How to defend torture

You have to create an inhuman enemy, argues Daniel Larison:

"two different rhetorical tactics are employed. First, you will have the outright denial that torture is taking place (“we don’t torture,” Mr. Bush has said on more than one occasion) and then grudging acknowledgements that “extreme” measures have been used (“enhanced interrogation techniques”), and finally a justification of the actual inflicting of mental and physical duress on detainees. Mr. Bush’s cheerleaders on blogs and radio are quite explicit about this. Blogger Dean Barnett once wrote, “The torture opponents’ entire premise rests on the erroneous notion that one can successfully wage war without cruelty and savagery. I wish they were right. But they’re not.” Challenged by one of his listeners that he supported torture in recent weeks, radio host Michael Medved unflinchingly agreed that he did. What is first wrapped in euphemisms is then openly defended and even celebrated as necessary. Central to this is the denial of the rationality of the enemy, which is tantamount to a denial of their humanity."

McCain's pastor problems

First, CNN is reporting that John McCain has rejected John Hagee's endorsement. It only took, what? 4 months or so? Looks like he did so right about the same time that John Hagee took back his endorsement, citing critics who were "misrepresenting" his words. No, sorry, Mr. Hagee. You are just as batshit crazy as we think.

Now the clock is ticking on the other batshit crazy pastor--Rod Parsley. McCain's campaign says that he only met with Parsley one time before accepting his endorsement, so, naturally, we can't hold him accountable for the guy's radical views on destroying Islam, right? As Yglesias says

But of course anti-Muslim bigotry has a large constituency in the United States so it's not a political weakness to be affiliated with it. Similarly, it's true that having a president who likes to associate himself with anti-Muslim bigotry would be a disaster for American foreign policy and national security, but since the essence of McCain's foreign policy vision is that he wants to maximize the number and duration of wars this won't actually be a problem for him.

Blech

More from crazy nutjob John Hagee:

"John Hagee, the controversial evangelical leader and endorser of Sen. John McCain, argued in a late 1990s sermon that the Nazis had operated on God's behalf to chase the Jews from Europe and shepherd them to Palestine. According to the Reverend, Adolph Hitler was a 'hunter,' sent by God, who was tasked with expediting God's will of having the Jews re-establish a state of Israel.

Going in and out of biblical verse, Hagee preached: ''And they the hunters should hunt them,' that will be the Jews. 'From every mountain and from every hill and from out of the holes of the rocks.' If that doesn't describe what Hitler did in the holocaust you can't see that.'"

A disturbing trend

Feministing notes that women (especially Black women) represent the fastest growing segment of the Prison population, 80% of which are in for non-violent drug offenses.

Then this:

The United States has less than 5 percent of the world's population. But it has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

Maybe we need to rethink what our prisons are for. I have long held that our education and penal system suffer from the same problem--we don't have a clear idea what we are trying to achieve with either.

I think I love the bouzouki

Saw people play it twice this week, and I think it is such a cool sound. Talked to Kieran Kane after the show Sunday evening and he said it was tuned just like the mandolin, only an octave lower.

Here are a couple of youtube videos featuring the bouzouki. Enjoy:

Nice company

One of Sully's readers noted a new low:

"Last night I was clicking back and forth between the Mets/Yankees game The Empire Strikes Back on cable. I hadn't watched Empire in a long time. There's a scene where Darth Vader tortures Han Solo (which occurs off-screen, but Han's screams are audible). Han is then dumped into the room with Lando and Pricess Leia, and the Imperial thug says contemptuously, 'Don’t worry. He won't be permanently damaged.' So include Darth Vader -- Darth fucking Vader -- among the prestigious company we're keeping with our sure-it-hurts-like-hell-but-if-it-doesn't-leave-a-mark-it -ain't-torture approach to interrogation."

Christian conservatives?

What the hell is this?:

"Columbus — Georgia Republican Party chairwoman Sue Everhart said Saturday that the party's presumed presidential nominee has a lot in common with Jesus Christ.

'John McCain is kind of like Jesus Christ on the cross,' Everhart said as she began the second day of the state GOP convention. 'He never denounced God, either.'

Everhart was praising McCain for never denouncing the United States while he was being tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

'I'm not trying to compare John McCain to Jesus Christ, I'm looking at the pain that was there,' she said."

This is what combining faith and politics has given us.

****

Speaking of conservative Christianity, I want to build on a subject raised in recent comments and something we have discussed peripherally on the blog for a long time. Every so often, a conservative Christian comes in here and suggests that people who believe evolution, or those who don't believe the Bible is divinely inspired, or those who aren't Christian at all--don't have any morals, or don't have the ability to form morality. That, according to many conservatives, comes alone from God.

So, how do conservative Christians learn their morality? I will concede that some of them are written down in the Bible. Not killing, not stealing, etc.

But what about those things not addressed directly in the Bible? Racism? Environmental destruction? Or even those things that are addressed? Taking care of the poor, the contrast between the wealthy and the poor, etc. How do conservative Christians understand those things?

And I am not being snide here. I really want to understand.

Birthday followup

So we went to the wedding. Turns out they played little snippets of music through the short ceremony, including Bette Midler's "The Rose" and a song by Coldplay. I didn't know anyone used the Rose any longer. But the ceremony was nice and short, and thoughtful.

***

But since we really only knew the parent of one of the participants, we bolted after the ceremony and had dinner at Johnny Carinos. Our waiter came up and knelt at the table (which seems to be all the rage now). He then said, "My name is Blah, and I will be taking care of us." Us? Since when did Blah join our little party and, more importantly, was he going to take some of the stuffed mushrooms or pay for part?

At first we thought it was just a slip, but Blah came back several times to ask how "we were doing," and when he brought the check, he said he would "be our cashier." At one point, he forgot to bring me a beer, and I came very close to saying to him, "we forgot to bring us our beer." But I decided not to.

Anyone else had that experience?

Saturday stuff--and turning 43

Yep, I hit the big 4-3 today. Whatever that means. It has been a nice birthday. Played golf yesterday with some friends and then enjoyed a nice dinner last night with SOF. Today, we are attending a wedding, which is not my favorite way to spend my birthday, but sometimes that happens.

****

Couple of interesting stories in the news today. Chris Matthews (and I don't have the link handy) actually made a really good point this week about Bush's appeasement comparison. It has become very common for conservatives to shout "appeasement" anytime liberals advocate diplomacy or in any other way oppose Bush policy. The most recent (and shameful) example was Bush's speech in Israel comparing Democrats to those who appeased Hitler. Never mind the crap that Obama or Clinton would take for making such a speech on foreign soil (hell, the Dixie Chicks got death threats for saying Bush embarrassed them during a concert in England), but Matthews pointed out the obvious problem with the analogy. Appeasement, as he noted, was not talking to Hitler, but allowing him to keep territory. Talking to our enemies doesn't mean that we have to either trust them or give them anything. Talking is not appeasement.

*****

In rare form, Peggy Noonan accurately describes the problems with the current Republican party:

What happens to the Republicans in 2008 will likely be dictated by what didn't happen in 2005, and '06, and '07. The moment when the party could have broken, on principle, with the administration – over the thinking behind and the carrying out of the war, over immigration, spending and the size of government – has passed. What two years ago would have been honorable and wise will now look craven. They're stuck.

Mr. Bush has squandered the hard-built paternity of 40 years. But so has the party, and so have its leaders. If they had pushed away for serious reasons, they could have separated the party's fortunes from the president's. This would have left a painfully broken party, but they wouldn't be left with a ruined "brand," as they all say, speaking the language of marketing. And they speak that language because they are marketers, not thinkers. Not serious about policy. Not serious about ideas. And not serious about leadership, only followership.

That has been my point for sometime--that the current crop of Republicans are not trustworthy. They have stood in near unison with this President as he has tortured, invaded, and mangled our constitution.

*****

Heh. Well, Washington University went ahead and gave Phyllis Schlafly the honorary doctorate. As a sidenote, btw, as someone who worked his ass off to gain a doctorate, I resent these in most situations. Being famous is not the same thing. Nor, of course, is giving a lot of money to a University. One of the rare times when I thought an honorary doctorate made sense, was at OU when they honored Marilyn Horne for her lifetime of work as an American opera singer. That made sense to me.

Giving Schlafly a doctorate for, well, standing in the way of women's equality, imho, is not good. I have no problem allowing her to speak--if that is what you want. She has the right to air her ideas as much as the next person.

Anyway, many students and faculty agree with me, evidently, and stood with their backs turned to a speaker who has said that women consent to sex when they marry. And in a typical Schlafly graceless fashion, she called the protestors a "bunch of losers" and

As for her detractors, she said, "I’m not sure they’re mature enough to graduate."
If anything, she said she feels sorry for them because they’ve been misled by women’s studies classes. She said they do not respect the role of the full-time homemaker, a role that she has championed.

I am still not sure how someone who has spent the bulk of her adult life outside the home can really say that, but whatever.

Some photos of the protest here.

****

Anti-intellectualism on the right

H/t to Melissa Rogers for more on John Hagee's apology letter to Catholics Bill Donohue. Any readers here know that I have no respect for Hagee--which comes from several years where I actually listened to his sermons in a kind of fascinated--ears-bleeding kind of way. I always loved his "wives have to give sex as rent to stay the marriage bit" or the time the angry preacher bragged about hurting another football player in his youth. He is quite an example of Christianity, I tell you.

But I digress. Melissa was struck by the weirdness of the assumption that all Catholics were to follow Bill Donohue's lead. I was sturck by another line:

"Mr. Donohue said of Mr. Hagee’s letter: “Well, miracles do happen. If I wasn’t a believer before, I sure am now.

“Republican activists have been working with him over the last several weeks, giving him books and articles and getting him up to speed and away from the black legends about the Catholic Church. I have to assume he’s acting sincerely, and now understands” that he has been recycling conspiracy theories."

According to wikipedia, Hagee has several degrees and not all from bible schools. During that education, he never actually read any history? For all the buzz about Jeremiah Wright, I remember hearing Hagee say amazingly stupid and uneducated things. He actually told his church (and I can't document this, but remember it from when I watched his circus) that the government was lying about how AIDS was spread and suggested to them that it was in fact spread through casual contact and through the air.

This is what happens when you emphasize reading the Bible and a personal experience with God over tradition, and reason.

The entire, sad, disgusting interview

I commented on Bush's "I gave up Golf for the war effort" (lie, of course) the other day, but until I watched this Olbermann special comment (H/t Mary, and no, don't watch it if you hate Olbermann. This isn't about him or his take.) I realized I hadn't read or seen the entire horrible interview. I can't watch the man speak, so I read the transcript instead, and it is enough to make your eyes bleed. The questions are horrible. "Who will win American idol?" Are you fucking kidding me? Not only who cares about American freakin Idol, but who the hell cares what this guy thinks about something like that?

And his answers to the questions are just horrible. Check out his passive voice on the intelligence leading into the war.

Bush: No, no, I was told by people that they had weapons of mass destruction — as were members of Congress, who voted for the resolution to get rid of Saddam Hussein. And of course, the political heat gets on and they start to run and try to hide from their votes.

Olbermann just about had an aneurism at that answer and he was right. Unbelievably stupid and crass. And passive. Everyone made mistakes but this guy. Other people are responsible, but he didn't make any errors. And now people are running from their votes?

But then again, Bush equates his own stubbornness with "principle."

And his response to Carter was even worse than I thought:

"Bush: Yes, well, what he ought to be saying is, is that America doesn't torture. If the implication there is that we do now, then he's wrong. And you bet we're going to protect ourselves by the use of military force. What he really is implying is — or some imply — you can be popular; if you want to be popular in the Middle East just go blame Israel for every problem. That will make you popular. "

Yes, Carter has blamed Israel for every problem. And of course we don't torture. Except when this person himself authorized it. Then it isn't torture, because we don't torture.

Worst. President. Ever. And it isn't even close any longer.

****

And then he compared Obama to Nazi appeasers.

Matthew Yglesias
(May 15, 2008) - Bush: Munich, Munich Munich
(Foreign Policy):

"The standard point to make in response to this is still a true one -- we refer to this day to the 'lessons of Munich' and make a big deal out of Adolf Hitler because that was really unusual whereas to hawks it's always 1939, every foreigner we don't like is a new Hitler, and preventive war is always the only solution. Bush and McCain truly are the ideological descendants of the folks who urged Eisenhower to go for 'rollback' and who insisted that Ronald Reagan betrayed the true path when he sat down with Gorbachev for arms control talks.
Meanwhile, Bush continues to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose and nature of diplomacy. The idea of talks isn't that you marshall convincing arguments and beat your enemies back with force of words. The idea is that it's sometimes possible to achieve a reconciliation of partially divergent interests"

Truly a horrible leader.

LIve music

Last night, SOF, myself, and three good friends went to hear The Greencards play at the Blue Door in OKC. We hadn't been for a while. And we have been meaning to catch this group sometime but never did. They are some of the best musicians I have ever seen. The mandolin player is unbelievable, and last night they had a 17 hear old kid playing guitar so well, it would make you cry. If you have a chance to see them, I recommend it.

Embarrassed by my own country

Italian’s Detention Illustrates Dangers Foreign Visitors Face - New York Times

Golf update--updated

Anglican reminds us of a previous Bush golf moment:

Additionally, Blue Girl, Red State calls "bullshit" on the whole "gave up golf for the war effort" story:

Actually, it is far more likely that Bush quit playing golf because he was suffering from knee problems throughout the latter half of 2003.Bush, 57, will have an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) test on Thursday, Dec. 18. The body-scanning device enables doctors to see internal organs in 3D. The MRI is being performed on the advice of the President's regular White House physician. Last summer, Bush suffered a minor muscle tear in his right calf and that injury, along with aching knees, forced him to abandon his running routine. The calf strain healed by August when he had his annual physical, but the president said in September that he suspected he had a meniscus tear.

Who knows? I do know that the President certainly didn't give up vacations for the war effort, and he certainly never asked the American people to actually pay for his war.

And Leighton had this great comment about Bush's stronger faith:

"Pretending for a moment that he's sincere (which I don't believe), the language he uses it is consistent with the faith community I left years ago, where the grammar of 'relationship with God' was actually an institutionalization of narcissism--it gave everyone an excuse to relate the suffering of others back to my (my, my, MY, MY) inner life, rather than letting them take center stage.

People past middle school and outside certain Christian groups rarely need to hear this, but when someone is killed in combat, the central point is not his personal remorse. It's not about him."

Well said.

***

More on Golf-gate from Froomkin

Not only is it a hollow, trivial sacrifice at best, Bush's story doesn't hold water. While he dates his decision to abjure golf to Aug. 19, 2003 -- the day a truck bomb in Baghdad killed U.N. special representative Sergio Vieira de Mello and more than a dozen others -- the Associated Press reported on Oct. 13, 2003, that he'd spent a "cool, breezy Columbus Day" playing "a round of golf with three long-time buddies.

and

Dan Eggen writes in The Washington Post: "Democrats have criticized Bush for allegedly not requiring Americans to sacrifice enough while waging wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and for urging people to keep shopping as a way to fight terrorism after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Bush was also widely criticized in August 2002 when he decried terrorist bombings in Israel while golfing and then told reporters: 'Now watch this drive.'

"Although Bush says he has given up golf, he is a mountain-biking enthusiast who has been photographed taking part in rides. He took up biking after an injury sidelined him from running.

"Presidential historian Robert Dallek. . . said Bush's remarks about Iraq 'speak to his shallowness.' Dallek added: 'That's his idea of sacrifice, to give up golf?'"

This President shallow? Unpossible.

Uh oh.--Updated

I mean, for the GOP.

Update: From a House district where Bush won by 62 percent in '04:

"Not only is Childers, the Democrat, winning that Mississippi House seat. It's really not even that close. With 94% of the votes in, he's winning by a 6 point margin.

Late Update: Scratch that. With 99% in, it's an 8 point spread. Not even close."

Bush gives up golf to honor war sacrifice

I am sorry, but this just doesn't cut it for me:

"For the first time, Bush revealed a personal way in which he has tried to acknowledge the sacrifice of soldiers and their families.

“I don't want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the commander in chief playing golf,” he said. “I feel I owe it to the families to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal.”"

He goes on to parrot Doug Feith and say that he was simply wrong, not a liar about the war; then decides to bad mouth Jimmy Carter while suggesting (again) that he (Bush) operates out of principle and values.

“That will make you popular,” he said. “Popularity is fleeting. … Principles are forever.”

And then this:

His Christian faith has increased in office, since “part of the faith walk is to understand your weaknesses and is to constantly try to embetter yourself and get closer to the Lord, and that's a daily occurrence.”

“Obviously, there's been some tough moments in here,” he said. “When you know that somebody lost their loved one as a result of a decision that I made, that's a tough moment. If you're a faithful person, you try to empathize with the suffering that that person is going through. On the other hand, there is a knowledge that the good Lord can comfort during these moments of grief. And that's what I ask for in my prayer.”

HIs faith is stronger, even as he authorized torture.

Sigh.

Argh--I have been tagged

By both Natalie and Tony.

The rules are:
1. The rules of the game get posted at the beginning.
2. Each player answers the questions about himself or herself.
3. At the end of the post, the player then tags five people and posts their names, then goes to their blogs and leaves them a comment, letting them know they’ve been tagged and asking them to read your blog.

Ten years ago, I was . . .

Struggling to write my dissertation. I floundered around for a long time before I really started producing pages.

5 Things on Today’s “To Do” List

1. Turn in grades.
2. Walk crazy dogs.
3. Avoid student emails asking for grade changes.
4. Have beers with Doug.
5. Practice guitar.

3 Bad Habits:

1. Procrastination
2. Reading political blogs and raging about Republicans.
3. Watching TV I don't really like instead of reading or listening to music or playing music.

5 Places I’ve Lived:

Spokane, WA

Norwood, CO

Fort Collins, CO

Houston, TX

Norman, OK

5 Jobs I’ve Held:

1. cowboy

2. cook/busboy

3. microfiche processor

4. IT specialist

5. history instructor

Tag, you're it

Jessika
Anglican
Educat
Steve at Marin County Jesus
Kevin Powell
Sarah and/or Dwight
SOF

Yeah, I tagged more than the rules call for. But then again, I have never been that good at following rules.

Interesting

Former Streak's Blog commenter Les Puryear to run for SBC president. Perhaps that explains why he is a "former" commenter.

Jon Stewart and Doug Feith

I found this interview very interesting. Bottom line? My uncharitable take? Feith says that the administration wasn't lying, they were just incompetent. (Oh, and this is the longer version than shown on air. Especially the second half. )

Far religious right considers an Obama Presidency "a plague"

Oddly enough, they don't see 8 years of Bush as bad. I guess.

(Apologies for linking to Bob Novak) I have never trusted Mike Huckabee or homeschool advocate Michael Farris, and here is why:

"Huckabee in personal conversation with him embraced the concept that an Obama presidency might be what the American people deserve. That fits what has largely been a fringe position among evangelicals, that the pain of an Obama presidency is in keeping with the Bible's prophecy.

According to this activist, at the heart of the let-Obama-win movement is longtime Virginia conservative leader Michael Farris -- the nation's leading home-school advocate, who is now chancellor of Patrick Henry College (in Purcellville, Va.) for home-schooled students. Farris is regarded as one of the hardest-edged Christian politicians. He is reported in evangelical circles to promote the biblical justification for an Obama plague-like presidency."

Phyllis Schlafly on marital rape

Here is a hint. she doesn't think it even exists.

Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?
I think that when you get married you have consented to sex. That's what marriage is all about, I don't know if maybe these girls missed sex ed. That doesn't mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery. If there is any violence or mistreatment that can be dealt with by criminal prosecution, by divorce or in various ways. When it gets down to calling it rape though, it isn't rape, it's a he said-she said where it's just too easy to lie about it.

Was the way in which your statement was portrayed correct?

Yes. Feminists, if they get tired of a husband or if they want to fight over child custody, they can make an accusation of marital rape and they want that to be there, available to them.

So you see this as more of a tool used by people to get out of marriages than as legitimate-

Yes, I certainly do."

Another American nightmare

Careless Detention | System of Neglect details how in the recent war on immigration, people die. In this case, some 83 have died in crowded and poorly managed camps.

"The investigation found a hidden world of flawed medical judgments, faulty administrative practices, neglectful guards, ill-trained technicians, sloppy record-keeping, lost medical files and dangerous staff shortages. It is also a world increasingly run by high-priced private contractors. There is evidence that infectious diseases, including tuberculosis and chicken pox, are spreading inside the centers.

Federal officials who oversee immigration detention said last week that they are 'committed to ensuring the safety and well-being' of everyone in their custody.

Some 83 detainees have died in, or soon after, custody during the past five years. The deaths are the loudest alarms about a system teetering on collapse. Actions taken -- or not taken -- by medical staff members may have contributed to 30 of those deaths, according to confidential internal reviews and the opinions of medical experts who reviewed some death files for The Post."

What is it with Republicans and contractors? Don't they cost more money? Is it a way to simply move the cost around?

Either way, this is just another story that makes me hang my head as an American. We need a good conversation on immigration--I don't deny that. But what the Republicans have given us is not that. They have given us a knee jerk fear based approach with the typical Bush style of administering the problem. Ten bucks says the person running this system is friends of someone--not someone with experience.

Sigh.

Amazing Grace

We watched the film Amazing Grace tonight (yeah, we are always about 6-8 months behind the rest of the world). We both loved the film for a lot of reasons. I think we both appreciated that this 18th century man loved animals and established one of the first groups for the protection of animals. And we both loved that the film presented a person like Wilberforce who was dedicated to making the world a better place.

It is hard to watch a film like this and not see the world around us. A political environment where fear is pitted against morality and right. Or where dissent is suggested to be unpatriotic. Or where profit is leveraged against humanity. (And something missed by those who saw this in the theatre, I suspect, was a clip connecting the colonial slave trade to the contemporary and ongoing slave trade.)

I remember a wise friend of mine warning about the film Amistad. She noted that it was very easy for us to project ourselves backwards and ignore that many of the people we admire, or perhaps the ones most like us, would have been on the wrong side of the equation. Or at least, would have held views that today we find abominable. Kind of the historical version of Crash Davis asking Annie Savoy why people in past lives were always famous, and never, as he put it, "Joe Schmo."

Very easy to look at this slave trade and project ourselves onto the Wilberforce character or John Newton. Newton is a good example. Credited with the hymn "Amazing Grace" he became a Christian during his work in the slave trade. That part is often cited. But we often forget that he continued to work in the slave trade for the next decade and didn't really denounce slavery until later.

Perhaps I have an axe here, I don't know. I remember a very recent conversation with a very conservative Christian. I challenged him about the world had conservatives had their way. Would we have abolished slavery, segregation, women's inequality, child labor? He chided me that, "liberals didn't end slavery, Christians did."

I think he is right. Or perhaps at least partly right. Christians did play a strong role in abolishing slavery, and this film makes that point very well. That should be remembered and appreciated. But they also played a strong role in the perpetuation of slavery and racism in this country. And perhaps that is the sticking point for me. This film is a great reminder of people fighting injustice, and doing so often because of and informed by their religious faith. But it is easy to ignore that people of faith can defend injustice too. The past and the present collide. People of faith rally for civil rights, but also defend torture. People of faith weep for a world in poverty, but also rally around the rich and the powerful.

Young evangelicals leaving the GOP

Not necessarily for the Dems, but they are leaving. This one will go against his family:

"He's a born-again Christian with two family members in the military. He grew up in the Bible Belt, where almost everyone he knew was Republican. But this fall, he's breaking a handful of stereotypes: He plans to vote for Democrat Barack Obama.

'I think a lot of Christians are having trouble getting behind everything the Republicans stand for,' said Dudley, 20, a sophomore at Seattle Pacific University."

Others are choosing independence or unaffiliated. But from my perspective, the fact that they are turning on the false religion of the GOP is the best news. As I have said repeatedly, I don't think the Democratic party is necessarily the answer to the evil that the Republicans have become. Hillary and Bill are showing us all just one reason that is true. But the GOP has been taken over by government-hating, pro-war, pro-torture people. The fact that evangelicals have aligned themselves with the GOP is just disturbing.

"This could turn out to be the election where both parties realize that the evangelical vote is so hopelessly split down the middle that it's not worth courting them at all because what parties need are blocs that can be appealed to en masse," Crouch said. "Paradoxically, evangelicals would become less relevant than ever before."

Braun, the seminary student, said he's not totally committed to any candidate yet.

"I just keep thinking, if Jesus were alive now, he wouldn't necessarily be voting Republican," he said.

John McCain is a maverick

Just ask him. And his poor wife. She hates the political attacks on her children. You know, like the ones done by her hubby's new BFF George Bush? And she is not just a stickler for principle in campaign tactics, but also ethics even though she refuses to release her tax returns as she uses her wealth to fund his campaign. But he is a maverick. Dammit.

Now the maverick shows just how big a maverick by appointing a lobbyist to run his convention. Don't worry, the lobbyist in question only represented the military junta that runs Burma.

But Jeremiah Wright is a problem because he makes us question what Obama really believes?

Sigh.

****

Update. Just saw that the former Myanmar lobbyist resigned from McCain's convention.

Saturday is the day for music

Well, at least to note a few forthcoming albums that have me a little interested.

First up is the first album in 4 years (or something) from the Old 97's which is coming out next Tuesday. You can watch a little video there at Amazon which gives you a little insight on the appeal of the band. I remember seeing them at a club in Austin and they just simply blew me away. Their last album, however, really didn't impress me, so I am excited about this one.

Second, and I just learned of this in my new issue of Paste magazine, is the new album from Alejandro Escovedo which will be out late June. Readers here know that Alejandro is one of my favorite artists and perhaps one of the best rocker's that you have never heard of. Unlike the Old 97s, his last album was great and we were able to catch him on tour. Great stuff.

Any albums you are looking at this summer?

***

Here in Norman, btw, we had a weird google outage that kept me from posting comments or blog posts all morning. Was that just in OK?

Sigh. Why Republicans make me sad

Michael Gerson still on the patriotism kick:

The problem here is not that Obama is unpatriotic -- a foolish, unfair, destructive charge -- but that Obama has declared himself superior to an almost universal form of popular patriotism. And this sense of superiority, revealed in case after case, has political consequences, because the Obama narrative reinforces the Democratic narrative. It is now possible to imagine Obama at a cocktail party with Kerry, Al Gore and Michael Dukakis, sharing a laugh about gun-toting, Bible-thumping, flag-pin-wearing, small-town Americans."

As one blogger (I forget where I read this) noted, David Kuo's book showed that, in fact, the Bush White House was filled with people mocking the religious voters behind their back.

And God help me, but I am damn tired of "lapel pin" patriotism. And bumper sticker patriotism. And t-shirt patriotism.

The VEEP betting pool begins

Obama Vice President Picks: Who Are The Frontrunners? - Politics on The Huffington Post

Put me down for Webb or Wesley Clark.

Yeah, we all know that now...

Al Meyerhoff had dinner with the McCain's and learned this

And as McCain flipped burgers, I could not help but ask his views about then candidate George W. Bush.

"He's as dumb as a stump" McCain offered.

Words kind of fail me

And I thought the Precious Moment's chapel was bizarre. But this?

Wow.

This isn't good news for Clinton

Political Radar: Obama Now Takes The Lead in Superdelegates Too

The issue of Race redux

Frank Rich notes The All-White Elephant in the Room and reminds us that the double standard is not just between Jeremiah Wright and John Hagee, but throughout the coverage of our campaigns:

"When Rudy Giuliani, still a viable candidate, successfully courted Pat Robertson for an endorsement last year, few replayed Mr. Robertson’s greatest past insanities. Among them is his best-selling 1991 tome, “The New World Order,” which peddled some of the same old dark conspiracy theories about “European bankers” (who just happened to be named Warburg, Schiff and Rothschild) that Mr. Farrakhan has trafficked in. Nor was Mr. Giuliani ever seriously pressed to explain why his cronies on the payroll at Giuliani Partners included a priest barred from the ministry by his Long Island diocese in 2002 following allegations of sexual abuse. Much as Mr. Wright officiated at the Obamas’ wedding, so this priest officiated at (one of) Mr. Giuliani’s. Did you even hear about it?"

Quote of the Day (er, from yesterday)

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan:

"The representative of working class white America is now using her own multi-million dollar fortune to ensure that the little people's voices are heard. It's a nice contrast with the elitist, commie egghead who has revolutionized campaign finance with 1.5 million small donors."

Status anxiety

Sullivan links to an interesting study that suggests that the desire for hierarchy is hardwired into our brains:

"The study 'confirms that our brains are exquisitely sensitive to position in the hierarchy,' says epidemiologist Michael Marmot of University College London. 'If the hierarchy is stable, we seem to ignore those below us but focus on those higher up. If unstable, and we are in danger of losing status, areas of the brain linked to emotions are aroused.'"

That last line is key to my own thinking right now. I am increasingly convinced that many people are motivated so much by status that they often seek jobs or promotions that they really don't want or need, and unintentionally put themselves into positions where they aren't happy. All because of the need for status. If you have ever watched someone completely inflate their accomplishments in front of your eyes, you know exactly what I am talking about.

In academia, I see it all the time (or more accurately for me, on the fringes of academia). And it messes with your head. When you get a Ph.D. you think that it will impress people. And it does some. For about 5 minutes. After that, it is really up to whether you have anything else to offer. If not, the Ph.D. doesn't carry very far, trust me. And it is even worse within the academic cult (h/t M) because there everyone is either already a Ph.D. or seeking one. Those who have it don't see it as having status because, well, they already have it. They often look down on you if you aren't tenure track, or not published, or blah blah blah.

But, obviously, status is a problem well outside this little area. I imagine if you look around at the conflicts you observe, many are about status, or perceived status, or perceived attacks on perceived status. I have worked really hard on this--perhaps because of my own grad school experience. I have worked really hard to understand what my degree means and what it doesn't. I am not always successful, mind you, but I try. I hate it when people use their status as a club, and I see that all the time around me. I am proud of what I accomplished, mostly because I know how hard I worked to finish the degree. But I also know how little I know....

Research: Conservatives better at rationalization?

I didn't read the whole story yet, but this is interesting:

"Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason: Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities.

Regardless of marital status, income or church attendance, right-wing individuals reported greater life satisfaction and well-being than left-wingers, the new study found. Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person's tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities."

Post-primary stuff

Perusing the news this morning, I saw more and more signs that the primary may be coming to an end. Rumors are flying that Wesley Clark called Hillary last night to urge her to drop out, and another said that she will be firmly out by June 15.

One of Sully's readers had the funniest take on the fact that Hillary seems to be the only one at the party who doesn't realize it is over:

Hillz is now that person at the party who's had 6 too many jello shots, is talking abnormally loudly and is incapable of understanding the fact that she has overstayed her welcome. And she's starting to hiccup.

C'mon Hillz, let's get your coat and we'll walk with you to the door..."

Heh.

****

Evidently there is a bit of infighting within the conservative wing of the SBC. Shocking, I know. Evidently, President Frank Page suggested that the SBC is in decline because some perceive the SBC as "mean-spirited, hurtful, and angry." You had me at "mean-spirited," Frank.

Well, Paige "Shootem if you got 'em" Patterson is not happy, and goes out of his way to prove that his mean-spirit is exactly what God likes.

The present state cannot please our Lord, but it is a safe bet that He is more pleased about what we are attempting globally than about the social and environmentally based programs of moderate and liberal churches.

Yes, of course. Every social justice program makes the Baby Jesus cry. Oh, and people who criticize Paige are not "real" Christians:

But I cannot help but suspect that an incipient post-modern influence is the womb from which part of this criticism arises. The world and much of "Christianity" is irritated that Southern Baptists on one hand continue to oppose abortion, the practicing of homosexuality, gender confusion, the alcoholic beverage industry that annually kills, harms, and creates so much sorrow in the social order, and on the other hand support biblical role assignments in the home and church.

I am sure glad Paige is there for us.

In an almost related note (something about flaming self-righteousness), Tony calls our attention to a proposed National Ten Commandments Day. That will show them. No word if the proposed "beautiful stone artwork tablets" are small enough to actually pummel sinners with. But we can only hope.

****

Let's call this the "even a blind pig finds an acorn now and then" category. Chris Matthews chastizes Rush Limbaugh for "project chaos" (or whatever Rushbo is calling it--where the drug addict calls for Republicans to corrupt the Democratic primaries--oh, and he also said that it was his dream that the Democratic Convention end in massive riots).

“I have to offer a ‘Keith-style’ Special Comment on that. Anyone who voted to screw up the political system of this country with the purpose of mischief should carry that with them the rest of their lives. What a ridiculous way to use the vote for which people fought and died — to use that vote to make mischief. I hope you’re proud of yourself.”

"Holiday from reality"

Heh.

But "elite" opinion was almost uniformly contemptuous about the proposal. Examples from left and right:

• Tom Friedman of The New York Times: "So ridiculous...it takes your breath away"
• Jonathan Alter of Newsweek: "Hillary Clinton has now joined John McCain in proposing the most irresponsible policy idea of the year"
• Jerry Taylor, a fellow for the Cato Institute: It's a "holiday from reality"
• Robert Shapiro, former undersecretary of commerce in the Clinton administration: "Stated as clearly as I can, it's utterly misguided both environmentally and economically"
• Max Schulz, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute: "I think it is close to political pandering. It is bad policy and political gimmickry"
• Harvard Professor and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Bush, Greg Mankiw: "What you learn in Economics 101 is that if producers can't produce much more, when you cut the tax on that good the tax is kept ... by the suppliers and is not passed on to consumers"

And maybe proof that the American people are not as dumb as Hillary and McCain believe:

So said the experts. But what about drivers, taxpayers, and voters? What did they think of the idea?

Last Sunday, watching ABC's This Week, Americans saw what might have been one of the most incisive teaching moments in the 2008 presidential campaign thus far. Kara Glennan, an Indiana voter, asked Sen. Clinton this question:

"I have -- Sen. Clinton, I actually make less than $25,000 a year, so talking about gas prices is not academic for me. I really do feel pain at the pump. However, I do feel pandered to when you talk about suspending the gas tax. I don't think that it's really a reasonable plan, and call me crazy, but I actually listen to economists, because I think that they know what they studied."

To which Sen. Clinton replied:

"Well, I'll tell you what, I'm not going to put my lot in with economists, because I know if we get it right, if we actually did it right, if we had a president who used all the tools of the presidency, we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented effectively."

It is not clear if anyone immediately appreciated the teaching moment that had just passed. The following day, The New York Times published a poll on the gas tax holiday proposal in which "an overwhelming majority of voters said candidates calling for the suspension of the federal gasoline tax this summer were acting to help themselves politically, rather than to help ordinary Americans."

Heh.

Quote of the Day--Part 2

The history of jingoistic patriotism:

From Kauffman’s Ain’t My America:
American flag lapel pins had been distributed to members before the president spoke to Congress on April 2, 1917, requesting a declaration of war. It took a certain obdurate courage to refuse to wear the colors; Senator La Follette was among the refusers, as was the Mississippi senator Vardaman."

"A Prison of Shame, and It’s Ours"

Kristoff on Gitmo:

"The new material suggests two essential truths about Guantanamo:

First, most of the inmates were probably innocent all along, but Pakistanis or Afghans turned them over to America in exchange for large cash rewards. The moment we offered $25,000 rewards for Al Qaeda supporters, any Arab in the region risked being kidnapped and turned over as a terrorism suspect.

Second, torture was routine, especially early on. That’s why more than 100 prisoners have died in American custody in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo."

The legacy of Bush and Cheney.

Quote of the day?

Courtesy of you know who:

"'You know, obviously, there's some good days and some bad days. I feel so strongly about my principles and my values and I'm an optimistic guy; that what may appear to be really difficult to deal with -- like my buddies from Midland, Texas -- that for me it's just part of the job. Interestingly enough, it is a lot harder to have been the son of the President than to be the President."

Yes, "principled values" will be exactly how I remember his Presidency.

Former commander speaks out

And I am not sure what to make of this excerpt from his forthcoming memoir. It doesn't make Donald Rumsfeld look very good, that is for sure.

Evidently, the former commander also has few good things to say about former NYC Police Commissioner and disgraced HS nominee Bernie Kerik, alleging that when he worked in Iraq, Kerik was more interested in busting Baghdad prostitutes than addressing security issues.

Sanchez also told The News that he was "flabbergasted" when he heard that Kerik was nominated secretary of Homeland Security.

Hagee continued

Sarah Posner has more on the theology foreign policy of Hagee:

"In Jerusalem Countdown, Hagee explains how the Book of Ezekiel prophesies that an army of Arabs (including Iran, although Hagee doesn't explain that Iran is not an Arab country), led by Russia, will invade Israel, but that God will exterminate all but one-sixth of the 'Russian axis of evil.' Hagee actually describes God's murderous judgment as 'His strategy of war.'

Ezekiel also predicts, according to Hagee, that 'judgment is coming not only to the invading Russian force but also on the headquarters of that power and upon all who support it or allowed this attack on Israel.' Focusing on Ezekiel 39:6, which reads 'I will send fire on ... those who live in security in the coastlands,' Hagee argues that God could, in the form of hurricanes, tsunamis, or nuclear war, bring judgment on the East and West coasts of the United States if it does not protect Israel from said attack. Why would God allow this? Hagee asks. He explains by quoting Genesis 12:3: 'I will bless those who bless you [Israel] and will curse him who curses you.'

Keep in mind that McCain says his association with Hagee is different from Obama's association with Wright because he doesn't go to Hagee's church -- he just likes Hagee's politics on Israel. Doesn't that make you feel better?"

When you add Hagee telling his millions of watchers that the US is under Satan's rule and that public schools promote abortion, the crazy Wright we saw last week is still saner than this guy.

Our troops and our politics

And contractors. Someone in the army told me that the days of KP are over since they have contractors to do all that work. I don't know if that is good or not, but at least the contractors should do the right thing. I am not convinced that all of them do, and am even less convinced that Bush cares. This story about KBR wiring killing our own soldiers just makes me ill. And worse, the report suggests that KBR mocked one critic for raising safety concerns.

But those of us on the left don't value the troops, right?

****

The most troubling thing about Hillary's campaign has been her willingness to use the very same right wing tactics used against her husband, Al Gore and John Kerry. We are Democrats, dammit. We should not model after Karl Freaking Rove. The mildest example is her gas tax holiday pander that she took from John McCain. Every economist says this is a horrible idea. It will increase demand for gas (which will raise prices, not lower them), will provide more funding for extremists, and do nothing to fundamentally examine the problem. (Sam Stein finds absolutely no experts who think this idea is a good one.) But Hillary here models after the religious right's response to critics of, well, any of their programs or approaches to science (cough, evolution, cough), and says:

"STEPHANOPOULOS: 'But can you name an economist who thinks this makes sense?'
CLINTON: 'Well, I'll tell you what, I'm not going to put my lot in with economists.'"

Sigh. That is the Republican response to experts showing that abstinence only doesn't work. That is the right wing response to climate change, and evolution and the death penalty. This is not the rational response of someone who certainly knows better.

****

H/t to Oklahoma Lefty for this list of TV's 50 Best Comedies of All Time. OL has some reservations about the list, but I have some serious ones. Glad to see Get Smart so well respected, but Roseanne in the top 10? And Arrested Development at 37? No NewsRadio at all? And while Family Guy makes the list, no King of the Hill?

Boo, I say. Boo.

Camera advice?

We are shopping for a new camera and wondering if anyone has some suggestions. We want a compact model that we can easily carry in a pocket; has at least 8 megapixels (7 would probably do) and good reliable features. At this point, we are leaning toward Canon since we have had such good luck with them in the past.

Any suggestions out there?

Family Research Council says nuts to law

Urges Pastors to "cross the line" and tell people who to vote for.

Friday morning

Saw that Tony had his own Friday Morning Stuff that includes a suggestion that an Obama presidency could actually resurrect actual and genuine conservatism by removing the hold that neo-cons have over the movement through the Iraq war. Interesting idea. I would welcome a return of real conservatives. Watching McCain pander to the neo-cons and religious right doesn't make me hopeful, but...

****

I took some grief offline for my comments on race and Jeremiah Wright. I still believe that the disparity in response to Wright v. Hagee and Parsley reflects some racial issues. But I also believe that there is much legitimate criticism of Wright.

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan: "Even the pastor's defenders think he's lost it in the last week. For Marty's previous assessment of Wright, see here. Wright is doubtless a complex figure: you cannot deny his theological depth, his intellectual gifts, his service in the Marines, his contribution to his community. But he is also clearly an ego-maniac, as some preachers often are. And he has succumbed to bitterness, envy, paranoia and racial polarization. One thing cable news cannot convey: human beings can contain a great deal of good and bad at the same time."

****

Obsidian Wings notes that Antonin Scalia seems to think that torture during interrogations is not prohibited by the "cruel and unusual punishment" portion of the Constitution because it isn't punishment.

****

Daily Show noted the other night, that many American ministers have a history of saying radical and stupid stuff. That includes Billy Graham who was caught on tape telling Nixon that he resented the stranglehold the Jews had on our country. Graham first denied those allegations, but when the tapes came out, he apologized profusely, to his credit.

****

Speaking of religious idiocy (religion isn't always idiotic, mind you), Boing Boing notes Ben Stein going on Trinity Broadcasting Network and speaking to one of the Crouch family.

Stein: When we just saw that man, I think it was Mr. Myers [biologist P.Z. Myers], talking about how great scientists were, I was thinking to myself the last time any of my relatives saw scientists telling them what to do they were telling them to go to the showers to get gassed … that was horrifying beyond words, and that’s where science — in my opinion, this is just an opinion — that’s where science leads you.

Crouch: That’s right.

Stein: …Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.

Crouch: Good word, good word.

Not only does this ignore the vast amount of atrocities that occurred well before Darwin's writings, but it also nicely ignores all the benefits from science that I am positive Stein's family has benefited from. Unless they have sworn off doctors because of the doctors used by the Nazis?

****

And Bush is finally back into the 70s. Unfortunately for him, that is not an approval rating:

'No president has ever had a higher disapproval rating in any CNN or Gallup poll; in fact, this is the first time that any president's disapproval rating has cracked the 70 percent mark,' said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

Nixon wasn't even this unpopular after impeachment.

****

Ok, a little music diversion. Earlier this week, Feist dropped by the Colbert Report. I first disliked her album until I gave it a few listens. Here, she performs "I feel it all" and I am so impressed with her voice and how good that guitar sounds. Very nice.

Enjoy.

But Wright is dangerous?

Let's count the ways that John Hagee is more dangerous than Jeremiah Wright

In a sermon given at his San Antonio, Texas Cornerstone megachurch that was telecast and available in up to ninety million homes worldwide, controversial pastor John Hagee, who has endorsed the presidential bid of Arizona Republican Senator John McCain, Jr., claimed that American public schools provide abortion services. Hagee stated, "Your daughter can get an abortion in public school without telling you but she can't get an aspirin without your approval." The pastor also claimed that public school teachers can force their students to study a "precursor to witchcraft" and suggests that America has invited "satan" and demonic spirits into its public school systems by failing to display the Ten Commandments on classroom walls. Presidential hopeful John McCain, Jr. has said he is "glad to have" Hagee's support and "admires" the leadership of the Texas pastor - who has declared God has cursed and doomed America.

If the bold doesn't come through on your screen, just focus on how many households can listen to the idiot, and what the idiot is saying about our public schools.

Heh. Tony and Dave Barry on the "economic stimulus" plan

It is funny because it is so true:

"Q. What is the purpose of this payment?

A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?

A. Shut up."

The "angry black man"

This Jeremiah Wright business has annoyed me to no end. Mary sent me this blog that places Wright in the Jonah tradition and it is a thoughtful explanation that keeps Wright understandable within the black church experience.

But last night, against my better judgement, I watched Newt Gingrich on the Daily Show. What a moron. And when discussing Wright and Obama, he said exactly what some of my conservative friends have also suggested--that Wright's hateful rhetoric and Obama's friendship with him for 20 years means that we "really don't know what Obama believes."

Right. Of course, John McCain sought out the idiot moron Hagee and then renounced (line-item renouncing, as I said the other day) bits that he didn't like while maintaining the idiot moron's endorsement. Imagine if Obama did that? And still no conservative will suggest that McCain's acceptance of Parsley ("kill all the Muslims") or Hagee ("Catholic church is a whore and God drowned NOLA to get the gays") raises any question about what McCain actually believes or stands for.

Why?

I am starting to believe it is the specter of racism. One of the very positive outcomes of the Civil Rights movement was the marginalization of open racism. The Klan and their counterparts were pushed further to the margins of society and membership in those horrible groups appropriately shamed.

So now, with a prominent black man running for President, open racism is really off the table. Conservatives who are troubled by his race can't say that directly, but have to find another way to criticize him. The funniest was that Obama is an elitist, which struck me as incredibly funny in the context of American race relations. Easier, I think to suggest that he is a closet Muslim, though I hope that is relegated to the most uniformed.

But then comes Jeremiah Wright and a good way out. Hard to criticize Obama when he is so damn smart, articulate, thoughtful, etc. But when you have an "angry black man" behind him, all of a sudden, a useful tool. After all, even conservatives believe that race relations in this country have sucked--how could Obama not be angry? But being angry is the worst thing a black man can be. Can't acknowledge that anger or you become dangerous. John McCain can embrace his anger. That is "passion" in a white politician. But Obama cannot.

And when he refuses to be angry, people just impose Jeremiah Wright in his place. Voila--one angry black man and an excuse not to vote for him. But one that allows them to claim it has nothing to do with Obama's skin color.

Sigh.

More Obama and Wright

Thanks for the nice thoughts yesterday. Perhaps I am a bit of a moody personality, but I am doing fine today. I finished planting the garden yesterday and have been relatively productive today. Still avoiding grading, but that is no sign of depression!

I was just about to post another rant about the ridiculous media event that keeps playing the Wright "God Damn America" clip when the former pastor went to the National Press Club. The media response is still ridiculous, especially when you compare the criticism or analysis of Hagee and Parsley. For example, while there has been at least some questioning of Hagee's ridiculous theology, there has been nearly none on Parsley.

And when Wright went on Bill Moyers, as we have discussed several times, his responses were thoughtful and even prophetic. But on Monday it became clear that he had no concern about how his views or beliefs were hurting Obama. In fact, it appears there is some resentment or something there where the Reverend may not even support Obama. I don't know. But his defense of Louis Farakhan and other statements about Zionism were clearly over the line. And on purpose. He has to know that this will cause Obama problems.

Or perhaps he did it to give Obama another chance to repudiate him. I don't know. But repudiate him he did:

"Sen. Barack Obama Tuesday said he was outraged by comments made by his former Pastor Jeremiah Wright.

'I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday,' Obama told reporters at a news conference."

I always thought that Obama was right to not attack the man before. But now, he had to do something.

****

Another example of how far we have fallen and how quickly, came in this story about a former Prosecutor who just testified for Hamdan at Gitmo:

Davis told Navy Capt. Keith J. Allred, who presided over the hearing, that top Pentagon officials, including Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R. England, made it clear to him that charging some of the highest-profile detainees before elections this year could have "strategic political value."

Davis said he wants to wait until the cases -- and the military commissions system -- have a more solid legal footing. He also said that Defense Department general counsel William J. Haynes II, who announced his retirement in February, once bristled at the suggestion that some defendants could be acquitted, an outcome that Davis said would give the process added legitimacy.

"He said, 'We can't have acquittals,' " Davis said under questioning from Navy Lt. Cmdr. Brian Mizer, the military counsel who represents Hamdan. " 'We've been holding these guys for years. How can we explain acquittals? We have to have convictions.' "

Davis also decried as unethical a decision by top military officials to allow the use of evidence obtained by coercive interrogation techniques. He said Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann, the legal adviser to the top military official overseeing the commissions process, was improperly willing to use evidence derived from waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning. "To allow or direct a prosecutor to come into the courtroom and offer evidence they felt was torture, it puts a prosecutor in an ethical bind," Davis testified. But he said Hartmann replied that "everything was fair game -- let the judge sort it out."

The triple play here. Using the justice system exclusively for political leverage, gaming the system to insure convictions, and then using evidence obtained through torture. If you had told me Americans would do this with the full support of the President and Vice President, I would have thought you were crazy just a few years ago. Now, I believe this man.

****

Speaking of bad trends:

One of the darkest developments of many dark developments in the Bush years has been the slow ascent of Christianism as a core value of the military. The promotion of Christianists throughout the armed services, the insistence by the president that no public institution be regarded as a place where religion should be silent, clear discrimination against Jews and atheists in military educational institutions: the possibility of a secular military dedicated to defending all Americans regardless of their faith or lack of it has been called into question under the current administration. The resilience of the ban on gays - while the military has granted a record number of waivers to criminals - can only be understood if one sees the US military as an increasingly religious institution at this point, and not a rational secular one. The latest story of an atheist soldier being threatened by superiors is believable in this context.

The story is a chilling one--if true--where a superior officer threatens to bar soldiers from re-enlistment or even bring charges against them for discussing atheism. They were further told by the officer that they were betraying their country and the founding fathers.

Sully finds a commenter at Volokh's blog who defends this attack on atheism and refers to the American military as a "Christian army." We can hope that this commenter is an outlier, but with the administration in power, who the hell knows. Historical ignorance is rampant.

Ok, back to work.

Eh

I have been a little morose lately and am not even sure why. Spring has always been a little hard on me for reasons I really can't quite identify. Perhaps it is the uptick in allergy symptoms, or the warmer days and nights. In some cases, it brings back memories of last year. I still miss my dog Alafair a lot lately.

Most of my mood is probably more about fatigue and stress. (Let's just hope that some jackass doesn't pop into the comments and tell me that since I accept the science of evolution, I can't feel sad or stressed because those are just biological responses). The project I spent the last few months working on was a job application that ended up just not working out. It was worth a shot, and I certainly don't regret going through the process, but in the end, it just wasn't going to happen in a way that was good for SOF and myself. And as much as I am at peace with that, the last few months have just worn me out.

I will be fine. We are working on our vegetable garden and trying to get our yard in shape. That is fun and fills me with a sense of anticipation for the warmer weather--something I can often find myself dreading if I am not careful. But I am always happier when I accept the weather (or any of the millions of things outside my control) rather than fighting them. Duh. Pretty obvious, but I find it harder than that to maintain. I often think about the plaque my mother made for me years ago with the serenity prayer on it. Good advice, that.

That is something I keep trying to remind myself about the election as well. I voted in the OK primary, and have contributed money to Obama's campaign. I can do no more than that. Getting anxious about the election doesn't actually accomplish much.

Don't get me wrong. I will still rant about this stuff. That is part of how I work through this anxiety and frustration and helplessness. But I work to not let it get me down.

Anyway

I think I would take Jeremiah Wright any day

Read the transcript of his interview with Bill Moyers.

And by contrast, read what John Hagee says still about Katrina and the gays.

You tell me which is more of a problem? The one that has a candidate still taking his endorsement and trying to "line-item" distance himself? Or the one that Obama was forced to reject?

And let me say another thing. I used to watch John Hagee and Rod Parsley on television. I am not sure why, but I did. I found them horrible and yet interesting at the same time. So, I am familiar with their work, and at least for Hagee, he has only Bible training. He has been in religious school after religious school--and not theology. But read the Jeremiah Wright interview and just see how much more educated this man is. Not only is he smarter, but he actually understands theology and history and culture. I would bet that John Hagee would not even get some of the references.

And that, in some ways, is one of the more troubling differences between the two. You may disagree with some of Jeremiah Wright's conclusions, but he is not just some angry black man raised in conspiracy theories. He is a well-educated and thoughtful man. John Hagee, on the other hand, represents the worst of the anti-intellectual wing of the conservatives. He reads the Bible and that is all that is needed (except, of course, to sell his books pushing for war with Iran).

I will take Reverend Wright any day.

Role of government

In an interesting piece on FEMA and John McCain comes a very good articulation of the right wing approach to government, and its open hostility toward all things government and all civil servants:

That's the right-wing approach to government management, applied to virtually every domestic agency throughout the Bush years: politicize, privatize, devolve, and cut.

It is irresponsible policy and about time that the adult Republicans that I know--the ones who know better--stand up to that wing of the Republican party. Government cannot and will not solve all our problems. But it isn't our enemy either, and there are things that government can do well.

I can't say it any better

TAPPED Archive | The American Prospect: "REACTIONS TO THE WRIGHT INTERVIEW: THE STUPIDITY CONTINUES.

The transcript isn't up yet, but on Hardball last night, Chris Matthews' roundtable (consisting of Tucker Carlson, Margaret Carlson, and Michelle Bernard) concluded that the Bill Moyers interview of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright was very, very bad for Obama. (And they hadn't even seen the whole thing!) Matthews, in his inimitably clueless way, called the Wright 'flap' 'Obama's Iraq,' as if sending hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians to their deaths was comparable.

The political panel concluded that Wright had dug a 'deeper hole' for Obama and had in fact 'thrown Obama under the bus' when he said, as Kate quoted below, that Obama had said what he had to say as a politician, and that he would say what he has to say as a pastor, and everyone hates politicians. Because people might have otherwise forgotten that Obama is a politician."

Just pure stupidity.

Friday morning rant

Well, we shall see. Right now it is just a series of annoyances.

First idiot? How about Rush Limbaugh? Evidently, the drug using idiot is hoping there will be massive riots in Denver at the Democratic convention.

Several callers called in to the radio show to denounce Limbaugh's comments, when he later stated, "I am not inspiring or inciting riots, I am dreaming of riots in Denver."
Limbaugh said with massive riots in Denver, which he called "Operation Chaos," the people on the far left would look bad.

I know he is an idiot, but imagine how much America would freak out if Reverend Wright had said these things? The right gets away with a lot in this country. (Crooks and Liars has a rough transcript of a caller who took Rushbo to task for calling for violence. He ends up calling her the racist and a "mush mind," and says his main goal is to put liberals out of business.)

****

Speaking of Reverend Wright, he continues to be rehabilitated, while John McCain's less sane, less honorable version continues to make the right look hateful and stupid. Yeah, that's right, John Hagee reiterated that Katrina was God's poorly aimed way of stopping a homosexual parade. Of course, he didn't say "poorly aimed." But evidently God takes a shotgun approach to sin and to make sure he hit New Orleans, also took out the coastal regions of Mississippi and the rest of Louisiana. That is just how much God hates the gays, according to this braying idiot. Yet, it is Obama who has to answer for his spiritual advisor.

****

Ok, a little more idiocy (perhaps this post should be renamed). I have ranted on this for sometime, but the conservative insistence that we fun only abstinence education makes me angry. Since it doesn't work very well, it exposes those kids to more unwanted pregnancies and sexual diseases when they break their abstinence pledge. Turns out, some conservatives don't care and/or simply ignore evidence that they are funding bad policy:

"Republicans said even if some abstinence-only programs do not work, others do, and it would be wrong to end the funding.

Rep. John Duncan, a Tennessee Republican, said that it seems 'rather elitist' that people with academic degrees in health think they know better than parents what type of sex education is appropriate. 'I don't think it's something we should abandon,' he said of abstinence-only funding.

Charles Keckler of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said the Bush administration believes abstinence education programs send the healthiest message."

Sure. What is more important? The message or the outcome? And the message here is that we would rather kids catch an STD than tell them about ways to prevent it beyond abstinence?

******

Speaking of more idiocy, Sally Kern qualifies, I think, and also speaking of unintended consequences, Sarah points to a story where a company might not relocate to OKC because of such hateful statements. Well, that will show them, right Sally?

*****

John Ashcroft is a bit of a cipher. I remember his appointment as AG sending a shiver down my spine that Bush was clearly not interested in moderation. After he stepped down, I watched him babble about torture on the Daily Show and felt bad that he was once our AG. Then we learn that Ashcroft was mildly reasonable on wiretapping and the world makes a little less sense.

Well, the babbling torture defender is back. A very interesting story about Ashcroft visiting a very liberal and hostile campus (good for him) and how badly some of the students acted toward him (bad for them). But when a reasonable student (at least by her account) challenges Ashcroft on torture, he comes unhinged.

I have a lawyer friend who says that these people did not commit war crimes and that talking about war crimes is stupid. I am not sure I agree, but in any case, it appears to me that people like John Ashcroft are very nervous about that potential.

The Penn Primary, a Green Bible, and Dobson and torture

And a few other things. First, Hillary's 10 point win in Pennsylvania is likely to keep her in the race, but I, for one, hope that Oklahoma's Brad Henry's SuperDelegate endorsement of Obama is just the beginning of the deluge. Come on, Supers, you know you want to vote Obama, and the longer you wait, the more you help McCain.

Second, and about damn time, Ethics Daily announced a website resource called The Green Bible where they plan to warehouse information about environmental stewardship. This is exactly the kind of leadership the evangelical community has needed for a long time.

One of those links, however, caught my eye, and I am not sure how I missed it. The 7th of this month, Robert Parham noted that James Dobson was angry at John McCain for more than his support for stem cell research. The great mob boss of the evangelical right is also angry because McCain is concerned about global warming and wants to shut down Gitmo and stop American torture.

McCain spoke last week during to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council on Foreign Policy, and reiterated his support for governmental intervention in the global warming debate, proposed shutting down Guantanamo, blamed the U.S military for torturing prisoners of war and promised to pander to our European allies before defending America's interests around the world

Sigh. It just warms your heart, doesn't it? The founder of Focus on the Family doesn't mind torture.

I wish this shocked me, but of course, it does not.

Seriously? How dumb are these people?

Small Church's Obama Sign Causes Big Controversy - Greenville News Story - WYFF Greenville:

"Pastor Roger Byrd said that he just wanted to get people thinking. So last Thursday, he put a new message on the sign at the Jonesville Church of God.

It reads: 'Obama, Osama, hmm, are they brothers?'"

He is just asking, mind you--just TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO THINK. HE ISN'T A RACIST OR A MORON OR AN IDIOT.

Sigh. Amazing that these people get to vote, drive cars, and carry weapons. Worse, of course, is his assumption that if Obama were a Muslim, that would make him the same as bin Laden.

Oh Sweet Jesus!

And I am sorry for posting this, but the need for a masculine Jesus just won't go away:

And while his ministry is not to men in particular, Mark Driscoll, pastor of Seattle's Mars Hill Church, nevertheless desires greater testosterone in contemporary Christianity. In Driscoll's opinion, the church has produced "a bunch of nice, soft, tender, chickified church boys. … Sixty percent of Christians are chicks," he explains, "and the forty percent that are dudes are still sort of chicks."

Nope, calling men "sort of chicks" isn't offensive, nor intended to shame the men and the women at the same time. Not at all.

The aspect of church that men find least appealing is its conception of Jesus. Driscoll put this bluntly in his sermon "Death by Love" at the 2006 Resurgence theology conference (available at TheResurgence.com). According to Driscoll, "real men" avoid the church because it projects a "Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ" that "is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for." Driscoll explains, "Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude"; rather, he had "callused hands and big biceps." This is the sort of Christ men are drawn to—what Driscoll calls "Ultimate Fighting Jesus."

Always nice when you can combine more misogyny with a little gay bashing along the way.

Driscoll comes closest to imagining Jesus as the model of maleness when he argues that "latte-sipping Cabriolet drivers" do not represent biblical masculinity, because "real men"—like Jesus, Paul, and John the Baptist— are "dudes: heterosexual, win-a-fight, punch-you-in-the-nose dudes." In other words, because Jesus is not a "limp-wristed, dress-wearing hippie," the men created in his image are not sissified church boys; they are aggressive, assertive, and nonverbal.

Because to truly be a Christian man means I need to be willing to punch people in the mouth.

Sigh.

Still the torture president

Top Bush aides pushed for Guantanamo torture | World news | The Guardian

Larry Wilkerson, a former army officer and chief of staff to Colin Powell, US secretary of state at the time, told the Guardian: "I do know that Rumsfeld had neutralised the chairman [Myers] in many significant ways.

"The secretary did this by cutting [Myers] out of important communications, meetings, deliberations and plans.

"At the end of the day, however, Dick Myers was not a very powerful chairman in the first place, one reason Rumsfeld recommended him for the job".

He added: "Haynes, Feith, Yoo, Bybee, Gonzalez and - at the apex - Addington, should never travel outside the US, except perhaps to Saudi Arabia and Israel. They broke the law; they violated their professional ethical code. In future, some government may build the case necessary to prosecute them in a foreign court, or in an international court."

Troubling report about military propaganda under this administration

I am still reading this report from the NYT about this administration's use of retired officers to promote their agenda, but it is worth reading. It is also worth noting how much this sounds like a Clinton policy.

But however we see it, it seems to me that we need to have a serious discussion about the role of media in our culture. If I were President, I would advocate more attention to some kind of independent funding for news, or at least a requirement that every "news" organization had to return to some idea of the public good instead of measuring their news output just as another revenue stream.

Yeah, I am not holding my breath either. And no one should fear a President Streak anytime, well, ever.

*****

Yesterday was largely a day spent trying to clean up the backyard and catch up on a little sleep. But during a visit to the grocery store, I had a funny exchange with the young woman sacker. She kept looking at me, and finally said, "you know, you look a little like Johnny Depp." The checker then chimed in and said, "oh, I see it too."

I asked if that was a compliment, and they assured me it was, but that it might mean I need to grow a goatee and mustache. That won't happen, btw, but if you are wondering, evidently, this is what Streak looks like....





Well, maybe not....

Saturday

As my friend Anglican noted, this has been a rough week. Not terrible, mind you. I just spent the better part of the last two months working on something that just didn't pan out. And more than likely for the best, but it is still a bit disheartening when it falls apart. I found myself just completely worn out at the end of the week and trying to get back into some focus. I already feel much better. Still tired, and still have a lot to do, but better.

That is, of course, until I read the news. :) Anglican also sent me this great video of a priest standing up to a Fox reporter about Jeremiah Wright. Interesting about Wright to be sure, and a strong defense of the man, but the most telling thing for me was the absolute total lack of objectivity by the Fox reporter. Not even close and not even trying. For him, Wright is unAmerican and a bigot and hate monger, and that is it. There is no alternative, and that is where he starts the questions. Pretty much par for the course from Fox reporters, from what I have seen. Or from ABC's Charlie Gibson at the last debate when he framed the question as if supply side economics is established truth. Sigh.

Speaking of sighs, Hillary Clinton is back on the attack, or more accurately, still on the attack. And that would be great if she were attacking John McCain. But of course, she is attacking Obama and his supporters. She has a right to do that, but unfortunately, it appears that she is willing to destroy Obama even if it means losing in the fall. Personally, I think if we could get her to drop out of the race she cannot win, then the polling data that shows Obama and McCain in a dead heat would change dramatically. McCain is a train wreck candidate and the more exposure he gets, the more we will see that. But Hillary believes the Presidency is hers--that she is entitled to it. So much so, that she is willing to cozy up with Richard Mellon Scaife and emulate the very same partisan attacks that the right used against her husband. So much so, that she is now bashing the core activists of the Democratic party. She was overheard bashing MoveOn.org's members as radicals who opposed Afghanistan and now crash caucuses to undermine her. Hilzoy is not happy and notes:

"To say this about her opponents is just wrong. But to say it about the activist base of her party -- about the people who are motivated enough to show up for caucuses and participate in the electoral process -- is insane. Hillary Clinton is running for the nomination of the Democratic Party. She is trying to represent us. If she thinks that people like publius, who caucused in Texas, is worthy of contempt, or that the stunning increase in Democratic voter participation this year is not a cause for joy but a sign that the dirty f*cking hippies have taken over, why doesn't she just become a Republican? She's certainly talking like one."

My friends and I have noted that just three months ago, we were fine with who ever won the Democratic primary. Now, I wince every time I see the Clintons on television.

Sigh.

More trouble for Hillary

Theda Skocpol on Hillary's "screw them" statement:

"But what is clear in both in my memory and my notes is that there was extensive, hard-nosed discussion about why masses of voters did not support Clinton or trust government or base their choices on economic as opposed to what people saw as peripheral life-style concerns. Hillary Clinton was among the most cold-blooded analysts in attendance. She spoke of ordinary voters as if they were a species apart, and showed interest only in the political usefulness of their choices -- usefulness to the Clinton administration, that is.

I vividly remember at the time finding it impressive that Bill Clinton (NOT Hillary Clinton) showed real empathy for the ordinary people whose motives and supposedly misguided choices were under analysis. Ironically, just as Barber reported, Bill Clinton was the one who combined analysis and empathy, much as Obama himself did in his full San Francisco remarks."

And

It is particularly despicable of them to criticize Obama for the sort of observation/analysis that was routine in and around the 1990s Clinton White House. And I cannot help but feel there is a psychological edge of pure envy in Bill Clinton's attacks: Obama is empathetic and charismatic as well as smart, just like Bill was back then, in those so much better days!

Over and out. I am going to try to find a way to preserve in amber my better memories and feelings about the Clintons, so as not to lose altogether the sense of admiration I once felt, but can no longer.

This is pretty funny

And also sad.

Obsidian Wings: The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858 (Slight Return): "STEPHANOPOULOS: I’m sorry to interrupt, but do you think Mr. Douglas loves America as much you do?

LINCOLN: Sure I do.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But who loves America more?

LINCOLN: I’d prefer to get on with my opening statement George.

STEPHANOPOULOS: If your love for America were eight apples, how many apples would Senator Douglas’s love be?

LINCOLN: Eight."

Read the whole thing.

On patriotism

From Upper Left

"Who loves America? Jeremiah Wright loved it enough that while Dick Cheney was getting his string of five deferments, Wright voluntarily gave up his student deferment, left college and joined the United States Marine Corps. Wright was valedictorian of his class in Corpsman School. When asked about the sacrifices he'd made, Wright said he was inspired by the words of John Kennedy that he should 'ask what he could do for his country.'

And he did that at a time where there were many restaurants in this country that wouldn't serve him food, hotels where he could not get a room, neighborhoods where he could not hope to live, and whole states where he could not obtain justice. That, damn it, is how much Jeremiah Wright loves this country. What Stephanopoulos asked isn't fair, because there are very few people who have expressed their love for America as clearly as Reverend Wright, especially when America -- then and now -- rarely seems to appreciate their dedication."