Oddjob hasn't left a comment in ages, and I haven't seen him in any of his other favorite haunts lately, either. Has anyone else?
Oddjob, if you left us out of ennui, that's okay...I just want to know you're all right!
Has anyone seen Oddjob?
In Which I Don a Tinfoil Hat
Early last month I posted about the MSNBC Dateline special, "To Catch a Predator." Take a look at the post if you need a refresher; basically, it's a "gotcha" show where they catch and arrest people soliciting sex with minors over the internet. The tone of the show kind of disgusted me.
Anyway. Last night, I'm flipping channels, and "To Catch a Predator" is on again. A quick look at television listings shows that MSNBC has been re-running these programs for a month since they aired. Over and over again... special reports that sledgehammer into your skull the same thing... if your children go on the internet, they will be molested!
It could be that I've been more aware of the trend because I was sensitized to these types of stories, but there's been an awful lot of "internet predator" news these days, on television and in print. The big bugaboo is MySpace; apparently the Dateline folks were shocked... shocked to discover the site.
MySpace.com: Never heard of it? Just ask your kids. They know.
It's a cyber secret some of them like to keep from their tech-challenged parents. I think of myself as a savvy dad, but I was shocked by some of what I found on the site. Friday night on Dateline we'll show you what you need to know about MySpace and other social networking sites to keep your kids safe.
MySpace is sort of a cyber diary, yearbook and social club. It's free, easy to join, and easy to message other members. You're supposed to be at least 14 to sign up but we found younger kids using it. Kids design their own MySpace page and most chat back and forth about school, sports, gossip etc.
In....terrrr...net? What is this in...terrr...net you speak of?
When you're finished guffawing over "It's a cyber secret some of them like to keep from their tech-challenged parents," I'll continue. The media loves to portray MySpace as this bizarre entity that somehow manifested itself overnight, but that's a little like acting shocked over the existence of Ebay.
Originally launched in April 1999 as FreeDiskSpace.com, its founders,MySpace is the current popular target of fearful parents, to the point where ridiculous lawsuits are being filed.
entrepreneurs Paul Hirner and Ari Freeman, changed its name to MySpace.com
in 2000. The current MySpace service was founded in July 2003.
People have been "cyber stalking" since the internet first came into being, folks. I remember people trying to get laid over Usenet newsgroups and IRC before web browsers existed. This is not a new phenomenon. It's not just happening on MySpace. However, the phenomenon isn't as prevalent as you might think.
So, why all the sudden flurry of media activity regarding internet predators? Sure, it's profitable... MSNBC wouldn't be re-running the same three programs for weeks on end otherwise. The Fear-Flavor of the Month is pedophiles online, and everyone's running with it; there's money to be made!
***DON YOUR TINFOIL HAT NOW***
But is there something else associated with the sudden flurry of "Fear the Internet" stories?
Well... there is that "Net Neutrality" thing.
And MSNBC is owned by General Electric and Microsoft, who would love to see Net Neutrality completely eliminated. And if there's one thing we learned from the Iraq war, boo-scary stories played ad infinitum in the mass media definitely helps the anti-civil-liberties legislation medicine (and lies) go down.
It'll be a lot easier to get Americans to agree to dismantling Net Neutrality if they're thinking, "I don't care if my internet is slower and I'm being watched online, as long as my kids are safe."
The internet must not be taken over, lock, stock and barrel, by corporations, simply because parents have been frightened by misleading spook shows. Getting rid of "Net Neutrality" will not end "cyber stalking," or make pedophiles vanish off the face of the earth.
Sign the petition. Bug your senators. And point out irresponsible, fear-mongering media when you see it.
(Oh what a beautiful cross-post... oh, what a beautiful day...)
Curious GWB
This guy doesn't look much like Bush, but his impression's pretty good. In any case, this totally made me laugh, so I thought I'd pass it along.
God's Not the Only One Watching You
The Left Behind Video Game, in which you gun people down for Jesus, has an additional bonus for the nutters that purchase the game. And it ain't holy water.
It's packed with spyware.
It's cutting-edge Israeli technology -- a piece of software inserted directly into Left Behind: Eternal Forces, software that cannot be blocked or removed -- and without your knowledge or permission, it tracks you. This in-game ad software records how often you play the video game, at what time of day and for how long, what game play areas you visit (like Times Square, Soho, Chinatown, or the United Nations Building), which video ads and product placements you view, where your computer is located geographically, and who you are demographically. It monitors your choices and behavior, collates data, and reports back in real-time to... whom? For what purposes? Do you know?(Tip 'o the Energy Dome to Crooks & Liars.)
Media Ménage à Trois
…with Georgie and Laura, who have “typical” days just like the rest of us. When Laura mentioned watching “a movie in the White House theater,” I could totally relate—although my home movie theater isn’t as big as it used to be, since we put in the bowling alley and the arboretum.
Seriously, why does our media feel compelled to do stories like this, indulging the Bushes’ pretension that they're jus’ ordinary folk? I don’t begrudge any president of the United States having access to a White House movie theater, a personal chef, a personal tailor, and other plush trappings, because, after all, s/he is the leader of an important country and can’t be housed in a shack wearing Dockers and feasting on mac ‘n cheese. But let’s not pretend that someone who’s afforded those luxuries is the same as the rest of us.
Enough already. If for no other reason than because watching those two acting like ninny-brained hillbillies when they’re millionaires is just embarrassing to behold.
(Hat tip to Creature.)
Good Bayh
Josh Marshall reports Senator Evan Bayh, likely presidential candidate and my senator, has signed on to support net neutrality. Good.
As for the other presumed candidates, I believe Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, and Mark Warner have also signed on. Joe Biden is opposed.
Al Gore, who is, of course, not a presumed candidate at this point, is a vociferous proponent of net neutrality.
Must... Keep... Brown People... from Voting!
Shakespeare's Sister's Question of the Day yesterday had to do with "The Defining Issue of Our Time." Is it the media? Is it fair and honest elections? Is it Religion and Politics? Obviously, the responses in the comments section were varied and all over the map; it's a difficult question. My opinion was: "It's the elections." In my opinion, we can do all the complaining we like, but if we don't have fair and honest elections, we have nothing. We all know the 2000 election was stolen; 2004's election doesn't look too kosher... and if there's one thing we know about Republicans, they never let a good thing go. (All bolds mine.)
House leaders abruptly canceled a vote to renew the 1965 Voting Rights Act yesterday after rank-and-file Republicans revolted over provisions that require bilingual ballots in many places and continued federal oversight of voting practices in Southern states.If there is one thing we have learned from the 2000 and 2004 elections, it is that African American Voters are disenfranchised. (Disproportionately so.) This was an enormous problem with the 2000 election, and one would think that the purging of black voters would have caused an uproar. And it did... sort of. People knew this was going on... just not much was done about it. So when the 2004 election came along, why not do the same thing? Redraw precincts, switch polling locations without warning, deliberately make people wait for hours in line, use all the same dirty tricks. After all... if you get away with it once...
The intensity of the complaints, raised in a closed meeting of GOP lawmakers, surprised Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and his lieutenants, who thought the path was clear to renew the act's key provisions for 25 years. The act is widely considered a civil rights landmark that helped thousands of African Americans gain access to the ballot box. Its renewal seemed assured when House and Senate Republican and Democratic leaders embraced it in a May 2 kickoff on the Capitol steps.
So, one would think, with African American approval of Republicans (and Bush in particular) in the single digits, Republicans would be more than eager to show how much they approve of this "civil rights landmark," right?
Oh-ho-ho, you foolish person... you're forgetting... we're coming up on an election, and "the base" must be satisfied. And this time, it's all about those damn immigrants and their non-english speaking ways.
But many Southerners feel the law has achieved its purpose and become more nuisance than necessity in several respects. They have aired those arguments for years, but yesterday they got a boost from Republicans scattered throughout the nation who are increasingly raising a different concern: They insist that immigrants learn and use English.So, again, Republicans are appealing to the racist, hatemongering, immigrant-fearing base to win a few political points. If there's one thing that brings the frothing Right to the voting booth, it's them damn foreign people that talk funny.
The Voting Rights Act requires Justice Department preapproval of changes in voting practices in states that used techniques such as poll taxes or literacy tests to discourage blacks from voting in the 1960s. Some Republicans in Georgia, Texas and other states say such efforts to disenfranchise minorities disappeared long ago, and that continued coverage by the act is an unfair stigma.Bullshit. The methods may have changed, but the disenfranchisement of black voters is alive and kicking in this country. The last think black voters need is protections taken away from them. This Act is a necessity, and to say that it is a "nusiance" is obnoxious and insulting. Saying "such efforts disappeared long ago" is like saying racism no longer exists in this country: Laughable.
...Barbara Arnwine, executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said a bipartisan commission found evidence of recent voting rights violations in Georgia, Texas and several other states. "These are not states that can say their hands are clean," she said.So again, it's all about the racism. Keep anyone that doesn't speak English away from the polls... and if we happen to eliminate black voters at the same time... that's just hunky-dory.
The House Rules Committee had agreed to let Georgia lawmakers offer two amendments that would make it easier for states to become exempt from the Voting Rights Act. House leaders had expressed confidence that the amendments would fail. But the committee rejected King's request for an amendment to end the multilingual requirements.
That was "a gigantic mistake," said Rep. Charles Whitlow Norwood Jr. (R-Ga.), a leading critic of the act's renewal. "What people are really upset about is bilingual ballots," he said. "The American people want this to be an English-speaking nation."
As the last two elections have shown, it's all about the votes. When the voting split is so close to 50%, every vote counts, and no one knows this more than Republicans. With Dear Leader squandering the Hispanic vote that has traditionally been Republican-leaning, and with Republican anti-immigrant (read: anti-Hispanic) policies driving even more away, it is now vital to eliminate Hispanic votes. And isn't it convenient that this could also effect the African American vote, who obviously aren't too happy with the Bush administration and Republicans; what with continued disenfranchisement and hurricane Katrina, and who may be eager to show exactly how displeased they are on election day.
They've done it before; they'll do it again, if we're not paying attention. It's all about the elections.
If we are to be a true Democracy, if we are to be a "shining example" to the rest of the world, as Bush loves to dribble during his embarassing visits to other countries, then every vote must count. Eliminating African-American and non-English speaking voters is racist and discriminatory. Eliminating voters because you consider multi-lingual voting materials and translators a "nuisance" is arrogant and lazy. It's also a lie.
(Every little boy needs a cross-post... Pop goes the World!)
Quote of the Day
Matt, waxing reflective on the World Cup:
Among the many things that the Bush Administration has added to my life is a distinct uneasiness with unbridled expressions of American patriotism. I want to root for the national team, but end up feeling like I’m cheering for Jesus on a cruise-missile sandwich.Laugh. Sigh. Sob.
Just $6
Via He of the Kickass Beard, I find my way to Just $6, a campaign generate grassroots support for publicly financed campaigns. Americans for Campaign Reform is a bipartisan group whose honorary chairs are Democrats Bill Bradley and Bob Kerrey, and Republicans Warren Rudman and Alan Simpson. The basics:
Congress would only have to spend $6 per citizen per year to publicly fund each and every election for the House, the Senate and the White House. When you consider that "pork barrel" projects cost every one of us more than $200 last year alone, it’s no contest.Americans shouldn't have to be buy the ability to influence the decisions that affect our lives or access to the decision-makers. Urge your representative to consider supporting this idea to make sure that our democracy is returned solely to the hands of voters, rather than being held hostage by money and lobbyists. It only took me a minute to make my opinion known to my rep via their petition—doesn’t get easier than that.
Think of it. With public funding, wealthy special interests and their hired lobbyists would no longer have a commanding influence over our politics and government. Instead of begging for campaign donations, candidates would spend their time communicating with voters. Once elected, our leaders would be free to focus on our nation's challenges rather than having to worry about financing their next campaign. And there's no doubt that more of our most able leaders would run for federal office when the ability to finance a campaign isn't such a daunting obstacle.
Americans for Campaign Reform is building a nonpartisan grassroots movement of citizens who support voluntary public funding and want Congress to act now. We can make this happen. Public funding is already working in Arizona and Maine, and was just passed by the Connecticut legislature.
As citizens we can complain about the corrosive influence of our election finance system, or we can do something about it. With your help, we can mobilize citizens across the country and put pressure on Congress to enact real reform.
Pax Britannia
The BBC's Jeremy Paxman talks to Ann Coulter here. What do you think of the interview?
I thought she came off looking like an idiotic lunatic, especially when I consider British viewers sitting at home taking in her usual dog-and-pony show of snide stridency. I can only imagine she confirms their worst suspicions about Americans: contemptuous of science and reason, nuttily and selectively religious, arrogant, stupid, and shrill. Thank goodness we have our beloved president to diplomicize their dumb European asses back to our side.
Me vs. Mr. Moustache
Over at AlterNet, you will find my review of John Stossel’s new book, Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity, for your reading pleasure.
Stossel makes his living pandering to those who are hostile to intellectualism, by reassuring them repeatedly that progressive government programs, advocates of various stripes, and experts of any credential are the bane of our society, and this book is no exception. Doing my part to counter the conservative—or, as Stossel will claim, “libertarian”—media roar, I subjected myself to Myths, and gave it a good debunking.
Back in the day…
Check out my bloggrrl Pam’s piece in The Independent Weekly, “My, how things have changed since Stonewall.” Good stuff.
Damn, I love that Alliance Defense Fund story! Ahhhhhhh.
Who said it?
The “Hitler or Coulter?” Quiz (via Blue Meme). I got 11 out of 14 right.
Perhaps Jay Leno, who always finds it “fascinating” to have on his show a woman whose pronouncements about liberals are nearly indistinguishable from that of one of the most evil dictators the world has ever known, could use this quiz during his next segment of Jaywalking.
Santorum continues his slow but determined slide toward obscurity
Claims we found WMDs in Iraq. Claim is denied by Defense Department official. Santorum retorts that he’ll “wait and see what the actual Defense Department formally says or more important what the administration formally says.” Wev.
What a nutjob.
Question of the Day
Jamison Foser has argued that “The defining issue of our time is the media.” I tend to agree—although I’m torn between media and fair elections. Toss a coin; whether it’s untrustworthy or outright cooked elections, or an environment in which a progressive message has no conduit to the people, nothing that we do every day really matters.
What you do think? Is the media the defining issue of our time, or is it something else?
“If a woman in India marries a snake, gay people in America should have to justify it.”
Great clip from The Colbert Report in which He For Whom the Report Is Named responds to Wall Street Journal editorial page editor Dan Henninger’s contention that a woman marrying a snake in India proves that legalizing gay marriage in the US may lead to all sorts of crazy shit!
For those who can’t view the video, Henninger says, “I would like to ask the proponents of gay marriage, which, after all, violates traditions going back through all of human history, to now absolutely, positively guarantee that the next movement is not going to be allowing people to marry their pet horse, dog, or cat.”
As a proponent of gay marriage, I’m happy to respond. First, let me address the assertion that same-sex marriage “violates traditions going back through all of human history.” That’s, um, not true. Being a cultural anthropologist whose focus is the marginalization of gender-based political groups, I’m well-versed in the history of same-sex marriage through the ages, but let’s not trust my zany progressive ass. Let’s go to those wanton purveyors of the radical homosexual agenda, Oxford University Press bloggers William N. Eskridge, Jr. and Darren R. Spedale.
As one of us demonstrated ten years ago, many cultures in the world have recognized same-sex relationships as unions or marriages. (Eskridge, The Case for Same-Sex Marriage chapter 2 [Free Press, 1996].) These include ancient Greece and Rome, dozens of African cultures (what anthropologists call “female husbands”), and Native American cultures. Same-sex marriages involving “berdaches” (men or women with cross-gender identification) were common in dozens of tribes.And, of course, Britain has done the same. In both ancient history and recent history, we see examples of old and new traditions of same-sex marriage, which I thought you might like cleared up for you, sir.
As our new book documents, in detail, modern societies are also recognizing same-sex unions. Denmark (1989) was the first, in its registered partnership law. Dozens of other countries and provinces have followed Denmark, with laws providing same-sex couples with most or all of the legal benefits and duties of marriage.
…The Netherlands (2001) is the first modern nation to recognize same-sex unions as “marriages.” Similar same-sex marriage laws have been adopted in Belgium (2002), Canada (2004), and Spain (2005). South Africa’s Constitutional Court has directed that country to follow in the next year.
Now to the primary issue, where you request gay marriage proponents “to now absolutely, positively guarantee that the next movement is not going to be allowing people to marry their pet horse, dog, or cat.” Are you ready…?
I guarantee it. Absolutely and positively.
Happy now?
(Hat tip Pam.)
E&P Reader Defends Coulter
From the letters section:
Maybe the reason "Ann Coulter hasn't lost any of her 100-plus newspaper clients, or the support of her syndicate, Universal Press Syndicate, despite her nasty remarks in her new book about 9/11 widows" is that they have read her book. According to the rebuttal I saw, the remark was aimed specifically at the four "Jersey Girls" and not all widows of 9/11.Thank you, Parsey McParsington, for clearing up the precise bristle count of the paintbrush used to make the smear.
Brian Alpert
Knowing that Coulter was only referring to some 9/11 widows, rather than all of them, when she said she’d “never seen people enjoying their husband’s death so much” makes the comment much more acceptable.
At least to total douchebags.
One More Reason to be a Cubs Fan
On Tuesday to reporters, White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen referred to Chicago Sun-Times columnist and Around the Horn contributor Jay Mariotti as a derogatory name for a homosexual.I call bullshit. Multiculturalism cannot be invoked as an excuse for using an ugly term, or a shield from criticism, especially when part of the explanation replaces the epithet with the only slightly less offensive “those people.”
Angry with a recent column by Mariotti critical of Guillen's handling of recently demoted relief pitcher Sean Tracey and upset with Mariotti with columns of the past, Guillen said to reporters when referring to Mariotti before Tuesday's game with the Cardinals, "What a piece of [expletive] he is, [expletive] fag."
…Guillen defended his use of the term "fag" by saying this about homosexuals and the use of the word in question: "I don't have anything against those people. In my country, you call someone something like that and it is not the same as it is in this country.''
I’m certainly not one of the assimilation drum-beaters who finds it objectionable that a long-time resident of the US continues to refer to his home country as “my country,” but when you’re the manager of an American League franchise of America’s favorite pastime, surely there comes a point at which you’ve got to consider America your country, too. And don’t tell me that someone who’s been in American locker rooms since 1985 hasn’t sussed out what “fag” means in this country.
Badly done, Ozzie. As a leader of a hometown team in a city where LGBT books are being burned and the whole city is preparing to welcome the Gay Games in less than a month, you need to get on board with denouncing homophobia, not promulgating it.
(Hat tip Me4Pres.)
Caption This Photo
U.S. President George W. Bush listens to questions
during a news conference in Vienna June 21, 2006.
REUTERS/Heinz-Peter Bader (AUSTRIA)
To fight the unbeatable foe
Hume’s Ghost, guesting at Glenn Greenwald’s blog, on why we need to respond to people like Ann Coulter (emphasis mine):
Not too long ago a friend of mine told me she was trying to become more politically informed. To do so, she continued, she had begun reading Ann Coulter's How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must). Think about that for a moment. This was an individual who did not know much about politics, was a non-ideological independent and the first person she could think of to learn more about politics from was a hate-mongering hack. This should have never happened, because Coulter should have been exposed for the vile, bigoted, intellectually bankrupt propagandist that she is by journalists a long time ago. In this regard, my friend was failed by a mainstream media which is more interested in using Coulter as a figure to drive up ratings than they are in doing their jobs of promoting a responsible national discourse.I urge you to read the whole post; it’s not very long, and it expertly articulates a point many of us have been circling around for some time.
Last week, I compared Coulter and her ilk to school bullies, and suggested that the only way to end their abuse is by standing up to it. The Ghost pinpoints why ignoring the bile is no longer an option: when hatespeak is absorbed into the national consciousness as a natural extension of public discourse, it becomes self-sustainable. The bullies have found that it’s not necessary to have a visible target- by simply insulting a group as a whole, they can poison the minds of others, and band together in hatred, without ever having to defend their position or see the real effects of their bigotry. By ignoring them, we simply make it easier for the message to spread. I submit that once an obvious sociopath like Coulter, whose history of spouting violent threats against anyone she disagrees with is well-documented, is invited to appear on two major, supposedly apolitical talk shows and manages to get through both interviews with her dignity and credibility intact, closing our eyes until she goes away is no longer an option. Coulter herself may not last forever, but her continued acceptance simply makes it easier for whoever comes along next to lower the bar still further.
I remember back in college I saw Coulter on “The Daily Show.” She made some criticism of a Republican, and Jon Stewart asked, “Oh, so you’ll admit that there are bad Republicans?” Coulter responded, “There are some bad Republicans- there are no good Democrats.” There was booing in the audience, and Coulter got this awkwardly pleased expression on her face, as though she realized she may have gone too far, but utterly adored the sensation. I had no idea who she was at the time, so I was just astonished by the her idiocy. Obviously she wasn’t going to get a positive response from the crowd she was speaking to, and it wasn’t as though it was a quip that invited debate, so what the hell was the point?
The beauty of it is, there is no point. At least not on a case by case basis. Coulter and Malkin and Limbaugh and all the rest aren’t using their media platforms to win over their opponents, but rather to throw out as much absurdist, id-based ramblings as they can get away with; they reach the few sympathetic ears that will listen (and there are always a few sympathetic ears), they keep selling whatever they’re selling, the world rolls on. But at some point, perhaps when the Republicans got hold of the government en masse, they were allowed a legitimacy that any rational society would deny them. So now these bullies are treated as though they’re an integral part of the political machine, which grants their third-grade Nazi bullshit a horrifying degree of credibility. At best it’s a distraction, at worst it poisons the debate by forcing us into a position where we have to defend ourselves before we can even state our case. And we can’t just ignore it; even if we know better, even if we’re not bothered by having our lives metaphorically threatened and our principles spat on, we’re not the only ones listening.
I work at a college library in the interlibrary loan department. I’m going to request a copy of Coulter’s latest, Godless: the Church of Liberalism, and I’m gonna read it, and then we’ll just see, y’know? It’s about time I put my money in the general vicinity of my mouth.
