Democrats vs. Republicans.

Rarely have I seen a graphic better sum up the core, true nature of the two major parties better than the Des Moines Register's caucus guides.

The Republicans are all in neat rows, ready to stand up and be counted. You get the feeling that their shoes are shined, their buttons buttoned, their hair slicked back, and ready to salute flag and leader. Hell: you could replace 'em with robots.

The Democrats meanwhile are an unruly mob of people standing around random signs. They apparently have a half hour in between when the congregate and when the action is allowed to start, presumably because freaking hippies can't be on time for anything.

Coming up soon, a new feature.

An aside

This is really off topic. It probably goes on the "if anything else is on my mind" section of the NewsBlues description. But the Iowa caucus is just 11 days away, and well, I am feeling nostalgic:

William. You so sexy.


Of course. It still can't hold a candle to this:

Alberto's Back!

<--Man. It's been a while since we last saw your sorry face.

Now, Alberto "I can't recall" Gonzalez didn't exactly have a reputation as being the most, er, competent of Attorneys General. But if there is one thing I trust this man has the ability to do it is deny knowledge of a scandal. So imagine my shock when reading about the destroyed CIA tapes scandal on CNN and reading this:

Lawyers representing Gonzales refused to comment to CNN on whether he had any knowledge of the tapes while he served as White House counsel or what advice he may have given regarding them.

Lawyers representing Gonzalez?! Now I am no legal expert. But I though the Attorney General was meant to be this government's top lawyer. And while I understand that doesn't necessarily mean he'd make a good corporate or even torts lawyer, I would expect that he should be able to comment on the legality of destroying CIA tapes, being that, well, it was his job to determine the legality of destroying CIA tapes. And we know for sure that he is capable of denying knowledge of just about anything on his own. What gives?

PS. the Chavez post is coming at some point. Don't you worry.

Anyone else find this picture hillarious?

Politicians/ in the debate/ Politicians made of ticky tacky / Politicians, politicians, politicians all the same

There's a white man/ and a white man/ and a white man/ and another one/ and they're all made out of ticky tacky and they all look just the same

OK -- This one was just for good fun. No real commentary here, I just think it is hilarious to line up seven old white men in dark suits on the same stage. And particularly given the camera angle, it;s hard to tell them apart.

OK -- enough fun and games. One of the greatest Hugo Chavez moments happened today, but I'm a bit behind at the moment. So keep you ear close to the ground and your eyes peeles to your RSS readers, 'cause that post is a-coming 'round the mountain when she comes.

Making fun of the wires

<--Security Forces in France wear a variety of uniforms. Some wear green. Some wear black. There is a car in the background with its headlights on. The car is read. Jesus writing is hard!

You remember how on the SATs and like standardized tests you would get questions with extraneous information, just to see if you were paying attention? Stuff like:

There are 5 red balls in a bag. There are 10 yellow balls. There are three green balls and it is partly cloudy with a 60% chance of snow. How many more yellow balls are there than red balls?

Well, reading the first news reports of stories that just hit the wire can be sort of like that. The BBC is reporting that a postal bomb has killed one and injured five at a law office in central Paris:

The former law firm of President Nicolas Sarkozy is located in the same building as the office where the device exploded, at 52 Boulevard Malesherbes.

Holy shit! Some crazy lefty bombed Sarozy's old Law Offices?! Two paragraphs later:

French officials said the parcel bomb exploded on the fourth floor - not the one where Mr Sarkozy's old firm is located.

Oh. Nevermind. But wait:

The building also houses The Foundation for the Memory of the Shoah - a Holocaust remembrance body.

Those anti-Semitic French bastards! Oh, wait. Apparently the bomb wasn't targeting them either:

It was addressed to the law office of Catherine Gouet-Jenselme, AFP reported. It was not clear why she may have been the target of an attack.

You get the feeling like some editor told some staff reporter to file a 500 word article, and he only could come up with 250? I mean, writing the wire stories has got to be a hard task, but is it too much to ask for only the relevant information?

CNN: You have hit new lows

Is it just me or is this picture lifted straight out of an Abercrombie and Fitch catalog?

Must be a real slow news day when you run this:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/personal/12/03/bad.kissers/index.html.

I'm so glad that there is no other news today of any importance. Hell! At this point I'd even go for another story on this MySpace suicide.

Word Choice

If I stand in between them, maybe they won't fight.

Now I know that picking on Bush's words is somewhat cliche, but fear not. This is not another Liberal self congratulatory gotchya at W's expense.

The BBC, emphasizing the importance the White House is placing on the Annapolis summit, states:

US President George W Bush has said "a battle is underway" for the future of the Middle East as regional leaders gathered for a key peace conference.

Uh. Sir? Mr. Bush? I'm not quite sure how to break this to you, but we already know that a battle is underway in the Middle East. In fact, that's sort of (very much sort of) the reason why this summit is being held in the first place.

The importance of good headline writers

Headline Writers are often overlooked, and for good reason. Most stories don't seem that hard to sum up in a few words. But every now and again, or every time you pick up the New York Post, the importance of good headline writing becomes clear. Take this morning's International Herald-Tribune, which boldly declared:

Palestinian says joint statement about peace is within reach

Aparently, we have reached the point where a single Palestinian's belief that peace is within reach constitutes news. Damn.

(The article is actually about the upcoming Anapolis summit, and the Palestinian in question happens to be Yasser Abed Rabbo, senior aide to Mahomoud Abbas. But you knew that.)

A great day to read the news!

There is so much NewsBlues worthy stuff around the "series of tubes" this morning, that I hardly know where to start.

Actually, I do. With FoxNews. Kabobfest beat me to this one, but I thought I'd link the clip anyway. It's just far too brilliant for me to even make a sarcastic comment on. Enjoy!


Now that the Foxies are out of way, let's turn to Pakistan. Now I usually don't like to blog about Pakistan, for the simple reson that I know absolutely nothing about that country. But the BBC is carrying some quotes that are just too good to ignore:

"Did I go mad? Or suddenly, my personality changed? Am I Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde?" he asked.

"Have I done anything constitutionally illegal? Yes, I did it on 3 November," he said, referring to his imposition of emergency rule. "But did I do it before? Not once."

He does have a good point, though. I mean, every world leader engages in some 'constitutionally illegal' behavior now and again. Why pick on little old Mushy?


And from Pakistan, we turn to NewsBlues mainstay Israel, which seems to be having an awful hard time relating to European royalty who are also heads of churches. First to Britain, where Prince Charles "snubbed" Israel:

[Deputy Private Secretar Clive] Alderton noted, "Acceptance would make it hard to avoid the many ways in which Israel would want HRH [Prince Charles] to help burnish its international image. In which case, let's agree a way to lower its expectations."

Is it too soon to call this a Royal boycott of Israel? As an aside, HRH is my new favorite acronym.

Pissing off a potential future head of the Anglican Church may be bad, but not as bad as pissing off the Pope. Ha'aretz is quoting Monsignor Pietro Sambi as saying:

"The Holy See decided to establish diplomatic relations (in 1993) with Israel as an act of faith, leaving to latter the serious promises to regulate concrete aspects of the life of the Catholic community and the Church in Israel," Sambi, the Papal Nuncio to the United States, said.

"If I must be frank, the relations between the Catholic Church and the state of Israel were better when there were no diplomatic ties," he continued.

Damn! The specific complaints have to do with taxing Church property and failure to lift travel restrictions on Catholic clergy in the West Bank. Said Israel, "well, you know, Islamo-fascista-terrorists might don a collar and try to blow up all of Western Civilization. Every other country would take the same action if their Catholic priests!" Hell, El Salvador did.

A Populist update/apology for my last post

Hugo to Juan Carlos II: "Talk to the hand 'cause the face don't wanna hear it!"

In the name of the Whiskey Revolution, I would like to hereby apologize to my reader(s). My last post was elitist and disrespectful to Hugo Chavez. I should have known that the back-in-three-days leader wouldn't take no lip from nobody, even if they are quite possibly the best King since Ferdinand II.

Al-Jazeera (which has suprisingly good coverage of Latin America), is quoting the Venezuelan President as saying:

"Mr King, did you know about the coup d'etat against Venezuela, against the democratic, legitimate government of Venezuela in 2002?"

Now the King of Spain is a mostly ceremonial post by now, so he probably didn't; but Spain probably did. You never thought that one botched coup could provide so much fun news. It almost makes the reign of Bush II worth it.

The real great thing about Chavez, though, is his possy. I mean, that quote above is a pretty good opening salvo, but leave it to the annonymous Venezuelan man on the street to throw down for el presidente:

"He's insolent. He has to respect a sovereign leader. The king is just a monarch and Spain has been sacking the people of Latin America for the past 500 years.

"President Chavez has more right to say what he pleases than the king because he was elected by the Venezuelan people.

"The king showed a total lack of respect. He wasn't at a nursery school, he was at a summit."

That's gotta burn. Just goes to show that while you may be able to get mad props for restoring democracy after a long dictatorship, you still can't mess with your former colonies. That's just a sore spot that isn't going away. Especially when it is part of the Boliviaran Revolution.

Also, don't mess with soccer fans. Not that it's relevant to the subject at hand, but you can never know when a world leader may be reading this blog.

SHUT UP!

So Spain, Portugal, Andorra, and all of Latin America decided to get together and have lunch. OK, so this was kind of a bas idea from the start. Especially considering how Andorra was invited.

Worse yet, someone put NewsBlues favorite son and anti-colonialist Hugo Chavez at the same table as the Spanish deligation. Big Mistake. Those of you who can understand Spanish should watch the clip above. Those who can't should read this:

King Juan Carlos told Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez to "shut up" as the Ibero-American summit drew to a close in Santiago, Chile.

The outburst came after Mr Chavez called former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar a "fascist".

Mr Chavez then interrupted Spanish PM Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero's calls for him to be more diplomatic, prompting the king's outburst.

The clip is far better for the play-by-play. You should also check out the story from El Mundo. I'm not sure how many of my readers will truly appreciate this story, so I'm including a link to the Wiki page on the King.

A 100% bias free post

From watching CNN and FoxNews all the time (no, not really, but bare with me) I know that to be totally unbiased you have to dedicate an even amount of reporting time to the Left and the Right, which are of course totally static and meaningful categories. So here goes:

For the Left-leaning NewsBluesians, the BBC is reporting this totally sensical bit today:

A Palestinian prisoner has died of wounds he suffered in a riot at a jail in southern Israel.

Israeli prison officials said the man had been hit by what they called non-lethal objects fired by guards during Monday's riot.

He died from non-lethal wounds, then?

Never fear Right-leaning readers (who totally exist). I have some news for you too, courtesy of CNN reporting on the arrest over over 100 protesters yesterday in Washington D.C.:

More than 100 people were protesting both the war in Iraq and U.S. policy on global warming. Some were dressed as polar bears and danced on the sidewalk, while others shouted, "No war" and "No warming."

And while they were at it, they decided to protest fur, gun laws, and marijuana laws as well. I mean, once you start with the protests it's hard to call it quits. And I mean, how often do we have people marching on D.C. nowadays? Gotta be efficient in your protesting. I move for more mergers and acquisitions of protest.

Jimmy! Take me on a genocide tour.

An admission: Jimmy Carter has been conspicuously absent from this here blog. And I admit it: I have a certain fancy that stays with me for Carter, despite his Bono-esque Liberalism. It may have something to do with a certain speech he once gave, but I digress.

So what has Jimmy Carter done this time? Published a book with a provocative title that is completely unjustified by its text? Taken me on a genocide tour? No. Worse. CNN is reporting that, in an interview with the 15-time softball Cy Young Award winning Wolf Blitzer (yay newsvertising), Jimmy Carter said:

"Our country for the first time in my life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights...We've said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."

Now let's think about this. Jimmy Carter was born in 1924, in the great state of Georgia. Think about it. Even in the most generous reading, in which the human rights he is discussing are specifically those of the Geneva Conventions, it is still somewhat, err, problematic.

Jimmy, take some advice from NewsBlues. Stick to what you are good at: building homes and winning Nobel Peace Prizes.

Can I join the Whiskey Revolution?

Look who's back. Back again. Chavez's back. Back again.

Long-time NewsBlues favorite Hugo Chavez is back in the news after quite an absence from these pages. Back on his "hombre nuevo" campaign, Chavez had this to say:

What kind of revolution is this? The Whisky Revolution? The Hummer Revolution? No, this is a real revolution!"

Hmm. Tell me more about this whiskey revolution. Can we compare and contrast it with the Boliviaran Revolution?

CNN added this quirky bit to top it all off:

And during marathon speeches he breaks into song frequently -- so often, in fact, that one aide compiled recordings of him singing on an "All Time Hits" CD, which has yet to be released to the public.

Chanukah is coming up pretty soon. Hint, hint.

Second Ahmadinejad post in as many days

Today's news cycle is already filled with tons of absurd news items on the Ahmadinejad speech at Columbia, as well as the numerous protests and counter-protests it inspired. But my favorite stuff so far is coming out of the KabobFest blog:


Oh! Now I get it! Apparently the Columbia/Barnard Hillel's problem with Ahmadinejad is that the Iranian judiciary has children on death row. Texas, you're presumably Columbia's organized Jewish community's next target.

And if you are still craving more, check out Dilbert creator Scott Adams's commentary on the same site.

Dan Gillerman: Master of Analogy

Ha'aretz is carying what is by far the best comment so far of what promises to be an eventful visit by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to New York for the UN's annual assembly:

Israel's United Nations envoy Dan Gillerman told the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organization that a visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Ground Zero would be similar to a visit by a resurrected Hitler to Auschwitz.

So let me get this straight. According to Gillerman, apparently in his official capacity representing the government of Israel, a visit by the President of Iran to the site of an attack on the United States by an organization which Iran has nothing to do with, is the rough equivalent of Zombie Hitler visiting the death camps which he established in an effort to ethnically cleanse the lands he ruled over of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, political dissidents, and other "undesirables".

But really, the problem is that Ahmadinejad doesn't respect the twelve million who died in the Holocaust.

Tony Snow exits in style

Tony Snow isn't the first man to jump the rapidly sinking Bush administration. Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove announced he was stepping down to "spend more time with his family". Alberto "I don't recall" Gonzalez resigned in disgrace after realizing -- 6 months after everyone else -- that his presence was unproductive. But no one, I believe, has ever come up with as good of an excuse as Tony Snow for why they had to leave. The NYTimes lays it out:

Mr. Snow, 52, said two weeks ago that he would not stay on until the end of the Bush presidency, and that he was leaving because of financial pressures. The father of three, Mr. Snow earned $168,000 a year as an assistant to the president...

Someone explain this to me. This guy is making $168,000, and he is leaving because he is making too little?! Please, NYTimes, give me some context:

...much less than he made as a conservative pundit and talk-show host on Fox Radio who occasionally criticized President Bush.

Now I hate to be the first one to point this out -- and I've been watching TV news all day so I'm pretty sure I actually am the first person to point this out -- but isn't the fact that he used to have a much higher paying job a reason why he should be able to stay? I mean, presumably Tony Snow did save some of the million he earned as a pundit, radio, and TV host over the years before taking his oh-so-drastic pay cut to $168,000 a year. And it is not like the guy doesn't have a ready made excuse: he does have cancer, after all.

(Anyone who wants to discuss the irony of this administration's hesitance to raise the minimum wage is free to insert their sarcastic remarks here)

Ah well. Take care Tony. You will be missed. Not as much as Ari Fleischer, but far more than Scott McClellan.

The long eye of the law

The BBC is reporting that prison guards, in defiance of court orders, have walked out on their jobs as part of a pay dispute. (Dear UAW: taking notes?). Among the numerous disturbances, fires, and kinks in the prisoners' feeding schedules that the BBC lists in its impact section is the following:

Cardiff prison where inmates locked in their cells have taunted a picket line in the car park with shouts of "You're breaking the law"

British prisoners: you officially win.

Take it off, Mr. President!

Well, I didn't meet Anderson Cooper on my vacations, but thanks to M and GoogleNews, I have found the perfect news story to welcome me back. M sent me this article from the India-based TimesNow.
Yep. Vladimir Putin without his shirt on.

Now that is pretty sexy, but let's leave it to the U.S. media to really provide the classy context that we the people need to fully understand this important news item. First things first: no partial shots. Give me the full body shot of Vladdy P:
But wait. Barak Obama is from Hawai'i. We must have at least one shot of him in a sexy bathing suit:
And to be fair and balanced, if there is one of a sexy liberal politician who campaigns on the theme of hope, we need one of a picture of an evil conservative fatty who nearly destroyed the world. (Yeah. I went there during election season):
And, of course, what discussion of sexy world leaders would be complete without the mac daddy himself, the Pimp in Chief, the Man, the Legend, William Jefferson Clinton:
Hmm. Actually, he looks a bit flabby in that 1993 shot of him. A bit Reagan-esque if I may (that's twice, for those counting my Reagan baching). But wait. He is still The Comeback Kid:
OH YOU SEXY BEAST! Nineteen-Ninety-Eight is your year boy. And Hildog is showing off her future Presidential aspirations here as well. (As an aside, the scary part is that it was just suggested to me that Hillary could pull off a one-piece if the current contenders held a bathing suit contest.)

So there you have it. ABC wins the most ridiculous news analysis of the --

--wait, I'm sorry. I'm getting late word (courtesy of M) that a new contender has won the title. Hit me with your best shot AP/Pravda:

Komsomolskaya Pravda reported that women who visited its Web site posted comments on Putin's "vigorous torso" and said they "were screaming with delight and showering (him) with compliments."

Russian gay chat rooms and blogs were particularly intrigued by the photos: Some claimed that Putin, by stripping to his waist, was somehow pleading for more tolerance of homosexuality in Russia - where gays and lesbians are for the most part forced to remain closeted.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner!

Special Vacation Update

The travel blog will get an update sometime soon. El Salvador's slow internet speeds is currently preventing me from posting photos. So, I thought I would do an emergency Vacation edition of the News blog. What could bring me out of my vacation shell, you ask:

This: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/07/penhaul.iraq/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Apparently, the United States, completely unfamiliar with the term blowback and lacking any sense of irony, has decide to start funding nationalist guerrillas, including Saddam Hussein loyalists. The reason, as explained in the article is that:

"a result of the deepening divisions among Iraqi insurgent factions, was on display earlier this week at a highway intersection in the town of Tahrir. There, a group of some 15 insurgents publicly chanted: 'Death to al Qaeda.'"

OK. So the U.S. Army has suddenly discovered what people like Juan Cole -- not to mention myself -- have been saying for quite sometime now. But how did they ever get such a brilliant idea?

"U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander of Multi-National Division North, believes U.S. counterinsurgency efforts in Vietnam and Latin America offer precedents for the strategy he is now pushing in this region of Iraq.

'We've seen this in previous counterinsurgency operations, using local nationals, arming them and forming them into scouts,' he told CNN. 'That's the primary role we want to use them in. They know the territory. They know the enemy.'"

Oh this is just great. Apparently the model for Iraq is either Vietnam or Latin America. Two shining examples of US foreign policy. Guess it's not too long until we start hearing about massive civilian casualties, torture, and death squads. Oh wait...

On Vacation

NewsBlues is on vacation through mid-August. Jonah is busy running into cardboard cutouts of Anderson Cooper. To find out if he actually meets Anderson Cooper check out the travel blog! Don't know the URL? Email me.

Republican Redux

So I know it is a bit late for a post on the GOP debate in South Carolina. By now, probably everybody has seen this little testy exchange between Rudy Giuliani and Libertarian Ron Paul. (As an aside, the audience was asked to not applaud until after the debate, but somehow found time to applaud several times including after Rudy's response.)

Guess what the news networks were talking about the next day. Most expressed the expected outrage against Paul's analysis that 9/11/01 was blowback from US operations in the mideast. Of course, leave it to FoxNews's John Gibson to go off the deep end on a guy who has gone off the deep end.


Um, Mr. Gibson. Ron Paul was not making the same argument as the "9/11 Truth" types. They say that September 11th was a conspiracy by the government in order to lead a war for profit. Ron Paul does not. He believes this is the result of US interventionist foreign policies.

Look, my problem is not that Ron Paul is not being taken seriously. He certainly has a point, even if that point is wrapped up in a world view which depends on the incomprehensible "irrationality of US politics." But no, I do not expect US news to be sophisticated enough to discuss the ideological and empirical underpinnings of his argument.

But is it too much to expect the news to get the facts right? I mean, you are the news. He is not in line with the 9/11 Truth types. In fact, he is directly contradicting them. Can we please, please, please try to get our facts right?! YOU ARE THE NEWS, DAMNIT!

Speaking of "damnit," the absolute best moment of the debate was this one. The following question dominated the debate, taking up by far more time than any other question asked:

MR. HUME: Welcome back to the Koger Center for the Arts on the campus of the University of South Carolina.

The questions in this round will be premised on a fictional, but we think plausible scenario involving terrorism and the response to it. Here is the premise: Three shopping centers near major U.S. cities have been hit by suicide bombers. Hundreds are dead, thousands injured. A fourth attack has been averted when the attackers were captured off the Florida coast and taken to Guantanamo Bay, where they are being questioned. U.S. intelligence believes that another larger attack is planned and could come at any time.

First question to you, Senator McCain. How aggressively would you interrogate those being held at Guantanamo Bay for information about where the next attack might be?

Yes, the most discussed question of the night dealt with a hypothetical terrorist attack on the nation. This is what we have come to. Every other candidate had responded quite seriously to this absurd hypothetical. Fortunately, Tom Tancredo knew exactly what to do:

REP. TANCREDO: Well, let me just say that it's almost unbelievable to listen to this in a way. We're talking about -- we're talking about it in such a theoretical fashion. You say that -- that nuclear devices have gone off in the United States, more are planned, and we're wondering about whether waterboarding would be a -- a bad thing to do? I'm looking for "Jack Bauer" at that time, let me tell you. (Laughter, applause.)

Tom Tancredo: you the man. Call in Jack. This man is ready to lead in a way that Bush and Logan never were! Way to call the absurdity of the moderators. Unfortunately, he then kept on talking:

And -- and there is -- there is nothing -- if you are talking about -- I mean, we are the last best hope of Western civilization. And so all of the theories that go behind our activities subsequent to these nuclear attacks going off in the United States, they go out the window because when -- when we go under, Western civilization goes under. So you better take that into account, and you better do every single thing you can as president of the United States to make sure, number one, it doesn't happen -- that's right -- but number two, you better respond in a way that makes them fearful of you because otherwise you guarantee something like this will happen.

Stupidity leads to arrogance. Arrogance leads to foolishness. Foolishness leads to suffering.

OK so Tom Tancredo is a bit of an arrogant fool. But at the end of the day, he was the only one to call Hume on the absurdity of his question, and he invoked Jack Bauer in doing so. Therefore, until further notice, Tom Tancredo has the official endorsement of this blog.

CNN vs. BBC

<--I do not envy this man

So yesterday, President Bush named Lt. Gen. Lute to be the US's new war czar, apparently because our drug czar had been doing so damned well that we needed to keep going with this whole czar thing.

What, exactly, is a war czar, you no doubt ask. CNN explains:

In the newly created position, Lute would serve as an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, and would also maintain his military status and rank as a three-star general.

Still not clear on it? Well, the BBC got you back:

Correspondents say it is unclear exactly what General Lute will do, and whether the job will involve settling turf wars between the Pentagon and the state department.

He will serve as an adviser to the president but will also keep his military position and three-star ranking, reports said.

The Associated Press news agency reported that the new appointee would speak for the president concerning developments in the conflict areas and smooth over differences between rival departments.

So we actually have no clue what a war czar is, but we do know that he will surely speak to the President. Do we really need to hire new people, just to speak to the President? But how did they choose this guy anyway? CNN, I'll give you first shot again:

It was a difficult job to fill, given the unpopularity of the war, now in its fifth year, and uncertainty about the clout the war coordinator would have. The search was complicated by demands from Congress to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq and scant public support for the war. The White House tried for weeks to fill the position and approached numerous candidates before settling on Lute.

A difficult position to fill, eh? BBC, can you give us some more tantalizing detail?

Gen Lute was appointed after a lengthy search in which several candidates apparently turned down the position. He must be confirmed by the US Senate.

So let me get this straight: the government made a new position, forgot to figure out what that position actually does, and then found the only guy who wanted it to fill it. Victory is right around the corner.

(PS. Anyone else catch the Republican Debate last night: I hope to have a blog post about how Tom Tancredo gets my official endorsement for President up late tonight or tomorrow)

Do terrorists have standardized tests?

<--When you say this guy's name, make sure to pronounce the doubel "l" as an l-sound, and not as a y-sound. That way he will sound less Latino.

So today, the trial of Jose Padilla, "The American Taliban", began in Florida. Padilla, for those readers with short memories, allegedly plotted to set off a 'dirty bomb' in the US, and has been held for three years without charge as a result. So finally, they are bringing down the books on him, right?

Not exactly. He is being charged with supplying material aid to terrorits. The BBC explains:

The BBC's Andy Gallacher in Florida says some critics are calling the case "Padilla Lite" because the most serious accusations have been dropped.

But lest you think this is some minor affair, the US gov'ment wants you to know that it has the goods on this guy:

However, prosecutors say that an application form to attend an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan will prove that Mr Padilla, also known as Abdullah Mujahir, was connected to Islamic extremists.

Hold up. Terrorists need to apply to go to terrorism camp? What happens? Do they write an essay on why that terrorism camp is the best one for them and submit a resume with their extracurricular activities? In my spare time, I enjoy playing basketball, leading the chess team, and, oh yeah, killing people.

I am assuming that if you don't get in to terrorism camp in Afghanistan, you are forced to go to the loser terrorist training camp in Somalia? Then again, I guess you could always just join the CIA...

<--This man disagrees with this entire post. I got nothing.

You know it's a pretty sad day when the top US commander in Iraq feels the need to remind his troops that it is probably a bad idea to torture people. The BBC is reporting that General David Patreus:

warned his troops not to sanction torture or abuse of Iraqi detainees and has urged them to fight by the rules.

Um, shouldn't that be the first thing that troops learn. "Welcome to boot camp. Follow your commanding officer's orders and don't break any laws. Now drop and give me 20!" Right? Apparently not:

It comes a week after an army mental health advisory team released a survey of troops in Iraq, which found a wide tolerance for torture and abuse.

More than a third believed that torture was acceptable if it helped save the life of a fellow soldier or if it helped get information about the insurgents.

About 10% of those surveyed said they had actually mistreated Iraqi civilians by hitting or kicking them, or had damaged their property when it was not necessary to do so.

Ten percent of troops admit to mistreating Iraqis. There are currently 152,000 US troops in Iraq, so that means that 15,200 US soldiers admit to mistreating Iraqi civilians, plus however many mre have rotated out. 'Nuff said.

Why I cannot stand sociologists

OK, so in truth I think very highly of a large number of sociologists: Jeff Paige, Emile Durkheim, Jorge Durand, etc. It is just a particular type of sociologist I cannot stand. Namely, the survey-wielding quantitative type.

Today, the New York Times is reporting on the Pope's trip to Brazil, the most populous Catholic country in the world. In the past two decades, however, Brazil has gone from being about 90% Catholic to only about two-thirds Catholic, with Pentecostal movements taking up a large part of the slack. If only I had some compact way of understanding this. Something that requires only about 100 words. Yo Sociology! Little help:

“Brazil has become a country with a lot of religious mobility, a mosaic,” said Silvia Fernandes, a sociologist at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro who worked on the survey, which had been conducted at the request of the National Conference of Brazilian Bishops. “A disposition to change and experiment and to question doctrine has been growing for 30 years now, and
Pentecostalism has been the biggest beneficiary because it is a more emotional religion.”

Of course! Brazilians in the past two decades have suddenly woken up from their slumber. Naturally, this makes them a more emotional lot (after all, Brazilians are naturally a passionate people; we've all seen Carnival!). And, of course, emotional people -- lacking rationality -- are magnetically attracted to charismatic movements. I mean just look at these people in what is either a Pentecostal or a charsimatic Catholic mass:

What I love about this picture is the look on the face of the younger woman on the right of the picture. Someone got dragged out o fbed on a Sunday to go to Church.

Some days the world just goes a bit crazy

Well folks, today I think that it is not only the reporting on the news which is insane, but the actual news today too. Let's take a swing around the world, shall we:

Taiwan MPs got into a fist-fight today over the timing of a bill to be voted on.


Yes, you see correctly: one MP's arm was bloodied following the legislative smack down. Honestly, I think the US should take their lead. Could you see Bush and Cheney coming to the Senate to brawl it out with Schumer and Kennedy? I think it would be a much better way of deciding the fate of the nation than whatever they are doing now, anyway.

Moving on.

North Korea, which seems to be at the center of a great many absurd new stories, is meeting with South Korea in an effort to finally implement the oft-delayed rail linking of the two States. So how to break the ice at a meeting between the two bitter rivals who have not had a rail link in 50 years? Tell a joke of course! Al Jazeera reports:

Shortly after the meeting began however, Lieutenant-General Kim Yong-chol opened proceedings by telling a joke at George Bush's expense.

"I recently read a piece of political humour on the internet called 'saving the president'," he was quoted as saying in pool reports from the talks.

Kim then went on to recount an often-told joke about the president out jogging when he a group of children save him from a sticky encounter with a speeding car.

(You can read the joke at the end of this page)

That's right! Offer the beginnings of the joke in the body of the article, but don't reveal the whole thing 'til they have read the whole article. But was the joke funny? Let's just put it this way: the article reports that "The South Koreans did their best to look amused":

Dude. Either the South Koreans really suck at looking amused, or that was one bad joke.

On to Little Britain, where the great people of Northern Ireland are celebrating a historic power-sharing agreement. Of course, for Tony Blair it is more like an ahistoric power sharing agreement. The BBC reports:

Mr Blair said that the day's events offered the chance for Northern Ireland to "escape the heavy chains of history" and "make history anew".

I'm not quite done formulating this thought, but there is something very interesting about the logic of history here. While I ramble, feel free to be amazed by the picture to the lefty According to this formulation, history, being a series of conflicts between political groupings, can do nothing but hold a nation back. But what is it being held back from? Surely it is not from violence, since Northern Ireland has been relatively peaceful for a decade now. Maybe it's just a report in The Economist of London that has me thinking it may be tied to the logic of capital. After all, capital by its very definition is not allowed to have a history. And the language of a nation being "chained down" and needing to restart are often associated with neoliberal structural reforms. Could this be an ideal of the neoliberal State slipping from Blair's lips? In that case, is the neoliberal state postmodern? Anyway, it's just some wild speculation. Like i said, the ideas aren't really quite formulated yet.

Finally, what crazy news wrap-up would be complete without a commentary on Israel? Israel today announced it will donate $5 million in aid to refugees in Chad and Dafur. Refugees closer to home will receive $5 million of bombs every day over the next few years. Oops.

Jealousy

<--While we are on the subject, I am very jealous of those giant timers they have in front of them. I want those in American debates as well!

So I didn't blog about the first round of the French election. Nobody won, and auite frankly I don't really care that much about French politics. But something about their election did strike me: they had 85% turnout. 85%! Eighty-Five percent! Hell, we are lucky if we get half of the electorate to turn out.

Now, the BBC is reporting that half of the electorate watched the latest Presidential debate. This is absurd. Not only do they have absurdly high turnout, but the majority of those voters are actually informed?

And the real kicker is that it seems the French aren't even that excited by the two candiates.

The Market Wins! The Maaaaaaaaarket Wins!

So I love reporting on teh financial sector. Between anthropomorphising it, infusing it with totemic spirits, and the metonymic devices it is a structuralist anthroplogist's dream. But for CNN, it appears to be a sports team:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Dow rallied to yet another
record high Wednesday, capping its longest winning stretch in nearly 52 years,
on robust earnings news, a $10.6 billion deal for Cablevision and a strong
reading from the manufacturing sector.

The Dow Jones industrial average (up 75.74 to 13,211.88, Charts) rose nearly 0.6 percent to close at an all-time high for the fifth time in the last six
sessions. The Dow also hit an intraday high of 13,256.33 during the
session.

The blue-chip indicator has now risen in 21 of the last 24
sessions - the best streak since the summer of 1955. Back then, the 30-share Dow
climbed about 10 percent over 25 sessions while it's up about 7.5 percent in the
recent run.

;">I just hope that the Dow Jones stays on its toes for the playoffs. The Nikei has a huge index and the EU Common market, while young, has been showing remarkable maturity and poise. They could put the breaks on that wining streak real fast unless the Dow Jones recruits some new stocks. Luckily, they have a great source of talent in their minor leagues: The S&P 500 crew has a few prospects just itching for the big time!

Huzzah!

It all comes together...

So I am up late at night and being a good patriotic citizen of these here United States, I am of course trying to learn everything I can about our enemies: The Terrorists. So I am scouring the Afghanistan-Pakistan border using Google Earth (in case the CIA missed UBL) and GAIMing with my fellow civilian terrorist hunters (heroes, for short), when what should I come across on Google News (yes, Google is the best line of defense we heroes have against the terrorists) but this CNN article:

American says he trained terrorists, cheered videos of 9/11

I, a good Patriotic citizen, naturally start reading so that I may add to my already extensive list of targets for profiling. Let's see here: Mr. Terrorist is a man, of Pakistani descent, educated in Britain...so far we fit the stereotypes, er, I mean profile. But wait, here is a little interesting tidbit:

The slightly built Yankees fan from Queens described how he mingled with radicals from the fall of 2001, when he quit a job as a computer programmer and left New York for Lahore -- saying he was radicalized by the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan.

As an unselfish hero who dedicates his life to searching for terrorists, I hereby call upon the U.S. government to take extra security measures against Yankee fans. For years I have been saying they are pure evil, and now we have incontrovertible proof! I will not stop until every Yankee fan is strip searched at airports, stopped randomly at traffic lights, and made to be a minor bad-guy on "24" who actually works for the Russians.

CNN does it again!

A few weeks back, in the midsts of the Imus mess, I blogged about the hilarity of CNN's context paragraphs. Well folks, the hits just keep on coming.

Today, CNN is running a story about the increasing use of iPods to cheat on school exams. I figure it's a slow news day, so I'll check it out. But please, CNN, educate us on exactly how one uses an iPod to cheat:

Some students use iPod-compatible voice recorders to record test answers in advance and them play them back, 16-year-old Mountain View junior Damir Bazdar said.

Others download crib notes onto the music players and hide them in the "lyrics" text files. Even an audio clip of the old "Schoolhouse Rock" take on how a bill makes it through Congress can come in handy during some American government exams.

Oh yes, the kids these days are apparently using Schoolhouse Rock to cheat on exams. And worse yet, the probably downloaded Schoolhouse Rock illegally!

Now then, far be it from me to point out the greater problem with our school system: that our government classes are no more sophisticated than a PBS cartoon. Since today's cartoons are apparently not smart enough to be used as cheating devices, I'd like to introduce the young and dishonest to a cartoon which made a huge impact in my life when I was their age: Animaniacs. Consider all their great contributions, which you can add to your iPod to help you on the next exam.

• On geography exams, kids can listen to either Wako Warner's "50 States and their Capitals", or Yako Warner's "Nations of the World"
  
• In biology class, load up your iPod with Brain feat. Pinky singing "The Parts of the Brain"
• In history class, they can load up on the Animaniacs's "US Presidents" song.
• Heck, they even do literature, and while your at it you can become cultured as well.

You know what, screw it. Kids, just stay at home and watch cartoons all day.

Analysis of the First Democractic Debate

I know this doesn't quite fall under "news", but I do say "unless something else is on my mind".

So, tonight was the first of a yet to be determined number of Democratic debates leading up to the primaries. Why they are doing a debate so early is a good question, but they are so let's just accept it and have ome fun. After some grave technical difficulties stemming from MSNBC's hatred of Macs, I finally got to catch the late night showing on MSNBC's website. And here is my take.

The Winners:

1) Sen. Hillary Clinton
I'm not a big fan of Hildog. I think she would make a poor candidate and a worse President. But at the end of the day, she was the only candidate on that stage who sounded Presidential. She was articulate, clear, and stood out from the crowd. Perhaps her best moment though, was in discussing Virginia Tech and Columbine. By showing a bit of emotion when discussing those shootings, she did something no one else managed to do: look human.



2) MSNBC's Brian Williams

This man had the unenviable job of moderating a debate between nine people, only three of whom anyone cares about. And you know what? He actually did a pretty good job. Clinton, Edwards, and Obama (in that order) got the most time to speak, but the minor candidates were not ignored.

And his questions weren't half-bad either. A little tougher than your average softball debate questions, but not so tough as to create animosity. In fact, the only reason he doesn't beat out Clinton Deuce is his poor time management skills. Did you really expect anyone to just give a name to the "Who is you ideal living Supreme Court Justice" question, Brian?

3) Fmr. Sen. Mike Gravel: This is sort of a win by default situation. I'm going to assume that most of my readers are under 60 years old, and therefore most of you have never heard of this man before. Now you have.

But Gravel took it one step further than simply having a pulse and standing on the stage for 90 minutes looking pretty. The man was a ranting machine. He combined the funnest parts of Al Sharpton, Dennie Kucinich, and Ralph Nader and rolled them all up into a single ball of old-man moaning:


Cussing, ranting at opponents, and accusing the country you are trying to lead of being a nuclear proliferator? Oh man do I love this guy! But wait, it actually gets better. Get ready for one of the greatest moments in the history of Presidential politics:

Joe Biden. Consider yourself served.

Treading Water:

4) Fmr. Sen. John Edwards: A $400 haircut and he still can't stand out in a crowd. Edwards was fine, stuck to his talking points, and was relatively coherant. But he didn't really do anything to distinguish himself.

5) Sen. Chris Dodd: When you are on the bottom of the pile, do you really have anywhere to go? He is a joke. He entered the debate a joke. He left the debate a joke.

The Losers:

6) Sen. Joe Biden: OK. So he did give the best answer of the entire debate. And I know that he is a joke too, and like Dodd does not have much room to fall. But oh lord did he sound awful! I mean, take this exchange from the transcripts of the debate:

[MODERATOR:] Senator Biden, the kind of flip side of the
question I just asked Senator Clinton: What could the federal government have
done to save those kids at Virginia Tech?

BIDEN: Shotgun -- not pistol.

I watched that exchange three times and I still have no idea why Biden said that. Not the best orator.

Also, could it be any clearer that this man is trying to run for the position of Obama's Veep?

7) Rep. Dennis Kucinich: Now I have a soft spot for Dennis. I mean, look at this picture. He actually manages to make Cindy Sheehan look tall!

For Christ's sake, the man makes Cindy Sheehan look tall! And, to be fair, he did precisely what darkhorse candidates are supposed to do. He picked a fight with Clinton and tag teamed on Obama.

But he got shown up. Mike Gravel totally stole your thunder.

And this is how you know there are too many candidates running. There is actually a competition between two people to see who will be that candidate who can say whatever is on his mind because he has no chance at winning.

8) Sen. Barak Obama: Barack Obama. I wanna be, your baby's momma. But boy, you had better get ready for the big show, and fast!

Full disclosure: Barak is my man. I am standing firm behind him. But he sounded just awful last night. Here is his real problem: the man is a great speaker. But when you have 60 seconds you simply do not have time to pick your words carefully. How many "ums" and "ers" do we need before you can just spit it out.

Obama has not mastered the soundbite yet and he is not quick with the responses. While these are great characteristics for a President, it makes for a piss poor candidate. Standing next to Clinton last night, he looked immature and unready. And his haircut looked bad too.

9) Gov. Bill Richardson: Not only did he sound awful, but he looks like he is going to eat your children. Check it out, if you dare.

EDIT: The BBC more or less agrees with me.

Careful what you wish for...

<--My book recommendation for the New York Times.

Special Thanks to C, for bringing this story to my attention.

So in my last post, I complained that there was not enough political news happening, forcing me to complain about the sci-tech section of the virtual paper:

Come on politics. Get me some funny/interesting news so I can stop with these sciency human interest fluff.

I should be careful what I wish for. Today, the NYTimes is reporting on the preparations for the first parliamentary elections of Bhutan. Oh wait, that was not nearly dramatic enough to describe a country in the Orient. Hey New NYTimes, can y'all give me a hand?

they undertook a sort of fire drill for democracy and set down an important marker on their carefully ordered journey toward modernity.

That is much better. Has that certain Asian Spice to it. And as a bonus, you get inserted into the telos of modernity. But wait, what exactly does modernity consist of?

Having once sealed itself off from the world, the lair of the Druk has cautiously and deliberately begun opening up. Television, including foreign cable stations, was introduced only in 1999 (and more recently featured an episode of “Desperate Housewives” on election day). The Internet came soon after.

There are no McDonald’s golden arches poking out from the blue pine forests yet, though the influence of global consumer culture can be glimpsed in the Pepe jeans on young men and a convenience store here that calls itself 8-Eleven.

The government is considering joining the World Trade Organization. Foreign tourists are allowed to come in somewhat larger numbers than before, though still chaperoned from one high-priced resort to another.

So we have three paragraphs on capitalist consumption now? Wasn't this just an article about elections and democracy? How did democracy become Desperate Housewives, the Internet, and the WTO. Of course, they have not officially reached modernity yet, seeing as how they do not yet have any McDonald's in their country yet. But they'll get there:

But all that is in its infancy. For the moment at least, Bhutan does not resemble a democracy, particularly compared with other countries in the region.

Aww... Cute wittle Bhutan. You're such a good little country. Yes you are! Yes you are! Who's a good country? Who's a good country?

Oh, and for a real bonus keep on reading 'till the last two paragraphs on the article.

And still I try so hard

<-- Buying a box of Cap'n crunch will greatly enhance the visual aspects of this blog post.

But in the end, it doesn't even matter.

I have been trying all day to ignore this news item. I accidentally read it on the BBC this morning, and have been trying my hardest to forget it ever since. And yet, CNN insists on mocking me, by displaying this headline prominently on their RSS feed:

NASA puts on 3-D glasses to view sun

First that deflector shield crap, and now the scientific community has reached the technological equivalent of Honey I Shrunk the Audience. Maybe the next big press release will involve a secret decoder ring!

Come on politics. Get me some funny/interesting news so I can stop with these sciency human interest fluff.

Check it out

Amos Schocken, publisher of Ha'aretz has an excellent editorial today in his paper. Check it out.

You're kidding me!

<-- William Shatner is now .001 cents richer.

So I usually am not too interested in the sci-tech section of the newspaper (yeah, I know I read the news online but it doesn't have the same impact when you say "the sci-tech section of news outlets' websites). I mean, I get wooed as much as anyone, but unlike the real news sections I don't care enough to learn more than is reported in the stories. So long as none of my technology fails and I can get a nifty new gadget every couple of years, I live and let live.

But the BBC has just cross the line:

British scientists are planning to see whether a Star Trek-style deflector shield could be built to protect astronauts from radiation.

No, I did not just make that up. They explain the importance of engaging the deflector shields thusly:

There are a variety of risks facing future space explorers, not least of which is the cancer-causing radiation encountered when missions venture beyond the protective magnetic envelope, or magnetosphere, which shields the Earth against these energetic particles.

Shockingly, they did not raise the possibility that radiation could give you super-powers.

Breaking News Bufoons

So there is a lot that is very disturbing about the recent shootings on the Virginia Tech campus. News Blues's thoughts and prayers go to the victims. However, in the rush to cover the story as it breaks, the news media has been inserting all sorts of bizzare facts. Take CNN:

Court records obtained by the AP show Cho got a speeding ticket from Virginia Tech police on April 7. He was cited for going 44 mph in a 25 mph zone, the AP reported, with a court date set for May 23.

Oh! So now we should watch out for every man with a speeding ticket?! Or maybe that was his motive? I guess I can now see that his true character was that of the criminal. CNN also inserted this tidbit:

Students in one of Cho's classes called him "the question mark kid," classmate Julie Poole told the AP, because Cho used just a question mark for his name on a class sign-in sheet.

Now that is pretty deep when you think about it. But the disturbing part come from AOL, where a former classmate who is now employed at AOL shared unpublished manuscripts that the gunman had written. I know this is hardly the main issue, but isn't there some sort of violation for reproducing that without consent?

Not to be outdone, the NYTimes finished its main article on teh tragedy with these two bizzare context paragraphs:

Until Monday, the deadliest campus shooting in United States history was in 1966 at the University of Texas, where Charles Whitman climbed to the 28th-floor observation deck of a clock tower and opened fire, killing 16 people before he was shot and killed by the police. In the Columbine High attack in 1999, two teenagers killed 12 fellow students and a teacher before killing themselves.

The single deadliest shooting in the United States came in October 1991, when George Jo Hennard crashed his pickup truck through the window of a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, Tex., then shot 22 people dead and wounded at least 20 others. He shot himself in the head.

Look. I know the news cycle can be viscious, and there is a competition between various sources to see who can break what first, but shouldn't there be some relevance? I mean, do we really need to know that this guy was (barely) speeding?

Yet another non-apology

<--This man may even have a Jewish friend. If so, we now know who pays for lunch when they go out.

Former Minnesota Governor and current Republican Presidential hopeful Tommy Thompson demonstrated yet again why he has absolutely no shot of winning. Ha'aretz reports:

Speaking to an audience at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in Washington D.C., Thompson said that, "I'm in the private sector and for the first time in my life I'm earning money. You know that's sort of part of the Jewish tradition and I do not find anything wrong with that."

So according to Tommy Thompson Jews are money-grubbers. Want to clarify, Mr. Thompson?

"I just want to clarify something because I didn't [by] any means want to infer or imply anything about Jews and finances and things," he said.

"What I was referring to, ladies and gentlemen, is the accomplishments of the Jewish religion. You've been outstanding business people and I compliment you for that."

Oh! Thanks for clarifying. You didn't want to imply that Jews control the market, just that Judaism makes for great businessmen. All better!

News Omnibus, Part 3: Normie v. Alan, and the poor apostrophe

The Chronicle of Higher Education is reporting that the feud between Harvard's Alan Dershowitz and DePaul's Norman Finklestein -- which is apparently of such proportions that it has its own (poorly written) wiki page -- took a new and ugly turn. Seems Alan Dershowitz saw fit to write a legnthy letter to anyone who would listen at DePaul, lobbying against Finklestein being granted tenure. Needless to say, DePaul faculty did not react kindly:

According to the minutes of the session, the council voted unanimously to authorize a letter to DePaul's president, Dennis H. Holtschneider, and the university's provost, Helmut P. Epp, along with the president of Harvard University and the dean of Harvard Law school. The letter was to express "the council's dismay at Professor Dershowitz's interference in Finkelstein's tenure and promotion case" and also to explain "that the sanctity of the tenure and promotion process is violated by Professor Dershowitz's emails."

The minutes add: "A discussion followed in which members expressed their views that this was a very disturbing intrusion which attacked the sovereignty of an academic institution to govern its own affairs."

Asked whether it was unusual for a scholar to weigh in on tenure deliberations at another university, Mr. Dershowitz responded, "What's so unusual about a concerned academic's objecting to his receiving tenure?"

The faculty voted 9 to 3 to approve him for tenure, and the College Personnel Committee vote 5 to 0 to approve him, but the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences recommended against granting tenure.

I know I should be angry that Dershowitz would try to publicly interfere with another university's tenure system. And I should probably be amused that these two "scholars" -- the one who uses an ellipse to cover 87 pages and has footnotes to nowhere, and the other who made a career following footnotes -- are butting heads again. But really, that is not what I find most irksome here.

Read that last paragraph of the block quote again.

Dershowitz responded, "What's so unusual about a concerned academic's objecting to his receiving tenure?"

Well, for starters it would be somewhat unusual for a verb to be possessed by a sentence's subject, since that is a role usually left to nouns.

I can only hope this was not an email interview. Somehow though I find this fitting.