Elfriede Jelinek was born on 20 October 1946 in the town of Mürzzuschlag in the Austrian province of Styria. Her father, of Czech-Jewish origin, was a chemist and worked in strategically important industrial production during the Second World War, thereby escaping persecution. Her mother was from a prosperous Vienna family, and Elfriede grew up and went to school in that city. At an early age, she was instructed in piano, organ and recorder and went on to study composition at the Vienna Conservatory. After graduating from the Albertsgymnasium in 1964, she studied theatre and art history at the University of Vienna while continuing her music studies. In 1971, she passed the organist diploma examination at the Conservatory.
Elfriede Jelinek began writing poetry while still young. She made her literary debut with the collection Lisas Schatten in 1967. Through contact with the student movement, her writing took a socially critical direction. In 1970 came her satirical novel wir sind lockvögel baby!. In common with her next novel, Michael. Ein Jugendbuch für die Infantilgesellschaft (1972), it had a character of linguistic rebellion, aimed at popular culture and its mendacious presentation of the good life.
After a few years spent in Berlin and Rome in the early 1970s, Jelinek married Gottfried Hüngsberg, and divided her time between Vienna and Munich. She conquered the German literary public with her novels DieLiebhaberinnen (1975; Women as Lovers, 1994), Die Ausgesperrten (1980; Wonderful, Wonderful Times, 1990) and the autobiographically based Die Klavierspielerin (1983; The Piano Teacher, 1988), in 2001 made into an acclaimed film by Michael Haneke. These novels, each within the framework of its own problem complex, present a pitiless world where the reader is confronted with a locked-down regime of violence and submission, hunter and prey. Jelinek demonstrates how the entertainment industry’s clichés seep into people’s consciousness and paralyse opposition to class injustices and gender oppression. In Lust (1989; Lust, 1992), Jelinek lets her social analysis swell to fundamental criticism of civilisation by describing sexual violence against women as the actual template for our culture. This line is maintained, seemingly in a lighter tone, in Gier. Ein Unterhaltungsroman (2000), a study in the cold-blooded practice of male power. With special fervour, Jelinek has castigated Austria, depicting it as a realm of death in her phantasmagorical novel, Die Kinder der Toten (1975). Jelinek is a highly controversial figure in her homeland. Her writing builds on a lengthy Austrian tradition of linguistically sophisticated social criticism, with precursors such as Johann Nepomuk Nestroy, Karl Kraus, Ödön von Horváth, Elias Canetti, Thomas Bernhard and the Wiener Group.
The nature of Jelinek’s texts is often hard to define. They shift between prose and poetry, incantation and hymn, they contain theatrical scenes and filmic sequences. The primacy in her writing has however moved from novel-writing to drama. Her first radio play, wenn die sonne sinkt ist für manche schon büroschluss, was very favourably received in 1974. She has since written a large number of pieces for radio and the theatre, in which she successively abandoned traditional dialogues for a kind of polyphonic monologues that do not serve to delineate roles but to permit voices from various levels of the psyche and history to be heard simultaneously. What she puts on stage in plays from recent years – Totenauberg, Raststätte, Wolken. Heim, Ein Sportstück, In den Alpen, Das Werk and others – are less characters than “language interfaces” confronting each other. Jelinek’s most recent published works for drama, the so-called “princess dramas” (Der Tod und das Mädchen I-V, 2003), are variations on one of the writer’s basic themes, the inability of women to fully come to life in a world where they are painted over with stereotypical images.
Friday, October 08, 2004
Who is Elfriede Jelinek?
Here's her biography, from NobelPrize.org:
Thursday, October 07, 2004
CBS Responds to Criticism of Dan Rather's Forgeries
From BoycottCBS.com:
"Addressed to BoycottCBS.com founder Michael Paranzino, the email from the CBS -- Black Rock -- headquarters in New York City was brief and to the point:
"A check of the computer-generated email headers provided to track abuse confirms that the email was sent from servers at CBS headquarters (170.20.116.206 and 170.20.9.150 , tadata@cbs.com)."
And we thought hate was not a famiy value...
"Addressed to BoycottCBS.com founder Michael Paranzino, the email from the CBS -- Black Rock -- headquarters in New York City was brief and to the point:
PARANZINO..YOU'RE A PUTZ!
GET A LIFE PARANZINO!!!!
"A check of the computer-generated email headers provided to track abuse confirms that the email was sent from servers at CBS headquarters (170.20.116.206 and 170.20.9.150 , tadata@cbs.com)."
And we thought hate was not a famiy value...
Martin Kramer on Dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood
He's against it. From Martin Kramer's Sandstorm:
"The wrong Muslims. Now if some of the Islamists today were on a march to power, the case for dialogue might be more compelling. But where are these Islamists? Where is the Khomeini of Saudi Arabia or Iraq? Skeptical as we may be about the prospects for the Saudi monarchy or the Iraqi government, it is difficult to see Islamists who could replace them. And what would we talk about in a dialogue with the kinds of Islamists who seek to seize power in Saudi Arabia or Iraq? Would not such a dialogue merely antagonize and alienate those forces for stability that still have a chance to see the crisis through? And do we really think that were we to facilitate the ascent of any of these groups, they would be grateful for it? Any more so than the Afghan mujahideen?
"In sum, dialogue with Islamists, far from undercutting the jihadists, would undercut their opponents. It would muddle the message of the war on terror--the message that there can be no middle ground, and that Muslims must choose. Islamists not only wish to create a middle ground in the Middle East, but they seek to extend it to American soil. Few things could undermine the war on terror more thoroughly than dialogue with them, because it would facilitate just that.
"The United States has no use for equivocating Islamists. The United States does have use for dialogue with believing Muslims--those who share its vision of a Middle East that is free, and free of terror."
"The wrong Muslims. Now if some of the Islamists today were on a march to power, the case for dialogue might be more compelling. But where are these Islamists? Where is the Khomeini of Saudi Arabia or Iraq? Skeptical as we may be about the prospects for the Saudi monarchy or the Iraqi government, it is difficult to see Islamists who could replace them. And what would we talk about in a dialogue with the kinds of Islamists who seek to seize power in Saudi Arabia or Iraq? Would not such a dialogue merely antagonize and alienate those forces for stability that still have a chance to see the crisis through? And do we really think that were we to facilitate the ascent of any of these groups, they would be grateful for it? Any more so than the Afghan mujahideen?
"In sum, dialogue with Islamists, far from undercutting the jihadists, would undercut their opponents. It would muddle the message of the war on terror--the message that there can be no middle ground, and that Muslims must choose. Islamists not only wish to create a middle ground in the Middle East, but they seek to extend it to American soil. Few things could undermine the war on terror more thoroughly than dialogue with them, because it would facilitate just that.
"The United States has no use for equivocating Islamists. The United States does have use for dialogue with believing Muslims--those who share its vision of a Middle East that is free, and free of terror."
Mark Steyn on the Cheney-Edwards Vice Presidential Debate
From SteynOnline:
"INSTANT DEBATE REACTION!
WINNER: CHENEY!
Classic Daddy Party performance, underlined by Edwards' closing with his maudlin generic hardscrabble vignettes. Simply by being who he is, Cheney made the other guy look a lightweight. Edwards had one good trick: he worked the format better - using the 30-second add-ons for his sharpest and best rehearsed jabs and leaving Cheney no time for rebuttal. That aside, I don't agree with Andrew Sullivan on much these days, but I'm with him on this: Cheney is way sexier than Edwards, who seems cheesier and emptier every time I see him."
"INSTANT DEBATE REACTION!
WINNER: CHENEY!
Classic Daddy Party performance, underlined by Edwards' closing with his maudlin generic hardscrabble vignettes. Simply by being who he is, Cheney made the other guy look a lightweight. Edwards had one good trick: he worked the format better - using the 30-second add-ons for his sharpest and best rehearsed jabs and leaving Cheney no time for rebuttal. That aside, I don't agree with Andrew Sullivan on much these days, but I'm with him on this: Cheney is way sexier than Edwards, who seems cheesier and emptier every time I see him."
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
Frankfurt Book Fair Promotes Arab Authors
From Deutsche Welle | [link from Artsjournal.com]:
"Many popular Arab authors remain unknown in the West. That may change as the Frankfurt Book Fair invites the Arab League as guest of honor this year. But the nagging issue of censorship might not be touched upon at all. Of the around 120,000 foreign fiction titles translated into German, only about 500 come from the Arab world. It's a telling statement on the lack of information in the West when it comes to the diversity of the literary landscape in the Arab countries. It's usually literary heavyweights such as Egyptian author and Nobel Prize winner Naguib Mahfouz or France-based Moroccan writer Tahar Ben Jelloun who enjoy relative popularity in Europe. But that might be about to change as the spotlight falls on the Arab League at this year's Frankfurt Book Fair. Starting October 6, visitors to the world's largest book fair will get the chance to meet and get acquainted with the works of around 200 authors and artists from 17 countries of the 22-member Arab League."
"Many popular Arab authors remain unknown in the West. That may change as the Frankfurt Book Fair invites the Arab League as guest of honor this year. But the nagging issue of censorship might not be touched upon at all. Of the around 120,000 foreign fiction titles translated into German, only about 500 come from the Arab world. It's a telling statement on the lack of information in the West when it comes to the diversity of the literary landscape in the Arab countries. It's usually literary heavyweights such as Egyptian author and Nobel Prize winner Naguib Mahfouz or France-based Moroccan writer Tahar Ben Jelloun who enjoy relative popularity in Europe. But that might be about to change as the spotlight falls on the Arab League at this year's Frankfurt Book Fair. Starting October 6, visitors to the world's largest book fair will get the chance to meet and get acquainted with the works of around 200 authors and artists from 17 countries of the 22-member Arab League."
The Only Thing We Have To Fear...
Roger L. Simon: Mystery Novelist and Screenwriter realized the Vice-Presidential debate subtext was about fear:
"But we all know that. And for the willfully disinterested who didn't, Cheney pointed it out last night with the one slightly witty line of the first two debates in which he wondered aloud how K & E could stand up to Al Qaeda if they couldn't stand up to Howard Dean. How indeed? Or should I say 'Howard indeed'? But it's worse, because the ghost of Dean and the Deaniacs sits astride all sides in the current conflagration. Consider the endless debate on the number of troops. Can you honestly suggest that the presence of the 'Dean Left' (quotes deliberate) did not influence the size of the deployments? Say what you want about 'military advice'... and I am an agnostic on the number of troops issue... I am certain that the administration, as would almost all politicians, was looking over its collective shoulder at its noisy adversaries as they went to war. And they continued to look over their shoulders as they pursued the peace. Consciously or unconsciously, they wanted to believe that lower numbers were acceptable. War-lite, they thought in the shadow of Dean, would garner less resistance. But like many decisions made in fear, this may not have been in true. Still, Bremer's complaints on troop numbers do not impress me. He is thought not to have distinguished himself as head of the CPA (who knows the reality of this?), so naturally he is looking to CYA, making his criticism suspect. But the overweening problem is being governed by fear, fear of Dean (how ridiculous is that, when you think about it). I didn't need Cheney to tell me that for that reason alone I could not vote for Kerry. "
"But we all know that. And for the willfully disinterested who didn't, Cheney pointed it out last night with the one slightly witty line of the first two debates in which he wondered aloud how K & E could stand up to Al Qaeda if they couldn't stand up to Howard Dean. How indeed? Or should I say 'Howard indeed'? But it's worse, because the ghost of Dean and the Deaniacs sits astride all sides in the current conflagration. Consider the endless debate on the number of troops. Can you honestly suggest that the presence of the 'Dean Left' (quotes deliberate) did not influence the size of the deployments? Say what you want about 'military advice'... and I am an agnostic on the number of troops issue... I am certain that the administration, as would almost all politicians, was looking over its collective shoulder at its noisy adversaries as they went to war. And they continued to look over their shoulders as they pursued the peace. Consciously or unconsciously, they wanted to believe that lower numbers were acceptable. War-lite, they thought in the shadow of Dean, would garner less resistance. But like many decisions made in fear, this may not have been in true. Still, Bremer's complaints on troop numbers do not impress me. He is thought not to have distinguished himself as head of the CPA (who knows the reality of this?), so naturally he is looking to CYA, making his criticism suspect. But the overweening problem is being governed by fear, fear of Dean (how ridiculous is that, when you think about it). I didn't need Cheney to tell me that for that reason alone I could not vote for Kerry. "
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
From Our We Hate To Say We Told You So Department: "CBS Says Probe Results Unlikely Until After Election"
You can scroll down to read our earlier post on the weakness of the blogosphere. Now this confirmation of further Dan Rather forgery scandal cover-ups, from Yahoo! News [link via LittleGreenFootballs]:
"NEW YORK (Reuters) - An external review of how CBS News came to use disputed documents in a report on President Bush (news - web sites)'s military record will probably not be concluded until after the November election so as not to interfere with the presidential race... "
"NEW YORK (Reuters) - An external review of how CBS News came to use disputed documents in a report on President Bush (news - web sites)'s military record will probably not be concluded until after the November election so as not to interfere with the presidential race... "
Russia's War on Terror
Leon Aron's analysis of Russian policies in the wake of the Beslan tragedy:
"Wars have repeatedly had a decisive influence on Russia's political development, and the present global conflict against fundamentalist Islam is no exception. With the murder of hundreds of Russians at the hands of Chechen terrorists--most notably, the massacre of schoolchildren at Beslan earlier this month--President Vladimir Putin has announced a sweeping overhaul of Russia's political system that would further consolidate power in the Kremlin and damage the country's nascent democracy. The United States and its allies now confront the dual challenge of assisting Russia in its fight against terrorism while simultaneously resisting the erosion of freedom there.
"The French only make reforms in the course of a revolution," General de Gaulle once told Raymond Aron. Of the Russians it may be said that their reforms (and revolutions) are very often precipitated by wars.
"The Crimean War (1854-1856) led to Alexander II's "revolution from above," which included the emancipation of the serfs. The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 brought about the 1905 Revolution and the beginning of democratic politics and constitutional monarchy. World War I was the key precondition for the success of the Bolshevik Revolution. The Soviet Union's war in Afghanistan (1979-1988) contributed mightily to the urgency of Mikhail Gorbachev's overhaul of domestic and foreign policies. And the defeat or, more precisely, voluntary withdrawal from the Cold War attended the breakup of the Soviet Union and the democratic revolution of 1991.
"With the murder of more than six hundred men, women, and children by Chechnya-based Islamic terrorists in Russia since late June--including the simultaneous downing of two civilian airplanes and the massacre of schoolchildren in Beslan--Russia is again at war. The historic pattern of wars' profound impact on Russian politics and society is evident in President Vladimir Putin's September 13 outline of political and bureaucratic reforms that would consolidate the Kremlin's power and damage Russia's nascent democracy. The United States now confronts the challenge of a "two-track" policy of helping Russia to combat militant Islamic fundamentalism while opposing the erosion of democracy. "
"Wars have repeatedly had a decisive influence on Russia's political development, and the present global conflict against fundamentalist Islam is no exception. With the murder of hundreds of Russians at the hands of Chechen terrorists--most notably, the massacre of schoolchildren at Beslan earlier this month--President Vladimir Putin has announced a sweeping overhaul of Russia's political system that would further consolidate power in the Kremlin and damage the country's nascent democracy. The United States and its allies now confront the dual challenge of assisting Russia in its fight against terrorism while simultaneously resisting the erosion of freedom there.
"The French only make reforms in the course of a revolution," General de Gaulle once told Raymond Aron. Of the Russians it may be said that their reforms (and revolutions) are very often precipitated by wars.
"The Crimean War (1854-1856) led to Alexander II's "revolution from above," which included the emancipation of the serfs. The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 brought about the 1905 Revolution and the beginning of democratic politics and constitutional monarchy. World War I was the key precondition for the success of the Bolshevik Revolution. The Soviet Union's war in Afghanistan (1979-1988) contributed mightily to the urgency of Mikhail Gorbachev's overhaul of domestic and foreign policies. And the defeat or, more precisely, voluntary withdrawal from the Cold War attended the breakup of the Soviet Union and the democratic revolution of 1991.
"With the murder of more than six hundred men, women, and children by Chechnya-based Islamic terrorists in Russia since late June--including the simultaneous downing of two civilian airplanes and the massacre of schoolchildren in Beslan--Russia is again at war. The historic pattern of wars' profound impact on Russian politics and society is evident in President Vladimir Putin's September 13 outline of political and bureaucratic reforms that would consolidate the Kremlin's power and damage Russia's nascent democracy. The United States now confronts the challenge of a "two-track" policy of helping Russia to combat militant Islamic fundamentalism while opposing the erosion of democracy. "
Monday, October 04, 2004
Why Go Digital?
Charlie Clark, in The Washington Post today,: considers the case of the vanishing reference book:
"In our digitally drenched age, I find myself fascinated by the 'refresh' function on today's more dynamic Web sites. The steadily blinking, disappear-and-reappear changes to washingtonpost.com and my AOL home page reassure me in a nanosecond that the information I take in is perpetually updated -- with zero effort by me.
"Small problem, however. Computers have so accelerated our thought processes, so raised our expectations and so reduced our patience that nowadays when I consult one of my venerable reference works, I take for granted this same up-to-the-minute 'refreshment.' Instead, it hits me like a punch in the nose when I discover that my research sources are frozen in an era when Jimmy Carter was president, the Bee Gees ruled radio and TV news was a half-hour a day.
"So, you ask, why not go digital? I mean, who still buys their children a heavy shelf of World Book Encyclopedia volumes when you can score a current and searchable version that fits in your coat pocket?
"Truth is, I'm too attached to the glorious objects that give ambiance to my thinking man's study to trade them for a rack of utilitarian plastic and ephemeral data. "
"In our digitally drenched age, I find myself fascinated by the 'refresh' function on today's more dynamic Web sites. The steadily blinking, disappear-and-reappear changes to washingtonpost.com and my AOL home page reassure me in a nanosecond that the information I take in is perpetually updated -- with zero effort by me.
"Small problem, however. Computers have so accelerated our thought processes, so raised our expectations and so reduced our patience that nowadays when I consult one of my venerable reference works, I take for granted this same up-to-the-minute 'refreshment.' Instead, it hits me like a punch in the nose when I discover that my research sources are frozen in an era when Jimmy Carter was president, the Bee Gees ruled radio and TV news was a half-hour a day.
"So, you ask, why not go digital? I mean, who still buys their children a heavy shelf of World Book Encyclopedia volumes when you can score a current and searchable version that fits in your coat pocket?
"Truth is, I'm too attached to the glorious objects that give ambiance to my thinking man's study to trade them for a rack of utilitarian plastic and ephemeral data. "
Che Guevara Didn't Ride Motorcycles
Agustin Blazquez let us know that the new film about Che Guevara, Motorcycle Diaries is not only fiction, it is a lie. Agustin shared this email from a friend as evidence that Che didn't ride a motorcycle -- because he didn't know how.
Guess what folks? Last night I went to Lectorium Books in Manhattan for a book presentation. The author who was presenting his memoirs is a Cuban who was on the Gramma expedition and Moncada Barracks attack with Castro. He knew Castro, Raul, and Che personally and up close. When asked by someone in the audience about the "Motorcycle Diaries," he laughed and said that Che did not know how to ride a motorcycle! He said that he unequivocally knows that, because on various occassions he went motorcycling around Habana with Castro and company and Che never went along with them even when asked to accompany them. All that he did was sheepishly wave GOOD-BYE, because he didn't know how to ride a motorbike!
Ah, the mythmaking of the left that ceaselessly lionizes Che! Pretty soon, they'll have him coming down on a cloud!
Museum of Modern Art Ups Ticket Prices
The entrance fee at New York's Museum of Modern Art just went from $12 to $20. My Stupid Dog is annoyed with Terry Teachout's knee-jerk condemnation:
"To call New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg plain-spoken is a bit of an understatement. When queried about MoMa's price hikes, Bloomberg stated with characteristic bluntness, ''Some things people can afford, some things people can't. ... MoMA is a private institution. It's not a city institution. And they have a right to set their own pricing policies.' Bloomberg added that 'If you can't afford [admissions] at any one, you can go to another one.' Journalists have had a field day with Bloomberg's statement, noting that the mayor is one of America's wealthiest men -- of course he won't be affected by a mere eight-dollar increase, with his multi-billion dollar personal fortune.
"Online arts critic Terry Teachout, who usually combines informed connoisseurship with common sense, claims that Bloomberg 'just earned himself a swift kick in the crotch for his personal contribution to the ongoing debate. (Not in the head--that wouldn't hurt him one bit.)' Yet Bloomberg's reasoning is absolutely correct: Private institutions should set their own admissions policies, without interference from government. He neither condemned nor condoned the new admission rates, but he did state that the price of MoMA admissions was not his concern as a government official.
"In the meantime, I wonder what has happened to Teachout's own head. When he accepted a prestigious position with the National Endowment for the Arts, I feared that the moribund institution might alter him more than he would alter it. Once you start to work with government-sponsored arts projects on behalf of 'the masses' -- who presumably are too ignorant to make an informed judgment in matters of taste -- the idea that artists and government institutions should work together to bring art to the people becomes embedded in your brain like a virus. The consequent government-funded art, complete with Uncle Sam's seal of approval, runs the gamut from redundant (NEA's ongoing "Shakespeare in the Suburbs" tour!) to banal ("Piss Christ," anyone?).
"I think the NEA tends to forget that art is not only accessible, it is everywhere. From television commericals to art-house cinema, from down-and-dirty blues music to fun-house postmodern architecture, even the poorest of Americans are sated, even glutted, with products of human imagination and creativity. That may explain why most Americans don't go to art museums: They've had enough truth and beauty for one day, thanks, and staring at colored squares isn't going to do anything for them. When interior designers on cable television can paint household cabinets in the style of Piet Mondrian, it's time for all government-subsized priests of high culture to declare "Mission Accomplished" and call it a day."
"To call New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg plain-spoken is a bit of an understatement. When queried about MoMa's price hikes, Bloomberg stated with characteristic bluntness, ''Some things people can afford, some things people can't. ... MoMA is a private institution. It's not a city institution. And they have a right to set their own pricing policies.' Bloomberg added that 'If you can't afford [admissions] at any one, you can go to another one.' Journalists have had a field day with Bloomberg's statement, noting that the mayor is one of America's wealthiest men -- of course he won't be affected by a mere eight-dollar increase, with his multi-billion dollar personal fortune.
"Online arts critic Terry Teachout, who usually combines informed connoisseurship with common sense, claims that Bloomberg 'just earned himself a swift kick in the crotch for his personal contribution to the ongoing debate. (Not in the head--that wouldn't hurt him one bit.)' Yet Bloomberg's reasoning is absolutely correct: Private institutions should set their own admissions policies, without interference from government. He neither condemned nor condoned the new admission rates, but he did state that the price of MoMA admissions was not his concern as a government official.
"In the meantime, I wonder what has happened to Teachout's own head. When he accepted a prestigious position with the National Endowment for the Arts, I feared that the moribund institution might alter him more than he would alter it. Once you start to work with government-sponsored arts projects on behalf of 'the masses' -- who presumably are too ignorant to make an informed judgment in matters of taste -- the idea that artists and government institutions should work together to bring art to the people becomes embedded in your brain like a virus. The consequent government-funded art, complete with Uncle Sam's seal of approval, runs the gamut from redundant (NEA's ongoing "Shakespeare in the Suburbs" tour!) to banal ("Piss Christ," anyone?).
"I think the NEA tends to forget that art is not only accessible, it is everywhere. From television commericals to art-house cinema, from down-and-dirty blues music to fun-house postmodern architecture, even the poorest of Americans are sated, even glutted, with products of human imagination and creativity. That may explain why most Americans don't go to art museums: They've had enough truth and beauty for one day, thanks, and staring at colored squares isn't going to do anything for them. When interior designers on cable television can paint household cabinets in the style of Piet Mondrian, it's time for all government-subsized priests of high culture to declare "Mission Accomplished" and call it a day."
Sunday, October 03, 2004
Mark Steyn Still Says Bush Will Win
From The Chicago Sun-Times:
"Those of us who've been sweet on George W. Bush a long time have gotten used to these moments. Four years ago, he stacks up more money and a bigger runaway lead than any other candidate in history, but he can't be bothered campaigning in New Hampshire, so he loses the primary to John McCain. He struggles to catch up, wins the nomination, but then takes the summer off to build his ranch house in Crawford, Texas. Al Gore's ahead on Labor Day, but Bush claws his way back to a small lead, then they drop the last-minute DWI scandal and, instead of rebutting it, he takes the weekend off, and lands us in a month of Florida chad-divining.
"So Thursday was one of those moments. Bush wasn't wrong, but he was in the same state he was in in early 2003, before launching the Iraq war, when he was tired and punchy and stumbling round the country not making a case against Saddam but just droning the same phrases over and over: ''He's a dictator.'' Smirk. ''He gassed his own people.'' In Thursday's debate, his own people seemed to have gassed him. Bush droned, repeatedly, that Kerry was sending ''mixed messages,'' but his own message could have done with being a little less robotically unmixed. He said, ''It's tough. ... It's hard work. ...'' again and again..."
"Those of us who've been sweet on George W. Bush a long time have gotten used to these moments. Four years ago, he stacks up more money and a bigger runaway lead than any other candidate in history, but he can't be bothered campaigning in New Hampshire, so he loses the primary to John McCain. He struggles to catch up, wins the nomination, but then takes the summer off to build his ranch house in Crawford, Texas. Al Gore's ahead on Labor Day, but Bush claws his way back to a small lead, then they drop the last-minute DWI scandal and, instead of rebutting it, he takes the weekend off, and lands us in a month of Florida chad-divining.
"So Thursday was one of those moments. Bush wasn't wrong, but he was in the same state he was in in early 2003, before launching the Iraq war, when he was tired and punchy and stumbling round the country not making a case against Saddam but just droning the same phrases over and over: ''He's a dictator.'' Smirk. ''He gassed his own people.'' In Thursday's debate, his own people seemed to have gassed him. Bush droned, repeatedly, that Kerry was sending ''mixed messages,'' but his own message could have done with being a little less robotically unmixed. He said, ''It's tough. ... It's hard work. ...'' again and again..."
Network Anchors Rally Behind Dan Rather's Forgeries
According to The Washington Post network anchors are supporting Dan Rather in the scandal over his forged documents:
"NEW YORK, Oct. 2 -- Dan Rather, vowing to resist any 'smear' campaign against him by the Bush administration or other critics, said Saturday he would not 'give up the fight' and intends to remain in the CBS anchor chair. Rather, who has apologized for reporting on National Guard documents about President Bush that the network now says it cannot authenticate, twice declined to comment on the controversy at a forum hosted by the New Yorker. He made clear he had been muzzled by management, saying CBS News President Andrew Heyward had asked him to stay quiet while an outside panel investigates the matter. The other network anchors at the forum stood by their longtime rival. NBC's Tom Brokaw accused Internet critics of 'a kind of political jihad against Dan Rather and CBS News that is quite outrageous.' Although he called Rather's '60 Minutes' story 'a big mistake,' Brokaw said it had led to an attempt to 'demonize' Rather and CBS through 'demagoguery.'"
"NEW YORK, Oct. 2 -- Dan Rather, vowing to resist any 'smear' campaign against him by the Bush administration or other critics, said Saturday he would not 'give up the fight' and intends to remain in the CBS anchor chair. Rather, who has apologized for reporting on National Guard documents about President Bush that the network now says it cannot authenticate, twice declined to comment on the controversy at a forum hosted by the New Yorker. He made clear he had been muzzled by management, saying CBS News President Andrew Heyward had asked him to stay quiet while an outside panel investigates the matter. The other network anchors at the forum stood by their longtime rival. NBC's Tom Brokaw accused Internet critics of 'a kind of political jihad against Dan Rather and CBS News that is quite outrageous.' Although he called Rather's '60 Minutes' story 'a big mistake,' Brokaw said it had led to an attempt to 'demonize' Rather and CBS through 'demagoguery.'"
Saturday, October 02, 2004
Al-Zawahri Calls for US Attacks
From Aljazeera.Net:
"'In Palestine, we are not only facing the Jews but also the anti-Islam international alliance headed by the US crusaders.So, fighting Jews and leaving America without being attacked will not make the Americans or the crusaders lessen their aggression against us.'"
"'In Palestine, we are not only facing the Jews but also the anti-Islam international alliance headed by the US crusaders.So, fighting Jews and leaving America without being attacked will not make the Americans or the crusaders lessen their aggression against us.'"
The Botox Factor
President Bush's facial expressions have come under attack from the Democratic National Committee, which posted selected clips from the Bush-Kerry debate on their website. But the Texan's more mobile face might simply be a sign that he hasn't used quite as much Botox, while the impassive rigidity of Kerry's lower-jaw might give credence to the notion that the Boston Brahmin has indeed been cosmetically enhanced, his skin paralyzed by the Botulism toxin.
That's what reports on the AwfulPlasticSurgery.com website seem to indicate, at least...
That's what reports on the AwfulPlasticSurgery.com website seem to indicate, at least...
Don't Call Me a "Blogger"!
From Wizbang:
"I've always hated the word... Blogger. Even without referencing its auditory resemblance to gelatinous masses ejected from nasal cavities, I still don't like it. Blogger. Say it aloud. It sounds as if you are talking with a mouth full of food you are trying to prevent from escaping. Or perhaps it sounds like some did escape. Either way, what does it mean? One who has a weblog? Look that up in a hip glossary and it does not cover what I do. This is no 'on-line diary.' People outside the blogospehre don't like the word either. After all, bloggers (as we all know) don't have the systems of checks and balances like they have in a traditional newsroom. It was my adventure debunking Professor Hailey that lead me to an epiphany. I no longer what to be called a blogger and neither should you. We are not bloggers, We are independent, peer reviewed journalists.
"It was the phone call to the head of Professor Hailey's department that made me see the light. He said something to the effect of, 'Certainly Dr. Hailey's work needs to stand up to peer review.' But who exactly is Dr. Hailey's peer? Apparently some guy sitting in his pajamas who has a blog. The simple act of 'getting things right' is important to society. Politicians must get things right so have have voters keep an eye on them. Lawyers must get things right so we have juries. So to must scholars get things right, so a system of 'peer review' was born. I can think of no other entity than the traditional media whose only review system is internal. Multiple people have tried to make the case that the blogosphere is more accurate than the mainstream media. Heck, search this blog and you'll find I've done it several times. What we have lacked is a way to explain our system of checks and balances to people outside the blogosphere. The phrase 'Peer Reviewed Journalism' does that."
"I've always hated the word... Blogger. Even without referencing its auditory resemblance to gelatinous masses ejected from nasal cavities, I still don't like it. Blogger. Say it aloud. It sounds as if you are talking with a mouth full of food you are trying to prevent from escaping. Or perhaps it sounds like some did escape. Either way, what does it mean? One who has a weblog? Look that up in a hip glossary and it does not cover what I do. This is no 'on-line diary.' People outside the blogospehre don't like the word either. After all, bloggers (as we all know) don't have the systems of checks and balances like they have in a traditional newsroom. It was my adventure debunking Professor Hailey that lead me to an epiphany. I no longer what to be called a blogger and neither should you. We are not bloggers, We are independent, peer reviewed journalists.
"It was the phone call to the head of Professor Hailey's department that made me see the light. He said something to the effect of, 'Certainly Dr. Hailey's work needs to stand up to peer review.' But who exactly is Dr. Hailey's peer? Apparently some guy sitting in his pajamas who has a blog. The simple act of 'getting things right' is important to society. Politicians must get things right so have have voters keep an eye on them. Lawyers must get things right so we have juries. So to must scholars get things right, so a system of 'peer review' was born. I can think of no other entity than the traditional media whose only review system is internal. Multiple people have tried to make the case that the blogosphere is more accurate than the mainstream media. Heck, search this blog and you'll find I've done it several times. What we have lacked is a way to explain our system of checks and balances to people outside the blogosphere. The phrase 'Peer Reviewed Journalism' does that."
Charlie Cook on the Debate
From The Cook Report:
"While I personally thought that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's performance in last night's debate was awful and that he has been badly damaged by the flip-flop argument, I am clearly in the minority. Data (polling, focus groups and dial tests) from both parties and the media show that Kerry won debate, though it remains unclear as to whether the ballot test moved much. Personally, I thought that Kerry sounded like Thurston Howell III, the snooty and condescending millionaire from 'Gilligan's Island,' but more people were comfortable with that than they were with the President's stammering and halting delivery and repetition of same phrases and arguments... "
"While I personally thought that Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's performance in last night's debate was awful and that he has been badly damaged by the flip-flop argument, I am clearly in the minority. Data (polling, focus groups and dial tests) from both parties and the media show that Kerry won debate, though it remains unclear as to whether the ballot test moved much. Personally, I thought that Kerry sounded like Thurston Howell III, the snooty and condescending millionaire from 'Gilligan's Island,' but more people were comfortable with that than they were with the President's stammering and halting delivery and repetition of same phrases and arguments... "
Why Kerry Will Lose
From Victor Davis Hanson's Private Papers:
"So Kerry flip and flops like a fish out of water, suggesting that his heart is with Howard Dean while his mind concurs with George Bush -- and thus his schizophrenia is on the verge of leading his party to a landslide defeat in the electoral college, and the loss of all branches of government with it. Americans simply have never voted for leaders who insult their allies on the battlefield, claim that their soldiers are losing, and shrug that the war is about lost. And they surely won't this time either."
"So Kerry flip and flops like a fish out of water, suggesting that his heart is with Howard Dean while his mind concurs with George Bush -- and thus his schizophrenia is on the verge of leading his party to a landslide defeat in the electoral college, and the loss of all branches of government with it. Americans simply have never voted for leaders who insult their allies on the battlefield, claim that their soldiers are losing, and shrug that the war is about lost. And they surely won't this time either."
Friday, October 01, 2004
Mark Steyn on Golda's Balcony
From The New Criterion:
"If you can't be a Zionist on Broadway, where can you be? That surely is one lesson to be drawn from Golda's Balcony, which has been playing at the Helen Hayes for almost a year now. That's a remarkable run for a solo show on a serious subject not exactly in tune with prevailing fashion, so I felt I ought to see it before it turned into Cats or The Mousetrap. The play is a new work by William Gibson, one of the old lions of the Anne Frank era: he made his name in the Fifties with Two for the Seesaw and The Miracle Worker. In his later career, he's found himself circling back to earlier hits: The Miracle Worker (1959) was about Helen Keller's young life, Monday after the Miracle (1982) was about her later life. Golda (1977) was a big-budget biodrama starring Anne Bancroft as the Israeli Prime Minister supported by a cast of dozens. Under the constraints of Broadway economics a quarter-century on, Golda's Balcony covers much of the same terrain but as a one-woman monologue for Tovah Feldshuh. Miss Feldshuh, as made up by John Caglione, Jr., with a prosthetic nose and thickened legs to suggest phlebitis, is a persuasive Golda Meir, especially in profile.
"In Gibson's monologue, Golda has, in fact, two balconies--one at her apartment in Tel Aviv overlooking the Mediterranean, the other an observation deck above the Israeli nuclear-weapons facility at Dimona. It's October 1973 and a seventy-five-year-old woman is pondering whether to unleash a nuclear holocaust. The events of Gibson's play are, within the bounds of dramatic license, historically accurate: it was the Yom Kippur War and the Prime Minister faced a tough decision on how far Israel was prepared to go in order to survive. As Gibson tells it, the bombs were loaded and the planes were ready to fly, awaiting the order to take off and nuke Cairo and Damascus. At the last minute, the Nixon Administration provided sufficient assistance to enable Israel to defeat its enemies with conventional weapons.
"Still, it’s riveting material for a dramatist. 'What happens when idealism becomes power?' Golda wonders. 'To save a world you create, how many worlds are you entitled to destroy?' What amazes in such situations is that the Prime Minister or President has only a few hours to make the right call. He or she needs to be able to concentrate, to see through every angle of the question, knowing there’s only one chance to answer it correctly."
"If you can't be a Zionist on Broadway, where can you be? That surely is one lesson to be drawn from Golda's Balcony, which has been playing at the Helen Hayes for almost a year now. That's a remarkable run for a solo show on a serious subject not exactly in tune with prevailing fashion, so I felt I ought to see it before it turned into Cats or The Mousetrap. The play is a new work by William Gibson, one of the old lions of the Anne Frank era: he made his name in the Fifties with Two for the Seesaw and The Miracle Worker. In his later career, he's found himself circling back to earlier hits: The Miracle Worker (1959) was about Helen Keller's young life, Monday after the Miracle (1982) was about her later life. Golda (1977) was a big-budget biodrama starring Anne Bancroft as the Israeli Prime Minister supported by a cast of dozens. Under the constraints of Broadway economics a quarter-century on, Golda's Balcony covers much of the same terrain but as a one-woman monologue for Tovah Feldshuh. Miss Feldshuh, as made up by John Caglione, Jr., with a prosthetic nose and thickened legs to suggest phlebitis, is a persuasive Golda Meir, especially in profile.
"In Gibson's monologue, Golda has, in fact, two balconies--one at her apartment in Tel Aviv overlooking the Mediterranean, the other an observation deck above the Israeli nuclear-weapons facility at Dimona. It's October 1973 and a seventy-five-year-old woman is pondering whether to unleash a nuclear holocaust. The events of Gibson's play are, within the bounds of dramatic license, historically accurate: it was the Yom Kippur War and the Prime Minister faced a tough decision on how far Israel was prepared to go in order to survive. As Gibson tells it, the bombs were loaded and the planes were ready to fly, awaiting the order to take off and nuke Cairo and Damascus. At the last minute, the Nixon Administration provided sufficient assistance to enable Israel to defeat its enemies with conventional weapons.
"Still, it’s riveting material for a dramatist. 'What happens when idealism becomes power?' Golda wonders. 'To save a world you create, how many worlds are you entitled to destroy?' What amazes in such situations is that the Prime Minister or President has only a few hours to make the right call. He or she needs to be able to concentrate, to see through every angle of the question, knowing there’s only one chance to answer it correctly."
John LeBoutillier on the Debate
From Boot's Blasts:
"Overall prediction: the race is now going to tighten a bit. How much? A bit. Kerry has reversed his downward momentum. Whether he can generate upward momentum is the next question. But this race is not over."
"Overall prediction: the race is now going to tighten a bit. How much? A bit. Kerry has reversed his downward momentum. Whether he can generate upward momentum is the next question. But this race is not over."
CNN: No Clear Victor in Debate
From CNN.com:
"Did the debate change many minds? Not according to the poll. After the debate, the same percentage of those interviewed -- 54 -- said Bush would be better on Iraq than Kerry.
The story was almost the same on who would be a better commander in chief -- 55 percent said Bush would be better before the debate, 54 percent said so after the debate. Although Kerry made a better impression on some basic measures and may have been successful at re-introducing himself to voters, the poll showed he might not have changed many minds on Iraq and military matters.
"Because the poll talked just to debate watchers, only subsequent surveys will be able to determine whether Kerry gained any votes. Four years ago, a plurality of debate watchers thought Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic nominee, had done a better job than Bush in the first debate. But when the dust settled Bush was the one who picked up a few points in the horse race. Gallup has asked the question about who did a better job in the debate in five previous elections, and in four of them the candidate who 'won' the first debate did not win the election in November."
"Did the debate change many minds? Not according to the poll. After the debate, the same percentage of those interviewed -- 54 -- said Bush would be better on Iraq than Kerry.
The story was almost the same on who would be a better commander in chief -- 55 percent said Bush would be better before the debate, 54 percent said so after the debate. Although Kerry made a better impression on some basic measures and may have been successful at re-introducing himself to voters, the poll showed he might not have changed many minds on Iraq and military matters.
"Because the poll talked just to debate watchers, only subsequent surveys will be able to determine whether Kerry gained any votes. Four years ago, a plurality of debate watchers thought Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic nominee, had done a better job than Bush in the first debate. But when the dust settled Bush was the one who picked up a few points in the horse race. Gallup has asked the question about who did a better job in the debate in five previous elections, and in four of them the candidate who 'won' the first debate did not win the election in November."
An Australian on the Debate
From The Command Post:
"Kerry won the debate, hands-down. Now that's not to say he's particularly wonderful at debating. He's not, at least, not from this performance. Any of the top 6 teams in the GPS (Greater Public School) Debating competition in Sydney, Australia would have him as, at best, a second reserve. But in terms of a debate, he did all the right things, made all the right moves, moves which are as stylised and formalised as anything in Olympic diving or gymnastics. So many points for eye contact, so many points for gestures at the right time, so many points for inflection and expression. Not a perfect 10, or even a solid 8, but a pedestrian 7.5. Kerry's performance was quite reasonable for a High School or College debate, though even I in my hayday could have made mincemeat of him - as could many people.
"Bush's, on the other hand, wasn't. He didn't behave like he was at a debate at all. He was comparatively inarticulate, halting at times, and confined his argument to only one main point : that whatever qualities he may have had, Kerry had shown himself to be incompetent to be a Commander-in-Chief. I got the impression he wasn't trying to engage in the highly formalised verbal combat that is debate at all - though repetition of a main them can be very effective in the right hands. When Bush did it, by the fourth or fifth time it was starting to grate on my nerves. Still, my impression was that Bush wasn't particularly interested in Kerry, nor Lehrer, nor even the studio audience. He was using this so-called 'debate' as a tool to communicate with the American people, confident in the belief that if they heard what he had to say, and got to know him as a man, a President, and a leader, that he'd garner more votes than with mere bardinage and verbal fencing. Arrogance or merely the courage of his convictions? If that was his aim, I think he succeeded. He came across as honest, plain-dealing, and straightforward. As the old saying goes : “The most important quality in Honesty : if you can fake that, you’ve got it made.” Well, he’s really good at that, because after listening to him, I’m not sure he’s faking."
"Kerry won the debate, hands-down. Now that's not to say he's particularly wonderful at debating. He's not, at least, not from this performance. Any of the top 6 teams in the GPS (Greater Public School) Debating competition in Sydney, Australia would have him as, at best, a second reserve. But in terms of a debate, he did all the right things, made all the right moves, moves which are as stylised and formalised as anything in Olympic diving or gymnastics. So many points for eye contact, so many points for gestures at the right time, so many points for inflection and expression. Not a perfect 10, or even a solid 8, but a pedestrian 7.5. Kerry's performance was quite reasonable for a High School or College debate, though even I in my hayday could have made mincemeat of him - as could many people.
"Bush's, on the other hand, wasn't. He didn't behave like he was at a debate at all. He was comparatively inarticulate, halting at times, and confined his argument to only one main point : that whatever qualities he may have had, Kerry had shown himself to be incompetent to be a Commander-in-Chief. I got the impression he wasn't trying to engage in the highly formalised verbal combat that is debate at all - though repetition of a main them can be very effective in the right hands. When Bush did it, by the fourth or fifth time it was starting to grate on my nerves. Still, my impression was that Bush wasn't particularly interested in Kerry, nor Lehrer, nor even the studio audience. He was using this so-called 'debate' as a tool to communicate with the American people, confident in the belief that if they heard what he had to say, and got to know him as a man, a President, and a leader, that he'd garner more votes than with mere bardinage and verbal fencing. Arrogance or merely the courage of his convictions? If that was his aim, I think he succeeded. He came across as honest, plain-dealing, and straightforward. As the old saying goes : “The most important quality in Honesty : if you can fake that, you’ve got it made.” Well, he’s really good at that, because after listening to him, I’m not sure he’s faking."
Jay Nordlinger on the Debate
From National Review :
"I thought Kerry did very, very well; and I thought Bush did poorly -- much worse than he is capable of doing. Listen: If I were just a normal guy --not Joe Political Junkie-- I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate, I would. If I were just a normal, fairly conservative, war-supporting guy: I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate. And I promise you that no one wants this president reelected more than I. I think that he may want it less. Let me phrase one more time what I wish to say: If I didn't know anything -- were a political naif, being introduced to the two candidates for the first time -- I would vote for Kerry. Based on that infernal debate."
"I thought Kerry did very, very well; and I thought Bush did poorly -- much worse than he is capable of doing. Listen: If I were just a normal guy --not Joe Political Junkie-- I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate, I would. If I were just a normal, fairly conservative, war-supporting guy: I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate. And I promise you that no one wants this president reelected more than I. I think that he may want it less. Let me phrase one more time what I wish to say: If I didn't know anything -- were a political naif, being introduced to the two candidates for the first time -- I would vote for Kerry. Based on that infernal debate."
Guardian: TV Networks Broke Rules to Make Bush Look Bad
From The Guardian :
"Instant-response polls by three major television networks all showed that a large majority of their viewers thought the challenger had won the 90-minute verbal contest at the University of Miami - the first of three debates in the last month of the campaign. Perhaps even more seriously for President Bush, the networks ignored broadcasting guidelines agreed beforehand and showed both candidates at the same time. On several occasions, Mr Bush could be seen sour-faced and nervous in reaction to some of Mr Kerry's remarks. Similar 'cut-away' shots of Al Gore in the first presidential debate four years ago sapped his campaign and helped put Mr Bush into office. After last night's debate, senior Democrats made it clear that they would make maximum use of the pictures of a disgruntled President Bush."
"Instant-response polls by three major television networks all showed that a large majority of their viewers thought the challenger had won the 90-minute verbal contest at the University of Miami - the first of three debates in the last month of the campaign. Perhaps even more seriously for President Bush, the networks ignored broadcasting guidelines agreed beforehand and showed both candidates at the same time. On several occasions, Mr Bush could be seen sour-faced and nervous in reaction to some of Mr Kerry's remarks. Similar 'cut-away' shots of Al Gore in the first presidential debate four years ago sapped his campaign and helped put Mr Bush into office. After last night's debate, senior Democrats made it clear that they would make maximum use of the pictures of a disgruntled President Bush."
Hugh Hewitt on the Debate
From HughHewitt.com:
"From spooked Bush-supporters: 'Most of the MSM talking heads are saying Kerry won on points!' True, and some of them are even Bush supporters. Which is why I watch the debates alone, which leads to a very different conclusion than my days of debate watching in television studios with their pressure of the collective voice pushes you towards 'don't be wrong.' So you overanalyze and over-react. MSM talking points thought that Kerry might pull a Gore, which would have finished him off. He didn't. He executed an excellent retreat to the left side of his party, and secured 45% in the general election. Ho-hum. The same folks that declared his Boston salute a brilliant bit of theater are now saying he's back in the race. Wrong in July, and wrong in September. Why?
"Because as group three notes: 'America will never elect a man who believes in (1)'global tests,' or (2)that we can't be trusted with 'bunker-busters.'' Kerry trotted out vintage nuclear freeze thinking tonight, arguing that the United States' development of a new generation of nukes is a bad thing. No, it is not, because we are a good and responsible country. End of debate, because Kerry's distrust of our weaponry is really a distrust of our national purpose. As the president kept saying, it is about the core of the candidates, and at Bush's core is a certainty about America's purpose in the world and its essential goodness. At Kerry's core, despite many protestations to the contrary, is a deep suspicion of America with its nukes, its weapons, its preemption and its resolve to go it alone if necessary."
"From spooked Bush-supporters: 'Most of the MSM talking heads are saying Kerry won on points!' True, and some of them are even Bush supporters. Which is why I watch the debates alone, which leads to a very different conclusion than my days of debate watching in television studios with their pressure of the collective voice pushes you towards 'don't be wrong.' So you overanalyze and over-react. MSM talking points thought that Kerry might pull a Gore, which would have finished him off. He didn't. He executed an excellent retreat to the left side of his party, and secured 45% in the general election. Ho-hum. The same folks that declared his Boston salute a brilliant bit of theater are now saying he's back in the race. Wrong in July, and wrong in September. Why?
"Because as group three notes: 'America will never elect a man who believes in (1)'global tests,' or (2)that we can't be trusted with 'bunker-busters.'' Kerry trotted out vintage nuclear freeze thinking tonight, arguing that the United States' development of a new generation of nukes is a bad thing. No, it is not, because we are a good and responsible country. End of debate, because Kerry's distrust of our weaponry is really a distrust of our national purpose. As the president kept saying, it is about the core of the candidates, and at Bush's core is a certainty about America's purpose in the world and its essential goodness. At Kerry's core, despite many protestations to the contrary, is a deep suspicion of America with its nukes, its weapons, its preemption and its resolve to go it alone if necessary."
Diplomad on the Debate
From The Diplomad:
"As we see it from the Far Abroad, Kerry was better on his style than he has been, but not too much better on substance; Bush was the reverse, not good on style (e.g., humming, slouching, smirking) but much better on the substance than his opponent and showed a good mastery of both detail and overall policy. Kerry needed a knock-out; he didn't get it. Bush needed a tie, he certainly got that and probably even got a win on points.
UPDATE (3:30 PM; Oct. 01 2004): On reading the transcript of the debate, we picked up a Kerry line we missed while watching on our puny TV set with the crappy reception here. He is opposed to the US having 'bunker buster bombs' and would immediately cancel their development? That joined up with Kerry's remark about a 'global test' in order to defend America, should give the Bush campaign lots of ammo over the next few weeks. Once again, Kerry is opposed to America having modern weapon systems; once again, Kerry wants the rest of the world to have a veto on the US ability to defend itself. We must now revise our initial view of the debate; if the Bush campaign exploits these Kerryisms, then we agree with Hugh Hewitt that the debate could prove a disaster for Kerry."
"As we see it from the Far Abroad, Kerry was better on his style than he has been, but not too much better on substance; Bush was the reverse, not good on style (e.g., humming, slouching, smirking) but much better on the substance than his opponent and showed a good mastery of both detail and overall policy. Kerry needed a knock-out; he didn't get it. Bush needed a tie, he certainly got that and probably even got a win on points.
UPDATE (3:30 PM; Oct. 01 2004): On reading the transcript of the debate, we picked up a Kerry line we missed while watching on our puny TV set with the crappy reception here. He is opposed to the US having 'bunker buster bombs' and would immediately cancel their development? That joined up with Kerry's remark about a 'global test' in order to defend America, should give the Bush campaign lots of ammo over the next few weeks. Once again, Kerry is opposed to America having modern weapon systems; once again, Kerry wants the rest of the world to have a veto on the US ability to defend itself. We must now revise our initial view of the debate; if the Bush campaign exploits these Kerryisms, then we agree with Hugh Hewitt that the debate could prove a disaster for Kerry."
Tim Blair on the Debate
From Tim Blair:
"Are you watching the debate? If you eat enough psychotropic drugs -- at least a kilo or so -- you can almost pretend that John Kerry is winning!
'That's not a grand coalition.' -- Kerry's line on Australia, the US, and Great Britain (he managed to forget Poland, although Bush had reminded him of Poland's participation only seconds earlier). Not a grand coalition? Way to suck, Senator.
UPDATE. A martini-fuelled Stephen Green is covering this minutely. Why the hell does Kerry keep going on about global alliances and passing global tests? It just feeds directly into a Bush response about acting in America's best interests. Because, you know, he's the American president.
UPDATE II. Bush is beginning to pick apart some factual errors in Kerry's claims. Sometimes you get a hint of the temper Bush is noted for in private meetings, but which rarely surfaces publicly.
UPDATE III. We've just moved into the friendly phase of the debate: 'Your daughters are great', 'I respect the First Lady', 'that bridge Teresa lives under is really cool', etc.
UPDATE IV. When Bush refers to Putin as 'Vladimir', does it remind you of the scenes in Dr. Strangelove when Sellers, as the president, is talking to his pal Dmitri?
UPDATE V. Bush's closer was strong. Kerry recycled his convention speech.
UPDATE VI. 'Nice lipstick, Senator!'"
"Are you watching the debate? If you eat enough psychotropic drugs -- at least a kilo or so -- you can almost pretend that John Kerry is winning!
'That's not a grand coalition.' -- Kerry's line on Australia, the US, and Great Britain (he managed to forget Poland, although Bush had reminded him of Poland's participation only seconds earlier). Not a grand coalition? Way to suck, Senator.
UPDATE. A martini-fuelled Stephen Green is covering this minutely. Why the hell does Kerry keep going on about global alliances and passing global tests? It just feeds directly into a Bush response about acting in America's best interests. Because, you know, he's the American president.
UPDATE II. Bush is beginning to pick apart some factual errors in Kerry's claims. Sometimes you get a hint of the temper Bush is noted for in private meetings, but which rarely surfaces publicly.
UPDATE III. We've just moved into the friendly phase of the debate: 'Your daughters are great', 'I respect the First Lady', 'that bridge Teresa lives under is really cool', etc.
UPDATE IV. When Bush refers to Putin as 'Vladimir', does it remind you of the scenes in Dr. Strangelove when Sellers, as the president, is talking to his pal Dmitri?
UPDATE V. Bush's closer was strong. Kerry recycled his convention speech.
UPDATE VI. 'Nice lipstick, Senator!'"
Kerry Wins French Poll
From Reuters.com:
"PARIS (Reuters) - Nearly nine out of ten French people would back John Kerry if they could vote in the U.S. election, according to an opinion poll on Friday which showed deep distrust of President Bush since the Iraq war. The poll, published after Kerry and Bush battled over Iraq in a television debate, came as no surprise in the country which led opposition to the U.S.-led war and whose people were dubbed 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys' by American Republicans. "
"PARIS (Reuters) - Nearly nine out of ten French people would back John Kerry if they could vote in the U.S. election, according to an opinion poll on Friday which showed deep distrust of President Bush since the Iraq war. The poll, published after Kerry and Bush battled over Iraq in a television debate, came as no surprise in the country which led opposition to the U.S.-led war and whose people were dubbed 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys' by American Republicans. "
Jonathan Last on the Debate
From The Weekly Standard:
"I've got this fight scored dead-even: It's a draw, 9 rounds for Kerry to 9 rounds for Bush. Of course there are intangibles to consider. On the whole, Kerry was more relaxed and polished--and certainly calmer. He also managed to sneak in a fifth Vietnam reference during his closing remarks ('I defended this country as a young man in war.') Kerry was a grounded presence and his performance should give Democrats hope. Bush was, as someone once put it, more tart than sweet. At times the president faltered and you could see the wheels spinning as he flipped through his mental Rolodex, looking for the right card. Peevish is the word which kept coming to mind. He was, however, ruthlessly on-message. If Kerry really is being damaged by the sense that he's a flip-flopper who doesn't know his own mind--and the higher-ups on Team Bush insist that this is the key to beating him--then the president did exactly what he wanted to do. But if the central issue of this election is the September 10 party versus the September 12 party, then Bush may have let slip a fair opportunity."
"I've got this fight scored dead-even: It's a draw, 9 rounds for Kerry to 9 rounds for Bush. Of course there are intangibles to consider. On the whole, Kerry was more relaxed and polished--and certainly calmer. He also managed to sneak in a fifth Vietnam reference during his closing remarks ('I defended this country as a young man in war.') Kerry was a grounded presence and his performance should give Democrats hope. Bush was, as someone once put it, more tart than sweet. At times the president faltered and you could see the wheels spinning as he flipped through his mental Rolodex, looking for the right card. Peevish is the word which kept coming to mind. He was, however, ruthlessly on-message. If Kerry really is being damaged by the sense that he's a flip-flopper who doesn't know his own mind--and the higher-ups on Team Bush insist that this is the key to beating him--then the president did exactly what he wanted to do. But if the central issue of this election is the September 10 party versus the September 12 party, then Bush may have let slip a fair opportunity."
Andrew Sullivan on the Debate
Andrew Sullivan says Kerry seemed "bigger"--a Presidential Height Index effect? The quote:
"KERRY'S MANNER: It was, as I hoped, an enlightening debate. No, it didn't include any real logical breakthrough and on the issues, I found myself agreeing more with Bush than Kerry. But from the very beginning, Kerry achieved something important. In tone and bearing, he seemed calm, authoritative, and, yes, presidential. I watched the C-SPAN version on a split screen, and in that context, it was particularly striking. In stark contrast to the Bush-Gore debates, it was Bush who was grimacing, furrowing his brow, almost rolling his eyes and at the very beginning, looking snippy and peevish. He seemed defensive throughout and because his record was front and center - and Kerry's long record in the Senate almost unmentioned - he was actually on the defense. He seemed physically smaller and more mobile than Kerry - and more emotionally alive. Their voices were contrasts too. I can see now for the first time why Kerry has a good reputation as a debater. It wasn't, I think, because he debated well. In fact, he debated poorly. He failed time and again to go in for obvious kills, failed to do what he really should have done, which is skewer Bush's conduct of the war, not his decision to launch it in the first place. But his tone was strong, clear, unwavering. And in some ways, this was critical to undermining Bush's constant assertion that Kerry is weak, vague and inconstant. In fact, Kerry didn't have to prove logically that this was the case (which would be hard to do); he undermined it merely by his tone and manner. For many people, who have only heard of Kerry from Bush ads or sound-bites or from droning campaign speeches, it will be the first time that Kerry seems strong. In the simple, symbolic man-versus-man contrast, Kerry often seemed bigger. That strikes me as a big deal. "
"KERRY'S MANNER: It was, as I hoped, an enlightening debate. No, it didn't include any real logical breakthrough and on the issues, I found myself agreeing more with Bush than Kerry. But from the very beginning, Kerry achieved something important. In tone and bearing, he seemed calm, authoritative, and, yes, presidential. I watched the C-SPAN version on a split screen, and in that context, it was particularly striking. In stark contrast to the Bush-Gore debates, it was Bush who was grimacing, furrowing his brow, almost rolling his eyes and at the very beginning, looking snippy and peevish. He seemed defensive throughout and because his record was front and center - and Kerry's long record in the Senate almost unmentioned - he was actually on the defense. He seemed physically smaller and more mobile than Kerry - and more emotionally alive. Their voices were contrasts too. I can see now for the first time why Kerry has a good reputation as a debater. It wasn't, I think, because he debated well. In fact, he debated poorly. He failed time and again to go in for obvious kills, failed to do what he really should have done, which is skewer Bush's conduct of the war, not his decision to launch it in the first place. But his tone was strong, clear, unwavering. And in some ways, this was critical to undermining Bush's constant assertion that Kerry is weak, vague and inconstant. In fact, Kerry didn't have to prove logically that this was the case (which would be hard to do); he undermined it merely by his tone and manner. For many people, who have only heard of Kerry from Bush ads or sound-bites or from droning campaign speeches, it will be the first time that Kerry seems strong. In the simple, symbolic man-versus-man contrast, Kerry often seemed bigger. That strikes me as a big deal. "
NY Post Cover Shows Height Gap
John Kerry stands 6'4", Bush officially 6' even (does that include his cowboy boots?). According to the Presidential Height Index, in American politics, the taller candidate in a TV debate usually wins the election. Two exceptions prove the rule: Jimmy Carter beat Gerald Ford, but Ford had not been elected in the first place. Nixon was shorter than McGovern, but there was no TV debate. There's more on the height effect in this Fox News story. Will this affect President Bush's chances?
Bush-Kerry Debate A Tie
And that's in Kerry's favor, since he went the distance with the President. Although he didn't score any knockouts, Kerry may end his own slide in public opinion polls...
Thursday, September 30, 2004
What Is Going On In Russia?
From Nezavisimaya Gazeta:
"I have already written, and I'll venture to say it again that the power struggle between Gusinsky's empire and the Kremlin is not a conflict between an authoritarian state and a media group opposed to that regime. Nor, so far, has any evidence of the Kremlin's intentions to curb the freedom of speech, or coral Russia's-already obsequious-mass media, been produced. Up to now, all the evidence has been that this is a conflict between two oligarchic clans-the Kremlin's, which includes many top officials, including elected ones-and thus has at least a shred of legitimacy in the eyes of Russians, and that of Gusinsky-which does not."
"I have already written, and I'll venture to say it again that the power struggle between Gusinsky's empire and the Kremlin is not a conflict between an authoritarian state and a media group opposed to that regime. Nor, so far, has any evidence of the Kremlin's intentions to curb the freedom of speech, or coral Russia's-already obsequious-mass media, been produced. Up to now, all the evidence has been that this is a conflict between two oligarchic clans-the Kremlin's, which includes many top officials, including elected ones-and thus has at least a shred of legitimacy in the eyes of Russians, and that of Gusinsky-which does not."
Have the Palestinians Lost their Intifada?
From Haaretz :
"If, in a political conflict, victory is perception, then in some quarters the war the Palestinians couldn't lose is already over. Some seasoned observers have begun speaking of a Palestinian defeat in the past tense. Remarked Laura King of the Los Angeles Times this week, 'many Palestinians fear that what has been, in effect, their military defeat at the hands of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has left them without leverage to extract political and territorial concessions that would help lay the groundwork for their hoped-for state.' Jackson Diehl of the Washington Post observed in a column this week that it is 'now undeniable that the 'military solution' that so manybelieved could not work has brought Israelis an interlude of relative peace.'"
"If, in a political conflict, victory is perception, then in some quarters the war the Palestinians couldn't lose is already over. Some seasoned observers have begun speaking of a Palestinian defeat in the past tense. Remarked Laura King of the Los Angeles Times this week, 'many Palestinians fear that what has been, in effect, their military defeat at the hands of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has left them without leverage to extract political and territorial concessions that would help lay the groundwork for their hoped-for state.' Jackson Diehl of the Washington Post observed in a column this week that it is 'now undeniable that the 'military solution' that so manybelieved could not work has brought Israelis an interlude of relative peace.'"
Absolutely Majnoon
From Athena's Terrorism Unveiled, a blog written by an American student living in Amman, Jordan [link from WindsofChange.net]:
"Out of the blue, my host mother asks, 'Who do you think was behind 9-11?' And of course I knew she was expecting me to say 'Osama bin Laden,' so instead I responded, 'Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had a lot to do with the operational planning.' She gave me a quizzical look so I gave her the, 'of course he was one of the top people in Al-Qaida under Bin Laden.' To this she told me that was all a lie and that 'the Israelis are behind this, it's all the Israeli Mossad who did this.' "
"Out of the blue, my host mother asks, 'Who do you think was behind 9-11?' And of course I knew she was expecting me to say 'Osama bin Laden,' so instead I responded, 'Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had a lot to do with the operational planning.' She gave me a quizzical look so I gave her the, 'of course he was one of the top people in Al-Qaida under Bin Laden.' To this she told me that was all a lie and that 'the Israelis are behind this, it's all the Israeli Mossad who did this.' "
After Hurricanes, Miami Braces for Presidential Debate
From The Miami Herald:
"The first of three debates, tonight's matchup at the University of Miami opens against the backdrop of hurricane-wracked Florida, where politics has been on hold since mid-August in the largest of the up-for-grabs states. Bush's campaign scrapped two post-debate campaign events in Florida on Friday in deference to hurricane recovery efforts. Karl Rove, his chief strategist, told Florida reporters Wednesday that the campaign is making adjustments to deal with the unknown factors of the hurricanes -- which have left Floridians without electricity, homes, and perhaps, voter registration cards.
'''We're flying sort of blind,' Rove told reporters at a briefing at Bush's Miami hotel. 'Since Aug. 13 we've not been able to get consistent polling.' 'Homes and condos are wrecked, we don't know how long it's going to take people to get home,' he added. For the president, however, the hurricanes have given him opportunity to appear as the comforter in chief, a role he relished Wednesday as he walked through a Lake Wales citrus grove hammered by three of the four hurricanes that tore across the state in six weeks.
"Kerry's campaign, which was all but forced to stop campaigning in the state, says it is undaunted by the storms, planning a two-day, post-debate campaign swing in Florida."
"The first of three debates, tonight's matchup at the University of Miami opens against the backdrop of hurricane-wracked Florida, where politics has been on hold since mid-August in the largest of the up-for-grabs states. Bush's campaign scrapped two post-debate campaign events in Florida on Friday in deference to hurricane recovery efforts. Karl Rove, his chief strategist, told Florida reporters Wednesday that the campaign is making adjustments to deal with the unknown factors of the hurricanes -- which have left Floridians without electricity, homes, and perhaps, voter registration cards.
'''We're flying sort of blind,' Rove told reporters at a briefing at Bush's Miami hotel. 'Since Aug. 13 we've not been able to get consistent polling.' 'Homes and condos are wrecked, we don't know how long it's going to take people to get home,' he added. For the president, however, the hurricanes have given him opportunity to appear as the comforter in chief, a role he relished Wednesday as he walked through a Lake Wales citrus grove hammered by three of the four hurricanes that tore across the state in six weeks.
"Kerry's campaign, which was all but forced to stop campaigning in the state, says it is undaunted by the storms, planning a two-day, post-debate campaign swing in Florida."
Glenn Reynolds on "Southern Strategy"
Instapundit is now writing for The Guardian about the American elections (congratulations Glenn!):
"In my lifetime, only one Democrat who was not from the American south has won the presidency. And the Democrat who did so, John F Kennedy, accomplished this feat when I was two months old. Since then, many have concluded that it's impossible for a Democrat to win the south unless - like Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter - he has southern roots. (Al Gore, who hails from Carthage, Tennessee but who spent much of his childhood in a posh Washington hotel, apparently wasn't southern enough.) But why would that be? It can't be because southerners won't vote for people from outside the south. After all, they happily voted in droves for Ronald Reagan, a Californian transplanted from the midwest. Nor is it likely to be because of 'traditional values', since southerners also voted for Bill Clinton, a Democrat whose commitment to monogamy was famously shaky...
"...So what is it about the south? I think it's defence. Some time between the election of John F Kennedy, and the ignominious defeat of 1972 Democratic nominee George McGovern, the Democrats lost credibility on national defence. From Kennedy's stirring "bear any burden, pay any price" language, to the "peace at any price" slogans of the anti-war left in 1972, the Democrats lost their traditional stature as the internationalist and interventionist war party. Instead, they became identified with the welfare-state liberalism of the north-east and west coast, and with the anti-military sentiments of the anti-Vietnam war movement."
"In my lifetime, only one Democrat who was not from the American south has won the presidency. And the Democrat who did so, John F Kennedy, accomplished this feat when I was two months old. Since then, many have concluded that it's impossible for a Democrat to win the south unless - like Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter - he has southern roots. (Al Gore, who hails from Carthage, Tennessee but who spent much of his childhood in a posh Washington hotel, apparently wasn't southern enough.) But why would that be? It can't be because southerners won't vote for people from outside the south. After all, they happily voted in droves for Ronald Reagan, a Californian transplanted from the midwest. Nor is it likely to be because of 'traditional values', since southerners also voted for Bill Clinton, a Democrat whose commitment to monogamy was famously shaky...
"...So what is it about the south? I think it's defence. Some time between the election of John F Kennedy, and the ignominious defeat of 1972 Democratic nominee George McGovern, the Democrats lost credibility on national defence. From Kennedy's stirring "bear any burden, pay any price" language, to the "peace at any price" slogans of the anti-war left in 1972, the Democrats lost their traditional stature as the internationalist and interventionist war party. Instead, they became identified with the welfare-state liberalism of the north-east and west coast, and with the anti-military sentiments of the anti-Vietnam war movement."
CBS News' Latest Fake Story
From INDC Journal:
"What is beyond question is that CBS failed to achieve common journalistic standards by failing to disclose Ms. Cocco's position and activism, failing to disclose the Selective Service's explicit statement denying the impending possibility of the draft and failing to disclose that the circulated e-mails in the story contained false and misleading information. These omissions - along with the story's questionable timing and dramatic tone - combine to create a blatantly misleading piece."
"What is beyond question is that CBS failed to achieve common journalistic standards by failing to disclose Ms. Cocco's position and activism, failing to disclose the Selective Service's explicit statement denying the impending possibility of the draft and failing to disclose that the circulated e-mails in the story contained false and misleading information. These omissions - along with the story's questionable timing and dramatic tone - combine to create a blatantly misleading piece."
Ann Coulter on Bush's Lead
From AnnCoulter.com:
"Amid a solid stream of bad news, the New York Times reported on its own poll -- showing Kerry 8 points behind Bush -- in an article titled: 'Bush Opens Lead Despite Unease Voiced in Survey.' The Times bases its 'unease' conclusion on some secret documents recently given to them by Bill Burkett. This would seem to go against the 80 percent likeability rating among Bush supporters I cited previously -- but hey, it's good to see Jayson Blair working again. In fact, the only 'unease' expressed by voters in the Times poll seems to center on the possibility that Kerry could be elected president. Sixty percent of respondents to the Times poll said they do not have confidence that Kerry could deal wisely with an international crisis. Only 26 percent of respondents said they had 'a lot' of confidence in Kerry's ability to stop another terrorist attack, compared to 51 percent who have a lot of confidence in Bush's ability to do so. How about that for the next Kerry-Edwards bumper sticker? 'Three-quarters of us don't trust him on terror, but only 60 percent of us think he'd be incompetent in any international crisis.' And yet Times reporters Adam Nagourney and Janet Elder reasoned 'there are signs that the election remains competitive ...' Most of these 'signs' can be found posted on the Bushlied.com website.
"After reading the Times' peculiar interpretation of its poll, I thought it might be fun to see how the Times reported on the polls preceding the largest electoral landslide in U.S. history: Ronald Reagan's 1984 a**-whipping of Walter Mondale. For the moveon.org voters and other ignorant teenagers, in the end, Reagan would win that election 59 percent to 40 percent. But in August 1984, the Times wrote about Reagan's massive lead over Mondale after the Republican Convention in an article titled: 'Convention in Dallas: The Republicans, the Dangers Ahead."
"Among the "dangers" for Reagan astutely noted by the Times was "the very fact that he appears so far ahead of Mr. Mondale." (Of course, the principal "danger" as far as the Times was concerned was that Reagan might win the Cold War and dispatch the left's favorite country.)
"Amid a solid stream of bad news, the New York Times reported on its own poll -- showing Kerry 8 points behind Bush -- in an article titled: 'Bush Opens Lead Despite Unease Voiced in Survey.' The Times bases its 'unease' conclusion on some secret documents recently given to them by Bill Burkett. This would seem to go against the 80 percent likeability rating among Bush supporters I cited previously -- but hey, it's good to see Jayson Blair working again. In fact, the only 'unease' expressed by voters in the Times poll seems to center on the possibility that Kerry could be elected president. Sixty percent of respondents to the Times poll said they do not have confidence that Kerry could deal wisely with an international crisis. Only 26 percent of respondents said they had 'a lot' of confidence in Kerry's ability to stop another terrorist attack, compared to 51 percent who have a lot of confidence in Bush's ability to do so. How about that for the next Kerry-Edwards bumper sticker? 'Three-quarters of us don't trust him on terror, but only 60 percent of us think he'd be incompetent in any international crisis.' And yet Times reporters Adam Nagourney and Janet Elder reasoned 'there are signs that the election remains competitive ...' Most of these 'signs' can be found posted on the Bushlied.com website.
"After reading the Times' peculiar interpretation of its poll, I thought it might be fun to see how the Times reported on the polls preceding the largest electoral landslide in U.S. history: Ronald Reagan's 1984 a**-whipping of Walter Mondale. For the moveon.org voters and other ignorant teenagers, in the end, Reagan would win that election 59 percent to 40 percent. But in August 1984, the Times wrote about Reagan's massive lead over Mondale after the Republican Convention in an article titled: 'Convention in Dallas: The Republicans, the Dangers Ahead."
"Among the "dangers" for Reagan astutely noted by the Times was "the very fact that he appears so far ahead of Mr. Mondale." (Of course, the principal "danger" as far as the Times was concerned was that Reagan might win the Cold War and dispatch the left's favorite country.)
Is Newsweek Championing Extremists?
FromAllahPundit:
"Whenever you see the mainstream media referring to someone as 'Sheikh', you're duty bound to do a search for that person on MEMRI and LGF. I'll show you why. Tonight in Loseweek [ed. note: Newsweek], Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball warn that the U.S. occupation of Iraq is radicalizing moderate Muslims. Moderate Muslims like 'Sheik' Yusuf al-Qaradawi. To be sure, say M&M, Qaradawi isn't a moderate on every issue. For instance, he doesn't have a big problem with blowing up Jews. He's also suspected of having ties to terrorist financing networks. And yes, sure, he happens to be the 'spiritual leader' of Egypt's most prominent fundamentalist group, the Muslim Brotherhood. But that doesn't mean he's not a moderate at heart..."
"Whenever you see the mainstream media referring to someone as 'Sheikh', you're duty bound to do a search for that person on MEMRI and LGF. I'll show you why. Tonight in Loseweek [ed. note: Newsweek], Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball warn that the U.S. occupation of Iraq is radicalizing moderate Muslims. Moderate Muslims like 'Sheik' Yusuf al-Qaradawi. To be sure, say M&M, Qaradawi isn't a moderate on every issue. For instance, he doesn't have a big problem with blowing up Jews. He's also suspected of having ties to terrorist financing networks. And yes, sure, he happens to be the 'spiritual leader' of Egypt's most prominent fundamentalist group, the Muslim Brotherhood. But that doesn't mean he's not a moderate at heart..."
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Victor Davis Hanson on Bush Hatred
From VDH's Private Papers:
"The 2002 winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award, Nicholson Baker, just published Checkpoint. It is an extended dialogue about killing (in a variety of strange ways) George Bush. Jay, the protagonist of the novel, characterizes the potential targeted President as a “drunken oilman. "Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld are portrayed as 'bog creatures' with 'grubs scurrying out of their noses.' Such venom filters down. Sue Niederer, the mother of a soldier recently killed in Iraq, recently scoffed in an interview: 'I think if I had him in front of me I would shoot him in the groined area. Let him suffer. And just continue shooting him there.'"
"The 2002 winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award, Nicholson Baker, just published Checkpoint. It is an extended dialogue about killing (in a variety of strange ways) George Bush. Jay, the protagonist of the novel, characterizes the potential targeted President as a “drunken oilman. "Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld are portrayed as 'bog creatures' with 'grubs scurrying out of their noses.' Such venom filters down. Sue Niederer, the mother of a soldier recently killed in Iraq, recently scoffed in an interview: 'I think if I had him in front of me I would shoot him in the groined area. Let him suffer. And just continue shooting him there.'"
A Hollywood Happy Ending
We saw Vanity Fair at the recently restored Avalon Theatre. When we left a couple of years ago, there were fears that it would be closed down after the Loew's lease expired. But the neighborhood rallied, we signed a petition, and amazingly, developer Douglas Jemal agreed to restore the theatre as an art house. Now it is much fancier than it ever was, at least in the 13 years we've been in the area. Beautiful wood carvings, murals, indirect lighting, an excellent projection and sound system. Better than a home entertainment center! If you are ever in Washington, you can see what a little neighborhood can do to preserve a landmark.
Vanity Fair
Last weekend, we finally saw Mira Nair's version of Vanity Fair. It wasn't bad. A little long, a little trouble telling the story in places, some problems with the actors, but overall, well worth seeing. Nair lays on the "India is England" subtext with a trowel. Lots of saris, peacocks, hot and spicy food. Not quite the Britain we remember from Stanley Kubrick's version of Thackeray's Barry Lyndon. But why not? The opening credit, "London 1812," the clip-clop of horses hooves on the soundtrack, the carriage riding down the cobblestone street, it's all right out of Masterpiece Theatre.
Unlike Bettye Davis' Becky Sharp in Rouben Mamoulian's 1935 version, Reese Witherspoon somehow avoids coming across as a conniving, calculating, immoral climber. Things seem to happen to her almost by accident, perhaps because she is blonde, while Davis was a brunette? Nair's storyline resonates with Gone with the Wind, Becky Sharp like Scarlett O'Hara; Amelia, Melanie. You can tell us who is Rhett Butler and who is Ashley Wilkes, after you've seen it. The battle of Waterloo parallels Sherman's burning of Atlanta.
In real life, according to our handy companion Who Was Really Who In Fiction Thackeray was Dobbin, and Amelia was Jane Brookfield, the wife of his best friend, for whom he burned an unrequited torch. Lord Steyne was Lord Hertford. And there was a real Becky Sharp, too, but her name escapes us, at the moment...She also came to a bad end.
Unlike Bettye Davis' Becky Sharp in Rouben Mamoulian's 1935 version, Reese Witherspoon somehow avoids coming across as a conniving, calculating, immoral climber. Things seem to happen to her almost by accident, perhaps because she is blonde, while Davis was a brunette? Nair's storyline resonates with Gone with the Wind, Becky Sharp like Scarlett O'Hara; Amelia, Melanie. You can tell us who is Rhett Butler and who is Ashley Wilkes, after you've seen it. The battle of Waterloo parallels Sherman's burning of Atlanta.
In real life, according to our handy companion Who Was Really Who In Fiction Thackeray was Dobbin, and Amelia was Jane Brookfield, the wife of his best friend, for whom he burned an unrequited torch. Lord Steyne was Lord Hertford. And there was a real Becky Sharp, too, but her name escapes us, at the moment...She also came to a bad end.
The CIA v. Bush
From The Wall Street Journal:
"Congratulations to Porter Goss for being confirmed last week as the new Director of Central Intelligence. We hope he appreciates that he now has two insurgencies to defeat: the one that the CIA is struggling to help put down in Iraq, and the other inside Langley against the Bush Administration. We wish we were exaggerating. It's become obvious over the past couple of years that large swaths of the CIA oppose U.S. anti-terror policy, especially toward Iraq. But rather than keep this dispute in-house, the dissenters have taken their objections to the public, albeit usually through calculated and anonymous leaks that are always spun to make the agency look good and the Bush Administration look bad. Their latest improvised explosive political device blew up yesterday on the front page of the New York Times, in a story proclaiming that the agency had warned back in January 2003 of a possible insurgency in Iraq. This highly selective leak (more on that below) was conveniently timed for two days before the first Presidential debate."
"Congratulations to Porter Goss for being confirmed last week as the new Director of Central Intelligence. We hope he appreciates that he now has two insurgencies to defeat: the one that the CIA is struggling to help put down in Iraq, and the other inside Langley against the Bush Administration. We wish we were exaggerating. It's become obvious over the past couple of years that large swaths of the CIA oppose U.S. anti-terror policy, especially toward Iraq. But rather than keep this dispute in-house, the dissenters have taken their objections to the public, albeit usually through calculated and anonymous leaks that are always spun to make the agency look good and the Bush Administration look bad. Their latest improvised explosive political device blew up yesterday on the front page of the New York Times, in a story proclaiming that the agency had warned back in January 2003 of a possible insurgency in Iraq. This highly selective leak (more on that below) was conveniently timed for two days before the first Presidential debate."
Bush Bounce Now Solid Lead
From Charlie Cook:
"The irony, of course, is that while the war in Iraq may either re-elect or defeat Bush, Kerry has not handled the topic well. Whoever coined the joke about Kerry's having 57 varieties of answers on Iraq should be earning substantial royalty payments, because it is continually repeated -- and all too true. My hunch is that Kerry cast his vote in support of giving Bush authority to go to war for reasons of political expedience, not principle, and that he has been having a devil of a time defending that position because it is not one he truly believed -- or believes -- in."
"The irony, of course, is that while the war in Iraq may either re-elect or defeat Bush, Kerry has not handled the topic well. Whoever coined the joke about Kerry's having 57 varieties of answers on Iraq should be earning substantial royalty payments, because it is continually repeated -- and all too true. My hunch is that Kerry cast his vote in support of giving Bush authority to go to war for reasons of political expedience, not principle, and that he has been having a devil of a time defending that position because it is not one he truly believed -- or believes -- in."
Artem Tarasov's Russian Expose
From Mosnews.com:
"Artem Tarasov, a Russian entrepreneur, oligarch, and participant of some of the most dubious chapters of Russian history, has done something that in the West would have been done ages ago -- he has aired the dirty laundry of some of Russia's most public figures, including those still in a position of power. His book, The Millionaire, has gone on sale in Russia. Tarasov isn't the first name that springs to mind when you think of Russian billionaires. Many of them gained permanent public attention after being jailed, exiled, or announced wanted, while Tarasov made his escape to England far in advance of the Kremlin's war on the oligarchs. In the late 80s, he was among the first people to take advantage of the door to opportunity, offered by Gorbachev's perestroika, which was just beginning to crack open. In 1989, Tarasov, a card-carrying Communist, handed over 90,000 rubles in party dues. Knowing that the party asked for 3% of member incomes, the math is simple: Tarasov had made at least 3 million rubles that year. Money took Tarasov places -- high and low. He was friends with government officials and bandits alike. A businessman, he specialized in transactions and negotiations and was partially responsible for the coming to power of first Russian President Boris Yeltsin and Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov. Now the stories of how swing voters were lured by free beer and how much less Margaret Thatcher charged per personal visit than Russian PM Victor Chernomyrdin are available in hard cover. MosNews is publishing some of the excerpts from The Millionaire."
"Artem Tarasov, a Russian entrepreneur, oligarch, and participant of some of the most dubious chapters of Russian history, has done something that in the West would have been done ages ago -- he has aired the dirty laundry of some of Russia's most public figures, including those still in a position of power. His book, The Millionaire, has gone on sale in Russia. Tarasov isn't the first name that springs to mind when you think of Russian billionaires. Many of them gained permanent public attention after being jailed, exiled, or announced wanted, while Tarasov made his escape to England far in advance of the Kremlin's war on the oligarchs. In the late 80s, he was among the first people to take advantage of the door to opportunity, offered by Gorbachev's perestroika, which was just beginning to crack open. In 1989, Tarasov, a card-carrying Communist, handed over 90,000 rubles in party dues. Knowing that the party asked for 3% of member incomes, the math is simple: Tarasov had made at least 3 million rubles that year. Money took Tarasov places -- high and low. He was friends with government officials and bandits alike. A businessman, he specialized in transactions and negotiations and was partially responsible for the coming to power of first Russian President Boris Yeltsin and Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov. Now the stories of how swing voters were lured by free beer and how much less Margaret Thatcher charged per personal visit than Russian PM Victor Chernomyrdin are available in hard cover. MosNews is publishing some of the excerpts from The Millionaire."
Chechen Gunmen Killed Russian Forbes Editor
From Mosnews.com:
"Moscow policemen have solved the murder of the chief editor of the Russian edition of the Forbes magazine Paul Klebnikov, the head of the Russian Interior Ministry's Main Directorate for Moscow City, Lieutenant-General Vladimir Pronin told the Interfax news agency on Tuesday. The general said that on Monday night Moscow policemen detained two Chechens who were involved in Klebnikov's killing. Three pistols were seized from the detained suspects, Pronin said. He also added that the same two Chechens had been holding a man hostage some time earlier. The RIA-Novosti news agency quoted a police source close as saying that the detained Chechens had kidnapped two men for ransom. After the kidnappers were detained on Monday night, a pistol was seized from them and the initial ballistic expertise has shown that this is the gun with which Paul Klebnikov was shot, the source said. "
"Moscow policemen have solved the murder of the chief editor of the Russian edition of the Forbes magazine Paul Klebnikov, the head of the Russian Interior Ministry's Main Directorate for Moscow City, Lieutenant-General Vladimir Pronin told the Interfax news agency on Tuesday. The general said that on Monday night Moscow policemen detained two Chechens who were involved in Klebnikov's killing. Three pistols were seized from the detained suspects, Pronin said. He also added that the same two Chechens had been holding a man hostage some time earlier. The RIA-Novosti news agency quoted a police source close as saying that the detained Chechens had kidnapped two men for ransom. After the kidnappers were detained on Monday night, a pistol was seized from them and the initial ballistic expertise has shown that this is the gun with which Paul Klebnikov was shot, the source said. "
Palestinian Captors Free CNN Producer
From Haaretz:
"Palestinian gunmen freed an Israeli Druze producer for CNN television unharmed yesterday, a day after kidnapping him in the Gaza Strip. Riad Ali said his captors told him they were members of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which is linked to Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement. But the Brigades issued a statement saying they had no connection to the abduction and condemning it as an act of chaos that hurt the Palestinian cause."
"Palestinian gunmen freed an Israeli Druze producer for CNN television unharmed yesterday, a day after kidnapping him in the Gaza Strip. Riad Ali said his captors told him they were members of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which is linked to Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement. But the Brigades issued a statement saying they had no connection to the abduction and condemning it as an act of chaos that hurt the Palestinian cause."
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
Cited in Holland!
Very excited to see my article on the Blogosphere has been cited in Weblog: een doe-het-zelf medium— Ordening in de informatiechaos? —Albert Benschop, in Dutch:
"Internet is een informatie- en communicatiemedium met een enorm bereik dat door honderden miljoenen mensen wordt gebruikt. Wie informatie op het internet wil plaatsen moest aanvankelijk eerst speciale hypertekstuele taal leren (de HyperText Markup Language: HTML) om vervolgens zijn producten met een programma voor bestandsoverdracht op een server te plaatsen (het File Transport Protocol: FTP). Later werd het publiceren op internet vergemakkelijkt door de opkomst van speciale webeditors. Sinds de opkomst van de weblog-technologie is publiceren op internet kinderwerk geworden. In weblogs kan iedereen die dat wil een chronologisch verslag doen van zijn persoonlijke besognes of interesses in bepaalde onderwerpen. Een weblog is een laagdrempelige publicatievorm met een maximaal bereik. En het is gratis. Geen wonder dat miljoenen mensen inmiddels via een weblog hun eigen plekje op het internet hebben ingericht.
"Wat is een weblog? Hoe gaan webloggers te werk? Wat voor soorten weblogs bestaan er? Welke functies kunnen weblogs vervullen? Waarom zijn weblogs zo populair geworden? En wat dragen weblogs bij aan de informatie- en communicatievoorziening via het internet?"
"Internet is een informatie- en communicatiemedium met een enorm bereik dat door honderden miljoenen mensen wordt gebruikt. Wie informatie op het internet wil plaatsen moest aanvankelijk eerst speciale hypertekstuele taal leren (de HyperText Markup Language: HTML) om vervolgens zijn producten met een programma voor bestandsoverdracht op een server te plaatsen (het File Transport Protocol: FTP). Later werd het publiceren op internet vergemakkelijkt door de opkomst van speciale webeditors. Sinds de opkomst van de weblog-technologie is publiceren op internet kinderwerk geworden. In weblogs kan iedereen die dat wil een chronologisch verslag doen van zijn persoonlijke besognes of interesses in bepaalde onderwerpen. Een weblog is een laagdrempelige publicatievorm met een maximaal bereik. En het is gratis. Geen wonder dat miljoenen mensen inmiddels via een weblog hun eigen plekje op het internet hebben ingericht.
"Wat is een weblog? Hoe gaan webloggers te werk? Wat voor soorten weblogs bestaan er? Welke functies kunnen weblogs vervullen? Waarom zijn weblogs zo populair geworden? En wat dragen weblogs bij aan de informatie- en communicatievoorziening via het internet?"
Uzbekistan's Persian Literary Heritage
The Teheran Times announces a new book on the impact of Persian writers Hafez and Sa'di on Alisher Navoi, the Pushkin of Uzbekistan:
"'The national poet of Uzbekistan, Ali Shir Nava'i, showed his great respect for Sa'di in his Persian language divan,' continues the introduction. The book 'Impression of Hafez on Uzbek Literature' consists of articles about Hafez and poems of Hafez translated into the Uzbek language. The book was written by Dr. Mahmud Azimov. In the introduction he wrote, 'The impression of Hafez's poetry on Uzbek literature is quite outstanding and there was a time in the past when the Divan of Hafez was taught at schools of Uzbekistan and the old poets used to compose poetry in the style of Hafez in olden times.'"
"'The national poet of Uzbekistan, Ali Shir Nava'i, showed his great respect for Sa'di in his Persian language divan,' continues the introduction. The book 'Impression of Hafez on Uzbek Literature' consists of articles about Hafez and poems of Hafez translated into the Uzbek language. The book was written by Dr. Mahmud Azimov. In the introduction he wrote, 'The impression of Hafez's poetry on Uzbek literature is quite outstanding and there was a time in the past when the Divan of Hafez was taught at schools of Uzbekistan and the old poets used to compose poetry in the style of Hafez in olden times.'"
Is CBS Tampering with Evidence of a Crime?
Scylla & Charybdis thinks so [link from littlegreenfootballs.com]:
"You want preponderance, Dan? OK.
"I’ll start here a checklist of CBS Legal Department Evidence Tampering, which I will update from time to time.
"I am defining evidence tampering in two ways: 1) the alteration of a thing with intent to change the thing in a manner material to a foreseeable investigation, or 2) tampering with the likely testimony of someone who is fairly identifiable as a material witness in a foreseeable criminal or official investigation..."
"You want preponderance, Dan? OK.
"I’ll start here a checklist of CBS Legal Department Evidence Tampering, which I will update from time to time.
"I am defining evidence tampering in two ways: 1) the alteration of a thing with intent to change the thing in a manner material to a foreseeable investigation, or 2) tampering with the likely testimony of someone who is fairly identifiable as a material witness in a foreseeable criminal or official investigation..."
The Texas crimes:
Texas Penal Code 32.21 – Forgery
Penal 36.05 – Tampering with Witness
Penal 37.09 – Tampering with or Fabricating Physical Evidence
The Federal crimes:
18 USC Sec. 1341. - Frauds and swindles
18 USC Sec. 1342. -Fictitious name or address
18 USC Sec. 1349. - Attempt and conspiracy
18 USC Sec. 1343. - Fraud by wire, radio, or television
47 USC Sec. 508 – [Payola] Disclosure of payments connected with broadcasts
18 USC Sec. 1512. - Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
Israel Working to Free Kidnapped CNN Reporter
From Haaretz:
"Palestinian Authority security officials Tuesday told the Israel Defense Forces officers in the Gaza Strip that they are holding talks with the group behind the abduction of an Israeli citizen working for CNN, and expressed hope that he will be released within a matter of hours.
"Riad Ali, an Israeli Druze employed by the American news network as a producer and translator, was taken at gunpoint from his car in Gaza City on Monday night.
"The Palestinian security officials also said that the Palestinian Authority has information on Ali's whereabouts. They added that Ali has not been hurt in any way and that the abduction did not a have nationalist motive. They said, however, that the abductors are in touch with Hamas activists. Israeli and Palestinian security officials believe that he is being held by either Hamas or Islamic Jihad. "
"Palestinian Authority security officials Tuesday told the Israel Defense Forces officers in the Gaza Strip that they are holding talks with the group behind the abduction of an Israeli citizen working for CNN, and expressed hope that he will be released within a matter of hours.
"Riad Ali, an Israeli Druze employed by the American news network as a producer and translator, was taken at gunpoint from his car in Gaza City on Monday night.
"The Palestinian security officials also said that the Palestinian Authority has information on Ali's whereabouts. They added that Ali has not been hurt in any way and that the abduction did not a have nationalist motive. They said, however, that the abductors are in touch with Hamas activists. Israeli and Palestinian security officials believe that he is being held by either Hamas or Islamic Jihad. "
Iraq Slide Shows
Just found this website featuring photographs from military combat photographers in Iraq,CombatCamera
World War II Weekend at the Eisenhower Farm
While in Gettysburg, we chanced upon this World War II Weekend at Eisenhower Farm.
The former President's pastures, located right by the scene of battle in the Gettysburg cyclorama, had been transformed into a WWII base camp for both Allies and Germans. There were middle-aged "re-enactors" playing everyone from medics to MPs. Lots of old jeeps, tents, medical equipment, too.
Mud was everywhere from a torrential downpour the night before (a remnant of the Florida hurricanes). The British had the only tent which didn't blow down--it was round. No tanks, but lots of guns, guts, and glory. The Germans seemed to have snazzier and scarier uniforms plus fancier weapons. There was even an old ex-Nazi giving a speech on behalf of world peace inside the barn. It made us very happy that the Allies had won, and just seeing the equipment revealed how close the outcome really was. The German "Panzer-Fast" was really scary, a huge anti-tank explosive carried on an infantryman's shoulder. Our American bazookas looked like BB-guns by contrast.
This event takes place every year, and judging from the reaction of the young man who accompanied us, it is great fun for children who like to play with toy soldiers--and videogames.
The former President's pastures, located right by the scene of battle in the Gettysburg cyclorama, had been transformed into a WWII base camp for both Allies and Germans. There were middle-aged "re-enactors" playing everyone from medics to MPs. Lots of old jeeps, tents, medical equipment, too.
Mud was everywhere from a torrential downpour the night before (a remnant of the Florida hurricanes). The British had the only tent which didn't blow down--it was round. No tanks, but lots of guns, guts, and glory. The Germans seemed to have snazzier and scarier uniforms plus fancier weapons. There was even an old ex-Nazi giving a speech on behalf of world peace inside the barn. It made us very happy that the Allies had won, and just seeing the equipment revealed how close the outcome really was. The German "Panzer-Fast" was really scary, a huge anti-tank explosive carried on an infantryman's shoulder. Our American bazookas looked like BB-guns by contrast.
This event takes place every year, and judging from the reaction of the young man who accompanied us, it is great fun for children who like to play with toy soldiers--and videogames.
The Gettysburg Cyclorama
A week or so ago, I went with my college roommate and his son to visit the site of the Gettysburg address. Among the impressive monuments and battlefields, we had a chance to see The Gettysburg Cyclorama in its 1963 building--a monument to the 1960s that looked like it landed from The Jetsons, which opened on the 100th anniversary of the battle. Unfortunately, this World's Fair-style pavillion is slated for demolition in the near future, which is a shame, because it had a real nostalgia-value for at least a couple of middle-aged visitors.
Although a portion of the painting had been removed "for conservation", the display was still impressive, with a 1960s-style sound and light show, the cyclorama illuminated in the darkness, almost like a 70-mm IMAX movie from the 19th Century.
The painting depicts "Pickett's charge" of July 3rd, 1863. It was painted by Paul Philippoteaux, who visited battlefield almost 20 years later. The cyclorama, in the best Beaux Arts style, features some very French-looking haystacks, and a small portrait of the artist by a tree observing the battle. It is definitely worth a detour, as the Guide Michelin might say.
Although a portion of the painting had been removed "for conservation", the display was still impressive, with a 1960s-style sound and light show, the cyclorama illuminated in the darkness, almost like a 70-mm IMAX movie from the 19th Century.
The painting depicts "Pickett's charge" of July 3rd, 1863. It was painted by Paul Philippoteaux, who visited battlefield almost 20 years later. The cyclorama, in the best Beaux Arts style, features some very French-looking haystacks, and a small portrait of the artist by a tree observing the battle. It is definitely worth a detour, as the Guide Michelin might say.
The Most Famous Writer You've Never Heard Of...
Also from The Washington Post, this profile of Paulo Coehlo:
"MONTPELLIER, France -- 'I'm a very famous author all over the world, totally unknown in America,' says Paulo Coelho. True. He's one of the most successful writers on the planet, yet virtually unrecognized in the United States. According to the industry newsletter Publishing Trends, Coelho's latest novel, Eleven Minutes, appeared at the top of more best-selling fiction lists around the world last year than any other novel, including the Harry Potter volumes and John Grisham's King of Torts.
"In the United States it's another story. Published in the spring by HarperCollins, 'Eleven Minutes' has not landed on the top-selling fiction lists of either The Washington Post or the New York Times."
Interestingly, when I lived in Uzbekistan, Coehlo's The Alchemist seemed to be everyone's favorite novel. It had been translated into Uzbek by a literary journal, and was taken very seriously.
"MONTPELLIER, France -- 'I'm a very famous author all over the world, totally unknown in America,' says Paulo Coelho. True. He's one of the most successful writers on the planet, yet virtually unrecognized in the United States. According to the industry newsletter Publishing Trends, Coelho's latest novel, Eleven Minutes, appeared at the top of more best-selling fiction lists around the world last year than any other novel, including the Harry Potter volumes and John Grisham's King of Torts.
"In the United States it's another story. Published in the spring by HarperCollins, 'Eleven Minutes' has not landed on the top-selling fiction lists of either The Washington Post or the New York Times."
Interestingly, when I lived in Uzbekistan, Coehlo's The Alchemist seemed to be everyone's favorite novel. It had been translated into Uzbek by a literary journal, and was taken very seriously.
How Washington Works
A fascinating profile of Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff in The Washington Post:
"The foundation's brief history -- now the subject of a federal investigation -- charts how Abramoff attached himself to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and, in so doing, became a magnet for large sums of money from business interests. It also demonstrates how easily large amounts of such cash flowed through a nonprofit advocacy group to support the interests of a director. "
"The foundation's brief history -- now the subject of a federal investigation -- charts how Abramoff attached himself to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and, in so doing, became a magnet for large sums of money from business interests. It also demonstrates how easily large amounts of such cash flowed through a nonprofit advocacy group to support the interests of a director. "
Monday, September 27, 2004
Dan Rather on Dan Rather
From the Media Research Center [link from Little Green Footballs]:
"A serious journalist can't run with a story without confirmation. Two sources at the absolute minimum....This is how your narrator made it through Watergate. If I'd gone off half-cocked, if I'd gotten my facts scrambled, if I'd run with unconfirmed leads, I'd be selling insurance right now.-- Dan Rather in his 1994 memoir, The Camera Never Blinks Twice, page 97."
"A serious journalist can't run with a story without confirmation. Two sources at the absolute minimum....This is how your narrator made it through Watergate. If I'd gone off half-cocked, if I'd gotten my facts scrambled, if I'd run with unconfirmed leads, I'd be selling insurance right now.-- Dan Rather in his 1994 memoir, The Camera Never Blinks Twice, page 97."
Sunday, September 26, 2004
Will White House Debates Fumble Help CBS?
From INDC Journal: A Very Brief Interview with Bob Schieffer:
"INDC: 'Has this scandal affected you personally, with your impending moderation of one of the (Presidential) debates?'
SCHIEFFER: 'Well, there's been some e-mail that says that I should excuse myself, uh, but both the White House and the Kerry campaign have said that they think that I can do a fair and honest job. [emphasisis added] So as long as it's ok with them, I think it's ok.'"
"INDC: 'Has this scandal affected you personally, with your impending moderation of one of the (Presidential) debates?'
SCHIEFFER: 'Well, there's been some e-mail that says that I should excuse myself, uh, but both the White House and the Kerry campaign have said that they think that I can do a fair and honest job. [emphasisis added] So as long as it's ok with them, I think it's ok.'"
The Diplomad v. Europe (continued)
From The Diplomad:
"We drew fire from those who took offense from our claim that educated Americans -- such as we humble Diplomads -- know more about Europe, than educated Europeans -- notably Euro diplomats -- know about the USA. We don't know why some got upset about that. It happens to be true. Various emailers challenged us to recite all the kings of Lower Saxony or some such thing to prove we know European history. That's a very European approach to history: dry recitation of relatively insignificant facts that can be looked up in a reference book (or now on the internet) without any context or analysis of why a particular fact is important to the way the world is today. You would think that the USA being the world's most important country, the richest and most powerful country that has ever existed, would be an object of serious study, at least by the European foreign policy elite. Not so. They seem to get what knowledge they have (and it's not much) from BBC, CNN, Hollywood, and the shoddy and demented news media organizations that dominate the EU. America, 'the land of McDonalds' as one email charmingly put it, has more bookstores, libraries, museums, theaters, orchestras, music and art schools, and high quality technical and educational institutions (private and public) than any other country in the world, including any European country. The New York City public school system probably has produced more Nobel prize-winners than any other educational institution in the world.
Let us also not forget that the USA is actually older as a nation than many European countries (Germany and Italy, to name just two.) We are also the world's oldest democracy. You would think that Europeans would be dying to read up on the American Revolution and the principles that founded such a successful Republic. But, no. They blather on about the French Revolution, a ludicrous and horrific event that produced empty slogans, mass murder, chaos, dictatorship, years of warfare, defeats galore for France, the installation of one of the world's most absurd monarchies, and decades upon decades of political instability."
"We drew fire from those who took offense from our claim that educated Americans -- such as we humble Diplomads -- know more about Europe, than educated Europeans -- notably Euro diplomats -- know about the USA. We don't know why some got upset about that. It happens to be true. Various emailers challenged us to recite all the kings of Lower Saxony or some such thing to prove we know European history. That's a very European approach to history: dry recitation of relatively insignificant facts that can be looked up in a reference book (or now on the internet) without any context or analysis of why a particular fact is important to the way the world is today. You would think that the USA being the world's most important country, the richest and most powerful country that has ever existed, would be an object of serious study, at least by the European foreign policy elite. Not so. They seem to get what knowledge they have (and it's not much) from BBC, CNN, Hollywood, and the shoddy and demented news media organizations that dominate the EU. America, 'the land of McDonalds' as one email charmingly put it, has more bookstores, libraries, museums, theaters, orchestras, music and art schools, and high quality technical and educational institutions (private and public) than any other country in the world, including any European country. The New York City public school system probably has produced more Nobel prize-winners than any other educational institution in the world.
Let us also not forget that the USA is actually older as a nation than many European countries (Germany and Italy, to name just two.) We are also the world's oldest democracy. You would think that Europeans would be dying to read up on the American Revolution and the principles that founded such a successful Republic. But, no. They blather on about the French Revolution, a ludicrous and horrific event that produced empty slogans, mass murder, chaos, dictatorship, years of warfare, defeats galore for France, the installation of one of the world's most absurd monarchies, and decades upon decades of political instability."
Chris Hitchens on Dan Rather
From INDC Journal:
"But for journalism and its standards do matter, not just to me. I don't think of myself now as in the same profession of Dan Rather. And Dan Rather showed himself, it seems to me, to be--not for the first time actually--a very poor specimen of a showbiz type. He's not in journalism at all anymore. It's an absolute scandal that this stuff ever got on the air.
And it's wrong for us to call it forgery, even. A forgery is an attempt to fake something that's worth having. If I could get my printer to give me a $100 bill and I handed it to you and you took it, the handshake between us would be of that kind. But if I printed a $99 bill and handed it to you, you would be a fool and I would be a crook twice. This is not a forgery. This is fabrication.
And we help Rather out, it seems to me, every time we say forgery. Forgery is the cover story now. That's what they're back to. They're saying, well, it's essentially true. All the documents are fake, but the story is true. This is unpardonable.
...
I don't think it could fall any lower than this, in other words. And whether there is collusion with the DNC or not, I don't know. But there really had better not be, because I can't think'having said it couldn't go any lower, that's as low as it could then go. "
"But for journalism and its standards do matter, not just to me. I don't think of myself now as in the same profession of Dan Rather. And Dan Rather showed himself, it seems to me, to be--not for the first time actually--a very poor specimen of a showbiz type. He's not in journalism at all anymore. It's an absolute scandal that this stuff ever got on the air.
And it's wrong for us to call it forgery, even. A forgery is an attempt to fake something that's worth having. If I could get my printer to give me a $100 bill and I handed it to you and you took it, the handshake between us would be of that kind. But if I printed a $99 bill and handed it to you, you would be a fool and I would be a crook twice. This is not a forgery. This is fabrication.
And we help Rather out, it seems to me, every time we say forgery. Forgery is the cover story now. That's what they're back to. They're saying, well, it's essentially true. All the documents are fake, but the story is true. This is unpardonable.
...
I don't think it could fall any lower than this, in other words. And whether there is collusion with the DNC or not, I don't know. But there really had better not be, because I can't think'having said it couldn't go any lower, that's as low as it could then go. "
Charles Johnson on The New York Times
From Little Green Footballs :
"Matthew Klam, with whom I spoke on the phone for 43 minutes of my life that I'll never get back, writes a story for the New York Times Magazine about political blogs. And in a 10-page article, covers only the left wing blogs, including the worst, most virulent centers of lunacy. In glowing terms. Featuring a photo of Markos Zuniga, the owner of Daily Kos.
"There is not one word about the anti-idiotarian blogosphere. No LGF. No Roger L. Simon. No Michael Totten. No Allah. No Belmont Club. No Power Line. No INDC Journal. No Command Post. No Michele. No Cox & Forkum. No Rantburg.
"Nobody but Atrios, Josh Marshall, Daily Kos, Wonkette, and the other New York Times-approved left-wing drones. Not one word. Ten pages.
"The New York Times, with help from Matthew Klam, is trying to make us all disappear.
"I don't trust myself to write what I really feel about Klam's outrageously slanted piece. Read it for yourself: Fear and Laptops on the Campaign Trail. The mainstream media's shameful, arrogant bias, up there for all to see.
"UPDATE at 9/25/04 8:00:33 pm:
Matthew Klam will be on C-Span's Washington Journal tomorrow, talking about his article and taking calls."
"Matthew Klam, with whom I spoke on the phone for 43 minutes of my life that I'll never get back, writes a story for the New York Times Magazine about political blogs. And in a 10-page article, covers only the left wing blogs, including the worst, most virulent centers of lunacy. In glowing terms. Featuring a photo of Markos Zuniga, the owner of Daily Kos.
"There is not one word about the anti-idiotarian blogosphere. No LGF. No Roger L. Simon. No Michael Totten. No Allah. No Belmont Club. No Power Line. No INDC Journal. No Command Post. No Michele. No Cox & Forkum. No Rantburg.
"Nobody but Atrios, Josh Marshall, Daily Kos, Wonkette, and the other New York Times-approved left-wing drones. Not one word. Ten pages.
"The New York Times, with help from Matthew Klam, is trying to make us all disappear.
"I don't trust myself to write what I really feel about Klam's outrageously slanted piece. Read it for yourself: Fear and Laptops on the Campaign Trail. The mainstream media's shameful, arrogant bias, up there for all to see.
"UPDATE at 9/25/04 8:00:33 pm:
Matthew Klam will be on C-Span's Washington Journal tomorrow, talking about his article and taking calls."
Saturday, September 25, 2004
Agustin Blazquez and the 'Bad Word' by Belkis Cuza Male
(Published by El Nuevo Herald, Friday, Sept. 24, 2004)
When I saw him at the door of my house I thought he was a resurrection of Fujita, because he was the living likeness of the Japanese painter living in Paris in the 1920s. His hair was evenly falling over his forehead making his eyes look oriental--everything about him reminded me of the painter. Well, these are the first impressions that later on vanish, deconstructing that person the next time our eyes focus on them.
In the case of Agustin Blazquez it is easy to realize that he was not Fujita, but a different being, emanating from himself, who knows if he is a relative of the famous Spaniard writer, nonagenarian Blasco Ibañez, but I could more accurately present him as a tenor, because that very special voice of his presides as a visiting card.
I am not far off; Agustin Blazquez was an actor and a singer in Cuba, he mentioned to me, and many years ago worked in theatrical companies in Havana. For sure, everybody knows him now for what he is, a film director with three fantastic documentaries, the most recent, Covering Cuba 3, about the case of the boy Elian Gonzalez, which was a success at the American Film Renaissance Film Festival in Dallas, Texas.
Agustin traveled from the Washington, DC area to participate with his film as a guest of the festival and while in Texas, on Sunday, September 12 he came to La Casa Azul in Fort Worth and presented Covering Cuba 3: Elian. He was accompanied by Jaums Sutton, his assistant and interviewer in his various films and co-editor of his articles and books.
The impression you receive when you see Covering Cuba 3: Elian is totally new and surprising, although the Elian theme by itself is too well known and could result in a hard to do piece when you want to create art. But Agustin has done it. He achieved the emotion and made us shed tears with his true-cinema and his denunciations.
But it is here, in this word – denunciation – where I want to pause and call your attention. Because I want you to understand that it seems there are “denunciations” and “denunciations.”
When Communists use propaganda to denounce something, immediately there are receptive ears, there are mouths multiplying, cameras that work, newspapers giving all types of coverage and front page exposure. But when someone that is categorized a “conservative” makes a denunciation about a situation, makes art with this denunciation, the result is an immense void, a profound silence, an unhealthy indifference.
If you could talk with Agustin Blazquez, he could tell you better than myself of the frustrations of his experiences. First as a painter and sculptor - for years he tried to make it as such – and later his uncountable efforts to show his films in this country. To date all would have been negatives. For example, recently the American Film Institute (AFI) and a film festival associated with the AFI in Maryland as well as the Maryland State Arts Council rejected Covering Cuba 3: Elian. It did not fit the political taste of the sponsors.
So when he was invited by the Dallas film festival, which intended to show the other side of the coin, the filmmaker and painter (former actor and singer) packed his bags and drove all the way to far away Texas, where his presence and his art were being requested. Indeed Covering Cuba 3 received all the deserving applause.
However, these days have been a non-stop roller coaster of emotions for Agustin Blazquez, who – thanks to the rudeness in Maryland – received a reaction from some in the media. A wonderful editorial in the Wall Street Journal about him and his work set him in orbit followed by a live interview at the Fox News Channel. And while in Dallas, the local CBS did the same in relation to his Elian film.
But for example, when we sent a press release to the Star Telegram in Fort Worth announcing Covering Cuba 3 and his presence at La Casa Azul (Heberto Padilla Cultural Center), what we got was a four-line ad among the ethnic activities on the calendar celebrating Hispanic Month. That in spite of the photos of the film and the director they requested which were promptly sent.
Everybody knows that conservative is a “bad word” and the Dallas film festival seemed to be such, so the newspapers appear to use that classification to treat as junk all of the participants. So, that’s why Agustin Blazquez and La Casa Azul didn’t deserve anything better from the Star Telegram nor La Estrella, their Spanish counterpart (that totally ignored the press release).
Could it be in fashion someday--the word “conservative”? A friend asked me, What’s wrong with being a conservative? I mean, to believe in God, in the family, in some moral values, to believe that abortion is a crime and of course don’t play with the Communists?
There are dictatorships of the right and the left? Of course, but the first type you can almost always can get rid of, but the Communist ones, as we say in Cuba, fall only by “holding the tin cup to the fire til the bottom melts.”
The real “conservative” is the one that of course is loyal to the traditional values of justice and rejects outright any dictatorship.
Truly, for me, the word conservative equally defines anyone from the right or the left who grasps at his ideas (sometimes with the extreme stubbornness of the liberals and the anti-imperialists). The ultraconservatives and fundamentalists are Fidel Castro himself and his Latin American associates, as well as all these characters of the horrible left and that Hollywood “star” fauna giving their stupid opinions and those that don’t want to see any other documentaries than the one of the pathetic Michael Moore.
Agustin Blazquez is a complete artist, a renaissance man, a character that breaks the parameters of the definitions, so it’s better that we don’t classify him but in the place where he belongs, in the landscape of the great creators and Covering Cuba 3 is a good sample of what I mean. If you haven’t seen it, run and do it and tell me about it.
I am sure you are going to agree with Bill, a humble American and a neighbor of La Casa Azul, who thinks that all the youngsters in this country must see Agustin Blazquez’s film.
(The film is available on DVD at http://www.cubacollectibles.com)
When I saw him at the door of my house I thought he was a resurrection of Fujita, because he was the living likeness of the Japanese painter living in Paris in the 1920s. His hair was evenly falling over his forehead making his eyes look oriental--everything about him reminded me of the painter. Well, these are the first impressions that later on vanish, deconstructing that person the next time our eyes focus on them.
In the case of Agustin Blazquez it is easy to realize that he was not Fujita, but a different being, emanating from himself, who knows if he is a relative of the famous Spaniard writer, nonagenarian Blasco Ibañez, but I could more accurately present him as a tenor, because that very special voice of his presides as a visiting card.
I am not far off; Agustin Blazquez was an actor and a singer in Cuba, he mentioned to me, and many years ago worked in theatrical companies in Havana. For sure, everybody knows him now for what he is, a film director with three fantastic documentaries, the most recent, Covering Cuba 3, about the case of the boy Elian Gonzalez, which was a success at the American Film Renaissance Film Festival in Dallas, Texas.
Agustin traveled from the Washington, DC area to participate with his film as a guest of the festival and while in Texas, on Sunday, September 12 he came to La Casa Azul in Fort Worth and presented Covering Cuba 3: Elian. He was accompanied by Jaums Sutton, his assistant and interviewer in his various films and co-editor of his articles and books.
The impression you receive when you see Covering Cuba 3: Elian is totally new and surprising, although the Elian theme by itself is too well known and could result in a hard to do piece when you want to create art. But Agustin has done it. He achieved the emotion and made us shed tears with his true-cinema and his denunciations.
But it is here, in this word – denunciation – where I want to pause and call your attention. Because I want you to understand that it seems there are “denunciations” and “denunciations.”
When Communists use propaganda to denounce something, immediately there are receptive ears, there are mouths multiplying, cameras that work, newspapers giving all types of coverage and front page exposure. But when someone that is categorized a “conservative” makes a denunciation about a situation, makes art with this denunciation, the result is an immense void, a profound silence, an unhealthy indifference.
If you could talk with Agustin Blazquez, he could tell you better than myself of the frustrations of his experiences. First as a painter and sculptor - for years he tried to make it as such – and later his uncountable efforts to show his films in this country. To date all would have been negatives. For example, recently the American Film Institute (AFI) and a film festival associated with the AFI in Maryland as well as the Maryland State Arts Council rejected Covering Cuba 3: Elian. It did not fit the political taste of the sponsors.
So when he was invited by the Dallas film festival, which intended to show the other side of the coin, the filmmaker and painter (former actor and singer) packed his bags and drove all the way to far away Texas, where his presence and his art were being requested. Indeed Covering Cuba 3 received all the deserving applause.
However, these days have been a non-stop roller coaster of emotions for Agustin Blazquez, who – thanks to the rudeness in Maryland – received a reaction from some in the media. A wonderful editorial in the Wall Street Journal about him and his work set him in orbit followed by a live interview at the Fox News Channel. And while in Dallas, the local CBS did the same in relation to his Elian film.
But for example, when we sent a press release to the Star Telegram in Fort Worth announcing Covering Cuba 3 and his presence at La Casa Azul (Heberto Padilla Cultural Center), what we got was a four-line ad among the ethnic activities on the calendar celebrating Hispanic Month. That in spite of the photos of the film and the director they requested which were promptly sent.
Everybody knows that conservative is a “bad word” and the Dallas film festival seemed to be such, so the newspapers appear to use that classification to treat as junk all of the participants. So, that’s why Agustin Blazquez and La Casa Azul didn’t deserve anything better from the Star Telegram nor La Estrella, their Spanish counterpart (that totally ignored the press release).
Could it be in fashion someday--the word “conservative”? A friend asked me, What’s wrong with being a conservative? I mean, to believe in God, in the family, in some moral values, to believe that abortion is a crime and of course don’t play with the Communists?
There are dictatorships of the right and the left? Of course, but the first type you can almost always can get rid of, but the Communist ones, as we say in Cuba, fall only by “holding the tin cup to the fire til the bottom melts.”
The real “conservative” is the one that of course is loyal to the traditional values of justice and rejects outright any dictatorship.
Truly, for me, the word conservative equally defines anyone from the right or the left who grasps at his ideas (sometimes with the extreme stubbornness of the liberals and the anti-imperialists). The ultraconservatives and fundamentalists are Fidel Castro himself and his Latin American associates, as well as all these characters of the horrible left and that Hollywood “star” fauna giving their stupid opinions and those that don’t want to see any other documentaries than the one of the pathetic Michael Moore.
Agustin Blazquez is a complete artist, a renaissance man, a character that breaks the parameters of the definitions, so it’s better that we don’t classify him but in the place where he belongs, in the landscape of the great creators and Covering Cuba 3 is a good sample of what I mean. If you haven’t seen it, run and do it and tell me about it.
I am sure you are going to agree with Bill, a humble American and a neighbor of La Casa Azul, who thinks that all the youngsters in this country must see Agustin Blazquez’s film.
(The film is available on DVD at http://www.cubacollectibles.com)
Dan Rather, the Blogosphere, and Me...
All this fuss about the role of blogs in the Dan Rather Forgery Scandal reminded me of an article about blogs from couple of years ago, which discussed the significance of the Blogosphere:
"It was rewarding to google 'bloggers accounts of The Idler's June 28th panel at the National Press Club: 'Inside the Blogosphere: The Weblog Phenomenon.' While it was naturally disappointing that Glenn Reynolds and James Lileks cancelled due to thunderstorms, airlines, and scratched flights, it was gratifying that they wrote about their experience in their blogs, because that is the Blogosphere in action -- self-referential, self-reflexive, self-analytical, self-correcting, universal, instaneous, decentralized, emotional, rational, and available for continuous updating, response, and review. It shows the strength of the Blogosphere as a network of responses.
In the words of William Quick's January, 2002 posting on DailyPundit:
'I PROPOSE A NAME for the intellectual cyberspace we bloggers occupy: the Blogosphere. Simple enough; the root word is logos, from the Greek meaning, variously: In pre-Socratic philosophy, the principle governing the cosmos, the source of this principle, or human reasoning about the cosmos; Among the Sophists, the topics of rational argument or the arguments themselves. ..' "
"It was rewarding to google 'bloggers accounts of The Idler's June 28th panel at the National Press Club: 'Inside the Blogosphere: The Weblog Phenomenon.' While it was naturally disappointing that Glenn Reynolds and James Lileks cancelled due to thunderstorms, airlines, and scratched flights, it was gratifying that they wrote about their experience in their blogs, because that is the Blogosphere in action -- self-referential, self-reflexive, self-analytical, self-correcting, universal, instaneous, decentralized, emotional, rational, and available for continuous updating, response, and review. It shows the strength of the Blogosphere as a network of responses.
In the words of William Quick's January, 2002 posting on DailyPundit:
'I PROPOSE A NAME for the intellectual cyberspace we bloggers occupy: the Blogosphere. Simple enough; the root word is logos, from the Greek meaning, variously: In pre-Socratic philosophy, the principle governing the cosmos, the source of this principle, or human reasoning about the cosmos; Among the Sophists, the topics of rational argument or the arguments themselves. ..' "
Nonie Darwish on the Jewish New Year
From Kesher Talk [link from WindsofChange.net]:
"At a time when most religions struggle to explain evil in the world, radical Islam found the answer. Without hesitation, they say it is the Jews. Just listen to most Friday sermons in mosques all around the Muslim world. In these sermons week after week, there is one theme that keeps repeating itself: The Jews are responsible for all that is wrong in Arab society, and Arabs are not responsible for their failures. Blame the Jews, is what ends every mosque sermon. For that I personally want to apologize to Jews around the world on their holiest time of the year.
"Jews do not wish each other a “Happy New Year” on Rosh Hashana, the way we are all used to on every January 1. The traditional Hebrew greeting is “Shanah Tovah”, which means a “good year” or “a year of goodness.” The greeting stresses the yearning for goodness and the desire of living a good life; a life committed to improving the world and relationships. I am in awe when I hear my Jewish friends speak and explain the teachings of their faith.
"During these “10 days of Repentance” I want to repent and personally apologize to Jews around the world on their High Holidays. I also want to thank them and their culture for their many contributions to humanity. I am grateful for their teaching me this great tradition that so many of us non-Jews need to reflect upon. We all need to examine ourselves from inside, bring out the good and see what we have accomplished as members of the human race. We all learn from each other on this small planet of ours, and that is good. Much of the early Islamic thought and practices were based on what the Prophet Mohammed observed from the Jewish tribes of Mecca and Medina, who were a significant part of the life and culture of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century. Let us revive a gracious cultural exchange, a time of appreciation and understanding. May the New Year bring to our reality some of our expectations and may it bring us more together."
"At a time when most religions struggle to explain evil in the world, radical Islam found the answer. Without hesitation, they say it is the Jews. Just listen to most Friday sermons in mosques all around the Muslim world. In these sermons week after week, there is one theme that keeps repeating itself: The Jews are responsible for all that is wrong in Arab society, and Arabs are not responsible for their failures. Blame the Jews, is what ends every mosque sermon. For that I personally want to apologize to Jews around the world on their holiest time of the year.
"Jews do not wish each other a “Happy New Year” on Rosh Hashana, the way we are all used to on every January 1. The traditional Hebrew greeting is “Shanah Tovah”, which means a “good year” or “a year of goodness.” The greeting stresses the yearning for goodness and the desire of living a good life; a life committed to improving the world and relationships. I am in awe when I hear my Jewish friends speak and explain the teachings of their faith.
"During these “10 days of Repentance” I want to repent and personally apologize to Jews around the world on their High Holidays. I also want to thank them and their culture for their many contributions to humanity. I am grateful for their teaching me this great tradition that so many of us non-Jews need to reflect upon. We all need to examine ourselves from inside, bring out the good and see what we have accomplished as members of the human race. We all learn from each other on this small planet of ours, and that is good. Much of the early Islamic thought and practices were based on what the Prophet Mohammed observed from the Jewish tribes of Mecca and Medina, who were a significant part of the life and culture of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century. Let us revive a gracious cultural exchange, a time of appreciation and understanding. May the New Year bring to our reality some of our expectations and may it bring us more together."
Madonna's Israeli Pilgrimmage
From Haaretz :
"After midnight prayers at the grave of a rabbinical sage, songstress Madonna on Sunday called for world peace at a conference on Jewish mysticism, a highlight of her five-day pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Israel hopes the star - the biggest pop celebrity to visit in years - will revive tourism battered by four years of violence, and government officials were on hand at a Tel Aviv hotel to share the spotlight, the glory and the photographs.
"Madonna, wearing a low-cut dress with a black and white leopard pattern, said she was hesitant to come to Israel 'after seeing so many news reports about terror attacks' and reading State Department travel warnings. 'I realize now that it is no more dangerous to be here than it is to be in New York,' she told the gathering of more than 1,000 people.
"Speaking without notes, Madonna said the people she met during her five-day Holy Land trip 'have one thing in common - we want to create peace in the world.' "
"After midnight prayers at the grave of a rabbinical sage, songstress Madonna on Sunday called for world peace at a conference on Jewish mysticism, a highlight of her five-day pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Israel hopes the star - the biggest pop celebrity to visit in years - will revive tourism battered by four years of violence, and government officials were on hand at a Tel Aviv hotel to share the spotlight, the glory and the photographs.
"Madonna, wearing a low-cut dress with a black and white leopard pattern, said she was hesitant to come to Israel 'after seeing so many news reports about terror attacks' and reading State Department travel warnings. 'I realize now that it is no more dangerous to be here than it is to be in New York,' she told the gathering of more than 1,000 people.
"Speaking without notes, Madonna said the people she met during her five-day Holy Land trip 'have one thing in common - we want to create peace in the world.' "
Ann Coulter on Dan Rather's Forgeries
From AnnCoulter.com:
"CBS was forced to run a fake story so early in the campaign that it was exposed as a fraud – only because of the Swift Boat vets. These brave men, many of them decorated war heroes, have now not only won the election for Bush, they have ended Dan Rather's career.
"It's often said that we never lost a battle in Vietnam, but that the war was lost at home by a seditious media demoralizing the American people. Ironically, the leader of that effort was Rather's predecessor at CBS News, Walter Cronkite, president of the Ho Chi Minh Admiration Society.
"It was Cronkite who went on air and lied about the Tet offensive, claiming it was a defeat for the Americans. He told the American people the war was over and we had lost. Ronald Reagan said CBS News officials should have been tried for treason for those broadcasts.
"CBS has already lost one war for America. The Swift Boat Vets weren't going to let CBS lose another one."
"CBS was forced to run a fake story so early in the campaign that it was exposed as a fraud – only because of the Swift Boat vets. These brave men, many of them decorated war heroes, have now not only won the election for Bush, they have ended Dan Rather's career.
"It's often said that we never lost a battle in Vietnam, but that the war was lost at home by a seditious media demoralizing the American people. Ironically, the leader of that effort was Rather's predecessor at CBS News, Walter Cronkite, president of the Ho Chi Minh Admiration Society.
"It was Cronkite who went on air and lied about the Tet offensive, claiming it was a defeat for the Americans. He told the American people the war was over and we had lost. Ronald Reagan said CBS News officials should have been tried for treason for those broadcasts.
"CBS has already lost one war for America. The Swift Boat Vets weren't going to let CBS lose another one."
Colbert King on Kerry's Latest Critics
From The Washington Post:
"Two weeks later, another e-mail arrived on the same topic. It was from a Howard University classmate, a friend of 47 years, former assistant secretary of the Air Force Rodney Coleman. A Democrat, Coleman has local roots, having worked for the D.C. Council and later the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corp. Bill Clinton appointed Coleman to the Pentagon post, in which he served from 1994 to 1998. Somehow, despite our running into each other over the years at various social occasions, Vietnam was never a serious topic of conversation between us. Until now. Coleman, who served in Vietnam for 13 months in 1971-72, wrote that he found disheartening the protracted mudslinging between Bush and Kerry and their respective camps about military records. But the favorable conclusion I drew about Kerry's service was, he stated, 'with all due respect, not mine!'
'Some of those 58,000 who died [in Vietnam] were at DaNang with me, and some were under my command, in the 366th Air Force engineering squadron,' Coleman wrote. Then he got to the heart of the matter.
'I vividly recall Kerry's antiwar testimony in April 1971. I was a White House fellow at the time, on a leave of absence from active duty, as were five of the 17 fellows selected. Two of them had Vietnam experience with Silver and Bronze Stars and Purple Hearts awarded for their heroism. In early April 1971, I volunteered to go to Vietnam after my year as a White House fellow. I could have very easily taken steps to forgo a tour in 'Nam, but as an Air Force captain committed to the ideals of the oath of office I took, Vietnam was the only game in town.' The oath of office was a serious matter for products of Howard's ROTC programs. I know. I was commissioned in the Army; Coleman joined the Air Force. Unlike some college campuses, Howard's ROTC programs were a source of pride, having produced, according to the school, more African American general officers than any other university in the country.
"When Kerry made those critical statements of the war," Coleman wrote, "my parents, God bless them, went ballistic about their son going in harm's way. My military colleagues in the fellows program who had been there and were shot up were incensed that a so-called military man would engage in such insubordinate actions. At the time Kerry made those unfortunate remarks, America had POWs and MIAs, among them my friend, Colonel Fred Cherry, the longest-held black POW of the Vietnam War. How could a true American fighting man throw away his medals, while thousands he fought alongside of were in the midst of another example of man's inhumanity to man?"
"Two weeks later, another e-mail arrived on the same topic. It was from a Howard University classmate, a friend of 47 years, former assistant secretary of the Air Force Rodney Coleman. A Democrat, Coleman has local roots, having worked for the D.C. Council and later the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corp. Bill Clinton appointed Coleman to the Pentagon post, in which he served from 1994 to 1998. Somehow, despite our running into each other over the years at various social occasions, Vietnam was never a serious topic of conversation between us. Until now. Coleman, who served in Vietnam for 13 months in 1971-72, wrote that he found disheartening the protracted mudslinging between Bush and Kerry and their respective camps about military records. But the favorable conclusion I drew about Kerry's service was, he stated, 'with all due respect, not mine!'
'Some of those 58,000 who died [in Vietnam] were at DaNang with me, and some were under my command, in the 366th Air Force engineering squadron,' Coleman wrote. Then he got to the heart of the matter.
'I vividly recall Kerry's antiwar testimony in April 1971. I was a White House fellow at the time, on a leave of absence from active duty, as were five of the 17 fellows selected. Two of them had Vietnam experience with Silver and Bronze Stars and Purple Hearts awarded for their heroism. In early April 1971, I volunteered to go to Vietnam after my year as a White House fellow. I could have very easily taken steps to forgo a tour in 'Nam, but as an Air Force captain committed to the ideals of the oath of office I took, Vietnam was the only game in town.' The oath of office was a serious matter for products of Howard's ROTC programs. I know. I was commissioned in the Army; Coleman joined the Air Force. Unlike some college campuses, Howard's ROTC programs were a source of pride, having produced, according to the school, more African American general officers than any other university in the country.
"When Kerry made those critical statements of the war," Coleman wrote, "my parents, God bless them, went ballistic about their son going in harm's way. My military colleagues in the fellows program who had been there and were shot up were incensed that a so-called military man would engage in such insubordinate actions. At the time Kerry made those unfortunate remarks, America had POWs and MIAs, among them my friend, Colonel Fred Cherry, the longest-held black POW of the Vietnam War. How could a true American fighting man throw away his medals, while thousands he fought alongside of were in the midst of another example of man's inhumanity to man?"
Friday, September 24, 2004
Ballerina on the Boat
Last night we watched a DVD called Masters Of Russian Animation, featuring Brezhnev-era cartoons. It was a mixed bag, generally the films for children based on fairy-tales were more appealing than the propagandistic adult-oriented Soviet animation. Can't recommend the DVD overall, but a few short films really were excellent.
Ideya Granina's "Crane Feathers" is striking, Japanese dolls tell a sad story of trapped lives. Yuri Norstein's three shorts were also super: "Fox and Rabbit," about courage, "Heron and Crane," about marriage, and "Hedgehog in the Fog", about life. These are charming Aesop's-fable like morality tales, sweet for children, while bittersweet for adults.
My favorite was Lev Atamanov's "Ballerina on the Boat." A beautiful ballerina comes onto a boat, transforming everyone she meets, rescuing the vessel from a dangerous storm, literally floating away. It reminded me of "Steamroller and Violin," how much art and culture meant to people as an escape from the grim realities of the "Worker's State."
Ideya Granina's "Crane Feathers" is striking, Japanese dolls tell a sad story of trapped lives. Yuri Norstein's three shorts were also super: "Fox and Rabbit," about courage, "Heron and Crane," about marriage, and "Hedgehog in the Fog", about life. These are charming Aesop's-fable like morality tales, sweet for children, while bittersweet for adults.
My favorite was Lev Atamanov's "Ballerina on the Boat." A beautiful ballerina comes onto a boat, transforming everyone she meets, rescuing the vessel from a dangerous storm, literally floating away. It reminded me of "Steamroller and Violin," how much art and culture meant to people as an escape from the grim realities of the "Worker's State."
France Promises Israel Support
FromHaaretz :
"NEW YORK - French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier promised U.S. Jewish leaders Thursday that his country would wage an intransigent battle against anti-Semitic violence and improve its relations with Israel. Barnier met a group of U.S. Jewish community leaders to explain government measures to counter a surge of attacks on Jewish targets in the Paris region and the provinces. 'I told them of the total determination of the president [Jacques Chirac] and the government to fight all forms of anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia,' Barnier told reporters."
"NEW YORK - French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier promised U.S. Jewish leaders Thursday that his country would wage an intransigent battle against anti-Semitic violence and improve its relations with Israel. Barnier met a group of U.S. Jewish community leaders to explain government measures to counter a surge of attacks on Jewish targets in the Paris region and the provinces. 'I told them of the total determination of the president [Jacques Chirac] and the government to fight all forms of anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia,' Barnier told reporters."
Russia Atones for Stalin's Anti-Jewish Purge
From MosNews.com:
"One of the skeletons rattling in the former Soviet Union's closet was finally put to rest with honors on September 21--it even happened at a cemetery. A newly unveiled memorial at Moscow's Donskoye Cemetery commemorates the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee. The committee had been created to further Jewish culture in the USSR, but in the 1950s its members, including renowned artists and writers, were eliminated during Stalin's anti-Semitic purge. The story of the committee's end has been unraveled by historians as a stark, chilling testimony of Stalin-era horrors. The committee had been formed in 1942 to create support for the Soviet Union among Jewish communities in the West. Solomon Mykhoels, a well-known Jewish actor, was chosen to head the committee. Many other famous Jewish cultural icons of the time were also active in the committee, including actors, poets, writers, scientists, and others. The committee published a newspaper in Yiddish. It was the first Soviet organization of this kind. Obviously, in the Soviet Union, an atheist state, the uniting factor was Jewish culture, since religion was discouraged. After the war, the committee revived Jewish culture in the Soviet Union, helping preserve Soviet Jews as an ethnicity. The ties it established with Western Jews helped assemble and spread information about the persecution of Jews and the Holocaust. After WWII, when the Soviet Union was becoming the center of one of two warring camps in a bipolar world, these ties to the West, which were the very reason the Committee was established, became a threat to the secretive, policing Soviet government."
"One of the skeletons rattling in the former Soviet Union's closet was finally put to rest with honors on September 21--it even happened at a cemetery. A newly unveiled memorial at Moscow's Donskoye Cemetery commemorates the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee. The committee had been created to further Jewish culture in the USSR, but in the 1950s its members, including renowned artists and writers, were eliminated during Stalin's anti-Semitic purge. The story of the committee's end has been unraveled by historians as a stark, chilling testimony of Stalin-era horrors. The committee had been formed in 1942 to create support for the Soviet Union among Jewish communities in the West. Solomon Mykhoels, a well-known Jewish actor, was chosen to head the committee. Many other famous Jewish cultural icons of the time were also active in the committee, including actors, poets, writers, scientists, and others. The committee published a newspaper in Yiddish. It was the first Soviet organization of this kind. Obviously, in the Soviet Union, an atheist state, the uniting factor was Jewish culture, since religion was discouraged. After the war, the committee revived Jewish culture in the Soviet Union, helping preserve Soviet Jews as an ethnicity. The ties it established with Western Jews helped assemble and spread information about the persecution of Jews and the Holocaust. After WWII, when the Soviet Union was becoming the center of one of two warring camps in a bipolar world, these ties to the West, which were the very reason the Committee was established, became a threat to the secretive, policing Soviet government."
Thursday, September 23, 2004
Belmont Club on Terror Networks
Thanks to Instapundit again, here's an interesting link at Belmont Club:
"Vladis Krebs has a case study page examining how mapping social networks and understanding their properties can be used to take down of terrorist networks. Network analysis was used to take down Saddam Hussein. The Washington Post has some of the details."
"Vladis Krebs has a case study page examining how mapping social networks and understanding their properties can be used to take down of terrorist networks. Network analysis was used to take down Saddam Hussein. The Washington Post has some of the details."
Iranian Bloggers v.the Mullahs
From the BBC [tip from Instapundit.com]:
"Hundreds of Iranian online journals have been protesting against media censorship by renaming their websites after pro-reformist newspapers and websites that have been banned or shut down by the authorities. Many of the websites, known as blogs or weblogs, have also posted news items from the banned publications on their websites. The protest was started by blogger Hossein Derakhshan, a student at Toronto university in Canada. He told the BBC that although he felt the action was symbolic, he wanted to show Iranian authorities 'that they would not be able to censor the internet in the same way as they have managed to control other media.'"
"Hundreds of Iranian online journals have been protesting against media censorship by renaming their websites after pro-reformist newspapers and websites that have been banned or shut down by the authorities. Many of the websites, known as blogs or weblogs, have also posted news items from the banned publications on their websites. The protest was started by blogger Hossein Derakhshan, a student at Toronto university in Canada. He told the BBC that although he felt the action was symbolic, he wanted to show Iranian authorities 'that they would not be able to censor the internet in the same way as they have managed to control other media.'"
Samuel Marshak
In our Russian class yesterday, we read a short poem by Samuel Marshak, a renowned poet of the Soviet era, best known as author of a number of children's books. His collaboration with Vladimir Lebedev was legendary, resulting in some 50 works for young readers. Marshak translated Shakespeare, Keats, Blake, Wordsworth, and Kipling for Russian readers, as well.
From Marshak and Lebedev's 1928 About a Foolish Mouse.
From Marshak and Lebedev's 1928 About a Foolish Mouse.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Mark Steyn on John Kerry
From SteynOnLine:
"If it weren't for the small matter of the war for civilization, I'd find it hard to resist a Kerry Presidency. Groucho Marx once observed that an audience will laugh at an actress playing an old lady pretending to fall downstairs, but, for a professional comic to laugh, it has to be a real old lady. That's how I feel about the Kerry campaign. For the professional political analyst, watching Mondale or Dukakis or Howard Dean stuck in the part of the guy who falls downstairs is never very satisfying: they're average, unexceptional fellows whom circumstances have conspired to transform into walking disasters. But Senator Kerry was made for the role, a vain thin-skinned droning blueblood with an indestructible sense of his own status but none at all of his own ridiculousness. If Karl Rove had labored for a decade to produce a walking parody of the contemporary Democratic Party's remoteness, condescension, sense of entitlement, public evasiveness and tortured relationship with military matters, he couldn't have improved on John F Kerry."
"If it weren't for the small matter of the war for civilization, I'd find it hard to resist a Kerry Presidency. Groucho Marx once observed that an audience will laugh at an actress playing an old lady pretending to fall downstairs, but, for a professional comic to laugh, it has to be a real old lady. That's how I feel about the Kerry campaign. For the professional political analyst, watching Mondale or Dukakis or Howard Dean stuck in the part of the guy who falls downstairs is never very satisfying: they're average, unexceptional fellows whom circumstances have conspired to transform into walking disasters. But Senator Kerry was made for the role, a vain thin-skinned droning blueblood with an indestructible sense of his own status but none at all of his own ridiculousness. If Karl Rove had labored for a decade to produce a walking parody of the contemporary Democratic Party's remoteness, condescension, sense of entitlement, public evasiveness and tortured relationship with military matters, he couldn't have improved on John F Kerry."
DiploMad on the USA v. Europe
From The Diplomad:
"Among the features of EU anti-Americanism is lecturing the US about how superior Europe is because of its doles and pensions and, of course, because it's, well, not the USA. We poor American Diplomads have to sit through endless bloviating from Euro colleagues about how Europe has high taxes but excellent public services, unlike in the USA. Of course, that the reality is far different doesn't bother them. OK, yes, we'll gladly grant them that Europe has taxes that are higher than in the US, but, sorry, they don't get much for them: European public services are much, much worse than ours. This statement comes as a shock not only to Europeans, but also to many Americans of the NY Times variety who see high taxes as the answer to every question. Don't believe it? Go to Europe, get sick or hurt, call an ambulance. Then, wait and wait and wait. If that's not the week the ambulance drivers are on strike, when (if) the ambulance comes, you quickly will learn that an American hearse has more life support equipment, and that European paramedics couldn't teach a Boy Scout first aid course. The ambulance, however, will look good compared to the public hospital where you'll be delivered, and, if still alive, you will wish that you were in the hands of American Boy Scouts.
"Our 'friends' the French get upset when we say this, and immediately retort that their medical system is considered (by whom?) the best in the world. Yes, that's the very same system that when the temperature went up a few degrees in the summer let 15,000 people die. Imagine the scandal in the USA if 15,000 people died because the temperature 'shot up' to 95 degrees Fahrenheit! Imagine if we couldn't handle 95 degrees: LA would be a ghost town; Vegas never would have happened; Texas would be a howling wilderness.
"Don't want to get sick? OK, then get robbed on the street, and if you stay in Europe for more than a couple of weeks, there is a very good chance that will happen as crime is skyrocketing -- and the EU solution is to lie about the stats. Then deal with the cops. See where that gets you. See if you don't have the experience one Diplomad's mother-in-law had when her purse was ripped out of her hands in a Madrid street. At the police station bored, listless, unionized cops grumpily took her statement; one then asked, 'So what do you want us to do? Poor people have to live, too.'"
"Among the features of EU anti-Americanism is lecturing the US about how superior Europe is because of its doles and pensions and, of course, because it's, well, not the USA. We poor American Diplomads have to sit through endless bloviating from Euro colleagues about how Europe has high taxes but excellent public services, unlike in the USA. Of course, that the reality is far different doesn't bother them. OK, yes, we'll gladly grant them that Europe has taxes that are higher than in the US, but, sorry, they don't get much for them: European public services are much, much worse than ours. This statement comes as a shock not only to Europeans, but also to many Americans of the NY Times variety who see high taxes as the answer to every question. Don't believe it? Go to Europe, get sick or hurt, call an ambulance. Then, wait and wait and wait. If that's not the week the ambulance drivers are on strike, when (if) the ambulance comes, you quickly will learn that an American hearse has more life support equipment, and that European paramedics couldn't teach a Boy Scout first aid course. The ambulance, however, will look good compared to the public hospital where you'll be delivered, and, if still alive, you will wish that you were in the hands of American Boy Scouts.
"Our 'friends' the French get upset when we say this, and immediately retort that their medical system is considered (by whom?) the best in the world. Yes, that's the very same system that when the temperature went up a few degrees in the summer let 15,000 people die. Imagine the scandal in the USA if 15,000 people died because the temperature 'shot up' to 95 degrees Fahrenheit! Imagine if we couldn't handle 95 degrees: LA would be a ghost town; Vegas never would have happened; Texas would be a howling wilderness.
"Don't want to get sick? OK, then get robbed on the street, and if you stay in Europe for more than a couple of weeks, there is a very good chance that will happen as crime is skyrocketing -- and the EU solution is to lie about the stats. Then deal with the cops. See where that gets you. See if you don't have the experience one Diplomad's mother-in-law had when her purse was ripped out of her hands in a Madrid street. At the police station bored, listless, unionized cops grumpily took her statement; one then asked, 'So what do you want us to do? Poor people have to live, too.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)