Alright, I've already done a 'In Praise Of' on Ol' Blue Eyes, but the man is (was) amazing. Today, I had a few minutes to kill while getting ready for the wedding of an old work acquaintance, so I dropped by Circuit City, and just for grins, picked up a copy of The Ultimate Rat Pack, a CD/DVD combo. I'm familiar with the standard acts of the boys from other recordings, so the CD, while entertaining, is secondary to me...what I really got it for was the DVD. More on that after some entertaining background.
The CD is a recording from late 1962 from the Villa Venice nightclub. The club was about a half hour outside of Chicago, and it was the entertainment arm of an illegal gambling joint run by Sam Giancana, the notorious Chicago mob boss who helped ensure JFK won the presidency, only to get doublecrossed by Bobbie Kennedy's War on the Mob as Attorney General (I'm not making this up - honestly). It was Sinatra who worked as the conduit between Joseph Kennedy and Giancana, and as a payback to Sam 'Flood', as he was also known, Sinatra, Dean, and Sammy did a multi-night stint for the total paycheck of - nada...that's right, zip. When Frank Sinatra and Sam Giancana said you were going to do a show, you did the show, baby.
The DVD background is almost as entertaining. Sinatra brought the Pack together for a 1965 benefit for the Teamster's favorite charity. (Imagine that - Sinatra and the Teamsters - hmm, what's the common link here?) Joey Bishop couldn't make it, so a young Johnny Carson filled in. As colorful as all of that is, though, I wanted to see the closest thing to a videotaped Rat Pack show that you can get.
I wasn't disappointed. Dean Martin was a wonderful, underrated entertainer, and of course, Sammy Davis performs energetically, but I must say, when you see Sinatra singing "I've Got You Under My Skin", in 1965, backed by the Count Basie Orchestra, conducted by Quincy Jones, well...electric is the word that comes to mind. Among the other Sinatra numbers are "Fly Me To The Moon", "Luck Be A Lady" (with suitable craps-shooting pantomine), and "You Make Me Feel So Young". Wow. Best of all, though, is to see Sinatra, not only near the top of his game, but so obviously enjoying himself. When Sinatra sings a song, it gets sung. And that's the end of that, as the man himself might say...baby.
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Peering Into the Future
With a hat tip to PoliPundit, Point Five has an absolutely shocking look at the future...shocking, because it's so plausible! Man, that's spooky...
Novak On Hillary: Don't Turn Left At Iowa
In further confirmation that, yes, Hillary will run, and yes, she's smart enough to run towards the center, Robert Novak reports that Clinton is being advised to avoid the Iowa caucases, in the belief that winning there requires a run to the left. Why is that? Because it is primarily party activists who run the Iowa dog-and-pony show, and it is precisely these 'progressive' insiders (the same insiders who think Howard Dean (!!!) should be the face of the Democratic Party) who will doom any candidate who gets too close to them. I'll continue saying it until events prove otherwise: Hillary is much smarter, politically, then her potential 2008 rivals. To discount her chances is to throw caution to the wind; it's not a position we can afford to take.
Weekly Jackass Number Twenty: Markos Moulitsas Z�niga
This week's honoree is, of course, better known as the Daily Kos. I've held off on Markos for quite a while as I pondered how to handle him. With some honorees, you just quote a few things they've written, and basically just let them hang themselves with their own rope. Markos, though, deserves a more nuanced approach.
Oh, sure, it would be easy to just go after his incomprehensibly vile comment after four U.S. citizens were killed horribly in Fallujah ('I feel nothing. Screw them.'), and search out other obscene pronouncements. (Markos, when faced with a huge backlash, and a flood of advertising revenue loss, attempted to backtrack without apologizing, by essentially saying he was a liar, then bizarrely, bragging about how he took our best shot and was still standing.)
And there are other obscence pronouncements. Oh, are there ever...obscene in mindset, message, and presentation. This is the heart of my indictment against Markos. Ted Rall, a few months back, challenged the rightwing bloggers to 'prove' that liberals were as hate-filled as conservatives (a ridiculous challenge, yes, but one that was easily met). I knew I would be able to call Rall's bluff in a heartbeat, and I knew just where to go - to the good ol' Daily Kos. I wasn't disappointed.
Many would defend Markos against this charge, by saying that he isn't responsible for what kind of trash his commenters post. Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. First of all, all bloggers have a responsibility for everything that appears on their blogs. That doesn't mean they own the comments, but it does mean they are responsible for monitoring them, and removing anything that crosses the line. It is up to the bloggers themselves to determine where that line is, and what constitutes crossing it...but by leaving something posted on your blog, that you yourself are responsible for publishing, you indicate at the very least a belief that the comment isn't heinous enough to warrant removal. (This isn't censorship, by the way, and if you think it is, you need to educate yourself on the term).
What goes on at the Daily Kos, though, goes beyond offensive comments. First of all, to post a comment, you must register. That's layer of tacit approval one. Then, you are allowed to post 'diaries' (tacit approval layer two), which other members of the community vote on (tacit approval layer three). The highest-rated diaries are 'recommended' (layer four), and, at Markos's discretion, sometime promoted to the entry page (layer five). If you still insist on saying Markos is not responsible, than it's hard to comprehend your definition of responsibility.
I'm not going to waste time hunting down examples of the foul level of discourse that is often found in these diaries and comments...if you doubt that it exists, just pay the site a visit...if you don't find something offensive in three minutes, you aren't looking hard enough. Instead, I'd like to close by paying tribute to some of the things our honoree does right.
Markos served his nation in the military. He has two bachelor degrees, a J.D., and a very successful website. In fact, The Daily Kos is consistently the highest trafficked political blog, right or left. He has a genuinely innovative site setup, and fosters a real sense of community among his 'followers'. He has quite a bit of fundraising prowess, and his own consulting business (that's a subject for another time). All the more's the pity, then, that he allows all of this influence to be subsumed by a reputation for hate. And that, Markos, is why you are this week's honoree.
UPDATE 1:45 p.m. central: It's always a treat to get a link from the great Tim Blair...look around and enjoy yourself, folks...I'm off to a wedding...
Oh, sure, it would be easy to just go after his incomprehensibly vile comment after four U.S. citizens were killed horribly in Fallujah ('I feel nothing. Screw them.'), and search out other obscene pronouncements. (Markos, when faced with a huge backlash, and a flood of advertising revenue loss, attempted to backtrack without apologizing, by essentially saying he was a liar, then bizarrely, bragging about how he took our best shot and was still standing.)
And there are other obscence pronouncements. Oh, are there ever...obscene in mindset, message, and presentation. This is the heart of my indictment against Markos. Ted Rall, a few months back, challenged the rightwing bloggers to 'prove' that liberals were as hate-filled as conservatives (a ridiculous challenge, yes, but one that was easily met). I knew I would be able to call Rall's bluff in a heartbeat, and I knew just where to go - to the good ol' Daily Kos. I wasn't disappointed.
Many would defend Markos against this charge, by saying that he isn't responsible for what kind of trash his commenters post. Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. First of all, all bloggers have a responsibility for everything that appears on their blogs. That doesn't mean they own the comments, but it does mean they are responsible for monitoring them, and removing anything that crosses the line. It is up to the bloggers themselves to determine where that line is, and what constitutes crossing it...but by leaving something posted on your blog, that you yourself are responsible for publishing, you indicate at the very least a belief that the comment isn't heinous enough to warrant removal. (This isn't censorship, by the way, and if you think it is, you need to educate yourself on the term).
What goes on at the Daily Kos, though, goes beyond offensive comments. First of all, to post a comment, you must register. That's layer of tacit approval one. Then, you are allowed to post 'diaries' (tacit approval layer two), which other members of the community vote on (tacit approval layer three). The highest-rated diaries are 'recommended' (layer four), and, at Markos's discretion, sometime promoted to the entry page (layer five). If you still insist on saying Markos is not responsible, than it's hard to comprehend your definition of responsibility.
I'm not going to waste time hunting down examples of the foul level of discourse that is often found in these diaries and comments...if you doubt that it exists, just pay the site a visit...if you don't find something offensive in three minutes, you aren't looking hard enough. Instead, I'd like to close by paying tribute to some of the things our honoree does right.
Markos served his nation in the military. He has two bachelor degrees, a J.D., and a very successful website. In fact, The Daily Kos is consistently the highest trafficked political blog, right or left. He has a genuinely innovative site setup, and fosters a real sense of community among his 'followers'. He has quite a bit of fundraising prowess, and his own consulting business (that's a subject for another time). All the more's the pity, then, that he allows all of this influence to be subsumed by a reputation for hate. And that, Markos, is why you are this week's honoree.
UPDATE 1:45 p.m. central: It's always a treat to get a link from the great Tim Blair...look around and enjoy yourself, folks...I'm off to a wedding...
Friday, April 22, 2005
Miscellanea: Special Fundraising Edition
Yesterday, in my post on the 'trashing' of Hillary, I mentioned that her ties to Hollywood were a matter of public knowledge. This is a timely reminder of why that's not a positive...
On the other hand, no one may ever find out about it. Will at Vodkapundit has that scoop (well, we've got the blogs, thank God)...
The great Chrenkoff with more on the vast leftwing conspiracy...
Punditish has some thoughts on Delay's ill-conceived attack on the judiciary...
Depressingly, our high schools aren't getting any better, and Bill Gates is trying to do something about it...The Bernoulli Effect has the story...
I notice Josh Marshall has finally begun blogging about something other than Social Security reform again in a few posts...and he's having a fundraiser...coincidence?...
Dan Drezner on political bias in the academy (the Reader's Digest Condensed Version) : Does it exist? ...yep...Does it matter?...not much...Cure worse than the disease?...oh, yeah...
On the other hand, no one may ever find out about it. Will at Vodkapundit has that scoop (well, we've got the blogs, thank God)...
The great Chrenkoff with more on the vast leftwing conspiracy...
Punditish has some thoughts on Delay's ill-conceived attack on the judiciary...
Depressingly, our high schools aren't getting any better, and Bill Gates is trying to do something about it...The Bernoulli Effect has the story...
I notice Josh Marshall has finally begun blogging about something other than Social Security reform again in a few posts...and he's having a fundraiser...coincidence?...
Dan Drezner on political bias in the academy (the Reader's Digest Condensed Version) : Does it exist? ...yep...Does it matter?...not much...Cure worse than the disease?...oh, yeah...
Juan Cole: A Three-Headed Conspiracy Is After Massad
Juan Cole can't decide who to blame the predicament of Columbia University Assistant Professor Joseph Massad on in his Salon article on the 'new McCarthyism' (oh, here we go again), so he goes for the trifecta:
- It's the Jews' fault:
The attacks on Massad, and two other professors in the department, were led by off-campus right-wing Zionist organizations aligned with Israel's Likud Party -- notably a murky Boston-based organization called "the David Project," which produced the film in which the accusations were made. (In fact, according to an in-depth report by Scott Sherman in the Nation, there is no single "film"; at least six versions exist, and it has never been screened for the public. When the Nation asked to view it, the David Project refused to make it available. Its head, Charles Jacobs, also refused to provide details to the Nation about the group's financial backers or its ties to professional pro-Israel lobbyists.) - It's the Christians' fault: Elected bodies throughout the United States, dominated by the Christian right, are now considering radical programs such as imposing the teaching of "intelligent design" in biology classes, or abolishing academic tenure (the practice of not firing professors for their views). Even Congress has succumbed to the pressure: The House of Representatives passed an outrageous bill, HR 3077, mandating that area studies programs that receive federal money must "foster debate on American foreign policy from diverse perspectives" -- a heavy-handed attempt to mandate pedagogy that supports the American administration in power and supports Israeli policies uncritically.
- It's the students' and other faculty members' fault: It noted that for several years, after pieces appeared in the tabloid press blasting the department as anti-Israel, many non-students, clearly hostile and with ideological agendas, had been attending classes in the department, interrupting lectures with hostile asides and inhibiting classroom debate. One individual began filming a class without permission. Chillingly, the report noted, "Testimony that we received indicated that in February 2002 Professor Massad had good reason to believe that a member of the Columbia faculty was monitoring his teaching and approaching his students, requesting them to provide information on his statements in class as part of a campaign against him."
Moussaoui - Guilty
The guilty plea of Zacarias Moussaoui has been accepted; Moussaoui says he was trained to fly a 747 into the White House during a follow-up attack to September 11th; others, of course, contend he was part of the 9/11 game plan. The mind boggles at the consequences had he been successful, regardless of the date. I am reminded of the awful period of time during 9/11 when no one was sure that all the planes were accounted for. 3 1/2 years later, and the man is still going through the legal system. It took only a few seconds to condemn the 3,000 9/11 victims to death, though one suspects they found a much more welcoming reception than the one facing Moussaoui.
I'm Shocked and Dismayed...
Eric Alterman went to the mailbag today so he could publish some sycophantic praise of his 'courage' for standing up to John Cloud (you say courage, I say hissy, let's call the whole thing off). Imagine my surprise that he chose not to print my response. For the record, it went as follows (I didn't save it, so this is from memory):
Eric:
You have all the emotional excitability of Andrew Sullivan and none of the talent. Thank you, though, for letting us all know how wonderful your resume is. Insecure much?
Sincerely,
Mark Coffey
Austin, TX
Eric:
You have all the emotional excitability of Andrew Sullivan and none of the talent. Thank you, though, for letting us all know how wonderful your resume is. Insecure much?
Sincerely,
Mark Coffey
Austin, TX
Claudia Rosett: Meet the New Boss, Same As The Old Boss
The great Claudia Rosett tells us that the current plans to reform the UN take place just three years after the last great plan to reform the UN, and notes that since that time:
...we have seen the sex-for-food scandal in the Congo, featuring the rape of minors by U.N. peacekeepers, which continued well after press disclosures last year prompted a U.N. internal investigation. We have seen theft at the World Meteorological Association, scandal in the U.N. audit department, the resignation over sexual harassment charges of the refugee high commissioner Ruud Lubbers, turmoil within the Electoral Assistance Division, and allegations of corruption involving the U.N.'s Geneva-based World Intellectual Property Organization. We have seen rebellion by the U.N. Staff Union against "senior management, and a raft of resignations by senior U.N. officials who nonetheless linger on the premises on official salaries of a dollar a year, plus the various perquisites and connections the place affords.Devastating...unfortunately, it appears that, for now, we will get fooled again.Biggest of all, we have seen the former Oil for Food relief program for Iraq blow like Krakatoa. The program's executive director, Benon Sevan, has been accused by the U.N.-authorized inquiry, led by Paul Volcker, of engaging in a severe conflict of interest. Among other items, Mr. Sevan was found to have been receiving large mysterious payments from his pensioner aunt in Cyprus. The U.N. Secretariat sent out secret hush letters to major U.N. Oil for Food contractors, Saybolt and Cotecna, hired by the U.N. to inspect Saddam's oil and food deals. Congressional investigators and Mr. Volcker's team have since discovered that not only was there far too little inspecting required by the U.N., but that the awarding of U.N. contracts to both parties was done in violation of the U.N.'s own procedures.
We have learned step by step--via details unearthed by the press, not conflict-of-interest disclosures by the U.N.-- that the secretary-general's own son, Kojo Annan, received payments during the course of the program from one of the Oil for Food contractors on the receiving end of last year's U.N. hush letters, Switzerland-based Cotecna Inspections SA. Last month the Volcker inquiry, in an interim report, said these payments routed through various conduits might have totaled more than $480,000.
We have seen signs that Saddam, via Oil for Food, corrupted officials and businessmen worldwide--though apart from legal investigations in the U.S., this aspect of the scandal in countries such as Security Council member states Russia, France and China, not to mention such crossroads of Saddam's commerce as Switzerland and Syria, has barely been scratched.
Now we have the charges by U.S. prosecutors that Koreagate's Tongsun Park shuttled millions in bribe money from Saddam Hussein to two high-ranking U.N. officials, referred to in the complaint as "U.N. Official #1" and "U.N. Official #2." Outside the U.N., the hunt is on to discover the identities of this duo.
A Non-Political Must-Read: Somebody's Going To Make A Great Book Out Of This
Here's a story that's got it all: mob murders, dirty cops, Mafia lawyers, courtroom drama - ahh, if only I lived in New York...guess I'll have to wait for the movie...
Sean Penn at the UN
Hey, that rhymes...is it just me, or does Sean always look like he's nursing one heckuva hangover?...Enjoy your Friday, folks....
Thursday, April 21, 2005
Quick Shots: Because I'm Too Lazy For A Miscellanea
Don't miss part 2 of Rusty Shackleford's interview with the wife of hostage Roy Hallums; it truly is a must-read...
Join me, please, in wishing the great Arthur Chrenkoff a happy birthday...
Meanwhile, as you contemplate the horrible killing of 11 contractors in Iraq today, including one particularly barbaric execution of a survivor, let's pause to reflect on the words of Markos 'Screw Them' Zuniga...also known as the Daily Kos. I highly suggest you click on this link if you haven't seen Zuniga's infamous statement...as Charles notes at Little Green Footballs, Markos is trying to rewrite history by eliminating all traces of the statement, but he's apparently missed this one...
Join me, please, in wishing the great Arthur Chrenkoff a happy birthday...
Meanwhile, as you contemplate the horrible killing of 11 contractors in Iraq today, including one particularly barbaric execution of a survivor, let's pause to reflect on the words of Markos 'Screw Them' Zuniga...also known as the Daily Kos. I highly suggest you click on this link if you haven't seen Zuniga's infamous statement...as Charles notes at Little Green Footballs, Markos is trying to rewrite history by eliminating all traces of the statement, but he's apparently missed this one...
A Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy
No, really, I mean it...just read this, it's no joke...what is a joke is that the Republicans are known as the party of the rich. Between Hollywood moguls, lunatic billionaires, and fat-cat trial lawyers, the Dems raise their money in big chunks from the wealthy...it's the Republicans who are funded by the small donors. I'm not joking this time, either...see the details here.
Moore Breaks Silence, Ask For Next Move Suggestions
From the website of Michael Moore:
Hmm, let's see...suggestions for Michael Moore's next move...France, anyone?...Wassup?
Friends,
How's it going? Ready for the next step?
Let me know what you've been up to and any ideas you have about what our next move should be (write me at the addresses below).
Meanwhile, I'll be in conclave this week handing out goodie bags and running for pope. Wish me well!
Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
Mike@michaelmoore.com
www.michaelmoore.com
Kerry Panders to Religious Right: Turn on the MoDo Signal, Quick!
Commissioner Gordon to Maureen, Commissioner Gordon to Maureen: we need you! That paragon of consistency, John Kerry, is sponsoring along with Rick Santorum (!!!!) the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense certain drugs they morally object to, as long as another pharmacist who works there is willing...of course, Maureen, the lone bastion against the theocratic hordes, will arrive any minute now to save us...uh, Maureen, come in, Maureen, do you copy? Ummm...guess she's on vacation or something...
Alterman Gets It Handed To Him
To Eric Alterman's credit (small though it may be), he did print John Cloud's oh-so-on-target response to his criticism of Time's Ann Coulter package, and the resulting spectacle is most entertaining. The classic pattern is followed here: Alterman spews invective all over Coulter and Cloud, engaging in the very vile, disgusting behavior he would tag on her; then when Cloud calls him on it, he pretends Cloud is nursing a personal dislike of him.
Then we are informed by the Boy Blunder (in comparing himself to Coulter):
Then we are informed by the Boy Blunder (in comparing himself to Coulter):
...we both have B.A.s from Cornell...I went on to earn an M.A. in international relations from Yale and a Ph.D. in U.S. history from Stanford. I�ve written six books, two published by university presses, containing many thousands of footnotes. None of these books have been substantially challenged on the basis of the evidence they employ, even by those who strongly disagree with my arguments. This is not true of Coulter.I am also a professor of journalism at the City University of New York, a senior fellow of two think tanks, a professional blogger for the most trafficked Internet news site in the world and the media columnist for oldest continuously published weekly magazine in the United States. I am pretty sure none of the above is true of Coulter, either.
Wow, looking at that, I can honestly say...what a waste of an education, both for Alterman and his poor students (much less anyone foolish enough to plop down any money for his 'scholarly' books, which, of course, have been challenged often and effectively - remember - don't laugh - this supposed paragon of honesty is the guy who wrote 'What Liberal Media?'). Then Alterman, incredibly, claims he doesn't go around spewing hate speech like Coulter (this from the guy who wished for a bomb to be planted at Republican headquarters and called Prime Minister Sharon a 'sorry sonofabitch').
Eric Alterman taking the high road is like Homer Simpson going vegan...it ain't gonna happen, today, tomorrow, or ever...
Hitchens on Poetry
Well, April, the month of Poetry, is nearing its end, and I will once again put in a plug for the excellent poetry blog of good friend bebere, and I recommend also this nice piece by the great Hitchens. It comes as no surprise to those familiar with his excellent literary criticism to learn that this master of prose has the gifts of memorization and recitation...
The Trashing of Hillary? Give Me A Break...
Ellen Goodman in the Boston Globe writes:
Let's get the easy cheap shot out of the way first. In a discussion of the polarized electorate (she did get that right), Goodman dismisses the notion that Hillary's run will be spoiled by the 'polarizing' factor with the following query:
On the more substantive points, Goodman maintains Hillary's run would be hampered by Bill (it will) and the fact that she's a woman (it won't). For crying out loud, if the oh-so-tolerant Left can't bring itself to vote for a woman in the year 2005...I promise you most Republicans won't have that problem if Condi is in the running.
Goodman's proof that the Right is trashing Hillary seems to rest on the fact that we consider her liberal (she did try to nationalize health care in an unappointed, unelected post, Ellen), less than honest in her recent pandering on religion (oh, Maureen, where's the outrage? Where's the quick condemnation of her kowtowing to current sensibilities?), and 'the darling of the Hollywood left'.
Taking the last point first, the Clintons' ties with Hollywood are quite real and very extensive, and anyone who cares to verify that can do so quite quickly with the help of Google. As for Hillary's recent religious proclamations, I prefer not to play the game of gauging the 'genuineness' of a person's religious commitment. If Hillary claims to be deeply influenced by religion, I'll take her word for it. More interesting is the liberal accusation, and I think a closer look at that aspect reveals how deeply flawed Goodman's argument is.
I submit that far from trashing Hillary, most political observers on the right are according her a good deal of respect. I certainly respect her far more than I ever did her husband. Hillary has shown a great deal of political astuteness after her health care debacle...leaving aside the question of her sincerity, her recent moves toward a reconciliation with 'values' voters and her reasonableness on most foreign policy questions reveal a smart politician who knows that she can't afford to carry the 'flaming liberal' burden into 2008.
This blog and many other commentators have acknowledged Hillary as a potent force to be dealt with in 2008. I continue to maintain that, one way or another, the road the Democratic nomination will go through Hillary. She may not get the nomination, but anyone who wants to move past her had better be prepared for a bruising fight. If that's 'trashing', sign me up for a taste of it...
IT IS MY fervent belief that anyone who writes about the 2008 presidential election before 2006 should be subject to immediate intervention and shipped off to rehab.Well, if the shoe fits...but on my way to the clinic, a few words on the supposed 'trashing' of Hillary Ellen speaks of.
Let's get the easy cheap shot out of the way first. In a discussion of the polarized electorate (she did get that right), Goodman dismisses the notion that Hillary's run will be spoiled by the 'polarizing' factor with the following query:
Need I remind you that John Kerry was picked as a moderate and got demonized anyway?It says volumes about the sorry state of today's Democratic party that the vain, arrogant, junior Senator from Massachusets (shown to have the most liberal voting record in the upper chamber) is considered a moderate by so many. On the other hand, when the head of the DNC is Howard Dean...
On the more substantive points, Goodman maintains Hillary's run would be hampered by Bill (it will) and the fact that she's a woman (it won't). For crying out loud, if the oh-so-tolerant Left can't bring itself to vote for a woman in the year 2005...I promise you most Republicans won't have that problem if Condi is in the running.
Goodman's proof that the Right is trashing Hillary seems to rest on the fact that we consider her liberal (she did try to nationalize health care in an unappointed, unelected post, Ellen), less than honest in her recent pandering on religion (oh, Maureen, where's the outrage? Where's the quick condemnation of her kowtowing to current sensibilities?), and 'the darling of the Hollywood left'.
Taking the last point first, the Clintons' ties with Hollywood are quite real and very extensive, and anyone who cares to verify that can do so quite quickly with the help of Google. As for Hillary's recent religious proclamations, I prefer not to play the game of gauging the 'genuineness' of a person's religious commitment. If Hillary claims to be deeply influenced by religion, I'll take her word for it. More interesting is the liberal accusation, and I think a closer look at that aspect reveals how deeply flawed Goodman's argument is.
I submit that far from trashing Hillary, most political observers on the right are according her a good deal of respect. I certainly respect her far more than I ever did her husband. Hillary has shown a great deal of political astuteness after her health care debacle...leaving aside the question of her sincerity, her recent moves toward a reconciliation with 'values' voters and her reasonableness on most foreign policy questions reveal a smart politician who knows that she can't afford to carry the 'flaming liberal' burden into 2008.
This blog and many other commentators have acknowledged Hillary as a potent force to be dealt with in 2008. I continue to maintain that, one way or another, the road the Democratic nomination will go through Hillary. She may not get the nomination, but anyone who wants to move past her had better be prepared for a bruising fight. If that's 'trashing', sign me up for a taste of it...
Today's Must-Read; Noah Says Of Nuclear Option, "Not Far Enough"
Far, far left Slate columnist Timothy Noah argues for a complete abolition of the filibuster, then veers into the land of the surreal with the following assertion:
The fact is that the GOP doesn't have an agenda. It has impulses: to cut taxes, to increase Pentagon spending, and to mollify the Christian right wherever possible. Does it act on these impulses? Of course. But what mostly gives the party appeal to the electorate is its ability to scream and yell...Talk about projection! Worth reading, though, for its bizarre combination of cogency and fantasy (hat tip to RealClearPolitics)...
That MoDo Mojo: Maureen Ups the Ante in The Times Columnists' War On Religion
Frequent visitors to this blog know that I am truly disgusted that the 'paper of record' gives such prominent play to such a hack as Maureen Dowd. Lately, I've watched with considerable consternation as the Times Editorial Page has gone completely ballastic on the culture war front, with attack after attack on religion disguised as political commentary. Finally, with the latest piece from Dowd, a line has been crossed that will be difficult to come back from.
Do I exaggerate? Judge for yourself...
Do I exaggerate? Judge for yourself...
- ...So media big shots are moving away from patriarchal, authoritarian voice-of-God figures, even as the Catholic Church and politics are moving toward patriarchal, authoritarian voice-of-God figures. (Yes, she really did write that horrible sentence; it's beyond satire...)
The white smoke yesterday signaled that the Vatican thinks what it needs to bring it into modernity is the oldest pope since the 18th century: Joseph Ratzinger, a 78-year-old hidebound archconservative who ran the office that used to be called the Inquisition and who once belonged to Hitler Youth. For American Catholics - especially women and Democratic pro-choice Catholic pols - the cafeteria is officially closed. After all, Cardinal Ratzinger, nicknamed "God's Rottweiler" and "the Enforcer," helped deny Communion rights to John Kerry and other Catholic politicians in the 2004 election.
The only other job this pope would be qualified for is "60 Minutes" anchor. (Again, stunningly awful writing).
- Dowd concludes with a vicious attack on the entire leadership of the Republican party, based on nothing but contempt for their religious faith. There is no other possible interpretation:
President Bush has also long acted as if he channeled the voice of God. And now Tom DeLay and Bill Frist are also pandering to the far-right-wing and evangelical Christians by implying that God speaks - and acts - through them, too.
Mr. Bush's more subtle obeisance to the evangelical right is no longer enough. Puffed up with its electoral clout, the Christian right now wants politicians to genuflect openly.
The doctor who would be president is down on both knees. He's happy to exploit religion by giving a video speech on a telecast next Sunday that will portray Democrats who block the president's judicial nominations as being "against people of faith."
A flier for the Christian telecast, organized by the Family Research Council, shows a confused teenage boy with a Bible in one hand and a judge's gavel in the other. The text reads: "The filibuster was once abused to protect racial bias, and it is now being used against people of faith."
The born-again Tom DeLay has been fighting his ethical woes by acting like a martyr for some time. Dr. Frist, by contrast, was not known for playing the religious card before. But he is clearly willing to turn himself over, lock, stock and barrel, if it will help him marginalize such Christian-right faves as Rick Santorum and Sam Brownback, and garner support from those who always vote because they see elections in terms of eternity..
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Miscellanea: Ay Caramba! Edition
Wow, so much good stuff out there, so little time...let's dig in, shall we?
Heather Mac Donald has a companion piece to the 'Bill Cosby Was Right' Kay Hymowitz piece in City Journal...
Betsy Newmark has a Master's in Russian, and she still has trouble with it, but don't tell that to the brilliant Kossacks, who use the occasion of a mild Condi snafu to call her a serial liar, Dr. Fraud, and assert that the lack of complete fluency means she 'can't speak Russian at all'...
Here's another Kossack genius, with the 20 rules of being a good Republican. Here's a taste of the brilliance:
Speaking of the Daily Idio...er, sorry, Daily Kos, he's cancelled his subscription to Time, but it doesn't have anything to do with a hissy fit over Ann Coulter being on the cover...oh, no, he's quitting because of Time's conservative bias!...BWAAA HAAA HAAAA....oh, stop it man, my sides hurt, that's too much!...
Speaking of hissy fits, over Ann Coulter and otherwise, champion whiner Eric Alterman skewers Time for, yep, it's conservative bias, and then adds:
Whaddya say we stick with the hissy fit theme? Here's the all-new, improved, Andrew Sullivan Emotionalert Meter...
And another model from Wizbang, Ace, and Allah, which I will proudly display on this blog (oh, and scroll down a little for Wizbang's post on the Kossacks and Benedict XVI...it was posted before mine, so I'll gladly throw a link...what can I say? The Kossacks bring out the best in all of us)...
Heather Mac Donald has a companion piece to the 'Bill Cosby Was Right' Kay Hymowitz piece in City Journal...
Betsy Newmark has a Master's in Russian, and she still has trouble with it, but don't tell that to the brilliant Kossacks, who use the occasion of a mild Condi snafu to call her a serial liar, Dr. Fraud, and assert that the lack of complete fluency means she 'can't speak Russian at all'...
Here's another Kossack genius, with the 20 rules of being a good Republican. Here's a taste of the brilliance:
16. You have to believe that Chinese communist missiles have killed more Americans than handguns, alcohol, and tobacco.Curses! They've found us out...and we would have gotten away with it, if it weren't for you meddling kids...if I had a dime for every time I've heard a wingnut ranting about those Chinese communist missiles!...but explain, please, I'm a little slow, how can a missile have a political affiliation?...Man, these guys are on a whole 'nother level...
Speaking of the Daily Idio...er, sorry, Daily Kos, he's cancelled his subscription to Time, but it doesn't have anything to do with a hissy fit over Ann Coulter being on the cover...oh, no, he's quitting because of Time's conservative bias!...BWAAA HAAA HAAAA....oh, stop it man, my sides hurt, that's too much!...
Speaking of hissy fits, over Ann Coulter and otherwise, champion whiner Eric Alterman skewers Time for, yep, it's conservative bias, and then adds:
While I�m alienating my friends, here, I suppose it is as bad a time as any to point out that Time�s political balance of columnists is badly skewed to the right in direct contrast to Newsweek�s. While the latter has the almost always excellent and genuinely liberal Jon Alter, together with the undeniably bleeding-heart Anna Quindlen to balance George Will and Robert Samuelson and Fareed Zakaria, who is perhaps America�s most thoughtful conservative pundit, now that David Brooks has decided to become something else entirely.Hey, I'm as shocked as you...Alterman has friends?...
Whaddya say we stick with the hissy fit theme? Here's the all-new, improved, Andrew Sullivan Emotionalert Meter...
And another model from Wizbang, Ace, and Allah, which I will proudly display on this blog (oh, and scroll down a little for Wizbang's post on the Kossacks and Benedict XVI...it was posted before mine, so I'll gladly throw a link...what can I say? The Kossacks bring out the best in all of us)...
A Couple of Announcements
Well, it's been another record quarter here at Enron, and I just want to thank...oh, sorry, wrong set of announcements. Two things: I'm postponing the Weekly Jackass to this weekend, and thinking very seriously about moving it to the weekend every week (it's usually been on Wednesday up until now). The reason is quite simple; I just don't have enough time in the work week to give the feature the loving, devoting focus it deserves (some weeks, anyway), and I have a really good (by that I mean bad, of course) candidate in mind for this week's honoree, so I want to do him justice (there you go - it's a 'he'. That eliminates more than half of the population right there).
Also, just a plug for the blogroll...visit these guys and gals as much as possible, please...they're all doing great work, and they all would just love for you to pay them a visit. I'd hate to have to initiate a new policy, such as sending the name of folks who don't share the blogging love to Greenpeace as potential high-dollar donors - I think we all know how ugly that would be, so just help me out, won't you?
Alright...carry on, folks, as you were...
Also, just a plug for the blogroll...visit these guys and gals as much as possible, please...they're all doing great work, and they all would just love for you to pay them a visit. I'd hate to have to initiate a new policy, such as sending the name of folks who don't share the blogging love to Greenpeace as potential high-dollar donors - I think we all know how ugly that would be, so just help me out, won't you?
Alright...carry on, folks, as you were...
Two Oil-For-Food Investigators Resign
Roger Simon broke the story, and it has been confirmed, that two Oil-For-Food investigators have resigned over what amounts to an accusation of a whitewash. Two very senior investigators, that is, who say the Volcker committee is not following the trail of evidence. This is, of course, a huge deal, so naturally, it's getting enormous play at the NY Times, CNN, and...what's that? No enormous play? How about any play at all? Sigh...thank God for the blogs (hat tip to Little Green Footballs)...
Adamsizing My Recent Milestone
When posting my recent thank-you for the 50,000 visitor milestone, I neglected to factor in Adamsizing (the details of this remarkable mathematical innovation can be found here). So, if I may, please allow me to thank all of you for helping me to hit 14,060,500 visitors in a little less than five months...(man, this Adamsizing is pure gold)...
Jeffords Stepping Down
With a hat tip to jp at Americans For Freedom, it is now confirmed that Jim Jeffords will not be trying to retain his seat in 2006. Interesting...among other reasons, he's apparently suffering from ill health, as is his wife...Jeffords, of course, is the Independent who switched from Republican and threw the Senate to effective Democratic rule a few years back...
Kossacks on Benedict XVI
As everyone knows, if you want intelligent commentary on any issue, there's no better source than the learned scholars who follow the Daily Kos. Let's sample some of the reactions of the Kossacks to the selection of Ratzinger, shall we?
UPDATE 3:49 p.m. central: Many thanks to PoliPundit, the good Dr. Shackleford, and Tim Blair for the links, and welcome to any new readers; hope you'll look around and stay a bit...
- Pope Hitler
- It's a great day to be a Nazi
- There's a party in Hell today
- May his reign be as brief and unremembered as that of Benedict XV
- ...we didn't start this war, that f***ing Nazi did. People can pray all they want for their church and the antichrist who has just taken over.
- If you're not IRATE, you're not paying attention. What's worse, attacking a sovereign country that was no threat to anyone and killing a hundred thousand innocent people while making the rest of the world hate you even more, or telling A BILLION CATHOLICS THAT CONDOMNS [sic] CAUSE AIDS!?????!!!!?!?! F*** the Roman Catholic Church.
UPDATE 3:49 p.m. central: Many thanks to PoliPundit, the good Dr. Shackleford, and Tim Blair for the links, and welcome to any new readers; hope you'll look around and stay a bit...
Today's Must-Read: A Treasure Trove Decoded
This is really exciting news, if you're a history buff like myself: researchers at Oxford University have used infrared technology to decode some old papyrus fragments found at an Egyptian rubbish dump. It's a real score...read the details here.
Or, if you prefer the world of alternate history (i.e., made-up stuff), don't miss this article on Benedict XVI by the AFP (hat tip to Jayson at Polipundit)...
Or, if you prefer the world of alternate history (i.e., made-up stuff), don't miss this article on Benedict XVI by the AFP (hat tip to Jayson at Polipundit)...
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Michael Novak Knocks It Out Of The Park
This is what I've been trying to say all day, only it's said with a lot more elegance and forcefulness. Highly recommended...
Assessing the Pope's Prospects: The Thin Line Between Tolerance and Anarchy
Many of the current events that interest me, and the books I've been reading lately, seem to revolve around relativity. Would that it were Einstein's theories (I'd settle for Special or General), but instead, it's the nagging feeling that the root of the Red State / Blue State divide is, not over specifics of morality, but how one views morality in general. That is to say, are all viewpoints equally valid?
On the face of it, such a tolerant stance sounds tempting, but if we say so, and truly mean it, then there are no eternal values, and ethical behavior loses its underpinning. How appropriate, then, that the selection of Benedict XVI brings these very issues to the fore again. In a good, short piece at Time's website, David Van Biema makes the case that the new pope will likely prefer doctrinal clarity over the size of the flock, sharing the view of Miles and Sullivan that I referred to in an earlier post. The money quote:
As an outsider, my gut feeling is this; dissenters should be given an opportunity to disagree with current Church policy, but those who would change the Church and not destroy it must acknowledge that there is a certain limit to how far the liberalization of the Church can go before it just isn't the Church anymore. Not even a Pope can be all things to all people.
On the face of it, such a tolerant stance sounds tempting, but if we say so, and truly mean it, then there are no eternal values, and ethical behavior loses its underpinning. How appropriate, then, that the selection of Benedict XVI brings these very issues to the fore again. In a good, short piece at Time's website, David Van Biema makes the case that the new pope will likely prefer doctrinal clarity over the size of the flock, sharing the view of Miles and Sullivan that I referred to in an earlier post. The money quote:
Benedict's papacy will pour cold water on the hopes of those who saw Vatican II as opening up the Church on questions of distribution of authority, autonomy and the role of the laity. Most of the great debates of the past half-century in the Catholic Church have been about how to interpret Vatican II. Many Catholics in the U.S. who have problems with the Church's stance on all kinds of issues, such as birth control, abortion, the status of gay people and other issues had already been greatly discouraged under John Paul II from expecting a shift towards emphasizing the primacy of individual conscience. The choice of Ratzinger won't please those believers in the U.S. who had been hoping that a new papacy might, if not advance a more liberal interpretation of Vatican II then at least reopen discussion over it, which had been shut down under John Paul II with Ratzinger as enforcer.I'm cautious in embracing the doctrinal clarity viewpoint (not least of all because I'm not a Catholic), but I see great merit in it. On the one hand, an excellent case can and has been made that the Catholic Church's stance on birth control has been disastrous in areas of the world that can least afford it; on the other, it is the Church, for cryin' out loud, and it has to stand for some things of permanence. Throw the net of tolerance too wide, and you might as well be talking about a social club.
As an outsider, my gut feeling is this; dissenters should be given an opportunity to disagree with current Church policy, but those who would change the Church and not destroy it must acknowledge that there is a certain limit to how far the liberalization of the Church can go before it just isn't the Church anymore. Not even a Pope can be all things to all people.
Pope Benedict XVI: The Reaction Elsewhere
The Anchoress has a detailed post with lots of Ratzinger quotes...
DJ Drummond thinks Stalin has his answer...
Carpe Bonum scores again with his patented 'Who Is' technique...
Viking Pundit wonders what happened to Andrew Sullivan's retirement...
And if all that's not enough, check out this great roundup by AlphaPatriot...and this one by Michelle Malkin...and this one by Tim Blair...and then, if it's still not enough, drive to the nearest hospital, you need a break...or better yet, pay a visit to the Therapist...
DJ Drummond thinks Stalin has his answer...
Carpe Bonum scores again with his patented 'Who Is' technique...
Viking Pundit wonders what happened to Andrew Sullivan's retirement...
And if all that's not enough, check out this great roundup by AlphaPatriot...and this one by Michelle Malkin...and this one by Tim Blair...and then, if it's still not enough, drive to the nearest hospital, you need a break...or better yet, pay a visit to the Therapist...
Bonus Papal Posting
Jack Miles, author of two excellent works I own (Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God, God: A Biography), echoes some of the concerns of Andrew Sullivan regarding Benedict XVI (although in a much less hysterical tone). Both Sullivan and Miles make reference to a vision (one they clearly don't agree with) of a Church that is smaller, but more orthodox in its beliefs, if you will. The questions before the court (of public opinion) are:
- Is a Catholic Church that is smaller, but more traditional, necessarily a bad thing?, and
- Is there a point at which 'reforms' of the Church make it unrecognizable as a moral authority, in contrast to 'the authority of the masses' posited by Miles?
Prof Bainbridge to Sullivan: Get A Grip
Andrew Sullivan is nothing if not excitable...those who followed his torturous journey through the 2004 election won't be surprised to find him laying on the hyperbole a bit over the selection of Pope Benedict XVI. So much so, in fact, that he has reduced our good friend Professor Bainbridge to calling him an ass.
The selection of Ratzinger was destined to be viewed as a disappointment by many, but Bainbridge makes a pretty persuasive case that the only thing Ratzinger is unbendable on is the stance against the moral relativism so prevalent in the world today. That's an argument that strikes me close to my heart; I intend to write more on the subject later. For now, I leave you in the capable hands of the good professor...
The selection of Ratzinger was destined to be viewed as a disappointment by many, but Bainbridge makes a pretty persuasive case that the only thing Ratzinger is unbendable on is the stance against the moral relativism so prevalent in the world today. That's an argument that strikes me close to my heart; I intend to write more on the subject later. For now, I leave you in the capable hands of the good professor...
The Damned of the West: Don't Forget Our Civilians
Our good friend Dr. Shackleford has posted an extraordinary interview that should not be missed. Part One appears today. The interview is with the wife of Roy Hallums, an American civilian contrator held in Iraq since November 1st. Once again, I tip my hat to a fellow blogger, and I strongly encourage you to check it out. Nice work, Rusty, and for the rest of us, a timely reminder...
Well Said...
Mickey Kaus on a possible clash between the FCC and Viacom regarding the upcoming gay-oriented basic cable station Logo:
Frank Rich can write the columns now and take July and August off.Man, I wish I'd thought of that...
..And It's Ratzinger
...the German conservative is the choice, sure to disappont those who wanted to see some of the Church's stances modified in the manner of Vatican II...more later, I'm sure...
White Smoke Is In The Air...
...signifying the election of a new Pope...no word yet on just who has been chosen...
Josh Marshall Is Right
Yeah, you heard me...that Josh Marshall, Mr. Talking Points Memo himself. I'm far from a fan, but he has a prescription for the Democrats that applies equally well to their counterparts. While engaging in the all-time favorite Democratic strategy of rethinking and remaking the party, Josh had an epiphany:
Today we hear Democrats asking whether they should take a hard line on Social Security or a soft line, stand in opposition or come up with a contending plan. Here's what I propose whenever Democrats have a question about just what stance to take on the Social Security debate.
One question ...
What is the actual policy outcome that would be most preferable on Social Security (to protect, preserve or augment it -- whatever) and how important is it that it take place in this Congress?
That's the first, second and third question.
That answer should drive everything else.
That's the smartest thing I've heard, politically speaking, in quite some time. To phrase it another, far simpler way (all apologies to Spike Lee): Do the right thing. Of course, what Josh thinks is the right thing, and what I think, are probably vastly different. Still, a party should announce publicly its basic principles, and then take policy positions that will further those principles. Sounds simple, but of course, the real world has a way of muddying the waters. Read the whole post, it's good stuff...
Cathy Young on Andrea Dworkin
Perhaps to make up for the inexplicably kind comments of Christopher Hitchens, Cathy Young has been absolutely skewering Andrea Dworkin in the pages of Reason and elsewhere. For good reason, I suppose; though I'm not a fan of piling on the recently deceased, Dworkin does epitomize the 'man-hating' feminist. When your personal philosophy condemns roughly half of all mankind (oops, perhaps I'm being paternalistic in my choice of words) as no better than rapists, perhaps your philosophy is in error. Just a thought...
Coming To Terms With Bruce...
...Springsteen, that is. It's ridiculous to think that movie stars or musicians aren't entitled to politicial views. When they personalize those views, though, to the point that they demonize an individual or group on the basis of partisan affiliation alone, inevitably, a huge chunk of their audience is going to be alienated. That's fine, too, if the decision is consciously made, in the mode of Al Franken, say, to attempt to appeal primarily to one side of the political aisle.
Artists with a more universal appeal, though, such as Bruce, or Bono, are on shakier ground. Why is this so? In part, it has to do with the tendency to mix our feelings with those of the singer or songwriter. We tend to put ourselves into another's shoes through art; indeed, that may be one of its truest purposes. When Bono speaks of AIDS and debt relief for Africa, we can imagine ourselves doing the same, if we were fortunate enough to switch places; however, when Springsteen leaves behind earlier politically motivated activites such as fundraising for Amnesty International and local food banks, and enters the realm of a political endorsement, many of us cannot understand why he so dislikes a man whose leadership we greatly admire.
Still, the fault is as much with the audience as the artist when we allow a person's political views to color our judgment of the artist's material. One reason it's so fun to make fun of Barbra Streisand is her work itself is so bloody awful. The same cannot be said about Bruce; he has been, for three decades, an amazing songwriter, musician, and performer. I've heard his forthcoming single "Devils and Dust" several times now, and it's good. Really, really good...so I'm gonna try to overcome my own revulsion at the sight of Bruce standing on stage with that buffoon of a senator, and remember the way his music once made me feel. It was a good feeling, and I'd hate to lose it...because, in the end, if we let John Kerry take away our enjoyment of Springsteen, then John Kerry has already won...
Artists with a more universal appeal, though, such as Bruce, or Bono, are on shakier ground. Why is this so? In part, it has to do with the tendency to mix our feelings with those of the singer or songwriter. We tend to put ourselves into another's shoes through art; indeed, that may be one of its truest purposes. When Bono speaks of AIDS and debt relief for Africa, we can imagine ourselves doing the same, if we were fortunate enough to switch places; however, when Springsteen leaves behind earlier politically motivated activites such as fundraising for Amnesty International and local food banks, and enters the realm of a political endorsement, many of us cannot understand why he so dislikes a man whose leadership we greatly admire.
Still, the fault is as much with the audience as the artist when we allow a person's political views to color our judgment of the artist's material. One reason it's so fun to make fun of Barbra Streisand is her work itself is so bloody awful. The same cannot be said about Bruce; he has been, for three decades, an amazing songwriter, musician, and performer. I've heard his forthcoming single "Devils and Dust" several times now, and it's good. Really, really good...so I'm gonna try to overcome my own revulsion at the sight of Bruce standing on stage with that buffoon of a senator, and remember the way his music once made me feel. It was a good feeling, and I'd hate to lose it...because, in the end, if we let John Kerry take away our enjoyment of Springsteen, then John Kerry has already won...
Today's Must-Read: Hitchens In Qatar
The great Christopher Hitchens attends the U.S.-Islamic World Forum, reminds us once again of why we fight, and proves he can say something nice about someone right after [s]he dies...
Monday, April 18, 2005
Miscellanea: The Favorite Bloggers of the Favorite Bloggers Edition
John Hawkins asked some of the big-time bloggers who their own favorites were; to the surprise of no one, I'm nowhere to be found (hat tip to Tim Blair)...
Our good friend Fargus says he's a John Edwards man...
Reason's a little behind the times on this one, but I still enjoyed the review of The Anti-Chomsky Reader (yes, I read it; and yes, it's great)...
Michelle Malkin beat me to the Hinchey story, it turns out...
Interesting story in the NY Times about The Atlantic Monthly - it's the only magazine I still subscribe to, and it's losing money like crazy. Oh, yeah, I can pick 'em (it really is a great magazine, though)...
Al-Jazeera is under fire again...this time it's the Iranians that hate it...
You know, you plug along, try to think of good posts, build some traffic, and fool yourself into thinking you have a pretty decent blog...then you take one look at, oh, Jay Rosen's tour-de-force interview with the Wall Street Journal Online's Bill Grueskin, and you realize just how far you have to go...wow, is Rosen thorough...he's the Arthur Chrenkoff of the press beat...
Speaking of Chrenkoff, read this post, then, when morons like Terry Jones ask if Iraq's worth it, you'll have an even better answer then before...
Our good friend Fargus says he's a John Edwards man...
Reason's a little behind the times on this one, but I still enjoyed the review of The Anti-Chomsky Reader (yes, I read it; and yes, it's great)...
Michelle Malkin beat me to the Hinchey story, it turns out...
Interesting story in the NY Times about The Atlantic Monthly - it's the only magazine I still subscribe to, and it's losing money like crazy. Oh, yeah, I can pick 'em (it really is a great magazine, though)...
Al-Jazeera is under fire again...this time it's the Iranians that hate it...
You know, you plug along, try to think of good posts, build some traffic, and fool yourself into thinking you have a pretty decent blog...then you take one look at, oh, Jay Rosen's tour-de-force interview with the Wall Street Journal Online's Bill Grueskin, and you realize just how far you have to go...wow, is Rosen thorough...he's the Arthur Chrenkoff of the press beat...
Speaking of Chrenkoff, read this post, then, when morons like Terry Jones ask if Iraq's worth it, you'll have an even better answer then before...
The Return of Hinchey: All's Fair In Love And War (But Who Said Anything About Talk Radio?)
Congressman Maurice Hinchey, charter member of the 'Karl Rove caused weeds to grow in my lawn' conspiracy club, is back with yet another great idea. Brian Anderson, author of South Park Conservatives, writes in the L.A. Times that Hinchey wants to restore the good ol' Fairness Doctrine to preserve a diversity of views. Because, you see, liberal talk radio network Air America (newly inaugurated here in Austin, and I literally don't know a soul who has mentioned it once) is failing miserably, and since the market can't provide a big enough audience for NPR and Air America, Congress surely can, right?...No word yet on whether the Doctrine would apply to public speaking and Rovian conspiracies...
...Or Is That Hagel '08?
Another 2008 hopeful is testing the waters; says Daly Thoughts:
If voting in Republican primaries was limited to members of the media, Hagel would have a shot at coming in second.Ouch...
Wesley Clark In 2008?
Mark Kleiman says there's not much doubt he's making the run. Get the details here (hat tip to Professor Bainbridge)...
So Give Me A Stage, Where This Bull Can Rage, er, Apologize
Alert reader C.F. Sullivan has caught me in a most egregious error - it seems I left Raging Bull off of the Scorsese flicks! This would be the same Raging Bull, mind you, that some critics call one of the greatest films ever made - d'oh! Unfortunately, Pollhost does not allow a poll to be modified once it has been created...so, if you were rooting for Raging Bull, feel free to fly or drive to Austin and kick me right square in the pants...
Racism? Bad Parents? What....?
...what is holding back black children? Bill Cosby took a lot of flack for speaking his mind on the issue; I happen to think he was right. Kay Hymowitz takes a closer look (hat tip to RealClearPolitics).
Adobe To Buy Macromedia
I don't often highlight straight business stories on this blog, but I am a huge fan of Macromedia's product line. At work, I use their Studio suite, consisting of Dreamweaver, ColdFusion, and Flash, and a few other components. Macromedia's product line is notable for both its ease of use and its affordability. Take away either of those, and you've done a great disservice to those who make a living making web applications with database interactivity, a particular strength of ColdFusion. Bottom line: don't screw it up, Adobe.
Today's Must-Read: Historical Revisionism and Iraq
There's a good debate taking place between syndicated columnist Sylvester Brown and our old friend the Instapundit regarding the WMD vs. spreading democracy meme. Glenn is quite right that the Left used to want us to attack the 'root causes' of terrorism, until we began doing precisely that, at which point it was suddenly 'imperialist' to do so. Good food for thought on a Monday morning...
More NY Times Bias...
...following up on the Frank Rich post below, as I know the Times serves as a favorite 'whipping boy' of the right, and I want to be clear I'm not making this stuff up. Here's the Minuteman with an editorial disguised as 'news', and here's a bonus shot at Ralph Reed playing up the Christian angle, of course. The label doesn't say editorial, but...well, you be the judge...
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Frank Rich's War On Religion
The hatred Frank Rich shows toward the right is not news; neither is the fact that the New York Times is unabashedly liberal in their editorial viewpoint. What is newsworthy, and breathtakingly blatant, is the paper's anti-religious tone of late, with Rich in the vanguard. Again (how often must I say this?), Rich has taken up some of the world's most valuable editorial space with a complete rant against the right and wrapped it in religion.
As I've noted before, Rich accuses the right of being soaked in religion (as if that's criminal) while talking about nothing but religion in column after tedious column. In this latest atrocity, he skewers Tom Delay, of course, as well as a Jew of (oh, pardon the pun, but I can't help it) 'unorthodox' political views; i.e., he happens to believe in lower taxes. Rich engages in the most sophomoric syllogisms imaginable; see if you can follow the airtight logic here:
Jack Abramoff is a Jew. Jack Abramoff is an unethical lobbyist. Jack Abramoff is tied to Tom Delay. Tom Delay is a Christian. So what's the common denominator? I got it! Religion!!!!
If Frank Rich is a Jew, Christian, Muslim, or atheist, I couldn't care less. Nor could I possibly be less concerned with what house of worship, if any, Tom Delay attends. If Delay goes down, it won't be because of his religion; nor will the religion of any of his associates have any bearing on the matters at hand. If Frank Rich has some great revelation (no pun intended, this time) to show us about how it is Delay's religion that is behind his ethical troubles, than let him show his cards. If his point is that some Christians are hypocrites, well, blow me down, if that don't beat all....who would have guessed it?
I don't think Rich has an ace up his sleeve or anywhere near the table; I don't think he even has a pair of threes. What I do think, and I will continue to think it as long as EVERY SINGLE COLUMN of his takes shots at Christianity, is that he has a very, very deep antipathy towards religion and Republicans, and since many Republicans do tend to be religious, he sees deep, dirty plots wherever he turns. There is a term for this: it's pathological paranoia. Frank Rich is a troubled man, and the evidence is before the entire world, once in a week, prominently displayed in the 'paper of record'.
As I've noted before, Rich accuses the right of being soaked in religion (as if that's criminal) while talking about nothing but religion in column after tedious column. In this latest atrocity, he skewers Tom Delay, of course, as well as a Jew of (oh, pardon the pun, but I can't help it) 'unorthodox' political views; i.e., he happens to believe in lower taxes. Rich engages in the most sophomoric syllogisms imaginable; see if you can follow the airtight logic here:
Jack Abramoff is a Jew. Jack Abramoff is an unethical lobbyist. Jack Abramoff is tied to Tom Delay. Tom Delay is a Christian. So what's the common denominator? I got it! Religion!!!!
If Frank Rich is a Jew, Christian, Muslim, or atheist, I couldn't care less. Nor could I possibly be less concerned with what house of worship, if any, Tom Delay attends. If Delay goes down, it won't be because of his religion; nor will the religion of any of his associates have any bearing on the matters at hand. If Frank Rich has some great revelation (no pun intended, this time) to show us about how it is Delay's religion that is behind his ethical troubles, than let him show his cards. If his point is that some Christians are hypocrites, well, blow me down, if that don't beat all....who would have guessed it?
I don't think Rich has an ace up his sleeve or anywhere near the table; I don't think he even has a pair of threes. What I do think, and I will continue to think it as long as EVERY SINGLE COLUMN of his takes shots at Christianity, is that he has a very, very deep antipathy towards religion and Republicans, and since many Republicans do tend to be religious, he sees deep, dirty plots wherever he turns. There is a term for this: it's pathological paranoia. Frank Rich is a troubled man, and the evidence is before the entire world, once in a week, prominently displayed in the 'paper of record'.
Abbey Road It Is...
...followed closely by Sgt. Pepper's, Revolver, and the White Album (Decision '08 readers are nothing if not discerning)...so, as you can see, a new poll is up. What's in it for you? Well, a big giant bowl of satisfaction!...Hope everyone's had a great weekend...
The Big Switch
Michael Kinsley, who I usually quite enjoy, despite the HUGE gap in our political thought, has a too-short editorial in the L.A. Times on the evolution of the neocon...Kinsley is essentially correct in noting that it is now the neocons who unabashedly advocate the spread of freedom and democracy to all corners of the globe. Those who say the spread of democracy in the Middle East was not a reason behind the Iraq War weren't paying much attention; people like Wolfowitz were making the argument years before 9/11. Worth a look (hat tip to RealClearPolitics)...
That MoDo Mojo: Oil-for-(Yawn)-Food
Another fairly boring Dowd column went up yesterday, but buried near the very bottom we find the following (so is it too much to expect an apology from those on the left who saw 'Oil-For-Food', or as the Times hilariously usually calls it, just to be different, don't you know, 'Food-For-Oil', as just part and parcel of the vast rightwing spin machine?)
Amazing...Claudia Rosett has been plumbing the depths of this scandal for years now, with little fanfare, and the likes of Dowd try to sneak in little asides like the one above, as if they had been on the right team all along. The gall...
An aside: When thanking my supporters recently for helping me get my first 50,000 visitors, I got Kill Righty's address wrong; here's the correct link, so pay him a visit, won't you?...
...Mr. Park has been charged with secretly collecting at least $2 million from Saddam Hussein for clandestine help setting up the corrupt U.N. oil-for-food program and carting away bags of cash from Iraq's diplomats in New York, partly to bribe a U.N. official.
Amazing...Claudia Rosett has been plumbing the depths of this scandal for years now, with little fanfare, and the likes of Dowd try to sneak in little asides like the one above, as if they had been on the right team all along. The gall...
An aside: When thanking my supporters recently for helping me get my first 50,000 visitors, I got Kill Righty's address wrong; here's the correct link, so pay him a visit, won't you?...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)