Warning: include(/home/annezook/public_html/sidebar.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/annezook/public_html/archives/001975.php on line 106

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/001975.php on line 106
May 12, 2005
Evening Blogging

I don't really have anything to say. It's just that I can either blog, or clean the kitchen. So I decided to check a few headlines.

It does seem unlikely that 65 students can convince the world to wage peace, not war, but every world-wide organization started somewhere. When you consider the economic danger of not waging war, it does seem that the world has backed itself into something of a corner but surely the "civilized world" can find something more appropriate to dedicate its production capacity to?

Looks like neither Mark Thatcher nor any of his posse are going to be facing any jail time in Zimbabwe.

By gosh, lookit that. Voinovich stands up for what's right...and what's not.

Tonight's NPR story is about Bolton, too. I'm driving home, listening to some arrogant yahoo sneer about how we're not sending someone to the U.N. to drink coffee with his pinkie sticking in the air and I'm thinking...no wonder 'they' hate us. We're a bigoted bunch of thugs these days, aren't we?

The story also contained the astounding information that Condaleeza Rice promises that Bolton won't be naughty when he's at the U.N. because she'll be watching him. And then my heart was brightened immeasurably because the interviewer asked if we really want to send the kind of person to the U.N. who has to be "watched." (Another Senatorial quote, not included in the article, was along the lines of, "If Bolton had pulled this shit in Corporate America, he'd have gotten fired.")

(Later note: David Corn has a more accurate post.)

Lest you think the prison abuse issue is yesterday's news, take a look at another report of the violence in Afghanistan. (Okay. Seriously? I'm thrilled that the Afghan people feel secure enough to riot. At the same time, I know that desecrating their object of holiness isn't going to persuade the religious extremists that we respect their beliefs. )

Was a USofA contractor killed by the random violence, or is it a case of assassination and cover-up? Considering that the scenario proposed requires that the US and UK leadership were complicit in looting Iraq's weaponry, the presence of which might help to alleviate the fallout over the lack of WMD, I'm finding myself amazingly skeptical. And then, of course, I read that there's rather a lot of money ($300M) involved and it sounds a bit more plausible. I love a bit of paranoid conspiracy-theorist perspective from time to time. Granted, the guy's credentials look like smoke, mirrors, and sleight-of-hand, but so do other contractors we're enriching funding in Iraq. The idea that at least one of them is a CIA front has occurred to me in the past.

Speaking of.... Just exactly what did Republicans get up to to defeat Carter and usher in the disastrous Reagan years?

Military recruiting in the USofA is having a few problems these days, but do they really think lying about the term of enlistment is going to fool anyone? I mean...we've all heard of "stop-loss" right?

And online coverage was hard to find (you can listen to audio here), but it looks like France is edging toward voting oui on the EU constitution after all. (Congrats to The Guardian on their Webby! I thoroughly approve of the publication being named the "best newspaper on the internet.)

Speaking of the U.K., it looks like they're sending an MP over to take on the Senate. George Galloway isn't at all amused at being implicated in the Iraq "oil-for-food" scandal.

(Speaking of the Senate, let's all hold our breaths and wish really hard that the Democrats hold the line on Pryor. Giving him a recess appointment was just an offensive way to force an up-or-down vote on a nominee whose nomination was seen as divisively controversial.)

And, speaking of the U.K. and France and the EU, I'm rather ashamed that I wasn't aware that the French oui might signal Blair's bye-bye. European politics are a mystery to me...but then, the things that happen here frequently mystify me as well. Anyhow, I wasn't aware that there's some reason to believe if the French are in, the U.K. is out. The article was certainly educational for me. At heart, the issue is one of globalization. Are the countries of the world inevitably moving together...or are they going to resist that movement with all they power they have? (And is the USofA's recent idiotic behavior going to incline more countries to band together to create the "United States of Europe" in order to counter our increasing radicalism?) Or, as the article suggests, would the U.K. prefer to ally itself with Eastern European countries in a looser conglomerate? I find myself wondering if the U.K. will find itself facing a choice between the USofA and the USofE?

This Chris Floyd guy who's always in the Moscow Times sure doesn't like the Bush family. Seems to me when I find myself reading him, he's always taking potshots at them. So I went looking to find out who he is. It's not really relevant. I just love the internet, that's all.

People of good sense continue to point out that religion and evolution aren't mutually exclusive but the Religious Right probably isn't listening.

In the good news department, a federal judge struck down Nebraska's same-sex marriage ban. (Nebraska tried to amend their state constitution.) Apparently it was because it wasn't well-written, but any progress in a crisis....

Mark Fiore takes on the Right's plan for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Conservatubbies Rule the Toob (flash) Tune in, Turn on, Turn right.

After I finished that, I went and watched Grocery Store Wars with Obi Wan Cannoli, Young Cuke and the Organic Rebellion fight the Death Melon and Darth Tater.

What Wal-Mart fails to comprehend is that a neighborhood's voters electing not to enjoy the economic devastation of a local big-box store is democracy in action. Which means that comparing it to Nazis burning books is ridiculous and offensive. (For what it's worth, I feel the Nazis had the right to burn books if they wanted to. I don't approve, but it wasn't anyone's business but Germany's if they wanted to raise a generation of mindless illiterates.)

Why don't we trust the media? Lack of disclosure might be part of it. If you're taking money from The Man, you should admit it when you publish. (Maybe they should just label it Bullshit and be done with it?) Also repeated revelations of fabricated stories aren't really encouraging. I mean, if you were wondering. I applaud the news media for openly admitting these things while I'm confused about why journalists tell lies. I mean, it's not like we're actually running out of news or anything, you know?

Did I mention this book review yet? Professor DeLong on Richard Parker's John Kenneth Galbraith: His Life, His Politics, His Economics. I don't know if I'm smart enough to understand the book, but the review itself was fascinating.

I know...I should shut up and go clean the kitchen. (Seriously, I'm going to try and cut down on these ridiculously long posts.)

Posted by AnneZook at 09:09 PM