It’s about moral values, people!

Unfortunately, this one isn’t from The Onion, but the WaPo:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist signaled yesterday that he and other White House allies will filibuster a bill dealing with the interrogation and prosecution of detainees if they cannot persuade a rival group of Republicans to rewrite key provisions opposed by President Bush.

Frist's chief of staff, Eric M. Ueland, called the dissidents' bill "dead."

Which is a bit of an exaggeration. It’s only been water-boarded within an inch of its life so far.

Frist is unhappy with the bill proposed by Republicans John Warner, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham because they believe that asserting compliance with the Geneva Conventions as long as CIA interrogators don’t engage in “cruel, inhuman, or degrading” treatment of detainees is rooted in language too vague, and could not only give too much leeway to our interrogators, but also “invite nations to interpret the Geneva Conventions is lax ways that could lead to abusive treatment of captured US troops.” They’ve also had the temerity to suggest that the president’s desire to ensure detainees can be convicted with secret evidence they’re not allowed to see for themselves is a fat load of horseshit. (I might be paraphrasing.) Basically, Warner, McCain, and Graham are being vaguely empathetic and logical, so Frist no likey.

Frist struck a more jarring tone, telling reporters that the trio's bill is unacceptable despite its majority support.

For a bill to pass, Frist said, "it's got to preserve our intelligence programs," including the CIA's aggressive interrogation techniques, and it must "protect classified information from terrorists."

Translation: We need to be able to torture people, bitchez! Compassionate conservatism, baby.

As Hilzoy notes: “After all sorts of unspeakable bills have passed the Senate under his leadership, here is where Bill Frist is finally going draw the line: he will not allow limitations on the administration's ability to torture people, or to violate treaties our country has solemnly sworn to abide by. Making it illegal for CIA officials to keep people standing for 40 hours, or to hold them in rooms cooled down to 50 degrees while dousing them with water, or to deprive them of sleep, even when a pretty impressive array of intelligence officials say that these techniques don't work, and an even more impressive group of retired generals say allowing them would put our soldiers at risk: that's just too much for him to swallow.”

That’s because he’s a Real Man, whose objectivity hasn’t been compromised by actually serving in the military, unlike those pussies Warner, McCain, and Graham. Mmm, I love the smell of gorilla testosterone in the morning.

Except…Frist isn’t even just a hardcase with a brain of mush and a heart of stone. If he could truly, genuinely just not abide even the mere thought of “softness” (as speciously defined by pants-wetting chickenhawk warmongers), that would be one thing—a contemptible position to be sure, but at least he’d be a loathsome shit with integrity. Instead, he’s just pandering (via), as per usual.

“This very definitely is going to put a chilling effect on the tremendous strides [McCain] has made in the conservative evangelical community," said the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, one of several conservative activists who support Bush's proposal on interrogation techniques.

There you have it. The Traditional Values Coalition supports torture—and anyone who doesn’t risks the ire of the conservative evangelical community, that self-proclaimed beacon of unassailable moral rectitude, who pray to a savior who, when facing certain torture and eventual death, fell to his knees on the Mount of Olives and prayed, “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.”

His fear forgotten, now torture is a traditional value. And Frist, whose only principle is Whatever It Takes and who worships none and nothing but Power, is all too willing to accommodate, to accept the new definition of values as he remakes America in the image of the least American among us.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Does America hate air traffic controllers?

Granted, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization grossly overplayed its hand back in 1981 - gambling that a national strike would give it a strong hand in contract negotiations - only to be shown the door by a thoroughly unamused Ronald Reagan (whom PATCO had ironically backed in the 1980 election). Still, that's all water under the control tower - or is it? For a vital (and relatively well-paid) profession entrusted with thousands of lives every second of the day, air traffic controllers get fairly short shrift. Now the Federal Aviation Administration wants to cut the number of controllers across the country by 10 percent, citing less traffic for people to actually control. Of course, tragic recent experience has shown us what can happen when there aren't enough controllers on duty, but that hasn't stopped the FAA from pushing lower staffing levels. Some controllers call the move part of a backdoor cost-cutting measure: controllers who quit in response to the FAA's new rules will be replaced by staffers who make less money. At any rate, the cutbacks come at an odd time as two-thirds of the controllers will be retiring anyway in the next decade.

The staffing cuts represent the latest insult to an increasingly unhappy workforce, one already saddled with tougher schedules, salary caps, and (of all things) new and more strict dress codes.

Explaining why the dress code matters, [FAA Administartor Marion C.] Blakey said there are “folks who push outside the norms of what is professional dress and what’s professional behavior.”

The dress code bans jeans, as well as T-shirts and shirts with big lettering and requires that controllers not appear “disheveled,” rules that are not onerous, she said.

Because, you know, air passengers are completely disheartened by the fashion choices of traffic controllers. It's no wonder some people are afraid to fly.

You get the feeling that twenty-five years after PATCO, we're still taking air traffic controllers out of the tower and to the woodshed.

(Cross-posted.)

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Hillary News

During his appearance on The Daily Show the other night, Bill Clinton said he had no idea whether Hillary would be running for the office he once held. But someone else certainly seems to have an idea about his wife’s plans.

Hillary + Terry = $100 million: “Former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe ‘has told business associates and Democratic donors that he will chair Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-NY) presidential campaign next year,’ reports The Hill. ‘Together, Clinton, the favorite to win the Democratic nomination, and McAuliffe, the top money man in Democratic politics, have a good chance of raising $100 million before the first official contest, the Iowa caucuses in January 2008.’”

Jeebus. Unfortunately, that’s probably still a drop in the bucket compared to what any Republican candidate could raise to defeat her.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Yet Another Way NCLB is Failing Kids

I'm always very pleased when I read something like this... then, of course, I'm immediately irritated, for the obvious reasons.

Music lessons help young child memories

(What an awkward headline)

TORONTO (Reuters) - Parents who spend time and money to teach their children music, take heart -- a new Canadian study shows young children who take music lessons have better memories than their nonmusical peers.

The study, to be published in the online edition of the journal Brain on Wednesday, showed that after one year of musical training, children performed better in a memory test than those who did not take music classes.

"(The research) tells us that if you take music lessons your brain is getting wired up differently than if you don't take music lessons," Laurel Trainor, professor of psychology, neuroscience and behavior at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, told Reuters.

"This is the first study to show that brain responses in young, musically trained and untrained children change differently over the course of a year," said Trainor who led the study.

Yet more proof that exposure to the arts is beneficial for children, which I'm sure isn't news to all of you. And yet, we're being governed by a group of people that have given us the No Child Left Behind act, which has not succeeded, and has caused a 22% decline in arts instruction.

Considering NCLB places so much emphasis on mathematics, it might do them some good to consider this:

"On the other hand, it is very interesting that the children taking music lessons improved more over the year on general memory skills that are correlated with nonmusicalabilities such as literacy, verbal memory, visiospatial processing, mathematics and IQ," she said.

Not only that, it gives you rhythm, baby.

I'm not going to do any "there's always money for sports" whinging; I just find it very frustrating that so many kids are denied access to the arts on a daily basis, simply because our government has their priorities all screwed up.

(I've got cross-posts, who could ask for anything more?)

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Dolls for Manly Men

Oh my. Why do I just know that Jonah Goldberg has a complete set?

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Finally!

New Bill Would Defend Marriage From Sharks:

Senator Bill Frist (R–TN) introduced a controversial new bill Tuesday that would severely limit the ability of sharks to "mutilate the institution of marriage until it is completely unrecognizable."

"For too long, we've stood by as our most sacred institution has been thrashed, bit by bit, by these amoral predators," said Frist at a press conference, standing in front of a detailed diagram of a great white shark. "Marriage is a union between one man and one woman, and no shark should come between them with its powerful jaws and massive dorsal fin."


…Despite the fact that the bill calls for mandatory fines of up to $100,000 and a permanent designation on the Marriage Offenders National Registry for any shark found guilty under the new guidelines, some conservative groups still complain that it does not go far enough.

"This bill focuses too much on the species who have attacked marriage in the past, such as the hammerhead, oceanic whitetip, and tiger sharks, but we need protection against all sharks," said Nathan Comino, president of The Quint Group, a conservative anti-shark think tank. "Scientific evidence shows that the once-indifferent whale shark is now angrier than ever over holy matrimony. We can't afford to ignore the facts."

Amen, brother.

(Great Caesar’s Ghost, I love The Onion! Hat tip to ChezLark. Explanation of CheneySharks here.)

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Facacta Macaca

After responding to a reporter’s question about his Jewish ancestry by accusing her of “making aspersions” (Really?—Since when is asking someone if they’re Jewish casting aspersions on them? Oh right, it isn’t…unless you don’t like Jews), now Senator George Allen is embracing his Jewish ancestry.

I’ve read the suggestion that Allen surely knew he had Jewish ancestry and has been hiding it, but I’m not so sure that’s true. I suspect if Allen knew about his family history, he probably would have been better prepared for the question. Plus, finding out late in life that one has Jewish roots is not actually all that uncommon, because Jews fleeing persecution elsewhere sometimes left their identities behind when arriving on American shores, since America isn’t exactly free of anti-Semitism, either. John Kerry and Wesley Clark both found out late in life that they had Jewish ancestors. I had a grandmother whose father was German and carried a surname that is generally Jewish, though he practiced Lutheranism. I suspect my own family history might have some hidden Jewish ancestry, but my mother doesn’t know, so I probably never will, either.

But here’s the thing—if someone came to me and said, “We have proof your great-grandfather was a Jew,” I imagine my response would be something like, “Bring on the kugel!” (Mmm…kugel.) Allen, on the other hand, flipped out. And now the explanation is that he was just irritated that the reporter “inappropriately introduced religion into the debate.” Does anyone buy that any more than his sorry assertion that he “made up” the word macaca? Anti-Semites don’t just dislike religious Jews; it’s also about ethnicity. When the Nazis were measuring the skulls of Jews, they weren’t interested in finding out how many verses of the Talmud were contained therein.

Allen’s clearly got an ethnic problem—and what he didn’t know is that his own ethnicity isn’t quite what he thought it was. Faced with the truth, it’s no wonder he reacted the way he did. He’s spent his life being an insensitive jackhole in the way only people convinced of their lily-white purity can. No one knows better than he does how men of privilege treat The Other, and suddenly finding his perfect pedigree in question must have rattled him to his racist bones.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

Family Ties

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Question of the Day

Suggested by Misty: “If you could sit down to a meal with a president (any president) and ask him one question: who is the president and what is the question?”

I guess I’ll have to think about this one for awhile for a serious answer, because what immediately leapt to mind is:

President: George W. Bush
Question: WHAT THE FUCK???!!!

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

The Adventures of Georgie: UN Edition

It was a big day for Georgie, who got to go to the United Nations and do some speechifizing and meet with some dudes who are important-but-not-as-important-as-him. (Mama Babs always told him he was the most important boy in the world, except the time she found him using her pearls for nefarious sexual purposes; that time he was the naughtiest boy in the world.) Anyhoo, today was a very grown-up day for Georgie!

Outside the UN, Georgie saw some of his biggest fans.



Then he got to sit in the Big Boy Chair
until it was his turn to talk to the folks.



He pretended he was a baseball coach and motioned to
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to steal first.
What a gas!



When he went to the podium, he remembered the advice
Daddy Bush had given him: Always open with a joke.
So he made some funny monkey noises.



Then it was right into an uproarious game of Simon Says.
“Stand up!”



First out. Simon didn’t say stand up!



Winner: French President Jacques Chirac.
He is very good at Simon Says.



Georgie was disappointed he was beaten by a Frenchie.



Jacques speaks to the media about his big win.



Georgie contemplates some strategery for next time.
If only he’d listened while Jacques explained his win.
Jacques admitted Georgie’s rapid-fire blinking preceding
an order sans “Simon Says” was a helpful “tell.”



To lift his spirits again, Georgie makes faces at Kofi
while he’s speaking to try to make him laugh.



“It would have been awesome if he’d messed up!”
Georgie said later. But Georgie only made himself laugh.



And laugh.



But the best prank of the day was Iraqi President Jalal
Talabani’s wacky hand buzzer!



“You got me this time, Talabani!”

There was also some stuff about a war and torture,
and some junk about international law or some such,
but by that time Georgie was tired. He ended the
day with a much-needed nap.
(More Adventures of Georgie here, here, here, here, and here. And probably elsewhere, but I’m too lazy to find them.)

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Maru Makes Me Laugh

Self-righteous, sphincter-faced Douchebag of Liberty a humorless asshole

Senile, incontinent traitor and pompous attention whore Boob Novak slams Jon Stewart for being a "self-righteous comedian" — even though he's "never seen [The Daily Show] in my life."

"I will go to my grave never having had sex with a woman uhh... had a normal bowel movement ummm... smiled seen it,” he added, drooling into his gruel.

Oh, Maru, I love you.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Red Letter Christians

Taking on the Religious Right. Amen.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Nutbags Ahoy!

The appropriately named Mr. and Mrs. Kampf of Maine apparently abducted their own 19-year-old daughter and tried to force her to get an abortion in New York because her baby’s father is black.

Parents of the Year
Tell me again, Senator Ensign, about how parents always, always, always have their pregnant daughters’ best interests in mind.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

“Homosexuality is a crazy act.”

So says “The Viking,” while wearing a toilet seat around his neck, aiming a toy gun at a cherry, and sitting in front of a sign reading “Sexual Millionaire: Be One.”

Via Jessica, who wisely recommends staying “through the weird video blips” to see all the other superb thoughts he feels compelled to share.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Caption This Photo

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Thai Coup in Haiku

Thai military
Greets Prime Minister with tanks
Declares martial law
I’d love to be able to say something intelligent about this situation, but I don’t know anything about Thai politics, aside from what I’m reading about it just now.

Love the response from the US State Department, though.

"We are monitoring developments closely, but the situation at the moment is unclear," Kenneth Bailes, a spokesman, said.

"We look to the Thai people to resolve their political differences in a peaceful manner and in accord with the principles of democracy and the rule of law," Bailes said.

My only question is whether he likes to dress up like a scolding, self-rightous school marm or if sounding like one is enough to get his rocks off.

Not to get all “history” on the State Department, but I’d like to remind them that the State they represent was born of a Revolutionary War, and the same State is ostensibly delivering democracy at the end of a gun in Iraq as we speak. I don’t know shit about the rightness or wrongness of this coup at the moment, but I don’t have to know shit about it to know that it’s utter claptrap for Team America World Police to start lecturing the rest of the world on how they should resolve their own political differences.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Winner of the Pointless, Infuriating Twaddle Award

Attention gay men: You all look exactly like this.

I'm really in the wrong profession. Why am I working so hard for my Master's degree when I could simply write bang out some complete, utter horseshit and get paid to do it? Case in point: this totally fucking ridiculous article from the ABC news website, "Gay Stereotypes: Are They True?"

(Hint: If there's a yes/no question in the title, it's a good bet that the answer is "Hell, yes.")

I'm wondering why in the hell they bothered writing, not to mention printing, this nonsense in the first place. I just find it simply preposterous that after decades of fighting for increased acceptance, equality and visibility, there are people that still behave as if gay people stepped off a flying saucer from planet Limpwrist early this morning, and they have to somehow understand this bizarre new species!

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that this epitome of stupidity is penned by none other than John Stossel, ingoramus par excellence. Apparently, writing this tired, hackneyed flapdoodle was too much of a daunting task for he of the mighty moustache; it took another writer, Gena Binkley, in order to crayon-scribble something this colossally dumb. (All emph. mine)

Sept. 15, 2006:— Gay activists often criticize media coverage of gay pride parades, saying, correctly, that the media focus on the extreme, the more flamboyantly feminine men and very masculine women. But that's not us, they say. Most of us are just like everyone else.

No seriously, you can stop there. You've already stated in your first sentence that you agree; the media focuses too much on sterotypes in the gay community. Therefore, you're not going to spend your entire article reinforcing those same stereotypes, right? Right?

Are gays just like straights? Or is Hollywood's frequent portrayal of gay men as feminine more accurate?

Sigh.

We talked to Carson Kressley and Ted Allen, two of the stars of the hit television show "Queer Eye" about the stereotypes. What, we asked, are the stereotypes about gay men?

Ah, yes, the "Queer Eye" boys. Experts on All Things Queer. The only people that could ever be consulted about LGBT issues, because they're on the teevee! And of course, you've got to talk to Carson, because he's so nelly and silly! Tee-hee! Maybe he'll say something really bitchy!

And, come on Stossel, do you really need to ask for examples of gay male stereotypes? I know your skull is filled with marshmallow pudding, but I'm willing to bet you could come up with a list of at least five.

"It's that you're obsessed with fashion, and that you tan a lot and that you color your hair," they said. But, says Allen, the stereotypes are not always true. "Not all gay men are superstylish. Not all straight men are bad dressers," he said.

What the fuck? Yes, when I think of gay sterotypes, the first that spring immediately to mind have to do with fucking tanning and hair coloration. Way to stray from the gravy train; you wouldn't want anyone to stop thinking about your ridiculous show for five seconds. Why didn't Carson just stand up, spread his arms, and shriek "You're looking at all of them, baby!"?

There is research that suggests gay men do prefer certain professions, like fashion, interior design and hair coloring, and that lesbians are more likely to prefer sports and the military. Researchers say it's because lesbians, on average, are attracted to more masculine occupations, and gay men tend to prefer more feminine occupations.

"Researchers say." Way to cite your sources, Stossel. Let me help you out; you might want to use this formatting in the future:

Stossel, John. Completely Pulled out of My Ass.
New York: Stossel, 2006.

Moving on.

Increasingly gay people are visible in every profession. Rosie O'Donnell and Ellen DeGeneres are high-profile lesbians working in comedy and daytime television. Barney Frank is an openly gay congressman from Massachusetts. And the writers of the show "Will and Grace" made their main gay character, Will Truman, a high-powered attorney.

But the stereotypes do persist. The show's most famous character, Jack McFarland, is flamboyantly feminine.

Of course the stereotypes persist. The reason they persist is that numbskulls like Stossel simply couldn't accept a television show featuring gay characters that didn't pander to sterotypes. Gay characters must fit into the stereotypical norms, and must be on "funny" shows, because otherwise they would be far too threatening to people like Stossel who can't get past the image of the faaaaabulous nancy boy. Imagine a dramatic program, starring a gay man, played by a gay man, who "acted normally" and - and here's the kicker - was openly affectionate with other men and had sex with them.

Right.

And don't try and bullshit me; Will Truman was just as big of a stereotype as Jack, just different stereotypes were in play. "Flamboyantly feminine" isn't the only gay male stereotype out there, but I suppose Stossel's exhaustive list didn't quite cover all of them.

Northwestern University psychology professor Michael Bailey has spent years studying human sexuality. He says sexual orientation is something people are born with, and this orientation makes some gay men more feminine.

"There's no obvious reason why sexual orientation should be associated with how masculine or feminine one is, but it is in our species. And it probably has to do with the causes of sexual orientation and early effects of hormones on the brain," Bailey said.

Bailey did a survey of professional dancers and found half the men were gay. But why? "Because dancing is a feminine occupation," he said.

Would anyone like to take a little trip with me to Northwestern University, and kick "professor" Michael Bailey right in his sexist nutsack? It's, like, fifteen minutes from my house. I'll drive.

Sigh. Moving on.

"People talk about it. It's no big deal, and as a matter of fact, it's almost celebrated if you're gay," said dancer Meredith Rainey. "So what if there are a lot of gay men in dance? I think it's a good thing."

While Rainey is gay, the ballet said most of its male dancers are straight.

"People assume that if you're a male ballet dancer you're gay. And I think it's quite silly because let's think about it. You are working around beautiful women all day that are half naked. It's a great job for straight guys," said Zach Hench, a straight dancer.

Yeah, gay men get into dance because it's "feminine," and straight guys do it for the TITS! It has nothing to do with the fact that, you know, these dancers are artists practicing their craft or anything. It would also be silly to assume that there are more gay men in the arts because they don't want to work in, oh, say, the MSM that happens to be full of ignorant, bigoted douchebags like John Stossel.

Can someone please check my blood pressure? I think I need to check my blood pressure.

One problem with stereotyping is that there are so many exceptions. The owners of the Prada Grusel hair salon in New York City are straight but people think they're gay.

"I feel like I've been very much stereotyped by clients, by industry people, all the time," said William Grusel, one of the owners.

Of course. Because of ignorant, bigoted douchebags like John Stossel.

Moving on.

Another stereotype is that gay people speak differently than straight people. That's often true, said Bailey.

"Gay men absolutely talk differently, on average. You can tell far better than chance who's a gay man from just listening to him say four sentences," Bailey said.

No, seriously, I will drive. I won't even make you guys pay for gas. I'm just asking that you wear really heavy shoes and kick hard.

With Bailey's help, "20/20" ran a test in 2004 to see if people could tell who was gay and who was straight. Five gay and five straight men spent an hour mingling with dozens of people. Could the testers determine who was gay and who was straight?

People were accurate 60 percent of the time, which is better than chance. But there were plenty of wrong guesses, too, showing that the stereotypes can be way off. The man who most people thought was straight was actually gay.

There! We have proven beyond doubt that stereotypes can be way off, except in the case where they are not way off, which is what we were really trying to prove in the first place! It's SCIENCE!

Many people do think that gay men are more promiscuous than straight men, and in fact, Bailey said, gay men do have more sex partners. But, he said, it's because men, in general, want lots of partners and women, in general, do not. Women limit the amount of sex that straight men have.

"I think that the typical straight man would have as many sex partners as the typical gay man if he could," Bailey said.

So, in other words, there is absolutely no difference between gay and straight men, it's just that straight guys can't fuck anything that moves, because women have them by the balls! Women! Can't live with 'em, can't live with 'em, am I right guys? And how about that airline food?

Oh, and by the way, your "typical gay man" has a million, billion sex partners. Without exception.

Oh, and by the way, stating that women hate sex and never, ever want to screw around is not a stereotype at all.

Urge to kill... rising...

But, we asked Bailey, isn't stereotyping harmful?

Ah, here we go. Now is the chance for "professor" Bailey to redeem himself to me. Perhaps he'll say that stereotyping is an unfair and dangerous way to marginalize and demean an entire group of human beings? Perhaps he'll state some statistics showing how stereotypes lead to hate crimes? Maybe he can state how stereotypes can span different groups, like gay men and women, harming all involved?

"Denying stereotypes means that people have to disbelieve what is right there in front of their eyes. That can't be a good thing," Bailey said. "Furthermore, there's nothing wrong with being a feminine man or a masculine woman."

Oh.

Stereotypes are only harmful when people have to challenge their beliefs and dispel stereotypes.

I see.

But, of course, stereotypes can lead to ridicule and to violence. People have long mocked gay people, even attacked them, for being different. While there may be some differences between gays and straights, there are lots of similarities.

With that inane, fluffball note, these two collective heads of knuckle end their exhaustive report on gay stereotypes, managing to reinforce the worst, most ancient ones, while not even answering their own question. I'm frankly amazed they bothered to mention lesbians at all.

This seriously has to be one of the worst columns I have ever read. Not only is it sloppily written, poorly researched, and incredibly offensive, it ends with a tacked-on "sterotypes are bad, mmmkay" sort-of "message," which reads like a halfassed book report written by a third grader that skimmed the Cliffs Notes.

"What Charles Dickens was showing in his book, A Tale of Two Cities, was that while these two cities may have had differences, there were also lots of similarities."

ABC should be embarrassed that this juvenile prating ever made it on to their "news" page. This is the kind of ignorant, pigheaded drivel that one would expect to be reading right after the Stonewall riots. This monkeys-flinging-poo writing does absolutely nothing to educate, inform or enrich, and any editor that wasn't a comple imbecile should have rightfully pitched it in the trash, smacked Stossel, and sent him to his room to think about what he had done. Pathetic.

Oh, fuck Carson Kressley, too.

UPDATE: Sarah in Chicago points to this rather illuminating information about "professor"Michael Bailey, who is no longer at Northwestern University, by the way. Gee, another thing Stossel got completely fucking wrong.

(You think you're a man, but you're only a cross-post...)

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Flip-Flopper!!!

Political Wire:

"President Bush is preparing an astonishing U-turn on global warming," according to The Independent. "After years of trying to sabotage agreements to tackle climate change he is drawing up plans to control emissions of carbon dioxide and rapidly boost the use of renewable energy sources."

"Administration insiders privately refer to the planned volte-face as Mr Bush's 'Nixon goes to China moment,' recalling how the former president amazed the world after years of refusing to deal with its Communist regime. Hardline global warming sceptics, however, are already publicly attacking the plans."

Meanwhile, the Washington Post notes Al Gore "laid out his prescription for an ailing and overheated planet Monday, urging a series of steps from freezing carbon dioxide emissions to revamping the auto industry, factories and farms."

You can read Gore’s whole speech here. (Thanks to Shaker Laura.)

I’m sure that Al Gore’s resolute dedication to generating within the collective consciousness an urgency to avert a global climate crisis has something to do with Bush’s (alleged) upcoming course-unstaying, but it’s probably my stupendous note card presentation that really made the ultimate difference.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Shared Zzzzzs

Interesting article on sharing a bed. To sleep.

I’ve gotta say, I don’t think there’s anything wrong or weird about sleeping separately if you sleep more comfortably that way. If I fall asleep before Mr. Shakes, I’m fine. If he falls asleep first, sometimes it’s impossible for me to drift off to the sounds of his snoring, which is approximately like that of a Great Sequoia being felled with a million tiny but shockingly loud chainsaws. On those nights, I go to the spare bedroom, where I sleep very peacefully and awake decidedly less crabby than I otherwise might have.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Populism for Anti-Populists

I second Ezra, who says:

If you want to know why I think the hype about Mark Warner oddly misguided, look no further than his recent comments lambasting the Kerry campaign for targeting Bush's top-bracket tax cuts as poor strategy. He takes up that favorite of chin-stroking op-ed columnists everywhere to argue that "Even though the Bush tax cuts only applied to the top 2 percent of Americans, what I think the Kerry campaign missed was that the other 98 percent of Americans still aspired to get to the point in their life."

Color me unconvinced.

…[W]hile Warner's genial rejection of class warfare may play well on the Washington Post op-ed page, there's no reason to believe it a good strategy, and lord knows it's terrible policy, particularly in an era when the federal treasury is starved for revenue and Democrats actually want to enact some social programs.

Ezra calls it anti-populism, but it’s really more like Populism Reloaded, because it’s not anti-populism so much as populism for social Darwinists. Specifically, poor and uneducated social Darwinists who are too ignorant to realize that they’re consistently voting against their own best interests, since progressive policies facilitate upward mobility, not conservative ones. The vast majority of the supposed “other 98 percent of Americans” who still aspire “to get to the point in their life where they could qualify for the tax cuts” won’t ever get there, and constructing policy around the foolishness of people* who can’t discern the difference between reality and an illusory promise that will never be fulfilled is madness. In fact, it’s precisely the kind of madness in policymaking which has served as the foundation of Bush’s entire presidency.

If that’s the best Warner’s got, color me unconvinced, too.

--------------------

* And, as Ezra points out, the polling doesn’t even seem to indicate that there are as many people as Warner seems to think who are that foolish in the first place.

(Crossposted at AlterNet PEEK.)

Open Wide...

Shut Up!