Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/000932.php on line 91

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/000932.php on line 91
December 03, 2003
Whine, whine, whine

There are days, you know, when I think that my life was made a lot more peaceful by not keeping close track on what was going on in the world.

This was fast. I knew it would come up but not quite so soon. Aside from the man's penchant for multiple wives, a subject which leaves me indifferent because I really don't feel compelled to regulate the private lives of consenting adults, I think he should be in jail. Seems pretty clear to me he uses his "marriage" gig as a way to get sex with very young women and girls, which is another thing altogether. Add fathering but declining to properly support 30 kids and he's a pretty unsavory sort of character in my eyes.

And the media really needs to get its act together, okay? It's bad enough that half the country is squabbling with the other half over whether we're doing the right things or the wrong things and whether or not Bush is the worst thing that's happened to this country in a hundred years or more without the uncertainty and misjudgments caused by disgracefully sloppy "reporting."

Of course, when it comes down to the media having to correct itself because of a too-heavy reliance on "military reports" or "Pentagon briefings" that prove, time and again, to have been wildly inaccurate, it sort of makes you wonder if someone isn't deliberately fostering mistrust of the media in this country. Doesn't it?

It looks to me like the "official" governments in Israel and of the Palestinians are pretty nervous about the Geneva Accord. That's good. It's time for peace in the Middle East and if those two groups don't find their own peace, they're going to get George Bush's version - and they won't like it. Also, as the article points out, Bush's much-vaunted "road map" is nothing but rules for how to negotiate solutions to problems. The Geneva Accord offers actual, you know, solutions.

Hate radio "jocks" should take note. In Rwanda, two hate radio jocks are going to jail for their hatemongering. (No, I'm not really saying that the ones we have are quite that bad . . . but spewing hate is a slippery slope.)

By now I suppose you've all read Sullivan's response to the "Bush should attend some soldiers' funerals argument. He says that no one is forbidding the coverage of returning bodies but the military doesn't have to let anyone cover such returns - an exercise in illogic I would rather not have encountered before my second cup of coffee. Anyhow, he argues that seeing dead bodies depresses people and if we get depressed, the terrorists have won. Or, you know, something like that.

The article gets obnoxious after that, sneering at the idea that the president should be "therapist-in-chief" to someone who has lost a loved one in battle. It's a pity Sullivan couldn't control his spite and bad temper. He was almost making a decent case for his position before that.

My opinion is that if I'd lost a loved one in a battle, the last thing I'd want is for their funeral to be turned into a media circus because of Bush's presence. Nor would I want the mourners to have to pass Secret Service background checks, so I've decided Bush can just stay home. (Well, I wouldn't have invited him anyhow, but that's just me.)

On the other hand, pretending the dead soldiers don't exist by trying to hide the returning bodies is just . . . disrespectful to the sacrifices the soldiers have made. Ditto for prohibiting coverage of the returning wounded.

And today Broder cites as a "theory" that same idea I mentioned yesterday - that Bush's re-election handlers are hoping they can use clips of him handing out turkey to sell him for re-election. (Okay, Broder didn't put it quite like that.) After all, it's the closest our AWOL-in-charge has ever gotten to actual combat.

He (Broder) gets a bit silly in the third-to-last graph. His claim that an incumbent has a grip on the hearts and minds of USofA voters that no other candidate can challenge is laughable. (Someone go ask Bush I how he feels about that one. Heck Bush II can't even count on the hearts and minds, or votes, of his own party, much less the general population.) The last graph is just wishful thinking, but it's a good column anyhow.

I didn't mention this yesterday because I thought everyone would be talking about it, but I don't remember reading any blog coverage. Where's the reaction to a kid being told that "gay" is a dirty word? I would have expected the blogosphere to be all over that one.

On a related subject, I'd imagine that Kristoff is really going to come under fire for today's column.

And don't let anyone kid you. The Bush Administration does believe in the separation of Church and State when it's not the "right kind" of church. I'm determined not to go off on another anti-religion rant, so I won't get into the hypocrisy of Christianity, with its history of Crusades and Inquisitions, being described as the church of "loving hearts."

Apparently the rumor that we'd nabbed a "big fish" in Iraq was just that. A rumor.

It does, however, seem to be more than a rumor that lawyers recruited to defend Guantanamo detainees were summarily fired by the military for complaining about the unfair rules for upcoming 'trials.'

It's not all bad news, of course. One suspect got to have a lawyer. Probably not coincidentally, he's a USofA citizen.

Political shenanigans are nothing new but it's always good to see them being held up to the light of day. In these fraud-riddled, economically challenging times, it's doubly good that shenanigans involving handing plum contracts to favored contractors are publicly challenged.

Posted by AnneZook at 10:07 AM


Comments