I guess the Red Sox won some game last night that was pretty important, so good for them.

• Chris Dodd decides to jump on student usury. I still have yet to find a reason to dislike Chris Dodd.
  
  
• Finally, the future that 6-year-old boys have always dreamed of is here . . .
  
  
• Larry Craig is going to argue (and I'll back him on this, actually) that getting arrested for toe-tapping is a violation of his First Amendment rights. Interestingly enough, this argument isn't saying that he wasn't looking for sex (on the contrary, it implies it), just that it's legal to look for sex in a public bathroom.
  
  
• Michael Chertoff on the California wildfires, last Friday: "We’re still not out of the woods . . ."
  
  
• FEMA . . . I . . . fuck it. They just suck.
  
  
• And apparently, so does the House Judiciary Committee. There is no worse fate I can imagine than ratting out Dick Cheney, only to have Dick Cheney find out about it.
  

News from the Streets

Today, H.L. Mencken will do my post for me.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

Don't forget it.

• This is heartening: apparently the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is capable of standing up to Dick Cheney.
  
  
• Comcast is now charging the government for the right to infringe on your privacy. Awesome!
  
  
• The "George W. Bush is a manipulative sack of crap" quote of the day:

  I know some in Congress are against the war, and are seeking ways to demonstrate that opposition. I recognize their position, and they should make their views heard. But they ought to make sure our troops have what it takes to succeed. Our men and women on the front lines should not be caught in the middle of partisan disagreements in Washington, D.C. I often hear that war critics oppose my decisions, but still support the troops. Well, I'll take them at their word -- and this is the chance to show it, that they support the troops.

• Apparently Chris Dodd is smarter than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, because he's the first one to figure out that the best way to campaign for president is by actually doing something with the power he has, rather than just talking about what he wishes he could do if he had more power. It drives me nuts to hear all of this hypothetical talk from the front-runners who have essentially abdicated their Senate seats so they can campaign, and the people actually trying to move forward legislation, guys like Dodd and Biden, get made fun of for even being in the race.
  
  
• Alright, Turkey, I'll make a deal with you. If you let us acknowledge the Armenian genocide, we'll give you not just Iraqi Kurdistan, but all of Iraq. It's all yours, we'll be out of there by spring. 'Kay? 'Kay. Have fun!
  
  
• As someone who's currently making his way through the DVD's of the new Battlestar Galactica series, this scares the living crap out of me.
  
  
• News from the White House on the economy front: more than half of America isn't poor. That's . . . that's pathetic and unacceptable is what it is. I think we should be shooting for a better vague statistic than "more than half."
  
  
• I wonder how many vegans will turn against Barack Obama for this.
  
  
• Tom Tancredo asked ICE to raid Dick Durbin's press conference and round up any illegal immigrants there might be floating around. When an organization whose acronym is "ICE" has to reign in your lack of decorum, something might, just might, have gone horribly wrong in your brain.
  
  
• Pennsylvania has an interesting take on voter suppression: don't tell anyone where they need to go to vote.
  
  
• I'll finish tonight with a victory: Pat Leahy and Arlen Specter finally get to see some domestic surveillance documentation.
  

Lovable Losers

This afternoon, my friend Mike noted that the Democratic Party, on which all of the hopes of the anti-war movement rests, is just a few short months from nominating Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate least likely to stop the war in a swift fashion, to be their candidate for the presidency of the United States. It occurred to me at this point that perhaps my lifelong affection for the Chicago Cubs is actually very similar to my affection for the Democratic Party. Disappointment is both obvious and inevitable.

Going into 2008, the Democrats have a massive glut of cash: Democratic top fundraiser Hillary Clinton has out-raised Republican top fundraiser Mitt Romney by 50%, and a good amount of his money comes from himself (Congressional candidates in both houses are raising money at similar ratios). The Cubs payroll for 2007 was nearly $100 million, while National League Champions the Colorado Rockies have slightly more than half of that. Both enjoy massive popularity. The Democrats have support because they favor an end to the war in Iraq, they talk about restoring civil liberties, and have gotten aggressive on popular social programs like SCHIP. The Cubs enjoy popularity because Chicago has a massive population of post-fraternity buffoons with too much money who like paying $400 for a ticket to a place where they can sit in an uncomfortable seat and pay $6 for a can of Old Style, watch their favorite team lose, and then puke their beer up all over Clark Street.*

The talent is there too. In the running are Hillary Clinton, the wife of (and some say the brain behind) the most popular living president; Barack Obama could probably legitimately change his middle name to "Rock Star," given how frequently people call him that; John Edwards has the most popular wife in politics, and is rumored to have also had some experience in national politics. The bullpen, much like the Cubs, has skill but is unreliable: guys like Joe Biden and Bill Richardson have moments where they seem untouchable, and then they turn into walking gaffe-machines and give up six runs in the debates. The Cubs have real talent at the plate (Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez) and some decent starting pitchers (Carlos Zambrano) but have never in my entire life have they had a reliable bullpen to draw on to replace the starters. In 2004, we could've seen Wes Clark as a decent Secretary of Defense or National Security Adviser, but no one really looked at all of those mock turtlenecks and thought we could have pulled him up to mound as a presidential candidate: he's just there to pull a couple of innings on the campaign trail or something like that.

There was a time when we had some solid guys calling the game for us, too. But they got cocky: Steve Stone pissed off the players by pointing out their mistakes, and got fired, and Michael Moore pissed off too many of the fans by pointing out their leaders' mistakes and got relegated to wingnut status.

But then there are management issues. Dusty Baker, of course, was plenty reliable: he always used the same strategy for losing games, and always backed up Larry Rothschild when he wanted to run good talent into the ground until they need Tommy John surgery. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, are the same thing: they talk a good bit about stopping the war in Iraq, about cutting off illegal domestic spying, expanding positive government programs: all the day before the Washington Post reports that they've caved on any or all of those things. And it repeats ad nauseam.

But here's the thing. We know that the other team is tough. There's some real solid competition in this division (central division for the Cubs, partisan division for the Democrats), and we need to go with the roster we think is going to take us there. The Cubs don't feel that they have the luxury of time to go back to basics: over the course of a few years, build up a solid bullpen, get a catcher or two with a decent bat, and hire a pitching coach who doesn't put his best players in the hospital, and build everyone together, as a team, over a few years, rather than scrambling around for ringers before the trade deadline. The Democrats certainly don't think they have time to get together and build a strong, coherent platform and pull their members into lock-step to get it done. Instead, you have Jim Webb and Joe Biden and everyone else trying to push 50 different plans to make some small progess towards getting us out of Iraq. So we go with someone we think can get it done and keep things warm for now: John Kerry (Kerry Wood) in 2004 and Hillary Clinton (Alfonso Soriano) in 2008. We know, of course, that this is not the dream team. We know that by signing Clinton we're just pining for the 90's, when the world is a very different place, and that by signing Soriano, we're just pining for the player he was with the Yankees (and the team and management he had around him). So when the inevitable defeats come, when the Cubs choke one game shy of the Series in 2003 like John Kerry a year later, no one will really be surprised, they'll just hang their heads in disappointment and say, "I thought maybe it would've worked out differently this time around."

*Seriously, if you're going to be near Clark Street on a game day, wear galoshes. It's like Bourbon Street, but all the college girls have their shirts on.

Catching up

Sorry about the lack of posting, everyone. Things have been a little hectic lately, I haven't had much time to keep up with the feeds.

• Whee! Sam Brownback is dropping out of the presidential race! You know what this means? It means Mike Huckabee has eight more votes.
  
  
• Uncomfortably honest headline of the day: "Self-loathing is Key to Success."
  
  
• Hastert is leaving. As Skeleton Key once said so eloquently, "let the fat man swing."
  
  
• Everyone knows that Illinois is a blue state, and that Chicago in particular is run by the Democratic party whether state or federal authorities like it or not. However, that doesn't mean we're immune to the whims of highly under-qualified, election-stealing, nepotist dimwits who are only in power because of their fathers' names and who want to use tax money to do nothing good for the people who are being taxed. We have Todd Stroger and Richard M. Daley, who are going to rape the city on taxes (a proposed 11% sales tax, with increases on just about every other tax to boot) and won't explain what they're going to do with the money. I'll cut Daley some slack, since he has done some good for the city, but Stroger has done nothing but give six-figure salaries to his cousins for jobs that are either unnecessary or for which they are not qualified. Since my voice will not be heard, though, I'll just take some sadistic glee in wikivandalism WHICH I DID NOT COMMIT but found and enjoyed anyway.
  
  
• I don't have time to write a proper essay on the merits of file-sharing right now, but in light of ComCast's decision to block P2P programs, let me just tell you what I told Wyl. I have a dream. I have a dream where Chuck D beats a cowering Lars Ulrich with a shovel, while the RIAA headquarters burns behind him. In this dream, there's a PA system playing a pirated copy of Gil Scott-Heron's "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised." It may not be as eloquent or idealistic as, say, Martin Luther King's dream, but it sure sounds satisfying.
  
  
• Liberals are up in arms about the Democratic compromise on the new FISA bill that would absolve telecom companies for giving information to domestic intelligence agencies without a warrant. I am less upset. The laws on this topic have been such a clusterfuck ever since the PATRIOT Act that I don't think anyone's been quite sure what's legal. And since none of these laws are especially constitutional, but are laws nonetheless, the telecoms were in a bind. As long as these agencies are now absolutely and permanently beholden to courts, I'm willing to move forward from here, and get a fresh start.
  
  
• Sadly, No on book censorship: "Sadistic librarians do not roam the stacks in vinyl stiletto boots, rounding up hapless patrons and giving interpretive readings of Venus in Furs. You have to choose books to read - the books do not choose you."
  
  
• Mitt Romney on Hillary Clinton: "

  She hasn't run a corner store. She hasn't run a state. She hasn't run a city. She has never run anything. And the idea that she could learn to be president, you know, as an internship, just doesn't make any sense."

  Can you pick out the one word in that sentence that he REALLY SHOULD NOT HAVE USED?
  
  
• Some times I feel disappointed in the world we've made for ourselves. As a kid, I was expecting it to be a lot more like Akira or Demolition Man than it is. Then I see headlines like "Robot Cannon Kills 9" and I know we're still making progress towards our dystopian dream of electronically anesthetized life under the barrel of a gun.
  
  
• For a while now, I've been trying to figure out the dynamic of the GOP nomination race. It's too wide open and it just feels really disjointed and schizophrenic. But as I was reading this, I figured it out. Everyone is running against someone or something. Romney and Giuliani are running against each other, because they both believe in nothing save that they should be in charge. Fred Thompson is running against the expectations he built up of himself and losing. Mike Huckabee is running a similar race, against his own "dark horse" status: people are finally paying attention to him, but all they're saying is, "oh my god, I can't believe I'm paying attention to Mike Huckabee." John McCain is running against his defeat at the hands of an imbecile in 2000, and possibly against the Viet Cong. Ron Paul is running against the post-war era (and especially the post-9/11 era): in a recent e-mail, he lamented the demise of the Robert Taft wing of the Republican Party. On the fringes, Tom Tancredo is running against Mexico, Duncan Hunter is running against Communist China (and anonymity), and Alan Keyes is running against Satan's insidious influence. But the one thing they're all against is Billary Clinton.
  
  
• You know I hate to say this, but good for the GOP: they're stripping five states of delegates for holding their primaries to damned early. THAT MEANS YOU, NEW HAMPSHIRE.

A Clarification Seems Necessary

If my McCain piece earlier has left anyone scratching their heads, allow me to clarify:

Would a President McCain be able to win the Iraq War? I highly doubt it, even if he had the full support of Congress and the American people. So why would I state that, at least in terms of respect and trust, I think I could support a petition by McCain to attempt to mend what we have horribly shattered?

The thesis that I cling to in regard to John McCain's support of this folly of a war is that McCain cares about American troops strongly enough to not want a single one to have died in vain - hence his vehemence on "winning" the war. I often wonder if he was so traumatized by the Vietnam War that he doesn't want a recurrence of that crushing emotional and moral defeat, with the corresponding unearned black mark on the rank and file, even if it is, at least for the moment, completely out of his hands. Clearly other politicians, even some within his own party, would disagree with McCain's conclusion that the war must go on, but I don't think any of them - or any of us - have enough reason to believe there is something at work in McCain's rationale beyond the sincerest of good intentions.

At least that's what I really hope is driving him.

I was discussing this with Tim a few moments ago, and he summed up his (and my) sentiments quite nicely:

Since I don't think it's possible to make something of the situation in Iraq by continuing our military presence, I would prefer to cut our losses and let our fallen soldiers have died for hubris rather than letting more soldiers die in the name of the hubris of trying to rescue George Bush from his own legacy.

I'm sorry if I caused any confusion with my previous post - I'm no more for the continuation of this war than anyone else with everything to lose from participation in it. I merely wished to express my personal bewilderment over my reaction to the intersection of my respect for John McCain as a man and former POW and the possibility of McCain asking me (and others in my same predicament) to follow his footsteps down a very lonely path.

In which I am in disbelief of my own convictions.

I came to the most disconcerting realization this weekend, one I will share with you in a paragraph or two. First, some brief context:

I'm against the war in Iraq. I recently joined the IVAW after many months of deliberation. As a member of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), it's not a decision I arrived at lightly. I'm still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and while servicemen are authorized to belong to anti-war organizations, it's best not to let one's membership become common knowledge at the command level.

Nevertheless, I'm making my membership public now; the purpose of stating my active membership in such an organization is to throw my following remarks into high relief.

I'm quite concerned about being called back to active duty in order for the Marines to redeploy me to Iraq. It's a distinct possibility which crosses my mind every day, and it's a fear my family, particularly my fiancée, my parents, and my siblings, must cope with until 01 December 2010. I personally know guys I served with who have already been cleared for an involuntary return to active duty; one former colleague will receive his orders to deploy to Iraq early next year.

I'm opposed to this war at every turn, particularly the deception with which it was initiated and has continued to be falsely justified by the present administration. I've been continually disappointed by the failure of the Democratic Congress, lead by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, to act on the mandate given last year. I'm equally disappointed by large portions of the American media for not turning up the heat on Congress, and - allow me to be completely honest - I'm deeply disappointed in the American people for not demanding Pelosi's and Reid's hides and heads for Congress' moral defeat at the hand of a ethically bankrupt Executive Branch.

Despite my signature on a covenant with the American people, I am having serious misgivings about answering any potential call to return to active duty. I do not believe this war has been argued for or waged in good faith, and I have come to believe this administration's repeated contempt for the men and women who have shed blood in Iraq morally absolves me from any document obliging me to obey the orders of this president. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and it saddens me to say that today I see more domestic enemies than I do foreign.

And yet, after reading John McCain's remarks at the Values Voter Summit, I arrived at a troubling conclusion: If, someday, President McCain were to ask me to return to active duty and redeploy to Iraq, I might be persuaded to do so.

It would take qualifications, admissions of wrong-doing. I'm not a McCain-booster, and I certainly don't agree with his stance on the war. But I somehow believe in the deepest part of my heart that a fully-informed President McCain would not ask, much less demand, that I die in vain, and that he would be honest with me, and with this country, about the war.

If President McCain were to say in his inaugural address that the Bush Administration had made a mess of this war, devastated an entire nation, and destroyed America's reputation, I would listen to him and his plan for righting those wrongs. If President McCain made a personal commitment to rebuild and then immediately withdraw from Iraq, I would believe him. I would believe him, and, as my Commander-in-Chief, if John McCain were to request my return to active duty to help rebuild Iraq and right the Bush Administration's wrong, I would go.

In my own small way I helped make that mess over there in the desert, and if something were to happen here because of the ill-will we have generated over there, I could never forgive myself. Though part of me would be devastated by a redeployment's cost to my family and friends, part of me would feel absolved in trying to do right by the Iraqis, my country, and my conscience.

You see, unlike most members of the current administration, President McCain would know exactly what he was asking of me. Unlike this administration's greatest chicken hawk, John McCain did not have "other priorities in the '60s than military service." John McCain, whatever his policy on the Iraq War, has a deep respect - a fraternal love - for the men and women in the armed forces, and he would not callously squander their lives the way this administration has.

I don't agree with John McCain on some very significant issues, but if, as President, he requested that I step up one more time and try to do something on behalf of my country, I don't think I could refuse the man. He is one of the select few in Washington who truly understand the price of war, and I feel confident he wouldn't needlessly and cavalierly send servicemen into harm's way.

That said, I'm not certain there is any evidence or any plan even a man like John McCain could possess which would make me change my mind about this war. It's been a dirty, rotten farce from day one, and each death is the result of an administration which has quite likely done more to create ill-will for Americans abroad than any other in history. If we live in danger today (and we certainly do), it is substantially of this administration's making.

I'm not sure there's any way, no matter how well-intentioned, to fix that.

dammit.

Evening News: Let's Talk About Sex!

• From a Mitt Romney campaign email.
  

  Team Mitt Action Center (TMAC) is HERE!

  We have launched TMAC, an online social networking platform that shares features common to popular social networks like Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn. TMAC empowers you to make a direct, positive impact on the campaign.

  
  I'm curious to know what kind of people hang around a Mitt Romney social networking site, but not curious enough to join it and find out.
  
  
• Joe Biden said the other day that "The solution to our situation in Iraq is, quite frankly, more important than who will be the next president," which is why he was focusing on campaigning for that rather than campaigning for president. It's just a coincidence that he happened to be in Iowa. Right.
  
  
• Huckabee is making the same tired, ill-considered abstinence analogy that uncreative, unquestioning religious zealots have been making for ages: promoting safe sex education is like encouraging such-and-such bad behavior through implicit acceptance (in this case, drunk driving and domestic violence). I call bullshit. The obvious response to this is that sexual craving isn't a learned behavior, it's something that your body chooses for you. Sex isn't the same as drunk driving, because an assortment of glands didn't give you the keys to a car, and they sure as hell didn't brew your beer for you. However, an assortment of glands did provide a biological imperative that says "orgasms are fun!" Second, let's deal with the assumption here that sex is a bad thing. Sex can become a bad thing when people are reckless about it: emotionally and physically. However, there's nothing implicitly "bad" about sex, and it is often quite a good thing. Huckabee himself is married and has three kids, so I'm sure he's found it a wholesome, rewarding and invigorating enterprise. And the great thing about condoms is that they can help minimize the physical repercussions of something that, let's face it, people are probably going to do anyway. Finally, this assumption Huckabee is making a value judgment, that sex is a sinful behavior and should be discouraged. However, millions of people across the country are bound to disagree with that value judgment, and aren't going to abide by his value system. What happens to those people who won't be educated as to the options for having sex safely and responsibly, but who will not embrace Huckabee's personal value system? Is God punishing them for their sin by giving them AIDS? Or is it Mike Huckabee punishing them for disagreeing with him by not teaching them how to avoid it? I'm not advocating anonymous mass orgies in the streets, I'm not downplaying the value of monogamy or the safety of chastity. However, this reckless denial of natural human instinct and the very existence of differing value systems is dangerous.
  
  
• During the early parts of his presidency, when he was popular, people used to say how much George W. Bush was like Ronald Reagan. Well, now he gets to be Reagenesque in another way: he's apparently getting Alzheimer's. See kids? This is why you don't scorch your brain with whiskey and blow.
  

• Tucker Carlson discusses gender solidarity, vaginal-Americans, and how Maggie Thatcher "ran and governed as a man." I can't get over the fact that this joker is still on the air.
  


• Rudy Giuliani has stopped reserving his attacks just for Hillary. The Mayor attacked Barack Obama, saying, "You're not Ronald Reagan." Obama supporters nation-wide laughed, exchanged high fives, then sent the senator more money. Obama responds by noting that Giuliani's law firm is currently representing Hugo Chavez. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Rudy Giuliani is Dick Cheney without the brains.
  


• John Schmersal of Enon & Brainiac explains, at great length, his feelings on Taco Bell.
  


• Stephen Colbert is running for President of Publicity.
  


• Karl Rove, scum-guzzler to the stars, is going to debate Max Cleland, the triple-amputee Vietnam veteran who lost his senate seat when someone (I'm not saying who) ran a bunch of ads about Cleland with Osama bin Laden's picture in them. Should be fun.


• Iowa has just moved their caucuses to last month. Since no one was there, the default winners were George W. Bush and Richard M. Daley for their respective parties.
  
  
• Blackwater USA to be detained at Gitmo.
  
  
• Reminder: Baby boomers are old, Steven Tyler is creepy.
  
  
• Ladies and gentlemen, I'd just like to remind you that America has the finest military in the world, and we would never accidentally launch a $3 million missile at no one.
  
  
• What I want to know is, where is the president hiding this 24%? I certainly haven't found any of them.
  
  
• Here's a question: if Rudy Giuliani wins the nomination, how many more ska references will we have to roll our eyes at?

More this evening.

Thank God for Public Education

It's come to my attention that Illinois lawmakers have decided to mandate a daily moment of silence in public school.

The Law:

"In each public school classroom the teacher in charge shall observe a brief period of silence with the participation of all the pupils therein assembled at the opening of every school day. This period shall not be conducted as a religious exercise but shall be an opportunity for silent prayer or for silent reflection on the anticipated activities of the day."

The First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

This shouldn't bother me. There is nothing explicitly unconstitutional about this law. The state is not compelling students to participate in a particular religion, leaving the establishment clause out of it. Nor are they forcing kids to pray (though the law is explicitly suggesting it) meaning that it squeaks past the free exercise clause by the skin of its teeth. But here are my two questions:

1) Why is this so important that it has to be dictated by law?
2) This opens the door for potential abuse. It's not a difficult step, in a homogenous community, between optional prayer and mandatory prayer. Is a solitary moment of silence worth the possibility that this will codify religion in certain settings?

Contrary to popular belief, it's not illegal to pray in public schools. Kids can get together and pray as loud as they want together. Teachers can put together voluntary religious groups where kids can talk about how great their beliefs are. Honestly, while I don't participate in any religion (or proselytize as an atheist), I think prayer can help center certain people and even for myself, I don't mind the idea of a moment of silence to put my brain in order at the beginning of the day. But the fact that this was so important that someone would draft a law, put it through the legislative process, and then override a gubernatorial veto for it means that there's an agenda here. The fact that prayer is explicitly mentioned and suggested in this law tells me it's a religious agenda. There are plenty of opportunities for kids to pray: at home with their parents, for example. At church. Not to mention the other mandatory quiet time kids have in school: When I was in grade school, we had mandatory silent reading time, and when I got older, we had study hall. It's so unnecessary to pass a law specifically bringing prayer into question. Are people so scared that children might not be religious enough that they're going to put the first amendment at risk (and that's all it is right now, a risk) to afford children another opportunity to pray? I respect people of faith wanting to keep God in their lives at all times and places: however, it is possible to remain faithful without legislating time into kids days for optional prayer. Are people really so scared that their kids aren't religious enough that they have to keep forcing this issue and dancing on the line of constitutionality?

HEADLINE NEWS THAT IS SO EXCITING THAT I ALMOST HAVE TO GO TO THE BATHROOM:

HARRY REID MIGHT RETIRE IN 2010!

And now, the evening news.

• Let's hear it for non-biased news reporting! From a CNN article about an artist who drew a sketch of Mohammed as a dog:
  

  "That's a way of expressing things. If you don't like it, don't look at it. And if you look at it, don't take it too seriously. No harm done, really," he says.

  When it's suggested that might prove an arrogant -- if not insulting -- way to engage Muslims, he is unrelenting, even defiant.

  "No one actually loves the truth, but someone has to say it," he says.

  Vilks, a self-described atheist, points out he's an equal opportunity offender who in the past sketched a depiction of Jesus as a pedophile.

  Still one could argue Vilks should have known better because of what happened in Denmark in 2005, when a cartoonist's depictions of the prophet sparked violent protests in the Muslim world and prompted death threats against that cartoonist's life.

  
  I'm picturing someone backed into a corner in a dark alley by a someone brandishing a lead pipe and saying, "you shoulda learned your lesson, boy."

• The Socialist case for Ron Paul: stripping down the federal government will allow the state governments to implement socialist policies, and states can deal with hot button issues (i.e. abortion) on their own, in smaller (and often more homogenous) settings where there's likely to be more agreement. And if you want to secede, Ron Paul won't fight you on it.
  
  
• I think Alaska is on par with Chicago in terms of corrupt politicians per capita, but only because there aren't that many people living there.
  
  
• I really like Al Gore a lot, but I'm still too traumatized by 2000 for me to want him to run again. I can't bear the thought of going through that again. People forget exactly how bad of a candidate he was: the brain is there, but he has the personality of a granola bar and unfortunately, that matters.
  
  
• 50 years after a court ruled that Allen Ginsberg's "Howl" was designated as not obscene by the courts, radio stations still won't air it because they're afraid the FCC will fine them into oblivion.
  
  
• Fred Thompson: "I would really have to strain hard to come up with something I wanted to say ten times a day for the next year of my life when I knew that talking about the really important stuff would not get me anywhere. You have to have a great desire to be President, and I never had the desire to do that." It shows, too, because his national polling has dropped a whopping 8 points in a month.
  
  
• This is just funny: A guy got tasered and arrested (that's really a thing?) for photographing the police performing a potentially illegal search.
  
  
• There's still a year between Hillary Clinton and being elected president. And as a wise man once said, "a year in politics is a very long time."
  
  
• Rudy Giuliani would be wise to heed the same advice (although I hope he doesn't).
  
  
• 30 years after Vietnam, it isn't the hippies spitting on our troops anymore.
  
  
• On a lighter note, Every day of my life, I dream of having a train conductor like this one.
  

• White House Press Secretary Dana Perino is uninformed on the issues that matter to the youth of America.
  
  
• Welcome to the news: bringing you in-depth analysis of things that don't matter and cursory mention of things that do.
  
  
• Talking Points provides an interesting explanation of why Romney won't discuss his religion.
  
  
• I really want to hear how Representatives Michael Rogers, Richard Baker, and Thomas Davis justify voting to keep war profiteering legal.
  
  
• I love Steven Colbert more than I love most things.
  
  
• If there's anything public hearings on human trafficking need, it's more entertainment value to lighten the mood. Luckily, Alcee Hastings has that need in mind.
  

Postscript

• Apparently sick of political Wikipedia vandalism, congresspedia.org has launched an open source reference on political candidates called "Wiki the Vote." P.S. -- Doing things to the vote (i.e. rocking it) in order to get youth interested in politics lost its hip factor around the time everyone recognized that the original reference was to a disco song, groaned, and went back to their coffee.
  
  
• TPM:

  Have we really gotten to the point in GOP Primary politics where you need to defend yourself against the charge that as President you'd take care to make sure that you were following the Constitution?

  Look at it this way: At least there's a GOP candidate (and not just Ron Paul) who's willing to defend their fealty to the Constitution. P.S. -- It's interesting to note that in that same debate, Rudy went out of the way to refer to himself as a "strict constructionist."
  
  
• Mother buys assault rifle for deranged 14-year-old son, gets arrested. I think we can all feel satisfied by this. P.S. -- He also had four operational hand grenades.
  
  
• The Director of the CIA is going after the Inspector General of the CIA for inspecting a little bit too hard.
  
  
• Apparently, Republicans have learned from Nixon or Clinton: when you try to cover it up, it just makes your screw-ups look worse.
  
  
• Charles Krauthammer, of all people, has come on record supporting Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. He could never vote for her, of course, but if she wins, it would be best for America. Why? Why does Krauthammer have so much respect for Hillary? Because she's risen beyond naive liberal affectations like "principle" and "morality." P.S. -- I think I know what a certain columnist had for breakfast this morning.
  
  
• Tucker Carlson thinks Barack Obama is like the Khmer Rouge because he wants young people to get involved in the electoral process.
  
  
• NARAL plans to sink Giuliani's nomination by expressing excitement about the possibility that he could be the nominee.

This just can't mean anything good

I have to say, for the sake of appearances I'm a bit conflicted about the Marine Corps' proposal to take over the war in Afghanistan and hand over Al Anbar to the Army. In some ways it could be perceived as a cut-and-run by the Marines, something we just don't do. To the general public, the war in Iraq is where the danger is, and Afghanistan - the one place we should be fighting a war if we've got to fight one at all - has largely been forgotten by the public and, seemingly, this administration.

Keeping up with appearances, though, should not deter us from doing what is most prudent and likely to be most effective for the war. In Iraq the Marine Corps has been forced into a role it is not well-suited for - that of an occupying force. The Corps' role is often (and in my opinion, stupidly) stated as "America's 911 force." We excel at speedy deployments and the bloody tooth-and-nail securing of objectives. The Marine Corps is the force best equipped to deal with guerrilla warfare. What we are not made for is the wholesale occupation of a former combatant country.

The Corps just isn't large enough, and I'm not sure if people realize this. Here's a look at the total number of active-duty personnel in each branch of the armed forces as of 30 April 2007:

• Army: 507,082
• Navy: 340,568
• USAF: 340,921
• USMC: 180,000

(please note that the US Coast Guard, 401,181 Coasties strong, is part of the Department of Homeland Security)

Tim had a very enlightening piece yesterday which illustrated, DoD-wide, the number of servicemen deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. He also linked to a document which the Pentagon itself has sent him.

The Pentagon numbers state that, as of 31 August 2007, there were 35,121 Marines deployed in support of these two fronts. As there are no Marine Corps units in Afghanistan (and there have not been for some time), we can safely assume those individuals are located somewhere in Iraq. This number is significantly higher, by about 10,000 individuals, than what is widely being reported by the Pentagon and the media. I'm not going to speculate why there is such a gross discrepancy between the two figures, but I do find it worth mentioning to our readers.

The news reports indicate that there are approximately 26,000 Army personnel in Afghanistan, along with (presumably) several thousand members of the US Air Force. While the Army is incapable of performing air support for its ground units in Afghanistan and must rely on the Air Force, the Marine Corps possesses a full complement of aircraft and would be able to take control of all operations in the country.

This aspect of the plan makes good sense to me, though I can't claim to know all the details of the proposal. The with the Marine Corps assuming full control of Operation Enduring Freedom, the Army and Air Force could be relocated to Iraq, streamlining both operations.

The overall numbers make sense. What doesn't make sense is why this hasn't been thought of before, and why it is being implemented now. I suspect there has been a shift for the worse in Afghanistan. At the very least there must have been a shift in the nature of the mission, one which an entity so massive as the US Army is incapable of moving rapidly enough to address. Most likely, this change in the battlefield indicates that the situation in Afghanistan is unraveling rapidly and needs the quick reaction force the Marine Corps so capably provides.

If it seems that I am incapable of making firm conclusions about this change in policy, it is because I have absolutely no idea what we should infer from this. Bush's DoD certainly isn't going to tell us if the war in Afghanistan is as lost as the war in Iraq, so we're left to analyze the type of policy coming from the Pentagon. I can only say I'm ill-at-ease by this drastic change in plans, and pessimistic about what it entails. Given what the Marine Corps is truly good at, I'm forced to assume that the situation on the ground in Afghanistan is very bad indeed.

The Human Cost of War, Part II

So last week, I requested information from the Department of Defense about how many troops have been deployed to Iraq since the initial invasion. They sent me back a surprisingly helpful chart detailing total deployment numbers. I've posted the whole thing here, but in case you don't want to look at the whole thing, here are some highlights:

• Total "Number of Members Currently Deployed:" 275,981. This is in startling contrast with the number we frequently hear discussed in the press, which hovers around 170,000, depending on who's talking. I'm going over this with Wyl, and even if you only count the number of troops on active duty, you still end up with well over 200,000 troops, so I'm guessing they're only talking about Army soldiers (169,076). [EDIT: Or, they're referring to active duty ground troops: If you only count active duty Army and Marines, you get 164,207).
  
• Total "Number of Members Ever Deployed:" 1,599,432. Subtracting out the dead, we now have almost 1.6 million veterans of the war in Iraq.
• Total "Number of Members With More than One Deployment:" 540,306. This means if you've ever been deployed, you've got almost exactly a 1 in 3 chance that you have been or will be deployed more than once.
  
• "Total Deployment Events:" 2,401,464. Those 1.6 million troops have served 2.4 million tours of duty over the course of four and a half years. If you add up the troops that have been deployed and the number that have served more than one tour, you end up with . . .
• 261,726 soldiers who have been deployed more than twice. That is, of course, almost as many troops as we currently have in Iraq.
  

These numbers were provided to me upon request by the Department of Defense. These numbers are current as of August 31, 2007, and include both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. These numbers make me feel ill.

The Self-pardoning of a Chickenhawk

In the wake of this disastrous war, the blame games, finger-pointing, and responsibility-shirking is on-going and will continue well into administration of the next president. Nearly every day we are bombarded with reports of petulant candidates pushing accountability around the political plate like overcooked Brussels sprouts.

An important angle in this apportioning of culpability that has gone suspiciously underreported - hell, unreported - is the responsibility of the vast majority of the American media in frothing the post-9/11 waters of discourse into opacity in their role as the crazed cheerleaders agitating the American public into supporting an ill-considered, shoot-from-the-hip war policy.

My brother Marine, Gulf War vet, and author Joel Turnipseed wrote a post on his blog, Hotel Zero, exposing Christopher Hitchens, one of these self-serving media charlatans, for what he truly is - a chickenshit warmonger trying to divest himself of all responsibility (and, reading between the lines, a dose of hidden Lady Macbeth-worthy guilt) by cunningly hijacking the death of Army Lt. Mark Daily, a young man inspired to go to war in Iraq by Hitchens' own words. Hitchens screens his role in Lt. Daily's killing to confer upon himself a self-absolution so sickening and demented that it eclipses the most egregious "journalism" published in Pravda in Stalin's Soviet Union.

This vomit-inducing anti-mea culpa published by Vanity Fair should serve to brand Hitchens and any other chickenhawk member of the media who has not personally and publicly addressed their involvement in preying on the fears and sense of patriotic duty of the American people in the days, months, and years following the September 11th terrorist attacks. I'm personally revolted that any publication would circulate such a calculated piece of self-serving finkery, particularly when it originates from one of the most odiously propagandistic, ignoble jingoists in memory.

I strongly urge you to read Joel's entire post on this subject, which addresses not only the issues I've presented above, but also denudes Hitchens' twisting the words of George Orwell in his maleficent objective of self-palliation.

• Ron Paul's thoughts exactly.
  
  
• It's really sad when candidates talk for two hours and two sentences become the focal point of all the coverage.
  
  
• In the span of a single sentence, the Tribune discusses de-evolution and implies that politicians are not "real people." Such is the state of our political discourse.
  
  
• Obama wants to give 17-year-olds who will be able to vote in the general election to be able to caucus in Iowa. When George W. Bush was elected for the first time, I was scared shitless that he was going to start a pointless war so he could rebuild the military-industrial complex, and make sure he got re-elected based on public reticence to switch presidents during wartime (go figure). More to the point, I was six months shy of being old enough to vote, and scared shitless that Bush would start a really big war which would require a draft, and I'd die a bloody and miserable death for the political career of a man I despised and couldn't vote against. I thought it was dramatically unfair, even though I lived in a blue state and my vote wouldn't have changed a thing. I do recognize that a line on voting age has to be drawn somewhere, but I'm all for giving almost-there kids a chance to voice their opinions. Really, the difference between 18 and 17 and a half isn't that huge: kids who are going to be well-informed before they vote are going to be well-informed, and kids that are going to cast a write-in vote for Shaggy 2 Dope are still going to vote for Shaggy 2 Dope.
  
  
• TPM:

  Considering this White House's track record on leaks, it should be noted that the bin Laden video was leaked on September 7, the Friday before Gen. David Petraeus was slated to begin his much-anticipated testimony on Iraq the following Monday.

  
  
  
• It's been almost 100 years since the Armenian genocide, but as a nation, we still haven't recognized it as such. And today, we're no closer, because George W. Bush is afraid that our failed war in Iraq is going to fail harder if we piss off the country that committed the genocide.
  
  
• Remember: Wikipedia is to be consulted for general information, which can lead to more detailed research. It is NOT a valid source.
  
  
• Any readers with a bottle of patchouli oil and a copy of Aoxomoxoa at home, you're not going to believe the news I have for you! On the other hand, I can now claim that Kuma's Corner and I are on a heroic environmental crusade to kill and grill this dangerous source of greenhouse gases.

As I'm finishing up for the day, I'm seeing the first reports of a school shooting in Cleveland. I won't comment, other than to express my sorrow. Things like this shouldn't happen, much less be so common.

Liveblogging: Conclusions.

Things I learned from last night's debate:

1. Fred Thompson doesn't think we'll have a recession for at least ten years, even though he says that every economic downturn in recent memory has been preceded by a spike in gas prices. I don't know what it is everywhere else in the country, but here in Chicago, it's $3.50 a gallon to fill your tank with Wild Irish Rose and dog piss, so I'm getting ready for the recession.
2. Taxing cigarettes encourages people to smoke cigarettes, not the other way around. I'm still trying to figure out McCain's logic on that.
3. Nuts to Wayne Brady. "Is Mike Huckabee gonna have to choke a bitch" is the funniest nice-guy-pimp joke I can currently imagine.
4. Nixon was right about Fred Dalton Thompson.
5. For Tom Tancredo, every single problem can be traced back to illegal immigrants.
6. There is something going on called a Doha Round. By demonstrating that he has heard of the Doha Round, and that he may or may not know what a Doha Round is, Mitt Romney has convinced a small handful of voters to vote for him based on the fact that he can show off how much smarter he is than them.
7. Many Republicans probably wonder why the hell crazy anti-war, anti-Bush-economic-policy guy Ron Paul gets to stand on stage with guys like Mitt Romney and Fred Dalton Thompson and Rudy Giuliani. I wonder why assholes like Romney and dumbshits like Thompson and Giuliani get to stand on stage with Ron Paul.

Liveblogging for Godot

I have decided to jump on the blogger bandwagon and dip my toes into liveblogging. It's not really liveblogging, because it's a re-run of a debate from this afternoon, but I have a job, so I couldn't watch it at 3:00 in the afternoon. Any time someone sits down to listen to Republicans talk economic policy for two hours, it should ideally be done with two pack of unfiltered cigarettes and a quart of Jameson's fine Irish whisky for anesthetic. However, I'm confident that none of these jokers will be president, so I'm running without the anesthetic tonight. All times are central standard, comments in italics are generally mine.

8:02: Fred Dalton Thompson: "Recession? I know no recession."

8:03: FDT makes the popular claim that we're borrowing from our children, when in fact we're borrowing from Communist China. Then he promises to stick with the Bush economic policies.

8:04: Mitt Romney is afraid of being taxed by Michigan. Because Michigan sucks, and it's not acceptable.

8:06: Giuliani: Capitalism is a good thing. So is Joe Torre.

8:07: Ron Paul: Recession is already upon us for anyone who doesn't make buttloads of money. Thank you.

8:08: McCain: What's the problem here? We've got rich people! That means America is wealthy!

8:10: McCain: Raising taxes on cigarettes means the government wants everyone to smoke. Wait, what?

8:12: Huckabee: Prostitutes don't pay taxes, and that's wrong.

8:14: So that's what Duncan Hunter looks like. And apparently, he doesn't like communist China, and he wants to rebuild the military/industrial complex.

8:15: FDT touts his record dealing with China's problem with sending us tainted goods. Yeah.

8:18: Brownback: technology is bad.

8:20: Tancredo: Medicare and social security are killing our budget. Fuck the old and sick!

8:21: Romney supports a line-item veto. Actually, good for him.

8:22: Giuliani claims to be a strict constructionist. Who likes the baby-killing part of the constitution.

8:23: Romney to Giuliani: You're dumb, but you're not dumb enough to disagree with me on key taxation and spending issues.

8:24: FDT apparently makes a great point, but his mic was off. Dummy.

8:25: FDT: Protecting certain jobs is "wrong."

8:27: McCain: The economy is different than it was in 1960. Also, the problem isn't pork, it's that the Americans don't have faith in Congress. If the American people would just pretend we didn't suck, everything would be fine!

8:29: Tancredo: McCain is right! The people hate the government, because the government doesn't hate Mexicans enough.

8:30: Romney: The average american family is $9000 a year richer because markets are open to American products. How the hell did he calculate that?

8:31: Mitt: We need to start signing treaties that help America screw all the other countries in the world.

8:31: Mitt: "Michigan is personal for me." Why?

8:33: Giuliani: Chiner and Indier should be seen as new customers. Or, as they say in New York, new "marks."

8:35: McCain: Reviving Hawley-Smoot will make China kill all the jews, or something like that. I'm confused.

8:36: FDT: We can't protect our corporate infrastructure, so we should do everything we can to protect our corporate infrastructure.

8:37: Duncan Hunter doesn't trust anyone in the city of Dubai.

8:40: FDT: If people pay less taxes, they have more money.

A break. Oh, thank god.

8:45: FDT: Bush has a good policy on Iraq right now. It sucked before, but it's good now.

8:46: Islamic fascism? Really? I thought that was just a haunt of the right-wing blogs Sadly, No covers.

FDT keeps not using up his time. Sounds like he doesn't have much to say.

8:47: McCain thinks people should join the Peace Corps. We still have a Peace Corps?

8:48: McCain thanks the people for not listening to him before when he said the Iraq war sucked, because it's awesome now.

8:49: Ron Paul doesn't like Iraq, but he sure does like the gold standard. I'm not entirely sure how he got from one to the other.

8:50: Sam Brownback: Went into Iraq to fight terrorists. Did he intend to bring all the terrorists to Iraq, or was that just a convenient consequence?

8:51: Brownback: Joe Biden's right about the soft partition. I still can't wrap my mind around Biden and Brownback getting along.

8:53: Romney doesn't like Iran, but he isn't stupid enough to want to go to war with them.

8:55: Ron Paul: Iran doesn't pose an imminent threat, so why the fuck should the president be able to start a war without a declaration? I fuckin' love this guy.

8:56: Huckabee: Congressional oversight is a "luxury."

8:59: Giuliani swats down Ron Paul. Guess why? 9/11. He's managed to go a whole hour without bringing up 9/11 though, so kudos to him.

9:04: Tancredo: The problem with the trade deficit is that we're importing too much oil, and all the money is going to countries "that want to kill us."

9:07: Huckabee: something about NASCAR and islamofascism Goober and Gomer and people that want to kill us and what the fuck is he even talking about?

9:09: FDT: Most economic downturns have been preceded by a spike in oil prices. But the economy is set to be awesome for the next ten years, yessirree.

9:10: Romney is talking about the Doha Round in Michigan? Seriously? Who the fuck talks to voters about the Doha Round? That's so worse than the arugula thing.

9:12: Huckabee: The lack of optimism in this country is a serious problem. I wonder what could have caused it? (McCain disagrees: it's a lack of faith and trust.)

9:13: Mitt: Republicans need to stop being all doom and gloom and put on the rose-colored glasses.

9:16: Giuliani: America needs to look not just to energy independence, but to selling energy to Chiner and Indier. "They need energy independence more than we do." Which means they're going to buy it from us?

9:18: Brownback: "This place [America] rocks!" No shit, he actually said that.

9:18: Tancredo: Republicans have been pandering too much, and immigrants are to blame for the economy.

Commercial break. I have come to the conclusion that liveblogging is a big fat waste of time.

9:23: Moderator: Senator Thompson, please get into the specifics of your social security plan.
Thompson: Social Security is a big problem, and it's borrowing from our grandchildren (I think it was literally designed to do that).

9:25: Tancredo: CAFTA is awful because it discussed immigration. It's impacting our national sovereignty because these treaties, which are approved by congress and the president, are changing the way we write and enforce our laws. Yes, Tom, I think that's how treaties work.

9:27: Mitt: Pawn the health insurance problem off on the states. "But we're not gonna tell'em how to do it." That's a policy?

9:29: Huckabee: Unions are the future, because the CEO's and hedge fund guys are making way too fucking much, and everyone else is taking it in the ass. Okay, he didn't really phrase it like that, but that's what he meant, and he's sort of right.

9:31: FDT, union member and champion of the working man: he's a member of the Screen Actors Guild.

9:33: Duncan Hunter: "The union is a receptacle of power." There's no better way to piss off a group of people than by calling them receptacles.

9:34: Brownback in response to Tancredo: "My mother is not an illegal immigrant!"

9:36: McCain: I have a glass of ethanol every morning before breakfast. That explains a lot.

9:38: Giuliani: We should not tax the internet. We should police the internet. This is pretty much Giuliani in a nutshell: more cops, less taxes.

I find it interesting that there are ads for professional wrestling (also, TNA wrestling? Really?) during the GOP debate.

9:43: Huckabee can't say whether or not he would've vetoed S-CHIP. That's not going to play well with the working-class types he's trying to woo.

9:45: The Mormon doesn't discriminate based on faith. I wonder why.

9:47: Giuliani agrees with Hillary on disliking our debt to foreign countries, but he can't say it, so he'll talk about the trade deficit instead.

9:48: McCain doesn't have the expertise to know whether or not Bernanke is doing his job right: that's why we have people like Bernanke to tell him what the chairman of the fed is supposed to be doing.

9:49: Ron Paul won't support a GOP nominee that sucks. All the other candidates will.

9:51: According to Giuliani, entrepreneurs wear hats.

9:53: Romney finally gets the shot in at FDT that he's been so obviously waiting for the whole goddam debate. The joke is so bad I'm not even going to repeat it here.

9:55: Romney: America has great schools. As a product of American schools, I can attest to the fact that it's very difficult, as a student, to make American schools not suck. I had to work had to get something out of public schooling.

* * *

That was miserable. I daresay it was even worse than Pearl Harbor. I'm entitling this entry "Liveblogging for Godot" because the debate had a lot of talking without anything really happening, and no one named Godot was there.

Now I'm going to go to bed listening to Throbbing Gristle or something like that, so it'll burn all of the horrible talking out of my ears as I fall asleep.

Free Speech: It should protect you from crazies like Tom Tancredo and the RIAA

• I'm delighted by this article. Free speech is only helpful if it's getting used, and it does no one any good if one side or another just keeps shouting the other down to stop them from getting heard. The outrage over Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia was preposterous: it was as if by hearing him out, we would all be infected by some hysterical desire to annihilate America and launch a global crusade for Islam that would erase civilization from the planet earth. It's as if we're that gullible, that easily swayed. By hearing him out, we get to laugh in his face. It's not giving him more power, it's letting him relinquish it freely through his own folly. Suppressing speech just gives it more power: when you push it, it just pushes back harder. Right now, the political discourse is largely one side blaming the other for things that don't matter, and getting incensed that they have the gall to speak their mind. Go back to the Constitution, go back to the Federalist Papers. Learn to love your free speech, America, even if you don't love what people are saying.
  
  
• For example. If you don't want Tom Tancredo to be president, make sure everyone hears what he has to say, because he's a total fucking lunatic.
  
  
• Furthermore, this is why I'm not going to say anything about the Republicans going after the little kid.
  

• The mafia will not be driving Nissan.
  
  
• Harry Reid just need to be replaced.
  

  “Iraq has always been the 800-pound gorilla in the room, but there are other issues to deal with,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). “We did well with our initial agenda. Now we need to move on to a broader agenda.”

  
  If you've got a major problem to get out of the way before you can get to your "broader agenda," you have to deal with that major problem. Reid hasn't done that, he's just talked a lot about Iraq and not accomplished anything. He didn't "do well with [his] initial agenda," he didn't do anything with it except give up fight after fight. That doesn't mean it's time to move on, that means it's time to dig in harder. (P.S. -- He isn't even winning on the broader agenda.)
  
  
• Mitt Romney: "Sorry you have a horrible debilitating disease, son, and yes, there is a treatment, but Jesus, Joseph Smith, and the FDA formed a commission which has deemed it immoral, so you'll just have to deal with the suffering. It sucks now, but remember: the federal government is here to make sure you don't damn your immortal soul."
  
  
• Calling it "intelligence" is really a stretch.
  
  
• Why Obama isn't winning, even though he should be.
  
  
• Hillary Clinton: the only major Democratic candidate smart enough to realize that she's going to have to go to Michigan if she wins the primaries, and it's going to help her if she hasn't treated them like pariahs. I'd love to be touting Chris Dodd's name in that article, but I've given up on the fact that, despite his being awesome, no one but me and Kos give a damn about Chris Dodd.
  
  
• John McCain doesn't care about haberdashers. No, really, he talks about haberdashers. And buggies!
  
  
• Sam Brownback and Joe Biden are campaigning together. Is this the new accidental face of Unity08? Seriously? The best thing these guys could do for each other's campaigns is beat each other up on camera.
  
  
• This is funny, but I'm more entertained by the fact that there's a Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology. It begs the question: could principles of quantum mechanics, namely uncertainty and predictability, be applied to economics to make an economic model that would account for erratic human behavior?
  
  
• Once more on the RIAA being awarded $222,000 for some poor woman filesharing 24 (mainly awful) songs. Jammie Thomas only makes $36,000 a year, and has two kids. Let's say she's filing as head of household, so she's paying 15% income tax. That leaves her with $30,600 a year. The poverty line in America currently for a family of three is $17,170 a year. Let's say that the RIAA is going to be charitable and give Jammie a few extra bucks in her pocket, just to keep afloat. Let's say they garnish her down to an even $20,000 a year in take-home pay. Paying them out $10,600 a year, Jammie Thomas will be done paying the RIAA in 21 years. Thomas' life will effectively be ruined, her kids won't be able to go to college, and all so fucking Destiny's Child can get paid for singing about "Bills, Bills, Bills." If you want to, though, you can help her out.
  
  
• Could we be watching the record industry choke on its own bile? Oh, how lovely that would be.
  
  
  

Nixon to Thompson: You ain't nothin' but a hound dog...

God bless Richard Nixon. I mean that. Today the oft-beleaguered but fascinating crook former President reached from beyond the grave to give us yet another reason to laugh at one of the mainstream GOP candidates. Had Nixon not taped every last bit of his Presidency, we'd likely never have learned today that, in Tricky Dick's opinion, Fred Thompson is "dumb as hell". Of course, we might also have had five terms of Richard Nixon in the White House. Nonetheless, I proudly nominate the ghost of Richard Nixon to head the RNC. Even dead, Dick would damn sure do a better job than Mel Martinez, another Republican who apparently is dumb as hell.

I'm not old enough to remember what Nixon might have thought of the candidacy of Ronald Reagan. I can vividly remember watching Nixon's funeral on TV as a fifth-grader because I was mesmerized by the sight of Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton (with their respective First Ladies) sitting together in the back yard of Nixon's birthplace. However, as I wasn't yet born when Reagan re-routed the Rockefeller-ized Republican Party in 1980, my personal discovery of any Nixon remarks on The Great Communicator will have to wait until I the American release of Lord Crossharbour's new book.

It seems rather obvious that Thompson is positioning himself as the Reagan of the 21st Century. Even more interesting is the internal competition within the GOP bears resemblance to the era which gave us our first professional actor in the White House (Note the emphasis on professional actor. Plenty of the occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. have been unjustly robbed of Oscars simply because they don't have SAG memberships.) Instead of the Rockefeller Republicans of the mid-to-late 20th Century we have the Rudy RINOS of the 21st Century.

Plagiarising Reagan's playbook appears to be the Thompson 2008 strategy. While Reagan would have grasped the importance of this particular moment in history and risen to the occasion just as he did in the waning days of the Cold War, Thompson is showing himself to be just what Richard Nixon said he was - dumb.

Here's a bit of what Nixon had to say about Fred:

H.R. Haldeman: Baker has appointed Fred Thompson as [Senate Watergate Committee] minority counsel.

Tricky Dick: Oh shit, that kid.

Haldeman: I guess so.

The Baker referred to above is Howard Baker, ranking minority member of the above-mentioned Senate Watergate Committee. Baker himself was a GOP candidate for President in 1980 and Reagan's Chief of Staff (1987-1988). Fred Thompson was Baker's campaign manager in 1972. No surprise that Fred returned the favor and once again connected himself to Ronald Reagan by making Baker co-chair of his candidacy.

From another tape:

Alexander Haig: He's talking to Fred Thompson. I said you're not --

Tricky Dick: Oh shit, he's dumb as hell. Fred Thompson, who is he? He won't say anything.

The general implication from President Nixon is that, like any good basset hound, Fred Thompson isn't very smart, but he's loyal. That's an excellent trait in a dog, but a pretty poor one in a President.

To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, Fred Thompson is no Ronald Reagan (and he's damn sure no Robert Taft). Unlike Reagan's impressive transition from silver screen to Governor's Mansion to White House, Fred's just a small-screen actor unable to translate his marginal talent and dim wits into a role too demanding for him. Sure, he's loyal to his party, but he's not smart enough to know how to lead it.

For that, the Republicans need a guy like Richard Nixon.

• This is just dumb. Dammit Hillary.
  
  
• Chris Dodd = MODOK.
  
  
• I firmly believe that it's part of the press' job to badger people in power when they screw up, and not stop badgering them until they respond and try to make things better. It's gotten to the point where I almost get nauseous every time I see a Blackwater article because I've read so many and because they're all so depressing. On the other hand, now the State Department seems to actually be taking some steps to at least document any continuing malfeasance from our soldiers of fortune.
  
  
• I just don't know how this jackass got elected twice.
  
  
• If it turns out that Larry Craig was actually involved with Ted Haggard's manwhore meth dealer, I don't know whether I'm going to laugh, cry, or laugh so hard that I cry. I'm skeptical, because, y'know, it's a meth dealing prostitute who's promoting his new book, but I still get a little giggle out of it.
  
  
• Chertoff: Remember how awesome 9/11 was?
  
  
• This article is more in line with the Obama I've seen personally: when he's improvising, or when he's thinking as himself and not as the fixers want him to think, he is stunningly forthright and direct. He comes off as intelligent and compassionate and honest, and he doesn't talk down to people. Somehow, this never seems to translate on television, where he sounds like a bumbling hopemonger. It's true though: he does have a brain, and he does have something to offer. He just needs to learn how to talk to the camera like he's talking to a single person.
  
  
• Oh, this is just fucking scandalous. 2,600 soldiers serve 22 month tours in Iraq, and come home to find out that they're not eligible for the GI Bill.
  
  
• Durbin has an interesting idea for immigrants: if they're productive members of American society, how about we don't deport them?
  
  
• The Iraqi president says we can have our troops back soon, and thanks for letting him borrow them for so long. Especially since the government has resolved not to make any progress.
  
  
• TPM:

  "Progress on most major policy initiatives has been difficult in the Senate this year, due entirely to the fact that the chamber's Republicans have decided to filibuster practically everything that moves. Indeed, the Senate GOP is on track to block more legislation in the 110th Congress than any in history -- filibustering at triple the usual rate."

  
  
  
• Fred Thompson scheduled to crash and burn tomorrow night.
  
  
• Giuliani knows that the Christian secession threat has him in deep shit, so he's going straight to them to pander. I look forward to his explanation of how keeping abortion legal means the terrorists have won.
  
  
• When I saw that Thurston Moore would be opening for Bright Eyes, I got sad. Very sad. Then my associate, Mike, put it into context: Thurston Moore isn't opening for Bright Eyes, Bright Eyes is closing for Thurston Moore.
  
  
• In other music news, while I don't care about Radiohead or Nine Inch Nails, I am excited that artists that actually have clout with the mainstream music industry are telling the major labels to get bent.
  

I need a nominee with soul power, and Fred Thompson ain't got no soul power

I went to see Of Montreal play last night, which was amazing in its own right, but notable here because the opening act, Pittsburgh trash-rappers Grand Buffet, plugged Ron Paul on stage. I wasn't sure whether to take that endorsement as a sign of Ron Paul's perverse ubiquity, or whether I should take the audience's indifference to Ron Paul as a sign that he's not as well-supported as I thought. It's hard to say: Chicago's a pretty Blue town, it's hard to imagine them getting riled up for any Republican.

And now, some sort of news.

• Giuliani is concerned that children of illegal immigrants that are born here might receive money from Hillary Clinton's $5,000-to-every-baby program. Last time I checked, anyone born within our borders is a citizen.

• Hillary plans to build a metaphorical "Bridge to the 20th Century" (or at least, after 1925 or so).
  
  
• Why have I seen not just one but multiple news stories about Barack Obama's lack of a flag pin?
  
  
• In a surprise twist, representatives of Iowa and New Hampshire have come out against reforming the country's totally dysfunctional primary system.
  
  
• It pains me to say this, but I have to. Chertoff has a point: using immigration law as a way to get gangbangers off the street is a worthwhile strategy, just the same as busting Al Capone on tax evasion. On the other hand, I disagree with his statement that he has to go ahead full-steam and bust all of those illegals anyway, just because Congress can't get anything done. He's got limited resources just like anyone else. Why should he feel obligated to spend all of his budget and manpower chasing down landscapers and guys with elote carts when the DHS could be spying on American citizens, waterboarding people, and hassling travelers about those two suspicious strings coming out of their shoes (laces? They look more like fuses to me!)
  
  
• Chicago remains a magnet for the disreputable. I love this town.
  
  
• The RIAA really needs to be stopped. The music business is evolving, and certain people (who know nothing about music, just marketing) will no longer be able to make themselves rich on an epic scale by robbing musicians and fans. So what are they doing? They're trying to milk a quarter of a million dollars out of a single mother of two. Who needs that money more? Jammie Thomas and her kids or Richard fucking Branson? Pitchfork:

  According to the Chicago Tribune, Thomas shared files by such artists as AFI, Aerosmith, Green Day, Journey, and Guns n' Roses. Thankfully, now these struggling entertainers will be able to feed their families.

  The complete list includes Sara McLachlan, Richard Marx and Linkin Park. It could be argued that Thomas was really just being penalized for having bad taste: if she had been swapping Public Enemy tunes, Chuck D would have come to her defense.
  
  
• Obama: Iowans know what arugula is. Iowans: No, we don't.
  
  
• The Cubs curse has nothing to do with the Greeks, it's actually a diabolical GOP conspiracy.
  
  
• If these numbers hold, Romney is the nominee. He takes the first two states by eight points each, despite all the coverage saying that he's lagging. That gives him a bump in South Carolina, where he can tie and potentially beat Fred Thompson, and then he can come in a respectable second in Florida. This effectively puts Law & Order re-runs back on 24-7 again and Rudy's on the run, campaigning for his life in big delegate states in a desperate attempt to make it look close, but the rest of the states will follow the lead and pick the guy who looks like a president and not someone who's desperately scrambling to save face. On the other hand, Romney himself is saying that what's going on now has squat to do with what happens in January.
  
  
• Ed Rollins, explaining why the GOP is losing the money race: "The Democrats, they’re out there, they’re hungry. We just got fat, dumb, and happy.”
  
  
• Torture? We don't tortu . . . hey, rich people! Next question!
  
  
• Seriously, it's nice when people push Democratic leadership to do what they need to do. Seniority be damned, I'd be fine if large portions of the Democratic leadership, who have been a large part of "guiding" the listless political drifting the DNC had been doing before the 2006 elections, were pushed out for the newbies (say, ambitious Jim Webb types) who pushed out Republicans on a platform of doing something worth a damn.
  

The Human Cost of War

Before I get into the news today, I want to bring up something that's been on my mind a lot in the past few days. We understand that there are currently 168,000 American troops serving in Iraq. Numbers like that have been bandied about for a while now, especially with all the recent discussion of the troop surge and how we're going to try to get those soldiers back out of Iraq. That's a huge number of human beings, many of whom are living every day with bombs going off around them.

But after I started really thinking about it, that number isn't the whole story. In the spring, we'll pass the fifth anniversary of the occupation of Iraq, and the 168,000 troops we have there now haven't been there the whole time. For all the talk about how the military is "stretched" and "strained," the specifics of that never really get laid out for us. How many people have served in the war in Iraq? Cox has an article from March (at the beginning of the surge) stating that there is no number solely for Iraq, but there is a joint number between Iraq and Afghanistan.

1,500,000.

According to suspicious source Wikipedia, "Approximately 1,426,713 personnel are currently on active duty in the military with an additional 1,259,000 personnel in the seven reserve components.

So what they mean, really, by "stretched," is that "there's a really shitty party in Iraq and everyone's invited."

I'm currently looking into getting updated statistics on how many troops have served and how many tours those soldiers have been on, but I just wanted to give you an idea of exactly what this war is costing in human currency: not in lives lost, but in lives scarred in battle, in husbands/wives/parents/children waiting at home and praying that their loved ones come home smiling and not dead or wounded, of upstanding citizens that could be safe at home with us instead of fighting tooth and nail in the desert for . . . [Editor's note: this sentence will be completed when someone gives us a satisfactory explanation of what this fight is about]. Since George W. Bush's presidency began, we have ONE AND A HALF MILLION NEW VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS. And no declaration of war.

P.S. -- "Furthermore: "About one in five of U.S. troops injured in Iraq have suffered serious wounds such as loss of a limb or an eye, massive burns, spinal or head damage or other potentially debilitating injury."