11/11/2004
WWBD.
"What would Bubba do? (Joe Scarborough)
Once again, Scarborough gets it right (no pun intended).
I have been in touch with Democratic friends in Washington over the past few days to see what stage of mourning they have entered.
We are told there are, what, four, five stages of mourning? Well, whatever the number, my friends are in the stage where the victim is really, really ticked off. (There is another word that is far more appropriate than 'ticked' but the Justice Department probably reads these blogs, so the homogenized version will have to do) .
For those mentally healthy Democrats in and out of newsrooms who are ready to put conspiracy theories behind them and start preparing for the next election, may I suggest you take a listen to one of the lone voices for moral values in the Democratic Party --Bill Clinton.
I will leave it to you to determine exactly what it means to the Democratic Party that a formerly impeached and disbarred politician is the voice of moral reason in his own party. But all that ugliness aside, right now William Jefferson Clinton seems to understand better than most what it takes for a Democrat to win votes in states like Missouri, Iowa, and Florida.
And no, my elitist, lefty friends: People in Kansas City don't want to launch a jihad against gay men. They just don't want appointed judges in Boston, Massachusetts passing orders to their Kansas leaders on the subject. Bill Clinton understands that better than John Kerry. That's why Mr. Clinton was called 'Mr. President' for eight years while Senator Kerry's own Senate peers now call him 'loser' behind his back.
It's not fair treatment for a man who just pulled in tens of millions of votes in such a way, any more than it is fair for MSM elites to dismiss all of us who live in flyover space as Jesus freaks.
Mr. Clinton knows that the stereotyping has led his once proud party to the edge of a cliff by creating a cultural divide between Us and Them.
How exactly does one respond to a New York Times opinion piece that suggest Christians who believe in the biblical version of Jesus' birth are on par with al Qaeda terrorists? What smoke signal does a Democrat living west of Manhattan send the Mother Ship explaining that insulting millions of voters' faith in God may not be the best way to win elections? (New York Times website subscription only— free but required)
James Carville claims the 2004 election was a "born again" experience for him, and that he now understands the importance of values to Americans living in Red States. But soon after making that proclamation, he boiled the entire GOP message under Bush down to this: "We will protect you from terrorists in Tikrit and homos in Hollywood."
Maybe you need to get back on your knees, James.
As I explained after the Times opinion page compared those who believed in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ to Islamic fascists, there are many middle Americans who believe in the virgin birth who also drink vodka— just as there are those who go to church on Sunday morning and watch "Desperate Housewives" Sunday night.
Interesting isn't it, that a year after bashing George W. Bush for living in a world of black and white, it is his most vicious critics in the elite media who are incapable of grasping nuance?
Manhattan and Hollywood insiders have spent the past week dismissing 90 percent of America's land mass as "Jesus-land," while Bill Clinton and a scattering of Democrats begin their efforts to save the Democratic Party by mainstreaming it. But the task won't be easy.
Just as elites convinced themselves that the Democratic Party lost its foothold on the South because of some secret racist strategy adopted by Richard Nixon, these same political losers are now blaming Jesus for their worldly woes.
But religious bigotry and stereotyping won't save the Party of FDR. Instead, their leaders should be asking the one question I continually urged John Kerry to ask himself throughout the 2004 campaign: W.W.B.D.?
Yes, my friends— What would Bubba do?
Ask that question, listen to the former president's answers, and those same clueless Democrats who once again find themselves out of power may actually get themselves locked up in a competitive election with Karl Rove in the next few years.
And if they can stop from looking down their noses long enough to ask for our votes, they may even win a race or two west of New York City.
Once again, Scarborough gets it right (no pun intended).
I have been in touch with Democratic friends in Washington over the past few days to see what stage of mourning they have entered.
We are told there are, what, four, five stages of mourning? Well, whatever the number, my friends are in the stage where the victim is really, really ticked off. (There is another word that is far more appropriate than 'ticked' but the Justice Department probably reads these blogs, so the homogenized version will have to do) .
For those mentally healthy Democrats in and out of newsrooms who are ready to put conspiracy theories behind them and start preparing for the next election, may I suggest you take a listen to one of the lone voices for moral values in the Democratic Party --Bill Clinton.
I will leave it to you to determine exactly what it means to the Democratic Party that a formerly impeached and disbarred politician is the voice of moral reason in his own party. But all that ugliness aside, right now William Jefferson Clinton seems to understand better than most what it takes for a Democrat to win votes in states like Missouri, Iowa, and Florida.
And no, my elitist, lefty friends: People in Kansas City don't want to launch a jihad against gay men. They just don't want appointed judges in Boston, Massachusetts passing orders to their Kansas leaders on the subject. Bill Clinton understands that better than John Kerry. That's why Mr. Clinton was called 'Mr. President' for eight years while Senator Kerry's own Senate peers now call him 'loser' behind his back.
It's not fair treatment for a man who just pulled in tens of millions of votes in such a way, any more than it is fair for MSM elites to dismiss all of us who live in flyover space as Jesus freaks.
Mr. Clinton knows that the stereotyping has led his once proud party to the edge of a cliff by creating a cultural divide between Us and Them.
How exactly does one respond to a New York Times opinion piece that suggest Christians who believe in the biblical version of Jesus' birth are on par with al Qaeda terrorists? What smoke signal does a Democrat living west of Manhattan send the Mother Ship explaining that insulting millions of voters' faith in God may not be the best way to win elections? (New York Times website subscription only— free but required)
James Carville claims the 2004 election was a "born again" experience for him, and that he now understands the importance of values to Americans living in Red States. But soon after making that proclamation, he boiled the entire GOP message under Bush down to this: "We will protect you from terrorists in Tikrit and homos in Hollywood."
Maybe you need to get back on your knees, James.
As I explained after the Times opinion page compared those who believed in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ to Islamic fascists, there are many middle Americans who believe in the virgin birth who also drink vodka— just as there are those who go to church on Sunday morning and watch "Desperate Housewives" Sunday night.
Interesting isn't it, that a year after bashing George W. Bush for living in a world of black and white, it is his most vicious critics in the elite media who are incapable of grasping nuance?
Manhattan and Hollywood insiders have spent the past week dismissing 90 percent of America's land mass as "Jesus-land," while Bill Clinton and a scattering of Democrats begin their efforts to save the Democratic Party by mainstreaming it. But the task won't be easy.
Just as elites convinced themselves that the Democratic Party lost its foothold on the South because of some secret racist strategy adopted by Richard Nixon, these same political losers are now blaming Jesus for their worldly woes.
But religious bigotry and stereotyping won't save the Party of FDR. Instead, their leaders should be asking the one question I continually urged John Kerry to ask himself throughout the 2004 campaign: W.W.B.D.?
Yes, my friends— What would Bubba do?
Ask that question, listen to the former president's answers, and those same clueless Democrats who once again find themselves out of power may actually get themselves locked up in a competitive election with Karl Rove in the next few years.
And if they can stop from looking down their noses long enough to ask for our votes, they may even win a race or two west of New York City.
11/10/2004
Why doesn't the MSM report on this?
Immediately after Bush was re-elected, the MSM (mainstream media) began to speculate that he was going to "run to the right" and impose the radical right's agenda. Even I got swept up in this fear, especially after his "political capital" remark two days after the election.
But as we watch the events unfold, and President Bush begins to outline his agenda, there are signs that he is going to move to the middle on somethings. He has already pissed off a number of conservatives with his appointment of Alberto Gonzalez to Attorney General. For those who are unaware, Gonzalez has indicated that he is pro-affirmative action and not the staunch pro-lifer that the more conservative right wants.
Now, we get This announcement, that Bush wants to reinitiate his bid to legalize illegal immigrants, again pissing off the conservative right.
And yet, these aren't the stories that the MSM wants to highlight. Granted, Fajullah is rightfully the story of this cycle. But reporting these stories would at least stem the "the sky is falling" mentality of the American public who don't realize that Bush is making concessions that are pissing off his base.
And let's mention the fact that Bush is working closely with McCain, a moderate Republican. Good news for us moderates.
But as we watch the events unfold, and President Bush begins to outline his agenda, there are signs that he is going to move to the middle on somethings. He has already pissed off a number of conservatives with his appointment of Alberto Gonzalez to Attorney General. For those who are unaware, Gonzalez has indicated that he is pro-affirmative action and not the staunch pro-lifer that the more conservative right wants.
Now, we get This announcement, that Bush wants to reinitiate his bid to legalize illegal immigrants, again pissing off the conservative right.
And yet, these aren't the stories that the MSM wants to highlight. Granted, Fajullah is rightfully the story of this cycle. But reporting these stories would at least stem the "the sky is falling" mentality of the American public who don't realize that Bush is making concessions that are pissing off his base.
And let's mention the fact that Bush is working closely with McCain, a moderate Republican. Good news for us moderates.
Take a chance you stupid ho.
Gwen's album drops on November 23
This is going to be a good album. Not just because I say so. Gwen says so too.
If you haven't heard/seen her new single "What You Waiting For", click on the link above and you'll launch a player. It shows the abbreviated video. The real video has a 5 minute intro that is quite funny.
Spread the word and buy the album. It'll be packed with some hot dance music to get you through this cold winter.
Update: The version of the video above is abridged. The extended version (with an extra 2 minutes) can be found here.
This is going to be a good album. Not just because I say so. Gwen says so too.
If you haven't heard/seen her new single "What You Waiting For", click on the link above and you'll launch a player. It shows the abbreviated video. The real video has a 5 minute intro that is quite funny.
Spread the word and buy the album. It'll be packed with some hot dance music to get you through this cold winter.
Update: The version of the video above is abridged. The extended version (with an extra 2 minutes) can be found here.
11/09/2004
No Madonna. We can't. It's called responsibility. Try it sometime.
Madonna calls for US troops to leave Iraq
Isn't this such a spoiled pop star's way? Such simplistic thinking. "This isn't working for me, so I don't want it anymore."
How hard is it to understand that whether you agree with the war or not, you have to agree that it would be irresponsible to just pick up and leave Iraq. We can argue all we want about whether we should have ever invaded Iraq at all, but now that we're there, the U.S. has the responsibility to help this war-torn country through its democratic infancy. We helped create the mess, now we have to help clean it up.
And the hypocrisy! "We have people who don't want to think, and who just want to guard what is theirs, and they're selfish and limited in their thinking and they're very fearful in their choices."
Newsflash: Pulling out of Iraq suddenly would be "selfish" and evidence a country that just wants "to guard what is theirs."
Listen Madonna. I love you. Some might say I'm Crazy For You. And of course you have the right to Express Yourself. But stick to what you're good at. Fly over to Iraq or Middle America and play some Music. Because I've been told that it makes the people come together.
Isn't this such a spoiled pop star's way? Such simplistic thinking. "This isn't working for me, so I don't want it anymore."
How hard is it to understand that whether you agree with the war or not, you have to agree that it would be irresponsible to just pick up and leave Iraq. We can argue all we want about whether we should have ever invaded Iraq at all, but now that we're there, the U.S. has the responsibility to help this war-torn country through its democratic infancy. We helped create the mess, now we have to help clean it up.
And the hypocrisy! "We have people who don't want to think, and who just want to guard what is theirs, and they're selfish and limited in their thinking and they're very fearful in their choices."
Newsflash: Pulling out of Iraq suddenly would be "selfish" and evidence a country that just wants "to guard what is theirs."
Listen Madonna. I love you. Some might say I'm Crazy For You. And of course you have the right to Express Yourself. But stick to what you're good at. Fly over to Iraq or Middle America and play some Music. Because I've been told that it makes the people come together.
"...but I remain totally unconvinced that it is necessary." WHAT?
CNN.com - Airport X-ray sees through clothes - Nov 9, 2004
I find it humorous that civil liberties groups are fighting this even though 98% of the people who actually get screened don't care about this "invasive" new x-ray.
Now don't get me wrong. I believe civil liberties should be defended vigorously against Government intrusion. I should be able to live my life without Government surveillance or monitoring. But come on. We're talking about safety. And it sounds like 98% of the people don't mind it so long as it means they're safe in the air.
I find it humorous that civil liberties groups are fighting this even though 98% of the people who actually get screened don't care about this "invasive" new x-ray.
Now don't get me wrong. I believe civil liberties should be defended vigorously against Government intrusion. I should be able to live my life without Government surveillance or monitoring. But come on. We're talking about safety. And it sounds like 98% of the people don't mind it so long as it means they're safe in the air.
I said it all along
USNews.com: Love is Stronger Than Hate (11/15/04)
Throughout the election people kept asking me, "Who do you think will win?" Quite calmly, I would reply, "Bush." Incredulous, they would ask the inevitable follow-up question, "How could he possibly win?"
It's simple. Love is stronger than hate. The ABB (Anybody But Bush) platform was not going to work. I think that the majority of eligible voters are either indifferent to Bush or absolutely hate him as if he is the devil himself. But that doesn't mean they're going to vote. Hatred doesn't drive people to the polls. Love and loyalty does.
Throughout the election people kept asking me, "Who do you think will win?" Quite calmly, I would reply, "Bush." Incredulous, they would ask the inevitable follow-up question, "How could he possibly win?"
It's simple. Love is stronger than hate. The ABB (Anybody But Bush) platform was not going to work. I think that the majority of eligible voters are either indifferent to Bush or absolutely hate him as if he is the devil himself. But that doesn't mean they're going to vote. Hatred doesn't drive people to the polls. Love and loyalty does.
Closed-mindedness is closed-mindedness, regardless if you're on the left or right.
I rarely agree with Joe Scarborough. He's too conservative on most social issues. But this recent entry was very well written and worth a read.
A nasty streak of religious intolerance is rearing its ugly head in America. And it's coming from America's cultural elites.
The election of George W. Bush has exposed an ugly anti-Christian streak in many of those who work in America's most powerful newsrooms. A flood of vicious opinion pieces over the past few days have generalized Christians who helped elect the President as a group of knuckle dragging
neandrethals whose aims are nothing less than anti-American.
Not surprisingly, some of the most offensive, bigoted rhetoric came from the opinion pages of the New York Times, a paper that at one time embraced diversity of thought and belief. But apparently those positions of convenience are closeted away when it comes time to opine on conservative Christians.
The day after George Bush's victory, the Times ran an Op Ed by famed historian Gary Wills, who questioned whether a people who believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus can be called an enlightened nation. Wills suggested that because of those Christians who helped elect George Bush, America now shares more in common with Al Qaeda and Saddam's Sunni loyalists than modern Europe. Wills wrote, "Americans wonder why the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous...They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed."
So according to the Times Op Ed page, if you believe in the Bible's account of
Jesus' birth, you are on par with those terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans on
September 11th. Strip it down anyway you want, but that is what lies at the base
of Wills' jihad argument.
Thomas Friedman, long one of my favorite columnists on all matters foreign
concluded that Mr. Bush was elected by Christians who are hell bent on
legislating social issues and "extending the boundaries of religion so hard that
it felt as if we were rewriting the Constitution and not electing a president."
Rewriting the constitution? Just because George Bush carried Ohio by 100,000
votes? Talk about one of our most gifted writers losing all perspective.
A nasty streak of religious intolerance is rearing its ugly head in America. And it's coming from America's cultural elites.
The election of George W. Bush has exposed an ugly anti-Christian streak in many of those who work in America's most powerful newsrooms. A flood of vicious opinion pieces over the past few days have generalized Christians who helped elect the President as a group of knuckle dragging
neandrethals whose aims are nothing less than anti-American.
Not surprisingly, some of the most offensive, bigoted rhetoric came from the opinion pages of the New York Times, a paper that at one time embraced diversity of thought and belief. But apparently those positions of convenience are closeted away when it comes time to opine on conservative Christians.
The day after George Bush's victory, the Times ran an Op Ed by famed historian Gary Wills, who questioned whether a people who believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus can be called an enlightened nation. Wills suggested that because of those Christians who helped elect George Bush, America now shares more in common with Al Qaeda and Saddam's Sunni loyalists than modern Europe. Wills wrote, "Americans wonder why the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous...They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed."
So according to the Times Op Ed page, if you believe in the Bible's account of
Jesus' birth, you are on par with those terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans on
September 11th. Strip it down anyway you want, but that is what lies at the base
of Wills' jihad argument.
Thomas Friedman, long one of my favorite columnists on all matters foreign
concluded that Mr. Bush was elected by Christians who are hell bent on
legislating social issues and "extending the boundaries of religion so hard that
it felt as if we were rewriting the Constitution and not electing a president."
Rewriting the constitution? Just because George Bush carried Ohio by 100,000
votes? Talk about one of our most gifted writers losing all perspective.
Meanwhille, The Washington Post's EJ Dionne swung wildly at windmills blasting away at the "exploitation of strong religious feelings" and the "radical efforts to
destroy the achievements of progressive government."
George Bush and Christians radicals want to destroy American government? Oh really? I guess I missed the debate when the W. laid out that plan of attack.
Michael Moore blasted the President, of course, for pandering to the Christian conservatives, while Maureen Dowd accused Mr Bush of taking America into "another dark age, where we replace science with religion and facts with faith."
The Pulitzer Prize winner concluded that "The new evangelicals challenge science because they have been stirred up to object to social engineering on behalf of society's most vulnerable: the poor, the sick, the sexually different."
Dowd also accused the President of running a "jihad along the fault lines of fear, ignorance and religious rule."
Never in my life as a practicing attorney, a newspaper publisher, a Congressman or a news host have I witnessed America's cultural elite become so unglued over any historical event. And most distressing is the fact that these opinion leaders are singling out a group of Americans for no other reason than the God they worship.
To paint all Republican Christians as angry, hate-filled, science-loathing, right wing beasts only helps explain why the Mainstream Media continues to lose market share and why those Democrats who take solace in their bigoted anti-Christian screeds remain out of power for another four years.
It leads me to wonder, can we only be good Americans if we turn our backs on our faith, or become champions of abortion on demand, stem cell research without reservation, and marriage defined in a way that conflicts with the spiritual beliefs of a majority of Americans?
Isn't it interesting that when pluralism and diversity of thought become politically inconvenient, it is the cultural and media elites who become the most close minded and bigoted?
Timbuk2 goes Chinese
Facing economic reality / Popular S.F. messenger bag firm finds cheaper labor overseas
I understand the rationale and obviously, why would you stay in the U.S. if the cost of doing business is prohibitive. But when your company's success is directly linked to the city in which you started, I find it less forgivable. Timbuk2 is a brand because San Francisco made it a brand. It is inextricably linked to SF in a way that few brands are. No one thinks twice when they see someone in SF wearing a Timbuk2 bag. But anytime I see someone in other cities wearing one, I always think (a) they must be from SF or (b) "how'd they know about Timbuk2?"
Timbuk2, though a small company of 45, built its name off of the goodwill and loyalty of the people of the city of San Francisco. Local SF law firms have firm-issued Timbuk2 bags. Local events usually list them as a sponsor. Even I, when deciding between North Face, Patagonia, or Timbuk2 bag, chose the latter because I felt that the high price was worth it if it meant supporting a local San Francisco company.
So all that is to say I'm disappointed that Timbuk2 has decided to go this route. I'll still hold on to my "Made in San Francisco" bag and I'll wear it with pride.
I understand the rationale and obviously, why would you stay in the U.S. if the cost of doing business is prohibitive. But when your company's success is directly linked to the city in which you started, I find it less forgivable. Timbuk2 is a brand because San Francisco made it a brand. It is inextricably linked to SF in a way that few brands are. No one thinks twice when they see someone in SF wearing a Timbuk2 bag. But anytime I see someone in other cities wearing one, I always think (a) they must be from SF or (b) "how'd they know about Timbuk2?"
Timbuk2, though a small company of 45, built its name off of the goodwill and loyalty of the people of the city of San Francisco. Local SF law firms have firm-issued Timbuk2 bags. Local events usually list them as a sponsor. Even I, when deciding between North Face, Patagonia, or Timbuk2 bag, chose the latter because I felt that the high price was worth it if it meant supporting a local San Francisco company.
So all that is to say I'm disappointed that Timbuk2 has decided to go this route. I'll still hold on to my "Made in San Francisco" bag and I'll wear it with pride.
I'm so excited.
MSNBC - Gamers go gunning for 'Halo 2'
My cousin, who somehow got his hands on an early copy, said that Halo 2 is fairly amazing. "Sensory overload" is how he described it.
My cousin, who somehow got his hands on an early copy, said that Halo 2 is fairly amazing. "Sensory overload" is how he described it.
11/08/2004
Yamagataseeher.
Rachael Yamagata will perform on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno this Thursday, November 11. Set your Tivos.
Update: To see some live performances of Rachael's plus her video for "Worn Me Down", click here.
Update: To see some live performances of Rachael's plus her video for "Worn Me Down", click here.
Gallup Poll shows Bush gained with the educated
From the Gallup Poll
Bush, 2000 % Bush, 2004 % Change
Postgraduate education 43 47 +4
College graduate (no postgrad) 55 58 +3
Some college 53 56 +3
High school or less education 45 46 +1
Just sayin.
Bush, 2000 % Bush, 2004 % Change
Postgraduate education 43 47 +4
College graduate (no postgrad) 55 58 +3
Some college 53 56 +3
High school or less education 45 46 +1
Just sayin.
Playlist of the Week
As Aaron Lewis would say, "It's been awhile."
1. Come to Jesus, Mindy Smith
2. What You Waiting For, Gwen Stefani
3. Tambourine, Tift Merritt
4. Letter Read, Rachael Yamagata
5. Y Control, Yeah Yeah Yeahs
6. Johnny Cash, Sons and Daughters
7. Seven Days A Week, The Sounds
8. Wanderlust, The Delays
9. The Black Amnesias, Hope of The States
10. Lilac Wine, Jeff Buckley
As you can see, I'm in a chick music/Scot-Rock phase. Good times. Gimme a Guinness and some Feminist Mystique and I'm good to go.
1. Come to Jesus, Mindy Smith
2. What You Waiting For, Gwen Stefani
3. Tambourine, Tift Merritt
4. Letter Read, Rachael Yamagata
5. Y Control, Yeah Yeah Yeahs
6. Johnny Cash, Sons and Daughters
7. Seven Days A Week, The Sounds
8. Wanderlust, The Delays
9. The Black Amnesias, Hope of The States
10. Lilac Wine, Jeff Buckley
As you can see, I'm in a chick music/Scot-Rock phase. Good times. Gimme a Guinness and some Feminist Mystique and I'm good to go.
I'm a Republican. Ask me why.
Can We Really All Get Along?
I agree with this article 100%. Instead of writing off middle America as a bunch of ignorant rednecks, Democrats would serve themselves well to figure out why the Red States went red. If they would stop to actually ask (instead of just assume that it's because the Reds are ignorant, homophobic, bible-toters) they might actually learn what these Americans value.
Dialogue is good. Discourse is good.
I agree with this article 100%. Instead of writing off middle America as a bunch of ignorant rednecks, Democrats would serve themselves well to figure out why the Red States went red. If they would stop to actually ask (instead of just assume that it's because the Reds are ignorant, homophobic, bible-toters) they might actually learn what these Americans value.
Dialogue is good. Discourse is good.
