"Getting It"

Expanding on my previous "Dean as McGovern", and the power of The Party's use of smears, and how it doesn't matter who we run. What matters is how the candidate fights back.

Here is one of the very first posts to this weblog:

Seeing the forest

Recent polls show that the public is blaming Clinton for the business scandals, and Bush's popularity remains astronomical. That's a tree.

Let's see if we can see the forest. Look back to the 2000 election. Step back and look at the candidates. The Democrat's candidate was a well respected, well liked, extremely experienced, Vietnam vet, former seminary student, character beyond reproach, faithfully married family man, foreign policy expert, with many accomplishments including being the person in the Congress most responsible for advancing the Internet... The Republicans ran a foul-mouthed thoroughly inexperienced scandal-ridden (Harken oil, Rangers stadium, recipient of bribes directed at his father) failed businessman, continuously bailed out of jams by his father's connections, draft-dodger (worse, he got into the Nat. Guard through connections and then played hooky!), former drunk, probable drug-user, kids constantly in trouble, with a campaign entirely financed by large corporations obviously looking for favors.

But by election time the only issue was “character”, and the character in question was the Democratic candidate’s! That's the forest.

Issues like the "Love Canal story" and "I invented the Internet" were trees. The forest was how they pulled it off - the smears, the propaganda blitz, the way they spread their message and the way people hear messages these days.

With this weblog I'll be writing about this issue, seeing the forest for the trees.

"Getting it," in this election, means understanding the new political environment of a near-fascist right controlling the White House, the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Courts, the Justice Department, blocking any and all oversight or investigations into their abuses of power, using the FBI as their investigative arm, the military as their international enforcement arm, and the major broadcast and print media as their propaganda organ. It means understanding that smears, threats and intimidation are the favored tactic of The Party. Understanding that there is nothing The Party will not do, even politicizing the national tragedy of 9/11 and using it to justify a pre-planned war in an unrelated country, all the while using THAT to manipulate an election.

The only way to fight this is to take it on directly, and FIGHT it. Otherwise the Party machinery and the Wurlitzer will just crush you under a pile of lies and smears. From what I see, only Dean "gets it." Only Dean is willing to take them on -- head-on and directly. Only Dean is building an organization of people, ready to talk to their neighbors, going door-to-door, and organizing the public to fight back.

Dean As McGovern

Talking Points Memo (also here) and Atrios (and here) are talking about whether Dean is electible. Is Dean another McGovern, destined to lose because of his anti-war stance?

Two words: Max Cleland.

Two more words: John McCain.

So you want to nominate a candidate who has a good military resume, because you think this means Rush Limbaugh will say good things about him? Well, guess what: IT DOESN'T MATTER. The Republicans are going to smear the candidate ANYWAY! And by the time they get done smearing the candidate YOU'RE going to be questioning whether the guy should be in office. (Admit it, it worked with Gore, didn't it? Even YOU started disliking Gore and having doubts about him, after they got through with him.) IT'S WHAT THEY DO! GET USED TO IT!

What matters is how the candidate is going to fight back. Al Gore didn't fight back. Clinton did. Dean will.

Just as important, Dean will also have hundreds of thousands of volunteers, walking precincts all across the country, and dragging people to the polls on election day. None of the other candidates have anything even close to that. The Democrats haven't had that for decades. This is going to put Dean in office, AND it is going to bring in Demcoratic members of Congress and the Senate and local offices as well.

I see a pattern forming. Politicians and pundits from Washington hate Dean and "just don't get it." People from outside "the Beltway" are enthusiastic.

By the way, I'll say it again, I LOVE Clark and I LOVE Edwards. But their campaign staffs just don't get it.

Update - Oh yeah, one more thing. McGovern was a war hero who was against the war. So if the DLC is really so worried about repeating the McGovern experience they should be trashing Clark instead of running him. In MY opinion, it's about Washington insiders v.s. outsiders, and the insiders concerned about outsiders getting elected and affecting their Washington insider careers.

If You Are Buying A Mac

Buy it at Small Dog Electronics. I just heard them advertising on Thom Hartmann's radio show. They should be rewarded for supporting progressives.

Always Amazed

Doc Searls:

"I'm always amazed, though I shouldn't be, when I talk politics with people who get all their news from newspapers, radio and TV. "

It's an excellent read, when you also go to the links.

For Bush-Haters Only

For all you Bush-Haters out there who also have high-bandwidth. (750K)

It Was A Set-Up -- They Were Getting Too Close

It turns out that the phony dispute over a leaked, never-circulated Senate Democrat committee memo that outlined ideas for what to do if the Republicans block the war intelligence probe was a complete set-up, providing cover for the Republicans to cancel the investigation.

The thought of the Republicans accusing Democrats of politicizing national security... Sheesh!

Here's what I wrote on May 4, 2003:

Prediction

I predict that the Republicans are going to start accusing the Democrats of exploiting 9/11 for political gain. The Wurlitzer is going to be talking about nothing else all through summer 04 until the election. If they do it right, it will be the major issue in the campaign: those horrible, despicable, un-American, treasonous Democrats using 9/11 to try to win the election.

I thought they'd wait until next summer. (Back then, Digby wrote this.)

And now, as the investigations and public opinion are closing in on The Party's use of national security for political gain, we get this: Frist Freezes Senate Probe of Prewar Iraq Data:

Angry about a leaked Democratic memo, the Republican leadership of the Senate yesterday took the unusual step of canceling all business of the committee investigating prewar intelligence on Iraq.

Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) called on the author of the memo -- which laid out a possible Democratic strategy to extend the investigation to include the White House and executive branch -- to "identify himself or herself . . . disavow this partisan attack in its entirety" and deliver "a personal apology" to Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence.

Only if those steps are taken, Frist said, "will it be possible for the committee to resume its work in an effective and bipartisan manner -- a manner deserving of the confidence of other members of the Senate and the executive branch."

Roberts followed Frist on the floor and said that unless the Democratic members "properly" address the issue, "I am afraid that it will be impossible to return to 'business as usual' in the committee."

Look at this Google search, with many examples of the Right-wing Wurlitzer manufacturing upset over the memo. Look at the way they orchestrate the pretend "outrage." See who is speaking out, and who is covering it, and the sequence of coverage. Far-right Republican leaders speaking out (here, here, here, here), using the same words. The Washington Times covering it, pretending it's a big story. Then far-right outlets like CNSNews issuing stories with the headline, "Memo Indicates Democrats Mulled Plan to Politicize War Planning," being picked up and repeated by other far-right news outlets. Murdoch's NYT Post prints, "TREASON'S FIRST COUSIN." Heritage's Town Hall with "Political terrorism" from, of all people, Ollie North. Manufactured outrage - all of it, obviously.

Look at this Google news search, and follow the timeline backwards. It's obvious that the memo dispute was a set-up from the start, preparing to give them cover for blocking the investigation. Clearly they have been planning this for a while - since the Plame affair started showing the public what this crowd is really made of. How does The Party get out of being caught leaking the name of a CIA agent, and using national security to manipulate public opinion for political and financial gain? By accusing the Democrats of doing it, using the Wurlitzer to orchestrate the outrage.

It's what they do best.

Oh yeah - one more thing. Yesterday was the deadline for the White House to turn over documents to the committee, but they refused. Incredible coincidence on the timing, no?

Updates - Thinking It Through:

Knowing W will come out looking like a dishonest snake if there's any serious investigation into the lies he told about pre-war intelligence, Republicans are trying to shut down an investigation by pretending this memo indicates the investigation will somehow be a sort of political bag job.

This is pretty damn desperate, isn't it?"

Talking Points Memo:

"Two guys walk into a ring for a fight. One knows he’s about to get creamed. But he can’t bear the shame and humiliation of walking away from a fight. So at the very last moment he whips out some phony claim that the other guy’s cheating."

Body and Soul:

"Forget manufactured outrage. Can Democrats summon any of the genuine article? Sarcasm is a good beginning, but doesn't the occasion demand something a bit stronger?"

The Left Coaster:

"First, Bill Frist just announced that because the Democrats are trying to politicize the issue of intelligence use and misuse by the Bush Administration, he is shutting down the Senate Intelligence Committee inquiry. Coming as this does from a party that used a war drive for political purposes leading up to the 2002 midterms, and then politicized intelligence to create a WMD threat that didn't exist, this is the height of gall. But it can galvanize the Senate Democrats to unite and fight the GOP leadership and the White House on all issues, all the time. With this clumsy arrogant move by Frist and the White House, this is now a legitimate political issue for next year because it confirms that the GOP is hiding something."

Oliver Willis:

"What's also interesting is the machine in action. Data flows from the congress, probably through some Republican flunky and then it magically finds its way into Hannity's hands. Then it fitters out to all the right-wing news services (Newsmax, Worldnetdaily, Washington Times) and becomes a "story". I'm not whining about it, heck I'd like my side to get off their high horse and build up an infrastructure with that sort of resiliency and reach. That's the only way you can win."

Collective Punishment

From the Geneva Convention:

"Art. 33. No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited."

From today's news:

"TIKRIT, Iraq — The U.S. military swept through Iraqi neighborhoods early Saturday, firing at houses suspected to be harboring hostile forces in the wake of an apparent attack on a Black Hawk helicopter that killed six U.S. soldiers.

Backed by Bradley fighting vehicles, American troops bombarded buildings with machine guns and heavy weapons fire.

'This is to remind the town that we have teeth and claws and we will use them,' said Lt. Col. Steven Russell, commander of the 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment. "

It doesn't get much clearer than this.

The Party can get away with threats, intimidation and blatantly violating laws in the U.S., because they control the House, the Senate, the Justice Department, the FBI, the Courts, the military and the press. Can they continue to get away with it internationally as well?

Getting Nastier In Washington

It's getting even nastier in Washington. Three stories today: Rejection of 'Earmarks' Angers Democrats,

"Rep. Ralph Regula (R-Ohio), who chairs the subcommittee that controls spending on education, health and jobs programs, recently stunned Democrats by announcing plans to reject every "earmarked" project they are seeking in the final, compromise version of the bill, which funds the departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor."

No government funding for projects in any district with a Democratic representative!

And White House Puts Limits on Queries From Democrats,

"The Bush White House, irritated by pesky questions from congressional Democrats about how the administration is using taxpayer money, has developed an efficient solution: It will not entertain any more questions from opposition lawmakers."

Democratic lawmakers are no longer allowed to ask the White House any questions!

And Judicial Nominee Approved 10-9:

"The GOP's main event will be a 30-hour talkathon, which would keep the Senate in session through the night Wednesday into Thursday evening, to showcase the GOP's case against the Democrats. "

This means that they won't just have a vote to see if they can override a Democratic filibuster, they'll make the Democrats talk for 30 straight hours. When Clinton was President the Republicans blocked almost everything using filibusters -- and then told the public, "The Democrats are in charge but aren't pasing the bills you want" -- but the Democrats never made them actually filibuster by talking nonstop. This shows the difference between a party that is willing to fight for its constituents, and a party that doesn't even know it's in a war.

Dean & Public Financing

Dr. Dean is likely to drop out of the public financing system. The reason is that Bush is going to have $200 million+ to use in the primaries, even though he has no opponent. Meanwhile the Democrats are all going to use up all of their money working to get the nomination. If they stay in the public financing system they are not allowed to spend any more money until after the convention in August.

This means that Bush will be running $200 million of nasty, negative ads between May and August, while any Democratic nominee who chooses to stay in the public financing system is not allowed to respond in any way.

Dean will get the nomination -- I think that's a given at this point. He is far ahead of the other candidates in all the states that matter, and he has a huge base of supporters and contributors, while the other candidates do not, and are depending on party insiders to get them through. And they're hanging around in case something changes -- Dean says something stupid or who knows what.

If Dean drops out of the public financing system he will be able to ask his base of supporters for the money to respond to Bush. He will easily have 2 million+ donors by then. He is going to ask each donor for $100, bringing him $200 million with which to respond.

Now, you can't even imagine Kerry or Edwards or even Clark being able to round up enough supporters to raise that kind of money. And, frankly, I also can't imagine Kerry or Edwards fighting back. Clark, yes. But he is not running the kind of campaign that is bringing in the numbers of active supporters.

So I support Dean leaving the public financing system.

Too Obvious For Smart People To See?

A week ago I attended a panel discussion on the election of Schwartzenegger, put on by Bay Area Dems. Speakers that day included California's Controller, Steve Westly, and Treasurer Phil Angelides. The panel included several high-level campaign consultants and ex-Clinton-White House officials.

Each panelist offered reasons they thought the recall occurred. Lots of high strategy was discussed. The reasons included the unpopularity of Davis, the failure to find and use a consistent framing narrative, the entry of Democrats into the race, failure of Get Out The Vote efforts, and others.

I listened to the panel and couldn't get over the feeling that all these smart people were missing what to me is the most obvious component. I think that we can't ignore that when you turn on AM radio you hear nonstop ridicule of Democrats and praise for Republicans. There's just no way around this. This is what radio IS now, and this has to have an effect, not just in California, but nationwide. (I'm using AM radio as my example, but the fact is that the right dominates every communications channel.) Before the California election every AM station I tuned into was promiting Arnold all day, every day, nonstop. I mean national as well as local talk shows. Sean Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, etc. All of them, all the time. They were talking about how the Democrats had caused all the problems in the state, and how "we" all want Arnold to get rid of Davis and "fix" the state. All day, every day.

I have a little bit of a marketing background, but I don't think you need to be a professional to know that marketing has an impact on people. It's pretty basic that repetition drives a message into people's consciousness. And what is going on around us, on the radio, on TV, in the newspapers, and from the Right's politicians is repetition. Coordinated repetition of strategic messages.

In most parts of the country there is NO OTHER SOURCE OF INFORMATION. The public is saturated with right-wing messaging from radio, Fox News, and right-wing local newspapers. People like you and me don't tend to listen to these right-wing talk shows, but I think we should. I think we need to understand the extent of right-wing domination, we need to experience it, and it would benefit our understanding of America to know what they are saying, every day. I listen when I'm driving somewhere -- usually turning it off in disgust after a few minutes of lies -- but I try to listen in several times a week.

There are a lot of people listening to this stuff. When you only have limited sources of information and everyone around you is in agreement on certain points, it's hard to resist joining them. Most people are not newshounds. They form their opinions based on hearing a few filtered news items, and from a sense of what most people around them are thinking. For example, everyone has heard about the woman who spilled coffee on herself and sued and got rich, and thinks there are too many lawsuits. This story is a flat-out lie, intentionally spread to further a right-wing agenda, but it is accepted as fact by almost everyone in this country. This is an example of manipulation of an information-poor environment to generate conventional wisdom. THIS is what is going on out there in America. Marketing professionals know how this works and know how to use it. When your message is repeated to a distracted public without opposition, your product sells.

It's also much of the reason that Democrats are completely on the defensive, even in their own minds.

1) It doesn't matter what your messages, arguments, merits, etc. are if the public doesn't hear them -- and hear them repeatedly.

2) The general public isn't paying attention, and almost all of their information comes from right-wing dominated sources. (CBS cancelling the Reagan miniseries demonstrates the extend of right-wing's domination of ALL sources of information AND the Right's understanding of the importance of furthering thisdomination.)

Update -- I just came across this piece by Thom Hartmann. Here's an excerpt:

"The result of conservatives buying their way into our airwaves has been a conservative transformation in average Americans' political viewpoints. Soccer Moms and NASCAR Dads tune in to coast-to-coast, dawn-to-midnight conservative talk radio, and many have come to believe the right's slogans and myths.

Thus, traditional American values of community and compassion have been replaced with the conservative notions that greed is good and corporations can better administer a democracy than a freely elected government. A vast national right-wing echo chamber across the AM dial has propelled conservative Republican candidates into office [emphasis mine - DJ], led us into two wars in two years, and succeeded in burying the high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush administration while continuing to blame all things bad on Bill Clinton."

Howard Dean Talks About Confederate Flag Remarks

Dean's statement:

"We're at a space today that's rich in our nation's history, a place where citizens have gathered for more than a century to debate the great issues of the day. From this platform and from this very podium Abraham Lincoln spoke nearly 150 years ago as a presidential candidate and when Lincoln came here, he did not shy away from talking about the greatest threat that our republic faced at that time which is the terrible institution of human slavery. I will not shy away today either.

The issue of the confederate flag has become an issue in this presidential race. Let me make this clear. I believe that we have one flag in this country, the flag of the United States of America. I believe that the flag of the Confederate States of America is a painful symbol and reminder of racial injustice and slavery, which Lincoln denounced from here over 150 years ago. And I do not condone the use of the flag of the Confederate States of America. I do believe that this country needs to engage in a serious discussion about race, and that everyone must participate in that discussion. I started this discussion in a clumsy way.

This discussion will be painful, and I regret the pain that I may have caused either to African-American or southern white voters in the beginning of this discussion. But we need to have this discussion in an honest open way.

In 1968 the Republican Party embarked on a strategy to divide white people from black people in the south just as they were divided when Abraham Lincoln stood at this podium 150 years ago. That is intolerable. Ending that is what this campaign is all about.

I am determined to find a way to bring white Americans and black Americans--as Dr. King said--to the same table of common brotherhood. As I said, we have started in a difficult way, but there is no way to escape the pain of this discussion. To think that racism was banished from the face of this country--even after the success of the civil rights movement is wrong.

Today in America, you have a better chance of being called back for a job interview if you're white with a criminal record than you do if you're black with a clean record--never having been arrested or convicted. Institutional racism exists in this country not because institutions are run by bigots or racists, but because of our unconscious bias towards hiring people just like ourselves. I am determined we will overcome this. I am also determined that we will not leave anyone behind in this discussion--no matter what their color, no matter where they live.

I understand Senator Edward's concern last night that we not have people from the north telling people from the south how to run their states--but we all need to understand that we are in this together and that it will be a difficult and painful discussion, and feelings will be hurt. And what we must do is that people of good will must stay at the table.

If we are ever to vanquish the scourge of racism left over from 400 hundred years of slavery and Jim Crow, only 40 or 50 years ago [did] the Civil Rights Movement begin to see relief from that. We can't think it is over; we must have the dialogue Bill Clinton promised us; we must continue that dialogue, and we must all be at the table. Many of the people in the African American community have supported what I have said in the past few days, because they understand. Some have not, so I say, to those, I deeply regret the pain I have may caused. Many of our white supporters have understood, but to those who do not, I regret the pain that I have caused. I will tell you, there is no easy way to do this. There will be pain as we discuss it; we must face it together--hand-in-hand, as Dr. King and Abraham Lincoln asked us to do.

Because this is about taking back our country and when white people and brown people and black people vote together in this country, that's when we get social justice in America."

The Draft

The Zeitgeist talks about the draft.

Also, I read somewhere (I forget where) speculation that while bringing back a draft is clearly necessary, Bush won't do it before the election. So just after the election Bush will start it up if he wins, or will leave it as a present for Dean to have to start up, ensuring him a stormy presidency. Bush won't do it now, because doing what is necessary for the country would harm The Party. Dean would do it because it is necessary for the country.

Blatant Lies

Turns out I get a lunch break this time. (Last time too many voters, no breaks.)

I'm watching Crossfire. It looks like the Republicans are afraid of Dr. Dean because they are using the smear machine on him. The Republican guy just said, "Howard Dean has said he is the candidate for white guys with confederate flags on their pickup trucks."

This is a blatant lie. What Dean said was that poor Southern white guys driving pickup trucks with confederate flags should vote for him, too, because their kids don't have health insurance either, and they didn't get the tax cut either.

That is a very different statement, and it has a very different meaning -- one that really scares Republicans, because it's true. Dean is going to campaign in the South, and he's going to point out that the Republican appeal to racism isn't benefiting anyone, that the poor whites should look at what they are really getting out of voting Republican.

They have to lie, because Dean is going to tell the truth. What really gets me is that the Republican guy KNOWS what Dean really said, and is choosing to blatantly lie.

And later they have a "Democrat" guy on -- clearly a Kerry or Leiberman supporter -- who pretends to agree that this is what Dean said. This is why so many of us are Dean supporters. We are so tired of these corporate Demcorats who are willing to play this kind of Washington politics game, handing Republicans issues to use against them as well as against the rest of us.

Working At The Polls Today

I'm working at the polls today. It starts at 6am and ends about 9pm so I'm not going to be in too much of a mood to be blogging. No blog hero here. Maybe if my wife was having contractions... :-)

March

It's March. That's when we have to remove a significant number of troops. From Krugman today:

"In September the Congressional Budget Office analyzed how many U.S. soldiers could be kept in Iraq without extending tours beyond one year. The conclusion was that force levels would have to start dropping rapidly about five months from now, and that the forces in Iraq and Kuwait would eventually have to shrink by almost two-thirds. As the report explains, the Pentagon can use various expedients to maintain a larger force in Iraq, but all of these expedients would threaten to undermine our military readiness."

We know it, and the Iraqi opposition and al-Queda know it, too. So in April and May the shit hits the fan.

DNC: Kicking Ass Guest Poster is Al Franken

DNC: Kicking Ass

The Party Orders Reagan Miniseries Off Air

Oliver Willis says it better.

Army Times Poll

At Army Times:

"If you were going to vote for president right now, which candidate would you support:

Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun  2.07 %    (738)

Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.)       22.12 %   (7,875)

Gov. Howard Dean               12.12 %   (4,315)

Sen. John Edwards              10.19 %   (3,626)

Rep. Dick Gephardt              0.59 %   (211)

Sen. John Kerry                 4.02 %   (1,432)

Rep. Dennis Kucinich           16.24 %    (5,782)

Sen. Joe Lieberman              0.62 %    (219)

Rev. Al Sharpton                1.04 %    (369)

President George W. Bush       30.98 %    (11,029)

Total votes:     35596"

Something tells me the Kucinich campaign has asked people to vote.

The Randi Rhodes Show

I hope you'll tune into the The Randi Rhodes Show over the internet. I'm listening now. Click on "Listen Live 3pm-7pm ET."

The Draft - Another Example of Republican Party Over Country

Salon has a story about the draft:

"Divisive military actions are ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. News accounts daily detail how the U.S. is stretched too thin there to be effective. And tensions are high with Syria and Iran and on the Korean Peninsula, with some in or close to the Bush White House suggesting that military action may someday be necessary in those spots, too.

[. . .] military experts and even some influential members of Congress are suggesting that if Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to consider a draft to fully staff the nation's military in a time of global instability."

Here's the fact. We've overcommitted in Iraq. We don't have enough troops there now and next year the rotation schedules will have the military severely understaffed WITHOUT another conflict breaking out. So how are we going to defend the country if another conflict DOES break out?

From the story:

"The closest parallel to the Iraq situation is the British in Northern Ireland, where you also had some people supporting the occupying army and some opposing them, and where the opponents were willing to resort to terror tactics," says Charles Peña, director of defense studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. "There the British needed a ratio of 10 soldiers per 1,000 population to restore order, and at their height, it was 20 soldiers per 1,000 population. If you transfer that to Iraq, it would mean you'd need at least 240,000 troops and maybe as many as 480,000.

"The only reason you aren't hearing these kinds of numbers discussed by the White House and the Defense Department right now," Peña adds, "is that you couldn't come up with them without a return to the draft, and they don't want to talk about that."

The Pentagon has already had to double the deployment periods of some units, call up more reserves and extend tours of duty by a year -- all highly unpopular moves. Meanwhile, the recent spate of deadly bombings in Baghdad, Falluja and other cities, and increasing attacks on U.S. forces throughout Iraq have forced the U.S. to reconsider its plans to reduce troop deployments."

The Republicans are refusing to reinstate the draft purely for political reasons: it will cost them votes. Never mind that it will cost lives and threaten our security if there is a conflict in, say, Korea or Iran. Or something unforeseen. The country NEEDS the draft now, but they refuse. Party over country, as always.

House Nixes Anti-Profiteering Penalties in Iraq Spending Bill

House Nixes Anti-Profiteering Penalties in Iraq Spending Bill:

"The final version of the $87 billion spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan is missing provisions the Senate had passed to penalize war profiteers who defraud American taxpayers."

The Republicans rigged the "conference committee" to take out the reasonable provisions that the Senate had added to the Iraq spending bill. THIS change allows corrupt crony contracts that reward campaign contributors.

Remember that immediately after taking office Bush gave the go-ahead to corporate lawbreakers.

I think it's time for the Democrats to make an issue of this corrupt cronyism. This spending bill should be filibustered.

(Thanks Atrios for the original article.)

CBS Self-Censoring Reagan Miniseries

According to The War Over the Gipper, CBS executives are cutting out anything they think the Right might object to:

"Director Robert Allan Ackerman has opted out of the editing, and CBS executives are now cutting it themselves.

[. . .]

The script was vetted by two teams of lawyers, and producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan, who would not be interviewed by NEWSWEEK, have insisted that every fact (though not every line of dialogue) is supported by at least two sources. Before a New York Times story last month detailed conservatives’ complaints, network executives reportedly loved the movie. “They all thought it was brilliant,” says someone who worked on the film.

But the day the Times’s story broke—”The Reagans” crew calls it “Black Tuesday”—the movie instantly became trouble. CBS chairman Leslie Moonves, who approved both the script and a juicy eight-minute trailer, ordered the lawyers to look at the movie again, and asked for assurances that the facts were all in order. When he was told everything was fine, Moonves started editing anyway. “There are things we think go too far,” he told CNBC’s Tina Brown last week. (Moonves also declined to be interviewed by NEWSWEEK.) At that point, Ackerman removed himself from the editing in protest and the actors stopped talking. “Nobody seems to know what’s going on,” Ackerman told NEWSWEEK. “Whatever is going on is going on very secretly.

As of late last week, the film had been through at least three edits. The most incendiary line—where Nancy asks the president to do more for AIDS victims and he replies, “They that live in sin shall die in sin”—has been cut. "

Once you let yourself care what the Right is going to think about ANYTHING you do, it's all over.

Another Voting Machines Article

Newhouse A1:

"The problem? 'There's no guarantee that what you see on the screen is what the machine is recording or counting,' said Stanford University computer scientist David Dill."

And, let me add, there is no way for anyone to ever KNOW if what you see on the machine is what is recorded.

Voting Machines

Warren Slocum, San Mateo County's Chief Elections Officer has a web page called Support Verified Voting, talking about electronic voting machines.

Voting Machines Story At CNN

CNN.com - Worries grow over new voting machines' reliability, security.

Blog Hero Award

From DailyKos this morning:

"Ok guys. I'm checking out. Elisa is having contractions three minutes apart which means it's time to go to hospital."

OK, this guy's wife is having contractions three minutes apart and this guy is WRITING IN HIS WEBLOG!

For this he earns the coveted Seeing the Forest Blog Hero Award.

I mean, how can I even call myself a blogger after that?

I mean, I'm supposed to be at my aunt's right now, walking the dogs. And my wife is yelling at me to get off the computer and into the car. But that's NOTHING. That's not even worth mentioning next to Daily Kos!

I'm not worthy.

Few of us are.

By Nightfall

From Daily Kos:

"In other news, Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz spoke at Georgetown University on Friday and and took questions. (hat tip Juan Cole.)

Q: Hi, Mr. Wolfowitz. My name is Ruthy Coffman. I think I speak for many of us here when I say that your policies are deplorable. They're responsible for the deaths of innocents and the disintegration of American civil liberties. [Applause]
We are tired, Secretary Wolfowitz, of being feared and hated by the world. We are tired of watching Americans and Iraqis die, and international institutions cry out in anger against us. We are simply tired of your policies. We hate them, and we will never stop opposing them. We will never tire or falter in our search for justice. And in the name of this ideal and the ideal of freedom, we assembled a message for you that was taken away from us and that message says that the killing of innocents is not the solution, but rather the problem. Thank you. [Applause and jeers]
Wolfowitz: I have to infer from that that you would be happier if Saddam Hussein were still in power. [Applause]
***snip***
Q: I'd just like to say that people like Ruthy and myself have always opposed Saddam Hussein, especially when Saddam Hussein was being funded by the United States throughout the '80s. And -- [Applause] And after the killings of the Kurds when the United States increased aid to Iraq. We were there opposing him as well. People like us were there. We are for democracy. And I have a question.
What do you plan to do when Bush is defeated in 2004 and you will no longer have the power to push forward the project for New American Century's policy of American military and economic dominance over the people of the world? [Applause]
Wolfowitz: I don't know if it was just Freudian or you intended to say it that way, but you said you opposed Saddam Hussein especially when the United States supported him.

It seems to me that the north star of your comment is that you dislike this country and its policies. [Applause]

And it seems to me a time to have supported the United States and to push the United States harder was in 1991 when Saddam Hussein was slaughtering those innocents so viciously.

That is OUT-FREAKING-RAGEOUS. I'd like to see this excerpt all over the blogosphere by nightfall.

Doing my part to get this all over the blogosphere by nightfall.

Voting Machines Cartoon

This Modern World: Something Truly Terrifying.

Voting Machines Petition

ActForChange Petition: Stop the Florida-tion of the 2004 election

"I'm A Uniter, Not A Divider"

Bush said, "I'm a uniter, not a divider."

Newspaper story today, Nation Is Again Divided Over Bush.

Actually, he's nothing more than a big liar.

"Strict Father, Nurturant Mother"

I left a comment over at DailyKos, in the discussion of Lakoff's "Strict Father, Nurturant Mother" description of politics. This is being discussed by Digby and Body and Soul. Please go take a look at what they're writing and discussing.

My comment:

"Lakoff is a linguist, and he studies how people think about new concepts. His research shows that people use metaphors to understand new conecpts. For example, if you are familiar with cars, and then see a bus for the first time, you'll think 'big car,' using the car as a model for your metaphor for understanding and categorizing what you are looking at. And when you see an airplane you'll think 'bus with wings that flys.' This is how our minds work.

Lakoff has done research into the metaphors that people use to understand the concepts of nations and politics. His research has shown that people think in terms of a family when formulating an understanding of politics, and his research has shown that this thinking breaks down into two basic metaphors. He has described them as strict father and nurturing parent because that is what his research has shown. He has put together an excellent model describing how condservatives and liberals see politics and why they are so different.

Please read his book 'Moral Politics' to understand this better. I think this book is essential for understanding what is going on in politics. It is also essential because the Right has also been doing this research, and clearly has these concepts nailed, and they are using them skillfully.

Lakoff is DEscribing. You might not like WHAT he is describing, but don't blame Lakoff. If you look at this with an open mind, you'll realize that 'strict father' and 'nurturing parent' ARE the metaphors that people use."

I advise everyone to read Lakoff's book, Moral Politics.

BlogStreet : Most Important 100 Blogs

According to BlogStreet : Most Important 100 Blogs, Seeing the Forest is #71 in the top 100. If you're a weblogger reading this, but don't have Seeing the Forest on your blogroll, do the right thing.

And if your weblog is in Seeing the Forest's blogroll but Seeing the Forest is not in yours, you're in big trouble.

Update -- Saturday -- Number 66 today.

Clark

I saw Gen. Wesley Clark interviewed on the News Hour yesterday. He was really good. Really, really good. I'm glad to see a person like that, with his credentials, making the case against Bush. It helps Dean a lot. When Dean has the nomination it will be harder for Bush to discredit his message, because the public will know they are shared by people like Clark.

I don't see Clark getting the nomination. Dean has too strong of an organization, and Clark entered the race too late. Dean is also a very, very good candidate and has built a strong, people-powered campaign. This shows why Dean will make a great president. I agree almost completely with Dean's positions - moreso than Clark's.

But Clark is showing himself to be a first-class American leader. Good for him!

Publicizing The Effects Of Tax Cuts

Interesting Times writes about the effects of the spending cuts in Alabama, then writes:

"Neither Joe Average Alabaman nor Joe Average American will see these results if Democrats don't loudly highlight them. The secret of the Republicans long-term success is that the Democrats have run away from the fight instead of making it clear just what are the consequences of the 'cut taxes cut taxes cut taxes' strategy. For Democrats to win on this issue they have to make it clear to people just what it is they are giving up if they continue to hold on to their Bush tax cuts."

Good point.

Did YOUR Economy Surge 7.2%?

The economy surged last month at an annual rate of 7.2%. (But still lost jobs.)

Did you feel any of it? Did your income increase by 7.2%? No? So who did feel it? Where did the 7.2% GO?

Who is our economy FOR? Think about it. A most dangerous question.

Policy Hijacked From Bush?

Cheney's hawks 'hijacking policy':

A former Pentagon officer turned whistleblower says a group of hawks in the Bush Administration, including the Vice-President, Dick Cheney, is running a shadow foreign policy, contravening Washington's official line.

"What these people are doing now makes Iran-Contra [a Reagan administration national security scandal] look like amateur hour. . . it's worse than Iran-Contra, worse than what happened in Vietnam," said Karen Kwiatkowski, a former air force lieutenant-colonel.

"[President] George Bush isn't in control . . . the country's been hijacked," she said, describing how "key [governmental] areas of neoconservative concern were politically staffed".

Light Blogging I Guess

It's 'cause I can't bring coffee into the computer room anymore. I'm not allowed to.

Center for American Progress

Have you all visited the new Center for American Progress, and signed up for their daily e-mail. the Progress Report?

Brad DeLong On Today's Unemployent Number

Yet More Unemployment Claims Weirdness:

"This week's number, of course, is not a 'decrease': it is the same as the number announced last week, which has been revised upwards. "

Lakoff Again

Digby on Lakoff and Framing.

Bob Barr Calls for Impeachment!

Excerpts from Republican Representative Bob Barr's call for impeachment:

"'...I believe in several fundamental premises. First, this is a rogue administration; consciously and systematically operating outside the bounds of the laws of this land, and outside the common and historical norms of political conduct for our country. Second, this President and his Administration must be held accountable for their misdeeds. If we in the House of Representatives, as the body charged with oversight of the executive branch, do not hold him accountable, then we have no legitimate claim to governing this country. [this] President ...enjoys a relatively high approval rating because he has not yet been held accountable for his misdeeds. Fourth, this is a most serious matter for consideration which must be approached knowingly, deliberatively, with an eye toward both past and future history, with each step weighed very carefully....

'...More important, we see a clear pattern of activity that establishes an intent or scheme to defraud the citizens of the United States of the honest and faithful services of their President; converting the Office of the President and the attributes thereof to the personal (i.e., campaign) use of the President; circumvention of our federal election laws; laundering of campaign and labor funds; violation of tax laws;... bribery; obstruction of justice in failing to respond to lawful congressional subpoenas and withholding evidence; and tampering with evidence. This is but a partial list....

'...Whereas, considerable evidence has been developed from a broad array of credible sources that... President of The United States, has engaged in a systematic effort to obstruct, undermine and compromise the legitimate and proper functions and processes of the Executive Branch:...'"

Computer All Fixed

My laptop is all fixed again. And again want to HIGHLY recommend Bay Area ComputerMan! They are quick and very reasonably priced. They handle computers from out of the area as well.

I'll start posting more tomorrow.

Whiskey Bar: Following the Money

Billmon is Following the Money.

Thank You Guest Bloggers!

I want to thank the guest bloggers for filling in while I was gone! Thank You!

What's Going On, Anyway?

Starting Saturday everything started going wrong. I won't tell you about the drive from Manhattan to JFK, or American not giving me the upgrades that we already had. Or the incredible meal -- it's like they hire caterers who make fun of vegetarians who order special meals. But you expect to have trouble driving from Manhattan to JFK, and always, always with airlines. It's not that...

Sunday I spilled coffee on my laptop, again. (I know, what a dick. Believe me -- I'm hearing it.) And then I get a wasp sting sitting on my own couch in my own living room.

This morning I had a nice post for the weblog ready, and the Mac crashed. About a half hour wasted. I'll try to recreate it. It was about the weather.

But here's the best one. In the mail was a notice that my car insurance is cancelled. I call the agent this morning and find out it is because my driver's license is suspended! To find out WHY my license is suspended requires a trip to the DMV. So I got that about 11, and got to talk to someone at about 2:30. Yes, waiting at the DMV from 11 until 2:30 to ask one question. THAT is what "cutting spending" means.

My license was suspected because I did not appear in court in July for a number of violations received in Bakersfield in March. Except I was not IN Bakersfield in March! The DMV printout had the phone number of the traffic court in Bakersfield. Call them. And by the way, if it really isn't you it will still cost you $55 to get your license back. Don't drive home.

So I call Bakersfield. naturally the phone system is designed to prevent you from talking to a human being, but there was a phone number given for something else, and i called that, explained and got through to someone who could look into this. It seems a David Thomas Johnson, with the same birthday as me, was ticketed for not having a driver's license and a number of other things. So they contacted DMV, and DMV's computer decided that David Courtney Johnson was close enough. If I send a letter to the judge with copies of my driver's license and the DMV printout and a letter explaining, then in about 3-5 weeks they'll get this off my DMV record.

Except the insurance agent tells me my insurance will be terminated by then. So more calls and finally they'll try to get it straightened out with DMV in a few days...

That took ALL DAY.

Looking forward to tomorrrow.

The Mac version of Blogger doesn't have a spelling checker. How'd I do?

Lakoff

Atrios is recommending everyone read Lakoff. Atrios has a lot of readers. My mission on the Internet may be turning a corner, entering a new phase. More on that later.

Meanwhile still no luck with the mouse button problem. It's still stuck in the "pressed" position, and without being able to use a mouse I can't boot my laptop past the "User/Password" screen. So maybe it's a repair shop tomorrow... It is difficult to use Blogger with a Mac. On top of that, this morning I had a great post ready and the Mac crashed.

The Computer

The computer works, except that the left "mouse button" won't come out of click position. I'm hoping this will dry out today.

No Luck

So far no luck with the laptop. I'll try again tomorrow morning and then take it to the repair shop. A great way to return. On top of that, I'm sitting on my couch about a half hour ago and a wasp stings me on the wrist. WTF?

Looks Terrible

Seeing the Forest really does look terrible on a Mac. I'll be working on the look very soon.

I'm Back

I'm Back. But I spilled coffee on my laptop again, so we'll see if it dries out OK. This is from the Mac. I just couldn't wait to have a Peet's. If you don't know about Peet's, you wouldn't understand.

New phenomenon: blog spam

One of my blogs just got hit by this yesterday, and I've seen discussions on how to deal with this, technically, in various developer lists. Do a search for "blog spam" on Google, and you'll find plenty of discussion about it.

Here's one particularly extensive thread:

http://www.unix-girl.com/blog/archives/001122.html

There's already a blacklist tool: MT-Blacklist

http://www.jayallen.org/journey/2003/10/mtblacklist_stop_spam_now

Everything old is new again?

Just what we needed. Another wholesale attack on an Internet service - it seems like the entire structure of IP based communication is now under attack... my email inbox is flooded, my IM clients have lost much of their functionality (over the past few months 95% of the "people" who've added me to their lists, via ICQ, have been spammers), my email lists all need to have new members moderated to prevent spam, and now I'm going to have to fight off attempts by these bastards to flood my weblogs. Great.

Heritage Foundation spamming bloggers?

According to Off the Kuff, in How clueless can you get?, the Heritage Foundation has be cause spamming bloggers... here's a sample:

Charles,

You've been discovered! Tim Rutten's Media column in today's edition of
The Los Angeles Times is the latest example of the traditional media's
newfound appreciation of the growing influence of bloggers on America's
public policy debates.

Our job at The Heritage Foundation is to provide useful resources -
objective data and conservative analysis and commentary - to journalists,
analysts and commentators of all stripes. But we aren't quite sure how
to do this with the blogger community.

So this email is an invitation for you to participate in an experiment.
For the next month, we will periodically email to you short notices
about significant Heritage studies, publications and events. At the end of
the month, let us know if these notices were helpful. If not, tell us
at any time, and you won't get any more. If you find you only want those
notices regarding specific issue areas - foreign policy, welfare
reform, etc. - we'll limit our future emails to you thusly. If you want to
continue receiving all of the notices, let us know that, too.

Regardless of your perspective on the issues of the day, we are
confident you will find Heritage materials useful in your effort to provide
the kind of incisive, immediate and thoughtful commentary and analysis
made possible by blogging.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Sincerely,


Laura Bodwell Mark Tapscott
Marketing Manager Director, Media Services
The Heritage Foundation The Heritage Foundation

... note the title: "Marketing Manager Director, Media Services"

While "spamming" (and I think this falls into a gray area - if you own a blog, and post your email address for contacts, it isn't unreasonable for someone to contact you, even using a form letter... although their "opt-out" strategy is majorly uncool) is highly un-hip, this is a pretty smart tactic on their part... a totally new way for them to "seed" a message, in a co-ordinated fashion, into the public dialogue. The Center for American Progress should take note.

John Podesta answers readers questions on Center for American Progress in NYT

Oliver Willis pointed to this article in the NYT, highlighting Podesta's favorable comments about blogs, excerpted below:

Q. 3. As a lifelong progressive, I have been rather depressed at the ideas and strategy of the Democratic Party. Last year an incredible culture of liberal blogs developed, exploding with amazing ideas and people. Is Mr. Podesta going to tap into the blog revolution for new ideas, information and people for his think tank? -- Gary Greenblatt

A. Absolutely. Two of our fellows, Eric Alterman and Ruy Teixeira, have their own blogs. We are actively monitoring a number of other blogs [maybe this one? -Thomas]. Our website is still in development but we are looking at using the blog format for some of our own content and creating a clearinghouse of progressive blogs.

Q. 4. What is your organization going to do to help Democrats better market our messages? -- James Briggs

A. American Progress is a nonpartisan organization – we’re interested in helping anyone with progressive ideas, not just Democrats. That said, we are conducting outreach to media to promote progressive thinkers on cable, radio and print. We are providing rapid response to conservative proposals and rhetoric. We are promoting progressive authors. Our website, www.americanprogress.org, will serve as a resource for academics, politicians, the media and the public.

Pardon me for expressing some level of cynicism about the their willingness to help progressives outside the Democratic Party, given that Eric Alterman is known for his flaming assaults on the Green Party and Ruy Teixeira has chimed in as a member of the chorus blaming Nader for Al Gore's defeat... maybe I should recommend that Tom Hutchings, Green Party candidate for the 33rd Assembly District in California, contact them? That might be a good test of how "non-partisan" they actually are. :)

Stalking horse Hillary?

I had the opportunity last night to attend the Jefferson-Jacson DNC fundraiser in Manchester, NH. It was a pretty good event- outside, before the event, well over a hundred of us gathered, cheering on our candidate of choice and filling the air with our placards and dueling chants. There was even a bit of surprise when I arrived with a portable projector and showed part of Dean's Boston rally on the side of a building across the street from the convention, facing the Kerry, Clark and Lieberman supporters with a twenty-foot image of the good doctor. Heh. Pity traffic kept me from arriving earlier....

Terry McAuliff gave a good speech, the most notable part being the instant, unanimous cheer when he asked that we all support whoever wins the nomination. I found the lack of hesitation on this point encouraging indeed.

But the most interesting part came late in the event when I noticed a man with a large poster calling for a write-in campaign for- no, I'm not kidding- Hillary Clinton. I asked him why, and he proceeded to tear into the pack of candidates like....straight off of the RNC spin/smear sheet. The level of hostility displayed towards every one of the Dems in the race was as shocking as his conviction that NONE of them stood any chance- whatsoever- of beating Bush. Only Hillary, he said, stood any chance of motivating Democrats to vote. Only Hillary could garner the resources to oppose Bush. Only Hillary. Nothing good was true about anyone else, nothing bad or challenging to H's chances of success could even be discussed. Not the way to win converts!

At this point, I had to ask him if he was a Democrat. And, while he did indicate in the affirmative, I wasn't convinced. A quick check in google revealed that the gentleman in question was none other than Bob Kunst. You may remember him from the battles with Anita Bryant and Jerry Falwell, as president of the Oral Majority. Or, as the independent candidate for Governor of Florida in 2002. To his credit, he has been active in calling attention to the theft of the election in Florida.

It turns out that most of the reasoning, as far as I can tell, comes from the fact that some polls indicate only 50% of the population can name a Democratic candidate, while Hillary polled at 46 to W's 50% elect numbers. This is a matter of name recognition, not ability to conduct a winning campaign.

I know this is still the primaries, and pretty much anything goes. But, please, knock the shit off once we have a nominee. We do not need another splitting of the vote in 04.

State your case, but do not add to the ranks of useful Idiots. Division after the primaries is the last thing we need, or will tolerate.

Media Literacy: Who is the "American Council for Capital Formation"?

So, I'm reading this article on Sen. Boxer's efforts to push through a huge tax break for corporate America, Boxer Promotes One-Time Corporate Tax Break to Boost Spending, and I see that she's waving around a study by economist Allan Sinai that claims it will produce a zillion dollars in new capital spending and hundreds of thousands of new jobs, etc.

At the end of the article, I see this: "Sinai is a well-known macroeconomist at Decision Economics Inc. The study was funded by the American Council for Capital Formation, a nonprofit advocacy group."

A "non-profit advocacy group"? Yeah right.

So, what did my buddy Dave tell me:

a) go search on MediaTransparency.org for ACCF - ping: money from the Olin Foundation, and a mention in this article: The Corporate Think Tank Complex; apparently, this is one of ExxonMobil''s favorite charities.

b) search in Google, both "the web", and in Google News... hmm, the Las Vegas Review Journal covers the same topic, but despite a rather sympathetic treatment to the topic (in the Business section, by a Washington Bureau reporter), described these guys as a "pro-industry group". What possessed the Chronicle to do differently?

c) sometimes it helps to check out namebase.org: they don't have much on Allen Sinai, but they have a fair bit on Gerald L. Parsky, ACCF board member, and member of the Governator's transition team (he's also a UC Regent, appointed by Wilson)... and you can see why he's on the ACCF board: "From 1977 to 1992, he was affiliated with the law firm of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, specializing in international corporate and tax law."

Google search for Allen Sinai produces quite a few hits... including all sorts of speaker's bureau entries, one of which states his fee is between $10,000 and $20,000 per speech. Obviously, this is a very media-saavy individual with a high profile. Seems that he can be counted on to produce consistent conclusions, too: here's his testimony before Congress on the benefits of repealing the estate tax.

Google produced this item from Capital Research Center... a lot of donations from corporate America and the oil industry... and guess what's on the ACCF home page? A rant about excessive subsidies to "renewable energy" research.

Anyway, all this begs the question: what is one of the most progessive Senators in the Congress doing waving around a study funded by these folks?

P.S. Can you guess how this little gem came to my attention? Well, the answer is two words, starting with G and P.

Spin, spin, spin!

Recent poll results in Iraq were cited by Dick Cheney in that infamous Meet the Press interview of a little while ago. He claimed that the Iraqis were overall feeling very favourable towards the occupation. Now the pollster himself has spoken up to say that it was a load of spun crap, and the attitude is much worse.

For example, while Cheney noted that when asked what kind of government they would like, Iraqis chose “the US... hands down,” in fact, the results of the poll are actually quite different. Twenty-three percent of Iraqis say that they would like to model their new government after the US; 17.5 percent would like their model to be Saudi Arabia; 12 percent say Syria, 7 percent say Egypt and 37 percent say “none of the above.” That’s hardly “winning hands down.”

When given the choice as to whether they “would like to see the American and British forces leave Iraq in six months, one year, or two years,” 31.5 percent of Iraqis say these forces should leave in six months; 34 percent say a year, and only 25 percent say two or more years.

So while technically Cheney might say that “over 60 percent (actually it’s 59 percent) ... want the US to stay at least another year,” an equally correct observation would be that 65.5 percent want the US and Britain to leave in one year or less.

Other numbers found in the poll go further to dampen the vice president’s and the AEI’s rosy interpretations. For example, when asked if “democracy can work well in Iraq,” 51 percent said “no; it is a Western way of doing things and will not work here.”

And attitudes toward the US were not positive. When asked whether over the next five years, they felt that the “US would help or hurt Iraq,” 50 percent said that the US would hurt Iraq, while only 35.5 percent felt the US would help the country. On the other hand, 61 percent of Iraqis felt that Saudi Arabia would help Iraq in the next five years, as opposed to only 7.5 percent, who felt Saudi Arabia would hurt their country. Some 50.5 percent felt that the United Nations would help Iraq, while 18.5 percent felt it would hurt. Iran’s rating was very close to the US’, with 53.5 percent of Iraqis saying Iran would hurt them in the next five years, while only 21.5 percent felt that Iran might help them.

The administration's misuse of the numbers is really only to be expected, but it's nice to see my skepticism about this poll was rewarded.

China and India talking...

I got this chat transcript off one of the innumerable lists I'm on. I thought it was worth redistributing, as an example of an exchange between citizens of two emerging world powers, representative of conversations that happen every day all over the world, and yet seem to be completely off the radar of American media.

Items that struck me (aside from the dialogue being held in English): the Indian's skepticism about whether or not the U.S. ever actually landed on the moon, the Chinese woman's comments about good jobs in the U.S., the differing perspectives on Iraq, and the environmental consciousness.

Regards,
Thomas Leavitt


Maia: so, bollywood?

blackcranein: no

Maia: is that famous in india

Maia: ?

blackcranein: thats a capitalist industry runs with black money

blackcranein: i would rather do underground

Maia: what kind of films do you make?

blackcranein: docus

blackcranein: i am working on a film on Bombay

Maia: wow, i love documentaries so much

blackcranein: i move around with the camera and shoot every day

blackcranein: i will then make a film on the city and how it is opressive

Maia: cool,

Maia: mostly i watch national geographic

blackcranein: thats very problematic

blackcranein: its from the first world perspective

blackcranein: they show wildlife as some sex and thriller

blackcranein: interested in mating and violence of animals

Maia: but its what truly happened in the nature

blackcranein: i dont think so

Maia: its natural

blackcranein: they want to say survival of the fittest is natural and it should happen with humans also

Maia: yes, evolution

blackcranein: some people say darwinism is dangerous

blackcranein: in the name of evolution first world says that they are smarter and will rule the wortld

Maia: no not like that, evolution is a science

Maia: you are overreacted

blackcranein: animals do not accumulate, they hunt whatever they need for today and that is also natural

blackcranein: but humans accumulate and thats the problem with the world, the greed of humans

blackcranein: they should focus on the environment friendly ness of animals

Maia: that mostly happened in the 3rd world countries, i think

blackcranein: it happens all over the world

Maia: you cant say america is like this, they are doing good jobs

blackcranein: are u sure u are communist, they are killing innocents in iraq and afganistan

Maia: communist is in the sense of a nation's political strategy, and how we should progress, to change social structures, to be stronger

Maia: we china is also learning from america

blackcranein: u mean imperialist in national strategy and communist in the domestic sense

Maia: we hope to make good relationship with every country

blackcranein: why not with iraq and help them

blackcranein: and cuba

Maia: its none of china's business

Maia: if we do so

Maia: it would just cause troubles

blackcranein: i think u need to read lenin

blackcranein: the workers of the world unite

blackcranein: workers of the world are one against all interantionals capital

Maia: rightnow what we need is to pursue economic development, but not conflicts.

blackcranein: one which sees nature as resourse and exploits it

Maia: tahts the most important thing china needs

blackcranein: we need happiness and not goods

blackcranein: are u interested in reading some interesting stuff of what i am saying

Maia: i dont read those stuff, currently what we learn

blackcranein: go to www.swaraj.org/shikshantar and read their vision of the world

Maia: is DengXiaoping's theory

blackcranein: our education is fucked up

blackcranein: read mao

Maia: maoism is old for china

blackcranein: and sometimes communists have also taken environement badly

Maia: what we are learning is a better way that suitable to china

blackcranein: so lets invent new forms of humanism

blackcranein: what about all the nuclear disasters and flood in china causes by playing with environment

Maia: but the main spirit also came from maoism

Maia: we have noticed that

blackcranein: we have to evolve

Maia: although its late

blackcranein: the world has caused major disaster to the world in last 100 years

blackcranein: polluted the soil our rivers

blackcranein: and go on till we realsie that we cannot eat money

blackcranein: we need to reverse it

blackcranein: nature is a loan from future generations and we have to preserve for them

Maia: you know a lot

Maia: i should learn from you, lol

blackcranein: we all know a lot , just have to see around us

blackcranein: but read the site i just mentioned, i just met those people and they are really sensible

Maia: ok, i will, thanks for the link

blackcranein: i feel my school was the worse thing for me

blackcranein: it taught me a lot of nonsense

Maia: same here in china, what they taught are just vacant theoretic things

Maia: but not realistic

Maia: not applicable

blackcranein: it was the worst form of child labour in a way

blackcranein: i read maths by figures, my mother knew it by making dresss for me from a straight cloth and according to my size

blackcranein: school taught me that my native language is inferior and english is good

Maia: bullshit

Maia: every culture is good

Maia: india has very old culture

blackcranein: it is doing this all over the world

Maia: we should reserve it

blackcranein: western education is fuck all

blackcranein: it teaches us that our tradition is bad

blackcranein: now they have started looking at chinese medicne and fengshui

Maia: fengshui?? geeez

Maia: its all bullshit

blackcranein: why

blackcranein: is it bad

Maia: its cult

blackcranein: i dont think so

blackcranein: they make it a cult when the can sell it

blackcranein: but i think their must be some truth

Maia: nobody believes it rightnow

blackcranein: in west they are going mad after it

Maia: i dont know bout that, maybe they are crazy? lol

blackcranein: u know their is a theory that americans didnt go to moon and it was a drama, we believe them but dont trust our traditions

Maia: i dont belive those theories

blackcranein: i bleieve them

blackcranein: why didnt they go again

Maia: why SHOULD they go again

Maia: since its already successful

blackcranein: no why did they go to antarctic again and again

blackcranein: thats one reason why i think they are liars

Maia: because they need to do so, and go to the moon second time is not needful

blackcranein: coz they cant

blackcranein: they would have buy now taken the minerals or whatever or sold the moon

Maia: no need to waste money on unnecessary things

Maia: thousands of ppl involved in the apollo, do you think its funny to make such a lie?

Maia: cheating the whole world?

Maia: no need!!

blackcranein: thousand can go and kill innocents in iraq

Maia: after all, its racism caused all the trouble

Maia: and racism is human nature

Maia: have to admit it

blackcranein: u say this coz u are fed on national geographic

Maia: prob is we have to change it

Maia: to improve it

Maia: but not to hate

Maia: hatred just cause more troubles

Maia: and disasters

Maia: we need PEACE

Maia: dont be involved in the hatred circle

Maia: thats what we need

blackcranein: now u know why the channel is dangerous

blackcranein: the essentialism and darwinism

blackcranein: but u cant change it if u say it si human nature as we are humans and we will do natural things

blackcranein: i am not

Maia: human is not flawless, racism came up when you were born in a stronger nation

blackcranein: but plz for god sake dont say racism is natural

Maia: IT IS, you have to admit

Maia: im not saying everyone is a racist

Maia: but racism

blackcranein: if it is then as humans we have to do natural things only

Maia: is one of human nature

blackcranein: no its not

Maia: im not saying everyone is a racist

blackcranein: then capitalsim is also one and fascism is also one

blackcranein: then its not human not nature

Maia: yes of course

Maia: so that's why we have to change it, nothing is born perfect, including human

blackcranein: but dont call it natural

Maia: being evil is a human nature? of course it is

blackcranein: its not

Maia: it is

blackcranein: being good is natural and we have to bring it back

blackcranein: its not

blackcranein: its not

blackcranein: its not

Maia: ok

blackcranein:

blackcranein: sorry

blackcranein: u have the right to ur opinion

blackcranein: but i think its not

Maia: well, dont have to argue, although argument is a nature too

Maia: lol

Maia: so improve it

Maia: change it

Maia: so, i want to be a progressivist and leftist

blackcranein: we have to resolve conflict

blackcranein: u are progressive and leftist

blackcranein: and nice person and a beautiful human being

Maia: see? that is do what i wanted to say

Maia: you put it well

blackcranein: we are all children of mother earth

Maia: true

Microsoft a cult?

... I have to agree with the poster. Seriously disturbing.

Ballmer obviously needs to work out more.

Regards,
Thomas Leavitt

[email addresses deleted]

From: Dave Farber
Subject: Steve Ballmer
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 06:42:37 -0500

Wonder if Dave Packard or Andy Grove ever did this? djf



Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 00:40:22 -0400
From: Alexandros Papadopoulos
Subject: Steve Ballmer
To: Dave Farber



Hi Dave!

Have you seen this clip of Ballmer?
http://andrew.cmu.edu/~apapadop/dancemonkeyboy.mpg (3MB)

I find it scary, all things considered.

-A

Separation of what and what?

Jefferson County Treasurer Mark Paschall presumes to tell jurors how they should go about their deliberations. From a story at FOX (yes really) --

The 61-page booklets promote "jury nullification" -- a concept promoted by conservative groups that say juries have the right to not only decide guilt or innocence, but also whether laws are just and adhere to God's law.

"You are above the law!" the booklet says. "As a juror in a trial setting, when it comes to your individual vote of innocent or guilty, you truly are answerable only to God almighty."

Said Paschall: "I want people to understand the form of government that we have and the rights and freedoms that went before. If it raises eyebrows, I think it perhaps ends up waking people up."

Some questioned whether Paschall has a right to distribute the material at a government office, and County Attorney Bill Tuthill said he was looking into the issue.

Riiiiiight! And since when was it the county treasurer's job to instruct the jury anyway? There's only one person whose job it is to tell you what to do, and you call them Your Honour.

Cheese-eating surrender monkeys!!

A sample from writer Susan Sontag's Friedenspreis peace prize acceptance speech, reproduced in The Guardian:

What the Americans see is almost the reverse of the Europhile cliché: they see themselves defending civilisation. The barbarian hordes are no longer outside the gates. They are within, in every prosperous city, plotting havoc. The "chocolate-producing" countries (France, Germany, Belgium) will have to stand aside, while a country with "will" - and God on its side - pursues the battle against terrorism (now conflated with barbarism). According to secretary of state Colin Powell, it is ridiculous for old Europe (sometimes it seems only France is meant) to aspire to play a role in governing or administering the territories won by the coalition of the conqueror. It has neither the military resources nor the taste for violence nor the support of its cosseted, all-too-pacific populations. And the Americans have it right. Europeans are not in an evangelical - or a bellicose - mood.

Indeed, sometimes I have to pinch myself to be sure I am not dreaming: that what many people in my own country now hold against Germany, which wreaked such horrors on the world for nearly a century - the new "German problem", as it were - is that Germans are repelled by war; that much of German public opinion is now virtually ... pacifist.

Were America and Europe never partners, never friends? Of course. But perhaps it is true that the periods of unity - of common feeling - have been exceptions, rather than the rule. One such time was from the second world war through the early cold war, when Europeans were profoundly grateful for America's intervention, succour and support. Americans are comfortable seeing themselves in the role of Europe's saviour. But then, America will expect the Europeans to be forever grateful, which is not what Europeans are feeling right now.

From "old" Europe's point of view, America seems bent on squandering the admiration - and gratitude - felt by most Europeans. The immense sympathy for the United States in the aftermath of the attack on September 11, 2001 was genuine. But what has followed is an increasing estrangement on both sides.

The citizens of the richest and most powerful nation in history have to know that America is loved, and envied ... and resented. More than a few who travel abroad know that Americans are regarded as crude, boorish, uncultivated by many Europeans, and don't hesitate to match these expectations with behaviour that suggests the ressentiment of ex-colonials. And some of the cultivated Europeans who seem most to enjoy visiting or living in the United States attribute to it, condescendingly, the liberating virtues of a colony where one throws off the restrictions and high-culture burdens of "back home".

Just a snippet of an excellent read: check out the rest.

Stovepipe

Seymour Hersh's story in the current New Yorker comes close to the complete ugly picture of the Bush administration's stupid, mendacious and finally very destructive relationship with the US intelligence community. The tiles of this mosaic are gathered from many disparate sources and stories, not previously understood in their totality. It's good Hersh.

The ultimate source of the forged Niger documents may be the missing key -- the grassy knoll, the 18-minute gap -- to Bush's Iraq war deception. Maybe we'll find it. Probably we won't.

Spam

I'm travelling, so when I can get on I'm using a dial-up connection. Yesterday over 24 hours I received 310 spam messages - all having to be downloaded over a slow connection. This morning it was 86, but that's just since I checked before going to bed.

What keeps Generation X awake at night (hint: it isn't "the bomb" or Islamic terrorists)...

Two words:

China

But that GDP is growing at an annual rate of 8%.

[...]

Meanwhile, China is a country coming alive. Shoucheng Zhang, a physics professor at Stanford University who also teaches at Tsing-hua University in Beijing, can't help but notice it when he returns to his native land. "I love to see the young people changing the world, [c]hanging China," he says.

India

After growing just 4.3 percent last year, India's economy, the second fastest growing in the world, after China, is widely expected to grow close to 7 percent this year.

... and, actually another word: "compounding".

What is America compounding?

The national debt (and the amount of interest paid on it annually).

Deferred maintenance on national infrastructure.

The costs of healthcare and the percentage of GDP devoted to it.

The cost of being the world's sole military superpower and wannabe traffic cop.

We see the nation's blood and our children's inheritance being pissed away in Iraq, and we wonder what the future will hold... as the above examples make clear, even in a global econony, our well being, and the opportunities available to us and ours, is dependent on the wisdom and foresight of our leaders. ... although, in the case of India and China, in some ways, it seems as if they are succeeding despite their leaders, as much as because of them. Imagine where India and China would be right now, if they hadn't been hobbled by an authoritarian/collectivist government for the last fifty years.

Being born an American, from 1946, up until now, has been a unique advantage - I'd rather be an American than anyone else, despite all the faults of my country; the level of economic opportunity... but also personal freedom available here is like no where else - not Europe, not Japan, not India or China, not Hong Kong prior to the mainland takeover, or Singapore... I'm worried about whether that will be true, looking back from 2050, whether or not our country will be seen as a bankrupt land that squandered a golden opportunity.

Seeing reports like this leaves me deeply uneasy... developments like this are what George Bush and Congress should be paying attention to, not tinpot dictators like Saddamn Hussein, and the ravings of crazed Islamic fundamentalists like Osama Bin Laden. Screw the war on terror and mirror-shaded CIA spooks hanging out in third-world capitals... I want to see universities being built, scholarships being awarded, grants and prizes being handed out, infrastructure being upgraded, schools being reformed, the moon, Mars, and near earth orbit being colonized.

The U.S. has leaned on immigration to supply technology innovation for the last hundred years... what happens when our comparative advantage in that area dries up, and people quit coming here to stay? 75% of Chinese who came here for an education used to stay; now 75% of them leave. That means three times fewer scientists, three times fewer companies, three times fewer economic side benefits being thrown off...

But, do we see our leaders worrying about this? No - it's the war in Iraq, it's terrorism, it's Internet pornography, it's taxes... it is anything but what really matters for the future of this nation.

Depressing.

Despicable treatment of American military personnel...

Seems to me that we oughta treat folks injured in the line of duty better than this.

"This ballot sponsored by Coca-Cola." (not a joke)

The Charlotte Observer has an article on the South Carolina Democratic Party's latest initiative: corporate sponsored election materials! Apparently their ED got the idea from Iowa Democrats (who're proposing to sell advertising space on a media backdrop to help pay for their caucuses) and decided to take it a step further; they're having trouble raising the funds necessary to put on a primary election (their state, unlike others, makes the party pay for the cost of holding the elction), and this is their solution. Given that it only costs $500,000, you'd think they could dun the various candidates for the nomination for the funds necessary to put it on (or the DNC), in order to avoid embarassment of this type...

I especially love the last paragraph:

[State Democratic Party Executive Director] Erwin brushed off the criticism, saying it would be worse if the primary were canceled. "It somewhat changes the nature of politics, but boy, isn't it consistent with the way things are changing?" he said.

No kidding.

BTW, this arrived in my inbox via a Green Party mailing list... thanks the the help building the party in South Carolina, Erwin. :)

What first came to mind when offered this big, shiny blog Dave built, was, what could I add? In the archives and posts are a great wealth of information. This is the place I've always sent friends who are new to the web.

Then, the question hits me: what are we doing with all these billions of bites of blogged bounty? We can find more information faster than ever before. What are we to do with it? How do we deprogram the propogandised hordes?

First, I'm trying to understood who 'we' are. Roughly half of American households have internet access, and you can bet your booties that it's income skewed. What percentage of that frequents Weblogs? We need to widen the circle somehow...Enter Dean. More on that later...

What we're up against

We stand little chance of changing the tide unless we understand the nature of the monster that ate our government. The unholy alliance between the neocons, radical religious right, and big corporate money is a mighty foe indeed. How we focus our efforts will make all the difference in winning this fight.

This article, 'Noble Lies and Perpetual War' gets at the real underpinnings of the current governing philosophy of the neocons-in-charge. It's an important read, because it highlights the futility of expecting any respect, or fairness, from our self-styled new ruling class. They have no shame and no guilt because they are convinced that the ends justify the means. Here for the visual.
Strauss does this by putting forward the argument that there is a natural ruling class, and a natural dominated class.
Leo also 'legitimizes' the sort of bull that got us into Iraq:

A natural order of inequality

Danny Postel: You've argued that there is an important connection between the teachings of Leo Strauss and the Bush administration's selling of the Iraq war. What is that connection?

Shadia Drury: Leo Strauss was a great believer in the efficacy and usefulness of lies in politics. Public support for the Iraq war rested on lies about Iraq posing an imminent threat to the United States - the business about weapons of mass destruction and a fictitious alliance between al-Qaida and the Iraqi regime. Now that the lies have been exposed, Paul Wolfowitz and others in the war party are denying that these were the real reasons for the war.

So what were the real reasons? Reorganising the balance of power in the Middle East in favour of Israel? Expanding American hegemony in the Arab world? Possibly. But these reasons would not have been sufficient in themselves to mobilise American support for the war. And the Straussian cabal in the administration realised that.

Danny Postel: The neo-conservative vision is commonly taken to be about spreading democracy and liberal values globally. And when Strauss is mentioned in the press, he is typically described as a great defender of liberal democracy against totalitarian tyranny. You've written, however, that Strauss had a 'profound antipathy to both liberalism and democracy.'?

Shadia Drury: The idea that Strauss was a great defender of liberal democracy is laughable. I suppose that Strauss's disciples consider it a noble lie. Yet many in the media have been gullible enough to believe it.

How could an admirer of Plato and Nietzsche be a liberal democrat? The ancient philosophers whom Strauss most cherished believed that the unwashed masses were not fit for either truth or liberty, and that giving them these sublime treasures would be like throwing pearls before swine. In contrast to modern political thinkers, the ancients denied that there is any natural right to liberty. Human beings are born neither free nor equal. The natural human condition, they held, is not one of freedom, but of subordination – and in Strauss's estimation they were right in thinking so.

Praising the wisdom of the ancients and condemning the folly of the moderns was the whole point of Strauss's most famous book, Natural Right and History. The cover of the book sports the American Declaration of Independence. But the book is a celebration of nature - not the natural rights of man (as the appearance of the book would lead one to believe) but the natural order of domination and subordination.(emphasis added)

Needless to say liberal thought is considered a weak inferior. Thus this administration's acting like it's entitled to do as it chooses, being superior and all...

A second fundamental belief of Strauss's ancients has to do with their insistence on the need for secrecy and the necessity of lies. In his book Persecution and the Art of Writing, Strauss outlines why secrecy is necessary. He argues that the wise must conceal their views for two reasons - to spare the people's feelings and to protect the elite from possible reprisals.

The people will not be happy to learn that there is only one natural right - the right of the superior to rule over the inferior, the master over the slave, the husband over the wife, and the wise few over the vulgar many. In On Tyranny, Strauss refers to this natural right as the "tyrannical teaching" of his beloved ancients. It is tyrannical in the classic sense of rule above rule or in the absence of law (p. 70).

Now, the ancients were determined to keep this tyrannical teaching secret because the people are not likely to tolerate the fact that they are intended for subordination; indeed, they may very well turn their resentment against the superior few. Lies are thus necessary to protect the superior few from the persecution of the vulgar many.

So, what kind of power are they accumulating over any potential opposition, threat or undesirables?

Information Clearing House has another article up describing US efforts to data mine every person traveling into or through the US, regardless of their home country's policy on privacy.

"In Europe, data protection laws allow information to be used only for the purpose for which it is collected. America has no such laws. The EU is arguing with America over how to restrict its access to the passenger records of European airlines, but from a position of extreme weakness. America says it will fine air- lines $6,000 per passenger if they fail to provide all the access demanded, and the EU's transport commissioner says he cannot afford to bring air traffic with America to a complete halt."

She goes on to describe the creeping erosion of our basic protections....and describes a situation that is chilling to say the least: detentions without benefit of council or even official charges being placed; development of no-fly lists with no way to determine how a person gets placed on, let alone removed from. Interrogations based on one's political opinion:

"Now ordinary people fall under suspicion for ordinary behaviour. In San Francisco, a retired phone company worker got into a fierce discussion at his gym about the failings of President Bush and the war on Iraq. He was woken several days later by federal agents calling at his apartment to interrogate him about his politics. Last February, a middle-aged defence lawyer in New Mexico was in an internet chatroom when he apparently suggested that "Bush is out of control". Within hours, he was surrounded by police, then handcuffed by Secret Service agents and questioned about whether he was a threat to the president. In North Carolina, a 19-year-old was visited by FBI agents who had been told she had "un-American material" in her apartment. It consisted of a poster opposing Bush's use of the death penalty. She was asked what she knew about the Taliban and questioned for 40 minutes. Her details have been placed on file."

But for an answer for where to look to widen our circle, she continues:

...Yet it isn't these measures that have aroused most public anxiety - it is the government's new power to track, secretly, what people read, research and borrow in public libraries. For the past two years, many libraries have had wall signs warning patrons that the library cannot guarantee their privacy, and may be required to hand information on them over to the FBI.

Much of the anger at this has come not from urban liberals, but from conservative rural communities. Robert Reich, who was labour secretary to President Clinton, told me that the library issue has united ordinary people, libertarians and civil liberties activists. "It's become symbolic of the entire effort to watch us," says Reich. "There's something very personal about library books, and it's too close to George Orwell and the behaviour of totalitarian governments. Americans guard their privacy with a tremendous sense of righteousness and indignation. We hate big government. This country was founded on a suspicion of it."

Maybe there's some use to be had of all the efforts conservatives have made demonizing our government....it would be sweet irony to turn the monster they created against them. Feed the snake it's own tail!

This is also a good indication of where we need to look to start building relationships and bring more support to the fight for sane government, although one wonders how the thought of FBI oversight affects surfing habits. But here is the fertile ground where we need to educate and recruit actively to take away more of those blood red states in 2004.
Time to take another look at Library Juice...