“I’m so glad that nigger-loving Commie fag Bill Clinton lost” That’s what someone shouted over the phone to Hillary Clinton long after midnight after her husband lost his 1974 campaign for Congress in Arkansas. She wonders, “What could inspire such bile?”
And so does Todd Gitlin in an article that once again plumbs America’s fascination with William Jefferson Clinton. Looking at Hillary’s recent largely self-penned bio, and Sidney Blumenthal’s gloves-off look back, he examines why the “vast right wing conspiracy” was so rapidly deployed and passionately effective against the man and his presidency.
In late May 1993, a calendar called “365 Reasons to Hate Bill Clinton” was already on sale in right-wing bookshops. Clinton had moved into the White House a bare four months before. Who had already divined 365 reasons to hate him, and why?
The claim that the scandals caused the hatred runs afoul of the fact that the hatred preceded most of the scandals. True, early in the 1992 campaign, scandal sheets funded by Clinton-hating fat cats had wound up the volume on charges that Clinton was not only the longtime lover of the lounge singer Gennifer Flowers but a drug-smuggler, a serial adulterer, a rapist, and the father of a black baby.
More consequentially, the New York Times had jumped in with a front-page story…
While he writes Hillary Clinton comes across as shocked as dismayed, Blumenthal goes after the big game. Why was The Right able to embark on a program to “repeal the 1960’s” without further impunity by the powers that be? “A network of foundations, media, lawyers, politicians and other operatives hijacked first the Republican Party and then the Republic,” Gitlan paraphrases. Compare Clinton’s treatment to Bush’s and one could be forgiven for drawing even starker conclusions.
No Gotcha team hammers Bush day after day on talk radio or cable news about his many years as a drunk, or the missing year during his draft-evading service in the Texas Air National Guard, or the mysterious windfall oil profits that came his way when other investors in his company were losing their shirts. Reporters have only recently begun to mar his triumphalist excuses for press conferences by asking pesky questions about Saddam Hussein’s phantom nuclear deal with Niger, or his putative al-Qaida connections, or other untruths this administration has found useful. The Niger-uranium deception finally undermined Bush’s amazing reputation for plain speaking, but on most issues he still escapes sustained scrutiny.
Clearly we’ve done, “Bush (or Clinton) is Good (or Bad)” stories before. Likewise we’ve done, “Is the media a right-wing or leftish-tool”? But I’m curious as to how people’s perceptions of either President has changed and why. Clearly they are different people in different times, but do you perceive a reactionary bias on the part of the public and/or the media? As we’ve gained the luxury of time, has our assessment of Clinton changed?
8/10/2003
Sentimental kitsch. That’s not how one typically hears abstract impressionistic art described, but that’s the implication in Bram Dijkstra’s provocative new coffee table art book American Expressionism. The San Francisco Chronicle’s review gives snippets of the snappish prose that accompanies the expansive artwork inside. Dijkstra retconned 20th centaury art history and comes to the somewhat surprising conclusion that abstract expressionism was (and is) the equivalent of a Thomas Kinkade painting on Christmas Eve. Trite, overrated, and ultimately intended to keep people from grappling with the issues that truly great art is inclined to suggest.
To oversimplify his delicious thesis -- something Dijkstra himself is guilty of from time to time -- reactionary corporate patronage allegedly killed off the thriving, progressive spirit that FDR's Works Progress Administration had nurtured in American art, replacing it with Abstract Expressionism, whose nonrepresentational canvases were less likely to frighten the stockholders. According to Dijkstra, composition without representation is tyranny, and we've been living under that tyranny ever since Henry Luce's Life magazine pretended to ask a question it had already answered affirmatively to its own satisfaction: "Is [Jackson Pollock] the Greatest Living American Artist?"
While the ruling class’ patronage of, and often power over, art is as old as the hills Dijkstra’s "American Expressionism" reacquaints us with the idea in some unexpected places.
Expressionism, writes Bram Dijkstra, "seeks to make us confront the harsher realities of existence. It calls upon us to acknowledge the raw, emotional core of experience and demand that we confront the inner conflicts that make us human." It would be unfortunate if we turned our back on transformational art for a manufactured fad.
To oversimplify his delicious thesis -- something Dijkstra himself is guilty of from time to time -- reactionary corporate patronage allegedly killed off the thriving, progressive spirit that FDR's Works Progress Administration had nurtured in American art, replacing it with Abstract Expressionism, whose nonrepresentational canvases were less likely to frighten the stockholders. According to Dijkstra, composition without representation is tyranny, and we've been living under that tyranny ever since Henry Luce's Life magazine pretended to ask a question it had already answered affirmatively to its own satisfaction: "Is [Jackson Pollock] the Greatest Living American Artist?"
While the ruling class’ patronage of, and often power over, art is as old as the hills Dijkstra’s "American Expressionism" reacquaints us with the idea in some unexpected places.
Expressionism, writes Bram Dijkstra, "seeks to make us confront the harsher realities of existence. It calls upon us to acknowledge the raw, emotional core of experience and demand that we confront the inner conflicts that make us human." It would be unfortunate if we turned our back on transformational art for a manufactured fad.
Barcelona Vs. Paris: Smack Down in the Kitchen!!
France has taken some hard knocks in the US press lately. But few slams may sting as long and as bad as the most recent NY Times cover piece on the state of European cooking. France, once the vanguard of nouvelle cuisine, no longer is creating the freshest ideas, innovative chefs, and taste sensations that inspire restaurateurs and foodies around the globe. That honor now belongs to Spain.
The two epicenters of the Spanish groundswell are both in the northern part of the country -- Catalonia, of which Barcelona is the capital, and the Basque country around San Sebasti?n. And while there are many exciting chefs throughout Spain, the name on everyone's lips, the man who is redefining haute cuisine into alta cocina, is a prodigiously talented, self-taught Catalan. Like Elvis or Miles, he is usually known by his first name alone: Ferran.
Ferran Adrià is perhaps the most notable, but he’s certainly not alone in the “new nouvelle cuisine” movement centered in Spain and reverberating around the globe. As with all truly great cultural phenomenon, the reach and roots of nueva cocina in Spain are wide and deep. 1976 is considered the beginning of this revolution. A nation unshackled by the death of Generalissimo Franco, with a close proximity to both the sea and France, a fervent embrace of outsiders, low-lifes, new ideas and bravado, has created a cooking culture that is electrifying and at times awe-inspiring.
France meanwhile has run out of steam. What has happened in Paris is troubling and has left some Francophiles a bit non-plussed. The noticeable lack of energy most likely stems from a combination of resting on past laurels, economic considerations trumping a commitment to innovation, and just plain bad habits. Thomas Keller, owner of what is generally regarded to be the best restaurant in America, sadly notes, ''the French work ethic has deteriorated over the last few years'' and that compared with Spain, ''you have in France a much more traditional, fundamental-based cooking.'' Or as David Bouley describes, “''The Spanish don't have this rigor where they have to cook a certain way. They seem to be totally free. Something happened in France -- they ran out of gas. I don't hear about youthful passion as I used to in those kitchens.”
While Paris is left wondering how and why it lost it’s culinary verve the rest of us can rejoice at the prospect of a new food revolution.
France has taken some hard knocks in the US press lately. But few slams may sting as long and as bad as the most recent NY Times cover piece on the state of European cooking. France, once the vanguard of nouvelle cuisine, no longer is creating the freshest ideas, innovative chefs, and taste sensations that inspire restaurateurs and foodies around the globe. That honor now belongs to Spain.
The two epicenters of the Spanish groundswell are both in the northern part of the country -- Catalonia, of which Barcelona is the capital, and the Basque country around San Sebasti?n. And while there are many exciting chefs throughout Spain, the name on everyone's lips, the man who is redefining haute cuisine into alta cocina, is a prodigiously talented, self-taught Catalan. Like Elvis or Miles, he is usually known by his first name alone: Ferran.
Ferran Adrià is perhaps the most notable, but he’s certainly not alone in the “new nouvelle cuisine” movement centered in Spain and reverberating around the globe. As with all truly great cultural phenomenon, the reach and roots of nueva cocina in Spain are wide and deep. 1976 is considered the beginning of this revolution. A nation unshackled by the death of Generalissimo Franco, with a close proximity to both the sea and France, a fervent embrace of outsiders, low-lifes, new ideas and bravado, has created a cooking culture that is electrifying and at times awe-inspiring.
France meanwhile has run out of steam. What has happened in Paris is troubling and has left some Francophiles a bit non-plussed. The noticeable lack of energy most likely stems from a combination of resting on past laurels, economic considerations trumping a commitment to innovation, and just plain bad habits. Thomas Keller, owner of what is generally regarded to be the best restaurant in America, sadly notes, ''the French work ethic has deteriorated over the last few years'' and that compared with Spain, ''you have in France a much more traditional, fundamental-based cooking.'' Or as David Bouley describes, “''The Spanish don't have this rigor where they have to cook a certain way. They seem to be totally free. Something happened in France -- they ran out of gas. I don't hear about youthful passion as I used to in those kitchens.”
While Paris is left wondering how and why it lost it’s culinary verve the rest of us can rejoice at the prospect of a new food revolution.
8/09/2003
The NY Times offers an interesting profile of economist Steven Levitt. He wants answers to questions not typically asked by economists.
For instance: If drug dealers make so much money, why do they still live with their mothers? Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What really caused crime rates to plunge during the past decade? Do real-estate agents have their clients' best interests at heart? Why do black parents give their children names that may hurt their career prospects? Do schoolteachers cheat to meet high-stakes testing standards? Is sumo wrestling corrupt?
He’s been called “The most brilliant young economist in America”. He is, at 36, a full professor in the University of Chicago's economics department, the American Economic Association recently awarded him its John Bates Clark Medal (given to the country’s best economist under 40), edits The Journal of Political Economy, and is a lightening-rod of controversy. His most widely noted piece ''The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime'' was one of those rare, unifying works that was able to rally conservatives and liberals together (albeit to demonize him and his work).
(H)is paper linking a rise in abortion to a drop in crime has made more noise than the rest combined. Levitt and his co-author, John Donohue of Stanford Law School, argued that as much as 50 percent of the huge drop in crime since the early 1990's can be traced to Roe v. Wade. Their thinking goes like this: the women most likely to seek an abortion -- poor, single, black or teenage mothers -- were the very women whose children, if born, have been shown most likely to become criminals. But since those children weren't born, crime began to decrease during the years they would have entered their criminal prime. In conversation, Levitt reduces the theory to a tidy syllogism: ''Unwantedness leads to high crime; abortion leads to less unwantedness; abortion leads to less crime.''
Whether it’s discussing poor, black, mothers and their impact on crime rates, or the relative dangers of backyard swimming pools to guns, he’s not afraid to look at old problems in new ways. Voltaire said, “Judge of a man by his questions rather than by his answers.” It’s clear that Steven Levitt is asking some very intriguing questions. Time will tell what answers we ultimately come up with in response.
For instance: If drug dealers make so much money, why do they still live with their mothers? Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What really caused crime rates to plunge during the past decade? Do real-estate agents have their clients' best interests at heart? Why do black parents give their children names that may hurt their career prospects? Do schoolteachers cheat to meet high-stakes testing standards? Is sumo wrestling corrupt?
He’s been called “The most brilliant young economist in America”. He is, at 36, a full professor in the University of Chicago's economics department, the American Economic Association recently awarded him its John Bates Clark Medal (given to the country’s best economist under 40), edits The Journal of Political Economy, and is a lightening-rod of controversy. His most widely noted piece ''The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime'' was one of those rare, unifying works that was able to rally conservatives and liberals together (albeit to demonize him and his work).
(H)is paper linking a rise in abortion to a drop in crime has made more noise than the rest combined. Levitt and his co-author, John Donohue of Stanford Law School, argued that as much as 50 percent of the huge drop in crime since the early 1990's can be traced to Roe v. Wade. Their thinking goes like this: the women most likely to seek an abortion -- poor, single, black or teenage mothers -- were the very women whose children, if born, have been shown most likely to become criminals. But since those children weren't born, crime began to decrease during the years they would have entered their criminal prime. In conversation, Levitt reduces the theory to a tidy syllogism: ''Unwantedness leads to high crime; abortion leads to less unwantedness; abortion leads to less crime.''
Whether it’s discussing poor, black, mothers and their impact on crime rates, or the relative dangers of backyard swimming pools to guns, he’s not afraid to look at old problems in new ways. Voltaire said, “Judge of a man by his questions rather than by his answers.” It’s clear that Steven Levitt is asking some very intriguing questions. Time will tell what answers we ultimately come up with in response.
8/08/2003
8/06/2003
The farther behind I leave the past, the closer I am to forging my own character.
-Isabelle Eberhardt
Frank Furedi writes in Spiked-online that a juvenillation of culture is occurring at an alarming rate. People, in a variety of ways, are holding on to their pasts, (or more likely an idealized version of it) and putting off growing up. The signs are everywhere: living with one’s parents past 30, college kids getting together and watching children’s TV shows, grown men putting off getting married and spending endless hours playing PS2’s, the children’s-book-as-adult-fad trend. As the ad folk try to sell things to actual youngsters to rush them into adulthood they are selling things to “grown-ups” in the hopes of pushing them ever backwards to their youth.
Two US advertisers, Becky Ebenkamp and Jeff Odiorne, have coined the term Peterpandemonium to describe this trend. 'People in their twenties and thirties are clamouring for comfort in purchases and products, and sensory experiences that remind them of a happier, more innocent time - childhood' they observe.
The present-day obsession with childish things may seem like a trivial detail - but the all-pervasive nostalgia for childhood among young adults is symptomatic of a profound insecurity towards the future.
One strategy for dealing with the risks to one's emotions is to distance the self from the potential source of disappointment.
Besides a general fear and dread towards the future, what specifically is causing this growing phenomenon? Earlier generations faced uncertainty with trepidation yet managed to put away their toys, get jobs, and raise families. Is Madison Ave. engaged in unseemly demand creation that fosters this environment or are they simply responding to our desires and doubts? Does this endless cycling of our past(s) serve any larger purpose? Why won’t we grow up?
-Isabelle Eberhardt
Frank Furedi writes in Spiked-online that a juvenillation of culture is occurring at an alarming rate. People, in a variety of ways, are holding on to their pasts, (or more likely an idealized version of it) and putting off growing up. The signs are everywhere: living with one’s parents past 30, college kids getting together and watching children’s TV shows, grown men putting off getting married and spending endless hours playing PS2’s, the children’s-book-as-adult-fad trend. As the ad folk try to sell things to actual youngsters to rush them into adulthood they are selling things to “grown-ups” in the hopes of pushing them ever backwards to their youth.
Two US advertisers, Becky Ebenkamp and Jeff Odiorne, have coined the term Peterpandemonium to describe this trend. 'People in their twenties and thirties are clamouring for comfort in purchases and products, and sensory experiences that remind them of a happier, more innocent time - childhood' they observe.
The present-day obsession with childish things may seem like a trivial detail - but the all-pervasive nostalgia for childhood among young adults is symptomatic of a profound insecurity towards the future.
One strategy for dealing with the risks to one's emotions is to distance the self from the potential source of disappointment.
Besides a general fear and dread towards the future, what specifically is causing this growing phenomenon? Earlier generations faced uncertainty with trepidation yet managed to put away their toys, get jobs, and raise families. Is Madison Ave. engaged in unseemly demand creation that fosters this environment or are they simply responding to our desires and doubts? Does this endless cycling of our past(s) serve any larger purpose? Why won’t we grow up?
8/05/2003
Willie Brown is one of the shrewdest politicians currently plying the trade. His announcement that he'll recall the recall winner reflects this on a number of levels.
8/01/2003
7/31/2003
Dahlia Lithwick (who has never written a bad article it seems) writes about America's rape law morass and Kobe.
7/30/2003
7/28/2003
Looks like Arnold is not running. That's the right decision. The proper candidate is his good friend, Richard Riordan.
There are significant signs that it's a good time to be bullish again. Nicely encapsulated by Gates' comments.
Ashcroft once again demonstrates why secular Americans are uneasy with his firebrand faith. DOJ going after porn, again.
7/27/2003
California's love affair with the auto has had some unintended consequences. Few are as troubling as fatal hit-and-run accidents. The San Francisco Chronicle had completed a study that shows the incidence of fatal hit-and-runs is increasing, extending California’s lead over the rest of the country. There is much speculation over the causes:
Law enforcement officers and traffic safety experts point to several possible reasons. An abundance of unlicensed drivers, the proliferation of wide, busy thoroughfares and intersections, California's car culture, fear of strict penalties for drunken driving and the large number of drivers driving without auto insurance all share the blame.
"I don't think it's just one thing," said Sgt. Russell Chew of the Oakland Police Department traffic section. "It's hard to put a finger on it -- hard to figure out what goes into someone's decision to flee."
Hard to understand, and harder still to prevent. What causes someone to flee from the scene of an accident? What can be done to slow this rise? Since one of the reasons given for the increase are the stiffer penalties recently implemented for crimes and infractions, will more stringent laws actually help or hinder?
"It's probably the same thing we see with (police) pursuits," said Steve Kohler, a California Highway Patrol spokesman, "a person who may feel like they have nothing to lose."
Law enforcement officers and traffic safety experts point to several possible reasons. An abundance of unlicensed drivers, the proliferation of wide, busy thoroughfares and intersections, California's car culture, fear of strict penalties for drunken driving and the large number of drivers driving without auto insurance all share the blame.
"I don't think it's just one thing," said Sgt. Russell Chew of the Oakland Police Department traffic section. "It's hard to put a finger on it -- hard to figure out what goes into someone's decision to flee."
Hard to understand, and harder still to prevent. What causes someone to flee from the scene of an accident? What can be done to slow this rise? Since one of the reasons given for the increase are the stiffer penalties recently implemented for crimes and infractions, will more stringent laws actually help or hinder?
"It's probably the same thing we see with (police) pursuits," said Steve Kohler, a California Highway Patrol spokesman, "a person who may feel like they have nothing to lose."
7/25/2003
King Kaufman wrote an interesting piece about why Americans don't care about the Tour. (Gotta sit through the ad for Salon premium)
He thinks it's the waiting for the other guy after he crashes thing:
I think that down in our bones, most of us can't fathom this business of gentlemanliness and sportsmanship. For better or worse, here's the American way to compete: Try to knock the other guy down, and if you succeed, put your boot on his neck and keep it there until he cries uncle.
And if you see his wallet while he's down there, take it.
Sportsmanship means helping him up after you've cleaned his clock. Before then, it can be summed up in these three words: Don't cheat blatantly.
I don't buy it, most Americans don't even know about that bit of etiquette and they still tune out. Actually, you even have to be somewhat of a fan to know about that tradition (until this Armstrong thing happened) But I think his other points about the team vs. individual glory concept works better.
He thinks it's the waiting for the other guy after he crashes thing:
I think that down in our bones, most of us can't fathom this business of gentlemanliness and sportsmanship. For better or worse, here's the American way to compete: Try to knock the other guy down, and if you succeed, put your boot on his neck and keep it there until he cries uncle.
And if you see his wallet while he's down there, take it.
Sportsmanship means helping him up after you've cleaned his clock. Before then, it can be summed up in these three words: Don't cheat blatantly.
I don't buy it, most Americans don't even know about that bit of etiquette and they still tune out. Actually, you even have to be somewhat of a fan to know about that tradition (until this Armstrong thing happened) But I think his other points about the team vs. individual glory concept works better.
7/24/2003
7/23/2003
When times are tough, people get scared. And they lash out in short-sighted ways. Efforts to ban foreign tech workers is no exception. People, you can't fight the tide of history, you can only ride it.
Often I get emails from readers asking about California's political scene. The recall, The Terminator, the energy mess, etc. It really can't be explained, only reported.
7/22/2003
7/21/2003
The FBI blew repeated chances to uncover the 9-11 plot because it failed to aggressively investigate evidence of Al Qaeda’s presence in the United States, especially in the San Diego area, where two of the hijackers were living with one of the bureau’s own informants, according to the congressional report set for release this week.
So begins a damning article from Michael Isikoff of Newsweek describing the results of a Capital Hill investigation sure to roil the already uneasy heads of U.S. intelligence agencies.
The key results of a congressional joint intelligence inquiry all point fingers at an agency that was mired in red tape, suffering from misdirected focus, and was extremely unlucky. While the CIA and Pentagon get some blame for ineffective or non-existent activity, in the months leading up to 9/11 the majority of the blame is directed towards the FBI.
The fact that Saudi nationals, who may also have been foreign agents operating in the U.S., supported, monitored, and associated with at least two of the hijackers while also working as informants for the FBI is a potentially embarrassing revelation for Saudi Arabia as well as the U.S. intelligence community.
A thorough understanding of the failures that lead to 9/11 is important to not only prevent similar future attacks but is also directly related to the changes that all Americans potentially face. What is less clear is how increased surveillance of all Americans will give the intelligence community a clearer picture of the threats that face the U.S. from within and without.
So begins a damning article from Michael Isikoff of Newsweek describing the results of a Capital Hill investigation sure to roil the already uneasy heads of U.S. intelligence agencies.
The key results of a congressional joint intelligence inquiry all point fingers at an agency that was mired in red tape, suffering from misdirected focus, and was extremely unlucky. While the CIA and Pentagon get some blame for ineffective or non-existent activity, in the months leading up to 9/11 the majority of the blame is directed towards the FBI.
The fact that Saudi nationals, who may also have been foreign agents operating in the U.S., supported, monitored, and associated with at least two of the hijackers while also working as informants for the FBI is a potentially embarrassing revelation for Saudi Arabia as well as the U.S. intelligence community.
A thorough understanding of the failures that lead to 9/11 is important to not only prevent similar future attacks but is also directly related to the changes that all Americans potentially face. What is less clear is how increased surveillance of all Americans will give the intelligence community a clearer picture of the threats that face the U.S. from within and without.
Good read on privacy. John Gilmore's battle to maintain some things about himself is profiled over at Reason.
Some privacy theorists have concluded -- in sorrow if not necessarily in anger -- that privacy, defined as the ability to keep information about ourselves to ourselves, is already dead and buried
My favourite part of the piece is the usage of reductio ad hitlerum. And this discussion of privacy vs. liberty is once again embarassingly exposed as the false dichtomy it is by the plain fact that it wasn't too many freedoms that created 9/11. As we've known since day one it was bad luck, bad police work, ineffective and unfocused agents at the FBI, and miles of red tape. And now we find out that two of hijackers were living with an FBI informant. From that we've decided to monitor 250 million Americans without cause.
Some privacy theorists have concluded -- in sorrow if not necessarily in anger -- that privacy, defined as the ability to keep information about ourselves to ourselves, is already dead and buried
My favourite part of the piece is the usage of reductio ad hitlerum. And this discussion of privacy vs. liberty is once again embarassingly exposed as the false dichtomy it is by the plain fact that it wasn't too many freedoms that created 9/11. As we've known since day one it was bad luck, bad police work, ineffective and unfocused agents at the FBI, and miles of red tape. And now we find out that two of hijackers were living with an FBI informant. From that we've decided to monitor 250 million Americans without cause.
7/18/2003
As an American I am used to our President’s speeches being nothing more than a serious of sound bites strung together around a loosely developed theme. I am always struck by how refreshingly erudite and ultimately inspiring Tony Blair’s addresses have been. Clearly, you can (and should) argue their merits, however it’s abundantly clear the art of political oration isn’t completely lost:
The spread of freedom is the best security for the free. It is our last line of defense and our first line of attack. And just as the terrorist seeks to divide humanity in hate, so we have to unify around an idea. And that idea is liberty. (Applause.) We must find the strength to fight for this idea and the compassion to make it universal. Abraham Lincoln said, "Those that deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." And it is this sense of justice that makes moral the love of liberty
The spread of freedom is the best security for the free. It is our last line of defense and our first line of attack. And just as the terrorist seeks to divide humanity in hate, so we have to unify around an idea. And that idea is liberty. (Applause.) We must find the strength to fight for this idea and the compassion to make it universal. Abraham Lincoln said, "Those that deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." And it is this sense of justice that makes moral the love of liberty
So it wasn't until after the passage of his horrific RAVE ACT that Joe Biden discovered what a bad idea it was? Perhaps next time he should read it first.
7/17/2003
Kaufman at Salon has been on a roll lately. He nails ESPN hire of Rush Limbaugh and has this great money quote(via Open Season):
At his introduction as a commentator on ESPN's pregame studio show, "Sunday NFL Countdown," Rush Limbaugh said, "I think football's a lot like life. I think I know life pretty well." Says King Kaufman of salon. com, "Football is nothing like life. It's organized and neat and rational. Everyone is either with you or against you and the boundaries are straight lines that are clearly marked. That is indeed how Limbaugh views life, and he's wrong. The only sport that's like life is bullfighting, and only for the bull."
At his introduction as a commentator on ESPN's pregame studio show, "Sunday NFL Countdown," Rush Limbaugh said, "I think football's a lot like life. I think I know life pretty well." Says King Kaufman of salon. com, "Football is nothing like life. It's organized and neat and rational. Everyone is either with you or against you and the boundaries are straight lines that are clearly marked. That is indeed how Limbaugh views life, and he's wrong. The only sport that's like life is bullfighting, and only for the bull."
7/16/2003
As many of you know, my cousin is with the U.S. Army in Iraq. His stories to us back home mirror what Reuel Marc Gerecht writes in this piece.
In a press release as trite as it is troublesome, Michael J. Garcia, Acting Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) declared "There is nothing more important than protecting our children - the future of our nation.” The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency charged with protecting America from terrorists, has proudly announced the latest instance of perilous mission-creep, they are now chasing child molesters.
Apparently so assured of success against Al-Qaeda and their ilk, the DHS unveiled “Operation Predator,” another operation designed to coordinate efforts of several federal agencies. Before long the FBI, U.S. Customs, the U.S. Postal Service, and the Department of Justice, will be working with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to protect “the future of our nation”.
Pandering to American’s fears about children certainly isn’t a new or novel tactic (we’ve recently seen the dreadful RAVE act unanimously passed in the Senate because it was buried deep inside a bill creating a nationwide Amber-alert system). It is inherently cynical and meant to foster an emotional response in place of rationale discourse. It is enticing fruit for politicians but leadership demands a different course.
If governance is the act of making choices than this is a peculiar use of DHS resources. Some have argued that the intelligence lapses leading up to 9/11 (and the subsequent creation of the DHS) resulted from misappropriated law enforcement focus. Perhaps, the reasoning goes, if fewer FBI agents were tasked with waging the war on drugs (or prostitution, or other “victimless crimes”), then neglected leads, unconnected dots, and relative lack of importance given to anti-terror activities would have had less catastrophic consequences. This may be a highly speculative exercise, but one that is valuable and vital as we wade further into a nebulous War on Terror. As Nobel economist Milton Friedman has warned about the dissipation of resources, when government begins to do what it should not, it ceases to do what it should.
Government agencies work for their sustained existence and a continual expansion of their reach. Most Americans have reconciled themselves with this truism. It’s disheartening to think that we are beginning to expect the same from Tom Ridge’s team. The DHS is charged with issues far too important to allow the public or the DHS the luxury of tolerating politics as usual. Shortly after September11th there seemed to be a reexamination of the role of government and an earnestness tied to public service that had been lacking for decades. America was hastily forced into civic adulthood. No longer resigned to feigning interest in politics every four years come election time, we were newly committed. No longer resigned to accepting a government of functionary bureaucrats but rather rejuvenating one full of dedicated, focused leaders working towards the safety and welfare of all. Gone for good were the empty slogans and attack ads, positions propped up on piles of opinion polls, and meaningless Beltway skirmishes that ultimately were about consolidating power rather than serving the public. With a single press release full of bombast and jargon, Operation Predator sadly harkens to a time we have left behind.
The attacks of Sept. 11th solidified America’s resolve, and for a time focused law enforcement on matters that were essential rather than illicitly titillating. It’s shameful and risky if we squander our resolve now and revert back to a method of governance more concerned with the expansion of its powers than the safety of its citizens.
Apparently so assured of success against Al-Qaeda and their ilk, the DHS unveiled “Operation Predator,” another operation designed to coordinate efforts of several federal agencies. Before long the FBI, U.S. Customs, the U.S. Postal Service, and the Department of Justice, will be working with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to protect “the future of our nation”.
Pandering to American’s fears about children certainly isn’t a new or novel tactic (we’ve recently seen the dreadful RAVE act unanimously passed in the Senate because it was buried deep inside a bill creating a nationwide Amber-alert system). It is inherently cynical and meant to foster an emotional response in place of rationale discourse. It is enticing fruit for politicians but leadership demands a different course.
If governance is the act of making choices than this is a peculiar use of DHS resources. Some have argued that the intelligence lapses leading up to 9/11 (and the subsequent creation of the DHS) resulted from misappropriated law enforcement focus. Perhaps, the reasoning goes, if fewer FBI agents were tasked with waging the war on drugs (or prostitution, or other “victimless crimes”), then neglected leads, unconnected dots, and relative lack of importance given to anti-terror activities would have had less catastrophic consequences. This may be a highly speculative exercise, but one that is valuable and vital as we wade further into a nebulous War on Terror. As Nobel economist Milton Friedman has warned about the dissipation of resources, when government begins to do what it should not, it ceases to do what it should.
Government agencies work for their sustained existence and a continual expansion of their reach. Most Americans have reconciled themselves with this truism. It’s disheartening to think that we are beginning to expect the same from Tom Ridge’s team. The DHS is charged with issues far too important to allow the public or the DHS the luxury of tolerating politics as usual. Shortly after September11th there seemed to be a reexamination of the role of government and an earnestness tied to public service that had been lacking for decades. America was hastily forced into civic adulthood. No longer resigned to feigning interest in politics every four years come election time, we were newly committed. No longer resigned to accepting a government of functionary bureaucrats but rather rejuvenating one full of dedicated, focused leaders working towards the safety and welfare of all. Gone for good were the empty slogans and attack ads, positions propped up on piles of opinion polls, and meaningless Beltway skirmishes that ultimately were about consolidating power rather than serving the public. With a single press release full of bombast and jargon, Operation Predator sadly harkens to a time we have left behind.
The attacks of Sept. 11th solidified America’s resolve, and for a time focused law enforcement on matters that were essential rather than illicitly titillating. It’s shameful and risky if we squander our resolve now and revert back to a method of governance more concerned with the expansion of its powers than the safety of its citizens.
7/15/2003
NK reminds me of a large, stupid, drunk at 2-for-1 drink night in upstate New York. Ah yes, Nukes, the tiny dictator's Porsche.
Ah yes, hipster disdain for the pious is supposed to be over, however I'm not afraid to admit that Robertson praying for the Supremes to retire makes me a little uneasy.
Encouraging news on the privacy front. The Terrorism Information Awareness program looks like it's just about out of funding.
And an interesting piece from the Economist on what they feel the U.S. is doing right and wrong in the war on liberity. (I mean, on terror)
And an interesting piece from the Economist on what they feel the U.S. is doing right and wrong in the war on liberity. (I mean, on terror)
7/11/2003
Misplaced priorities alert. Fresh on the heels of the DHS announcement yesterday the Bushies now announce they are escalating the war on some drugs.
7/10/2003
Mission-creep of the worst sort. A cynical, dangerous, and absurd extension of the Office of Homeland Security.
Even though this reads like the worst sort of over-the-top satire this is an actual quote from the press release: "There is nothing more important than protecting our children - the future of our nation."
Horrific, stupid, insulting, and dangerous. As Nobel economist Milton Friedman has pointed out, when government begins to do what it should not, it ceases to do what it should.
Even though this reads like the worst sort of over-the-top satire this is an actual quote from the press release: "There is nothing more important than protecting our children - the future of our nation."
Horrific, stupid, insulting, and dangerous. As Nobel economist Milton Friedman has pointed out, when government begins to do what it should not, it ceases to do what it should.
Pictures from Iran. From Andrew Sullivan, these photos show the aftermath of the "disciplined"dissedent students. The conditions are dire, but not hopeless.
7/09/2003
7/08/2003
While my story about celebrating America on the 4th of July rages on over at Plastic Peter Jennings announces his thoughts on the matter.
The WSJ eviscerates Treason calling Ann Coulter "the Maureen Dowd of the conservatives". Yikes! Even Horowitz takes a chunk of flesh.
[Coulter's use of the term] 'functionally treasonable' is ... disturbingly reminiscent of the old Stalinist term 'objectively fascist.' This was how people who swore their loyalty to the cause were condemned (often to death) if they deviated from the party line. Stalinists defined all dissent as 'objectively' treacherous. This is not a path that conservatives should follow. When intent and individuality are separated from actions in a political context, we are entering a totalitarian realm where Ann Coulter does not really want to be
[Coulter's use of the term] 'functionally treasonable' is ... disturbingly reminiscent of the old Stalinist term 'objectively fascist.' This was how people who swore their loyalty to the cause were condemned (often to death) if they deviated from the party line. Stalinists defined all dissent as 'objectively' treacherous. This is not a path that conservatives should follow. When intent and individuality are separated from actions in a political context, we are entering a totalitarian realm where Ann Coulter does not really want to be
7/07/2003
7/06/2003
7/05/2003
7/04/2003
Delio reports on an interesting project that takes intrusive technology and turns it on its masters.
7/03/2003
An interesting (as always) discussion at Plastic about the risks and benefits of deploying wi-fi in developing and war-torn countries.
7/02/2003
Visitors to Ted the Dog and Plastic know how near and dear Wired is to me. Wired: A Romance looks like a good read. I'd love to hear from any of you if you've seen copies yet.
Michael Kinsley is on a roll. This week he advocates the privatization of marriage. (Which, as many of you know, I'm a huge proponent of)
7/01/2003
Ben Yagoda at Slate believes that Sports Illustrated’s Gary Smith is the best sportswriter working the craft today. (Actually, he goes on to say he’s the best magazine writer in America). Yagoda explains why Smith isn’t better known:
The real reason lies in his attributes as a writer, all of which go counter to powerful prevailing trends in journalistic writing: He favors obscurity over fame, complexity over simplicity, and humility over literary showmanship.
On the heels of the Slate piece is a Tuesday Morning Quarterback (“TMQ” for those who frequent espn.com) that exhibits why many believe Gregg Easterbrook is the current king of sports writing. He discusses if God cares who wins or loses sporting matches. A lighter exploration of the themes and ideas he thrashed out in his book on Christian theology, Beside Still Waters: Searching For Meaning In An Age Of Doubt. Easterbrook’s TMQ (which used to run on Slate) is a seamless blending of hi and lo-culture, deep sports insights, quirky observations, and steeped in references to scantily clad women (and occasionally men). He is believed to be the first Brookings Institution scholar to write a football column yet manages to infuse his pieces with a wit and humility that makes them as interesting as they are accessible. So I pose the question to you, who is the best sports writer working today? Smith? Easterbrook? Or someone else entirely?
The real reason lies in his attributes as a writer, all of which go counter to powerful prevailing trends in journalistic writing: He favors obscurity over fame, complexity over simplicity, and humility over literary showmanship.
On the heels of the Slate piece is a Tuesday Morning Quarterback (“TMQ” for those who frequent espn.com) that exhibits why many believe Gregg Easterbrook is the current king of sports writing. He discusses if God cares who wins or loses sporting matches. A lighter exploration of the themes and ideas he thrashed out in his book on Christian theology, Beside Still Waters: Searching For Meaning In An Age Of Doubt. Easterbrook’s TMQ (which used to run on Slate) is a seamless blending of hi and lo-culture, deep sports insights, quirky observations, and steeped in references to scantily clad women (and occasionally men). He is believed to be the first Brookings Institution scholar to write a football column yet manages to infuse his pieces with a wit and humility that makes them as interesting as they are accessible. So I pose the question to you, who is the best sports writer working today? Smith? Easterbrook? Or someone else entirely?
The Bulls are back on Wall St. and now Herman Miller has released a sequel to the Aeron, hostile takeovers in the headlines....yes, it smells like the good times.
Sinbad apparently is the first flix made with open-source. news.com's continued coverage of tech changing industries continues with a profile of its impact on Hollywood.
6/29/2003
America. What a place. What an idea. As the Fourth of July looms Dinesh D'Souza give us a top ten list that is both topical and thoughtful. As he outlines why he loves America it provokes a discussion as to why the rest of us do (or don’t).
His list:
-America provides an amazingly good life for the ordinary guy.
-America offers more opportunity and social mobility than any other country, including the countries of Europe
-Work and trade are respectable in America
-America has achieved greater social equality than any other society.
-People live longer, fuller lives in America
-In America the destiny of the young is not given to them, but created by them.
-America has gone further than any other society in establishing equality of rights.
-America has found a solution to the problem of religious and ethnic conflict that continues to divide and terrorize much of the world.
-America has the kindest, gentlest foreign policy of any great power in world history.
-America, the freest nation on Earth, is also the most virtuous nation on Earth.
As each of his points are worthy of discussion, I ask you, what makes America great? What are your hopes for this nation? What are your fears? What do believe is best about our ideals? For what are you thankful vis a’ vis America? As America, once again, celebrates her birth, what do you consider to the hallmarks of who we are?
His list:
-America provides an amazingly good life for the ordinary guy.
-America offers more opportunity and social mobility than any other country, including the countries of Europe
-Work and trade are respectable in America
-America has achieved greater social equality than any other society.
-People live longer, fuller lives in America
-In America the destiny of the young is not given to them, but created by them.
-America has gone further than any other society in establishing equality of rights.
-America has found a solution to the problem of religious and ethnic conflict that continues to divide and terrorize much of the world.
-America has the kindest, gentlest foreign policy of any great power in world history.
-America, the freest nation on Earth, is also the most virtuous nation on Earth.
As each of his points are worthy of discussion, I ask you, what makes America great? What are your hopes for this nation? What are your fears? What do believe is best about our ideals? For what are you thankful vis a’ vis America? As America, once again, celebrates her birth, what do you consider to the hallmarks of who we are?
6/27/2003
While the results of MoveOn's online primary isn't a surprise, they may resonate middlewards. This can only be good news for Dean's campaign.
6/26/2003
Ain't innovation grand? Wired with a piece about how the Chinese are working their way around the brutal censorship of their part of cyberspace.
They make shoes in an impoverished nation, helping the locals to earn wages higher than the local average, engage in environmentally friendly campaigns, and leverage the internet as a sales and marketing tool. In a “good” month an employee earns about US$2.35 per day.
While Nike is chastised for their efforts ecosandals is being heralded for using a similar production model. Wired profiles the company and heralds, once again, the power of the internet. Nike, due largely to its size, is able to place upward wage pressures on entire local economies, helping not only the workers at their plants but also those within the regions they are located. One company is held up for praise, the other for scorn. Why?
While Nike is chastised for their efforts ecosandals is being heralded for using a similar production model. Wired profiles the company and heralds, once again, the power of the internet. Nike, due largely to its size, is able to place upward wage pressures on entire local economies, helping not only the workers at their plants but also those within the regions they are located. One company is held up for praise, the other for scorn. Why?
The Supremes got one right. Imagine, consenting adults being allowed to do what they chose in the privacy of their bedrooms.
6/25/2003
6/24/2003
The Ministerial Conference and Expo on Agricultural Science and Technology has begun in Sacramento, California to discuss bio-engineered foods. As with any meeting dealing with so-called “Frankenfoods”, this one was met with protests, demonstrations, and pleas for legislation to curb agri-business’ efforts.
The protesters, which include luminary chefs such as Alice Waters, believe that there are healthy alternatives that can be used to feed the world, preserve the environment, and protect human rights. They claim the advent of frankenfoods brings the possibility of long-term health problems on a massive scale, but perhaps also a wide-scale environmental domino effect that could spin out of control and cause an unstoppable ecological disaster.
The advocates of bio-engineered foods say that not using advancing technologies is more likely to exacerbate already dire conditions in much of the world.
Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman says biotechnology and science can reduce global hunger, improve nutrition and boost economies. She says biotech already is helping farmers by boosting yields, lowering costs, reducing pesticide use and making crops more resistant to disease, pests and drought.
The debate isn’t hypothetical. Sub-Saharan Africa is in the midst of a famine with current methods incapable of safely feeding the region. Facing all involved is whether or not agri-business has the means and will to feed the planet, and perhaps more importantly, whether or not they’ll be allowed to.
The protesters, which include luminary chefs such as Alice Waters, believe that there are healthy alternatives that can be used to feed the world, preserve the environment, and protect human rights. They claim the advent of frankenfoods brings the possibility of long-term health problems on a massive scale, but perhaps also a wide-scale environmental domino effect that could spin out of control and cause an unstoppable ecological disaster.
The advocates of bio-engineered foods say that not using advancing technologies is more likely to exacerbate already dire conditions in much of the world.
Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman says biotechnology and science can reduce global hunger, improve nutrition and boost economies. She says biotech already is helping farmers by boosting yields, lowering costs, reducing pesticide use and making crops more resistant to disease, pests and drought.
The debate isn’t hypothetical. Sub-Saharan Africa is in the midst of a famine with current methods incapable of safely feeding the region. Facing all involved is whether or not agri-business has the means and will to feed the planet, and perhaps more importantly, whether or not they’ll be allowed to.
6/23/2003
Christopher Lydon is blogging now, and he says that the spiritual father of blogging is Emerson. He has always been a favorite of mine and it's nice to know that Emerson is still vitally relevant.
6/22/2003
The most comprehensive blog on the Iranian democratic movement. He also links to a ton of good blogs from within Iran.
6/21/2003
I’m almost as relieved as I am terrified that the authorities managed to stop this deal for smuggled Russian radioactive elements. Even if we catch 99% of these guys that outcome could be horrific.
A nostalgic desire for globalism via capitalism from, of all places, The Nation:
From this point of view, Clinton may well be justifiably seen by future generations as a particularly intelligent and valuable servant of American imperial capitalism, in a way that went beyond diplomatic cleverness. He seems to have understood three things that the Bush Administration has wholly or partly forgotten: that the American economy is utterly intertwined with the world capitalist order, depends on the health of that order and draws immense benefits from that order. This is indeed likely to be seen by future historians as the central tragic irony of the Bush Administration's world policy: that the United States, which of all states today should feel like a satisfied power, is instead behaving like a revolutionary one, kicking to pieces the hill of which it is king
From this point of view, Clinton may well be justifiably seen by future generations as a particularly intelligent and valuable servant of American imperial capitalism, in a way that went beyond diplomatic cleverness. He seems to have understood three things that the Bush Administration has wholly or partly forgotten: that the American economy is utterly intertwined with the world capitalist order, depends on the health of that order and draws immense benefits from that order. This is indeed likely to be seen by future historians as the central tragic irony of the Bush Administration's world policy: that the United States, which of all states today should feel like a satisfied power, is instead behaving like a revolutionary one, kicking to pieces the hill of which it is king
6/20/2003
Glenn Reynolds on gay marriage. Interesting take. The neanderthals may be right, gay marriage may change straight marriages. But for the better.
6/19/2003
Sometimes the poetic justice is so sweet it plays like music to the ears. The latest example? Sen. Hatch and his illegal software. Note to Orrin Hatch: Please shut up.
The Bechtel Corporation has long been a lightening rod for conspiracy theorists. The privately held construction company has played major roles in the construction of the Hoover Dam, the San Francisco Bay Bridge, the Alaskan pipeline and numerous vital infrastructure projects around the globe. The reach and scope of the company has convinced many that Bechtel is actually the most successful front the C.I.A. has ever developed. That is highly speculative, however what is abundantly clear is that this firm’s successes are perhaps only exceeded by its amazing connections. SF Weekly reporter Lisa Davis shares some of these connections and details the formal and informal connections that have helped make Bechtel an unqualified success.
Bechtel’s friends in high places is best exhibited by the roommate list from their uber-exclusive (and extremely drunken) Bohemian Grove retreat. Some notable bunkies from the 2001 enclave:
Mandalay Camp
Colin L. Powell
Henry Kissinger
Nicholas F. Brady
George P. Shultz
Hillbillies Camp
William F. Buckley Jr.
George H.W. Bush
Walter Cronkite
Donald H. Rumsfeld
While perhaps not as powerful and wide reaching as the Stone Cutters, the friends of Bechtel are impressive indeed. What’s less clear is how much of this is old-fashioned networking and how much is an erosion of the line between public trust and private gain.
Bechtel’s friends in high places is best exhibited by the roommate list from their uber-exclusive (and extremely drunken) Bohemian Grove retreat. Some notable bunkies from the 2001 enclave:
Mandalay Camp
Colin L. Powell
Henry Kissinger
Nicholas F. Brady
George P. Shultz
Hillbillies Camp
William F. Buckley Jr.
George H.W. Bush
Walter Cronkite
Donald H. Rumsfeld
While perhaps not as powerful and wide reaching as the Stone Cutters, the friends of Bechtel are impressive indeed. What’s less clear is how much of this is old-fashioned networking and how much is an erosion of the line between public trust and private gain.
Camille on Hillary.
On the evidence of this book, Hillary appears to believe that good intentions excuse all. Impediments to her lofty goals may have arisen partly through minor miscalculations on her part, she concedes, but most of the problems, in her view, have come from pigheaded reactionaries “who want to turn the clock back on many of the advances our country has made”, thanks to the Democratic Party, a congregation of the elect whose mission is the salvation of mankind.
On the evidence of this book, Hillary appears to believe that good intentions excuse all. Impediments to her lofty goals may have arisen partly through minor miscalculations on her part, she concedes, but most of the problems, in her view, have come from pigheaded reactionaries “who want to turn the clock back on many of the advances our country has made”, thanks to the Democratic Party, a congregation of the elect whose mission is the salvation of mankind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)