I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Hebert, like Krugman, has kept the flame alive at the New York Times.
If Modo would learn to write like something other than a gossip columnist she would do herself and her readers a great service.
If she would take a stand and defend it, and not snipe at those who might stand with her, she could be a potent scourge of the Dark Side.
Damn. The question for me is why did we have to get this far in order for people to get this pissed?
That Herbert is quite an eloquent writer.
OT
but has anyone here read this?
Kristof's quite the humanitarian himself.
"What's the military mission in Iraq? Can it be clearly defined? Is it achievable? At what cost and over what time frame? How many troops will be needed? How many casualties are we willing to accept? And how much suffering are we willing to endure here at home in terms of the domestic needs that are unmet?"
Is he being deliberately deceptive or just being a moron? The military mission now is to hold down Iraq until the the new government has the forces and trained manpower to take over and defeat the insurgency. And the "how many casualties are we willing to accept" is obviously a stupid question since nobody, not even Kerry is going to go on TV and say "we will leave if we take this many casualties". The fact is he knows very well that the answer to most of his questions are situational, therefore he is dishonest and has no valid opinion that he is sharing in this piece of tripe.
Sheesh, find somebody with more of a brain to write you editorials.
I get a sense from reading headlines that the idea is starting to sink in the Bush administration doesn't know that in the world it's doing. We turned the corner, right into a dead-end street.
kristof will be human scum until he realizes that the best way to fight for global human rights isn't to attack the people who have been spending much of their lives doing just that.
"President Bush's re-election mantra is that he's the leader who can keep America safe. But that message was stepped on by the urgent, if not frantic, disclosures this week by top administration officials that another Al Qaeda attack on the United States might be imminent."
Amen, Bob.
It's funny that Bushco were all of a suddent rushing to protect "potential targets", and hurrying to meet elected and private sector CEOs to discuss security. Um, isn't this what they should have been doing, like, uh Sept 12?
It's almost as if Karl Rove said, "Oh, shit, Kerry's ahead in the polls, he's dominating headlines after the convention, and we're less than 90 days away from an election - quick, show you're doing something about terrorism!"
What's the military mission in Iraq? Can it be clearly defined? Is it achievable? At what cost and over what time frame? How many troops will be needed? How many casualties are we willing to accept? And how much suffering are we willing to endure here at home in terms of the domestic needs that are unmet?
Each of these questions are excellent ones, no matter how the Pomeranians yip.
More kitties please.
I'm just sayin'.
War hero or AWOL drunk?
YOU make the call!
MoMonkey, GWB is no Abraham Lincoln. 'Nuff said.
Did you all hear the clip of Bush speaking today at the Unity Journalism event? When he was asked how he defined sovereignty, and answered in his usual stuttering, gibbering way that sovereignty was, uh, you know, sovereign...
Air America played the WHOLE clip, meaning the one which included the audience response: out and out hooting.
kristof will be human scum until he realizes that the best way to fight for global human rights isn't to attack the people who have been spending much of their lives doing just that.
Kristof wants it to be about him, not about reducing human misery.
so, herbert reads the texas observer.
that is where the tulia stys were unveiled.
and more to the point, with the nyt's resources tht could be proferred herbert, where are they in revealing all the other tulias?
because they are out there.
herbert really needs to find another employer. in these times, perhaps. if he has sensibilities beyond parsing the likes of the texas observer, he really ought to move on to a journal that would foster his initiating stys like the tulia ones.
i have got one for hiim...he can piggyback on greg palast. hebert, do a lengthy piece on how rethugs and demthugs keep blacks from voting, keep criminalizing blacks so as to keep them off the ballot.
herbert's mostly a hitchhiker.
venceremos?
Is this meant to be taken seriously?
Is he being deliberately deceptive or just being a moron? The military mission now is to hold down Iraq until the the new government has the forces and trained manpower to take over and defeat the insurgency.
Do you realize there is no "government" in Iraq? That "Sadr City," which is in open revolt and run by a man with his own army, is a suburb of Baghdad, not some far flung village on the edge of the frontier? That U.S. forces are still fighting in Najaf (sp?) and Fallujah? That the country has maybe 8 hours of electricity per day, and is still IMPORTING oil because the drilling, transportation, and refining of oil is so precarious due to those "insurgents" you seem to think constitute a tiny percentage of the population.
And the "how many casualties are we willing to accept" is obviously a stupid question since nobody, not even Kerry is going to go on TV and say "we will leave if we take this many casualties". The fact is he knows very well that the answer to most of his questions are situational, therefore he is dishonest and has no valid opinion that he is sharing in this piece of tripe.
Well, Vietnam was much the same "situation" (waiting for the government to get enough forces together to stop the "insurgents." I remember the "Vietnamization" of Vietnam, and the promise that the South Vietnamese gov't would form an army that would take over from us. It was laughable then, it's laughable now. We are the SUPREME military power in the world, and we can't stop these "insurgents." How the hell is the fledgling gov't of Iraq (assuming Allawi actually controlled more than a portion of Baghdad, arguendo supposed to do what we, apparently, cannot? With what arms? With what trained forces? With what weapons?). And it ended on precisely that question: apparently around the 50,000 mark, we decided enough Americans had died, and we left. Shall we just go through that again, to prove we can repeat the same mistakes twice?
Sheesh, find somebody with more of a brain to write you editorials.
You are in no position to complain about a "piece of tripe" or having enough knowledge to state an informed opinion.
Damn. The question for me is why did we have to get this far in order for people to get this pissed?
NYMary | Email | Homepage
==================
Agreed. It isn't as if this hasn't all unfolded in an awful kind of slow motion, with intentions broadcast well ahead of time. It's as if they knew they could depend on the porcine complacency of the majority.
Does the administration have any real sense of what motivates the nation's enemies? Does it understand the ways in which American policies are empowering its enemies?
Well Mr. Herbert, since we were told that what motivates our enemies is that "They hate our freedom." I think you have long since guessed that the administration doesn't have a clue. The really frightening part of this is they don't think that it matters to them whether or not they know what motivates our enemies.
What matters to them is that they get re-elected. The war against Democrats and Liberals is more important to them than the war against Al Queda.
OT, butSteve Gilliard nails it.
Did you all hear the clip of Bush speaking today at the Unity Journalism event? When he was asked how he defined sovereignty, and answered in his usual stuttering, gibbering way that sovereignty was, uh, you know, sovereign...
Slate has now declared his statement that terrorists never stop thinking about how to harm the U.S., and "neither do we," the Bushism of the Year.
I think that malapropism may be verbal nail in his political coffin. That one is so bad, it's almost impossible to laugh off.
Is this meant to be taken seriously?
"Is he being deliberately deceptive or just being a moron? The military mission now is to hold down Iraq until the the new government has the forces and trained manpower to take over and defeat the insurgency."
No.
The military mission now is to hold down Iraq until the the new government has the forces and trained manpower to take over and defeat the insurgency.
Spoken like a true brownshirt who doesn't have a fucking clue.
Make sure ma got those cheetohs at the store for you, fuckface...
The military mission now is to hold down Iraq until the the new government has the forces and trained manpower to take over and defeat the insurgency.
Funny how that evolved, isn't it. I thought that the military mission might just have some tangental relationship to the people who made it possible to fly airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I guess it's kind of hard to focus on this when Bandar Bush is so thoughtful and considerate to the Band of Oil Brothers. The insurgency is coming straight out of a pipeline from the Wahibbi schools in Saudi Arabia.
Anyone hear Robert Fisk on Democracy Now today? He totally put to bed the idea that there is a functioning Iraqi government, or army, or anything. He said that while there may be enough of an army to put on a parade in Baghdad, there certainly is not enough enough to declare martial law, so Allawi has no ace in the hole, as it were.
Herbert is the best of the best. Has he gotten his Pulitzer yet?
Herbert: "That is what a failure of leadership can do to a great power."
This says it all.
Now it is up to the voters to bring new leadership and send the miserable failure 43 back to daddy 41.
Anyone hear Robert Fisk on Democracy Now today?
Yes, Fisk has convinced me that Iraq is about to, in his words, "implode." I can only hope that, if this is inevitable, it happens before November, so while Kerry may have to clean up the shit, he doesn't get covered with it in the blast.
It beggars my understanding that people think the greatest military power in the world can't resolve this situation, but a bunch of Iraqis pressed into military service will be able to restore order in no time, or in any time.
Hell, Hussein had one of the biggest armies in the area and we beat 'em like a drum in Gulf War I. The conventional wisdom then was that they hardly fought because they were pressed into fighting.
Why should they fight now? For Allawi? For order and sanity? That won't play. Somebody's got to represent it for them, the way Sadr obviously represents something to his army.
This situation is so screwed it really is FUBAR.
Sometimes Kristof criticizes liberals, that makes him bad? Criticism is often needed, and I bet it gives incentive to improve. Otherwise, they'll grow complacent.
AC... give it up. No one wants to hear your pseudo-liberal rantings and ravings.
Oh yes. Good double helping today. Herbert and Krugman on the same day does seem to be the best. I'd really like it if they keep Gates on full time as well.
zip
I wouldn't take anything Fisk says too seriously.
Those were rhetorical questions, moron.
Bob Herbert's column is good except his question “Does the administration have any real sense of what motivates the nation's enemies?” deserves a better response than “No”.
Why did the US invade Iraq when it was already at war in Afghanistan? 1) hubris, 2) cultural insensitivity, 3) because they could, 4) to win 2000 and 2004 elections, and 5) they were conned. But mainly, the administration won’t analyze or understand the “nation’s enemies motivation” because Islamic fundamentalist are just like themselves and their evangelistic supporters: radical true believers and religious fanatics who are intent on imposing their beliefs on others.
AC... give it up. No one wants to hear your pseudo-liberal rantings and ravings.
Goddamn right, whether or not Herbert had the primary role, he had a big role in making sure that innocent people are not rotting away in jail in Tulia. Get a clue as to where to pick your battles, Albert. Herbert is a hero for keeping this story alive.
That was beautiful - he said every single thing that I have been thinking about Iraq since the start. I really love the guy - you are so right about Tulia, Atrios. That puts him into Bodhisattva territory, for real. He saved those men's lives.
God I hate Texas sometimes.
The Texas Observer may have broken that story, but Herbert took it national and kept on it until something was done.
Bush runs the country like he plays computer games:
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
> East
You have turned the corner. You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
> West
You have turned the corner. You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
> Quit
Fisk was reporting on what he'd seen: bombed-out trucks littering the roads, a complete lack of any government outside the capital, and even whole neighborhoods of Baghdad just out of the reach of the government. It had the real ring of truth to it, as did his prediction that the country's ready to implode, as RMJ reminds us.
"what is the military mission in iraq?..."
it has been painfully obvious to me for months and months that the military mission in iraq was to have a successful, finished war to point to during this campaign season as a feather in bush's cap.
they were planning on running "mission accomplished" commercials right about now, pretty much nonstop.
Slate has now declared his statement that terrorists never stop thinking about how to harm the U.S., and "neither do we," the Bushism of the Year.
The fact that AP used this headline is proof that the media sharks are ready to feed on W:
"Bush Insists His Administration Seeking 'new Ways to Harm Our Country'"
OT, sorry, maybe this is old news--as far as old news goes in a blog comments section:
Apparently, while justifying the recent alert, the White House named the Al Qaeda computer whiz Pakistan captured. The thing is, the computer whiz was working in an undercover opertation to capture more Al Qaeda members when his name was printed in the NYT.
Two days after he was captured.
So, in process of pounding their chests about the alert, they burned a double agent TWO FREAKING DAYS into his employment.
Kos has the details.
I wouldn't take anything Fisk says too seriously.
What if we threw in a Juan Cole and a Christopher Allbritton?
Fisk's latest story unfortunately jibes with other reporting.
Sorry. That last post was supposed to have quotes around the first sentence, which was from a Robert M Jeffers post.
adam, i can't imagine why you wouldn't take fisk seriously. he is the only western reporter who ever leaves the green zone.
Democracy Now! was covering the Tulia story back in August, 2000. When was Herbert covering the story?
You know it's funny you should mention the general failure fully to appreciate Herbert -- I was just thinking recently myself that Herbert has a way of working on you over time that makes him very persuasive. I had mostly dismissed him some time past, but as I've read more and more of his material, there emerges from it a passion for the truth and good, combined with a dignified anger over injustice, that makes him very edifying to read.
"Why did the US invade Iraq when it was already at war in Afghanistan?"
Don't forget what Paul O'Neill said: they were carving up a map of Iraq's oil fields in early 2001. I suspect that Cheney's energy plan all along was to install a puppet in Iraq. It would also allow us to move our troops out of Saudi Arabia, thus helping "secure" the #1 and #2 largest oil reserves on earth.
ok, have it your way.
i live down here.
the nyt and herbert had very little to do with reversing the situation in tulia.
oh, it is nice to see that herbert's reading goes beyond the east coast. and his eds may have given the observer some credibility, but i doubt that the nyt has enough influence in texas to have arrested the crimes of the law enforcement establishment.
christ, had they that power, and used it, gwb could never have executed so many.
and i shall say it again, my guess is that right in the nyt's back yard are similar stories that are going unreported. perhaps the texas observer should hire stringers in ny, nj, conn, etc. so as to break the news that the nyt cares to avoid.
give me a break. and you call me a pseudo-liberal?
hah.
Herbert may not have Dowd's style, but what the hell good has her style done anyone except her? Her (and others like her) obsession with form over content is a large reason we have the Iraqi mess in the first place.
Olaf glad and big: I liked your rewrite of "Highway Patrolman" on the Springsteen thread the other night (read it the following morning). Here's something that fits these times just as written:
in the wee wee hours
your mind gets hazy
radio relay towers
gonna lead me to my baby
radio's jammed up
with talk show stations
just talk talk talk talk
til you lose your patience
Olaf B&G--how about they run "Mission UN-Accomplishable" ?
i honestly don't even know how the heck this can EVER get fixed.
i know who to BLAME-Preznit Awol & Co., but as to *how* we can make this better, assuming for the moment that Awol goes home to TX in January, i just keep seeing a lose-lose equation: can't "cut and run", also can't fix it by staying...no real Iraqi goverment ready to step in, don't want to leave them with an Islamist Theocracy--not when most Iraqis don't want that, even if the UN/Nato comes around, will that do much good? i mean, look at Afghanistan! STILL.
help!
was it Hannibal that has the great quote about staying the heck away from any "land war in central Asia"?
USA plundered, Middle East in chaos...who knew so much damage could be wrought in just 4 years? (not to say that things have been perfect or anything before that, but this is just all way the hell beyond the pale.)
they were planning on running "mission accomplished" commercials right about now, pretty much nonstop.
So how does this "moment" compare to Dukakis in the tank as a campaign faux pas? If we were really repug like, we would have lots of commercials with grainy pictures of Commander Codpiece strutting on the flightdeck.
But that's their mistake, always taking it too far.
Yes, Herbert is grossly underappreciated. I wish I had gotten to this thread sooner ; I have always though that the NYT redeemed itself to some minimal degree by retaining Herbert and Krugman.And yes , Bob has served and invaluable service in his patient outrage.
I just wondered why he didn't go down the hall and flatten Safire out cold for being such a fuck-up liar.
It took us too long to sing the praises of a long standing voice of reason.
Re Bob Herbert's string of rhetorical questions, why is he begging for leadership instead of answering them himself?
I'm reminded of Paul De Man's essay on Yeats, where he takes the line "How can we know the dancer from the dance?" and says that while it is easy to like the poetry and see the dancer/dance fusion, it's also instructive to take the question seriously and explain the difference. He then applies his technical linguistic answer to a broader understanding of "Among School Children."
Taking my cue from De Man, I've answered the Herbert questions literally, and the answer comes out "Get the hell out now, unless the US wants ruin for the sake of crackpot neo-con ideology and war-profiteering. We can't even steal the damn oil at this point."
A real scholar would bave addressed the questions one by one, but I simplify fo the sake of moral clarity.
George Bush should be voted out of office for one act alone-saying "bring 'em on!"
Taking my cue from De Man, I've answered the Herbert questions literally, and the answer comes out "Get the hell out now, unless the US wants ruin for the sake of crackpot neo-con ideology and war-profiteering. We can't even steal the damn oil at this point."
I got your point, Draco. But we still need calm understated voices like Herbert's to patiently explain, with a pat on the head, to the politically underaware, just how fucked up things are in this nation right now.
Draco, I agree with you utterly, though I've always thought that particular De Man essay on Yeats was, well, not very good...
But then that has perhaps more to do with my own preconceptions (er, maybe snobberies?). I will reread the essay. Thanks for reminding me.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. As Frank O'Connor said, Yeats could deduce a universal truth from two errors and a fallacy. And we haven't exhausted the lessons of those truths, which, in my current estimation, lead us to an inescapable conclusion:
We're fucked.
OT: Here is some excellent analysis from commentator 'tjs' on www.davidwissing.com
Wages are the lowest share of national income on record – while profits are rising. Wages as a share of national income fell from 55.4 percent in 2001-Q1 to 51.9 percent in 2004-Q1. That is the lowest share since these data started being collected in 1929.
[Bureau of Economic Analysis]
Comment by tjs — 8/6/2004 @ 9:00 pm
Family income has declined $1,462 under President Bush. Under President Bush the typical family has seen its inflation-adjusted income decline by $1,462 based on the most recent data showing the change from 2000 to 2002. Under President Clinton the typical family saw its inflation-adjusted income rise by $7,202. [Census]
Comment by tjs — 8/6/2004 @ 9:00 pm
Morgan Stanley: “It turns out that fully 81 percent of total job growth over the past year was concentrated in low-end occupations.” [Morgan Stanley, 7/9/04]
Comment by tjs — 8/6/2004 @ 9:02 pm
The President predicted the 2003 stimulus would create 306,000 jobs per month – we have fallen short in 12 of the 14 months since the stimulus. In February 2003 the President’s Council of Economic Advisers issued a White Paper predicting that the President’s stimulus plan would create an average of 306,000 jobs per month for the following 18 months. The economy has fallen short of this prediction in 12 of the 14 months since the tax cut – creating an average of 100,000 jobs per month. [Council of Economic Advisers, 2/4/04, “Strengthening America’s Economy” and BLS]
Comment by tjs — 8/6/2004 @ 9:02 pm
That column says it all. I think Mr. Herbert nailed most of the issues in one column. Good for him. Thank you, Bob Herbert.
Read that and still support bush, and I will confirm that you are a moron.
Yes, pseudo-liberal. You're so loony left, that I don't even consider you a liberal. Liberals are supposed to be open-minded, but your hatred for America and your steadfast belief that it is a horrible country just make it obvious that you are nothing but a hate-filled, empty-headed asshole.
Not to take anything away from Herbert's worth as a journalist and as a person, but the Texas Observer had much more to do with what happened on the ground with the Tulia story than anything with the NYT or 60 Minutes.
They probably would have gotten out without Herbert. They wouldn't have gotten out without the Observer.
That's not to say he didn't write good stuff about Tulia that needed to be written, and that he didn't make a contribution. But Bob Herbert didn't come riding in from New Yawk and undo what the hicks in Texas had wrought.
The hicks had it under control, thankyaverymuch.
Subscribe to the Texas Observer and see what real journalism looks like.
http://www.texasobserver.org/
Thug,
No food for you...
Just go Fuck Yourself.
But mainly, the administration won’t analyze or understand the “nation’s enemies motivation” because Islamic fundamentalist are just like themselves and their evangelistic supporters: radical true believers and religious fanatics who are intent on imposing their beliefs on others.
Jim S
The New Republic has a hilarious article by Peter Beinart where he quotes Joe Biden at the DNC:
...Biden never mentioned the "T" word. Instead, he spoke of the "death struggle between freedom and radical fundamentalism."
Then Beinart continues chastizing Kerry and praising Biden for laying out that we have to go up against "radical Islam" as if it is identical to "radical fundamentalism". He completely misses the sublety in the way Biden's speech was zinging Bush for squandering the opportunity presented by the world's reaction to 9/11 and tries to twist it into something else entirely.
Adam 4-4-2,
no food, you too should go fuck yourself.
leadership? how about : bush is face-man for the oil/military industrial complex cartel?
they dont give a damn about the country - just their financial interests. else all this wouldnt be happening now.
its called fascism.
hope we can keep them from stealing the next election.
but has anyone here read this? "The Case For George W. Bush
McMonkey 11:57 post,
The problem with the author's fixation with Bush's so-called moral clarity is that he leaves out the part where Bush fought any investigation of the events of 9/11 tooth and nail. A man with true moral clarity walks out there and says "something went wrong, let's see what it was. No blame, no pointing fingers; let's just see what we can do to make sure it never happens again."
Instead, this guy fought against the search for the truth, seemingly because he seemed to fear where it may lead, or at least appear to lead. That is why is so-called moral clarity that the author seems to hear about this issue rings false to many. That is why there is the appearance of ulterior motives. That is why the "moral absolutism" that the author attributes to Lincoln is total bullshit when it comes to Bush. CYA is not an admirable foundation from which to begin to fight a "war on terror."
Eric. Don't feast on your own. I'm a staunch liberal. Herbert's article was very good, a 8.5/10.
I was referring to the resident redshirt troll, albert chumpion.
You're right Uicker. It's not a bad article overall, but he supposes too much about Bush's supposed moral clarity. He mentions that his actions don't match the rhetoric, but goes on to praise the rhetoric.
Lincoln didn't just talk rhetoric... he acted upon it. And he was actually rather flexible. Bush is too rigid. Remember the fable about the reeds and oak tree after the storm?
Unfortuneatley, "Get the hell out now" isn't an option that either candidate will choose. What really worries me is the so-prevalent thought that we, as the only remaining superpower, have an obligation to bring so-called democracy to the Middle East and the rest of the world. If we continue down this road, considering our diminishing number of allies, we will be at war long after the average American realizes Tricky Dick was a vituous beneficence compared to Chimpy.
You have turned the corner. You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
> Quit
jsg
Shit, I miss that little game. I used to keep maps in my desk, trying to keep track of where I was. That was like 20 years ago. Plugh!
The little laughing guy was supposed to come before the reminiscing about Adventure, dammit. JSG, that was funny.
yev kazim, youn refer to the us as "the only remaining superpower." it's not just you. a lot of people do it and it's bullshit. the us was the only real superpower after wwii also. things change. they change really quick. status as the "only remaining superpower" is temporary.
Semi-OT to Thersites
I'm glad someone still reads De Man, even after he's been systematically (I say falsely) "discredited" by anti-academics who want to censor the implications of deconstruction by making PDM a "Nazi collaborator," as if that, even if true, would nullify his Yale work, and decon in general. Nice try that will convince lazy people who never wanted to read decon in the first place.
In any case, if you're approximately my age, you might know the Eagles song "Staurday Night," if only from 70s FM radio where it played plenty (I never bought an Eagles album, I swear). I love rock critic Robert Christgau's take on that song: "Gee, guys, I don't know how you 'tell the dancer from the dance' either. Got to get people off their asses first."
OT: take a look at the sparkling list of presenters at the manhattan institute for policy research's upcoming conference, "compassionate conservative policies that changed new york city" [no, really, they actually mean in a good way!]
extra credit for spotting the stunning nedra picklerism at the top of the conference invite [too bad she didn't get credit for it...]
Robert M. Jeffers : yours are among the more outstanding postings. Salut.
I wouldn't take anything Fisk says too seriously.
When you say things like that, you should explain them.
Otherwise, you'll come across exactly like the people you're criticizing here.
Know what I mean?
give me a break.
though it may have given the observer's stys on tulia some national credibility, bob herbert really did nothing to advance the interests of the victims. and neither did the nyt. i don't think that herbert came to tulia. neither do i think that he broke any bit of the sty.
all the investigation was initiated by the observer. no one else really did jack shit but piggyback on the observer's journalistic skills.
had it not been for the observer, herbert wouldn't even have known of the sty.
herbert, and you east coaster liberals[sic], might feel warm and fuzzy, thinking that you have rescued black texans from the evil ofay narcotics cops, but i can assure you that the wrongly incarcerated residents of tulia see the observer as their savior, not the nyt and bob herbert.
and not to put to fine a point to it, but the sty of tulia is not unique. they can be found all over the usa. they are the product of a national drug policy that the bob herbert's and the nyt's of the world have allowed to proliferate without their coherent opposition.
why is it that i think that the nyt and the bob herbert's of the world would serve us better if they assiduously attacked the drug policies of the usg?
i think it unseemly of them, and of adam 442, to pat themselves on the back for piggybacking the sty developed exclusively by the observer rather than to devote column inches weekly to revealing the enormity of the usg's drug enforcement crimes.
now, i don't follow herbert on a daily basis. i have rejected the nyt as a force for good.
there was a sty that broke recently, though, on ashcroft's doj instructing libraries to remove all copies of the federal forfeiture laws[ordinarily linked to drug violations] from their shelves.
tell me, has bob herbert focused on those laws and that new doj policy?
if he hasn't, then writing about tulia is virtually beside the point.
the nyt and bob herbert are a national presence. they should be concentrating on the big picture. it would do the country a big favor.
the observer solved the tulia, texas problem. when will bob herbert and the nyt dedicate themselves to solving that problem on a national scale?
from a pseudo-liberal.
I like Herbert's style, though it may not suit American lifestyles that well. And I hate MoDo, largely because she's the token woman in NYT and keeps out better female voices. Of course I should really hate the paper for limiting woman writers of importance to one. And I do that, too, at least until they hire me.
OT, but in case anyone hasn't seen it... here's a remarkable chart that correlates terror alerts and Bush's approval ratings. Pass it on!
status as the "only remaining superpower" is temporary.
I will be ever so glad when we get over this "only remaining superpower" fever and just get back to being a good country with conservatives and liberals and a good nation of laws that follows our written constitution. Nothing has fucked us up so much as this maniacal drive to be number one, instead of being good.
My hatred of GWB does not motivate me to vote for someone else, because Kerry (even with Edwards) does not merit my vote.
Before you start bashing me, just know that I am not trying to get anyone to agree with me. Just stating an opinion. (Is that okay?)
I mean, bash my opinion all you want, but it's actually liberating to not care if Bush wins or not because it is clear that Kerry just wants to be a better Bush, and that is heartbreaking.
The sad truth, Mr. Herbert, is that the Empire doesn't need a better Emperor...
it needs to be allowed to expire.
Oops, messed that up. Smart boy wanted.
Here's a remarkable chart that correlates terror alerts and Bush's approval ratings. Pass it on!
I'm glad someone still reads De Man, even after he's been systematically (I say falsely) "discredited" by anti-academics who want to censor the implications of deconstruction by making PDM a "Nazi collaborator," as if that, even if true, would nullify his Yale work, and decon in general.
I come by my De Man snobbery by other means, actually, from the Irish Studies direction. We are also required to sniff at Edward Said and Frederic Jameson, if that makes you feel better. We do a lot of sniffing in Irish Studies. We're experts.
I enjoy reading things I was told not to agree with in grad school, actually. So I remember the De Man essay, but I remember not being supposed to like it. That makes me now want to reread it, and I have it somewhere, I just have to fish it up...
Just stating an opinion. (Is that okay?)
It's okay with me. As long as you don't mind ME saying that John Kerry not only gathered and presented a huge amount of the evidence that let us know just how bad the US empire had gotten in terms of narcotrafficking and the like, but was also largely responsible for shutting down the BCCI and breaking up Iran/Contra.
Even those on the far left--and I'd include myself in that group--owe him a HUGE debt of gratitude for that. And Henry Gonzalez, of course...but as noble as Gonzalez was, and as essential as the information he gathered was, he didn't get results...Kerry did.
Not trying to convince you, of course! Just saying.
Another blogger/journalist that should be mentioned more is Al Giordano and his BigLeftOutside and his revived NarcoNews.com, which tackles the Tulia issue on a global scale.
If only people would pay attention to something bigger than "Biggest Whore of the Day" nonsense.
Philalethes, no doubt that you have noticed the steady decline in Bush's approval ratings in that chart. Have you also noticed how discordant the most recent correlations have been between the warnings and the poll numbers? Methinks that they have cried "Wolf" several times too often.
Oops, messed that up. Smart boy wanted.
Hah! Might I profess my entirely proper and platonic love for you?
"Smart boy wanted..."
Hah!
Olaf glad and big,
Was "youn" a keyboard error or are you from the Ohio Valley? No offense intended, I lived there for three years. As far as your "it's not just you. a lot of people do it and it's bullshit. the us was the only real superpower after wwii..." I've got to ask, What about the USSR? I'm somewhat confident they were a superpower. I'm not a warmonger(or a whoremonger for that matter) and am against the war in Iraq. That said, look up superpower in the dictionary.
Philalethes, it would be interesting to take that data and control for things like unemployment rate and other known factors in the presidential ratings to see if the correlation would be clearer.
Olaf glad and big,
Was "youn" a keyboard error or are you from the Ohio Valley? No offense intended, I lived there for three years. As far as your "it's not just you. a lot of people do it and it's bullshit. the us was the only real superpower after wwii..." I've got to ask, What about the USSR? I'm somewhat confident they were a superpower. I'm not a warmonger(or a whoremonger for that matter) and am against the war in Iraq. That said, look up superpower in the dictionary.
What's interesting to me, Phialethes, is that Kerry didn't do MORE with his findings!
We're still seeing the same characters and not a peep from John about the info he gathered and how it relates to today.
Sadly, the narcopolitics underpining US policy since the Russells drew up the still predominate paradigm.
I mean, why can't any politician get real about the fact that the Afghanistan actions were successfully designed to create a drop in the price of smack around the world to create demand that can be manipulated when we "get serious" about poppy farming?
I'm not saying I advocate a "burn the village" approach like Plan Colombia.
D'oh! I did not post that twice. I think.
it was a typo, yev, and the ussr was devastated by wwii. definitely not in a position to challenge the us for a long time after that.
and thersites, i spent a lot of time on "irish studies" myself. 
Robert M. Jeffers:
"It beggars my understanding that people think the greatest military power in the world can't resolve this situation, but a bunch of Iraqis pressed into military service will be able to restore order in no time, or in any time."
Thank you. You've once again put into words the underlying truth in such a way that any fool should be able to understand it.
This will be helpful, as there are republicans in my family.
Thank you for your great posts. I like both your reasoning and your writing.
Aaah crap, us west coast Eschatonians have to suffer. Everybody goes to bed on the east coast about now. Let me take you on the wayback machine, to a time when this blog was written "Behind the Orange Curtain."
right on about big al.
his willingness to go after the bankers that financed the narco-trafficantes, laundered their cash in defiance of us of amerikan laws[mexican establishment and us of amerikan bankers, TEXAS COMMERCE BANK]] was the sty of a century.
how about these houston banker names: marc shapiro, ben love, for starters.
and by the way, it was both rethugs and demthugs that went after big al. think of robert rubin et alia.
does anyone recall bob herbert or the nyt dealing with that sty?
i think you will find that it did not happen on that bit of birdcage lining.
i haven't reviewed kerry's hearings into iran-contra drug trafficking[of course, the exec sessions are denied to the citizens] but if my memory serves me accurately, though his committee started out investigative, it somehow rolled away from the conclusions that were inescapable from the prelims of his hearings.
have i got that accurately?
why is it that i don't recall jfk giving a great deal of support to gary webb and his dark alliance investigations that aired not in the congress, but in the san jose mercury.
could it have something to do with the boners being financed by the russell trust? a trust where the founding funds derived from the opium trade?
a trade that enriched the forbes family and other boner families.
oh, well, maybe my version of the past is incorrect.
i think not, but i would entertain correction.
venceremos?
and thersites, i spent a lot of time on "irish studies" myself
Then you understand the sniffing...
I for one never understood how such a beautifully constructed scheme for keeping half-productive academics permanently half-drunk ever degenerated into an actual academic discipline... shudder...
Ah, I kid.
Sort of.
I wouldn't take anything Fisk says too seriously.
You gotta be kidding. I certainly would. Fisk is a damn good reporter and he's fearless.
As for Herbert- I don't care if the Texas Observer broke the Tulia case. Herbert still did something I admire immensely. He spoke up for a group of people who were utterly powerless and had no one to speak for them. And he kept on doing it.
And that's what he mostly does- he speaks for the poor, the uneducated, and the downtrodden. All the left-behinds of bush's america. And frequently he's the only voice speaking for those constituencies.
As for Modo- I don't get those who praise her so-called "style." Sheesh, all she does is string together a bunch of catty non-sequitors. There's rarely any point to any of it beyond a "look at me, I'm so clever" attitude. If she ever said anything profound I think I'd die of shock.
But speaking of serious people, did anyone catch Bobby Kennedy Jr. on Hardball tonight? He was eloquent and forceful in his condemnation of chimpy's environmental policy- something I think Kerry should make more of during the election. He also has a new book coming out- Crimes Against Nature.
the hilarious thing about Bush's ham-handed Rovian/ Segrettioid attempt at manipulating the media is that they thought NO ONE was watching ....you cannot expect a nation founded on resisting tyranny not to have an inherent sense that they are being Played ...the People can tell that there is a distinct correlation between terror alerts and that 'spidey-sense' reaction that they are co-incident with a Bad-News day for the Misadministration...
Were this 72 and Nixon were worried about the Burden of Vietnam and then suddenly David Brock came round the corner and called the government of South Vietnam a corrupt cabal of torturing ,pandering ,disloyal sluts, Nixon’s head would have Blown ( a la Scanners...) apart...kaplooee!!!
So now they know someone is listening ...now they know their authority does not come unchecked ....and they are offended that their constituents would dare question Motive...pure as it is...
If only Bush had read more. If only Rove had bothered to understand the view of Chomsky, to better disarm ...if only he could grasp Riefenstahl rather than trying the wonder bread mimic-version....when they realise that we have been hard at it , down here in the pit, it will be too late.
For their offence is too bold
And our patience too stretched...
Olaf glad and big,
I'm not gettin' your point. Are you saying the US is not a superpower, there are no superpowers, or there are multiple superpowers? I want to understand, but my box o' burgundy is getting light.
What's interesting to me, Phialethes, is that Kerry didn't do MORE with his findings!
What's interesting to me, DB, is that he accomplished as much as he did, despite an incredible amount of opposition from Republicans AND Democrats, and ceaseless ridicule from the media. And, I'm sure, threats against his life and his family.
It would be nice if Sibel Edmonds told the entire world exactly what she knows, too...but martyrdom is always a difficult decision, and one you can't really make for other people. What she's done, I'm grateful for...I'm not going to ask for more.
What Kerry did was more than the majority of recent politicians have done, and took more courage than most politicians have.
But if you find it "liberating" to sit around and wait for the "Empire" to die...by all means, go ahead. I hope you've got a comfortable seat, and plenty of time.
it needs to be allowed to expire.
Another "we have to burn the country down to save it" adherent.
How completely tiresome.
I'm sorry, it's your opinion but I'm sick of hearing that.
Hey guys!
If you are sufficiently bored, jump on in the troll-infestd waters of yahoo...
Yahoo! Message Board.
That is if you like arguing with trolls, that is....
Hey guys and gals, I hate to distract you, but you should check out Kevin Drum's site right about now. Not only is he on West Coast Time, but (As someone pointed out upthread,) he is on fire pissed as hell about the possible politically motivated exposure of a Pakistani double agent who was passing on valuable info about Al Queda. As Sludge would say, Developing....
Bob's been my favorite for a long time. I absolutely agree about the Tulia case, I can't believe it wasn't just a national headline on its own, Herbert really saved a bunch of people for real. that's some powerful shit
Maureen Dowd just seems lost. She was interviewed by a fawning Terry Gross the other day, and I found her just rather shallow and lost.
bonus comment: I wonder what kind of Navy ship will be named the George W Bush in the future.
yev, i would say that right now the us is the only superpower, or was until recently when we squandered all of our military resources alienated our allies (the real ones, the ones with modern, disciplined military forces). my point is just that it shouldn't be treated as a permanent situation. people seem to think it's checkmate for everyone else. it isn't.
and i know what you mean about that burgundy. after all, i started out on burgundy but soon hit the harder stuff.
Hey folks, I wish I had a clue on the hyperlink thing but:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5626850/
Check this out. Your Friday night is about to get more interesting. I scared my cat with my yell of rage when I read this.
I think he strikes the right tone. Wouldn't want to be "shrill" after all. Him and Krugman and the Sunday crossword is the only thing worth while about the NYT
re: NarcoNews -- It looks as if Kerry has worked his way to a less objectionable policy towards Venezuela, where Chavez looks likely to survive the recall referendum with a big majority. More here.
(One of the unexpected consequences of rising oil prices is that it fills the Chavez treasury and helps fund his community outreach programmes.)
Chavez is no angel. (He's no Lula, for that matter.) But he's the first Venezuelan leader to give the dark-skinned, overwhelmingly poor majority a stake in the democratic process, and deserves more respect from American politicians than he'd been getting.
I wonder what kind of Navy ship will be named the George W Bush in the future.
Too easy. Of course it will be a garbage scow.
bonus comment: I wonder what kind of Navy ship will be named the George W Bush in the future.
A pedalo.
they'll never name a ship after him. sailors are too superstitious.
herbert didn't save a one.
the texas observer did the job.
it was nice, though, that someone at a big, national paper noticed the work that the observer had done.
but i have to reiterate, bob herbert had nothing to do with making this sty happen.
all the legs were texas observer legs.
got that?
all herbert did was to give the observer's work a nyt audience.
that is all.
unless you can demonstrate otherwise.
and by the way, it wasn't just that the observer unveiled the sty...it was that they kept after it. with real interviews with the victims and the residents of tulia. with real investigation into the narcos and the law enforcement history. if you doubt that, i think that you can view the stories on the net.
the nyt, bob herbert, did none of that. all his stys were based on the facts in the case developed by the texas observer.
bob herbert was sort of less than a dan rather in this sty.
all he did was put the sty up on the ed page of the nyt.
big fucking deal. or maybe that is a bfd in this age of no journalism.
the way i view it , cancel your subscription to the nyt. initiate one with the texas observer.
real journalism. real reporters.
ann coulter might have gotten it accurately, for what it hasn't done over the last 10-20 years, the nyt could be extinguished and we wouldn't be missing it. would we?
but in texas, we would suffer from the loss of the texas observer. there is just no other voice.
send them all of your loose change. NOW!
"bonus comment: I wonder what kind of Navy ship will be named the George W Bush in the future."
A dinghy, of course!
though his committee started out investigative, it somehow rolled away from the conclusions that were inescapable from the prelims of his hearings.
People need to understand: Kerry is the person who discovered I/C. He didn't just investigate it; he uncovered it in his FIRST MONTH as a senator. His 1989 report is utterly damning on US involvement in narcotrafficking.
The I/C investigation rolled over to the BCCI investigation, which was actually the logical conclusion--or a logical conclusion--of the preliminary hearings. While he didn't--and probably couldn't--follow the thread further, he laid out a number of unanswered questions that a lot of other researchers built on.
Wikipedia has a good overview here.
And here's the BCCI Report, before Kissinger-friendly redaction by Hank Brown.
Yeah, most of the stuff Kerry investigated continues. Some of it's probably worse. So what? You, AC, are not going to bring these people down. Neither am I. In fact, I'm certain we've accomplished far, far less in that regard than Kerry has. Perhaps all of us acting together won't stop them. Perhaps nothing will.
Reading this stuff, and studying it, becomes a sort of cocoon after a while. When I was 18, I spent all my time listening to Mae Brussell and reading "The Great Heroin Coup" and God knows what all. After a while, I realized that it was a form of escapism...by treating everyone as equally guilty, and their power as vast and unstoppable, I was giving myself an excuse for feelings of helplessness. I found myself answering every political concern with gloomy rants about P2 and Reinhard Gehlen and the OSS. I took a kind of perverse pleasure in knowing just how bad things were, and in telling people about it.
Fortunately, I grew out of it. Just as death doesn't make life not worth living, universal political corruption doesn't make political resistance--no matter how mild--worthy of being sneered at. Which is why I'd advise you to stop complaining about people like Herbert...this isn't a game of oneupmanship. It's deadly serious. Anyone who does ANYTHING helpful, even if it's less than they could've done, deserves more praise than blame.
That's what I think, anyhow.
i don't understand it.
i am not anonymous.
the post ending with "send them all of your change. NOW!" is from me....
THE PSEUDO-LIBERAL REDSHIRT
albert champion[or chumpion as adam 442 would have it]
So, speaking of Tulia.
i just met a delegation of four folks from Tulia, including one young man who was locked up on those false charges. They are -- like me -- attending the Fellowship of Reconciliation conference (www.forusa.org) being held this weekend at Occidental College.
Tomorrow they have a workshop/presentation which I plan on attending! I am blogging (but not with much detail) on my Livejournal about the FOR national conference.
--Kynn
Philanethes, I think you're giving Kerry too much credit, and YES, there is such a thing as giving him too little on other matters.
Nevertheless, I don't think Kerry just happened to uncover it, I think it was given to him because he would be able to make it seem like a big deal but end with a whimper, not a bang.
If he's willing to take fire from Cong, why not Congress and its hired hands? Wait. You mean they SHOOT horses?
Another "we have to burn the country down to save it" adherent.
Hmm, maybe I should ask JFK if I can borrow his Zippo.
Another Bruce - The Paki Plame?
Oy.
I forgot to add above that I think this post on Herbert is absolutely spot-on, and I agree with all of it, whole-heartedly. Herbert is one of the good guys.
(Also, I'm very happy about Chavez, good news for the poor of that struggling country, IMHO. Thanks for the mention upthread.)
OT- speaking of good guys, it looks like Max Sawicky over at Max Speaks may be sick with something, he mentions hospital waiting time in his latest post. People should run over there and send him some well wishes, Max is a super guy. If you click on "homepage" for this comment it will take you to the blogpage for Maxspeak where you can read his post mentioning hospital waiting rooms, and you can leave him a nice comment.
Nevertheless, I don't think Kerry just happened to uncover it, I think it was given to him because he would be able to make it seem like a big deal but end with a whimper, not a bang.
Interesting theory...got any factual basis for it?
crap...sorry, put in an extra "http" in the above link...
click on "homepage" in this comment to take you over to maxspeak where you can wish Max well.
and i am not complaining about herbert.
it is just that some of you think that he hung the moon concerning tulia. as if he made that sty happen.
and he didn't.
it was the texas observer that made that sty happen. without the t.o., herbert would never have addressed that sty.
just as he has never addressed the similar stys in his backyard that the nyt reporters have ignored.
as to kerry and iran-contra/bcci all i have to say is, WHA HAPPENED TO HIS INVESTIGATIONS?
perhaps you could find bob parry and ask him how much john kerry stood by his stys that really revealed iran-contra.
perhaps you could find gary webb and ask him how much john kerry stood by his stys into iran-contra narco-trafficking.
these would be good stys. somehow, i don't think that john kerry assisted either one of these journalists. i think that they might tell you that he left them twisting in the wind.
and i urge you to consult with big al and peter dale scott. ask them what they think of jfk and narco-trafficantes.
look, i am jfk's age. he went to yale. i went to harvard.
why is it that neither he, nor any other amerikan politician of my lifetime, will renounce the goddam war on drugs? consider that he is as eager to incarcerate marijuana smokers as was bill clinton.
what is wrong with this picture?
worse still, he is comfortable with killing third world non-combatants. in afghanistan. in iraq. in columbia. and in other countries.
just as he was comfortable with killing them in indochina.
i am tired of the cant, the chicanery. the demthugs please me no more than the rethugs.
it is all so bernaysian. no one with any honor. no one with any cojones. all cornflakes.
drown them with milk.
The Paki Plame?
It's unbelievable, what height of arrogance do you have to attain to believe that this won't snap at your ass?
Philanethes, I think the evidence is that few of us even know what you're talking about!
Next, you aren't suggesting that Kerry has done a good job of follow through, are you?
Plan Colombia was not the proper response to finding cucarachas in the banks. More light shone on the buggy banks are. But we can't even find out who placed all of those puts on the airlines and made a killing on 9/11!
For whatever else you may think of his contributions, AC did pretty much nail it:
If you follow the money too far you might find your accountant. (Or your wife's!)
Instead of being stuck in roach motels, those insects are running new banks and bankrolling our new pet monsters.
Banks were invented by pirates for pirates. Too much treasure kept being exhumed. But thankfully for those involved, BCCI has been undertaken care of.
(PS - I happened upon a cache of Mae tapes and was surprised how little has changed.)
A. Bruce - Don't you think it's the sound barrel-bottom being scraped?
Burn, bitch, burn.
Coming to this thread late, but my reaction to the Herbert column was "Oh yeah, that's how adults write about serious matters." And how adults react to serious matters. The reaction of most of the national media has been to say that the terror threat is serious, and therefore we better not question anybody in charge because, um, we'll look weak or something? Mature adults react to potential threats by questioning everybody in charge and demanding both results and accountability. (Ever been to a contentious school board meeting?) We have an administration that has provided neither, and a goodly portion of the population that has mostly stopped trying, whether through cognitive dissonance or learned helplessness or some other process.
To me, one of the most serious responsibilities of the presidency is the use of the bully pulpit to engage and inspire the country. In Bush we have simply a pulpit bully. He has declined, refused, or bungled virtually every opportunity to utilize our post-9/11 sense of unity, both within in our country and among the world's nations. My fervent hope is that at some level, maybe not entirely conscious yet, much of the country has realized this and concluded that he's just not up to the task.
But, Mr. Brockman, aren't you tacitly acknowledging the usefulness of such events?
And, admitting that, wouldn't the practical politician want to foster an environment where such "unifying events" can take place?
I'm not going to be popular here, but I'm not trying to be moonbat when I say I think that's exactly what happened.
Remember, an FBI agent cooked the 1993 WTC bomb.
At least, that's what the NYT said!
Don't put it out...
albert, i think you're right about the tulia thing. nothing against herbert, of course. but i don't think kerry was "comfortable" killing 3rd world non-combatants, or even combatants for that matter, in indochina. i don't think kerry is going to save the world or anything. and i'm sure he won't even try without a lot of pressure from us. but i really see the current administration as a national emergency. so i will be voting for him.
National emergency?
How about the definitive flatlining of what little life was left in this old neon whore we call America.
Pull the plug.
Correction: it was not an FBI Agent who was involved.
It was an FBI informer.
Have a dozen of one / six (dead) of another.
A. Bruce - Don't you think it's the sound barrel-bottom being scraped?
Yes I do, and that's what absolutely scares the loving shit out of me. He's our President with a capital "P". At the very minimum he has 4 months of power left. I've only been on the planet 46 years, but I have never seen someone so out of their depth with so much power. It would have been one thing if he had been a caretaker president. But 9-11 clearly caused a genuine crisis in our country's history. As much as the Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Perle axis of arrogance tried to make up for his incompetence. (They had enough of their own.) They could not hire enough speechwriters to cover up for his vacuity.
Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt. We have truly been blessed with great leaders at dangerous junctures in our nation's history. Our luck ran out, that is what scares me.
How about the definitive flatlining of what little life was left in this old neon whore we call America.
Pretty tough talk...problem is, it's really just more empty rhetoric. It doesn't mean anything.
But again, you're welcome to your opinion. Maybe it's just that I'm a bit older than you, but I've been hearing this stuff for a few decades now...nothing much ever comes of it. And fully half the time, it's just agent provocateur bullshit anyway. There are probably people who believe this stuff that are neither FBI nor GOP nor RCP stooges, nor even naive 17-year-olds...but if I learned anything in my dreary little life, it's that nothing worthwhile comes of arguing over empty abstractions like these. So like I say: enjoy the wait.
Or maybe not, I have a good feeling about Kerry.
OT:
My sister is going to John Kerry's La Junta Colorado rally today and I am soooo jealous!
The rally is being held in the same town park where I spent most of the early 80's cutting school, getting baked and collecting money for kegs. It would be an absolute trip (in more ways than one) to see The Johns there.
Nice to see them bring the crowd to LJ - it's a small town in the boondocks, they can use the money - GO JOHNS!
Well, Philanethes, I don't share your good feelings.
If you ask a man whose balls are on fire with sterno if he'd prefer to have them amputated than to continue burning, he'd probably agree.
There seem to be a lot of people willing to trust JFK to make the cut.
People need to understand: Kerry is the person who discovered I/C. He didn't just investigate it; he uncovered it in his FIRST MONTH as a senator. His 1989 report is utterly damning on US involvement in narcotrafficking.
Anyone wonder why Chimpy has been so desparate to control access to records from Reagan and his Poppy's time in office?
There seem to be a lot of people willing to trust JFK to make the cut.
DB
And aardvarks glow in the dark on leap years.
no one with any honor. no one with any cojones. all cornflakes.
drown them with milk.
albert champion
More tough talk that's really just empty rhetoric. It's all about bullshit macho oneupmanship. It's like religious people who flagellate themselves and wear hair shirts, and look down on those who don't. It's such an easy stance; just lock yourself up in a little room, read a bunch of books, listen to a few tapes, and pontificate about the coming apocalypse to the "sheeple." Anyone can do it. Takes neither guts nor brains.
Affectation of historical/social detachment. Messages from the bunker, voices from the abyss. It's old news and it's boring. The funny thing is, I don't even necessarily think you're wrong; in fact, you're probably right. The problem is not with your facts; the problems is getting this bullshit tough-guy hardass stance from people who (if we take your words to their logical conclusion) are a buncha goddamn drones like the rest of us.
No skin off my nose, though. Suit yourselves. I just find it boring. Not challenging, not helpful, not intelligent or insightful or ultimately meaningful.
I don't know that anyone could have been sure what the national mood would be after the 9/11 attacks. Most other countries in the world are all too familiar with blood being shed on their own soil, and reactions vary. Although I do care who knew what when, the reality is that most of the country is not interested in asking that question and getting a real answer. They are content to focus on what's come after. That can be a strength, except when we keep doing the same things over and over because no one tries to understand what's driving us and them in the first place.
So yes, Iran-contra sullied Reagan's second term and a few people went to jail, but we didn't change how we do things. We've spent decades mucking about in other countries' politics, covertly and overtly, and siding with whatever oppressive bastard was against the commies, and thus much of the developing world hates us with not a little justification. When the world is black and white, as it seems to be to our man Bush, there are good guys and bad guys, and since they are clearly the evildoers, we must be good. And good guys by definition can do no wrong. I firmly believe he's sincere in his perspective.
Again though, mature adults realize that even those who strive toward their better natures sometimes do some serious damage to themselves and others. More likely when they can't admit it to themselves. Had Bush ever made it into a Recovery program for his addictions, he might have learned about the need to take responsibility and make amends for behaviors that hurt others. I believe that we as a nation have yet to own up to our shortcomings. The fact that we were founded on very high ideals does not make us better than the rest of the world, particularly when we so doggedly act against them. It just means we may have more to live up to.
I agree with those who say it is more important to fix what's wrong than to assign blame, but I vehemently disagree that we have to choose one or the other. In fact, I think it is absolutely crucial that we do both. How would the public react to a campaign theme that not a single person in the Bush administration has been fired, demoted, or otherwise held accountable for the many failings leading to 9/11? Going back to Iran-contra, I watched those hearings every day and saw thugs like Oliver North playing the public. North should still be serving time for treason IMO. But the public loves to forgive and forget, and it will take a strong and committed leader to push us further. I don't know that Kerry is that leader - he probably isn't. But we have to start somewhere, and ridding ourselves of an administration than has yet to find fault with itself at any level is a really good place to start.
Sorry, but Kerry making a token gesture, no really, a toke, while his convicted child molesting friend Pete Yarrow sings 'Puff the Magic Dragon' does not equate ending the modern Burning Times, otherwise known as the War on Drugs.
But he won't. He'll probably only have a commission if that. I doubt it.
I am having fun watching it all happen, Philanethes, but mostly because I don't think any candidate can fix the leak in this USS Cole.
Especially when they're all so tight with the hole makers.
Forget vicarious politics. Take it to the streets.
And no, I'm not a provocateur. But hasn't the role changed? Instead of trying to provoke violence, the modern provacateur simply encourages people to pick a party and pick their faux opponents apart.
That's the best way to discredit everyone: Force them to align themselves with the disreputable Right or the disreputable Left.
Bah.
Let's get rid of these pesky mice!
I know!
We'll replace them with rats!
-Quagmire in Iraq, check.
-Taliban in power, check
-Israeli/Palestine holy war, check
-War profiteering, check
-Fake terror alert, check
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
GET READY FOR THE RAPTURE.
DB, lead by example, or shut up.
You want it taken to the streets, organize it yourself. Don't lecture people--give them something to rally around. Where's your homepage? Where's your e-mail? People here always talk about what they're doing, what political actions they're taking...what are YOU doing? And if people like what you're saying and want to join with you, how can they do that? You want collective action in the streets, then organize a collective and invite people into it instead of being a carping, holier-than-thou malcontent around here.
Yeah, talk's cheap. 'Twas ever thus on the left, sad to say. Like I said, I've been hearing this shit for years. Nothing ever comes of it...it's just becomes a substitute for action. Endless analysis that never engenders personal responsiblity, and always sloughs it off on other people.
i encountered gwbush in midland in 1962. at the time, my friend and i said, what a creep.
living in texas, i observed how he was anointed. and how the national press refrained from discussing that bit of press agentry.
why was that do you think? israeli money? saudi money? or amerikan investment banking money?
today, the question for me, and it should be one for you, is: why does the demthug party refuse to attack bush and the rethugs.
my office and i discuss this daily. we have concluded that rethugs and demthugs are all run by the same corporate interests. puppets.
we have concluded that the controllers don't care who wins in our elections. principally because they own both parties, both sets of candidates.
if you doubt that cynicism, think on who now operates the presidential debates.
and then there is the counting of the votes. today, some fear that the electronic machines will skew the results. probably an accurate assessment.
however, ballots have been miscounted for years.
my wager is that in my lifetime, 1947 on, there has never been an honest vote count.
at least from my experience, growing up amongst those that controlled the state of ohio, there was never a vote that wasn't tampered with.
from mayor, to congressman, to senator, to president. all winners were those that the monied class wanted to win. saw to it that they won. never forget it.
and if you think that level of manipulation was unique to ohio, think again. it was, it is, the norm.
now, adam 442 wants to characterize me as a redshirt, pseudo-liberal.
all i care to say about that is that i grew up amongst controllers. mostly of the republican persuasion. and i can tell you this, it ain't a straight deal in this country. hell, most citizens don't even know the names of the folks who jerk their chains.
anyone on this site who is as connected as i have been? if so, you should have the honesty to confirm what i have had to say about how the deal is run.
thank you.
Well, Philanethes, I don't share your good feelings.
Well, I guess you can choose to live in a Fool's Paradise, or a Fool's Inferno.
I don't have "good feelings." I have rational ones, and they tell me that this is the world we're living in, whether we like it or not, and that each of us has a responsibility to do what we can to improve it, ESPECIALLY when things look most hopeless and futile.
Look up "Active Denial Weapons," DB, and then tell me all about how we're gonna fight in the streets, and all about the Glorious Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
See? It's easy. Any hope you can raise, I can destroy. Nothing to it. Literally.
albert champion, has it always been like this? Seems to me that people are much dumber than they used to be and that makes me think it's impossible. I see dumb people, everywhere. How can we turn this around? I don't see that it's possible. I hate to seem defeatist, but goddamn, people in this country are so fucking stupid, generally.
Well, it's almost a typical Friday evening here at Eschatonia, I see.
Re: Herbert and Tulia
I don't get the idea that anybody, anywhere dissed the Texas Observer; anyone with a brain who knows journalism and the issues knows it's the Lone Star's finest paper. But, for all its strengths, the Observer is almost a wonk's paper, virtually unknown to anyone but political junkies. It doesn't have the reach of a NYT. That's just the way it is. I don't see Herbert as "hijacking" the story, as much as helping to spread the word about something that needed as many friendly and influential voices as possible.
As for the notions of "Empire"
Gotta weigh in with Phila on this one. Support theEmpire/Destroy the Empire? That's a False Dichotomy. Alternatives exist, and plenty can be done with them. It's just that those are the most difficult things to do, the things that take the most work. Involvement, standing up, questioning, vigilance over our Constitutional rights AND responsibilities--these are things most people are just too overworked or lazy or pessimistic or weak to even try to accomplish. It's easier to go with the simple things, like going along with the flow, or just tearing the whole thing down.
Nobody said a democratic republic would be easy. It isn't. Each of us can only ask ourselves: What am I doing to make it WORK?
Dumbasses in this country are affecting us all in this country. Christian Fundamentalists, who are behind much of this, are sitting like birds on a wire about it totally somehow unconcerned. It's really weird these days.
See high school pics here
http://www.newsandviews.blog-city.com
anyone on this site who is as connected as i have been? if so, you should have the honesty to confirm what i have had to say about how the deal is run.
thank you.
albert champion
Same thing I said to DB, AC. It's the same old shit. Say something new. Offer some insight or some good advice. Explain what you're doing, and invite people to help you do it. Quit pretending you're watching earth from the clouds, and say something that amazes people and shocks them into action.
If you can't offer anything but the same crap I rejected 20 years ago, then your posts are basically static, as far as I'm concerned.
Say something compelling and powerful that represents new thinking on this problem, Albert, or offer even the hint of a solution that includes details of your personal actions, and I'll be the first one to shake your hand. 'Til then, you're just making me feel like I'm back in some early-eighties punk squat with a bunch of bickering, lazy kids.
ah phil,
i would like to get your point. here is what i said...
"i am tired of the cant, the chicanery. the demthugs please me no more than the rethugs.
it is all so bernaysian. no one with any honor. no one with any cojones. all cornflakes.
drown them with milk."
but your response seemed to have missed the context.
i have to tell you, i have been fighting the bushies and their buds in courts for years.
i really hate it when someone tells me that i don't know what i am saying.
more than anyone on this board, my guess is that i have walked the walk. as opposed to talking the talk.
i am constrained by court order to tell all that i can tell. publicly.
succinctly, you just don't know the half of the bushies crimes.
Hey LJ,
Once again, you walk in as I walk out...
Smooches,
Your secret admirer
'Til then, you're just making me feel like I'm back in some early-eighties punk squat with a bunch of bickering, lazy kids.
Philalethes
It's been your generation that's fucked all this up. The most privileged-- never known any hardship yuppie generation, which has brought us to this near ruin. Not my generation. It will be my generation which will right this after your generation has totally destroyed it.
Honey, I'm leaving as well. Gotta go to work, at this unholy hour. I'll take those smooches and raise you a grab of your...take your pick.
Your secret admiree.
Really, Philanethes, getting testy aren't you?
#1: I mistakenly attributed the "good feeling" statement to you. It was stated by Another Bruce. However, you must have some good feeling about Kerry or you wouldn't support him, would you? Perhaps you hate Bush & his sterno enough to surrender to orchiectomy. Whatever.
#2: I do have websites up. You've probably read some things I've written, but who needs to be patting themselves on the back? Not me. I'd rather call attention to others, as I did with Big Al.
#3: Plasma guns are on the market, so if you want to buy one, go ahead. I'm more interested in how to neutralize them. Know how? Love to know.
As for "Destroy the Empire"...where did I ever advocate that?
I suggested that people not destroy their own name and character by aligning themselves with Right or Left and thereby not have to defend the bums on both sides of the aisle.
Don't let yourselves get wrapped up in saving America from Bush by electing Kerry. Neither one can nor will do anything but continue to reinforce the narcopolitical water-carrying instilled in them since Yale or earlier.
The Empire is on fire, it is crumbling. So, act like chicken little with some credibiltiy or (better) make people aware of how to live without relying on narco-kleptocratic systems.
That's where most of my focus is on: Where's your food and water going to come from once the electricity in the US reaches the level of reliablility now experienced by those liberated Iraqis.
But, hey, feel free to continue bashing me and trying to make me look like an agent provocateur, even though I'm not.
Whatever works for ya!
but your response seemed to have missed the context.
Or vice versa. Look, I've defended you before here, and would again. If you're fighting these guys as hard as you say, then inspire us to do likewise. Tell us the RIGHT way to do it.
If you're claiming you've got more experience than anyone on this board, then you ought to be able to offer us far more than the cheap defeatist rhetoric I've been hearing from RCP layabouts for decades.
I don't think asking you to offer, for once, helpful and PRACTICAL suggestions is at all unreasonable. You don't have to, of course...but it's a perfectly reasonable request on my part.
I'm going to sleep, though...so maybe I'll see something in the AM. Christmas in August!
Everybody I see in the media are squabbling Yuppies.
Yuppies are the Squabbling Generation.
It's been your generation that's fucked all this up. The most privileged-- never known any hardship yuppie generation,
Love those simple scenarios, don't you? 'Course, I was living in rural poverty, on welfare, in the years you're talking about...and had some other things happening that I won't describe here, though they certainly qualify as hardships. But whatever, yeah...yuppies. My generation. Whatever. No hardship. Check. Goodnight.
Love those simple scenarios, don't you? 'Course, I was living in rural poverty, on welfare, in the years you're talking about...and had some other things happening that I won't describe here, though they certainly qualify as hardships. But whatever, yeah...yuppies. My generation. Whatever. No hardship. Check. Goodnight.
Philalethes
Philalethes thinking he represents the typical yuppie.
Goodnight, Philanethes, but before you go -- it's just as important to know what NOT to do as what should be done.
It is NOT worth acting like a blue-state dittohead (I'm not saying you are, but please admit that goes on here quite often).
It is NOT worth suppressing legitimate criticism of Kerry by asserting the color of the critics' tunic.
It is NOT worth wasting money nor time trying to convince intelligent and not-so-smart people that they have anything to hope for from Kerry regarding significant change. Why didn't Kerry stand up for the Floridians who got vote-jacked? Because he knows how much historical evidence there is regarding Demo vote-rigging.
I don't care if Bush or Kerry win. They don't matter ultimately.
A passive flock will be fleeced either way, and with their man in WH, I expect Dems to lay down for JFK the same way they did for WJC.
Let's start telling the truth:
Kerry admitted war crimes on TV; Bush's war crimes have been televised for over a year now.
When War Criminals run against War Criminals for the White House, the President will be a War Criminal.
Neat.
I guess Bill O'Reily or Michael Wiener and even Bush are representative of "early-eighties punk squat with a bunch of bickering, lazy kids."
I guess Sean Hannity was an "early-eighties punk squat bickering lazy kid."?
Sean Hannity was too busy polishing priests to be a punk.
Sean Hannity was too busy polishing priests to be a punk.
DB
That's, like, grody to the max.
One last question, though who's up to answer it?
Kerry keeps saying how he was defending his country by serving Viet Nam.
Defending it against what? Coolie control of the Golden Triangle? The rise of Viet Namese owned soft drink companies?
Kerry was right in '72 that the war was sick and wrong and that the order he took and gave were immoral.
Why is now he claiming that's somehow defending the US?
Bogus.
Tired.
Goodnight, and breathe deep...
that's Empire you smell burnin'!
i don't know much about early 80s punk squats, but o'reilley would have been right at home in an early 90s punk squat. as far as style goes anyway. he'd have to tweak the content of course.
STRATHAM, N.H. (AP) - President Bush challenged Democratic rival John Kerry on Friday to give a yes-or-no answer about whether he would have supported the invasion of Iraq "knowing what we know now" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction.
"I have given my answer," Bush told a cheering crowd. "We did the right thing and the world is better off for it."
What would Kerry's answer be? Is he already on the record for this?
The puppet regime just closed Aljazeera in Iraq.
What would Kerry's answer be? Is he already on the record for this?
ecoast
Knowing what we know now, he said he would support the invasion. Later on he said he would oppose it.
Love those simple scenarios, don't you? 'Course, I was living in rural poverty, on welfare, in the years you're talking about...and had some other things happening that I won't describe here, though they certainly qualify as hardships. But whatever, yeah...yuppies. My generation. Whatever. No hardship. Check. Goodnight.
Philalethes
Do all boomers have these fantasies? I can't wait until that generation is gone so the country can shed all their holier than thou garbage.
Bob writes: What's the military mission in Iraq? Can it be clearly defined? Is it achievable? At what cost and over what time frame? How many troops will be needed? How many casualties are we willing to accept? And how much suffering are we willing to endure here at home in terms of the domestic needs that are unmet?
When was the last time Bush came out and told us anything specific about where he plans to take the US in the future? Everything out of his mouth is rhetoric: We're going to stay the course, America is safer, The world is safer, Sadaam was evil, blah blah blah.
I don't think I would know how to act if this president actually came out and told us specific plans about Iraq and its future, and how the US is going to proceed from here. But isn't that what Americans should be demanding.
When he says we will stay the course, he should tell us why we will stay the course when the course we are on is not working.
When he says we are safer, he should give us specifics rather than a terror alert.
Sadaam was evil, yes we know, tell us how Sadaam was different from the 30 other evil dictators around the world.
I am tired of the worn out, overblown rhetoric. It may subdue his stepford masses, but for thinking Americans, enough is enough. If he doesn't have a plan, then he shouldn't have his job. And if his supporters can't see that then there is no help for them.
Phila (RE: Empire):
Acknowledging the inevitable abuses of empire is a necessary first step, which I take to be your general point. In my field, at least, colonial literature, the critiques of how empire was accomplished preceded the critiques of the imperial project itself by as much as 50 or 100 years. For example, Multatuli's novel *Max Havelaar* was written in 1850 and addressed administrative problems in the Dutch East Indies, much as Conrad's more famous "Heart of Darkness" would do in 1899. But neither one of those texts seemed to question the validity of empire itself. The critiques of the actual imperial project didn't come until a number of years later, maybe most famously with Achebe's *Things Fall Apart* in 1954. There, even the thin, benevolent wedge of empire was seen as dangerous.
My lame-ass parallel here is intended simply to point out that the critque has to begin somewhere. reforms in imperial systems--"doind empire better"--have never kept empires afloat; they always crash eventually. In Ireland, the British were determined to "kill Home Rule with kindness"--it didn't work, even with a people who probably ought to have understood each other fairly well.
Arguing that we need to reforn empire, then, is not the same as arguing that we need to keep it or protect it or whatever.
ecoast asks:
"What would Kerry's answer be? Is he already on the record for this?"
I haven't heard him address this, and I suspect he would probably say it's a good thing Saddam is gone but that he never would have gone to war as Bush did without significant allied support, without a plan to win the peace, and without a clear exit strategy. He will undoubtedly throw back in Bush's face the fact that,in 2000, Bush criticized the Clinton administration's military deployments and touted the "Powell doctrine," which he articulated as, "The force must be strong enough so that the mission can be accomplished. And the exit strategy needs to be well-defined."
What he probably won't say, but what needs to be remembered, is that "what we now know" is that Iraq was not a threat to the US and had no WMD's. To go to war in spite of that knowledge is not only immoral and foolhardy, it violates the authority granted in the Iraq War Resolution:
"(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
(snip)
and, only if
(snip)
"(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq;"
So going to war for unauthorized reasons or unnecessarily would be an impeachable offense.
Oh, and baby boomers didn't live in punk squats in the eighties--they were investment bankers by then. Do the math.
My generation, growing up in that era, was constantly told we weren't as good as the boomers. "What do you kids protest? Apartheid? Screw that! We had a war, man!" Now to get this from the other side "Your generation was lazy and privileged--you didn't have Kurt Cobain!" or whatever this critique is based on--it's simply ridiculous. We all play the historical hand we're dealt.
Homey - I have two words for you: Trent Lott. Sleep well.
Albert Champion: How much time/space do you actually save by leaving the "or" out of the word, "story"?
Just curious.
whats judith miller been up to?
Thanks Philalethes, all your comments have been right on the money as far as I'm concerned.
I too get bored and frustrated with those navel gazing types who have nothing to offer but sneering criticism of any actions taken to improve things even the slightest bit.
The answer is a secret.
Here in Albany, NY, developments on the local front in the "war on terror" are being met with more than a little skepticism: http://tinyurl.com/4et6j
Check out the following editorial cartoon in today's St. Louis Post Dispatch about the Kerry/Edwards Rally in St. Louis on Thursday.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday...View&
Count=2000
There is some local color and even local inside jokes, but generally entertaining. It tells the story of what happened very well, especially about the diversity of the crowd. The reference to BB guns follows up on the story about two lawyers in a suburban office building who were arrested for playing around with BB guns during a workday (always fun time in St. Louis!)
Enjoy!
Now that the Bush supporters have opened up the subject of the candidate' military record, when are Kerry campaign and the DNC going to plaster the airways with ads about the heroic efforts of GWB to protect Montgomery, Alabama from the Viet Cong? It's time to fire back!
Well, speaking of NYT columnists:
David Brooks this morning drops the "Bush can do no wrong" mantra for a "Where's the beef?" critique of both candidates.
True, he's no supporter of Kerry, and reserves his harshest critique for Democrats (he's the candidate of "caution," all his ideas are "orthodox" Democratic ones), but Bush, he claims, is supposed to be a candidate of "bold ideas." (This tells you what "Bold" is in David's world).
So, he asks Bush, where are the "bold ideas"?
When you start losing as loyal a cheerleader as David Brooks, observers can't help but wonder if the media "Friends of George" don't see a ship going down, and are positioning their boats to be as far away as possible, to avoid going down with it.
Or maybe the more apt metaphor is rats.....
Just e-mailed that one to a bunch of friends - it's all the more powerful for the fact that he is an understated and precise writer.
It should have been Bush! Bush! Bush! instead of Herbert! Herbert! Herbert! Do you reach?
"redshirt troll,"
great expression.
hey hey!
cut the in-fighting...this is what happens when too-smart people debate - they argue over semantics and misunderstandings...eyes on the prize!
is the problem we gather for: one liberal calling another liberal, too liberal? arguing whether a yeats essay is relevant to current happenings!
semantics my friends - semantics...we need to bring each other together in unity (I feel like a preacher!)...energy wasted beating each other up does nothing for our cause.
Yes, the Cult Of The Yellow Sign runs the world and the OSS/CIA was founded by Nazis. So fucking what? Either do something about it, ignore it and live your life or simply kill yourself in utter hopelessness. Don't slam others who are trying to change things for the better or you're no better than the meth-addicted pomeranian trolls.
Glad to see that the "pomeranian" thing is catching on ,BTW. 
Yes! We must be One to reach the One.
On PBS, Tucker (rhymes with you know what) Carlson said he was no fan of Bush, either. Then why is he such an ass? He had Krugman on and laid into him about being obsessive and crazed. Of course, Krugman did fine. I sometimes wonder if this is some kind of double secret undercover agent thing, where Tucker asks belligerent questions on purpose, to give the interviewee a chance to make him look like a clown.
If you imagine Tucker Carlson or David Brooks dressed up in a jester costume, the stuff they say begins to make sense.
The bottom line is that Kerry is less dangerous than Bush. As exhausted as we are, and as exhausted as we will be when we win on election night, the work will only be starting. I've reconciled myself to the fact that I'll be working for the rest of my life to ensure that American citizens become competent, vigilant, and activist.
I've reconciled myself to the fact that I'll be working for the rest of my life to ensure that American citizens become competent, vigilant, and activist.
Get over yourself already. Your time would be better spent ensuring you become competent.
I didn't hear the Democracy Now program where Robert Fisk was the guest, but I did read his column in the UK Independent - his reporting is valuable - he is, and has been, in Bahgdad - and he reports what he sees - if he says the country is about to implode, he knows of what he speaks. Our leaders should be reading him and listening to him.
Would that we had more US reporters there giving us the truth.
OT, but speaking of media, did anyone watch Bill Maher last night? Cokie Roberts, Bob Barr, and Steve Harvey were on. Bill was trying to get them to discuss the very real threat of no guarding of our chemical plants, and how Al Qaeda is so adept at using our weaknesses against us. You could have heard a pin drop during that segment. As important as it is, no one seemed to want to talk about.
I finally was able to see what y'all have said about Cokie all these months in full glory. She had *maybe* one coherent thought the whole hour. I wish Maher would get someone like that to own up to the shit the media puts out, someone in the 'mainstream' like her. I hate to take down another woman, but she just seemed stupid. Shame.
Offer an alternative or quit bitching kid.
Is my memory right? Re Tulia, I seem to remember Herbert calling on the Texas AG (one John Cornyn, now a truly loathsome senator) to investigate, and the AG's office did precisely nothing? Help?
Oh god, not the generational thing again. There is nothing more boring than arguing pop sociology that comes straight out of a magazine. Talk about a big straw man. These "baby boomer, generation x or y or z" arguments have about as much relevance as a warm bucket of spit.
I too get bored and frustrated with those navel gazing types who have nothing to offer but sneering criticism of any actions taken to improve things even the slightest bit.
curly
I just prefer sneering navel gazing.
Do all boomers have these fantasies? I can't wait until that generation is gone so the country can shed all their holier than thou garbage.
boomered-out
I was born in 1965. Old and in the way, perhaps...but not a baby boomer.
This is offered more as general information, not as a specific response to this troll.
Of course Mr. Herbert's right. I wonder though where was the leadership from our media: tv and print at the time this unholy decision was being perpetrated on the American Public? Very few journalists or commentators (pundits or otherwise) questioned the actions of the Bush White House, or its justifications for this unnecessary and damaging war in Iraq. That was a failure of leadership also.
I was born in 1965. Old and in the way, perhaps...but not a baby boomer.
This is offered more as general information, not as a specific response to this troll.
Philalethes
Born in 1961, myself, do not consider myself a boomer.
I belong to the BLANK Generation.
Acknowledging the inevitable abuses of empire is a necessary first step, which I take to be your general point.
Yeah, basically. The thing is, I really am pessimistic. Or at least, I'm not a utopian. I just have a very practical view--Kerry doesn't have to be perfect; he just has to kill fewer people. Obviously I want something better that that, and will work towards it, but having expecations that are too high is what burns people out. I think one aims at incremental change directed towards a goal, while realizing that the goal is an ideal that might be out of reach, and so you settle for incremental change. Whereas other folks will act like unless the goal is imminently atttainable, the incremental steps represent "compromise."
And yeah, my point about Kerry was basically that he laid a solid foundation for a critique of how THIS Empire operates, and that that took more courage within his milieu that critiquing it takes within, say, mine. And that having done so, he's already done more than I expected of someone in the belly of the beast, as it were. Sure he's flawed, but who isn't? Kipling had huge political problems, as you know, but today, where a book like "Kim" is most powerful in its critique of Empire.
Oh, and baby boomers didn't live in punk squats in the eighties--they were investment bankers by then. Do the math.
Hate to have you think I lived in one of those dumps! Fortunately, my group-identification skills have always been pretty low. I just found myself in them pretty often, for one reason and another. And oddly enough, pretty much ALL those kids came from wealthy backgrounds (you could always spot the richest ones, because they NEVER talked about anything but the evils of money).
I knew a couple kids who, like me, grew up on welfare (we're talking rural Northern California in the 1970s, after all!), but they were always kind of quiet about it. Unlike a lot of the punk kids, they never bragged about having eaten out of dumpsters. In fact, a couple of 'em developed this quasiconservative anti-welfare bias where everyone was supposed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Class remains a huge emotional issue in this country, that's for sure.
I belong to the BLANK Generation.
MisterX
I can take it or leave it.
I've also gotta make it clear--since I'm kind of touchy about this stuff--that MY brand of "poverty" was comparatively privileged. We weren't forced into it, or anything. My parents were just impractical intellectual artist-types, who kept getting themselves into problems they couldn't easily get out of. They really didn't have anyone to blame but themselves, and I'd never dream of expecting sympathy for that! But yuppies? Not hardly.
For a lot of kids in that time, it didn't even seem like poverty, anyway. It was more like some camping trip that never ended, but was usually pretty fun and only occasionally frightening...at least 'til your teenage years. It's only later in life that you'd talk to other kids and find out that they'd never eaten Cheerios with water instead of milk!
I'm in the Tulia session at the FOR conference. Allen Bean, one of the Texan activists who got the Tulia prisoners freed from their imprisonment, is giving a presentation on their activism.
Bean credits the success of their activism to the national media attention, and specifically highlighted Herbert for writing 6 columns on the issue.
Concluding quote from Allen:
"Tom Coleman is just a pawn in the game. tulia hapepned because politicians were building prisons and demonicing the poor when they should have been investing in jobs and education."
Now I'm hearing from Tulia native Freddie Brookings, Jr., a young man who was falsely accused and imprisoned.
This is going for another 45 minutes -- if anyone has questions they'd like me to ask the panelists, email me quick! (Before 2:30 p.m. Pacific time)
--Kynn
I'm glad Bob Herbert is identifying the insanity of the Bush administration's lack of leadership and tunnel vision approach to fighting terrorism by taking out Saddam. However, I wonder where Mr. Herbert was before the war started? It seems to me the same logic the White House is currently using he finds so deplorable was no less absurd from the start of the selling of the Iraq war. Herbert, like so many media horns is way late in coming around to writing this piece. Had more media columnists been vocal when the improbable course taken to fight terrorism by invading Iraq the political turf would have been softened and given more Congressional opponents the ammo to speak out against it. Thanks again Mr. Herbert, but this piece was needed long ago. Now after the loss of over 900 American lives it seems like an editorial footnote hardly worthy of mention.
linktv is running a special on tulia. with focus on the undercover narc behind the scandal. pity this isn't being shown on broadcast network.
http://www.worldlinktv.org/progr...php4?
code=texas
Quote: Does it understand the ways in which American policies are empowering its enemies?
Ah I see, 9/11 was America's fault. John Kerry will cave in to the demands of terrorists, and then America will be safe. Just do what they say and all will be fine.
Or this one: And is it even beginning to think seriously about lessening our debilitating dependence on Middle Eastern oil?
Guess where most of America's oil comes from. Found it? (here: http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html). Ah, oops Herbert. But as Duncan wrote: Why oh why is our press corps so horrible...
No idea Duncan, but you don't seem to notice if it suits you.
I agree - you don't link to Herbert enough, atrios! One thing that struck me about Mr Herbert when I emailed him a year or so ago to congratulate him on one of his columns was that he emailed a PERSONAL 'thank you' back to me. From every other NYT columnist/writer you just get an automated reply. Still ... that is better than the reaction from Melbourne's broadsheet "The Age": no reply at all from that paper!
forum gambling offshore sports forum gambling offshore sports forum gambling offshore sports. cash colorado refinance cash colorado refinance cash colorado refinance.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
