Thursday, June 14, 2007

Hamas Closer to Seizing Control of Gaza


They've got Abbas' Fatah on the run:
"GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Hamas fighters overran two of the rival Fatah movement’s most important security command centers in the Gaza Strip on Thursday, and witnesses said the victors dragged vanquished gunmen into the street and shot them to death execution-style."
Here's the rub, Hamas isn't good at running a country, but it's good at taking over one. It seems that perpetual war is a good state for these guys (sort of like Rudy Giuliani). Of course what would any war within Palestine borders be, without war crimes charges being sicced on Israel:
"Israel was also caught up in the Palestinian power struggle, with Hamas officials alleging that an Israeli tank shell killed four children in the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah. The Israeli army said it would look into the report.
"The report came after Hamas also seized control of Rafah, the second of Gaza’s four main towns to fall into the Islamic militants’ hands."
I can almost see it...two Hamas soldiers fire off a rocket. It flies through the air, dancing around when it suddenly malfunctions and obliterates a playground. The soldiers look at each other, and simultaneously say, "Israel."
It would be funny if it weren't so dammed serious.

Retaliation


After the bombing of Shiite's holiest site, you knew it was bound to happen, but fortunately it seems as if the tide has been stemmed for now:

"BAGHDAD (AP) -- A handful of Sunni mosques were attacked or burned Thursday, but curfews and increased troop levels kept Iraq in relative calm a day after suspected al-Qaida bombers toppled the towering minarets of a prized Shiite shrine."
The mid surge (crackdown) figures though, when placed in conjunction with this, do not look good:
"The crackdown was launched in mid-February and had early success in reducing the number of targeted sectarian murders between Shiites and Sunni Arabs, who were dominant under Saddam Hussein but now form the backbone of Iraq’s bloody insurgency.
"But civilian deaths rose by 29 percent in May to almost 2,000, the highest level since the crackdown began.
"U.S. military deaths have also risen during the crackdown as thousands more troops fan out through the streets of Baghdad, becoming more visible targets.
"A total of 126 were killed in May, the highest monthly total for two-and-a-half years and the third-highest since the invasion to topple Saddam began in March 2003."
September can't approach fast enough.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

The Angry Left

Look, as much as I hate to say it, Joe Klein has a point. Of course he communicates it badly, because, well, that's how Joey talks, and yes, it seems he internalizes their hate against himself (ironically, linking himself with the right-wing, those he claims to disagree with) but we have finally got to admit that certain elements of the Left wing of the blogosphere are rude and belligerent.

I mean just read the comments under Mudcat's last post on Swampland. From what was a rather innocuous and saccharine essay came dozens of ugly, rude, and counterproductive comments.

Look I'm not saying that sarcasm and a bit of bile doesn't have its place, but I thought the progressive left was supposed to be the good guys--the Jedi to the right's Sith. We should do a bit better than Ann Coulter rhetoric, especially against our own.

Iraq: A Guide for GI's

No I didn't make it up, the Department of Defense, called the War Department back in 1943, did, and it had such golden nuggets of information such as:
  • NEVER discuss religion or politics or women with Moslems.
  • Don't stare at anyone. Remember the fear of the "evil eye".
  • Knock before entering a private house. If a woman answers, wait until she has had time to retire.
  • If you see grown men walking hand in hand, ignore it. They are not queer.

And my favorite:

  • American success or failure in Iraq may well depend on whether the Iraqis (as the people are called) like American soldiers or not. It may not be quite that simple. But then again it could.

Sully asks, "How did we get so much dumber in fifty years? And, yes, I am not exempting myself from this assessment. I guess we panicked, didn't we?" Gee I guess we did, and guess what, we still are.

Senate Democrats Get Ready for Round 3

More amendments to Bush's Iraq strategy to be introduced:

"The first amendment, crafted chiefly by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), mandates the start of a troop withdrawal from Iraq within 120 days of passage. The second amendment, crafted chiefly by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), would set strong troop readiness standards and ensure a minimum period between Iraq deployments.


"The third amendment, a hotly sought goal of Reid’s that was crafted chiefly by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), would block spending on a future military presence in Iraq after April 2008, save for troops on counter-terrorism and training missions.


"A possible fourth vote could come on revoking Congress’s original 2002 war authorization, a tactic favored by many but agreed upon by few. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) has suggested “de-authorization” followed by a new, targeted mission, while Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) have suggested forcing President Bush to seek a new authorization from Congress."


And you thought it was over. Then again, so did I.

Civil War in Gaza.

It's on:

"GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Hamas pounded Gaza City's three main security compounds with mortars, grenades and assault rifles Wednesday, calling on beleaguered Fatah forces to surrender, as it battled to take control of the entire Gaza Strip.


"In one dramatic victory, hundreds of members of a Fatah-allied clan that had fought fiercely surrendered to masked Hamas gunmen and were led, arms raised in the air, to a nearby mosque...

"“This is madness, the madness that is going on in Gaza now,” [Palestinian President] Abbas told reporters.

No this isn't madness this is Sparta...or Palestine, it's just about the same thing. All joking aside this a huge barrier blocking peace in the Middle East. Some possible scenarios here.

Subpoenas Issues for Bush Officals

Namely Harriet Myers and Sara Taylor in relation to the Attorney General firings.

My question: why hasn't Rove been called in? It seems pretty obvious that he's the keystone in all this. Samson directly linked the two, and even said he took his marching orders from Rove. It's time to get him sworn in.

Holy Shiite Shrine Attacked Again


















From MSNBC.com:
"BAGHDAD - Saboteur bombers destroyed the two minarets of Samarra’s Askariya Shiite shrine early Wednesday, site of a 2006 bombing that shattered its famous Golden Dome and unleashed a wave of retaliatory sectarian violence that still bloodies Iraq. Sunni extremists of al-Qaida were quickly blamed.
"The repeat assault on a revered Shiite shrine immediately stirred fears of a new explosion of intra-Muslim bloodshed, and prompted the 30-member bloc of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to suspend its membership in Iraq’s parliament, threatening a deepened political crisis."
This is trouble of the biggest kind. There's violence in Iraq and then there's violence, and the latter kind usually follows an attack on holy shrines. One thing I wonder: how much is the US working to protect these places? It seems to me that if your goal is to decrease sectarian violence, then keeping mosques protected should be high on your agenda.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Damn

I blogged again, now I'll have to kick myself in the neck, which is pretty hard. Well since I already broke my oath and the title fits I guess I'll give you this short link following up the Genarlow Wilson case. Thought he was free...don't be so sure. Sully's getting his Sharpton on, I'm just wondering why the US is so nuts about BJs.

Then again, no I'm not--they're GGGGGgreat!

Rather vs. CBS

In a recent interview Dan Rather, former anchor for CBS Nightly News had the following critque of his former show:

"...I want to make clear that I have nothing against Katie Couric at all. She’s a very nice person and I have a lot of friends at CBS News. However, it was clear at the time and I think it has become even clearer that the mistake was to try to bring the ‘Today’ ethos to the evening news and to dumb it down, tart it up, in hopes of attracting a younger audience. And I just don't think that people at 6:30, or seven o’clock at night or even 5:30 in the central time zone , six o’clock when it’s seen, that that is what they want. This is a continuation of a trend that we've talked about before, Joe and Mika, and John, and that is the combination of what I call the corporatizing of the news has led to the trivializing of the news. If you notice, it isn’t just anybody's evening news. That the front page of the New York Times took space the other day to talk about, I know we don't mention her name, so I will call her Rome Marriott. This woman, Rome Marriott, Paris Hilton, on the front page of the Times. And then, today’s Washington Post has a big spread, a multi-column spread on the front page about celebrities. And the belief runs strong in the corporate towers of almost every news organization, print or over the airwaves these days, that if you go to celebrities, uh, it increases your audience. There is no empirical evidence to indicate that. But even if it were true, I think that those of us in journalism are going to have a lot to answer for when you put Paris Hilton on the front page and put developments and celebrities on the front page and put developments such as the splintering of the coalition of the Anbar Province in Iraq, which has been helpful to us, but is now splintering apart and the fact that, what, 12 or 13 people were blown up and killed at a police station on Tikrit, when you put the war on the inside pages and Paris Hilton and other celebrities on front pages, it tells you that we have got a lot to answer for in journalism."
So what was the CBS rebuttal? Rather's a sexist.
My opinion? I don't watch CBS, or any nightly news show, but I think Rather's statements in terms of the entire M$M is right on the money. Unfortunately, he still has a problem with his sources because I've never heard of Rome Marriott.

Today's Must Read

Sully on the folly of neo-conservatism. Money quote:

"By neoconservative logic, the U.S. has undertaken about the least viable, most intractable, self-defeating task on Planet Earth. Why? Once the WMD rationale was exposed as a delusion, why haven't neoconservatives cited the pathologies of Arab culture to argue for withdrawal?

"I think the answer is that, beneath the surface, they actually believe in American empire - or, at least, the alleged peril of not having an empire - and Iraq is a new staging ground for the empire's fear-driven expansion. By this, I don't mean a literal Brit-style occupation of half the globe. I mean the U.S. having the final say in every region of the world."

And with that I'm done for the day; I really have to get some work done on my novel. If you happen to catch me blogging please feel free to kick me in the neck.

Palestine Eases Closer to a Civil War


From MSNBC.com:
"GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Hamas gunmen stormed a Fatah security headquarters in Gaza City on Tuesday, moving Palestinians closer to civil war, minutes after a deadline from the Islamic group to its rival to withdraw from key government buildings expired.
"Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas accused his Hamas rivals of staging a coup and called for a cease-fire. That call went unheeded and instead Hamas and Fatah militants threatened to kill each other’s leaders."

Don't Fall in the Trap

I usually don't like to disagree with Yglesias most because his intellectual strength intimidates the hell outta me, but I'm going to take a shot here. Today he posted:

"Writing about Democrats' tendency to want to shoehorn energy policy issues into discussion of national security, Ezra says he "can't quite decide if the subject is acting in a complementary way to a straight national security policy, or serving as a substitute for an issue Democrats are still uncomfortable talking about."


"The correct answer is that it's serving as a substitute for an issue Democrats are still uncomfortable talking about. Global warming is an extremely important issue for the country. It's potentially a favorable issue for the Democratic Party. But when people say they want to hear from Democrats about foreign policy, they're saying they want to hear a message about war and peace. The trouble is that you can't articulate a clear theory about war and peace that doesn't provide a clear conclusion about Iraq. And reaching a clear conclusion about Iraq would involve confronting the large number of Democratic elites who backed the war.

"People on both sides of that divide, however, have been very interested in sort of covering up the breach and having everyone play together nicely. And party unity is a good thing. But you're never going to have a clear, forceful message on the core foreign policy issues unless you're willing to take a stand on preventive war, on democratization by invasion, etc." (Itz mine)

I think his last statement is the trap that the GOP-Rove machine has created that has sunk Democrat candidates since 2000. (Or at least post 9/11). Furthermore I think that the idea that a canidate should take a "stand on preventive war, democratization, etc" is a red herring. It's as if I say that a candidate can't have a clear, forceful message on national security unless he takes a stand on torture. There are historical foreign policies guidelines that have been set in US for ages and have worked well for us based around the idea that the US will not put troops into a foreign land unless that land is a direct and imminent threat to the US or US interests. (and likewise, if you didn't know, we did pretty good with banning torture as well) Now obviously, this rule has been broken again and again, mostly for dubious reasons. But the fact remains that these decisions come on a case by case basis, and furthermore, any competent leader must acknowledge the fact that they must be decided on a case by case basis. Trying to make these ideological doctrines the sole basis for implementing foreign policy seems counterproductive.

As a side note: I was just thinking about Supreme Court nominations. Remember how every time they pop up there's always someone who wants to ask the litmus test question? Something like "If a case about abortion comes up will you vote for or against it?" What does the nominee usually say? "Well, I'll rule on the merits of the case." Then, with the exception of the few radicals, every one sagely nods and says how wise the nominee's answer was.

Foul Tip

Democrats don't get this resolution passed, but the point has been made:

"The Senate just voted to prevent further action on S J Res 14, the "no confidence in Alberto Gonzales" resolution. The vote was 53 - 38, with one voting present. 60 votes were needed to proceed to a vote on the actual resolution. So, while this wasn't the actual vote, this was a resounding and humiliating vote for Bush and Gonzales. Looks like he lost every Democrat and several Republicans, including Specter (PA), Collins (ME), Snowe (ME), Coleman (MN), Smith (OR), Hagel (NE) and Sununu (NH). Lieberman, the last Senator to vote, sided with Bush, of course. Ted Stevens (AK) voted present."

Funny...I don't feel better.

Justice Finally Served

Teen who recieved 10-years for getting head finally gets out:

"ATLANTA (AP) -- Genarlow Wilson's joy was short-lived. The Georgia man, who has become a symbol for extreme cases of getting tough on sex offenders, was ordered released from prison by a judge who called his 10-year sentence for having consensual oral sex as a teen ''a grave miscarriage of justice.''

"The verdict brought cheers from his legal team. His mother, Juannessa Bennett, wiped away tears as she called it ''a miracle.''

"But the mood dampened some 90 minutes later when the state's attorney general announced he would appeal, which will keep the former honors student and football star behind bars for now."

But MJ is still free.

For more info on the case look at this.

Complaints Don't Matter

Especially if you're NYPD officer Sgt. Carlos Fabara:

"He racked up more civilian complaints than any other cop in the NYPD last year - but he has yet to face anything more severe than a letter of reprimand and several lost vacation days.
"Thirteen complaints were filed against NYPD Sgt. Carlos Fabara during the 12 months ended July 1, 2006, according to Civilian Complaint Review Board records obtained by the Daily News.
"Only about 10% of the city's cops get even a single complaint over the course of a year - so Fabara holds a dubious distinction."

But notice the tone of the next passage in the same NY News article:

"His record reads as a kind of Rorschach test on the NYPD: He can be seen as a good, tough cop, a vital soldier in the city's constant battle against crime - or an aggressor who oversteps his authority.
"The 31-year-old sergeant is a decorated cop credited with 123 arrests as an officer and another 185 as an anti-crime sergeant. But he has been repeatedly flagged for alleged stop-and-frisk violations and search abuses."

Rorschach test indeed. But the rubric that the News uses is flawed. His record doesn't read on the NYPD in general, but on the particular policy of "stop and frisk" (the policy that he's specifically charged with abusing) a policy that the News admits (at the end of the article) is used primarily against blacks and Hispanics:
"Civil rights advocates have criticized the NYPD for searching more than a half-million people last year, saying the tactics amount to harassment and racial profiling. An analysis by The News found that 78% of the people stopped by cops assigned to precincts were black or Hispanic."

So what is the News really saying when they call Officer Fabera a "Rorschach Test"? Surely they can't mean that the general population debates over the validity of Fabera's conduct, but rather that Fabera represents the significant racial division in NYPD policy that still dominates their image. Furthermore, by not representing it that way does as much of a disservice to New York as the NYPD does by not disciplining Fabera for his violations. Of course, to discipline him would be to criticize their own policy, a policy that the NYPD strongly defends. Until this Catch-22 is addressed you will continuously get charges of racism leveled against the NYPD regardless of the validity of the complaints.

New York Closer to Getting that Good $h_T...

NY State legislature ready to legalize medical marijuana:

""I'm very optimistic the bill will pass both houses and go to the governor within the next 10 days," Assembly Health Committee Chairman Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan) said.


"Gov. Spitzer, after flatly stating last year as a candidate he opposed medical marijuana, is now open to the legislation, aides said.

"Under the measure, to acquire marijuana a person would have to have a debilitating or life-threatening illness and would need a doctor's note certifying that marijuana would be beneficial.


"Those individuals would be limited to possessing no more than 2½ ounces of cultivated pot or 12 growing plants.

"The patients would also need to get a registration card from the state Health Department."

On a side note, Snoop Dogg says he's planning to spend alot more time in NY. Personally, I'd like to see what happens to pot crimes in NY after the bill passes. I'm down for anything that helps to end America's foolish War on Drugs.

Yet Another Reason Why Mike is the Man

One thing I'll say about our Mayor, whether you agree with his policies or not, it feels like every day he's doing something to improve life in NY in the short and long run. Today Mayor Bloomberg introduced a new green energy program in NY providing for solar and hydro energy production:

"The city will officially solicit bids this fall from private solar developers to build, own, operate and maintain solar panels on 20 to 50 city-owned buildings as part of a pilot program aimed at promoting the use of solar energy, Bloomberg said yesterday.


"The city will agree to buy electricity from the winning bidder over a 20-year period, officials said. A year after the pilot program starts, the city will determine whether the program should be expanded."

Could Mayor Mike be the most progressive Republican since Abe Lincoln? Debatable, but he certainly seems like the most progressive of our generation.

Monday, June 11, 2007

You're the Loser

According to Arlen Specter:

As the vote draws near, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) made it simple this afternoon: Republicans have no confidence in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, but they're not going to vote that way, because that would hand a victory to Democrats.

And meantime AG will continue to screw us up.

Big Win for Civil Rights

Appeals court rules against Bush:

"RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - The Bush administration cannot legally detain a U.S. resident it believes is an al-Qaida sleeper agent without charging him, a divided federal appeals court ruled Monday. The court said sanctioning the indefinite detention of civilians would have "disastrous consequences for the constitution—and the country...

"To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain civilians, even if the President calls them 'enemy combatants,' would have disastrous consequences for the constitution—and the country," the court panel said."

The Assault on Gore

The Wapo Op-Ed fires it's opening salvo, Anonymous Liberal fires back.

By the way, I'm half way through with it, and while I do think it drags on and has a tendency to be preachy (Yes Rev. Gore I know we can do more about climate change), one thing that seems to be on point is his references, and his academically precise cataloguing of sources. Gore is not Ann Coulter and like AL says, it's an embarrassment to try to nit pick his work. Either take down and debate his overall point or keep your trap shut.

Rolling Back DADT; What Bush Can Teach Dems

From Sully:

"A reader writes:


"I just watched This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC. Stephanopoulos asked the roundtable whether the next Democratic president should try to abolish DADT right away and risk the same backlash that Bill Clinton experienced in the opening days of his presidency.
Stephanopoulos was a leading advisor to Bill Clinton when a wave of homophobia swept the nation on the issue of gays in the military. Stephanopoulos was clearly reliving that nightmare in his mind in asking this particular question. To my disappointment, almost every member of the roundtable immediately agreed that a Democratic president should wait before tampering with DADT. Most of these journalists were young and should know better that a sea change in attitudes toward gay people has taken place since the early '90s.

"The only person who was aware of this major transformation was George Will, the oldest one sitting at the table. He explained how his 26 year old daughter and all her friends view being gay as no different than being left handed. This accepting attitude is shared by a majority of Americans under 30, the age group that fills the ranks of the military. As he often does on the This Week roundtable, George Will put the other journalists in their place, this time in support of an immediate lifting of the noxious Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, a policy that actually puts our nation’s security at risk, contrary to what its supporters claim.


"Stephanopoulos represents a certain class of Clintonite Democrat: still so spooked by the 1990s that they cannot move forward. He also promoted Clinton's anti-gay policy initiatives as a wedge against the Republicans. Alas, many tired Democratic pros are encouraged in their cravenness by the conviction-free HRC and big gay donors, many of whom are also old, and have come to believe their own permament defensive crouch is political realism. George Will remains the class of the conservative punditocracy. Over the last few years, he has put the rest of us to shame.
The truth is: anyone who is serious about winning this war will not be throwing good soldiers on the scrap-heap to cater to fear. It seems to me we should cede anti-gay bigotry to our Islamist enemies. We're better than them. Or aren't we?"


There's a ton of very good reasons by DADT should be tossed out for an all inclusive policy, and the debate, like the debate about Segregation and Slavery, can be tossed around forever. If there's any thing that Bush should have taught us is the strength of bullishness. He's been absolutely wrong about everything, but his manner of being wrong, and ignoring criticism is a lesson that the Democrats should memorize. This is one of those issues that the Dems shouldn't have to, excuse the irony, hide in the closet about. Getting rid of DADT makes a stronger military and creates a more just society. Standing up to it, and remaining bullish about it, can only add credibility to a candidate.

Iran War Watch

Joe Lieberman is down:

"NEW YORK Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Sunday the United States should consider a military strike against Iran because of Tehran's involvement in Iraq.''I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq,'' Lieberman said. ''And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers.''"

Follow the time line...JL supports Iraq invasion because Iraq has connections to Al-Qada and WMDs...it's discovered that Iraq has no connections to Al-Qada nor do they have WMDs...US troops get attacked by motley crew of radicals from all over the Middle East...JL supports invading Iran, who may or may not be (but probably are) supporting Anti-American factions in Iraq.

Hey Joe, ever heard the saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right"? I've seen better critical thinking from elementary school students.

Dems Get Ready for AG No Confidence Vote

Symbolically useless.

Why Isn't Bush Attacked for Not Supporting the Troops?

I mean you'd figure that if the Pentagon wouldn't give the troops body armor that they'd allow American's to send it to them as gifts right? You'd be wrong:

"The body armor that West Seneca’s American Legion Post 735 bought for Marines in Iraq is gathering dust somewhere in dusty Anbar province, thanks to Marine Corps orders preventing its use."

Hat Tip: Americablog

Saturday, June 09, 2007

Guess Fat People Stick Together

Michael Moore helps out Anti-Moore blogger.

In related news Al Gore runs over George Bush with a bus. (Actually this is probably not true, but wouldn't it be nice if it was?)

More Truth About Thompson Emerging

Like his ties with lobbyists:

"USA Today finally breaks the national media silence about the one-third of Fred Thompson's life that he spent as a high-paid corporate lobbyist in Washington, D.C. Thompson's campaign, which is being run by his fellow K Street lobbyists, responded by saying only that being a K Street lobbyist "is an honorable endeavor that goes back to the beginnings of this republic." I love this pathetic attempt to liken corporate lobbying right up there on the "honorable" scale with George Washington heroically crossing the Delaware."

That doesn't sound like the Fred Thompson I've heard about. So who do they keep getting him confused with?







Friday, June 08, 2007

Paris back in Jail


She's in, she's out, she's in...I haven't seen this much action since Jenna Jameson won best starlet at the AVNs. Ironicly, now she's got to serve her entire 45 days.
But I'm not entirely pitiless. Hopefully she'll learn not to tread over the laws that all of us have to follow.

Nit-Picking


















Americanblog wonders if this is a problem, though it looks like he had a non-alcoholic beer. To me it's a null issue. Bush's biggest problem isn't that he's drunk on beer, it's that he's drunk on power.

Another Thought


I'll bet this cover does match the content.

A Thought...
















Too bad the contents weren't as good as the album cover.

Just Affleck's Presence...

...spawns rationality.



And yes, I know one doesn't necessarily goes with the other. But don't deny that you liked Armageddon! Oh, and by the way, Matthew's point is exactly the reason why Rudy would be a horrible President.

Hat Tip: TPM

Dick of the Day

Seriously, Armey must be getting money from the GOP. Here's just the title of his last Swampland posting:

"Why Do Liberals So Stridently Oppose Choice and Ownership?"

WTF? Are you kidding me? That sound you hear? It's the toilet flushing with Time in the center of the bowl.

Two Reasons

There's either two reasons why Carlson and Limbaugh would say that Obama's "Quiet Riot" speech "giv(es) a political justification to totally unacceptable, never justifiable behavior", one: they didn't look at it and instead skimmed over the report in the Kansas Star, or they're partisan hacks who will lie in your face. The first makes them incompetent, and the second makes them evil. Guess which one I think they are? (Hint--they're evil).

If you haven't seen it, watch the speech again. It's such a disservice to Obama and us for the right-wing to characterize these beautiful words in such a deceitful manner.

Smartishness

I've just begun reading Al Gore's book The Assault on Reason and a couple of things have dawned on me. The first is that he would have SO made a better president that Bush, and the second is...Gore's pretty dammed smart.

Now I know that when you call a politician smart in this time and place he's immediately labeled a "faggot" by the Ann Coulter population of America, since, to put it mildly, we haven't been fans of intelligence since Ben Franklin was flying kites. But it follows that what Gore really is talking about, or an a priori reason he's writing this book, is our society's disgust at intelligence. This is why, as I read through his marvelous and illuminating points, I wonder, "Why bother? Does it make any difference?" Seems to me that he could have just as easily written a book, The Assault on Intelligence: Why Everyone Wants to Be Like Mike? And it could have been just as vital to the problems of America as a debate on our loss of reason since reason stems from our higher regions of brain activity, our intelligence.

In the first chapter for instance, he speaks about neuroscience and evolutionary development. Well how can one even decode those passages when one either is ignorant of, or doesn't believe in evolution? How can our leaders make "rational" decisions when three of our candidates for the Presidency don't believe in evolution? It's like making an argument for incorporating solar energy into our national energy policy and the head of NASA believes that the sun revolves around the earth, shining "happy rays" on us which go away when God beats his wife. We can't do one, or even talk about one, without first addressing the other.

Yet Another Democrat Failure

The continuing funding of programs to control teenagers' reproductive systems, a.k.a "Community based Abstinence Education" Sing it to the key of $141 million:

"Prior to this painful backstab, the Dems had given us the impression that these medically inaccurate programs, full of "false, misleading, or distorted information" -- as confirmed in Representative Henry A. Waxman's "The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs" report -- would be cut or eliminated by our new Congress. Instead, we're faced with an additional $27.8 million for this reprehensible approach to human sexuality education, not only hailing the failing White House Chief's delusional efforts, but providing a whopping tax dollar waste of $141 million to CBAE."

Yeah, I know its a Republican plan. But when the inmates get control of the asylum, it's usually the guards' fault.

The Immigration Bill is Dust

From Wapo:

"A tenuous compromise to overhaul the nation's immigration laws collapsed last night when senators from both parties refused to cut off debate and move to a final vote, handing the unlikely alliance of Democratic leaders and President Bush a setback on a major domestic priority.


"The defeat came after months of painstaking negotiations and weeks of debate as a 45 to 50 procedural vote fell well short of the 60 votes needed to break the filibuster. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) then pulled the bill from the floor, while holding out hope that the Senate could resurrect the measure within weeks."

Americablog wants to blame it on Bush, but the real blame is alot closer. In fact its the same people who want us to be more energy efficient but don't want to pay for it either in government subsidies or gas taxes. The culprits? You and I, but mostly you. (Yeah, yeah, I'm drinking my coffee as we speak). This "immigration problem" we claim to have is the same deal. First, separate border security from the economic problems of illegal immigration and you discover that they are two totally separate issues, and should be treated as such. The first needs a protocol and the second has one. There are laws on the books that when enforced would deal with this issue. But the fact is, the laws which would penalize businesses who hire illegal immigrants aren't enforced. And their savings get passed on as hush money to the American public in the form of low prices on produce. We're all involved in the failure of any reasonable immigration policy, and until we're ready to face up to that we might as well not even bring up the issue.

Europe Admits to Housing CIA Torture Facilities

From Americablog:

"The rumors have now been confirmed. Unfortunately, many more beyond the countries named - Romania and Poland - probably knew about this but failed to act, possibly due to the shock of 9/11 and wanting to help a traditional ally. How the eastern countries could actively participate in this disgusting program after all they went through under Soviet occupation makes this all the more disappointing. This was a real low point of democracy."

Get over yourself. The low point of democracy is somewhere between Bush and Putin and that puts it right in Romania. Asking how can Eastern Euro countries "actively participate" in a torture program is like asking how can addict have a relapse. It's part of their programing, hardwired into their justice and law enforcement system. It will take a long, long time for them to overcome their own brutality, and it will only be spurned on through the examples of other democracies. Too bad the largest of those democracies encouraged such horrible behavior. Yet another thing to add to Bush's long list of crimes.

Iraq Police Chief Targeted by Insurgents

More great news out of Iraq:

"BAGHDAD (AP) -- Carloads of attackers descended on a police chief's house northeast of Baghdad at dawn Friday, killing the official's wife, two brothers and 11 guards, and kidnapping three of his grown children, Diyala provincial police reported."

Excuse the snarkiness. It's early and I haven't had my double expresso latte enema yet.

I Hope You're Watching Bush

Because this is the type of grief you'll open up if you decide to pardon Scooter:

"LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Paris Hilton is headed for a courtroom showdown Friday that could put her back behind bars, as prosecutors sought to hold sheriff's officials in contempt for releasing her early from jail.

"Hilton was ordered to report to court at 9 a.m. and will be brought in a sheriff's vehicle from her Hollywood Hills home, said Superior Court spokesman Allan Parachini."

Then again Bush started Iraq, so he doesn't care much about opening up grief.

Thursday, June 07, 2007

Correcting the "Quiet Riot"

Here's another timeline of spin. How quickly does a message of hope get twisted into a message of fear? Try less than 2 days. Watch the video below, and find out how shamless some media outlets can be.



Hat Tip: Sully

The Set-Up

I really think Klein set up Armey, just so he could look good on Swampland. They're playing off of each other like Superman and Lex Luthor, or more accurately, Ricky and Lucy:

"Dick: Seems to me, reading you this week, that although you've left public office, you're still infected with political blather, Frank Luntz-style. For example, the word "Ownership." That tested really well in focus groups, but what does it mean? The 47 million people who don't have health insurance--the vast majority of them hardworking folks who could use some help--don't "own" an insurance policy. But you're even opposed to plans like Romney's (which came out of the Heritage Foundation) which give the working poor the means to choose among private health plans and "own" one. It's socialism, you say.
But your definition of socialism...

"Socialized medicine can take the form of government taking your money and then spending it on insurance. Socialized medicine can take the form of a requirement from government for you to spend money on health insurance. Either way, it is the government making the decision about your money, no matter whether you call it Medicare, Medicaid, or an individual mandate....is a smear, the sort of language used in 20-second attack ads, not a definition. I seem to remember socialism defined as state ownership of the means of production. What you're all het-up about is state regulation--not ownership--of an untrammeled, semi-monopolistic free market. How far do you go, Dick? I mean, paying taxes is a state intervention, too. A military draft is a state intervention--would you rule that out, too, if we faced another existential threat like World War II?"

Sweet, although, in terms of blogger wars, it's still not as good as Althouse vs. Jessica Valenti's breasts.

Putting things in Perspective

From Yglesias:

"When I posted on Americans' increasing tolerance of interracial dating a lot of people were less happy to see that 83 percent think it's okay than baffled by the continued presence of the other 17 percent. It's a fair enough point, but Kieran Healy points out that only about 75 percent of the population agrees that the earth orbits the sun, while 18.3 percent think it's the other way 'round."

What's Bush's approval rating right now?

Obama Watch

According to an internal memo, McCain media advisor, Mark McKinnon, says that if Obama wins Dem nomination he would leave McCain camp to work for Obama:

"But he wrote a memo to the campaign in January, explaining that he would quit if the general election pitted McCain against Obama. McKinnon wrote that while he opposed Obama's policies, especially on Iraq, he felt that the Illinois senator--as an African-American politician--has a unique potential to change the country."

Inspiration: Obama's dishing it out in spades.

Hat Tip: TPM

Paris Does Go Free

Medical reasons are sited:
"For medical reasons, Paris Hilton will serve her sentence at home, according to a spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
"After serving just three days behind bars, Hilton was "reassigned" to home detention and was sent home with a electronic-monitoring device. In conjunction with her home detention, Hilton's sentence was re-set at 40 days."
I'm just sick of this whole thing (Yet, I keep blogging about it. What the hell is wrong with me?) I know it's "not a big deal" but in a way, it is. It just seems to be another sign of how unfair American justice is regarding race and class. Yes, what she did was more stupid than malicious, but I've seen poor minorities literally beaten by police for doing stupid things. People have been executed for stupid things. But because Paris is an hotel heiress, a celebrity, she gets coddled. I'm reminded of a scene from the movie John Q where Denzel tells his son to be a good and honest man, but then says, "But most importantly be rich. Wealth will solve most of your problems." In calling truth to power, he's right. Just ask OJ and just ask Paris.
I'm going to go and sell some drugs now. In Iceland.

In the Kingdom of the Blind


The people with one eye chose not to open them. The intellegence report that warned us about Iraq, before we invaded, was ignored. Sully wonders if anyone read it, but at 229 pages, you probably won't read it either. From the summary at Nationalinterest.org:

"The assessments described the main contours of the mess that was to be, including Iraq’s unpromising and undemocratic political culture, the sharp conflicts and prospect for violence among Iraq’s ethnic and sectarian groups, the Marshall Plan-scale of effort needed for economic reconstruction, the major refugee problem, the hostility that would be directed at any occupying force that did not provide adequate security and public services, and the exploitation of the conflict by Al-Qaeda and other terrorists..."

More Immigration Bill Problems

The Senate votes 49-48 to put a five year limit on guest worker program.

Quote of the Day


From Bob Barker in an interview with Matt Lauer on retiring from the Price is Right after 35 years:

"“What will you miss the most, Bob?” Lauer asked.

“The money,” Barker deadpanned without blinking an eye."

Personally I'd miss the Beauties.

Time Not Served?

Paris to possibly get released early from prison. Authorities to hold press conferance shortly. We'll follow up.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Yet Another Reason Why Mike is the Man

Because he's got a good perspective on terrorism:

"There are lots of threats to you in the world. There's the threat of a heart attack for genetic reasons. You can't sit there and worry about everything. Get a life. You have a much greater danger of being hit by lightning than being struck by a terrorist."

Hey Rudy, take notes.

Hat Tip: TPM

Quayle '08

No, No, No, NO!!!!!!!

Hat Tip: Yglesias

GOP Debate Wrap-Up

I completely forgot about the GOP debate last night. I also worked late and didn't get home until 8:30 so that played a part of it as well. Still I heard it was interesting. McCain won some points from Sully, Ambinder doesn't seem to have been too impressed, TPM catches Giuliani in another flip-flop, Huff gives the debate to McCain, and Yglesias says screw the top three. Then decides never to live blog again.

Personally, I'm just hoping Sanchez makes another video.

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Happy Anniversary Iraq!

No not of the war, but of the ideas that got you into a war. Today is the 10th anniversary of the Project for the New American Century's statement of principles. Please be sure to thank the authors, listed below, for their commitment to f_cking up the world:

Elliott Abrams
Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama
Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz

Hat Tip: Yglesias

If You Want Your Head to Explode


Then look at this and be sure to turn on all the YouTube screens at the same time. You'll get your Scanners on.

Your Daily YouTube

Watch this and tell me you don't begin to believe--even when he asks you to do something:

The Democrats and Religion

I missed the Democratic forum on religion last night, but if Sully's account is any inkling of what I missed then I'm happy that I just sat on my ass and played online poker:

"It was a spectacle at once spiritually crass, politicallly vulgar and democratically corrosive. It didn't help that the theologically-challenged moderator, CNN's Soledad O'Brien, asked questions like: "What's the biggest sin you've ever committed?" Just when you think cable news cannot get any dumber, someone like Ms O'Brien slinks onto a stage.


"But the implications of the debate were more worrying. We have had terrible problems grappling with the religious right these past few years, but we may have just begun to adjust to the power and emergence of the religious left. The rhetoric would have done evangelical statist, Michael Gerson, proud. And when you see three leading Democratic candidates fall over each other to endorse faith-based initiatives, and insist, in Clinton's words, on "injecting faith into policy," or, in Obama's words, basing politics on a "Biblical injunction," you realize that George W. Bush really has had a legacy. He has decisively increased the religiosity of public debate - as well, of course, as its fatuousness."

Don't blame Bush, blame Regan. He's was the first whore to jump in bed with Jerry Falwell. Personally, I have no problem with people calling on their faith and spiritual beliefs in their decision making, but I have a problem with endorsing faith-based initiatives. Unfortunately, pandering to the born agains does have it's advantages. Just ask Karl Rove.

Also, it's a bit disturbing to hear John Edwards say:

""I'd have a very hard time telling you one thing," the ex-senator said. "I'm about to turn 54, and if I've had a day when I haven't sinned multiple times, I'd be surprised.""

Internet porn?

Just a Bit of News You Won't Hear About Sharpton

Rev. Sharpton continues his assault against offensive lyrics in Hip-Hop; plans to buy shares in corporations that promote rap music:

"Sharpton and his National Action Network are planning to purchase stock in various companies, including Time Warner and Universal Music Group, and will then use his right to attend shareholder meetings, where he will voice his opinion on lyrics deemed raunchy and sexist."

That crazy Sharpton, always pandering to his black base.

Scooter Rides Into Prison

Turns out Paris isn't the only one getting time behind bars:

"WASHINGTON - Former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby was sentenced to 2-1/2 years in prison Tuesday for lying and obstructing the CIA leak investigation."

I think the Judge on the case summed up my thoughts exactly:

“People who occupy these types of positions, where they have the welfare and security of nation in their hands, have a special obligation to not do anything that might create a problem,” U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton said."

Still 50-50 whether Bush gives him a pardon.

What's in a Name?

As the largest city on the planet, New York has thousands of streets, parks, avenues and such all named after just as many people. Some like Washington, Jefferson, and King everyone knows, but others, like Cummings, Corbin, and Halberstam people may not be so familiar with.

Recently there's been a controversy centering around renaming part of a Brooklyn Street in the predominately African-American community of Bedford-Stuyvesant for Sonny Carson, an activist in the New York Black community. The local community board in Bed-Stuy voted for the change but was overruled by the NY City Council in a 25 to 15 vote. Though the ultimate power to name a street is held by the Council it traditionally only formalizes the Community Board's decision. This has led to heated charges of racism, led by Brooklyn Councilman Charles Barron, who has said of the vote, "What could be more divisive, whether intentional or unintentional, than have four white members of this city council tell an entire black community no?"

In talking about this topic, as a writer, there's many ways I can spin this with neither way exposing the full truth of the situation. Critics of Carson claim that he was too radical, too divisive, and in many ways he was. In 1974 he was convicted of kidnapping and was sentenced to seven years in prison. Upon his release he began his career as a black activist helping to shut down crack houses in Brooklyn. But several times his ardent defense of blacks led to charges of bigotry against other races. As the NY Times reports:

"Once asked about charges of being anti-Semitic, he said: “That’s absolutely absurd, ‘anti-Semitic.’ And so you don’t ask the question, I’m antiwhite. Don’t limit my antis to just one group of people...

"In 1990, Mr. Carson led a boycott of Korean-owned delis in black neighborhoods, carrying picket signs that said, “Don’t shop with people who don’t look like us.”

But the harshest and most personal criticism of Carson came from Michael C. Nelson, the chairman of the City Council's Jewish Caucus who recalls, "Thirty-seven years ago, Sonny Carson walked into my wife’s classroom and said he didn’t want any white Jews teaching his children, and he also said he would carve his initials on her chest if she didn’t leave."

All of these issues, when looked at in a vacuum, can lead one to believe that Mr. Carson isn't worthy of having a street named after him. But then again, who is worthy of having a street named after them?

Is Horatio Gates, a Revolutionary war general who owned slaves worthy of having his name on a street? Ironically, his is the name they want to rename for Carson.

How about Austin Corbin, whom Corbin Place in Brooklyn is named after, a Brooklyn developer and anti-Semite.

How about Punk Rock icon Joey Ramone? Who was known just as much for his cocaine habit as his three chord melodies.

And what about America founding father Thomas Jefferson, who one could argue was a rapist, slaveowner, and pedophile?

Personally I grew up on St. Nicholas Avenue. Now there's a street name no one can argue. He's literally a saint, and he gives out toys to kids on Christmas. Oh and he's also not a real person.

I bring up these names and issues not so much as to compare their negatives with Carson but rather to bring up the innate human flaws that exist within us all. We can easily fall into the pit of anger and hatred, pointing fingers and playing the gotcha! game. Oh this one did that and this one did this. But rather let's look back and see the things that unite all of the above people. They were men of their time, and they tried, in their own ways, to do something positive for people. Recently critics of renaming the street have said, "Well what if someone wanted to name a street for Adolf Hitler?" But that's not only a flawed comparison, it's downright insulting. Hitler was a madman, and a mass murderer. Some Germans may say that he tried to make life better for Germans--but that's Germany's matter, and they have to work that out for themselves. Though you may disagree with his tactics there is no doubt that Carson made life a little bit better for a population that is consistently, repeatedly, and historically ignored and marginalized by the American justice system: poor blacks. He was a veteran of the Korean war, he helped to fight for voting rights for former black convicts and fought against police brutality, a problem that continues till today. He helped to found Medger Evers College in Brooklyn, and the Black Men's Movement Against Crack a direct action movement of blacks to shut down crack houses in their community. For all of these things he was posthumously honored by Mayor Mike Bloomberg, and Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz with the proclamation of October 24th as Sonny Carlson day. Though, in a surprisingly acute case of amnesia, Mayor Bloomberg said, after the Council vote, that "... that there is probably no one who less deserves a street named after him." How Rommeyish.

As a libertarian, I believe that the community has the right to name their streets after whomever they like. I understand some of the criticism that many people level against Carson, much like I can understand the criticism many people can level against John Brown, Nat Turner, and Malcolm X. We would all love our heroes, and our advocates to be King, and Einstein, pacifists and gentle characters. We would love it if all our legends were as perfect as St. Nicholas. But we are men and not myths. We are people and not Gods. We do the best we can with what we have, and it is in our intentions, the good that we try to create, and the passionate determination to create that better day that will ultimately create our legacies. Would I want my street to be named after Carson? I don't know, that's up to my community to decide, but I'm glad this debate has occurred if only so that I could learn more about this fascinating individual.

What's in a name? A lesson.

Just Wondering...

Rumor has it, Jay-Z and Beyonce have broken up. If that's the case then who is Jay going to date now? Helen of Troy? Going to clone Cleopatra? Just wondering.

Monday, June 04, 2007

Ironic...Don't You Think?

Klein corrects Dick. In other news, the pot just called the kettle black.

Astounding



No, not that Fred Thompson's wife is hot...she is...but that if you type in 'Fred', 'Thompson', and 'wife' into Google a Word of the People post comes up as the first hit.

Update: Sorry, that's only if you misspell Thompson as 'Thomspon" I'm firing my entire editorial staff.

Joe Klein Gets Bumped...

...out of the number one spot as biggest putz on Swampland. Dick Armey begins his tenure there, and starts out by taking a big dump on the truth:

"So when we look at issues or examine the statements of a politician this week, lets get to the core of the issue of whether it expands and restricts an individuals’ freedom. The two primary debates this week should give us plenty to talk about.On the Democratic side, we see an abundance demagoguery and proposals for the largest expansion of government since the 1930’s and 1970’s, with socialized health care and severe regulation of the economy, especially the energy sector. Great for sound bites, but a complete disregard for fundamental economic principles." [Itz mine]

This is so wrong it's sick, and if Rick Stengel wasn't such a putz himself he'd immediately fire Cock Marines off Swampland right now. Does Time have any more integrity?

The Crop-Out

A broader explanation of what I called the 'M$M-Paul' effect:

"This raises an interesting question about the ethics of media intrusion into America's electoral process. Whether or not a candidacy truly has the money, organization and charisma to win a nomination and be elected, should private media corporations have the right to weed out candidates they decide are not going to win? In other words, once a candidate fills out petitions, gets themselves on the ballot and legally enters a campaign--presidential or otherwise--should a private corporation have the power to, effectively, cut that candidate out of a debate? Should editorial or business meetings in private boardrooms have the power to declare a candidacy over?"

The simplest answer? No, but they do.

Great Tool

And no, I don't mean A-Rod.
My television happens to be in my bedroom, away from my computer. and it sucks, especially when I want to live blog. Fortunately I found this little tool from Yahoo widgets that worked really well. It plays through Windows Media. The sound/ video is slightly out of sync, but it was free so I'm pretty happy. It's worth the download.

And in Case You Forgot...

...we're still at war:

"BAGHDAD - Fourteen American soldiers were killed in three deadly days in Iraq, the U.S. military said Sunday, including four in a single roadside bombing and one who was struck by a suicide bomber while on a foot patrol southwest of the capital."

Wake me up when September ends.

More evidence that Law Enforcement is THE Way to Fight Terrorism

Informant was key in capturing JFK terror suspects:

"NEW YORK - An informant who helped break up an alleged plot to bomb a fuel pipeline feeding the city's busiest airport was so convincing to the suspects that they actually thanked God he was with them, federal authorities said."

Another Great Bush Nomination

His Surgeon General nominee founded a church that claims to cure homosexuality.

He also claims that sleeping with a virgin cures AIDS. Not really, but we're easing on down that road aren't we?

HT: Sully

Sully on the Dem Debate

He focuses too much on Clinton, giving her the win with deep reservations:

"She did well, it seems to me. There were times when her robo-lecture act began to wear down my ear-drums, but, in general, Senator Clinton bestrode the debate as an authoritative figure. In fact, I've never witnessed a U.S. political debate in which a woman clearly dominated as she did tonight. She was hawkish, and I was frankly surprised to hear her state baldly that "we are safer than we were," referring to the Bush administration's counter-terrorism policies. (Truth be told, I don't really know the answer to that question, but I suspect we are much less safe than we were, say, two years ago. Fueling Jihad with an incompetent, half-assed occupation of a Muslim country is the worst of all worlds for national security.) She also deftly began to criticize the Iraqis for the chaos that the Bush occupation spawned. Well: up to a point. We had a six-month window of opportunity to leverage the removal of Saddam to reboot Iraq but we blew it. And that scarred little girl whose photograph I posted earlier today is not to blame for anything.


"Yes, there were the usual knee-jerk responses. Of course, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was a mistake, Senator. It doubled the rate of gay discharges from the military. It has denied us critical skills in a dangerous war. But Clinton cannot concede anything critical about someone she called at one point "my dear husband." Yes, I gagged on that one. What a total phony. But an effective, shameless one."

Don't forget Andrew, she's the one who's got to sleep with him...or at least live in the same state.

One thing I'm surprised about is that he didn't mention Edwards or Biden, who I think were on point, and he spent time on Obama who I think, with exceptions, got lost in the crowd. In fact the media spent alot of time on Obama, which makes me wonder how much the media is gearing up for an Obama nomination (it's the opposite of the 'M$M-Paul effect': they tell us he can't get nominated and thus he doesn't get nominated) which I'm sure would make for a great story. And, oh yeah, it would be historical too.

The Gaping Hole in Guiliani

What he doesn't get:

"More troubling than any of Bush's rhetoric is that of the Republicans who wish to succeed him. "They hate you!" says Rudy Giuliani in his new role as fearmonger in chief, relentlessly reminding audiences of all the nasty people out there. "They don't want you to be in this college!" he recently warned an audience at Oglethorpe University in Atlanta. "Or you, or you, or you," he said, reportedly jabbing his finger at students. In the first Republican debate he warned, "We are facing an enemy that is planning all over this world, and it turns out planning inside our country, to come here and kill us." On the campaign trail, Giuliani plays a man exasperated by the inability of Americans to see the danger staring them in the face. "This is reality, ma'am," he told a startled woman at Oglethorpe. "You've got to clear your head."

"The notion that the United States today is in grave danger of sitting back and going on the defensive is bizarre. In the last five and a half years, with bipartisan support, Washington has invaded two countries and sent troops around the world from Somalia to the Philippines to fight Islamic militants. It has ramped up defense spending by $187 billion—more than the combined military budgets of China, Russia, India and Britain. It has created a Department of Homeland Security that now spends more than $40 billion a year. It has set up secret prisons in Europe and a legal black hole in Guantánamo, to hold, interrogate and—by some definitions—torture prisoners. How would Giuliani really go on the offensive? Invade a couple of more countries?"

Hat Tip: Sully

The Truthiness of Government--A Paradox

I was thinking about a comment I made about Obama during my live blogging of the Democratic debate last night, and a thought occurred to me that there is an inherent paradox in the way many people like myself think. My original quote:

"8:20: Obama seems to be the leader of the main crowd--Gravel (who is he?) calls him out about Walter Reed--the correct thing to do. I believe Obama when he says he didn't visit the outpatient part of Walter Reade, but, big but, doesn't make him look like a leader." [Boldface mine]

Here's the paradox. I like Obama and it's been obvious from anyone who reads my blog that I support him. Thus, I trust Obama. After all it's pretty hard not to support someone who you don't trust. But, simultaneously, I don't trust government. This leads to a problem. Let me write out the possible syllogism:

a) Government is untrustworthy.

b) Obama is part of government.

c) Therefore, Obama is untrustworthy.

Two logical statements which leads to a logical conclusion which goes against what I want to believe about Obama. Of course, if that's the case then no one should even participate in the governmental process, and government falls apart. Yet I still believe in Obama, or want to believe in him. Thus how can this syllogism be solved? That's the question I pose to you. However, I have a few ideas how it can be solved.

In any syllogism a conclusion can only be reached when the givens are true. The second given, "Obama is part of government" is undeniable. So the only given that can be questioned is the first, and that's where the debate begins. Is the government "untrustworthy"? Well how does one begin to answer that? Past experience has shown that the government does, in fact, do things that are fraudulent, criminal, and dishonest. You need to look no farther than this current war, the suspension of Habus Corpus, et al. Of course you could say, 'well this is the Bush administration and it is an anomaly.' But that's a mistake. Clinton lied (Monica), Bush lied (read my lips), Regan lied (I didn't know about Iran-Contra), and so on and so on. And even if you don't believe that they purposefully lied, isn't an unpurposeful lie still a lie? Or is it a sign of incompetence?

Thus the best reconciliation I can make for all this is to say that the government displays the stark personality trait of "truthiness," to coin the Colbert term. It floats around in a "truth field": a miasma of what could possibly be the "truth" that "truth" being something that is, depending upon the situation, more "truthy" that others. If this is added into my syllogism I think we get something like this:

a) The Government is "Truthy"

b) Obama is part of government

c) Therefore Obama exhibits "Truthiness"

This is more fuzzy than my first syllogism but it actually feels more correct, and it seems to encompass more of the human condition. Politicians aren't necessarily liars, but, because of the very system the work in, lying is sometimes required (that is if you are to be successful--Gravel and Kuchinch and Paul probably won't get elected (or even considered) because that lack this very trait--they're too honest).

If this is true, then ironically, those of us in the population who do participate in the governmental process (vote, send their reps letters, and maybe even pay taxes), unconsciously want our leaders to have this element of truthiness, no matter how much we claim we want honesty. We want them to lie, but, and here's the kicker, only at the appropriate times. It's like a parent who just lost their job and their kids ask is everything going to be ok. The parent wants to say, "Hell no!" But their children want them to assuage their fears. A good parent does so, but a bad parent (or at least a bad parent at the time) is bluntly honest. A good politician understands that a lie at times can inspire hope, and squelch fears, while at other times a corrupt politician lies to mask their deceitfulness and incompetence.

Of course that fine line between the two is often crossed by a politician with the greatest of intentions, especially when the politician feels that the destiny of their country is wrapped up within them, forgetting that in the grand scheme of things they are ultimately expendable, a brilliant trait of the Constitution which spreads out power among three branches to insure the public against corruption and incompetence.

I feel like I've taken the long boat to China to arrive at this answer; but, as I said before, this feels correct. Please drop me a line and tell me what you think.

Sunday, June 03, 2007

Blogging the Democratic Debate IV

8:48: Richardson, "A pro-growth Democrat." So what does that make everyone else? Anti-growth? God I hate him.

8:50: God I love Kunchich he makes it seem so easy, and I believe you CAN do it.

8:51: Yet another dumb question, "will you veto bills with earmarks?" You CAN'T do that. That's like asking Senators not to get "massages".

8:53: Who the hell is GRAVEL?

8:54: Clinton, "Remember 6 years ago we had a surplus." Correct answer, the best you can do is cut spending, while you raise revenue.

8:55: Gravel "You balanced the budget by raiding Social Security for 200 million." Whoh. My dad says the same thing--and suddenly I feel weird.

9:00: End of debate.

I can't say who won. No one really lost...well maybe Kuchinch (what can you do). They didn't really give any one enough time, but I'd have to say Edwards stuck out as very moderate, controlled, and hopeful. Clinton seemed stalled as did Obama, ready to break out but not good with the format. But people will remember Biden, Kuchinch and the Democratic Ron Paul...that Gravel dude.

Blogging the Democratic Debate III

We're back!

8:11: Beginning with the big hitters, a Marine's wife. Kunchich starts. Asking K how to rebuild the military is like asking Emperor Palpatine to rebuild the Red Cross.

8:13: Chris Dodd's answer was nice, but there's just not enough time to let them speak. Sorta a shame.

8:19: Richardson "Hero's health card." Not feasible. Sounds great, but can't work, and if you make it open for all vets then why have the VA Heath plan.

8:20: Obama seems to be the leader of the main crowd--Gravel (who is he?) calls him out about Walter Reed--the correct thing to do. I believe Obama when he says he didn't visit the outpatient part of Walter Reade, but, big but, doesn't make him look like a leader.

8:24: Clinton: "And once and awhile they send Dick Cheney, and that's not very diplomatic." Great zinger.

8:25: Edwards gave a great answer about Iran. And yes, it shouldn't have to be explicitly said "I'll attack you." Of course the President will and can!

8:27: Good question about Pakistan.

8:29 WTF! What kind of question is Blitzer asking about killing Bin Laden to...Kuchinch! What do you think Dennis is going to say? God! Obama is right though, Bin Laden is a military target.

8:31: Blitzer should be ashamed asking that question.

8:32: This has really been an excellent discussion so far.

8:33: Dafur, about time. Biden "Enough talk. A no fly zone, get 2,000 NATO troops to get in there. Good.

8:35: Richardson, "We should lean on China, and if they don't help, maybe we'll not go to China." F'ing right. If you want it to end, something has to be sacrificed.

8:38: Edwards was about to bring up a great point and Blitzer cut him off. COME ON! Edwards agrees about boycotting China.

8:39: Really impressed by Biden's intensity about Darfur. He's right. We can't be scared to use the military when GENOCIDE occurs.

8:41: WHO THE HELL IS GRAVEL?

8:44: What is rich...ooo, this is going to be tricky. Obama--over 200,000.

8:47: Edwards, "College for everyone." Excellent.

8:47: Question: "Do you think big deficits are bad?"...sigh...

Blogging the Democratic Debate II

7:51: They all agree to get rid of don't ask don't tell--but would they follow through? Richardson getting his Rommey on.

7:53: Edwards is right--gay marriage is a religious issue, not federal.

7:54: Is it just me or is Wolf just rushing people?

7:55: Richardson is right, Bill Clinton is needed in Middle East peace process, and take GBush the I with him. Then start a road show.

7:57: By the way, the Bill Clinton question is funny. Think Hil will say that he should be used as bait for terrorists?

7:58: Gas Prices, will anyone have the guts to talk about a gas tax?

8:00: Who the hell is Mike Gravel? The guy who says he won't do anything to lower gas prices? Holy crap I like him. But who is he?

8:03: Biden and Richardson, only partly right, but you have to either let it rise or tax it, one way or the other.

8:04: CNN's music is insanely cheesy.

And we're on break!

Blogging the Democratic Debate

7:35: Yes I started late (went on tilt playing on line poker) Note: Wolf Blitzer--the most manly name in news.

7:36: Who's Mike Gravel? I didn't get an e-mail about him and only Gore should get to join in late.

7:37: Obama gets the "National Language" question right. Have to quote his answer tomorrow.

7:41: I like Obama's overall goal of his Health plan, but so much his method.

7:44: Impressive answer on HC by Richardson, brought up key word--preventative care.

7:47: Kuchinech wants straight Socialist care...and we wonder why he's not a front runner. I think the social/ private care way can work.

7:50: Gays in the military--Biden "Pace is dead wrong." Nice work. Strong talk--what we need.

Saturday, June 02, 2007

Joost Invites...

...does anyone out there have one? I'm dying to try it out.

Changes at The Word

As you can see I've been busy changing around various parts of this blog. So far so good. I was hoping to place a map from Mapped Up (pic on the side) but I would have had to have gotten a degree from MIT in Computer programming to do so. If anyone has an idea how to get it up on here (or any live news map) please let me know. Anyway, I'm busy working hard to give you a more fullfilling news experience, and hopefully I will be live blogging the Democratic debate tomorrow night.

PS: There's also Space Invaders at the bottom, for when you just want to waste time.
PPS: Widgets are cool!

Friday, June 01, 2007

What Makes Fred Thomspon Qualified For President?

Well it's probably not his resume, but maybe it's his family values. Like such beacons of virtue as thrice married Rudy Guiliani, and twice married John McCain, Thomspon has been married twice, and his current wife is 24 years younger than him. That's a year for every hour in a Jack Bauer season.

With this in mind I think I've discovered the perfect candidate for the GOP ticket. He's a man of dubious distinction, an underachiever in the mold of G.W. Bush, it looks like he's close to getting remarried himself, and he's a Republican:

A-Rod for President. Because he doesn't believe in taking oaths seriously either.


Dan Bartlett Jumps Ship...

The long standing advisor to Pres. Bush decides to quit to spend more time with his family:

"Bartlett’s pending departure will follow that of some other aides such as deputy national security adviser J.D. Crouch and the National Security Council expert on Iraq and Afghanistan, Meghan O’Sullivan, who chose to leave rather than ride out the rest of the president’s term, which ends in January 2009."

You know, it seems that everyone who leaves Bush claims it's to take care of their kids. I'm starting to think that they're having kids and getting married just to make a break.

The Opposite of Mitt Rommey...

Obama, of course:

"Presidential-primary politics tends to be played like a game of connect the dots, with all the would-be nominees running from interest group to interest group, knowing and delivering precisely what each constituency is expecting to hear. Unless, that is, the would-be nominee happens to be named Barack Obama. Whereas other candidates like to throw red meat before their audiences, Obama is developing a penchant for hurling cold water at them."

Klein will get it, sometime during Obama's second term.

Hat Tip: Sully

Once Again, Joe Klein is Behind the Learning Curve

He just found out that Mitt Rommey will say anything to get elected.

LabPixies TV