Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Cornyn getting whipped around already

I can only imagine what Sen. John Cornyn -- Texas Republican senator and chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee that finds and supports GOP Senate candidates -- must be thinking these days.

On the heels of the NY-23 special House election, in which Conservative Party insurgent Doug Hoffman overtook moderate GOP nominee Dede Scozzafava, only to lose to Democrat Bill Owens, NRSC chairman John Cornyn (R-TX) has announced that the GOP's national Senate committee will not be spending money in contested primaries.

"There's no incentive for us to weigh in," Cornyn told ABC News. "We have to look at our resources."


Cornyn, you caved quick man. A little too quick....

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Blame it on the full moon


365 Photo: From last night/early morning. It's called a Hunter's Moon in November.

Deeds' spanking is a wake-up call for national Dems

Creigh Deeds, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in blue-state Virginia, attempted to corral the conservative vote. He ignored, and at times disparaged, progressive causes. And Barack Obama's youth support is not turning out for that. Virginia looks to be a plain obvious that Obama can still pull people out. I don't think Corzine was hurt at all by campaigning with him. These moderates are typified by their feckless and conflicted representatives, as David Kurtz so aptly describes:

When backed into a corner by reporters, the centrist is known to give vague, uncomfortable answers, eye flitting about looking for escape routes.


So what does that mean in 2010? Progressives will have to work a little harder if they want to out gun conservatives next year. Kos on why 2010 could be contentious:

2010 will be a base election. The party best able to turn out its core voters has the best chance of winning. If Democrats want to see a repeat of Virginia at the national level next year, then they should cave to Blue Dogs and the media nabobs and water down reform efforts (whether in energy, health care, financial services, or immigration).

The further Right Deeds moved, the further his poll numbers collapsed. The correlation is clear, even if the Blue Dogs argue the opposite.


No more catering to moderates you say? I'm not waiting around for that pipedream.

The homers know best

I'm always interested in how the hometown media report a story that has national appeal. When America wanted to know who the hell Sarah Palin was back in late August 2008 -- when she was named Crank McCain's VP candidate -- the national media immediately paid attention to everything that came from the Anchorage Daily News. They went to some of the only journalists that had a clue what she was like. Those guys had the national spotlight for quite some time. And actually, since they don't care about much that she does in the lower 48 I assume, they were better off with her in Alaska full-time as governor. (Too bad McClatchy.)

Anyway, I think this is especially true with anyone famous, especially bands. For Nirvana, it was Seattle's media that saw everything in real time. Or at least a large chunk of it, since Kurt Cobain grew up and long lived elsewhere around Washington, then moved to the larger Seattle for maybe two years before moving to LA with his family. Obviously Seattle was the epicenter of other, similar bands as well. (We won't get into a discussion about how and why.)

I imagine many Seattlies from back then -- just like bands Pearl Jam and Mudhoney -- have stayed, or moved and come back, and work in Seattle. So they know ALL the Nirvana history and post-Cobain suicide antics surrounding Courtney Love and otherwise. I feel like that gives them credentials. They will avoid the well-worn cliches and tropes on innuendo and cut to what the news is, assuming the reader knows the back story. I guess it's insiderish.

The Seattle Times music columnist Jonathan Zwickel has written a nice piece on the new Nirvana DVD release of live concert footage from 1992, the peak of their artistic talent many agree, in "Live at Reading."

Zwickel:


Nirvana's 1992 performance at England's Reading Festival is impossible to separate from its historical significance, which is this: Nirvana was at the time ascending to biggest-band-in-the-world status, and their 90-minute, 25-song set at Reading officially put them there.

This was August '92, a year after "Nevermind" reset the expectations and aesthetics of modern pop music. This was a headlining slot at Reading, one of the longest-running, traditionally career-making music festivals in the world. And this was Nirvana at its artistic peak.

All factors conspired for a Zeitgeist-defining moment. Seventeen years later, "Live at Reading" — an oft-bootlegged concert film released for the first time in 5.1 Surround Sound, recently remastered under the supervision of Kurt Cobain's estate and the remaining members of the band — proves Nirvana not only lived up to the opportunity, they smashed it to slivers and walked away grinning.


Artistic peak? I think I would agree. I always thought this time, as Nevermind was between album releases was a peak. The way down was immediate and horribly sad. Regardless, this footage is priceless. It is a snapshot of history for more than just a band. The fans grew up with him and felt the loss deeply. But no doubt, a city lost an adopted son. He defined them, and vice versa.

Was much of it marketing after a point, no thanks to the media oddball fascinations with this exotic land of woodsy punks? Sure. But that doesn't take away the spirit of the local musicians and artists. They remember Cobain, they remember each other and they've seen how time has passed. It's almost personal. I think it's worth something.

Side Note: McClatchy does quite a thorough job detailing their affiliate papers' press kits. The Anchorage Daily News section looks like an ad for the city of Anchorage.

Monday, November 2, 2009

Grayson won't comment on state secrets

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) was asked today about state secrets privileges and other ever-expanding executive powers given the president these days. I was hoping he'd give a hint of fire, maybe at least a nod to the elephant in the room that is blatant lawbreaking and exemption from accountability for the U.S. president. He chose to continue to crusade against the Fed. I'm behind him there, but it's not what was asked. From a Washington Post chat:

Des Moines, Iowa: Thanks for joining us Rep. Grayson. You've admirably taken on Republican chicanery in recent months, but I'd to know if you will ever test the Obama administration on state secrets privileges, indefinite detention and other egregious executive powers the office of the president is vested with in our modern era. It's not about partisanship; it's curtailing the power of the president. He's not a king. This is not a monarchy. You, Mr. Grayson, seem to be a voice that could stand up to his own party on this issue. Thanks and best of luck.

Rep. Alan Grayson: The closest thing that we have to a king in this country is the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. He handed over $500 billion of our money to foreigners, without even discussing it with the President or any member of Congress. That, my friend, is a problem.


Sure. Is this subject that touchy among Democrats? If I were cynical, I'd say that there's no wonder they don't want to curtail the very things, the unprecedented abuse, they rightfully decried when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney did it. They're in power now. That certainly changes things, doesn't it? If there's one thing that's never easy to swallow, it's that feeling you get when you realize how corrosive power really is.

Terrorized by the FBI


365 Photo: Terrorized by the FBI

London, Baltimore journalists to switch jobs

Reporters from London and Baltimore are planning to switch jobs for a short time to report on what they see in their temporary home. This stunt was inspired by the show The Wire, set in Baltimore. The Brits thought it'd be fun to see what it was like.

Democracy in America (The Economist):

AN IMAGINATIVE work of journalism or a stunt with a travel budget attached? Crime reporters for the Independent in London and the Baltimore Sun are going to switch places and report for each other's paper. The inspiration, as anyone with more than a basic-cable package could guess, was "The Wire": the Brit wants to know how accurately the show depicts the city. "The Wire" was far and away the best television programme ever created, and as someone who grew up in Maryland, I'm in favour of all things Charm City. As a reporter, however, I'm leery. I worry that what we'll get are two streams of reporting that will prove rather banal to anyone who knows either Baltimore or London. And so far, so zzzzzz: we have an American discovering that London is statistically safer than Baltimore, and a Brit discovering the opposite. I worry, too, that a mission to find out whether Baltimore is "like" a television show will result in checklist reporting (this is similar, that's not, etc). It also ignores what made "The Wire" great: not so much verisimilitude—if that's what you're after, just put cameras on corners—but old-fashioned narrrative control that enabled inventiveness and great storytelling. I expect that in two weeks the British reporter will find Baltimore much messier and duller than "The Wire". That's because real life is messier and duller than television.


I can't imagine this will be A) at all enlightening or even interesting to Americans, much less Baltimoreans, or B) at all accurate. I guess the only thing that intrigues me is that, in the end, how hard will the London guys go to reach a satisfactory end?

I hope they're good writers, regardless. While I'm skeptical of the overall "success" of this, I would bet that both sides are aware of the expectations of this project and have confidence that if things are flat, especially in Baltimore, these writers will be able pull it out.

What if Obama drastically altered the course in Afghanistan?

Andrew Sullivan's impassioned plea -- for Obama to take the a botched fiasco of an election in Afghanistan as an opportunity to take a U-turn in the war there -- got me thinking. What if?

And if this isn't a golden opportunity to drastically scale back our commitment, what would be? A clear reversal of course by Obama would be a sign that he can make a decision that the Beltway establishment does not have the strength to make; that he really is a change agent; that preventing Iraq from imploding again is now a more serious worry than propping up an unpopular, corrupt regime in Kabul ... and losing more decisively to the Taliban in the end.


You could file it in under Shrewd (and potentially politically awful, which is why it won't happen). But imagine if Obama actually dramatically scaled back.

---

Maybe, it was as simple as hearing or seeing something, some small snapshot, that triggered what would have taken a considerable amount of courage and fortitude. Or maybe it wore on him day in and day out, seeing this maelstrom worsen. And he finally stands up. His conscience awakened.

He knows he has to come out forceful, yet fully informed and prepared for the shitstorm. He knows his allies, he's aware of the wave of detraction and scorn he'll receive from the media. He understands the consequences.

He has an inner-inner circle that knows. He is wired and focused. ("Mercy" by the band Wire is playing) He must inform the principals, including the hawkish military brass. (They've never really felt comfortable with him.) He works himself up and pops through the door with force and purpose. He sits and looks around. He says some kind words to begin. He stares into there eyes as he lays down some preliminary background to his announcement. He is forceful and hard with his glare. His hand gestures are direct and cutting. (The guitar rhythm dictates his arm gestures and body movements if you were making a video. He would sing out his orders. He's basically dancing to "Mercy". It would also be stop-motion. Maybe even out of various still photos of him. Or it's animated.) He tells them he's pulling back now. The Karzai-led government is corrupt, inept and isn't trusted by Afghans. If we can help Iraq not fall apart, we'll send what we can. But de-escalation on all fronts is ordered. ("Mercy" is his guide. It moves his entire body. It's what he's seeing in his head, not in his eyes.) His decision is final. "Here's our plan. If you want to resign, do it now so I don't have fuck with you later. Yes, I have possible replacements for you, so do it what you think you have to do."

The military is shocked. There is outrage, there is finger-pointing and hand-wringing. There is anguish. He is sure and resolute. "Here's our plan. If you want to resign, do it now so I don't have fuck with you later. Yes, I have possible replacements for you, so do it what you think you have to do."

It takes time for the public to see the benefits. (We've been bombarded with war our whole lives. It's all we know.) There are leaps of faith. He's inspirational. There is confidence and positivity. There are sighs of relief. Problems remain, but de-escalation is near. The militant focus shifts to problems at home. If for only a moment, there's less fear and more breathing room.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Funniest thing I've ever seen

George Brett, ladies and gentlemen.

I never laughed so hard....

Watch and learn, Beck

I admire Rush Fucking Limbaugh in the sense that he may be one of the great entertainers our time. Today, he said Obama doesn't care about "victory" in Afghanistan and alluded that Obama didn't care about military families either, among other things, on Fox News Sunday:

-On the economy: "I believe that the economy is under siege," Limbaugh said, adding that "anybody with any economic literary would not do one thing that this administration's done."

-On President Obama: "I think he's got an out-of-this-world ego"; "He's immature, inexperienced, in over his head"; and he "actively sought the defeat of the U.S. military." Oh, and "we've never seen this kind of radical leadership at such a high level of power in the country."

-On Obama's visit to Dover to honor fallen soldiers returning home: "It was a photo op precisely because he's having big-time trouble on this whole Afghanistan dithering situation."

-On health care reform: "This is not about insuring the uninsured. This is not about health care. This is about stealing one-sixth of the U.S. private sector." That, Limbaugh said, is "the easiest, fastest way for them to be able to regulate every aspect of human behavior."

-On Vice President Joe Biden: "Pompous, a bit of a windbag and wrong" -- and "a walking comedy of errors."

-On Sarah Palin: "I do have profound respect for Sarah Palin."


I urge you to find the whole transcript if you enjoy pure vitriol.

Glenn Beck, you have a way to go to beat the maestro, I'd say.

Boo


365 Photo: Happy Halloween

Costume shop on 8th SE.

And I saw Paranormal Activity (the movie). It sucked.

Friday, October 30, 2009

Those torture photos ... a final edition?

Signed, sealed, delivered by President Obama.

President Obama signed legislation Thursday that blocks the release of photos that depict the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody. The new law is expected to thwart any chance the Supreme Court will hear the case over whether the photos should be disclosed to the public.

The Homeland Security Appropriations bill Obama signed grants the Department of Defense authority to withhold the photos.

Now that the bill is signed into law, it likely makes the long-fought battle over the torture photos moot. The Supreme Court twice this month postponed whether it would hear the government's appeal to the ACLU’s Freedom of Information Act suit that sought access to the photos, pending the enactment of the law. Solicitor General Elena Kagan sent a letter today apprising the Supreme Court of the legislation and stating the government would file a supplemental brief regarding its effect likely before the Court's conference Nov. 6.


We may never see this evidence of torture and some of the most egregious human rights abuses in modern American history.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Iconic



365 Photo: Some memorable photos here, of President Obama saluting caskets of American soliders coming home via Dover Air Force Base from Afghanistan. This is around 3 a.m., but it was 18 people, I think.

Next day update: Iconic in the sense that these powerful photos will be a symbol for so much of our modern era.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Does jock culture dominate?

John Hodgman makes some fantastic, thought-stimulating points on baseball and jock culture in his interview with The Pitch.

Baseball is the only sport I am capable of tolerating, because of its historicity and its fundamental weirdness and slowness. And its fondness for large, sedentary men. It is essentially a vehicle for nostalgia, which is the most toxic of impulses.

[...]

Well, I don't hate sports -- I completely appreciate the passion people feel for sports, and indeed, as I say in the new book, there's a lot more in common with your average baseball stats nerd as there is with a guy swinging a foam sword around than there is not. There's a lot of geekery surrounding sports that I actually get and appreciate.

And I appreciate that it's market driven, but what I don't need is for sports to dominate every single part of the culture, including even high education. It has a disproportionate representation in the culture, but let the invisible hand of commerce guide us -- the invisible hand is apparently always adjusting its jock strap and not rolling a twelve-sided die. But that will change.

The Pitch: In what way?

I think that we are necessarily moving toward a geek culture. The health of our society is going to rely on information technology. It's going to rely on a familiarity with math and science and technology. Geekery in general is founded on questioning and proof via analysis of the actual world and not the world as we wish it to be. By contrast, jockdom -- not sports -- jock culture proceeds from a certainty you create in your mind: 'My town is the best because the incredibly wealthy owners decided to keep the team for now.' Or, 'My political team is the best because it was my dad's and they best stoke my primitive fears,' as opposed to 'They have the best policies for me and my family.'

Jockdom is very noble. It's not deliberative. It's certainly the best way to win wars. It's the best way to motivate teams of people to fulfill a goal -- not just war, but getting things done. The most important way to motivate a factory floor. But as you know, we're not as much of a manufacturing society as we were before. China and other big industrial nations are rewarding their nerds and technicians rather than creating a culture that makes fun of them -- it would be wise for us to embrace the book-smart as much as our culture has traditionally embraced the street-smart, the jock-smart. I'm not saying nerds must have their revenge; I'm just saying the time for wedgies is at an end.

Beautiful skies


365 Photo

This could be the beginning of an epic struggle

The rabid Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin crew vs. the establishment power structure of the crony-cultured Republican Party. (via Andrew Sullivan)

"I just find it fascinating that my many friends who claim to be against Washington having too much power, they claim to be in favor of the 10th Amendment giving states back their rights, they claim to favor local control and local authority, now they suddenly get local control and local authority in upstate New York, they don’t like the outcome. [...] So I say to my many conservative friends who suddenly decided that whether they’re from Minnesota or Alaska or Texas, they know more than the upstate New York Republicans? I don’t think so. And I don’t think it’s a good precedent. [...]

And so this idea that we’re suddenly going to establish litmus tests, and all across the country, we’re going to purge the party of anybody who doesn’t agree with us 100 percent — that guarantees Obama’s reelection. That guarantees Pelosi is Speaker for life. I mean, I think that is a very destructive model for the Republican Party," - Newt Gingrich, on Palin and others supporting Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.


They created this monster. Good luck Newt. They're going to set their sites on him at some point before 2012, if not in 2010. This seems to be brewing as the most vivid example inner-Republican backlash in some time ... dare I say since Newt's own party-rebound effort from George H.W. Bush's turnover to Clinton. His Contract with America. Ironic.

The stuff that wins an Emmy Award

Stephen Colbert's episode on the Senate Finance Committee's health care bill is amazing.

Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts takes it pretty hard.

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Pat Roberts Warns Against Health Care Box Canyon
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorReligion

Officials say 'more troops'

The New York Times reports that Obama's pending decision on Afghanistan -- likely to be announced around Nov. 7, according to Jake Tapper -- will definitely include a troop increase.

Mr. Obama has yet to make a decision and has other options available to him, but as officials described it, the debate is no longer over whether to send more troops, but how many more will be needed. The question of how much of the country should fall under the direct protection of American and NATO forces will be central to deciding how many troops will be sent.

At the moment, the administration is looking at protecting Kabul, Kandahar, Mazar-i-Sharif, Kunduz, Herat, Jalalabad and a few other village clusters, officials said. The first of any new troops sent to Afghanistan would be assigned to Kandahar, the Taliban’s spiritual capital, seen as a center of gravity in pushing back insurgent advances.


Two things: One, I guess we already assumed there would be more troops going. The White House has been consistent about one thing in this debate, and that is that de-escalating is not option. And two, these are purely anonymous sources. We know how that goes. So, take it with a grain of salt or not. Call it obvious or not. But it still hurts to see those words.

Note to the White House

I think I'll start what is sure to be a much-anticipated daily feature: Note to the White House.

In the inaugural installment, the White House hears some difficult truths.

Note to the White House:

Stop crying about Fox News. We all get it, they're bogus. But, A) you're playing right into their hands, mostly because B) just about all of the comments about Fox I've heard made by the WH have come off highly impetuous, indignant and, yes, whiny. You're not succeeding in really calling them out. Does it suck to watch your friends be slandered by a bunch of hacks? I would bet so. But, come on, you're the White House for fuck's sake; you're the most powerful entity in the world. Let Glenn Beck and friends dig their own grave.


This message was brought to you by Note to White House. "Note to the White House: America's least favorite commentary."

White House/Fox addendum: As usual, Thomas Frank nails it.

But no journalistic operation is better prepared to sing the tragedy of its own martyrdom than Fox News. To all the usual journalistic instincts it adds its grand narrative of Middle America's disrespectful treatment by the liberal elite. Persecution fantasy is Fox News's lifeblood; give it the faintest whiff of the real thing and look out for a gale-force hissy fit.

As the Obama administration has discovered by now. A few weeks ago, after Fox had scored a number of points against administration figures and policies, administration spokesmen decided it was time to start fighting back. Communications Director Anita Dunn called the network "a wing of the Republican Party," while Obama himself reportedly dismissed it for following "a talk radio format."

The network's moaners swung instantly into self-pitying action likening the administration's combative attitude to Richard Nixon's famous "enemies list."


He goes on to document some of the prime double standards at play here, including G. Gordon Liddy's insidiousness, Fox chairman Roger Ailes' hit jobs and, worst of all, Fox's silence on the Pentagon Pundits program courtesy of the Bushies. Nice. And even nicer considering Frank writes his weekly column in the Wall Street Journal, which is owned, along with Fox, by Rupert Murdoch.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Combating private mercenary armies


365 Photo: From left, Vince Warren (Exec. Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights), Jeremy Scahill (journalist and author of Blackwater: Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army), Emira Woods (Co-Director of Foreign Policy in Focus) and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) at a panel discussion of the private military industry in Iraq, Afghanistan and Africa at the True Reformer Building.

Protest earlier in the day decrying defense contractors, who are meeting outside DC this week in a major conference to drum up more war business.