? December 2003 | Main | February 2004 ?

January 28, 2004

New Hampshire Observations

 by Jeremy

Having a bad stomach night -- scrolling making me seasick -- will keep it brief...but here are some random, loose thoughts I need to remove from my head:

• I had hoped Edwards would have done a little better, but we'll see what happens. If Kerry and Dean are hit by a meteorite then I think Edwards could pull it out. Also, I just noticed that Edwards has a bit of a Dustin Hoffman smile, for what that's worth.
• Kerry comes across as a bit more human, a bit more likeable when he's happy, and he's happy when he's winning it seems. I just can't shake the feeling that he's a born senator -- I'm not sure why.
• Nation of Franken
  What does the guy on the left have in common with the guys on the right? Hint: it ain't the bowtie...
  

• I like Lieberman so I'm going to offer him the following advice: please stop saying "Joe-mentum."
• Dennis Miller made the observation that Kerry looks like an Easter Island statue in a power tie.
• Jack Paar died today, I'm sorry to say. Listening to a tape of him on the radio today I thought two things: this guy was ahead of his time and possibly ours too; he reminds me of a tame Lenny Bruce; and...ok 3 things...there was a kind of directness and honesty in his stage persona that would be refreshing in a political candidate, though I somehow don't think that will ever happen.
  A few Paar quips:
  

  "Immigration is the sincerest form of flattery."
  "She should get a divorce and settle down."
  "My life seems like one long obstacle course, with me as the obstacle."

  
  Alright, so this had nothing to do with New Hampshire. Sorry.

I have a taste in my mouth, as I generally do during a bad stomach day, that makes me feel as if I'd taken a quart of Ripple wine and about 7 or 8 packs of Pez, mixed them up in a blender, chugged the whole thing down, and then done a headstand (I know, that's digusting, I'm sorry...obviously you'd want a white wine with Pez). Even my usual Diet Coke and Claritin cure is not working, but Cara is feeling lousy too so it must be an actual stomach bug. Have you ever heard two bloggers groaning in stereo? That's me and Cara.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 02:35 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

January 25, 2004

Some Thoughts on War Writing (From Someone Who Doesn't Know What He's Talking About)

 by Jeremy

Iraq Now, a blog that Patrick Lasswell turned me onto, and Glenn Reynolds reminded us all to check out for tips on leadership, strikes me as one of the most important blogs out there in terms of recording a slice of the history that is being made in Iraq. I guess it must be unprecedented that historians of this war will have had so much of their homework done for them before they start. The blogosphere will be the Studs Terkel of our current era, and a large wing of its research library.

Iraq Now reminds me of a very literary Viet Nam memoir written by a guy I used to work with. His name is Norman L. Russell and his book is "Suicide Charlie." This page turner reads like a novel but one gets the sense that it is impeccably accurate (or as accurate as 20 year old memories can be). I had expected the read to be traumatizing to my naive self, but it wasn't, exactly. There is one scene that is quite disturbing -- it describes an incident very similar to Kurt Vonnegut's experiences following the fire bombing of Dresden. But the description is that of a literate veteran, not a sensationalist film maker's, say.

I asked Norm several years ago what he thought about some of the more popular depictions of Viet Nam. He didn't go into great detail, but said he thought the violence in Oliver Stone's "Platoon" was "pornographic."

What Norm does that is so affecting is to quite simply make you feel as if you were there. The book, as I recall, does not make a larger point about war so much as it shows you what war does to people. The book is not political; it's a record not a polemic and so it's lessons are not fuel for ideologues on either side of the current debate on the world situation.

This passage was, to me, a revelation about war:

War is one of life's most boring activities, most of the time. Our main release from tedium was cardplaying. Rook was the game of choice my first couple months in the platoon.

It would go without saying, of course, that the long stretches of boredom are punctuated by explosions of infinite horror. And it almost seems that the real trauma is inflicted on the soldiers while nothing is happening, while they're wondering whether their death may come in ten seconds, ten days, six months...

The sappers are wraiths who come in the night. I can't see them, can't hear them. I can only think them and, in my mind, they are always here.

The night moves in small pieces. As I stare into the dark, things appear to creep up to my bunker. My eyes do not adjust smoothly to changes in the light. They click abruptly from one f-stop to another, adjusting in jumps that jerk everything a few paces closer. Bushes, trees, tufts of grass all seem to be slowly working their way in toward the perimeter until I am confronted by an army of vegetation.

I'm ashamed to say I had never read a book about Viet Nam when I picked his up 9 or 10 years ago. I read it because he was a coworker at the mental health "crisis respite" site I worked at (a kind of halfway house where people trying to avoid the psych hospital hob-nobbed with people just leaving the psych hospital). Part of the job was answering the crisis hotline. Norm, a crusty guy on the outside, was cynical about most the callers, many of whom would say they were going to kill themselves but who often were yanking our chains (not exactly for fun, but because they had other kinds of mental health problems. Note to people truly contemplating suicide: yes, hotline answerers may be tired and cynical, but if you really need help they will pick that up immediately and it will awaken them; and they will take you very, very seriously since you will make them feel that there is actually a chance that their work may be of some use to someone. So call already).

While Norm's prose alternates between the journalistic and the poetic -- between, I guess, the soldier's head and the veteran's soul -- Jason Van Steenwyk, who blogs Iraq Now, writes more in the former mode. It's literate, realtime journalism. And here's what he says about the possibility for high art during combat:

If James Joyce were to place Stephen Daedalus in the scene, and describe the stream of consciousness process, he'd probably simply write "Accountability. No one bleeding out. Headquarters boys, first, then redlegs. Maintenance and mess after. Ooops--better not go that way. Overhead cover in back. 18 inches."

Joyce would have then completed "Ulysses" in 30 pages...[from Jason Blows His Top]

I would add here that if you are interested in both an incredibly good war novel and an example of how effective a judicious and sparing use of stream of consciousness can be, read Ford Madox Ford's "Parade's End". Ford is an immense writer and I don't feel that"The Good Soldier" does him full justice.

It's important for non-military people like me who support this or any military action to read this stuff. And I hope Jason goes on to write the book that he clearly has in him.

UPDATE: Here are the big guys, Ford and Joyce in 1923:

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 04:00 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 23, 2004

Kick Me Hard
Facing A Tough Decision

 by Jeremy

[Warning: Zoned blogger trying to be ironic -- construe with extreme caution]

My take on the ass-backward thinking that led to Dean's inexplicable popularity in the first place.

My take on the misplaced anger and self-soothing optimism that may have led people to hold onto fantasies about Dean that they just won't be able to support once they actually get to the polls.

"Things were going to be great. We didn't believe in all that Y2K crap, we had that "Millenium Shmillenium" bumper sticker on our volvo, we were cynical about all the right things...but the new...you know...millenium was going to fix everything, make all the bad things go away and the good things come our way. We were so close to having universal health coverage I could just feel it. The United States could have achieved world peace by now and solved all that disease and hunger stuff. But then that fascist bastard Dubya and his cabal of neoconservative monkeys staged a coup and turned the country and the world into their own personal concentration camp. But Howard Dean may just be the man with the vision to put us back on track."

"We had measured optimism that a new era of social justice and world peace might be the legacy of this new century, but those hopes were dashed when George W. Bush hijacked the country and drew the world into a dangerous, downward spiral. But Howard Dean may just be the man with the vision to put us back on track."

"Dean rocks! When he loses and Bush pulls out his real agenda, then they'll really be sorry."

"Still, now that I find myself at the polls, ballot in hand, I find I need to vote for someone who stands the best chance of prevailing in the general election."

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 01:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 20, 2004

Yuck

 by Jeremy

It really pisses me off when Bush talks about gay marriage as if it's clearly vile and he's being exceedingly tolerant to merely describe it as something that should be banned. He seemed to ramp up his vague intention to support -- in theory, if necessary, whatever -- a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. This is probably the thing I find most disturbing about Bush, the thing that ranks up there with Dean's reptilian screech. It's something to watch and speak out about, in my opinion.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 10:10 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Kennedy says no, Hillary says yes

 by Jeremy

I'm writing this while watching Bush's State of Union speech...while Bush spoke of the invasion of Iraq as a liberation of the Iraqi people from tyrrany, MSNBC cut to a shot of Ted Kennedy shaking his head in annoyed disagreement, his hand cupping his chin -- and covering his mouth lest he heckle -- then Hillary was shown joining in the standing ovation. What significance do I see in that? I don't know...that Kennedy speaks his mind but is blind and wrong about this issue and that Clinton, whatever else may be going on with her, has got her eyes open. I remember back when I was in High School I, my brother and his friend, an aspiring jazz musician, went to see Miles Davis play at Lincoln Center. During the concert, Miles started playing "Time After Time" a recent hit for Cyndi Lauper and I thought, and whispered, that maybe it was true that Miles had sold out. My brother's friend whispered back "he's got his ears on, that's all" meaning maybe he simply liked the tune enough not to care that it was a top 40 hit recorded by a white woman. Certain things stick with you, and I have found myself thinking of this lately. It was an object lesson in the importance of making your own decisions about the things that matter to you.

UPDATE: I'm really not one of those real-time bloggers. Kennedy might have been shaking his head specifically at the 87billion. Not 100% sure; so correct me but don't quote me. I really can't listen and write at the same time. But you get the point.

UPDATE #2: Cara says Kennedy was shaking his head at Bush's assertion that the toppling of Saddam made the world safer, not at the 87 billion.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 09:59 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

A word of advice

 by Jeremy

If you are toying with the idea of trying that Godzilla* cry that Howard Dean executed yesterday, please just don't. I tried it a few minutes ago and I really regret it -- I don't care how hip and satirical you think it could come out, it just won't. The thing is poison and will stick to you like the toxic funk that it is. Which, by the way, might be a good title for the righteous and moving anthem that James Lileks is spinning over at his site (via Michael Totten)

* Or is that Megalon? Either way, it gives a disturbing spin to the littany of states he plans to conquer:

P.S. I'm actually feeling a bit sorry for Dean. We all make asses of ourselves from time to time. The trouble in Dean's case, though, is that it just seems to fit a littlle too well. He's a bit like the hyperactive kid who, though you like him well enough, has to be taken to the quiet room every once in a while and who probably wouldn't be appointed milk monitor.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 08:44 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 18, 2004

No tolerance for senseless destruction

 by Jeremy

It's good to see that people who go around committing acts of senseless destruction are called to account for their behavior (via Roger Simon):

Israel's ambassador to Sweden was kicked out of Stockholm's Museum of National Antiquities after he destroyed an artwork featuring a picture of a Palestinian suicide bomber, the artists said.

...
The art installation, called Snow White and located in the museum's courtyard, featured a basin filled with red water, designed to look like blood.

A sailboat with the name Snow White floated on the water, and placed like a sail was a photo of a smiling Hanadi Jaradat, the female lawyer who blew herself up in the Haifa suicide bombing attack in October which killed 21 Israelis.

"For me it was intolerable and an insult to the families of the victims. As ambassador to Israel I could not remain indifferent to such an obscene misrepresentation of reality," the ambassador told Swedish news agency TT.

The artists say that the piece was "not a glorification of the suicide bomber." They claim they "wanted to show how incomprehensible it is that a mother-of-two, who is a lawyer no less, can do such a thing"

Fair enough in theory. But imagine seeing this, as Roger points out, if someone in your family had been killed by this nice looking young woman. Hint to world: if you're an artist wanting to make a powerful statement but don't want to provoke extreme reactions, try starting out with something like a painting of a sorrowful unicorn thinking "why?" and steer clear of equally vacuous but far more stupid works such as ones that seek to find the aesthetic beauty in a sorrowful woman stranded in a sea of bloody hate (oh, and who kills 21 innocent people by blowing them up in a cafe).

So yes, the Israeli ambassador -- who yanked out electrical wiring and tossed a light fixture into the bloody water -- is guilty of an act of vandalism, though he also deserves credit for imbuing the piece with a level of artistic meaning with which it had not previously been burdened.

The museum director makes the reasonable claim that the ambassador created a "life threatening" situation by tossing live electrical hardware into a pool of water in proximity to hundreds of people. True enough. But as someone who writes for an electrical trade journal I feel it appropriate to point out that it would be the responsibility of the museum to ensure that any electrical device in a public setting installed near an open pool of water be protected by a ground fault circuit interrupter if not also by an arc fault circuit interrupter. I don't know what the electrical code in Sweden actually requires here, but this would be common sense. (I'm being facetious but only partly. If someone had gotten electrocuted it would probably only have been possible if no GFCI was installed. The museum would have properly been accused of extreme negligence because, though a museum shouldn't have to plan for an ambassador throwing electrical equipment into a pool of water, they should plan for the possibility of falling equipment where water and people are present. And yes I know -- a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. If you're a Swedish electrician I invite your perspective).

But to get back to my larger point: this woman murdered 21 people whose lives cannot be restored by reaffixing 8x10 glossies onto popsicle sticks with Elmer's glue, so let's keep our outrage in perspective here.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 03:36 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

January 17, 2004

Irwin, Mengele, or Hackenbush?

 by Jeremy

My first thought was that this guy deserves the first annual Steve Irwin ob/gyn award:

With theatrical flair, Dr Panos Zavos, an IVF expert from Kentucky, told a packed press conference in London that he had created the first cloned pregnancy. He said that he had taken a skin cell from a man and fused it with the egg of a 35-year-old woman and that in two weeks' time they would know whether a full pregnancy was safely established.

But if this is really true I think it may stray rather close to Mengele territory:

Many cloned animals have been born sick or deformed, and there are few successful births. In primates it appears to be even harder

The only reason I'm able to joke about this at all is that I suspect the prize he's most likely to garner is the Hugo Hackenbush award:

His announcement was greeted with laughter and disbelief.
...
The press conference descended into farce when he criticised the highly respected medical journals Nature and Science, saying he wouldn't want his work to be reviewed or published in them because they did not have enough experts to deal with it.
...
During the press conference Zavos presented pictures of himself as an astronaut walking on the Moon to convey his point that much was achievable in the future.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 09:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

BBC Parodies Self

 by Jeremy

I would assume this to be some kind of April Fool's joke planted by, say, Andrew Sullivan were it not mid January:

The Arabic satellite TV channel al-Jazeera says its editor-in-chief has submitted his resignation. According to an al-Jazeera spokesman, Ibrahim Helal said he had had "a tempting offer" from the BBC.

Thanks to Jeff Jarvis for this reminder that truth is stranger than fiction.

Says jarvis: "The BBC isn't clever enough to even care about appearances." So it seems. I suppose one could frame this as an heroic embracing of transparency on the part of the BBC...but let's not.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 08:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 16, 2004

A Call For the Internal Separation of Church and State

 by Cara

In his recent round of thoughtful essays about what he calls (and I would agree with him) the three-way war, Steven Den Beste has noticed a larger pattern emerging from his examinations of recent events. He points out that there are 3 different ways of seeing the world that are largely behind the conflicts that are currently playing out: the Islamists (militants, fascist fundamentalist extremists, anti-enlightenment/modernity/science, ''Allah' is the only reality of the universe') are literally attacking the materialists (realists, pluralists, humanists, pro-enlightenment/modernity/science, 'the universe is the reality of the universe'), and the idealists (relativists, existentialists, post-modernists, de-constructionists, mistrustful of enlightenment/modernity/science, 'our perceptions are the only reality of the universe') are tacitly siding with the Islamists because they both take issue with materialism; they may have different reasons for this, but they both want to roll back the clock; and they both have issue with materialism because it happens to be the most successful with regard to maintaining human life.

I'm grateful to Steven for working to help flesh out this stuff; it's so confusing and overwhelming at times. I've written about certain aspects of some of this stuff before, here, but I think it bears exploring further.

Part of the problem with so much of this leftist/relativist/idealist philosophical 'dogma' is that it is, for the most part, unconscious and reflexive for those who practice it and therefore much more dangerous than it appears to be. The everyday idealist practitioners, I think, are for the most part unaware of how much these philosophical convictions are guiding their thoughts and actions in the world. I give you one quick example of a woman on Oprah chastizing, I'm paraphrasing here, her daughter for saying that Sadaam Hussein was a bad man, that he may have done bad things, but that didn't make him a bad man. I believe these convictions or assumptions, partly because they have become so mainstream and fashionable, have become invisible to their practitioners and thus they behave as though these convictions are just an obvious part of reality. In other words, they don't understand that these assumptions are just another type of 'faith' (hopes and wishes about human nature) and are not proven facts but yet they act as if they are facts. They do not see that these philosophical convictions are functioning for them much like religious faith functions for the consciously religious person. They are like zealots who are unconscious of their zealotry and behave as though their zealotry is fact. This must be why it is so difficult to reason with them. There's a level of deception there that even outright 'religious' people (of the non-extremist variety anyway) don't have. These idealists think their beliefs are facts in a way that is much more insidious than people who are conscious of their faith, for the simple reason that the 'religious' are conscious of their faith.

The consciously religious are well aware that their faith doesn't exactly match up with science and have been working that out in various ways over many years. And this awareness of their own faith (bias) actually seems to leave the consciously religious (non-extremist) more objective in judgment than the idealists who are not aware of their own bias, i.e. that they have unconsciously vested their philosophy with religious emotional zeal. Because they are blind to their own 'faith', in that they do not consciously recognize it as the 'faith' that it really is, the 'left' idealists haven't had to struggle so much with the discrepancies between their convictions and reality. And this 'faith' hadn't really been tested in the concrete world until 9/11.

All this seems to be leading me here: among people, there seems to be a strong 'religious' impulse, even among atheists or those who claim to be non-religious, that demands our acknowledgment and must be consciously dealt with and expressed in a healthy constructive way (art, poetry, storytelling, music, etc) otherwise, religious or dogmatic emotional furor becomes all enmeshed with the reality that it isn't and the results always seem to compromise information and twist reality. Maybe there's an internal or psychological 'separation of church and state' that has to be consciously maintained, even among non-religious and atheist folks, so that a person's internal flow of information remains free from dogmatic blocks long enough to reason through to reality.

Another part of this puzzle I think has to do with humanism. I think that there are idealists/relativists who still hang onto that word, who still insist that they are humanists when they are not. Humanism is very pro-science. They do think that truth in the universe exists and that it can be verified by good science. That is one of the basic tenets of humanism. Relativists simply do not believe in an objective truth that can be verified. So you simply can't be a relativist and a humanist at the same time and if you claim both, you're in denial, big time.

- Cara

Posted by Cara at 06:44 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

January 15, 2004

But ask me again tomorrow...(UPDATED)

 by Jeremy

WARNING: I am beginning to think out loud about presidential politics. Much of what you are about to read will seem unsupported and otherwise silly. You will find opinions that I may contradict as soon as later today. You are encouraged to think out loud along with me by posting comments. Comments must be neatly typed, stacked in an orderly fashion underneath the post, and may be either water-tight or glib and tenuous (unless you're running for president, in which case you really ought to have nailed it down by now).

I like that the Bush/Dean doctrine has toppled one of the most vicious dictators in the world and seems to have sent a chill into the souls of those who remain in power. But, though polls are bullshit, I like the idea (which is all it is right now) that voting Democrats are starting to leapfrog over the backs of the demagogues (i.e. Dean and Clark, not to mention Sharpton and Kucinich). I wish they would leap closer to Gephardt than to Kerry, but it's an angel's breath -- not yet a whisper -- of hope for the future of the Democratic party.

While I don't see Gephardt as the answer to my prayers as a voter, I could do it -- I could vote for him. I'm starting to feel that the Bush administration is no longer the uniquely right team at the right time, at least in terms of post-war Iraq. It's starting to seem inevitable that Iraq will start slipping out of the hands of the Coalition a little prematurely, regardless of who is president, and so I can no longer easily say that none of the Democratic candidates could handle this. I could imagine Gephardt or Edwards in this role. I still have reservations about changing horses mid-stream, but the Hobson's choice between foreign policy and domestic policy that a Bush vote would feel like to me is getting harder for me to justify. The possibility of dangerous misjudgement in Iraq is starting to seem a universal risk, something a Bush vote would not necessarily hedge against. And if a president is going to spend outrageous amounts of money the country can't afford, I'd rather it be spent on health insurance than on tax cuts and space travel. The fact that Gephardt voted for the 87 billion dollar "don't-f*ck-over-the-Iraqis" expenditure gives him some credibility on foreign policy. On the other hand, I'm mindful of a point Matthew Yglesias made about the danger of judging a politician's convictions on the basis of their compromises with powerful adversaries during extraordinary circumstances.

To anticipate and answer your question: I'm assuming Lieberman doesn't have a matzo ball's chance in Paris of actually becoming president, so he'd have to be a dream candidate to get my vote.

But now I crave cheese and crackers so I bid you adieu.

UPDATE: See this post's comments for my most current radical rethink. But let me underscore the following principle: I am trying to set an example here by having the courage to cravenly flounder in choosing a single candidate or party so early in this "race." My hope is to lead a coalition of the confused in a muttering tizzy toward the voting booth this election year (hey, I think I'd vote for a candidate who spoke that way). The trouble is, I'm haunted by those Iraqi voices asking Wolfowitz what will become of Iraq if there is a new president in 2004 (can't find the link at the moment). But I think it's important to keep an open mind and rethink often this early in the "game."

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 08:58 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

January 12, 2004

Collective Chaos

 by Cara

Randal Robinson , bless his heart, spotlights another example of the "LOL" joys of collectivism:

"The socialist clowns at SF Bay Area Indymedia can't even make a virtual collective work without spiraling into anarchy:

Our IMC has now split into two groups. When a few of the tech members began to have personal problems with other members of the collective, these tech members demanded a split of the collective. The resulting dynamics within the group continued to worsen. It created an environment that made it difficult to continue working together and also discouraged potential new people from joining the collective. While most members of the collective opposed any kind of split, the aforementioned tech members insisted that they would split anyway, because they wanted to and because they could.

The tech members who wanted the split also had convinced the rest of the group to agree to move the site to the linefeed.org server. They claimed that this was merely a technical issue which would enable the site to run faster.

The members of the splitting group also began making viscious and false accusations about other members of the collective. This even went as far as accusing some members of being security risks and/or police
informants."

LOL. Can there be a more apt demonstration of a failed ideology?"

Aaaah...this takes me back to my sweet collective memories of 'social justice' a la 'Lord of the Flies'... collective members lovingly nurturing the contemptible power games they claim to be so against and so beyond... it just chokes me right up!

I know those 'peace-loving' tyrannies all too well. This is what happens, well one of the things that happens, when the craziness of the elitist manipulators and grandstanders of the group (they always exist, touchy feely socialist rhetoric or not) is allowed to spiral out of control because of a total lack of real and grounded accountability ('hey, rules are for the man, man!') and anything goes because heaven forbid anyone judge an enlightened comrade's erratic behavior.

If you're honest with yourself, the pretense and hypocrisy of the never spoken of covert/overt power play in a group that is supposed to care so much about people and their rights is unbearable. At least traditional capitalist businesses are honest about their hierarchy and tyranny. The amount of dishonesty and denial of reality required to continue working in that kind of 'collective' environment is beyond daunting.
Been there, done that, and here to help spread the word:

COLLECTVISM ALWAYS FAILS!

And so will this, hat-tip Andrew Sullivan.

- Cara

Posted by Cara at 09:54 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 10, 2004

"Do you think I'm bad?"

 by Jeremy

I?ve just realized that Howard Dean, mentally and emotionally, is a troubled teen. This is, of course, no reason to disqualify him from being president of the United States. Just a few years ago George W. was a bit of a wily adolescent too, as we know. And we watched him grow up on television. Likewise, Dean might very well grow and flower into a fine young gentleman once elected president. But we?ve just raised a president and I?m not sure I have the energy to start all over again. I don?t know about you.

Ok, that?s all. The name thing is just a coincidence but undoubtedly the subconscious impetus for my brilliant new theory. Apologies, of course, to Mr. James Dean.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 06:56 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 07, 2004

Liberal solidarity is less important than liberal ideals (or: sometimes a water buffalo is just a water buffalo)

 by Jeremy

Uh...actually I have nothing much to add beyond that title. Except that this is my response to the suggestion that Jeff Jarvis is not a liberal simply because he dares to have his own opinions about recent wars and about other people on the left. I still consider myself on the left, but the label means less to me than ever before. It's starting to feel like a secret fraternal order. You might as well be a water buffalo. Either way, I plan to form opinions without consulting my comrades first, so I guess I'm out of the club too.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 10:36 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

Sometimes a Radium Pellet is Just a Radium Pellet (or: Life in a Clancy)

 by Jeremy

There?s a rich and finely woven tapestry of fear, concern, relief, anxiety (to select a few of the more brightly colored threads) in the report that authorities were and are worried about the imminent use of dirty bombs during this latest code orange, but I will zero in on one bizarre detail. This one fills me with dread and confidence. Get nice and cozy, grab a cup of hot tea, and enjoy this thrilling little tale:

On Dec. 29 in Las Vegas, the searchers got their first and only radiation "spike," at a rented storage facility near downtown. The finding sent a jolt of tension through the nation's security apparatus; the White House was notified. The experts rechecked the reading with a more precise machine that told them that inside the cinderblock storage unit was radium, a radioactive material used in medical equipment and on watch dials. As rare snow fell on the city that early morning, FBI agents secured the industrial neighborhood around the site, and a small army of agents and scientists converged on the business. Soon the renter of the storage closet in question, a homeless man, happened on the odd scene and asked the officers not to cut his padlock. He supplied the key.

The scientists sent in a robot to snag a duffel bag in which the man had been storing a cigar-size radium pellet -- which is used to treat uterine cancer -- since he found the shiny stainless-steel object three years before. Not knowing what the object was, he had wrapped it in his nighttime pillow.
Officials said he has not exhibited any signs of ill health, yet. The man, whose name could not be obtained, was released.

Mental gymnastics such as ?gee, how does a homeless guy can get his hands on a lovely radium pellet anyway? Hmm.? will keep me awake at night. But I must say that I am impressed and encouraged that ?they? are doing some of what needs to be done to prevent the unthinkable; it?s pretty impressive that they found this thing. Perhaps they caught it in time to prevent the poor guy from getting gravely ill as well.

I?ll admit I?m not sure what to make of this, except that it?s another clue that we are all living in a novel, probably a Vonnegut, or a Heller, or a Delillo. Still, if the authorities stay on the stick, we may yet be spared further glimpses of life in a Clancy.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 10:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 06, 2004

Reflections on Socialism, Hierarchy and Crisis

 by Cara

This post started out as a simple response to a commenter. I was going to put this in the comment section under my Anne Frank post but realized it was a post of its own too. Keith Macdonald wrote:

?Your story of the woman more concerned about the use of "Mrs." than Anne Frank (or the larger matter of the Holocaust) reminds me of a similar incident during one of Mayor Giuliani's press conferences right after 9/11...A woman at the briefing felt it necessary to insist that the mayor specifically mention the contributions of women...The mayor... very pleasantly ammended his statement to overtly praise the women within the ranks of rescuers. But within the context of why the mayor had to give those press conferences at all, the grace and humanity of his presentation, how could someone dwell on "gender"??

Now that you mention it, Keith, I remember that comment at Giuliani's press conference too. I'm glad you remembered that! Yeah, I remember it as a jarring interruption that seemed to rudely take attention away, if only a moment or two, from the crisis and left you feeling like she'd somehow just insulted everyone for thinking that this trauma was currently the most important one on the radar. Now, being female, I obviously know how important women's rights are; Jeremy and I are married but I chose to keep my last name, to the consternation of my parents. I understand the power of words and names, etc., but sometimes words must take a back seat to lives.

When there's a crisis you have to move and think fast. The staff in an Emergency Room, for instance, in the middle of life saving procedures is not going to have time for the niceties and courtesies they would normally give and receive to each other outside of an emergency. Sorry, but in a crisis, hierarchy, someone in authority thru real life knowledge and experience communicating to others as efficiently as possible how to proceed, is absolutely necessary; lives may be at stake.

I'm so glad you brought this up because just the act of writing this has focused for me, in a more succinct way than ever before, why the 'egalitarian' collective I worked in fell apart at every crisis.

People naturally look for real leadership to help in a crisis. Because the collective only had either phony manipulative 'elites' (the grandstanders who were more often than not the cause of the crisis, so we'd get no help there obviously) or reluctant 'leaders' (who may have had some knowledge and experience but were reluctant to use it for the obvious reason that you can't just take charge when you're sincere, anyway, about egalitarianism), we'd spiral into chaos when crisis hit. You can't just go around stepping all over your mission statement, which is your 'sacred text', your dogma. It's a kind of catch 22 isn't it? And as a result, the 'sacred texts' (words/dogma) are actually more protected than the people. I don't think I ever saw this as clearly before.

I guess socialism just doesn't handle crisis well at all. I can't help but think of France during that heat wave. It?s outrageous! 15,000 people died (what does the 'humanitarian' 'left' have to say about this?), more than died in Iraq by the way (war not withstanding, how hot is it in Iraq during the summers?), due to a 'socialist' system that lost it's grip on it's priorities, giving more attention to socialist dogma than to the people they were supposed to serve. They (?leftists? and ?socialists?) really do care more about words than anything else. If you only say the magic 'lefty', 'socialist', 'anti-imperialist' words, abracadabra...utopia! That is, of course, until Bush interferes with his filthy western ways! It?s such a toxic denial of reality which I believe boils down to being, at least, just as dangerous as 'capitalists' who care more about profits than anything else. People?s lives end up last in both systems when power goes unchecked and there isn?t accountability to the people, and no matter how pretty ?words?, and the ?good intentions? they reflect, are, the results can only be disastrous.

- Cara

Posted by Cara at 04:44 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 05, 2004

Extremist Poison 'slips in'

 by Cara

Okay, so here we go.

MoveOn.org is sponsoring a contest to find the best anti-Bush t.v. ad and have been showing the entries on their site. Many left-of-center celebrities are judging this contest: Jack Black, Benny Boom, Donna Brazille, James Carville, Margaret Cho, Hector Elizondo, Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, Stan Greenburg, Ted Hope, Jessica Lange, Michael Mann, Moby, Michael Moore, Mark Pellington, Tony Shalhoub, Russell Simmons, Michael Stipe, Gus Van Sant, Katrina Vanden Heuvel, and Eddie Vedder.

These folks are not only aligning themselves with MoveOn.org?s political message but are also tacitly aligning themselves, unless they say otherwise, with the message of the videos themselves. Yesterday, MoveOn.org stopped showing one entry due to complaints that it equated Bush to Hitler, which it did outright. (You can check it out at A Small Victory)

The Simon Weisenthal Center, hat-tip Matthew J. Stinson, had this to say yesterday:

The Simon Wiesenthal Center sharply criticized MoveOn.org for accepting and posting ads comparing President George Bush to Adolf Hitler. ?Politics and preparing for a presidential election is one thing, but comparing the Bush Administration?s fight against Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein with the policies of Adolf Hitler is shameful, beyond the pale and has no place in the legitimate discourse of American politics,? said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the Center?s founder and dean. ?Adolf Hitler was responsible for the greatest crime in the history of mankind -- the Holocaust. To compare Hitler to an American President is not only ludicrous, but defames the Holocaust,? he added. ?This ad is not about Democrats or Republicans -- it is about lies and a distortion of history,? he said. ?Move On.org has a responsibility to publicly repudiate such lies as do all political leaders,? he concluded.

Today, after the above and other complaints, they showed another entry that again equates Bush with Hitler. They issued a statement, I just saw on CNN t.v. news though I can?t find it on their site, essentially saying that they are sorry these ads which were in poor taste slipped through onto their site, but, I?m sorry, I just don?t buy that this was a simple ?mistake?, 2 days in a row. They need to do better than that.

And all of these ?judges? also need to speak up right now and dissociate themselves with not only the content of these videos but with MoveOn.org for accepting and displaying these videos (the second time after complaints) or from now on they will forever be associated with the ?Bush=Hitler? crowd, period.

This is beyond vile and this vileness will stick to each and every one of the folks involved unless they strongly and publicly repudiate these videos and the political mess that deemed them acceptable for display.

UPDATE:
Here's the full text of the official MoveOn.org apology. It would be nice if they could take full responsibility for their own bad judgment in allowing that trash to be shown on their site without trying to deflect the blame onto the Republicans both in the opening and closing of this 'apology'. As I said before, they need to do better than that.

UPDATE:
Check out this DAY BY DAY, thanx to Insults Unpunished.

UPDATE:
And from the Anti-Defammation League, (thanx again to Matthew Stinson):

"It is shocking that a mainstream political group like MoveOn.org not only allowed this vile and outrageous comparison of the American President to Adolf Hitler to be entered into its "Bush in 30 Seconds" contest in the first place, but that they even went so far as to make it available to the public on the Internet. Those responsible for this contest at MoveOn.org should have immediately identified this advertisement as one going far beyond legitimate criticism and rejected it out of hand. Instead, they made an irresponsible decision that has given legitimacy to the exploitative manipulation of images in a campaign season.

"MoveOn.org clearly would not have accepted a pornographic ad as legitimate criticism of a candidate. Why did they think that images of Hitler, the Nazi whose evil regime was responsible for the slaughter of millions of people during the Holocaust, was a fitting and credible expression of criticism of President Bush and his policies? Their lack of discretion cheapens the level of political discourse in America, and their comments explaining it were hardly comforting."

- Cara

Posted by Cara at 10:54 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

January 03, 2004

Don't Let Anne Frank Distract You From What Matters Most!

 by Cara

Susan Goldman Rubin was on C-SPAN today (taped in October in San Bernadino, CA) talking about her new book, Searching for Anne Frank: Letters From Amsterdam to Iowa.
From Amazon?s description:

?Few people know that Anne Frank and her sister, Margot, had pen pals in the United States: Juanita and Betty Wagner, of Danville, Iowa. Although the girls corresponded only briefly, their letters capture a poignant moment in Anne's life, before the Nazis arrived.

Through interviews with people who knew Anne, Margot, Juanita, Betty, and their friends, author Susan Goldman Rubin skillfully contrasts the realities of life in rural America and urban Holland through the duration of World War II. Packed with firsthand reports, photographs (many never before published), and intriguing new information, Searching for Anne Frank provides a vivid look at lives torn apart by war-a subject that has great relevance for today's readers.?

In the eighth grade I chose to read A Diary of Anne Frank for my mid-term book report essay. I do think it was a good age to read it but because every student chose a different book to write about I never had the support of class discussions to help me through the mountain of issues it presented. (I also remember thinking to myself, ?well too bad for you, neither did Anne, you brat!?) Though I remember feeling alone and overwhelmed I also knew how important it was to read this book. I couldn?t have articulated it at the time, and still may have trouble doing so now, but I know this was one of those books where you felt not only your brain grow but your soul as well, with all the obvious and shocking growing pains. Even then I guess, knowing as I did about the horrific facts of the holocaust, I knew that a person had to truly and personally/emotionally face this stuff head on at some point in their lives, I remember thinking it was the least I could do to face it at the same age Anne was when she had to literally experience it in the flesh, with her abundant courage, grace and hope.

It seems to me that a lot of people, adult people, these days still refuse to face this stuff. It?s occurring to me now that maybe these are the same people that make up a large portion of the anti-war/leftist/relativist crowd. During the question and answer portion of this lecture a woman, in her 50s I?d say, asked, ?This is not a question about Anne Frank but I?d like to know why you still use the term ?Mrs.? before your name? It seems like an old term to use.? Now, Mrs. Rubin was more polite and diplomatic than I ever could?ve been in that situation. And even though it was asked in a seemingly light hearted manner it still felt like a slap in the face not only to Mrs. Rubin but to Anne Frank as well. There really was something so hostile in this conscious deflection of attention away from the very subject (Anne Frank and the holocaust) everyone there had gathered to hear and talk about and onto what this woman must?ve seen as an issue of at least equal, if not more, importance since she made not even a hint of an apology for the fact that this was completely off the subject. This is it in a nutshell, this present day ?leftist? habit of ignoring the horrendous realities of absolute tyranny, even when directly faced with hard evidence and chilling photographs before their eyes, in favor of the comfortable distraction of obsessing over the minutia of ?enlightened leftist? dogma.

I do think all questions are valid; this one was certainly invaluable in showing me where ?leftist? priorities are these post-9/11 days. Their insistence that their rhetoric override the facts of genocide and mass murder, that they know best what the real problems are more fully than even the victims of tyranny themselves do, only makes their fear and cowardice more obvious. Don?t they know they?re as good as naked standing there? I?ve asked it before, will they ever be embarrassed?

- Cara

Posted by Cara at 06:03 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 02, 2004

How's Nigeria Doing?

 by Jeremy

If this means that the Nigerian government is taking real steps to stem the tide of radical Islamist influence, then I suppose one should read this as good news. But am I alone in being a little frightened by this? What symbolic message do you think this ?radical Muslim group? may be trying to send?

In neighboring Yobe State, authorities beefed security by deploying anti-riot squads to quash the activities of a local radical Muslim group which in the past week has sacked two police stations and taken over a primary school which they renamed 'Afghanistan'.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 02:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Musharraf Musings

 by Jeremy

If you have reassuring words, please comment.

Please: what will happen if (when?) he?s assassinated? I suppose the fact that Pakistan is now part of a smaller clique of possible sources of nuclear holocaust should be of some comfort. On other hand...I must say that I?ve never before wanted to pray for the health and welfare of a military dictator (and indeed I?m an atheist) but please, God, let him live another several years at least.

Musharraf has a legendary track record for surviving deadly encounters, though he has notably stopped making wry, bragging comments about this subject of late. Let us hope that Al Qaeda is as incompetent as they would appear to be and will fail at the simple task of assassinating him (consider that there really is no excuse for this latest New Year?s Eve no-show. If I were the head of a mass murdering theocratic-fascist mob I feel I?d have been able to pull off something in Times Square. Or at least in some small town parade in the Midwest the next day. I wonder if they realize how surprised so many of us are that nothing happened).

And what will become of Musharraf?s cunning plan for ever greater democracy through ever-tighter dictatorial control? I can?t decide if that?s out of the Josef Stalin playbook or the Joseph Heller one. More the latter, I think.

These things concern me for 2004 more than my need to lose weight. More concerns to follow.

-Jeremy

Posted by Jeremy at 02:26 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack