Alien Life Form

2007-03-21T13:44:00.000-04:00

What to Watch Tonight
Friday Night Lights. Watch or I will find you and kill you.

Bones. TV's most entertaining crime procedural series. If you somehow refuse to watch something as good as Friday Night Lights, this is pretty much the best you can do with anything else in the 8:00 hour.

Lost. Finally resolving the question of how Locke got paralyzed. And knowing this show, probably creating like 20 new questions. Still, the second best thing on TV tonight.

And I ask a moment of silence at 8:30 to observe the continued absence of The Knights of Prosperity. I mean, really, do TV audiences have such bad taste that a repeat of According to Jim is doing better than that did?

Yes. Yes, they do.

2007-03-20T18:25:00.000-04:00

Marvel June Solicitations
At Newsarama.

Given the amount of solicitations they previewed over the last week, there's really not much new to see here.

X-Men: Endangered Species--Funeral for an unnamed mutant. 2 years later, somebody finally gets around to addressing the consequences of House of M.
Mark Bagley's last full issue of Ultimate Spider-Man.
The Ultimate X-Men vs Nightcrawler--A fight get the impression I'm supposed to be a lot more excited about than I am.
Spider-Man "in his darkest hour"--Oh. Dark. Black. Black costume. I totally get this whole event now.
Sensational Spider-Man brings us the return of Eddie Brock nobody was really asking for. Still, an intriguing premise and I guess they gotta do something with the movie coming.
Mythos: Spider-Man finally reveals Spider-Man's shocking origin. Cause they've never told that story before.
Spider-Man Fairy Tales trying to trick us into buying, well, Spider-Man Fairy Tales by hiding it under beautiful Niko Henrichon art.
Spider-Man Family continues to be published for no particular reason.
Annihilation: Conquest has potential. They've apparently replaced Brian Denham with Mike Perkins on art.
The Initiative 3 has a great cover. I'm glad they made this an ongoing. The concept has pretty much endless possibilities and it's clear there are still a whole lot of things they need to explain.
Black Panther takes the pseudo-Fantastic Four to the zombie Skrull planet. Um, yeah. Okay.
Captain America 27 continues to explore the effects of Cap's death.
Fantastic Four deals the with aftermath of visiting the zombie Skrull planet. Still not feeling it.
World War Hulk kicks off a whole lot of people hitting each other for several months.
Blade vs Spider-Man? Didn't we already do this dance in issue 1? And did I just see the word "gun-arm"? I'm willing to give Guggenheim the benefit of the doubt here but, damn, that sounds stupid and it doesn't look any better on the cover.
Ant-Man fights Dragon Man. Because you demanded it.
Jonathan Hickman writes and draws a Legion of Monsters back-up. That's worth a look.
Mighty Avengers continues to look like a whole lot of crazy ass action.
New Avengers kills Elektra. I don't know why I should care. But Bendis and Yu might be able to make it work.
Nova 3 looks like an interesting peek at the emotional aftermath of Speedball becoming Penance. Too bad Nova's going straight back into Annihilation next issue.
Punisher War Journal--I've been loving this book so far but, Christ, that's an awful cover.
She-Hulk. Giant size Man-Thing. Heh. Like a big penis.
Thunderbolts ends its first arc, most likely with more violence, cynicism and entertainingly heavy handed satire.
Storm in Uncanny X-Men too? When did she start having more monthly titles than Wolverine?
David Finch's X-Men 200 cover kicks ass.
And in trade paperbacks, Marvel finishes jumbling all of those random Civil War specials into collections where they don't entirely fit.

2007-03-20T18:21:00.000-04:00

Dr. Fate Cancelled?
Before it even ships. That can't be a good sign. Maybe leading into it with 5 really crappy one-shots featuring characters people care about even less than they care about Dr Fate wasn't such a good plan. They say it'll be resolicited eventually. Gotta wonder what happened there.

UPDATE: Apparently a change in artists is the cause of the delay. So we will eventually be seeing the series, which is good news because Steve Gerber does seem to have some interesting ideas.

2007-03-20T18:18:00.000-04:00

Stuff for You to Get
Jesse Malin's Glitter in the Gutter.

Get on that shit.

2007-03-20T17:55:00.000-04:00

What to Watch Tonight
Um...damn.

If you have to watch something, The Unit is usually a decent hour. Not quite as edgy or exciting as you would expect from David Mamet and the creator of The Shield, but very competent television with a great cast. Tonight is the 8th or 9th time a unit member gets stuck behind enemy lines alone and has to get out.

Then there's Dirt. Yeah. Um...I want to support FX dramas in general and this is the build up to a theoretically intense season finale, but it's just not that good. It's gotten better as it goes along and it's not a total waste of an hour. It's pretty damn close, though.

2007-03-19T18:56:00.000-04:00

Monday
Things to watch on TV tonight:
Prison Break--3 episodes left. Sure, it doesn't make any sense at all anymore, but you gotta admit it's pretty entertaining.
24--Jack deals with "devastating news." I really hope it's something more devastating than Charles Logan dying because as much as I love the character, I don't particularly care if he lives or dies at this point. Tonight's hour 14. This is around the point in the season where you stop and realize, damn, they've got 10 more hours to fill somehow. And you pray for the best.
The Riches--Who would have guessed Eddie Izzard could actually act? Like, really, really well. Minnie Driver is saddled with an unfortunately dull character, but especially given the current competition in the timeslot, Izzard alone is worth the hour of your time.

DC Comics June solicitations
That 3-D issue of Action Comics solicited for, what, the fourth time?
And more fill-in art on Batman. At least from a great artist this time. But still, what the hell happened to the Kuberts? They could meet deadlines when they were working the X-Men books. They're doing phenomenal work, but that doesn't matter so much if we never actually see any of it.
A new Superman/Batman arc with art by Dustin Nguyen.
4 weekly issues of Countdown with unsurprisingly vague descriptions.
Another 52 trade with enough extras that you feel kind of cheated for paying for the damn thing monthly.
The Brave and the Bold 4. Supergirl and Lobo. Heh.
Checkmate remains derailed by an Outsiders crossover I have no interest in picking up.
Sinestro Corps. Ethan van Sciver art. That's all I need to hear.
Another Green Arrow series dies and I imagine very few people still care. Looking forward to seeing where Scott McDaniel ends up next.
Jodi Picoult's Wonder Woman run ends, almost completely sucked into the Amazons Attack crossover that didn't sound like her original plan for the book. Seems kind of a waste.
Another intriguing Midnighter issue, this month by Christos Gage.
A Stormwatch PHD trade that I'm pretty sure cuts off in the middle of a 2-part story.
J.M. DeMatteis on Wetworks. Almost tempting enough to pick it up.
Is Marcelo Frusin ever going to draw the interiors of Loveless again? Because their fill-in artists both kind of suck and it's really dragging the book down.
Superman action figures based on Adam Kubert designs. If nothing else, that Bizarro deserves your money.

Tomorrow:
Possibly June solicitations from Marvel

2007-03-16T13:54:00.000-04:00

Veronica Mars Not Canceled?

Somewhat good news.

2007-03-16T13:19:00.000-04:00

World War Hulk Art

At Newsarama

Wow. That is one extraordinarily pissed off Hulk. Understandably, given the fairly ridiculous and horribly unjust decision by some of the supposedly smartest men in the Marvel Universe to exile him to space for life.

Tony Stark saw Civil War coming when he fought a bunch of zombies with King Arthur but he somehow didn't see how that plan could go wrong? If this is the characterization of the Hulk we're going to be seeing throughout the event, I've gotta wonder how this one ends without a whole lot of people getting killed. Or where the Hulk can go when it's over.

I realize this is just going to be five issues of people hitting each other but, damn, it looks pretty cool. When Greg Pak's on, he can do some great work (Phoenix: Endsong). When he's off...ugh (Phoenix: Warsong). But this is some of the best looking art Romita Jr's ever put out. So, for now at least, I'm going to hope for the best.

2007-03-16T10:35:00.000-04:00

Veronica Mars canceled?

Hopefully this report is premature.

Come on, CW. Really, what else are you going to put on instead?

Bastards.

2007-03-15T22:05:00.000-04:00

Comic Book Reviews for March 14, 2007

I get most of my comics shipped to me through an online service a week or two after their release, but I still pick up a few things in stores. So then, some thoughts on a few of this week’s releases and a few older ones I’m just getting around to reading.

Civil War: The Confession—Ah, yet another in the seemingly endless stream of books Marvel had to put out to provide the satisfaction that Civil War itself failed to give us and to explain the many, many, many extremely important story elements they just couldn’t fit in. Like, for example, what the fuck Tony Stark was thinking. Civil War: Frontline 11 took a step in that direction and Brian Michael Bendis finally makes some sense of it all. Admittedly, the “I realized this was coming while King Arthur and I were fighting zombies” logic is a bit flawed, but the emotional beats of the story are spectacular. As is the art. Structurally, it’s a bit shaky, with one powerful extended monologue taking up most of the issue and then a flashback to a bunch of shouting two days earlier. I see what Bendis was trying to do in terms of setting up the whole “was it worth it?” line but it comes across a bit disjointed. Maybe it’s partly the unnecessary “Marvel Comics Presents The Confession” title appearing for a second time at the start of the flashback. Also, while I realize part of the point was showing the extent of Stark’s reaction to Captain America’s death, he has a couple of horribly awkward, childish and arrogant lines (like the “Uh, yes” and the “You’re a sore loser” bits) that seem out of place. The first part of the story is far better than the second in that sense. Still, it’s a huge step toward rejuvenating the character and it’s probably the best single issue to come out of Civil War.

Up next, a five-part miniseries about characters reacting to the death of Captain America, the climax of Civil War that didn’t actually happen during Civil War. Can’t wait.

Moon Knight 8—Through the magic of Marvel scheduling, Steve Rogers makes his final living appearance here, the week after his death in a story that takes place before Civil War 6, which shipped in January. Not that the Civil War connection here is particularly relevant to Charlie Huston’s story. Though Marc Spector sums up the whole event better than pretty much anyone else has: “People being murdered while you and Stark and your pals play capture the fucking flag. You self-righteous son of a bitch. Coming in here acting like this is anything but your regularly scheduled grudge match to work out all of your differences. All of you. Trying to prove who has the biggest super power.” Always count on the crazy guy to make sense of the riduclous. And we now return to our regularly scheduled Moon Knight story arc, in which we get our obligatory moment of extreme violence and more hints about the return of the Midnight Man. All wonderfully drawn by David Finch in what sadly appears to be his final issue on the title. I read the first arc in the collected hardcover and I definitely get the sense this arc’s going to read better that way too. Hopefully Huston has more in mind for the upcoming Punisher and Iron Man guest appearances than a brief tangential cameo.

Grifter/Midnighter 1—Chuck Dixon wrote this? Really? This? I used to love Dixon’s work. His runs on Detective Comics and Robin were some of the most entertaining books of their time. Exciting, fun and extremely well-paced. The man was a master of the character-driven action story. And now there’s this. A few pages of the Authority fighting monsters inside Midnighter’s head, a whole bunch of melodramatic bickering between team members and six pages of Grifter literally doing nothing? I was oddly looking forward to this series. It sounded perfect for Dixon. But despite a few nice moments, this is pretty disappointing. Ryan Benjamin’s art has never looked better, though.

Wonder Woman 5—I really should have looked through this before I bought it. With Will Pfeifer taking over for an issue, I assumed this would be a lead-in to his Amazons Attack thing. Instead it’s a perfectly competent completely stereotypical fill-in issue. Bit of a letdown.

Coming soon: TV recommendations, music, maybe college basketball picks. Who knows?

2007-03-15T22:03:00.000-04:00

Death of the Dream

Yeah…so…Captain America’s dead.

It’s not like that’s what suddenly inspired me to restart this blog after two years. I’ve been meaning to do this for a while now and I just haven’t gotten around to it. Since nobody was actually reading this before—and most likely nobody’s going to reading it now either but that’s beside the point—I’ll just quickly say the focus of things is going to be shifting away from what it was to, well, something else. I reached a saturation point with disgust with politicians and I’m not terribly interested in digging into that grave as much anymore. We’re going to be swinging more toward the pop culture route here—TV, movies, music, comic books, basically whatever the hell I feel like. Part of a desperate effort to keep myself writing something of some sort every day.

Anyway, Captain America. It’s been a great book for two years now and it’s a little disappointing to hear that Civil War forced Ed Brubaker to change his plans on the series. Especially given that Civil War wasn’t all that good to begin with. And it seems more than a little silly that the biggest moment of the miniseries is happening here in another book two weeks after the last issue. Just another example of the sloppy planning and execution of the event. Regardless, Captain America 25 is a solid piece of storytelling, clearly geared toward new readers and setting up an arc that’s going to focus on Sharon Carter, Bucky and Sam Wilson. And the ending reveal of who fired the last shot is an extremely powerful moment. I have a lot of faith in Brubaker’s writing, so I’m looking forward to see where he goes with it.

Still, this is a man who in his time at Marvel has killed Foggy Nelson and the Red Skull, brought back Foggy Nelson and the Red Skull, brought back Bucky and brought back the third Summers brother we hardly knew anything about. I will be shocked if Steve Rogers isn’t back by issue 50.

2005-03-30T23:40:00.000-05:00

What Liberal Neurology?

Much has been made by some--well, really just by one of my friends and a few conservative radio hosts--of the bias of various doctors involved in the Schiavo case.

The reasoning goes that someone like Cheshire will be more likely to diagnose Terri as non-PVS because of his religious beliefs and vocal opposition to physician-assisted suicide. And if you accept that premise, Ron Cranford might be saying she is PVS because he wants to do some euthanizing.

I don't buy it.

I think it's significant that Cheshire sat in Terri's hospice room and observed her for quite a while but chose not to examine her. Why? Maybe because he knew he wouldn't like what he'd find? I've read his affidavit. He states that he saw no consistent signs of responsiveness but he really felt like he was in the presence of a living person. That really doesn't sound like science.

More importantly, though, I find it much more plausible that a doctor with beliefs like Cheshire's would lean toward a pro-life diagnosis because he wants Terri to live than that a doctor, any doctor, would want to find someone in a vegetative state knowing it would mean their death. I just don't see the upside to that. I don't believe a doctor would be so mean-spirited. I don't think there's an ideology that would seek out the death of patients. It seems to go against the concept of being a doctor at all. It's one thing to support mercy killing. It's another to actively desire diagnoses that could let you kill the patient. I've spent quite a while looking into Cranford's background. His support for euthinasia is indeed well-documented and I think it goes a bit further than most are comfortable with. That belief, though, has nothing to do with his ability to diagnose PVS. He is, in fact, one of the nation's leading PVS experts. He's been studying this for nearly 3 decades. He got game.

Much is made by people who really hate him of Cranford's diagnosis of police officer David Mack as PVS in 1979. 20 months later, Mack woke up. Setting aside that this was 25 years ago and both Cranford and medical technology have improved quite a bit, it's not clear that this was actually a misdiagnosis. It appears to be considered something of a medical mystery how he was able to recover. That recovery, however, did leave him in a state of disability where he and his wife would both come to say that they wished they had just pulled the plug and let him go in 1980. It's a bizarre case, and Cranford may have made a mistake, but that was very long ago and it hardly disqualifies him from offering his expert opinion here or in the many, many PVS cases he's been part of since. PVS is a difficult diagnosis. Some studies suggest it is misdiagnosed very often. This is why so many doctors were asked to look at Terri. And all of the credible neurologists (not including "Nobel Prize nominated" liar William Hammesfahr) said it was PVS. That's got to count for something.

2005-03-30T23:35:00.000-05:00

Carpentry

Is it me or does Schindler family physician Jay Carpenter look kind of like Schindler family spiritual advisor Pat Mahoney with a different beard?

For that matter, does anyone else get the sense Jay Carpenter isn't a particularly good doctor?

Among other things, the internist (note: not a neurologist) stated:

a) There's no such thing as a persistent vegetative state.

b) Ron Cranford invented PVS because he wanted an excuse to kill people.

c) Terri Schiavo is awake and responsive.

And yet he seems to expect us to take him seriously or something.

What's up with that?

2005-03-29T23:25:00.000-05:00

The Unseen Costs of the Actions of Ignorant Right Wing Assholes II

In my continuing effort to remind everyone that there's more to this than just what appears to have become the right wing asshole equivalent of Sesame Place, I would like to point out that abuse hotlines are for, well, actual abuse complaint. I realize a lot of these people have trouble comprehending the notion of reality, but do they really think they'll be taken any more seriously if 100 of them call in a frivolous complaint than if 10 of them do? Besides, the DCF seems to be perfectly capable of fabricating their own baseless abuse allegations. They don't need help from somebody who has a low enough IQ to think that putting a picture of Terri and a picture of Jesus on the same poster constitutes a compelling argument.

If I were as immature as these assholes, I'd suggest that handing your children over to police to be arrested for trespassing is substantially more abuse than, you know, not abusing your wife.

And I'd tell you that the DCF hotline number is 1-800-96ABUSE and the parents of those children include Scott Heldreth Tete Donahue and Geilen and Chris Keys.

I'm better than that, though.

2005-03-29T23:22:00.000-05:00

Respecting the Culture of Direct Marketing

Bob Schindler seems hellbent on testing my willingness to excuse anything he does or says, given his circumstances. I've tried to be very flexible about things. The man is clearly delusion and deeply traumatized.

But still, why the fuck did he have to go and do this?

I'm not sure if I'm bothered more by the fact that someone's going to profit from these donations--which, by the way, the family is still soliciting even now--or that right wing assholes are being so upfront about how little they actually care about Terri's life. It's just another list of dollar signs for them.

Actually, no, it's definitely the assholery that bothers me more.

2005-03-27T11:31:00.000-05:00

This Is Me Being Completely Serious

For all of us whole believe in God, I'd just like to ask that we take a moment to say a prayer for the Schindler family. They were finally forced yesterday to accept that their daughter will die within a week. As angry as I've been about the things they've done and, much more so, the things done on their behalf, they're losing a daughter. After years of right wingers giving them false hope that they'd somehow be able to rewrite Florida law to get what they wanted, I can't imagine how difficult these final days must be for them.

As long as we're at it, pray for Michael Schiavo. He has endured 15 years of pain and at least 5 years of assholes calling him a murderer. He has spent the last week by his wife's bedside, grieving. You can be suspicious of the guy all you want, but I guarantee you none of the sinister motives attributed to him by the prolife crowd--who, I'd like to reiterate, have no legitimate reason to connect themselves to this situation, given that it has nothing to do with the right to life--none of those motives make any sense when you look at the facts. This is a man who has fought for nearly a decade to give his wife what she wanted. The right wing will likely continue to slander him through the midterm elections. The man does not deserve any more pain than he's already endured.

Pray for them.

2005-03-27T11:20:00.000-05:00

A Glimpse of the Future of American Right Wing Assholery

Via Knight-Ridder, a conservative political figure spells out for us exactly how he plans to exploit the Schiavo situation in a grossly dishonest fashion, as conservative political figures often do:

"The Schiavo case has further inflamed conservatives' long-standing antipathy toward the judiciary. The charge is that federal judges have defied Congress and sentenced her to death. Some religious conservative leaders, in fact, believe that "Remember Terri!" will become the movement's rallying cry. Gary Bauer, a religious conservative leader and former Republican presidential candidate, said, "If or when Terri passes away, she will become a symbol of conservative anger and disdain for what we see as out-of-control federal courts that are making decisions way beyond what they are authorized to do."

Let me just repeat: "making decisions way beyond what they are authorized to do."

Because the courts allegedly rejected the US Congress' efforts to insert themselves into one family's private medical decision. The courts went beyong their authority. Congress was totally in line though. Right. Makes sense.

See, what pisses me off is that anybody who thinks this has no understanding at all of the law and has no business criticizing judges for anything. If you want to blame somebody, blame the Florida legislature for passing an unambiguous law that clearly states that the husband has the authority to make medical decisions for his wife. The Schindlers were unable to make a compelling legal argument to supercede the power given to Michael Schiavo by law. Judges don't make laws. They uphold them. And yet they blame the courts for somehow overstepping their bounds by not doing something about a private dispute in which neither party is breaking the law. Gotta love the definition of "activist judge" that extends to judges who don't act on something at all. As this case makes abundantly clear, even a conservative Christian Republican judge like Judge Greer will uphold the law and the constitution rather than cave in to idiots screaming about "judicial murder". It terrifies me to think, if they've got a problem with all 30 something of these judges (including the entire federal appeals court for the southeast and the entire Supreme Court), what kind of judges are they looking for?

So just to reiterate: Florida law gives Michael Schiavo the right to make this decision. The Schindlers, as is their right, challenge that right in court. Two full trials are held and Michael wins both and all subsequent appeals. The Schindlers still file motions to stop him. The court follows a strict interpretation of the law. The Schindlers appeal. The appeals court follows a strict interpretation of the law. The Florida legislature passes "Terri's Law", a law they know is unconstitutional and will not be upheld just so they can take illegal action without consequences within the brief window of time needed to declare it unconstitutional. Then Terri's Law is declared unconstitutional. The Florida legislature chooses not to pass another unconstitutional law to prevent a husband from granting his wife's final wish. Republicans in Congress and President Bush decide they know better than the Florida legislature and 19 judges. They ram through a likely unconsitutional law that calls for a new trial in federal court. (This would also be the point where Bush flies home from Texas and goes to sleep so he can be awakened at 1 am to sign it in DC rather than just signing it at 3 am in Texas, which would have made absolutely no difference under any circumstances since no action could be taken until the courts opened in the morning.)A federal judge holds a hearing to determine whether an injunction should be issued to put the tube back in until that trial can be held, as is the proper procedure. As the law dictates, that judge must consider whether the Schindlers are likely to win that trial before taking action to invalidate an existing court order. The federal judge, a 3 judge federal appeals panel, an entire federal district appeals court, and the US Supreme Court all refuse to file that injunction, citing the lack of a chance in hell that the Schindlers will win. Conservative Christians whine like little bitches. Let me just emphasize again that this decision was a necessary first step in the process that Congress apparently forgot about. The Schindlers appeal again. The judges again follow the established legal procedures required in situations like this and deny it.

But it's the judges who are the problem here? Scalia wasn't even willing to speak up against the lower courts' decisions. He could have written a dissenting opinion if he disagreed. Do you realize how wrong you need to be when Scalia won't support a Christian conservative moral argument?
The judges were right. The system worked exactly the way it is supposed to. Nothing went wrong here, other than the courts being clogged for years with baseless, hopeless appeals by this family and their rather incompetent attorneys.

I don't really expect the kind of person who respects Gary Bauer to understand that, but I know he does and it makes me sick that he's willing to mislead his followers about it.

2005-03-27T11:17:00.000-05:00

Why We Fight

Somebody asked me why this case matters so much to me and what it has to do with the liberal political agenda. That question seems to miss the point, but this is my answer.

Personally, I don't see this as a liberal issue or a conservative one. I don't think of it politically. I don't care if its a Republican or a Democrat, everyone responsible for passing that bill in Congress disgusts me. I think Republicans and right to lifers desperate for a cause to rally around made it political and made it a conservative issue. But this case ultimately has no relevance at all to the liberal agenda, except in the sense that some (Tom Delay) are trying to abuse it to advance the conservative agenda.

It matters to me because I think it's insane that it's become such a national spectacle. Because this attention is the last thing Terri Schiavo would have wanted. Because her parents' insistence on feeding pictures of her in her state to the media destroy any sense of dignity that remained. Because she and her parents have been abused and exploited by polticial activists. Because this is not an unusual situation and it has somehow become one for some people who don't care about the truth. Because I see so many people talk about the situation without knowing a damn thing about it.

I've had to study and research this case very heavily for my job. I've dealt with some of the family members and spokespeople. I know how many lies are out there. I watch people call Michael Schiavo a murderer as he sits crying by his wife's bedside. I watch people say there's been no due process as if there haven't been trials and many, many appeals. I watch people trot out former coma patients and act like it's the same thing. I watch protesters push their children out with cups of water just so they get arrested on camera. I watch so many people who know so little about this and still take a side with such conviction. I watch people who know nothing about the law argue that this is judicial tyranny even though, given the evidence, there was no other conclusion for any of the 30 something judges who have no been involved with it to reach. I watch people who are bizarrely unwilling to even consider that maybe someone in this kind of state might actually once have told their husband they wouldn't want to live on. I watch people give these parents, who have already suffered so much, false hope. They have no legal case. They have no medical case. They cannot win. Their lawyer should have sat them down 10 years ago and explained that to them.

Basically, this case matters so much to me because I find the things that are being said and done about it so incredibly offensive. I want this family to be left alone to say goodbye to their loved one with the peace, privacy, and dignity that thousands of people across the country are afforded every day. That's not going to happen and that's what makes me so angry.

2005-03-27T11:13:00.000-05:00

Bringing a Gun to a Knife Fight

What sickens me about this case is that Republicans and activists are using misleading words and distorting the facts (calling Terri a “victim,” etc.) as if this was just another political debate. But they're not fighting Democrats here. They're fighting regular citizens who know a hell of a lot more than they do. The doctors and legal experts trying to explain the medical and legal reasons why this is the right thing to do aren’t used to that and aren’t prepared to fight it. They’re speaking plainly and accurately, as they have been trained and have taken oaths to do. In our media culture, that never works. Look at the way even liberals here are talking about “starvation” like it’s some horrible torture and not an incredibly common and humane way for very ill patients to die.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again, this is NOT a right to life issue, no matter how much the right wing wants it to be. This is a case built on two basic questions. Did Terri say she wanted to die in the situation? And is she incapable of recovery? Neither of those have anything to do with the right to life. An impartial court determined after hearing both sides that there was clear and convincing evidence that Terri could not recover and would want to die. You think that judge was wrong? Fine. Appeal it. You’ll lose. But there’s no moral question at stake here. There is no political issue. These people have twisted the situation to create one.

2005-03-27T11:12:00.000-05:00

The Unseen Costs of the Actions of Ignorant Right Wing Assholes

There was an AP story that came across the wires Friday. Even if you have heard it, I'm going to say it again because it's disgusting and it hasn't been reported enough. A 24-year-old girl was called to the hospice the other night to be with her dying grandfather. She had sworn to him that she wouldn't let him die alone. When she arrived, it took several minutes to get through the protesters. Once she did, because security was tightened in response to the protesters and the violent pro-life nutjobs, she had to be searched and that also took several minutes.

She arrived at his room about a minute after he died.

God, I want to hit something.

2005-03-27T11:08:00.000-05:00

Schiavo-rama

So over the last 24 hours or so, I've posted a number of comments at the Washington Monthly's blog about the Schiavo case.

I think they cover the situation pretty well and I'm honestly just way too lazy to bother writing new ones. So I'll be reposting them here under authority granted to me by the Governor of Florida, who, if I understand Randall Terry correctly, has approximately as much power as God.

2005-03-26T12:12:00.000-05:00

Bob Schindler yesterday: Terri's in her last hours. It's like a concentration camp.

Bob Schindler today: She's putting up a tremendous fight to live. She's doing very well.

God, I feel sorry for this guy.

I really wish his attorney or a doctor would sit him down and explain this is over so he can say goodbye to his daughter with something at least resembling dignity.

2005-03-21T23:03:00.000-05:00

Yeah, I'm just that pissed off

I've said it before, I'm sure I'll say it again: Fuck Tom Delay.

Let me state 10 basic, undisputable facts about the Terri Schiavo situation.

1) Her cerebral cortex is pretty much gone. That doesn't grow back.

2) People in persistent vegetative states have expressions and motions that often fool their families into thinking they're responding.

3) 19 judges have ruled on this case and Michael Schiavo has won every time.

4) Michael Schiavo will recieve no money (actually, disputably, maybe up to $50,000) after her death. He has refused millions of dollars to divorce Terri and give control to her parents, who will then do what he does not believe she would want.

5) This has been going on for 15 years. Congress got involved 3 days ago. That's how much they care about the situation.

6) The courts have found that having the tube removed is what Terri wants, not what Michael wants. This was her choice.

7) No court has found any evidence of abuse and certainly not any evidence that Michael Schiavo tried to kill Terri.

8) Terri Schiavo is not in a coma. She is in a persistent vegetative state. Huge difference. This isn't Pat Boone's son we're talking about.

9) Those videos of a few seconds of apparent response are taken from several hours in which Terri responds only at random.

10) She is not in pain. She does not feel pain. Death by starvation will be painless, peaceful, and humane, however unpleasant it may sound to us.

Turn on your TV. Count how many of these facts Republican assholes get wrong.

Damn, I am so pissed off right now.

2004-12-15T21:46:00.000-05:00

Wooden Nickel

My first reviews are up at the Avalanche.

Come on. You know you want to know what I thought of the latest issue of Catwoman.

2004-12-15T16:29:00.000-05:00

In the House

I'm a big fan of Fox's "House". By far the most entertaining medical drama I've ever seen, at least for the five or so weeks it's been on. But I'm watching last night's episode and the whole thing is built around the idea that Dr. House is never wrong and it's such a big deal that he might be this time. What I don't get is, as far as I can, the entire story structure of every episode has been driven by him being wrong several times, the patients getting worse, then him eventually being right. Last week, a baby died because he gave it the wrong medication. Otherwise, a very good episode. Except for the horrible closing montage of all the characters celebrating Christmas while House plays the piano. That sucked.

Still, watch this show. You will enjoy it. Or I will come to your house and I will stand outside and make loud noises late at night so you can't sleep.

2004-12-15T08:46:00.000-05:00

Breaking News: Bush Administration Admits Mistake

Today's NYT front page:

"Missteps Cited In Kerik Vetting By White House"

Gee. Ya think?

2004-12-14T15:14:00.000-05:00

Best Songs of 2004

Okay, so there are 20 of them. Deal with it.

Note that these are in alphabetical order, which I admit is just laziness on my part. Also, I chose not to comment on them simply because, well, beyond "this song is really good," I don't have much to add.

Neighborhood #3 (Power Out) by the Arcade Fire
10 AM Automatic by the Black Keys
Honest Mistake by the Bravery
Tune Out by the Format
Dark Of The Matinee by Franz Ferdinand
Carnival Kids by the Futureheads
Home By Saturday by Hayden
Next Exit by Interpol
Mr. Brightside by the Killers
Nothing To Be Done by the Legends
New World Order by Jesse Malin
Laid A Highway by Tift Merritt
Something Pretty by Patrick Park
Bullets By The Door by Patrick Park
All Wrong by the Perishers
Shut Up And Kiss Me by Pony Up
Rock’N’Roll Lies by Razorlight
Fair by Remy Zero
You Can’t Fool Old Friends With Limousines by the Thrills
Original Of The Species by U2

Though they're not ranked, I think the top five would probably include the Thrills, both Patrick Park songs, Hayden, and either Franz Ferdinand or Jesse Malin.

The main reason I went all the way to 20 is that all of them should fit perfectly on one 700 MB/ 80 Min. CD. Most of them are available through iTunes and are more than worth the dollar. Unfortunately, Honest Mistake and Shut Up And Kiss Me were only posted on their bands' webpages. Both the Bravery and Pony Up are planning album releases early next year, so keep an eye out. A 3-track Bravery EP is available, but this song isn't on it.

In the next few days, I'll be posting best albums and/or best television shows. Enjoy the awesomeness.

2004-12-14T14:50:00.000-05:00

My Bonus-size Year-end Spectacular

Note to self: remember this phrase for future use as euphamism for penis.

So this is Christmas and that means it's time for me, like so many others, to tell you what I liked this year and expect you to trust me.

Over the next few weeks, you'll be seeing lists of my favorite movies, music, books, TV, whatever for 2004. Two important rules: 1) This is obviously only selected from what I've seen, heard, or read, so some good stuff will inevitably be left out; and 2) Especially with music, this is based on things I saw or heard for the first time this year either on new albums or on new compilations and soundtracks. Some stuff may actually be a bit older, but I'm going to try to avoid that.

Up first, probably songs. Movies'll come last because I won't even see a lot of the year's best movies until around or after Christmas.

And I swear I'll get back to talking about actual things again soon.

2004-12-14T14:22:00.000-05:00

Coming Apart in the Avalanche

Starting Thursday, I'm going to be reviewing comic books every week over at Comic Avalanche.

There will now be a link to it over on my sidebar and I'll likely post reminders when the new reviews are put up.

Check it. Or I'll hunt you down and set your dog on fire.

2004-12-13T22:46:00.000-05:00

Let's Get This Party Started Right

Josh Marshall's got a long excerpt from a Scott McClellan press briefing on Kerick. I almost feel bad for the guy, until I realize he's voluntarily working for George W. Bush and he's a lying scumbag. The highlight, though, is this moment right here:

Q: Scott, Mr., Kerik said that when he was finally filling out some of those detailed forms, that's when it dawned on him that he might have a problem.
McCLELLAN: That's right.
Q: Would it be better, in the vetting process, to have that filled out beforehand, before he is nominated?

A lot of people, myself included, argued that one of the most compelling reasons to vote against Bush this year was not allegations of dishonesty or deception but the fact that his administration has a rather remarkable record of complete and total incompetence on nearly every level. I think it's time to put this whole Kerick incident near the top of the very, very long list of Bush administration screw-ups.

And to yet again ask 51% of voters what the hell they were thinking.

2004-12-13T22:32:00.000-05:00

A Re-Introduction

The season of change continues...

So yeah. It's been a while. Longer than I'd realized. The short explanation is my whole life went wacky in August and I've been home doing nothing for far too long. Now, I'm going to be home doing something. This.

With the campaign over, I might not have as much media laziness to bitch about, but I'll try. To make up for the lack of "How is the Bush campaign getting away with this?" posts, expect a bit more of a mix of subjects around here. There'll be some reviews from time to time, maybe some lists of things I'm liking. Movies, music, TV, books, comic books, whatever I feel like.

I'm driving this bitch and you're riding in the trunk.

2004-12-13T21:42:00.000-05:00

Consider Yourself Warned

I'm coming back. Lock up your women and livestock.

2004-07-28T20:50:00.000-04:00

Offline

Have you noticed how CNN's conservative political analysts at the convention are directly on RNC script regardless of the events they're responding to, while the liberal analysts are actually, well, analyzing? Victoria Clarke isn't doing the job of a contributor. She's doing RNC PR work. She's spouting pure talking points. Donna Brazile, while biased, is actually reacting to what's happening and providing commentary. The difference is pretty striking.

At some undetermined point tomorrow, I'm going to lose internet access. Over the weekend, I drive back home and I don't know how much I'll be posting from there on in. Check in every couple of days, though. I'll try to keep things going a little longer.

2004-07-27T13:59:00.000-04:00

Moore or Less (ugh)

Heh. Me write witty title.

Anyway, from Atrios, I learn that Drudge is angry because Michael Moore somehow weaseled his way into Jimmy Carter's box at the convention last night. In response to that, I have one thing and only one thing to say: Dick Cheney has appeared as a guest on the Rush Limbaugh Show. And unlike Carter, he's actually a candidate in this year's election.

Something the right should learn from USA Today's dumbass idea to lower the standards of campaign journalism by hiring Michael Moore and Ann Coulter (then Jonah Goldberg) is that Ann Coulter and Jonah Goldberg are just like Michael Moore. As are Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Until Republican politicians refuse to appear on either of their shows, they have no right to criticize a Democrat for daring to socialize with Moore. Not that being hypocrites has ever stopped Republicans before, but I'm just saying.

2004-07-27T09:42:00.000-04:00

Looking Like Sperm

Today, the esteemed conservative media provides us with two textbook examples of why nobody takes it seriously.

In our first case, the Crazy Cult Leader Gazette, or "Washington Times" as some call it, reminds us of the story of hyper-paranoid Arab-hater Annie Jacobsen. Annie gained quite a bit of noteriety last week for having been on a plane with 14 Syrians who did nothing wrong and in no way threatened her. She was frightened so much by their presence that an air marshall ultimately had to reveal his identity to her to calm her. When the Syrians turned out to be innocent musicians on the way to a show and not terrorists, Annie did what any good American would. She wrote an essay about her terrifying experience on a plane with terrorists. The Washington Times chose to highlight her story in a piece about actual incidents of terrorists probing air security. Since then, DHS officials have said Jacobsen's panic blew the whole thing way out of proportion. Despite that, the Times ran today, on its front page, this story. The gist of it is that 14 men who the government does not believe are terrorists entered the US on expired visas. This is front page news.

Of course, compared to today's New York Post, it's a Watergate level scoop. The cover story of today's Post teaches us that people touring NASA facilities have to put on goofy looking scrubs. Unfortunately, the edition online doesn't show it. The version at my metro station had a picture of Kerry in blue scrubs, which he and all those with him were required to wear in the sensitive environment, and the headline "Boston, We Have a Problem". The little bit of text underneath compared Kerry to one of the sperm in a Woody Allen movie. Apparently, this horribly embarrassing photo of a government official touring a government science facility has completely distracted from the convention story. Which is clear because every other media outlet in the country only devoted their front pages and several interior pages to the convention.

Instead, the version of the Post online chooses to spin Bill Clinton's speech last night as an attack on Kerry.

And these jackasses accuse the New York Times of bias?

2004-07-27T09:05:00.000-04:00

Quaker State

I'm really not sure how much of this editorial is meant to be satire:

But Heinz Kerry didn't settle for un-American. She also called her unnamed enemies "un-Pennsylvanian." This went too far. Many of us feel that we are insufficiently Pennsylvanian, but we don't wish to be reminded of this.

2004-07-27T08:22:00.000-04:00

Insight

Tom Shales is a TV critic I'm generally pretty indifferent to. He's kind of creepy looking and he's not always on target. His piece on media coverage of the Democratic convention contains this gem, though:

People in the crowded hall held up lights or candles or matches. This all made a mockery of Fox anchor Neal Cavuto's imbecilic statement earlier in the day, as he sat in the foreground of the hall, that "there's a lot of hatred in this room behind me." He said the convention would be "predictably partisan." Gosh! Does that mean the Democrats wouldn't give equal time to Republicans? Heaven help us if the November elections are partisan, too.

"Some of the prime-time lineup appears to be very partisan," CNN pretty-boy Bill Hemmer told commentator Jeff Greenfield on the network's morning show. Insights like these are so dazzling you really have to step back from the set to avoid having your eyebrows singed.

It's kind of funny. Shales is critiquing the media while media critic Howard Kurtz is writing the thousandth story of the year about how clever Jon Stewart is.

2004-07-26T23:05:00.000-04:00

Strength and Wisdom Are Not Opposing Values

That right there is some mighty fine speechifying.

2004-07-26T16:38:00.000-04:00

Scary

A bizarre new anti-Kerry campaign.

I have to admit, nonsensicality and dishonesty aside, the little cartoon Franken-Kerry is pretty funny.

2004-07-26T14:12:00.000-04:00

Roundup

Two interesting bits of information in the weekly magazines this week:

1) Newsweek: The DOJ probe of Sandy Berger ended in January. And yet it mysteriously leaked last week. How convenient.

2) US News: Many conservatives are angry that Cheney used profanity and now do not plan to vote at all.

2004-07-26T14:08:00.000-04:00

Making America Safer for Non-Sequitors

The latest attack in the Bush administration's war on relevance:

John Kerry: George W. Bush has politicized science and endangered US technological leadership.

Bush campaign: John Kerry voted for higher taxes and didn't vote to support the troops.

2004-07-26T09:44:00.000-04:00

Zig-Zag

In today's Wall Street Journal, Zell Miller writes what may be one of the most unintentionally ironic op-eds I have ever read. In a desperate attempt to pretend he hasn't completely flip-flopped in the last decade, Zell tries to argue that Republicans used to be dishonest and negative back when he spoke at the Democratic convention in 1992 and now the Democrats are the liars and the pessimists and that's why he now opposes the Democrats. He lambasts Democrats for distorting facts, although he doesn't actually cite any examples of that. He then goes on to grossly distort the history of welfare reform and just about every position John Kerry and John Edwards have ever taken on anything. Really. I'm not sure if it's online, but if it is, check it out. It's breathtakingly dishonest.

Then again, Zell Miller is technically a Democrat, so using him as an example, I guess it would be fair to say Democrats are exeedingly dishonest.

2004-07-25T19:59:00.000-04:00

Sluggish

I don't complain much about the Kerry campaign. Relative to the 2000 Gore campaign, they're political geniuses. But I'm looking at the way Kerry is covered and the way Bush is covered and it becomes clear very quickly that they're letting far too many pitches go by. I realize Kerry's trying to avoid going negative too much and there certainly are benefits to that. But he's dealing with an opponent who has no regard whatsoever for facts or reality. And we live in a media environment where both sides are given equal weight by the press despite that.

In any given story about Kerry, there's a quote from a Bush spokesman desperately trying to distort whatever Kerry's saying to make him seem like a flip-flopper. In articles about Bush, though, there's often no Kerry campaign response or what there is isn't very convincing. And I'm afraid it's just because Kerry's people aren't willing to stoop to Bush's level of complete make-shit-up-ery.

Two recent examples of how the Bush campaign works:

1) No Child Left Behind. Kerry gives a speech expressing his support for NCLB and he promises to fully fund it. The Bush campaign responds that Kerry has flip-flopped and opposes NCLB. This is a direct contradiction of what Kerry said. The media runs the Bush campaign quote and doesn't make its inaccuracy clear.

2) Kerry gives a detailed speech on the many initiatives he is planning to deal with gang violence. There's like ten different specific things he talks about. The Bush campaign responds that Kerry has no plan to deal with gangs.

So what I'm perplexed by is where is the Kerry campaign response to Bush? When he says he's the war president one month and the peace president two months later, there should be a Kerry quote in every single article pointing out the ridiculous contradiction. When a comedian appears at a Bush rally and makes offensive jokes, the Kerry campaign should respond exactly like Bush's responded to the Kerry fundraiser. They need to be all over the media. They need to be swarming over every mistake Bush makes. Otherwise, they're going to be outmatched and they can't afford that. Kerry's got to fight back more. Especially going into August when Bush is theoretically going to start presenting an agenda and Kerry is going to be at a big money disadvantage. He needs to be using the free media to get a message out and launch his attacks. He needs to learn from how Bush uses his surrogates. He hasn't done that effectively and I think that's hurting him.

2004-07-25T00:38:00.000-04:00

Dropping the Ball

I will readily admit that things around here have been pretty slow this week. Unfortunately, I think that's a sign of things to come. I'm leaving my current, free time intensive job on Tuesday, losing my high-speed internet connection on Thursday, and moving back home Saturday. Depending on whether I get a job for the month of August, posting is very likely to be infrequent, if not entirely non-existent. And either way, this whole enterprise is probably going to be shutting down when I head off to grad school in September.

It's been a fun few months, but it's going to be time to get off the ride soon. Don't walk away quite yet, though, because I've got enough snark and outrage left to last me a little bit longer.

2004-07-24T21:43:00.000-04:00

Republican Lies Endangered National Security

From the 9/11 report:

``The failure of the strikes, the 'wag the dog' slur, the intense partisanship of the period and the nature of the al Shifa evidence likely had a cumulative effect on future decisions about the use of force against bin Laden.''

2004-07-22T10:12:00.000-04:00

Geniuses

The LA Times on Sandy Berger.

The editorial points out what I have found most baffling about the ridiculous, dishonest Republican response. There's no logic to any of the motives they have suggested. As the editorial says, these were copies so he wasn't keeping the originals from the 9/11 commission. Today's Washington Post notes that Kerry probably had clearance to see them himself, so stealing them for him wouldn't make sense either.

You would think they'd just take the easy road and criticize Berger for being so sloppy with classified information and what does this say about his approach to national security and so on. Instead, they make shit up.

2004-07-22T09:54:00.000-04:00

Flip-Flop

Now President Bush is opposing a tax cut. Boy, that guy just can't stop taking both sides of issues.

Seriously, this is pretty disgusting. Let's allow tax cuts to expire just so we can blame Democrats even though the Democrats actually support extending them. Who cares about the middle class families who this will affect? Woohoo! Honor and integrity in the White House! Responsibility! Four more years!

2004-07-21T10:15:00.000-04:00

Last Friday

Catching up on some news. Last Friday, John Kerry vowed to "fully fund" No Child Left Behind. In response, the Bush campaign criticized Kerry for having "walked away" from his support for No Child Left Behind.

What the fuck?

Can the media comprehend the idiocy and dishonesty of the Bush campaign? Is it too obvious for them? Why isn't the clear distance between what Bush says and reality more widely reported? He's just making stuff up now.

2004-07-21T09:40:00.000-04:00

More Joe Wilson

Further evidence Joe Wilson is not a liar, while Bob Novak, William Safire, and the vast majority of Republican pundits and politicians are.

2004-07-21T09:34:00.000-04:00

Yes, All of Us

Yesterday, President Bush made this baffling statement:

"In the campaign, you'll hear, we're going only to tax the rich," he said. "That's what you'll hear. Now, this is from a fellow who has promised about $2 trillion of new spending thus far. And only taxing the rich, first of all, creates a huge tax gap, which means buyer beware. You see, if you can't raise enough by taxing the rich, guess who gets to pay next?"
He answered his own question: "Yes, the not-rich. That's all of us."

George W. Bush. America's most not-rich mutli-millionaire.

How is anyone stupid enough to fall for this crap?

2004-07-21T09:28:00.000-04:00

Berger on the Run

I'm reading these disgusting Republican attacks on Sandy Berger that keep insisting that he took documents to hide them from the 9/11 commission. The Wall Street Journal editorial page makes that argument today. Clearly, they're hoping nobody will notice that the documents Berger took were COPIES, not originals. He couldn't have hide them from anyone because the originals are all still sitting in the Archives.

2004-07-20T17:20:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

You know you've hit rockbottom when you need to make shit up to make Castro look bad:

Maura Reynolds writes in the Los Angeles Times: "In a hotel conference room in Tampa, Fla., on Friday, Bush told law enforcement officials that Fidel Castro was brazenly promoting sex tourism to Cuba."
Here's the text of his speech in which he said: "The dictator welcomes sex tourism. Here's how he bragged about the industry. This is his quote, 'Cuba has the cleanest and most educated prostitutes in the world.' "
Reynolds asked White House officials what their source was for the quote and was led to a paper on the Internet written by Charles Trumbull, then an undergraduate at Dartmouth College. Trumbull told Reynolds he didn't remember the source, and that it was taken out of context anyway.
Lesley Clark, writing in the Miami Herald on Saturday, traced the quote back to comments Castro made in a 1992 address "when he spoke about the country's need for tourism and acknowledged the presence of prostitutes in Cuba, even though prostitution is illegal. His actual words, according to a transcript prepared by the U.S. Foreign Broadcast Information Service, were: 'We can say that they are highly educated hookers and quite healthy, because we are the country with the lowest number of AIDS cases.' "
Tracey Eaton wrote in the Dallas Morning News that the charge has even further enraged Cubans, who already call Bush "Pinnochio."
"Cuba was a bustling sex tourism destination in the early 1990s after its economy collapsed, travel writers say, but police crackdowns have turned that around," Eaton wrote.

And why the hell is the White House getting its information from Dartmouth undergraduate papers?

2004-07-16T12:33:00.000-04:00

Out

Leaving town for the weekend. No posting until Tuesday.

So far, only one local station has picked up the Dennis Miller story.

2004-07-16T09:19:00.000-04:00

Joe Wilson Strikes Back

Wilson responds to accusations from right-wing jackasses here. Not surprisingly, they're lying.

I reread his NYT op-ed that started all this yesterday and everything he said there was indeed completely accurate. And CIA sources support his claim that his wife didn't recommend him. The last paragraph of the article could be the most important. Many conservatives jumped all over Susan Schmitt's horrible, biased report and its claim that Iraq sought uranium in 1998. Of course, this was a huge mistake on her part because it was Iran that sought it. The paper has quietly corrected it. Conservatives continue to say it.

It's like Whitewater and Love Canal all over again.

2004-07-15T13:30:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

Dan's got a roundup of reports about Bush's Wisconsin trip.

None of them seem to mention Dennis Miller's extremely offensive jokes.

That's some good liberal media there.

2004-07-15T09:26:00.000-04:00

Belfast Parking Valet

One can only assume the Republican and media outrage over Dennis Miller's offensive comments introducing Bush at a recent rally will begin any minute now.

Unless, of course, Bush thinks it's okay to suggest that his opponents are gay and that James Carville is Satanic. Since he didn't renounce Miller's jokes, that is clearly the case.

Speaking of celebrity endorsements: Dennis Miller, a big backer of Bush, was in Green Bay, Wis., yesterday to warm up the crowd before the prez spoke. Miller made a glancing reference to Whoopi but promised, "In deference to George W. Bush, I will try not to fall to depths that some would in this case."

Then he went on to imply a homosexual attraction between Kerry and Edwards.

"Those two cannot keep their hands off each other, can they?" Miller said. "I think I have a new idea for a new campaign slogan -- use the bumper sticker 'Hey, Get A Room.' "

The Post's Dana Milbank also reports that Miller riffed on other noted Dems. "Asking Bill Clinton to write an honest book is like asking Britney Spears to sing a capella," he said.

And he called strategist James Carville "a muppet who accidentally was washed on hot" and a "Satanic Chihuahua under a strobe light" who has "more nervous ticks than a Belfast parking valet."

All in good fun, of course. Bush thanked Miller "for joining us" but made no mention of his warm-up act.

2004-07-15T08:53:00.000-04:00

Whoopi and Dick

Slim-Fast has fired Whoopi Goldberg for using vulgarity in talking about Bush.

What does it say to you when the makers of Slim-Fast have higher standards for decency and decorum among their representatives than the President of the United States?

2004-07-14T16:30:00.000-04:00

This is Not a Flap

One former state Democratic party official whining that the junior senator from New York, who herself isn't upset at all, is not scheduled to speak at the Demcratic convention does not constitute a "flap."

And yet the media is all over it. Which is good because it's not like there are real issues to talk about.

2004-07-14T13:57:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

Most of us, I would imagine, have worked at places where everybody knew what the boss wanted -- and without necessarily being told, tried to give it to him.

It's a self-preservation reflex at even slightly dysfunctional organizations. (And you sure don't want to be the guy who tells the boss he's wrong.)

So it occurred to me that the CIA analysts who massively flubbed their Iraqi weapons analyses might concievably have felt an oblique sort of pressure if the bosses were out and about telling other people what they wanted to hear -- even if they weren't getting direct orders. In May 2002, the CIA started work on the only comprehensive assessment of Iraq's weaspons of mass destruction released to the public before the war. It was released five months later in October.

So what were Bush and Cheney saying publicly (not to mention privately) while that document was in process?

Follow the link for the quotes. It's pretty good stuff.

2004-07-14T13:51:00.000-04:00

A conservative is finally asked all those questions about opposition to gay marriage that you always wanted someone to ask and, not surprisingly, he has no answers at all.

A preview:

My point is that marriage has always and will always, but not in every case, have something to do with children and the relationship between parents, children, and the rest of society.

Has always and will always...but not always.

Says it all, doesn't it?

2004-07-14T13:32:00.000-04:00

Note to Gay Marriage Opponents

Some friendly advice. Stop making remarkably dumb statements like this:

"I would argue that the future of our country hangs in the balance because the future of marriage hangs in the balance," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a leader in the fight to approve the measure. "Isn't that the ultimate homeland security, standing up and defending marriage?"

People might possibly start taking you seriously. Maybe.

2004-07-14T13:29:00.000-04:00

Divisive III

An interesting article on Bush's hateful and divisive rhetoric against "sophisticates" (because, you know, we should really support the notion that sophistication is undesirable). It does a very good job of highlighting the hypocrisy of Bush's attempts to be a "regular guy" and also delves into the causes of Bush's ridiculous anti-elitist streak.

2004-07-14T10:46:00.000-04:00

Let's Rock and Roll with the Korean Train Explosion

Pandagon's got a link to the newly released Fox News memos that are somehow meant to undermine the case presented by Outfoxed. To be fair to Fox, I am curious how these would stack up against internal memos at CNN or MSNBC. Also to be fair, though, the memos make their conservative bias mind-blowingly obvious.

To save you time, although they're amusing enough to read the whole thing, some highlights:

It won't be long before some people start to decry the use of "excessive force." We won't be among that group. . . More than 600 US military dead, attacks on the UN headquarters last year, assassination of Irai officials who work with the coalition, the deaths of Spanish troops last fall, the outrage in Fallujah: whatever happens, it is richly deserved.

Nominees who both sides admit are qualified are being held up because of their POSSIBLE, not demonstrated, views on one issue -- abortion. This should be a trademark issue for FNC today and in the days to come.

Not surprisingly, we're facing resistance from our erstwhile European buddies, the French and Germans.

Heads of state don't leave G-8 meetings early unless they have good reasons. President Bush has two: he has to get to Egypt, and he doesn't like the French. Let's explain to viewers that despite the tepid handshake, Bush and Chirac are far from reconciled, as are the US and Germany. The early departure from Evian should take the sparkle out of the bottled water spa.

No one's in favor of murder or bombing of public places. But feelings in North Carolina may just be more complicated than the NY Times can conceive.

It's a distinctly skeptical crowd that Bush faces. His political courage and tactical cunning are worth noting in our reporting through the day.

Kerry, starting to feel the heat for his flip-flop voting record, is in West Virginia.

The incident is a reminder of the danger our colleagues in Baghdad face, day in and day out. Please offer a prayer of thanks for their safety to whatever God you revere (and let the ACLU stick it where the sun don't shine).

Remember that while there are obvious political implications for Bush, the commission is looking at eight years of the Clinton Administration versus eight months (the time prior to 9/11 that Bush was in office) for the incumbent.

There can be no proof more compelling and visual of what Palestinian suicide bombers are all about than the pitiful sight of a teenager frantically cutting away the bomb vest he was wearing in order to save his life. "I don't want to die" he said. Without willing dupes, this barbaric practice can't continue. Let's not overlook that story today, even if the tape has been out there for awhile.

As is often the case, the real news is Iraq is being obscured by temporary tragedy.

Air America, featuring Al Franken and other liberals, got on the air last week, but at what cost? Well, in New York, it took the place of an ethnic show. In LA, it knocked off a Korean program. And in CHicago,a spanish language broadcast was replaced. None of these people are happy.

Do not fall into the easy trap of mourning the loss of US lives and asking out loud why are we there? The US is in Iraq to help a country brutalized for 30 years protect the gains made by Operation Iraqi Freedom and set it on the path to democracy. Some people in Iraq don't want that to happen. That is why American GIs are dying. And what we should remind our viewers.

Condoleeza Rice's testimony will still be picked apart by those looking to blame someone, whether it's Bush or Clinton, for September 11. Let's not forget UBL's share of that blame.

It should be obvious that we are working hard on the oil for food scandal story at the UN. Please be disposed to use stories on this topic, rather than not.

let's rock n roll with the korean train explosion. [not biased, but pretty damn insensitive]

If, as promised, the coalition decides to take Fallujah back by force, it will not be for lack of opportunities for terrorists holed up there to negotiate. Let's not get lost in breast-beating about the sadness of the loss of life. They had a chance.

This is one of the few times we've gotten a count of enemy dead. Let's use that to make the point what happens when terrorists take on the coalition.

On a positve note, I found a few bits of genuine balance:

Let's not overdo the appearances by Kerry's swiftboat mate John O'Neil. While his appearances so far have been OK, he represents one side of the 30 year recollections of what Kerry did, or didn't do, in uniform. Other people have different recollections.

We can do some lives on the service, but as before, be cautious about making his death, though tragic, any more significant than the deaths of non-famous GI casualties.

2004-07-14T10:26:00.000-04:00

Another Bush Flip-Flop

I like the Kerry campaign's response to Bush insisting that they released a video of their fundraiser where celebrities criticized (the horror!) him. But it seems like the more obvious response would just be to point out that Bush has held many fundraisers where he didn't even let the media watch the event or see a transcript of his remarks.

Just another example of Bush saying one thing and doing another. He's only been in Washington four years and he's still found time to take both sides of just about every issue.

2004-07-13T16:11:00.000-04:00

Divisive II

More hateful rhetoric from the Divider in Chief:

Noting that Kerry had called the celebrities the "heart and soul of America," Bush told several thousand supporters on Michigan's Upper Peninsula that "I believe the heart and soul of America is in places like right here in Marquette, Michigan."

Yeah. Celebrities in New York can't be the heart of America. Only people in small towns in middle America can be.

So does Bush not think New Yorkers are the heart and soul of America? Why does he hate New Yorkers so much? Why is he so negative about his critics? Isn't he their president too? Can't you represent the heart and soul of America while still criticizing Bush? Apparently not, if he can score cheap points by playing on middle Americans' anti-coastal prejudices.

2004-07-13T16:07:00.000-04:00

Division

Of the countless deeply offensive things our "uniter" president says on a daily basis, the one that has most angered me in recent days, and he has repeated it several times, is this:

"You cannot be pro-small business and pro-trial lawyer at the same time.

Why the fuck not?

What a divisive, hateful jerk. Why can't you have fair tort reform that doesn't completely screw lawyers and their clients? Why can't you balance the concerns of business and lawyers? And for that matter, how often do greedy trial lawyers sue small businesses? Don't they usually sue rich corporations? And why is it a good thing to be anti-lawyer? Aren't they Americans, too? Don't they have the same rights as small business owners?

Apparently not in George W. Bush's America.

2004-07-13T12:48:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

It's been observed many times before, but it's worth repeating. Bush doesn't make arguments using evidence. He just repeats the conclusion over and over and over again:

It's not hard to tell when President Bush is really, really serious about getting a particular message out.

He repeats it, over and over again.

But it's unusual even for him to say the same thing seven times in one short speech.

That's what he did yesterday, in Oak Ridge, Tenn., asserting that because of his foreign policy initiatives and the war on terror, "the American people are safer." (Here's the text.)

Bush said it so many times that CBS and ABC both spliced a sort of dance mix and inserted it into their reports on the evening news: "The American people are safer. . . . The American people are safer. . . . The American people are safer."

2004-07-13T12:00:00.000-04:00

You Have to Be Kidding

Unfortunately, they're probably not.

A Bush spokesman made the following claim about John Kerry without the slightest hint of irony:

"John Kerry one week was in America's heartland saying 'I share your conservative values' and then in New York City at a Hollywood hate-fest where there was vulgar language and actors on stage attacking the president."

Vulgar language! Attacking the president!

Heavens no!

Attacking the president. Can you believe it? During an election campaign! I'm outraged. Almost as much as I am by Bush attacking John Kerry in the same damn article. Are we really supposed to believe there's something wrong with criticizing the president? Are we supposed to be that stupid?

Of course, it's not like anyone on the Bush/Cheney ticket has ever used vulgar language to...um...er...oh, yeah.

2004-07-13T09:07:00.000-04:00

Odd

When I woke up this morning, this story was headlined "AP Poll: More Voters See Bush as Decisive." Now, it's "AP Poll: More Voters See Bush as Arrogant."

2004-07-12T13:27:00.000-04:00

Lynne Cheney's Out of the Mainstream

I can't wait to see how the Bush campaign deals with Lynne Cheney's weak, unprincipled, politically opportunistic position on gay marriage. You know, the one that's the same as John Kerry's. It's going to be fun seeing Dick Cheney mocking his own wife's position, not to mention his own until recently (FLIP-FLOP), when he takes on Edwards on this issue in the debate. If the Kerry campaign doesn't start saying "We agree with Lynne Cheney" when reporters ask about the constitutional amendment, I'm going to be very disappointed.

Who knew Lynne Cheney was so liberal and out of touch with America's conservative values?

2004-07-12T12:48:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

Wow. Bush truly may be an idiot. Check out his response to a question about his memoirs:

"Q Thank you -- I was wondering, there's a lot of talk right now about memoirs being written with the former President. After you are elected in 2004, what will your memoirs say about you, what will the title be, and what will the main theme say?

"THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate that. (Laughter.) There is a painting on my wall in the Oval -- first of all, I don't know. I'm just speculating now. I really haven't thought about writing a book. My life is too complicated right now trying to do my job. (Laughter.) But if -- there's a painting on the wall in the Oval Office that shows a horseman charging up a steep cliff, and there are at least two other horsemen following. It's a Western scene by a guy named W.H.S. Koerner called 'A Charge to Keep.' It's on loan, by the way, from a guy named Joe O'Neill in Midland, Texas. He was the person, he and his wife Jan, introduced -- reintroduced me and Laura in his backyard in July of 1977. Four months later, we were married. So he's got a -- I'm a decision-maker and I can make good decisions. (Applause.)

"And so we sang this hymn -- this is a long story trying to get to your answer. (Laughter.) This is not a filibuster. (Laughter.) That's a Senate term -- particularly on good judges. (Applause.) The hymn was sung at my first inaugural church service as governor. Laura and I are Methodists. One of the Wesley boys wrote the hymn. The painting is based upon the hymn called, 'A Charge to Keep.' I have. The hymn talks about serving something greater than yourself in life. I -- which I try to do, as best as I possibly can. (Applause.)

"The book -- I guess one way, one thing to think about it is -- one of the themes would be, I was given a charge to keep. And I gave it all my heart, all my energy, based upon principles that did not change once I got into the Oval Office. (Applause.)"

Now that's a rambling response.

And I have to wonder: Did he forget that he already has a memoir called "A Charge to Keep"?

2004-07-12T10:30:00.000-04:00

Millionaire Don Rumsfeld

For the first time in a while, a Jodi Wilgoren article I don't really have any complaints about. Seems a bit short for the only coverage the Times gave Kerry and Edwards' first joint interview, but whatever.

The article allows the candidates and their wives several shots to explain the blatant hypocrisy of the weak Republican attacks on their wealth:

"Those very same people never criticized my late husband for his money or his wealth - in fact, they used it," said Mrs. Heinz Kerry, who inherited an estate estimated at $500 million to $1 billion from her first husband, Senator H. John Heinz III, a Pennsylvania Republican who was killed in a plane crash. "His money was just dandy."

In an interview broadcast on Sunday on the CBS News program "60 Minutes," Mrs. Heinz Kerry added, "I find it un-American for people to criticize someone and say they're not deserved for any position, whether because they have too much or too little or because they're black or they're white."

Mr. Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential nominee, called criticism of the candidates' multimillion-dollar bank accounts "the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my life."

He asked: "Is this coming from millionaire George Bush and millionaire Dick Cheney? And millionaire Rumsfeld?"

In the interview, Mr. Edwards's wife, Elizabeth, pointed out that the Democratic candidates "voted against tax cuts that would have benefited them" - tax cuts proposed by the Republicans.

"Isn't that what we want - a leader who looks at the greater good instead of simply what benefits the person himself?" she asked Lesley Stahl, the "60 Minutes" interviewer, in a 20-minute segment.

"It seems to me that's an enormous test of character,'' Mrs. Edwards said, "whether you're willing to step out and do something against your own self-interest."

And yet, somehow, you know the media is going to continue reporting on their wealth as if it matters while completely ignoring Bush and Cheney's money.

2004-07-12T10:27:00.000-04:00

That's Comedy

In an otherwise completely substance free front page story on John Kerry, the Washington Post throws in this little anecdote:

About 1 a.m., during a recent cross-county flight, Kerry broke from his game of Hearts with staffers to lead a prank on Rubin.

As Rubin slept, curled up in a chair, Kerry placed next to him "Pepe the Piñata," a large, multicolored papier-mâché dog, and covered them both with a blanket. He summoned the staff photographer and staged a photo that looked like Rubin was cuddling with the dog.

For all the talk about Kerry being stiff and unlikable, come on, you have to admit, that's pretty funny.

The article also sees fit to remind us that John Kerry's bike costs $8,000. Also, intrepid reporter and RNC mouthpiece Nedra Pickler's engaged.

2004-07-12T10:25:00.000-04:00

Am I Missing Something?

The Bush administration keeps saying that terrorists may attempt to "disrupt the Democratic process" by attacking around the election. Okay. Yeah, probably. But what's their solution? Look into delaying the election.

Am I the only one who sees a logical flaw in disrupting the Democratic process to prevent terrorists from disrupting the Democratic process?

2004-07-08T14:07:00.000-04:00

Hungarian School Children Compare President Bush to Hitler

In a new poll of Hungarian secondary school children, Bush almost beats out Hitler as the most hated foreigner.

The Bush campaign has called on Senator Kerry to denounce the 34,000 16-18 year olds for their, quote, "wild-eyed" rhetoric.

If Kerry does not do so, they will be featured in an upcoming Bush campaign ad alongside footage of Michael Moore eating kittens.

2004-07-08T12:44:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

Details on Bush's "spontaneous" visit to a lemonade stand:

Turns out little lemonade-sellers Heather and Shelby Dew had waved to the presidential motorcade as it sped toward a North Raleigh fundraiser. A little later on, Secret Service agents stopped by to taste the lemonade. Raleigh Police Chief Jane Perlov came over to hang out on the lawn. And then, as the motorcade was on its way back from the fundraiser, it -- surprise! -- pulled over.

"The Dews told Bush the drinks were free for Republicans, but the president paid $10 cash anyway."

Pool reporter Neil A. Lewis of the New York Times informed his colleagues that Bush once against unleashed his hoary "trying to help the local economy" quip, and invited reporters to join him. "Some did. People who were there at the beginning said Mr. Bush paid with cash from his pocket, an unusual occurrence for presidents who often do not carry cash (what for?)."

Well, with all that advance notice, I'm guessing someone slipped him a few bucks.

Also via Froomkin, we find Baltimore's comptroller accusing the mayor of treason.

In case you were wondering, when Democrats say Republicans are questioning their patriotism, this is the kind of thing they're talking about.

2004-07-08T11:53:00.000-04:00

Damn that Liberal Media!

The New York Times reports that John Kerry's house is really expensive:

The estate where Mr. Edwards paid the ritual visit to his running mate includes a swimming pool, carriage house and colonial manse whose front is adorned with six white columns and a pair of stone lions flanking the entrance - not the ideal image for two Democratic millionaires beginning their campaign as champions of ordinary Americans.

And again the media immediately accepts GOP spin without question. Somehow being rich and supporting ordinary Americans are supposed to be mutually exclusive. The article observes the rather pathetic detail that the Kerry campaign needed to orchestrate the event in such a way as to hide the expensive house because they knew idiots like the guy who wrote this article would waste their time critiquing it and reminding voters that they're supposed to see a contradiction. Take this on top of the Washington Post story about the logo on the stairway Kerry and Edwards walked down getting off their plane and you've got further evidence that the press is neither liberal nor conservative. Just mind-numbingly stupid.

John Edwards is a successful self-made man. The woman John Kerry loves happens to be rich. Does the press want an apology or something? What the hell does the press expect them to do to change that?

(Post link via Pandagon)

2004-07-08T09:29:00.000-04:00

Nonsensical Novak

In today's Post, Bob Novak produces yet another incoherent and self-contradictory column. In addition to repeating one of the most illogical attacks the right-wing has constructed in quite some time (Edwards clearly won't help Kerry get votes, but regardless, Kerry picked him solely to get votes), Novak manages to simultaneously claim that Kerry didn't consider any moderates and that Kerry considered John McCain. He then adds that Kerry should have picked a moderate like McCain, who Kerry considered, despite Kerry not considering any moderates.

Seriously, the guy's going senile.

2004-07-08T09:01:00.000-04:00

Glaring Ommission

Ken Starr's op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal about what Bill Clinton left out of his book is itself a rather stunning example of what he accuses Clinton of. Starr conveniently neglects to mention that, despite all those Whitewater convictions he's so proud of, none of them were of the Clintons. He also doesn't bother to inform readers that the Clintons were exhonerated in a report released fairly early in his little witch hunt.

Ken Starr's full of shit. Who'd have guessed?

2004-07-08T08:43:00.000-04:00

Unconfirmed Report Officially Unconfirmed

As I have been suggesting, it does now appear that those unconfirmed reports about Kerry offering McCain the VP slot were false. US News is now reporting that McCain briefly considered staying in the selection process at first, but he took himself off the list very early. He never made the final list. There were, however, other Republicans who were interviewed, but the Kerry campaign won't reveal who.

Point is, we can put Bush's "First Choice" ad up as yet another lie.

2004-07-07T17:49:00.000-04:00

Pot Kettle Black

George W. Bush, whose primary accomplishments before running for president amounted to owning a failed business, being accused of insider trading, trading Sammy Sosa, and executing a comically large number of prisoners in the least powerful governorship in America, is questioning John Edwards' ability to assume the presidency.

Other than that he's completing "only" his first term in the US Senate (having served several years on the intelligence committee), has anybody actually presented a coherent argument about why exactly Edwards is not capable of serving as president if necessary? I mean, do they have any tangible evidence that he can't handle the responsibility?

More importantly, check out the article. Kerry actually made a funny joke.

2004-07-07T13:47:00.000-04:00

Daily Froomkin

Via Dan Froomkin's White House Briefing, we find this LA Times article on the elaborate stagecraft of Bush campaign appearances. Not much new, but interesting. And kind of sad.

But how great would it be to be the guy with this job:

In dry runs, White House planners send to the podium a stand-in who is Bush's height in order to set the lighting and camera angles.

2004-07-07T10:58:00.000-04:00

Huh?

What? Does anybody understand what the hell Christopher Hitchens is trying to say here?

2004-07-07T09:57:00.000-04:00

EJ

EJ Dionne brings the smackdown on Republican talking points on John Edwards. He starts with possibly the most damaging quote I've seen yet on the experience issue from Orrin Hatch:

"You've been a great governor," Hatch declared of his rival for the Republican presidential nomination. "My only problem with you, governor, is that you've only had four and going into your fifth year of governorship. . . . Frankly, I really believe that you need more experience before you become president of the United States. That's why I'm thinking of you as a vice presidential candidate."

In other words, shut up.

Then EJ makes the very important point that Republicans were going to whine about anyone Kerry chose:

Republicans were in a foul mood because Kerry's choice of Edwards as his running mate muddied up all the story lines they were itching to trot out. To understand why Edwards was the best choice for Kerry, consider what the Republicans (and, yes, the media) would have said if the nod had gone instead to Rep. Richard Gephardt, the clear runner-up in the vice presidential stakes.

Kerry would have been described as "insecure" at the prospect of standing next to the "charismatic" and "populist" Edwards. Fearing being "upstaged" by the equally ambitious Edwards, Kerry would have been accused of making the "obvious," "uninspired" and "comfortable" choice. Gephardt's experience would have been trotted out to turn him into the "tired" face of the "old" Democratic Party. It would also have been said that Kerry, the "elitist Massachusetts liberal," had "written off" the South and rural America.

Absolutely true. And note that I emphasized "the media." I'm reading today's papers and seeing that the Times and the Post have both pretty much adopted GOP talking points without any analysis. John Edwards is liberal and inexperienced. John Kerry chose him for purely political reasons. They're dishonest because they criticized each other during the primaries. Neither paper makes much of an effort to scrutinize these allegations. They've been immediately welcomed as part of the new Kerry/Edwards media storyline. They're stated as fact. And yet, articles also acknowledge that many Republicans are reluctantly admitting anonymously that Edwards was the right choice. Given that, why are they report what the Republicans are saying publicly as anything other than typical political posturing? Why do they give legitimacy to arguments they know are disingenuous? Probably because they're so damn liberal.

2004-07-07T09:26:00.000-04:00

At Least It's Not About Hillary

Bill Safire's latest column highlights what seems to be a significant logical flaw in the arguments being presented all over the place (including not one, not two, but three different pieces on today's WSJ editorial page) that John Edwards was a substance-free pick made solely for political purposes. While Safire makes this claim repeatedly, he intercuts it with comments by Lindsey Graham explaining that Edwards will have very little political impact. Safire insists that all Kerry cares about is politics, but then he lets Graham explain how Edwards will not help Kerry win any states. Either Kerry's monumentally stupid and he doesn't know what Graham knows, or there's more to it than that. So if there's no political advantage, why is he a political choice? Because Republicans can't find any other effective avenue for criticism of the guy.

Also, despite currently having two years more experience in national government than George W. Bush, he's too inexperienced to be president.

2004-07-06T20:04:00.000-04:00

Crazy Dick Cheney

Looks like Crazy Dick Cheney is making stuff up again.

No new evidence to back up his claims. Man, they got to keep an eye on that guy over there. I think he's skipping his medication.

2004-07-06T19:50:00.000-04:00

Burt Ward

So begins the most bizarre fundraising letter I ever recieved, from the DCCC:

Dear Fellow Democrat:

This July 6th will be a big day for would-be superheroes. Burt Ward, known for his
role as "Boy Wonder" in the Batman TV series, turns 59. Ned Beatty, who played arch
villain Lex Luthor's bumbling sidekick Otis in the Superman movies, will be 67.

On that same day George W. Bush, the GOP's own bumbling wonder, will turn 58 -- with
your help, we can make sure it will be his final birthday in the White House, and
one he won't soon forget.

2004-07-06T16:52:00.000-04:00

More Odd Definitions of Flip-Flopping

I'm reading these excerpts and there seems to be a massive logical flaw in the argument presented. Several of these reporters and pundits claim selecting Edwards after McCain reportedly (unconfirmed) rejected the VP slot is somehow a flip-flop. Because Kerry went for McCain, then picked someone else. Seriously, that's what Fred Barnes is saying here.

What the hell else is a candidate supposed to do when his first choice (allegedly) turns him down? Not select a VP at all? Of course he moves on to his second choice.

Morons.

2004-07-06T15:42:00.000-04:00

VPness

Just a quick thought on Edwards as VP. There are a number of good things about this. First, the obvious contrast with Vice President Fuck Yourself. Second, Edwards communicates a populist message better and more believably than Kerry does. Third, he does have a Southern accent and that sadly does matter. His primary downside is his lack of experience, but he's a hell of a lot more experienced than George W. Bush was in 2000 so I can't really see how that shot will stick. As long as he doesn't make any more mistakes like misunderstanding DOMA in one of the primary debates, he'll be okay. He has about three months to learn more about foreign policy before his debate with Cheney. He's a lawyer, but anyone with strong anti-lawyer feelings is probably already voting for Bush. Or they support Kerry enough that his VP choice won't change their minds.

Now, with regard to the question of whether any of this really matters, a few things. I agree that historically VPs haven't had much effect on elections. I think this year will be different, though. One reason is the extreme prominence of Cheney as a negative figure in the Bush campaign. He calls attention to himself, which will in turn call attention to Edwards. Also, Edwards really does outshine Kerry in the charisma department. I see this as an asset for Kerry, though, because anyone who likes Edwards is going to vote for Kerry. They don't have another choice. Putting them together at joint appearances should allow some of Edwards' charm to brush off on Kerry. They're two heads of the same beast is what I'm saying. Edwards is an unusually compelling figure and Kerry is unusually not compelling, so I do think he will provide a significant boost to the team.

Note how the Bush campaign is making ridiculous predictions of being 15 points behind after the next few weeks. Setting artificially low expectations is never a sign of strength.

2004-07-06T15:34:00.000-04:00

McCain

One more bit from Tad Devine's Post chat:

Rockville, Md.: During the last discussion with a spokesperson for the Bush campaign, someone asked, "Was this just another flip-flop on Kerry's part? Didn't Edwards and Kerry attack each other all through the primaries? How can he get away with this?"

My question for you is, with the Bush team using John McCain in web ads, is that just another flip-flop on Bush's part? Didn't Bush and McCain attack each other all through the 2000 primaries? How can Bush get away with this?

Tad Devine: That is a great question. What President Bush did to Senator McCain in the South Carolina primary was the worst kind of politics. We are not surprised that a republican senator would endorse a republican president for re-election. Having said that, I think that most Americans would agree that John McCain is a patriot and someone who is honest about the political process and who, unlike the president and vice president, is willing to reach across party lines on behalf of the American people. That's why John McCain worked so closely with John Kerry to find the truth about POWs and MIAs in Vietnam and to restore relations with Vietnam during the Clinton administration. And that is why Senator McCain to this day is standing with John Edwards to support a Patients' Bill of Rights in the United States Senate. Instead of invoking Senator McCain's political support, perhaps the president should support some of John McCain's legislation. That would be good for all Americans.

The "Kerry criticized Edwards and now he's his VP" idiocy is already creeping around. Turning it around and making the connection to Bush's criticism of McCain in 2000 is, frankly, brilliant. I hope that idea becomes part of the Kerry campaign's talking points on this. Also, the McCain-Edwards bill needs to be brought up often, not only because it underscores bipartisanship but because it points back to one of Bush's more flagrant lies in 2000, that he supported a patients' bill of rights in Texas.

2004-07-06T15:15:00.000-04:00

There It Is

Kerry campaign spokesman Tad Devine in a Washington Post online chat just nailed his response to Republicans whining that John Edwards is a dirty trial lawyer:

John Edwards has spent twenty-five years fighting for people - for families and children in North Carolina where he represented victims against armies of lawyers on the other side, and for the past 6 years on the floor of the United States Senate and all across America where he championed the cause of ordinary people.

He's the good lawyer fighting against the armies of bad ones. Works for me.

But really, is there actually a single voter out there who was going to vote for Kerry but now won't because his vice president used to be a lawyer?

2004-07-06T13:36:00.000-04:00

Dishonesty

I mentioned earlier, I think, that McCain's chief of staff denied Kerry offered him the VP slot. I've found the quote.

"Senator McCain categorically states that he has not been offered the vice presidency by any one," said McCain's chief of staff, Mark Salter, who would not confirm the officials' account.

So how can the Bush campaign claim McCain was Kerry's first choice? By lying. Or accusing McCain of lying, which would sort of soften the impact of his endorsement of Bush. So which is it?

2004-07-06T10:26:00.000-04:00

Loserman

Comic book and science fiction writer Warren Ellis in his latest newsletter entry on Kerry picking Edwards:

As an aside, the only good thing about the Dem selection process this time around was that Joe Lieberman was finally shown up as the sickening, ugly, hatepowered hack I always believed him to be, and he should now be finally nailed into his political coffin.

Couldn't have said it better.

Although I also think Kerry-Edwards is the best ticket the Democrats could have put together this year, so I wouldn't say Lieberman's loss of Joementum was the only good thing to come out of it.

2004-07-06T09:32:00.000-04:00

second Choices

Man, there's so much wrong with this line of attack, I'm not even sure where to start.

Just weeks earlier, Mr. McCain, of Arizona, had been the subject of widespread reports that Mr. Kerry, a friend and fellow Vietnam veteran, had sounded him out about joining the ticket, reports that Mr. Kerry never publicly confirmed.

Let me repeat that: never publicly confirmed.

Again, there is no confirmed report that John Kerry actually offered the vice presidency to John McCain. None. Period. It may not be true. From the description given at the time by McCain's chief of staff, it sounded exactly like the conversations Kerry has been having with Gephardt and Edwards. Obviously, in the course of those discussions, the question of whether McCain would accept probably came up. But that's in no way indicative of McCain being Kerry's first choice. To claim otherwise is to make a completely unsubstantiated accusation. Which, of course, the Bush team does all the time so it's not really a surprise.

Citing a report by ABC News last week that Mr. Kerry's camp had conducted polls to see how different running mates would play with voters, Ms. Devenish said the Bush campaign would also emphasize that even when it came to picking the person who could succeed him as president, Mr. Kerry was shaped not by conviction but by public opinion. Mr. Kerry's campaign has denied such polling.

Um...again: Mr. Kerry's campaign has denied such polling.

Do these people care at all about facts having evidence supporting them?

Even if it is true, and really, it probably is, does Bush seriously expect us to believe that he did no polling whatsoever in 2000 before picking Cheney? Isn't that pretty much the standard procedure for these things.

Or are we supposed to believe that Bush somehow had the conviction that the CEO of Halliburton must be his vice president, popular or not? Did he look into his eyes and see his soul?

2004-07-06T09:29:00.000-04:00

Yes, He Did Say It. Because It's True.

Over the weekend, the NYT reported on yet another wildly dishonest and frankly nonsensical Bush campaign criticism of John Kerry:

Mr. Kerry tried hard to make a personal connection. He told an audience in Independence, gathered in the machine shed of a 300-cow dairy farm, that he had fond memories of time spent on the farm as a boy. Mr. Kerry, the son of a foreign service officer who often lived abroad, noted that he lived for a time on a Massachusetts farm. "I learned my first cuss words sitting on a tractor, from the guy who was driving it," he said.

A spokeswoman said he was referring to time spent with his parents while a small child outside Boston, as well as with an aunt and uncle, the Winthrops, at their home on a dairy farm on Boston's North Shore.

The Bush campaign instantly put out a mocking news release about the idea of Mr. Kerry growing up on a farm. "He said it!" was the headline - and the battle to define Mr. Kerry to small-town America continued.

Note that John Kerry actually did spend time on a farm as a kid and that his statement appears to be 100% accurate and in no way dishonest. The Bush campaign pretends it is. They are liars. And they seem mighty desperate.

2004-07-03T16:25:00.000-04:00

The Press Effect

I'm reading this book, The Press Effect, by Katherine Jamieson and Paul Waldman. It's interesting, kind of like reading 200 pages of the Daily Howler. A little obvious in places, but interesting. It covers the irresponsible handling of the 2000 election by the press and in the section on the media recounts, it includes this rather amazingly dismissive quote by ABC's Antonio Mora in a story about how Bush really won:

"The review showed that Al Gore might have won only if he had asked for a statewide recount, a request he did not make."

Then he moves on, as if this doesn't matter. Process that for a second. Al Gore might have won a statewide recount. He recieved more votes than Bush statewide, but it doesn't matter because he didn't as for a statewide recount. What the fuck?

Now, the book's whole point is that the dismissal of any chance that Gore won was a result of the patriotic instincts of media in the months after 9/11 (this was November 2001). I only mention this, first of all because it pissed me off a lot when I read it, but also because Michael Moore claims in Fahrenheit 9/11 that Gore won several of the media recounts. This is true, but some conservatives have pulled out the media headlines that ignored that fact as evidence Moore was lying. This despite the fact that Moore includes a headline confirming it in the movie. The point is, anyone who tells you Bush won every recount scenario is either lying or grossly misinformed.

Punch them in the nuts.

2004-07-02T13:45:00.000-04:00

New Fox News Poll

65% of Americans say they are more patriotic than the average American.

2004-07-02T13:32:00.000-04:00

Finally, Some Fairness and Balance

From today's White House Bulletin:

President Bush held a White house event this morning to highlight the positive trends in the US economy. His presentation was long and rambling, though, and Fox News, which was covering the event live, cut away from coverage mid-sentence to run a biography on Marlon Brando.

2004-07-02T12:20:00.000-04:00

I Don't Want To Get Off On a Rant Here

But does anyone else think the new Saddam Hussein looks a lot like Dennis Miller?

2004-07-02T10:48:00.000-04:00

What the Hell Have They Been Doing for Four Years?

Looks like Florida election officials still haven't fixed the flaw in their computer program that wrongly made thousands of Gore voters ineligible in 2000, quite possibly costing him the election.

How is this so difficult? You have prison records. You have names, social security numbers, fingerprints of all prisoners. You have voter registration cards. How is it so hard just not to give the damn things to the felons? Why can't you just do it based on social security numbers? And why aren't election officials more concerned that they appear to yet again be mistakenly disenfranchising thousands of black voters?