But the undeniable Quote of the Year...

... had to come from the Canadian prime minister, Stephen Harper, in explaining why he met the Dalai Lama in his office despite Chinese pressure for heads of state to shun him:

"I don't know why I would sneak off to a hotel room just to meet the Dalai Lama. You know, he's not a call girl."

As I say, he's a respected international spiritual leader."

I'm a big admirer of the Dalai Lama and mean no disrespect, either, but this makes me laugh very hard every time I hear it. And we thought our president had a way with words.

On that note, happy holidays, everyone!

Ron Paul from "Meet the Press" today: More Good and Bad

first, what I think was a really good answer, re: foreign policy, albeit not one, unfortunately, that a "mainstream" candidate could get away with:

RUSSERT: But it sounds like you think that the problem is Al Qaida -- the problem is the United States, not Al Qaida.

PAUL: No, it's both. It's both. Al Qaida becomes the -- it's sort of like, if you step in a snake pit and you get bit, you know, who caused the trouble, because you stepped in the snake pit or because snakes bite you?

So I think you have to understand both. But why produce the incentive for these violent, vicious thugs to want to come here and kill us?

RUSSERT: Do you think there's an ideological struggle, that Islamic fascists want to take over the world?

PAUL: Oh, I think, some, just like the West is wanting to do that all the time. Look at the way they look at us.

I mean, we're in 130 countries. We have 700 bases. How do you think they propose that to their people and say, "What does America want to do? Are they over here to be nice to us and teach us how to be good democrats?"

but here, defending his sponsorship of earmarks for his district, even though he follows his usual policy and doesn't vote for them, (although he knows everyone else will follow their usual policy and pick up his slack) I didn't find him as convincing:

RUSSERT: When I looked at your record, you talked about big government and how opposed you are to it, but you seem to have a different attitude about your own congressional district.

For example, "Congress decided to send billions of dollars to victims of Hurricane Katrina. Guess how Ron Paul voted.

Quote, "`Is bailing out people that choose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?' he asks."

And you said no. And yet, this: "Paul's current district, which includes Galveston and reaches into the Brazoria County, draws a substantial amount of federal flood insurance payments" -- for your own congressional district.

This is the Houston Chronicle: "Representative Ron Paul has long crusaded against a big central government. But he also represented a congressional district that's consistently among the top in Texas in its reliance on dollars from Washington. In the first nine months of the federal government's 2006 fiscal year, it received more than $4 billion."

And they report, The Wall Street Journal, 65 earmark-targeted projects, $400 million that you have put into congressional bills for your district, which leads us to the Congressional Quarterly. "The Earmark Dossier of Dr. No: There isn't much that Dr. Ron Paul thinks the federal government should do. Apparently, though, earmarks for his district are OK..."

PAUL: (LAUGHTER)

RUSSERT: Paul is the sponsor of no fewer than 10 earmarks in the water resources bill, all benefiting his district: The Gulf Intercoastal Waterway, $32 million; the sunken ship you want to be moved from Freeport Harbor; The Bayou Navigation Channel. They talk about $8 million for shrimp fishermen.

PAUL: You know...

RUSSERT: Why would you load up...

PAUL: You've got it completely wrong. I've never voted for an earmark in my life.

RUSSERT: No, but you put them in the bill.

PAUL: I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back. But it doesn't cut any spending to vote against an earmark. And the Congress has the responsibility to spend the money.

Why leave the money in the executive branch and let them spend the money?

RUSSERT: Well, that's like saying you voted for it before you voted against it.

PAUL: No -- come on, Tim. That has nothing to do with that.

RUSSERT: You put them in the bill and get the headlights back home...

PAUL: No, I make the request. They're not in the bills.

RUSSERT: ... and then you know it's going to pass Congress and so you don't refuse the money.

PAUL: Well, no, of course not. It's like taking a tax credit. If you have a tax credit -- I'm against the taxes, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people.

RUSSERT: But if you were true to your philosophy, you would say no pork spending in my district.

PAUL: No, no, that's not it. They steal our money. That's like saying that people shouldn't take Social Security money. I don't advocate that.

Bush Scandals: Hugh has made a list.

I don't know who Hugh is, but he's very meticulous; exhaustive, I would say.

Good for Hugh... "because there are just too many scandals to remember."

And someday those historians who are going to vindicate this administration may be interested in looking back, just for exhaustiveness's sake.

And A Very Christopher Hitchens Xmas...

... at Reason Magazine's party last night.

He claimed to my date and I (my date being the Reasonable one, don't worry; I'm still a damn liberal) that no one until us -- I got an adorable photo with him; at least he was adorable, more svelte and charming in person; I always smile like a goofball next to famous people -- mentioned the war. No one mention the war! I may have mentioned it once or twice, but I think I got away with it ;) I think he laughed at my joke. In any case, we ended up with his abandoned final glass of whiskey when no one else would take it. I have the hangover to prove it. A good night.

Another Way of Believing

Some might call this guy a hypocrite or a master of double-think; many more might call him a heretic; and some might just call him someone going to great lengths to avoid a career change.

I've often heard how seminaries produce more atheists than secular programs of study, but skeptical priests and ministers generally keep their lack of belief to themselves. This guy is just putting it out there.

But what intrigues me more are his reasons for believing his (what I would characterize as a humanist, interpersonal) idea of God is something worth discussing and celebrating, not a dirty little secret but something of psychological value. This has always been my personal belief as well, although I've never reached any conclusions as to how it might be worked out. So I'm curious about what this guy has to say, although I guess it will be awhile before his book is translated from the Dutch.
I think it's more than, as Richard Dawkins noted, just a matter of sentimentally preserving the cultural trappings of our Christian history, although I agree that there's nothing wrong with that, either.

Dutch pastor says he can believe in a 'God who doesn't exist.'

And then there's the "F" word.

OK, maybe I'm being too down on the GOP today. And I hate to sound like an apologist for the new Congress, because they've disappointed me, too, but I'm just kinda burned out with hearing what a failure it is, when it's basically operating with its hands tied behind its back.
Yes, they've been cowardly in many ways; the impeachment issue being one, and they've failed their promise to do something about Iraq. But whenever they try something proactive, whether it's to do with Iraq or anything else, it's blocked at every turn. For one, there's Bush treating his veto power like a new toy he hadn't realized could be so much fun until he tried it...
And does anyone remember when "filibuster" was such a dirty word that it made poor Senate Leader Bill Frist break down in teary press conferences, at the mere suggestion the Dems might possibly employ it?
Now it's such an implicit matter of course that "a Senate majority" is commonly defined as 60 votes, the number needed to block a filibuster, rather than 51.
How soon some forget.

Congressman Wexler's Sad Little Press Conference...

... about the quixotic dream of Cheney impeachment hearings.

It consisted of him, the guy who wrote a book on the subject, and maybe two or three other reporters.

But the guy who wrote a book on the subject made a good point on why this is the case.

Where was Kucinich, though? It's not like he's been invited to any debates lately.

DAVE LINDORFF: Let me follow that up. As you may know, I wrote the book, "The Case for Impeachment," with Barbara Olshansky.

REP. ROBERT WEXLER (D-FL): Yes.

LINDORFF: Since we've written it, we've been deluged with people asking us why isn't Congress acting; why is the media not -- you know, for instance, that book never got a single mainstream media review.

(LAUGHTER)

WEXLER: Is that so?

LINDORFF: Yes. And you know, people ask why is this; why is this?

And one of the things that people suggest -- and I wanted to bounce this off you -- is that both the leadership in Congress and the editors and reporters in the mainstream media have a fear that they are so complicit in the various issues that you've raised, you know, the spying, particularly the buildup to war, and even the outing of Valerie Plame, that -- in the case of the media -- that they don't want to see these things exposed the way they would be in impeachment hearings.

What are they putting in Joe Scarborough's "Morning Joe"?

He was acting awful loopy during this interview with John Edwards yesterday... Good thing Mika Brzezinski was there to nervously laugh off his line about Republicans. Maybe it was truth serum. If only Fox News used the same catering people.

BRZEZINSKI: What do you make of what's going on in the Republican Party, with the surge of Governor Huckabee?

And some analysts might say that the Republicans don't know what they want yet, but Huckabee seems to be sticking, at least for now, and is winning heavily in several states...

(RAUCOUS LAUGHTER FROM SCARBOROUGH)

BRZEZINSKI: What?

SCARBOROUGH: Republicans never know what they want.

BRZEZINSKI: Well...

SCARBOROUGH: Other than war. We want war.

BRZEZINSKI: Oh, (OFF-MIKE) Don't listen to him.

(LAUGHTER)

What do you make of Governor Huckabee's surge so far?

What do you think voters are responding to here?

EDWARDS: Oh, I have to be honest. I don't spend a lot of time following what's happening on the Republican side...

(LAUGHTER)

BRZEZINSKI: That's smart.

What else do Halliburton and Saudi Arabia have in common?

Justice for rape victims, apparently. In fact, Saudi Arabia is arguably more advanced here, in that they actually tried and sentenced the perpetrators.

ABC story on KBR/Halliburton's cover-up of the gang rape of a female employee in Iraq.

And since rescuing her -- from KBR, who had locked her in a room with no food or water! -- at the request of her congressman, the State Dept. hasn't done a hell of a lot, either, nor has Justice. Maybe they will now that it's on the news.

Quote du Jour: John Boehner

This proves once and for all that Republicans, at least those who've spent any time in Washington, either have no concept of irony, or less powers of recollection than that guy from Memento:

Republicans have been shut out of this process from the beginning. This process that they've employed of private negotiations amongst literally no more than a handful of people is troubling.

-- discussing the House energy bill in a press conference last Thursday.

Useful Timeline: Bill of Rights Under Bush

from MondoGlobo

Biden's take on Bush & the NIE

Biden's grasp of the situation seems pretty solid to me (not so much his grasp of sentence structure, but then Bush has set the bar pretty low in that regard. I've noted however, that Cheney speaks in perfectly grammatical, discrete sound bites, albeit out of the side of his mouth. Even that has failed to endear him to me, however.)

from Hardball with Chris Matthews this week:

MATTHEWS: Well, this propaganda war that's been fought, now, for years now -- their phrases like "weapons of mass destruction" that you and I never heard of growing up, "regime change," all the rest of it, "homeland," all the rest of the new language we've learned from this crowd that came in a few years ago -- around the late '90s, they started pushing this.

If their motive is not to fight weapons of mass destruction, which don't seem to materialize when they're supposed to in either Iraq or the Iranian case, what is the grand motive for war?

Why did we invade Iraq?

Why were we threatening World War III with Iran?

Why did this administration, Cheney and the president, keep pushing the war?

Why do they always want to fight or scare somebody?

What's it about if it's not weapons?

BIDEN: Let me tell you what I think it's about. I can't prove it. I think it's about our ability to try to dominate that region of the world and control oil.

I don't think we went to war because of oil, but I think there was an absolute belief -- the only thing I can fit together with Cheney and his gang is that they went to war -- they're smarter than they are acting. They're smarter than they are acting.

What they do -- they went to war in the hope that they would be able to do two things; one, have a government that sat on a whole bunch of oil, that still exists in the world...

MATTHEWS: Right.

BIDEN: ... that would be indebted to us.

MATTHEWS: Two, have permanent military bases in Iraq to dominate that part of the world, to be able to control oil, not to go steal it for American oil companies but be able to control the pricing, control the access of it -- a very Machiavellian view.

There's nothing idealistic about Cheney. I don't know what President Bush thinks, but I think he's bought, hook, line, and sinker, the Cheney rationale that the only way for us to be able to be dominant in the 21st century is to use our overwhelming power, in the face of the moral disapprobation of the rest of the world, to threaten the rest of the world, and that's how we'd avoid war in the future.

I think these guys are irresponsible. But the thing that angers me the most -- and it angers me, Chris -- is how incomprehensible it is for anyone to think that the president did not know that his intelligence agencies didn't believe what he was saying.

I believe that's why these guys came out with, now, 16 American intelligence agencies uniting, saying, I'm not going to wear the jacket again on this one.

Bush Quote du Jour: "I did it once; I'll do it again."

This enigmatic quote was apparently passed, real-time, to National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley during Hadley's White House briefing this afternoon via -- who knows? -- mobile texting, a BlackBerry, cranial implants? Just kidding. It was probably a BlackBerry.
The Huffington Post, having missed the audio, understandably attributed it to Mr. Cheney:

QUESTION: Second question. When did the Vice President get briefed on this? Because he was warning of serious consequences just last month, too.

HADLEY: I've just got a note from him -- I did it once, I'll do it again.

But they printed a correction on being told that it was actually referring to the president's reaction, probably to the line by Hadley, found in this transcript from the News & Observer, that was followed by a question about the vice president which Hadley apparently wasn't paying attention to, as he was busy checking out the prez's text:

HADLEY: So again, as the President says many times, we're asking people to do hard things. We're asking people to put pressure on Iran, and it has consequences for their diplomacy, it has consequences for their companies doing business with Iran. People don't like to do that. So I'm sure some people will try and use this as an excuse or a pretext for flagging on the effort.

Our argument is, actually, it should be just the reverse, because we need to keep the halting of the nuclear weapons program in place; we need to achieve the suspension of the enrichment program; and the only way -- what this NIE says is that the best path to do that is to continue what we've been doing, which is diplomatic isolation, U.N. sanctions and other financial pressure, plus the option for negotiations.

QUESTION: Second question. When did the Vice President get briefed on this? Because he was warning of serious consequences just last month, too.

And of course, the occasion of Hadley's briefing was to react to the newly released NIE that reveals Iran halted their nuclear weapons program in 2003.

I wonder if that halting was possibly due to the very early successes in the Iraq war, such as the removal of Saddam, something they didn't want to see repeated in Iran. If we keep having all this "success" over there that we've been having lately, they might just change their minds again.

Ron Paul: Good News and Bad News.

First the good news: His truly "maverick" (makes John McCain look darn establishment) campaign is now outraising Giuliani (already passed Romney.) But somehow his name will probably continue to be mentioned only in passing in most of the press coverage. And when it comes down to it, the ballots may back up the mainstream news outlets' decision to snub the Internet's favorite son. Still, it would be nice to find out what would have happened if Paul had gotten truly fair and balanced coverage from the outset.

Now, the bad news. Paul doesn't merely tolerate the pro-life vision, harbor a private revulsion to abortion based on his own personal faith or career in obstetrics, or object on principle to federal funding (in line with his general hardline stance against federal funding.)
He sponsored this bill, defining all fertilized zygotes as "persons" under the law. And this proactive step to define a key term in the abortion debate seems all the more glaring to me because of his laissez-faire attitude toward government putting its inflated two cents in.
This seems to be where Paul and many of his Libertarian supporters part ways -- no huge surprise, since he is, after all, a Republican congressman running for the Republican nomination.

Writer's Strike Update P.3: A good summary...

... of why mediocrity abounds in Hollywood despite talented writers, and what those writers can do about it (hold onto their copyrights for dear life, forego those Faustian "up-front fees.")

Thanks a lot, Sarah Khawad...

... secretary at Unity High School in Khartoum, obviously no fan of teddy bears or at least one of her colleagues. Now you have your 15 minutes of international fame.
People are silly.
Free the teddy bear lady! In the name of sanity.

Cool Thing of the Day: FreeRice.com

It's a fun, addictive little word game that improves your vocabulary, and for every word you get right, 20 grains of rice are donated through the United Nations to help end world hunger.

It's simple. It's tangible. If people are going to slack at their desks, (and people always will, as long as there are desks at which to slack) it may as well be for a good cause.

Check it out.

Coalition of the Willing: Who's Left

from the Boston Globe

If any good comes of this...

... nearly unbelievable case of injustice in Saudi Arabia, it's an awakening of the rest of the world, and indeed, Saudi Arabia itself, which is actually engaging in debate on the issue, to both the haphazard state of the justice system in that country and the hopeless state of women, whose lives are limited in every aspect from the cradle to the grave.

Although, of course, the State Department doesn't have much to say on the issue, beyond "astonishment." But that's no huge surprise.

Unhappy Holiday, America

Americans enter holidays in dark mood: Reuters poll

I knew our friend Scott McClellan was pissed...

... when he was asked to step down, as everyone knew, because of the Plame incident, but didn't think he'd speak out so soon...
Remember when he was on the Daily Show (ah yes, remember the Daily Show ;) and basically said he didn't know what the **** his considerably-closer-to-retirement boss was talking about when he gave Scott a parting line about how, one day, they'd sit on a porch somewhere as old men together and laugh about these crazy times.
Yeah, he's pissed, and if he was truly as ignorant as he claims, then well he should be.

Writer's Strike Update

Week Two

Related:
Speaking of writers...
Almost the Daily Show...

The Gen X Demographic: Why are we so cynical?

The naivete of the Baby Boomers' 60s leaves a bad taste in our mouths. It seems they gave everything an honest try, and failed.
We were born in the 70s, at the pinnacle of decadence, when everything was in decline.
Then we saw America born-again in the Reagan '80s. We (the lucky ones) were too young to know that renaissance was built on lies, staged by cynics with a handsome frontman saying all the right things.
In the early 90s, at the start of the first Iraq war, it looked like we might get our own movement together. We didn't. I guess we just didn't have the heart for it. We were too clever, and knew too much, although most of it was secondhand. We let our parents blame the media for that.
Things were looking up in the Clinton era, and a lot of us got on the prosperity bandwagon, hoping all our country's foibles would just work themselves out, one dotcom success story and trade agreement at a time. Some of us stayed by the sidelines, but to listen to us, there wasn't much difference anymore, between the sell-outs and the rest of us, in contrast with the Boomers.
Oh, what went wrong with us?
We were such a beautiful baby. Look at those Gerber commercials.
And who will set us straight?
In 2008?
Stay tuned.

***

Pop Culture Brats: The Songs of our Lives

"Good Times" by Chic, 1979

Boys will be boys, better let them have their toys.
Girls will be girls, cute pony tails and curls.
Must put an end to this stress and strife.
I think I want to live the sporting life.

"The End of the Innocence" by Don Henley, 1989

Armchair warriors often fail
And we've been poisoned by these fairy tales.

"Smells Like Teen Spirit" by Nirvana, 1991

With the lights out, it's less dangerous.
Here we are now, entertain us.

"The Impression That I Get" by The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, 1997

I've never had to knock on wood
And I'm glad I haven't yet
Because I'm sure it isn't good.

"Waiting on the World to Change" by John Mayer, 2006

It's not that we don't care.
We just know the fight ain't fair.

Almost the Daily Show...

... for those like myself who need a fix before 2008 (an early prediction for when the strike will end.)

Not the Daily Show, With Some Writer

The best assessment of Thursday's Democratic debate...

... I think, came from conservative columnist David Brooks, on Friday's NewsHour.

... I always think almost -- and especially last night -- that Biden, Dodd and Richardson won the debate. I just think, if you didn't know anything about these people, you saw those three, you'd say they're pretty qualified to be president. [or vice president.]

Yep, Harry, you've got to watch that guy...

... in the White House. He's a sneaky one.

Reid shuts down Bush recess appointments during Thanksgiving.

With nothing to veto and no midnight appointments to make, I guess he'll have to content himself with pardoning turkeys over the congressional break (yes, I did mean that literally... he's not much for the pardoning of the featherless.)

Busted: Highlight from Wednesday's hearing...

... of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, on assessing whistleblower allegations against the State Department Inspector General (Howard Krongard):

REP. DIANE WATSON (D-CA): If your brother [Alvin "Buzzy" Krongard] is currently at the hotel in Williamsburg, Virginia, sitting on that [Blackwater advisory] board, would you repeat that you would recuse yourself?

KRONGARD: Immediately.

WATSON: OK. Then maybe you want to do it today...

KRONGARD: Recuse myself from anything having to do with Blackwater, yes. I mean, I wouldn't step down.

WATSON: Blackwater, yes, that's what I'm referring to. He's sitting on the Blackwater -- I understand he's in the hotel. He's checked in the hotel. You might want to follow up on that.

KRONGARD: Well, if he's -- if he's there for that meeting, as a member of that committee, he may be there to tell them he's not joining. I don't know.

WATSON: OK, now, remmeber you're on the record.

KRONGARD: Yes, sir -- I mean, yes, ma'am.

WATSON: OK, and you know what today's date is?

KRONGARD: Yes.

WATSON: OK. Will you recuse yourself from any inquiries, audits, or investigations your office conducts regarding Blackwater?

KRONGARD: Absolutely.

WATSON: OK. We have it on the record. Now...

Krongard clears things up later in the hearing, after a little phone call. Oops.

Speaking of writers...

... I have mixed feelings about the ongoing television writer's strike.
I'm rooting for them, but I miss my Daily Show/Colbert Report hour. Oh well...

Photos: Writer's Strike Grows Stronger

Norman Mailer...

... tough guy, Luddite, and consummate writer, 1923-2007, RIP.

Quote du Jour: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)

from Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Committee vote on the Mukasey nomination (he was approved, of course, and his nomination sent up to the full Senate. I can understand why many in the committee voted for him, in the interest of the Justice Department and its dire straits, and in the interest of future precedent -- since not every nomination can be all-out war, and this nominee was recommended by anti-Gonzales bulldog Chuck Schumer, after all, who had second thoughts, post-hearing, before coming back around. However, I am also heartened to hear opinions like this one, and wish more in the committee had expressed them -- and backed them up with a vote.)

WHITEHOUSE: The reason that I voted against Judge Mukasey is that I feel that the discussion about torture that we have had has provided the opportunity for this country to have a moment of clarity about what should be a simple and clear proposition. And I'm afraid that by allowing this nomination to proceed, we will lose that moment of clarity.

I don't think we can look to this administration to provide that moral clarity to the world.

Unfortunately, it is my belief that when Vice President Cheney, for instance, gets on the television and tells the world that we do not torture, around the world, far too many people believe not only that we torture, but that we lie.

And so, Congress has the chance to provide that moment of moral clarity that I think is important.

No one, I doubt, feels the harm to the Department of Justice more than I do. I served as a United States attorney and the calling that that department represents is very, very, very important to me, to this country, to the values that we share.

So, I am very deeply torn to have voted against this nominee.

But I do see a nation under the Bush administration that is on a slow and sickening slide from the city on a hill that earlier presidents talked about.

We have compromised our values. We have disregarded our Constitution. We have degraded our standing in the world. And people died for this stuff.

So, in some respects, it is a sacrifice to the Department of Justice. And that pains me and grieves me.

But in pursuit of that moment of clarity that can be a signal to the rest of the world that the fires of our values still burn alive in American hearts, I have voted against this candidate.

Pakistan: Who Saw This Coming?

Just about everyone but the White House and the State Department, it looks like.

No, that's not fair... of course they saw it coming; they just didn't really have the time to spend on the fact that

• one of the world's eight nuclear powers,
• next door to India, a fellow nuclear power who's contributing greatly to the fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan, thus pissing off those in Pakistan who support the Taliban,
  
• ruled by a general who seized power in a coup,
• (and he's the good guy, if you don't count exiled former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who can't even enter the country without an attempt on her life)
• a good proportion of whose people support the Taliban and view Osama bin Laden as a hero while burning George Bush in effigy (sure, he's not my favorite person, either, but he ranks a lot higher on my list than Osama... not saying much, I know)
• who most likely are sheltering bin Laden, if he's still alive, as well as other top Al Qaida leadership, not because Musharraf wants to, but because he can't control entire regions of his country,
• which recently have come to include his own capital.

So now Musharraf's declared martial law, and speculation is that it has more to do with an upcoming supreme court decision that would have prohibited him from being re-elected in January, than with any other of the overwhelming problems facing his country.

So far, all we've had is a "statement" from our secretary of state, the same person who threw around the term "mushroom cloud" back when it was oh-so-safely hypothetical...

Quote du Jour: Tony Blair on his hopes of personal redemption...

... and a salvaging of his legacy...
... or, more precisely, a peace deal between Olmert and Abbas.

from "Late Edition" this morning.

And so, for all sorts of reasons, strategic, tactical, immediate, long-term, we've got to just make this work. And however difficult it is for the leaders, in a way, this is the toughest option at one level for them but also the surest way to show people the leadership they want to have shown.

... or maybe it's Fred Phelps He's not so fond of...

He certainly wouldn't be alone in the sentiment.

Invading soldiers' funerals really pushes the boundary between one person's freedom and another's, under the law.
Personally, I'm glad the grieving father's right to grieve in peace was acknowledged by the jury before the right of a family of deranged hatemongers to crash his son's funeral.

Burma: Maybe it's not over yet...

But if there's going to be any hope, these guys are going to need a little bit of support.
So where are all the Superpower friends of democracy and freedom now?

Related: U.S. Policy on Burma: A Point for Semantics; Now What?

Maybe I spoke too soon...

... about giving FEMA the benefit of the doubt. I hadn't realized that Tuesday's "news conference," at which Deputy Administrator Harvey Johnson talked about lessons learned from Katrina being applied to the wildfire response, was held with FEMA staffers pretending to be reporters, since none of the real reporters could make the briefing that was held with only 15 minutes prior notice.

Is it sympathy for the devil to just feel sorry for these guys?

I mean, the guy in that photo is no Dana Perino. Poor dude; he obviously never got fashion advice from Naomi Wolf on how to pick a power suit. Maybe he should just stay out the press conference business, especially the deciding-whether-to-hold-one-even-if-no-one's-there part.

Paulison spoke confidently of the response itself in an interview with NPR.

As long as they do their job, I guess that's what counts. But then I'm only a blogger with a snarky (and sometimes overly generous) opinion. Hell hath no fury like a press corps implied to be irrelevant. We're going to be hearing about this one for awhile.

And who else is doing a heckuva job?

No, I'm not going to trash FEMA again until their (earnest, at least) new leadership under David Paulison proves or disproves itself in response to the California wildfires.

This year's award has got to go to First Kuwaiti, for turning the (grandiose and ill-conceived, to begin with) U.S. embassy in Iraq into arguably the most disastrous construction project in the Mesopotamian region since the Tower of Babel. And yet we just awarded them another three contracts.

Related: Filipino "contractors" in Iraq: OK, this is bad...

Speaking of The Colbert Report, on Thursday's show...

... Stephen had Craig Newmark, founder of craigslist, as a guest, and Newmark (or let's just call him Craig) mentioned a really cool thing: DonorsChoose.org, which allows donors to choose the precise amount of their donation to students and classrooms in need, as well as the specific project they would like to fund.

Politico on Stephen Colbert's Alleged "Favorite Son" Bid

Ah, Politico, whether his run is for real or not, you're just playing into his hands by taking it so seriously with this lengthy analysis of the legal implications of the bid. You just want him to mention your article on his next show, don't you?
He may be fumbling giddily about on-air, drunken with the sheer bravado of it all, (he being the character rather than the "real" Stephen Cole-burt, of course) but I'm sure he has plenty of "people" around him who know what's what, and will advise him not to push it farther than will sell books and entertain his minions.
(Yes, there's already a copy sitting on our living room table, so I guess I'm one of said minions. And he should feel free to mention this post on his next show, too ;)

Nobel Watch Update: Yep, he did.

Not a big surprise, but good news, nonetheless, from an earth-based perspective (hard to imagine an alternative perspective, but some factions may claim one...)
Maybe he'll run and maybe he won't. Polls show him with a much better chance to beat Giuliani than Hillary. I'll be honest. I'd like to see a woman (not just any woman; I'm not talking Elizabeth Dole or Condi Rice) but a moderate-to-liberal woman in the White House, whether as veep or in the top spot. Reservations notwithstanding, (in a nutshell, the hawkish persona she's cultivated for this campaign) I think Hillary would do a fine job at the top. But I wouldn't mind seeing another Clinton/Gore / Gore/Clinton ticket, and I could get behind Gore/Obama or Gore/Edwards as well.
But regardless of that omnipresent election year question, and regardless of the precise details on what's happening environmentally, (that's what Gore's co-recipients, the IPCC, are trying to find out) the more attention paid to the planet on which we depend for our survival, (barring that expedition to Mars) the better. And this can't hurt.

Related: Nobel Watch: Will he get it? Will he get it?

A Chessman's Life

I think I've seen this guy before, playing a game in "the circle" down in D.C.

Homeless man is chess king of Washington

But I hadn't realized he was a tournament champion and aspiring master (the highest title in American chess.)
If he could just beat the bottle the way he beats his challengers... but nothing's as easy as black and white...
Wishing him luck, though.

Nobel Watch: Will he get it? Will he get it?

Yes, with all that's going on in the world, sometimes it's still fun to engage in a little frivolous speculation... and some Democrats are acting a bit like kids waiting for Christmas morning.
A) Will Al Gore receive the soon-to-be-announced Nobel Peace Prize?
B) If so, will it prompt him, as some diehard Gore fans are hoping, to ride the momentum into the race?

Warning to English Verbs: You Will Be Regularized

... according to this study by Harvard mathematicians on the evolution of the English language over time.
"Wed" is next on their prediction list of irregular verbs that will take the dominant "-ed" ending for its past tense form.

What does a U.S. security contractor have to do to get kicked out of Iraq?

Apparently engaging in manslaughter (at the least) and conspiring to cover it up isn't quite enough to put you on the bench for more than two months.

The information that the Blackwater employee who was involved in the Christmas party "incident" was back to work in February for a DOD contractor in Kuwait, after being quietly flown home by Blackwater, in complicity with the State Department, was tactfully not submitted to the House oversight committee in time for last week's hearing, although the meager payoff to the victim's family was disclosed. And he's since been sighted back in the Green Zone in Iraq.

And apparently the Army didn't know any more than DOD did, according to Chairman Waxman's letter:

The report also stated that in April 2007, the U.S. Army tried to call Mr. Moonen, a veteran of the 82nd Airborne Division, back to active duty, but cancelled the request upon learning that he was already overseas.

But I'm sure that even if these facts were mentioned, Ranking Member Davis and Reps. Mica and Westmoreland would still spend most of their questioning minutes complaining about what a tragic waste of time the hearing was and how the good folks at Blackwater and the State Department are just trying to do their jobs and don't deserve all this pointless harassment from those meanies on the other side of the aisle.

Speaking of off-the-radar countries...

This blog by Sokwanele Civic Action Support Group is documenting the catastrophic economic collapse within Zimbabwe.

This is Zimbabwe

Sokwanele is local slang for "enough is enough."

U.S. Policy on Burma: A Point for Semantics; Now What?

The brutally repressive regime of the country referred to in English by the name Myanmar (its name in the Burmese language had never changed, according to the notes on etymology in the Wikipedia article) is still known as Burma (from Bama or Bamar) by the U.S., Canada, U.K., Ireland, and Australia. And for good reason, I think.
Colonial history aside, the name change was instituted by an illegitimate government that has been holding the democratically elected leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, under house arrest indefinitely.
The U.N. uses the name Myanmar.

But regardless of what you call it, a tragedy is unfolding there, while once again the world stands by and looks on sadly, as if there's nothing it can possibly do. Where's the sense of urgency that always seems (now that "radical Islamic regimes" and their oil have replaced Russia and the Red Scare as Bogeyman #1 on our radar) to surround crises in countries a bit to the west of Southeast Asia, a bit to the north of Africa?

Buddhist monks are being rounded up by the thousands, with possibly 200 or more protesters killed.

This assessment by a Swedish diplomat is heartbreaking in its sense of hopelessness for the country's future:

Liselotte Agerlid, who is now in Thailand, said that the Burmese people now face possibly decades of repression. "The Burma revolt is over," she added.

"The military regime won and a new generation has been violently repressed and violently denied democracy. The people in the street were young people, monks and civilians who were not participating during the 1988 revolt.

"Now the military has cracked down the revolt, and the result may very well be that the regime will enjoy another 20 years of silence, ruling by fear."

So that's it? It's "over?" Just like with Tiananmen Square, only, without economic prosperity, even less hope?

What We've Been Missing: the Classics in Color

Don't get excited, Ted Turner. I'm talking about classical sculpture and architecture, which has always seemed more abstract and universal because it lacked color (color: how garish! how baroque!)
But as scholars have known for a while but kept mostly to themselves, color was a big part of classical art, meaning that Renaissance sculpture and the later neoclassical style was actually quite innovative; it just thought it was being entirely derivative.
The true ancient style was dripping in color, that unfortunately washed away in time.
There's an exhibit right now at the Sackler Museum at Harvard, but I hope more reproductions start popping up in other places, too, so we can all witness the ancient world in color.

Here's some background from a German archeology site.

Quote du Jour: John Edwards/ Arcade Fire

So that's what that song that's hopelessly stuck in my head is about...

The black mirror knows no reflection
It knows not pride or vanity
It cares not about your dreams
It cares not for your pyramid schemes

Maybe...

I read an article in a British newspaper a couple weeks ago. It said, based on some work being done by American scientists -- suggested that the polar ice cap will disappear in 23 years, unless we change our behavior.

And once it's gone, it is not coming back. And this is -- you know, I won't claim to be a scientific expert, but I'm smart enough to figure out that a polar ice cap reflects the sun's heat. And when that ice cap is gone, the black, dark ocean is going to absorb the sun's heat. And it is not healthy for America.

from Edwards' MySpace/MTV presidential candidate forum last night

MTV, what have you done to me?
Save my soul, set me free!
Set me free! What have you done to me?
I can't breathe! I can't see!
World War III, when are you coming for me?
Been kicking up sparks, we set the flames free
The windows are locked now, so what'll it be?
A house on fire or a rising sea?

Why is the night so still?
Why did I take the pill?
Because I don't wanna see it at my windowsill

http://www.arcadefire.net/lyrics/neon/

No Second Thoughts: Bush Quote du Jour

from today's White House briefing with recently anointed new spokesperson Dana Perino:

QUESTION: Did it strike the president that 18 Republican senators voted for this bill? Did that make him have any second thoughts about his plan to veto?

PERINO: The president does not have second thoughts.

I like this new spokesperson already.

Well, it's hard to pick on a woman in a pink suit.

Although I've always admired that shade of salmon, from a purely aesthetic standpoint, I don't think the pinker and gigglier Hillary is as endearing as the Hillary we all know and... respect... would be, (in my dream scenario) standing in a boring suit and talking about how maybe getting into Iraq wasn't such a great idea and getting into Iran would be even more not-so-hilariously insane.

From the WP on the debate last night.

And by the way...

While Iran's president is still on our turf, now the Senate is trying to hand Bush another ambiguously worded authorization for war?

I'm going to pretend I didn't notice the glaring omission of a certain junior senator from New York (whom I was almost ready to consider picking as a tentative frontrunner for my very own not-so-coveted primary vote) in the list of senators who voted against the Lieberman-Kyl amendment.
At least, happily, the most offending two paragraphs were removed from the amendment, the ones which essentially called (admittedly with all the force of a "Sense of the Senate" resolution) for war at any moment when the president happens to be feeling especially scrappy, and a sort of qualifying amendment was added at the end, but why did such an overwhelming number of Democrats feel compelled to vote for it at all? Have the neocons perfected their voodoo technology, or have the Dems learned nothing from these ever-present polls, their (now so distant-seeming) victorious election, etc.? Are they just trying to make Hagel and Lugar look especially heroic?
The American people do not want any more wars. We don't even want the one we've got.
Can't they hear us anymore, or have they just tuned us out?

Here's the speech by Jim Webb that I had just assumed was going to be more influential than whatever mind-altering drugs ended up in all but 22 of the Senate water pitchers.

And now let's welcome our very special guest, "a petty and cruel dictator."

I've always been a fan of dwelling comfortably with ambiguity, but Columbia University's president seemed to take it to an extreme today by inviting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and then discussing him in the introduction pretty much like he wasn't in the room (he had a translator, you know.)

Given the quality of Ahmadinejad's public discourse thus far, just not inviting him would have been a pretty decent decision.

He did offer some historical perspectives that were of merit, like pointing out the hypocrisy of the U.S. with regard to the nuclear issue (to applause) and our tendency to keep memories of the hostage crisis alive while burying those of our complicity in several decades' worth of intervention in Iran, from coups to Saddam's eight-year war against them.

However -- and effusive, flowery language aside -- he also said a bunch of stuff that was frankly unbelievable (painting his nation as a gentle, peace-craving haven of democracy where the press is entirely free, Jews are beloved, and women enjoy dizzy heights of freedom) and some stuff that was just plain nutty, which inevitably casts a shadow of discredit on the entire speech, even the snippets which may have contributed in some small way to a dialog. He and his Western Hemisphere counterpart Chavez are pretty good at doing that.

The excerpt below is probably the nuttiest part (and no, Mr. President, they weren't laughing with you for your remark about living in a straights-only zone. You have your 10 percent non-straights like everyone else, unless you've executed them all out of existence, which is the question you dodged and haven't yet answered. And I'm not sure all of the women in your country consider being "exempt from many responsibilities" as a sign of respect. We tried that argument in the West during the Victorian days, and it didn't quite hold up.)

AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country.

(LAUGHTER)

We don't have that in our country.

(AUDIENCE BOOING)

AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it.

(LAUGHTER)

But, as for women, maybe you think that being a woman is a crime. It's not a crime to be a woman.

Women are the best creatures created by God. They represent the kindness, the beauty that God instills in them. Women are respected in Iran. In Iran, every family who is given a girl is given -- in every Iranian family who has a girl, they are 10 times happier than having a son. Women are respected more than men are.

They are exempt from many responsibilities. Many of the legal responsibilities rest on the shoulders of men in our society because of the respect, culturally given, to women, to the future mothers.

Happy Birthday, Blog.

Here's a belated present (I wish it was surprising that I'm late for my own blog's birthday) of a new look.
At one year old yesterday, you've nearly come of age in blog years. I'm so proud. Next year I'll take the time to make you an original template, blog, I promise.

Letter to a Young Patriot

Naomi Wolf was on The Colbert Report last night to discuss her new book The End of America: A Letter of Warning To A Young Patriot, and naturally had trouble getting a word in edgewise with her gracious host, but this Guardian article details her listing of the 10 steps democracies take on the path to fascism. Some of the later stages have only been lightly broached, but we have a pretty good handle on the first three or four, which is reason for caution, I think.
(And now I'm going to swallow my feminism for a moment and note that the author of the '92 bestseller The Beauty Myth, a big phenom during my college grrl days -- and Gore campaign styling consultant -- is looking pretty fabulous these days ;)

Belgium is not for sale...

... not any more, at least. (And I love the way the PR guy from eBay Belgium phrased it: "We decided to take [the ad] down, just to avoid confusion.")

This is the biggest headline I've seen involving Belgium since I left Belgium two weeks ago (and pretty much at any time in my life before traveling there as well.)

But seriously, folks, this is a great country in the heart of Europe with a history that's central to the story of Europe. It would be a darn shame to see it split into little sub-kingdoms and Brussels made into a no man's land like D.C., even if it would be so wealthy that no one actually living in city limits would probably care (quite unlike D.C.)

Quote du Jour: ACLU Director Anthony Romero

"Sen. Craig has not always been a great friend of civil liberties, but you shouldn't have to endorse the civil liberties of others to keep your own," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero, alluding to Craig's history of voting against gay rights.

The ACLU, yet again proving it can be the bigger person, is supporting Craig by making a claim that his "bathroom bust" was unconstitutional.

I think their opinion is quite reasonable, and that a bit of light-hearted schadenfreude over the senator's shameful hypocrisy is probably preferable to inviting precedent for cops to spend their time hanging around airport bathroom stalls watching for foot signals.

It would be more satisfying, though, if the senator would just take this opportunity to cop to said hypocrisy, instead of holding onto his thoroughly transparent cover story and the self-hating bigotry that's already translated into discriminatory legislative positions.

Mother Teresa letters/ Nonbelievers coming out of the closet

These somewhat surprising letters should be a catalyst for thoughtful discussion. I say "should be" because they will probably instead prompt merely the drawing of the usual battle lines.

E.g. this "Hardball" debate (well, what do you expect? It's "Hardball") between Christopher Hitchens, author of an unsympathetic book on Mother Teresa (in this clip, he seems to have acquired a bit of sympathy for her as a pawn in the game, although that could simply be a rhetorical tool) and Father Bill "You wanna take this outside?" Donohue, who, in this exchange, makes Hitchens (whom I grudgingly admire but have trouble forgiving for his pro-Iraq war stance) look relatively equanimitous.

Here's the book which compiled the letters discussed in the Time article:
Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Brian Kolodiejchuk

*

And on a loosely related note, this article in the Washington Post notes the rise of the nonbelievers' movement since 9/11.

Update on Burned Iraqi Boy

Yes, the title of this CNN article is a bit giddy, but if there's something special about America, it's not what's going on in DC; it's the 12,000 CNN readers who contributed to the fund to help this boy, and the doctor who agreed to treat him for free.
Maybe if our policymakers consulted those 12,000 people more often, or gave a damn what they thought, we'd all be better off.

Related: Another heartbreaking story from Iraq...

AQSL, the terrorist formerly known as bin Laden...

... or, "What's in an acronym?"

First time I've heard that one.

from one of Tuesday's Senate hearings with Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker:

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Why do you think bin Laden is so worried about the outcome in Iraq?

AMBASSADOR CROCKER: Well, I think -- again, as I mentioned earlier, it has been regarded by Al Qaida senior leadership, AQSL, as the central front. They are trying to give us a bloody nose, which would be an enormous shot of adrenaline in the arm of international jihadists.

Bin Laden tape forged?

This blogger thinks so, for technical reasons.

Update on the Troy Davis case

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that they are willing to hear Troy Davis' appeal to present new evidence, but he remains on death row.

Related: Another reason why the death penalty sucks.

Back to Work...

... for me and for the good old 110th Congress.

I had a great vacation and am feeling jetlagged but revived in spirit. I hope the same is true for the legislative branch, and that they'll get down to accomplishing something tangible, especially on Iraq.

Harry Reid had the following to say in a press conference today, where he seems to take a stand against the kind of empty political compromise that gives moderation a bad name. Let's hope it holds true in the coming weeks.

We're going to take this matter up the week of September 17. The one thing that we're trying to do is to give the Republicans the ability to keep their word.

They said, in September, there would be a change of course. We're willing to go halfway with them, as long as everyone understands that we're not going to do something that's cosmetic in nature.

To say that a Democrat and a Republican get together and have a piece of legislation that we can all vote for and it doesn't accomplish anything -- I will do everything I can to stir up enough votes to stop that from passing.

I want some legislation that will change what's going on in Iraq, for the reasons I've already outlined.

This is a war that's going to soon be in its sixth year -- think about that -- costing this country -- we're close to three-quarters of a trillion dollars.

I think enough's enough.

Gone Fishing

Well, gone, anyway, for a couple of weeks. And not a minute too soon. I'm having one of those days where it started out cloudy; now it's sunny; but it still feels cloudy.
See you in September.

Another heartbreaking story from Iraq...

... maybe the saddest I've heard:

Five-year-old-boy set on fire.

How can anyone justify to themselves an act like that, obliterating a young child's capacity and reasons to smile?

I have to hope an offer of medical aid will be made by some group or individual with the means to do so.

Poems from Guantanamo

This small book, edited by Marc Falkoff, a lawyer for 17 of the detainees, is subtitled "The Detainees Speak."
But Dan Chiasson from the NYT Sunday Book Review notes that it might be better titled "The Detainees Do Not Speak" or "The Detainees Are Not Allowed to Speak," due to the Pentagon's heavy vetting of the edition.
Still, given the human drive for expression, and the circumstances under which these were written, (one of them, Falkoff says, carved into a Styrofoam cup when pen and paper were banned, one of them, a despondent claim of innocence by a prisoner who has been in solitary confinement for nearly four years and tried to kill himself 12 times) it seems worth looking at.

Women's Options: Another Casualty of the War in Iraq

This CNN story about women resorting to prostitution when low-paid cleaning work is not enough to feed their children is generating a lot of interest, hopefully enough to make a difference among those in Iraq (and perhaps in Washington) with the power to alleviate the situation, as well as with the average CNN viewer.

But for the average CNN viewer, Arwa Damon provided a link to an organization that is accepting donations to help women in this situation, as well as women in Kurdistan who have been facing a horrific number of "honor killings."

I have to admit that I can't even comprehend what could bring someone to kill an immediate family member for an (often unsubstantiated) claim of dishonor. I can't imagine a father killing his own daughter for any reason at all besides insanity, although it happens at times, in all parts of the world. But for it to be considered routine is beyond what I can fathom.

The president of the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq, Yanar Mohammed, received the Eleanor Roosevelt Global Women’s Rights award this year. I try to donate something each year to one or two organizations, and I can't think of a better one than this.

In the meantime, it's free to sign the petition.

Related: Are these supposed to be the good guys?

The Rise and Fall

Listening to the rehash of the Rove resignation on The NewsHour, Charlie Rose, etc., last night and reading articles like this one in The Washington Post, I was just pondering the "might have been" for the Republican plans of a permanent majority were it not for A) Iraq, B) Katrina, and C) the campaign-driven decision to abandon "compassionate conservatism" for bringing out the base.
Compassionate conservatism was a great buzzword, and it got people excited in 2000 (even if not quite excited enough to elect GWB in the popular vote.) And after 9/11, Bush the Younger had won over even those who had considered him a laughingstock, at least temporarily.
However, none of those three events came from the "outside."
Iraq was the definition of pre-emptive.
The unfunded levees; the bureaucratic mishandling and seeming apathy from the White House toward Katrina were rooted in misplaced trust and serious disorganization in the ill-conceived Department of Homeland Security and in a growing isolation of those at the top, and an insulation of the president from anything seemingly unpleasant that was going on "out there" in the country.
And the choice to humor the base at all costs was a miscalculation that proved Rove's undoing, and an ironic one, since it's been pointed out that, back in Texas, the Religious Right was not in the W. camp. The battles within the GOP on immigration and the Harriet Miers disaster are reminders that there's still a bit of the Elder (moderate) Bush in the son, as well as the Texas pragmatist who once made his repuation on knowing how to compromise with Democrats.
When you ask what went wrong, the answer seems to simply be that Rove just took it all too far, and stopped listening to anyone, thinking he could somehow pull it back together in the end. It came to be just the two of them, and now they're going down together.
If things were otherwise, would the Democrats have simply faded away, little by little? It's very possible; that's how good the Rove machine was when it was good. If it hadn't self-imploded, even the lean and hungry team of Emanuel, Pelosi and Schumer would have struggled for a few seats here and there. But fortunately for the Dems, it did implode, and now, given a chance, they've begun to get their groove back. And the wheel keeps on turning.

Look, kids: real robot armies!

It's things like this that make me glad I wasn't born a single year later...

More Republicans Talking Sense (White House Edition)

First it was Newt Gingrich; now we have the infamous 1994 Cheney, talking the most sense I've ever heard (too bad 2007 Cheney is too stubborn to listen to advice.)

The popular YouTube video of Cheney in 1994 making the case not to invade Iraq

The transcript from "Editor & Publisher"


And Karl Rove is finally "movin' on down the road," to quote his boss. I have to admit that even I felt a twinge of sentiment listening to Karl choke up as he made his farewell speech beside the guy he's spent so many decades with and shared such a deeply symbiotic relationship. But then I cry over animated rats in Disney movies, so that doesn't mean I'm not glad to see the door hit him on the way out... to spend more time with his family (and perhaps Fred Thompson?)
We probably haven't seen the last of him, but at least he won't be architecting national policy for the next year and a half.

The Last Frontier...

... of human discovery may be our own brains. But this article sheds a lot of light on the subject:

10 Unsolved Mysteries of the Brain

(One month) older than my years...

... that's how I scored on the RealAge Test. I know this has been out a while, and I think I took it a few years ago, actually (and scored better, I think) but anyway, I guess it could be worse.
Positive factors included daily flossing, not smoking or eating much red meat, good BMI, education level, wearing my seatbelt and taking a vitamin every day.
Negatives included not enough exercise, never having lifted a weight in my life (okay, maybe once) not enough vitamin C, not enough Omega-3 (I try, but tuna has mercury in it and salmon is so darn expensive; back to stocking up on walnuts) and too small a social network.
Most of these things I knew, but good to have them reinforced, to motivate me to kick my age down to what I get mistaken for when ordering liquor (and not ordering liquor would probably kick it down even further, unless it's red wine ;)

What's the world coming to...

... when Newt Gingrich starts sounding (to my registered Democrat ears) like a voice of reason in this roiling sea of campaign insanity?

from his remarks at the National Press Club on Tuesday (and I'm sure his interest in the subject of the candidacy process is informed by his own deliberation process, but on that point, he's not opining.)

[The current system] turns the candidates into rigidity. Because if a candidate says something in March of 2007 and, in the course of the campaign, they learn something fundamentally different and they mature and change, and in August or September or October, they adopt a new position based on having grown during the year, they will promptly have flip-flopped.

And so you begin to trap people. As the campaigns get longer, you're asking a person who's going to be sworn in, in January of 2009, to tell you what they'll do, in January of 2007, when they haven't got a clue. Because they don't know what the world will be like.

And you're suggesting they won't learn anything through the two years of campaigning.

It was John F. Kennedy, campaigning in West Virginia, being horrified by poverty, which profoundly changed him in 1960.

And so we now have a system that is overly focused on money, overly delegated to technicians, and in which candidates are held to a rigidity standard that is very dangerous, while their answers are held to a soundbite and 30-second standard, which is just, frankly absurd.

What's your answer on Iraq in 30 seconds?

What's your answer on health care in 30 seconds?

Now, I believe this is really, really serious.

The War on War

I've been thinking lately... about this so-called war on terrorism (or struggle against global extremism -- whatever they're calling it today.)
For all my shame and disgust at the way it's being conducted, do I support the idea of a struggle against violent extremism?
As a self-professed radical moderate, I can't say there's much that I support more, in principle. And there certainly are some things we've gotten right about it, in practice. But there's a heck of a lot more that we've gotten wrong.
And there are other wars that I'd support as well...

To name a few:

A war on global poverty
A war on global injustice
A war on pandemic diseases
A war on diseases that are potentially curable through support for advances in medicine
A war on crime fed by hopelessness from within communities and apathy from without
A war on climate change fed by unchecked pollution fed in turn by corporate greed
A war on willful ignorance and intolerance due to arrogance or self-hatred
A war on unwillful ignorance fed by poor access to education
A war on inequality owing to systematic discrimination
A war on contempt for the mentally ill and the elderly
A war on contempt for, oppression of, and violence against women
A war on random, unfocused violence
A war on systematic, focused violence (what we call terrorism falls somewhere in between those two extremes. All three varieties equally suck.)
A war on a warlike mindset

Surge Assessment: Life Cycle of a Timeline

Do I hear a "January '09," anybody?

Related: When September Ends: A "vast metaphysical question."

Ted Kennedy, from today's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the nominations of Admiral Mullen and General Cartwright for chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

We had, in January, when this surge was started -- Secretary Gates said, "It's viewed as a temporary surge."

In February Secretary Gates told the Senate Appropriations Committee, "I think General Petraeus believes they'll have a pretty good idea whether this surge is working, probably, by early summer."

And in April, Secretary Gates told us, "More time would be needed. I think it's been General Petraeus's view all along, sometime, at some point, during the summer -- mid- to late summer, perhaps -- he has thought that he would be in a position to evaluate whether the plan was working."

In May the president said even more time would be necessary. He told us General Petraeus said it would be at least the end of the summer before we can assess the impact of this operation; the Congress ought to give Petraeus' plan a chance to work.

A week later, Secretary Gates said the administration would make their evaluation of the situation of the surge in September.

On May 9th, Lieutenant General Ray T. Odierno, the commander of the Multi-National Force-Iraq, said the surge needs to go through the beginning of next year for sure.

Then, on July 20th, General Odierno again admitted that it would be at least November before the military could provide a real assessment.

A Welcome, if Fleeting, Respite

Some good news from Iraq

But one can always hope it will have some small unifying effect on the country. You never know.

Filipino "contractors" in Iraq: OK, this is bad...

... so maybe I owe at least one German high school student a teary apology, after hearing about what is essentially hijacked slave labor being used to build the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, being effectively (up until this point) swept under the rug by the State Department's I.G.

And hearing about people dying from formaldehyde exposure in FEMA trailers doesn't boost my patriotism very much.

Not sure what else to say, except, once again, dammit, I voted for Gore (and Kerry.) I know we're not perfect (ahem, what country is?) but who knew how fast we could fall in 6 1/2 years?

Pat Tillman Update

It may be worse than we even thought.

U.S. exchange students in Germany moonlight as scapegoats (I mean goodwill ambassadors)

I went through the checklist:

Did I vote for Bush? No, not once.
Pro-war in Iraq? Nope, was out carrying "No Blood for Oil" signs, even when Hillary was still game for it.
The death penalty? No.
Gun control? Yeah, pretty much. (No comment please, Mr. X. ;)
Climate protection? Yep, for it.
I love organic grocery stores,
and to sweeten the deal, I'm not even from Texas.

What more do they want from me?
I'm kinda afraid to ask.

Ah well, I'm too old to be an exchange student, so maybe I shouldn't take it personally, but I am headed on vacation soon to two of Germany's next-door neighbors (who have, from all accounts, not much more love for us Yanks) so I guess I'm feeling a little defensive.

Quote du Jour: Bud Cummins on his old boss

on "Hardball" today with a giddy Chris Matthews (admittedly Cummins, one of the fired U.S. attorneys, has reason to be bitter, but I think he summed up Gonzales' present situation pretty well.)

I think that his credibility is gone. It's partly -- it's clearly partly his fault. I could probably list a dozen things he's done that makes him deserving of losing his credibility. Part of it's politics. The Democrats are now on him like piranha.

But the bottom line is, he has no credibility left. And he's like a boxer that can't keep his hands up anymore but he won't fall down. Somebody needs to throw in the towel.

Gonzo Testimony

Three questions on the TSP memo and Gonzales' blatantly false statements at yesterday's hearing:

1. What were you thinking, Al?
2. Did you really think Chuck Schumer wasn't going to follow up on those documents?
3. Who's pulling the strings here, and what are they smoking? (OK, four questions ;)
   

Time Magazine: Who Dies in Harry Potter? (No Spoiler Alert)

Here's a refreshing perspective on the Potter series... once again, without any spoilers, for those of you who are still waiting for the book to arrive in the flesh (so to speak.)

Who Dies in Harry Potter?

Gee, that's the nicest thing a U.S. general ever said about Saddam...

... and he's not alive to hear it.

from the commandant of the Marine Corps, General Conway's remarks at the National Press Club yesterday.

There is sectarian violence. But if you talk to Iraqis, they would say, hey, my wife's a Sunni; my father-in-law is a Sunni -- or their father-in-law might even be a Shia, you know. I mean, they're just that intermarried.

And Saddam demanded one thing. That was that whatever you are, whatever sect you are, that's second; you're an Iraqi first. And I think we need to be able to capitalize on that.

Speaking of sleep...

... who's live-blogging the Senate slumber party?
Don't look at me... Maybe it's just the humidity of mid-July in D.C., but politics has been making me yawn this past week or so, as my spotty posts seem to indicate.
Wake me up when there's a chance in heck of getting any meaningful legislation passed.

The Wonderful World of Sleep

Interesting program on the latest research into various aspects and functions of sleep:

WNYC Radio Lab: Sleep

Biden Starts the Hard Sell

No, not his candidacy for the Democratic nomination.
He's begun a campaign, on the Senate floor today, to win Republican votes for a timely exit strategy, to be passed, if not before the August break, then by September.
False starts and incoherent flourishes aside, he makes a good speech, and he knows his stuff; gotta give him that.

The question is, do we continue to send our kids into the middle of a meat grinder, based on a policy that is fundamentally flawed?

I don't think there's a dozen Republicans on that side of the aisle who agree with the president's strategy. Nor do I believe, if the president had followed the recommendation of the senator from Delaware and, then, the senator from Arizona, back before there was a civil war, to put enough troops in to solidify the situation on the ground, we might not be here.

The rationale he offered and I offered, if I'm not mistaken, was, Mr. President, you don't have a strategy. The secretary of defense -- these are not a bunch of dead-enders. They're not a bunch of thugs. They are thugs. But you've got a big problem, Mr. President.

If I'm not mistaken, I heard the senator from Arizona make those speeches four years ago. I heard him, along with me, call for more troops, back then, in order to get out sooner.

We predicted there would be a civil war if we didn't gain control. Surprise, surprise, surprise. We have a civil war.

Look, I understand the political dilemmas that we find ourselves in when we have a president of our own party we have a problem with. I've been there. It never kept me from talking up, speaking up.

You recall, my friend from California, as presiding member, to use the trite expression, I beat President Clinton up and about the head, as they say in the neighborhood where I come from, to use force in Bosnia, to end a genocide.

The president didn't agree with me. I was told, calm down; don't put him in that spot. I'm accustomed to taking on presidents of my own party. And I know it's hard. It's hard.

But I tell you what. Name me any one of the people who were quoted here who thinks the policy we're pursuing now makes any sense.

Look. Ever since the Democrats took control of the Congress back in January, we've been working to build pressure on the administration, and quite bluntly, on our Republican colleagues, to change course in Iraq.

Because I've reached the point, Madam President -- I think the president is impervious to information. There's a great expression -- I believe it was Oliver Wendell Holmes -- he was referring to prejudice. And the president is not prejudiced, but it'll make the point.

He said "Prejudice is like pupil of the eye. The more light you shine upon it, the more tightly it closes."

This administration is like the pupil of the eye. The more hard facts you give them to prove that their policy is a failure, the tighter it closes and the less -- the less inclined to change they are.

Recommended Viewing: "The Prisoner"

This documentary by the directors of "Gunner Palace," is, first of all, simply an order of magnitude better than "Gunner Palace" -- more complex and nuanced, more stylistically innovative (still cartoons used to illustrate flashbacks), and just more substantive. The earlier film was criticized for being a bit too neutral to really say anything, and so maybe what Epperlein and Tucker needed was the strong voice of a single subject to carry the film, and Iraqi journalist and former Abu Ghraib prisoner Yunis Abbas is perfectly suited to this task.
This is a fascinating character study as well as a suspense story where the villains -- Saddam, U.S. military bureaucracy, nameless bullies and callous leadership -- are always shadowy and ill-defined. But this film, with its focus on Abbas' candid but uncynical first-person narrative -- and the names of dead prisoners and undocumented abuses he wrote, through it all the earnest journalist, on the inside of his underwear and on pieces of tin foil smuggled outside the prison in visitors' mouths -- is a testament to what really did happen not so long ago in U.S.-occupied, post-Saddam Iraq.

The Prisoner: or How I Planned to Kill Tony Blair

Death from Natural Causes Considered a Blessing in Iraq

From NPR's Morning Edition on Wednesday:

In Iraq people die every day from acts of violence: a roadside bomb, a suicide attack, a sectarian assassination. Though it's hard to lose a loved one no matter what, in this kind of world it's considered a divine gift when someone dies a natural death.

Another reason why the death penalty sucks.

The case of Troy Davis.
This man doesn't sound like a murderer to me.

If you agree, or just disagree with the death penalty, here's Amnesty International's action letter to the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Trust, but verify.

I can't count how many times I've heard politicians (particularly GOP presidential hopefuls) drop that Reagan quote in the last six months, but in the last six days, it's really peaked in the zeitgest. Now, even Democrats like Pat Leahy are using it.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy at today's press conference on the latest subpoenas:

You know, I remember that sort of made-up saying, although I loved it, and President Reagan did it so well. I remember when he said, "Trust, but verify." It was a Russian slogan, even though nobody could find it.

But it's a wonderful slogan. And President Reagan was right on that, on arms control. He was right on that and so many other things.

So I consider myself a strong Reaganite here.

I trust, but I want to verify. And I want to verify under oath. I want to verify on the record. And I don't want to verify behind closed doors.

The Fourth Branch of Government...

... is the vice president's office?
Dick Cheney seems to think so.

Heckuva Job, Pete.

Peter Pace spent what was theoretically the pinnacle of his career as the scapegoat and whipping boy of Donald Rumsfeld.
So it's not exactly ironic that he goes out on the same note, with barely a whimper.

It's about time...

... moderate (and former "lifelong" Democrat) Mayor Michael Bloomberg admits he doesn't really want to be a Republican anymore.
Early pundit reaction basically translates this as the first step toward an independent run for the White House, a move that would greatly threaten the GOP nominee's chances and be another breakthrough election for third parties.
So there's really nothing not to like in this story, as far as I'm concerned ;)

The Continuing Shame of Abu Ghraib...

... the sad story of the rise and fall of General Antonio Taguba, by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker.

Read this and weep.

Quote du Jour: Bob Schieffer

From "Face the Nation" today:

And finally today, I have never been much for third parties and independent candidates. For all its flaws, the old two-party system has brought us a long way in this country, and I'm slow to change.

But as I watched the Senate fumble around with the immigration bill, it made me wonder, has our two-party system lost the ability to get anything done?

We keep hearing that both parties are playing to their base. Republicans don't want to offend conservatives, so they block real immigration reform. Democrats fear the liberal left, so they don't want reform.

Result: nothing gets done on that or anything else. Yet polls show a majority of Americans want reform, want a guest worker program for illegal immigrants in this country, favor a way to make their status legal.

Who speaks for that segment of the electorate?

Certainly not Democratic and Republican leaders, who are so busy pacifying those so-called base voters.

You know, I hope we do see a third-party candidate in the presidential race next year, not because I favor anyone who might run as an independent, but because a third choice would force both the Republicans and the Democrats to move more to the center, to stop an independent from siphoning off moderate voters.

If both parties are forced to shift their hunt for votes to the center, rather than the edges of their parties, who knows?

They may find some common ground every once in a while, and actually get something done.

Congressional Quote du Jour: A Little Grammar Review

from Wednesday's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's Hearing on the GSA Administrator Investigation

REP. JOHN YARMUTH (D-KY): I have two questions. One is that you said, sometimes, you have a problem with tense. And basically there are only three tenses.

LURITA DOAN, GSA ADMINISTRATOR: No, that's not true.

YARMUTH: Past, present and future.

DOAN: No, there's, like, present perfective. There's present progressive, past progressive...

YARMUTH: In the time continuum -- that's grammar. But in the time continuum, there are only -- it either happened, it is happening or it will happen.

DOAN: Or it's ongoing as we talk.

YARMUTH: I'm trying to get a handle on exactly where the issue of tense might relate to whether or not you actually were speculating about what you might do, what you may have in fact done or what you were in the process of doing.

DOAN: Well, I thought I was using, like, a hortatory subjunctive right there, in which...

YARMUTH: OK.

Well, she was an English professor, who graduated from Vassar with honors in English... as the blogger linked above points out, maybe she does know her tenses after all.

You Don't Have to Be Crazy to Hear Voices...

... although, no doubt, it helps.
But that cheap joke aside, Daniel B. Smith, who was on The Colbert Report last night, has written what looks like a fascinating book on the phenomenon of auditory hallucination through the ages, centered around the story of his own father, an otherwise normally functioning attorney who heard voices throughout his life.

Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination

For the Time Being: The Current Strategy

'We have made a deal with the devil,' from crooksandliars.com, by Steve Benen

Apparently, U.S. forces have not only aligned themselves with dozens of Sunni militiamen, we’re now cooperating with sectarian militias, working outside the Iraqi security forces, that include insurgents that have attacked Americans in the past. What’s more, we’re allowing them to procure weapons and we’re granting them the power to arrest other Iraqis.

“We have made a deal with the devil,” said an intelligence officer in the battalion.

The dynamic is not without complications. Joshua Partlow’s report explained that “fighters on both sides appeared nearly identical,” using the same weapons and wearing similar clothes. “Now we’ve got kind of a mess on our hands,” a leader of a U.S. Stryker team remembered thinking. “Because we’ve got a lot of armed guys running all over the place, and it’s making it very hard for us to identify which side is which.”

Might these militias turn on the U.S. sometime soon? No one knows. Ali Hatem Ali Suleiman, a Sunni militia leader said, “Let’s be honest, the enemy now is not the Americans, for the time being.”

When September Ends: A "vast metaphysical question."

Remember when September was the moment of truth as to whether or not the surge plan was working in Iraq?
Tony Snow doesn't, as of today, although the press corps tried to jog his memory.

QUESTION: The president himself has said, not just in the Reuters interview but in others, that in September we will find out whether it's working. He's been blunt about it.

SNOW: Well, again, you'll be able to see what's going on at the juncture.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: He has said "We'll know whether it's working in September."

SNOW: OK, but what I'm saying -- OK.

QUESTION: Is that what you think?

SNOW: No, I think my concern is that the expectation that seems to be raised is that suddenly, in September, there may be an expectation that the report says, "OK, all the problems are solved."

No. But what will happen in September is that we will have an opportunity to assess what's going on. Yes, we'll have an opportunity to say...

(CROSSTALK)

SNOW: ... whether it is working -- whether it is working. That does not mean that we'll have all the work. It will not be completely successful at that juncture. "Is working" where you have it in the motion of a present imperfect, I think, is fine. So...

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: Is it a moment, though, for judging -- I understand the difference between -- it's not going to be over then, but is it the right time to judge whether the new way forward is working?

SNOW: Again, we'll see. We'll have to take a look. I just...

QUESTION: That sounds like backpeddling.

SNOW: No, it's not backpeddling. It's just it seems to me to be such a vast, metaphysical question.

Is your kitchen soap breeding superbacteria?

Antibiotics have an important role in modern medicine, but apparently using them for the kitchen sink may not be such a good idea...

Actually, antibiotics are one thing that are probably best not taken in moderation...

Congressional Quotes du Jour: The Good, the Bad and the Dangerously Insane

Ron Paul (R-TX) from Tuesday's Republican Presidential Debate on CNN:

We have a lot of goodness in this country. And we should promote it, but never through the barrel of a gun. We should do it by setting good standards, motivating people and have them want to emulate us.

But you can't enforce our goodness, like the necons preach, with an armed force. It doesn't work.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) discussing the William Jefferson indictment on the House floor this week (Jon Stewart's moment of zen yesterday):

When we talk about the standard here, we all know that bringing dishonor on this House is a standard that all of us attempt to meet.

Trent Franks (R-AZ) in yesterday's House Armed Services Committee hearing on body armor, in which he suggests that the committee just suit up a couple of staffers in the sets of armor in question, find Jim Webb's gun and go down to the basement to do their own damned ballistics test. Hey, if NBC News can do it:

And it's just perhaps a little bit unusual, the suggestion, Mr. Chairman, that -- we've got a gun range in the basement of this building. And I think we ought to take a couple of sets of both sets of this body armor and have both sides have a sworn affidavit that this is indeed the exact armor that's going into the field, and that we all go down and have some experts there to make sure that the tests are fair, and witness this for ourselves.

Bill of Rights Monument Project

Here's another cool thing I just learned about: Juggler/comedian Chris Bliss started a nonprofit corporation dedicated to installing Bill of Rights monuments (with different designs/ sculptures in each city) in each of the state capitals, and elsewhere across America.

Play Pumps: just heard about this...

Someone had a good idea:
Children playing instead of their mothers or themselves spending hours a day carrying water from the river.

Welcome back, Jack

Dr. Kevorkian leaves prison after serving eight years.

Eight full years... and you think about some of the violent criminals who spend far less time than that, for crimes that don't seem to compare, either in degree or kind.