Maliki: Bush administration rhetoric is providing "morale boosts for the terrorists." Where have I heard that before…? Oh, yeah—from the Bush administration, directed at their critics, for the past five years. Turns out Bush isn't spreading democracy—he's spreading Rovism.
Aside: I have no idea what it means (other than "so not good") for the future that Maliki is turning on Bush, and Bush is sticking his face in front of every camera available to try to make this mess the Iraqis' fault, but I'm putting on my crash helmet.
Related: Chet finds the stupidest thing ever written.
Oy
RIP Art Buchwald
Pulitzer Prize winning columnist, "patron saint of political satire," and owner of one of the greatest faces of all time Art Buchwald has died. I don't actually think we snarky political bloggers realize how much we actually owe to the wonderful Mr. Buchwald.
Thanks to Oddjob for the heads-up.
Signs
Roger Bowman and Debbie Vasquez's dogs Hercules, front, and Max tried their owners' patience so much that the dogs were about to lose their home. When the image appeared on the doggy door, the couple changed their minds.The image, which results from a combination of "dirt, claw marks, and a manufacturer's logo," appeared after Bowman and his fiancée decided to get rid of the dogs because they are "big and rambunctious…bound around like puppies…chew things—furniture, shoes, whatever's handy…[and] scare visitors." Figuring the appearance of a face resembling Western artists' interpretation of a long-dead Middle Easterner was a sign, the couple gave the dogs a reprieve.
"I'm probably not going to become a born-again evangelist, but I cannot deny that I think there was a spirit of redemption at work," said Roger Bowman, 41. "I don't know, maybe the dogs will save somebody in our swimming pool one day."
This is what happens when amateurs try to interpret signs, who inevitably see Jesus or Mary or some other holy folk. But, quite obviously, the face on their doggy door is not Jesus—it's Kip Winger, who's now head trainer at Junkyard Dog Obedience School in San Bernardino.
"You're headed for a heartbreak…unless you bring those pooches down
to Junkyard Dog so I can teach them to behave. It's time to surrender!"
Via Chris. Holy folks Gone Wild on ice, peanuts, x-rays, turtles, ultrasounds, chocolate, dying plants, sheet metal, trees, more trees, more trees, more trees, more trees, wardrobes, water stains, grilled cheese sandwiches, potato chips, plates of pasta, drywall, fish, and more fish.
Going…going…
That's a damn shame: "For seven years, conventional wisdom has said that the state’s pivotal independent voters would line up behind maverick Sen. John McCain, as they did so famously in the 2000 GOP primary. But new polling data, to be released later this week, will suggest that might no longer be the case. Manchester, N.H.-based American Research Group finds that McCain’s popularity among New Hampshire’s independent voters has collapsed. 'John McCain is tanking,' says ARG president Dick Bennett. 'That’s the big thing [we’re finding]. In New Hampshire a year ago he got 49 percent among independent voters. That number’s way down, to 29 percent now.' … Bennett says ARG is finding a similar trend in other states polled, including early primary battlegrounds like Iowa and Nevada. 'We’re finding this everywhere,' he says." (Via.)
Just When You Think Bill O'Reilly Couldn't Sink Any Lower…
…it turns out there are yet further depths to his heartless, reactionary depravity. He and his guest Greta van Susteren were discussing the case of 15-year-old Shawn Hornbeck, a boy who has just been found after being held captive by for four years by 41-year-old Michael Devlin, and all O'Reilly could do was accuse the kid of not escaping because he had "a lot more fun then when he had under his own parents. He didn't have to go to school; he could run around and do what he wanted." No matter how much van Susteren tries to point out that Hornbeck's just a kid, that victims of abductions are often held in thrall by torture and threats, that not all kids hate school, and that piercings are no indication that he enjoyed being kidnapped (sigh), O'Reilly won't budge: "I think when it all comes down, what's going to happen is, there was an element here that this kid liked about his circumstances."
(Watch the video at Crooks and Liars or Media Matters, which also provides a transcript.)
Mind you, neither O'Reilly nor van Susteren even veer close to addressing what the likely circumstances of Hornbeck's abduction actually were. All O'Reilly can see is that this kid didn't make hay of escape opportunities, so he must be a lazy, impudent brat who simply enjoyed not being made to go to school, because apparently he lives in some fucking fantasyland where a 41-year-old man kidnaps an 11-year-old boy for some other reason than abject ugliness we can only begin to imagine.
When some of his viewers criticized O'Reilly for this horseshit, he then said on the following day's broadcast: "I actually hope I'm wrong about Shawn Hornbeck. I hope he did not make a conscious decision to accept his captivity because Devlin made things easy for him. No school, play all day long."
So, apparently, Bill O'Reilly hopes that Devlin terrorized a child so thoroughly that he stayed against his will. What. The. Fuck.
He then continued: "But to just chalk this up to brainwashing and walk away is turning away from the true danger of child molesters and abductors. All American children must be taught survival skills, must be prepared to face crisis situations. That is the lesson of the Shawn Hornbeck story."
The lesson of this story is that American children must be taught survival skills. Uh-huh. Because if an 11-year-old boy has "survival skills," then presumably he can escape with no problem from a 6'4", 300-pound man who's fucking with your head and your body. How fucking stupid is Bill O'Reilly? (And, while I'm asking rhetorical questions, what chance do you think his wrinkled old ass has of getting away from that guy? I'd say somewhere between slim to none, but evidently that doesn't stop him from suggesting a teensy wee kid should be able to manage it.) I guess it would be far too much for his puny little brain to engage the thought that adaptability is not only one of humankind's greatest attributes, but also one of our strongest survival strategies—and kids especially manage to adapt to all kinds of grotesquery if they can be convinced their survival depends on it. If he had, he might realize that what appeared to him to be Hornbeck's preference for the kidnapped highlife might well have been in actuality his using "survival skills" after all.
Worst of all is O'Reilly's feigned ignorance about the scores of children who are trapped in abusive families and fail to leave. Kids who are beaten, molested, berated, manipulated, starved, and ignored by their own parents still go to school, still ride their bikes around the block, still play with friends. Does O'Reilly think that, ultimately, there's just "an element these kids like about their circumstances"? Same for battered adult partners who don't leave? Where, pray tell, does O'Reilly's victim-blaming stop?
Radical Administration Move: Adherence to the Law
The Bush administration, in a surprise reversal, said on Wednesday that it had agreed to give a secret court jurisdiction over the National Security Agency’s wiretapping program and would end its practice of eavesdropping without warrants on Americans suspected of ties to terrorists.This doesn't particularly sound like something to celebrate just yet, to my ears. I'd like to know a little bit more about this "innovative" arrangement before I start applauding the administration for, uh, complying with the law and shit. Gonzo's letter formally announcing this new policy is a little vague, though. It's not entirely clear to what exactly the FISA court has agreed, which may leave a lot to be desired.
The Justice Department said it had worked out an “innovative” arrangement with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that provided the “necessary speed and agility” to provide court approval to monitor international communications of people inside the United States without jeopardizing national security.
This maneuver is also quite obviously designed to try to prevent investigations into how the eavesdropping program has operated the last five years. Thankfully, it looks like the Dems are having none of it.
"The announcement today is welcome news,” said Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who leads the Intelligence Committee. “But it is also confirmation that the administration’s go-it-alone approach, effectively excluding Congress and the courts and operating outside the law, was unnecessary.”Good man.
Mr. Rockefeller added, “I intend to move forward with the committee’s review of all aspects of this program’s legality and effectiveness.”
Keep Your Comments to Yourself
In this Think Progress piece, we see the latest 9/11 excuse that the wingnuts are touting as gospel: a book by Dinesh D’Souza titled “The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11.” Once again, it's all the fault of the Left that 9/11 happened. And, according to D'Souza... it's not just usual suspect Clinton who's at fault, FDR has to share the blame.
Last night on The Colbert Report, D’Souza repeated the right-wing attack that President Bill Clinton “did absolutely nothing” to fight global terrorists. Stephen Colbert jokingly asked, “Doesn’t some of it lie at FDR’s doorstep? Doesn’t things like Social Security and Medicare and LBJ’s Great Society, doesn’t some of that send the wrong message to our enemies?”Le sigh. Same old stuff, right? The Right is still trying to blame 9/11 on us? Now, you'd think there would be enough here to attack... beginning with the fact that D'Souza took Colbert's suggestion seriously. But here's the thing, you look in the comments to this article, and a few pop out at you:
D’Souza answered, “Indirectly, yes,” explaining that “FDR gave away Eastern Europe through Yalta, and then the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, the Muslims had to fight back and that’s where bin Laden got his start.”
* I watched - D’Souza couldn’t maintain his act for a minute - Colbert was agreeing with him, and STILL made a fool of him. Why did Ann Coulter ever bankroll this guy’s book deal? Very, very funny, to me, that Dinesh casts his lot with the “macaca” crowd. Anything to “curry” favor with the power elite, right buddy? Just like your white frat bros told you back at the teke house, right!?
* Anyway, this little fairy is going to expect us to swallow this load of crap?
* Just like a wingnut to overlook selling weapons to the same terrorists who held Americans hostage to make a bogus point about Kadaffy the cross-dresser!
* Are there not any issues back home in India that he can tackle?
* Dinesh D’Souza was not even born in this country!! Don’t the right-wing Nazis know they are outsourcing their stupidity to ugly furners?!? They better wake and smell the samozas!
I just can't begin to tell you all how delighted I am when I read the comments of supposed "progressives" that see nothing wrong with spouting racist, homophobic language in a hamfisted attempt to belittle someone (or worse, be "funny"). The target happens to be conservative, and I'm expected to believe that makes this somehow okay?
Now, that last one may have been a feeble attempt at "humor," but I fail to see how that mess could ever be thought of as "funny." I've blogged about this in the past, but I'd just like to make this perfectly clear.
The second you begin using the tactics of the Right, you lose the ability to criticize the Right for using the same tactics. In doing so, you only give people like Michelle Malkin more ammo for another goddamned book deal. Racism and homophobia are Republican values. We don't need or want that on our side.
Oh, and it's "samosa," you idiot.
(video at C&L)
Virgin on Ice
An ice formation inside a Morton, Texas, grocery store's freezer is prompting tears from people who see it and has apparently answered the prayers of some visitors, according to a Local 6 News report.
Morton Thrifty Foods employee Alma Avalos said when she went to the back she noticed that some drops of water from the ceiling had frozen.
As more and more people began to hear about the Virgin Mary, they started traveling in droves to see the ice. Some people cried when they spotted the ice and others said it answered their prayers. "I had a lump in my breast and yesterday when I went home it disappeared," a woman said. "I don't have it no more."
Others said they believe the ice formation is the real thing. "There are some really Catholic people that really cherish her and they really know it's her and stuff like that and they are really amazed," visitor Stephanie Santos said.Will do!
Workers at Morton Thrifty Foods said they will keep the Virgin Mary in the freezer.
Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.
Via Chris. Holy folks Gone Wild on peanuts, x-rays, turtles, ultrasounds, chocolate, dying plants, sheet metal, trees, more trees, more trees, more trees, more trees, wardrobes, water stains, grilled cheese sandwiches, potato chips, plates of pasta, drywall, fish, and more fish.
"Some Pessimism and Some Skepticism"
Add a little water, and—voila!—a 70% disapproval rate!
Shaker Random Guy forwarded me the link to Bush's interview with Jim Lehrer (watch it here), which is simply astounding. Even if you hate watching Bush (as I do), this one is worth watching, because Lehrer asks him real questions…and so Bush squirms.
I'm not certain what my favorite bit is, but this has gotta be a contender, following a hilarious exchange when Lehrer asks Bush about why he hasn't asked Americans to sacrifice for this war, and Bush pretends Lehrer is asking about tax cuts instead of a draft, something Lehrer refuses to let him get away with:
MR. LEHRER: Well, for instance, Mr. President, some people have asked why—and I would ask you about—have you considered some kind of national service program, that would be civilian as well as military, that would involve more people in the effort to—not just militarily, but you talk about ideology, all this sort of stuff—in other words, to kind of muster the support of young Americans, and other Americans, in this struggle that you say is so monumental and so important.Wow.
PRESIDENT BUSH: Yeah, I have considered whether it ought to be compulsory, non-military service, I guess is the best way to put it. I'm not for compulsory military service, by the way. I think the volunteer army is working and we got to keep it strong. I made the decision early on to set up what's—something called the USA Freedom Corps, which could encourage volunteerism; call people to take time out of their lives to serve our country with compassionate acts. And by the way, volunteerism is high in America. But no, you know, I thought through compulsory national service and thought that the route that we picked was the best route.
MR. LEHRER: The best route. How would you define, finally, where the best route is going to end? …
Just Say No…No…No…
"Willful Ignorance," an article by Courtney Martin in The American Prospect, is driving me to distraction this morning. Its basic premise is that there's a deleterious relationship between abstinence-only sex education and date rape on college campuses, which is certainly thought-provoking, particularly when the posited alternative is truly comprehensive sex education, to include information about power, dignity, and respect along with birds-and-the-bees basics:
The lack of public, comprehensive, and complex sex education in this country contributes to this toxic sexual culture on most college campuses. The abstinence-only sex education that most young men and women receive does not teach them how to articulate their own sexual needs and respect those articulated by their partners. Teens who are merely told "Just don’t do it" are lacking more than an anatomy lesson or information on contraceptive choices. They [are] also missing out on essential communication skills and life-saving knowledge about sex and power. Which is bad news for teenagers in our paradoxically hyper-sexual and hyper-conservative contemporary America who are in desperate need of wise mentorship.I'm totally on board with that shit. Good stuff.
…We live in a society that raises many boys to be repressed men, raises many girls to be self-hating women, glorifies violence, shames victims, and hides histories of incest and molestation. Many of these dynamics feel too big to tackle, too personal to control. But sex education is concrete, fundamental, and totally public. It is something that we can change. Knowledge and dialogue can’t always prevent rape, to be sure, but they can be powerful tools toward that end.
Then things get a little sticky: "Both women like Jen and young men who drunkenly don’t listen when their dates say 'no' can end up scarred from the experience. All parties involved can be hurt by a failure to properly delineate and stick to boundaries." Yikes. Shades of this mess.
Using phrases like "young men who drunkenly don’t listen when their dates say no" instead of "rapists" at worst suggests that date rapists aren't really rapists at all, and, at best, functions to make a coddling of men the flipside to the scolding of women—drunken men can't be rapists and drunken women can't be rape victims. I've no doubt that murdering someone while smashed can be a scarring experience, too, but we don't call killers rueful in their stone sobriety "people who drunkenly disregarded the will of another to live."
It just doesn't do anyone any good to pretend that men who are drunk when they refuse to hear a no, or who haven't been specifically taught in a classroom to listen to the word no, are just as innocent as their victims. And I imagine men who would never dream of such behavior, irrespective of never having been explicitly instructed against it, would be the first to take issue with that particular bit of false equivalence—particularly men who live with rape survivors.
All of this tiptoeing around calling a rapist a rapist seems to be the result of Martin's decision to frame the article within a particularly distressing and coercive sexual experience of a friend, who "isn’t sure whether to call [it] rape."
Her mind flashed back to a night over a year earlier: moonlight coming through her dorm window fell across the shoulders of a guy she barely knew, on top of her. Drunk and exhausted, Jen told him that she wasn’t up for it. He persisted. She remembers saying no a few more times, then eventually giving up, staring at the dark ceiling, waiting for it to be over.Well, guess what? That’s rape. Rape is legally defined as a victim having sexual intercourse against her/his will and without her/his consent. Repeatedly saying no is a clear indication of a lack of consent. As Auguste said so perfectly in Consent: Possibly the Easiest Concept in the History of the World: "Consent is defined according to the quality and quantity of assent, not the quality and quantity of dissent."
Almost every argument about rape can be boiled down to this one sentence, because almost every argument about rape centers on what the victim did or didn’t do. "She didn't kick him, she didn't bite him, she didn't dress modestly, she didn't scream for help, she didn't break his nose…" Rape apologists throw up requirements, levels and types of dissent that the woman would have had to live up to in order to really have been raped. It's interesting, however, that they're always able to come up with something.And/or doesn't acknowledge her dissent. Construing a limp resignation after a series of protestations as "consent" is not appropriate. If someone were holding a loaded gun to my head and I begged for life until I was too exhausted to carry on, would that be interpreted to mean I suddenly wanted to be shot? Of course not. The threat of intercourse against one's will is no different. End of story.
No, rape is about something that the rapist does. Or rather, what he doesn't do, in that he doesn't rely on the woman's assent.
It's disappointing that in an article seeking to address rape prevention would fall so short of being honest about what rape really is in the first place. Unfortunately, however, it's not terribly surprising.
Solipsism in the dugout
It's all about George, all the time
President Bush discharged one of his many obligatory ceremonial duties yesterday in welcoming to the White House the reigning World Series champs, the St. Louis Cardinals. While it's no surprise that all presidential addresses are political in nature, the the somewhat strained analogy to the war in Iraq - or rather, to the "character" of the Ball Fan in Chief - makes you shake your head in disbelief:
They say in baseball in order to become the World Series champ, you can't have losing streaks of over two or three games. (Laughter.) This club had losing streaks of -- one eight-game losing streak; another eight-game losing streak; and a seven-game losing streak -- which really speaks to the characterof the baseball team, doesn't it? I mean, it's a team that -- (applause.) And I think it speaks to the character of the manager, Tony LaRussa, and his staff. (Applause.)When you're on one of those losing streaks, it's easy to get down and to forget the goal. So, like, I'm sure the sports pages were a little rough on you for a while there, you know? How can they possibly endure yet another eight-game losing streak? Well, you endure it as the result of character and leadership.
You see, Iraq is really all about the president's character, and what he must endure.
He's just making sure that we remember that.
Now play ball.
(Cross-posted here, there, everywhere)
Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!
Usually I skip the SOTU address and read the highlights the next day. Let's face it, it's 80% the same crap, and the other 20% is all new lies to make it seem as if Bush might work on legislation that isn't specifically created to make Dick Cheney and his buddies richer than they already are. In addition to that, listening to Prezint Squinty McHeh-Heh makes me want to destroy my television. And we just bought the thing, so I want to keep it in once piece for a while.
Even if I do tune in for a little of the SOTU, I never watch the Democratic response, as it's usually just completely embarrassing. But this time... I may just have to tune in.
Because Jim Webb is delivering the response.
That would be Jim "That's between me and my boy" Webb.
Holy crap. We might actually see a Democratic response with teeth.
Update: By the way, this is going to be this year's SOTU bullshit:
WASHINGTON -- President Bush will outline a policy on global warming next week in his State of the Union speech but has not dropped his opposition to mandatory limits on greenhouse-gas emissions, the White House said yesterday.
"It's not accurate. It's wrong," White House spokesman Tony Snow said regarding media reports suggesting that Bush would agree to mandatory emissions caps in an effort to combat global warming. Such caps could require energy conservation and pollution curbs.
"If you're talking about enforceable carbon caps, in terms of industrywide and nation wide, we knocked that down. That's not something we're talking about," Snow said.
[...]
"We'll have a State of the Union address in a week and we'll lay out our policy on global warming," Snow said when asked whether Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain had persuaded Bush to agree to tougher action to combat global warming.
[...]
Snow suggested the president was sticking to his emphasis on voluntary steps to curb emissions.
So, in other words, a lot of flowery talk about global warming, but no action. I'm sure all of Bush's industrial cronies will get right on curbing their emissions, you know, since it's voluntary and they all have our best interests in mind.
"Our policy on Global Warming: Bugger all."
The 30th Carnival of the Liberals
Welcome all liberals: I am your host
For this evil round-up of traitorous posts,
Terrorists sympathies, and acts of sedition:
It's the Carnival of the Liberals—30th edition.
"Religion's not morals; its void not vile,"
Daylight Atheism reminds us; meanwhile…
Little Miss Know It All gives with a cheer
The First Brilliant Political Move Award of the Year.
SAP has a laugh at the bully Bush
And his empty-gestured bipartisan push;
While Nate reviews with a cynical eye
The Left Behind video game in "Die Sinner, Die!"
Upon crossing paths with an Army gent,
Hell's Handmaiden offers a similar lament
To World Gone Mad: "It's getting old;
Support the Troops is more than a ribbon of gold."
Joseph Hughes, for America, always the mensch,
Fires off a terse letter to Nancy French.
And at Framed, a debate from above and below—
On one side an angel, and the devil his foe.
Rey Thomas reveals what the president means
Because what he says is not what it seems.
And at No Right Turn, a poignant request
After five long years: Gitmo delenda est.
Well, my dear friends, that's it and that's all
For this installment of the Carnival.
Your next host for this soothing political balm
On Jan. 31 is Pollyticks.com.
Thank you to everyone who submitted posts for consideration! The Carnival has a home until March 28, but after that it's looking for a home—so sign up!
Question of the Day
When was the last time you shamelessly indulged yourself, and what did you do?
(Sorry about the lack of round-ups. I'll get back to them tomorrow...)
Humpy McHumperson Can't Take a Hint
Oy. "Sen. John McCain said Tuesday he hopes to patch things up with conservative Christian leader James Dobson, who recently said he wouldn't support the Republican's presidential bid under any circumstances. In a radio interview with KCBI, a Dallas Christian station, Dobson argued that McCain didn't support traditional marriage values and said he has prayed 'we won't get stuck with him'."
McCain then went on—seriously—to point out that other kids will play with him! "I'm happy to say that I've established a dialogue with a number of other leaders." Like, Jerry "Agent of Intolerance" Falwell, who totally didn't choose him last in gym class, and Rick "Purpose Driven Life" Warren, who only took his lunch money once, and Dr. Richard "Dickland" Land, who throws the dodgeball at McCain's face instead of his groin.
I'm actually not certain if there's anyone on the planet who dislikes John McCain more than I do, and even I'm starting to cringe at his excruciating attempts to get in with the Kool Khrist Kids. Yeesh.
Huzzah!
GOP Rep. Tom Tancredo—the immigration crusader who heartwarmingly voted against funding the relief package for victims of Katrina—has announced he will form an exploratory committee for a possible presidential campaign. I'm a huge fan of his, as you can imagine, so I've put my mad design skillz to use designing a white hood hoodie for his many ardent supporters. Only $39.99, and all proceeds will go toward electing anyone but Tom Tancredo.
Yay, Tom!
TCM's 2006 Tribute
TCM's annual tribute to the performing arts professionals is always very well done and touching; the tribute on the Oscars doesn't even come close.
I was particularly touched by the images shown with several of the actors, such as Darren McGavin. It's amazing to be how certain actors can be perfectly encapsulated with one look. Just try and look at Don Knotts' pure, joyful smile without getting a little choked up.
My only complaint is with their treatment of my favorite character actor, Vincent Schiavelli. Geez, couldn't they pick better footage than his appearance in Ghost?
