I really shouldn't snark any more about "Charlie from Brooklyn" or "Nick from New Jersey" or "Frank from Lodi" (the latter two of whom I actually know slightly in real life) after I found myself calling the new WWRL morning show this morning to talk about last night's debate. But with Mr. Brilliant finally discovering the value of an MP3 player in playing old Morning Sedition shows while at work, and us turning our laptop and Bose Wave into the world's most expensive AM radio to listen to Rachel Maddow at dinnertime, I was just so GRATEFUL to have even a tolerable morning AM radio show to listen to.
For nearly two years, my mornings started with "It's six past the hour, and this....is Morning Sedition", followed by "Good morning geniuses, philosopher kings and queens, working class heroes, progressive utopians with no sense of humor, lurking conservatives...." And after listening to a couple of hours of Marc Maron's bebop funny, the smart interplay among Maron, Riley, the writers, and the board dudes, I was ready to face the horror that is life in the Bush years.
So when I left work today at five and rushed out to the car so I could hear the last hour of Maron's sub gig for Randi Rhodes, and my face broke out in a wide grin, I realized that things are at a sorry pass indeed when the world somehow seems so much more tolerable when this hopelessly neurotic, narcissistic, emotional wreck of a Jewish man is on the radio. And it isn't just me. Morning Sedition has been gone for nearly two years, and every time Maron subs for someone on Air America, there will be five callers, and it's not even gypsy or Seanie or Kristapea from the Seditionists blog, saying "I really miss you on the radio, man!" I wonder how he feels when he hears that; if he goes home after the show and sits on his deck, smoking a cigar and muttering dire things about what he'd like to do to Danny Goldberg. Hell, I sit there after the show muttering dire things about what I think should be done to Danny Goldberg.
It isn't that I'm not glad that Rennie Bishop finally realized that an idiot shill like Armstrong Williams had no place on progressive talk radio. And it isn't that I have a grudge against Mark Riley for not going to bat for Maron when Danny Goldberg was painting a huge target on his own network and then shooting it as if he were Dick Cheney and Air America were Harry Whittington's face. When you're on the shady side of 50 and have to earn a living, sometimes Fighting the Good Fight has to take second place to being able to buy shoes for your kid. It's kind of nice to have Riley back on the radio in the morning even if it does feel like a bone tossed at us old Seditionists; and if Richard Bey isn't Marc Maron, well, who else is? Could we really handle more than one of him? But after having been screwed over as badly in his radio career in the last few years as Maron has, it's promising that Bey has finally landed on his feet after four years in the AM Substitute Host Purgatory in which Marc Maron finds himself these days. Maybe it's an omen.
I still don't understand people who call radio shows on a regular basis, especially in the morning, when you have barely enough time to make your point and hope that the host doesn't mistake your unfortunate use of the word "pragmatism" to describe why Dennis Kucinich isn't really a viable candidate to mean that you are a Hillary supporter. I suppose there's a certain amount of pseudo-fame that comes with being a regular caller. "Nick" is actually a pretty bright guy, though he's sort of the Leonard Zelig of Bergen County Democratic politics in that he's EVERYWHERE. And "Charlie from Brooklyn" knows of what he speaks as well. I'm not sure it's any worse to call every Air America show than it is to spend enough time with AM radio on that one knows that "H.R. from Staten Island", the elderly conservative who for some reason used to call Sam Seder every week and seemed to be fond of him despite their disagreements, also calls Richard Neer on WFAN on Saturdays, identifying himself as "Howie from Staten Island" instead -- as if he's some kind of secret agent going by a number of aliases.
Melina wrote earlier this evening about what it was like when Air America started up and people like us realized that it wasn't just us out here, that there were other people who also saw what was going on; who didn't have those fucking ribbon magnets on our cars and didn't see George Bush as a tough guy because he "went after the terrorists." It was like being Donna Douglas in the old Twilight Zone episode Eye of the Beholder and being in that place with others like us so that we could finally feel normal.
The people who run progressive talk radio, and particularly those who run Air America (for while the cast changes, nothing else really does) really don't understand what a lifeline it is to have these shows out there in a sea of media where presidential candidates are asked about UFOs and who they want to win the World Series instead of about FISA and the Constitution; and where the Speaker of the House is asked if she prays for the troops to win in Iraq and Robert Novak still insists that everyone in Washington knew who Valerie Plame was and that she wasn't covert. They don't understand how we NEED to hear over the airwaves that we are Not Insane and to reach out and grasp the figurative hand that reaches out through the radio -- and now over the Intertubes -- to let us know we're not alone.
mercredi 31 octobre 2007
Another Debate, Another Halloween....
Its Halloween...Boo!...and I'm listening to Marc Maron filling in for Randi Rhodes. Its almost like the old days except that he wont be on again tomorrow.
Last night I watched another democratic debate on MSNBC, and this one was notable in its horrible format and questions...and also in the poor moderating by Brian Williams, who was stiff and counter-intuitive. The light moments were the lightening round, which was basically the candidates talking in fast forward like Alvin Chipmunk, and Biden's comment about Rudy's "noun, verb, and 9-11" structure for every comment he makes.
The word today is that Barak Obama crashed hard, and I saw something that I find annoying in ...well, anyone, much less my President...He is not right on point... he says ummm alot and looks around too much. I think that he has his moments of real shining presence, but I find him to be sort of soft when it comes to the need for some sort of combative message to the people.
We are in what might be described as a serious crisis in this country. We are in trouble, and I don't want to feel like the man who wants to be my President doesn't have a strong sense of urgency. And its true also that when I saw them all debate live at Yearly Kos 2, Obama sat, leaning forward, looking to the side at the moderator rather than at the audience, and seemed almost young and sort of lacking in the kind of polish and presence that enables someone to go confidently into negotiations with world leaders; someone who goes in and kicks ass. I think that he is a gifted orator, but I don't know that he can really command the dyed in the wool politicos that have to be dealt with in this job. By this debate I can see clearly that he is green and he does need seasoning. Obama is just not ready yet....(notice that I say yet.)
Meanwhile, Hillary has been touted by the press as the one, and we are basically being told to pack it in and head to the polls and pull her lever...but the same press that is telling us who to vote for and sizing up the big show as a Hillary vs. Rudy game, were tremendously quick to jump on her when they felt like she had made a big slip in saying that she believes that illegal immigrants should have access to drivers licenses. This is a hot button issue, and its one that is being skirted by most politicians; embraced by others....And Hillary made the mistake of stating a position!! Well, we can't have that, for Christ's sake!! I guess that its silly to note that all the candidates agreed with her except for Dodd. This is the crack in the veneer that they were looking for.
It dawned on me, much to my delight, that if Obama is looking young and green, and Hillary showed a hairline fracture, Edwards is only one mistake away from being the guy...and let me tell you, Edwards shined last night.
John Edwards is a man who has been through this ringer as the different apparitions that advisers and handlers will create at the big show. He has clearly straightened out, in his own mind, what his life is about and what his campaign is about. I think so anyway...Its impossible to ever truly trust any politician, but I've seen him up close, and I bought his line; hook, line, and sinker. I really think that he is the guy...and that if its not for President this time round, its to do some really important work on this country and whats wrong with it. Like Al Gore, he might actually be able to do more good while not being president.
What I love about this process, which is a much more open-format and full debate schedule than the Rovian Bushies would ever permit, is that the field is fantastic and varied. I'm not wishing that the field would narrow all that soon, mainly because I'm acutely aware that things are being said over and over that have needed to be said for years. And though its true that the corporate media has their own manipulated spin on what is being said, in their drive to make Hillary be the candidate, sound/YouTube bytes are being created that are bound to make their way out of that lock on information that is hanging heavily in the air on network TV, radio, and in the papers.I want everyone from the media powers-that-be to the bloggers to pick this stuff apart until its dust. I want the conversation about how horrible Bush has fucked us up to go on and on.
I keep remembering driving around here as the war began and as the first part of the attempted destruction of the constitution began, and the first horrible mistakes started to become apparent...and this is such a different atmosphere, even if we end up with the repugnant Hillary Clinton, (with her questionable ability to beat even Rudy Giuliani,) at least the things that needed to be said were, for the most part, said. All that is left is to try to understand why the House and Senate are not on board with what the country clearly wants....and where the corporate media thinks that they are getting off in distorting things so much. I love this stuff, even if it is gut-wrenching and heartbreaking most of the time.
Last weekend, I had a garage sale here at the Chicken Ranch , and due to my ever present Impeach Bush sign, I was treated to a day long running conversation about the extreme disappointment that people are feeling about the current majority rule and their lack of balls in getting us out of Iraq one way or another.
Why do I like John Edwards so much? He is very clear that if we are to continue on this road that we need to understand that we are going to have to sacrifice and take responsibility for the position that we are in. This isn't just Bush's mistake or something that politicians have to handle; we are all there in the thick of this thing and as time goes on it will effect us in much more palpable ways...so, don't look to the authority figures in this thing to get us out of it; they are every bit as helpless as we all are. This thing is going to take some real work to dig out of, and its not going to be easy.
By far, the most interesting person at the sale was the last guy, who was a local pump guy on his way to an emergency call. He wanted to get some toys for his grandchildren...and upon seeing my Impeach sign explained to me that he is a vet and that as far as he can see, that this is a fascist government.... then he went on to lay out every point that I had ever thought or had heard from the likes of Seder and Maron, the prophets out there, and my favorite blogs....not to mention what had been going around my head for all of these years. This is an older local guy who is not on the internets at all, and who is getting by listening to a local black liberal station which is supposedly available up here at 95.5 FM.
He reminded me of myself before AAR came out of nowhere and reminded me that there are sane voices out there somewhere...and he was so happy that he found someone who agreed with him. Sometimes it seems like we are out here rattling round in our own heads, and at some point critical mass has to ensure that there is some movement in the direction that we are mandating. They work for us, don't they? I mean, I guess that if Hillary gets into office, it will be the equivalent of more of the same lite, so you cant be too careful. But when are we gonna get so mad that we remove these people from power? What has to happen? How bad does it have to get before we demand that the networks even actually report on the demonstrations that we are marching in?
Garage sales are strange in that they cross personal barriers...who is buying what?...and who understands what? Many immigrants came by and they bought alot of my old sneakers at 50 cents a pop....I lowered the price for things like that, in that these are the people doing most of the heavy lifting around here. The Hispanics were the best hagglers, but I started to get a little tired of it all in that I was making the prices super low to begin with. I began to pull items back from even being on sale because I felt like...it was almost embarrassing to fight with an older Mexican woman about a jacket from Banana Republic or something, that was new, and that she wanted for a dollar...but that I could sell on eBay for $15...I was saying basically that I live uptown here in this beautiful place and that I have a computer to sell my fancy things, (actually my sister had given it to me as a present and I had never worn it,) and I was somehow torn between giving the stuff away and pulling it back...but I didn't want to haggle down to some silly price. Maybe I was losing my mind...maybe I had been in the garage too long. It was an odd sensation and it reminded me of why I usually just give stuff to the Salvation Army and let them sell it.
Maybe that I was just getting sick, which I was, but a whole day of discussing the extreme political distress that is going around out there, on top of going through all of my kid's baby stuff, my past, and seeing so many neighbors and people who came up from downtown to go through the "rich people's" stuff, frazzled me.
No doubt that I am frazzled and burned out anyway. I don't quite know what to do about it, because its not like I can shut off politics, or my kids, or my life...and even if I do, it all goes round in my head until I can research the ideas and spit them out here or there...I don't know what to do. But something that I find heartening in all of this is that this guy, John Edwards, is really speaking the truth; and its not just a truth about the current situation. Its a truth about life in general and how we move around on this planet, what we can expect from our interaction in this society, and what our responsibilities are in life...towards each other, our families, our friends, and the larger world. The disconnect has to stop here...we must find our way back from becoming so disconnected. If we don't, we cant hope for much besides a fast food, cardboard, empty world, with a couch and a TV remote....
So let the debates continue, and maybe, just maybe, some little bit of information will get out there and into the popular psyche enough to wise us up...lift us up...
C/P: RIPCoco
What makes you so sure it's Al-Qaeda doctoring these videos?
Buried at MSNBC's site is this little tidbit claiming what many of us believed from the beginning-- that the latest so-called Al Qaeda video was doctored:
It's evident that most of these so-called Al Qaeda videos are edited. But what makes these guys so sure it's Al Qaeda doing the editing? Who really benefits from these videos?
When al-Qaida’s media arm released its first Osama Bin Laden video in nearly three years, most of the media attention was focused on Bin Laden's beard. It appeared either dyed — or perhaps even pasted on. He was ridiculed and a variety of theories were offered to explain it.
But now, there is a running debate among video analysts about whether al-Qaida faked the video altogether —that rather than being new, the September 7 message may have been something recorded at the same time as his last video in October 2004 (and then released with new audio).
The point of departure for the debate is something not noted at the time: that of the 25 minutes of video tape, only three and a half minutes, were moving video. The rest was covered by a still image or a frozen still. Moreover, the still covered the only time references on the 25 minute of tape— references to political developments in Iraq, Britain and France. This lead to the suspicion that the video is not new, but disguised to appear as new.
A senior U.S. intelligence official says they believe the message is authentic, adding “it remains our view that the September 7 Bin Laden video is, in fact, new… interesting but not compelling.”
The leading proponent of the theory is a computer scientist and self-described hacker Dr. Neal Krawetz of Colorado. Krawetz, who makes his living a computer security consultant, tells NBC News in interviews and e-mails that the similarities between the October 29, 2004 tape and the September 7, 2007 tape are too great to be coincidental.
[snip]
Krawetz does not believe that al-Qaida used the exact same video it did in 2004. Instead, he suspects that al-Qaida had recorded much more video than it released in 2004. There may have even been two sittings. “The main thing I am getting at: I am not saying that they are the same recording,” he said. “I believe they recorded a speech, changed a little, and then recorded some more. (Under this same theory, they may have done it many times and AQ just has not released other videos yet).”
“I am saying the two videos were likely made either on the same day or within days of each other.”
[snip]
The CIA will not say what it thinks about the possibility, but a senior U.S. intelligence official tells NBC News the U.S. believes the tape is new. He would not discuss the reasons why intelligence analysts feel that way. Another even more senior intelligence official dismissed the possibility that that beard is fake, but would not discuss the reason for the darkened beard.
Despite the debate over the most recent Bin Laden video, there is no debate among private analysts or intelligence officials about the increasing use of digital editing, in some cases sophisticated editing in the videos released by al-Qaida.
Krawetz said there is no evidence of video editing on the scale seen in the videos of his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri.
Krawetz noted in one recent video, Zawahiri was featured in what appeared to be a library, complete with a desk, a banner, a bookshelf and even a toy cannon mounted on the bookshelf.
IntelCenter
Ayman al-Zawahiri’s September 29. 2006 video
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of it, Krawetz said, was created digitally using software like 3DStudio. Even the lettering on the banner was added separately. The software permits the creation of wire frame images that can be inserted over a green screen.
“They use multiple overlays,” said Krawetz. “I suspect they have a portable green screen or black fabric they use for the shoot, then edit the video with multiple overlays,” all of which can be seen in a forensic analysis of the video.
“You can tell the number of times it was layered and the order in which the layers were added,” Krawetz added. And a close examination can even determine whether the “green screen” has wrinkles in it. Krawetz said he has noticed the same wrinkle in several Zawahiri videos.
None of the software they use is particularly expensive, says Krawetz. The most basic software, from Adobe or Microsoft, can yield the required effects. (Evan Kohlmann, the NBC News counter terrorism analyst, says most of the software is probably pirated, that every major jihadi site has a download section filled with software from companies as big as Microsoft or Adobe.) Nor is the editing time-consuming, especially since digital editing is now so common in al-Qaida videos.
It's evident that most of these so-called Al Qaeda videos are edited. But what makes these guys so sure it's Al Qaeda doing the editing? Who really benefits from these videos?
Barack Obama's very, very, very bad week didn't get any better last night and other debate postmortem
The media have been treating the Democratic presidential race as a two-person game for practically the last six months. Granted, a fight to the [political] death between a serious woman candidate and a serious black candidate, particularly when played against a sea of Gray White Saber-Rattlers on the Republican side, makes a more compelling story than do the white guys in the Democratic race. But as Barack Obama's peculiar flavor of "Can't We All Just Get Along" politics has been shown to involve throwing Teh Gays under the bus and a refusal to take a strong stand against just about anything, we ought to start seeing some movement in the race.
The Hillary is Inevitable storyline has increasingly dominated the media with every poll that comes out showing her with a commanding lead -- despite the fact that no one seems to know anyone who's planning to vote for her. But after last night's debate, we're at least starting to see some acknowledgement that there are others in this race, particularly John Edwards, who has trounced the competition in the last two debates.
Today, from two of the most loathsome so-called "journalists" covering the political beat from the New York Times, Adam Nagourney and Elisabeth Bumiller, comes mention, however fleeting, of this reality:
If I were conspiracy-minded (Moi? conspiracy-minded? Quelle horreur!), I'd almost think that Obama, whom we know is capable of rousing a crowd, has been told to take a dive by some giant BushClinton conspiracy to run things in this country in perpetuity in return for keeping some peccadillo secret or for a plum job in a Clinton administration. But it's difficult to take Hillary's anti-Bush rhetoric seriously when she keeps voting for Bush's insane military adventures and later claiming she was voting for diplomacy. John Edwards is absolutely right: How many times does it take to learn a lesson?
I can't even express how much I wish Hillary were someone I could support. Given the kind of mess that the so-called "manly men" currently running the country have made of things, it would be wonderful to have a woman to enthusiastically support. But when I see Hillary's sense of entitlement, her continuation of the famed Clinton Triangulation that made her husband a very good moderate Republican president but not a progressive one, and the spectre of another four to eight years of Clinton Derangement Syndrome in the press and on talk radio, I just want to crawl into bed and pull the covers over my head.
John Edwards right now is the one candidate who has outlined a serious progressive agenda and is both able and willing to articulate what his agenda looks like. And yet he's been virtually ignored by a media that wrote him off over a haircut and a house. It's wonderful that Chris Dodd has in this race found a voice as the silver-haired lion of the Constitution, and indeed I've sent his campaign some money as well. Joe Biden has an unfortunate tendency to be a blowhard and make himself the story, but he did have the best line of the night about Rudy Giuliani (and whoever is the eventual nominee should memorize it) when he said of the self-appointed saint of 9/11: “There’s only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun and a verb and 9/11.” Even Dennis Kucinich, whose continued talk of a Department of Peace often makes him sound like Congressman Moonbeam, makes a more compelling case for his nomination than does Hillary.
I would hope that this notion that we are just waiting to crown Hillary as the nominee before a single vote is even cast falls by the wayside as we head into the few months before the first primary. And I hope the people of the states of Iowa and New Hampshire realize that they have a voice and need not do the media's bidding in this coronation.
The Hillary is Inevitable storyline has increasingly dominated the media with every poll that comes out showing her with a commanding lead -- despite the fact that no one seems to know anyone who's planning to vote for her. But after last night's debate, we're at least starting to see some acknowledgement that there are others in this race, particularly John Edwards, who has trounced the competition in the last two debates.
Today, from two of the most loathsome so-called "journalists" covering the political beat from the New York Times, Adam Nagourney and Elisabeth Bumiller, comes mention, however fleeting, of this reality:
But for all the attention Mr. Obama drew to himself coming into the debate, he was frequently overshadowed by former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, who — speaking more intensely — repeatedly challenged Mrs. Clinton’s credentials and credibility, and frequently seemed to make the case against Mrs. Clinton that Mr. Obama had promised to make.
If I were conspiracy-minded (Moi? conspiracy-minded? Quelle horreur!), I'd almost think that Obama, whom we know is capable of rousing a crowd, has been told to take a dive by some giant BushClinton conspiracy to run things in this country in perpetuity in return for keeping some peccadillo secret or for a plum job in a Clinton administration. But it's difficult to take Hillary's anti-Bush rhetoric seriously when she keeps voting for Bush's insane military adventures and later claiming she was voting for diplomacy. John Edwards is absolutely right: How many times does it take to learn a lesson?
I can't even express how much I wish Hillary were someone I could support. Given the kind of mess that the so-called "manly men" currently running the country have made of things, it would be wonderful to have a woman to enthusiastically support. But when I see Hillary's sense of entitlement, her continuation of the famed Clinton Triangulation that made her husband a very good moderate Republican president but not a progressive one, and the spectre of another four to eight years of Clinton Derangement Syndrome in the press and on talk radio, I just want to crawl into bed and pull the covers over my head.
John Edwards right now is the one candidate who has outlined a serious progressive agenda and is both able and willing to articulate what his agenda looks like. And yet he's been virtually ignored by a media that wrote him off over a haircut and a house. It's wonderful that Chris Dodd has in this race found a voice as the silver-haired lion of the Constitution, and indeed I've sent his campaign some money as well. Joe Biden has an unfortunate tendency to be a blowhard and make himself the story, but he did have the best line of the night about Rudy Giuliani (and whoever is the eventual nominee should memorize it) when he said of the self-appointed saint of 9/11: “There’s only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun and a verb and 9/11.” Even Dennis Kucinich, whose continued talk of a Department of Peace often makes him sound like Congressman Moonbeam, makes a more compelling case for his nomination than does Hillary.
I would hope that this notion that we are just waiting to crown Hillary as the nominee before a single vote is even cast falls by the wayside as we head into the few months before the first primary. And I hope the people of the states of Iowa and New Hampshire realize that they have a voice and need not do the media's bidding in this coronation.
mardi 30 octobre 2007
Live debate chat at Hoffmania
Hoffmania's supplying the chips 'n' dip this evening. So pop on over there.
Hey David Bernstein, maybe you want to listen to this
All you Maronistas, Seditionists, and people who think progressive talk radio should be smart AND funny: Marc Maron is guest-hosting for Randi Rhodes tomorrow, October 31 from 3-6 PM. Check your local Air America affiliate for run time in your area.
The imbecile's candidate
So does Grandpa Fred have Ronald Reagan beat by having Alzheimer's before even winning the election, or is he just this mind-bogglingly dumb?
What's with Thompson's obsession with the Soviet Union, anyway?
Massachusetts' highest court ruled in 2003 that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. But high courts in several other states have refused to follow suit, including Maryland last month. Cases are pending in Connecticut and California.
Edward Paul, an employee of the Delta Dental Plans Association, asked the question Monday, but had trouble being understood.
"I'm proud to say that in January 2008 New Hampshire has passed a law facilitating civil unions here. ... What is your belief for federal civil unions to be passed?" Paul asked.
"Soviet Union?" Thompson responded.
"No, civil unions," Paul said.
"Oh. No, I would not be in support of that," Thompson said.
What's with Thompson's obsession with the Soviet Union, anyway?
Do wingnuts really respond to this kind of idiocy?
"This is the world we live in. It's not this happy, romantic-like world where we'll negotiate with this one, or we'll negotiate with that one and there will be no preconditions, and we'll invite (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad to the White House, we'll invite Osama (bin Laden) to the White House," Giuliani said.
"Hillary and Obama are kind of debating whether to invite them to the inauguration or the inaugural ball," he added.
Does this stuff really reasonate with wingnuts? Can anyone be THIS reptilian and stilll be human?
Jimmy's Recipe, Sydney
Assam laska $7.90Round rice noodles served with sliced cucumber, pineapple,red onion, sardine fish and boiled egg in a tropical Malaysiansour soup boiled with tamarind skin, pineapple and fishThere's always a queue at Jimmy's, but we arrive early at The Galeries Victoria for a weekday lunch. I'd heard good things about their murtabak--a roti crepe rolled up with meat curry and egg--but on this
If parents didn't buy these, there'd be no need to offer them
There comes a time in a young girl's life when she doesn't want to be "cute" anymore, she wants to be "hot" and "sexy" -- and rebels against the creeping Little-Bo-Peepism that parents want to keep their daughters in forever. It's one thing when that happens when you're 23, as it was with me (and granted, that gesture of independence took place later in me than it does for most, but let's not go into why that is right now).
But today, when tabloid journalism is everywhere and the media tell kids that the way to get attention is to show as much flesh as possible, it's perfectly predictable that 11-year-olds would start patterning themselves after Lindsay Lohan.
So I don't see why anyone is shocked....shocked...and appalled -- to find that Halloween costumers are creating costumes for these aspiring sex tape celebrities:
So why are they good sellers? Because people are buying them. The article cited above, predictably, blames the phenomenon on baby boomers, for all that the baby boom ended in 1964, which means that the youngest boomers are now 43 and those born in the last few years of the boom hardly constitute enough parents of 'tweens to account for the boom in hooker costumes for little girls. And last time I looked, younger parents were neither more able, nor more willing, to say "No!" to their children than their boomer forbears.
I'm not saying that kids should be forbidden to have any allure until they're in their 20's, nor am I saying that a little bit of dress-up is always inappropriate. I went to my senior prom in a dress better suited to Little Bo Peep than to a seventeen-year-old in 1973. But I'm not sure that preteen kids can draw the line between the attention their costumes get on Halloween and the attention they get when they show up in class in halter tops and bare tummies. And I'm not sure that when you send your ten-year-old out on Halloween dressed as a French Maid, you should be surprised when she learns that her only currency in this world is her fuckability. Nor should you be surprised when she becomes predator bait on MySpace.
But today, when tabloid journalism is everywhere and the media tell kids that the way to get attention is to show as much flesh as possible, it's perfectly predictable that 11-year-olds would start patterning themselves after Lindsay Lohan.
So I don't see why anyone is shocked....shocked...and appalled -- to find that Halloween costumers are creating costumes for these aspiring sex tape celebrities:
Gabby eyed the Sexy Super Girl but decided against it. A friend at her Catholic school had worn that costume for a Halloween parade and pulled the already short miniskirt way up to cover her tummy. "That didn't look very good." But Gabby did like the Aqua Fairy, a vampy get-up with a black ripped-up skirt, black fishnet tights and blue bustier that comes in medium, large and preteen. A medium fits a child of 8.
No.
How about the Funky Punk Pirate Pre-Teen, with an off-the-shoulder blouse and bare midriff?
No.
Gabby pointed to the Fairy-Licious Purrrfect Kitty Pre-Teen, which, according to the package, includes a "pink and black dress with lace front bodice and sassy jagged skirt with tail. . . . Wings require some assembly."
Cheryl Cirenza shook her head in exasperated disbelief. "This is all so inappropriate. It's really disturbing," she said, eyeing a wall of such girl and preteen costumes as Major Flirt in army green, the bellybutton-baring Devilicious and a sassy, miniskirted French Maid, pink feather duster included. She'd just turned down her 13-year-old daughter's request for a Sexy Cop outfit. "When I was their age, I was a bunch of grapes."
But that was back in the days when Halloween was still a homemade kind of holiday, when an old sheet with eyeholes was a perfectly acceptable ghost and clumsily carved pumpkins on the front porch were about as elaborate as the decorations got. Now, Halloween is big business. Americans are expected to spend upwards of $5 billion this year on candy, ghoulish decorations and costumes. And the hottest trend in costumes, retailers say, is sexy. And young.
Fishnet tights, once associated with smoky cabarets or strip joints, now come in girls' sizes and cost $3.99.
Joe Thaler, head of TransWorld Exhibits Inc., runs the annual Halloween Expo for big-box retailers. He said suggestive costumes for girls burst onto the scene about three years ago and the phenomenon is so big that he's had to create a separate fashion show. The costumes have since moved to the plus-size market for adult women and now come in teen and preteen versions. Even little girl costumes show more leg and tummy than they used to. "They're just good sellers," Thaler said.
So why are they good sellers? Because people are buying them. The article cited above, predictably, blames the phenomenon on baby boomers, for all that the baby boom ended in 1964, which means that the youngest boomers are now 43 and those born in the last few years of the boom hardly constitute enough parents of 'tweens to account for the boom in hooker costumes for little girls. And last time I looked, younger parents were neither more able, nor more willing, to say "No!" to their children than their boomer forbears.
I'm not saying that kids should be forbidden to have any allure until they're in their 20's, nor am I saying that a little bit of dress-up is always inappropriate. I went to my senior prom in a dress better suited to Little Bo Peep than to a seventeen-year-old in 1973. But I'm not sure that preteen kids can draw the line between the attention their costumes get on Halloween and the attention they get when they show up in class in halter tops and bare tummies. And I'm not sure that when you send your ten-year-old out on Halloween dressed as a French Maid, you should be surprised when she learns that her only currency in this world is her fuckability. Nor should you be surprised when she becomes predator bait on MySpace.
This is not a "Real Time With Bill Maher" campaign ad parody
Actual ad that ran in the Trenton Times on Saturday:
"Admitted homosexual"? You want better he should stay in the closet?
Print and clip this ad. And next time a Barack Obama supporter asks you why having a gay-basher emcee a fundraiser matters in the larger sphere of things, just whip this puppy out and show it as an example of what happens when you think that because your guy talks about "inclusion", it means you can let homophobes be the public face of your campaign.
(via Blue Jersey)
"Admitted homosexual"? You want better he should stay in the closet?
Print and clip this ad. And next time a Barack Obama supporter asks you why having a gay-basher emcee a fundraiser matters in the larger sphere of things, just whip this puppy out and show it as an example of what happens when you think that because your guy talks about "inclusion", it means you can let homophobes be the public face of your campaign.
(via Blue Jersey)
License to Kill
Now the Administration is claiming it has the right to grant anyone it wants immunity from prosecution for crimes. The latest beneficiary? Blackwater:
Translation: We all knew about it, but we ain't talkin'.
Does anyone actually believe that these immunity deals were offered without approval by all concerned?
State Department investigators offered Blackwater USA security guards immunity during an inquiry into last month’s deadly shooting of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad — a potentially serious investigative misstep that could complicate efforts to prosecute the company’s employees involved in the episode, government officials said Monday.
The State Department investigators from the agency’s investigative arm, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, offered the immunity grants even though they did not have the authority to do so, the officials said. Prosecutors at the Justice Department, who do have such authority, had no advance knowledge of the arrangement, they added.
Most of the guards who took part in the Sept. 16 shooting were offered what officials described as limited-use immunity, which means that they were promised that they would not be prosecuted for anything they said in their interviews with the authorities as long as their statements were true. The immunity offers were first reported Monday by The Associated Press.
The officials who spoke of the immunity deals have been briefed on the matter, but agreed to talk about the arrangement only on the condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to discuss a continuing criminal investigation.
The precise legal status of the immunity offer is unclear. Those who have been offered immunity would seem likely to assert that their statements are legally protected, even as some government officials say that immunity was never officially sanctioned by the Justice Department.
Spokesmen for the State and Justice Departments would not comment on the matter. A State Department official said, “If there’s any truth to this story, then the decision was made without consultation with senior officials in Washington.”
A spokeswoman for Blackwater, Anne E. Tyrrell, said, “It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the investigation.”
Translation: We all knew about it, but we ain't talkin'.
Does anyone actually believe that these immunity deals were offered without approval by all concerned?
lundi 29 octobre 2007
And yet ANOTHER reason to love John Edwards
Remarks by Senator John Edwards
St. Anselm's College, Manchester, New Hampshire
October 29, 2007
Many of you know that I am the son of a mill worker -- that I rose from modest means and have been blessed in so many ways in life. Elizabeth and I have so much to be grateful for.
And all of you know about some of the challenges we have faced in my family. But there came a time, a few months ago, when Elizabeth and I had to decide, in the quiet of a hospital room, after many hours of tests and getting pretty bad news -- what we were going to do with our lives.
And we made our decision. That we were not going to go quietly into the night -- that we were going to stand and fight for what we believe in.
As Elizabeth and I have campaigned across America, I've come to a better understanding of what that decision really meant -- and why we made it.
Earlier this year, I spoke at Riverside Church in New York, where, forty years ago, Martin Luther King gave a historic speech. I talked about that speech then, and I want to talk about it today. Dr. King was tormented by the way he had kept silent for two years about the Vietnam War.
He was told that if he spoke out he would hurt the civil rights movement and all that he had worked for -- but he could not take it any more -- instead of decrying the silence of others -- he spoke the truth about himself.
"Over the past two years" he said, "I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silence and speak from the burning of my own heart."
I am not holier than thou. I am not perfect by any means. But there are events in life that you learn from, and which remind you what this is really all about. Maybe I have been freed from the system and the fear that holds back politicians because I have learned there are much more important things in life than winning elections at the cost of selling your soul.
Especially right now, when our country requires so much more of us, and needs to hear the truth from its leaders.
And, although I have spent my entire life taking on the big powerful interests and winning -- which is why I have never taken a dime from Washington lobbyists or political action committees -- I too have been guilty of my own silence -- but no more.
It's time to tell the truth. And the truth is the system in Washington is corrupt. It is rigged by the powerful special interests to benefit they very few at the expense of the many. And as a result, the American people have lost faith in our broken system in Washington, and believe it no longer works for ordinary Americans. They're right.
As I look across the political landscape of both parties today -- what I see are politicians too afraid to tell the truth -- good people caught in a bad system that overwhelms their good intentions and requires them to chase millions of dollars in campaign contributions in order to perpetuate their careers and continue their climb to higher office.
This presidential campaign is a perfect example of how our politics is awash with money. I have raised more money up to this point than any Democratic candidate raised last time in the presidential campaign -- $30 million. And, I did it without taking a dime from any Washington lobbyist or any special interest PAC.
I saw the chase for campaign money at any cost by the frontrunner in this race -- and I did not join it -- because the cost to our nation and our children is not worth the hollow victory of any candidate. Being called president while powerful interests really run things is not the same as being free to lead this nation as president of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. If protecting the current established structure in Washington is in your interest, then I am not your candidate. I ran for president four years ago -- yes, in part out of personal ambition -- but also with a deep desire to stand for working people like my father and mother -- who no matter how hard things were for our family, always worked even harder to make things better for us.
But the more Elizabeth and I campaigned this year, the more we talked to the American people, the more we met people just like my father, and hard working people like James Lowe. James is a decent and honest man who had to live for 50 years with no voice in the richest country in the world because he didn't have health care. The more people like him that I met, the more I realized something much bigger was stirring in the American people. And it has stirred in each of us for far too long.
Last month Ken Burns -- who made the great Civil War documentary -- launched his newest epic on World War II on PBS -- and what a story it tells.
At the cost of great suffering, blood and enormous sacrifice, within four years after Pearl Harbor it is incredible what this nation achieved. America built the arsenal of democracy worthy of our great history. We launched the greatest invasion armada in the history of warfare against Hitler's fortress Europe, and, with our allies, we freed a continent of suffering humanity.
At the same time on the other side of the globe we crossed 10,000 miles of ocean and liberated another hemisphere of humanity -- islands and nations freed from the grip of Japanese militarists. While at the same time succeeding in the greatest scientific endeavor ever undertaken -- the Manhattan project -- and topped it off with building the Pentagon, one of the largest buildings in the world in a little over a year.
It is incredible what America has accomplished. Because no matter what extraordinary challenges we have been faced with, we did exactly what America has always done in our history -- we rose to the challenge.
And, now, as I travel across America and listen to people, I hear real concern about what's going on. For the first time in our nation's history, people are worried that we're going to be the first generation of Americans not to pass on a better life to our children.
And it's not the fault of the American people. The American people have not changed. The American people are still the strong, courageous people they have always been. The problem is what our government has become. And, it is up to us to do something about it.
Because Washington may not see it, but we are facing a moral crisis as great as any that has ever challenged us. And, it is this test -- this moral test -- that I have come to understand is at the heart of this campaign.
Just look at what has happened in Iraq. What was the response of the American people to the challenge at hand? Our men and women in uniform have been heroes. They've done everything that's been asked of them and more. But what about our government? Four years after invading Iraq, we cannot even keep the lights on in Baghdad.
When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, the American people were at their best. They donated their time and their money in record numbers. There was an outpouring of support. I took 700 college kids down to help -- young people who gave up their spring break. But what about our government? Three years after hurricane Katrina thousands of our fellow Americans, our brothers and sisters, are still housed in trailers waiting to go home.
There's no better example of the bravery and goodness of the American people than the response to the attacks of 9/11: firefighters and first responders risking and too often giving their lives to save others, charging up the stairs while everyone else was coming down; record bloodbank donations; and the list goes on. But what about our government? Six years after 9/11, at Ground Zero there sits only a black hole that tortures our conscience and scars our hearts.
In every instance we see an American people who are good, decent, compassionate and undeterred. And, American people who are better than the government that is supposed to serve and represent them.
And what has happened to the American "can do" spirit? I will tell you what has happened: all of this is the result of the bitter poisoned fruit of corruption and the bankruptcy of our political leadership.
It is not an accident that the government of the United States cannot function on behalf of its people, because it is no longer our people's government -- and we the people know it.
This corruption did not begin yesterday -- and it did not even begin with George Bush -- it has been building for decades -- until it now threatens literally the life of our democracy.
While the American people personally rose to the occasion with an enormous outpouring of support and donations to both the victims of Katrina and 9/11 -- we all saw our government's neglect. And we saw greed and incompetence at work. Out of more than 700 contracts valued at $500,000 or greater, at least half were given without full competition or, according to news sources, with vague or open ended terms, and many of these contracts went to companies with deep political connections such as a subsidiary of Haliburton, Bechtel Corp., and AshBritt Inc.
And in Iraq -- while our nation's brave sons and daughters put their lives on the line for our country -- we now have mercenaries under their own law while their bosses sit at home raking in millions.
We have squandered millions on building Olympic size swimming pools and buildings that have never been used. We have weapons and ammunition unaccounted for that may now be being used against our own soldiers. We literally have billions wasted or misspent -- while our troops and their families continue to sacrifice. And the politically connected lobby for more. What's their great sacrifice -- higher profits.
It goes on every minute of every day.
Corporate executives at United Airlines and US Airways receive millions in compensation for taking their companies into bankruptcy, while their employees are forced to take cuts in pay.
Companies like Wal-Mart lobby against inspecting containers entering our nation's ports, even though expert after expert agrees that the likeliest way for a dirty bomb to enter the United States is through a container, because they believe their profits are more important than our safety. What has become of America when America's largest company lobbies against protecting America?
Trade deals cost of millions of jobs. What do we get in return? Millions of dangerous Chinese toys in our children's cribs laden with lead. This is the price we are made to pay when trade agreements are decided based on how much they pad the profits for multinational corporations instead of what is best for America's workers or the safety of America's consumers.
We have even gotten to the point where our children's safety is potentially at risk because nearly half of the apple juice consumed by our children comes from apples grown in China. And Americans are kept in the dark because the corporate lobbyists have pushed back country of origin labeling laws again and again.
This is not the America I believe in.
The hubris of greed knows no bounds. Days after the homeland security bill passed, staffers from the homeland security department resigned and became homeland security consultants trying to cash in. And, where was the outrage? There was none, because that's how it works in Washington now. It is not a Republican revolving door or a Democratic revolving door -- it is just the way it's done.
Someone called it a government reconnaissance mission to figure out how to get rich when you leave the government.
Recently, I was dismayed to see headlines in the Wall Street Journal stating that Senate Democrats were backing down to lobbyists for hedge funds who have opposed efforts to make millionaire and billionaire hedge fund managers pay the same tax rate as every hard-working American. Now, tax loopholes the wealthy hedge fund managers do not need or deserve are not going to be closed, all because Democrats -- our party -- wanted their campaign money.
And a few weeks ago, around the sixth anniversary of 9/11, a leading presidential candidate held a fundraiser that was billed as a Homeland Security themed event in Washington, D.C. targeted to homeland security lobbyists and contractors for $1,000 a plate. These lobbyists, for the price of a ticket, would get a special "treat" -- the opportunity to participate in small, hour long breakout sessions with key Democratic lawmakers, many of whom chair important sub committees of the homeland security committee. That presidential candidate was Senator Clinton.
Senator Clinton's road to the middle class takes a major detour right through the deep canyon of corporate lobbyists and the hidden bidding of K Street in Washington -- and history tells us that when that bus stops there it is the middle class that loses.
When I asked Hillary Clinton to join me in not taking money from Washington lobbyists -- she refused. Not only did she say that she would continue to take their money, she defended them.
Today Hillary Clinton has taken more money from Washington lobbyists than any candidate from either party -- more money than any Republican candidate.
She has taken more money from the defense industry than any other candidate from either party as well.
She took more money from Wall Street last quarter than Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and Barack Obama combined.
The long slow slide of our democracy into the corporate abyss continues unabated regardless of party, regardless of the best interests of America.
We have a duty -- a duty to end this.
I believe you cannot be for change and take money from the lobbyists who prevent change. You cannot take on the entrenched interests in Washington if you choose to defend the broken system. It will not work. And I believe that, if Americans have a choice, and candidate who takes their money -- Democrat or Republican -- will lose this election.
For us to continue down this path all we have to do is suspend all that we believe in. As Democrats, we continue down this path only if we believe the party of the people is no more.
As Americans, we continue down this path only if we fail to heed Lincoln's warning to us all.
"At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected," he asked, "if it ever reaches us it must spring up amongst us. It can not come from abroad. If destruction be our lot -- we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we must live through all time or die by suicide."
America lives because 20 generations have honored the one moral commandment that makes us Americans.
To give our children a better future than we received.
I stand here today the son of Wallace and Bobbie Edwards. The father of Wade, Cate, Emma Claire and Jack -- and I know, as well as you, that we must not be the first generation that fails to live up to our moral challenge and keep the promise of America.
That would be an abomination.
There is a dream that is America. It is what makes us American. And I will not stand by while that dream is at risk.
I am not perfect -- far from it -- but I do understand that this is not a political issue -- it is the moral test of our generation.
Our nation's founders knew that this moment would come -- that at some point the power of greed and its influence over officials in our government might strain and threaten the very America they hoped would last as an ideal in the minds of all people, and as a beacon of hope for all time.
That is why they made the people sovereign. And this is why it is your responsibility to redeem the promise of America for our children and their future.
It will not be easy -- sacrifice will be required of us -- but it was never easy for our ancestors, and their sacrifices were far greater than any that will fall on our shoulders.
Yet, the responsibility is ours.
We, you and I, are the guardians of what America is and what it will be.
The choice is ours.
Down one path, we trade corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans; our cronies for their cronies; one political dynasty for another dynasty; and all we are left with is a Democratic version of the Republican corruption machine.
It is the easier path. It is the path of the status quo. But, it is a path that perpetuates a corrupt system that has not only failed to deliver the change the American people demand, but has divided America into two -- one America for the very greedy, and one America for everybody else.
And it is that divided America -- the direct result of this corrupt system -- which may very well lead to the suicide Lincoln warned us of -- the poison that continues to seep into our system while none notice.
Or we can choose a different path. The path that generations of Americans command us to take. And be the guardians that kept the faith.
I run for president for my father who worked in a mill his entire life and never got to go to college the way I did.
I run for president for all those who worked in that mill with my father.
I run for president for all those who lost their jobs when that mil was shut down.
I run for president for all the women who have come up to Elizabeth and me and told us the like Elizabeth they had breast cancer -- but unlike Elizabeth they did not have health care.
I run for president for twenty generations of Americans who made sure that their children had a better life than they did.
As Americans we are blessed -- for our ancestors are not dead, they occupy the corridors of our conscience. And, as long we keep the faith -- they live. And so too the America of idealism and hope that was their gift to us.
I carry the promise of America in my heart, where my parents placed it. Like them, like you, I believe in people, hard work, and the sacred obligation of each generation to the next.
This is our time now. It falls to us to redeem our democracy, reclaim our government and relight the promise of America for our children.
Let us blaze a new path together, grounded in the values from which America was forged, still reaching toward the greatness of our ideals. We can do it. We can cast aside the bankrupt ways of Washington and replace them with the timeless values of the American people. We can liberate our government from the shackles of corporate money that bind it to corporate will, and restore the voices of our people to its halls.
This is the cause of my life. This is the cause of our time. Join me. Together, we cannot fail.
We will keep faith with those who have gone before us, strong and proud in the knowledge that we too rose up to guard the promise of America in our day, and that, because we did, America's best days still lie ahead.
Another reason to love John Edwards
While Barack Obama's staff is trying unsuccessfully to explain away having homophobic pseudo-ex-gay bigots sing at fundraisers for him, John Edwards' staff gets into the spirit of Stephen Colbert's quixotic presidential campaign:
Do I smell a winning 2008 ticket in the making here? Or just the nacho cheez staining Colbert's fingers?
(h/t: Melissa)
Mayor Bob Coble also declared October 28th "Stephen Colbert Day." Coble has endorsed another South Carolina native for President, the Democratic former Sen. John Edwards.
Asked about this apparent conflict, the Edwards campaign said that until Colbert wins the primary like Edwards did in 2004, he cannot claim to be a favorite son.
Edwards spokesperson Teresa Wells also ribbed Colbert for his ties to the snack food industry. Colbert has said his campaign will be sponsored by Doritos.
"What is more troubling than his quest for a status his own mother won't grant him (favorite son) are his ties to the salty food industry," Wells said. "As the candidate of Doritos, his hands are stained by corporate corruption and nacho cheese. John Edwards has never taken a dime from taco chip lobbyists and America deserves a President who isn't in the pocket of the snack food special interests."
Do I smell a winning 2008 ticket in the making here? Or just the nacho cheez staining Colbert's fingers?
(h/t: Melissa)
Kicking ass and taking names -- at 95
Can we somehow find a way to let Studs Terkel live forever? Here's a man, born a month after the sinking of the Titanic, who is still fighting the good fight:
Today we have politicians and so-called "pundits" rewriting history because they believe that those who were there have forgotten and those who weren't will believe anything if delivered emphatically enough in a "truthy" manner. But at least we still have guys like Studs Terkel and Howard Zinn around who were there for that history and who aren't going quietly into that good night without speaking out about what they saw and what they lived. Terkel hasn't yet given up on his countrymen's will to right the wrong of warrantless surveillance and blanket immunity for corporations that went along with the Administration's violation of the law. But he is only one man, and Howard Zinn is only one man, trying to wake up a nation more concerned with Ellen DeGeneres' dog than with how its own government is marching them down the road to fascism.
During my lifetime, there has been a sea change in the way that politically active Americans view their relationship with government. In 1920, during my youth, I recall the Palmer raids in which more than 10,000 people were rounded up, most because they were members of particular labor unions or belonged to groups that advocated change in American domestic or foreign policy. Unrestrained surveillance was used to further the investigations leading to these detentions, and the Bureau of Investigation — the forerunner to the F.B.I. — eventually created a database on the activities of individuals. This activity continued through the Red Scare of the period.
In the 1950s, during the sad period known as the McCarthy era, one’s political beliefs again served as a rationale for government monitoring. Individual corporations and entire industries were coerced by government leaders into informing on individuals and barring their ability to earn a living.
I was among those blacklisted for my political beliefs. My crime? I had signed petitions. Lots of them. I had signed on in opposition to Jim Crow laws and poll taxes and in favor of rent control and pacifism. Because the petitions were thought to be Communist-inspired, I lost my ability to work in television and radio after refusing to say that I had been “duped” into signing my name to these causes.
By the 1960s, the inequities in civil rights and the debate over the Vietnam war spurred social justice movements. The government’s response? More surveillance. In the name of national security, the F.B.I. conducted warrantless wiretaps of political activists, journalists, former White House staff members and even a member of Congress.
Then things changed. In 1975, the hearings led by Senator Frank Church of Idaho revealed the scope of government surveillance of private citizens and lawful organizations. As Americans saw the damage, they reached a consensus that this unrestrained surveillance had a corrosive impact on us all.
In 1978, with broad public support, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which placed national security investigations, including wiretapping, under a system of warrants approved by a special court. The law was not perfect, but as a result of its enactment and a series of subsequent federal laws, a generation of Americans has come to adulthood protected by a legal structure and a social compact making clear that government will not engage in unbridled, dragnet seizure of electronic communications.
The Bush administration, however, tore apart that carefully devised legal structure and social compact.
Today we have politicians and so-called "pundits" rewriting history because they believe that those who were there have forgotten and those who weren't will believe anything if delivered emphatically enough in a "truthy" manner. But at least we still have guys like Studs Terkel and Howard Zinn around who were there for that history and who aren't going quietly into that good night without speaking out about what they saw and what they lived. Terkel hasn't yet given up on his countrymen's will to right the wrong of warrantless surveillance and blanket immunity for corporations that went along with the Administration's violation of the law. But he is only one man, and Howard Zinn is only one man, trying to wake up a nation more concerned with Ellen DeGeneres' dog than with how its own government is marching them down the road to fascism.
In case you thought the Katrina response wasn't about eviscerating black culture in New Orleans
Two-plus years after Hurricane Katrina, the lower Ninth Ward is still in ruins, the Federal government has decided that having fulfilled their goal of turning Louisiana red, it's time to move onto greener pastures.
You'd think enough damage had been done to the thriving black culture of New Orleans...but you'd be wrong. Now police are cracking down on jazz funeral marches:
I guess the arrivistes, real estate speculators, and other carrion-eaters who descended upon New Orleans didn't really have an affinity for the city's culture and heritage after all. What they wanted was a theme-park version, Disneyfied version of the New Orleans jazz scene -- tightly controlled, heavily scripted, and done only when it's convenient for the newcomers. It's bad enough that this city, which is the birthplace of some of the most rich cultural heritage in this country, was allowed to drown by a Republican administration who saw it as an opportunity to drive out minorities and allow rich white guys to snatch up the city, exploiting its culture for profit while simultaneously destroying it.
You'd think enough damage had been done to the thriving black culture of New Orleans...but you'd be wrong. Now police are cracking down on jazz funeral marches:
On the evening of Oct. 1, some two dozen of New Orleans' top brass-band players and roughly a hundred followers began a series of nightly processions for Kerwin James, a tuba player with the New Birth Brass Band who had passed away on Sept. 26. They were "bringing him down," as it's called, until his Saturday burial. But the bittersweet tradition that Monday night ended more bitterly than anything else -- with snare drummer Derrick Tabb and his brother, trombonist Glen David Andrews, led away in handcuffs after some 20 police cars had arrived near the corner of North Robertson and St. Philip streets in New Orleans' historic Tremé neighborhood. In the end, it looked more like the scene of a murder than misdemeanors.
"The police told us, 'If we hear one more note, we'll arrest the whole band,'" said Tabb a few days later, at a fundraiser to help defray the costs of James' burial. "Well, we did stop playing," said Andrews. "We were singing, lifting our voices to God. You gonna tell me that's wrong too?" Drummer Ellis Joseph of the Free Agents Brass band, who was also in the procession, said, "They came in a swarm, like we had AK-47s. But we only had instruments."
The musicians were no longer playing but instead singing "I'll Fly Away" when the cops converged and the cuffs came out. A New Orleans police spokesman claimed the department was simply acting on a neighborhood resident's phoned-in complaint. And the department maintains that such processions require permits.
But when they busted up the memorial procession for a beloved tuba player, arresting the two musicians for parading without a permit and disturbing the peace, they didn't just cut short a familiar hymn -- they stomped on something sacred and turned up the volume in the fight over the city's culture, which continues amid the long struggle to rebuild New Orleans.
In that fight, Tremé is ground zero. Funeral processions are an essential element of New Orleans culture, and the impromptu variety in particular --- honoring the passing of someone of distinction, especially a musician -- are a time-honored tradition in neighborhoods like Tremé, which some consider the oldest black neighborhood in America. For black New Orleans residents who have returned to the city, these and other street-culture traditions -- second-line parades and Mardi Gras Indian assemblies -- offer perhaps the only semblance of normalcy, continuity and community organization left. In a changing Tremé, within a city still in troubled limbo and racked by violent crime, long-held tensions regarding the iconic street culture have intensified. The neighborhood, the breeding ground for much of this culture, has a history of embattlement. And now more of that history is being written.
"I've been parading in the Tremé for more than 25 years, and I've never had to deal with anything like this," said tuba player Phil Frazier, who leads the popular Rebirth Brass Band. He's brother to James, who died of complications of a stroke at 34. "I told the cops it was my brother we were playing for, and they just didn't seem to care. He's a musician and he contributed a lot to this city in his short life."
Katy Reckdahl, a reporter for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, had rushed to catch up with the Monday-evening procession when her 2-year-old son Hector heard tubas in the distance. What she didn't expect was a sudden flood of patrol cars, sirens blaring. Her front-page, full-banner-headline report two days later described police running into the crowd, grabbing at horn players' mouthpieces, and trying to seize drumsticks out of hands. "The confrontations spurred cries in the neighborhood about over-reaction and disproportionate enforcement by the police, who had often turned a blind eye to the traditional memorial ceremonies," she wrote. "Still others say the incident is a sign of a greater attack on the cultural history of the old city neighborhood by well-heeled newcomers attracted to Tremé by the very history they seem to threaten."
I guess the arrivistes, real estate speculators, and other carrion-eaters who descended upon New Orleans didn't really have an affinity for the city's culture and heritage after all. What they wanted was a theme-park version, Disneyfied version of the New Orleans jazz scene -- tightly controlled, heavily scripted, and done only when it's convenient for the newcomers. It's bad enough that this city, which is the birthplace of some of the most rich cultural heritage in this country, was allowed to drown by a Republican administration who saw it as an opportunity to drive out minorities and allow rich white guys to snatch up the city, exploiting its culture for profit while simultaneously destroying it.
Debunking the fearmongers
The pollsters have been curiously remiss in their lack of polling recently of just how well the Republican fearmongering campaign is working. I realize they're busy trying to cement the nomination of Hillary Clinton, but with every one of the Republicans trying to turn Iran into the Second Coming of the Soviet Union, you'd think that a measurement of how well the fearmongering is working might be in order.
It's working in some circles; antiwar marchers over the George Washington Bridge on their way to the rally in the city were told that they're "Communists" -- the favorite catch-all slur of the ignorati. And of course Faux Noise can always be relied upon to fan the flames of fear.
On Friday night, Bill Maher did his part to put the so-called "war on terror" into perspective:
Today Paul Krugman weighs in:
In the days immediately following the 9/11 attacks, you probably could have convinced Americans that Liechtenstein was a grave threat -- and you'd understand why Americans would jump if Suriname had so much as said "Boo!" But today, with the Taliban regaining control of Afghanistan; Iraq, a country that represented no threat to us, in ruins; Osama bin Laden still out there and submitting VHS tapes every time George W. Bush thinks he needs one to keep people afraid; and people being arrested at airports for no good reason, Americans are skeptical of the hysterical claims coming from Republicans that Islamic terrorists are a bigger threat to us than, oh, say, the British were in the 1700s, or Japan was when it attacked Pearl Harbor. And if they aren't, they should be.
We were told by Paul Wolfowitz that the Iraq War would pay for itself with oil revenues, and now the war has already cost us a half-trillion dollars, and oil is above $93/barrel in early trading today. We have yet to see a huge impact at the pumps, given the price spike; here in northern New Jersey, gasoline is at $2.65. I suspect that we'll see the impact in home heating oil prices, where it's not as easy to just go out and switch the way we heat our homes. Those who make their living brokering petroleum stocks make money based on dollar volume, and so they have no reason to try to keep prices low. I suspect that as the Iran rhetoric ratchets up, there will be lip service given to the need to keep the oil supply line out of Iran open -- and a corresponding hike in fuel prices. After all, if fearmongering about safety isn't working, hitting people in the tank of their Expeditions might.
One of the reasons we're given for the Democrats' lack of will to rein in this pack of wild dogs currently running the country is that this Administration will be over in just over a year anyway and then the Democrats will have the White House. But anyone who lived through the last two elections knows that what looks like a good bet a year out can look very different when Ohio and Florida -- and if the Republicans have their way, California -- figure into the mix on Election night. And with every one of the Republican candidates promising endless, escalated war -- and the Democratic frontrummer promising the same, not with her words but with her votes in the Senate -- the time to stop the madness is NOW.
It's working in some circles; antiwar marchers over the George Washington Bridge on their way to the rally in the city were told that they're "Communists" -- the favorite catch-all slur of the ignorati. And of course Faux Noise can always be relied upon to fan the flames of fear.
On Friday night, Bill Maher did his part to put the so-called "war on terror" into perspective:
Today Paul Krugman weighs in:
Consider, for a moment, the implications of the fact that Rudy Giuliani is taking foreign policy advice from Norman Podhoretz, who wants us to start bombing Iran “as soon as it is logistically possible.”
Mr. Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary and a founding neoconservative, tells us that Iran is the “main center of the Islamofascist ideology against which we have been fighting since 9/11.” The Islamofascists, he tells us, are well on their way toward creating a world “shaped by their will and tailored to their wishes.” Indeed, “Already, some observers are warning that by the end of the 21st century the whole of Europe will be transformed into a place to which they give the name Eurabia.”
Do I have to point out that none of this makes a bit of sense?
For one thing, there isn’t actually any such thing as Islamofascism — it’s not an ideology; it’s a figment of the neocon imagination. The term came into vogue only because it was a way for Iraq hawks to gloss over the awkward transition from pursuing Osama bin Laden, who attacked America, to Saddam Hussein, who didn’t. And Iran had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 — in fact, the Iranian regime was quite helpful to the United States when it went after Al Qaeda and its Taliban allies in Afghanistan.
Beyond that, the claim that Iran is on the path to global domination is beyond ludicrous. Yes, the Iranian regime is a nasty piece of work in many ways, and it would be a bad thing if that regime acquired nuclear weapons. But let’s have some perspective, please: we’re talking about a country with roughly the G.D.P. of Connecticut, and a government whose military budget is roughly the same as Sweden’s.
In the days immediately following the 9/11 attacks, you probably could have convinced Americans that Liechtenstein was a grave threat -- and you'd understand why Americans would jump if Suriname had so much as said "Boo!" But today, with the Taliban regaining control of Afghanistan; Iraq, a country that represented no threat to us, in ruins; Osama bin Laden still out there and submitting VHS tapes every time George W. Bush thinks he needs one to keep people afraid; and people being arrested at airports for no good reason, Americans are skeptical of the hysterical claims coming from Republicans that Islamic terrorists are a bigger threat to us than, oh, say, the British were in the 1700s, or Japan was when it attacked Pearl Harbor. And if they aren't, they should be.
We were told by Paul Wolfowitz that the Iraq War would pay for itself with oil revenues, and now the war has already cost us a half-trillion dollars, and oil is above $93/barrel in early trading today. We have yet to see a huge impact at the pumps, given the price spike; here in northern New Jersey, gasoline is at $2.65. I suspect that we'll see the impact in home heating oil prices, where it's not as easy to just go out and switch the way we heat our homes. Those who make their living brokering petroleum stocks make money based on dollar volume, and so they have no reason to try to keep prices low. I suspect that as the Iran rhetoric ratchets up, there will be lip service given to the need to keep the oil supply line out of Iran open -- and a corresponding hike in fuel prices. After all, if fearmongering about safety isn't working, hitting people in the tank of their Expeditions might.
One of the reasons we're given for the Democrats' lack of will to rein in this pack of wild dogs currently running the country is that this Administration will be over in just over a year anyway and then the Democrats will have the White House. But anyone who lived through the last two elections knows that what looks like a good bet a year out can look very different when Ohio and Florida -- and if the Republicans have their way, California -- figure into the mix on Election night. And with every one of the Republican candidates promising endless, escalated war -- and the Democratic frontrummer promising the same, not with her words but with her votes in the Senate -- the time to stop the madness is NOW.
dimanche 28 octobre 2007
Hillary Clinton is the president. Hillary Clinton has always been the president
George W. Bush's presidency never existed. It was all a collective hallucination.
I think Digby may be on to something here:
Why else would so many Republicans be planning to vote for Rudy Giuliani, a warmonger and fascist who makes George W. Bush look like an amateur?
I think Digby may be on to something here:
I don't know if anyone's noticed, but George W. Bush is being disappeared from the presidential campaign and everyone's running against incumbent Hillary Clinton. Subtly, but relentlessly, the public psyche is being prepared to deny Junior ever existed. And it could work. For many different reasons, most Americans want nothing more than to forget George W. Bush was ever president. So, we see a very odd subliminal narrative taking shape in which the blame for the nation's failures of the last seven years is being shifted to Clinton (and the "do-nothing" Democratic congress) as if the Codpiece hasn't been running things since 2000. (Not that the radical wingnuts haven't always blamed the Clenis for everything, but the disappearing of Bush is a new element.)
I certainly don't blame the Republicans for trying to do it. It makes sense, since their boy is an epic failure and the original Clinton is still very present in people's minds. It will be quite a trick to pull off, but I can see the press already helping them do it. (Naturally.)
Why else would so many Republicans be planning to vote for Rudy Giuliani, a warmonger and fascist who makes George W. Bush look like an amateur?
"How about 'tell the truth' mode?"
John Edwards slams Hillary for being in "general election mode":
While the media are at best calling this a two-person race between Hillary and the faltering Obama, and at worst calling the primary season over before a single vote is cast, John Edwards is out there telling the voters that THEY, not the media, should have the voice.
The other money quote: "How long does it take to learn a lesson? I learned my lesson the hard way: You cannot give this guy an inch."
While the media are at best calling this a two-person race between Hillary and the faltering Obama, and at worst calling the primary season over before a single vote is cast, John Edwards is out there telling the voters that THEY, not the media, should have the voice.
The other money quote: "How long does it take to learn a lesson? I learned my lesson the hard way: You cannot give this guy an inch."
Hey Clarence, your back won't hurt as much if you take that boulder off your shoulder
Just because you have a book published doesn't mean anyone wants to read it. And just because someone doesn't want to read hundreds of pages of an accomplished, educated man whining and kvetching about how terrible his life is doesn't make that person a racist.
Clarence Thomas and his friends, who rail against "the entitlement society", seem to think Clarence is entitled to adulation from everyone:
I hate to tell these people, but Clarence's Complaint is #2 on the New York Times bestseller list. Sorry, Clarence, but I Am America (and So Can You) is #1.
(h/t)
UPDATE: Thomas' devaluation of his Yale law degree isn't something that was done to him by racists, it was done to him by himself. Trey Ellis at HuffPo explains:
Clarence Thomas and his friends, who rail against "the entitlement society", seem to think Clarence is entitled to adulation from everyone:
They're calling themselves "Friends of Justice Thomas," and they say that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his bestselling memoir have gotten a bum rap from the "mainstream media."
So, headed by Wendy Long, one of Thomas's former high court law clerks, the friends announced this morning the launch of a website named after Thomas's book, www.mygrandfathersson.com. The site features favorable reviews of the book, which tops the New York Times bestseller list, as well as links to blog entries and video and audio of interviews with Thomas. The site, says Long, is an effort to give readers an alternative to what she characterized as "agenda-driven, ignorant, and in some instances racist attacks on Justice Thomas" by the Times and other media.
I hate to tell these people, but Clarence's Complaint is #2 on the New York Times bestseller list. Sorry, Clarence, but I Am America (and So Can You) is #1.
(h/t)
UPDATE: Thomas' devaluation of his Yale law degree isn't something that was done to him by racists, it was done to him by himself. Trey Ellis at HuffPo explains:
George Bush the First's appointment of a black man who was patently unqualified to the highest bench is exactly what affirmative action is not supposed to be about. The point is to open up gatekeepers like elite law schools and medical schools. Once the students graduate, however, they, and every other job applicant has to rise to a certain standard. My sister is a heart surgeon. Nobody is going to let her cut somebody open just to fill a quota. She has to be excellent at what she does. The bar for a lifetime appointment to our highest bench should have been just as high.
My mom went to Yale law school a few years after Thomas, after having graduated Magna Cum Laude from Howard. She was a thirty-five-year-old black mother of two teenaged kids. She knew she was brilliant, the best of the best, and thrilled at debating the other students. She never once said, "Oh, I'm only here because they needed a brown body. I really belong at the DeVry College of Law."
And that's how she raised me. Old school. Yes, racism still exists, she would tell me. So a B+ might do for the white boys, but you have to be that much better. How pathetic is it that Clarence Thomas writes that he graduated from Yale Law School with his head hanging low, convinced that the world knew that his diploma came with an asterisk of inferiority? When my mom's friends graduated they burst out of law school ready to kick ass and take names.
Chocolateria San Churro, Glebe
San Churro hot chocolate Okay so I've been meaning to get to San Churro for weeks now, the Victorian franchise that opened up its first Sydney branch in Glebe over a month ago.Chocolate con churros bring together perhaps the two greatest things in this life: melted chocolate and freshly made donuts. As Homer would say, anghhhhhhhhhhhhhkkkkkk.San Churro Truffles $1.95 eachIt's a warm and cosy cafe
Maybe Amazon.com just has cheap hosting
Someone has hacked the page for Spawn of Lucianne's new screed at Amazon.com:
samedi 27 octobre 2007
The Rachel Madow/MSNBC Watch for Saturday, October 27
Lately it seems that everyone on MSNBC wants Rachel Maddow. She's been on Countdown almost every night, even holding over into Dan Abrams Hour O'Crap. Last night, she was even allowed into the Hallowed Sanctum Into Which Almost No One Is Permitted:
Meanwhile, in other Progressive Talk Radio Personalities news, Liberal Talk Radio reported this week on comments made by the latest utterly clueless jerk to manage programming at The Network That Used To Be Awesome But Now Only Serves Up Pablum, David Bernstein. Sayeth The Guy Who Decided that "Lionel" was better than Sam Seder:
No? Three years ago the best damn radio show since Jean Shepherd went off the air was just starting to hit its stride. It was funny and it was entertaining. Yes, it was topical, but it was funny and it was entertaining, and its held its audience nearly two years after going off the air. But rather than try to atone for Danny Goldberg's Mistake during morning drive-time, we have the last remaining Young Turk Cenk Uygur and a rotating array of sidekicks consisting of whoever happens to be walking down the street that morning.
At least the pathetic New York affiliate, WWRL, is doing something to make morning radio more tolerable for those of us who have been reduced to plugging our MP3 players into the Bose Wave in the morning and listening to Morning Sedition shows from 2005 and noting with dismay at how current they still sound. Having realized that Armstrong Williams, that Bush apologist, useful idiot, and pocketer of a few hundred grand of taxpayer cash to shill for No Child Left Behind wasn't exactly an appropriate face for "the flagship station of Air America" and that Sam Greenfield is neither funny nor entertaining, WWRL owner Rennie Bishop has actually done something smart. He's decided to team up Marc Maron's old sidekick, Mark Riley, with former WABC host and Iraq war radio casualty Richard Bey, to do the morning show.
No, it's not Morning Sedition, but then, what else could be? But while Riley founders on his own, he plays well with others, and while Richard Bey's song parodies can wear thin after a while, he's one of the good guys, and after wandering in the radio wilderness for four years, subbing for Lynn Samuels on Sirius every now and then, before snagging the eight-to-ten PM slot on WWRL in September (when the station's signal is at 5000 watts), it will be nice to hear him at a time when WWRL has something vaguely resembling a radio signal.
Meanwhile, Marc Maron and Sam Seder are continuing to refine both the format and the technology behind their (for-now-titled) "Unshaven" VODcast. Perhaps when Rachel Maddow jumps to MSNBC, David Bernstein will decide that two smart, funny Jewish guys might be a good fit for the six-to-eight timeslot.
Meanwhile, in other Progressive Talk Radio Personalities news, Liberal Talk Radio reported this week on comments made by the latest utterly clueless jerk to manage programming at The Network That Used To Be Awesome But Now Only Serves Up Pablum, David Bernstein. Sayeth The Guy Who Decided that "Lionel" was better than Sam Seder:
"I do think the liberal programming that has occurred here has been far too extremist… It's not our job to get a Democrat elected to Congress. We need to be funny, we need to be enjoyable, and I don't think that existed at this company three years ago."
No? Three years ago the best damn radio show since Jean Shepherd went off the air was just starting to hit its stride. It was funny and it was entertaining. Yes, it was topical, but it was funny and it was entertaining, and its held its audience nearly two years after going off the air. But rather than try to atone for Danny Goldberg's Mistake during morning drive-time, we have the last remaining Young Turk Cenk Uygur and a rotating array of sidekicks consisting of whoever happens to be walking down the street that morning.
At least the pathetic New York affiliate, WWRL, is doing something to make morning radio more tolerable for those of us who have been reduced to plugging our MP3 players into the Bose Wave in the morning and listening to Morning Sedition shows from 2005 and noting with dismay at how current they still sound. Having realized that Armstrong Williams, that Bush apologist, useful idiot, and pocketer of a few hundred grand of taxpayer cash to shill for No Child Left Behind wasn't exactly an appropriate face for "the flagship station of Air America" and that Sam Greenfield is neither funny nor entertaining, WWRL owner Rennie Bishop has actually done something smart. He's decided to team up Marc Maron's old sidekick, Mark Riley, with former WABC host and Iraq war radio casualty Richard Bey, to do the morning show.
No, it's not Morning Sedition, but then, what else could be? But while Riley founders on his own, he plays well with others, and while Richard Bey's song parodies can wear thin after a while, he's one of the good guys, and after wandering in the radio wilderness for four years, subbing for Lynn Samuels on Sirius every now and then, before snagging the eight-to-ten PM slot on WWRL in September (when the station's signal is at 5000 watts), it will be nice to hear him at a time when WWRL has something vaguely resembling a radio signal.
Meanwhile, Marc Maron and Sam Seder are continuing to refine both the format and the technology behind their (for-now-titled) "Unshaven" VODcast. Perhaps when Rachel Maddow jumps to MSNBC, David Bernstein will decide that two smart, funny Jewish guys might be a good fit for the six-to-eight timeslot.
Oscars, Pyrmont
Salt and pepper squid $15.00Tender squid battered in a salt and pepper coatingwith mixed leaves, tomato and spanish onionwith a zingy chilli and lime dressingWith tickets to Miss Saigon on a Friday night, we met up for an early dinner at Oscars on Union Street, only a short stroll from the casino.We shared a plate of salt and pepper squid between four as an entree; it's actually listed as a main
vendredi 26 octobre 2007
Harvey Sees Nonexistent 6 Foot Tall Reporters.
"Are you happy with FEMA's response, so far?"
"I'm very happy with FEMA's response so far. This is a FEMA and a federal government that's leaning forward, not waiting to react. And you have to be pretty pleased to see that." - FEMA to FEMA, October 23, 2007
We've all heard the stories of Richard Nixon muttering to himself and to portraits of past presidents in the last days of his term. Little would even the most cynical of us ever imagine that the same thing would happen to an entire agency that effectively had sealed off the media and the American public from its soliloquy.
Last Tuesday, FEMA had literally staged a press conference that was intended to impart information about the wildfires in Southern California. The nerf ball questions put to FEMA Deputy Administrator Harvey Johnson were not from the press, as FEMA would've had you believe, but from FEMA staffers themselves.
The reason they were able to get away with this is that they gave the press 15 minutes to arrive before they had to answer these urgent softball questions. Plainly, 15 minutes wasn't enough time for them to get there. So FEMA staged their shadow puppet play while giving the press an 800 number (they weren't allowed to ask questions). So it beggars the question: What was FEMA hiding this time around while California was burning down and what were they afraid the real press was going to ask?
Dana Perino's take on this, typically, was priceless:
“It is not a practice that we would employ here at the White House or that we -- we certainly don't condone it.”
I guess Dana didn't get the memo about the Bush administration a couple of years ago literally paying to have fake news stories planted in Iraqi newspapers or the one about the Pentagon six years ago starting up the supposedly disbanded OSI (Office of Strategic Influence), which job it also was to fabricate news to be passed off as the real thing. But that's OK, Dana Bash the Liberals: We understand there's a high learning curve over at the Ministry of Propaganda.
If nothing else, this "news" story perfectly delineates the hermetic insularity of a White House that steadfastly refuses to listen to anyone but Yes Men insiders. It also flawlessly represents the contempt that the White House and its agencies feel for what is nonetheless an endlessly criminally compliant press (and Noron O'Donnell's apparent amusement at this whole thing alone would almost justify such contempt) and an equal contempt for the intelligence of the American people.
It also captures in a candid snapshot the sheer superficiality of an administration made of tinsel, one that guided people to food tables when they were in need of clothes and then had the food and water aid stations broken down and, later, lights getting shut off the minute George W. Bush was out of camera range.
Bomb Bomb Iran
In case you had any doubts that the run-up to the Iraq war was repeating itself in the Bush Administration's lust to attack Iran, those doubts were dispelled yesterday. Less covered than the Administration's trotting out yesterday of Condi Rice to put a "moderate" face on Cheney's insane war policy is the fact that tucked away into the latest Iraq supplemental is funding for so-called "bunker-buster" bombs that are have no practical purpose in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
Steven at Booman Tribune explains:
The path to war with Iran is clear, as this article from Der Spiegel (via Alternet) explains:
When Senators like Hillary Clinton voted "Yes" on the Lieberman Kyl amendment, they were giving tacit approval to war with Iran. As John Edwards noted in the last Democratic debate, the man that the Bush Administration has named as its latest "Second Coming of Hitler" isn't even popular in his home country, and that there is a lesson to be learned from the way George Bush handled the 2002 AUMF vote -- and that lesson is NOT to give him ANY leeway to start another war:
It's enough to make one believe that where the 2008 election is concerned, the fix is in -- and that fix is that we will have a choice between a president who will continue to expand the U.S.-initiated conflagration in the Middle East, and a president who will continue to expand the U.S.-initiated conflagration in the Middle East. Hillary Clinton has made it clear, despite her preposterous rhetorical bones thrown at the netroots that she will end the Iraq war the day she takes office, that she is going to out-tough talk the tough guys. Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani, he who doesn't know that waterboarding is, in fact torture; and blind people carrying guns, has as his foreign policy advisor the neocon nutball di tutti neocon nutballs -- Norman Podhoretz.
There is still time to prevent this 2008 Matchup From Hell, but only if Americans start paying attention. That's probably too much to ask, and so this country will Dancing With the Stars itself right into a global nuclear holocaust, and then wonder what went wrong.
Steven at Booman Tribune explains:
When the the Pentagon and CENTCOM were contacted about this "urgent need" ABC's reporters were given the run around by military spokespersons. However, it seems quite clear that the oinly reason to modify Stealth bombers to carry these large bunker busting bombs would be to attack Iran. Doesn't mean an attack is necessarily imminent, but it also stronly suggests that Bush intends to attack Iran before his term of office is up. If Congress allows this funding to go forward without questioning the need for this particualr item they will be enabling our "Decider in Chief" to take matters into his own hands whenever he feels like it. So, maybe you should contact your Congressional Representatives and inform them about this peculiar request, and remind them that the last thing we need or desire at this time is another "preventive war" in the Middle East against a country that currently poses little if any threat to our security.
The path to war with Iran is clear, as this article from Der Spiegel (via Alternet) explains:
In the scenario concocted by Cheney's strategists, Washington's first step would be to convince Israel to fire missiles at Iran's uranium enrichment plant in Natanz. Tehran would retaliate with its own strike, providing the US with an excuse to attack military targets and nuclear facilities in Iran.
This information was leaked by an official close to the vice president. Cheney himself hasn't denied engaging in such war games. For years, in fact, he's been open about his opinion that an attack on Iran, a member of US President George W. Bush's "Axis of Evil," is inevitable.
Given these not-too-secret designs, Democrats and Republicans alike have wondered what to make of the still mysterious Israeli bombing run in Syria on Sept. 6. Was it part of an existing war plan? A test run, perhaps? For days after the attack, one question dominated conversation at Washington receptions: How great is the risk of war, really?
In the September strike, Israeli bombers were likely targeting a nuclear reactor under construction, parts of which are alleged to have come from North Korea. It is possible that key secretaries in the Bush cabinet even tried to stop Israel. To this day, the administration has neither confirmed nor commented on the attack.
Nevertheless, in Washington, Israel's strike against Syria has revived the specter of war with Iran. For the neoconservatives it could represent a glimmer of hope that the grandiose dream of a democratic Middle East has not yet been buried in the ashes of Iraq. But for realists in the corridors of the State Department and the Pentagon, military action against Iran is a nightmare they have sought to avert by asking a simple question: "What then?"
The Israeli strike, or something like it, could easily mark the beginning of the "World War III," which President Bush warned against last week. With his usual apocalyptic rhetoric, he said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could lead the region to a new world war if his nation builds a nuclear bomb.
Conditions do look ripe for disaster. Iran continues to acquire and develop the fundamental prerequisites for a nuclear weapon. The mullah regime receives support -- at least moral support, if not technology -- from a newly strengthened Russia, which these days reaches for every chance to provoke the United States. President Vladimir Putin's own (self-described) "grandiose plan" to restore Russia's armed forces includes a nuclear buildup. The war in Iraq continues to drag on without an end in sight or even an opportunity for US troops to withdraw in a way that doesn't smack of retreat. In Afghanistan, NATO troops are struggling to prevent a return of the Taliban and al-Qaida terrorists. The Palestinian conflict could still reignite on any front.
In Washington, Bush has 15 months left in office. He may have few successes to show for himself, but he's already thinking of his legacy. Bush says he wants diplomacy to settle the nuclear dispute with Tehran, and hopes international pressure will finally convince Ahmadinejad to come to his senses. Nevertheless, the way pressure has been building in Washington, preparations for war could be underway.
When Senators like Hillary Clinton voted "Yes" on the Lieberman Kyl amendment, they were giving tacit approval to war with Iran. As John Edwards noted in the last Democratic debate, the man that the Bush Administration has named as its latest "Second Coming of Hitler" isn't even popular in his home country, and that there is a lesson to be learned from the way George Bush handled the 2002 AUMF vote -- and that lesson is NOT to give him ANY leeway to start another war:
It's enough to make one believe that where the 2008 election is concerned, the fix is in -- and that fix is that we will have a choice between a president who will continue to expand the U.S.-initiated conflagration in the Middle East, and a president who will continue to expand the U.S.-initiated conflagration in the Middle East. Hillary Clinton has made it clear, despite her preposterous rhetorical bones thrown at the netroots that she will end the Iraq war the day she takes office, that she is going to out-tough talk the tough guys. Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani, he who doesn't know that waterboarding is, in fact torture; and blind people carrying guns, has as his foreign policy advisor the neocon nutball di tutti neocon nutballs -- Norman Podhoretz.
There is still time to prevent this 2008 Matchup From Hell, but only if Americans start paying attention. That's probably too much to ask, and so this country will Dancing With the Stars itself right into a global nuclear holocaust, and then wonder what went wrong.
jeudi 25 octobre 2007
Exploding the Rudy Mythos
Crooks and Liars has a segment from tonight's Countdown that if this country were populated by thinking human beings instead of reptilian brains would topple any hopes Rudy Giuliani had of becoming the next president. On tonight's show, David Shuster showed footage of Rudy Giuliani outright lying about his pre-9/11 terrorism concerns -- lies that fly in the face of his testimony before the 9/11 Commission. Wayne Barrett gives the details, and his story in the Village Voice should be read by anyone even remotely considering voting for this guy.
As if Giuliani's judgment in hiring a corrupt criminal like Bernard Kerik as his police chief and recommending him for the post heading up the Department of Homeland Security and in having a pedophile priest working for his campaign weren't bad enough, he's now engaged in an appalling campaign of revisionism:
Rudy Giuliani is a charlatan, a snake oil salesman, and s complete poseur. That some readers of this very blog are considering voting for this aspiring fascist is sad -- and indicative that there is much more work to be done exposing the real Rudy Giuliani to American voters.
As if Giuliani's judgment in hiring a corrupt criminal like Bernard Kerik as his police chief and recommending him for the post heading up the Department of Homeland Security and in having a pedophile priest working for his campaign weren't bad enough, he's now engaged in an appalling campaign of revisionism:
A 15-page "memorandum for the record," prepared by a commission counsel and dated April 20, 2004, quotes Giuliani conceding that it wasn't until "after 9/11" that "we brought in people to brief us on al Qaeda." According to the memorandum, Giuliani told two commission members and five staffers: "But we had nothing like this pre 9/11, which was a mistake, because if experts share a lot of info," there would be a "better chance of someone making heads and tails" of the "situation." (Such memoranda are not verbatim transcripts of the confidential commission interviews, but are described on the cover page as "100 percent accurate" notes taken by staffers, stamped "commission sensitive/unclassified" on the top of each page.)
Asked about the “flow of information about al Qaeda threats from 1998-2001,” Giuliani said: “At the time, I wasn’t told it was al Qaeda, but now that I look back at it, I think it was al Qaeda.” He also said that as part of one of his post-9/11 briefings, “we had in Bodansky, who had written a book on bin Laden.” Giuliani was referring to Yossef Bodanksy, the author of Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America, which was published in 1999 and predicted “spectacular terrorist strikes in Washington and/or New York.” Giuliani wrote in his own book, Leadership, that Judi Nathan got him a copy of Bodansky’s prophetic work “shortly after 9/11,” and that he covered it in “highlighter and notes,” citing his study of it as an example of how he “mastered a subject.” Apparently, he also invited Bodansky to address key members of his staff.
Giuliani attributed his pre-9/11 shortcomings in part to the FBI, which was run by his close friend (and current endorser) Louis Freeh, and to the Joint Terrorism Task Force, an FBI-directed partnership with the NYPD. "We already had JTTF, and got flow information no one else got," he explained. "But did we get the flow of information we wanted? No. We would be told about a threat, but not about the underlying nature of the threat. I wanted all the same information the FBI had, and we didn't get that until after 9/11. Immediately after 9/11, we were made a complete partner." He added: "Without 9/11, I never would have been able to send an adviser to FBI briefings."
Tom Von Essen, who was Giuliani’s fire commissioner and is now a partner in his consulting company, Giuliani Partners, was asked at a confidential interview on April 7, 2004, what information he had “re terrorism prior to 9/11” and said: “I was told nothing at all.” Bernard Kerik, the police commissioner on 9/11, who also later joined Giuliani Partners, appeared to contradict Giuliani, insisting in his April 6 private appearance: “I never had a problem with the FBI.” Kerik, who did not become commissioner until August 2000, testified, however, that he did have a problem with his own department. “When I took over,” he said, “I was not happy with NYPD’s intelligence in general.” He said the intelligence division “had more to do with fighting criminal activity than terrorism” and that “within 3-4 months, I directed a total merger of NYPD intelligence.” In other words, Kerik indicated that he’d begun a reorganization of the department’s counterterrorism intelligence operations in 2001, as the Giuliani administration entered its final year—hardly a testament to its urgent understanding of the threat.
Rudy Giuliani is a charlatan, a snake oil salesman, and s complete poseur. That some readers of this very blog are considering voting for this aspiring fascist is sad -- and indicative that there is much more work to be done exposing the real Rudy Giuliani to American voters.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)