to Alternate Brain!
Question of the Day
What's your favorite board game?
Mr. Shakes and I just had a couple of hot rounds of Scrabble. He won one; I won the other. Now I'm just about to go crush his ass (or get mine crushed) at Yahtzee.
Frankly Nuts
The batshit insane lunatics of FreeRepublic.com and Accuracy in Media are now saying that the Times’ decision to publish information about the SWIFT program is akin to revealing the location of Ann Frank’s hiding place during WWII.
Seriously. They’ve lost. the. plot.
“Aggressive Christianity”
Charming.
Here's a helpful little PSA for anti-Semitic Christians: Jesus was a Jew.
I’m just sayin’.
The Sod Squad
Watch out, America! It’s only a matter of time before the New Moral Order, “fueled by hedonism and a mutated form of individualism,” will decimate our way of life.
(Hmm…the Sod Squad looks suspiciously like Specter’s Republibots!)
Bush told Cheney to go after Wilson
President Bush told the special prosecutor in the CIA leak case that he directed Vice President Dick Cheney to personally lead an effort to counter allegations made by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV that his administration had misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war with Iraq, according to people familiar with the president's statement.But here comes the parsing. Bush also said that he “never directed anyone to disclose” Valerie Plame’s identity, “had no information” that Cheney had disclosed it or directed anyone to disclose it, and was “unaware that Cheney had directed [Libby] to covertly leak the classified information to the media instead of releasing it to the public after undergoing the formal governmental declassification processes.” And of course Libby has always maintained that neither Bush nor Cheney directed him to disclose Plame’s identity, either.
Bush also told federal prosecutors during his June 24, 2004, interview in the Oval Office that he had directed Cheney, as part of that broader effort, to disclose highly classified intelligence information that would not only defend his administration but also discredit Wilson, the sources said.
So, to summarize, here’s what we are meant to believe: The Bush administration wanted to discredit Joe Wilson. They thought a good way to do that was to inform the public that his wife was an undercover CIA operative. Bush tasked Cheney with getting that information out there, but wanted it done through proper channels. Somehow, Libby—Cheney’s chief of staff—found out about all this, except for the part where it was to be done legally, and, without either Bush or Cheney telling him to do so, he leaked the information before it was declassified.
Yes, that makes perfect sense.
Britain Thinks We’re Wankers
With much of the worst criticism aimed at the US administration, the poll showed that 70 percent of Britons like Americans a lot or a little.Uh—too many of us, yes, in some places (see previous), yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes.
[Bush] fared significantly worse, with just one percent rating him a "great leader" against 77 percent who deemed him a "pretty poor" or "terrible" leader…
In answer to other questions, a majority of the Britons questions described Americans as uncaring, divided by class, awash in violent crime, vulgar, preoccupied with money, ignorant of the outside world, racially divided, uncultured and in the most overwhelming result (90 percent of respondents) dominated by big business.
To prove we are not wankers, a spokesperson for the American Embassy said, “We question the judgment of anyone who asserts the world would be a better place with Saddam still terrorizing his own nation and threatening people well beyond Iraq's borders," and that the Embassy bears “some of the blame for not successfully communicating America's extraordinary dynamism,” but “frankly, so do you (the British press).” Now that’s what I call some effective tactical strategery.
The anonymous spokesperson then shot a brown-skinned beggar and took a dump in front of Parliament, screaming, “Take that, Norway!” and wiping his arse with a $100 bill.
Quote of the Day
“You know, Bush is always comparing me to Elvis in sort of unflattering ways. I don’t think Bush would have liked Elvis very much, and that’s just another thing that’s wrong with him.” — Bill Clinton during the 1992 presidential campaign, referring to George H.W. Bush
Caption This Photo
Japan's Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi (R) poses with his Elvis Presley
No 
Al Gore faced an unwelcome choice when a fan pushed a copy of his new book at him for his autograph.Heh. And here’s an interesting thought:
Inside the cover she wrote, "Plan to run for president in 2008?" with boxes marked "yes" or "no." Gore paused, then scribbled one word - "plans"- next to the "no" box and checked it. No plans, but not a firm no.
[A possible motive for remaining flexible] is that his non-campaign campaign is putting him in a better position to run later and delay having to make all the grueling fundraising calls and chicken-dinner speeches that other candidates will have to start soon. This strategy would allow Gore to enter the race late, declaring that he hears the demand for a draft. But it also would leave him the option of declining to run, if by, say, late 2007, he doubted that he could win his party's nomination.I don’t think there’s any doubt that Gore would prefer to avoid as much of the campaign as possible—but something worth considering is that it would probably also help the Dems if their eventual nominee stayed away from the smear machine as long as possible, no matter who that eventual nominee is, though the reality is that Gore’s really the only one with the ability to do so.
(Via DraftGore2008.)
Fuck
Iraq war veteran charged with rape and murder. The discharged soldier raped a 15-year-old girl and then killed her and her family.
Lieberman
…has announced he will run as a “petitioning Democrat.” Basically, if he loses the primary, he’ll run as an Independent, but if he wins it, he’ll run as a Democrat. In the interim, he’ll be collecting signatures that he will need if he’s to run as an Independent.
Shady.
Conservatives Gone Wild
Glenn Greenwald has the rundown of the latest conflagration in the rightwing blogosphere after the Times published pictures of Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s vacation homes as part of a travel article about “the tiny, charming village of St. Michaels on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.”
Three thoughts:
1. Any conservative engaging in the fantastic delusion that the Times is trying to point al-Qaida toward Cheney and Rumsfeld is batshit insane.
2. Anyone who first and foremost associates the publication of any personal (though public, as Greenwald documents) information with inevitable assassination attempts, then consequently publishes personal information as retribution, has a sick and evil mind.
3. One of the cornerstones of Bush’s reelection campaign was that his administration was uniquely qualified to protect Americans against terrorists. If that’s true, then none of its members (nor their supporters) should be the teensiest bit concerned about anyone knowing where they vacation. And hey—whaddaya know? Rumsfeld, in fact, gave his permission.
Children’s Magazine Accused of Recruiting
Cobblestone magazine, which is geared at kids aged 9-14, has been accused by teachers of putting out an issue that seems designed as military recruitment propaganda. The publisher of the mag, Carus Publishing, denies it, and “Cobblestone's editors insist the idea for the special issue was theirs alone, though they received permission to use Army photos.”Its latest issue features a cover photo of a soldier in Iraq clutching a machine gun and articles on what it's like to go through boot camp, a rundown of the Army's "awesome arsenal" and a detailed description of Army career opportunities.
Most controversial has been a set of classroom guides that accompany the magazine, which suggest teachers invite a soldier, Army recruiter or veteran to speak to their classes and ask students whether they might want to join the Army someday.
One of the teaching guides — written by Mary Lawson, a teacher in Saint Cloud., Fla. — suggests having students write essays pretending they are going to join the Army: "Have them decide which career they feel they would qualify for and write a paper to persuade a recruiter why that should be the career."
"Some of the teachers were like, 'Holy cow, look at this,'" said Francis Lunney, a sixth-grade English teacher in Hudson, Mass., who quickly called the publishing company to complain. He told The Boston Globe that the guides looked exactly like the official recruiting material distributed at high schools.
I wanted to see the issue for myself if I could, so I went to the website, where I found a description of the issue and a picture of the cover. To be honest, I have a hard time believing that the editors had no agenda when the cover reads “Calling all cadets.” And one teaching guide is actually more disturbing than the article suggests. Listed as an Objective of the issue is: “To develop the ability to use information effectively, form and support an opinion as well as sway the opinion of someone else,” with associated activities like:Survey: Teacher asks for a show of hands of those who think they might want to someday join the Army
(The second teaching guide is here.)
Think, Pair, Share: Students turn to their neighbor and explain their reasons to join or not join
Take a Stand!: Teacher makes the statement: The United States should reinstate the draft. Class separates into three groups- a. those that agree, b. those that disagree, c. those that aren't sure.
Now, I’m not a parent, so take this for what it’s worth, but I’m not remotely convinced much of this material is appropriate for every 9-year-old in the first place, even if there weren’t the suggestion of an agenda. I think there’s a big difference between the way war and the military is spoken about in military families and the way they are spoken about in non-military families, which is not to suggest that either is right or wrong, but just that there are many children who are probably not prepared to engage a discussion about the army’s “awesome arsenal” or debate a contrarian position to “Duty, Honor, Country” at such a young age. Suffice it to say, I’m glad some teachers raised the flag on this one.
Megachurch Mega-Lawn Ornament
A Memphis church that claims a membership of 12,000 will unveil a 72-foot-tall statue during Fourth of July services.
The Statue of Liberation looks a lot like the Statue of Liberty, but the famous torch is replaced by a cross. Instead of the inscription about giving the lady the tired and poor, there are Roman numerals for the Ten Commandments.
Guess what the price tag was for that little beauty? Depending on which story you read, it cost somewhere between $260,000 and $2.5 million. Blessed are the meek, bitchez.
Thanks for the heads-up to Sister Novena, who notes, “To put this into perspective, the actual statue of liberty is only 151 feet tall,” and to Stranger at Blah3 for the photo.
Ha!
A Tale of Two Photos in the Times:
The caption reads: “John McCain and George W. Bush had notable differences in the 2000 Republican primary season, left. But by Mr. Bush’s re-election bid in 2004, the relationship had mellowed, at least publicly.”
America 2.0
“Two Republican senators said Sunday that Congress must rein in the Supreme Court ruling that international law applies to the Bush administration's conduct in the war on terror.”
I’ve spent awhile now trying to decide what the most disconcerting part of that sentence is. Is it that the GOP believes America is above international law? Is it that the GOP doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the Geneva Conventions? Is it that the GOP believes the Supreme Court must be “reined in,” irrespective of the decision? So much to which to object; it’s hard to find the worst bit.
Jonah Goldberg says, “If Democrats want terrorists to fall under the Geneva Convention let them say so. My guess is most won't, if they're smart.”
Drum gives him the what-for. So does Cernig. And I agree with both of them. It’s not even a tough decision.
One of those “two Republican senators” referenced above, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is concerned that “American servicemen potentially could be accused of war crimes” if the SCOTUS decision stands, because they could be in violation of Article 3, which “prohibits outrages upon personal dignity, ‘in particular humiliating and degrading treatment,’ and bars violence, including murder, mutilation and torture.” In my opinion, if the GOP wants to protect American servicemembers from being accused of war crimes under that statute, then they ought to rein in the bloody Bush administration and their Defense Department which has created a culture in which treatment of detainees is not only accepted, but encouraged.
And, while they’re at it, they may want to rethink the notion that protecting American soldiers from war crimes is at least as important as protecting them from being kidnapped, tortured, and killed by enemy combatants, which certainly isn’t discouraged by situations like Abu Ghraib and Gitmo.
Coulter the Copycat
John Barrie, the creator of a leading plagiarism-recognition system, claimed he found at least three instances of what he calls "textbook plagiarism" in the leggy blond pundit's "Godless: the Church of Liberalism" after he ran the book's text through the company's digital iThenticate program.Etc. etc. etc. She’s pathetic.
He also says he discovered verbatim lifts in Coulter's weekly column, which is syndicated to more than 100 newspapers, including the Fort Lauderdale (Fla.) Sun-Sentinel and Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle.
…Her Aug. 3, 2005, column, "Read My Lips: No New Liberals," about U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter, includes six passages, ranging from 10 to 48 words each, that appeared 15 years earlier in the same order in an L.A. Times article, headlined "Liberals Leery as New Clues Surface on Souter's Views."
But nowhere in that column does she mention the L.A. Times or the story's writer, David G. Savage.
I hope someday I get a book deal just so I can be described as “the plump brunette pundit.”
(Hat tip to Blogenfreude.)
Calling All Bleeding Hearts
A collection of bloggers at ScienceBlogs have set up challenges to raise money to help schoolteachers fund educational projects for their students. The projects on which they’re focusing, in conjunction with DonorsChoose.org, don’t require huge donations—just a little bit here and there to help public school teachers to provide the books, equipment, and field trips to, as Mike the Mad Biologist says, make science come alive for kids. And with the constant assault on science in the classroom, the cause of turning kids on to science is more important than ever.
If you can’t afford to donate, you can always help just by passing on the word. Below you’ll find the ScienceBlogs bloggers who are participating with Bloggers Challenges.
A Blog Around the Clock (challenge here)
Adventures in Ethics and Science (challenge here)
Aetiology (challenge here)
Afarensis (challenge here)
Cognitive Daily (challenge here)
Evolgen (challenge here)
Gene Expression (challenge here)
Good Math, Bad Math (challenge here)
Island of Doubt (challenge here)
Mike the Mad Biologist (challenge here)
Neurotopia, version 2.0 (challenge here)
Pharyngula (challenge here)
Pure Pedantry (challenge here)
The Questionable Authority (challenge here)
The Scientific Activist (challenge here)
Stranger Fruit (challenge here)
Terra Sigillata (challenge here)
Uncertain Principles (challenge here)
The World's Fair (challenge here)
(Crossposted at Ezra’s place.)
