« July 1, 2007 - July 7, 2007 | Main | July 15, 2007 - July 21, 2007 »
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Quote for the Day II
14 Jul 2007 08:10 pm
"I am a university student, and we are bored of you. Hitchens is our hero. Orwell is our hero. Paine is our hero. Dostoevsky is our hero. We are humanitarians, and The Left is dead to us," - a commenter responding to a piece by leftist Terry Eagleton in the Guardian. Eagleton regards the genocide-backing, America-hating Harold Pinter as a progressive mentor.
The Pro-War Democrats
14 Jul 2007 07:07 pm
Many more favored toppling Saddam Hussein than would now acknowledge.
The End Of Bear Week
14 Jul 2007 06:53 pm
Today is the last day of Bear Week in Provincetown. Alas, I came down with bronchitis the past couple of 
days so missed some of the festivities. In case you want a primer on what bear culture is, here's a link to my 2003 Salon essay, which seems to have become something of a manifesto for this movement. This year's was about double last year's attendance. Given how good a time most people seem to have had, I predict an even bigger turnout in the future.
What's it about? In part a celebration of mature masculinity - untweaked, unshaven, full-bellied masculinity. Simultaneously, it's an attempt to subvert a little of that masculinity. The atmosphere is almost aggressively gentle, good-humored, accepting, and friendly. These are not men trying to impress anyone, ro to throw their considerable weight around. Mostly over forty, these men are not traumatized by having a gut or some flab. They're not afraid that back-hair tumbles over their collar. They're not afraid to embrace their sexual orientation as fully as their gender. They are what happens, I think, when an entire generation of gay men reach maturity having always been out of the closet in large numbers, already over much of the psychological damage of past generations, and eager to move forward, together, and have some fun.
I remain convinced that this is the cultural future of mainstream gay male America. In its Whitmanesque embrace of fraternity, in it disavowal of body-fascism, in its democratic spirit and sense of play, it's also something straight America could learn from. Many straight men, for example, lack good friendship networks and an image of masculinity that isn't laced with violence, machismo or sexual ego. Bears are an antidote to that. Maybe straight guys will notice.
(Illustration: Walt Whitman, bear icon.)
Microsoft vs Hitler
14 Jul 2007 06:18 pm
Or fun with subtitles:
An Anti-War Liberal Balks At Withdrawal
14 Jul 2007 04:34 pm
A reader writes:
I think you, as someone whose view of the war in Iraq has evolved over the last year or so, might be able to appreciate how my opinion is suddenly undergoing a major transformation.
I have been against the war from the start. In fact, I was even skeptical of our mission in Afghanistan, although the Taliban, in offering sanctuary to Al Qaeda, gave us little choice but to invade. As for Iraq, I viewed it as pure folly, and everything I predicted -- sectarian strife, unleashed tribal and ethnic passions, a breeding ground for terrorists, seeds sown for more blowback -- has come to pass. The only thing I found surprising was the sheer incompetence of the American operation -- and the ongoing, unrelenting blundering, with one absurd mistake piled atop another. No one, not even the fiercest Bush critic, could have predicted how horribly he and his cronies have managed this war. From the very beginning, and from every angle, the incompetence has been mind-numbing. Thus, like many, I've been clamoring for us to do the only sensible thing: get the hell out before things get worse (and they can get much, much worse for both the coalition soldiers and the Iraqi citizenry).
That said, the more I turn the problem over in my mind, the more I realize I can't morally excuse a U.S. withdrawal. The Pottery Barn Rule is cliché, but the underlying principle is not. No matter how horribly we have failed in Iraq, and no matter how ill-conceived the mission was from the start, we own the mess. Yes, Bush and Cheney and Rice and Powel lied through their teeth to sell the war. But as Americans and as citizens of a democracy, don't we all have to take ownership of this colossal fuck-up? Isn't it all of our problems, not just the administration's and its knee-jerk supporters'? Consider how awful it is now, with more than 100,000 U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq and trying to maintain order. Now imagine what it will look like when we leave. It will make the exodus from Saigon look like a holiday. There was a reason why Saddam was so brutal. He had to be to keep a lid on all the centuries of brewing tensions. (Thus, any sane person with a grasp of history, while despising Saddam, viewed the invasion as an impossible task.)
But here we are. Is it possible, however unlikely, that the U.S. and Iraq can survive 1 1/2 more years of Bush incompetence and hand the problem over to a more competent administration? It may sound like a pipe dream -- and I recognize that a shit load of tragedies could still play out over the next 18 months. But don't we owe it to the Iraqi people, having invaded their country and having unleashed all these demons, to do our best by them, even if it means emptying our treasury and sacrificing many more of our soldiers' lives? Doesn't a democracy that voted for Bush twice (and/or looked the other way while he stole the office) have a responsibility to the world to rebuild everything he has methodically destroyed? Isn't Iraq our responsibility as much as it is his? Can we really just wash our hands of it and walk away, as if the problem belongs only to W?
In some ways, it isn't my liberal side that is countenancing withdrawal at this point. It is my cold conservative side. I do think the moral costs of withdrawal are immense. I fear the moral and strategic costs of staying are higher.
(Photo: Wathiq Khuzaie/Getty.)
Great Moments In Architecture
14 Jul 2007 04:22 pm
Dubai gets in on the act.
Best Movie Line Ever
14 Jul 2007 03:13 pm
"Surely you can't be serious." Airplane.
The Path Of Progress In Iraq
14 Jul 2007 02:09 pm
Just some data points:
At a news conference Friday, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said the number of battle-ready Iraqi battalions able to fight independently has dropped from 10 to six in recent months despite an increase in U.S. training efforts.
Pace said the readiness of the Iraqi fighting units was not an issue to be "overly concerned" about because the problem was partly attributable to losses in the field.
"As units operate in the field, they have casualties, they consume vehicles and equipment," Pace said.
In another development Friday, Bush's top spokesman appeared resigned to the fact that the Iraqi parliament is going to take August off, even though it has just eight weeks to show progress on military, political and other benchmarks designated by the United States.
However, Tony Snow said, "Let's also see what happens because quite often when parliaments do not meet, they are also continuing meetings on the side. And there will be progress, I'm sure on a number of fronts."
On two critical benchmarks - training of Iraqi troops and moves toward constructing the semblance of a national government - Iraq is going backwards not forwards.
That Mark Twain Telephone Piece
14 Jul 2007 12:59 pm
I mentioned it here. It's now outside the Atlantic firewall. Enjoy.
Tapper vs Hewitt
14 Jul 2007 12:24 pm
Poor Jake. If you're talking with Republican propagandist Hugh Hewitt on the radio or on a podcast, you really aren't talking with someone in good faith. It pays to know that in advance.
Vive La Resistance
14 Jul 2007 12:04 pm
"BILL MOYERS: Bruce, you wrote that article of impeachment against Bill Clinton. Why did you think he should be impeached?
BRUCE FEIN: I think he was setting a precedent that placed the president above the law. I did not believe that the initial perjury or misstatements-- that came perhaps in a moment of embarrassment stemming from the Paula Jones lawsuit was justified impeachment if he apologized. Even his second perjury before the grand jury when Ken Starr's staff was questioning him, as long as he expressed repentance, would not have set an example of saying every man, if you're president, is entitled to be a law unto himself. I think Bush's crimes are a little bit different. I think they're a little bit more worrisome than Clinton's. You don't have to have--
BILL MOYERS: More worrisome?
BRUCE FEIN: More worrisome than Clinton's-- because he is seeking more institutionally to cripple checks and balances and the authority of Congress and the judiciary to superintend his assertions of power. He has claimed the authority to tell Congress they don't have any right to know what he's doing with relation to spying on American citizens, using that information in any way that he wants in contradiction to a federal statute called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He's claimed authority to say he can kidnap people, throw them into dungeons abroad, dump them out into Siberia without any political or legal accountability. These are standards that are totally anathema to a democratic society devoted to the rule of law," - from Bill Moyers' Journal on PBS yesterday.
HRC Backs Down
14 Jul 2007 10:55 am
The largest gay money group, the Human Rights Campaign, has now backed down from excluding one of the few Democrats to support gay and lesbian equality forthrightly, Mike Gravel, from their Democratic debate. Here's an email they sent yesterday to a complaining member:
Thank you for taking the time to express your views regarding Senator Gravel and the Presidential Forum on Logo Television. It is a welcome sign to see members of our community so engaged in following the 2008 Presidential campaign and the platform of the various candidates. The goal for the forum has always been to provide our community with a chance to hear from the candidates on issues most important to GLBT Americans.
Although we stand by the notion that having a criteria for candidates is important for a political forum, we also heard an enthusiastic response from a portion of the community who wanted to hear from Senator Gravel. Therefore we extended an invitation for him to participate in this year's forum. It is also worth noting that HRC's original decision is not unique or completely without precedent. Senator Gravel was also not extended an invitation to the CNN Presidential debates but petitioned the decision and was consequently invited by CNN.
"Although we stand by the notion that having a criteria for candidates is important for a political forum..." A criteria? And what exactly was the unmentionable criterion? Money. The main focus of the Human Rights Campaign.
Obama on the Libby Outrage
14 Jul 2007 09:45 am
Here's stunning video of Barack Obama hearing live the news of the commutation Scooter Libby's sentence for perjury. It strikes me as revealing that Obama immediately sees a parallel to the way a young black man is being railroaded by the justice system, with no recourse. Yes, Bush had no power over Genarlow Wilson's sentence. But the contrast is striking - and corrosive of confidence in equal justice under the law. When such injustices are a common occurrence among the poor and marginalized, the special treatment meted out to one of the president's friends is particularly galling.
The View From Your Window
14 Jul 2007 09:29 am
Chicago, Illinois, 9.10 am.
For a newly updated, global gallery of Dish readers' window views, click here.
Friday, July 13, 2007
The President Disapproved Of His Own War Policy
13 Jul 2007 09:12 pm
I'm a litle slack-jawed at this quote from Bush in a confab with a handful of journalistic handmaidens:
"[L]ast fall, if I had been part of this polling, if they had called upstairs and said, do you approve of Iraq I would have been on the 66 percent who said, 'No I don’t approve.' That's why I made the decision I made. To get in a position where I would be able to say 'Yes, I approve.'"
I wonder if he would have voted Democrat, like so many of the non-approvers did. But the news in the story is that Bush intends somehow to ignore military reality and not abide by necessary troop rotations and draw down in the spring:
President Bush rejected the notion that he will be constrained by the availability of troops come next spring and will have to draw down the surge. He said, with a pointed ending to his answer, "The key factor that I'm confident that David Petraeus is looking at as he comes back is how to achieve the initial objective he set out, which is to provide enough security for the political process to move forward. I'm sure that in the bowels of the Pentagon people are looking at troop rotations and troop movements, but that is not the primary objective of our commander on the ground—next question."
Asked specifically if that meant that Petraeus would get the troops to continue past the spring if he needed them, he said, "We will work as hard as we can. People said we couldn’t find the troops for the last reinforcement as well," but he added that he’s mindful of troop rotations and time in theater.
He said, eventually, "We need to be in a position that can sustain a long-term troop presence," although that depends on "conditions on the ground."
"A long-term troop presence." He intends to go nowhere. He's the kind of person who, when he sees a wall, accelerates towards it. But it's not his car.
Quote for the Day II
13 Jul 2007 08:38 pm
"So, my argument is that as we become more and more scientifically literate, it's worth remembering that the fictions with which we previously populated our world may have some function that it's worth trying to understand and preserve the essential components of, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath water; because even though we may not accept the reasons given for them being here in the first place, it may well be that there are good practical reasons for them, or something like them, to be there. I suspect that as we move further and further into the field of digital or artificial life we will find more and more unexpected properties begin to emerge out of what we see happening and that this is a precise parallel to the entities we create around ourselves to inform and shape our lives and enable us to work and live together. Therefore, I would argue that though there isn't an actual god there is an artificial god and we should probably bear that in mind. That is my debating point and you are now free to start hurling the chairs around!" - Douglas Adams, Boing Boing.
Best Movie Line Ever
13 Jul 2007 07:01 pm
"Well sometimes I get the menstrual cramps real hard." From "Raising Arizona."
Liberalism, Libertarianism and Gay Rights
13 Jul 2007 06:03 pm
Matt has a good point here, I think:
Similarly, the gay rights movement does indeed want gay couples to be unmolested in their private conduct. But their demands go far beyond that. They want to regulate who you may employ, who you may rent a house to, etc., etc., etc. — not merely a state that refrains from discriminating, but a state that takes the lead in fighting discrimination.
To me, this is all to the good. And if Cato Institute employees want to endorse it, that's all to the good as well. But it's not libertarianism.
That's a fair assessment even now of the main agenda of gay rights groups. It's not, however, my own
agenda. Nor is it that of many gay libertarian/conservatives. For a different flavor of discourse on gay rights, try the Independent Gay Forum. Virtually Normal tried to grapple with this. I argued specifically against the liberal recipes for gay equality: against hate crime laws and even against employment discrimination laws. I argued that a conservative position on gay rights would leave private discrimination and prejudice alone and change only the government's stance so that all citizens are treated equally by the state, even if they are subject to discrimination by private entities. Virtually Normal did contribute, I think, to a deeper understand that marriage rights and military service were central to the gay rights movement. In that, it helped revolutionize the gay rights movement - against the wishes of many of its leftist leaders. But I had no luck trying to shift the liberal nannying and tolerance-mongering of the gay establishment.
Still, we're not all liberals. For the record. But it's a quixotic position, I will sadly concede. Freedom is not as popular as it once was. And liberals have helped whittle it away.
Gordon Brown and George Bush
13 Jul 2007 05:48 pm
Tony Blair really has gone, hasn't he?
Bush's Philosophy
13 Jul 2007 05:33 pm
A reader nails it, I think:
I have taught at a military school now for about thirty years. Two years ago, a Lieutenant Colonel, new to the faculty, dropped into my office for advice. "Dr. *******, I made a mathematics mistake on the blackboard today, plain for all to see. Am I of high enough rank that I can claim I didn't make a mistake?"
My answer was "Hell, no, you're not!"
But our president believes he is of high enough rank ...
And he has gotten away with everything, has he not?
How Far We've Come, Ctd
13 Jul 2007 04:59 pm
That 1982 piece by James Fallows on learning to write on a computer provoked major blogospheric chatter. Here's another classic Atlantic piece on another technological innovation. It's Mark Twain hearing someone talk on the telephone for the first time:
Without answering, I handed the telephone to the applicant, and sat down. Then followed that queerest of all the queer things in this world, — a conversation with only one end to it. You hear questions asked; you don't hear the answer. You hear invitations given; you hear no thanks in return. You have listening pauses of dead silence, followed by apparently irrelevant and unjustifiable exclamations of glad surprise, or sorrow, or dismay. You can't make head or tail of the talk, because you never hear anything that the person at the other end of the wire says. Well, I heard the following remarkable series of observations, all from the one tongue, and all shouted, — for you can't ever persuade the gentle sex to speak gently into a telephone."
Hitch on Saddam
13 Jul 2007 04:26 pm
In 1976: "perhaps the first visionary Arab statesman since Nasser." Look, we all have a right to change our minds. I see no reason to believe that Christopher's evolution has not been completely genuine. And he noted the torture and barbarism at the time.
McCain As Lear
13 Jul 2007 04:01 pm
Publius unpacks the analogy:
Here's a man whose daughter – daughter – was viciously slandered by the GOP political machine in South Carolina, which included the social conservative hierarchy. Here's a man who endured unspeakable torture. Here's a man who, for better or worse, came to prominence through high-profile dissents from party orthodoxy. And in the past three years, he’s abandoned it all ...
McCain's soul-selling will be remembered (forever) in one of two very different ways. On the one hand, it could be remembered as the shrewd political calculation that won him the nomination and then the presidency. More likely, it will be remembered as pathetic hypocrisy that will accompany his permanent, eternal humiliation. He will soon go from media darling to "pathetic loser." Dukakis: Welcome to the club.
I think that's too severe. I think he has tried to do the right thing and his politicking in the environment he's in - the toxic state of the GOP - was about as minimal as he could muster. Yes, I'm still a sap for the guy, for all his faults.
Christianist News
13 Jul 2007 03:57 pm
Members of Karl Rove's base defend their recent display of raw bigotry in the Congress:
Ante Pavkovic, Kathy Pavkovic, and Kristen Sugar were all arrested in the chambers of the United States Senate as that chamber was violated by a false Hindu god. The Senate was opened with a Hindu prayer placing the false god of Hinduism on a level playing field with the One True God, Jesus Christ. This would never have been allowed by our Founding Fathers.
"Not one Senator had the backbone to stand as our Founding Fathers stood. They stood on the Gospel of Jesus Christ! There were three in the audience with the courage to stand and proclaim, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me.' They were immediately removed from the chambers, arrested, and are in jail now. God bless those who stand for Jesus as we know that He stands for them" - Rev. Flip Benham, Director, Operation Save America/Operation Rescue.
But Will It Blend?
13 Jul 2007 03:33 pm
If your iPhone destroyed your computer, as it just did for a friend of mine, this might be good therapy:
Suppressing Traumatic Memories
13 Jul 2007 03:03 pm
Science has demonstrated how it's done. Now for therapies that could help veterans. (Hat tip: 3QD.)
McCain Doubles Down
13 Jul 2007 02:54 pm
Ambers reports from New Hampshire.
Subpoena Cheney
13 Jul 2007 02:50 pm
Mark Kleiman suggests another tack to rein in the veep.
Worst Editorial Ever?
13 Jul 2007 02:47 pm
Matt hits paydirt at the WSJ. Money quote:
At this point, one needs to think that letting Rupert Murdoch destroy the WSJ news pages might be better for the world than letting the WSJ news pages' credibility continue to provide a "halo effect" to the editorial page.
Infiltrated
13 Jul 2007 02:32 pm
Iraqi troops fighting alongside Americans set the GIs up, in an incident last January. Five Americans were killed. The attackers were helped by Iranian forces:
The investigation reveals several new details about the assault, including:
•Iraqi police suddenly vanished from the government compound before the shooting started.
•Attackers, evidently briefed on how U.S. forces would defend themselves, bottled up more than three dozen soldiers in a barracks and headquarters complex using a combination of smoke and fragment grenades and satchel charges to blow up Humvees.
•Gunmen knew exactly where to find and abduct U.S. officers.
•Iraqi vendors operating a PX and barbershop went home early.
•A back gate was left unlocked and unguarded.
This is salient, it seems to me:
It's worth noting that Army officials disclosed none of this when Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, a former White House aide, briefed the press this month. Bergner failed to mention that an internal Army investigation had found that the Iraqi police the US troops are supposed to be training and cooperating with played a direct role in the ambush.
Instead, Bergner blamed Iran. "The Quds Force, an elite unit of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards, helped plan and direct it with Iraqi militants, said Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, a military spokesman," USA Today reports. "The Quds Force, he said, supplied Shiite militias with weapons and up to $3 million a month in aid."
Most lies in wartime are designed to trick the enemy. Bush's lies of omission are designed to trick the American people. If you can blame it all on Iran, you don't have to concede the fact that Iraq's military forces and police are extensions of sectarian militias. That would be off-message. Grrrr.
Big Government Conservatism Update
13 Jul 2007 01:55 pm
Jon Rauch has another great column detailing again how statist George W. Bush has been in the White House. The picture, however, is a little more complicated than the crude indicators above:
According to the Mercatus-Weidenbaum report, the bulk of the increase in regulatory spending and staffing is for homeland security: such functions as airport screening (the creation of the Transportation Security Administration alone accounts for 80 percent of the staffing increase under Bush, though only 29 percent of the spending increase), maritime and border enforcement, new air-cargo rules, and so on. Subtract homeland security, and Bush turns out to be as tight a regulator as Reagan was, with annual growth of regulatory spending and staffing at rates of 2.6 percent and 0.1 percent, respectively, through 2006. Prepare, then, for a shock of recognition: On regulation, as on everything else, the Bush administration's war on terrorism is driving an expansion of government.
Are we getting our money's worth from Bush's security-driven burst of regulation? The answer, unfortunately, is that no one knows.
Catholics Against Rudy
13 Jul 2007 01:35 pm
Their dissection of his - and the GOP's - violation of the strict prohibition of torture under Catholic doctrine.
Something Smells, Ctd
13 Jul 2007 12:59 pm
It appears from all the emails that re-hashing some of the flim-flam deployed in taking us to war is not as big a bore as some would believe. But it's still a difficult task, because although many facts are available, the key question of good faith is definitionally elusive. In the case of Cheney, where the records will have been destroyed or sequestered, and where the suspicion of deception is greatest, we may never know for sure. My own sense is that it was an obvious mixture of genuine concern and less genuine corner-cutting. In their own way, they thought they were doing the right thing. But their refusal to involve the larger body politic, to bring in Democrats, to bring in even sensible Republicans and Bush cabinet members, led to the mess they're now in. They weren't fully honest with us, or prehaps with themselves, and their arrogance and defensiveness and secrecy prevented them from becoming more honest. And so the conduct of the war has been accompanied by behavior more redolent of a cover-up. Hence Libby's perjury. And the interminable lies about torture and detention. And the wiretapping and secret gulag of torture sites. And the weird war-plan that did not focus on WMDs. The arrogant dismissal of the insurgency, the refusal to accommodate it, the inability to look ahead, and the reflexive tendence to deploy fear as a political weapon. And on and on. It's no way to run a war you might hope to win.
Another reader, frustrated by the lefty bias of my last reader's interpretation, offers another view. More sympathetic to Bush and Cheney in some ways, but therefore more devastating in others. I reprint it here partly in the interests of airing various scenarios, but partly too because it comes closest to my own rough-edged and evolving sense of what happened. History will judge in the end:
Your "something smells" post illustrates, I think, why many of us who are disgusted with the Republicans are in such a quandary. The left constantly gets it half-right, the rest is a bit of naivete mixed with off-base cynicism. The effect is one of looking at a fun-house mirror: there's always a lot of truth and accuracy, but its upside down, and a little bit wobbly.
So, I'd like to address some of his points:
1. Many of us knew the WMD intelligence and evidence were flimsy. We also knew that the Bush administration knew it. This was not controversial, especially after Powell's UN appearance. (From 2002 onward, the people who were brilliant and devastating about this were Joseph Sobran, Pat Buchanan and Bob Novak, all paleocons.) However, based on Saddam's evasive behavior—that is, his failure to verifiably disarm, as outlined in 18 U.N. Security Council resolutions spanning ten years—tended to suggest that he was hiding something. Bush et. al. made what seemed at the time a low-risk bet that there would be WMD. Confident he was right, and having every reason to believe so, he fed the nation a pretty big bullshit sandwich. Perhaps he should be impeached for this. Nevertheless, not knowing for sure what was there, and Saddam's reluctance to clarify, presented a certain risk in itself, did it not? (For the sake of argument)
2. Democratization and humanitarian relief were not issues once WMDs fizzled; they were issues from the beginning, for better or worse.
Continue reading "Something Smells, Ctd" »
Best Movie Line Ever
13 Jul 2007 12:27 pm
Al Pacino channels Peggy Noonan on Bush:
"What you're hired for is to help us. Does that seem clear to you? To HELP us. Not to fuck us up."
Heads up: This is among the less profane of the passages. Not safe for the office.
Vive La Resistance
13 Jul 2007 12:14 pm
Peggy Noonan formally joins the resistance today. Welcome! Money quote:
I'm not referring to what used to be called Bush Derangement Syndrome. That phrase suggested that to passionately dislike the president was to be somewhat unhinged. No one thinks that anymore. I received an email before the news conference from as rock-ribbed a Republican as you can find, a Georgia woman (middle-aged, entrepreneurial) who'd previously supported him. She said she'd had it. "I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth." I was startled by her vehemence only because she is, as I said, rock-ribbed. Her email reminded me of another, one a friend received some months ago: "I took the W off my car today," it said on the subject line. It sounded like a country western song, like a great lament...
I suspect people pick up with Mr. Bush the sense that part of his drama, part of the story of his presidency, is that he gets to be the romantic about history, and the American people get to be the realists. Of the two, the latter is not the more enjoyable role.
Americans have always been somewhat romantic about the meaning of our country, and the beacon it can be for the world, and what the Founders did. But they like the president to be the cool-eyed realist, the tough customer who understands harsh realities.
With Mr. Bush it is the people who are forced to be cool-eyed and realistic. He's the one who goes off on the toots. This is extremely irritating, and also unnatural. Actually it's weird."
And unnerving. I've gone through the same cycle as Peggy, just a little sooner. I'm just alternately very angry and very sad now, and trying to figure out how we can repair the damage - globally and domestically. So far, I have only one serious, provisional thought in that respect: Obama. No one else seems close to being up to it.
The Power of a Good Cheese
13 Jul 2007 11:38 am
An astonishing story of how a mugging turned into a hugging. But did they turn him in at the end?
Gamers
13 Jul 2007 11:20 am
A reader writes:
I'm 23 years old and have been playing MMOs since I was 13. While I don't play 55 hours a week, I can assure you that this is not uncommon. I specifically remember when I was about 14 years old and had befriended a blacksmith in Ultima Online. One day, he told me his weekly schedule. From Monday through Friday, he worked from home for 8 hours, then played Ultima Online for 10 hours, then slept for 6 hours. On the weekend, he played for 18 hours, then slept for 6.
It's easy at first glance to take these numbers and think that there is something serious wrong, which is why so many people start calling it an addiction or a disease, but it is important to understand the full picture. Most people who play excessively do so, because the social life in these games is more valuable than the one they have in their "real life". They, sadly, had little to do with their spare time and would spend it watching t.v. or some other mindless activity. With MMO's, they have the opportunity to build relationships, be challenged, and have a great time when they aren't at their 9-5 and at a very low cost. These MMO's such as World of Warcraft and Everquest are not popular because they are a drug, rather, they are popular because they add real value to someones life. These worlds are not fake, they're merely intangible.
I don't actually know how you feel about them, but I'm hoping I have shed some light on why 55 hours a week is neither unbelievable nor bad.
The View From Your Window
13 Jul 2007 10:47 am
Carcavelos, Portugal, 5.20 pm.
For a newly updated, global gallery of Dish readers' window views, click here.
Yglesias Award Nominee
13 Jul 2007 10:31 am
"I will say to my Republican friends that it does no good to whine about double standards. You’re going to have to concede the hypocrisy point to our Democratic friends on this one. If you’re going to lecture people about the sanctity of marriage as it relates to banning gay unions or campaign on a platform stressing “family values,” it would be best if you didn’t go whoring around on your wife, wetting your wick at $300 a pop," - Rick Moran, on the right-wing Pajamas Media.
Obama Hits The Jugular
13 Jul 2007 09:51 am
This absolutely needed to be said:
Obama derided President Bush's commutation of former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's prison term, noting black men routinely serve time.
"We know we have more work to do when Scooter Libby gets no prison time and a 21-year-old honor student, who hadn't even committed a felony, gets 10 years in prison," Obama said.
Aides said Obama was referring to Genarlow Wilson, a Georgia man serving a 10-year prison sentence for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. A judge last month ordered Wilson to be freed, but prosecutors are blocking the order.
Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted of lying and obstruction of justice in the CIA-leak case. He received a 30-month prison sentence, which Bush commuted last week.
One rule of law for connected neocons; another for the rest of the country. Get angrier. And get rid of them.
Iran's Economy Teeters
13 Jul 2007 09:33 am
The inflation rate just surged, and unrest is brewing:
The CPI surged by 16.1 percent in the month from May 22 to June 22 from the same month of this year, giving an annual inflation rate of 14.2 percent, it said.
The rise follows an increase in the price of petrol from just eight cents to 10 cents a litre in May, while a rationing plan which took effect last month has also had an inflationary effect on services and consumer goods.
The price of foodstuffs and housing has also increased substantially. In May, the central bank forecast that inflation would reach 17pc in the current Iranian year to March nest year, compared with an official rate of 13.5 percent last year. However many economists dispute this figure and Iranian parliamentary research has estimated that inflation this year is running at 22.4 percent
Know hope.
The President's Oath
13 Jul 2007 09:17 am
A reader writes:
This president often mentions his oath but never talks about protecting the constitution. On the contrary, he regularly talks about his oath to protect the people, or to protect America. But it's possible to justify any number of tyrannies in the name of protecting the people.
The framers were aware of that danger and so wrote an oath of office that demands the constitution be protected, not the people. It would be much harder for a president to claim dictatorial powers in the name of protecting the constitution. "I had to destroy the constitution to save it" wouldn't fly. Or so you'd think. Yet Dubya has gotten away with it nearly unchallenged, as far as I can see. This slip by a functionary already has received much more attention than Dubya's frequent use of the same construction — perhaps because any Senator or presidential candidate who dared say "The president's oath is not to protect the people, and in the name of a vow he never took he has deliberately violated the oath he did take, to protect the constitution" would be pilloried by the Bushies for "not understanding the threat" or having a "pre-9/11 mindset."
Maybe. But it needs to be said, loudly and often, by patriots of any political stripe.
I agree. It needs to be stated again and again that the fundamental job of the president is not to protect the people of America, but to protect their constitution. This president has gotten things exactly the wrong way round. In a terror war, we have to acclimatize ourselves to the fact that many Americans may have to die as a consequence of a collective decision not to become a police state or a presidential protectorate. A free country that remains free in the face of terror will necessarily have many casualties. A police state would have fewer casualties. Given a choice between a loss of life and retaining constitutional liberties, what would you pick? And what would the first Americans have picked?
We've slid a long way, haven't we?
Amnesty International On Abortion
13 Jul 2007 08:07 am
Larry Cox explains what Amnesty International's position is on abortion. I posted on the controversy here. Why they would want to keep this secret is beyond me. Money quote:
AI will not advocate "abortion on demand," nor do we counsel individuals as to what choice they should make on abortion. We take no position as to whether abortion is right or wrong, nor on its legalization generally. Instead our position is focused on three areas of concern: opposition to imprisonment or other criminal sanctions for women or providers of abortion; support for medical treatment for women who suffer complications from unsafe abortions, and within reasonable gestational limits, support for women who seek abortion in cases of rape, incest or to preserve her life or when pregnancy poses a grave risk to her health.
Under this policy, AI will, as it always does, research and act on the most grave human rights cases. Nevertheless, AI continues to fervently oppose forced abortion, coerced sterilization, honor killings, human trafficking and other human rights abuses against women. We oppose, too, the coercion, isolation, and abuse that many women who have suffered violence face. And, we believe that those women who have survived rape, incest, or who face grave risk to their health or lives due to pregnancy should not be judged for their choices; within reasonable gestational limits and without force or coercion, they must be free to determine whether to continue the pregnancy.
This policy is consistent with our mission as a worldwide, secular and democratic movement defending and promoting universal human rights.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Alter Egos
12 Jul 2007 08:58 pm
This is one photograph by Robbie Cooper featured in this way-cool slideshow at the NYT. The photographs depict real-life individuals and their online gaming personae. This one is summarized thus:
NAME Lucas Shaw
BORN 1985
OCCUPATION Student
LOCATION Texas
AVATAR NAME Gaenank AVATAR CREATED 2003
GAME PLAYED EverQuest
HOURS PER WEEK IN-GAME 55
CHARACTER TYPE Barbarian berserker
SPECIAL ABILITIES Dual wield
55 hours a week?
The Presser
12 Jul 2007 08:33 pm
My take on the president's press conference this morning can be read here.
"Something Smells" II
12 Jul 2007 07:22 pm
A reader underlines the point I made here about the scant attention paid to WMD or weapons sites in the original invasion of Iraq. The salience of it is either a) rank incompetence, or b) that the military leadership really didn't have reason to fear the WMDs the president had scared the rest of us about. But even well-known nuclear sites were left to be raided by looters. If the Bush administration really feared WMD programs, they had a funny way of invading. A reader writes:
An important line of evidence indicating that the Bush administration did not believe their own WMD hype has been neglected. Why did the administration do nothing to secure WMD during and after the invasion? They certainly were concerned with securing the oil fields but did nothing to prevent weapons from falling into terrorist and insurgent hands. The following from the NY Times are in content chronological order. Peter Galbraith in October 2004:
In 2003 I went to tell Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz what I had seen in Baghdad in the days following Saddam Hussein's overthrow. For nearly an hour, I described the catastrophic aftermath of the invasion -- the unchecked looting of every public institution in Baghdad, the devastation of Iraq's cultural heritage, the anger of ordinary Iraqis who couldn't understand why the world's only superpower was letting this happen.
I also described two particularly disturbing incidents -- one I had witnessed and the other I had heard about. On April 16, 2003, a mob attacked and looted the Iraqi equivalent of the Centers for Disease Control, taking live HIV and black fever virus among other potentially lethal materials. US troops were stationed across the street but did not intervene because they didn't know the building was important.
When he found out, the young American lieutenant was devastated. He shook his head and said, "I hope I am not responsible for Armageddon." About the same time, looters entered the warehouses at Iraq's sprawling nuclear facilities at Tuwaitha on Baghdad's outskirts. They took barrels of yellowcake (raw uranium), apparently dumping the uranium and using the barrels to hold water. US troops were at Tuwaitha but did not interfere.
There was nothing secret about the Disease Center or the Tuwaitha warehouses. Inspectors had repeatedly visited the center looking for evidence of a biological weapons program. The Tuwaitha warehouses included materials from Iraq's nuclear program, which had been dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War. The United Nations had sealed the materials, and they remained untouched until the US troops arrived.
The looting that I observed was spontaneous.
Continue reading ""Something Smells" II" »
A Fat Tax
12 Jul 2007 06:33 pm
You know the nanny-state can't wait.
The View From Your Window
12 Jul 2007 06:01 pm
Clinton, Washington, 12.01 pm.
For a newly updated, global gallery of Dish readers' window views, click here.
A War and Energy Conservation
12 Jul 2007 06:01 pm
We did it before:
In the 1940s, Americans simultaneously battled fascism overseas and waste at home. My parents, their neighbors, and millions of others left cars at home to ride bikes to work, tore up their front yards to plant cabbage, recycled toothpaste tubes and cooking grease, volunteered at daycare centers and USOs, shared their houses and dinners with strangers, and conscientiously attempted to reduce unnecessary consumption and waste. The World War II home front was the most important and broadly participatory green experiment in U.S. history. Lessing Rosenwald, the chief of the Bureau of Industrial Conservation, called on Americans "to change from an economy of waste--and this country has been notorious for waste--to an economy of conservation." A majority of civilians, some reluctantly but many others enthusiastically, answered the call.
Christianist Democrats
12 Jul 2007 05:37 pm
This just about sums up the Democratic candidates' decision to mimic Bush on faith issues:
"One-third gets it," says a Democratic values pioneer, talking about the rank and file. "A second third understands that this can help us win. And another third is positively terrified."
The second third is the key, I guess. Obama is going to ride this, I'm afraid. (Hat tip: Mirror of Justice.)
An Iraq Proposal
12 Jul 2007 05:04 pm
McSweeney's contributes to the debate:
Here's what I propose for Iraq: Distribute assault weapons to every Iraqi man, woman, and adolescent with the aptitude to crook a trigger finger. After all, the insurgents are a proportionately minuscule part of the overall population, and since the bad guys get hold of weapons anyway, why not put equalizers in the hands of law-abiding citizens? That'll make any mass murderer with a death wish think twice—unless he's got a death wish or something. And just think of the relief our soldiers will feel every time their patrol encounters a dozen Iraqis stroking AK-47s at a traffic light. They'll say, "Man, maybe Al Qaeda should fight us at home, because they sure don't stand a chance here."
I suppose some of the weapons we provide could be used against us. But we all know that guns don't kill people, people kill people. All a semiautomatic does is discharge 75 poor choices per minute. Remember that so-called assault-weapons ban we had? What happened there? Thugs merely adapted and replaced drive-by shootings with drive-by pillow smotherings, and no one was any safer.
Writing On Computers
12 Jul 2007 04:31 pm
I linked yesterday to Jim Fallows' 1982 account of learning to write on a computer. A reader tracks down Russell Baker's little 1987 op-ed on the same theme. Not online, but here's the money quote:
The wonderful thing about writing with a computer instead of a typewriter or a lead pencil is that it's so easy to rewrite that you can make each sentence almost perfect before moving on to the next sentence.
The wonderful thing about writing with a computer instead of a typewriter or a lead pencil is that it's so easy to rewrite that you can make each sentence almost perfect before moving on to the next sentence.
An impressive aspect of using a computer to write with One of the plusses about a computer on which to write Happily, the computer is a marked improvement over both the typewriter and the lead pencil for purposes of literary composition, due to the ease with which rewriting can be effectuated, thus enabling What a marked improvement the computer is for the writer over the typewriter and lead pencil The typewriter and lead pencil were good enough in their day, but if Shakespeare had been able to access a computer with a good writing program If writing friends scoff when you sit down at the computer and say, ''The lead pencil was good enough for Shakespeare One of the drawbacks of having a computer on which to write is the ease and rapidity with which the writing can be done, thus leading to the inclusion of many superfluous terms like ''lead pencil,'' when the single word ''pencil'' would be completely, entirely and utterly adequate.
"Something Smells"
12 Jul 2007 03:55 pm
Who wants to revisit the reasons we went to war at this point? I do. Because the integrity of the project is one reason it has run aground. The American people have lost faith not just because we're losing, but because they harbor legitimate doubts as to the good faith in which the Iraq decision was made. I was once contemptuous of such doubts, but the evidence has forced me to revisit some of them. Here's a long reader email that lays out what he believes were the real reasons for the war, as opposed to the ones we were told about. It's not left-wing paranoia, although some element of paranoia about these people now seems to me to be a sign of mental stability. I'm not sure yet what I believe about what really happened. It's unknowable in many ways until historians get their hands on the records. But anyway, for the purpose of airing these themes, here's my reader's take (and he's not too kind to me either):
Ultimately, all of these scandals and revelations force us to confront the basic issues of why the Iraq War was launched in the first place. What do we know now or suspect to be largely true?
1. The WMD intelligence was flimsy, and there is a good deal of circumstantial evidence suggesting the inner core surrounding Bush all knew this and went to war anyway. This has as much been admitted both in the infamous Downing Street Memo and by Paul Wolfowitz.
2. Democratization and humanitarian relief only became an issue once WMDs fizzled. The president's lack of movement on Darfur also suggests 'human rights' and democracy aren't a motivating force with this administration.
3. 'Terror' - as with WMDs, there is a strong possibility this reason was knowingly overplayed by the inner core. They refused to move on Zarqawi and Iraqi Islamists, who were irregardless a minor force in Saddam's Iraq and lurking in areas of the country that Saddam could not reach them. We also know the president pulled away reinforcements from Afghanistan in order to put them in the deployment pipeline for Iraq as the now infamous as Tora Bora took place.
So, what was the reason? Consider this possibility...
Continue reading ""Something Smells"" »
Mike Gravel on the Human Rights Campaign
12 Jul 2007 03:50 pm
One of the few Democratic candidates who actually supports gay equality without reservation is not invited by the Human Rights Campaign for their presidential debate. To his credit, Gravel sees why:
According to a HRC spokesperson, I didn't raise enough money and therefore my candidacy did not meet their standard of "viability." But that's strange -- CNN, PBS, NBC and the NAACP invited me to their debates without evaluating my financial viability. Ironically I think the real reason why HRC didn't invite me is that I'm too vocal in my advocacy of gay rights. None of the top tier candidates would have been comfortable facing an opponent who consistently points out their refusal to embrace true equality for gays and lesbians.
I love it when outsiders begin to rumble the HRC scam. It usually doesn't take long if you're allergic to bullshit. Gravel seems to be, which is why he understands that HRC cares much less about gay equality than about their own money and access. This debate is designed to maximize both. There will be no tough questions. Especially of Clinton. Solmonese and Etheridge are her stooges.
Amnesty International and Abortion Rights
12 Jul 2007 03:33 pm
This is a worrying development: a statement on AI's members-only website of a new, and apparently hush-hush decision:
"This policy will not be made public at this time. There is to be no proactive external publication of the policy position or of the fact of its adoption issued."
Restrictions on abortion will now be deemed human rights violations. Maybe there's more to this story but on the face of it, it's hard to disagree with Ryan Anderson:
Even people who differ on these issues can see why Amnesty International's advocacy of abortion is a mistake. It severely weakens its ability to form broad coalitions of human-rights defenders. It makes Amnesty International indistinguishable from all the other standard-issue leftist organizations that cluster around international affairs. Worst of all, it will have disastrous consequences for relations with religious believers--especially Catholics--who will be forced to distance themselves from the organization's other work.
Amnesty's work on torture is invaluable. They shouldn't tarnish it with this kind of mission creep.
Religious and Economic Freedom
12 Jul 2007 03:08 pm
They don't always correlate, the Economist notes.
O'Reilly's Latest Homophobic Eruption
12 Jul 2007 02:48 pm
First lesbian gangs, for which his guest has now apologized; now a Paul Cameron statistic, aired without rebuttal.
The Drug War Clock
12 Jul 2007 02:36 pm
Someone is arrested every twenty seconds.
Blog Wars on FDR
12 Jul 2007 02:25 pm
I can't wait to get my hands on Amity Shlaes' new book on the depression. Anything that is ticking off the domestic economic left can't be all bad. Pejman notes this passage in a George Will column:
Some mornings during the autumn of 1933, when the unemployment rate was 22 percent, the president, before getting into his wheelchair, sat in bed, surrounded by economic advisers, setting the price of gold. One morning he said he might raise it 21 cents: "It's a lucky number because it's three times seven." His Treasury secretary wrote that if people knew how gold was priced "they would be frightened."
Kevin Drum responds. Pejman fights back. John Holbo joins in. And Belle Waring sums up. The blogosphere: yesterday's debates tomorrow!
The Wife's Pitch
12 Jul 2007 01:50 pm
Ann Romney's new radio ad for Willard. Ugh. Probably effective though.
Why Creationism Endures
12 Jul 2007 01:35 pm
Jonah Lehrer, watching Planet Earth, writes:
And then I looked at myself, lazing on a couch and complaining about the lack of air-conditioning as I sipped my cold beer. I have absolutely no understanding of the struggle for existence, or just how cruel the selection of the fittest really is. Most Americans live similar lives of luxury. As a result, we don't realize that staying alive (let alone reproducing) is damn hard work. And this leads us to dramatically underestimate the creative powers of natural selection. Most of us think it's absurd that a simple algorithmic process could create an orchid, or a human brain, or hundreds of thousands of beetle species, in "just" a few hundred million years. Thus, we invoke God. But perhaps the ingenuity of evolution appears less absurd from the perspective of the male emperor penguin, who is shivering in a -90 degree blizzard right now.
(Photo: Khaled Desouki/AFP/Getty.)
One Dem They Didn't Invite
12 Jul 2007 01:10 pm
Mike Gravel is pissed at the Human Rights Campaign. He supports gay equality more clearly than any of the top three Democratic candidates, and yet he wasn't invited. Gravel doesn't seem to understand what motivates HRC. If you haven't got any money, they're uninterested.
Great Moments In Architecture, Ctd
12 Jul 2007 12:43 pm
A runner-up: Smaralind in Iceland. And another. And another.
