Showing newest 45 of 124 posts from February 2008. Show older posts
Showing newest 45 of 124 posts from February 2008. Show older posts

Friday, February 29, 2008

Prince Harry's War Story

Prince Harry is being redeployed from Afghanistan.
Secrets may be the raw materials of warfare, but short-staffed British commanders in Afghanistan learned four months ago that they would have to devote considerable resources to a secret that the government considered far larger and more dangerous than any of their fighting strategies.

That secret has been known over the radio frequencies of southern Afghanistan for the past 10 weeks as Widow Six Seven, the call sign for a Joint Attack Control officer who directed bomb strikes against suspected Taliban outposts in violent Helmand province.

He was known only to his immediate comrades in the Household Calvary as Second Lieutenant Harry Wales, a name, along with orange locks and a plummy accent, that immediately identified him as Prince Harry, third in line to the English crown.

Amazingly, their secret remained safe for months, amid an elaborate public-relations effort designed to keep the British media on side, and the efforts of scores of officers committed to preventing either the Taliban or the larger British or NATO military forces from learning the identity of the Prince, who had earlier been known as a “bullet magnet” for his target value to insurgents.

[...]

But when the secret operation was forced to wrap up Thursday after the Internet leaks, and the entire British media unloaded lengthy interviews and documentaries about the Prince in action Thursday night, there was a palpable sense of relief among Britain's military commanders.

Sir Richard Dannatt, head of the British army, had never wanted Harry to become part of the military operation, arguing to his political masters that his deployment would distract much-needed people and resources away from combat operations and create unnecessary risk. He won that argument in Iraq, persuading the Prince and his supporters that his presence would be deadly, but last fall he was forced to draw up plans to bring the Prince to Afghanistan.

“In deciding to deploy him to Afghanistan, it was my judgment that, with an understanding with the media not to broadcast his whereabouts, the risk in doing so was manageable,” Sir Richard explained Thursday night. “Now that the story is in the public domain, the chief of defence staff and I will take advice from the operational commanders about whether his deployment can continue.”

On Friday, the Ministry of Defense said Harry is being withdrawn immediately.
Kudos to him for doing his job and setting a good example for other people of privilege.

By the way, it was the Drudge Report that broke the embargo on the news that Prince Harry was stationed in Afghanistan. Never let it be said that Matt Drudge let discretion and the safety of the soldiers stand in the way of making a headline.
Fetch more...

Battle of the Uglies

Bill Donohue, the head of the Catholic League, is pissed at John McCain for happily accepting the endorsement of Pastor John Hagee, who has called the Catholic Church "the Great Whore."
"Senator Obama has repudiated the endorsement of Louis Farrakhan, another bigot. McCain should follow suit and retract his embrace of Hagee," Donohue said.

Catholics United, a national online group, also blasted McCain over the endorsement. "By receiving the endorsement of an outspoken critic of the Catholic Church, McCain once again demonstrates that he is willing to sell out his principles for a chance to win the Presidency," said Chris Korzen, Executive Director of Catholics United in a statement. "We hope Senator McCain will take the principled position of publicly and unequivocally distancing himself from Pastor Hagee's anti-Catholic comments. Intolerance and bigotry do not belong in American politics."
Donohue, who fancies himself as the Torquemada of the 21st century, is no slouch when it comes to calling out bigotry -- or what he perceives as bigotry -- and he is capable of making a lot of noise; just ask Melissa McEwan at Shakesville who had the temerity to write blog postings that called out the Catholic Church on its misogyny and work for the John Edwards campaign last year. So it will be interesting to see if his outrage has any effect on the McCain campaign, and I wonder if Tim Russert will moderate the cockfight between Donohue and Hagee to see who is the ugliest of them all.

Glenn Greenwald has an interview with Mr. Donohue and a clip of Mr. Hagee's teachings about the Catholic Church.
Fetch more...

Barack Obama Speaks to Gay America

Via the Daily Dish:
I’m running for President to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all – a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. It’s wrong to have millions of Americans living as second-class citizens in this nation. And I ask for your support in this election so that together we can bring about real change for all LGBT Americans. Equality is a moral imperative. That’s why throughout my career, I have fought to eliminate discrimination against LGBTAmericans. In Illinois, I co-sponsored a fully inclusive bill that prohibited discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity, extending protection to the workplace, housing, and places of public accommodation.

In the U.S. Senate, I have co-sponsored bills that would equalize tax treatment for same-sex couples and provide benefits to domestic partners of federal employees. And as president, I will place the weight of my administration behind the enactment of the Matthew Shepard Act to outlaw hate crimes and a fully inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act to outlaw workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws. I personally believe that civil unions represent the best way to secure that equal treatment. But I also believe that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide on their own how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples — whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage.

[...]

I will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all LGBTAmericans. But neither will I close my ears to the voices of those who still need to be convinced. That is the work we must do to move forward together. It is difficult. It is challenging. And it is necessary. Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. Join with me, and I will provide that leadership. Together, we will achieve real equality for all Americans, gay and straight alike.
Read the whole letter here.
Fetch more...

Nailed

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) is an affable right wing tool who has been making the rounds repeating the canard about Barack Obama and his lack of patriotism by not wearing a flag pin while not wearing one himself. Dan Abrams of MSNBC calls him on it.


(HT to TPM)
Fetch more...

Friday Blogaround

Here's the Leap Day edition of the weekly round up around the Liberal Coalition.
- A Blog Around The Clock: what exactly is a science blog?
- archy: coyotes on the Pill?
- Bark Bark Woof Woof: a legacy.
- Bloggg: cultural value.
- Collective Sigh: andante endorses...
- Dohiyi Mir: NTodd remembers a friend.
- Echidne Of The Snakes: Matt Drudge and Prince Harry.
- Florida Progressive Coalition Blog: lessons from Black History Month.
- Iddybud Journal: wind energy
- Left Is Right: driving in L.A.
- Musing's musings: coming to terms.
- Pen-Elayne on the Web: Elayne does the blogaround.
- Rook's Rant: Matt Drudge and Hillary Clinton. (Wow, Matt gets around.)
- rubber hose stakes his claim with this candidate.
- Scrutiny Hooligans out West.
- SoonerThought: Pelosi wants to prosecute.
- Speedkill: a brilliant dilemma.
- Steve Bates, The Yellow Doggerel Democrat: Shiver me timbers, it's Sing Like a Health Care Pirate Day.
- Stupid Enough Unexplanation: no shirts.
- The Invisible Library: portait of an atheist.
- WTF Is It Now?? Is John McCain eligible to be president?
- ...You Are A Tree: Diebold leaks the news.
Happy Leap Day. Notable events on this day include Hattie McDaniel becoming the first African-American to win an Oscar for her role in Gone With the Wind in 1940.

Leap Day Trivia Question: There is a very popular theatre piece wherein the date of February 29 plays a crucial point in the plot. Name the piece. (No peeking.)
Fetch more...

Friday Catblogging


"It's Leap Day!"

Fetch more...

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Survey Says...

[I've been asked to post a survey by a doctoral student. Having been through the doctoral dance myself, I'll do anything to help.]
The purpose of this survey is to examine how people think and feel about the political issues, parties, and candidates in the upcoming election. In the survey, you will be asked a series of questions about two political candidates, John McCain and Hillary Clinton. We are very interested in how individuals that find information on the web think about politics, and your participation would be greatly appreciated. In total, the survey should take about 15 minutes to complete. The survey is completely anonymous and you can skip any questions you do not wish to answer.

Click here to take the survey.

Please feel free to contact Chris Weber [crweber@notes.cc.sunysb.edu] at Stony Brook University with any questions or concerns. Thanks for your help!
IMPORTANT: Chris has requested that you do not comment directly on the survey in the comments section so as to not affect how other people take the survey.
Fetch more...

Question of the Day

I heard a promo for Radio Lab where the topic will be earworms; the phenomenon where you get a song stuck in your head and you can't get it out. The example they used was Petula Clark's 1964 hit Downtown, and now, as expected, I can't get it out of my head. Even a strong dose of baroque music from Tom Allen and Music and Company on CBC Radio 2 can't wipe it out. So...
What's the one song or piece of music you can't get out of your head once you hear it?
By the way, did you ever notice that the lyrics to the theme song from Gilligan's Island fit very nicely to the tune of Ghost Riders in the Sky? (Ha, gotcha.)
Fetch more...

Of Course They Will

John McCain and his campaign can repudiate and disassociate themselves from the likes of Bill Cunningham all they like, but if you think that's going to put an end to it, Josh Marshall has some news for you.
Don't insult your intelligence or mine by pretending that John McCain's plan for this race doesn't rely on hundreds of Cunninghams -- large and small -- across the country, and the RNC and all the GOP third party groups, to be peddling this stuff nonstop for the next eight months because it's the only way John McCain have [sic] a real shot at contesting this race.
The last thing the Republicans want to talk about are the real issues facing the country, like the economy, education, health care, equality for all citizens, because they lose on every one of them. So they will resort to stuff that people like Bill Cunningham and Rush Limbaugh will use; hustler, hack, Muslim, funny name, oh, and of course they'll remind you that he's black without actually saying it, but they have a pocket full of dog-whistles to do that. Oh, and he has an uppity wife, too.

One of the other tactics they will use is to find some outrageous comment by some radical that Barack Obama once shook hands with and demand, as Tim Russert did in the debate on Tuesday night, that he denounce and repudiate the statements, and stomp on his birthday cake for good measure. Any failure to do so is a tacit endorsement of the radical. Well, it works both ways; as Will Bunch notes at Attytood, when will Tim Russert denounce and repudiate Don Imus?

This kind of crap can go on forever, and if the Republicans have any hope of winning in November, it will. Just remember; you have been warned.

Update: John McCain has been endorsed by Pastor John Hagee who believes, among other things, that there is no such thing as a good Muslim, that Hurricane Katrina was God's retribution for a gay pride parade in New Orleans, and that it is the duty of the President to hasten Armageddon in order to further the Second Coming. As Glenn Greenwald notes, not only does Sen. McCain not "denounce" and "reject" this support from this hate-monger, he is "very proud to have Pastor John Hagee's support."

I'll have a double standard with a twist, please.
Fetch more...

The Blade for Obama

The Toledo Blade rarely endorses a candidate during the primaries, but this time they're making an exception.
We are not yet ready to say who we will endorse in November. But we wholeheartedly agree with something our editorial board heard on Sunday: 'We have to have a government that works for ordinary people. We've got to be able to bring the country together so we have a working majority for change. We have to break down some of the ideologically driven polarization that prevents us from taking practical steps to make the country more competitive and to get opportunity to people.'

We urge Ohio Democrats to vote on Tuesday for the man who spoke those words, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. It has become clear during the year-long primary campaign that he eclipses Sen. Hillary Clinton as the strong­est possible candidate to run in the general election against the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain.

Moreover, we believe that Mr. Obama's inspiring life story, keen intellect, strong but quiet confidence, ready grasp of public policy issues, and his fresh and optimistic world view are what America needs after eight years of an administration that repeatedly has shown open contempt for the American people and for the Constitution.

Mr. Obama offers a breath of fresh air and new hope at a depressing time in the life of this nation. His selection would send an unmistakable signal to the world that America really may be living up to its promise of a just and truly pluralistic society.
An endorsement by a newspaper may or may not sway the voters in an election (and I'm still skeptical that celebrity endorsements mean anything), but it can't hurt, either.
Fetch more...

Bloomberg Says No

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg decides not to run for president as an independent, but has some suggestions.
I believe that an independent approach to these issues is essential to governing our nation — and that an independent can win the presidency. I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not — and will not be — a candidate for president. I have watched this campaign unfold, and I am hopeful that the current campaigns can rise to the challenge by offering truly independent leadership. The most productive role that I can serve is to push them forward, by using the means at my disposal to promote a real and honest debate.

In the weeks and months ahead, I will continue to work to steer the national conversation away from partisanship and toward unity; away from ideology and toward common sense; away from sound bites and toward substance. And while I have always said I am not running for president, the race is too important to sit on the sidelines, and so I have changed my mind in one area. If a candidate takes an independent, nonpartisan approach — and embraces practical solutions that challenge party orthodoxy — I’ll join others in helping that candidate win the White House.
See, Ralph, that's how you influence the discussion and maintain some sense of dignity.
Fetch more...

What's In a Name?

Juan Cole at Informed Comment names names.
I want to say something about Barack Hussein Obama's name. It is a name to be proud of. It is an American name. It is a blessed name. It is a heroic name, as heroic and American in its own way as the name of General Omar Nelson Bradley or the name of Benjamin Franklin. And denigrating that name is a form of racial and religious bigotry of the most vile and debased sort. It is a prejudice against names deriving from Semitic languages!

[...]

Barack and Hussein are Semitic words. Americans have been named with Semitic names since the founding of the Republic. Fourteen of our 43 presidents have had Semitic names (see below). And, American English contains many Arabic-derived words that we use every day and without which we would be much impoverished. America is a world civilization with a world heritage, something Cunninghamism will never understand.

[...]

Let us take Benjamin Franklin. His first name is from the Hebrew Bin Yamin, the son of the Right (hand), or son of strength, or the son of the South (yamin or right has lots of connotations). The "Bin" means "son of," just as in modern colloquial Arabic. Bin Yamin Franklin is not a dishonorable name because of its Semitic root. By the way, there are lots of Muslims named Bin Yamin.

As for an American president bearing a name derived from a Semitic language, that is hardly unprecedented.

John Adams really only had Semitic names. His first name is from the Hebrew Yochanan, or gift of God, which became Johan and then John. (In German and in medieval English, "y" is represented by "j" but was originally pronounced "y".) Adams is from the biblical Adam, which also just means "human being." In Arabic, one way of saying "human being" is "Bani Adam," the children of men.

Thomas Jefferson's first name is from the Aramaic Tuma, meaning "twin." Aramaic is a Semitic language spoken by Jesus, which is related to Hebrew and Arabic. In Arabic twin is tau'am, so you can see the similarity.

James Madison, James Monroe and James Polk all had a Semitic first name, derived from the Hebrew Ya'aqov or Jacob, which is Ya`qub in Arabic. It became Iacobus in Latin, then was corrupted to Iacomus, and from there became James in English.

Zachary Taylor's first name is from the Hebrew Zachariah, which means "the Lord has remembered."

Abraham Lincoln, of course is, named for the patriarch Abraham, from the Semitic word for father, Ab, and the word for "multitude," raham,. Abu, "father of," is a common element in Arab names today.

So, Mr. Cunningham, Barack Hussein Obama fits right in this list of presidents with Semitic names. In fact, we haven't had one for a while. We are due for another one.

Fetch more...

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

William F. Buckley, Jr. - 1925-2008

William F. Buckley, Jr. has died.
Editor, columnist, novelist, debater, TV talk show star of "Firing Line," harpsichordist, trans-oceanic sailor and even a good-natured loser in a New York mayor's race, Buckley worked at a daunting pace, taking as little as 20 minutes to write a column for his magazine, the National Review.

Yet on the platform he was all handsome, reptilian languor, flexing his imposing vocabulary ever so slowly, accenting each point with an arched brow or rolling tongue and savoring an opponent's discomfort with wide-eyed glee.

"I am, I fully grant, a phenomenon, but not because of any speed in composition," he wrote in The New York Times Book Review in 1986. "I asked myself the other day, `Who else, on so many issues, has been so right so much of the time?' I couldn't think of anyone."

Buckley had for years been withdrawing from public life, starting in 1990 when he stepped down as top editor of the National Review. In December 1999, he closed down "Firing Line" after a 23-year run, when guests ranged from Richard Nixon to Allen Ginsberg. "You've got to end sometime and I'd just as soon not die onstage," he told the audience.
There were very few things I agreed with him on politically, but I have tremendous respect for his writing, his manners, and most especially his sense of humor. His intelligence, his wit, and his ability to make an argument without insult and rancor is something rare on either side of the aisle.
Fetch more...

Question of the Day

Based on the post below about the earthquake in England...
What's the worst natural disaster you've been through?
I guess making it through Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma in 2005 would count, but the one that stays with me the most was the Big Thompson Flood on July 31, 1976 because I helped with the rescue of stranded campers and it led to the writing of my first play.
Fetch more...

Shaken, Not Too Stirred

The headline is shamelessly stolen from the Times of London reporting a 5.2 earthquake in Britain this morning.
Property owners were out this morning assessing the damage to their homes and businesses after Britain suffered its biggest earthquake in over two decades.

The tremor, measuring 5.2 on the Richter scale and with its focus 3.1 miles (5km) below the Lincolnshire town of Market Rasen, struck at 12.56am.

It was felt from southern Scotland to the south coast of England, and from East Anglia to Wales, with tremors lasting for up to a minute that sent walls vibrating, chimneys shaking, furniture moving, paperwork tumbling and ornaments rattling on shelves.

The only definite report of injury was of David Nates, a 19-year-old student in Wombwell, Barnsley, who suffered a suspected fractured pelvis when part of the roof masonry fell through the ceiling of his attic bedroom and landed on his legs as he watched TV. His parents were also in the house, but were unhurt.

His father said today: “Of all the things that can happen - an earthquake. I could not believe it but when I think about it, it could have been worse.”

A spokeswoman for South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service said that "some sort of fancy stonework" had become dislodged.

In Birmingham a 31-year-old pregnant woman suffered a panic attack, but did not need hospital treatment.

But emergency services were inundated with calls from puzzled and frightened people woken from sleep by the quake. This morning they were still dealing with minor damage caused by the earth movement.
I love the British reserve when they face things like that:
"Oh, I say, was that an earthquake?"

"Why, yes, I do believe it was."

"Oh. Well. Everything all right?"

"I seem to have broken my hip and the tea cozy has gone missing."

"Oh, bad luck. Well, let's press on with all possible dispatch, shall we?"
There'll always be an England.
Fetch more...

Byte Me

The GOP tells the House that it's not going to turn over White House e-mails.
After promising last year to search its computers for tens of thousands of e-mails sent by White House officials, the Republican National Committee has informed a House committee that it no longer plans to retrieve the communications by restoring computer backup tapes, the panel's chairman said yesterday.

The move increases the likelihood that an untold number of RNC e-mails dealing with official White House business during the first term of the Bush administration -- including many sent or received by former presidential adviser Karl Rove -- will never be recovered, said House Democrats and public records advocates.

The RNC had previously told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that it was attempting to restore e-mails from 2001 to 2003, when the RNC had a policy of purging all e-mails, including those to and from White House officials, after 30 days. But Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) disclosed during a hearing yesterday that the RNC has now said it "has no intention of trying to restore the missing White House e-mails."

"The result is a potentially enormous gap in the historical record," Waxman said, including the buildup to the Iraq war.

Spokesman Danny Diaz said in a statement that the RNC "is fully compliant with the spirit and letter of the law." He declined further comment.
The response boils down to "I don't want to and you can't make me, so there. Nyah."

Makes you just want to slap them, doesn't it?
Fetch more...

Debate Wrap

Just a few thoughts on what I learned from last night's Democratic debate in Cleveland:
  • Whatever happens to Hillary Clinton, it's pretty clear that she shouldn't count on a successful career as a stand-up comic. Spontaneity is not her strong suit, and even the off-the-cuff remarks come across as forced.
  • Tim Russert asks a lot of questions he thinks everybody in the world wants to know the answers to, but in fact they are high-school forensics exercises in gotchas. The one about Louis Farrakhan to Senator Obama was just lame. What did he expect Mr. Obama to say, that he's doing his own version of "I'm F***ing Matt Damon" with Mr. Farrakhan?
  • Did you know that Hillary Clinton is a fighter? Well, she is. She told us that a lot last night. Okay, I get it. She's a fighter. (Although I understand why she has to keep emphasizing it -- see below.)
  • I'm not a policy wonk, but when critics of both candidates say they don't offer much substance, I'm confused. It sounded to me as if both of them could go on and on about specifics of their plans for health care, tax reform, immigration, and just about everything else to the point of numbness.
  • Am I the only one who thinks that the obsession some talking heads had about which Hillary would show up at the debate -- the cranky, the smooth, the conciliatory, the catty, the whiny -- carried with it the odor of sexism? The implication is that women are prone to mood swings because they're ... women? The inverse implication is that men are ploddingly predictable and never have "off days." Sheesh.
Pundit consensus is that this was the make-or-break debate for the Clinton campaign. We'll know in a week. Or maybe sooner.
Fetch more...

Ric's Legacy

You've probably never heard of Ric Weiland. That seems to be the way he wanted it. But he was one of the men who was there at the beginning of Microsoft, and his legacy through philanthropy to the gay rights movement is making itself heard.
Weiland [pictured left with Bill Gates in 1976] has left $65 million to the Pride Foundation in Seattle and 10 nonprofit organizations, believed to be the largest estate gift ever given to the gay and lesbian community in the U.S.

His generosity didn't stop there.

Weiland left $160 million, the majority of his estate, to charity. That includes a gift to Stanford University estimated to be worth $60 million, which the university said is the largest bequest it has ever received. Weiland also gave significant amounts toward environmental protection and scientific research.

Weiland, one of the first five Microsoft employees, committed suicide in 2006 at age 53.

It has taken more than a year to sort out his estate, and the full scope of Weiland's giving is now starting to emerge. The first disbursements began last summer and will be completed sometime this year.

For the Pride Foundation, which has an annual budget of $2.5 million and endowment of $3 million, Weiland's gift of more than $19 million will significantly expand its efforts throughout the Northwest.

The money will support anti-discrimination campaigns and programs to help youths, develop future leaders and provide scholarships.

[...]

Weiland was hardly a typical Microsoft millionaire.

He shunned the spotlight, refusing to be singled out on donor-recognition lists. Friends say he wrestled with the burden of wealth that came almost by accident, and thought deeply about how to give his life meaning.

Weiland, who suffered from chronic depression, found great solace in his philanthropic projects.

"I've never met someone with such a thoughtful personal agenda that was at the same time not about himself," said Thatcher Bailey, a high-school classmate and friend. "It was about how he can be a good citizen."

News of Weiland's bequest brought a sense of hope to people still coping with the tragedy of his death. His suicide shocked even his closest friends, who didn't realize how ill Weiland had become. That was the nature of his private personality, Haberman said.

"People knew him for years and years, but upon his death didn't really know him very well," she said.

[...]

Ultimately, Weiland hoped his acts would inspire more people to give, even though the visibility of these last donations would have made him uneasy, Bailey said.

"Each time he became more visible around his giving, I could tell he knew he was sacrificing something by doing that — the low profile that was so important to him," he said.

But, Bailey added, "In his absence, he's standing up one more time and showing people the way."
Thank you, Ric.

(HT to CLW)
Fetch more...

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Power Play

A lot of south and central Florida was hit with a power outage this afternoon.
Traffic lights, air conditioners and elevators began returning to life Tuesday afternoon -- and something approaching normalcy began returning to South Florida -- after a major power outage cascaded through much of region and the state.

Florida Power & Light said it hoped to have most customers back in service by 5 p.m.

At one point, Miami-Dade schools briefly delayed regular dismissals, but school buses began moving shortly after 3 p.m. Police initially reported many traffic accidents, but signals later began flicking back on. Hospitals temporarily operated on backup power, but later returned to normal operations.

Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez said there was no sign that ''criminal activity'' was involved in the power failure. He attributed it to a ''procedural'' issue at FPL, but the precise cause remained a mystery.

As the failure struck, all but four of Miami-Dade County's 2,670 traffic lights blinked off -- at precisely 1:09 p.m. ''A massive failure,'' said Robert Williams, chief of the county's traffic signals division.

By 3 p.m., 92 percent of the lights were functioning as power was restored one intersection, one neighborhood at a time, though far more quickly than after Hurricane Wilma left nearly the entire region without electricity in 2005.

At the peak of the failure, about 700,000 customers were without power, according to FPL.
The lights went out for about five seconds in my office, long enough to crash the computers, but either the generator kicked in or the "critical grid" that's supposed to power offices in Miami-Dade County took over because everything was back to normal in a moment. Not so outside, apparently, with traffic lights going out and the Metrorail trains standing still. But reports now say that everything is returning to normal; or what passes for normal here in Miami.

The authorities were quick to point out that there didn't seem to be any "criminal activity" or terrorism involved. Gee, until they mentioned it, those possibilities never entered my mind. I just assumed it was a technical glitch somewhere involving a transmission line or at one of the nuclear power plants that supplies electricity to FPL.

Or a giant metal robot.

Klaatu barada nikto!
Fetch more...

Question of the Day

From the Washington Post:
America has always been a competitive religious marketplace, but a major survey released yesterday shows a country increasingly exploring different faith identities and ways of worship. More than 40 percent of respondents told pollsters that they had changed their religious affiliation since childhood.
What about you?
Have you changed your religious affiliation since childhood, assuming you had one to begin with?
For me, yes. I was raised and confirmed in the Episcopal church, left it when I felt drawn to the Quakers in college, and have stayed with them ever since.
Fetch more...

Stop It

Tell the Associated Press to stop writing crappy articles like this. Jane at Firedoglake tells you how. Or feel free to contact them on your own.

Glenn Greenwald notes that Sen. Obama is not letting this kind of slimy writing get past him, and compared to previous Democratic candidates, he shows both ease and class in responding to these attacks.
Ever since 2002 -- at least -- most national Democrats have quivered with fear the moment Republicans utter words like "patriotism" and "national security." Traumatized by the 2002 mid-term elections, George Bush's 70% approval ratings, and the media's lock-step adoration of the Commander-in-Chief, to this day they become frozen the moment such attacks are even suggested and desperately and defensively try to comply with whatever demands are made of them. Like many trauma victims, they can never break free of the terror from their past, and still live perpetually in 2002, whereby George Bush's invocation of the words "patriotism" and "terrorism" can send them into spasms of fear and submission.

Perhaps (in part) because he wasn't in Washington in 2002, Obama's response here is the opposite of all of that. He's not the slightest bit defensive. To the contrary, he went out of his way to raise numerous examples of why it is the flag-waving Republicans whose "patriotism" ought to be in doubt, if anyone's should be. Without having to do so, Obama even went and raised the issue which Republicans currently think is their big, bad weapon -- warrantless spying on Americans -- and used it against them, to argue that spying on Americans is a profound violation of core American political principles, a far more substantive test of "patriotism" than what pretty accessories one wears with one's clothes.
As I previously noted, this is the only way the right wing can win this year because they really have nothing positive to run on. John McCain is promising another 100 years of occupation of Iraq, more wars with other countries who don't like us, and a continuation of the Bush economic policy. They know they can't sell that and win, so all they have left, as Aaron Sorkin wrote in The American President, is to make America afraid of something and find someone to blame it on. And to their everlasting credit and our shame, it's worked. But this time, to further paraphrase Mr. Sorkin, they'd better come after us with more than a flag pin and a father's middle name, because this time we're going to show up.
Fetch more...

Jonah's Tome: "Tedious and Inane"

Michael Tomasky read Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism and reviews it in The New Republic.
Goldberg no doubt believes that he has written something that will provoke, traduce, and infuriate liberals everywhere. (For all his supposed fearlessness, though, he pulled one haymaker of a punch: the original subtitle of the book was The Totalitarian Temptation From Mussolini to Hillary Clinton. I'm mildly curious about the logic by which a writer who insists that Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy were fascists thought that the original subtitle violated some canon of judgment or taste.) For about fifty or sixty pages, I confess, I took the bait, and did my best to work myself into a lather. By page 200--there are 405 pages of actual text--offense was beside the point, and I was mentally imploring the author to get it over with. By page 300, I was bored out of my skull. And by the time I made it to the final pages, I was wishing that I had been invited instead to review a multi-volume history of farm subsidies.

But I made it all the way to the end--and to the atypically succinct coda, in which Goldberg expresses the hope that his efforts will serve the same noble, lonely cause that William Buckley aided on national television in 1968 when, after Gore Vidal called him a "crypto-Nazi," he flung the word "queer" at Vidal. (Except Goldberg hopes for greater "civility"!) So I can report with a clear conscience that Liberal Fascism is one of the most tedious and inane--and ultimately self-negating--books that I have ever read. I suspect our white-coated researchers of the future would conclude mainly that we were a society with too much time on our hands--or at least that there was once a certain Goldberg with far too much time on his. Liberal Fascism is a document of a deeply frivolous culture, or sub-culture.

[...]

The great danger, Goldberg writes in the book's closing pages, is simply that "the promise of American life will be frittered away for a bag of magic beans called security." So that's it? Four hundred-plus pages, three-plus years of writing (I have been hearing about this book since 2005), and the concluding indictment is only that liberals are over-eager in their desire to use the state to provide people with material security? In the good old days of contemporary anti-liberalism--I mean the 1980s--right-wingers used to be able to make that point in just a sentence. Like I say--too much time on his hands.
Thank you, Michael, for saving me from having to read the bloody thing myself.
Fetch more...

From the New World

The New York Philharmonic plays in North Korea.
They came bearing bows and basses rather than the arms and armor Americans carried the last time this large a contingent set foot in the North Korean capital. The brass will issue fanfares, not orders.

Critics hold out little hope that this updated version of ping-pong diplomacy, sports and cultural exchanges that helped warm relations with Maoist China in the 1970s, will do much to transform North Korea under Kim Jong-il. Mr. Kim has cracked open North Korea’s door to outside businessmen, sports teams and diplomats in the past without allowing significantly more pluralism in the country’s regimented economic and political life, and there are few signs that the arrival of the New York orchestra signals a major shift in direction.
The program will include "An American in Paris" by George Gershwin, Symphony No. 9 "From the New World" by Antonin Dvorák, Prelude to Act III from "Lohengrin" by Richard Wagner, and the overture to "Candide" by Leonard Bernstein.

It will be broadcast later this week on PBS. Check local listings.
Fetch more...

Cage Match: Hanging Out in the Lobby

E.J. Dionne and David Brooks square off on John McCain's lobbying connections.

Dionne:
It seems odd, but for John McCain it was a blessing to have the chance to bury questions about his dealings with lobbyists beneath an alleged sex scandal. The prurient part of the story was easy to deny, and voters are sick of sex scandals.

But even if the sex goes away, the underlying questions raised last week in the story for which the New York Times took such grief are unlikely to disappear. The McCain campaign's sweeping denials may have been a bit too sweeping, and sex, in the end, is not what the story was really about.

[...]

In denouncing the Times story, McCain's campaign denied that he had met with Lowell "Bud" Paxson, president of the firm. But Paxson later told The Post that he had met with McCain. More telling, Newsweek reported this weekend that McCain himself acknowledged in a 2002 deposition that he had met with Paxson.

As Newsweek wrote, "With his typically blunt, almost cheery way of admitting the sinfulness of man, including his own weaknesses, he acknowledged in the deposition that his relationship with Paxson . . . would 'absolutely' look corrupt to the ordinary voter."

And on Friday, The Post reported that while McCain may relish attacking lobbyists, many top officials of his campaign -- including Rick Davis, his campaign manager, and Charlie Black, his chief political adviser -- are themselves well-known lobbyists with long client lists.

Why does this matter? Many of us have praised McCain over the years for his reform work and his criticism of special-interest politics. His reformer image is one reason he's so close to securing the Republican presidential nomination. It's thus perfectly reasonable for journalists to explore how McCain's strong words about lobbyists square with how he's actually dealt with them.
Brooks:
Over the course of his career, McCain has tried to do the impossible. He has challenged the winds of the money gale. He has sometimes failed and fallen short. And there have always been critics who cherry-pick his compromises, ignore his larger efforts and accuse him of being a hypocrite.

This is, of course, the gospel of the mediocre man: to ridicule somebody who tries something difficult on the grounds that the effort was not a total success. But any decent person who looks at the McCain record sees that while he has certainly faltered at times, he has also battled concentrated power more doggedly than any other legislator. If this is the record of a candidate with lobbyists on his campaign bus, then every candidate should have lobbyists on the bus.

And here’s the larger point: We’re going to have two extraordinary nominees for president this year. This could be one of the great general election campaigns in American history. The only thing that could ruin it is if the candidates become demagogues and hurl accusations at each other that are an insult to reality and common sense.
E.J. Dionne makes sense. David Brooks makes excuses.
Fetch more...

Monday, February 25, 2008

Really?

Ellroon thinks Bark Bark Woof Woof is excellent.


Thanks, Ellroon; I appreciate the honor and accept it with all due humility.

Part of the honor is to list ten other blogs that I think deserve the honor. Rather than hurt anyone's feelings by inadvertently leaving someone out, I open the floor to you, the reader, for your choices of ten -- or more -- Excellent blogs. Rather than dilute the recognition, it will spread the word that there is a lot of excellent bloggy goodness out there.
Fetch more...

Speaking of Self-Indulgent...

If Bill Kristol thinks the Obama campaign is all about him (see below), what would he say about Ralph Nader foisting himself once again on an unsuspecting and resentful electorate?
Nader, who turns 74 later this week, announced his candidacy on NBC's "Meet the Press."

In a later interview with The Associated Press, he rejected the notion of himself as a spoiler candidate, saying the electorate will not vote for a "pro-war John McCain." He also predicted his campaign would do better than in 2004, when he won just 0.3 percent of the vote as an independent.

"This time we're ready for them," said Nader of the Democratic Party lawsuits that kept him off the ballot in some states.

[...]

Pointing a finger at Republicans, he described McCain as a candidate for "perpetual war" and said he welcomed the support of Republican conservatives "who don't like the war in Iraq, who don't like taxpayer dollars wasted, and who don't like the Patriot Act and who treasure their rights of privacy."

"If the Democrats can't landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up," Nader added.
Ralph Nader is basically Ron Paul without the charm.
Fetch more...

Leaking Desperation

It's pretty clear that the desperation has not only set in on the Republicans, they're getting to the point that it's starting to leak out like anti-freeze from a crack in an overheated radiator. What more proof do you need than the continuing fascination the right wing has with Barack Obama's middle name and his lack of the proper lapel attire. Affable if not loony Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) was on Real Time with Bill Maher over the weekend and he repeated both the middle name and the lapel pin crap and got a derisive hoot from the host and the audience for the trouble. (And, it should be noted, Mr. Kingston was not wearing an American flag lapel pin himself, as if that actually matters.) It's gotten to the point that even some right wingers are throwing up their hands in disgust and telling their fellow conservatives and whacko conspiracy theorists to "get a grip."

The Serious Pundits are taking a different tack. Or at least one is. William Kristol, in a fit of unintentional irony, accuses Sen. Obama of making himself the focus of the race, as if he is the only one who can save the country, and thereby creating a cult of personality surrounding him rather than focus on the issues, and also uses the flag pin kerfuffle as his sticking point.
Last October, a reporter asked Barack Obama why he had stopped wearing the American flag lapel pin that he, like many other public officials, had been sporting since soon after Sept. 11. Obama could have responded that his new-found fashion minimalism was no big deal. What matters, obviously, is what you believe and do, not what you wear.

But Obama chose to present his flag-pin removal as a principled gesture. “You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest.”

Leave aside the claim that “speaking out on issues” constitutes true patriotism. What’s striking is that Obama couldn’t resist a grandiose explanation. Obama’s unnecessary and imprudent statement impugns the sincerity or intelligence of those vulgar sorts who still choose to wear a flag pin. But moral vanity prevailed. He wanted to explain that he was too good — too patriotic! — to wear a flag pin on his chest.
No, what Mr. Obama is saying is that just because you wear a flag pin -- or put a magnetic one on the back of your Hummer -- doesn't make you a patriot. It makes you look like you're a morally superior simp who has to use jewelry (probably made in China) to reassure yourself that all you have to do is wear the pin to be patriotic instead of doing something like, oh, actually do something to make the country a better place. The flag pin is your free pass to commit sartorial demagoguery.

The irony comes from the fact that in accusing Mr. Obama of making the race "all about him," Mr. Kristol is ignoring the fact that the right wing has been running on the cult of personality they built around the sainted Ronald Reagan and trying to get it back ever since. And if you don't think that the GOP would love to have someone with the talent and the vision of Barack Obama -- even if it is just rhetorical splendor -- and that they wouldn't sell that over substance, you have obviously not been checking with your answering service.

Ever since the end of the Reagan era, they have been desperately seeking someone who had the smile and charisma to repeat the magic that overwhelmed the nation and swept out the humble and bumbling Carter administration. And what have they come up with since then? A pale imitation in the person of George W. Bush, who even on his best day couldn't summon the timing and carefully-crafted spontaneity of Ronald Reagan if it was handed to him on a silver platter. And now they're proposing to nominate John McCain, who Mr. Kristol summons his best game face to describe as someone who "more proud of his country than of himself. And his patriotism has consisted of deeds more challenging than “speaking out on issues.” Wow; not exactly what I've call a ringing endorsement.

What I think is happening is that the Republicans are realizing that with John McCain they haven't got the next Ronald Reagan, they've got the next Jimmy Carter: a competent if not inspiring candidate that stirs suspicion in the base that he's not really One of Them (David Keene of the American Conservative Union told NPR this morning that Sen. McCain barely scores a 60 on his 100-point scale of being a True Believer, and 80 is a passing grade) and that given his age, if he's elected, he'll be a one-term caretaker until they can either find the next Reagan or come up with a scientific breakthrough to reanimate the last one. (Oh, wait; the right wing thinks science has a liberal bias.) The spluttering defense of Sen. McCain against the story in the Times last week about his relationship with a female lobbyist was more about the story and the unproven sexual angle than it was about the uncomfortable reminder of the fact that Mr. McCain has had a problematic history with lobbyists in the past and has since painted himself as the paragon of virtue when it comes to Capitol Hill influence.

When John McCain loses, they will then turn on him with all the pent-up fury and frustration that's already evident in their subtext and continue to desperately seek out their next Reagan. It won't be pretty, but it will be fun to watch.
Fetch more...

Good Work

Talking Points Memo gets a nice write-up in the New York Times.

If you want to see one of the best examples of the blogosphere, including excellent writing, thorough coverage of issues, and a good mix of topics covering everything from the presidential race to the occasional picture of a cute kid, TPM should be on your bookmarks and required-reading list.
Fetch more...

Geezertocracy

Cuba keeps the old guard in place.
Cuba's new leader has placed two top army generals in key positions in his new government, giving the armed forces an even bigger grip on the civilian power structure, experts said Sunday.

The National Assembly also filled the government's No. 2 position -- first vice president of the ruling Council of State -- with 77-year-old José Ramón Machado Ventura, regarded as a very hard-line communist ideologue.

Retired CIA Cuba analyst Brian Latell said Sunday's changes in the Council of State -- no doubt orchestrated by Raúl Castro -- resemble the Soviet Union in the early 1980s, when ''old men were replacing very old men.''

''This is a gerontocracy,'' Latell added, noting that Castro's inner circle is now dominated by people well into their 70s. Only 56-year-old Carlos Lage, who has been supervising the economy, represents a younger generation in the upper echelon of power.
Not unlike the old American cars that dot the streets of Havana, the "new" Cuban leadership sounds like they all hit their prime fifty years ago, they're running on jury-rigged repairs, and sputtering along on the fumes of a cause they've long ago forgotten.
Fetch more...

Didn't Watch

I caught about ten minutes of the Oscars last night (not including the commercials). I had company in town this weekend and we spent the evening, before going to the airport, enjoying a nice dinner out. I tuned in just in time to see the awards for best supporting roles, and when Hal Holbrook didn't win, I turned it off and went back to the crossword puzzle.

I think this is the first time in years that I haven't seen any of the nominated films. It's not that I don't care about them any more -- not like the way I've gotten with the Grammys -- but I just... didn't. Other things, like work and the fact that the nearest movie theatre to my house is a pretty long haul to a shopping mall where you have to pay to park, have kept me out of the movie houses.

Anyway, congratulations to all who won.
Fetch more...

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Sunday Reading

- Evangelical and Liberal? Amy Sullivan tells of her blend of faith and politics.
As an evangelical who worked in Democratic politics before entering journalism, I'm used to getting looks from liberals who are embarrassed for me when I use the E-word to describe myself. Confusion flickers across their faces as they instantly reassess my political leanings and intelligence. People who have known me for years start asking whether I watch Fox News and brace for spontaneous proselytizing.

And then there is the more dangerous sort of bias. A few months ago, while participating in an early-morning panel discussion in the heart of Manhattan, I was startled fully awake when a man stood up to declare that Democrats who reached out to religious voters, especially evangelicals, were akin to those who collaborated with the Nazis. I put on a sweet smile of Christian charity and counted to 10.

Comments like that explain why so many of us liberals who also happen to be evangelicals have stayed in the closet for so long. It is hard to overcome decades of suspicion, much of it richly earned by leaders of the religious right who used faith in the cause of a political power grab and in the name of intolerance and fear. But the lingering misconceptions are also painful reminders of the price people like myself have paid for staying silent while others claimed a monopoly on faith. And the country has paid, too.

That thought seems to have been on Sen. Barack Obama's mind last month, at the end of a presidential debate in Myrtle Beach, S.C. "There have been times," Obama said, "when our Democratic Party did not reach out as aggressively as we could to evangelicals because the assumption was, well, they don't agree with us on choice, or they don't agree with us on gay rights, and so we just shouldn't show up. . . . And that means that people have a very right-wing perspective in terms of what faith means and of defining our faith."

Amen. Democrats weren't just passive nonactors who stood by helplessly while the GOP claimed Christ for itself. Instead of pushing back against conservatives' insistence that Democrats aren't religious, the party beat a hasty retreat, ceding the high ground in the competition for religious Christian voters and discussions of morality. The religious divide in U.S. politics that emerged -- call it the God gap -- represented as much a failure by Democrats as it did an achievement by Republicans.

The first religious bloc that professional Democrats wrote off was the evangelicals, despite the fact that fully 40 percent of born-again Christians describe themselves as politically moderate. Then party officials started to steer clear of Catholic voters, spooked by their opposition to abortion. Michael Dukakis's 1988 campaign was the first in Democratic history to turn down all invitations to appear at Catholic venues.

Thus isolated, the professionals who run Democratic campaigns fell into a self-reinforcing spiral of misconceptions about the faithful. As being religious became not just declasse but downright dangerous in Democratic circles, religious Democrats silenced themselves. No one wanted to be lumped in with the likes of Jerry Falwell, who went on Pat Robertson's show "The 700 Club" two days after 9/11 and accused the left of helping cause the attacks.

But now, after 30 years in the wilderness, the Democratic Party is being reborn. The "Come to Jesus" moment was Sen. John F. Kerry's loss in 2004. Catholic Democrats, shocked at the idea that it might be impossible for one of them to ever again win the White House, banded together to push back against their church and their party. Religious liberals, angered at being left out of the definition of "values voters," finally rose from their slumber. Kerry himself called on his colleagues to get over their discomfort with matters of faith.

Most important, led by the two main contenders for the party's 2008 nomination, religious Democrats are publicly reclaiming their faith.
I have no doubt whatsoever that it is possible to be both evangelical and liberal, even if there are those of us who are aligned with a faith and practice -- the Quakers -- who are aggressively non-evangelical. The Quakers have put their faith and beliefs into political action long before the Religious Reich came into being. The difference is that the Quakers and the liberal churches did it to make the world a better place for everyone, not just the "right" kind of people.

- "Good Night, Albuquerque" The city's evening newspaper is ceasing publication after 86 years.
The Albuquerque Tribune will publish its final edition Saturday, ending a buoyant and sometimes bare-knuckled presence as the city's afternoon newspaper.

E.W. Scripps Co., The Tribune's Cincinnati-based owner, today said the U.S. Department of Justice -- which had closely monitored a six-month effort to sell the newspaper -- was aware of the decision to cease publication of the 86-year-old Trib.

The newspaper's 38 editorial employees were told of Scripps' decision by Editor Phill Casaus in a staff meeting this morning.

"It's a difficult day, but there is a lot to celebrate about The Tribune, and I don't think that's limited merely to the people who work here or have worked here," Casaus said.

The Department of Justice was required to monitor the sale or closure because it oversees the newspaper's joint operating agreement with the Albuquerque Journal. The agreement has allowed the papers to share certain business functions while operating independent newsrooms.

Scripps announced in August it would sell or discontinue publication, saying it had determined the Albuquerque market couldn't support an afternoon newspaper.

The Trib's daily circulation in January was about 9,600, Casaus said. In 1988, the newspaper sold about 42,000 copies a day.

"The loss of The Albuquerque Tribune is profoundly sad for the community, its dedicated staff, and all those great journalists who have contributed over the years to the newspaper's outstanding reputation for editorial independence and excellence," said Rich Boehne, executive vice president and chief operating officer for Scripps.

"As The Tribune passes into history, we take some solace in the knowledge that Albuquerque and New Mexico are better places to live today thanks to the newspaper's commitment to community service," he added.

The Tribune -- which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1994, was a finalist for journalism's highest award in 1996 and consistently won state and national awards -- will publish a commemorative edition Saturday to celebrate its 86 years of covering Albuquerque and New Mexico, Casaus said.
I had a subscription to both the Journal and the Tribune when I lived in Albuquerque, and the Trib's somewhat liberal editorial page made a nice counterbalance to the Journal's conservative leanings. And for those of us who still remember when almost every town had two or more papers, it was good for journalism and good for the people. (HT to Brian.)

- Mea Sorta Culpa: Clark Hoyt, the "public editor" for the New York Times, takes the paper to task for raising the whiff of sexual impropriety in the McCain story when it was never proven in the background or the facts of the story.
The uproar was over an assertion in the second paragraph that during McCain’s first run for the White House eight years ago, some of his top advisers became “convinced” he was having a “romantic” relationship with a female lobbyist and intervened to protect the candidate from himself. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, denied they had an affair, and at a press conference after the article was published, McCain denied that anyone ever confronted him about their relationship. He described her as a friend.

The article had repercussions for both McCain and The Times. He may benefit, at least in the short run, from a conservative backlash against the “liberal” New York Times. The newspaper found itself in the uncomfortable position of being the story as much as publishing the story, in large part because, although it raised one of the most toxic subjects in politics — sex — it offered readers no proof that McCain and Iseman had a romance.

[...]

The pity of it is that, without the sex, The Times was on to a good story. McCain, who was reprimanded by the Senate Ethics Committee in 1991 for exercising “poor judgment” by intervening with federal regulators on behalf of a corrupt savings and loan executive, recast himself as a crusader against special interests and the corrupting influence of money in politics. Yet he has continued to maintain complex relationships with lobbyists like Iseman, at whose request he wrote to the Federal Communications Commission to urge a speed-up on a decision affecting one of her clients.

Much of that story has been reported over the years, but it was still worth pulling together to help voters in 2008 better understand the John McCain who might be their next president.

I asked Jill Abramson, the managing editor for news, if The Times could have done the story and left out the allegation about an affair. “That would not have reflected the essential truth of why the aides were alarmed,” she said.

But what the aides believed might not have been the real truth. And if you cannot provide readers with some independent evidence, I think it is wrong to report the suppositions or concerns of anonymous aides about whether the boss is getting into the wrong bed.
Which only goes to prove that timeless adage that sex sells. If the paper had left out the innuendo, the story would have had a lot more impact. As it is, though, especially with the Republicans and their obsession with other peoples' sex lives, getting past the titillation is the hard part.

- Goodbye, Antioch College.
YELLOW SPRINGS, Ohio - Antioch College, known for inspiring quirky academic programs that produce students with a passion for free thinking and social activism, has no choice but to close for the 2008-2009 academic year, trustees of the parent Antioch University said yesterday.

Operations will be suspended June 30.

Antioch and Yellow Springs, tie-dyed and liberal-leaning, fed off each other. Students were encouraged to create their own programs for learning.

Famous alums included Twilight Zone creator Rod Serling, Coretta Scott King, and evolutionary scientist Stephen Jay Gould.

After two days of meetings in Los Angeles, trustees reaffirmed their June, 2007, decision to close the college for a year. They said they ran out of time to reach a deal on transferring the financially struggling school to a group of alumni, donors, and others with its own board of trustees.

Trustees had reversed their earlier decision in November, contingent on whether alumni and the school could meet fund-raising deadlines. But the college could not overcome declining enrollment, dependence on tuition, and a small endowment.

Trustees said they would continue discussions on a possible transfer of the college, but said it was important to clarify for students, faculty, and staff that they would need to make plans for the next phase in their educations and careers.

The town and school have been fertile ground for social activism and civil disobedience, ranging from anti-Vietnam war protests in the 1960s and '70s through demonstrations against the Iraq war in recent years.
One of the alumni of Antioch is my older brother.

- Frank Rich: The parallels of history and how Hillary Clinton lost the war.

- Doonesbury: what's in a name. (Fixed the link. Thanks, Rook.)

- Opus: a metaphor.
Fetch more...

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Roots

My cousin sent me some family photos that I had never seen before.


These are my great-great-grandparents, Stephen Allen Bemis and Hannah Jane Thomas Bemis, taken, as the caption notes, in July 1854. As far as I know, this is the earliest photo of my ancestors.

Stephen was born in 1828 in Fitchburg, Massachusetts. He later wrote a book called Reflections of a Long and Somewhat Uneventful Life, but from what I can gather, through tales of my father and my own research, it was anything but uneventful. (Perhaps it's from him that I get my dry sense of humor.)
Fetch more...

Short Takes

Some things to scroll through:
  • Just the Facts: Both sides dig into Barack Obama's story about soldiers in Afghanistan.
  • Denial Denial: John McCain's blanket denial of ever doing any favors for a friend is getting some holes in it.
  • The High Road Out of Town? Bob Herbert wonders if Hillary Clinton is signaling the exit music... will she tug on her ear like Carol Burnett?
Enjoy the snow up the the Northeast.


Fetch more...

Friday, February 22, 2008

Snortin' Norton Update II

After my posting last week about my troubles with Norton Anti-Virus, I got an e-mail from one of the company's higher-ups, who was sorry to see that I was having problems with their software and told me that my story would be passed on to the customer service department. The subtext was pretty apparent; we're sorry you had trouble with our program, but we're even sorrier to see that you blogged about it.

I then got an e-mail from a person in the customer service department who offered to call me to discuss the issue. I wrote back that the call wasn't really necessary; the software was working fine now, as I had explained in a follow-up post, and I just wanted to know if my experience with the glitch in my subscription expiry date was isolated or part of a larger pattern. I also told him that the Norton Anti-Virus program was a large, intrusive, and cumbersome program. Back when I had my Toshiba Satellite laptop, it took a good ten minutes for the program to boot up and do all its scans before I could effectively use the computer. I told him that if I hadn't replaced that computer with my HP Pavilion with the larger hard drive and bigger RAM, I would have let the subscription on my Norton products expire and then drop it like third-period French. His response was basically, Gee, maybe your computer was maxed out, and he never said whether or not my subscription issue was an isolated incident.

That is not what I call customer support. That's what I call dodging the issue. In actuality, my old computer was not maxed out; it still had plenty of room in the hard drive. It was a slower computer, to be sure, but telling the customer that basically "it's your fault" -- even if it is -- does not engender good feelings on the part of the customer, and I'm still seriously thinking about dumping Norton next November after I squeeze my $49.99 out of them.

Compare that with the experience I had yesterday with Go Daddy. They are my e-mail service provider as well as the managers for the domains of www.barkbarkwoofwoof.com, www.mustangbobby.com, and www.bobbycrameronline.com. When I got home yesterday afternoon and opened Outlook, I got one e-mail. I normally get about fifteen or twenty, and then I got the error message that Outlook could not contact my incoming mail server. I got on the phone to Go Daddy technical support and got through to a guy named Mike who explained to me with no hesitation whatsoever that they were having a problem with their e-mail servers and that it would be resolved momentarily. He apologized graciously, then showed me how to get my mail through the web. No "blame the customer" and no obfuscation about whether or not it was a system-wide problem. And true to his word, in about ten minutes my e-mail was up and running in Outlook.

It's the things like that that count in customer service. I will recommend Go Daddy to anyone who asks just because I was able to get a quick and honest reply out of them. As for Norton, I think the only reason they contacted me via e-mail was because I embarrassed them on my blog.

Perhaps I'll hear from them again now.
Fetch more...

Debate Wrap

I caught the last ten minutes of the Democratic debate last night; just enough time to see Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama deliver their closing answers. Josh Marshall does a good summation:
Both candidates had a good debate. The level of specificity and detail in discussions of policy questions spoke well of both of them. Hillary had a strong closing. Obama has clearly improved as a debater and seemed to embody the frontrunner mantle. All of this points basically to a tie. And in the context of where this campaign is, a tie is a win for Obama because he's winning. And Clinton needs to change the dynamic of the campaign.

Notwithstanding the inflamed partisans on both sides, I think the great majority of Democrats like both these candidates, genuinely like and admire both of them. You could feel that in the responses from the audience tonight. But that pleasant equilibrium is losing the race for her right now.
And that may not be altogether a bad thing. If she knows that the nomination is slipping away, going out kicking and screaming would be bad for her, bad for the party, and it would only reinforce the misogynistic stereotypes bellowed by the righties that she's not ready to be president because she can't handle the defeat. A graceful exit would actually enhance her image, and that's a win for everybody.
Fetch more...

Branded

Take this fun quiz.

I got eighteen out of twenty.
Fetch more...

Friday Blogaround

A short work week -- for some -- but a lot of news. Here's the weekly take from the LC:
- A Blog Around The Clock: how to raise children without religious indoctrination.
- A Rational Animal: how long will Mark Penn be Hillary Clinton's adviser.
- archy: what obsolete skills do you still have?
- Bark Bark Woof Woof: it's only a theory.
- Bloggg: one reason not to shop on E-bay.
- Collective Sigh: andante is on a chemo "vacation."
- Dohiyi Mir: NTodd caught the eclipse.
- Echidne Of The Snakes: Hey, you white Europeans! Start screwing!
- First Draft: Freeper freakage.
- Florida Progressive Coalition Blog: Stamp out Sean Campbell.
- Iddybud Journal enlightens us as to the situation in Kosovo.
- Left Is Right: this 'n' that and other news.
- Lefty Side of the Dial: why I don't have an iPhone.
- Musing's musings: trying to return to normal at NIU.
- Pen-Elayne on the Web: If Stephen Sondheim lived in Mayberry...
- Rook's Rant: 19%?
- rubber hose: straight talk on Pakistan?
- Scrutiny Hooligans: what to do while watching a debate.
- SoonerThought: what would you do with $2 million?
- Speedkill: amazing medical breakthroughs.
- Steve Bates, The Yellow Doggerel Democrat: Whodathunkit? The New York Times stands up for free speech on-line.
- Stupid Enough Unexplanation: faint hope.
- The Invisible Library: racist bingo.
- WTF Is It Now?? Look who hired an illegal immigrant.
- ...You Are A Tree: what if the Beatles had recorded Stairway to Heaven?
A busy weekend coming up, including the Boca Raton Concours d'Elegance.
Fetch more...

Friday Catblogging Classic

What my week has been like.


Fetch more...

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Question of the Day

Melissa ran out of QotD's yesterday, so she asked her readers for suggestions. Here's one from Meowser:
What one thing in or around your house have you owned the longest?
I have a lot of family heirlooms that have been handed down to me, but I would say that chances are the thing I've personally owned the longest is either my dog-earred and dog-chewed copy of Roger Tory Peterson's Field Guide to the Birds that I've had since I was about nine or ten, or Snowball, my stuffed toy kitten and star of Friday Catblogging. I think both arrived at the same Christmas in 1962 or thereabouts.
Fetch more...

The Eclipse

It was partly cloudy last night, so the lunar eclipse was mostly visible from my front yard here in Miami. I tried to take a picture of it, but my camera is not designed for celestial photography, so here's one from West Hartford, Connecticut.


Fetch more...

Zap

The Navy says they blasted a spy satellite out of orbit with a missle launched from a ship in the north Pacific.

What, they couldn't get a lock on it with a photon torpedo?


The debris will either burn up in the atmosphere or fall harmlessly to Earth. So they say.
Fetch more...

Ink Blots

The reaction to the McCain/Iseman story has been a lot more telling than the story itself, and you can see that the pundits and bloggers are putting their own spin or agenda behind the interpretation. It’s this week’s Rorschach test of the campaign.

They've come down roughly in three camps. First there's the kill-the-messenger group, mostly on the right, who claim this is just another smear job by the New York Times; that it is old news from the 2000 campaign, and there's not much to the story in the first place. Then there's the group that immediately jumped to the conclusion that Sen. McCain was having a sexual relationship with Ms. Iseman; after all, what else could the term "inappropriate relationship" mean, and they're jumping to the conclusion that we're on the verge of a Bill-and-Monica story again. And then there are those who are watching those first two groups and waiting to see if the story itself has legs or whether the story about the story is what will give it more than a one-day news cycle lifespan.

As for the story itself, it is long on Mr. McCain's history as a congressman and senator and his dealings with lobbyists and short on accusations of actual wrong-doing. It is more about the perception of Mr. McCain's relationships within his own campaign and how they could be used against him in the campaign. As Josh Marshall notes at TPM, it seems that the story has been lawyered down to the point that whatever raw meat there was that could have created an implication of a romantic relationship between the senator and the lobbyist has been taken out. (This is where the defenders of the senator jump in and say the story is too thin to warrant any attention and slam the New York Times for launching a smear job. A bit of a vicious cycle there.)

According to several reporters, including Jonathan Alter of Newsweek, this story has been floating around for several months and that Sen. McCain hired Robert Bennett, the lawyer who defended President Clinton, to intervene with the Times to kill the story in December, before the Iowa caucuses. According to other reports, the reason the Times came out with it now was because another outlet, The New Republic, was planning to put out its own story... about the Times not writing the story.

It will be interesting to see how the anti-McCain wingnuts in the conservative camp take to this story. On the one hand, they will see it as an affirmation that Sen. McCain is a sanctimonious hypocrite about campaign finance and lobbying reform with the titillation of a possible sex scandal thrown in, and that gives them even more reasons to hate him. But there's also the natural instinct to come to the defense of a Republican being attacked by the New York Times, that bastion of elitist left-wing liberalism. This may provide a bipolar moment for folks like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. My guess is that they will torture it enough that they can come down on both sides and still claim they were right about John McCain and the liberal media all along.

The McCain campaign issued a blustery non-denial denial, accusing the Times of launching a "hit-and-run smear campaign" and claiming that "Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics." The next couple of days will prove whether or not that's true.
Fetch more...

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

John McCain and the Lobbyist

From the New York Times:
Early in Senator John McCain’s first run for the White House eight years ago, waves of anxiety swept through his small circle of advisers.

A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, in his offices and aboard a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.

When news organizations reported that Mr. McCain had written letters to government regulators on behalf of the lobbyist’s clients, the former campaign associates said, some aides feared for a time that attention would fall on her involvement.

Mr. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, both say they never had a romantic relationship. But to his advisers, even the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity.

It had been just a decade since an official favor for a friend with regulatory problems had nearly ended Mr. McCain’s political career by ensnaring him in the Keating Five scandal. In the years that followed, he reinvented himself as the scourge of special interests, a crusader for stricter ethics and campaign finance rules, a man of honor chastened by a brush with shame.

But the concerns about Mr. McCain’s relationship with Ms. Iseman underscored an enduring paradox of his post-Keating career. Even as he has vowed to hold himself to the highest ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest.
Stay tuned.
Fetch more...

It's Only a Theory

Following up from this post two weeks ago, the Florida Board of Education will now allow the public schools to teach evolution.
For the first time ever, evolution is to be taught clearly and explicitly in Florida classrooms now that the state Board of Education approved a batch of new science standards Tuesday that mention the ''E'' word.

But there's a catch: The subject will be taught as ''the scientific theory of evolution.''

As originally proposed, the science standards, updated for the first time since 1996, didn't call evolution a ''theory'' when they were drafted and reviewed by a panel of experts last year. Following numerous public complaints, though, the state Department of Education suggested the wording change to clearly label every scientific law and theory -- not just about evolution -- as such.

The seven-member board adopted the alternate proposal, and therefore the standards, by a 4-3 vote.

Religious advocates wanted more.

They proposed a so-called ''academic freedom'' amendment to counter what they say is the ''dogmatic'' tone of the standards that call evolution ''the fundamental concept underlying all of biology.'' The amendment would have given teachers explicit permission ''to engage students in a critical analysis of that evidence.''
I know the Religious Right thinks they won some sort of victory by qualifying "evolution" by making it the object of a prepositional phrase, but in reality, scientists are not uncomfortable attaching "theory" to it, because that's what it is. The religious advocates think the word "theory" leaves open the door for doubt, but, to quote the immortal Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Scientists are very careful to describe what the word theory means.
In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation, and general relativity.
(The fundies, on the other hand, would have you believe it's intelligent falling.)
In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statement "It's not a fact, it's only a theory." True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.
The evangelicals say they only want to open the discussion in classrooms to the possibilities of other explanations for the origins of life on earth, but what they're really trying to do is to sneak their religious mythology into the public schools.

Of course, that's only a theory.
Fetch more...

False Bravado

Lawrence Kudlow gloats about Hillary Clinton's loss in Wisconsin.
Please allow me a dose of hardened market realism concerning Obama's landslide victory in Wisconsin. The race is over. Hillary is finished. The Clinton Restoration is over. President Bill Clinton's political invincibility is over. Hillary's electability is over.

Obama got to the far Left faster than she did. He out organized her in the precincts. He out fundraised her. He out speechified her. He out-hustled her. He out-dressed her. He out-presidentialed her. He outdid her and he outbid her for votes, one promised government check at a time.

A 15-point margin in Wisconsin is incredible. Wisconsin is a lot like Ohio except for the wacko ultra-Left Madison college population, which is even worse that Columbus's Ohio State. But there are so many campuses in Ohio that will go for Obama that it is no matter. Think faculty voters, grimly determined for a left-wing takeover of America " from the bottom up" to use the former Saul Alinsky community organizer's phrase. As goes Wisconsin, so goes Ohio.

[...]

As of tonight, the market has officially pulled the plug, terminating her campaign. The only thing left for her is to muster some grace, humility and character to begin the process of pulling out. To do otherwise will destroy the Democratic party and what's left of the Clintons' badly tarred and tattered reputation.

The real winner tonight? That chap from Arizona. Captain John McCain.
This reminds me of the old cartoon of the Battle of the Little Big Horn: a corporal rushes up to General Custer: "They've got us surrounded!" he cries. General Custer replies, "Ha! Everything is going according to my plan! We've got them right where we want them!"

I have the feeling the same sentiment is going through the GOP inner circles right about now. They have been banking on running against Hillary Clinton since the day she announced she was running for the Senate in New York, knowing full well that she would run for president at the first real opportunity. They had never heard of Barack Obama, and when he emerged from obscurity to become a viable candidate, they checked with all of their friends out at the country club and decided that no one would ever vote for a black man from Chicago with a funny name. They could nominate anyone they wanted, even a guy they didn't trust all that much, who had a temper, and who voted against the tax cuts. So what if he pissed off the fundies and mouth-breathing loons like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? They're just useful idiots who can be counted on to bully the liberals, but you wouldn't want them to rent the cottage next door at Harbor Springs.

What's really going on here is that Mr. Kudlow is making the best of a bad situation for the Republicans. They didn't know who they were going to nominate going into this whole thing -- Giuliani? Romney? -- but they certainly weren't counting on John McCain being the one. They all breathed a sigh of relief last summer when it looked like he was toast and Fred Thompson was creating all the buzz. (Only later did they figure out that the "buzz" was Fred snoring in his La-Z-Boy.) And they were certain that they could bring out all the oldies-but-goodies from the 1990's to run against the Clinton machine; they wouldn't even have to do any new research. Well, now all of that has changed, and suddenly the Republicans are stuck with a candidate that has to convince his own party's base not to hate him so much in public, and it looks like they're going to end up running against a Democrat that even some Republicans won't demonize. If Sen. Obama can survive and win against the Clintons, he can certainly handle anything the GOP throws at him, including lunatic-fringe accusations of commie-Jewish baby-making conspiracy theories. (HT to Jeff.)

Larry Kudlow may be saluting Captain John McCain, but he'd better not forget General Custer.
Fetch more...
 

Blogger Template Designed and Implemented by CLWill