Thursday, January 27, 2005

Disillusioned Conservative Says Media Ain't Liberal

From Paul Craig Roberts' "End-Timers and Neo-Cons:"
The Iraqi War is serving as a great catharsis for multiple conservative frustrations: job loss, drugs, crime, homosexuals, pornography, female promiscuity, abortion, restrictions on prayer in public places, Darwinism and attacks on religion. Liberals are the cause. Liberals are against America. Anyone against the war is against America and is a liberal. "You are with us or against us."

This is the mindset of delusion, and delusion permits no facts or analysis. Blind emotion rules. Americans are right and everyone else is wrong. End of the debate.

That, gentle reader, is the full extent of talk radio, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal Editorial page, National Review, the Weekly Standard, and, indeed, of the entire concentrated corporate media where noncontroversy in the interest of advertising revenue rules.
I don't agree with his contention that liberals went wrong because they trusted government too much. But, I'll welcome any conservative who can pull back the curtain on this sham administration and the sad complict media that has supported it. Even if he's an unrepentant supply-sider.

Not Every Church Hates Sponge Bob

Don't conservatives have better things to do than criticize Sponge Bob Squarepants and PBS kids shows? Well at least some churches have a sense of humor. Stop by the The United Church of Christ for a lesson in tolerance and a good chuckle.

Boxer Stops by Daily Kos

Barbara Boxer, aka "My Hero," posted a really nice message to Daily Kos.

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Trib Caves a Little, but Mostly Steady on Doublespeak Directives

As a number of good bloggers (see Talking Points Memo and Eschaton) out there have noted, the President & his White House minions have decided that Social Security terms "privatization" and "private accounts" are not polling well. So they have decreed, after having used this terminology for YEARS, that henceforth and foervermore such things shall be called "personal accounts." And any newspaper not using the term "personal accounts" (which, frankly could be my passbook savings account for all I know) is "editorializing" and is biased against the President.

Shake head in wonder, and insert Orwell reference here.

So, TPM and Eschaton and others have been documenting all the newspapers that have bowed to this pressure.

I'd like to report, thankfully, gratefully, and somewhat astonishingly, that the beloved Chicago Tribune is still (mostly) calling them "private accounts" although some language like "managed investment" and "private retirement" is creeping into the debate.

In a January 26 article, "Black caucus, Bush to discuss key issues" (from Newsday): One issue likely to come up is Bush's plan to divert part of their Social Security taxes to privately managed investment accounts. Supporters of privatization say African-Americans could benefit from the change.

From the lede to a January 26 feature article, "High stakes: As President Bush seeks to reform the Social Security program, economists argue the pros and cons of switching to private accounts" by Nancy Traver: Joan Staples invested her money well during the years she worked as a Chicago Public Schools teacher. Now that she is retired, she's enjoying a comfortable income from her investments. Still, President George W. Bush's proposals to privatize Social Security make her uneasy.

This article does mention "personal accounts" 4 times, in the context of what Bush and his supporters call them. But "privatize" is used three times and "private accounts" is used 6 times, and that seems to be what the economists and "regular folks" are calling them. Even a letter-writing supporter of "private accounts" calls them..."private accounts!"

Note that all Tribune links are free for one week from the published data, and registration is required to view them.

Monday, January 24, 2005

Johnny Carson

I am sad that Johnny Carson has died - 79 seems much too young for someone these days. I have fond memories of watching Johnny as a very young person - the first time I saw his show was staying up late to babysit on New Year's Eve. Johnny and Ed dressed in tuxedos and gamely shephered in the New Year in a 90-minute special. As I grew older, I appreciated his monologue, his quick wit on the couch, and his eclectic interest in a wide variety of entertainment, news and regular quirky people. He may have lost his cache moving into the late 80s, but he could still get more out of lame joke (or a lame guest) than any other host then, now or ever.

I happened on his "official" web site, johnnycarson.com, where you can search on any guest. I thought of Joe Williams, one of my favorite all time singers, and there he was (many many shows), on July 31, 1980 alongside Bruce Dern, June Carter Cash and Jeff Greenfield.

Tom Shales has a lovely obituary--one of the better ones, and I've read most of them today.

Without devolving too deeply in politics, as Carson was notoriously private and seemed apolitical and equal-opportunity when mocking politicians of all stripes, one wonders what he would think about the current police state. His tribute to democracy from 1991 (after the fall of Soviet Communism) gives a little hint:
Democracy is buying a big house you can't afford with money you don't have to impress people you wish were dead. And, unlike communism, democracy does not mean having just one ineffective political party; it means having two ineffective political parties. ... Democracy is welcoming people from other lands, and giving them something to hold onto -- usually a mop or a leaf blower. It means that with proper timing and scrupulous bookkeeping, anyone can die owing the government a huge amount of money. ... Democracy means free television, not good television, but free. ... And finally, democracy is the eagle on the back of a dollar bill, with 13 arrows in one claw, 13 leaves on a branch, 13 tail feathers, and 13 stars over its head -- this signifies that when the white man came to this country, it was bad luck for the Indians, bad luck for the trees, bad luck for the wildlife, and lights out for the American eagle. I thank you.
Last, but not least, Carson loved the standards. Here are the lyrics to "Here's that Rainy Day" (Johnny Burke & Jimmy Van Heusen), which Better Midler sung to him on one his last shows. It's definitely a little rainy around here.
I should have saved
Those leftover dreams
Funny
But here's that rainy day
Here's that rainy day
They told me about
And i laughed at the thought
That it might turn out this way
Where is that worn out wish
That i threw aside
After it brought my love so near
Funny how love becomes
A cold rainy day
Funny
That rainy day is here
It's funny
How love becomes
A cold rainy day
Funny
That rainy day is here

Saturday, January 22, 2005

Catholic Church Defends the Indefensible

At one point, I was planning to write a novel about stolen Jewish art, a Vatican conspiracy, and Holocaust survivors. I haven't written it yet, only because, well, I'm lazy. Writing is hard, especially lots or writing. And writing that requires research.

But stories like this one in the New Republic (subscribtion required), "QUESTIONS FOR THE VATICAN. Hide and Seek" by Daniel Goldhagen, make me want to revisit the topic all over agin. The article discusses whether the Vatican endorsed kidnapping Jewish children after the end World War 2. Parents and relatives and Jewish charities who came to reclaim children left in the care of Catholic schools were thwarted in their efforts. Some were told children had died.

Pope Pius XII, who was also behind the Vatican's tacit support of Naziism (or to be kind, an unwillingness to speak out against the Nazis as an institution or thwart them in any way) as well as the rounding up of Roman Jews, still gets a rousing hoo-ray from the current powers that be, and it seems there's no low that can't be defended or explained away by his supporters. After all he was infallible and is heading for sainthood.

Friday, January 21, 2005

Freedom Is on the March -- Look Out World

The president's inauguration speech makes it obvious our president really really likes freedom (mentioned 27 times) and liberty (mentioned 15 times). Or, if I were going to be cynical, I'd say he thinks that WE, the Amuric'n Public, really like hearing about "freedom" and "liberty" and won't think too much about what it means.

The most striking (and a leetle beet scary, kids) is this metaphor:
By our efforts, we have lit a fire as well -- a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world.
Look out world, it's the untamed fire of freedom and it's coming to get YOU! Iran! North Korea! Cuba! AAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIYYYYY! (Pakistan? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Are they in trouble, too? Doubtful.)

There are lot of intelligent people out there taking apart the speech bit by bit. I could not stomach to listen to it, so I've breezed through the transcript and caught snippets here and there on the radio. For more studious analysis, I strongly recommend Juan Cole's pictorial commentary and Max Speak's "Liberventionism," a term that is the best one-word summary of this new policy as one could ever hope for.

Wednesday, January 19, 2005

This Man-Date is OVAH

Not that you could tell from the coronation activities going on. The WP reports on a recent poll:
Bush said in an interview last week with The Washington Post that the 2004 election was a moment of accountability for the decisions he has made in Iraq, but the poll found that 58 percent disapprove of his handling of the situation to 40 percent who approve, and 44 percent said the war was worth fighting.
...
The president's overall job approval rating stands at 52 percent, up slightly in the past month. Of all presidents in the postwar era who won reelection, only Richard M. Nixon had a lower job approval rating at the start of his second term. The other chief executives began their second term with job ratings of 60 percent or higher.
Can we stop the mandate talk now? Oh, didn't think so.

My new hero: Barbara Boxer!

I'll admit it. For a long time, I've confused Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) with Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). Now that Sen. Boxer has had a metric ton of media coverage, I can honestly say there is absolutely no resemblance. Boxer: attractive, sleek salt-and-pepper hair, expensive glasses. Mikulski: cabbage patch doll.

Anyhoo, I think Sen. Boxer is living up to her name, and throwing a few smart jabs at the administration. First there was her effort (visciously maligned by the Repubs) to support a challenge to the Ohio vote. And now, she dares to question the SLOTUS (that's Second Lady of the U.S.), aka Dr. Rice.

So follow the various links. Considering that 58% of the U.S. population disapproves of Bush's performance in Iraq (40% approve), a courageous voice challenging the administration is welcome. More, please.

Sen. Boxer's Day 2 Questions (requires registration)
Salon interview (premium content)
Daily Kos interview


Thursday, January 13, 2005

For Family & Friends Not Familiar with Fafblog

Fafnir, Medium Lobster & Giblets are the most funniest writers in Blogoland. See fer yersef:
what fool's errand?
So there's gonna be a whole lotta whining and bitching about "oh the Iraq War was a sham" all because the US military gave up looking for weapons of mass destruction. Three weeks ago. Well, that's a whole lotta crap! By invading Iraq the US headed off a grave and gathering threat, like a mushroom cloud made of terrorists! Oh, you hear a lotta talk about "chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons" that never turned up. But does the "Mainstream Media" ever talk about the OTHER weapons of mass destruction that the US has disarmed in Operation Iraqi Freedom? No!

SAND! It is well-known in the "blogosphere" that Saddam was mastering the creation of unstoppable Sand Golems capable of crushing whole cities in monster rampages! Only by siezing control of deadly Iraqi sand could we protect decent Americans from this menace. But the threat of high-sand-content nations isn't over! Giblets hears that Syria may already have a sand processing plant up and running!

ARABS! Saddam had hidden thousands of potentially deadly "dual-use" Arabs that could have been weaponized at any moment! Fortunately the US military has been rounding up and destroying these civilians of mass destruction. But did Saddam hide any of these CMDs to other countries such as Iran and Syria? Giblets says there's only one way to find out!

OIL! Ever tried to drink oil? Oh, it tastes pretty good, but after a while you can get reeeeeaaal sick. So what was Saddam doing with all this black Giblets-sickening stuff in his country anyway!
posted by Giblets at 11:45 AM Comments (10)

Thanks Gibs my friend for clearing this up.

In other No WMD news, a clever fellow called The Poor Man created a nice chart to compare the fallout from media failings/lies of "Rathergate" to that of the WMD. As we used to be told in our AP English class essays, "Compare and contrast...".

And in case anyone has forgotten how shamelessly the Bush Administration flogged this issue, Daily Kos diarist Macabbee published What They Said. Staggering and shameful.

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

TV Musings for the "Second" Season

Yes, with a lack of politics to pay attention to, and a cranky back, I've spent an inordinate amount of time with TiVo and some new and returning shows.

Lost
I missed out on this show's first half because I was strangely fascinated with the train wreck known as America's Next Top Model. ANTM was like eating spun caramel corn - the first few bites were sweet and crunchy, soon it began to stick in my mouth, and ultimately, I felt a little sick. I was spoiled on the winner - or I guessed it, maybe - so I wasn't surprised at all. But damn, it was silly and boring.

So Lost started showing up in a few reruns here and there, and I caught up on all (OK, most) of the synopses on Television Without Pity, and now I'm in on the fun. And it is fun. I could do without the multiple flashback back story, where each main character thinks back to How I Got Here, but doesn't really relate any of their back story to any other character, so basically they're a bunch of ciphers running around trying to get rescued, build a viable society, and protect themselves from strange goings-on. Jeez, given the backstory I get from people just waiting for the train, these are the most close-mouthed 21st centurians I've ever seen. Oh well, keeps that mysterious feeling going - cause all we the viewers do is watch and wait for everyone else to find out stuff we already know. Hee. Kind of like Hitchcock, but about 10% as good but 100% more jungle-y.

24
Oh. My. God. I'm back, Jack. I'm sorry I left you midway into Season 2. I couldn't stand your Spawn, and I lost the storyline (that was pre-TiVo) and I just didn't have the patience to figure it out all over again.

This season, 24 has given up the pretense of "foreign" terrorists (I'm looking at you, Dennis Hopper, Season 1) and committed to offending the Arab Defense League (or whoever they are) with real Islamic Jihadist Terrorists as the bad guys. Well, if the Sopranos can go balls-out and offend Italian Americans, network TV should be able to do the same.

The terrorists include a sleeper cell family, who apparently have been in the U.S. for four years as part of the nefarious plan. The most arresting of the terror family is the strikingly beautiful but evil Dina Araz, played by the beautiful but probably very nice Iranian actor Shohreh Aghdashloo. Her dark eyes are so arresting that you feel she could hypmotize you with a 10-second stare. She has an amazing way of smiling with her face but not her eyes.

Other promising characters include Aisha Taylor as a sneaky independent contractor trying to trade her way into CTU's power base; William Devane as the bad-ass Secretary of Defense, whose kidnapping started off the fun; and Lukas Haas as a hapless computer programmer who stumbled into someone hacking "the Internet." Uh-huh.

Despite the ridiculous plot twists (too many to name, even after only 4 epi-hours), the show is still engrossing and even unsettling. It leaves you with a feeling of "yeah, that could happen," when you see a train blown up by plastic explosives, or the hopeless scrambling go on at the intelligence agency to figure out what's going on. Ouch.

MI-5
This British import, called "Spooks" in the U.K., is showing up in its third season on A&E. Unfortunately, MI-5's season is only 6 episodes. Stingy Brits.

Where "24" goes for over-the-top effects, suspicious "good guy" characters, implausible "whatever" technology that works or doesn't in the service of the plot, and unbelievable heroics from Jack Bauer, MI-5 concentrates more on the Crazy Business We Call Spy - what it does to personal lives, the subtle office, national and international politics, the erosion of trust and faith, and, oh yeah, some really rip-roaring good stories.

Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares
Gordon is my new TV boyfriend. Yeah, Jack Bauer can save the world, but can he clean out a nasty kitchen, re-train chefs, rip a lazy stubborn owner a new one, revise a menu, and prepare delicious meals all in a single week? I think not.

Gordon first caught my eye on the goofy show "Faking It," where a burger chef was made into a real chef, and he was one of the coaches.

He is horribly potty-mouthed and arrogant, but that doesn't mean he's an idiot. On my ever popular and easy-to-learn scale of Nice/Mean and Smart/Stupid, he would fall into the "Mean/Smart" quadrant, although probably he's not all that mean - just tough. But tough isn't in my quadrant. Oh well, I digress.

The point of this show (again, only four episodes? What is up, Stingy Brits?! Make more, please.) is for Gordon to go into a failing restaurant for a week to get it back on its feet. The problems originate with clueless restaurant owners who don't seem to consider decent food at decent prices a priority. One owner has run a fancy restaurant into the ground by trying to cook himself; another has let a 20-year-old kid run a "fine dining" place - meanwhile the "chef" has let food go horribly off, and he has a particularly bad palate and no real knowledge of basic cooking techniques. And so on.

Gordon's dedication to the business of food service makes for compelling viewing - especially when he threatens to shove a microwave up a useless "executive" chef's arse. I just love watching Gordon dropping his f-bombs liberally, along with some "bollocks" and "bloody hells," in his never-ending quest to serve .... the customer! He is devoted to providing the customer with a pleasant dining experience (he offers redecorating tips), and good, simple food for a good value. He is also big on food cost and time savings - he is apopleptic when he sees food going to waste. This devotion often takes the employees and owners by surprise - wow! our food sucks! wow, people around here don't WANT fancy food! Wow! We have competitors who are better than us!