Goddess Praise
- "Dear Echidne, I read your blog all the time! I love it."
- Katha Pollitt, the Nation
- 2005 Koufax Award Winner: Most Deserving of Wider Recognition
- Yes, you read it right. I won.
- DONATE: FEED THE GODDESS!
Links
- A Blog Around the Clock
- Adventus
- Agitprop
- Alas, A Blog
- Alternet
- The American Street
- And Another Thing
- Angry Black Bitch
- Baghdad Burning
- Best of Both Worlds
- Bitch. Ph.D.
- blackfeminism.org
- Blog Sisters
- Blue and White
- Bouphonia
- Broadsheet
- Bush v Choice
- Conservatives for American Values
- Crooks and Liars
- Daddy Dialectic
- Dependable Renegade
- Devil's Dictionary Defiled
- Diary of an Anxious Black Woman
- Donna's Place
- Eschaton
- eteraz.org
- Ezra Klein
- Fact-esque, A Reality-Based Blog
- Faux Real Tho!
- the f-word
- Feminist Blogs
- Feminist Campus
- Feminist Law Professors
- Feministe
- Feministing.com
- First Draft
- Frogblog
- Fuming Mucker
- TheGarance.com
- Girlistic.com
- GOTV
- Graphic Truth
- Heavens to Mergatroyd
- Hecate
- The Heretik
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo (Digby)
- I Blame The Patriarchy
- Informed Comment
- James Wolcott
- Jesus' General
- Katha Pollitt Dot Com
- Kathryn Cramer
- La Chola
- Laura, 11D
- Lance Mannion
- Lawyers, Guns and Money
- The Left Coaster
- The Liberal Avenger
- Liberal Oasis
- Liberty Street
- Mad Melancholic Feminista
- Majikthise
- Matthew Yglesias
- Maya's Granny
- Multi Medium
- Net Politik
- The Next HurraH
- News From the Front - Fair And Balanced
- No Capital
- Nothing New Under the Sun
- Nyarlathoteps' Miscellany
- Oh No A Woc PhD
- olvlzl
- One Good Thing
- Orcinus
- Our Word
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Paralysis of the Mind
- Pen-Elayne on the Web
- Pensito Review
- pesky'apostrophe
- Pharyngula
- Pinko Feminist Hellcat
- Preemptive Karma
- Prometheus6
- Pseudo-Adrienne's Liberal-Feminist Bias
- Raw Story
- The Reaction
- Rebel Dad
- RH Reality Check
- Rising Hegemon
- Roger Ailes
- Rox Populi
- The Rude Pundit
- Science and Politics
- scribblingwoman
- Shakespeare's Sister
- Shrillblog
- Sivacracy.Net
- skippy the bush kangaroo
- slacktivist
- Sour Duck
- Spiiderweb
- Spocko's Brain
- Steve Bates
- Stone Court
- Suburban Guerrilla
- TalkLeft
- TAPPED
- TBogg
- Think Progress
- Unclaimed Territory - By Glenn Greenwald
- The Vanity Press
- Welcome to the Sideshow (Avedon)
- What She Said
- Where in Washington, D.C...
- Zuky
- DONATE: FEED THE GODDESS!
The Liberal Coalition
Archives
- 11/01/2003 - 12/01/2003
- 12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
- 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
- 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
- 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
- 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
- 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
- 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
- 07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
- 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
- 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
- 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004
- 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
- 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
- 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
- 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
- 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
- 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
- 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
- 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
- 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
- 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
- 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
- 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
- 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
- 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
- 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
- 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
- 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
- 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
- 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
- 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
- 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
- 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
- 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
- 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
- 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
- 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
- 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
- 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
- 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
- 05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007
- 06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007
- 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
- 08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
- 09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
- 10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
- 11/01/2007 - 12/01/2007
- 12/01/2007 - 01/01/2008
- 01/01/2008 - 02/01/2008
- 02/01/2008 - 03/01/2008
- 03/01/2008 - 04/01/2008
- 04/01/2008 - 05/01/2008
- 05/01/2008 - 06/01/2008
- 06/01/2008 - 07/01/2008
- 07/01/2008 - 08/01/2008
- 08/01/2008 - 09/01/2008
- 09/01/2008 - 10/01/2008
- 10/01/2008 - 11/01/2008
- 11/01/2008 - 12/01/2008
- 12/01/2008 - 01/01/2009
- 01/01/2009 - 02/01/2009
- 02/01/2009 - 03/01/2009
- 03/01/2009 - 04/01/2009
- 04/01/2009 - 05/01/2009
- 05/01/2009 - 06/01/2009
- 06/01/2009 - 07/01/2009
- 07/01/2009 - 08/01/2009
Powered by
RSSify at WCC
ATOM Feed
OPINIONS OF ECHIDNE OF THE SNAKES, A MINOR GREEK GODDESS. She can be reached at: ECHIDNE-OF-THE-SNAKES.COM
Friday, September 30, 2005
The Bennett Slip
It's showing. You must have read or heard all about what Bill Bennett said recently but if you haven't here is the bit from Bennett's own show:
Quite a few people are discussing Bennett's statement out of context but even within context it's fairly bad. He picks African-Americans as the group to use in his stupid example, and that is racist. Because if he had really wanted to make the point by picking a group with very high crime rates he should have suggested aborting all male fetuses. And don't you now go saying that I have advocated that, because I didn't. I just pointed out how one can see that Bennett uses an "out-group" for his example, and by doing that he others the members of that group. |
Krugman
He has written such a true piece that it's a crime I can't just print it all here. But I can give you a sample, about "That's the way it is":
And so it goes on, from yet another proof of criminality or incompetency in the Bush administration to something that is really worrying (avian flu, for example) for everyone else except this obsessive-compulsive government of ours. Never mind hurricane rescue preparadness, never mind dirty nuclear bombs, never mind the avian flu or global warming. What really matters is to dismantle the Social Security system, to fight brown people somewhere outside the U.S., and to gather as much money as possible into the neocon coffers. And to ban gay marriage and guarantee that women are in the kitchen with lots of children. - Not that Krugman said all of this; I just latched on to get my rant in as well. But the point he makes is a very important one. This government is adrift in a hurricane of greed and ineptitude and we are all going to suffer for it. |
Hank
![]() Hank Hank is under anesthesia right now. Her left front shoulder is being x-rayed. She should come home tonight. |
Iraq. A Mess.
I don't write much about Iraq because it pains me far too much. I demonstrated against the war before it started because the whole plan was clearly hatched up by total lunatics and every scenario I tried out in my head ended up in too much blood flowing for no great results. And once the invasion started it was already too late for all practical purposes. To make a difference by writing about it, I mean, including a difference for the wingnuts. If they had followed my advice they'd be a lot better off today. There is nothing I'd like better than to be proved wrong about Iraq, for the sake of all the innocent Iraqis, but this is very unlikely:
And soon we may see the most awful of the torture photographs from Abu Ghraib. See why I don't want to write about it all? |
Ahnuld's Veto Day in California
Arnold Schwartzenegger, the Governator of California, has today vetoed the bill to legalize gay marriage. He also vetoed several other bills:
Schwarzenegger enjoys a solid 33% approval rating... But an e-mail from prochoiceamerica.org informs us that he also
Thus, I can't give Ahnuld a zero approval rating here. Poor governator. He's not finding politics quite as much fun as he may have thought at the beginning. I almost feel guilty for adding this funny "California Dreaming" to the end of this post, courtesy of Little Sister:
|
Thursday, September 29, 2005
The Friday Dump
It is usual for certain types of news to be released on Fridays, especially anything that the powers-that-be would prefer not widely discussed. So I am wondering if this is the reason that it is on a Friday that Judith Miller, the New York Times reporter imprisoned during the course of the Plame investigation, has agreed to testify after all. Probably a red herring. The whole investigation has been full of red herrings, and I doubt that we have seen the end of them yet. But for what it's worth, here is what Miller herself says:
|
If You Want To See A Funny Picture
go and visit the derenegade. This one makes me think all sorts of possible thought bubbles one could add to the president's head. |
Haiku Time
Because I don't feel like writing anything serious right now. I can't write haikus in English yet, but I bet that you can! So write me one about some recent political event or whatever else has caught your attention using only three lines with five, seven and five syllables. |
Mystery Man Confirmed
Nobody really knows what John Roberts will do on the bench. The wingnuts think that he will get rid of abortion and affirmative action and civil rights and otherwise make things pleasant for corporations and the radical religious right. The Democrats hope that he won't do those things, or at least not very vigorously, and even if he does he won't be any worse than Rehnquist was. It's the next nominee that will be important for the Democrats to fight. That seems to be the consensus on the left. It was clear from the very beginning that Roberts would sail through. After all, he at least knows how to do law and that's about as good as any wingnut offer we will get. But he is very young to be the Chief Justice, and whatever he will turn out to be will affect us for a very long time. This and the next Supreme Court nomination may well turn out to be the most damaging parts of the Bush era and the very odd 2004 elections. I hope that I am overly pessimistic here, naturally. So it is with some pleasure that I turn to the other mystery man confirmation, that of Roy Blunt to step into the pants of Tom DeLay. What happened to Dreier's nomination? The rumors are that he didn't get it because of his gayness. Could that possibly be true? |
Gloating
That was my first reaction on reading David Brooks's most recent babble in the New York Times. But it was short-lived, I swear, and quickly passed into a study of what Brooks is saying about Tom DeLay's recent troubles, and this is that pretty much DeLay is over, and that the whole Bush administration is a mess. Heh. (Pardon me.) Brooks uses sports metaphors in his column, calling DeLay "the designated hitter". He argues that DeLay is a good man who has done nothing for his own advancement. Instead, all he has done was for the team: the Republican party. If Brooks is right (I have no way of knowing) it might be time to look at this team concept and the use of sports and war metaphors in general in political commenting. Feminists have long pointed out how this particular way of viewing politics makes it hard for women to run for elected office, because the concepts of war and sports are still fundamentally seen as masculine. But it is pretty clear that running politics like it was a war or a baseball game isn't ultimately good for the country, either. Yes, I was gloating. It's a nice feeling, all warm and fuzzy and full of little lightning strikes of pure exhilaration. After all these years I'm allowed to feel warm and fuzzy for a few seconds. But Brooks doesn't really want that: he concludes his little piece by implying that the Democrats are not going to be any better at all:
Funny. Didn't Brooks quite recently write that the Democrats are all scattered and confused because they never had this wonderful era of ideological purification that the Republicans went through? Or was it Tierney? In any case I have no doubt that there are corrupt Democrats. There are even corrupt priests, I've been told. But the danger of excessive party discipline on the left is very distant, to be anticipated around the time when the Devil opens the skating rinks in Hell. |
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
And the Enron Era Continues
Now in trailers:
Little or no competitive bidding. This is because of the urgency, you see. It's also a lot easier to just look up who has already gotten federal money and to hand out more to the same companies. But it would be very interesting to see what the actual contracts look like. For example, it isn't too hard to find out how much a trailer like the ones supplied by Gulf Stream would retail. Then one could compare that price to the prices in this contract, to get a starting point. |
DeLay in the Enron Era
I'm listening to Al Franken's show on Air America and he is just telling how Tom DeLay has stepped down as the House Majority Leader because he has been indicted in a criminal investigation. Maybe times are finally changing; I remember writing about one of DeLay's schemes about a year ago and even then it seemed not quite ethical (channeling donations to the Republican party via something that looked like it was funding children's welfare). Add DeLay to what is happening to Frist. Then stir in a little bit of Karl Rove's problems. Sprinkle liberally with Michael Brown and FEMA. If desired, add a little bit of alcohol use by the president... The Enron Stew. ----- Here are more details on DeLay's current dilemma, via Atrios:
|
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
John Conyers Writes Letters
With apologies to Atrios from whom I stole this nifty little title. Here is an example of a letter by Representative Conyers on the treatment of arrested peace protesters:
|
Sodom and Gomorrh
Rorschach has a post about an interesting study which argues that the more religious countries may in fact be the more sinful ones:
The implication is that religion may not be that helpful as an aid towards a more ethical or moral society. Or is it? The problem with correlational studies like this one is that they tell us nothing about causality. In this particular study, for example, we find out that the United States appears to be both more religious and more "sinful" than most Western European countries. But we can't actually conclude that it's the religiousness which causes the sin. It could be the other way round: the sin might drive people to religion, or it could be that there is something else about religious people that makes them both pious and sinful at the same time, or countries which have large religious majorities might have small very sinful minorities who are not religious, or the correlation might be just a historical coincidence. If we could get data from many time periods and if we could establish that the religiosity was first and then the sinfulness followed we'd have a stronger case for arguing that it's the Bible-thumping which causes extramarital humping and so on. Despite all these academic and uninteresting reservations I do agree that the study shows us that the Christian Right in the United States is full of baloney when it portrays this country as the last shining and virtuous one among the Sodom and Gomorrh of the corrupt west. |
The Best Bumper Sticker Ever
The Short and the Sweet
News about the Bush administration, very condensed because I have to go somewhere. First, Michael Brown (the one who is going to study his own incompetence and get paid for it) has given us a statement about why he did so poorly as the head of FEMA. It has to do with Democrats. Second, the Enron era of the administration continues. Curioser and curioser. Third, via Hesiod, Laura Bush will be participating in reality tv! Because that is what the focus groups show will work to make the president look better, even though the president doesn't listen to focus groups. The idea is for you to read each of the articles I have linked to. There will be a quiz later on... |
Monday, September 26, 2005
Only In Wingnuttia!
Raw Story reports that FEMA has rehired Michael Brown, the guy who used to run FEMA (to ground) as a consultant. Guess what his job description is? To evaluate the FEMA response to hurricane Katrina! Then Osama bin Laden should be the judge in the international court on terrorism. Pardon me while I go and bang my head against the garage door. |
Cindy Sheehan
has been arrested outside the White House. At least according to MSNBC. And here is more:
|
More Enron Era
The Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (aka the catkiller) may be in trouble, perhaps of the type that bothered Martha Stewart (of the iron-your-underwear fame). It is a story of blind trusts and what a blind trust means. Blind trusts are used to absolve federal politicians who own stock from accusations of conflict of interest: if they don't know what stocks they own they can't be accused of conflict of interest with respect to the involved companies. The idea is to hand over the day-to-day running of the portfolio to an outsider who will then take care of it without informing the owner as to its contents. This can't work completely as the politicians do know what they had in their portfolios to begin with. Like, say, shares in a family-owned company:
Think Progress presents a history of the events in this little scandal. And a little scandal it is, nothing to compare to the big scandals that this administration is busy organizing. It is not even comparable to the hiring scandal my previous Enron era post referred to. But it's a sign of the times, a sign of the Republican strong values and ethics. |
Today's Quiz
You know how liberal the Hollywood establishment is? The wingnuts moan and groan about it daily, and this moaning and groaning may have had an effect on the new batch of movies just coming out. Does "The Exorcism of Emily Rose" support the theory of Intelligent Design? Is "Just Like Heaven" a retake of the Theresa Schiavo case? I don't know, but a recent movie review in the New York Times suggests that this might be the case, and that more generally the new movies slant slightly to the right. This quote is on "Just Like Heaven" where the heroine, Elizabeth, lies in coma:
What caught my eye was the little sentence about "Elizabeth, the ambitious career woman" being "sad and unfulfilled in contrast to her married, stay-at-home sister", and I tried to recall at least one movie in the last ten years which would have depicted an ambitious career woman as happier and more fulfilled than a stay-at-home wife. I can't think of a single movie like that. Can you? For more points, mention the name of at least one movie where a mother holding a job outside the home is portrayed as happy and fulfilled. For bonus points, mention a movie in which the ambitious career man is portrayed as sad and unfulfilled in comparison to his less ambitious and more relaxed peers. |
Sunday, September 25, 2005
The Enron Era
Frank Rich is excellent in his latest New York Times column about the Bush administration's hiring choices:
Rich goes on to list example after example of very similar hiring choices. Did you know that the Iraq reconstruction process was largely in the hands of inexperienced twenty-somethings whose only relevant experience was being an avid wingnut? Or that being a fundraiser for Bush or his cronies will get you almost any job in this administration, never mind what your actual qualifications might be? All this might be logical, of course. A party which doesn't believe in the government might well try to run it to ground by appointing lots of really unsuitable people to run things, including FEMA and the reconstruction of Iraq. And friends will always be rewarded, naturally. But this leaves us taxpayers paying for a party which we were not invited to attend. Even worse, we are expected to pay for the after-party clean-up, too. ---- Sadly, the Rich column is now available only in exchange for payment or from the paper edition. But Google is your friend. |
Fall Garden Blogging
|
Pictures from the Anti-War Rally
Saturday, September 24, 2005
The Anti-War Rally
It is held today in Washington, D.C. and in other cities around the world. The early media coverage is, as usual, interesting in the way it grasps for "balance". Like giving thousands of anti-war protesters roughly the same number of quotes as a handful of pro-war protesters in the same place. Here is an example. |
Enjoy!
Hmj sent these to me. They are really funny:
|
Friday, September 23, 2005
Friday Dog Blogging
![]() Henrietta This is a few years old. Henrietta no longer wears a flea collar and her eyes are a lot more visible now that her cheeks are silver-colored. But otherwise she looks the same. |
Today's Deep Thought
From res ipsa loquitur:
They might get a civil war first. Discuss. |
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Operation Offset
This is the Republican Study Committee's proposal as to how to fund the reconstruction necessary after hurricane Katrina by cutting other federal spending. The real objective is to save the tax cuts for the wealthy and the abolition of the federal estate tax on the inheritances the ultra-wealthy leave behind. And who is to make the sacrifices instead of Bush's rich base? The elderly, on the whole. The Committee proposes delaying the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill by one year but making the elderly pay for it already by raising the premia as well as by more cost-sharing by the elderly who are unfortunate enough to be ill. Though to be fair to the wingnuts on this committee, they also propose eliminating and/or reducing everything else they happen to hate: The poor will pay more for their federally subsidized Medicaid program (but not the elderly whose nursing-home care is covered by Medicaid, too, as there are too many Republicans with a mom or a dad enjoying these benefits), foreing aid will be cut, including aid to the African continent (have you checked recently what percentage foreign aid is of the federal budget?), and naturally nothing should be given to the National Foundations of the Arts or the Humanities (girlyman stuff) or the Public Broadcasting System (commies!). Read the rest yourselves. What I found intriguing were the reasons given for various cuts. The most common was the argument that a particular program duplicates the same services available elsewhere, but in several cases the justification was simply that the funding doesn't belong to the federal government. This one, for example, is funny:
Hmm. Medically underserved populations live in inner-city ghettoes are far out in poor rural areas. Local funding? Other funny justifications abound. Many programs trying to keep illegal drugs away from children are cut or offered reduced funding because studies do not support their efficacy. Yet I see no cuts in the abstinence programs which have been proven to be of very questionable efficacy. And the Legal Services Corporation should be eliminated because, among other things, it has provided "resources for individuals to sue the government for more generous federal benefits". The problem in trying to pay for the reconstruction effort this way is that those who are going to pay are predominantly the elderly, the poor and various groups who don't carry enough votes to affect the next election. But this isn't a problem for the wingnuts on the Republican Study Committee; instead, it's another chance to forward the wingnut ideology. Operation Upset. For an alternative proposal that might suit the Democrats, see Think Progress. |
Some Fun...
What Is News?
Molly Ivins has, as usual, an excellent new column, this time on the ten most important topics not covered very well in the American media. She says:
The number one not-covered item is how the Bush administration moves to eliminate open government. Molly points out that this item has been hard to cover because the process has been in little drips and drops and at no one point in time has there been a clear major step towards an authoritarian government. But the results are all there for any journalist to see:
The whole list is worth reading. Another way of looking at the question in my title is by following foreign news sources. There are days when I think that the British, for example, live in a different world from the one we inhabit here; so different are the news that are discussed and the slant the discussion takes. If you can access news from several other countries you start getting a better understanding of what is omitted in any one of them, including the U.S.. |
Hurricanes
If you live anywhere along the probable route of Rita, please leave. Take your family, friends, pets and neighbors and leave. If you have two cars lend the keys of the second one to someone who doesn't have a car. Then leave. If you can't leave find a high place. My blessings on all of you. There are still uncollected corpses in New Orleans. |
How Democrats Voted on Roberts
From LATimes:
I still would have liked to see what Roberts said on those cases the Bush administration refused to release to the committee members. Next time even more information might be withheld and the Democrats would have a tough time arguing that it should be offered given that they surrendered on Roberts. |
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
News From Penisland
A joke courtesy of the Heretik about some recent events in the liberal blogosphere: First a group of feminist bloggers (smart ones, too) published a letter about John Roberts and then Armando on Daily Kos sort of gave an answer to it. The gist of the interaction has to do with the importance of the pro-choice stance in the Democratic Party. Armando thinks that the party should be a big tent, with room for people who don't believe in the woman's right to choose but who are otherwise in agreement with Armando. The idea is to use them to get into power and then somehow ignore them on all the so-called social issues. This is probably easier said than done, and the pro-life Democrats are quite likely to vote with the wingnuts on any women's rights issue. Which of course makes the whole big tent strategy meaningless for anyone whose first priority is the rights of women: the tent will collapse on them. The real question is whether the woman's right to reproductive choice is one of the tentpoles or not, among ideals such as economic and racial justice, gay and lesbian rights and environmental protection. If it no longer has this role then the big tent might end up spacious indeed as most pro-choice women stop bothering to vote. The political game question is quite different. It has to do with the idea of getting into power and winning with the idea of grabbing all those independents who hover in the middle and would be Democrats if only the Democrats were more like the wingnuts. This might make sense if there indeed are many such independents, all "single-issue" voters on abortion which I very much doubt. Those voters are already voting for Republicans. The costs of such an unlikely victory are fairly high if you happen to be a feminist, for "social conservatives" are not just against abortion. They are pretty much against the whole idea of equal rights for women (and gays and lesbians). They are opposed to mothers in the labor force and gender equality in education. They are opposed to same-sex marriage and to a military consisting of anything but heterosexual males. And so on. Then there is the "single-issue" voter argument. Should the Democrats cater to those who vote on the basis of a single issue such as abortion? Armando would say no. I always find it interesting to read comments threads about the care and feeding of the single-issue voter. The single-issue pro-lifer is taken seriously, explained carefully and seen as eminently wooable. The single-issue pro-choicer is often asked to make the necessary mature compromises for common good, and then many of these pro-choicers try to explain why they can't make thse compromises, why certain issues are like water and bread for them, necessary for anything else even to register much. Some use examples such as whether a white supremacist would be welcomed with open arms into the Democratic big tent. The answers this elicits explain carefully how this country now agrees that racism is bad but the question of women's rights is still debated. The point this misses (among others) is the way pro-choice women feel when their political opponents are embraced by those they thought were on the same side. Betrayal might a be a good summary of this feeling. Politics does involve compromising and some things are best done holding ones nose. But it is hard to see what remains of the Democratic ideas if compromising means letting go of the idea of equal opportunity, and that is what I believe social conservatism ultimately means. For women, at least. |
Ares and Friends?
I haven't talked much about my divine pals recently, largely because I've been hiding from them. There was this little incident at a cocktail party on Olympus having to do with snakes and underpants, and I'm not popular these days. But Ares dropped by. Did I tell you that he is still HAWT! And thick as a board. I made the mistake of telling him all my blogging woes, especially my current frustration that silly right-wingers get things published in the New York Times and I can't even get an answer to the angry and educational e-mails I send them. Ares offered to toss a few thunderbolts on the newspaper's headquarters which I nixed. Talking about blogging with him was a humongous mistake, because he suddenly decided that what this world needs is a Greek guygod blogger called Ares, and that the cushiest way of getting there would be for him to co-blog with me. With me. On my blog. Which would be renamed "Ares and Friends". I made excuses. My blog was too puny for his greatness, too wimpy, too snakey. He waved them all aside (with most of my good china on the dining-room table), he would fix all these problems, he would insert the sorely needed humorous and upbeat element, he would post lots of pictures of naked women with Ares in action, he would become a billionaire and so on. He would write long posts on baseball (about which he knows nothing). There was only one thing to do. I told him about the war in Iraq and urged him to go and see George Bush for an advice-giving session. It almost worked, but he's still sleeping off the nectar in my spare bedroom. |
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Sexism Hurts Men, Too?
Well, I happen to think that this is true, but I recently read it in a different context, a medical one:
Lots of examples here about the difficulties of studying something that doesn't have an easy measurable equivalent (patriarchy) and of the use of data outside laboratory conditions. Most social science studies use such data, of course, and it is almost always possible to argue that a study may not have taken into account all possible explanatory causes or controlled for them adequately. For example, the study I'm discussing here seems to have taken into account poverty rates and such, but did they also check to see if the male mortality rates correlated with male murder rates? And what about female mortality rates in general? Did they show the same pattern as the male rates? Perhaps they did all these things. Which means that I should dig up the original study and look at it. Sigh. Maybe I will if I feel especially good. |
Funny....
It looks like a Democrat accidentally got a Republican memo on the soundbites to be used on immigration. See Raw Story. |
The Mrs. Degree
The New York Times gives us a little article with the title: Many Women at Elite Colleges Set Career Path to Motherhood. These types of articles are a recurring event, happening every few years since the 1970's: the story how highly educated women are deciding not to work, after all, or not to work full-time. The story is also always written as a purely private decision, astonishingly pristine in having nothing to do with the way the labor market is structured or the fact that it is women who are expected to care for the children, or indeed having nothing to do with anything else except the young women themselves. They just wake up one morning having decided that they don't want to be lawyers or physicians or economists, after all. It is very hard to judge the relevancy or validity of such stories because of this recurrent appearance. It can't always be true that suddenly women are acting differently than they have just done, and mostly these stories appear to be planted to have the newspaper's circulation go up. So I am hesitant to interpret this newest wave of the same story as indicative of actual change. In fact, if you read the article carefully the fact that this is not a change in actual behavior is fairly obvious. For example:
Then contrast this to the survey results the article talks about, a survey about two Ivy League colleges, which found that sixty percent of the interviewed freshmen and seniors (all women) planned to take at least some time off or to work part-time. Exactly the same percentage as with the mothers' cohort! Then you might point out, if you are a sharp-eyed reader, that this means that forty percent of those interviewed don't plan to take any time off at all, and that the time others plan to take off may not amount to much more than a few years. In fact, if you read the article really carefully you will find that seventy percent plan to continue working either full-time or part-time, and that among the remaining thirty percent some, at least, are only planning a short career-interruption. Just think about this. Then think about the title of the piece: Many Women at Elite Colleges Set Career Path to Motherhood. Hmmmmmm. And then think about this bit:
I can almost hear the gently purring threat there: We should weed out those applicants who plan to take any time off during their working lives, because they are going to waste the education and our investments in it. Because this would be hard to do based on what naive eighteen-year old students say, let's just use sex as a proxy and weed out most women. This is an argument that was once used to set maximum quotas on women in medical schools. It was believed that the expensive training, federally subsidized to boot, should be only available for a few women because allowing women to enter freely would fritter away the expensive education on people who will never wield the scalpel. Similar arguments are brought out all the time to "explain" why there are so few women in whatever area of the society you might look at. We don't do this with men. Men are brought up to expect that they work full-time all their lives, that they are somehow not capable of taking breaks and staying with their children, and we don't even ask young men entering college about their home-family balance plans. Because it is not seen as their problem. Or their choice, but it is a choice with a very large price tag in terms of lost retirement income, for example. I probably shouldn't have written about this story, given that it is a nonstory as I have demonstrated above. But I find it annoying how these stories are written, the woman deciding on her very own or at most thinking about her mother's role in the family and wondering if she should replicate it or not. The writer could have mentioned how the media has been full of articles and books discouraging women by writing about the horrible difficulties of combining career and family (but only for women) and of articles and books about the solution of opting out (but only for women). The writer could have mentioned how the maternity leave is still about three months long and how very few companies allow highly educated people to work less than eighty hours a week. Or stressed a little more the 24/7 upbringing of girls into the care-giving role in this country and the almost total lack of societal support for this. But it is more fun to just make up a story and go and interview some people (mostly those who are not planning to work full-time) and then to suggest that this is a really severe problem for the elite colleges, one having its roots in the young women themselves. Though it's not really a problem at all because the young women themselves don't see it that way, perhaps because at eighteen thirty is really, really old and most of ones life will take place before that age! Perhaps because they are mostly eighteen and have not spent very much time thinking about the issues and absolutely no time at all trying to live them. Maybe next time they should interview those fifty-something educated women who have actually lived through this all, or even some women who don't have the luxury of deciding on anything but full-time work without any career considerations. Though naturally this would be a lot less fun and interesting to debate. --- Thanks to sb for the link. |
President at a Precipice
Say that very fast a few times. Then apologize to anyone who happened to be within your saliva range. The title comes from one description of yet another bad poll for George Bush. The USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll suggests that George is not the likeable president the so-called liberal media likes to tell us. In fact, his disapproval rating is at a new high of 58%, and he is doing poorly even in the category of boldness: for the first time the majority doesn't find him that strong or decisive as a leader. And
Those polled also want an independent panel to study what went wrong with the Katrina unrescue efforts, not the kind of Republican panel we are going to have. This by a four-to-one margin. Hmmm. But Bush doesn't care about focus groups. He told us so. |
Monday, September 19, 2005
The Value of Blogging
"To blog" is an unfortunate term, like the sound one hears when someone is trying to swear at you with a hot potato in her mouth. It's not elegant, not like "write" or "pen". So well suited for what I try to do. Some days I like blogging a lot less, though. For example, today the New York Times has decided to start charging a fee for its opinion columns. This means that if I want to choke and vomit over Tierney or Brooks I have to pay for it. That may sound fair to some of you, but then you can't read my masterful dissections of the same vomit. (Hint: You can donate me ten bucks by pressing that little symbol in the right column, below the hurricane one. Of course after you have donated all your other disposable income to the hurricane rescue operations. Don't do this if you are poor!) This may be the beginning of a trend of charging, and the final outcome is to lock all amateurs and goddesses out of the sources of evidence. I'm sure someone would like to do exactly this. One reason why I think so is this excellent article. It discusses the purpose of political blogs, the need to triangulate between the blogs, the political machinery and the traditional media, and it tells us how much better the wingnut blogs are doing in all this, largely because they are marching to the commands of the top of their hierarchy and feeding on the soundbites sent down by Hannity and Limbaugh and so on. The lefty-liberal bloggers, sadly, are like cats walking on their own and about as easily herded together. But as the article says we really must learn to do better to have more influence on the public discussion. Where I differ from Daou Report is explained by the place where I sit. Though I'm a fairly widely-read feminist blogger, I'm but a tiny speck as a political one. Well, not so very tiny but you get my point. I'm not one of the big boys and neither the Democratic establishment nor the traditional media is likely to check out what I say every morning. Nothing much is getting triangulated here, but I hope that something else is happening, perhaps a debate, a discussion about the need to include women's points of views more, a discussion to start finding the political machinery that we need and the access to the traditional media we simply don't have. That's when I feel like a really ambitious and powerful divine, which isn't often. The reality is much more limited, but still useful: to at least join the conversation, to name things which may not yet have names so that the phenomena they are attached to can be discussed. This is what we all smaller bloggers are doing, and I believe that it is useful or at least fun. For a feminist blogger this quote from the Daou Report article is also a point of divergence:
For us feminists the borderline between "social" and "political" is much hazier than it is in the mainstream (malestream?) conversation. Much which really is political avoids the limelight of the big liberal blogs because it appears to be social, and feminist blogs can point this out. This also means that writing about our everyday lives, about what happened in the streets, in the kitchens, in the bedrooms or in the boardrooms can be deeply political and may ultimately convert more people to a certain political view than the discussions about the campaign promises of the next Democratic candidate. It is this wider sense of political that many feminist bloggers employ, and if what they do is not seen as political blogging then we are defining the term too narrowly. |
Sunday, September 18, 2005
The Big Dawg Barks
I never really liked Bill Clinton but at least he had the necessary skills to run a country. On most days. Now he has opened his mouth and out came some not-so-nice statements about the current administration:
This after having cavorted around in the company of Bush The Elder, mind you. Bill always knew how to polish both sides of the apple. In many ways he truly was the best Republican president we have had. Now I await for all sorts of angry comments from my faithful readers... |
A Little Sunday Sermon
The United States is a predominantly Christian country. Most people believe in a god and the majority appear to believe in angels, too. The religious right tells us that the politics and the laws of this country should reflect its Christianity, and the natural inference to draw is that these should somehow follow the tenets of this religion. But things get confusing when we hear (via Bobo's World) that most American Christians don't know their own religion very well:
This isn't that astonishing. Most religious people in this world appear not to know the tenets of their own religion or what its leaders might be doing. - I remember listening to a radio interview to do with Aceh during the time when various Islamist policies were attempted there. One of them was the use of shariah law in place of a secular legal code. The ordinary people interviewed in the program were happy to hear about the possible use of shariah; they expressed a strong need to do something about the lawlessness on the streets, the rapists and the muggers. But the religious expert also interviewed stated that the use of shariah would ban playing cards, alcohol and would punish adulterers more harshly. And indeed, these would have been the major changes to the laws already in force in Aceh, with the exception of extra whippings etcetera. This may not be astonishing, but it is very worrying. It means that the voices of authority within the religious sphere have the power to misinform. There are few built-in safeguards to correct anything that is said from the pulpit or its equivalence in other faiths. Still, the very act of uttering something in this context makes it more weighty, more to be trusted, than the statements the same people might make in their private roles. Or in their political roles. It is also difficult to debate a religious authority if all that the outsiders can use are the written tenets of the religion, yet these tenets are not widely known or perhaps even followed. This pretty much makes real debate impossible, should it not already be so by the unspoken code that religions must not be criticized. As the article I quote points out, the Christianity of many Americans is better seen as an identity than actual adherence to Christian teachings. Such an identity is moldable, and the religious right has effectively molded the idea of Christianity into something that requires, among other things, that the faithful always vote Republican. Religion has entered politics, yes, but even more it is the politics that have entered religiosity. What to make out of this all is unclear to my divine eyes. |
Saturday, September 17, 2005
On Toe Rings
I have bought two in Europe. They cost about four Euros each, and are covered with lovely little "emerald flowers". It takes time to get used to having rings on ones toes but I like to look at my bare feet under the desk and see the glitter in the semi-darkness. Of such things is the human self-decoration made. Sometimes we just like to play with our bodies and the impact they have on the world. Other times it is the world that tries to tell us how to present or not to present ourselves, and here we step into much darker areas of debate and feminist analysis. But my toe rings are wholly innocent of any attempt by anybody else to influence me and nobody else even sees them. They are just fun. |
On Hating George Bush
I heard some talking head on the radio this morning discuss the need to get over hating Bush. According to this man the democratic base (or us extreme moonbats, really) is too wound up in the Bush-hating to practise good political moves. We should all look ahead to the next Republican president, House and Senate, and ignore Bush whose reign is already essentially over. This is a misperception. The base hates what Bush is doing to this country and what the wingnuts are planning to do in the future. The so-called Bush-hating is not some odd psychological tic which makes people scream because of the way Bush pretends to have a Texan twang or because of the way he pretends to be a fireman or a working stiff or because he appears to have no brain whatsoever. True, all these little bits of Bush are annoying, but they are not the reason just naming the guy causes rashes in so many of us. The reasons are in the policies the Bush administration has pursued, is pursuing and will pursue. Getting rid of Bush will not get rid of these policies, and all us Bush-haters (so-called) know this. Besides, I really hate being lectured to by some talking head whose information may be acquired in inside-the-beltway cocktail parties. I hate being othered in this way, and I hate the fact that there was no response to this man's assertions. Maybe I suffer from the "hates-the-talking-heads" syndrome? Yet another reason to ignore all I write. |
Friday, September 16, 2005
On Animals, Men and Women's Health
Remember that the last director of the Office of Women's Health, Susan Wood, quit in protest of the decision not to let the morning-after pill be available over the counter? Now her place has been filled. By a man whose experience is on veterinarian science:
Foot-in-the-mouth disease. ----- ADDENDUM on Saturday: This decision has been changed. Maybe the publicity helped with the change? Nah. Thanks to dancinfool in the comments. |
The America Haters
The radical right calls me an America-hater almost every day. The idea that anyone criticizing this administration hates America and plots treason is spread all over the net and the traditional media. The intention is to make us critics ashamed and fearful of saying anything. The intention is approving silence, the only love that is acceptable to the most extremists on the right. But it is we, the noisy and complaining ones, who really love America, love her as she is, a gangly teenager with acne and furious dreams and occasional bad mistakes which she then corrects. Love her beautiful mountains and rivers and prairies and wetlands and deserts and cities and all the people that inhabit these, even the ones who think differently. It is we who love what America was, what she had grown to, her promises and her frailties, her ability to learn from errors, to become better, to promise to try, her genius, her optimism, her determination to follow the arc of justice, ultimately. Yes, we would complain about her teenage fads, about her shallowness, about the serious problems which she didn't know how to correct: the role of race, the role of poverty and the role of violence in a society. But she tried, however unclearly sometimes, and all the voices, even the conservative ones, participated in this trying and made the country ultimately better, closer to maturity, without any loss in the optimism and sunniness that we all prized. This is the America that was and still is, at least partly, and this is the America that the current administration and the radical right want to destroy. We love her too much to want to see this young country clad in a burkha, to want to see her bent over to carry the heavy moneybags of a few greedy capitalists. We love her too much to want to see her poisoned by mercury and arsenic in her beautiful oceans and lovely lakes. We want her to learn and to grow, not to be forced to sit in a solitary silence, reading over and over the same "thou-shalt-nots" of the conservative bibles. We critics don't want our America to rampage across this globe, grabbing money and power and leaving behind destitution and death. It is not good for the world and it is terrible for the young country we still are. We are like the parents who love their children, yet see clearly where their frailties lie, and as good parents we tell how to fix those frailties and how to grow stronger while retaining the essential greatness of the child, the teenager, this glorious country of many songs. How to be mature. The radical right wants none of this. It wants a country with no kindness, no shelter, no common squares where people can meet. It wants a country in perpetual war, a country where mercenaries and corporations are cared for, where America is but their feeding ground, the silent congregation in some monsterous church for money. We critics are needed, because we indeed love this country. Our tough love is needed, because it sees with clear eyes. Our patriotism is needed, because it is untainted with false beliefs and childish assertions of how much greater America is than the rest of this earth. We are needed for the very love that makes us named the haters of America. |
Friday Dog Blogging
|
Thursday, September 15, 2005
The Bush Speech
I'm not going to write about it. You can hear the wingnut interpretations all over the so-called liberal media. The wingnuts like George when he has taken his tie off and rolled up his sleeve to look just like one of them, like someone who works with his hands. Oh, were it only true. But one thing I will say. Watch the money. Keep an eagle's eye on it. Because what this will be is a big feast for all Bush's friends, unless we all watch and count and remember. |
Today's Action Alert
This comes from the National Women's Law Center, and you can find out what to do about John Roberts by clicking on their action page. The current progressive/liberal near-consensus on Roberts seems to be that he is as good a candidate as we can expect from Attila the Hun, and that with the exception of abortion (which he will help to outlaw) he is actually quite a charming man. Naturally only some of us can view the question in this "cool and detached" way, but then some of us are lumbered with uteri and so on. Sigh. I haven't slept enough. This is a summary of Roberts's views on those of use saddled with wombs:
|
Roving to New Orleans
Froomkin:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! My most eloquent post ever. |
How To Lower The Costs Of Doing Business
The Wall Street Journal reports that the Republicans in Washington, D.C., see the hurricane disaster in Louisiana as an excellent opportunity to spread free market principles into this erstwhile den of failed families and big government and so on. The idea, according to Representative Todd Tiahrt (R., Kan.), is to lower the costs of doing business! This raises the profits of the entrepreneurs, natch. How much all this helps the people in the area, including the workers these businesses might hire, isn't quite so clear. Or perhaps not just very relevant. After all, Bush's executive order allows the contractors to pay less than prevailing wages in the disaster areas (do I hear the trucks bringing immigrant workers already?). And the following extra steps to lower the costs of doing business are being percolated right now:
Note the attempt to make the disaster area into one where environmental causes matter not at all (especially upsetting considering the role of wetlands destruction in exacerbating the hurricane's effects and the current high rates of toxic substances in the remaining floodwaters). And note the tax advantages offered to the same firms who already enjoy lower wages and now needn't worry about any polluting costs, either. This is a big division of the spoils after one of the largest natural disasters to strike this country. You can bet anything that those benefiting will be good ole Republican boys and that they will remember the fat wallets they earned when the next election time rolls around. At least some of this money will return to the Republican party. This is what we are paying taxes for, under a one-party government. A big division of the spoils, yes, but also a wonderful opportunity for the Republican party to make Louisiana into a wingnut state. If only all those who voted for Democrats (the poor black people) could be kept from returning! If enough money could be poured into the right pockets to guarantee more votes in return! Wouldn't it be paradoxical if the greatest leadership blunder of our George actually resulted in such rewards! As I read this WSJ article I realized that I should be reborn as an oil company. I would get much more attention from the government. I could even pretty much dictate which laws I want to micromanage, and my wishlist would at least appear for discussion in the Congress:
---- Thanks to kg for the link. |
Let Us Make Fun Of
Democratic Senators, people who believe in democracy, anyone not delighted with John Roberts as the next Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Let us use a column in the New York Times to ridicule the process of presenting a candidate for the Supreme Court to the nation. Let us chuckle at the idea that the candidate can't be made to say anything at all revealing. Let us stick our fingers in our ears and let us stick our tongue out at the enemy. Let us go "Nannannah!" And let us call this political writing. If we happen to be named John Tierney. |
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
And Even More Pictures
Not a writing day, it seems. This is from Daily Kos: ![]() It is worth showing because Grover Norquist really wants to do what he threatened in the statement (contrasted with New Orleans) in the picture, and he should be held accountable for his views. |
Not Photoshopped!
From Reuters and all over the blogosphere: ![]() Text: REUTERS/Rick Wilking U.S. President George W. Bush writes a note to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during a Security Council meeting at the 2005 World Summit and 60th General Assembly of the United Nations in New York September 14, 2005. World leaders are exploring ways to revitalize the United Nations at a summit on Wednesday but their blueprint falls short of Secretary-General Kofi Annan's vision of freedom from want, persecution and war. --- It seems to read: I think I may need a BATHROOM break. Is this possible? |
Wingnuts and Science
Salon has this photograph for your education: ![]() It goes with an article which asks some questions about the wingnuts and their funny attitudes towards science. To me the wingnuts appear to fall into two groups: those who believe in God and no science, and those who believe in science as God. Both approaches are unscientific. Science is not some hundred-percent-proof alternative for religion or some panacea that solves every question we might have about life, universe and stuff. Science is one way of studying answers to various questions, a laborsome way, a slow way, and a way that doesn't always proceed correctly. But it has the advantage that the steps the explanation takes are laid out for all to see. This is not true of the religious approach, and neither is it true of the approach which says that if something is called science then it must be true and nobody must ask questions about it. A simpler way of making the same point is to refresh your memories about the meaning of the scientific method: (Bold mine.) This is a very simple initial definition. Each of these steps may have additional refinements, and as my added bolding of the word "may" is intended to indicate, alternative theories might actually explain the same evidence. Thus, it is not always the case that a hypothesis which appears to predict well is the only one, or even the best one, to explain a particular phenomenom. |
Go Read Molly Ivins
The Tale of Two States
Blanco and Barbour, the governors of Louisiana and Mississippi, respectively, are being compared and analyzed in USA Today (via Atrios). Atrios points out this upsetting pair of quotes in the article:
Which makes me worried that this government might see its responsibility (the one Bush has now freely accepted) as limited to only those who voted Republican. The article is fascinating in other ways, as well. The whole tone of the story is really a comparison of the stereotypes of a "traditional woman" and a "traditional man" in a leadership role. We are told that Governor Blanco had many children, stayed at home for several years, cares for her people and takes a nurturing approach. She sounds like the mold from which good wingnut women are supposed to spring. Governor Barbour, on the other hand, comes across as tough as rock, ready to grab bullhorns and eager to shake lots of hands, all the time denying that anything at all has gone wrong. The reader is supposed to draw the obvious conclusions about what works. It's unfortunate that Blanco would then come across as punished for being the "good woman" and that Barbour would appear to win this game without actually having been a very good governor for his state. So confusing. What is a reader to do? Well, a good idea would be to read sources which offer somewhat less stereotyped and superficial reports; sources, where one doesn't have to dig and wonder about what was really said. If one is careful with this USA Today story it actually tells that Blanco most likely did a fairly good job and that we don't yet know what sort of a job Barbour did. But the story itself ends with predictions of a presidential ticket for Barbour... |
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Ammunition
For your next conversation with a wingnut. Wingnuts live in an alternate universe, one in which George Bush is the younger brother of Jesus and in which we progressives are the spawns of Satan himself. The more modern section of Wingnuttia reads Adam Smith and books about social Darwinism instead of the Bible but the ideas are otherwise fairly similar. All wingnuts get their information from Fox, so that what they think happened during the hurricane Katrina may sound very odd to you. Don't despair, Think Progress has created a list of wingnut myths with proper corrections to each myth. Not that you can just offer the corrections and see the air cleared. The same myth will be thrown back at you repeatedly. But at least you can feel calmer knowing that evidence doesn't back the weird stuff you hear, over and over again. And you will certainly be told that us lefties blame Bush for the hurricane itself. That is one of the myths which is most intriguing: how on earth did they decide that it is us who think Bush is strong enough to steer hurricanes? It's always been the Wingnuttia that believes this. |
Bush Takes Responsibility
About federal blunders in the Katrina unrescue effort. The problem with this responsibility-taking is that I have no idea what he might mean. Is he going to resign? Offer compensation? Do public penance? Can we now blame him more openly? I doubt it. Here are some possible definitions of responsibility that Bush might have used:
|
John Roberts
Monday, September 12, 2005
The Roberts Hearings
John Roberts reminds me of the Sleeping Beauty. There he lies, asleep, pristine, surrounded by rose bushes, waiting for the kiss from George Bush that would make him spring alive. But this is as far as the fairy tale goes, as I'm not quite sure what Roberts-awake would look like. He hasn't been asleep, of course. He has been suave, polished, pleasant, intelligent and most destructive of the right to privacy, civil rights and the Commerce Clause (which matters for the federal government to be able to interfere in the aftermath of a hurricane, for example). In fact, he's so pleasant and nice that most beltway insiders find his appointment very natural. He is one of them. But the real Roberts is hidden somewhere deep inside the Sleeping Beauty, and I want that real Roberts to wake up and speak. Because we will have him around for something like three generations. So what would Chief Justice Roberts do about Grizwold vs. The State of Connecticut, the famous forty-year-old case which decided that married couples can use contraception if they wish? If we don't have a right to privacy, according to Roberts, what else will fall by the wayside? Our right not to use contraception, say? I don't know what Roberts plans to do, and it seems it's very bad manners to try to make him tell us:
The vast majority of the Senate are Republicans, so naturally they wouldn't punish their pal John. I might, though. And what do we get instead of answers to questions about judicial philosophy? We get an analog to baseball:
Right. But what are the rules of the game you are umpiring, John? Are they the same rules the players believe in? Wake up or go back to sleep. |
On Poverty
Jonathan Alter writes about the poverty question in the aftermath of Katrina. I don't agree with everything he says but his article is a good beginning for those who wish to learn more about the roots of the problem. When I have more time I will write something long and boring on the topic here. But the preview is that the solutions ain't easy though not as hard as the wingnuts pretend. |
Michael Brown Has Resigned from FEMA
It seems that Brown is no longer the head of FEMA. This is the western equivalence of seppuku, I guess. |
The Royal Visit to New Orleans
Was there a foghorn this time? I haven't watched the visit, because I firmly and angrily believe that he should not have gone there to cause disruption in the real rescue effort. The only reason for this visit is in the abysmal approval numbers of our George. He's playing the only game this government finds worthy (other than war games): the illusion game. Part of the illusion game is to shroud everything into words which carry nothing but sound:
So criticism is "preposterous", things are "comprehensive" and "pure and simple". No evidence to support the Iraq argument's preposterousness, no attempt to answer what those who charge racism really refer to. No substance, just a lot of fluff, like happy little Republican clouds floating about in the sky of emptiness. See, I can do the same! |
Sunday, September 11, 2005
A Headline I Saw
It stated: Specter will not question Roberts over abortion. Well, no. He is unlikely to need one anytime soon. |
9/11/2005
|
Why Have A Government?
David Brooks, the wingnut windbag of the New York Times, has returned to his usual liberal-bashing after a couple of fairly thoughtful columns. The most recent one isn't thoughtful: it regards the failure of the Katrina rescue efforts as proof that governments fail. The logical conclusion then is to have as little government as possible. In the (sadly) unforgettable words of Grover Norquist (who is crazy) the government should be shrunk so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub. Let us take these wingnuts at face value. Let's ask the question:"What would happen in the absence of a government?" The answer is chaos, and then a new government would be created. Because governments are necessary for human cooperation and human cooperation is necessary for survival. It's as simple as that. In a little more detail, common activity is necessary to get certain types of jobs done. Suppose, for example, that you wish to build levees to protect a low-lying city from hurricanes. Once the levees are built they will protect everyone inside them. It's not efficient for each individual to build his or her own levees. But doing the building together means that one must also solve the question of funding the work. Sometimes the work is done together by the whole community, but mostly someone is employed to do the actual work while others just pay for it. Now assume that I decide to settle in this city and I see the levees already built. There is then no real (selfish) reason for me to pay anything towards the levees. After all, they will protect me even if I pay nothing! But this same logic applies to everyone else: why would anybody pay for the levees if others can be persuaded to build them free? The outcome would be either no levees at all or the creation of a system where people are forced to pay for the levees. These forced payments are called taxes. It is the power to tax that distinguishes formal governments from the kind of cooperation I described above. A market solution doesn't allow the power to tax, and can be shown to always produce fewer levees (or military troops) than the optimal level would indicate. In econo-babble, some goods and services are said to be public in nature. In their purest form public goods and services have these two characeristics: 1) the amount I consume of the service or good does not reduce the amount you can consume, and 2) it is prohibitively expensive to exclude anybody from consuming the product. The usual examples of such pure public goods are lighthouses: the amount of guidance they provide to one ship doesn't reduce the amount they offer other ships and there is no inexpensive way of excluding ships from using the service. At the other extreme, a sandwich is an example of a purely private good. If I eat it you can't, and I can keep you away from my sandwich fairly easily. Many goods and services have characteristics that are both public and private, but the closer a service comes to the public endpoint the less efficient a market solution will prove to be. Wingnuts who want the government small enough to drown in a bathtub will also drown large chunks of modern civilization, national security and disaster preparedness. None of this means that governments are necessarily efficient, but then neither are the markets. The wingnut way of always suspecting the government of evil and always giving the markets free pass is stupid, but so would its opposite be. Markets and governments are nothing more than institutions which humans have created, and which to use and in which proportions is an empirical question about what works. |
Saturday, September 10, 2005
Don't Worry
We are in good hands. Thank the Lord that the disaster relief and reconstruction work will go largely to Bush's good friends! Who needs open bidding! If the good Lord had wanted us to have open bidding he wouldn't have sent us George and his friends. I read this and my teeth grind each other to white dust:
Just the firms I would have picked up for further payments from the American taxpayers, especially now that Bush has abolished the rule that required federal contractors to pay prevailing wages. And just the reminder we all needed that nothing this administration does is ultimately about anything else than how to grab the most cash. |
Saturday Waffling
(For more of my political posts, check out American Street (in the links on the right) today) I've been so focused on the hurricane unrescue efforts that I haven't had time to write rubbish at all, and I really miss it. Rubbish writing, I mean. Reading it may not be so fun, but writing it is a blast. But disasters make this very hard to do. Still, if I quit now I might never get back in the saddle. It is a lovely autumn morning here, the sun seeping down between the dark green leaves in rays of pale gold, and it is once again possible to smell the earth and not just its flowers and leaves. I have an autumn switch which seems to have turned on, and suddenly I'm a ball of energy, cleaning and planning and just enjoying the feeling of ripening all around me. I go out and buy the fruit and the vegetables just for their colors and shapes and the kitchen looks glorious. Earthmotherly. This is as close as I ever get to being earthmotherly. The snakes aren't especially affected by autumn but the dogs are. They get all edgy and even more eager to run, and then they change from spring shedding to fall shedding. Slightly different type of hair can now be found in the corners of the Snakepit Inc.. This morning Hank jumped into the stream and got stuck quite deep in the mud. I had to pull her out (with a slurp sound), and then we were both smelly and brown. Don't give me any wise-cracks here! It wasn't fun to walk back past the popular local soccer game, but luckily Henrietta was as clean and noble-looking as usual, to show that the smelly browniness didn't extend to all of the household. I'm thinking of painting all the walls brown. This would save on cleaning time. What could I use to cover the pungent smell of boggy water in the mud? |
Bipartisanship
New definition (erase the old ones): Anything proposed by wingnuts and supported by Joseph Lieberman. |
Friday, September 09, 2005
And Then The Dogs?
A Little Economics Lesson in Wingnuttia
Courtesy of John Stossel. Excuse me for the long quote but it is needed:
According to "Professor" Stossel, the black market profiteers in Europe during the WWII did a real favor. They saved all the red meat, cream and eggs and guaranteed that it went to the neediest. The mistake Stossel makes is not distinguishing the need for water (dehydration and thirst) from the ability to pay for water (wealth). He assumes that everybody has the twenty dollars in their pack pockets, and that those who won't pay the necessary twenty are the ones who are less thirsty, rather than being the ones who are poorer. Stossel is correct that hoarding can be a problem during disasters. But he advocates more hoarding (by the sellers) as a solution. This is a cruel and unethical solution, making some very rich and causing lack of water elsewhere. What is usually done during disasters of this kind is some kind of rationing. The rationing guarantees that as many people get the water as possible and makes hoarding less likely. But rationing means intervening with the holy markets, Stossel might grumble. Indeed. There are many reasons for interfering with markets and the economic consequences of disasters are good ones. Those who worship the markets (rather than see them as one tool among many in our economic toolkit) think that markets would function well even if the market distribution would leave all but the wealthiest dead of thirst. Which it would in the case of disasters like Katrina if water became extremely scarce. So remember this when you interpret Stossel's argument that "price gougers save lives". |
Today's Bumper Sticker
I saw my first Rapture-sticker today! I'm so excited. It said:"There is no speed limit during rapture". The van with this sticker was parked in the driveway of a very nice suburban house. First dibs on the house! |
Friday Dog Blogging
Define "Enemy Combatant"
A federal appeals court has ruled that the U.S. government had the authority to order the detention of Jose Padilla, an American citizen, based on him qualifying as an enemy combatant, despite the fact that he has not been accused of any crime. What this means depends crucially on how the courts define an enemy combatant. What is required for one to be viewed as such? Writing a blog critical of the current administration? I hope not. |
Quasi-Firing
Michael Brown has been quasi-fired from his FEMA job:
Why wasn't he kicked out on his arse? Because Bush never makes mistakes in his hiring decisions? Because Brown got him lotsa votes in Florida? Because of what, exactly? We are all expected to make sacrifices because of Katrina. We are supposed to give to charities, conserve gas, and the workers don't have to get paid prevailing wages in the hurricane-affected areas, not to even mention the much more horrific sacrifices some have made already. But Bush's cronies get a cushy office job as a punishment for being totally incompetent. |
And Yet More Incompetency
The Time magazine has done some research on Michael Brown's resume. The FEMA director appears to have padded his achievements a tiny bit. For example:
And this is the man George Bush appointed to take care of our country, while Joe Lieberman cheered him on. Then there is this New York Times editorial, sputtering with anger:
Too little, too late. --- Link to the Time article via Daily Kos. |
And Still More Unrescue
This made me really angry, not that everything else hasn't already. But this is so petty, so greedy, so horribly unempathetic:
It's the contractors who will benefit if they can find people desperate enough to work for very little money. And what did Bush sign to curtail the contractors' profits from the hurricane? As far as I know, nothing at all. |
Thursday, September 08, 2005
The Ones Who Said No
To the proposed federal aid package intended for the victims of Katrina:
All are Republicans. |
The Day's Philosophical Question
Would it be better if the cockroaches took over from humans? I'm not sure. If I was a cockroach I'd know what their sense of humor is. I like humor, and I fear that I wouldn't get the cockroach jokes. They'd be all about silly humans suddenly bursting out of the woodwork, all saying that it wasn't their fault. Whatever the "it" might be. I also am too large to find lovers among the cockroaches unless they agree to collaborate. On the other hand, it wouldn't be that difficult to overperform the humans. Not that difficult, at all. But then there are the beautiful works of human art and the acts of kindness and the sudden lightning strokes of understanding and feeling...the universe. Can cockroaches do that? |
Otterside
This is the blog of a physician who is in Louisiana trying to help with the rescue. A snippet:
|
From Daily Kos
An Eyewitness Account
This one is interesting as it records the experiences of paramedics who were stranded in New Orleans while attending a conference. Because of their backgrounds, the writers have a very clear-sighted grasp of the rescue efforts they witnessed and the many blunders they observed. |
Just For (Sarcastic) Laughs
Some time ago Rick (the Dick) Santorum said this about the people of New Orleans:
I'm so happy that Santorum defined carefully the groups that should be treated harshly if they don't leave. Like this one, perhaps:
Mr. O'Dwyer has stubbornly refused to leave, you see. |
Getting to the Bottom of It
Aren't you glad to hear that there will be an inquiry into the unrescue effort after Katrina? So good to find out exactly who caused several unnecessary deaths and much suffering. There is just one little snag:
No independents. Given what the recent polls have shown us Republicans appear to believe (without evidence) that Bush did a great job after Katrina. So prepare for the same findings. |
More Poll Results
Rasmussen Reports have one out. It says that 45% of the respondents thought the federal government had done a poor job responding to hurricane Katrina. Still,28% think that this job was done excellently or well. So the wingnuts are nearly 30% of all Americans...(assuming the sample is representative, of course). But this is most interesting:
My faith in humanity is a little restored. For a while there I thought that I had somehow landed in a parallel reality where the heads of people are mostly hollow and there just to have something to hang the eyes and the mouth on. |
Unrescue Effort Continues, Relentlessly
Louise Slaughter's office sent me this in an e-mail:
Note the bit about "no-one having seen a copy of the legislation". So we don't actually know what it contains! Isn't modern politics marvelous in this one-party country. |
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
More Incompetency Or Unrescue Efforts
In late August the White House had this to say about the hurricane Katrina:
Good, huh? Except that the list of parishes doesn't include the ones that were really hit by Katrina, the coastal ones, you know. If you don't believe me look for Jefferson Parish in that list or check out this map of Louisiana: ![]() --- Props for the White House report to easy rider on Eschaton threads. --- Added: It seems that this is not necessarily incompetency. There is a separate statement for the omitted parishes a few days later. But it is still odd that the safer parishes are covered in the first notice. Thanks for dave in Rubber Hose's comments for the link. |
A Gallup On Public Opinions About The Unrescue Operation
It tells us that 42% of the respondents think Bush has done a "terrible" or a "bad" job, while 35% think that his response was "good" or "great". Some of the latter group would have voted Nero the Best Emperor Ever. And 63% of the respondents think that nobody should be fired for this fiasco. These are much nicer people than yours truly. I'd love to see practically everybody fired, starting with Georgie Porgie. But then I'm a vicious goddess and I also follow the news. Most Americans are kindly people and are fairly oblivious about currrent events. It could also be that the respondents don't want to assign blame when the country is still suffering greatly. Sadly, this is likely to lead to more suffering in the future. The time for some new brooms is right now. |
In California
a bill that would allow same-sex marriage has passed in the California Assembly. But the battle is not over with this victory:
The opposition of same-sex marriage has a bunch of arguments which fall, one after the other, like a house of cards, when they are responded to. This makes no difference at all. It just leads to a new round of presenting the same arguments which then again can be refuted. This makes me believe that the real reason so many oppose same-sex marriage is one of those hidden subconscious things. Nothing can be said that would affect the underlying premise of those scared of all change, even when the change has no direct impact on their own lives. But the California decision must be included in the category of good news. It is the beginning (not counting Masssachusetts's legal decision to the same effect) of many similar decisions, albeit probably only after some decades have passed. |
The Real Katrina Timeline
Courtesy of Think Progress. This is good to read, because the wingnut spin consists of an altered timeline; one in which the local and state authorities do nothing and valiant George finally steps in. The real timeline begins like this:
Read the whole timeline at the link. It's well worth your time. |
Understanding FEMA
This Salon article is quite thought-provoking in explaining how FEMA was destroyed:
|
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Some More Unrescue News
You might be glad to learn that contractors interested in post-disaster jobs don't have to worry about open bidding:
Understandable, perhaps. But which firms will be informed about these opportunities? And what prices will be set? Who monitors this? Anyone? Then there is the internal FEMA memo which according to Josh Marshall shows that:
Michael Brown isn't the only FEMA director without any relevant work experience. It turns out that his number three is equally inexperienced:
|
Business Boom After Katrina
Yes, my title is sick, but I feel sick. The one business that will be doing well is the mortuary business:
---- From Aladdinslamp on Eschaton threads. |
Some Good News
From Talk Left:
Maybe he could be the next head of FEMA? --- Props to w00t on the Eschaton threads. |
The Deep Question of the Day
Why does Michael Brown, the ex-commissioner of the International Arabian Horses Association, still have the job of running FEMA? ------ Added:
|
The Blame Game Begins
Kos has the e-mail that has been circulating this morning, with the wingnut plan set out clearly. The blame is going to be put on bureaucracy (which somehow miraculously has nothing to do with Bush), the local and state authorities in Louisiana (because they are Democrats), on political correctness (???) and the socialist (!!!) government of New Orleans. The heroes are going to be FEMA and our fearless leader. Sorry, I have no brown vomit bags. Kos also points out that all right-wing talk shows had the script this morning. Shows some mighty hierarchical authority. Too bad it wasn't rolled out to fight Katrina. |
Disrespectful to the President?
I just received this in an e-mail. It argues that the Fox network turned down a political ad as disrespectful to the president:
The Heretik has a picture which certainly would qualify as disrespectful: ![]() To Marie Antoinette at least. |
The Bright Side of Life After A Hurricane
From New York Times:
(Bolds mine.) Those Halliburton boys must have been born covered in Teflon. Nothing sticks to them. Doesn't matter how they have performed in Iraq, for example. The sun always shines on them. So does the federal government. |
Monday, September 05, 2005
Olbermann
His latest blog entry is well worth reading, though you may not want to do so if your anger quotient has been exceeded. |
The Culture of Affluence
Via Eschaton, I learned about this little interview with Barbara Bush, the mother of our fearless leader:
The silver-foot-in-the-mouth disease appears to be herited. I don't usually blog about the family members of politicians, because they are private individuals, not politicians, and it seems wrong to me to expose them to the harsh limelight of my viper tongue (what an idiom!). But I'm going to make an exception this time. Barbara Bush is such a good example of the consequences of "the culture of affluence", that dire disease that makes its members phlegmatic, smug and self-satisfied, despite the fact that they know nothing about how the rest of humanity lives. Perhaps for her everything about life is money. Else how to interpret her assumption that individuals who have been forcibly separated from their family, their friends and the place they called home should be happy because now they are somewhere like a football arena? After all, their houses could never have been that big! And food is just being carried to their cots! It is funny, for someone who suffers from the "culture of affluence" syndrome. Too bad that we can't help Barbara. We don't have the resources for that. |
Roberts Nominated for Chief Justice
That was quick, quicker than Bush's response to the hurricane. Let us be thankful for small mercies. Why so quick? Could it be because:
Maybe. |
And Even More on the Unrescue Effort
From Washington Monthly:
For your information. |
On Race And Disasters
New Orleans is a predominantly black city and most of the poor who stayed behind are black. So are most of the armed looters we see on television. This has opened a crack for the old (but always present though suppressed) discussion on race. The wingnuts are getting more and more courageous in offering the explanation that it's the race of the sufferers that is the problem, not their poverty or the ineptitude of the rescue effort:
Indeed, there are poor people who just sit and wait. There are even rich people who just sit and wait, for their trust funds to mature, say. And there is a lot of crime among the poor, although there is crime among the rich, too, though then it is named "white collar crime" and punished less often and less heavily. Lack of education goes with lack of money, and lack of education makes it a lot harder to make informed decisions about anything. A long time ago I read our favorite crackpot, Charles Murray, pontificate on the topic of poverty. He argued that anyone who is poor could at least keep his or her family clean and reading Shakespeare. This is one of the Victorian arguments about poverty, the idea that the poor could otherwise be like us, the wealthy, if they only tried. That they don't try shows that they are not like us and probably deserve to be poor. Murray's argument is a naive one as anyone who has ever been without food for a while knows. Lack of food tends to do things to the body and the mind which cause fatigue, and fatigue causes frayed nerves and bad decisions. And more fatigue. Anyone who has worked two jobs at the same time knows that keeping the house clean isn't going to happen, that reading Shakespeare is not very likely. Energy is limited in its total amount, and the more of it we need for mere survival the less of it remains for all the little niceties of life that Murray so values. So New Orleans isn't about how blacks are somehow intrinsically different from whites or how the poor somehow are causing their own poverty and violence. But New Orleans definitely is about race, about our inability to provide adequate education and opportunities for all children, about our segregated neighborhoods, about lack of will which feeds back to racial perceptions. I happen to believe that there is something like "a culture of poverty", just as there is something like a "culture of unearned wealth". Neither is wholly pretty, but both have their purposes: to help a person survive in the environment in which he or she is stranded. But these cultures are not some independent thing sprouting from the genetic memories of their participants; they are a consequence of the societal arrangements and they can be influenced. In France, it is the Muslims who have "a culture of poverty" because it is the Muslims who are the underclass, the recent immigrants, the ones who stand out in their difference. In other countries these cultures are sometimes attached to people of the same race and religion as the rest of the society, but they are set apart by the poverty of the group itself. In short, "a culture of poverty" is not an explanation for what we see. For that we need to dig deeper. But it isn't necessary to dig very deep to find the "culture of racism" (my term) that permeates so much of the discussion of the conservative right. It is nowadays expressed in careful terms, with nary a whiff of actual racist terms, but it is still offered as an excuse, an explanation that will allow the majority to continue ignoring the plight of the minorities. Because anything that is intractable or caused by something in the minorities cannot be affected by the rest of us. Which allows us to keep our money and our gated communities and so on. And our neat and clean consciences. |
Time Running Out
So reports CNN:
This is terrible if true. What about employing volunteers who have the necessary skills? What about asking foreign nations for their teams trained in similar rescues? Are we really this short of personnel that we are going to let people die? Where are all the skilled rescue teams? |
The Real Rescue Effort
This will cover how to rescue George Bush's skin. The plan seems to be as follows: 1. Rewind the machines so as to make Bush look like he cares. Send him back to Louisiana on Monday, even if that stops all real rescue efforts for the duration. 2. Blame Louisiana governor Blanco for the ineptitude. She's a Democrat and a woman, so this is an excellent strategy. Find out later if she had any blame to share, actually. 3. Don't talk about the past. Talk about what is happening right now: "Look! All those military people are going into New Orleans! Isn't that wonderful!" Or in slightly different words:
This rescue will be run very competently. You will see. But it shouldn't work, because the hurricane of incompetence is still totally uncontained in Washington, D.C.. |
Sunday, September 04, 2005
Passing the Buck
It has started. The White House is blaming the state and local authorities for the mess. The Washington Post reports this:
Then, at the top of this article the Post has added a little correction which states this:
She also accepted help from other states last Monday:
And she asked for federal help before the hurricane hit. I don't know how Blanco's performance should be evaluated, but this whole thing is clearly an attempt to make her the scapegoat of all that has gone wrong, including the mistakes of the FEMA. This is just wrong, even if it is sweet to the ears of the wingnuts who dislike women in power and root for them to fail. In this particular case there are plenty of good ole boys failing. ---- Thanks to bg in the comments for the WaPo link. |
Frivolosities
We need those, too. I just went out and had a sundae which I created myself. Here's the recipe: one scoop of chocolate ice-cream, one slurp of chocolate sauce, as many M&Ms as fit into the bowl. Eat with a spoon or your tongue. It was good. My Labrador retriever no longer dances on three legs. All the four are functional now and tomorrow she will be allowed off-leash for the first time in ten days. She has most likely gained a pound or two as I didn't have the heart to cut back her food as much as her exercize has been cut, but as she's hell on wheels, usually, she will probably lose them tomorrow in the chase for her George Bush chewtoy or the many tennis balls she finds in the park. About once a month I re-seed the park with twenty or so tennis balls, and then Hank goes back to collecting them. Doesn't cost anything, either, as they were never my tennis balls to begin with. And one day, soon, I will even clean the house. Right now I only clean those bits that keep staring at me with blameful eyes, but once some peace returns to the blogosphere I will be out there with a blowtorch and a pressure washer and the Snakepit Inc. will shine again. Who am I kidding here? But it sounds good. |
Deaths On A Bridge In New Orleans
From the Associated Press, apparently the New Orleans police shot at eight people carrying guns on the Danziger bridge, killing five or six of them. There is a rumor that these people were contractors, but I have so far been unable to verify or falsify the rumor. Update: It seems that the people shot at were not contractors, but those who had shot at the contractors:
|
Body Count
Will we get one? And when will we get it? Will it be done objectively? This administration has made me into the goddess of the paranoid, and I am now fearing that we will never know how many died because of Katrina and the ineptitude that followed and preceded her monsterous passing through Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. But we have to demand an objective count. It is important to know what the price has been. |
News About The Unrescue Effort
Today's Meet the Press was full of them. Here is the president of Jefferson parish:
Britain is offering us help for the victims of Katrina. And we? What are we doing? Here's the answer:
And then there is the story of the eighteen-year old who took a bus in New Orleans and filled it with evacuees. He then drove the bus to Texas and thus saved about a hundred people. What is he getting for his efforts? Supposedly he is in prison, waiting a court visit:
Well, it seems like you will be blamed for it, Jabbor. Everything points out to an effort to keep order and to keep property safe. Human lives (and animal lives) are worthless, troubling, something that shouldn't be mentioned at all. A bus is more important than one hundred, mostly black and poor lives. But a bus doesn't have a soul, can't suffer, doesn't feel pain. It's worth some money, though, and these people appear to be worth nothing. What has been missing from the powers-that-be in FEMA and the federal government in general is empathy. I see not one speck of it anywhere. |
Chief Justice Rehnquist Died
According to Los Angeles Times:
I don't know what to say. This will be a most interesting fall season, I guess. Possibly also the beginning of the imperial era of the United States. Nothing good will come out of this, that is certain. The Vichy Democrats are not going to be of any help, either. |
Saturday, September 03, 2005
Asleep
(This post is safe to skip unless you enjoy rants, for rant I shall.) Sri Lanka is offering aid to the survivors of hurricane Katrina. At least twenty other countries are offering aid to these survivors, including Cuba and Venezuela. Other American states have been offering aid, pleading, begging, praying to be allowed to offer aid. Nearly three hundred million dollars have been sent to the American Red Cross by ordinary people of all types. Nobody knows how many have drowned in the filthy waters of Katrina's wake, how many have died of thirst, of hunger, of the absence of someone who knows how to help. Nobody knows how many have died of gunshot wounds, how many have been raped, how many have just been too tired to stand on tiptoe in their hot attics, in water up to their necks, hoping for aid. Nobody knows who gave the orders that keeps aid agencies outside New Orleans, though we know that the reason for these orders is in Order itself: the god of rigidity, ranking and property. Let's not spread food and water around freely; people might not leave and others might come back. Chaos. That keeping order will result in neatly ordered tiers of corpses seems like a small price to pay. Let's not let anyone out of the city on their own, either. That way lies chaos. Decide on a few collecting points and have people gather there for the purpose of being picked up by buses. But where are the collecting points, does anyone know? Do those know who are standing in the heat without water or food? Does the woman with untreated diabetes know? Or the old man in his attic? Or the family with all those crying children? At least there are collecting points, neatly marked in the planning files. So there is Order. I'm a stupid goddess. The god of Order knows that help must be under control, under one capable director. Otherwise chaos results. It is good to ban aid from entering the ravaged city, good to ban pedestrians from leaving, good to ban other states or countries from helping, because we need one leader, one pyramid of operations, one voice telling us what to do. And do we hear this voice? What is it telling the suffering people of New Orleans and Louisiana? Is it whispering? Why can't I hear anything? Something? Wait a minute! I do hear something! Excuses and accusations, lots of spin. Masterful spin! Yes, someone is in charge who knows how to spin. What a relief. If only those pictures from the city would leave my retinas, if those voices of survivors, reporters and doctors in the stinking wrecks of hospitals would be silenced, if I could somehow stop finding more and more evidence of callous, uncaring, unthinking, unplanning greed and cowardice, then I could sleep. Sleep in my clean bed, in my safe room, far away from those who can't sleep or don't have beds. Sleep like an innocent, like a corpse, like the members of this administration. Sleep like the city of New Orleans will, for months, if not for years. Sleep. |
The Unrescue Effort
A harsh title, but it is deserved for those who have kept the aid agencies out of New Orleans, and for those who caused this delay:
And for those who didn't activate the CRAF provision earlier:
The actual rescue is getting better, finally, and I am very happy to read about that. Now, how many days did it take? Let me think, the storm struck on Monday... |
Why Is Red Cross Not in New Orleans?
This is their answer. Read and weep:
Nice and logical. Too bad that the dead and the dying are inside New Orleans, and that most of us have been giving our money to an organization that has been frozen out. |
Friday, September 02, 2005
Read This
CNN has an article which compares what officials say about the aftermath of Katrina to what journalists and other eyewitnesses actually on the site say. The disconnect is enormous. Granted, eyewitnesses can fail to see the totality of a disaster, but in this case the sum of all the eyewitness accounts does not make the totality of "things-under-control" that we fear from officials. Physicians in hospitals are desperate for help, for example. Any disaster-control plan worth its salt would start with hospitals and other places where the truly helpless will be found. |
From Representative Louise Slaughter
This is what her office sent me:
|
Friday Dog Blogging
Airlifts
Why are they not happening in adequate numbers in New Orleans? I understand that snipers are shooting at the planes but is that the only reason? Don't we have enough planes to remove the patients and the staff from hospitals in the area? If there is an inadequate number of military planes, what about requisitioning private airline planes? As far as I can see this was done in 2003 for Iraq purposes. |
Today's Irony
September is the National Preparedness Month:
|
You Always Learn Something!
Attytood gives us this little lesson, via Eschaton:
Jesus wept on hearing that one. I kicked the garage door in, again. When you show me the bureaucrat who has not had food or water for five days, who is living in a congested sports arena or on the street, among feces and corpses, who is watching infants and the elderly die and hearing gunshots in the distance, then I will have as much understanding for the bureaucrats as I have for the plight of the victims. This has been the most fucking demonstration of incompetency I have ever observed in my life. What are the qualifications of the Bush appointed head of FEMA? Is it true that he used to be an estate lawyer? Do you feel that the government can cope with a major terrorist attack after watching the events of the last five days unfold? Gah. ---- Added: This must be the best demonstration of what is wrong with the new media fashion of deciding that neutrality from the media requires giving each viewpoint equal weight, as in the idea that "Opinions on the Shape of the Earth Vary", as if there are no objective criteria to decide on anything. I thought that relativism was something extreme lefties are accused of? It doesn't take a long discussion to decide that job stresses of the bureaucrats are not equal causes for concern with people quite possibly dying from the effects of hurricane, lawlessness and government ineptitude. |
Katrina 5
Things are still bad:
|
Nagin's Interview
The mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, gave a real radio interview. If you haven't listened to it yet, you can do so here. |
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Katrina 4
![]() A man covers the body of a man who died Thursday outside the Convention Center in New Orleans And this is what people saw:
And this is what people saw:
---- For where to donate, check Katrina 3. |
Weaseling
This morning, about 7:05 am Eastern time, George Bush was interviewed by Diane Sawyers on ABC's Good Morning America. This is what he said:
Mm. Here is a quote from an article originally published on June 8, 2004 in the Times-Picayune:
And here is an excerpt from May of this year:
I guess it all depends on what one means by "nobody" and "breach" and so on. |














