If I read another editorial associating the war in Iraq with the greater war on terrorism….
The Bush administration propoganda machine has convinced far too many people that the occupation efforts in Iraq are a cornerstone to the war on terror despite the following facts:
1. The war has diverted military resources from Afghanistan (a very real source of terrorism) and moved them to Iraq.
2. The cost of the war in Iraq has taken money away from the homeland security budget. The Coast Guard, tasked with protecting our ports and waterways, has estimated that the upgrades mandated by the Maritime Transportation Security Act would cost roughly $7.5 billion. But they have received only $500 million. What’s worse — only 4 to 6 percent of all cargo coming through U.S. each day is properly screened.
The information above comes, in part, from this article.
Bush has successfully won over the majority of Republicans in the country, but he might be losing hardcore conservatives and libertarians who see through the smokescreen and understand that Iraq has more to do with nation-building than fighting a war against terror (don’t believe me? Read the editorial of the Tribune Review, or if you dare, Pat Buchanan’s website). What’s worse? Military folks serving in Iraq have begun to wonder aloud why Americans are focusing on things like the Vietnam war while they are mired in a very West Bank-esque scenario.
Posted on 12 September 2004
A couple of royal screw-ups on the campaign trail, especially right after the opposing party’s convention, aren’t going to help matters. The first, his addition of the words “the war on terror” while talking about the casaulties in Iraq, won’t complete doom Kerry, but the spin unleashed from his campaign afterwards only solidifies the image of Kerry as a flip-flopper. The second — his wife’s assertion that we really need is a Department of Wellness — could really hurt. That sound you hear? That’s thousands of centrist, undecided voters fleeing to George Bush to avoid yet another layer of bureaucracy telling us how to live our lives. This idea also provides civil libertarians with fodder to skewer Kerry, something they’ve typically avoided with a big government Republican currently in office. At this point, the Kerry campaign has to hope that the release and analysis of documents pertaining to George Bush’s National Guard, uh, service does a lot of damage to the incumbent.
Posted on 9 September 2004
As the remains of Hurricane Frances hit the Mon Valley, we can expect lots and lots of rain for the next couple of days. Yesterday’s ride home was an adventure, as I left just as it really started to pour. There was at least 2 inches of rain on most of the roads, and I got doused by a wave thanks to a lake that had formed on Smallman Street. The ride in today wasn’t bad, and I wisely slapped on the rear fender so at least my butt was dry.
In other bike news, I’ve spied a good deal for a used track bike on eBay, so hopefully I’ll have a new ride soon. I did my homework this time and contacted people who had bought from this seller before, and his references are good, so I’m going for it.
Posted on 8 September 2004
After 1300 miles and five days away from home, we survived the East Coast tour. The trip, in a nutshell — Philadelphia to Hartford to Ocean City NJ. Note to self — if going to beach again, be sure to bring the bike. I did manage to find an open wifi node in Ocean City (somebody’s wide open Linksys) but I was bit nervous using it since I hadn’t installed an antivirus app, so there was no blogging from the ocean. I did manage to catch the Speedvision Rally Japan wrapup show last night, which was very cool (nice work Petter Solberg).
While there isn’t much other news from trip, I’ve got a few entries brewing at the moment, so stay tuned….
Posted on 6 September 2004
The tour continues — right now we’re just outside Hartford CT staying with Jen’s sister Jackie and family. This is a bit nicer than a hotel, as we don’t have to go to bed when Seb does.
We actually watched GW Bush’s nomination acceptance speech last night. I’ll let William Saletan sum up what I think. I’ve been working on a longer essay outlining my disaffection with our version of democracy (basically I think our two party system is muzzling our political freedoms), but it could be weeks before that is finished….
Posted on 3 September 2004
You’ve got to love hotels with free (I hope) broadband….
William Saletan has written an excellent review of Arh-nold’s speech last night at the Republican National Convention.
Posted on 1 September 2004
We’ll be travelling the next five days, making a whirlwind East Coast Hemphill family tour. No climbing to be had this trip, however — though I may have to do some track bike shopping in Philly. If all goes well there we’ll find some wifi hotspots to check email and post up.
Posted on 1 September 2004
I got an email from Elisabeth Esselink (aka Solex) via her newsletter saying that a new album (“The Laughing Stock of Indie Rock”) is forthcoming, and she might, maybe, possibly, play in Pittsburgh. I hope she does make it here — we wussed out on a road to Cleveland to see her several years ago. Oh, and another bit of good hews — she’s releasing the album on the Arena Rock label, instead of the big bad indie giant Matador.
Posted on 26 August 2004
I came across this very interesting interview with linguist George Lakoff. He’s got some intriguing ideas about how progressives should frame their debates against conservatives. I found this bit pretty interesting:
Why do conservatives like to use the phrase “liberal elite” as an epithet?
Conservatives have branded liberals, and the liberals let them get away with it: the “liberal elite,” the “latte liberals,” the “limousine liberals.” The funny thing is that conservatives are the elite. The whole idea of conservative doctrine is that some people are better than others, that some people deserve more. To conservatives, if you’re poor it’s because you deserve it, you’re not disciplined enough to get ahead. Conservative doctrine requires that there be an elite: the people who thrive in the free market have more money, and they should. Progressives say, “No, that’s not fair. Maybe some should have more money, but no one should live in poverty. Everybody who works deserves to have a reasonable standard of living for their work.” These are ideas that are progressive or liberal ideas, and progressives aren’t getting them out there enough.
What progressives are promoting is not elite at all. Progressives ought to be talking about the conservative elite. They shouldn’t be complaining about “tax cuts for the rich,” they should be complaining about “tax cuts for the conservative elite,” because that’s who’s getting them.
I think he dodging the issue a bit. Honestly, there’s an elite on both sides of the aisle. To say that George Soros isn’t among the elite is just out false. He may be a philanthropist, and he may care about poor people, but he’s still stinkin’ rich, and he cannot, absolutely cannot, relate to a poor person. And unless we’re going to ditch the free market completely for communism, there will be some sort of class system. Now, a free market isn’t necessarily incompatible with a living wage, or ending poverty, but there will always be elites of any flavor. The real question is, are progressive elites willing to be taxed at a higher rate to support the fight against poverty. And his final sentence is just a flat out lie — every rich person in the United States benefits from the tax cuts — not just conservatives….
Progessives like to talk about the “widening gulf” between the rich and poor. But this will always exist in a free market economy — it’s built into the rules. The gulf could be narrowed, but it will never, every disappear. So progressives need to ask themselves what they might be willing sacrifice to bring this about. Will they pay more taxes? Will they pay more for goods and services? Simply saying that conservative elites are getting more money off the backs of the poor doesn’t reframe (his terminology) the debate at all, because it doesn’t offer any solutions.
Posted on 26 August 2004
I came across this history of rock music today, and after reading through the history of the 1990s, I found that while the author was tracing the patterns of indie music, I was tracing my past, as defined by the music I listened to. I’ve always thought that life would be better with a soundtrack, and one of the things I love about films is the juxtaposition of images, themes, and music. Back in the days when I fancied myself a writer, I would almost always write a story with a song in my head. I couldn’t always convey that to the reader (short of putting lyrics into the story, or making the song a part of it), but it was, to me, the soundtrack.
So, that said, it’s easy for me to read a list of bands, and immediately think about how their music defined different parts of my life. I’ll spare you the gory details, here’s a rough overview of the music that has defined the various eras in my life….
High School
The Specials
The Toasters
U2
College (I suddenly become much more musically literate)
Galaxie 500
Pavement
Luna
Mercury Rev
Uncle Tupelo
Polvo
Stereolab
REM
Madder Rose
Post-College
Loads of no-depression/alt-country/cow punk
Sunday Puncher
Bailter Space
The Electronic Period
Autechre
Aphex Twin
Squarepusher
DJ Spooky
This Present Age
Death Cab for Cutie
Citizens Here and Abroad
Bedhead
The New Year
Pedro the Lion
Solex
Obviously, this isn’t any sort of exhaustive list. But, for each era, I do remember nearly wearing out the CDs of the bands listed. But reading that history was like a trip down memory lane. And I’ve been amazed at the number of bands that have just fallen off my radar. Looks like I’ll be dusting off the CDs tonight…..
Posted on 25 August 2004