skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I mentioned the plans to turn Rocky Flats into a wildlife refuge. They also plan to allow a little hunting, which is a definition of refuge I was not familiar with. At least it’ll make hunting a bit fairer, since the deer will be able to defend themselves by shooting death rays out of their eyes.
The Bush campaign has sent my cat a penetrating analysis of the debate. The email asserts, “The President spoke with clarity, conviction and compassion about the most important issues facing our country.” My cat does not care (evidently, the email has infected my computer with the dreaded Alliteration Virus).
“President Bush revealed John Kerry’s tendency to confuse a litany of complaints with a plan.” Of course Bush tends to confuse Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden. And “Kerry believes education is unrelated to the economy” while Bush “believes that no child should be left behind”. Except maybe Jenna. Bush “revealed just how far out of the mainstream Kerry’s record lies on abortion, gay marriage, immigration, taxes, health care and fiscal discipline.” My cat has a headache now, and wishes the whole thing would go away.
The Village Voice’s John Powers says Cheney is “a run-to-fat version of The Simpsons’ Mr. Burns”.
James Wolcott wonders about Bush’s “cavalier lack of preparation” for the debates. “He not only didn’t have the eloquence, he barely had the facts and figures. For some bizarre reason best left to future psychologists, Bush doesn’t seem to have approached these debates seriously. He refused to acknowledge he couldn’t get by with simply rehashing his stump speech.”
More fun with pictures.
California voters: Although you will no doubt slavishly follow my recommendations, the SF Bay Guardian also always does a good job of describing the issues and candidates fairly, from a progressive standpoint--and then recommending that you vote for the lesser of 2 evils. But they’ll do it in such a way that you might start out reading their endorsement of, say, Barbara Boxer, planning to vote for her, and finish it convinced to vote for the Peace & Freedom candidate, as I just did.
Oh, and I hate do this to you, but they convinced me to vote against 1A, which I was always suspicious of.
Go Granny Go: In the Senate race in New Hampshire, former governor Judd Gregg was forced to debate the D candidate, 94-year-old Doris Haddock, famous for walking across the US at 90 in support of election reforms. He had initially refused, but she then challenged him to Scrabble, and he had to give in.
Which reminds me that I meant to criticize McNeil-Lehrer last week and yesterday because they keep running interviews with pollsters trying to predict the presidential election. Pointless, time-wasting segments, the reason, along with hurricanes and Fannie Mae stories, that I record the News Hour and watch it with one hand near the fast forward button. But there are 34 Senate races, 435 House races, and how many of them has the program bothered profiling?
Molly Ivins: “Character, says George Bush, is the issue. George Bush. Says character is the issue. ... What are George Bush’s principles, this man who accuses John Kerry of waffling.”
I’m afraid I altered that quote, which is from a column Molly wrote 12 years ago. It was George Bush the Elder accusing Clinton. Plus ca change, huh? More: “he has descended into rank McCarthyism with his unfounded charge that there was some impropriety about Clinton’s having visited Moscow...implying that it was unpatriotic to oppose the war in Vietnam.” Just what the Sinclair documentary says about Kerry. The column is in her new retrospective book, “Who Let the Dogs In? Incredible Political Animals I Have Known,” which I’m currently doling out to myself in little bits, as treats.
Speaking of “plus ca change, plus c’est la même chose,” the Indy has a counterpart to the NYT story I mentioned yesterday about Allawi bringing Baathists back into power: “Alleged war criminals [i.e., the warlords] are poised to take positions of power in Afghanistan’s new government”. As in Iraq, it’s just plain convenient to bring back the old shitheads, because they know how to make the trains/torture chambers/poppy trade run on time.
In the debate, Kerry referred in this wise to Mary Cheney: “I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney’s daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she’s being who she was. She’s being who she was born as.” That’s the sum total of what he had to say, but Lynne Cheney threw a tantrum, calling it “a cheap and tawdry political trick,” saying he “is not a good man” and generally letting her daughter know how truly ashamed she is of her sexual identity. Really will be a hell of an awkward Thanksgiving this year. Oh, and fuck you Lynne Cheney.
Full text.
Bush says Kerry’s quoting him about not being worried about Osama is ex-ag-er-ra-ted, taking the 5 syllable word very slowly.
Bush says we took the right action in not permitting the contaminated flu vaccine into the US. Actually, it was the British that shut them down. He had nothing to do with it. Bush says he hasn’t had a flu shot. I’m waiting for him to turn to Kerry and ask him if he has, the big coward. He blames the reliance for flu vaccine on 2 companies on litigation. Everyone says it’s more to do with the unpredictable level of demand for the vaccine year to year.
Ohmygod, Kerry is going to do that “I have a plan” thing over and over again. Bush says a plan is not a litany of complaints, and calls it bait & switch. Like a lot of Bush’s memorized come-backs, it could be easily turned back by a method Kerry would never use: “President Bush, you just used the word ‘litany.’ Could you define litany? Could you spell it?”
Oh-so-hilarious Bush put down: Pay-go to a senator from Mass., a colleague of Ted Kennedy, means you pay and he goes ahead and spends.
I know Massachusetts isn’t that popular a state, so Kerry isn’t standing up for his home state, but isn’t there something unseemly about a “president” of the entire United States using the name of one of those states over and over as an insult?
Kerry alludes to The Sopranos. Oh, he’s so cool and “with it.”
Oops, there’s that blinking again.
Bush: litany of misstatements. Oh dear, he’s learned a new word. Add it to the drinking game. Also: “his rhetoric doesn’t match his record.”
Question: is homosexuality a choice. Bush doesn’t know. Or care.
Bush uses loaded phrase “culture of life” again. Adoption is “a great alternative” to abortion. Also abstinence. Praises Kerry’s wife for being involved in abstinence programs. I’ll bet she is.
Oh, there’s that chuckle again, that always makes me want to smack him. Bush’s chuckle, of course.
The No Child Left Behind Act is “really a jobs act, when you think about it,” at least if you’re trying to fill up time because you have nothing to say about jobs and the minimum wage.
With an opportunity to go after Bush for refusing to give his position on abortion rights, Kerry hits him with the softest of Nerf blows. Bush responds with an attack on Kerry having a “litmus test.” Again, Kerry should ask him to define it. Why do R’s think that that phrase has any resonance with the American people? Oh no, he has a litmus test! Duck!
Ah, there’s the “global test” again. Kerry suggests instead a “sort of truth standard.”
Bush: Part of being a hopeful society is that somebody owns something. Unless it’s a crack pipe.
Bush: “my faith is very personal.” Then fucking keep it to yourself. Faith gives him calmness. I thought that not knowing what was going on is what gives him calmness. God wants everybody to be free. The freedom in Afghanistan is a gift from the almighty. Can you say crusade?
Kerry: we have a lot more loving of our neighbor to do. Thanks, we had enough of that with Clinton.
What did you learn from the women in your life? Bush’s wife was a librarian so...not much. Although there’s this:
The Bush campaign is accusing Kerry of standing “in pulpits across the country using Scripture to make political attacks.”
After John Edwards makes a comment about stem-cell research helping people like Christopher Reeve, Sen. Bill “Here, Kitty Kitty” Frist accuses him of cruelly offering false hope to patients. Frist prefers to offer false despair.
(Later: Edwards said “When John Kerry is President, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get out of that wheelchair and walk again.” The repugnant Mr. Frist may have a point.)
From a letter to the NYT: “The Bush record is a barrel of fish, and John Kerry can’t seem to hit any of them.”
Mass graves are being dug up in Iraq, with children in them, and I’ll bet Bush mentions that fact in tonight’s debate even though it’s supposed to be confined to domestic and economic issues. I don’t think it’s too cynical of me to wonder about the timing of this. (Bob Goodsell was on this first.)
The NYT has a piece on Allawi trying to hobble the de-Baathization process, trying to disband the independent commission, and then not allowing its members sufficient passes to enter the Green Zone, ordering ministries not to deal with it, etc.
Ha’aretz locates one of the secret CIA detention/torture centers, in Jordan. Human Rights Watch claims that this location is so secret that Bush asked the CIA not to tell him where it was. Not that he could find Jordan on a map. But if the existence of such centers is to remain a (dirty little) secret, how can you release any of the prisoners, or try them in real courts? Ever?
I’ve stayed away from the Sinclair Broadcasting issue, because I don’t want to be on the side of speech suppression, even when the speech involved is nasty and one-sided. Did I say “even”--I meant especially. Sinclair has called its anti-Kerry film (I was going to use a pejorative adjective, but I haven’t seen it, so I shouldn’t be characterizing it--that’s a hint to other bloggers) a news report, and while that may be laughable, we really don’t want lawsuits every time Frontline or NBC News profiles a candidate, and the news programs we’d get if that sort of scrutiny became common would be even duller and stupider than they are now.
And then Sinclair VP Mark Hyman, a jerk of the highest order, goes on tv and makes me want to join the baying crowd. First he tells CNN that if this is an in-kind campaign contribution, then every car bomb in Iraq is a contribution to Kerry’s campaign. Then he goes on McNeil-Lehrer and says that his idea of equal time is for Kerry to come on after and respond to the charges that he’s a traitor. No, Sinclair should be required to air anything Kerry wants it to air. In a perfect world, that would be “Fahrenheit 9/11.” The antidote to bad speech is more speech, not censorship.
Purely coincidentally, I’m pleased to announce that this blog has been mentioned negatively (idiot, schmuck were the words used) on a website I will not name here. And let me extend a big welcome to anyone who may have clicked through from there: a mind willing to listen to multiple viewpoints is a free mind.
The US occupation authorities are not letting the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspect in Iraq. And the interim government isn’t fulfilling its responsibilities to the IAEA either.
Interesting LA Times article, explaining the Duelfer report, “Through Hussein’s Looking Glass.” In the world that only existed inside Saddam’s head, he won the 1st Gulf War, was the greatest Arab leader in history, and, get this, the CIA was smart enough to know that he had no WMDs. He was bluffing Iran, but he assumed--god, this cracks me up--that the CIA was competent.
In preparation for the last presidential debate, I have devised the World’s Shortest Presidential Debate Drinking Game: whenever Bush brings up Kerry’s “reducing terrorism to a nuisance” quote, take a drink. Five minutes into the debate, you will be lying unconscious in a pool of vomit. Drinking game over.
I asked 3 days ago how long the US could deny that it bombed a wedding in Fallujah. Well the NYT (which doesn’t bother updating us on the condition of the bride/widow) quotes a senior Pentagon official, who was having a senior-Pentagon-official moment, saying “We know what the strike was supposed to hit, and we hit it. If a wedding was going on, well, it was in concert with a meeting with a top Zarqawi lieutenant.” Some weddings just have the worst entertainment.
The article also quotes a “Pentagon official” thus:
“If there are civilians dying in connection with these attacks, and with the destruction, the locals at some point have to make a decision. Do they want to harbor the insurgents and suffer the consequences that come with that, or do they want to get rid of the insurgents and have the benefits of not having them there?”
Please note that this official is admitting to deliberately bombing a civilian population in order to get them to “make a decision.” This is the textbook definition of both a) terrorism, and b) a war crime.
The government is dismantling the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant. It just gave up the idea of blowing up the old plutonium processing building because that might be unsafe. They are planning to turn the site into a wildlife refuge. Really, really wild life. But at least you’ll be able to see the animals at night. When a superintelligent antelope with two heads takes over the world, don’t say I didn’t warn you.
Bush meets his Waterloo
(sorry, couldn’t resist)
(but didn’t try very hard).
Kerry really needs to clarify that reducing-terrorism-to-a-nuisance quote to counter the silly charge that he doesn’t take terrorism seriously. If I may make a suggestion: “I meant to say ‘a fucking nuisance.’”
The WaPo spots a banner in the Iraqi city of Hit: “Freedom is not given. It is taken by force.”
Bush chair Marc Racicot has written to the AFL-CIO accusing it of, well really, an unspecified but indirect connection to vandalism at several Bush campaign offices (the union demonstrated at those offices to protest the new overtime rules). Note the care taken to avoid slanderous accusations in the letter (full text here): “Protests by your organization come on the heels of several other incidents... I hope you will put an end to protest activities that have led to injuries, property damage, vandalism and voter intimidation. We will hold you and your organization accountable for the actions of your members and urge you to immediately discontinue any coordinated protest efforts.” Led to? Come on the heels of? Not exactly proof of a causal connection, and indeed the campaign later clarified itself, according to Reuters: “Bush campaign spokesman Brian Jones said Racicot did not mean to link shootings and break-ins to the union protests. ‘I think what he’s trying to show is that there is this pattern of violence and vandalism and just pointing to the fact that it’s a part of an overall pattern,’ Jones said.”
The over-all message is familiar: your legal, peaceful dissent from governmental positions emboldens the enemy, so shut up.
Freedom is not given. It is taken by force.
The military budget just passed eliminates the limit on the number of US troops and “contractors” that can be sent to Colombia in support of the government of death-squad promoter and violent thug Alvaro Uribe (I’m not a big fan of Uribe). I’ve written a lot in the past about Colombia and Uribe, and here’s the results of a Google search for those posts (not in chronological order, I’m afraid, but the dates are clear enough).
The Iraqi “government” has been buying up weapons in Sadr City. They may come from members of the Mahdi Army, or not, since the prices are higher than those on the black market. Just in case you’ve got a few RPGs or machine guns you’ve been wanting to get rid of, I am providing the buy-back price list as a public service:
- Heavy machinegun, $1,000
- Heavy machinegun ammunition, 440 rounds, $200
- 60mm mortar, $225
- 120mm mortar, $275
- Rocket-propelled grenade, $160
- Kalashnikov, $150
- Romanian sniper rifle, $630
- Roadside bombs, $50
- Katyusha rocket-launcher $50
- Empty Kalashnikov magazine, $4
- Grenade, $5
- 350 Kalashnikov rounds, $320
Nothing about bows & arrows. One of the many industries for which tax breaks were just secretly voted by Congress is bow and arrow manufacturers.
Elsewhere in Iraq, Marine Capt. Carrie Batson, herewith declared Military Moron of the Day, said of the massive destruction caused by American bombing of Najaf, “Even though we’ve destroyed their houses, the people are happy with us” because Sadr had “hijacked” their town.
Happy Indigenous People’s Day (Berkeley only).
The LA Times says that of California’s 53 Congressional seats, exactly one is even close to being a competitive race (and that one isn’t very close). Also, 2 out of NY’s 29, 1 out of Florida’s 25. “We’re getting back to the divine right of kings,” says alliterative Rob Richie of the Center for Voting and Democracy. Which explains why members of Congress so often seem like the result of generations of cousins marrying cousins.
Kerry tells the NYT, “We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives but they’re a nuisance.” Even when he’s right, you just want to slap him, don’t you? Although from the look of his face, that would probably hurt your hand more than his face.
Saudi Arabia will have municipal elections in February, its first elections of any kind since the 1960s. And no, women won’t be allowed to vote. The voting age is 21.
Tom Coburn, the asshole running for Senate in Oklahoma, says (said, actually, on 8/31/04, and we’re only hearing this now?) “lesbianism is so rampant in some of the schools in southeast Oklahoma that they'll only let one girl go to the bathroom. Now think about it. Think about that issue. How is it that that’s happened to us?” Us? Spend a lot of time in girls’ bathrooms in schools in southeast Oklahoma, do ya, Tom?
Coburn also has an ad out which “shows images of Hispanics and dark hands receiving welfare payments,” echoing an old Jesse Helms ad, which I’ve been unable to see. It’s not, for example, on Coburn’s website, although many other of his ads are. If anyone’s seen it online somewhere, drop me an email.
And given that he’s running racist ads, it occurs to me to ask how many of those under-age girls he sterilized were non-white.
Rumsfeld is upset that the media are ignoring the Iraqi security forces: “They do exist. Over 700 of them have been killed.” There’s something wrong with that logic, I just can’t put my finger on it...
The party line is that the complete failure of safeguards against fraudulent voting in Afghanistan is irrelevant. So what if the condom broke, baby, we had a good time, didn’t we? Karzai says the ink thing “did not diminish the value people gave to the vote.” Robert Barry, the OSCE guy I quoted a while back, says talking about the fraud would “put into question the expressed will of millions of citizens.” As Antonin Scalia wrote in Bush v. Gore, counting the votes accurately might “cast a cloud on what [Karzai] claims to be the legitimacy of his election.” Vote-counting is the boring, messy bit, like cleaning up after a party, and I say we don’t bother doing it. If the only thing that’s important is that people showed up to vote, who needs to count ballots? Let’s declare victory and go home.
Many of the candidates have been bribed/pressured/whatever to back away from demands to re-run the election. They will accept the findings of an independent commission. An “independent” commission, in Afghanistan. Really now.
The Indy: “Bombs in Baghdad killed 18 people as the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, declared during a visit to Iraq that America was winning the war against insurgency.” Also, “Mr Rumsfeld’s trip had not been announced beforehand for security reasons.” He held a Q&A with Marines, who were ordered beforehand not to ask him when they would be going home. He told the Marines that Iraq was “ground zero” in the war on terrorism, which must have reassured them no end (American Heritage Dictionary: “Ground zero. n. 1. The target of a projectile, such as a missile or bomb. 2. The site directly below, directly above, or at the point of detonation of a nuclear weapon.”).
For a change of pace, a religious story, from the London Times:
Spanish count jet skis to heaven
From David Sharrock in San Sebastián
A SOCIALITE count hopes to avoid Purgatory by embarking on a maritime pilgrimage, using a jet ski to undertake one of Europe’s most well-trodden paths, the Camino de Santiago.
Alvaro de Marichalar, Spain’s most eligible bachelor, was expected to be somewhere off Spain’s “Coast of Death” this morning, bearing down upon Santiago de Compostela at 35 knots.
For centuries weary pilgrims have walked the Camino de Santiago, from the French Pyrenees and through northern Spain, to atone for their sins, taking an average of three weeks.
But Count Alvaro, who earned a place in The Guinness Book of Records in 2002 by crossing the Atlantic by jet ski, is pioneering what could turn out to be the salvation of time-starved believers.
This is a Xacobeo year — when the day of St James falls on a Sunday in Spain — which means the souls of pilgrims who complete the Camino are excused from Purgatory.
Count Alvaro hopes that by Wednesday evening, having made landfall on the Galician coast and marched the last 18 miles inland, the Camino will have been completed in record time.
The count, 43, was anxious to dispel thoughts that this 650-mile journey is no more than a jaunt for someone who took 63 days to complete the 10,000 nautical miles from Rome to Miami about two years ago.
“Success is never guaranteed, and I will be standing up all the time to avoid injuring my back,” he said.
Although Bush didn’t like the idea of global tests, he says that Kerry “doesn’t pass the credibility tests.” Must not be graded on a curve.
Everyone is rushing, prematurely, to proclaim the Afghan elections good enough. For example, the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), which had just a handful of its own election monitors, has pooh-poohed calls for the Afghan election to be re-run, its ambassador saying that that “would not do service to the people of Afghanistan who came out yesterday, at great personal risk, to vote.” This is a variant of Bush’s “You can’t call the war a mistake, that would demoralize the troops” argument.
Oh, and this should be obvious, but the news reports featuring pictures and interviews with happy voters came from the few parts of Afghanistan it was safe enough for reporters to travel to.
Another piece of animation by the guys who did “This Land.” This one’s even better.
Afghan women (one presumes) on line to vote.
It’s bad enough to see the word election applied to the event that just took place in Afghanistan, but to use the word democracy is to strip the word of 90% of its meaning, to turn it into a signifier without a signified (that’s my little homage to the late Jacques Derrida; don’t worry, I won’t do it again.)
First, democracy is a SYSTEM of government. But there won’t be elections for a legislative body for another 6 months. Even if you accept this election as legitimate, it was only for a single branch of government. There are no checks and balances, unless of course you count the fact that the only power he really has grows out of the barrel of an American gun. If he weren’t a puppet, he’d be an absolute dictator.
As for the elections, there seems to be an unspoken agreement in the media to pretend that the mere fact that a lot of people voted, without too many casualties, legitimizes the election, no matter how little the final vote count will correspond to the votes actually cast by the people who voted who were actually qualified to vote. We all know that more people registered than were eligible to register (one of my readers has pointed out that population figures for Afghanistan are just estimates, which is true but the over-registration was highly uneven geographically, with some regions reaching more than 140%). Given that, you’d think the failure today of the procedures that were supposed to prevent multiple voting would be considered serious, but when 15 candidates have the presumption to complain, the WaPo dismissively describes them as “posturing,” which is as childishly insulting as those “Sore Loserman” placards in 2000.
And then there’s the absence of newspapers or national media of any kind, or any other form of political infrastructure, the fact that the country is occupied by a foreign power and too unsafe for the candidates to campaign (I doubt whether the majority of voters could have named more than 2 of the candidates), the attempts by the US ambassador to force candidates to quit, little stuff like that. This is not to denigrate the brave Afghans who went to the polls, some of them children, some of them repeatedly, some enthusiastic at the thought of rejecting warlordism and embracing democracy. But the majority of countries have elections, and the majority of those countries are not democracies.
Moving on alphabetically, I’d also like to reject the results of Australia’s elections. Just because I don’t like John Howard, a liar and racist douchebag.
In 1941 Americans were deeply affected by the diary of a little Dutch boy (Dirk van der Heide, My Sister and I), whose mother had been killed by German bombing during the invasion of Rotterdam and who had fled with his sister to safety in America. Turns out, the whole thing was manufactured by the British Secret Service to help convince the US to join the war.
I haven’t yet mentioned the warning issued, and then retracted, that Al Qaida intended to attack schools in Florida, Oregon, NJ and Michigan. All of which are swing states.
The story about Bush possibly having worn an earpiece in the 1st debate, which was originally just one of those “rumors on the Internets,” has now received play in the WaPo, NYT & Independent. This may not contribute anything, but in Marlon Brando’s last film, the not-very-good “The Score,” Brando refused to memorize lines, which were fed to him through an earpiece.
Made-up quotes are in red.
15 of 16 presidential candidates in Afghanistan’s elections today denounced the election process when indelible ink put on voters’ thumbs to prevent fraud turned out to be rather easily, uh, delible. Karzai dismissed their complaints, asking “Who is more important, these 15 candidates or the millions of people who turned out today to vote,” waiting for hours “in the dust and snow and rain” in order “to participate in a complete bloody farce.”
The UN Security Council passed the Russian resolution for creating a list of terrorist organizations, speeding up extradition and imposing travel bans. Expect many loud battles over what groups are or are not terrorist. US ambassador to the UN John Danforth says that “the deliberate massacre of innocents is never justifiable in any cause,” adding, “unless you, like, totally accidentally, bomb a wedding or something. That’s cool.”
In unrelated news, US planes bombed a wedding in Fallujah. The US has never admitted that the last wedding we bombed (in December, I believe) was actually a wedding, so we’ll see how long they can claim that this was a Zarqawi hideout. Forever, would be my guess. He was probably hiding in the cake. 11 members of the wedding party were killed, including the groom.
The Bush campaign’s email to my cat says: “President Bush won a decisive victory last night. The President dominated the debate with impassioned, thoughtful and concise arguments that left Kerry looking petty and defensive as he sputtered out tired, false political rhetoric and distortions that shattered his credibility and contradicted the Senator’s 20-year record of being on the wrong side of history on national security and domestic policy.” It goes on to quote from emails sent to the campaign from...hey, they’re all from swing states, what a coincidence!... such as “You were awesome,” “You are my winner tonight.” The only quote from Bush himself is the “You can run, but you can’t hide” line, which Atrios and others have pointed out Bush also liked to use about Osama bin Laden.
I was about to say that despite walking with sticks and being 6’4”, Osama seems to be running and hiding perfectly adequately, when it hit me that John Kerry is also 6’4”. So that’s where Osama’s been hiding all this time! Right in plain sight. Oh, he’s good.
A FEW CHANGES TO THIS POST. Altered or added text is in blue.
Transcript.
James Wolcott describes this debate as pitting “President Pet Goat against knight of woeful countenance, John Kerry.” I am gonna so totally steal both of those names.
You don’t get to call it a town hall meeting if its members were chosen by Gallup.
Kerry says he likes the Patriot Act, just not how Ashcroft uses it. That’s not point. The powers available to the government should not be so far-reaching that it matters who the attorney general is. Ashcroft hasn’t abused the powers he was given by the Patriot Act (although he has abused others of his powers), he used them.
Bush says again we had to look at the world differently after 9/11. The other day I saw a book titled “Moral Philosophy After 9/11.” My reaction was that if it’s changed by 9/11 it’s either not philosophy or not moral (I didn’t look inside the book).
Bush: sanctions were not working, the UN not effective in removing Saddam Hussein. Kerry correctly says what I was starting to type, that the objective of the UN was removing WMDs, not removing Saddam. The UN doesn’t get to decide which national leaders are legitimate.
Bush’s tactic seems to be to say the same crap he’s said before, but more vehemently. And then to nod his head vigorously once or twice afterwards--what’s that about?
Bush says the decision to “take Saddam out” was unpopular. I think he means with Europeans. No, on reading the transcript, I can't tell who it was unpopular with, unless "taking Saddam out" mean taking him out on a date...
Also, dissing Arafat was unpopular. I think he means with Palestinians.
Kerry finally challenges the Bush line that his job in the war is to do what the generals tell him (“Of course, I listen to our generals. That's what a president does.”).
Bush called the Internet the “Internets.” Remember his father and checkout scanners?
And then he says that wars can be fought with fewer soldiers, using technology. Technology which is just sorcery to Bush.
Bush: it’s a long, long war. Now he tells us.
Bush: we’ll talk about the tax cut in a minute. Funny, I thought they didn’t know the questions in advance. Of course, what he’s saying is that he’ll talk about tax cuts no matter what the question is.
When a drug comes in from Canada, I want to make sure it won’t kill you. Oh, he means to make sure it doesn’t come from the Third World, where drugs by definition are made out of snails, rhino horns, aardvark feces and arsenic.
You can tell he’s in the South, because he just referred to the Yew-nited States Congress.
Bush says Kerry is “running for the president.” The word is presidency, moron. How could you hold the office and not know that? Also, I could swear I heard him call Kerry “Kennedy” earlier. I did.
Bush: “I don’t think the Patriot Act abridges your rights at all.” Also, “I really don't think your rights are being watered down.” Yeah, they're not being watered down, they're being pissed on. And Kerry says we shouldn’t let terrorists change the Constitution. Um, ok.
On stem cells, Shrub says he made the decision to balance science and ethics. Like he thinks science is inherently unethical.
Bush says he wouldn’t appoint a Supreme Court justice who would uphold Dred Scott. Fair to say that Dred Scott won’t be coming up for reconsideration any time soon, but best to be prepared. Or ban “under God” from the pledge of allegiance. Oddly, he insists that those decisions must have derived from personal opinion rather than constitutional interpretation.
Kerry: “It’s never quite as simple as the president would have you believe.”
Asked to give three instances where he made mistakes--and calling for 3 was a wonderful touch--Bush evades. I think that’s a mistake, so to speak, because he’s demonstrated yet again his inability to acknowledge error. He does say some of his appointments were wrong, but he won’t say which ones because he doesn’t want to hurt their feelings. Oh brother.
Ken Bigley is “executed” (the word the killers used, evidently in the belief that someone would believe this was some sort of judicial process), his head sawn off, while someone filmed. These people are not normal.
I haven’t been talking as much as I should about the details of the intelligence reform bill, which is turning rapidly into a sub rosa version of the Patriot Act II we all feared. In part this was because I have no idea which provisions are likely to pass. I’m not really sure what Congress is capable of, which is frightening by itself, and which bits will quietly die in committee. The provision for deporting people to countries where they were likely to be tortured has been replaced by one allowing the head of Homeland Security to order foreigners detained forever, with no judicial review. There’s something about letting employers have access to arrest--not conviction--records, without punishing them for passing on the info to everyone they know.
Does anyone know of a website with Afghan election posters? I’ve mentioned several of them, but I’ve only been able to read about them. The Guardian reports on a Taliban anti-election poster: “A glossy colour poster juxtaposes photos of charred American corpses swinging from a bridge in Falluja with that of a US soldier apparently frisking a burka-wearing Afghan woman.” It then asks a question that none of those undecided voters in Missouri thought to ask, “Are there any brave Afghan men to forcefully take the dirty hands of the crusaders from this innocent Afghan virgin?”
Muslims in Bangladesh demonstrate against the recent formation of what they call the satanic women’s football league.
So GeeDubya’s handlers told the cable news networks that he’d be making a major policy speech, conning them into running what was actually a regular campaign speech for an hour (and not one of them pulled the plug?), with lots of little digs at Kerry. Two things occur to me:
1) Isn’t it just adorably deluded that after all this time, Team Chimpy think that what undecided voters need in order to make up their minds is more exposure to...Shrub... speaking?
2) The thing that’s so irritating about those little pauses he takes after he gets off one of those zingers, where he stands there smugly smirking until you want to smack him (if I may alliterate), is that he’s so goddamned self-satisfied about a line he didn’t actually come up with himself, just read off the teleprompter.
I was going to look for a picture of Junior smirking to attach to this post, but I think we’ve all suffered enough.
Creeping jargon alert: I’ve mentioned before the military’s use of the phrase “anti-Iraqi forces” to describe Iraqi insurgents. The NYT parenthetically mentioned today that the phrase has acquired initial caps (Anti-Iraqi Forces) and an acronym (AIF). Now, are the forces anti-Iraqi, or are the forces made up of Anti-Iraqis, possibly traveling here through a dimensional portal from a parallel universe exactly opposite to our own, where Saddam really had WMDs and Spock has a goatee? Because if that’s the case, I think we should be told.
Bush, spinning the Duelfer Report, which says that everything he ever said about Iraq was a lie, claims that it shows that Saddam Hussein was “systematically gaming the system... with the intent of restarting his weapons program once the world looked away.” Except that the system couldn’t be “gamed” and the world couldn’t “look away”: the sanctions were imposed by the UN Security Council and could only be removed by the Council, where the US has a veto. The sanctions worked. Bush’s arguments are getting stupider. The strongest retrospective case for invading Iraq, or rather the case they’re pushing now, is that he could have passed WMDs to terrorists, which is not the sort of thing he ever did.
The House Ethics Committee admonished (from the Latin admonere, meaning didn’t do doodly squat)(to quote Cicero) Tom DeLay two more times yesterday, for 1) the appearance that an energy company was buying access to him when he went to a fund-raiser they held on behalf of his PAC while energy legislation was pending. Appearance? That word just covers one of the senses, and it also sounds like that and it smells like...well, let’s just say it smells. And 2) getting the FAA to track down Texas legislators during the redistricting thing. DeLay’s lawyer says--and just to diagram this sentence--“Mr. DeLay has not done a lot that others may not have done,” adding, “It is just that he is under the microscope.” Lord, who would want to look at this under the microscope:
DeLay himself responded to calls by D’s that he step down as House R leader, calling them “relentless personal attacks”--which is just what they are not; they are attacks on his public behaviour--made in an attempt to “tie my hands and smear my good name,” and he already pays a hooker perfectly good money to tie his hands and smear his good name (if you know what I mean) every Tuesday night.
Post-election, I'm adding the results, in this color. Numbers at the secretary of state's site.
I know everyone in California is just waiting for my opinions on the propositions before filling in their absentee ballots. (Everyone else can skip this post: by California standards it’s a remarkably un-wacky election, so find another state to point at and laugh, go away, nothing to see here).
I'd also recommend checking out the SF Bay Guardian's endorsements. And there's also the LA Weekly.
1A & 65 are both about the fiscal relationship between state and local governments, and are therefore important and very dull. Fortunately, 65 has been abandoned, and rightly so--it looks like a mess. 1A looks ok to me, mostly protecting local gov finances from more raids by the state and from unfunded mandates, but it’s supported by Governor Ahnuuld, so I’m suspicious and reserve the right to change my mind. (Later: and I have changed my mind, for the reasons the Bay Guardian sets out).
No on 1A & 65.
1A easily passed--Arnold supported it, 65 failed.
Proposition 59 — Guarantees the right of access to state and local government information.
Yes.
Easily passed.
Proposition 60A — Requires that the proceeds from the sale of surplus state property be used to pay off bonded indebtedness.
It's bad budgeting practice to dedicate a revenue source to a completely unrelated purpose. No.
Yes.
Proposition 61 — A $750-million bond issue for constructing, expanding and equipping children’s hospitals.
I’m opposed to bonds on philosophical as well as fiscal grounds. They’re an expensive way of funding something, they’re regressive in that they provide their purchasers an undeserved tax deduction, and place tax obligations on future citizens to pay them off--taxation without representation. No.
Yes.
60 & 62 are evil-twin initiatives and have to be considered together. If both pass, the one that passes with fewest votes won’t be enacted. These are yet more attempts to “reform” primaries. Primaries are in an odd position, constitutionally speaking: they’re slightly less official than other elections because you’re voting to fill a position not in government, but in a political party, which is essentially a voluntary association. The party hacks reminded us of this when they refused to accept two previous initiatives in favor of open primaries, but they still wanted the taxpayers to pay for primaries. After the last round of reapportionment, districts in California (and most of the country) are so solidly partisan that the primary is the only election that matters, which favors ideologues rather than centrists, and leaves you with a choice of whack-jobs in November. And choice is not the word, since there isn't a single competitive race for the US House of Reps in all of California this election. Prop. 62 is an answer to that problem, but not the right answer. It would have a non-partisan (yeah, right) primary, with the 2 top vote-getters facing each other in November. In practice you’d still wind up with a D and an R, with rare exceptions--but no Green, Libertarian, Peace & Freedom. Even if you don’t vote for candidates in those parties, don’t you feel better about the democratic process just knowing they’re there? In my case, I have a little litmus test that I apply to voting for offices (governor, lite governor, attorney general, judges) that might have something to do with death penalty decisions: I am against the death penalty and feel morally obligated not to vote for supporters of it in those positions. I don't consider that unreasonable. In 20 years of voting in this state, I have never been able to vote for a Democrat for any of those offices applying that standard. Without third-party options, I won't vote. A choice of 2 is no choice. There are better ways to deal with the problems 62 addresses: 1) reform the redistricting process to create more competitive races; 2) if the worry is that a third-party candidate will act as a spoiler, change the November elections, adding, for example, an instant-check-off system. 62 pretends to remove political parties from the election process, but as long as candidates require money and lots of it in order to be viable, the parties will always sneak back in. Prop. 60 enshrines the status quo in which all parties make it onto the final ballot; it is a fairly cynical ploy to preserve party power, but (sigh) vote for it, and against 62.
To my surprise and great relief, that's just what happened, even with the governor's meaty finger on the scales.
Proposition 63 — Levies an additional 1% tax on the income of millionaires to finance expanded mental health services.
Ignore what I said re Prop 60A about bad budgeting. Increasing mental health funding is good, increasing progressivity in taxation is good, so what the hell. Yes.
Yes.
Proposition 64 — Limits an individual’s right to sue under unfair business competition laws to situations in which the individual has suffered actual injury or financial loss because of an unfair practice.
There are definitely cases of lawyers using threats of these lawsuits to blackmail small businesses. Reform is needed. This isn’t it. It would leave enforcement of laws against unfair business practices to the government, which can’t be trusted with it (but has nothing to do with environmental laws, public health, etc as the fear-mongers who wrote the no argument claim. I wish someone would enforce a minimum standard of honesty in these arguments; it’s especially annoying when the legitimate arguments are lost behind the alarmist rhetoric). No on 64.
Yes. Everyone hates a lawsuit.
Proposition 66 — Amends the three-strikes law to require that a crime be a violent or serious felony in order to qualify as a strike and imposes more severe penalties for sexual crimes against children.
The Jean Valjean protection initiative. You have to love how they threw in the sexual crimes against children thing as red meat to balance out the part making 3 Strikes more rational (but not actually rational; that would be too...rational). Some of this would be enacted retroactively, but nowhere near as many people would be released as the No people in the pamphlet, or indeed the governor, have been shamelessly claiming. And while the opposition talk about rapists and murderers being released, by definition anybody affected will have served their time for those crimes and only be in prison now for a non-violent crime. Yes on 66.
No, the public fell for the lies. At least we'll be safe from pizza thieves.
Proposition 67 — Adds a 3% surcharge on telephone usage to provide additional money for hospital emergency services and training.
Ignore what I said about ignoring what I said about bad budgeting. Telephone calls have nothing to do with ERs. No.
No.
Proposition 68 — Requires Indian tribes that own casinos to contribute 25% of their slot machine revenue to state and local governments. If they refuse, 11 card rooms and five horse-racing tracks would gain the right to install 30,000 slots and would pay 33%, or roughly $1 billion a year, primarily to local government.
This is a first, I believe: blackmail enshrined in a proposition. Call this the “You sure got a nice casino, it would sure be a shame if something was to happen to it” initiative. No.
No on both gambling initiatives. I can't tell if we hate gambling, or just Indians.
Proposition 69 — Requires felons to provide a sample of their DNA for storage in a law enforcement database, and authorizes local authorities to take such specimens from individuals arrested on suspicion of rape or murder.
Creepy. It’s even retroactive, applies to some non-felons, to juveniles... DNA tells many things about you that you may not want the government to know, and as the human genome is deciphered, the amount of info will increase. No on 69.
Yes.
Proposition 70 — Grants Indian tribes unlimited casino expansion rights on their land. In return, the tribes would pay the state 8.84% of their net profit.
Unlimited? I think not.
No.
Proposition 71 — Establishes a constitutional right to perform stem-cell research. Authorizes a bond issue of up to $3 billion to finance such research.
Gesture politics at its most gesturey. It will be federal legislation that decides this thing. I like a good gesture as much as the next lefty, but there’s that bond thing, not only because I oppose them philosophically, but because medical research should not be funded by this sort of popularity contest. Including for-profit medical research, I might add--the LA Times says venture capitalists have put up $10 million in support of 71. My advice: don’t vote against it, but don’t vote for it either.
Yes, by nearly 60%.
Proposition 72 — Requires employers to provide healthcare insurance for uninsured workers.
Yes, of course.
No, the fear-mongering about jobs leaving the state worked, paid for mostly by Wal-Mart and the restaurant lobby, which are obviously businesses that can't leave the state. The consolation is that Schwarzenegger will not be able to eat in a restaurant without having his food spit in by the staff.
