...They'll dance because of that crazy Casssbaah Sooooound!
Seriously, folks, the racism and fearmongering doesn't get any more obvious than this.
This ranks right up there with concerns that electing Kennedy would put America under the control of the pope.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Friday, March 7, 2008
Clinton's Experience?
She goes around, talks with people, gets people organized, makes strong statements on moral matters.
So says the Chicago Tribune.
Which means the only real thing she has on Obama is a couple of years in the Senate. And he has six years on her in elected office.
Experience might count, if you have it, and have learned properly from it. Otherwise, all experience is a collection of bad habits made more confidently.
So says the Chicago Tribune.
Which means the only real thing she has on Obama is a couple of years in the Senate. And he has six years on her in elected office.
Experience might count, if you have it, and have learned properly from it. Otherwise, all experience is a collection of bad habits made more confidently.
Support the Troops*
*Just not their education.
ThisDudesArmy tells us about the brilliant reasoning faculties of the college-educated Defense Department, who in their infinite wisdom have decided it's a bad idea to back an updated GI Bill to reward those who will put their life on the line for their country, since folks might leave after one tour to attend college.
Well, gee, that shouldn't be their problem. You might consider that people might be attracted by the idea of free college to serve their country. It's probably better for the economy in the long run than a recruitment bonus.
Besides the fact that this was one of the most successful government programs in history, laying the foundation of our economic dominance, making education a middle class reality, I think their real concern might just be that if our soldiers get educated, those folks might have to compete with people who actually know how wars really are run. And we just couldn't have that, could we?
ThisDudesArmy tells us about the brilliant reasoning faculties of the college-educated Defense Department, who in their infinite wisdom have decided it's a bad idea to back an updated GI Bill to reward those who will put their life on the line for their country, since folks might leave after one tour to attend college.
Well, gee, that shouldn't be their problem. You might consider that people might be attracted by the idea of free college to serve their country. It's probably better for the economy in the long run than a recruitment bonus.
Besides the fact that this was one of the most successful government programs in history, laying the foundation of our economic dominance, making education a middle class reality, I think their real concern might just be that if our soldiers get educated, those folks might have to compete with people who actually know how wars really are run. And we just couldn't have that, could we?
Well, the least you can say is that she's got guts...
...because otherwise, I don't know how you can say this after your campaign has done this, otherwise.
More to the point, what Powers said actually makes some kind of sense. You want somebody in the loop when they're hashing out the details of the plan. You could make claims taking certain words out of context, of course, if you were inclined to do that, but as a whole she's saying that the Obama campaigns committed to getting us out, just not doing it in some ideologically imposed way. An ideologically imposed entrance into the war is what got us into trouble in the first place. Why should we allow ourselves to make the same mistake going out?
More to the point, what Powers said actually makes some kind of sense. You want somebody in the loop when they're hashing out the details of the plan. You could make claims taking certain words out of context, of course, if you were inclined to do that, but as a whole she's saying that the Obama campaigns committed to getting us out, just not doing it in some ideologically imposed way. An ideologically imposed entrance into the war is what got us into trouble in the first place. Why should we allow ourselves to make the same mistake going out?
Michigan and Florida: A Path to Forgiveness (or how to pay for new primaries)
If both states are willing to do new elections in order to leave the illegitimate first tries behind, but neither is willing or able to pay for it, then I have a suggestion.
We've seen both candidates raise massive amounts of money to fund their presidential efforts. We've proven that this can be done within a matter of weeks.
So here's what we do: we set up a fund for these primaries, and both candidates implore their supporters to donate to it, the same way they've donated to their campaigns.
The advantages of this approach is that we have no one candidate funding the election, with the conflict of interest that brings, no drain of Party or candidate funds currently going to win races. If distributed widely enough, it would hardly have an effect on what people give to the candidates.
If we all give to the fund with the same commitment we've given to our respective candidates, we can easily pay for these new primaries. But that's not all.
The funding drive, if successful, would show that the Democratic Party is more united than it seems at the moment. It would show that our party is committed to keeping voters enfranchised. It would allow us to do this within the party's rules, maintaining their integrity.
Last, but not least, it would welcome Michigan and Florida back into the fold in a way sure to improve party morale. The national party, this drive would say, came together to give these two states their voice. All is forgiven. It would also reflect positively upon the party in those states, which might give our candidate an advantage in November.
We've seen both candidates raise massive amounts of money to fund their presidential efforts. We've proven that this can be done within a matter of weeks.
So here's what we do: we set up a fund for these primaries, and both candidates implore their supporters to donate to it, the same way they've donated to their campaigns.
The advantages of this approach is that we have no one candidate funding the election, with the conflict of interest that brings, no drain of Party or candidate funds currently going to win races. If distributed widely enough, it would hardly have an effect on what people give to the candidates.
If we all give to the fund with the same commitment we've given to our respective candidates, we can easily pay for these new primaries. But that's not all.
The funding drive, if successful, would show that the Democratic Party is more united than it seems at the moment. It would show that our party is committed to keeping voters enfranchised. It would allow us to do this within the party's rules, maintaining their integrity.
Last, but not least, it would welcome Michigan and Florida back into the fold in a way sure to improve party morale. The national party, this drive would say, came together to give these two states their voice. All is forgiven. It would also reflect positively upon the party in those states, which might give our candidate an advantage in November.
MAGIC MARKET FAIRY MAKE PONY!1!1!! LOL
Not only does Atrios' entry at Eschaton contain the funniest snark I've read all day, it also contains the most astute economic analysis of the matter I've seen in a long time.
Now where's that pony?
Now where's that pony?
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Maybe it don't mean a thing...
But could Texas have that Swing?
Do wop do wop do wop do wwwwooooop!
Burnt Orange Report is reporting that poll results indicate that Obama might be within striking distance of winning Texas this next election.
Do wop do wop do wop do wwwwooooop!
Burnt Orange Report is reporting that poll results indicate that Obama might be within striking distance of winning Texas this next election.
When one decides to throw bombs at others...
...one is advised not to be within the radius of the blast when it goes off.
This is further evidence of how disorganized and ill-informed this campaign is.
If she tries to push this point in a debate, It will be all too easy for the Obama to say, "according to these reports, your own campaign was making such assurances as you described."
Don't throw razor boomerangs without padded gloves.
This is further evidence of how disorganized and ill-informed this campaign is.
If she tries to push this point in a debate, It will be all too easy for the Obama to say, "according to these reports, your own campaign was making such assurances as you described."
Don't throw razor boomerangs without padded gloves.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Diminished Returns
I would like somebody in the Bush White House to explain to me how we can be spending the most money for our military since WWII, and yet still be losing the war we're currently fighting. A big defense budget doesn't add up to success.
We're paying mostly to outsource things we could do more cheaply, and do better internally. We're paying mostly to run an unsuccessful war into the ground, rather than admit we screwed up. We're paying mostly to fund cold-war style projects for an international situation that has rendered them obsolete. American needs a sustainable defense, not an unsustainable war in Iraq or corporate welfare program for defense contractors.
We're paying mostly to outsource things we could do more cheaply, and do better internally. We're paying mostly to run an unsuccessful war into the ground, rather than admit we screwed up. We're paying mostly to fund cold-war style projects for an international situation that has rendered them obsolete. American needs a sustainable defense, not an unsustainable war in Iraq or corporate welfare program for defense contractors.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
This Guy Makes Don Imus Look Like...
To those who think foregoing torture makes us weak...
I give you the story of how we got Zarqawi without raising a hand against one Iraqi prisoner.
Work smarter, not harder.
Work smarter, not harder.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
What I Really Think is Pathetic About The Republican Party at This Point...
Romney and McCain are hacking each other to pieces trying to make the other candidate look like they're a quitter, a yellow, white flag waving coward who wants to tell the enemy everything we're doing by giving ourselves a timetable for leaving.
Or, put another way, the Republicans are fighting to see which one of them can, with the most conviction, tell the American people they're wrong and contradict their wishes.
Or, put another way, the Republicans are fighting to see which one of them can, with the most conviction, tell the American people they're wrong and contradict their wishes.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Yeah, I thought the De-Baathification Reform was a good idea...
But I was sort of counting on them getting it right.
Spencer Ackerman's saying it got screwed up.
I know the Bush Adminstration likes to talk about milestones reached, but it helps if you're not celebrating empty victories, such as loophole-laden laws that might lead to even greater disenfranchisement.
Repeat after me: results matter.
Spencer Ackerman's saying it got screwed up.
I know the Bush Adminstration likes to talk about milestones reached, but it helps if you're not celebrating empty victories, such as loophole-laden laws that might lead to even greater disenfranchisement.
Repeat after me: results matter.
That's Why This Man Scares Me
Apparently, Bush has decided to ignore another inconvenient truth.
Fortunately, this one only has the potential to embroil the Middle East in near-perpetual warfare, not cook the planet on HI.
Do any of these people get that provoking needless conflict will make defending Israel more difficult than plain Diplomacy will? So many people out there think of war as being the Gordian knot strategy cutter of all time, but many times, it can entangle the knot even more.
The problem with the Neocons is that they nearly always underestimate the complexity of military force and its consequences. They are accustomed to being the stinging gadflies of tough foreign policy, but in practice, they've become blusterers and bluffers who who hope for the best and blunder after it. Their policies, in both Israel and America, have made us less safe rather than more, as they'd desire.
The sooner these people lose power, the better.
Fortunately, this one only has the potential to embroil the Middle East in near-perpetual warfare, not cook the planet on HI.
Do any of these people get that provoking needless conflict will make defending Israel more difficult than plain Diplomacy will? So many people out there think of war as being the Gordian knot strategy cutter of all time, but many times, it can entangle the knot even more.
The problem with the Neocons is that they nearly always underestimate the complexity of military force and its consequences. They are accustomed to being the stinging gadflies of tough foreign policy, but in practice, they've become blusterers and bluffers who who hope for the best and blunder after it. Their policies, in both Israel and America, have made us less safe rather than more, as they'd desire.
The sooner these people lose power, the better.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Fascio-Fascism
I kind of shake my head at calling Jonah Goldberg "the doughy pantsload", but I've already had the privilege of taking shots at his previous pronouncement on his fascism.
Well, I think he just robbed a bakery, because this takes the cake.
Mussolini got labelled a fascist because he supported WWI.
Just one problem: Mussolini WAS the original Fascist. He founded the party that gave the 20th century a name for totalitarian, brutal governments.
The real problem here is that some people identify fascism with any political cause that steps on their toes by preventing them from indulging whatever impulse they want, or does something they can't keep them from doing. Hence, Jonah's previous equation of Ivy-League educated school teachers with Nazi brownshirts.
At the end of the day, what Jonah can't tolerate, is somebody teaching or advocating what he disagrees with, in a way where he or others can come back in and reverse the "damage". He wants control, and fears the Left's influence on all levels.
And this is how, Ironically enough, they justify indulging in the paranoia and political acts that get them defined as fascists. Fascism, more than anything else, is defined by the impulse towards authoritarian control of society. Now, bureaucracy and government intrusion can be part of this, when not balanced by civil liberties, but what truly defines fascism is the vicious will to employ violence and other abuses of power to maintain power over the society, and the impulse to use violence to untie the Gordian knot of problems both internal and external.
Are the Republicans Fascists? No. But the party's become the closer of our two to that. The Democrats once strayed in that direction, and paid the price for it.
If we wish to stay clear of this problematic kind of politics, we must realize one thing: at the end of the day, we may have adversaries in politics, but we have very few true enemies.
Well, I think he just robbed a bakery, because this takes the cake.
Mussolini got labelled a fascist because he supported WWI.
Just one problem: Mussolini WAS the original Fascist. He founded the party that gave the 20th century a name for totalitarian, brutal governments.
The real problem here is that some people identify fascism with any political cause that steps on their toes by preventing them from indulging whatever impulse they want, or does something they can't keep them from doing. Hence, Jonah's previous equation of Ivy-League educated school teachers with Nazi brownshirts.
At the end of the day, what Jonah can't tolerate, is somebody teaching or advocating what he disagrees with, in a way where he or others can come back in and reverse the "damage". He wants control, and fears the Left's influence on all levels.
And this is how, Ironically enough, they justify indulging in the paranoia and political acts that get them defined as fascists. Fascism, more than anything else, is defined by the impulse towards authoritarian control of society. Now, bureaucracy and government intrusion can be part of this, when not balanced by civil liberties, but what truly defines fascism is the vicious will to employ violence and other abuses of power to maintain power over the society, and the impulse to use violence to untie the Gordian knot of problems both internal and external.
Are the Republicans Fascists? No. But the party's become the closer of our two to that. The Democrats once strayed in that direction, and paid the price for it.
If we wish to stay clear of this problematic kind of politics, we must realize one thing: at the end of the day, we may have adversaries in politics, but we have very few true enemies.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
While we're on the subject of charming...
Let's try the new catchphrase in the war: Iraqi Solutions. Which more or less amounts to saying, we're not going to force policy changes on unwilling Iraqis, we're just going to let them sort out things for themselves.
Naturally, it should beg the question: if we're going to let them sort out things for themselves, why are we keeping tens of thousands of soldiers in Iraq? Oh, that's right, so they don't kill each other sorting things out. Brilliant!
But should that be our job, for the indefinite future, especially given the fact we're running low on referees- sorry, peacekeepers- to send over there?
If they're going to sort things out themselves, eventually it's going to come down to them sorting it out between themselves, and that's either going to happen with us in the middle and in the way, or with our presence minimal. I don't think we should suffer from the illusions that this is going to be pretty whatever course we pick. We should also, though, not suffer from the illusion that staying in Iraq will do anything but continue to aggravate the problem, and get Americans killed for the sake of procrastinating, ass-covering politicians.
You know, those likeable fellows. How many Americans have to die so that Congress and the President can save face and avoid political risks?
Naturally, it should beg the question: if we're going to let them sort out things for themselves, why are we keeping tens of thousands of soldiers in Iraq? Oh, that's right, so they don't kill each other sorting things out. Brilliant!
But should that be our job, for the indefinite future, especially given the fact we're running low on referees- sorry, peacekeepers- to send over there?
If they're going to sort things out themselves, eventually it's going to come down to them sorting it out between themselves, and that's either going to happen with us in the middle and in the way, or with our presence minimal. I don't think we should suffer from the illusions that this is going to be pretty whatever course we pick. We should also, though, not suffer from the illusion that staying in Iraq will do anything but continue to aggravate the problem, and get Americans killed for the sake of procrastinating, ass-covering politicians.
You know, those likeable fellows. How many Americans have to die so that Congress and the President can save face and avoid political risks?
Are they naturally charming, or do they have to work at it?
In Blackwater's distinguished career, this has to rate as one of their more beautiful foul-ups, probably highly appreciated by our men and women in uniform: dropping tear gas on our own troops, not to mention a bunch of Iraqis, at an intersection in Baghdad.
The blog this links to notes that both the Helicopter in the air and the vehicle on the ground released this stuff, so it begs the question, not only why this was released, but why they had it to release in the first place.
Update: For those considering the innocent mistake defense for Blackwater, This Wired Blog entry on the matter should put that bad idea to rest. Repeat after me: Smoke grenades are yellow on green, CS grenades are red on grey. Unless Blackwater is employing visually impaired people just for the purpose of confusing these two different kinds of grenades, they ought to know the difference, and they ought to have people with the sense not to inflict tear gas on friendly forces.
Here endeth the lesson.
The blog this links to notes that both the Helicopter in the air and the vehicle on the ground released this stuff, so it begs the question, not only why this was released, but why they had it to release in the first place.
Update: For those considering the innocent mistake defense for Blackwater, This Wired Blog entry on the matter should put that bad idea to rest. Repeat after me: Smoke grenades are yellow on green, CS grenades are red on grey. Unless Blackwater is employing visually impaired people just for the purpose of confusing these two different kinds of grenades, they ought to know the difference, and they ought to have people with the sense not to inflict tear gas on friendly forces.
Here endeth the lesson.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
A Word of Advice from a Media Student to Bill O'Reilly
"We're sorry we had to have that little confrontation," O'Reilly added, "but no one on this earth is going to block a shot on The O'Reilly Factor. It is not going to happen."
Bill , mugging your future interview subject's employee will hardly endear you to him, nor will claiming that assault and battery, criminal behavior, is justified in the name of getting your shot. When I was videotaping a presentation, and the people got in the way, I raised the camera up, or planned the shot from a vantage point that I knew would be clear.
There is absolute no excuse for shoving somebody to get a shot.
Oh, another suggestion: if somebody blocks a shot, make lemons into lemonade. It makes it more cinematic to stage in depth, and as long as you frame it right, you can shoot over somebody's shoulder, and have them be in the foreground without getting distracting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)