Somebody buy this for me right now.

Kevin Hayden over The American Street was nice enough to include yours truly on his list of cool female blogs (yes I am going to make you click on all of the links until you figure out which one is me). He clearly hasn't seen my latest traffic stats.

UPDATE: Oh fine, click on the word "more".

OT: 15 Minutes of Fame

If you have time today check out the MTV News Special on R. Kelly. Not only will you see my old high school but towards the end my baby brother Greg is interviewed. 3:00 p.m Central Standard Time, re-aired on MTV 2 at 4: 00 p.m.

ADDED: I probably should add that Greg's role is strictly man on the street as-a-student-how-do-you-feel-about this blah blah. Right now family members across the country are watching a tabloid show on a sex scandal in the hopes of seeing my brother. It is a proud moment in Casa Warren.

ADDED: Greg was the second of the teen interviews.

Endless Love

Well it's been a rough couple of years but the Blair-Bush love affair has become the dysfunctional relationship that just won't die. And I just gotta hand it to them for being able to make it work for so long.

George, Tony...

...this one's for you.

UPDATED: Link fixed. It's funny, I swear.

From Frank Rich today on Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11:

Fahrenheit 9/11" doesn't push any Vietnam analogies, but you may find one in a montage at the start, in which a number of administration luminaries (Cheney, Rice, Ashcroft, Powell) in addition to the president are seen being made up for TV appearances. It's reminiscent of Richard Avedon's photographic portrait of the Mission Council, the American diplomats and military figures running the war in Saigon in 1971. But at least those subjects were dignified. In Mr. Moore's candid-camera portraits, a particularly unappetizing spectacle is provided by Paul Wolfowitz, the architect of both the administration's Iraqi fixation and its doctrine of "preventive" war. We watch him stick his comb in his mouth until it is wet with spit, after which he runs it through his hair. This is not the image we usually see of the deputy defense secretary, who has been ritualistically presented in the press as the most refined of intellectuals — a guy with, as Barbara Bush would have it, a beautiful mind.

Said my mother after reading that passage: "I think I'd rather see The Passion than that sequence."

Ewwww.

Oh unfair New Mexico

Our hearts with shame o'erflow...

In March 2003, a teenage girl named Courtney presented one of her poems before an audience at Barnes & Noble bookstore in Albuquerque, then read the poem live on the school's closed-circuit television channel.

A school military liaison and the high school principal accused the girl of being "un-American" because she criticized the war in Iraq and the Bush administration's failure to give substance to its "No child left behind" education policy.

The girl's mother, also a teacher, was ordered by the principal to destroy the child's poetry. The mother refused and may lose her job.

But, as with horseshit everywhere, it's spread farther and deeper than just little old Rio Rancho High.

Writers and editors who have spent years translating essays, films, poems, scientific articles and books by Iranian, North Korean and Sudanese authors have been warned not to do so by the U.S. Treasury Department under penalty of fine and imprisonment. Publishers and film producers are not allowed to edit works authored by writers in those nations. The Bush administration contends doing so has the effect of trading with the enemy, despite a 1988 law that exempts published materials from sanction under trade rules.

I've reformatted Korean and Arabic healthforms...does that make me an enemy combatant?
Thanks to bartcop entertainment for the link.

Eric A.'s column in The Nation

These are the men not just the neocons but self-described progressives and human-rights advocates believed capable of carrying out the delicate and difficult mission of bringing democracy and modernism to the Arab world, while safeguarding the security and good name of the United States. Excuse me, but just what was so hard to understand about this bunch? We knew they were dishonest. We knew they were fanatical. We knew they were purposely ignorant and bragged about not reading newspapers. We knew they were vindictive. We knew they were lawless. We knew they were obsessively secretive. We knew they had no time or patience for those who raised difficult questions. We knew they were driven by fantasies of religious warfare, personal vengeance and ideological triumph. We knew they had no respect for civil liberties. And we knew they took no responsibility for the consequences of their incompetence. Just what is surprising about the manner in which they've conducted the war?

It's hard to welcome the disillusionment of so many chickenhawks. As much as I'd like to be happy that they are finally growing a brain, I find myself even more angry at their surprise and dismay. Eric's right. How the hell can you be surprised at a catastrophe played out in plain sight?

The Ryan campaign is paying somone to stalk Barack Obama (via Josh Marshall)

In what has to be a first in Illinois politics, Republican Jack Ryan has assigned one of his campaign workers to record every movement and every word of the state senator while he is in public.

That means Justin Warfel, armed with a handheld Panasonic digital camcorder, follows Obama to the bathroom door and waits outside. It means Warfel follows Obama as he moves from meeting to meeting in the Capitol. And it means Warfel tails Obama when he drives to his campaign office.

"It's standard procedure to record public speeches and things like that," Obama told reporters as the bald, 20-something operative filmed away. "But to have someone who's literally following you a foot and a half away, everywhere you go, going into the restrooms, standing outside my office, sitting outside of my office asking my secretary where I am, seems to be getting a little carried away."

Warfel interrupted Obama several times with heckling questions, but wouldn't respond when reporters asked him about who he was and why he was filming Obama's every move.

"You'll have to speak to the campaign office," Warfel said tartly to practically every inquiry.

Yeah, I know.

ADDED: Here's Jack Ryan's contact info
Jack Ryan for U.S. Senate
118 N. Clinton St., Suite 305
Chicago, IL 60661

312.258.8600
312.258.8601 (fax)
888-880-2004 (Toll-free in Illinois)

email: info@jackryan2004.com

Jon Stewart's Commencement Speech at William and Mary

Lets talk about the real world for a moment. We had been discussing it earlier, and I…I wanted to bring this up to you earlier about the real world, and this is I guess as good a time as any. I don’t really know to put this, so I’ll be blunt. We broke it.

Please don’t be mad. I know we were supposed to bequeath to the next generation a world better than the one we were handed. So, sorry.

I don’t know if you’ve been following the news lately, but it just kinda got away from us. Somewhere between the gold rush of easy internet profits and an arrogant sense of endless empire, we heard kind of a pinging noise, and uh, then the damn thing just died on us. So I apologize.

But here’s the good news. You fix this thing, you’re the next greatest generation, people. You do this—and I believe you can—you win this war on terror, and Tom Brokaw’s kissing your ass from here to Tikrit, let me tell ya. And even if you don’t, you’re not gonna have much trouble surpassing my generation. If you end up getting your picture taken next to a naked guy pile of enemy prisoners and don’t give the thumbs up you’ve outdid us.

We declared war on terror. We declared war on terror—it’s not even a noun, so, good luck. After we defeat it, I’m sure we’ll take on that bastard ennui.

We had Robert Pinsky speak. He read a poem about death.

Regulating Atrocity

Sy Hersh's follow-up piece is the crown jewel of this week’s New Yorker but be sure to look at Hertzberg’s column. He touched on something that I’ve been mulling over for the last few days.

There is something a little unsettling about the suggestion that war is just another routine human activity, like driving or stock trading, that needs to be conducted according to the rules lest someone get hurt. Baroness Bertha von Suttner, the 1905 Nobel Peace laureate, once remarked that improving the laws of war was like regulating the temperature while boiling someone in oil.

I’ve always been confused by the concept of the “fair fight.” If the object is to pulverize your opponent why set parameters? And yet from the schoolyard to the war zone, we believe that within every aggressive situation there are lines that we don’t cross. Systematic extermination is barbaric, whereas collateral damage is merely unfortunate. We’ve so internalized the idea that war is necessary that we agree to this absurd notion of systemic killing “within reason.” Hence the Geneva Conventions, The Hague, etc. We also assume that we can objectively identify a war crime when we see one.

Except that there is no objectivity in the perception of a war crime. If we assume that the basis for war is just, or at least justified, we can very easily slant the actions of soldiers, leaders, and etcetera however dubious or criminal as all part of the same just cause.


That is what has made the War on Terror rhetoric so effective. It is a failsafe. We can persuade the weaker minds of this country that there is no possible comparison between anything the terrorists do and our own actions at Guantanomo, Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere. They want to destroy freedom and we want to spread democracy, therefore we have a moral justification for all of our actions whereas they do not.

Right now most the regular readers here are going, “Duh.”

If you look at this debate over the Abu Ghraib scandal it clearly illustrates how the rhetoric of the war on terror has forced us to have this absolutely absurd argument comparing the crimes of Saddam Hussein, and the actions of the terrorists who killed Nick Berg *, and Daniel Pearl, to our own at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. There seem to be following under three categories.

1) Yeah what we did was wrong but what they did was worse.
2) What we did wasn’t wrong because they’re all terrorists and enemies.
3) I went to a very bad high school and can't tell the difference betwee hijinks and torture.

To which our response should be

1) What we did was wrong; end of story.
2) See number 1.
3) (Don't speak to this person. Walk away quickly and avoid eye contact.)

What’s more complicated about this debate, is the "Bad Apple" quandary. And this is something those of us in the anti-war camp should have known better to get tangled up in.

When we first went to war, we let ourselves get caught up in the “Support our troops,” meme which is why we find ourselves fighting this idea of just a few bad apples. Leaving aside the question of Rumsfield’s responsibility (and at this point there isn’t really a question about it) why should it surprise us that soldiers whether ordered to or not tortured prisoners? It doesn’t occur to us that a person who has been trained to kill people labeled as the enemy is probably capable of any amount of abuse. This isn’t to say that all of our soldiers have the capacity to do this. But the fact that this scandal is growing beyond the seven initial suspects illustrates that this is more common than we know. And isn’t a tad bizarre that we are willing to accept the deaths of at least 10,000 Iraqi civilians during major combat, but we are shocked and disgusted at the photos and the stories that are coming out now?

When John Kerry was protesting the Vietnam war he said this on Meet The Press in 1971:

There are all kinds of atrocities and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free-fire zones.  I conducted harassment and interdiction fire.  I used 50-caliber machine guns which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people.  I took part in search-and-destroy missions, in the burning of villages.  All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare.  All of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down.  And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free-fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.

I wish he'd stood by that statement, but I still think that it's relevant. An unjust war compromises everyone involved and the longer it goes on, the harder it is to distiguish between the good and the bad apples. I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't continue to support our troops nor that to do so was wrong. But what we are seeing now is a merely a preview of things to come and it is entirely likely that the longer our troops are in Iraq the harder it will be to support them.

"I’m not into conspiracy theories except those that are true" part II

At the risk of repeating myself, literally, I don't know about you but I'm still willing to think unthinkable thoughts:

Look at this pic that was released today of the latest prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison. Notice the white chair in the lower left corner. Now - look at the chair Nicholas Berg is sitting in!! It's the same fucking chair!!...

I sit here stunned. I want to call someone but don't know who to call. If this turns out to be true - the world will experience a moment of horror unlike anything the world has ever experienced - except maybe the nuking of Japan.

Hmmmm...

thanks to bartcop for the link

BS Curve Ahead

As others condemned the reported abuse of Iraqi prisoners, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe on Tuesday expressed outrage at the worldwide outrage over the treatment by American soldiers of those he called "terrorists" and "murderers."

"I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment," the Oklahoma Republican said at a U.S. Senate hearing probing the scandal.

"These prisoners, you know they're not there for traffic violations," Inhofe said. "If they're in cellblock 1-A or 1-B, these prisoners, they're murderers, they're terrorists, they're insurgents. Many of them probably have American blood on their hands and here we're so concerned about the treatment of those individuals."

I was in the car on Lakeshore Drive when I heard this. Had I crashed out of sheer fury, it would have been nice to try to sue this asshole. Futile but nice.

The word is that Van Helsing sucks big time so it might be better to check out Supersize Me! instead. The director, Morgan Spurlock, was on Chicago’s “Eight Forty Eight” this morning. It was pretty good interview.

One thing I wish he’d mentioned was the way people who live in impoverished neighborhoods don’t have access to healthy food. Since I haven’t seen the movie I can’t say for certain that he doesn’t address it. But since it hasn’t shown up in any of the interviews I’ve heard or read, I’m just assuming.

Fresh fruit and vegetables are something of a luxury for a lot of people, never mind buying organic. And even if you want to buy fresh produce, if you live in a neighborhood like West Englewood finding stuff that’s edible can be difficult. One woman told me that she doesn’t shop at the chain grocery store near her house because she can smell the food going bad.

Health costs and I don't just mean care and insurance. People who can't afford healthy food usually can't afford to join a health club or find the time to do something like go running.

Here in Chicago the Park District has a program called Chicago Works Out. You can take a six-week class in yoga or aerobics for $25. This is great but $25 is still money that's not going towards food or bills.

I’m lagging behind in my reading so I haven’t read this or this, but since I do know they address these issues I’m going to plug them anyway.

Moral high ground? We prefer deep chasms.

If you haven’t checked out Seymour Hersh’s New Yorker piece, read it.

The “fact” that we are better than Saddam Hussein has been the tiny bit of tattered nothing that has shielded this administration from the harshest criticism of this war. How many times did Bush trot out those torture chambers and rape rooms to counter the question of WMDs?

As Jon said, the rape rooms are merely “under new management.”

Fatigue

11 soldiers died today and it barely registered. I'm afraid of the numbing effect this war is having. We're getting used to the mounting casualities. It's exhausting being outraged/frustrated/horrified all of the time. I think one by one we're tuning out. I can feel it happening to me.

I can't believe that Bush's horrible "Mission Accomplishment" speech was a year ago. In some ways these last three plus years have been interminable. And yet when you've spent them in a sort of sustained state of disbelief, it feels as though time isn't passing at all. I'm still stuck in 2000 when everything went wrong.

If a tree falls in the forest…

I would like to blog about Bush and Cheney’s testimony in front of the 9/11 commission but I can’t. I can’t blog about it because it isn’t really happening. All the evidence we have on this is purely circumstantial. No oaths, no tapes, no transcripts. Five years from now both Cheney and Bush can deny that this appearance ever took place and people would be hard pressed to prove it did.

In a way it’s brilliant. Scary.

Well it's been a week without a post. I didn't mean to take a break but my life has turned slightly more screwy than usual. I am moving twice over the course of the next four months. A short move in May at which time I will temporarily move back in with my parents' house and then again in August to New York. This won't drastically effect the future of this blog, but things might be a bit sporadic. So bear with me.

The Kerry web site has posted docs of his Vietnam service record. Somebody less lazy/busy/tired than me go check them out. There is plenty to keep you busy.

Brave New World

I'm not sure what to say about this other than, "Stop. Now."

The political consultants discreetly observed from the next room as their subject watched the campaign commercials. But in this political experiment, unlike the usual ones, the subject did not respond by turning a dial or discussing his reactions with a focus group.

He lay inside an M.R.I. machine, watching commercials playing on the inside of his goggles as neuroscientists from the University of California, Los Angeles, measured the blood flow in his brain. Instead of asking the subject, John Graham, a Democratic voter, what he thought of the use of Sept. 11 images in a Bush campaign commercial, the researchers noted which parts of Mr. Graham's brain were active as he watched. The active parts, they also noted, were different from the parts that had lighted up in earlier tests with Republican brains.

-snip

Mr. Freedman and William Knapp, a strategist with both Clinton presidential campaigns and the Gore campaign in 2000, turned to this technology after consulting with Mr. Freedman's brother, Dr. Joshua Freedman, an assistant professor of psychiatry at U.C.L.A., who was less than impressed by the methodology of political consultants.

Yes, unfortunately you read that last part right. Now if you'll excuse me I have to go and build a bunker.

Random Sighting

A harried-looking Barak Obama at the Hyde Park Co-op grocery store with his daughters.