After I go down to hear Horst Rechelbacher speak at the Social Capital Collective meeting tonight, I will be headed out to the Vita.mn One Year Anniversary "Concert Event" at the Varsity Theater in Dinkytown (Minneapolis). I saw Cloud Cult there months ago and it was a great show so I am excited that they are back. I am also interested to see Doomtree, First Communion After Party and DJ Espada as well. It should be a fun, busy night.
For whatever reason I was not motivated to post yesterday. I wanted to post, but I couldn't get myself to do it. What I wanted to do was to post a positive story about Arabs and/or Arab Americans and make that sort of a tradition on this anniversary, here at Alt Text.
When this idea was conceived I was thinking in these specific terms but wanted to change the way people thought of this day - a day now linked to a war that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or making us safer. I wasn't looking to start a meme or actively market my idea, just post some positive news.
Reading Seth Godin's site today I came across his post about how we can market our way closer to an end to terrorism. In the post Seth writes how you cannot beat terrorism with guns and prisons - those consequences do little to affect the terrorist's mind and could do even more to fuel the creation of new terrorists. After all, terrorists are just people who subscribe to a particular idea - an idea that America and the West are immoral - heathens that are bent on destroying their culture and robbing them with the resources.
For all I know, we may never be able to eliminate terrorism and animosity towards us (especially as we are sitting atop the world in terms of wealth and consumption). But what we can do is try to create another idea that can combat those to which the terrorists subscribe.
We have not been very successful invading and bombing our way to changing minds but we do know how to market our ideas. The problem right now is that somewhere along the line, our leaders decided that the time for crafting this sort of idea, had passed and they have been busy reinforcing the old ideas that terrorists have of us.
We are already at a place in time where many people are fearful of expressing racist thoughts and that may eventually give way to the idea of racism finally disappearing. In the same way, maybe some day, the idea of attacking innocents as a means of affecting change an the idea that the Western countries only want to hold down and plunder the rest of the world may seem crazy. Unfortunately, for now, there are far too many people willing to do participate in the former and far too much truth to the latter. Even powerfully crafted and marketed ideas need to eventually mirror reality.
FNB politics can be tricky to write about, and to pin down, because it relies on surfacing deep-seated anxieties and archetypes that, when revealed to the light of day, appear ridiculous.
To a large extent my perceptions of public figures is based only upon how the news media (a term used very loosely here) chooses to present them. I have been too naive to realize or too stubborn to admit it, but I just have not known the extent to which political parties use back-channels and media-types to conduct swift-boat style attacks on the character of their "enemies" and just how effective such attacks have been. While I admit to being oblivious to Edwards' manhood being called into question (for the most-part), I have known about the attacks on Hillary as far back as before she was first lady. The attacks on Barrack are a little more covert, but comments by Rush Limbaugh (shown below), while appearing humorous at first, are no doubt attempting to bring up (in some people) antiquated fears of black men "stealing" "our" white women. It is outrageous!
One of Limbaugh's ongoing jabs is that white female reporters find him sexually irresistible. "Snerdley is convinced Maureen [Dowd] wants Barack Obama," he sighs. "I don't even want to go there." He depicted Time's Ana Marie Cox as helpless before Obama's overpowering sexuality, putting the following thoughts into her head: "Well, there's no question the power is crackling through his jeans!"
I know it is getting full when my dad says he is now firmly on the Barack Obamawagon*, but is anyone else worried about what GOP and other political detractors will do with Barack's surname?
* Damn, I missed coining that term by at least 2 years! But there is still only a half dozen online uses at this point.
The Republicans are falling all over themselves trying to figure out how to deal with their latest scandal.
But reading the front-page headlines and watching the breathless TV coverage five weeks before the election, one could glibly assume that the fallout from the Foley frenzy will be the tipping point that will produce a Democratic sweep in the House. Especially seeing the Republicans in full meltdown, vacillating between fetal-position defeatism and a desperate effort to find a scapegoat.
Really? This is the tipping point? What about all the things the American people now know about Bush and the the Republican congress that allowed all of this? What about...
...the National Intelligence Estimate tells us that the invasion of Iraq has created a greater worldwide terrorist threat, making us less safe.
...and Bob Woodward's 60 Minutes interview and new book, State of Denial that each outline a "ruinous mix of arrogance and naiveté" within the Bush administration - the direct cause of the Iraq mess.
...and those are just in the last week! If you go over the last six years there are so many more, but is America listening?
...but the key question here is, how much bad news can the Republicans take? Sooner rather than later the weight of the evidence should tilt the scale against Republican control of Congress. For given the way things are going for Hastert and the White House, it can't take much of a tipping point for the Democrats to get those 15 needed seats.
Here is one strategy they could use: label Foley as a Democrat as Fox "News" did during the O'Reilly Factor.
How long will the American people allow this type of crap from their "leaders"? From their press? Clinton made a strong showing but the Republicans have corruption and deviant behavior down to an art form.
On Thursday, the House is expected to take up a Republican resolution supporting the tracking of financial transactions and condemning the publication of the existence of the program and details of how it works. The resolution says Congress "expects the cooperation of all news media organizations in protecting the lives of Americans and the capability of the government to identify, disrupt and capture terrorists by not disclosing classified intelligence programs." Democrats are proposing a variant that expresses support for the treasury program but omits the language about the news media.
I am sure that similar resolutions had been made in Communist China and Russia as well as Nazi Germany. The first step toward control of the media is "expecting cooperation". [Source of quote was the NY Times - subscription required)]
For one reason or another, I have never been much of a consumer of magazines. In many respects I am grateful for this. Time is always an issue and I can rarely get through a full magazine before the next one comes. But I also do not like the waste magazines generate. It is very visible and apparent to me as I retain stacks of magazines and then have to recycle them. That being said, there are a few magazines to which I really ought to be subscribing:
The New Yorker - I am always impressed with the content of this magazine and the esteem that it has throughout my network of friends and beyond. It hits right on most of the issues it tackles, and does so much better than the daily newspapers.
Paste - I love to find new music and film and Paste makes it easy. Not only can I read about a ton of great artists and projects that are just coming out, but I can also see and listen to them thanks the CD or DVD included with every issue. They are right on with my tastes too.
Aperture - The few times I have seen this magazine I was very impressed and since I would like to be a better photographer it would help me out.
National Geographic Traveler - Travel magazines are hard for me. I really feel like I need a good one and this one seems very good (though I am tempted to want the traditional National Geographic instead).
Make - I am curious and love to build stuff (or rip stuff apart. Is there another magazine that is better suited to those types of activities?
Wired - The only magazine on this list that I actually do get. I like it, I really do, but more and more often, I get this type of news via the osmosis known as being online.
These were all listed in the order I would like them. If anyone knows how I can get any of the following delivered free for a year let me know. Anything else missing?
A couple that didn't make the list but were very close were:Dwell, Real Simple mostly just because I don't think I would have time.
I doubt I will find many things to agree with Christopher Hitchens about but on this Islamic cartoon "scandal" he and I can agree. In a column at Slate Hitchens makes my argument much better than I could about why the fanatics in the Muslim world are hurting themselves and are even somewhat successful in their goal of affecting and changing life in the United States and other "western" countries.
The prohibition on picturing the prophet—who was only another male mammal—is apparently absolute. So is the prohibition on pork or alcohol or, in some Muslim societies, music or dancing. Very well then, let a good Muslim abstain rigorously from all these. But if he claims the right to make me abstain as well, he offers the clearest possible warning and proof of an aggressive intent.
We cannot, and indeed, should not, refuse to publish such a cartoon as that published first in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Our news media should not bow to extremism in any of its forms — there is sensitivity and then there is fear and cowardice.
I am not asking for the right to slaughter a pig in a synagogue or mosque or to relieve myself on a "holy" book. But I will not be told I can't eat pork, and I will not respect those who burn books on a regular basis. I, too, have strong convictions and beliefs and value the Enlightenment above any priesthood or any sacred fetish-object. It is revolting to me to breathe the same air as wafts from the exhalations of the madrasahs, or the reeking fumes of the suicide-murderers, or the sermons of Billy Graham and Joseph Ratzinger. But these same principles of mine also prevent me from wreaking random violence on the nearest church, or kidnapping a Muslim at random and holding him hostage, or violating diplomatic immunity by attacking the embassy or the envoys of even the most despotic Islamic state, or making a moronic spectacle of myself threatening blood and fire to faraway individuals who may have hurt my feelings.
Hitchens doesn't reserve his criticism for just the weak-kneed U.S. media or the over-reacting extremists but also lashed out at the Bush administration for its own trampling of the 1st Amendment and disregard for upholding its own rights in the face of such scrutiny. He closes his rant with the following remarks:
And civil society means that free expression trumps the emotions of anyone to whom free expression might be inconvenient. It is depressing to have to restate these obvious precepts, and it is positively outrageous that the administration should have discarded them at the very first sign of a fight.
There's no war on Christmas. I hate to break it to all those oppressed American Christians and their rabbi friend who wrote the following fairytale.
Well, David, that’s the dark little secret that only your Grandpa and a few others knew. These people weren’t anti-religious as much as they were anti-Christian: anti- the majority religion that made America, America. They weren’t against Allah or African gods. They hated the Christian God. Many simply despised Christians of Faith, hated them as people.
I want to make sure no one thinks I have any problem with Christmas. I love the secular celebration known, now, as Christmas. I love the secular spending spree it has become. Actually I am not crazy about the consumerism of the season (much like these guys who showed up at the Church Mall of America last week) but I admit I do get into the "spirit" of it and time I get to spend with family and friends. I am just tired of people getting on their high horse about things - this time of year especially. This writer has a few (coarse) words for those same people at - ahem, pardon my French, fuckchristmas.org
Here is an excerpt:
Christmas isn’t fucking Christian. Ok, now we’re talking.That’s right, that Yuletide cheer you’re spreading? What exactly do you think Yule is? It's the fucking Pagan celebration of solstice. And those “Christmas” traditions? They’re not just like Pagan rituals, they fucking are Pagan rituals. Way before your Jesus got all magical with the bread and fishes, the Romans were celebrating the birth of Mithra on . . . guess? Go on – guess. December fucking twenty fifth. What a weird coincidence. Practically the whole thing is ripped off from the fucking Druids and the Romans. Twelve days? Check. Exchanging gifts? Check. Mistletoe? Check.
Oh and by the way, there is still a very costly real war still going on.
Viggo Mortensen, my new favorite actor, in an interview with The Progressive where he is asked about his views on President Bush. The entire interview is actually quite interesting and Mortensen comes across as intelligent and well informed. Something I would love to have in a leader.
"Q: Are you anti-Bush, as the pundits say?"
No, I'm not anti-Bush; I’m anti-Bush behavior. In other words, I’m against cheating, greed, cruelty, racism, imperialism, religious fundamentalism, treason, and the seemingly limitless capacity for hypocrisy shown by Bush and his Administration.
Awesome.
And I almost forgot to post this Mike Wallace link I had been meaning to post since last week. Whan asked what he wuld ask Presidnet Bush if he was given the chance to interview him, Wallace said:
What in the world prepared you to be the commander in chief of the largest superpower in the world? In your background, Mr. President, you apparently were incurious. You didn't want to travel. You knew very little about the military. . . . The governor of Texas doesn't have the kind of power that some governors have. . . . Why do you think they nominated you? . . . Do you think that has anything to do with the fact that the country is so [expletive] up?
Having cancelled my DirecTV service some months back and with the summer network schedule lull I have had a good deal of time away from the TV. Because shows like Lost, 24, and Arrested Development don't resume again until fall, there is nothing to watch, which is generally good, it being summer and all. 
This break has given me a chance to rediscover some of the great PBS programming that I have been neglecting. In addition to some excellent travel and cooking shows, and of course NOVA, there's the weekly news show: NOW - previously NOW with Bill Moyers - currently just Now.
Last week's show, NOW: The Design of Dissent was an interview with graphic designer Milton Glaser - famous for designing the I (heart) NY imagery, the buttons created for The Nation (and shown at right) and more. Amidst some political waxings, Glaser mostly discusses how graphic design can and does change people's perspectives.
That's the thing that makes you most crazy the idea of this passive acceptance of an authority. We thought we weren't that kind of people.
The show's themes correspond with a like-named exhibit at the School of Visual Arts and a similarly like-named new book by Glazer.
I think it's a rather simple-minded idea that if you examine government, those that have the least dissent are those that are most totalitarian. That is, in fact, the manifestation of dissent that defines democracy, (because) it means that there are oppositions to power that are freely expressed and that minority opinion is also considered to be worthwhile. Generally speaking, dissent comes out of a sense of fairness that something is wrong. Power is being used unfairly, and there has to be some manifestation or complaint about it.
I'll try not to quote the entire interview and instead encourage you to read the full interview transcript. I will mention however, that this is what I have always believed - that dissent does not equal disdain. On both a national level and in terms of jobs I have had, I always felt the greatest need to voice dissent, when I cared the most. It isn't worth arguing for thing A to improve, if you don't give a damn about thing A. It surprises me upon how many people this point is lost.
To alter Eisenhower's famous words a bit: The efforts and resources expended, from time to trees - every word uttered or written or posted to a blog - by the media about the Michael Jackson trial, is in a final sense, a theft from those causes who should have attention paid to them, environmental concerns, hunger, and true injustices that matter to humanity.
This NY Times article isn't very interesting except that it clued me into this site by the Magazine Publishers of America (which they did NOT provide a link to of course - I hate that about the NY Times) that attempts to illustrate the future relevancy of the magazine format as it currently stands. Even if you don’t believe that it is interesting to look at the fun covers some of the publications have come up with to depict the future.
The headline of this post was something that Edward Tufte attributed to Steve Balmer's description of books at a recent seminar I attended (and will be writing about soon)
All the lip service that the announcers gave to Randy Moss' display of...ahem...his posterior (albeit a pantomimed display) was ridiculous and I remember thinking that they were acting like bigger idiots than Moss. But the ensuing brouhaha over this event is mind-blowing. I cannot believe there are people like Howie Long (arguably one of the dirtiest players ever) saying that it just shows that "talent and class don't always go together" and Michael Irvin who got busted for having a separate house he would go to snort coke and cavort with prostitutes. These people and in fact the entire NFL and even the networks are the definition of hypocrisy.
To decry the loss of class and integrity caused by someone pretending to moon a crowd (a crowd, by the way, which has a long-standing tradition of mooning the visiting team busses as they leave the stadium), while neglecting to mention that their networks air shows like Desperate Housewives,The Swan, and Who's Your Daddy (not to mention all the cheerleader shots and beer ads) is contemptible.
A lesson in capitalist justice...
Because of Sinclair's decision to air a 42-minute "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth"-style television commercial produced by a former employee of Tom Ridge, the secretary of George W. Bush's Department of Homeland Security and skirt around rules set up to stop favoring political candidates by media groups there have been more than a few consequences:
It just goes to show that the easiest way to stand up to a big corporation is with your wallet - Sinclair and its investors have lost around $70 million in just over a week. Keep up the boycott and the calls and emails to advertisers!
I had a post written regarding an email (spam) I received asking me (and other bloggers) to discredit a number of documents that make Bush look bad. Here is what I started to write:
It would seem that bloggers are now a big part of a strategy to disseminate misinformation.
Some of the statements ("Bush and Cheney have excellent judgment and would never get behind the wheel while drunk.") they were making were ridiculous but then again much of this administration and those who support them has and have been ridiculous as well.
When I got to this one I had to investigate further:
First I looked at the home page — it looked normal. Then I looked at the "Patriot Pledge page and knew that it wasn't quite right. A quick search or two of the whois databases returned the following:
YesBushCan.com is registered to Support and Commitment, Inc. which had the following email addresses listed: info@cheneybush.com and info@georgewbush.org. The CheneyBush.com site is deceptive and I can't really tell that it is a parody - it is too subtle. The subtly is gone at the GeorgeWBush.org site and after looking up these site registrants I found that the trail led back to John Wooden of Chickenhead Productions and WhiteHouse.org fame and which is connected with the new movie The Yes Men in some way. (which incidentally is a movie that I was close to seeing last night but instead saw The Motorcycle Diaries - which I will review tomorrow)
So, YesBushCan.com and the Bush documents have been put out there by someone who really doesn't like President Bush. Why the subterfuge? Why put it out there like this? Does he think that some folks won't pick up on this (like I almost didn't) and inadvertently post these document on their blogs, which in turn will be picked up by "legitimate" media outlets? What gives? By the way, some folks are a bit quicker than me.
I promise to post about something other than politics soon but I just have to say that we really do have a pathetic group of journalists in this country. So many of them are underinformed, lazy, only interested in sound bites and entertaining, it is sad.
CBS News has had some good coverage of the election but, like many news outlets they allow their reporters to only give the most shallow aspects of a particular story.
Here is one small example of irresponsible journalism: a video titled Debate Fact Check. In it CBS, in trying to clear up some "inaccuracies" introduced more misstatements and confusion.
First they implied that President Bush misspoke when he asked Young Americans to forgo getting flu shots this year. Everyone listening understood that Bush meant young healthy adults should skip the shots but CBS correspondent Jim Acosta makes sure to state that "President Bush was playing doctor" and that it is important for those young children aged 6-23 months get their shots.
A second misunderstanding or misreporting occurred when CBS said that Kerry was wrong when he said that under President Bush the tax burden for the middle class has gone up. Acosta incorrectly states that it is "no secret that President Bush has lowered the tax burden for all tax brackets." This statement misses the point Kerry was trying to make and makes me wonder if Acosta actually watched the debate at all. Kerry has insisted that the tax burden on the middle class is about more than just their federal tax bracket. Many state and local governments had to pick up the slack and tax people more on their property, etc. In addition, and as was stated by Kerry, the increases in Medicare, Medicaid, and other governmental programs (not to mention all the rising costs of everything else) are effectively increasing the amount of taxes the middle class is paying.
I won't go into the things Acosta got right, but you can checkout for your self the statements Bush made regarding Kerry's "exaggeration" about Bush's statement that he was truly not that concerned about Osama Bin Laden.
Outfoxed is a new documentary on how the Fox News Channel openly tries to subvert the agenda of the Democratic party and consistently attempts to shape a positive public opinion of republicans.
While I believe that many of the nation's media outlets have, to one extent or another, been witting or unwitting accomplices to the unprecedented (in American politics) propaganda machine that is the Bush administration, Fox has clearly been the front runner in not only bias reporting but actual campaigning for Bush and against Kerry.
HOME | CONTACT | XHTML | CSS
All content by Ben Edwards, except where noted. Licensed under this Creative Commons License.
