If Kerry had the cojones to take on Nixon, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush, why would anyone think that he wouldn't take on anyone else?
Listen closely and tell anyone you know who is still thinking about voting for Bush: has Bush ever, personally, faced down anyone other than with a chant of "Drink, drink, drink"? Has he ever gone against someone who was really, truly powerful in order to place the good of the people above his own good? No. Heroes do that - they don't care what's in their way - they will face down evil, no matter how powerful. And they don't bother with those who are too weak to fight. It's why the latest news from Iraq fanned the fire: those in charge have screwed us over again, and Kerry's ready to bring the superhero costume out. Call him "the Winter Soldier."
Josh Marshall asks a good question:
Which of these two statements sounds like it comes from the stronger leader?
John Kerry: In response to this tape from Osama bin Laden, let me make it clear, crystal clear. As Americans, we are absolutely united in our determination to hunt down and destroy Osama bin Laden and the terrorists. They are barbarians. And I will stop at absolutely nothing to hunt down, capture or kill the terrorists wherever they are, whatever it takes. Period.
George W. Bush: Earlier today I was informed of the tape that is now being analyzed by America's intelligence community. Let me make this very clear: Americans will not be intimidated or influenced by an enemy of our country. I'm sure Senator Kerry agrees with this. I also want to say to the American people that we're at war with these terrorists and I am confident that we will prevail.
Via Juan Cole:
The Lancet, a respected British medical journal, reports that the US and coalition forces (but mainly the US Air Force) has killed 100,000 Iraqi civilians since the fall of Saddam on April 9, 2003. Previous estimates for civilian deaths since the beginning of the war ranged up to 16,000, with the number of Iraqi troops killed during the war itself put at about 6,000.
The troubling thing about these results is that they suggest that the US may soon catch up with Saddam Hussein in the number of civilians killed. How many deaths to blame on Saddam is controverial. He did after all start both the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War. But he also started suing for peace in the Iran-Iraq war after only a couple of years, and it was Khomeini who dragged the war out until 1988. But if we exclude deaths of soldiers, it is often alleged that Saddam killed 300,000 civilians. This allegation seems increasingly suspect. So far only 5000 or so persons have been found in mass graves. But if Roberts and Burnham are right, the US has already killed a third as many Iraqi civilians in 18 months as Saddam killed in 24 years.
I hadn't realized that the cat blogging phenomenon had gotten that big. I haven't posted any images of our family felines, mostly because I felt like that was other people's thing, but also because I don't want the other cats to feel bad. After all, can you get any more adorable than this?
I didn't think so. Of course, these same adorable little monsters were also responsible last night for literally demolishing a loaf of bread (all that was left was a ziploc bag full of crumbs), chewing up the leaves on at least one plant, ingesting part of a cat toy, and then barfing up the lot on the carpet. So appearances can be deceiving.
A friendly neighborhood Kossack does an analysis of "Mosh":
Other than to straight up hand it to Eminem, Dr. Dre, Ian Inaba, Anson Vogt, Kevin Elam and Thomas Brohdal and everyone else who had a hand in the making of this video?
Watching this video is one of those experiences that just changes you. Mosh has a transformative power. Like, before I clicked on my computer this morning and downloaded the thing....well, I thought and felt one way...about Eminem, the youth vote, our troops, the state of oppositional culture in America, the meaning of this election, what George Bush means to young Americans...and afterwards, I just had huge fucking scales fall from my eyes....
I felt this powerful sense that I had just seen something calibrated exactly for this moment, something hopeful and disturbing and honest...something spoken from the crux of this hour in our history and yet resolutely looking forward. Mosh is political art that, at the same time, speaks in an authentic and specific voice. It is art that seems to bear a power to unleash something new.
I don't know how "transformative" the video really is-- we'll need the passage of time to tell us that. Apparently it's the #1 video on MTV right now, though, which must mean something.
In an effort to not be one of those people who only reads stuff he agrees with, I've added Instapundit to the list of blogs I read regularly. It's interesting to see his reaction to Bush's comment today that "a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief." He says that Bush's comment "interplays nicely with Kerry's usual criticism of Bush for rushing to war without knowing all the facts." I find this reaction a bit of a head-scratcher. "Interplays nicely"? Does he think this is a libretto?
Contrast this with Wesley Clark's statement, which is more explicit.
I predict that there is going to be a time in the not-too-distant future when we all look back on the first years of the 21st century with complete and utter shame and disgust.
Well, I did my civic duty today, so now it's up to God and Diebold. There wasn't a huge crowd there, but there seemed to be a steady stream of folks. Turns out there are two places in the same building where you can vote, which is only really clear if you approach the building from the side. The back side of the building wasn't really set up for much of a crowd, so it's a good thing traffic was light. After I filled in the early voting form they had to go off in the back to code my ballot card, which they then brought back out so that I could vote in one of the four machines set up. There wasn't a clear process laid out, so there was a fair amount of milling about and people scooching past each other. The whole thing took about 15-20 minutes, which is a lot faster than when we voted at the firehouse in Statham in 2000.
The server seems to be momentarily swamped, but this is definitely worth a look.
Salon.com News | Eminem's anti-Bush anthem: "With his history of homophobia and his long-running beef with MoveOn supporter Moby, Eminem is an even less likely lefty hero than Howard Stern. But the just-released video for his new anti-Bush song "Mosh," makes "Fahrenheit 9/11" look like a GOP campaign spot, and it will almost certainly reach an audience that wouldn't think of shelling out for a documentary."
The local Athens paper has endorsed Bush. That's not unexpected. What I find a little strange is the closing argument they make:
Beyond that, there are the intangible factors that help voters measure the people asking to be their president.
In that regard, we were somewhat troubled by a last-minute attempt by Kerry to close the gap with Bush. Kerry's recent hunting trip in Ohio seemed to us a bit too calculated in its attempt to bring in votes by painting Kerry as a regular guy.
With Bush, there's no question who you get for your vote.
With Kerry, you just can't be sure.
We certainly wouldn't want a president who dresses up in costume to score political points now, would we? The horror.
PhysicsWeb has a story on the greatest equations ever, featuring many of the usual suspects, plus a few that I had never heard of before. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell they limited themselves to equations actually used in science and mathematics. My own nomination for the greatest equation ever would have to be "2 + 2 = 5", which comes from a different realm altogether. I don't know if it's really called "Orwell's Equation," but that's what I think of it as.
To Bush-bashers, it may be the most infuriating revelation yet from the military records of the two presidential candidates: the young George W. Bush probably had a higher I.Q. than did the young John Kerry.
The second-most infuriating thing must be having to read this in the Sunday New York Times . . .
(Via Instapundit.com.)
Just for the record, I'm not one who necessarily thinks Bush is dumb in the sense of say, Forrest Gump. If I say he's a dumbass, I'm using the term as one would when they hear of a college kid who spends an entire semester playing "Grand Theft Auto" and then doesn't understand why he flunked the final. Bush isn't dumb, he's a lazy S.O.B. who's had life handed to him on a silver platter, and has never really had to work for anything in his life. He's uninformed, and has a cocksure certainty born of ignorance. He values loyalty over and above everything, which is apparently a family trait in general. If it's stronger in W than in the rest of the clan, it's because he wouldn't have gotten where he is without people loyal to his father. Those of us who got where we are based on our brains value intelligence and education. People like Bush value connections, because to them that's what matters. For him the question isn't how you apply yourself, it's not what you know, it's who you know and how much you can milk them for. So okay, maybe Bush did score higher than Kerry on some IQ test. Maybe by some measures he's more intelligent. That doesn't make him any less of a dumbass.
Good grief, more animals. This time it's the Democrats doing it, only they've moved from mammals to birds.
So...there's a new ad coming out from the Bush campaign called "Wolves" that seems to be making something of a stir, at least in the blogging world. The lefties seem to think it's not all that, while the righties are declaring it all that and a bag of chips. Folks are also comparing it to an old Reagan ad that I do think is pretty good. You can compare them here. (I know, they're in WMV format...I'm sure you can find something in a more Mac-friendly format if you look hard enough.)
Personally, I thought the Reagan ad was pretty good. "Wolves" didn't do much for me...seeing the animals at the end just made the little voice in the back of my head say, "puppies!"
I've been waiting for this...looks like Eminem's getting political. I've thought for a while now that if we're going to have really vital protest music in this day and age, and not just recycled folkie tunes or 60's rock anthems, that it would come from hip-hop and rap.
There's an interview with Ron Suskind in Salon, which is interesting enough, but this bit caught my eye:
Do you think there's a coordinated attempt to knock journalists down so that what they have to say is taken less seriously?
There is a varied, national, forceful, coordinated campaign to do that, to try to create doubt about the long-held and long-respected work of the mainstream media. Absolutely. So that Americans believe that what we do and say, what the mainstream media offer, is not of value, is not honest, is not factually accurate. And [that we are] not in any way connected to strong traditions of American public dialogue, that we've been co-opted, that we're not objective, and that essentially we are carrying forward an agenda.
Ok, so I'll agree that there is a long-standing effort on the part of some to discredit the media. Think about all the conservatives screaming about the "liberal" media. Still, if there's a coordinated campaign to discredit the media, I have to wonder if they aren't in on it, too.
There may be hope for us yet:
Kid power! Democrat John Kerry is the winner, and the rest of the country should pay attention because the vote on Nickelodeon's Web site has correctly chosen the president of the United States in the past four elections.
Nearly 400,000 children and teens voted, and the results were released Wednesday. Kerry received 57 percent of the vote; President Bush got 43 percent.
Los Angeles Times: If Le Carré Could Vote
Like mange, I find it strange
to be prompted by a meme.
"WTF?" say I, as I look up to the sky
and ponder what it means.
I'm at work, you jerk
is what I'd like to scream.
I don't have time to sit and rhyme
I must suck it up for the team.
Oh, fine. I quit. I'll submit
even if it hurts my self-esteem.
. . . .
This poem inflicted on you thanks to Jon and a temporarily compliant nature. I'm sorry. Really.
Well, as I'm sure you've heard by now, Voting started in Florida today. Here's hoping that it goes more smoothly there than it did last time and that everyone who's supposed to be able to vote can actually do it. Chandra & I are probably going to vote early this year, just to try and beat the crush on election day. According to the link I got from MoveOn.org for GA absentee ballots, it looks like early voters may use paper ballots instead of the computer, so that's one more reason to go early. Not that I'm paranoid or anything, but with my cynicism dial still cranked up I'll do anything I can to make sure my vote gets counted.
It doesn't take a genius to see that this is nuts. The Army is moving unit devoted to training over to Iraq, replacing the trainers with National Guard troops. As Mr. Carter puts it, "That's like replacing the Dodgers with a high school baseball team. Sure, they can both play baseball and wear the uniform — but one is a whole lot more proficient and experienced at its job."
One side says "Welcome to heaven. Here's your harp." the other side says "Welcome to hell. Here's your accordion."
This is probably not what Rove was hinting at when he talked about October surprises.
I have no idea if the source is reliable or not (Kos is, but some random poster is another story), but it would make for an interesting wrinkle...
Kossacks with a Scoop: "Looks like the Kossacks may have a scoop - after the debate Bush asked Kerry if he could talk to him later.
I was wondering what was in that exchange, it seemed rather strange and extended."(Via Eschaton.)
Bob Schieffer: Mr. President, health care costs in the U.S. are skyrocketing. What's your plan to deal with that?
G. Bush: Bob, that's a-- that's a good question. Healthcare is very important. I believe that we should all have good healthcare. But what's more important is that we educate our kids to be healthy. Kids today-- hispanic kids, african american kids-- they all need to learn how to be healthy. That's why my education plan is so important. Bob, we need to learn how to be healthy in a twenty-first century world, where there are so many freedom-hating viruses tryin' to do us harm. I also have a plan to introduce new technologies into educational healthcare. I believe that with new hand-washing technologies we can learn how to fight back against viruses and live in a healthcare-free world.
I didn't think my cynicism dial went past 11, but I think it might now. There are apparently voter suppression efforts afoot, and they're being funded by the Republican National Committee.
And you thought I was just being an alarmist.
I have a dream that one day I'll wake up and discover that I'm being too cynical about the world. Today is not that day.
Normally I don't pay much attention to tax ideas, but this is something new to me. being well below the $500,000 mark, it's something I can wholeheartedly support. Heh.
Krugman does us a favor and fact-checks tomorrow's debate before it happens. He also includes this kicker, which is important to keep in mind:
By singling out Mr. Bush's lies and misrepresentations, am I saying that Mr. Kerry isn't equally at fault? Yes.
Mr. Kerry sometimes uses verbal shorthand that offers nitpickers things to complain about. He talks of 1.6 million lost jobs; that's the private-sector loss, partly offset by increased government employment. But the job record is indeed awful. He talks of the $200 billion cost of the Iraq war; actual spending is only $120 billion so far. But nobody doubts that the war will cost at least another $80 billion. The point is that Mr. Kerry can, at most, be accused of using loose language; the thrust of his statements is correct.
Mr. Bush's statements, on the other hand, are fundamentally dishonest. He is insisting that black is white, and that failure is success. Journalists who play it safe by spending equal time exposing his lies and parsing Mr. Kerry's choice of words are betraying their readers.
This seems pretty strong:
It's not a 'fairness' or a free speech issue. It's a massive and quite public case of election and campaign finance fraud.
It's the sort of thing that, if it happens, will put the legitimacy of the entire election into doubt.
I'm fine with the fraud angle, and I would like to see some serious consequences for this stunt. However, it seems a little strong to be talking about the legitimacy of the election at this point. It's entirely possible, after all, that whether this thing is broadcast or not that Bush will still lose. Should that happen, I would be inclined to think that it increases the legitimacy of the election-- after all, it will show that this kind of blatant manipulation of the media doesn't necessarily have an impact on voters.
Having said that, I agree with Josh's overall thrust, and think that Sinclair should lose its license to broadcast.
The more blather there is about the "War on Terror," the harder it is to know exactly what it means. Juan Cole has an excellent essay about this, and asks what Bush/Cheney are really fighting.
Bush and Cheney are cynically using the trauma of September 11 as a pretext to fight a series of elective wars against weak governments that are inconvenient for hawkish goals and some US corporate interests. Iraq was a poster child of this policy. It had no weapons of mass destruction, was ramshackle, and had no significant ties to terrorism. It was invented as a dire threat to Peoria by Karl Rove and Rupert Murdoch, the latter-day Wizards of Oz.
. . . .
The "war on terror" of Bush-Cheney is a smokescreen for naked American imperial aggression. The sad story of how Iraq posed no threat either to the US or to any of its neighbors, despite high-decibel claims to the contrary for two years by Bush, Cheney and their acolytes, will be repeated in the case of Syria and Iran if Bush and Cheney are reelected. They hope that their project of overthrowing governments in the region will go smoothly, but they do not really care, since even an Iran and a Syria in chaos is a net gain from their point of view. Chaos creates "terror" and justifies further US involvement, aggression and control. It is inconvenient for the rest of us, but then they insist, unlike John Kerry, that we live with the nuisances they are creating.
If this was a test, this one question would be worth the whole enchilada, pass/fail. What Bush means when he talks about the "War on Terror," is not so much stopping terror where it exists, as it is about entering a state of perpetual war with whoever looks at him sideways. That's why he has to go.
This alarmed me initially more than it normally would have, because I confused "Independent Media Magazine" (who may be publishing "Failing the Dover Test" in an upcoming issue) with "Indymedia."
Not to make light of this, because I think it's serious, but it's good to know that it's nothing I'm personally going to get sucked into.
heh.
Global Test: "
(thanks to reader l. don't know who created it)."(Via Eschaton.)
As the phrase goes, you can't make this stuff up:
Today we have this line from the Associate Press: "This week marks the first time that the Bush administration has listed abuses in the oil-for-fuel program as an Iraq war rationale."
I like brainstorming! Let's see...we went to war in Iraq because:
those mustaches were driving us crazy.
vroom vroom! neeerrrruuuum! I'm an airplane!
how can a country name end in q?
George needed more sand for his sandbox.
brains! BRAAAIINS!!
Condi insisted on bombing a real country.
this war was brought to you by vIraqra.
What else can you say about this, beyond oh shit...
This one may actually not be as bad as it appears, but still.
Piece on Rodney Dangerfield. They don't mention my personal favorite line of his, "I called the suicide hotline-- they put me on hold!"
Well, I didn't think much of the debate last night. I wasn't sure if it was because the performance(s) were dull or I was just tired, but I found myself wandering off a lot during it-- getting a bowl of ice cream, finishing off another dessert, grabbing my guitar, etc. Cheney still creeps me out, and I thought Edwards was a little nervous. The moderator I thought was a bit of a twit. Most of what I've read so far today had a different take, so I was glad to see that at least one writer came away with the same impression I did:
Here's how bad it was Tuesday night. Fifteen minutes before the end of the vice-presidential debate -- with Dick Cheney still talking about the terrorists who want to kill us, with John Edwards still trying to circle back to some prior question -- the spinners for the two candidates came barging into the press room like rodeo clowns trying to save a fallen cowboy.
They were too late.
Dick Cheney and John Edwards debated for a little more than 90 minutes Tuesday, but the snippy, sordid and yet somehow sleepy affair seemed to stretch on for days. It was a dispiriting debate, and it left both men diminished. Edwards repeatedly missed chances to defend his ticket; in a moment that was at least a little Dukakis-esque, he let Cheney get away with claiming that he had dishonored Iraqis killed in George W. Bush's war. Cheney simply declined to answer questions he didn't like.
Here's something else I missed last night, but a number of bloggers are pointing out (with glee). Cheney at one point referred voters to "factcheck.com", when what he really meant was "factcheck.org". The goof isn't of the whitehouse.com variety, but it turns out factcheck.com is owned by George Soros (of MoveOn.org fame, etc.)...this one's not going to help the Bush camp much.
I believe the operative word here is "D'oh!".
UPDATE: Apparently it's not owned by Soros, just someone who agrees with him. Interesting...
Can't say the same for Cheney, though. Turns out that he forgot ("forgot"? hard to know) having met Edwards before last night. This, of course, seems to be everywhere in the blogs I read. This is just one:
Cheney Lied: "Claimed he'd never met Edwards. LIIIIAAAAAAARRRRRR. February, 2001:
Congressman Wamp, Senator Edwards, friends from across America, and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world: Lynne and I are honored to be with you all this morning."
(Via Eschaton.)
Yes, I'll be watching the debate tonight. I'm not expecting the same kind of meltdown (is that an extreme way of putting it? maybe...) we saw last week, but with any luck we'll get a good show. Say what you will about Cheney's moral compass, he's probably more disciplined than Bush is. I figure he'll speak in that murmuring drone of his that sounds perfectly reasonable despite whatever words are coming out of his mouth. I honestly have no idea what to expect out of Edwards.
Anyway, mostly I just hope that I'll get home in time to see it live, since an unexpected meeting's popped up for after work today...
You're not going to see this tonight, but it would be satisfying to witness. Said with a smile, I'm sure.
Ambassador L. Paul Bremer, administrator for the U.S.-led occupation government until the handover of political power on June 28, said he still supports the decision to intervene in Iraq but said a lack of adequate forces hampered the occupation and efforts to end the looting early on.
"We paid a big price for not stopping it because it established an atmosphere of lawlessness," he said yesterday in a speech at an insurance conference in White Sulphur Springs, W.Va. "We never had enough troops on the ground."
He's a coward, and who pays the price? They should make these guys go personally apologize to every relative of every person who's been killed over there, and grovel at their feet for forgiveness.
UPDATE: ok, so maybe Bremer wasn't a coward...according to this it sounds like he did request more troops, but the paperwork may have gone in the circular file. So we blame Donald and Dubya instead...same deal apples with the groveling, though.
Came across some interesting statistics on undecided voters...
And here I thought Miss Cleo was out of business entirely.
This seems like as good a summation of the first debate as any:
It appears that George W. Bush is tired of being president.
His weariness and frustration with the job was evident throughout last night's first presidential debate of the 2004 campaign. Whenever the discussion turned to questions about his management of the occupation of Iraq, Bush said, "It's hard work." Why didn't he anticipate the disaster? "It's hard work." Considering the mounting death toll, was the Iraq invasion worth it? "It's hard work."
By the end of the night, the sullen president had repeated the "hard work" line at least nine times, using it as frequently as he did those stock talking points about "progress" in Iraq and Democrat John Kerry's "mixed messages." And, in contrast to his rote recitation of the talking points, Bush's grumbling about how difficult it is to do his job did not seem at all insincere. At least on this point, Bush was speaking the truth. For George W. Bush, serving as president at this time in history is very hard work.
What was striking last night was the marked distinction between the world-weary performance of the president and the engaged presence of John Kerry. The Democratic challenger did not suggest that the challenges of cleaning up the mess in Iraq would be easily met. But his answers to questions about the quagmire suggested that he did not find the notion of tackling those challenges nearly so daunting as does the current occupant of the Oval Office.
That's right-- bein' president ain't no fishin' contest, George.
This is a different call than the one I posted about, but the answer to the question is yes, it really is that easy to punk the Republicans.
Once again, the media proves that it's too lazy to do a fucking Google search. Guess what-- one of the "undecided" voters paraded on CNN is actually an active member of College Republicans. Tools.
I hadn't noticed this...
The Charge Not Answered: "Yglesias says:
THE CHARGE NOT ANSWERED. The main thing that lends debates -- as opposed to normal speeches -- some interest is that even when the candidates aren't allowed to directly address one another, they still set up their charges in such a way as to clearly imply that the other guy ought to be responding to his opponents' attacks. In that light, it's worth highlighting one charge Kerry made several times that Bush never responded to directly -- namely that the reason Osama bin Laden is at large threatening the United States rather than dead on the battlefield was the Bush administration's decision to "outsource" the battle of Tora Bora.
I've never heard any of Bush's allies offer a convincing defense of this decision, and it's a critique Kerry's been leveling on-and-off ever since the day it happened. Tonight, Bush didn't even try. A tacit admission, perhaps, that Kerry was right. I think that means Kerry ought to press the assault forward and start bringing this up more often. Force the president to either admit he was wrong and puncture his self-cultivated mystique of infallibility or else offer some kind of defense. I don't see what he could possibly have to say for himself.
Indeed."(Via Eschaton.)
Well, I watched the debate last night...mostly on C-SPAN, but I also flipped to other channels occasionally to see what they were doing differently in terms of camera angles. C-SPAN kept it on split screen almost the whole time, so we could watch both candidates. A couple things struck me about their body language-- first, Kerry really seemed to be enjoying himself. He looked comfortable, and really in his element. Bush, on the other hand, mostly looked annoyed and irritated. What particularly struck me, however, was how Bush kept thumping the podium during his responses, and how he kept stammering out rebuttals before Jim Lehrer had given him permission to do so. Kerry occasionally signalled that he'd like to say something in response to Bush, but he had the courtesy to be less vocal about it.
Anyway, like I said yesterday, I didn't get anything of substance out of the debate, but being something of a news junkie that's no surprise. I think there were some bits of information that were new to Chandra, so I have no doubt that for a lot of viewers there was a lot to digest.
Kerry: 1
Bush: 0
