Heretics' almanac

Urgent memo to Kerry

Dear Senator Kerry;

To paraphrase the president's father, it's getting hotter in the kitchen. Quoting you out of context and willfully misconstruing your opinions should be the acts of desparate people, but it appears Karl Rove believes in such tactics. It's probably because time is running out, and by the time the press makes an issue out of their tactics, it'll be too late.

You can't afford another debate that ends in a draw, senator. That's the bad news. The good news is that Americans are convinced you can a) stand straight and look presidential; b) express yourself clearly and unequivocally; c) maintain your composure under pressure.

So, here's what you gotta do in the last debate:

Do politicians really think we're stupid?

Three seemingly unrelated items have come to me the last few days:

1) In its October edition, the Atlantic Monthly has published a letter Joseph M. Price (M.D.) sent to them in regards to George W. Bush's debating style. Price points out that:

...slowly developing cognitive deficits, as demonstrated so clearly by the President, can represent only one diagnosis, and that 'presenile dementia'!

2) In the same issue, the Atlantic shares with us an analysis from yourdictionary.com that compares the level of language used in presidential debates through the years. And whereas Douglas and Lincoln argued with each other at the level of a 12th grade graduate, Bush and Gore spoke at a sixth- and seventh grade level, respectively. And that was actually a step up from previous debates.

3) In an exchange with Chris Matthews at MSNBC, Zell Miller (who can't possibly have many friends left in the Democratic party) defended his "spitball" comment by saying it was a "metaphor," (though from the way he said it, you'd think it was spelled "metafur," just like "nookeelur."

Johan Galtung is O'Brien (Nineteen Eighty-Four)

Bjørn Stærk critiques (in English) a (Norwegian) article by Johan Galtung in today's Dagbladet.

Galtung's written work is - truthfully - a study in Orwellianism. By often invoking "peace," "dignity," and other unassailable but otherwise vague terms, he assumes that his position is automatically superior to everyone else's. In the article in Dagbladet, for example, his premise - which he never bothers to substantiate - is that Norway is taken in by the evil ways of the American empire. Neither the US nor Norway have legitimate claims to self-defense in their military policy; and never mind the Jewish refugees who inhabit the country - Israel, we are told, is an extension of American imperialism.

How does he get away with it?

Ken Starr's lame defense

In today's Wall Street Journal pornographer Ken Starr writes an op-ed piece lambasting Bill Clinton's view that Starr's work as independent counsel somehow was reprehensible. As proof, he points to the fact that several people were convicted in the course of the independent counsel's work, and that many of his colleagues were "career prosecutors." Oh, and a sanctimonious discourse on the US constitution.

Where is Palestine?

Has anyone noticed that the term "Palestine" has come into common usage in the mainstream press? People now say that they've visited "Palestine" and are concerned about the conflict between "Palestine" and Israel. The CIA differentiates between Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza; and I've seen maps that highlight "Palestinian autonomous areas," but nobody has made it perfectly clear what is Palestine and what isn't.

Freudian slips and Bush's secrecy

Laura Kipnis, who I think I have some kind of literary crush on (or is it: on whom I may have a literary crush?) writes about Condi Rice's Freudian slip in referring to the president as her husband. (The president's national security advisor isn't married.)

Although I'm not a psychologist, I am an introspective guy, and when I misspeak I try to find out why I did. What was it in my brain that caused one word to slip out of my mouth when I really wanted to use another one? Sometimes, I don't know or don't want to know - confusing my wife for my mother evokes a grimace, for example. But usually it's because my brain is free-associating a little too fast, leaving my mouth to finish the business my mind should stay with for just a little longer.

My tendency is therefore not to overanalyze Freudian slips too much. But Laura's point is that reporters embedded with the Bush administration are acting like spectators of a trapeze show or car race: they're there to see if some horrible mistake happens. Because when a mistake occurs, the truth may come out.

Right-wing idiotarian dictionary (well a start anyway)

Mike Silverman deserves a tip of the hat for his Idiotarian Dictionary. Mike may be particularly pissed at the left wing, but there is similar (ab)use of terminology on the far right as well, e.g.,

Liberal: a treacherous amoral naif who hates rich people and believes that big government is the solution to all problems

Patriotism: an attitude characterized by believing everything the Bush administration says.

Rights: buying and carrying guns in case the government gets uppity, worshiping Jesus in public schools, paying as few taxes as possible, keeping government off your back

Civil liberties: peddling pornography, killing unborn babies, standing up for Nazis and communists

Moral clarity: the ability to parse everything into what's absolutely right and what's absolutely wrong, without getting confused by facts or nuance

War on terror: the inalienable right to start a war against whomever we please

WMD: any device that poisons, infects, or radiates people to death, or equipment to build these devices, or at least evidence that such equipment may have existed