 Other Fecke Stuff Minvolved jeff-fecke.com The Valkyrie's Tale
Minnesota Liberals
Minnesota Conservatives
Funny Liberals
National Moderates
National Conservatives
Hacktackular!
Friends' Blogs
Random Non-Blog Permalinks
My Friend is a Lawyer in Boston....
...And a Beer Journalist
My Friend's Friend's Brother Is In
Archives
November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 Questions? Comments? Complaints? Email Jeff at moderateleft@gmail.com © MMII, MMIII, MMIV, MMV, MMVI Jeffrey K. Fecke, All Rights Reserved. |
Tuesday, September 16, 2003
WUSA Folds Okay, hands up if you even know what that means. The Women's Unted Soccer League, another textbook case of how not to start a professional league, has folded. The league has burned through a staggering $100 million in its brief history, and its folding on the eve of the Women's World Cup is doubly galling. I'm a big fan of women's soccer. I grew up watching my sister play keeper for a variety of teams--she ended up at Kansas, eventually--and I've seen enough women's soccer over the years that I watch it like any other sport. I'm looking very much forward to the World Cup, which starts this weekend. But I have no sympathy for the WUSA, which folded because it was based on unrealistic assumptions. This doesn't mark the end of professional women's soccer in the US; indeed, it can mark a new beginning if the new league starts with a few simple rules in mind: 1. Think Small You may not be able to pay enough for Mia Hamm to view your league as worth her time. You may not draw more than a couple thousand people per game. You may be touring on busses, not planes. Deal with it. Major League Baseball started out with a bunch of semipro guys who worked in the offseason as laborers and insurance salesmen and pitchmen. It took decades for it to pay enough to be a full-time job. Don't expect that you can simply jump to the big time just because you want to. This means that some players on your team will get paid $300 per month. Some less. A few stars might be worth more. But not much. And if the Brandi Chastains of the world decide to pass on the WUSA, don't worry. You're building for the long-term future, not today. 2. Diversify Geographically The WUSA featured teams in San Jose, Atlanta, Boston, Philadelphia, the Carolinas, Washington, San Diego, and New York. What do those cities have in common? That's right, not one of them is located in the midwest. More to the point, all of those cities already host at least one professional sports team. Atlanta, especially, is renowned as one of the worst sports cities in America. Instead of trying to crack New York, go back to rule #1. Look for teams in Des Moines, in Boise, in Syracuse, in Lubbock. Don't be afraid to tap smaller cities, because these cities don't have a top-flight pro team to compete against. 3. Baby Steps Don't worry if you don't get nationwide cable coverage. Don't worry if you can't get public access coverage. Stick to a small-scale model and grow slowly. 4. Attack your base... That's soccer families. Go after these people with everything you can. Give away the tickets if you have to--get them to the field. These people will pay for your team. 5. ...but don't be afraid to draw outside of it. The Saint Paul Saints are a minor league team in a big-league town. How have they drawn fans opposite a pennant-contending pro team? They've created a fun atmosphere, with massage-giving nuns, a pig that brings baseballs out to the ump, and a lighthearted, fun atmosphere that practically screams that they don't take themselves too seriously. You can draw a few thousand folks out to a good time that happens to be a soccer game. Will these people be your core fans? No. But no team makes it on core fans alone. So there you go. My plan for starting a pro-anything league. I offer it free of charge to anyone willing to take it and run. Follow these steps, and in a generation or so, you may have an actual major sports league. Hey, it's not quick, but it's a better model than the WUSA. The Invincible George W. Bush Now, an internal House GOP conference poll shows him with sub-50% approval (49% approve-46% disapprove). More alarming, the generic Congressional ballot question gives the Dems a 45%-40% edge. In an internal GOP poll. So...this isn't a Zogby poll, so you can't immediately discount it...my question again: righties, tell me how this is a good thing for you. "8 Simple Rules" to Continue Does this make any sense? This is "News Radio" after the death of Phil Hartman--it just won't work. ABC would do better to simply cancel the show with dignity. But that's not what a network would do. Sunday, September 14, 2003
$87 Billion Here, $87 Billion There, Pretty Soon You're Talkin' About Real Money Vice President Dick Cheney (R- Asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” if that would be the final such request, Cheney replied: “I can’t say that. It’s all we think we’ll need for the foreseeable future, for this year.” Meanwhile, America responds to our President's plea with cool disdain: A majority of Americans disapprove of President Bush’s request to Congress for an additional $87 billion to fund military and reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next year, amid growing doubts about the administration’s policies at home and abroad, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. I said we had the mojo. This tears it. Bush is beyond merely no longer being popular. He is now in trouble, and he will be fortunate to be reelected come 2004. This is not to say that Bush is done; a rebounding economy would help him, as would stabilization in Iraq. But the Iraq win was supposed to solidify his countrol of the nation. It has done just the opposite. Heh. Shocked...part two David Kay's September Surprise? After failing to get any evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the US and Britain have decided to delay indefinitely the publication of a full report on the controversial issue, the media reported today. But...but...but.... All I know is that when they finally do find those weapons of mass destruction, those liberals who've been complaining will be in a world of hurt. Unfortunately, it looks like they may not be found for a couple thirteen fourteen years, so I'll take my chances. (via Pandagon) I'm Shocked, Shocked.... Ben and JLo have split up. In a world where Ben and Jennifer couldn't make it, how can any of us believe in love? Saturday, September 13, 2003
Ann Drinks the Kool Aid But we knew that: On the basis of their recent pronouncements, the position of the Democratic Party seems to be that Saddam Hussein did not hit us on 9-11, but Halliburton did. Um...Ann? Psst...Osama bin Laden hit the U.S. Thought you'd want to know. I'm sure you'll issue a correction. That statement is only the most egregiously insane in an article full of half-truths and willfull ignorance of history. The most ridiculous, of course, is that the internationalization of the occupation of post-war Germany caused a forty-five year Cold War and the Marshall Plan, which she notes was not needed in Japan. Ann...where to start? One might start by noting that THE FUCKING SOVIET UNION OCCUPIED ALL OF EAST GERMANY TO BEGIN WITH, AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO FIGHT A WAR TO PUSH THEM OUT. Of course, I'm sure that was part of Truman's plan to give all of Europe to the Soviets. In Japan, we controlled the nation because we did all the major fighting. We didn't need to share power because--unlike the European theatre--we were the only folks in position to occupy Japan. And why didn't we put a Marshall plan to work in Japan? Maybe it was because THE COMMUNISTS WEREN'T POISED TO TAKE JAPAN. They were poised to take Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Greece, and Italy. The Marshall Plan prevented that. But then again, I'm sure it was just canny strategy. There's just no way that a Democrat would work against the Soviets. No way at all. I Walk The Line I was too busy to blog yestertay, so I failed to note the passing of Johnny Cash, one of the all time greats. I won't waste your time with day-late thoughts, but I'll point you to two atricles, one from before his death, one after. Virginia Hefferman reviewed Cash's video for "Hurt," a cover of a Nine Inch Nails song that improves on the original. The video is haunting, even more so now at the end of Cash's life, and the article helpfully has a link to the video. The other is from Reason's Hit and Run blog, where Jesse Walker eulogizes Cash. The intriguing section is a quote of Cash in 1969, discussing the Vietnam war, a war he quietly opposed while wholeheartedly supporting the troops--yes, Ann, it's possible. The quote that sticks with me: And a reporter friend of mine asked, said, "That makes you a hawk, doesn't it?" And I said, "No, that don't make me a hawk. No. No, that don't make me a hawk." Rest in Peace, Man in Black. And say hi to June. Thursday, September 11, 2003
Not a Good Development From VOANews.com: The United States is making clear its opposition to the expulsion of Yasser Arafat from Palestinian territory, as decided on in principle by Israel's security cabinet. U.S. officials say Mr. Arafat might be more disruptive to Middle East peace effort than he is now, if we went into exile. For once, I agree with the Bushies: Arafat is likely a more formidable force in Palestinian politics abroad than he his holed up in Ramallah. And I'm guessing he won't go quietly. Might just as well have used a map of Iowa as this roadmap for peace. Why Doesn't Jeff Fecke Hate America? Being a good liberal, I know I should be, you know, burning a flag in my front yard or walking around in a Burqa or my "CCCP" hockey jersey, but instead I put my American flag up last night (replacing the Winnie-the-Pooh flag that usually adorns my house). Maybe, as a friend once suggested, it's an "uninformedly bourgeouise" act to fly the flag. Don't care. I love my country, and today is a good day to show that love. The Legacy of 9/11 Josh Marshall style: As the documentary moved toward the aftermath, I wondered whether those thoughts of mine would seep into the present to color what's happening today. Read it. Bush Blew It So says Slate's Fred Kaplan: Aside from letting a handful of NATO's AWACS radar planes come help patrol American skies, Bush's response was a shockingly terse: Thanks, but no thanks; we'll handle it by ourselves. Marc Grossman, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, later admitted to the Washington Times that the United States initially "blew off" the allies. Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense for policy, said that the United States, in the Times' words, "was so busy developing its [Afghanistan] war plans that it did not have time to focus on coordinating Europe's military role." Ah, yes, and this works out well for us. After all, it's not like we're saying we need more troops in Iraq that, say, our allies could provide. What? We are? We do? C'est la Vie. 9/11 The day is still fresh in my mind. It always will be, I suppose. My fianceé had gone to a legal conference in Minneapolis that morning. I was up early because I had to vote that morning in the mayoral primary and then I had to take a bus across Saint Paul to the doctor, all before I had to go to work. I was flipping around before I had to leave. I chanced across and ancient "Little House on the Prairie," but couldn't watch for more than a few minutes. I checked the clock--almost time to leave. Absentmindedly, I switched over to the "Today" show. We're showing a live shot of the World Trade Center, which is on fire this morning. We believe a commuter plane may have hit the tower.... * * * Seven hundred and thirty days have passed since September 11, 2001. Two years ago today, a day of infamy for those of us who lived through it, there was the most terrible day for America in my memory. Odds are that everyone reading this remembers that day clearly, remembers the way the wind was blowing, the way the sun shone. The moment is still fresh in our minds, the pain still all too real. But as two years have passed, the pain is lessening. * * * I tried to reach my fianceé on the cell phone. "Hey hon, just wanted to let you know a plane hit the World Trade Center. Hope you're having a good day,talk to you later." With that, I left our apartment and headed over to my polling place. I had my radio on to KQRS--Tom Barnard's show had not quite taken the hard, hard right turn it would take in 2002. They were discussing the fire in the World Trade Center, talking about what it could be. And then I heard a sudden outburst that I'll never forget. Oh my God! A plane just hit the tower! Is that a shot of the first plane hitting? No! No, it's another plane hitting the other tower! My heart sank. Because there was no doubt at that instant that we were at war. Voting took on added urgency. I told an aging poll worker that two planes had hit the World Trade Center. "In Saint Paul?" she asked, referring to the decidedly less symbolic tower on West Seventh. "No, in New York," I replied. "Oh," she said, suddenly disinterested. "Here's your ballot." I've wondered often what she thought later, and if the provinicalism she expressed carried over to later in the day. I rather doubt it. I voted for Randy Kelly--I'd worked on his campaign, and was quite sure he was the best guy on the ballot. I had been thinking about going to the party that night, but my heart wasn't in it anymore. Instead, I turned back to the radio and over to MPR, which was now in the wall-to-wall coverage that was warranted. We didn't know anything yet. Nothing at all. All we knew was that someone hated us enough to kill us. There were people trapped, they said. I hoped they could evacuate. I boarded the bus to the doctor--it hadn't occurred to me that I shouldn't. On the ride, the driver kept shooting rude looks at me. I had the radio cranked, I didn't want to miss a word. The rumor of what was happening was spreading among my fellow passengers, and when the driver made an announcement that radios needed to be turned down, the result was a bus full of people yelling, "Shut Up!" "They've hit the Pentagon," I reported to the group. "How bad?" "Don't know yet. But they've hit it." * * * I didn't know who "they" were. I knew there was a "they" as sure as I was alive. This wasn't accidental. Someone had coordinated this, and they had done their best to bloody us. And they had succeeded. But I remembered the Oklahoma City bombing, and knew that we had played pin the blame on the Arabs before it turned out the murderer was a sick white boy from the heartland. But...it didn't feel like Oklahoma City. The Murrah Federal Building was a target onlya Midwesterner would pick. (McVeigh had toured the Federal Building in Minneapolis, among others). It was a strike at the heart of America. A strike at New York was more like a strike at the face of America. It just wasn't a place an American would choose--not even an angry rural anti-metropolitan American. This was someone else, but I didn't know who. * * * I went through the appointment half-there, and came out to the news that Tower 2 had collapsed, and a plane had crashed in Pennsylvania. Every plane in the air was landing at the nearest airport. Billions of dollars, they said it would cost. But it seemed irrelevant compared to estimates of ten thousand dead if Tower 1 collapsed too. It did. I bought a donut at a gas station while I waited for a bus. "Doesn't seem right to say here," said the girl behind the counter. "Seems like I should go home. What do you think's going on?" "I think we're at war," I said. I bought a newspaper, too. I didn't read it. I just wanted to see something from before. I went off to work, and spent the day trying to track down every bit of news I could get my hands on. I was hardly alone. Indeed, my boss dropped by often to check on the news. Nobody was calling. Nobody gave a damn about getting rid of their cable. It could wait. I went home, listening to the radio again, listening to the stories that were coming out about the dead. It sounded like the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania might have been taken down by the passengers. Good. Already, we were fighting back. Osama bin Laden was being fingered now as the culprit. No evidence was presented, but it made sense. The President gave a shaky speech but at the time I didn't notice. He was my President and he had my support, even if I didn't like the guy. I got home to my fianceé, and we spent the evening watching TV, and for the first time I saw the planes hit the tower. And I cried. * * * For a time, the best of America was brought out by the attack. We pulled together as we never had in my lifetime. Whether it was people standing in line to donate blood or Congress--all of Congress--standing on the steps of the Capitol singing "God Bless America," there was an overwhelming sense that we were in this together. When evidence pointed to Afghanistan as bin Laden's base of operations, few questioned whether we would attack them. Oh, a few inveterate lefties like Noam Chomsky felt the need to yammer about seeking peaceful solutions, but no matter what myths the right try to spin, nobody of significance--not Paul Wellstone, not Russ Feingold, not Tom Daschle, not Ted Kennedy--nobody objected to ousting the Taliban. In fact, everyone was pretty keen on it. If there was a complaint, it was that we moved to tenatively in our response. We won in Afghanistan, won easily. The Taliban was ousted, and no matter what came after, it could scarcely be worse. I was thrilled. I was even (gasp!) wondering if I should consider voting for Bush in '04. And then the wheels started to come off. In the wake of our victory, the Bush administration started to recognize the enormous political advantage they had been given. And they used it. They used it to accuse the Democrats of being unpatriotic, of being less than committed to the War on Terror. Their surrogates used it to accuse Democrats of treason. They accused a Senator who left three limbs in Vietnam of being pro-Osama and anti-American. And then they decided that it was the time to invade Iraq. By the time of the President's May 1 infomercial on the aircraft carrier, any notion that we were in this together had been obliterated. We had won in Iraq, for the most part. But the victory had come at a price. It had come at the price of our alliances and at the price of national unity. Which would have been fine had Saddam really been as dangerous as the Bush administration said. But of course, he wasn't. And now we have come full circle to where we were on September 10, 2001, with a deeply divided, embittered electorate and an unpopular President presiding over a bad economy, the Taliban on the rise again in Afghanistan and the Wahabist Muslims operating unfettered in Saudi Arabia. But despite all of this, I remain optimistic. Because despite the pain and destruction of 9/11, we have been able to survive as a nation, and the instinct that drew us together has not passed--will not pass. Seven hundred and thirty days have passed. We are not any closer to nirvana, nor to enlightenment. We have learned a few hard truths, but sometimes, I fear, too few. And as much as we swore it never would be the same as it was before, it pretty much is. And we are that much closer to the day when September 11 isn't a day that causes our whole nation to worry, to think back to memories of planes hitting buildings and people falling like rain. * * * My daughter was born August 11, 2002. For her and for her generation, September 11, 2001 will be like December 6, 1941 or April 4, 1969 or November 2, 1963. A date of horror that will be marked with a mention on the news, and maybe a wistful look from a parent. Her children will study it in textbooks. Their children will remember it like I remember the Great Depression. And their children may not remember it at all. This does not diminish the events of September 11. But it bears noting. When people ask why the networks aren't spending all their time this year on 9/11, it is because we have lived through seven hundred and thirty days, and we are reaching the point where things are back to normal, or at least, as normal as can be. We are almost there. And while those of us who lived through 9/11/01 wll never forget it, we will find soon enough that it is no longer the defining moment in our nation's history, nor our own. Another tragedy (a President killed...a nuclear strike...an asteroid strike....) or another victory (a Mars landing...a cure for old age...peace in the Middle East....), that will supplant 9/11/01. And then something will supplant that, and so on forever. That is how it always has been, and how it always will be, as far back as the history of man and as far forward as the life of the universe. 9/11 was a terrible moment, but it was only a moment. We must mourn it, remember it, cherish it. And then, we must move on to a future we can all share in. I doubt we have reached the point as a society that this can be done. I haven't. But we will. We must. Because America has never been about the past. And God willing, it never will be. Wednesday, September 10, 2003
And why is it I pointed out Gregg Easterbrook's Blog? Because he's willing to say things like this: Families who have taken the federal compensation have, so far, received average awards of $1.6 million, tax-free. Families of the United States personnel murdered by Al Qaeda in the Kenya and Tanzania terror attacks of 1998 received, on average, nothing. Families of the several hundred United States military personnel killed in Afghanistan fighting to destroy al Qaeda, and killed in Iraq fighting at least in part against terrorism, received, on average, $9,000, taxable. Easterbrook. A blog. It don't get any better than that. I'm Not Above Linking To You At least not if you point me in the direction of interesting articles on Iraq. A snippet: The American soldiers smashed through 68-year-old Ali Ahmed’s door at 2:30 in the morning. I'm hoping this story is exaggerated, because this is decidedly not the way to win friends and influence people. Revenge of Gregg Easterbrook! The fine writer has a blog! Much rejoicing in the land, expecially since he's also still writing the finest football column in the history of mankind, Tuesday Morning Quarterback. Sickening That's my take. Atrios says they're monsters: NEW YORK (Reuters) - The burning ruins of the World Trade Center spewed toxic gases "like a chemical factory" for at least six weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks despite government assurances the air was safe, according to a study released on Wednesday. I know it was important for us all to get back to business and to get in there and clean up Ground Zero and all, but was it worth the health of the workers? Was it worth the lives and health of those who lived near the site who were told it was okay for them to go home? I don't fault the administration for wanting to get people back into lower Manhattan. I fault them for being so eager to that they ignored the EPA, and risked even more lives in the process. Tuesday, September 09, 2003
Housekeeping Due to the ever-expanding length, I've switched to archiving by month. I doubt anyone cares much, but thought you might like to know. Tears fall from my eyes. I love Big Brother. It's good to know that Donald Rumsfeld is conversant with the First Amendment: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Monday opposition to the U.S. President was encouraging Washington's enemies and hindering his 'war against terrorism'. Ah, yes. That's right, I forgot, we who question whether the Bush administration knows its collective ass from a hole in the ground are objectively pro-terror! I forgot for a minute. Of course, Secretary Rumsfeld remains objectively pro-communist so long as he refuses to invade China. Why does Donald Rumsfeld hate America? * * * You know, I consider myself a moderate. It's the title of this blog, it's my general political nature. I lean democratic, but I haven't voted for a single Democrat to be Governor of my state (for the record: Carlson [R] '94, Ventura [Ref] '98, Penny [IP] '02), and I've been more than happy to blast the Democrats early and often. And yet, over the past several months I've noticed myself becoming more and more partisan, and I've wondered why. Donald Rumsfeld's comments are why. I was sort of for the war and sort of against it--there were good points on both sides, and while I didn't cry for Saddam, I remained unconvinced that we had to invade when we did, with as little international support as we had. After the war ended, and it became obvious that our raison d'etrê for this war--weapons of Mass Destruction, folks, don't even pretend otherwise--simply didn't exist, I became angry at having been misled. When Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" before we had secured the country, I became furious at the chutzpah of our leader, and the ridiculous politicization of war. And as the months have worn on and shown that we did not adequately plan for just what the Hell we were going to do once we took over Iraq, well, that just has pushed me into full meltdown mode. I started this blog by declaring I was no longer a Democrat. Well, Mr. President, congratulations: I now am. Of course, it is treason for me to say so--treason for me to argue that we were wrong to fight in Iraq before Afghanistan was secured, treason for me to argue that we should be looking for international support (as we should have back in March) without strings attached. It's treason for me to mourn the death of American soldiers in Iraq--as a liberal, I am not allowed to mourn. Any note of the death of a soldier is gloating. And any criticism leveled at the Bush administration helps our enemies. Well, I've had it. I can't stand by and let an administration that lied about the need to go to war, severely damaged our international alliances, and then, when war was over, mismanaged the peace off the hook. Getting Saddam Hussein was good. It was. But the way we did it was not, and the actions we continue to take are not. And it is not treason to say so. Or as Josh Marshall says: So here the whole sordid business comes full circle. The administration games the public into an endeavor by exaggerating the gains and minimizing the price. Then the gains are revealed as not quite so great. And the price is revealed as very much greater. And if all that weren't bad enough, the operation is bungled on several fronts. So the gamers and the scammers say it's the fault of the critics who tried to carve through the mumbo-jumbo in the first place. And when the public has a touch of buyers' remorse over a product that was peddled on false advertising, the answer lies in the public's own degeneracy and division. Indeed. We have no choice but to go ahead in Iraq--to give Bush $87 billion and more. We have no choice because we've created this mess, and we have to get ourselves out of this. But we don't have to like it, and we don't have to pretend that the men and women responsible are blameless. And I'll be damned if I do. Why Does Ann Coulter Hate America? Via Democratic Underground, transcript of Sunday Final with Lawrence O'Donnell, August 30, 2003: [Ann] COULTER: Well, I think I can answer everyone’s objections. Yeah, it's sad how when you get hit by an RPG, you hair often ends up mussed. And blood can really stain uniforms! Of course, we liberals hate the military. Thank god enlightened folk like Ann Coulter show them the respect they deserve. Also, Ann: one might suggest that the reason all these same arguments that were made before the war are still being made after is that they were right. At the very least, you boy GDub hasn't exactly proven the rest of us wrong. Sunday, September 07, 2003
If Mitch Berg's Football Analogy is Right, We Just Got an Interception I look forward to the spin on this news: President Bush's job approval rating dropped in two polls released on Saturday amid concern about the economy and instability in Iraq. To reiterate, the Zogby poll reads thus: Approve: 45% Disapprove: 52% In other words, a majority of the American people now disapprove of the way our President--our popular, invincible President--is conducting himself in office. So how 'bout it, righties? Is Bush invulnerable still? Should the Democrats just pack things up for '04? Is the Republican party still clearly ascendant? Come on, tell me how these polls show your party's strength and my party's weakness. I'm waiting. Thursday, September 04, 2003
And Meanwhile, in Iraq.... Speaks for itself: A year ago, American General John Abizaid published an internal Defense Department book about urban warfare. Abizaid’s “Doctrine for Joint Urban Operations” (see sidebar) was all but ignored by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and General Tommy Franks, who ran the Iraq war and the initial postwar occupation. Via TPM, natch. The Personal and the Political Michael Kinsley takes Ahnuld to task for his risqué Oui interview, in which the Guvunator said, among other things: Once in Gold's gym there was a black girl who came out naked. Everybody jumped on her and took her upstairs, where we all got together. But not everybody, just the guys who can fuck in front of other guys. Much fun has been had at Ahnuld's expense, and heck, it's a funny article. It doesn't exactly reflect well on the guy, but he wasn't married in 1977, and it's not like the seventies were a time of puritanism. Does this mean Ahnuld is unqualified to be Governor? Of course not. (The fact that he is actually unqualified to be Governor takes care of that). Schwarzenegger's private sexual acts are none of my business--and if he chooses to make them public, as he did twenty-six years ago, I'd just as soon ignore them. To the point: what Schwarzenegger did or did not do sexually--like what Clinton, or Gingrich, or Coleman do--has little to do with their ability to lead. That's what I say. Not Michael Kinsley: In terms of his fitness for elected office, the fact that Schwarzenegger bragged about this episode in a published interview makes the question of whether it really happened almost irrelevant. In 1977, at least, he wished to have people believe that he shared and was proud of an attitude toward women that is not acceptable in a politician. [Emphasis added] Hwha? Okay, I see what Kinsley's saying. He's saying that guys who treat women like sexual objects are just not capable of good governance, because.... Because.... Okay, someone's going to have to explain it to me, 'cause I don't get it. I consider myself a feminist. I believe in equal pay for equal work, a woman's right to choose, I'm even a booster of Title IX. And I will assert that Kinsley is conflating issues like crazy here. Some of the most liberal, feminist men I've ever met are--how shall I put this?--well, if they were women, they'd be called sluts. Some of the most retrobrained, anti-women men I've ever met are faithful as the day is long. Most of us who have lived a while and met a variety of people realize the the personal should rarely meet the political because the personal so rarely affects the political. Pop quiz, women: who do you trust more on "women's issues?" Ted Kennedy, or Orrin Hatch? Kinsley is just wrong here. Ahnuld may not be the best choice for California, but this is not the reason. His youthful excesses and bragging--true or false--are funny. But they are largely irrelevant today. It's much more of an issue that Ahnuld refuses to debate, or come up with a coherent policy position. In the end, that is what matters to the people of California--not an interview given to a porn magazine before many California voters were even born. 404 Error Jesse! Where are you? Not Found This ain't no good. UPDATE: Well, unlike Lileks, it doesn't look like he forgot to reregister his domain: Registrar: DOTSTER The mystery awaits.... And meanwhile, in a parallel universe.... Tim Graham on The Corner: Am I the only one to find it disturbing that NBC/MSNBC is routinely referring to abortionist-killer Paul Hill today as an "anti-abortion activist," as if he's comparable to Chris Smith or Phyllis Schlafly? In answer to your question, Tim: yes. Yes you are. Wednesday, September 03, 2003
A New Feature Every so often, I'm inspired to wonder just what's going on in the world--not the obvious, blogged about stuff that everyone can find out, but the behind-the-scenes, hidden stuff we may never know. So I've decided to start a new featurelette here at the BOTM: Blog of the Moderate Left short stories. They're fiction (duh), but based on real figures and real events, and maybe, just maybe, they are a little closer to the truth than we normally get. (And maybe not). My standard disclaimer: Blog of the Moderate Left short stories are works of fiction. They do not purport to be the truth. If you wish to believe they're true, that's your problem. Without further ado.... His Great Reward A Blog of the Moderate Left short story by Jeff Fecke He though it odd that the doctor was checking his health. After all, within a few minutes, he would be dead. Not that he minded. He had done what he was being executed for--killed the doctor, killed the bodyguard. He had snuffed out their lives like they'd snuffed out the lives of so many unborn children. He felt no guilt, none that he'd admit to, anyhow. He told everyone that would listen that he had killed the doctor to save lives, that others should follow his lead. It was his hope and his dream that his death would end with hundreds, thousands of copycats. They would rise up against the abortionists and kill them, kill them all, until no man or woman would dare to kill a baby ever again. It would be glorious. They pierced his vein, and the minister began the familiar Psalm, "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want...." He felt the saline now, burning just a bit as it entered his bloodstream. He closed his eyes and envisioned the future, the afterlife, the glory of God. He would be welcomed as a hero, he was a martyr of God. Saint Paul, he chuckled, as he felt the next drug enter his system. Yes, he would be welcomed as a champion of his Lord. He struggled to maintain his consciousness as the tranquilizer took effect. He would see God soon, he would see his God soon.... A verse stumbled through the back of his mind. "Thou shalt not...." * * * And then, he was flying. He saw himself below on the gurney, an IV strapped into his arm. He turned, and there was a tunnel with a light at the end. He was pulled towards it. Heaven--! He reached the light quicker than he could imagine, and gasped at the sight. It was a sea of angels lined up along a golden road, leading up to a towering desk with an old man sitting at it. Saint Peter--it had to be. Waiting to welcome him! He wanted to run to him, but he found he was unable to. Instead, he walked respectfully past the angels. He tried to look at them, but he wasn't able to get a good feel for them. They were all looking at him, staring, really. He turned back to Saint Peter, who was smiling at him. "Your Holiness," said Paul, as he reached the desk. "Reverend Hill," said Peter. "Welcome to the next life. The Lord bless and keep you." Paul smiled broadly. He started to speak, and found himself unable to. "You were a man of the cloth on Earth, Reverend Hill. You preached the gospel, and you studied the Bible. You know well that the Lord's love is infinite." Yes, thought Reverend Hill. "And you know the Bible, and what it requires of you, do you not?" Of course, thought the Reverend. "You may enter Heaven--if you are able to answer my questions of you." At this, the Reverend's smile faded slightly. "To whom belongs Vengeance, Reverend?" Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord. "Indeed. And shall a mortal judge another mortal's life?" Judge not, lest ye be judged. The Reverend could feel a mounting panic as he realized where this line of questioning was heading. "And are you justified in murdering another?" Thou Shalt Not Kill. "Correct, Reverend. One more question: how, can a man of God declare himself God's agent of vengeance and kill those he judges to be wrong?" "He was killing babies!" "So you have said, often." "What was I supposed to do? Sit idly by while he killed them?" "MINISTER TO HIM!" thundered an exasperated Saint Peter. "Minister to them all! You were a man of God, ordained in the name of the God who enjoined his flock to turn the other cheek. It was not yours to take these men's lives. That right resides only with God." "But I thought--I mean, abortion is wrong." "Hmmf. You know not what right and wrong is. Believe me though, when I say the Lord would sooner welcome an abortionist to Heaven who was contrite than a murderer who bragged about it, and told others to do the same. "Reverend, here is the great glory you spoke of, the great glory of God." As Peter spoke these words, he laid a hand on Paul Hill's head, and suddenly the Reverend felt the bullets piercing him, and piercing again, and he saw through the woman's eyes her husband falling, dead, while the bullets tore through her.... And more than that--the pain of the women who had endured pregnancies in fear of injury, the pain of those who died for want of thereputic abortions, the pain of the unwanted.... And he felt the fear of every doctor and nurse and secretary that had ever walked from the office aware that somewhere, out there, was a man who wanted to kill him, and the pain of the doctor whose children's pictures had been posted on the internet.... He felt all of this pain at once, all of it flowing through him, his great reward for his selfless deed. And when all the pain had flowed through him, he stood again before Peter. It seemed like years had passed. Peter looked at him sternly. "You are not worthy of Heaven. Leave my sight." And with that, the gates of Heaven disappeared, and the erstwhile reverend was falling towards another place. And it occurred to him as he fell that maybe--just maybe--he had been wrong. Pro-Death Tonight, the former Rev. Paul Hill has been put to death by lethal injection. The good reverend was executed for killing a doctor and his bodyguard, and wounding the bodyguard's wife. He has stated repeatedly that he did this to prevent the murder of the unborn. The doctor, John Britton, performed abortions. Also killed was Lt. Col. James Herman Barrett, USAF (ret.), who worked as Dr. Britton's bodyguard. Barrett's wife, June, was injured in the attack. Hill spoke openly about the killings, admitting freely that he had taken the action to save the lives of the unborn, and that he felt he had done the right thing. "I expect a great reward in heaven," he said in an interview on the eve of his execution. "I am looking forward to glory." * * * I am ambivalent about the death penalty. It isn't a great deterrent; it is imposed almost at random--unless, of course, you happen to be black; and of course, an executed man cannot be brought back to life should exculpatory evidence come to light. But in cases where there is no question of innocence; where the action was taken to terrorize; where the murderer shows no remorse--in these cases there is no question in my mind that death is not only a just penalty, it is the only just penalty. Paul Hill will tell you that he was saving the unborn. Perhaps. I consider myself pro-choice, but only one who is so in thrall to their political views that they can not see past them would think that the morality of abortion is not an open question. Our society has not come to a consensus on it, and the debate rages on, with both sides claiming the moral high ground. The legality of abortion, however, is settled: it is legal, and will likely remain so for a great many years. Roe v. Wade settled this, and as much as Rev. Hill and his ilk may disagree with the ruling, abortion is legal, and those who practice it break no laws. We have talked much in the past two years about the meaning of terrorism. A rough consensus is that terrorism is the attempt to advance political goals by committing violent acts against civilians. By this definition, Rev. Hill is a terrorist, an a relgious fanatic, to boot. And as with other unrepentant terrorists before him--Tim McVeigh, Osama bin Laden, Erich Rudolph--there is only one just penalty for Hill. Death. Tonight, justice was done. Predictably, Hill's extremist followers have claimed him as a martyr. They have sent bullets to abortion clinics and to Gov. Jeb Bush, warning of violence in the wake of Hill's execution. Fine. We have decided as a nation that we do not acede to the demands of terrorists. Kill who you want to. We will not surrender to you. If you want to save lives, and you believe abortion is wrong, you have many legitimate organizations you can join. Join them. Be like the guy on my drive in to work, who holds the "Abortion: Highway to HELL" sign along Pilot Knob Road.. He hates abortion, and he's doing something about it. I disagree with him, but hey, it's a free country. But if you kill--if you murder--you are no better than those you purport to stop. God said, "Thou Shalt Not Kill." No exceptons, no footnotes. I don't think Rev. Hill can expect much glory in the hereafter. I hold no illusion that I know the mind of God, but I doubt that He takes kindly to those who murder in His name. Cruz Bustamante v. Trent Lott One has to care about the California gubernatorial election. It's requisite. I mean, California is the most populous state in the Union, and it has a strong role to play in our nation's economy. Yes, you have to care about the California election, except that I just can't. Sorry, folks, that's just the bottom line. The California electorate has long shown itself to be quirky and bizarre, and the '03 recall is no different than it ever has been. I tend to think that this will backfire on the GOP one way or another--if ever there has been a time not to be Governor of California, it's now--but aside from the entertainment that provides, I just can't work up the effort to care. So you can forgive me if I haven't delved into the whole Cruz Bustamante/MEChA thing. To recap: MEChA is a Latino student organization that is long on crazy liberalism and short on common sense, much like the Green Party or USPIRG. Because it's a student organization, one can forgive them their stupidity; never are we more certain than when we are in college. That's not to say MEChA doesn't have some--well, issues. For one, many chapters have expressed a longing to have the southwest of America back in the dominion of Mexico. For another, their slogan--freely translated as "For the race, everything, for those outside the race, nothing"--is more than a little off-putting for those of us who are "outside the race." In short, MEChA is the sort of campus group those of us who attended college are all too familiar with: loud, obnoxious, too sure of themselves, dismissive of their rivals, prone to overstatement, and radical. Pretty much describes every campus group I ever affiliated with, from the libertarians to my resident hall association. Of course, we can thank goodness that most people usually lose a bit of their zeal once they graduate college, get out in the real world, and realize that the world is not black and white, but so long as there are students there will be groups like MEChA. That's my take. The right would suggest that MEChA is as damaging an organization as the KKK. Of course, this all stems from the fact that, as a student, Cruz Bustamente was a member of MEChA, and that as a candidate, he has refused to condemn the organization. Sniffs InstaPundit: He [Stefan Sharkansky] also notes, via email, that the lefty regions of the blogosphere don't seem as willing to condemn Bustamante's racist connections as the righty regions were willing to condemn Trent Lott's. Yes, yes. This is exactly like the comments by Trent Lott, which were again: I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either. Yep, Bustamante refusing to condemn an overzealous radical student organization is precisely the same as Trent Lott going out of his way to praise a man who campaigned on a pro-lynching ticket. Now, I'm not saying that Bustamante shouldn't have criticized MEChA's excesses--he should have. And I'm not saying he shouldn't repudiate racisim--of course he should. But then again, nobody--nobody--has suggested that Bustamente is a racist. More than a few suggested that Lott was. For the final word, I point you to Orcinus: It is hard in the end not to come to the conclusion that the proliferation of the "MEChA is racist" meme is intended to blunt the emerging news over Arnold Schwarzenegger's substantial connections to U.S. English, a group whose racist underpinnings are themselves fairly substantial. And indeed, there are good reasons why Schwarzenegger should distance himself from them and resign his position with them. Yep. This is just politics, folks--a means to paint Bustamante as a racist in order to blunt the fact that Ahnuld's dad was a Nazi. That's all this is. Asteroid Won't Hit Us After All All together: whew! Odds were never better than 1:900,000, but still, that ain't good. Sky News: Bush Admin let bin Laden family fly out of US durning 9/11 ground stop Sky News (yes, that Sky News) is reporting that members of the bin Laden family in the US were allowed to fly during 9/11, even after the ground stop that halted airline traffic: Even though American airspace had been shut down, the Bush administration allowed a jet to fly around the US picking up family members from 10 cities, including Los Angeles, Washington DC, Boston and Houston. Nobody inappropriate. Just a planeload of Saudis and the bin Laden family. I mean, it's not like anyone like that was involved in 9/11. After all, we know that was a plot by Saddam Hussein. I'd be skeptical here...but this is one of Rupert Murdoch's networks reporting this. All I know is that whoever made this decision should be out on the sidewalk selling pencils tomorrow. Yes, just because Osama bin Laden is evil doesn't mean that Skippy bin Laden is, too, but it might have helped our efforts had we been able to sit down face to face with Skippy. Yet another victory in the war on terra.... Friday, August 29, 2003
Well, I Guess I'm In The Right Faith.... The Belief-o-Matic says I'm either a Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestant or a Unitarian Universalist. Hey...I am a Unitarian Universalist! And I used to be a Liberal Christain! This gol-darned thing works! Noooooooo...... Hillary mulls bid? No no no no no no no no no! First off, Hillary, I love you and everything (not true, but go with me here), but you will never be President. Also, nice job, waiting to enter the race until it looked like Bush was vulnerable. Where were you six months ago? No Hillary. No. No no no. I'll still vote for you over Bush, though. You just...don't...get it, do you, Bill? Bill O'Reilly tries to intimidate yet another reporter over his pretend Peabody: And while it's plausible that his slips were as innocent as O'Reilly now says they are, it's harder to understand why a man who boasts that his code of ethics requires him to never "distort anything or exclude anything" would have stopped short of explaining that he had nothing to do with the award in question. Actually, he's lying. But that's a very diplomatic way of putting it, and I applaud you. Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them Well, among them, Marc Racicot: Among them, Racicot says former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean stated that Bush might suspend the 2004 election, called Bush "reckless" and "despicable," compared him to the Taliban and said Bush was trying to destroy Social Security, Medicare, public schools and public services. No...that could never happen. Never! Thursday, August 28, 2003
He's an Indian Outlaw/Part Cherokee and Choctaw/His baby she's a Chippewa/She's a-one of a kind.... Toby Keith grows a brain: Keith took a long pause to consider his words, and then added: "I was for Afghanistan, 100%. We got struck and the Taliban needed to be exterminated, but this war here, in Iraq, I didn't necessarily have it all worked out. It didn't work out for me. I know a tyrant is gone and all of that, but whether it was our duty to go do that, well, I haven't figured that out." Ah, yes: the Dixie Chicks were horribly unpatriotic for criticizing the President. So said, well, Toby Keith. How long until we start boycotting? David Kay of the Milky Way...er.... Josh Marshall on the forthcoming David Kay report: Let's translate this: the Republican Guard's failure to use weapons of mass destruction might be explained by the fact that Saddam had shuttered his WMD programs until sanctions were lifted. But of course, David Kay is not interested in the truth. He's interested in saving Bush's kiester. We'll see if this works. There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See Did Saddam trick the US into thinking he had Weapons of Mass Destruction? Yes. Frustrated at the failure to find Saddam Hussein's suspected stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, U.S. and allied intelligence agencies have launched a major effort to determine if they were victims of bogus Iraqi defectors who planted disinformation to mislead the West before the war. So let's review. The neocons wanted war, and Ahmed Chalabi was giving them defectors who seemed to back the case for war. So the Bush administration focused on these defectors to the exclusion of any other evidence, and took us to war. Maybe--maybe--this is a massive intelligence failure. That's a bit easier to swallow, on some level, than it being an outright lie by the Bushies. But more and more, it looks like we wanted to believe Saddam was an imminent threat so we could go to war. And wanting to go to war isn't a sufficient reason to do so. Wednesday, August 27, 2003
Light Posting Today Should be a light posting day, as I have the day off and will probably do stuff with my wife and daughter. Just thought you'd like to know. Tuesday, August 26, 2003
Heh I'll be giving my review of Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look At The Right soon. One word: funny. But one little cartoon from the book just has to be reproduced. (Disclaimer: text by Al Franken, illustration by Don Simpson. Used without permission as part of a review, and since I linked to Amazon, I imagine Dutton won't mind much, but I'll take it down if you want me to.) 
The beauty of this is that the dirty story O'Reilly is telling Thomas comes from Bill O'Reilly's book Those Who Trespass. Really. Go buy Franken's book if you haven't already. Mich Berg: You may have the mojo, we've got the ball Well, it's his metaphor, I just report it: So it's third and five, and Bush knows he has to convert. A field goal is not an option. Of course, Mitch, as any Vikings fan knows, if it's the Vikes third-and-five, needing a conversion to win, Daunte will throw a ball deep to Moss that will be deflected, and then, on the subsequent play, fumble. If the Vikes are on defense, Favre will pump once, twice, and throw over the top for a TD. (I am a Vikings fan, but I've had my heart broken enough to get used to it.) To take Mitch's metaphor further, though: the GOP may be third-and-five, just needing a first down, but that's not where they thought they'd be. They claimed before the war that they'd be up by three touchdowns at this point, with the starting quarterback out of the game resting up for the next tilt. The Dems were just supposed to lay down and die. But we didn't. We're in there scrapping, and we're in the game, and the favored team--the GOP--is starting to show a little bit of fear. Yep, they've got the ball. But our defense is turning out to be pretty damn good. Get Your Mojo Working Now, I'll Show You How.... Dwight Meredith expands on my earlier post: It was not long ago that our Republican friends were assuring us that the war was the one and only issue that mattered for 2004. The war, the argument went, placed the Democrats against the views of the American people and assured Mr. Bush’s reelection. Indeed. Things are not going to Karl's plan--and funny, but winning the war didn't make Bush invulnerable to criticism, did it? Huh. Strange how that happened. Why Clark? Josh Marshall asks and answers the question. Short answer: because no moderate in the race is doing diddly squat. And Then, There Are Times When I Remember Why I Voted For The Guy Bill Clinton ripped into the GOP and the press at a conference in Aspen. Highlights: Clinton kept referring to the media as...the "supine" media, pointing out that when Bush insulted Helen Thomas (who, by asking a rough question in the infamous prewar press conference had, Clinton said, "committed the sin of journalism"), no "young journalists" stood up and walked out. Nice work, Slick Willie. Now, maybe some current officeholders can follow your lead. We're Sending Iraq's Oil Where? To Israel! Oh yeah. Nothing says pro-Arab like shipping oil through Israel. The Iraqis will love this plan. Opening line on life of this pipeline: Over/Under 1.23 Minutes. God Help Me, I Agree With Bob Barr At least up to a point: Marriage is a quintessential state issue. The Defense of Marriage Act goes as far as is necessary in codifying the federal legal status and parameters of marriage. A constitutional amendment is both unnecessary and needlessly intrusive and punitive. Of course, I think DOMA was a particularly dumb law. That said, it's nice to see an anti-gay politician come out against the insanely dumb idea of a Constitutional amendment "protecting" heterosexual marriage--and a states'-rights politician staying true to that ethic even when the result of granting states freedom might result in laws he disagrees with. Maybe I shouldn't regret my '94 Governor vote.... Former Gov. Arne Carlson (R-MN) injects some sanity into the partisan sniping between Gov. Pawlenty and AG Hatch: Since both political parties seem to be involved, as well as office holders of both parties, it may be well for the attorney general, as the state's chief legal officer, to meet with the leadership of the House and Senate and agree to the creation of a bipartisan panel to review all these matters. It would be my hope that this panel would be chaired by a distinguished retired jurist with an inquisitive mind. At the same time, perhaps we can also examine some of the more trivial rules that limit or prohibit normal human contact. Of course, why would Gov. Timmy or AG Mikey agree to this when they can simply lob grenades at each other? Bring 'Em On From CNN:
Of course, things would've been worse had our mission not already been accomplished, right Mr. President? I mean--the mission has been accomplished, right? Monday, August 25, 2003
Whither Clark? I've gotta admit, I like Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) He's been an incisive critic of the Bushies, and given that he was, you know, a General and all, it's tough to say he's soft on the military and hates America. There are signs that Clark is about to enter the race for the Democratic nomination, and if so, it will certainly intrigue me. I remain undecided, committed to the Democrat best able to beat Bush, whomever he or she may be. Clark may be the guy. (So may Dean or Kerry). The person with the most to lose from a Clark candidacy is Dean--he's the clear frontrunner, and any alteration in the political calculus affects the frontrunner most. (Kerry is second--yes, he's a Medal of Honor winner, but Clark was a General, and likely the winner in the "Hates America Least" race). And Dean--who has proven to be an able politician--knows it: On Sunday, Dean told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer" that -- if nominated by his party -- he would consider tapping retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley Clark as a vice presidential running mate. Dean/Clark '04? It would be a pretty formidable team. Clark would help balance Dean on defense--Dean's opposition to the war in Iraq, while becoming more and more mainstream, still can be used to argue that he hates the military. Who better to counter that impression than the guy who used to run NATO? It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but both Dean and Clark have the potential to beat GDub. This should be fun. Putting the Fun back in Fundamentalism Kos notes rising fundamentalism in Iraq. Oh, goodie. Because, you know, those fundamentalist Muslims tend to be so reasonable and pro-American. Thanks, GOP! A new featurette here at the BOTM, where I issue a hearty thank-you to the Republican party for helping the Democrats. Today: California. Thanks, GOP! Thanks to your manipulation of California's recall law, you've managed to do the impossible--turn Gray Davis into a sympathetic character. And thanks to your inability to plan for actually getting the recall on the ballot, you've given a huge boost to Davis' Lt. Governor, Cruz Bustamante. Let's review: Davis is enormously unpopular and dealing with a budget deficit that has no possible politically popular solution. The GOP recalls Davis. Given what recent polls are saying, the likely outcomes are: 1. Davis is recalled, removing the Right's favorite whipping boy in Cali. Bustamante is easily elected to replace him, installing a Latino in the statehouse with none of Davis' baggage. 2. Davis manages to avoid being recalled, thus giving him a back-from-the-dead story that could resurrect his moribund campaign. 3. Pigs fly. 4. Hell freezes over. 5. The Republicans unite behind Ahnuld. So there you have it. Nice side benefit: this should kill Arnold's chances at running in, say, 2006. Indeed, given Schwarzenegger's flat-line numbers, it should kill his political career altogether. This has managed to unite Democrats and divide Republicans, and in the end, the Democrats will be the big winners. Thanks GOP! Friday, August 22, 2003
The Invincible George W. Bush Okay, hypothetical: let's say that a President has 52% approval, is tied in a generic reelect poll with the opposition party, 43%-43%, and in a poll asking whether he should be reelected or not trailed "not" 43%-48%. Is this President popular? Why sure he is, because he's George W. Bush! This just continues Bush's inexorable downward slide, and it brings me to something I've been noticing lately. Before the war, the righty blogs had all the mojo. Reading Insty or Lileks or Mitch Berg's site was fun, because they were so damn giddy. They knew they had the momentum, they knew the big issue of the day favored them, and they were joyous. Meanwhile, the lefty blogs were either dispairing or furious or, in my case (and a few more notable cases, like TPM), circumspect. The left knew we were on the wrong side of the White House door, and while not all of us opposed the war outright, most all of us were leery, to say the least, at the way the war was sold and prosecuted. Fast-forward six months, and look around. Kos is at the top of his game, Josh Marshall is witty as Hell, Pandagon has found his voice, Atrios rules, and...well, pretty much any lefty blog you stumble into is sweetness and light, while righty sites grumble about media coverage and why people don't see things like they do. And I realize something: We've got the mojo now. We have the momentum, the it, the zing. The issues favor us. The Bush administration is failing all over the place. That doesn't mean we're thrilled about it. The fact is, we're a pretty pissed-off group--angry about deaths in Iraq, failures in the economy, sprialling deficits. But we're righteously, vocally angry now. And we know the issues of the day favor us. The righties know they're on the short end of it. Why else would they spend so much time complaining about how we don't know the "real" Iraq? Why would they spend so much time in classic bully mode, tearing down France and the UN when they're hurt an suffering? It's because the neocon wet dream of a happy Iraq full of duckies and bunnies and chirping birds hasn't come to fruition--and people are starting to realize that the raison d'etre of the war wasn't a reason at all. We're winning, folks, and that's a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing because it's always better to be in the lead than behind. If you'd asked the Atlanta Falcons in the '99 NFC Championship Game if they'd trade halftime scores with the Vikings, they would've taken the seven-point lead 1000 times out of 1000. But it's a curse because the leader doesn't always win. The Falcons beat the Vikings, breaking my heart in the process. Remember, the neocons were riding high six months ago. We must guard against hubris. I don't think that's going to be hard to do. If the ego hasn't been kicked out of the Democrats in the last four years, it never will be. We have to scrap and fight like the future of the world depends on how we do--because it does. We must never stop working, never stop trying, never stop doing. But we have the advantage, my friends. If we move together, for once, we can leverage that advantage into victory in 2004, and whether the person being cheered is Howard Dean or Wesley Clark or Dennis Kucinich, I'll be cheering loud and proud. This is our moment, my friends. If we let this one slip away, we'll regret it forever. Let's win. Requiem for a Foe As I watch the desperate rear-guard fight of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore to keep his enormous ediface of the Ten Commandments in place, I feel an emotion I am unaccustomed to feeling about these folks: sorrow. Sorrow because this is so clearly the end of this fight. The Christian Conservatives have been fighting to keep the Ten Commandments in the public sphere for years, and they are about to lose, absolutely. This is no longer an issue of states' rights; the Alabama Supreme Court--Moore's own court--voted 8-1 to move the statue in obeyance of the Federal Court's order. Moore is a lone holdout, asserting his personal right to religious freedom, the only right he can seriously note. His court wants the statue out. His state's government wants the statue out. Only Moore and a loyal cadre of supporters wants to keep the statue, and they will inevitably lose. It may take arrests, but the statue is coming down. I could run through all the tired cliches that those of us on the Religious Liberty side of the culture war trot out: Moore's right to religious expression in his personal life has not been abridged, obedience to the law is demanded of jurists, the Ten Commandments are not acceptable in a secular sense so long as the First Commandment begins "I am the Lord your God," and so on, and so forth. But the fact is, today we have won. The people who support Justice Moore are about to get a harsh object lesson of the power of the Federal government and the First Amendment. And they will not like it. So today, I want to win politely. To Justice Moore's supporters: I commend you on your faith, though it differs from mine. Faith is a wonderful thing, capable of accomplishing great things. I challenge you to use your faith to make our nation a better place. Worship as you will. Tout the Ten Commandments in your church. Get involved politically--no, really. I mean it. Our nation is best served when a number of people of different backgrounds and beliefs are involved. You won't, and can't, win this one. That's life. Nobody has destroyed your right to worship God, though. Tonight, I'll pray for you. I don't know if prayers from a Unitarian count in your book, but I'm going to anyhow. You have fought with honor, and I salute you. Thursday, August 21, 2003
Maybe we're wrong. Nah. The Conservatives would never do what we evil liberals would do, and hijack the other side's machinery for their own goals, right? Absolutely not. Never would happen. The internet is forever, folks. Flood The Zone Fridays Not Geniuses want to stand toe to toe and duke it out with the Bush website. Good for them: And every Friday, we want to use those tools to write letters and make calls highlighting a different part of the Bush disaster. This Friday will be fiscal irresponsibility day -- where we blanket the media with calls and letters about Bush's absurd fiscal policies. We're even going to get you the info, for instance, behold the Bush Record (if you're not a Dean supporter, just ignore the stuff about Dean). This is a nice addition to the liberals' toolbox, especially when the Bush website is putting together some very nice interactive tools. Hey, if you're going to fight, let's fight. Take 'em bring! UPDATE: And it isn't childish to do this. It's democracy in action. I know, conservatives would love to believe that anyone organizing in response to Fearless Leader is just throwing a tantrum, but come on--you're now angry at liberals for writing letters to newspapers and calling people? What can we do--simply stare straight ahead? Vote for Bush, or barring that, Bush? What's okay for us to do? Tell me, and I'll tell you to go fuck your head. Up is Down! War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Terrorist Bombings Are Good! The sensless destruction of UN headquarters in Baghdad demonstrates just how desperate the Ba'athist underground has become. For as long as the Ba'athist remnants held fast to their strategy of assassinating American soldiers, they could plausibly represent themselves as rebels against a foreign occupation. That's right, when terrorist blow up buildings, it really proves that they're weak, and they're losing. Heck, no need to step up attacks, we've won already! Just like when al-Qaieda blew up the World Trade Center.... Um, wait, no.... Uh, it's like the latest bombings in Israel.... No, wait.... Um...trust me on this, okay? It's enough to make Josh Marshall really funny: To be a policy, as opposed to a theological position, there must be some potential results that would show the policy was not working. The proponents of the policy should be able to say ahead of time that if this or that result happens, the policy has failed. "The paradoxically positive mass-casualty terrorism event theory." Heh. Janklowgate U.S. Representative Bill Janlow (R-SD) was speeding when he ran a stop sign, struck, and killed a motorcyclist, Randolph Scott of Hardwick, Minnesota. Alcohol was not involved in the accident. Janklow, who was widely seen as the Bush administration's pick to challenge Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) in 2004, now is fighting for his political life as prosecutors weigh whether to charge the former Governor with felony second-degree manslaughter. The accident occured about twenty-five miles northeast of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Now, some have suggested that Janklow may have to resign as a result of this incident. I doubt it. I realize that many are not familiar with the topography of flyoverland, but 25 miles northeast of Sioux Falls means that this occurred right on the Minnesota border, where there is...well...absolutely nothing. It's not uncommon for drivers in that neck of the woods to drive in a careless manner, on the assumption that there won't be anyone else on the road. It's a simple matter of playing the odds--when you're on a back road late at night, the odds are good that you can just blow through that stop sign and nobody will be there. Heck, you probably have done it more than a few times and gotten away with it. This is not to trivialize or minimize the magnitude of this incident. Janklow is almost certainly done as a contender for Senate, and may well end up choosing not to face reelection. But until and unless Janklow is convicted of a felony, it is almost certain that he'll be able to stay in office. Indeed, I'm sure there are more than a few South Dakotans who view this as an accident--tragic, yes, but simply that. This will not force Janklow out. Tuesday, August 19, 2003
The Dividend Tax Cut Is Working...Not The big dividend tax cut is working...well, about as well as the other Bush tax cuts: In the weeks since Congress slashed the tax on dividends to 15 percent, stocks that pay dividends have fared worse than their brethren who stubbornly refuse to share their earnings with shareholders. According to Standard & Poor's, between the beginning of June and mid-August shares of dividend-paying members of the S&P 500 rose 2.5 percent, while shares of nonpayers rose 3.9 percent. And the goose provided by dividends—2.174 percent annually for payers—doesn't come close to making up the difference. Hwah? I can't believe that this didn't turn out the way GDub suggested it would. I mean...he wouldn't lie to us, would he? Oh yeah, that's right...he would. Nahm! Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), you magnificent bastard, I salute you. By actually putting pressure on the RIAA, rather than roll over and let them scratch your belly and give you a few million bucks, you've managed to force them to state, on the record, that they won't go after low-use file traders, but rather, that they intend to target the big boys. Now don't let up--keep the threat of hearings on! My God, man, you keep doing this and you may just win my vote in '08 (it's a long shot, but so far, you're one out of one hundred Senators who seems to actually have their brain engaged on this issue). Good job. Mission No Longer Accomplished! Dana Milbank reports that Fearless Leader is no longer claiming that combat operations in Iraq are over: In an interview with the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service given on Thursday and released by the White House yesterday, Bush interrupted the questioner when asked about his announcement on May 1 of, as the journalist put it, "the end of combat operations." Alas, poor George. Because we all remember his speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln, where GDub said, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country." Even today, the White House Website touts Shrub's May 1 speech with the headline "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended." But, you know, it depends on what the meaning of "ended" is. It gets better, though. In the same interview, Bush commented on troops in that other country...tip of my tongue...you know, the one where that one guy who bombed those buildings lived...oh yeah, Afghanistan: "We've got about 10,000 troops there, which is down from, obviously, major combat operations," [Bush] said. "And they're there to provide security and they're there to provide reconstruction help. But both those functions are being gradually replaced by other troops. Germany, for example, is now providing the troops for ISAF [International Security Assistance Force], which is the security force for Afghanistan, under NATO control. In other words, more and more coalition forces and friends are beginning to carry a lot of the burden in Afghanistan." Unfortunately, those 10,000 US troops represent the largest number of troops stationed in Afghanistan since the war began--up from a December 2001 figure of approximately 3,000 troops, and 5,000 at the end of hostilities in Afghanistan. Now, don't get me wrong: I would actually like to see more troops in Afghanistan. It might prevent things like the Taliban regouping and killing people. But it's a bit disconcerting to have the President--who presumably should know these things-- Heh...heh...hrm.... Jesse beat me to the punch by noting Insty's post on the UN bombing in Iraq: EXPLOSION AT U.N. HEADQUARTERS IN BAGHDAD: Hmm. The problem is that everyone in Iraq, both pro- and anti-Saddam, has a reason to dislike the U.N., which makes assigning responsibility tricky. Put this together with the mortar attack on (presumably pro-Saddam) Iraqi prisoners the other day and it almost makes me wonder if there's a third force at work here. Follow the link for updates as they come in -- The Command Post is all over this story. That's right Glenn, when the Iraqis attack the UN, it's because of the UN's inability to keep Saddam from causing environmental devastation in his quest to obliterate the Marsh Arabs (which, incidentally, the US was in position to prevent as well). Or, barring that, something else the UN did made the Iraqis mad. Certainly, the Iraqi attacks are explicable. When the Iraqis attack us, it's just small pockets of Saddam loyalists who hate freedom. Of course, the conservatives are showing the usual sensitivity towards the nine dead UN officials who were, by the way, helping the US rebuild Iraq. Heh. It is obvious to me that Matthew Yglesias is an idiotarian. I know, I know, idiotarian means "liberal", but it's the best word to describe this relentlessly inane post: MY IDEOLOGY: For those of you who care to know, I'm an Obvioust. It means exactly what it says. I won't bother refuting these--some are true, some are false, all are dull. I will say that I find it interesting that it's "obvious" the Dems have no chance in '04 when Bush's reelect is sub-50%. That's not exactly lights-out. Bush isn't a true conservative, but that's worse than actually being a true conservative--our nation's defecit would be in better shape, for one. What I object to most, though, is the smug, "I'm right and you're wrong" tone of the post. It's what drives me nuts when lefties have bumper stickers that say "If You're Not Outraged You're Not Paying Attention!" That smug, self-satisfied, if-you-don't-agree-with-me-you're-an-idiot mentality that 'wingers on both sides so often fall into. It's obvious to me that when someone argues their positions on issues of the day are obviously true, they haven't thought more than two seconds about the positions they take. Obviously. Sunday, August 17, 2003
Hmmf Mitch Berg is skewering Al Franken and City Pages. Not sure why, but heck, I'll be supporting his right to skewer if anyone sues him. |
 
 
 |
