Category Archives: Politics: US

Losing the Sports Illustrated Voter

Tompaine.com was one of the early truth-squad, good-government sites, a trailblazer, which may be why it seems a little dowdy already. But they keep delivering.

Today it's A Cronkite Moment? in which Jonathan Tasini suggests that SI might be a bellweather today a bit like Walter Cronkite was 46 years ago.

In the May 3 issue of SI, Reilly, in his regular back-page column “The Life of Reilly,” wrote a piece under the headline “The Hero and the Unknown Soldier.” The hero in Reilly's column was Pat Tillman, the former star football player who was killed in Afghanistan. After 9/11, Tillman had given up a multimillion-dollar contract to volunteer for the Army Rangers. He was lionized throughout the country for his sacrifice.

The Unknown Soldier was Todd Bates. Bates drowned in Iraq. His death went virtually unnoticed except to his family and friends. The man who raised Bates, Charles Jones, refused to go to the funeral, refused to eat or relate to others; he died just four weeks after the funeral. “He died of a broken heart,” Bates' grandmother, Shirley, who also raised him, told Reilly. “There was no reason for my boy to die. There is no reason for this war. All we have now is a Vietnam. My Toddie's life was wasted over there. All this war is a waste. Look at all these boys going home in coffins. What's the good in it?” Reilly, in barely controlled rage, concludes his piece about Tillman and Bates:

“Both did their duty for their country, but I wonder if their country did its duty for them. Tillman died in Afghanistan, a war with no end in sight and not enough troops to finish the job. Bates died in Iraq, a war that began with no just cause and continues with no just reason.

Be proud that sports produce men like this.

But I, for one, am furious that these wars keep taking them.”

Reilly, in his eloquence, was expressing opinions already delivered in places like The Nation and op-ed pages around the country. But that's the point. With all due respect, The Nation,—of which I am a subscriber and supporter—and its ilk will not change the course of history because they speak to the already converted.

What's important here is that Reilly's audience is not the typical Nation reader.

Posted in Politics: US | Comments Off on Losing the Sports Illustrated Voter

Unfortunate Metaphor

My brother's White House Briefing today includes this zinger:

… at the rally in Cincinnati, Bush uncorked a possibly unfortunate image. From the transcript:

“I appreciate the grassroots people who are here. Listen, you've got to work hard to turn out the vote, and that's what we call grassroots. I want to thank you. I'm here to fertilize the grassroots today. I'm here to ask you to grow. (Applause.)”

Posted in Dan Froomkin, Politics: US | 1 Comment

Disney Blocks Anti-Bush Movie…Allegedly Because It Fears Retaliation from Bush Family

One of the signs that you live in a banana republic is that the people disappear off the streets and are held indefinitely without trial (think Padilla). Another is that shadowy people who aren’t officially there and who everyone says are not subject to ordinary authority beat up detainees (think ‘other agency’ operatives and contractors in Iraq’s prisons). Another is that the nation’s Treasury is looted to give favors to cronies of the junta. Check.

But has it come to the point where even the big fish live in fear? Apparently so. Disney is refusing to let its Mirimax subsidiary distribute a polemical anti-Bush film by Michael Moore. I have no brief for Moore, but the New York Times reports that Mirimax at least believes that Disney’s actions are not justified by its contracts with it.

Be that as it may, the shocking part is not corporate political censorship — we lost that virginity long before the first Bush — but one alleged reason for Disney’s unwillingness to have anything to do with the film: a fear of retaliation from the ruling family!

Disney Forbidding Distribution of Film That Criticizes Bush: Mr. Moore's agent, Ari Emanuel, said that Michael D. Eisner, Disney's chief executive, asked him last spring to pull out of the deal with Miramax. Mr. Emanuel said Mr. Eisner expressed concern that it would endanger tax breaks Disney receives for its theme park, hotels and other ventures in Florida, where Mr. Bush's brother, Jeb, is governor.

“Michael Eisner asked me not to sell this movie to Harvey Weinstein; that doesn't mean I listened to him,” Mr. Emanuel said. “He definitely indicated there were tax incentives he was getting for the Disney corporation and that's why he didn't want me to sell it to Miramax. He didn't want a Disney company involved.”

Disney executives deny that accusation, though they said their displeasure over the deal was made clear to Miramax and Mr. Emanuel.

A senior Disney executive elaborated that the company has the right to quash Miramax's distribution of films if it deems their distribution to be against the interests of the company. Mr. Moore's film, the executive said, is deemed to be against Disney's interests not because of the company's business dealings with the government but because Disney caters to families of all political stripes and believes Mr. Moore's film could alienate many.

Ironically, the film is called “Fahrenheit 911”, presumably an allusion to Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, a book about censorship. Moore's project, apparently, is about the Bush-Saudi connection.

Update: Jack Balkin takes Disney at its word, and argues that this exposes a new danger of media concentration, which he dubs the soft censorship of Corporate Expectations:

The soft censorship of corporate expectations suggests a generally unremarked problem with media concentration: It is often argued that media concentration can actually help foster diversity, because a monopolist will have an economic incentive to produce a diverse menu of media goods in order to capture an increasingly large audience share. But this reasoning neglects the fact that as media become vertically and horizontally integrated, they may become held responsible by politicians and advertisers for everything that they do. That leads them, all other things being equal, to avoid the kinds of attacks and controversies that will get them in hot water with politicians. Thus, although media concentration may produce products that are increasingly diverse from one perspective, they may be increasingly shallow from another. Conversely, in a world in which there are a large number of different players, the chances become higher than one of them is willing to risk the wrath of the powers that be.

This is a real danger, although it's currently too late in the evening for me to figure out whether it's new, or a more elegant formulation of the old.

Posted in Civil Liberties, Politics: US | 5 Comments

Sometimes Godwin’s Law Does Not Apply

One of the things I'm fairly squeamish about is comparisons of contemporary figures to Hitler. I do not go as far as those who say that this genocide was unique and superlatively horrible; Cambodia, 'ethnic cleansing', Rwanda, the 20th century has examples of horrors, each different in meaningful ways, each horrible.

Nevertheless, I am highly predisposed to dislike and distrust a statement like this one: “ Rush Limbaugh is as mainstream in America as Hitler was mainstream in Germany, circa 1932.” Trouble is, Digby got evidence, drawn from Day One of David Brock's new site Media Matters for America​.

It ain't pretty.

If there is any decency around, then decent people are going to run away from Limbaugh, despite the TLC they may wish to give this slightly repentant drug abuser.

  • Limbaugh suggests that feminists are into bestiality with dogs
  • “What's good for terrorists is good for John Kerry”
  • “if you want the terrorists running the show, then you will elect John Kerry”
  • “[Speaking about Democrats] I don't know who they are, I don't know what they believe, but I can't relate. I can't possibly understand somebody who hates this country, who was born and raised here. I don't understand how you hate this Constitution. I don't understand how you hate freedom”
  • “These people have become the mainstream thought — thinkers, generators of the Democratic Party. It's who they are. They hate this country. They hate the military of this country.”

(there's quite a bit more where that came from).

Posted in Politics: US | 5 Comments

IQ (and 2000 Presidential Preference) By State

When I lived in Cambridge, back in the Thatcher era, my friends — especially David Howarth, now the LibDem Propective Parliamentary Candidate for Cambridge — commonly called the Conservative Party (the Tories) the “stupid party”.

So what to make of this chart? (via Leiter)

At least Florida is only a tiny bit below average. I'm sure that when Jeb Bush gets done trashing our school system we will do worse here.

Continue reading

Posted in Politics: US | 9 Comments

Flowers In the Muck

Angry Bear and Brad DeLong are trying to compile a list of people who are going to get out of the Bush administration with their reputation intact. Being economists, they're naturally concentrating on those, which means mostly higher staffers and regulators, with a dash of policy and press people thrown in for good measure. It turns out that the set of people who will emerge with reputations unsullied is not empty, but by their reckoning it's pretty small.

Back in October I surveyed the Bush cabinet and found it to be a fairly sad lot. But I did find one name that I think should be added to their list. You may never have heard of him, but he's in the Cabinet.

Posted in Politics: US | Comments Off on Flowers In the Muck