Saturday, August 23, 2003 Just Curious: When Dartmouth's ISTS publishes such documents (such as a treatise on how easy it would be for terrorists to knock out the US electricity grid, here) and puts them right there for everyone to read on the web, are they helping or hurting the fight against terrorism? I can ofcourse understand good arguments for why these public debates need to occur, but couldn't/shouldn't America's security failings be discussed behind closed doors?
Posted by Kumar,
9:46 PM
-
What Do You Think Clint? It's a repuduation of Instant Run-off Voting, of which I think you are a big fan. Read it here, and respond.
Posted by Kumar,
9:41 PM
-
Gratutious posting of Arnold quotes
- On the Decision to Run - "It's the most difficult [decision] I've made in my entire life, except the one I made in 1978 when I decided to get a bikini wax."
- On Multi-Culturalism - "It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat or Republican, if you're young or old, what the racial thing is, nothing matters to me." "After watching mulattas shake it, I can totally understand why Brazil is devoted to my favorite body part, the ass."
- On Balancing the State Budget - "We have to make sure everyone in California has a great job. A fantastic job!" "The public doesn't care about figures" [asked if he would provide details on budget cuts] "Like I told Warren, if he mentions Prop 13 one more time, he has to do 500 situps."
- On Political Independence - "As you know, I don't need to take any money from anybody. I have plenty of money myself. I will make the decisions for the people." "I was always dreaming about very powerful people, dictators and things like that. I was always impressed by people who could be remembered for hundreds of years or like Jesus for thousands of years." (from "Pumping Iron")
- On Past Indiscretions - "Nothing will haunt me" "I have inhaled, exhaled everything."
- On Family Values - "My mother would spend time with me, saying read out loud. When I stopped, with a yardstick, she would hit me over de head. Do you know how fast I read again? I was reading so fast, let me tell you." "There are two things at work here. Since the '60s, many more women have gone to work outside the home. The husband is at work, the mother is at work. Now the kids are always alone. As a country, we have to supplement where there is a vacuum." "My mother called me on the phone and she said, you know, "Your dad died." And this was exactly two months before a contest. She said, "Are you coming home to the funeral?" I said, "No, it's too late. You know, he's dead, there's nothing to be done. And I'm sorry and I can't come, you know?" (from "Pumping Iron")
- On the Status of Women - "But no one that has been around me would believe that a woman would be complaining about me holding her." "It was a handful. I never know if my wife’s watching. I’ll tell her it was a stuntman." [after touching British TV host's breast on air] "Your daughter has a great butt" [to Eunice Kennedy Shriver, Arnold's future mother-in-law, shortly after meeting Maria] "Any woman who thinks, 'My biological clock is ticking and I want a baby and it doesn't matter if I have a husband or not' -- well, without running anyone down, that is a mistake." [discussing a scene in T3, in which he pushes the female cyborg's face into a toilet bowl] "I saw this toilet bowl. How many times do you get away with this -- to take a woman, grab her upside down, and bury her face in a toilet bowl? I wanted to have something floating there ... The thing is, you can do it, because in the end, I didn't do it to a woman -- she's a machine! We could get away with it without being crucified by who-knows-what group." [after Sylvester Stallone invited him to join an all-male club]"I told him it was the worst thing he could do. That we're living in a very sensitive time period, when women were struggling for equality. I said I didn't agree with half the stuff they were talking about, but a club like that would offend every smart woman in the country." "As much as when you see a blonde with great tits and a great ass, you say to yourself, 'Hey, she must be stupid or must have nothing else to offer', which maybe is the case many times. But then again there is the one that is as smart as her breasts look, great as her face looks, beautiful as her whole body looks gorgeous, you know, so people are shocked."
- On Taxes - "This is really embarrassing. I just forgot our state governor's name, but I know that you will help me *recall* him." [laughs]
- On If He Wins - "I promise you, I promise you that if I get elected to be governor of this great state I will continue on my crusade for this state and across the country to make sure that ... after-school programs will be made available in every public school in the whole United States."
- On the Importance of Exercise- "Pumping iron is a great feeling...like coming, but coming continuously."
- On His Finances - [on Today show, interviewed by Matt Lauer, end of interview] Matt: "Will you be releasing your tax records publicly for the citizens of CA to examine?" Arnold (in a remote studio), holding hand up to ear: "What was that?" Matt: "I asked if you would release your tax records to the public?" Arnold, still holding hand up to ear, now looking around his remote studio: "I can’t hear, I’ve lost the connection....."
Posted by Timothy,
6:49 PM
-
Condolences: and the deepest of sympathy to Dartmouth student Alexia Huffman, whose brother was a marine who bravely died serving his country this past Thursday. When tragedy strikes so close, it only re-emphasizes the true costs of the decisions our elected leaders make. Read about this brave soldier and his inspirational life, here.
Posted by Kumar,
3:54 PM
-
Favorable Words for Dean: From the New Republic blog, here. Their contention: Dean is loved by the left for his rhetoric and anger, not his policies. This makes him uniquely poised to go to the center on actual policy positions. Maybe we can test this proposition. So, Jordan, Greg, Liz and Graham, what "moderate" policies could Dean come out with that would make you jump the Dean ship, or are you committed as long as he has the fire?
Posted by Kumar,
2:31 PM
-
Is this a surprise to anyone?
Posted by Jonathan,
10:02 AM
-
Friday, August 22, 2003 A Million Dollars in Five Days: Thats what the Dean camp is planning to raise, to match what Bush raised in a single recent fundraiser. If you support Dean, help them out with a contribution of 10 dollars that you would have ended up wasting anyway. These small things add up. [LINK]
Posted by Kumar,
4:41 PM
-
Trade Unlilateralism? If Kucinich had his way, the US would immedately pull out of its WTO and NAFTA obligations. Sounds a whole lot like a unilateralist foreign policy to me. Disagree?
Posted by Kumar,
3:04 PM
-
Friendster: I have now officially heard about this from three people who don't know each other, which is making me think it might be the next big tech thing among our age group (like Ebay, IM, blogs etc). It is a very simple concept: you sign up, and get your friends to sign up. Anyone who is a friend of a friend and on is in your network. You can email these people for dinner, a game, a date etc. It probably is a nice way to meet people in a new city. Check it out. [LINK]
Posted by Kumar,
1:43 PM
-
Outsourcing... Economist Brad Delong has ignited a massive (and massively informative) discussion on outsourcing over at his blog. DeLong starts off by critiquing the projection that outsourcing will cost the US 3.3 million jobs over the next few years:
First of all, the number of jobs in the United States is not set by what happens on the sea lanes--on what exports and imports the container ships carry from port to port. The number of jobs is set in the Eccles Building, by the Federal Reserve... (if the Federal Reserve does its job) Americans' demand for imports made in other countries is recycled into foreign demand that employs Americans in industries that export goods, export services, make producers equipment, or build structures... This means that nightmare scenarios--3.3 million high-tech jobs moving overseas--are beyond the bounds of short-run probability. The current account plus the capital account must balance: if the work that used to be done here by 3.3 million people is to be done there, that means that our export industries here must employ an extra 3.3 million people as well.
Of course, that's a hefty little "if" couched in parentheses there, but this all seems plausible enough. We don't need to lose those jobs if we simply reshuffle our industries, and for that reason trade barriers are unnecessary (not to mention harmful). DeLong goes on to offer an alternative solution:
First, get our people out of industry segments where we are about to lose comparative advantage and where wages are about to take a big dive--this is the reason we Democrats like various forms of Trade Adjustment Assistance, for those who work in such industries are about to get shafted and have done nothing to deserve it (and have the ability to impose enormous costs on the rest of us through trade barriers if the political dice roll their way). Second, make sure the public investments in basic research are there to spark applied research and development to create new industries and new forms of high-tech in which our labor and our capital can be very productive (NIH, NSF, DARPA anyone?). Third, remember that the principal determinants of our prosperity and our productivity come from within: get public investment in infrastructure right, private savings and investment high, and investment in education high as well.
Well, that certainly sounds heaps more prudent than trade barriers, but not everyone seems so convinced. The ensuing debate in the comments section raises the usual army of objections, questions and concerns. To list a few:
Is it really that easy to ask 3.3 million workers (many of who have families to support) to retrain, shift location, and start anew in another industry (at the entry level, in all likelihood)?
Will the wages in the new jobs be comparable to the wages in the jobs lost? Will the fall in consumer prices compensate for the fall in wages? Is there any way to figure this out?
What sorts of jobs are being outsourced here? If, say, India is siphoning away our low-level programming jobs, then American workers can stay ahead of the curve through better education, yes? But if Indian programmers are on par with American workers, and simply willing to work longer hours for less pay, then that's a more serious problem, and the US really does need to consider an industry shuffle.
Isn't DeLong ignoring the fact that we're running up account deficits with China and India, as documented by, among others, MSNBC. What exactly can we export to these countries if they're not buying? Isn't this when we really start to worry about our trade deficit, like Billmon told us to?
There's more, of course, and it's quite fascinating, even if it seems like no one knows what's really going on. Whether the outsourcing "crisis" makes a good case for protectionism... well, frankly, I have no idea either.
Posted by Brad Plumer,
1:32 PM
-
Thursday, August 21, 2003 Dude! It's a buzz flood! Blabberforce is now called buzzflood. Buzzflood? Did the bong water spilled all over and suddenly, inspiration struck?
P.S. "Buzz" is not something to something to make your college as prestigious as Harvard or Princeton. "Buzz" is what Tina Brown lived on, and look what that did for Talk Magazine. But this attempt should be useful for their resume. Maybe any effort to raise Dartmouth's prestige needs serious effort. A student needs an incentive to be really committed. Would we want people who have nothing better to do working on rebranding? I certainly wouldn't want the committed traditionalists working on it. Maybe wannabe consultants combine the best of promoted the school's interests while having self-interest as a reason for dedicating their time to it. Anything the Review hates, you'd think I'd like. But not consultants. bleech.
Posted by Timothy,
11:38 PM
-
Rino Schwarzenegger Angry Clam has Arnold's new campaign poster:
Posted by Timothy,
7:43 PM
-
Stupid conservative pundits What crap won't Fred Barnes say? He thinks Bush is a "big government conservative" and apparently that's a good thing too. (via Yglesias) For all I know, Barnes may be right in his description of Bush, but is such a position coherant? The big freakin' problem is you can't cut taxes forever AND afford a huge military and all other social priorities. All you conservatives who rely on theories of supply-side economics should be absolutely ashamed and never again pretend you have any pretense to intelligent thought on this matter.
Posted by Timothy,
7:19 PM
-
Bringing a real U.N. force in Bucko keeps crying that us Bush-bashers should stop thinking about the distance past of a few months ago and start thinking about the solutions for Iraq. How about a real U.N. force? We'd already have a lot more troops from other countries if we had done this multilaterally. But the Bushies are still prideful and arrogant and stubbornly stuck in their ways. Might I add less U.S. troops would like be dying? And we'd have more moral authority to say countries should come in, if the U.S. hadn't effectively said we fought the war, we get to rebuild it alone.
Posted by Timothy,
7:03 PM
-
Dainty Eating? Jordan was telling me this story about Kerry's visit to Philly and how he screwed up by ordering swiss on his philly cheesesteak (you only are supposed to get it with cheesewiz or provolone). Then, he was criticised for eating it "daintily." Is this fair? Here is the article and picture of his eating posture. You decide.
Posted by Kumar,
6:56 PM
-
A Good Blog: The Tough Democrat. Good name and good commentary. Check it out. [LINK]
What gets me is the nonsense about historical accuracy. As best I can make out in this smoky skirmish, Icon informed a reporter for The Wall Street Journal that the script was based not only on the Gospels but also on the writings of two visionary nuns, writing in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. So much for historical accuracy. (These later writings, luridly painting Jews as 'Christ-killers,' are what most trouble the scholars.) There is also the small problem of inconsistency among the evangelical accounts of Christ's passion and death: Mr Gibson will necessarily have had to choose to follow one of the Gospels, and to ignore the others, with regard to each of many details. Finally, there is the nonsense of casting the dialogue in Aramaic - which was indeed the ligua franca of Palestine in Jesus's lifetime, and probably his native language - and in Latin, which nobody, not even the Roman occupiers, spoke in that part of the Empire. What cosmopolitan people spoke in the eastern part of the Roman Empire was Greek. The Gospels themselves were composed in Greek. I can imagine the meeting at which people who knew better chose instead to defer to Mr Gibson's announcement that his new movie would be shot in 'authentic' Aramaic and Latin. Mr Gibson is a rich, major movie star who has contributed heavily to a breakaway church that, while claiming to be Catholic, recognizes neither the authority of Vatican II nor that of the popes since Pius XII - a church, in short, for which the revival of Latin is a touchstone. Only a knucklehead, then, could conceive of an historically accurate Passion based on all the Gospels and the wholly extra-Scriptural visions of much later writers, and filmed, moreover, partly in Latin. The urge to snort derisively is irresistible. But the misconceptions that apparently underlie The Passion highlight the peculiar relation of Catholics generally to the Bible.
Emmett, who knows RJ, can judge what he thinks RJ got right and wrong. The New Republic article agrees with much of what RJ says.
Posted by Timothy,
5:54 PM
-
Flood the Zone Fridays.... Speaking of George Bush's website, Ezra Klein over at Not Geniuses has a cute little idea: get the left-leaning part of the blogosphere to commandeer the Action Center page on Bush's website (which allows you to send form letters praising Bush to local newspapers),a nd start sending out anti-W invectives. Ezra explains:
Matt Singer and I originally conceived of this as a project for the DDF, but we quickly realized this wasn't candidate specific -- this is for every lefty in America. So here is what we propose. We want to get a coalition together -- every influential and non-influential lefty site with the ability to direct readers and members over to the Bush action tools. And every Friday, we want to use those tools to write letters and make calls highlighting a different part of the Bush disaster. This Friday will be fiscal irresponsibility day -- where we blanket the media with calls and letters about Bush's absurd fiscal policies. We're even going to get you the info, for instance, behold the Bush Record (if you're not a Dean supporter, just ignore the stuff about Dean).
Come Friday, Matt or I will post up some talking points and sample letters, and then watch the fun begin. Lets show Rove who owns the 'net.
Sounds fun enough, and if it helps scuttle Bush's poll numbers even further, then no harm done, eh? I say everyone on this site should join up. Plus we get to feel all cool and subversive. Oooohh....
Posted by Brad Plumer,
4:11 PM
-
New Zogby Poll: Bush's slide in the polls continues, as do his re-election numbers [LINK]. A lot of pundits are predicting that the drops in numbers should be stalled by the media attention around the recall. I wonder if the UN story will bring Iraq back into focus as the big story.
Posted by Kumar,
3:38 PM
-
The 10th Dem Prez Candidate: I don't why but he seems not to have fallen within the media limelight. Check out his website. Here.
Posted by Kumar,
3:28 PM
-
Nerd corner... Do multiple universes exist? Jim Holt at Slate considers the arguments pro and contra. Which brings to mind this old but nifty Scientific American article by physicist Max Tegmark, which sets the following outlandish proposal alongside other, equally outlandish proposals:
I have suggested that complete mathematical symmetry holds: that all mathematical structures exist physically as well. Every mathematical structure corresponds to a parallel universe. The elements of this multiverse do not reside in the same space but exist outside of space and time. Most of them are probably devoid of observers. This hypothesis can be viewed as a form of radical Platonism, asserting that the mathematical structures in Plato's realm of ideas or the "mindscape" of mathematician Rudy Rucker of San Jose State University exist in a physical sense. It is akin to what cosmologist John D. Barrow of the University of Cambridge refers to as "ð in the sky," what the late Harvard University philosopher Robert Nozick called the principle of fecundity and what the late Princeton philosopher David K. Lewis called modal realism. Level IV brings closure to the hierarchy of multiverses, because any self-consistent fundamental physical theory can be phrased as some kind of mathematical structure.
Cool, huh? Read it all. It might be ludicrous, but then, as Michael Riordan argues in recounting the discovery of the quark, ludicrous theories sometimes get their due. Meanwhile, Robert Park gives us The Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science. Warning sign #7--"The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation"-- obviously kicks the multiverse theory in the teeth. Boo. Where's Thomas Kuhn when you need him?
On its Web site, the National Association of Evangelicals recently posted a statement about "The Passion," which included a passage that rankled some Jewish leaders:'There is a great deal of pressure on Israel right now, and Christians seem to be a major source of support for Israel. For Jewish leaders to risk alienating 2 billion Christians over a movie seems shortsighted."
Hmm, I wonder why some Jewish leaders were "rankled." Oh, wait, it's pretty clear. Maybe it's because some Christians are basically saying, "Look, admit you killed Jesus or we're gonna whack your homeland." Now, I know plenty of people I like who are, shall we say, opposed to the prevalent Jewish view on Israel. But I don't know many people who would change their view on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on what the ADL said about a movie. Man, that's craven if I've ever heard of it. The only thing more sickening about that comment was the arrogance of these people to assume they speak for all Christians.
Posted by Sam,
9:43 AM
-
Wednesday, August 20, 2003 Bush's Definition of Compassion: Brad and I were checking out President Bush's website last night and we noticed the weird fact that the President defines "compassion" as pictures of him and African-Americans. Look at all the pictures. Its like the 2000 Republican covention all over again. LINK
America has created — not through malevolence but through negligence — precisely the situation the Bush administration has described as a breeding ground for terrorists: a state unable to control its borders or provide for its citizens' rudimentary needs.
--Jessica Stern, a Harvard's Kennedy School lecturer. From today's NYTimes op-ed page.
Posted by Clint,
3:24 PM
-
Tuesday, August 19, 2003 More Fun with Fox & Franken
Even Cool Hand Luke couldn't resist a piece of Fox-bashing action. And his big finale is particularly chuckle-worthy:
A coalition of the willing — i.e., the Bratwurst Asphalt Company and the Ypsilanti Hot Dog and Bean Shop — has been pushed forward and is prepared to label its products "fair and balanced," knowing that Fox News will sue and that its newscasters will be so tied up with subpoenas they will only be able to broadcast from the courtroom, where they will be seen tearing their hair and whining, looking anything but fair and balanced, which would certainly be jolly good sport all around.
Actually, a live broadcast from the courtroom would be quite the entertaining show. Fox News Execs would be shouting wild accusations, Franken would provide enough wisecracks to keep them enraged, and Bill O'Reilly would be screaming his trademark "Shut-UP!" over and over again. If only they could get Judge Judy into the courtroom, the show would give Jerry Springer a run for his money.
Posted by Nick,
10:01 PM
-
Gibson I know you're kind of bored of The Passion, but the headline in Atrios' post made me laugh:"Gibson to Add Lovable Jews to Movie". It links to this article by the Baptist Press. The sad thing is there have been long and difficult attempts to enact passion plays in Germany without inspiring Anti-Semitism; I would think Mel have benefitted from learning from those experiences. If you missed it, I liked earlier to this article on aztlan.net (La Voz de Aztlan is not the group Cruz Bustamante belonged to):
Who were responsible for the heinous crucifixion of Jesus Christ; the Romans or the Jews? There is ample historical and biblical evidence that it was the Jews who conspired and carried out the murder of the true Messiah by having him nailed to a wooden cross at Golgotha... La Voz de Aztlan understands and greatly sympathises with Mel Gibson and his present predicament. The two Jewish organizations that have vehemently attack him, the ADL of B'nai B'rith and the Simon Wiesenthal Center have also attacked us. Both organizations have written extensively against us simply because we are Christians and because we dare to write the truth in articles such as this one. We are not deterred, however, and pray that Mr. Gibson does not change the script of his film as he originally wrote it. We are convinced that these hypocritical and self-righteous Zionists are of the same mold as those Jewish Pharisees responsible for the cruel crucifixion of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Not the kind of defense Gibson wants, I would think. I have heard that different gospels have different accounts of Jesus being crucified. The 'account' by atzlan says there was "ample historical and biblical evidence that it was the Jews who conspired and carried out the murder..." I'm wondering (a) do they basically get the Bible right or wrong? (b) what historical evidence is there besides the Bible? and (c) How does the account of Atzlan.net differ from other people defending the passion on the basis of history and/or the gospels? (it better and I'm sure they do, as this Atzlan.net writer seems to be a crude, blatant, and vile Anti-Semite)
Posted by Timothy,
8:45 PM
-
Bush Lies Or, rather, look at his mendacity on display here:
In an interview with the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service given on Thursday and released by the White House yesterday, Bush interrupted the questioner when asked about his announcement on May 1 of, as the journalist put it, "the end of combat operations." "Actually, major military operations," Bush replied. "Because we still have combat operations going on." Bush added: "It's a different kind of combat mission, but, nevertheless, it's combat, just ask the kids that are over there killing and being shot at." In his May 1 speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln, Bush declared: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country." The headline on the White House site above Bush's May 1 speech is "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended."
Ok, Bush corrects a questioner by saying something isn't true, but that thing turns out to be what Bush had said. Tell that to troops, indeed. Read the whole thing. Another confirmation that the Bushies are fundamentally dishonest.
Update: In seeming Orwellian fashion, the White House has even changed its website after the Post story. The headline of the carrier speech was originally listed as 'President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended'. Actually, as I'm writing this, I have to say I would say it would be really Orwellian if they had changed the text of the speech, or the headline, to major 'Military Operations' in line with President Bush's revisionism noted in the Post article. Instead they just added a 'major' before 'combat'. In this case, this change doesn't particularly matter, as it does match what the president said then. Even if it does support the general tendency of the White House to be revisionist, it's hard for me to get all that exercized about these specifics. That's not true of what the President said above, which showed real mendacity. A blogger notes:
"I don't know why the WH is so concerned over the word 'major' as it is absolutely evident that both 'major combat operations' and 'combat operations' have not ended. Bush loses either way.
It depends on what the meaning of 'major' is? Actually, this is more tractable in other ways and it is less worthwhile to simply see it as 'Clintonian', because it is touches on a political issue: if the meaning of 'major' is up for dispute, it could be up for the voters to decide, in the sense that it corresponds to how they feel about the continuing number of deaths after the aircraft carrier speech. That number, I believe, is now approaching the number of troops who have died while 'major combat operations' were going on. Another Update: Hmmm... The web-updating of the white house site seems more extensive (and clumsy) than I thought it was. I might have spoke to soon, and it could have relevence after all. Judge for yourself. The State Dept. still has President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended as the title for the text of the Lincoln speech, where the white house people seem to be changing multiple references to "Combat Operations" to "Major Combat Operations." (and having a date stamp on the webpage of August 18 for a May speech) Basically, the only relevence I see is that if the President wants to explain his revisionism above through clever parsing. (ie. 'Major Combat Operations' = 'Military Operations' while simply 'Combat Operations' = what is going on today). That doesn't fly because their official website have said 'Combat Operations' are over. Eh. Whatever. Not too excited anymore. I need to study!!!
Posted by Timothy,
5:50 PM
-
Bush has no idea what's going in Aghanistan From Calpundit with the blockquote from the Washington Post.
I GUESS HE'S A BIG PICTURE GUY....Our wartime president demonstrates his keen grasp of the military operations he is overseeing in Afghanistan:
"We've got about 10,000 troops there, which is down from, obviously, major combat operations," he said. ....In fact, the 10,000 troops in Afghanistan represent the highest number of U.S. soldiers in the country since the war there began. By the time the Taliban government had been vanquished in December 2001, U.S. troops numbered fewer than 3,000 in Afghanistan. And three months later, in March 2002, when the last major battle against remnants of the Taliban and al Qaeda took place in eastern Afghanistan, about 5,000 U.S. troops were in the country.
As I recall, Howard Dean got pilloried for being about 10% off in his estimate of U.S. troop strength in Iraq. Do you think we'll see the same reaction to the guy who actually is president for not even knowing if U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan is up or down compared to a year ago? No, I didn't think so.
Posted by Timothy,
5:35 PM
-
Alabama, Race, and Radio Ads
In line with what Tim posts about the Republican ad mocking a "Mexican" accent, this is from the article I posted below
Riley's opponents also have targeted black voters, airing a radio ad on stations with mostly black audiences featuring a man with poor diction warning, "Our property taxes could go up as much as fo' hundred percent," and blaming "Montgomery insiders who have been ignorin' us for years."
Posted by Jonathan,
3:44 AM
-
And people say liberals are self-righteous? See a blow-by-blow on how O'Reilly is a total idiot in his latest assault on Franken and praising Fox suing him. This is ridiculous self-parody. Does this guy not know anything about free speech and throwing stones in glass houses?
The main point here is that trying to hurt a business or a person because you disagree with what they say is simply unacceptable in America. And that message has been sent by FOX. There's a principle in play. Vigorous debate is embraced by us, but smear campaigns will be confronted. It is simply a joke for The New York Times to editorialize that fabricated personal attacks are acceptable under the banner of satire.
Now Fox News is striking back by putting the demonizers on notice that they will be held responsible when they violate trademarks or launch defamatory personal attacks on Fox personnel.
The trademark part is the actual complaint. But it seems O'Reilly really wants to sue because he feels Franken defamed him. Except defamation would be an even weaker legal claim than the crap they are putting out now (they would have done it otherwise, believe me). But notice how O'Reilly is being a hypocrtical thug, announcing: don't dare attack us, we help dialogue!
It is simply a sorry joke to see a political activist like Al Franken labeled a satirist by The New York Times. Attempting to smear and destroy the reputations of those with whom you politically disagree is not satire. If that were the case, Richard Nixon's Watergate plumbers would all be writing for "Saturday Night Live." Fox News has become the highest-rated news network on cable because we feature lively debate and all honest voices are welcome. We don't do drive-by character assassinations, and we don't denigrate opposing points of view by launching gratuitous personal attacks.
Yeah.
Posted by Timothy,
2:26 AM
-
Texas, Race, and GOP ads Someone please point me to a site saying this isn't true... please? (via offthekuff)
Posted by Timothy,
2:16 AM
-
Monday, August 18, 2003 Bustamante Ornicus has long posts I was only able to skim here and here saying and links to Front Page Magazine really bashing Bustamante (Ornicus notes how FPM has now removed an earlier reference connecting Bustamante to the anti-semitism of an outfit called La Voz de Aztlan, still in evidence here in this blog). Ornicus claims this is an unsuccessful effort to detract from Arnold's connections to groups like U.S. English and having Pete Wilson involved in his campaign (which is a political decision, though Calpundit doesn't think it will matter much). Ornicus says:
Moreover, there is simply no evidence that at the time Bustamante participated in MEChA that it espoused the kind of naked racism and virulent anti-Semitism as can be found in La Voz. Nor is there a smidgen of evidence that Bustamante ever held such views or endorsed them. The best that Ponte can do is to demand that Bustamante publicly disavow such groups. This is, incidentally, precisely the kind of "guilt by association" of which right-wing characters like Horowitz and others regularly accuse the left and civil-rights organizations like the SPLC. But unlike the associations that the SPLC finds, say, between mainstream Republicans like Trent Lott and neo-Confederate organizations, the evidence to support such linkage is not only extremely thin in Bustamante's case, it is nearly non-existent. It probably would help clear the air if Bustamante were to make his position regarding La Voz de Aztlan unmistakable.
Here at "Fair and Balanced" Free Dartmouth, we report, you decide (and hopefully I go back to studying and you can sort through it).
Update: Did anyone know Bustamante is Lieberman's top supporter in California? Huh. Doesn't say much for his political judgment. In comments Tacitus says to someone who posted the Ornicus post linked to above:
Though I did cite Carreon and Cienfuegos's La Voz de Aztlan as "Mechista fellow-travellers" -- an entirely accurate description -- I did not state nor imply that Cruz Bustamante was directly affiliated with or even sympathetic to that publication. Furthermore, I specifically disavowed Lowell Ponte's hypothesis of Bustamante's hidden agenda. Finally, the piece itself contains a glaring factual error: While there is indeed no evidence, to my knowledge, that MEChA harbored anti-Semites during Bustamante's active association with it, the statement that it did not espouse "naked racism" at that time is simply false. Such racism is at the core of its founding, and plainly evident in its constituting documents.
Tacitus is asked questions (in italics) and answers them:
2) On topic: Indeed, Bustamante may have been a Mechista, it is probably likely...when was he a mechista, and what were the activities and politics of the mechistas at that time? What was his participation? Did he write for them? When did he disassociate with or drift away from involvement, and has he been involved since? Has he ever espoused any political lines that could be attributable to or akin with mechista politics Just questions all. I only know 1.5 answers. The 1 answer is that the Mechista ideology was thoroughly racist from the get-go in '69, as evidenced by its founding documents cited above; that hadn't changed by Cruz's college years from '73 through '77. The 0.5 answer is that aside from endorsing illegal immigration, I don't know that Cruz has espoused any Mechista policies since then. ...What's absurd is your comparison of MEChA to Nazis and the Klan. Until you can prove a pattern of systematic murder, torture and racial violence.... Quite obviously I'm not making that comparison of scale; nor am I asserting that "Chicanismo" as espoused by MEChA is as inherently evil as Nazi or Klan ideology. Re-read that portion.
What's So Bad About Arnold Schwarzenegger Anyway? Schwarzenegger's reputation, meanwhile--which I've heard from one reliable source, one eyewitness ultra-reliable source, and one unreliable Premiere article-- is this: He bullies people "below the line." That is, he bullies the technicians, costumers, etc. who aren't billboardable talents. Is it to get his way? No--he's the star and he's going to get his way anyway. It's from an ugly sense of pleasure in others' discomfort. ... Will this unpleasant character trait come out in the campaign? Schwarzenegger may learn, as Howell Raines learned, that it's harder to get away with being a bigshot prick than it used to be. ... On the other hand, if I were being hounded by investigative journalists, I'd sure want them to be investigative journalists from the L.A. Times. The Times' record of failing to destroy its targets is legendary. Under its new management the paper is better than it was, but culture is hard to change....
La Voz de Aztlan understands and greatly sympathises with Mel Gibson and his present predicament. The two Jewish organizations that have vehemently attack him, the ADL of B'nai B'rith and the Simon Wiesenthal Center have also attacked us. Both organizations have written extensively against us simply because we are Christians and because we dare to write the truth in articles such as this one.
Posted by Timothy,
8:39 PM
-
Out with the old, in with the new...
...racial stereotypes, that is. The Sunday Post "Outlook" section notes:
Who eats watermelon? And why? Asians and Asian Americans top the list of watermelon lovers, according to the National Watermelon Promotion Board's latest survey of more than 2,800 customers, followed by Hispanics, non-Latin whites, and finally, blacks. (The sound you just heard was yet another racial stereotype going kersplat!)
But we've a new one to replace it now, huh? It turns out that 78% of Asians bought a watermelon in the past year.
The relevant, question, of course: who cares?
Posted by Jonathan,
1:52 AM
-
Sunday, August 17, 2003 Pop Quiz
Q: How do you stop people from destroying their own infrastructure in an attempt to get you to leave their country?
A: Send Arnold to be the Chief Administrator.
I think he could command some respect from those people.
Posted by Jonathan,
9:06 PM
-
The Pope Knighted Kurt Waldheim I was shocked when I came across this when searching for articles on Arnold and Nazi Kurt Waldheim.
The Gazette (Montreal, Quebec), August 11, 1994, Thursday, Pg. D11, "Papal politics; Knighthood for Waldheim reflects debate over future of Catholicism in Europe" by Bernard Kaplan
PARIS- Pope John Paul II's surprising decision to award Kurt Waldheim a papal knighthood stems from an increasingly heated debate within the Vatican over Catholicism's future in Europe, according to experts on church affairs. These analysts say the pope knew that honoring the former United Nations secretary-general and Austrian ex-president would stir strong condemnation because of Waldheim's record as a officer who lied about belonging to a German army division that committed atrocities in Yugoslavia during World War II. But the pope "bowed to the argument that he had to make a gesture to conservative Austrian Catholics who are the church's greatest bulwark," said Pierre Boisdeffre, a French Catholic writer with close ties to the Vatican. "For a large number of Austrian Catholics, Waldheim remains an eminent figure, even something of a hero because of what they consider the unfair treatment he has received from foreigners. And, of course, he is a devout churchman," he said. The pope's decision to bestow a papal knighthood on Waldheim was a victory for those who fear the church has been steadily losing ground since the end of the Cold War in the traditionally staunch Catholic countries of Central Europe, he said. Aware of the controversy that would ensue, the pope arranged for Waldheim to receive his knighthood at a low-key ceremony at the papal nuncio's residence in Vienna last month. News of the event leaked out last week. Boisdeffre describes John Paul as "embarrassed" by the episode. But he said: "Don't forget, the pope is inevitably a politician as well as a man of God. Every pope must seek to balance the incessant political pressures placed on him. This pope is no different, except that he has been more successful than most in performing that kind of juggling act." The French specialist said the Waldheim award could have been "partially in exchange" for the recent establishment of diplomatic relations between the Vatican and Israel. For more than four decades, church conservatives opposed recognition of Israel for fear of offending the Arabs, including Arab Christians. "Those elements within the Curia (the Vatican's highest-ranking administrative body) who were least enthusiastic about recognizing Israel are also those who most favored honoring Waldheim," Boisdeffre said. George Schwartz, a Swiss expert on Vatican affairs, referred to the Waldheim award as "part of a much wider debate currently going on about the Catholic church's position in Central Europe since the end of the Cold War." The end of communist oppression has led to an erosion of church influence and support in countries like Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic where previously the Catholic hierarchy was regarded as the champion of national independence from Soviet domination. "Now, the church is seen as pursuing its own political agenda which isn't necessarily in accord with popular aspirations," Schwartz said. "In Poland, for example, church efforts to maintain a virtual monopoly over education have provoked opposition even among many Catholics. The churches are no longer as full as they were in communist times. The priest is no longer the figure to whom all turn." The situation has strengthened those inside the Vatican who want Catholicism to revert more than ever to its most conservative traditions as a way of preserving the core of its support, according to Schwartz. Honoring Waldheim was a gesture to conservative Catholicism in a country whose geographic position and historic cultural role makes it an important factor in central European religious affairs, he said.
Posted by Timothy,
4:59 PM
-
When Bad Republicans Go Good
After the Prattville speech, an 81-year-old lawyer named Harold Howell rose. "I think everybody here feels like we're overtaxed," Howell began, "but you know, when you get down to it, what you're asking for is peanuts compared to the incomes that people in this room here make. And it's payback time for us. I got my education in this state, and I make a living out of this state, and it's time to help the kids that's coming up. I support you."
What could the governor possibly have added? "God bless you," he said.
Posted by Jonathan,
2:54 PM
-
Rape and Kobe Bryant Read Susan Estrich. You might be surprised.
