Why Do Republicans Hate America?

Here's a statement from the Taliban concerning the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama:

KABUL - The Taliban Friday condemned the decision to award this year's Nobel Peace Prize to U.S. President Barack Obama, saying he had "not taken a single step towards peace in Afghanistan".

"We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan. He has not taken a single step for peace in Afghanistan or to make this country stable," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told AFP.

"We condemn the award of the Noble Peace Prize for Obama," he said by telephone from an undisclosed location.

"We condemn the institute's awarding him the peace prize. We condemn this year's peace prize as unjust."

And here's a statement from Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee:

“The real question Americans are asking is, ‘What has President Obama actually accomplished?' It is unfortunate that the president's star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain – President Obama won't be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.”

And here's the response of the Democratic National Committee to both:

"The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists -- the Taliban and Hamas this morning -- in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize," DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse told POLITICO. "Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize -- an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride -- unless of course you are the Republican Party.

"The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore -- it's an embarrassing label to claim," Woodhouse said.

The Republicans sure do make it easy.

Why did Obama get the Nobel Peace Prize?

Diplomacy died under George W. Bush. Obama single-handedly brought it back from the dead. The world appreciates that, even if the Republicans do not.

Addendum: John McCain, who undoubtedly has thrown a temper tantrum about this, "gets it," nevertheless.

A Stupid Self-Indulgence

If you're interested in the kind of photography that I am (portrait photography), and there's no reason you should be, you'd be aware that there is an international community of people who are kind of nuts about off-camera flash. The idea is that if you use a flash other than that little thing that's built into your camera, and can make it work without being attached to your camera, you'll get much better pictures. No red-eye, to start with. More interesting light, for another.

If you're already nodding off, move on to something else. This doesn't get any better.

Another thing you can do with this off-camera flash is modify it in some way. In this silly little video (shot with a Canon 5D Mark II (sigh)], the videographer is illustrating the kind of light you can get by bouncing the flash off something silver, then something white – in this case, off Bounceman's cape, then off Bounceman's shirt.



What he's saying in the third episode is "What you need [is] a little hairlight" (the guys who made this are Belgian). And the principle works when you're photographing people who aren't beautiful models, too, but who'd watch a video like that?

Hey, I warned you go move on to something else. You've got nobody to blame but yourself.

A Diamond Roughed Up

It was surprising to read yesterday that General Stanley McChrystal, Obama's choice for commander of forces in Afghanistan, was arguing publicly with Vice President Biden's suggestion that we scale back those forces and concentrate on eliminating Al Qaeda.

Biden's position on this issue may not be correct, but that's beside the point. If you want to retain the confidence of the President, you give as strong an argument to the Vice President's analysis as you want to in private, but in public you shut up.

Gen. McChrystal should know that.

Today we learn that Obama summoned Gen. McChrystal from London to Copenhagen for a 20-minute consultation aboard Air Force One.

Which do you think you can do in 20 minutes?

• Review the pluses and minuses of the different strategies being considered in Afghanistan.

• Tell somebody to shut up.

Just a guess.

Conservative Shock Jocks

David Brooks has been described as the liberals' favorite conservative, and that's true here. Today's column, The Wizard of Beck, is illustrative of why. Brooks today takes on the voice of the Republican Party: the wackos on Faux, though he never mentions Faux by name. He's courageous, but not that courageous.

Of course, if you're a Republican trying to make the case that the GOP is not as wacko as Hannity, Rushbaugh, O'Reilly, and Beck (and there are many more), the first thing you have to do is blame the Democrats for the perception that it is. Thus:

[The shock jocks] still ride the airwaves claiming to speak for millions. They still confuse listeners with voters. And they are aided in this endeavor by their enablers. They are enabled by cynical Democrats, who love to claim that Rush Limbaugh controls the G.O.P.

It's the Democrats' fault.

But then he goes on to say:

The Republican Party is unpopular because it’s more interested in pleasing Rush’s ghosts than actual people. The party is leaderless right now because nobody has the guts to step outside the rigid parameters enforced by the radio jocks and create a new party identity. The party is losing because it has adopted a radio entertainer’s niche-building strategy, while abandoning the politician’s coalition-building strategy.

Gee, I'd say that sounds like Rush Limbaugh controls the GOP.

I'd say that, but I wouldn't want to be an enabler.

Addendum: Was Brooks's column part of a wider conspiracy of non-Faux Republicans to try to take the party back? Within the past few days Sen. Lindsay Graham was taking the same tack.

Sedition

You knew it was going to happen eventually. With the Governor of Texas suggesting secession is a reasonable option for his state, it was only a matter of time.

Yesterday a "news" web site very popular with right-wing wacko "Christians", called Newsmax, ran a piece that nearly begged for a military coup:

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

When the article began to get some uncomfortable attention, it was removed from the site. But Talking Points Memo has the full text here.

Missing Carl Sagan

Consider:

Keynes

I'm going to try hard to write this post without saying anything snarky about any individual or any publication. It will be a struggle, and I'm not sure I can do it, but here goes:

The New Republic [argh! (struggle) argh!] has a fascinating essay by Richard Posner [argh! (struggle) argh!], whose name will be familiar to some readers, about John Maynard Keynes. Posner [argh! (struggle) argh!] is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals (7th Circuit). Perhaps you will be as surprised as I am by it. The essay is longish, but will reward you with deeper understanding.

A sample:

Until last September, when the banking industry came crashing down and depression loomed for the first time in my lifetime, I had never thought to read The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, despite my interest in economics. I knew that John Maynard Keynes was widely considered the greatest economist of the twentieth century, and I knew of his book's extraordinary reputation. But it was a work of macroeconomics--the study of economy-wide phenomena such as inflation, the business cycle, and economic growth. Law, and hence the economics of law--my academic field--did not figure largely in the regulation of those phenomena. And I had heard that it was a very difficult book, which I assumed meant it was heavily mathematical; and that Keynes was an old-fashioned liberal, who believed in controlling business ups and downs through heavy-handed fiscal policy (taxing, borrowing, spending); and that the book had been refuted by Milton Friedman [HA! Oops, sorry], though he admired Keynes's earlier work on monetarism. I would not have been surprised by, or inclined to challenge, the claim made in 1992 by Gregory Mankiw, a prominent macroeconomist at Harvard, that "after fifty years of additional progress in economic science, The General Theory is an outdated book. . . . We are in a much better position than Keynes was to figure out how the economy works."

We have learned since September that the present generation of economists has not figured out how the economy works. The vast majority of them were blindsided by the housing bubble and the ensuing banking crisis; and misjudged the gravity of the economic downturn that resulted; and were perplexed by the inability of orthodox monetary policy administered by the Federal Reserve to prevent such a steep downturn; and could not agree on what, if anything, the government should do to halt it and put the economy on the road to recovery. By now a majority of economists are in general agreement with the Obama administration's exceedingly Keynesian strategy for digging the economy out of its deep hole. Some say the government is not doing enough and is too cozy with the bankers, and others say that it is doing too much, heedless of long-term consequences. There is no professional consensus on the details of what should be done to arrest the downturn, speed recovery, and prevent (so far as possible) a recurrence. Not having believed that what has happened could happen, the profession had not thought carefully about what should be done if it did happen.

Baffled by the profession's disarray, I decided I had better read The General Theory. Having done so, I have concluded that, despite its antiquity, it is the best guide we have to the crisis.

More War

This isn't fun, thinking about whether we should get more involved in Afghanistan.

The stakes seem pretty high. The Taliban are not nice people. In addition to treating "their own" people badly, they were, after all, the folks who gave Al Qaeda sanctuary before and after the 2001 attacks. If they return to power, we can expect more of the same. As John Kerry said in 2004, Bush took his eye "off the ball" with his Iraq invasion. We didn't finish our business with the Taliban, and now we're paying the price.

And right next door is Pakistan, a country with 50 nuclear weapons, teetering on the edge of anarachy. Right now the Taliban and Al Qaeda use Pakistan as a base to attack Afghanistan. A Taliban-ruled Afghanistan would be a base to attack Pakistan.

Meanwhile, our NATO allies are getting pretty tired of this. Trust in American leadership has been so diminished that the fact the Americans are involved is now good enough reason for some Europeans not to be involved.

What are the consequences of failure? Pretty ugly.

What are the chances of failure? Informed people, even those who support sending additional troops, admit the chance of failure is significant.

Polls are showing that Americans, by and large, want Afghanistan to "go away". They don't want to send more troops, they want American troops home. That's a very understandable position. What does that say about our chances of a sustained operation? And how much of a factor should that be in Obama's decision-making?

What are the alternatives? Pretty ugly. We could pull out entirely. We could maintain a military presence that goes after Al Qaeda and leaves the Taliban alone. Got any other ideas?

In a column that overstates the case, David Brooks wants to go for it. He points to an excellent discussion of the issues in a Stephen Biddle piece in The American Interest magazine. It's reasonably short. Go read it.

Biddle says encouraging things, like "failure is not inevitable." Oh, boy.

Health Care Again

Charles Peters at The Washington Monthly identifies four ways health care reform can lead to less expensive, but better, health care:

• Give the government the power to negotiate prices with the drug companies. This could save Medicare a ton of money—the Veterans Administration cut its drug bill in half when given the right to negotiate. The House bill makes this reform, but the Los Angeles Times reported that the White House has made a deal with the drug companies’ chief lobbyist, Billy Tauzin, not to support the reform. According to the New York Times, the White House at first confirmed the deal, but then denied it—sort of. The potential savings of having the government bargain for drug prices are so great that Obama should leave no doubt. He should repudiate the deal. Better to betray Billy Tauzin than to betray the American people.

• Abolish or radically reduce drug advertising. Remember, it was outlawed until relatively recently—and for good reason. Not only does it often obscure dangerous side effects, it encourages people to bug doctors to prescribe drugs either that they don’t need or that are the most expensive of the possible therapies. Representative Jerrold Nadler has offered a bill to take away the tax exemption that is now given to drug advertising. And the FDA is proposing regulations that would require drug ads to disclose side effects in an obvious way instead of rapidly reciting them sotto voce over sunny pictures of people happily enjoying the benefits of the drug.

• Encourage doctors to work in Mayo- and Cleveland-type clinics that have doctors working together, and that pay salaries instead of fees for service. Massachusetts, the only state with experience offering near-universal health care, is now being urged by a high-level commission to abolish fee for service, which encourages physicians to recommend services that pay the highest fee, rather than those that are the most needed by the patient.

• Don’t allow physicians to administer expensive tests in their own offices when that encourages them to order more tests than they ordinarily would. To understand why, consider this anecdote reported by the Washington Post’s Shankar Vedantam: "In August 2005, doctors at Urological Associates, a medical practice on the Iowa-Illinois border, ordered nine CT scans for patients covered by Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance. In September that year, they ordered eight. But then the numbers rose steeply. The urologists ordered 35 scans in October, 41 in November and 55 in December. Within seven months they were ordering scans at a rate that had climbed more than 700 percent. The increase came in the months after the urologists bought their own CT scanner."

The practice of medicine is a different animal than it was in the old days.

The Scourge of Libertarianism

Want to read a great essay on prolonged adolescence libertarianism? Meet Rinth de Shadley, who is, I believe, a college student.

Let's Not Blame Fox Yet

Here's one to keep our eyes on:

The FBI is investigating the hanging death of a U.S. Census worker near a Kentucky cemetery, and a law enforcement official told The Associated Press the word 'fed" was scrawled on the dead man's chest.

The body of Bill Sparkman, a 51-year-old part-time Census field worker and occasional teacher, was found Sept. 12 in a remote patch of the Daniel Boone National Forest in rural southeast Kentucky. The Census has suspended door-to-door interviews in rural Clay County, where the body was found, pending the outcome of the investigation.

Investigators are still trying to determine whether the death was a killing or a suicide, and if a killing, whether the motive was related to his government job or to anti-government sentiment.

Doesn't sound good.

Afghanistan

Obama has a big decision to make about Afghanistan: throw more troops in and hope the Afghan government cleans up its act enough to turn things around; or ... what?

Kevin Drum has a good synopsis of where things stand right now.

Quoting the Bible

Couldn't resist sharing this:


The sign is not a quote, actually, but a summary of the verses. The full quote is even worse. It's something every card-carrying Taliban could agree with.

Discuss.

This is one of a series of pictures of "The Funniest Protest Signs of 2009" at the Huffington Post.

Sailors Take Warning

As I stumbled past the living room door early Saturday morning, I noticed a deep red colored light coming under the blinds. I grabbed my camera and went out the door.

I probably should have put on some trousers, but hey, who besides a dairy farmer is up at that time of day on a Saturday?

Anyway, here's the scene.


The little tower thing on the lower right is a tornado/air raid/terrorist siren. When the world comes to an end, we'll know it before you do.

I applied a little sharpening to the picture, but that's all. And yes, it rained later that day.

Is It Racism?

We had a wonderful dinner last night with wonderful friends (Happy Rosh Hashanah, everyone!). As our conversations usually do, we got around to talking about current events, and sharing our own perspectives on what has transpired.

And that gave me the impetus for this post, which I've been thinking about doing for several days, about the animus behind the wild-eyed frothing that is the conservative movement today: the Glenn Becks, the Rush Limbaughs, the pictures of Obama as an African witch doctor. I've found several articles I can recommend that offer different perspectives on the issue. They're all from the NY Times, and that's no accident. Despite the shortcomings of some of its political reporters, the Times is still the best place to look for informed commentary.

A week ago Maureen Dowd kicked off the discussion in the mainstream press with her September 12 NY Times column, the punch lines of which were:

I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer — the frantic efforts to paint our first black president as the Other, a foreigner, socialist, fascist, Marxist, racist, Commie, Nazi; a cad who would snuff old people; a snake who would indoctrinate kids — had much to do with race.

I tended to agree with some Obama advisers that Democratic presidents typically have provoked a frothing response from paranoids — from Father Coughlin against F.D.R. to Joe McCarthy against Truman to the John Birchers against J.F.K. and the vast right-wing conspiracy against Bill Clinton.

But [Rep. Joe] Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president — no Democrat ever shouted “liar” at W. when he was hawking a fake case for war in Iraq — convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.

Five days later, David Brooks offered an answering column, No, It's Not About Race. Brooks does not deny that racism is a part of how the foamers express themselves, but sees other historical movements as the motivation.

...I don’t have a machine for peering into the souls of Obama’s critics, so I can’t measure how much racism is in there. But my impression is that race is largely beside the point. There are other, equally important strains in American history that are far more germane to the current conflicts.

For example, for generations schoolchildren studied the long debate between Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians. Hamiltonians stood for urbanism, industrialism and federal power. Jeffersonians were suspicious of urban elites and financial concentration and believed in small-town virtues and limited government. Jefferson advocated “a wise and frugal government” that will keep people from hurting each other, but will otherwise leave them free and “shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”

Jefferson’s philosophy inspired Andrew Jackson, who led a movement of plain people against the cosmopolitan elites. Jackson dismantled the Second Bank of the United States because he feared the fusion of federal and financial power.

This populist tendency continued through the centuries. Sometimes it took right-wing forms, sometimes left-wing ones. Sometimes it was agrarian. Sometimes it was more union-oriented. Often it was extreme, conspiratorial and rude

So two white NY Times columnists disagree. What about the Times' black columnists?

Bob Herbert weighed in yesterday:

Republicans have been openly feeding off of race hatred since the days of Dick Nixon. Today’s conservative activists are carrying that banner proudly. What does anybody think is going on when, as Anderson Cooper pointed out on CNN, one of the leaders of the so-called tea party movement, Mark Williams, refers to the president of the United States as an Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug, and a racist in chief.

After all these years of race-baiting and stirring the pot of hatred for political gain, it’s too much to ask the leaders of the Republican Party to step forward and denounce this spreading stain of reprehensible conduct. Republicans are trying to ride that dependable steed of bigotry back to power.

Charles M. Blow is one of the least visible of the regular NY Times columnists, but he always offers a unique perspective. That's probably because his beat is "By the Numbers," examining data from polls, censuses, and elsewhere to see what they say about us. His column goes into detail, but his conclusion is this:

Racism is real. It is very likely an element of some people’s opposition to President Obama, but everyone who wants smaller government is not a racist.

Let’s stop talking about racism as if it’s black or white. There are many shades of gray.

My own thoughts about the issue are not as coherent as any of these folk's.

On the one hand, I take as established historical fact that the modern Republican Party was built on racism. When the Democrats passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Republicans gave the defeated segregationists intellectual cover for their racism (it wasn't racism, you see, it was Brooks' Jacksonian opposition to the big, bad, federal government).

On the other hand, as insufficient as it is for life in the 21st century, the Jeffersonian view of the political world as a conflict between small-town virtues and urban decadence is still a strong descriptor, with adherents who are not just using it as cover for ugly souls. The problem with Brooks' perspective is that the Republicans so mixed the two that you can't neatly pull them apart now. You reap what you sow.

Mary Travers

Word has come in the last hour that Mary Travers died of cancer tonight in Connecticut. I've looked for a video that captured the babe-osity that was Mary Travers in the 1960s. This is the closest I could get, even though she's not in it so much.



Peter, Paul, & Mary was a group that held up over the years. I wish they could have stayed together for another couple of decades (i.e., until about 2029).

Stupid Leads, 1-0

Please watch this trailer for a new movie, Creation.
The London Telegraph says:

Creation was developed by BBC Films and the UK Film Council, and stars [Paul] Bettany [as Charles Darwin and his] real-life wife Jennifer Connelly as Darwin's deeply religious wife, Emma. It is based on the book, Annie's Box, by Darwin's great-great-grandson, Randal Keynes, and portrays the naturalist as a family man tormented by the death in 1851 of Annie, his favourite child.

Watch the trailer, because you may never get a chance to see the movie itself.



Distribution rights to the movie have been sold all over the world.

Except in the United States.

In the country that gave you Pulp Fiction, and endless Holloween slasher movies, a movie about Charles Darwin is too controversial. The "Christian" Right hates it, doesn't want you to see it, so nobody wants to touch it.

The campaign to make us stupid has won a great victory.

The Public Option

Everybody who reads this knows who Robert Reich is. Here he describes, in less than 3 minutes, what the Public Option is.



Was that so hard? Why has it taken so long?

An Olive Branch to My Opponents

It's time to stop the caricatures, and take a fair look at both sides of the health insurance reform issue:

Good News for the Legal Profession

The Ave Maria School of Law, bankrolled by the founder of Domino's Pizza and intended to create little clones of Antonin Scalia, is not doing so well. The Washington Monthly has the story. So far, the comment section is as entertaining as the article.

The GOP At Its Best (Unfortunately)

In case you missed it, the Republicans were disgusting at last night's speech, but Republicans being disgusting is not news. What's news is they're even disgusting the Washington Village people.

All in all, it looks like a debacle for the GOP. John McCain was on Larry King later in the evening, calling on Congressman Wilson to apologize.

It will be interesting to see how the evening plays out over the next few days. It didn't take very long for the Repulsives to come up with their first attempt at deflecting criticism. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham:

I was incredibly disappointed in the tone of [Obama's] speech. At times, I found his tone to be overly combative and believe he behaved in a manner beneath the dignity of the office.

They'll try that for a few days and see if it works.

Update: It doesn't look like it's going to work. Steve Benen has a good wrap-up here. Some outtakes:

When Wilson accused the president of lying, Wilson was, in fact, lying. Even in Congress, facts should matter, and the right-wing Republican wasn't just obnoxious with his idiotic interruption, he was also wrong.

...Joe Scarborough, a former Republican member of Congress, said, "Whoever shouted out that the president was lying is a dumbass." John McCain denounced Wilson's outburst as "totally disrespectful." While right-wing blogs were thrilled, Republican lawmakers have been entirely unwilling to defend Wilson's behavior.

...President Obama couldn't have been more magnanimous last night, highlighting a plan that "incorporates ideas from many people in this room tonight, Democrats and Republicans." He made frequent references to Republican lawmakers and even George W. Bush. Obama even talked up medical malpractice reform. It was in this context that Wilson decided to lash out? As Gail Collins noted this morning, "Let me go out on a limb and say that it is not a good plan to heckle the president of the United States when he's making a speech about replacing acrimony with civility."

...It's striking that Wilson, unable to find any support from his allies, quickly apologized....

But the damage has been done. Indeed, Wilson's outburst is an almost perfect summation of 2009 -- President Obama appears big, Republicans appear small. Democrat show class, Republicans act like children. One side is serious, one side is shrill. The White House says something true, Republicans lash out with falsehoods.

A Simple Prayer

When it comes to making much of the trivial, it's hard to beat American popular culture. We're so used to it now that the most contrived programs on television are called "reality" shows, and we don't blink.

Still, it was hard not to go slack-jawed when a "business reporter" recently described an advertising campaign as "the #1 mascara launch in recent history."

Come soon, sweet Jesus.

A Course in Economics

Long-time readers will know that I have no use for the late Milton Friedman and the cult that grew up around him at the University of Chicago.

I was surprised, therefore, that Paul Krugman (who is brilliant, irritating, and sometimes wrong) was so kind to him in this survey of economic theory and real life: How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?

Would you like to take a quick college survey course in the history of economic theory? Professor Krugman gives us one for free (or, should I say, for the cost of the New York Times Sunday edition, which you can read for free). Describing current macroeconomic thought, he divides American theory into two schools: "saltwater" economists (i.e., East Coast and West Coast) and "freshwater" economists (i.e., the University of Clueless).

... Friedman certainly never bought into the idea that mass unemployment represents a voluntary reduction in work effort or the idea that recessions are actually good for the economy. Yet the current generation of freshwater economists has been making both arguments. Thus Chicago’s Casey Mulligan suggests that unemployment is so high because many workers are choosing not to take jobs: “Employees face financial incentives that encourage them not to work . . . decreased employment is explained more by reductions in the supply of labor (the willingness of people to work) and less by the demand for labor (the number of workers that employers need to hire).” Mulligan has suggested, in particular, that workers are choosing to remain unemployed because that improves their odds of receiving mortgage relief. And Cochrane declares that high unemployment is actually good: “We should have a recession. People who spend their lives pounding nails in Nevada need something else to do.” [That condescending attitude about people who are not University of Chicago economists is typical of the cult.]

Personally, I think this is crazy. Why should it take mass unemployment across the whole nation to get carpenters to move out of Nevada? Can anyone seriously claim that we’ve lost 6.7 million jobs because fewer Americans want to work? But it was inevitable that freshwater economists would find themselves trapped in this cul-de-sac: if you start from the assumption that people are perfectly rational and markets are perfectly efficient, you have to conclude that unemployment is voluntary and recessions are desirable.

It's a long article, but well worth your time.

Musical Interlude -- Perpetuum Jazzile

This one's going viral. Over 5 million views as of this post. Forwarded to me by my friend Ted.

Perpetuum Jazzile is an a cappella jazz choir from Slovenia. But you knew that, didn't you? Very cool.



To see it in a larger screen, click on it after it starts.

A Breath of Fresh Air

Have you been following the "controversy" about Obama's coming speech to school children? Obama plans to tell the kids to study hard and stay in school. The tenor of the argument is best illustrated by this press release from the chairman of the (what else?) Republican Party in Florida:

As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology. The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the President justify his plans for government-run health care, banks, and automobile companies, increasing taxes on those who create jobs, and racking up more debt than any other President, is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power.

While I support educating our children to respect both the office of the American President and the value of community service, I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda. The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates.

I guess studying hard and actually learning something are just part of the liberal Democratic ideology.

Three cheers for John Harwood, a real middle-of-the-roader who just can't take it anymore:

Looking at the Bright Side of Global Warming

How long do you think it will be before one of the climate change deniers latches on to this headline in the NY Times:

GLOBAL WARMING COULD FORESTALL ICE AGE

Of course, if they bother to read it, they'd have to consider the good news to be tempered just a little bit by the time frames being discussed:

Scientists ... said it provided fresh evidence that human activity is not only warming the globe, particularly the Arctic, but could also even fend off what had been presumed to be an inevitable descent into a new ice age over the next few dozen millenniums.

Who do you think will be the first Bozo to cite this article as proof that global warming is a good thing (even though it doesn't exist)?

My money is on the clown Inhofe.

Consequences of the Crash

Hey, you were looking for something to really bum you out, right?

Via Steve Clemons at The Washington Note comes this 9-minute video of former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating's analysis of the consequences of that little blip in the economy in the past year.



Don't expect the future to be like the past. Things aren't looking too good.

An Antidote for "Death Panels"

Artist Maira Kalman, who told us about her trip to Monticello a couple of months ago, ruminates on America in I Lift My Lamp Beside the Golden Door.

WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?
Who knows?
How did we GET HERE?
I'll tell you.

Surely We Are in the End Times

I have evidence.

The crypt above Marilyn Monroe's at Westwood Cemetery has been sold.

On eBay.

For $4,602,100.00

Here's a piece of the write-up:

Here is a once in a lifetime and into eternity opportunity to spend your eternal days directly above Marilyn Monroe. This crypt in the famous Westwood Cemetary in West Los Angeles currently occupied above Marilyn Monroe is being vacated so as to make room for a new resident.

Don't you love that? The crypt "is being vacated."

But don't feel too bad for the former occupant:

[T]he person occupying the address right now is looking face down on her.

"Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me." [F. Scott Fitzgerald]

How to Dial a Rotary Phone

We still have a rotary phone on the wall in the kitchen. We once had a youngish repairman in the house who asked to use the phone. When we pointed to it, you could see the confusion and panic in his face. Too bad we didn't have this video at the time:

The Health Insurance Debate – 35 Years Ago

Thanks to Emily for sending this video:



It's fascinating how much time and attention to detail is given in these news reports.

Peak Oil

There's an interesting op-ed in the Times this morning about Peak Oil, the theory that there is a finite amount of oil in the ground, that we're just about done pumping the stuff that's easy to get at, and that oil production will inevitably start declining, starting in [insert date here]. It's a provocative piece, attempting to debunk three of the observations made by Peak Oil proponents.

I can't say it's particularly convincing, even if the author, Michael Lynch, is right on all three points. For instance, on the issue of whether the easy oil is gone, he says:

A related argument — that the “easy oil” is gone and that extraction can only become more difficult and cost-ineffective — should be recognized as vague and irrelevant. Drillers in Persia a century ago certainly didn’t consider their work easy, and the mechanized, computerized industry of today is a far sight from 19th-century mule-drawn rigs. Hundreds of fields that produce “easy oil” today were once thought technologically unreachable.

And that's all he has to say about that. Sorry, but that's at least as vague and irrelevant as the argument it attempts to rebut.

But let's grant him the point on all three of his arguments. Let's say that for all practical purposes there is an unlimited supply of reachable oil in the world, that there's no reason at all to be concerned about the fact that nearly all that oil is somewhere besides America, and that the reason we shouldn't be alarmed that the rate of use exceeds the rate of discovery is a mystery known only to manly oil men.

So what?

The Peak Oil issue is a concern, but it is just part of a much larger concern: man-made climate change. The overwhelming weight of scientific opinion is that our use of fossil fuels is leading us to disaster. Mr. Lynch doesn't talk about that, although he does endorse alternate energy – at the same time he dismisses it:

This is not to say that we shouldn’t keep looking for other cost-effective, low-pollution energy sources — why not broaden our options? But we can’t let the false threat of disappearing oil lead the government to throw money away on harebrained renewable energy schemes or impose unnecessary and expensive conservation measures on a public already struggling through tough economic times.

Uh, Mr. Lynch, the issue is bigger than Peak Oil.

Update: And while Mr. Lynch is trying to divert our attention, China Racing Ahead of U.S. in Drive to Go Solar.

Recommended Reading

Via Andrew Tobias: Nazis.

Musical Interlude -- Don't Give Up

This just seems like an appropriate song for the times.

Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush



Willie Nelson and Sinead O'Connor also have a version.



Kate Bush is huge in England, but relatively unknown here.

Is There Hope for the GOP?

Joe Klein at Time Magazine doesn't seem to think so, either. Read "The GOP Has Become a Party of Nihilists."

Obama's Nazi Policies

This one says it all:



From Talking Points Memo, as you can see.

Update: Here's the entire exchange between the young woman (a LaRouchey) and Barney Frank, and more. It's worth the time:

Pearlstein Again

On the "Public Option." Worth reading.

What a delight to hear informed opinions without wackos shouting them down.

♬ Schadenfreude, Darling Schadenfreude ♬

Perhaps you haven't yet heard of the adventures of Daniel Hannan, a Conservative Member of Parliament who had been in the States, making guest appearances on Froth News. Mr. Hannan, one of the more wacked-out MP's on the Sceptered Isle, was brought over to denounce the British National Health Service as part of the Froth News campaign against affordable health insurance.

There were only two problems with the plan:

• The plans for improving American health insurance bear no resemblance to the National Health Service. But that's okay, because if your only source of information is Froth News, you will remain ignorant – of this, and generally.

• The British like their National Health Service, by significantly higher margins than Americans like our health system, and when You Tube videos of Hannan calling it "communist" started playing in the UK, the Brits started getting upset.

This priceless column from WalesOnline gives you a flavor, or should I say: a flavour.

And Andy Tobias points us to this article. If you haven't heard how Investor's Business Daily embarrassed themselves (tee-hee), make sure you click through.

The Tree of Crazy

Rick Perlstein (not to be confused with Steven Pearlstein at the same paper) sums it up well at the Washington Post:

Conservatives have become adept at playing the media for suckers, getting inside the heads of editors and reporters, haunting them with the thought that maybe they are out-of-touch cosmopolitans and that their duty as tribunes of the people's voices means they should treat Obama's creation of "death panels" as just another justiciable political claim. If 1963 were 2009, the woman who assaulted Adlai Stevenson would be getting time on cable news to explain herself. That, not the paranoia itself, makes our present moment uniquely disturbing.

It used to be different. You never heard the late Walter Cronkite taking time on the evening news to "debunk" claims that a proposed mental health clinic in Alaska is actually a dumping ground for right-wing critics of the president's program, or giving the people who made those claims time to explain themselves on the air. The media didn't adjudicate the ever-present underbrush of American paranoia as a set of "conservative claims" to weigh, horse-race-style, against liberal claims. Back then, a more confident media unequivocally labeled the civic outrage represented by such discourse as "extremist" -- out of bounds.

The tree of crazy is an ever-present aspect of America's flora. Only now, it's being watered by misguided he-said-she-said reporting and taking over the forest. Latest word is that the enlightened and mild provision in the draft legislation to help elderly people who want living wills -- the one hysterics turned into the "death panel" canard -- is losing favor, according to the Wall Street Journal, because of "complaints over the provision."

Good thing our leaders weren't so cowardly in 1964, or we would never have passed a civil rights bill -- because of complaints over the provisions in it that would enslave whites.

The entire article is a good history lesson.

Meanwhile, Steven Pearlstein sees hope. Some of the crustiest stalagmites in the conservative arsenal are seeing the need to reform American health insurance: Behold, a National and Rational Conversation on Health Care.

It's Not 100% Bad

Atrios, at Eschaton:

One weird thing about our press is that lies about personal stuff, and things which are likely just inadvertent slips, can cause Great Outrage among the assembled Villagers [the Washington press corps], while sustained and repeated lies about policy are just laundered and retransmitted.

It has something to do with that attention span thing (see previous post). Thinking about policy issues is hard. Who wants to do that? And if you call Newt Gingrich a liar, he won't talk to you again! Then how would you do your job!?!

On the other hand, the NY Times has a good piece this morning: False "Death Panel" Rumor Has Familiar Roots. It's not news, really, but it's starting to get at the real story behind the wingnut outrage.

I might have lost some money if anybody had taken me up on my challenge.

Performance Art

Here's something different: Kseniya Simonova is a sand painter. She lives in Ukraine, and was a contestant on the Ukraine version of "America's Got Talent."

They gave her eight and a half minutes for this. I guess one of the advantages of having lived behind the Iron Curtain (I can't think of a second) is you still have an attention span. Commercial television hasn't taken over your brain patterns yet.

For her performance, Ms. Simonova painted the Nazi invasion of Ukraine:



By the way: she won.

I found this on Huffington Post.

Not a Minute Too Soon!

From Steve Benen at The Washington Monthly, news that a coalition of groups has put up $12 million to run ads like this one:



Did you notice that it's being referred to as health insurance reform, now? People in the know (or at least, people with $12 million) read Sempringham.

Comic Books and Graphical Novels

I was never really a big fan of comic books, with one exception: Back in the 1950's and early 60's, I couldn't get my hands on enough comic books about World War II Navy battles. Nowadays you hear only about the superhero comics, and I'm sure I read a lot of Superman. But you may be surprised to hear there was another genre, a group of comics that provided spine-tingling stories about American submarines evading Japanese depth charges, then firing off their torpedoes when the Japanese thought they were home-free. They were called "Japs," though, not "Japanese."

I can think of three reasons for my Navy battle fixation: one, World War II was fairly recently over when I was born, but was still fresh in the mind of everyone who lived through it; two, my eldest brother, who hadn't lived at home since I was four, was a Naval officer and my hero; and third, there was an enormous picture of the USS Enterprise hanging on the wall in the bedroom I shared with my two other brothers. It looked something like this one:


I was going to join the Navy myself. Every week the family would watch a program called "Men of Annapolis" on television, a show that told stories about the lives of midshipmen. (There was another, vastly inferior, program about West Point, too.) I wouldn't miss an Army-Navy game; Navy pummeled Army with regularity in those days. (They had a pretty good quarterback named Staubach. Don't know whatever became of him.) And I read and re-read a book about life at Annapolis. Here's my main takeaway from that:

"How's the cow?"

"Sir, she walks, she talks, she's full of chalk. The lacteal fluid extracted from the female of the bovine species is highly prolific to the nth degree."

I decided I'd better memorize that in case an upperclassman ever asked me if there was any milk left at the dinner table, where I would be seated on the front three inches of my chair. Fifty years later, I'm still prepared.

Then Vietnam.

But this is a post about comic books, and I left them in the 50's, I'm sure. Like most people who grow up.

While I wasn't paying any attention to them, comic books became something else: they became graphic novels. I've only read one graphic novel, something called Maus: A Survivor's Tale. My Father Bleeds History, and I'd say it adds enough gravitas to the genre that nobody needs to feel apologetic about being a graphic novelist. If you haven't read it, you should.

So, that's where things stood until this morning, when I saw this review in the NY Times of a comic book series called Unknown Soldier which is being collected into a book. Unknown Soldier is a comic book about – are you ready for this? – the civil war in Uganda.

Perhaps because I know this can be done well (Maus), or because I got to talk to a bunch of wonderful children from Uganda recently, I'm looking forward to reading it. I think it's going to be a far cry from my Navy comics, though.

All Health Insurance, All the Time

Andrew Tobias to the rescue, again. This morning he points us to this article by Matt Miller at The Daily Beast:

The truth is that everything that’s taking place right now is irrelevant.... Between now and [the House/Senate conference], everyone should take a deep breath. The talking heads have to fill up air time, but the rest of us should remember: until we get to conference, it's all prelude.

We need to think back to Obama's incredible political campaign. Does everybody remember a time when we were all frantic? We thought Obama was being too easy on McCain? He had dropped in the polls!

These guys know what they're doing.

Courage is not a common commodity among politicians. Right now they're being pummeled by the wackos. We need to take Matt Miller's advice: "Legislators need to get the message that their constituents want "change" on health care, and will punish them for supporting the status quo."

And the Republican Party needs to be put on notice that if health insurance reform fails to pass, they will be held accountable.

Don't Drop Your Nikon, Joe!

Joe McNally, author of The Moment it Clicks, had an idea. He wanted to take a picture of the guy changing the light bulb at the very top of the Empire State Building.

In my humble opinion, Joe McNally is nuts!

A Supreme Court Snark

The Washington Post had a picture of Sonia Sotomayor's swearing-in as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court today:

Notice that Chief Justice Roberts, who is administering the oath, has it written out in front of him. (If you're unclear what's snarky about this, look here.)

What is even more interesting, however, is that it appears to be in LARGE PRINT. The ravages of age strike Supreme Court justices, too.

Something Completely Different

You are excused from reading this post just as soon as your eyes start rolling into your head, which shouldn't take long. But Chicago friends should read the last paragraph before lapsing into REM sleep.

A couple or three years ago a couple asked me to be the photographer at their wedding. I knew something about them, and even though they offered to pay me I knew they really couldn't afford to. So I cheerfully offered to do their wedding gratis, and it was an honor to do so.

I thought I could just show up for the wedding with a camera and, since I know an f-stop from a shutter speed, do as well a professional.

Stupid, stupid me.

By the time it was over, I swore I'd never photograph a wedding again. It was work! Hard work! With some significant pressure thrown in. Although everyone was kind enough not to mention them, I made some monumental mistakes. Like not getting pictures of the bride's family (whom I did not know). That's not all, but it gives you the flavor. If I were to catalog them all I would break down in uncontrollable sobbing.

I've shot three gratis weddings since then (they got what they paid for), with varying degrees of success, and one thing I noticed each time was that the experience pushed me to better understand what I was doing right and, more frequently, what I was doing wrong.

When I get in one of those places I start buying things: books on photography, books on wedding photography, videos on photography, videos on wedding photography, a new lens, gizmos for the camera, and so on. And I scour the internet for training materials, and magazine articles to validate my purchase of books on photography, books on wedding photography, videos on photography, videos on wedding photography, lenses, cameras, camera gizmos, and so on. I basically do everything except go out and take some pictures.

So I tried something different. In the past few weeks I've taken a couple of photography courses at Calumet Photographic's Chicago store. Both courses were taught by a highly skilled photographer and teacher, Bill Skinner, who's shot more than 1,500 weddings and knows his way around a photo studio pretty darn well, too. Two weeks ago was Introduction to Lighting and Portraiture, which started out slow with explanations of what an f-stop is [well, the syllabus did say "Introduction"], but finished in a flurry of really useful information.

Yesterday was a full day of Wedding Photography, and my mind has been blown. I think I've got it! The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain!

The pictures are from yesterday's class.

That's Bill pushing light up the model's nose. No, actually, he was demonstrating the effects of the different types of reflectors and diffusers.

Loop lighting, short side.

I've known for more than 25 years about the four classical lighting patterns: Split, Rembrandt, Loop, and Butterfly. For some reason, though, I've always viewed them as things to evaluate portraits with after they were taken. Looking at my pictures I might say, "This is an example of Rembrandt lighting." I might say that. But usually what I'd say was "This is an example of garbage," because I was paying no attention to the lighting pattern while taking the picture.

Bill showed me how a professional photographer – or any portrait photographer who knows what he/she is doing – builds the picture with the light. I am transformed.

And he gave me some powerful information, if I have but the courage to use it. Such as:

1. When shooting with a strobe, such as an off-camera flash, the exposure of the subject is controlled by the aperture; the exposure of the background is controlled by the shutter speed. So what? Well, if you want a sky that's richer and bluer than it really is, adjust the shutter speed and let those colors soak in. The subject will still be properly exposed. I know you knew that, and I have about 20 books that tell me that in so many words, but somehow Bill managed to actually beat it into my brain.
2. If you need to know which aperture to use when taking a flash picture [because the aperture – not the shutter speed – is what gives you the proper exposure], divide the guide number by the distance between the flash and the subject. Then you can play around with the shutter speed (see item #1).

Our principal model for both sessions was the lovely Leigh – or maybe Lee. Here Bill is setting her up to look great:

And then I swoop in and take a shot like it's my studio:

If it really were my studio, I'd have Leigh's eyes in sharper focus. That's butterfly lighting, by the way.

Leigh, like many brides, knew what she was doing in front of a camera. To represent grooms, who don't, Bill brought in a young man who had never modeled before.

He did a great job and reminded me of every groom I've ever photographed. (All four of them.)

The classes were a great experience. When I started talking to people in the class I discovered that, in addition to doofuses like me, there were people there who knew what they were doing and were there to get their batteries juiced, so to speak. A woman I talked to at lunch had done documentary shoots for non-profits in Brazil and Iraq. Another had been second photographer for a DC wedding photographer for two years, and was now ready to hang out her own shingle.

I'd love to do more weddings, but don't want to make a business out of it. I'll be happy to do the best job I can for people who just can't afford a professional.

In the meanwhile, I've got to get out and take pictures. I've imposed upon my friends in the past to serve as models for me. Friends, start thinking up excuses, because I'm comin' round again.

A Challenge

It's still doom and gloom here.

Talking Points Memo reports that Sarah Palin has managed to discover the secret intent of the current health insurance legislation:

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's "death panel" so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their "level of productivity in society," whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Which made this challenge from Publius seem appropriate:

Can the American media, as an institution, inform the public about what's really being proposed? And can it do so in the face of sustained, outright falsehoods (not good faith policy disagreements).

Publius quotes the Steven Pearlstein column quoted below, and optimistically opines, "Well, this column by Steven Pearlstein sure is a good start."

Alas, it will probably be the end of it, too. I'll give 5 to 1 that the answer to Publius's question is "No."

Health Insurance Reform

Steven Pearlstein, the business columnist for the Washington Post, is a must read today.

While holding themselves out as paragons of fiscal rectitude, Republicans grandstand against just about every idea to reduce the amount of health care people consume or the prices paid to health-care providers -- the only two ways I can think of to credibly bring health spending under control.

When Democrats, for example, propose to fund research to give doctors, patients and health plans better information on what works and what doesn't, Republicans sense a sinister plot to have the government decide what treatments you will get. By the same wacko-logic, a proposal that Medicare pay for counseling on end-of-life care is transformed into a secret plan for mass euthanasia of the elderly.

Government negotiation on drug prices? The end of medical innovation as we know it, according to the GOP's Dr. No. Reduce Medicare payments to overpriced specialists and inefficient hospitals? The first step on the slippery slope toward rationing.

Can there be anyone more two-faced than the Republican leaders who in one breath rail against the evils of government-run health care and in another propose a government-subsidized high-risk pool for people with chronic illness, government-subsidized community health centers for the uninsured, and opening up Medicare to people at age 55?

Health reform is a test of whether this country can function once again as a civil society -- whether we can trust ourselves to embrace the big, important changes that require everyone to give up something in order to make everyone better off. [My emphasis.] Republican leaders are eager to see us fail that test. We need to show them that no matter how many lies they tell or how many scare tactics they concoct, Americans will come together and get this done.

If health reform is to be anyone's Waterloo, let it be theirs.

Meanwhile, over at the NY Times, Paul Krugman is saying this:

... right now Mr. Obama’s backers seem to lack all conviction, perhaps because the prosaic reality of his administration isn’t living up to their dreams of transformation. Meanwhile, the angry right is filled with a passionate intensity.

And if Mr. Obama can’t recapture some of the passion of 2008, can’t inspire his supporters to stand up and be heard, health care reform may well fail.

That "prosaic reality" and "dreams of transformation" claptrap is pure Krugman. He mocks Obama's supporters, then says they're the only people who can get health insurance reform to pass. Krugman still thinks Obama is going to lose in November 2008.

Finally, take a look at the reports of the tea bagger protesters being reported at Talking Points Memo here, here, and here.

This does not bode well for the future of this country. Has the Republican Party damaged the American political process beyond repair? Are we never again going to be able to accomplish great things? Is our future going to be held captive to ignorant mobs?

We'll see in the next few months.

Addendum: Andrew Tobias has a very worthy post on health care in America here.

Oh. My. God.

Here's the fullest version I could find of a story that's starting to make the rounds. It concerns George W. Bush's efforts to convince former French President Jacques Chirac to join us in the invasion of Iraq:

Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their “common faith” (Christianity) and told him: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.”

This bizarre episode occurred while the White House was assembling its “coalition of the willing” to unleash the Iraq invasion. Chirac says he was boggled by Bush’s call and “wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs.”

After the 2003 call, the puzzled French leader didn’t comply with Bush’s request. Instead, his staff asked Thomas Romer, a theologian at the University of Lausanne, to analyze the weird appeal. Dr. Romer explained that the Old Testament book of Ezekiel contains two chapters (38 and 39) in which God rages against Gog and Magog, sinister and mysterious forces menacing Israel. Jehovah vows to smite them savagely, to “turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws,” and slaughter them ruthlessly. In the New Testament, the mystical book of Revelation envisions Gog and Magog gathering nations for battle, “and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”


In 2007, Dr. Romer recounted Bush’s strange behavior in Lausanne University’s review, Allez Savoir. A French-language Swiss newspaper, Le Matin Dimanche, printed a sarcastic account titled: “When President George W. Bush Saw the Prophesies of the Bible Coming to Pass.” France’s La Liberte likewise spoofed it under the headline “A Small Scoop on Bush, Chirac, God, Gog and Magog.” But other news media missed the amazing report.

Subsequently, ex-President Chirac confirmed the nutty event in a long interview with French journalist Jean-Claude Maurice, who tells the tale in his new book, Si Vous le Répétez, Je Démentirai (If You Repeat it, I Will Deny), released in March by the publisher Plon.

Shorter versions have been reported by Andrew Sullivan, the Toronto Star, Kevin Drum, and Beliefnet, among others.

I can't believe this story, though. If it were true, it would mean that for eight years our foreign policy was being run by lunatics.

Oh, My!

You may remember Kathleen Parker, the syndicated conservative columnist for the Washington Post. It has been kind of fun to watch her wake up to the realities around her.

In September she wrote:

I've been pulling for Ms. Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I've also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

And after the election she wrote:

Simply put: Armband religion is killing the Republican Party. And, the truth -- as long as we're setting ourselves free -- is that if one were to eavesdrop on private conversations among the party intelligentsia*, one would hear precisely that.

The choir has become absurdly off-key, and many Republicans know it.

[snip]

... the GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows. In the process, the party has alienated its non-base constituents, including other people of faith (those who prefer a more private approach to worship), as well as secularists and conservative-leaning Democrats who otherwise might be tempted to cross the aisle.

My gosh, if you take away the Bimbo, and you take away armband religion, what do you have left in the Republican Party?

Today, Ms. Parker goes after that:

What the GOP is experiencing now, one hopes, are the death throes of that 50-year spell that [Lyndon] Johnson foretold [i.e., that the Civil Rights Act would drive the South into the Republican Party for half a century]. But before the party of the Great Emancipator can rise again, Republicans will have to face their inner Voinovich and drive a stake through the heart of old Dixie.

The column had 1600 comments by 7 a.m.

* By whom she apparently means herself and David Brooks, because for the life of me I can't think of third!

Health Insurance is Sexy

Drifting in Asia

A little while ago, Jeannelle at Midlife by Farmlight pointed her readers to Drifting in Asia, a spectacular blog by an American photographer living in Indonesia with his wife and two little girls.

The photographer's name is Scotty Graham, and he does some funky things with color. Go pay him a visit. You'll be amazed at the things going on Southeast Asia. He doesn't know me from Adam, but I'm going to add his blog to my list of blogging friends just so you'll be reminded to visit him from time to time.

Almost forgot: He has a separate, photo blog here. And take a look at these.

Health Insurance Reform

Apparently, this television ad really rattled Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, one of the Democrats who is trying to kill health insurance reform:



Nelson called the Nebraska businessman cited in the ad, Michael Snider, to explain his position:

"He said if we went with a full public option -- which he called a government plan -- it would drive the price down and hurt private companies. I said, 'you mean competition.' And he replied that it would force people off the private plan and onto the government plan."

Of course, no one would be "forced" off the private plan by the availability of a government plan. What's forcing people off private plans is their cost!

When you take $2 million+ from insurance company lobbyists, you have to be prepared to have people suspect you're putting insurance company interests ahead of your constituents'.

Page two.

Keep a close eye on television news in the next few days. The Teabagger Movement, those folks who were screaming about fascism just a month or two ago, has set its sights on disrupting Congressional town hall meetings, shouting down people who disagree with them. Talking Points Memo has been chronicling their activities.

Our eagle-eye press, on the other hand, is reporting this as some sort of grass-roots reaction to health insurance reform, as though these brownshirts had wandered into the meetings independently of one another.

Kevin Drum quotes Marc Kleiman on the best tactic for handling these goons:

If I were a Member of Congress threatened by this nonsense, I wouldn't stop holding town meetings; I'd start out each meeting by welcoming my constituents and warning them that there's an organized group in the hall planning to disrupt the proceedings. Never pass up an opportunity to portray your opponents as extremists, especially when they are.

Will our wonderful Washington press wise up to what's happening? Don't bet on it.

Update: Credit where credit is due. Not 10 minutes after this was posted, ABC News carried a story about how the disruptions were being organized by low-lifes from the Bush Administration. They didn't actually use the word "low-lifes", I think. It would have been redundant.

Update: Publius at Obsidian Wings isn't concerned about the brownshirts. He's (She's?) concerned about the lies.

Punctuation Matters [A Rant]

If you consult your Stunk and White, or your eighth grade grammar textbook, you will learn that writing clear sentences requires placing a comma before the word and in a series. Hooray for the red, white, and blue.

Some years ago, though, somebody decided that the last comma in that sentence took up too much ink, or space, or something, and now you will find far too many journals that should know better writing that sentence as Hooray for the red, white and blue. Not so bad, you might say. I understand what the writer means, and that's what's important, right?

And if we never had a complex thought, that would be just fine. But every once in a while we try to mix things together to share information in interesting ways, and that's where the danger lies.

I just happen to have an example here. Today we learn in the New York Times that Annie Liebovitz was in an incestuous relationship with her mother, Susan Sontag!

In the last five years, Ms. Leibovitz lost her father, her mother and her companion, Susan Sontag; added two children to her family and oversaw the costly and controversial renovation of three properties in Greenwich Village.

Let's not even talk about that semi-colon. Good Lord.