
I’m pumped. Howie’s already told the BBC, but I wanted y’all to know.
I’m almost as young and beautiful as I appear in writing, and can’t wait to meet some FDL nutmeggers. Back on the road!
Your Liberal Media
Candy Crowley, who once said that Dick Cheney "oozes credibility":
Ever since the early '70s when Democrats got tagged as the party of acid, amnesty and abortion, they have been on the losing side of the values debate, the defense debate and, oh yes, the guns debate.
Two Weeks
Well, two weeks from today everything will start to look a bit different... or it won't.
Consider giving, volunteering, etc... There are numerous ways to do something if you're so inclined - local candidates, DSCC, Move On, etc... - so if you are so inclined don't hesitate to figure out how.
Consider giving, volunteering, etc... There are numerous ways to do something if you're so inclined - local candidates, DSCC, Move On, etc... - so if you are so inclined don't hesitate to figure out how.
Free Speech
There's nothing wrong with having opinions on a news show, but that shouldn't give people license to make stuff up.
Compassion
You all remember what a huge controversy it was when Michael J. Fox starred in ads in support of Arlen Specter, right?
Oh, right, there was no controversy.
Oh, right, there was no controversy.
Pivot
As Upyernoz reminds us, same sex marriage will probably become legal in New Jersey tomorrow. So, get ready for some fabulous weddings and the usual political shitstorm.
Still Staying the Course
So sez Darth Rumsfeld:
HANNITY: A lot of debate has no emerged over the phrase “stay the course,” and what that actually means. “Well, the President is backing away from staying the course.”
RUMSFELD: Aww, that’s nonsense.
HANNITY: He’s not backing away from staying the course?
RUMSFELD: Of course not.
Chump Change
$10/person for a national election campaign really isn't a lot of money.
In fact, it's so little that public financing would be a perfectly realistic option.
In fact, it's so little that public financing would be a perfectly realistic option.
Where's the Dough Joe?
Jennifer Medina reports that Lieberman still won't say where the petty cash went.
While you're over there you can ask her why she didn't uncover all those times Joe did, in fact, say we should "stay the course."
While you're over there you can ask her why she didn't uncover all those times Joe did, in fact, say we should "stay the course."
Spoke too Soon
Santorum just had a new ad on CNN. He's back to jokey humanizing ads, which is what he should've stuck to all along.
Safe to Turn the Teevee Back On
According to the DSCC, Santorum has no active ad buys at the moment.
Elect Rick Santorum or Hitler Takes Control
Please tell me I'll wake up in 15 days with at least one semi-reasonable senator.
Obama and Clinton
I guess I should explain a bit more. The dynamics of this presidential race, barring something weird happening, is going to be about Hillary and the contest to be NotHillary. There are two ways to try to be NotHillary - you can nuke everybody else in the race or you can set yourself up to be the AntiHillary and try to nuke her. I assume someone will by the designated Clinton nuker, whether successful or not, but it's pretty damn hard to see Obama being that guy. Instead, he'll join in this little dance which Grover Norquist got exactly right:
I think Clinton is beatable, but someone has to take the battle to her, someone with widespread popularity. Obama probably could to it, but I don't see him wanting to. I see him kicking the other guys under the table while singing her praises, winning the Veepstakes.
I passed out a piece on 2008 and I’ll summarize it. My assumption is that Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee. I believe the debates will be Hillary Clinton and seven guys sitting around a table, her chair will be four inches taller than everybody else’s, and Biden will say things like, “I was thinking today how clever and brilliant and witty Hillary was, which reminded me that Evan Bayh is an idiot.” And so, they’ll kick each other under the table while praising Hillary, and then one of them gets to be vice president. So that’s my operating assumption on the Democratic Party.
I think Clinton is beatable, but someone has to take the battle to her, someone with widespread popularity. Obama probably could to it, but I don't see him wanting to. I see him kicking the other guys under the table while singing her praises, winning the Veepstakes.
Can't...Resist...
I've been trying to Not Talk About the Presidential Primaries until at least two weeks from now, but I'm getting sucked in.
FWIW, if Obama's running he's really running for Vice President. Far from blunting the Hillary machine, he'll reinforce it.
Clinton/Obama '08 baby. Taste it.
FWIW, if Obama's running he's really running for Vice President. Far from blunting the Hillary machine, he'll reinforce it.
Clinton/Obama '08 baby. Taste it.
2-3 FUs
Okay, this is what I woke up to on CNN:
BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. officials said Tuesday Iraq’s government has agreed to develop a timeline for progress by the end of the year, and Iraqi forces should be able to take full control of security in the country in the next 12 to 18 months with “some level” of American support.
Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, also said he felt the United States should continue to focus on drawing down the number of American forces in the country, adding that he would not hesitate to ask for more troops if he felt they were necessary.
Poor TamSun
I'd almost feel sorry for her, except she's the one who decided to work for Where's the Dough Joe.
Dare to Dream
Unless I'm missing part of the calculation, if I were one of these members of Congress facing a pretty high likelihood of imminent indictment I'd get my ass out of Dodge to minimize the publicity when it does happen.
Monday, October 23, 2006
The Return of Angry Joe
Holy crap
Lieberman reversed himself yet again on Iraq. In the debate, he said that the situation only started getting worse in February. Yet in the primary debate, Lieberman said that "the situation in Iraq is a lot better." This guy's a professional liar. He saw the polls, changed his strategy because he knew that voters realized the situation was bad. It's good he's getting angry and sloppy, and I imagine it has something to do with the possible criminal activity involving his petty cash disbursements.
Here's a little tidbit. After the debate, Lieberman went up to Lamont and said "You goddam sonovobitch!" And then he went on to said something along the lines of 'how dare you accuse me of voting for the Energy bill because of campaign contributions?'
Lieberman is angry again. Nice.
And he fully embraced his pro-war stance, in contrast to the ads he's been running about wanting to end the war and bring the troops home. It's clear that Joe will just say anything. He's a very very bad man.
Where'd the Dough Go, Joe?
Jane says that TamSun is now saying the petty cash diary will not be released.
Big Pharma
Limbaugh says Michael J. Fox is acting or deliberately off his meds.
Here's how Howard Kurtz described Limbaugh:
Here's how Howard Kurtz described Limbaugh:
Has the senator listened to Rush lately? Sure, he aggressively pokes fun at Democrats and lionizes Republicans, but mainly about policy. He's so mainstream that those right-wingers Tom Brokaw and Tim Russert had him on their Election Night coverage.
Simple Answers to Simple Questions
Actually, this time I don't have an answer. But Dean Baker does have a simple question
Why do Washington Post columnists so frequently say things about Social Security that are not true?
Accent On
This isn't important, but I just watched a clip of Ford/Corker from the weekend and Ford sure has amped up his Tenn. accent compared to how he's sounded in the past.
That Wasn't So Hard
CNN anchor just said:
Too hard for CBS or the AP, however.
President Bush has used the term "stay the course" throughout the war.
Too hard for CBS or the AP, however.
Clinton v. McCain
Overall I'd say that Hillary Clinton gets decent coverage in the mainstream press these days (for a Democrat) - occasional eruptions of the Clinton Rules of Journalism aside - but she doesn't get the sycophantic Savior of the Universe press that John McCain gets, so it's rather heartening to see that in a national poll she's about even with him.
Some people, all by themselves, have come to the conclusion that John McCain isn't the greatest human being to ever walk the Earth. That's encouraging.
Some people, all by themselves, have come to the conclusion that John McCain isn't the greatest human being to ever walk the Earth. That's encouraging.
Economy
I don't really think they're switching strategies here, it's just a temporary head fake before they relaunch version 3.0 of TERRA TERRA TERRA.
War, What is it Good For?
Drum writes:
Well, no, not really. This is silly. Perhaps a detailed explanation of how those gears were turning tells us a lot about a person's views of the world, but the final up or down vote? Not so much.
This provides an opportunity to revisit the incompetence dodge favored by our better liberal hawks everywhere (it was a great idea but they fucked it up!). What's always bothered me most about the incompetence dodge isn't the basic set of reasons set out by Yglesias and Rosenfeld. Instead, what has long bothered me most about it was that pre-war it was probably the most derided (or, in the vernacular of the day, most "morally unserious") argument against the war. Imagine a senator getting up and giving a speech which said, in essence, that if we had competent people running the show we should go to war, but since George Bush is incompetent it'd be a really bad idea. The fine folks at Joe Lieberman Weekly would've really taken that argument seriously. But now it's the favored position of all those self-appointed very serious people.
I don't wish to to re-debate any particular military conflict other than the current one, but I do find it troubling the extent to which it's accepted that Gulf War I was a war that all sensible people should have supported. I'm not taking a position here, really, but I find it absurd and dangerous that conventional wisdom has solidified around the idea that this is now a closed question. If nothing else, war is not really a binary question as Drum and Beinart, along with the incompetence dodgers, suggest. The how and what next questions are extremely important. But, along those lines, imagine how seriously the incompetence dodgers of yesteryear would have been taken: "Yes, I think that in an ideal world America should intervene against Saddam Hussein's aggression in Kuwait, but I don't trust Poppy Bush to do it right so on balance I have to oppose this war." Very morally unserious that, but it would have been a perfectly reasonable position to take. Gulf War I was definitely a war of choice. It isn't clear how our buddy Saddam's occupation of Kuwait posed any additional threat to us. Sure, there are oil-related and other great game arguments that can be made, but they aren't really all that strong. It was a war which could have - and ultimately did - have some catastrophic unintended consequences. If you believed the people in charge were less than competent, opposing it would have been a good idea even if you broadly supported the advertised goals of the war.
Anyway, all I'm trying to say is that whether you gave the thumbs up or thumbs down to any particular conflict, no matter how right or wrong it seems after the fact, doesn't necessarily say all that much about you. However, I would say an exception to that is the current conflict in Iraq, which was sold to the country in an especially divisive and dishonest manner. Supporting this war wasn't just about supporting the war, but "supporting the supporters" who, by the time the bombs dropped at least, had clearly demonstrated that they were very bad people who were not acting in good faith. Though, I suppose, they weren't quite as smelly and annoying as Some Guy With A Sign somewhere.
In general, it's hard to fudge on war: you either support it or you don't. After you've examined everything, talked to everyone, and thought long and hard, you draw together everything in your experience and make a decision. The gears may turn in private, but the final result represents one of the ultimate tests of someone's foreign policy judgment.
Well, no, not really. This is silly. Perhaps a detailed explanation of how those gears were turning tells us a lot about a person's views of the world, but the final up or down vote? Not so much.
This provides an opportunity to revisit the incompetence dodge favored by our better liberal hawks everywhere (it was a great idea but they fucked it up!). What's always bothered me most about the incompetence dodge isn't the basic set of reasons set out by Yglesias and Rosenfeld. Instead, what has long bothered me most about it was that pre-war it was probably the most derided (or, in the vernacular of the day, most "morally unserious") argument against the war. Imagine a senator getting up and giving a speech which said, in essence, that if we had competent people running the show we should go to war, but since George Bush is incompetent it'd be a really bad idea. The fine folks at Joe Lieberman Weekly would've really taken that argument seriously. But now it's the favored position of all those self-appointed very serious people.
I don't wish to to re-debate any particular military conflict other than the current one, but I do find it troubling the extent to which it's accepted that Gulf War I was a war that all sensible people should have supported. I'm not taking a position here, really, but I find it absurd and dangerous that conventional wisdom has solidified around the idea that this is now a closed question. If nothing else, war is not really a binary question as Drum and Beinart, along with the incompetence dodgers, suggest. The how and what next questions are extremely important. But, along those lines, imagine how seriously the incompetence dodgers of yesteryear would have been taken: "Yes, I think that in an ideal world America should intervene against Saddam Hussein's aggression in Kuwait, but I don't trust Poppy Bush to do it right so on balance I have to oppose this war." Very morally unserious that, but it would have been a perfectly reasonable position to take. Gulf War I was definitely a war of choice. It isn't clear how our buddy Saddam's occupation of Kuwait posed any additional threat to us. Sure, there are oil-related and other great game arguments that can be made, but they aren't really all that strong. It was a war which could have - and ultimately did - have some catastrophic unintended consequences. If you believed the people in charge were less than competent, opposing it would have been a good idea even if you broadly supported the advertised goals of the war.
Anyway, all I'm trying to say is that whether you gave the thumbs up or thumbs down to any particular conflict, no matter how right or wrong it seems after the fact, doesn't necessarily say all that much about you. However, I would say an exception to that is the current conflict in Iraq, which was sold to the country in an especially divisive and dishonest manner. Supporting this war wasn't just about supporting the war, but "supporting the supporters" who, by the time the bombs dropped at least, had clearly demonstrated that they were very bad people who were not acting in good faith. Though, I suppose, they weren't quite as smelly and annoying as Some Guy With A Sign somewhere.
All Class
Your GOP:
Hillary Clinton's Republican challenger is getting personal and it's not pretty: He says the senator used to be ugly - and speculates she got "millions of dollars" in plastic surgery.
"You ever see a picture of her back then? Whew," said John Spencer of Clinton's younger days.
"I don't know why Bill married her," he said of the Clintons, who celebrated their 31st anniversary this month.
Noting Hillary Clinton looks much different now, he chalked it up to "millions of dollars" of "work" - plastic surgery.
"She looks good now," he said.
Spencer's bizarre comments came during a conversation with a reporter seated beside him and his wife, Kathy, on the 10:30 a.m. JetBlue flight Friday to Rochester, the site of the race's first debate.
Meanwhile
In that other place:
BAGHDAD, Oct. 23 -- At least 15 Iraqi police recruits were killed Sunday when two buses taking them to Baghdad were ambushed by insurgents north of the capital, a local police official said. Twenty-five recruits were injured in the attack, and 20 others were kidnapped, he said.
The U.S. military announced the deaths of seven soldiers and a Marine over the weekend, bringing the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq this month to at least 86 -- the fifth-highest total in any single month since the war began. Attacks against U.S. and Iraqi forces in Baghdad have increased more than 40 percent since midsummer, U.S. military officials say. The only higher monthly tolls were 137 in November 2004, 135 in April 2004, 106 in January 2005, and 96 in October, 2005.
Six U.S. soldiers were killed Sunday, in five separate attacks in and around Baghdad, the Defense Department said in e-mailed statements. Iraqi gunman killed two soldiers with small-arms fire west of the capital, and another soldier southwest of Baghdad, the military said. Three other soldiers were killed in explosions caused by three different roadside bombs, one of which left four soldiers injured.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
One Blair = 2 F.U.s
Whatever:
Tony Blair will put pressure on the Iraqi government today to demonstrate that its security forces will be ready to take over from the British army in southern provinces within roughly a year.
Blitzed
Like the rest of us who have no idea why we invaded Iraq, and certainly don't know how invading it with wanton destruction without consideration of loss of innocent life was likely to create a pro-US beacon of freedom-loving Democracy in the Middle, I find it quite disturbing that MSNBC to give airings to these insane views.
More than that, it's important to remember what Melanie Morgan is referencing. The suggestion that Iraq should have been "blitzed" isn't a football reference, it's a suggestion that we should have emulated Nazi German's bombing campaign against the UK which wikipedia says killed about 45K people, destroying numerous properties and forcing mass evacuations of parts of London.
Hearts and minds, people, hearts and minds.
More than that, it's important to remember what Melanie Morgan is referencing. The suggestion that Iraq should have been "blitzed" isn't a football reference, it's a suggestion that we should have emulated Nazi German's bombing campaign against the UK which wikipedia says killed about 45K people, destroying numerous properties and forcing mass evacuations of parts of London.
Hearts and minds, people, hearts and minds.
War, What is It Good For?
Anyway, wanking aside, what I was thinking of when I wrote that post was this bit from Peter Beinart where the measure of a man is determined by his rightness in supporting the use of force in various situations:
And, my point was, simply, that whatever the merit of those particular wars at the moment we decided to undertake them, they were all the consequence of failures of policy beforehand. More than that, foreign policy/international diplomacy is an extraordinarily complex undertaking with numerous moving parts, uncontrollable circumstances, and people of various levels of competency in important positions of power at any one time. To reduce all that to "did you support the wars I liked?" as Beinart seems to requires a fascinatingly childish worldview.
Anything one writes deserves to be judged by itself. The Democratic Party nominated someone in 2004 who had been flat wrong in his opposition to the Gulf War in 1991, I think most people would acknowledge that. Many people who were very prominent figures in the Democratic foreign policy debate and the Democratic Party in general–most of the people who were there at that time in 1991 were wrong about that. The vast majority of the party was wrong, and yet it still seems to me that we have things to learn from people like Sam Nunn or John Kerry. If you were to go from the Gulf War through Kosovo and Iraq, you would find that a large number of people in every facet of the liberal Democratic universe were wrong, on at least one of those wars. Very, very few people were right about all three of them. The people who were–and I think Al Gore is in this category–deserve a significant amount of credit, but the truth of the matter is, if you were looking for an untainted record, you would find very few people.
And, my point was, simply, that whatever the merit of those particular wars at the moment we decided to undertake them, they were all the consequence of failures of policy beforehand. More than that, foreign policy/international diplomacy is an extraordinarily complex undertaking with numerous moving parts, uncontrollable circumstances, and people of various levels of competency in important positions of power at any one time. To reduce all that to "did you support the wars I liked?" as Beinart seems to requires a fascinatingly childish worldview.
Not Dead Yet
On the road a bit here. Anyway, watching the Sunday shows this morning it struck me that the Wise Old Men of Washington have, 3.5 years later, decided that the Iraq war wasn't such a hot idea after all.
Not so wise, really. Took them long enough.
Not so wise, really. Took them long enough.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
J. Pod Hearts Borat
Not a subscriber so I can't read the whole thing, but he's right about this:
As I wrote before, it will be, for a moment, The Biggest Thing Ever. Whether that translates into actual ticket sales I have no idea, but it will take over everything for its moment.
A cheap-looking and extremely strange movie with an even stranger title--Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan--is opening in a few weeks, and it will make a sensation.
...
This is one of the four or five funniest movies ever made.
As I wrote before, it will be, for a moment, The Biggest Thing Ever. Whether that translates into actual ticket sales I have no idea, but it will take over everything for its moment.
Sailor Servants
Crazy Curt is such a wanker:
Springfield, PA In his second debate against former Navy Vice Admiral Joe Sestak, Curt Weldon’s temper got the better of him. Weldon, in his opening statement at the Springfield Country Club debate, lashed out in a tirade, taking aim at Sestak’s 31 years of Navy service. In doing so, Weldon revealed his own lack of knowledge about the Navy, and denigrated the hundreds of thousands of men and women who currently serve. Weldon also made a series of inaccurate claims throughout the debate, some of which are catalogued below.
Although the debate was limited to economic questions by its sponsor the Delaware County Chamber of Commerce Congressman Weldon inexplicably used his opening statement to attack Admiral Sestak and his position in the Navy, ranting: “Were you always in the admiral quarter drinking out of your wine goblets and being waited on by your sailor servants?”
“A member of the Armed Services Committee like Curt Weldon should know better than to slander the working sailor officer and enlisted who serves this nation in war and peace,” noted Ryan Rudominer, communications director for Joe Sestak. “In any case, the regulations on alcohol in the Navy are very clear, and are publicly available. In fact, alcoholic beverages on board any underway ship of the Department of the Navy are prohibited.”
Retired Navy Captain Bill Walsh, who now serves as Admiral Sestak’s campaign manager, had the following to say after the debate: “When Curt unleashed that one, I just couldn’t believe it. Referring to any sailor as a servant is just outrageous. It is the officers who serve their sailors that is central to the Navy’s culture and always will be. If Curt’s aware of goblets being used in the U.S. Navy, he should make that known to the Secretary of the Navy as soon as possible. Perhaps the Congressman is referring to some visit he had with the Russian Navy?”
WHEEEEEEEEEEEE
That's some bounce:
and:
While the new poll shows the president with a two-point bump in his approval rating—from an all-time low of 33 percent two weeks ago to 35 percent today—most Americans think Bush is already a lame duck. Fifty-six percent said he won’t be able to get much done in his last two years in office. Only 33 percent believe he can be effective.
and:
The poll found terrorism came fourth as the “most important” issue to voters, at just 13 percent; behind Iraq (31 percent), the economy (18 percent), and health care (16 percent). And a solid majority of Americans want the Democrats to take over Capital Hill, 55 percent, versus 32 percent who want the GOP to retain control—a 23-point margin. And the Republicans can’t count on their biggest name, George W. Bush, to help much. While the new poll shows the president with a two-point bump in his approval rating—from an all-time low of 33 percent two weeks ago to 35 percent today—most Americans think Bush is already a lame duck. Fifty-six percent said he won’t be able to get much done in his last two years in office. Only 33 percent believe he can be effective.
Most worrisome for the president, should the Democrats retake one or both houses of Congress, the American public supports their proposed “First 100 Hours” agenda. An overwhelming majority says allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companies should be a top priority for a Democratic Congress (74 percent, including 70 percent of Republicans); 68 percent want increasing the minimum wage to be a top priority, including 53 percent of Republicans; 62 percent want investigating impropriety by members of Congress to be a top priority; and 58 percent want investigating government contracts in Iraq to be a top priority. Fifty-two percent say investigating why we went to war in Iraq should be a top priority (25 percent say it should a lower priority and 19 percent say it shouldn’t be done.)
Social Norms
One thing which is quite common is for people to attempt to impose their own particular preferred social norms on the internet. I'm sure we'll get a funny dose of this when Sprezzatura Siegel writes his book. It's generally condescending, it assumes a lack of self-awareness on the existing participants in a particular internet subculture, and of course is generally utterly ignorant of how and why things are the way they are.
Shorter me: stop crashing my party and telling me how to act.
Shorter me: stop crashing my party and telling me how to act.
Progress
We in Philly have for some time had to deal with the national joke that is the Liberty Bell/Independence Hall security situation. After 9/11 it was harder to get in there than to board an airplane, and hideously ugly and tragically ironic security barriers were put up everywhere. Independence Hall indeed.
It's slowly improved since, with the road in front of the building reopened and a slight improvement in the cosmetics of the security barriers. Now it sounds like the situation will improve a bit more.
Still, I wish someone would answer a very simple question - why the hell do people need to go through a metal detector to enter the building? It's ridiculous.
It's slowly improved since, with the road in front of the building reopened and a slight improvement in the cosmetics of the security barriers. Now it sounds like the situation will improve a bit more.
To the delight of activist Ann Meredith, who led the fight to free Independence Mall from proposed six-foot security fencing, National Park Service Director Mary Bomar announced yesterday that the national shrine would remain fenceless.
Bookended by smiling U.S. senators Arlen Specter and Rick Santorum, both R-Pa., Bomar said the Park Service had decided to "eliminate" the proposed fence and to remove the bicycle barriers outside the Liberty Bell Center.
"This is a great day for freedom," Specter said, adding, "Today, we have told the would-be terrorists, we're not going to pay any attention to them" when it comes to limiting public access to Independence Mall.
"There oughtn't to be a fence," Specter said. "People ought to have access."
Still, I wish someone would answer a very simple question - why the hell do people need to go through a metal detector to enter the building? It's ridiculous.
Media Matters
From Jamison Foser:
If you believe what you hear from prominent conservatives and political reporters, the following things are true:
1) Anytime terrorism is in the news, it plays to the political and electoral benefit of the Republicans.
2) Terrorists who are trying to destroy America are trying to help elect Democrats because they think Democrats are weak. The terrorists are doing so by increasing violence in Iraq and otherwise drawing attention to their existence, as the Osama bin Laden videotape released shortly before the 2004 election.
Those two things are obviously incompatible. The latter is based on the premise that increased news of terrorism benefits Democrats; the former is an explicit statement of the opposite. The two are fundamentally inconsistent. (OK, there is a way the two sentiments could rationally coexist -- but it requires us to believe that The Enemy has reached depths of incompetence previously explored by only Wile E. Coyote. And, in that case, why haven't we been able to defeat them yet? This possibility can be safely dismissed.)
The fact that the U.S. political media routinely tell us both of those mutually inconsistent things reveals almost everything we need to know about the state of the profession and the quality of the political information we receive. Almost everything.
Appointment Programming
Olbermann's problem on MSNBC was always that being sandwiched between Tweety and Joe Scar meant that the only way he was going to get a decent audience was to become appointment programming - where people deliberately switch their teevee channel over to MSNBC at 8pm. Larry King and O'Reilly have long managed to accomplish that, but otherwise it's pretty tough thing to achieve on a cable news channel. But, recent ratings - with Keith consistently having a ratings spike - suggest that he's managed to do that.
Of course, stupid people like me have long suggested that the way to counterprogram a right wing news network was not to put on slightly less right wing programming, and that a left-of-center block of programming on MSNBC in prime time would spike their ratings, but no one listens to stupid people like me.
And, no, CNN with The Situation Room, Paula Zahn, Larry King, and Anderson Cooper does not qualify as a block of liberal programming.
Of course, stupid people like me have long suggested that the way to counterprogram a right wing news network was not to put on slightly less right wing programming, and that a left-of-center block of programming on MSNBC in prime time would spike their ratings, but no one listens to stupid people like me.
And, no, CNN with The Situation Room, Paula Zahn, Larry King, and Anderson Cooper does not qualify as a block of liberal programming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)