Dean's World

It seems to me that an awful lot of our National Guards are emergency response personnel. When a war comes, and they go to fight, our police and fire-- heck! many companies lose specialists tasked with computer security. Perhaps cities need to implement a rule about how many members of its police and fire departments can be reservists and national guard?

Joe Gandelman notes that some 200 students are stranded at Dillard University in Louisiana, with apparently little food or water.

I know it sounds weird to just ask on a blog, but if anyone can help...

The situation in New Orleans is looking bleaker by the hour. Michele has a report from a physician on the front lines.

The situation isn't improving. It's deteriorating.

Google Announces Plan To Destroy All Information It Can't Index

As a part of Purge's first phase, executives will destroy all copyrighted materials that cannot be searched by Google.

"A year ago, Google offered to scan every book on the planet for its Google Print project. Now, they are promising to burn the rest," John Battelle wrote in his widely read "Searchblog." "Thanks to Google Purge, you'll never have to worry that your search has missed some obscure book, because that book will no longer exist. And the same goes for movies, art, and music."

What happened to "Do no Evil"? Well, it must be true, because I read it in America’s Finest News Source. My question is: will libertarians support government action on this one? Or will they hope the Free Market steps in to correct the situation?

Did you get your free shirt yet?

Using interspecies sex to sell a product. Michael is so kinky!

The nutjobs over at The Daily Kos are in a blame Bush frenzy. Bush is being blamed for not being in New Orleans sharing the pain of the people and perusing the damage. Maybe he isn't there because they are still trying evacuate the area and they don't have the time or the manpower to host a Presidential visit. Maybe he's not there because people are going nuts looting and shooting. I don't know but I do know that it's a bit early to be expecting Bush to head on over to the disaster.

Personally, I'd love to see Bush down there in a gondola looking at the damage. Then we could hear how insensitive he was for floating by in a gondola. The poor don't have gondolas and that would make them feel even worse. Bastard!

Bush and the Republicans are also to blame because New Orleans didn't evacuate everyone properly. I didn't know the mayor of New Orleans was a Republican...

As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure that Louisiana is run by Democrats. Is there a prominent Republican to blame from LA?

Bush also caused Katrina because...

Wait for it...

He didn't sign The Kyoto Protocol!

Yes, according to the whackjobs at Kos, global warming caused this and that is Bush's fault too! I guess the nuts didn't read the New York Times recently:

Because hurricanes form over warm ocean water, it is easy to assume that the recent rise in their number and ferocity is because of global warming.

But that is not the case, scientists say. Instead, the severity of hurricane seasons changes with cycles of temperatures of several decades in the Atlantic Ocean. The recent onslaught "is very much natural," said William M. Gray, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University who issues forecasts for the hurricane season.

From 1970 to 1994, the Atlantic was relatively quiet, with no more than three major hurricanes in any year and none at all in three of those years. Cooler water in the North Atlantic strengthened wind shear, which tends to tear storms apart before they turn into hurricanes.

In 1995, hurricane patterns reverted to the active mode of the 1950's and 60's.

Yeah, instead of imploring his readers to donate money for the victims, he's got them all hot and frothy, pointing fingers and whining about how bad they have it. Screw you, you pathetic babies. Fork over some of that evil money that is burning your pocket. Give all that you think should have been taxed away to Operation Blessing.

As you may know, about two-thirds of New Orleans’ population is black. We now have liberal blogs and commentators around the world arguing that there was a conspiracy by New Orleans officials (and they toss in the Bush administration for good measure) to kill off the city's black population. I just had to address these crazy claims (and provide aid links courtesy of Instapundit blog), and state: "A key question that these liberal critics should ask: Where are their Hollywood and other entertainment friends, while various Christian and other religious groups are already out in force with relief efforts? Why aren't their beloved European allies helping out, as America helps out folks when disaster strikes? Using their own logic, it must be because (at least in New Orleans and parts of Mississippi) it mostly affected black folks. By the way, BlackAmericaWeb.com reported yesterday that the National Urban League and the NAACP are assessing how they can help."

I'm pleased and honored to announce that Aziz Poonawalla has agreed to join the list of Dean's World contributors. Born in Chicago, he currently resides in Texas. He is a husband and father, a doctor of medical physics, a Shia muslim, and runs the excellent City of Brass weblog. I hope you will give him a warm welcome.

Val of Babalu Blog is giving away free t-shirts in exchange for hurricane relief donations.

Go get your shirt.

Michele has an incredibly good idea about hurricane coverage. You go girl.

Jane Novak, one of my personal heroes, has a stinging article about politics in the Arab world. Even more amazing? It was published in the Arab press. You can find her blog, Armies of Liberation, right here. I wish I were half the man that Jane Novak already is.

The latest Storyblogging Carnival is available at Working Titles.

The folks at CampusJ have reached their first anniversary of documenting anti-semitism on campus. Keep kicking ass, guys.

World-renowned political scientist Rudy Rummel has responded to Tall Dave's assertion that economics are the make-or-break for democracy. All very worth reading.

One of our treasured commenters, Steven Malcolm Anderson, recently dared me to add a Muslim blogger to the Dean's World list of contributors. As it happens, I had already been thinking about doing just that. So I'm pleased to announce that we have recently made an agreement with an esteemed and thoughtful--and patriotic--muslim who will be joining our list of contributors. I'll have more to say about him later. But you'll be hearing from him soon.

Finally: I'm still very tired, so My Evil Queen will continue to reign here on Dean's World for the next day or so. Thanks for giving her a warm reception. Have fun y'all.

Regular unleaded is selling at $2.99 9/10 at the corner. While visiting my Mom this evening we saw it for $2.79 and Dean and I both agreed to get it while the getting good.

Anyone over $3 for regular yet?

The latest Carnival of the Vanities is up at Incite.

The "Stupid Republicans" thread has been added to the Best Discussions Archive.

I'm always open to suggestions if someone thinks a thread is worthy of inclusion in that archive. I don't always think of it, so don't be shy.

* Update * While at it, I added our discussion of Malcolm X. There were some dynamite discussions in that thread. Please be sure to make special note of comments by Arnold Harris and Tyrone Steels, who helped elevate the discussion to a raw and real level rarely achieved in online discussions.

There are two types of Salty dog. One is a refreshing drink, the other is a condition that will ruin a promising evening...

Draco is 7 months old! Yes, those are Dean's ears. :-)

There may be more than 55 dead in Mississippi.

New Orleans survived the immediate effects of the hurricane, but the city is now being flooded by a levee breach:

The effect of the breach was instantly devastating to residents who had survived the fiercest of Katrina's winds and storm surge intact, only to be taken by surprise by the sudden deluge. And it added a vast swath of central New Orleans to those already flooded in eastern New Orleans, the Lower 9th Ward and St. Bernard and Plaquemines parishes.

Beginning at midday, Lakeview residents watched in horror as the water began to rise, pushed through the levee breach by still-strong residual winds from Katrina. They struggled to elevate furniture and eventually found themselves forced to the refuge of second floors just when most in the neighborhood thought they had been spared.

"It would have been fine," refugee Pat O.Brien said. "The eye passed over." But his relief was short-lived. "It's like what you see on TV and never thought would happen to us. We lost everything: cars, art, furniture, everything."

Scott Radish, his wife Kyle and neighbor Brandon Gioe stood forlornly on their Mound Street porch, where they had ridden out Katrina, only to face a second, more insidious threat. "The hurricane was scary," Scott said. "All the tree branches fell, but the building stood. I thought I was doing good. Then I noticed my Jeep was under water."

CNN and the Washington Post do have a list of aid agencies, though.

I love New Orleans - it's my favorite place to visit. I hope they'll be able to recover from this, and I hope they might move some of their treasured landmarks inland.

I used to live in a hurricane prone area (Cape May, NJ). There used to be a South Cape May, but that's underwater now. It has been underwater for decades. Friends of ours had a seaside home, but they sold it because they were tired of cleaning up after flood damage. I don't know if it's global warming or something else, but the ocean seems to be moving inland. Even if we all stopped driving cars tomorrow, lived in harmony with nature and dressed ourselves in bannana leaves, this trend would not reverse itself. We're probably going to have to learn to live with things as they are, and give large bodies of water some breathing room.

Star Jones: She's just annoying and I hate annoying people.

Anyone that likes Star Jones: Cuz, you are obviously annoying too.

Viggo Mortensen: He may be cute but he's just not that bright.

Eve Ensler: "I blame America! Ooh, I have a vagina! Blah, blah, blah..." I'm sick to death of you, your vagina and America hating bitches in general.

Bill Maher: Oh Bill, you used to be funny but now you are just sad. Pick a position and stay there. Maybe, just maybe, you'll be funny again.

Pat Robertson: Dude, STFU! You are embarrassing us.

This list is a work in progress, add your nominees in the comments.

Part 34.

Welcome to the Carnival of the Liberated, a sampler of some of the best posts from Iraqi and Afghani bloggers. This week we have more thoughts on the new Iraqi constitution, the Badr Regiment, the Afghan parliamentary elections, and much, much more.

Afghan Warrior brings us up-to-date on the upcoming Afghan parliamentary elections.

Faiza of A Family in Baghdad has a long, rambling multi-segment post musing on politics, economics, the evils of capitalism, and terrorism:

There are hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, or perhaps hundreds of thousands of people around the world who oppose capitalism just like they oppose terrorism, but they support justice, and noble principals…

A Glimpse of Iraq has a few Iraqi jokes for us. I see that ethnic humor is universal—only the ethnicity changes.

An Average Iraqi writes about the Badr Regiment.

Sunshine of Days of My Life posts about helping the poor.

Mama of Emotions… wonders.

Hammorabi writes about the complications of writing a constitution for a country that is ethnically and religiously diverse. His main point: the differences in interests among the Kurds, Shi'a Arabs, and Sunni Arabs spring from the differences in their experiences.

Ibn Al-Rafidain comments on circumcision, sodomy, and the death penalty.

Iraq the Model reflects on the Iraqi constitution:

Iraqis as a people are facing a very difficult choice this time; it's not like the January elections when they had 111 slates from all colors of the political spectrum to choose from but now they're left to choose between a constitution they don't agree with all its contents and a possible dangerous political vacuum in case they reject the constitution.

IraqPundit writes about the prospect of civil war in Iraq (and how some seem to be pushing it on Iraq):

While civil war is a serious possibility, Iraq is not there yet. In order to have a war like Lebanon's, the population must hate each other.

Ferid of Iraq4ever has pictures of a pro-Saddam, pro-Ba'athist demonstration. I wonder how this will be viewed if there's a ban on the Ba'athist party in the final version of the constitution.

Raed Jarrar of Raed in the Middle still believes that Iraq can't have any freedom or draft a legitimate constitution until after a complete American withdrawal from the country.

neurotic iraqi wife sticks her head up long enough to mention her one year blogging anniversary and bring us up-to-date on her life in the Green Zone. You might want to give her a good word.

Dave Schuler posts regularly to his own weblog, The Glittering Eye. The Carnival was originally conceived by Ryan Boots.

Republican chicks are just hotter than their Democrat counterparts. Yeah, I know everybody likes to pick on Kathryn Harris' looks but next to Nancy Pelosi, Harris is a freakin' MILF.

Why do you think that is?

Is it because Republican chicks wear bras and know how to use a razor? [Not work safe]

Did you know that Cindy Sheehan has her own diary over at Kos? Yep, I read Kos and I saw something that just floored me.

Cindy Sheehan:

"The second thing that worries the crap out of me is the almost icon status that I have achieved. I never set out to become the 'Rosa Parks of the Peace Movement.' I ventured out on August 6, 2005 to hold George Bush accountable and to raise awareness about his lies and misuse and abuse of power. I didn't set out to become anyone's hero." [Emphasis mine]

Hero? Rosa Parks of the Peace Movement? Um, don't worry your little lefty head about it honey. I know Rosa Parks. Rosa Parks is a fellow Detroiter. Trust me lady, you are no Rosa Parks.

Seriously.

I think that she is more like the "Jesse Jackson of the peace movement". What do you think?

Note:

I'm not linking it directly, out of respect for Dean, but you can find a link to it over at Jeff's. It's the first update.

Dean annoyed me, so I gave him a much deserved spanking (he's kinky that way) and I'm taking over the blog.

Enough of this "defending the liberal tradition" crapola, I'm imposing Rightwing Martial Law for the day.

You've been warned.

Today marks forty-four years of the world being a better place.

The latest Carnival of the Capitalists is available at KC's blog.

Fuzzilicious Thinking has some important scientific data and thoughts.

Quoted:

Dean:

After resisting blogs for quite some time, you got the ball rolling for me after none other than Dr. Duesberg himself referred Dean's World to me.

To the point... after the last presidential election I noticed that *many* democrats were calling Bush voters stupid. At the time I found that pretty disturbing. Today I read on a mailing list a tale of an Iraqi war protester chatting with a young soldier. The protesters conclusion was that the soldier had a 'meager intellect.'

Over years of political discussions with a variety of people I don't think I've *ever* heard a conservative/republican/libertarian question the intellect of someone they were talking to. Is it just me or is it only liberal/left/democrats that resort to this (for the most part, of course)?

What could possibly explain this bizarre notion of intellectual superiority?

I hope you can post this or write your own note on this topic. Your blog has a pretty good group of participants - I'd like to see their take on this issue.

Beyond that: both of America's major parties have caricatures of each other. The primary rap against Republicans for any number of years has been that they are stupid, and the primary rap against Democrats has been that they are weak and ineffectual. Conservatives and liberals (who aren't the same as Republicans and Democrats, but there's a lot of overlap) map to roughly similar cartoonishness: Conservatives are authoritarian, nasty, and rather stupid, and liberals are wishy-washy pansies with their heads in the clouds.

How and why we got here is a fascinating question, but let's posit this: there's a kernal of truth to most stereotypes, otherwise, they wouldn't be stereotypes. As it happens, many American white guys do look funny dancing, fancy spinning tire rims are quite popular among young black men, and there really are an awful lot of "Asians" in the nation's math departments. I've known a few accountants and lawyers in my day, and by golly, an awful lot of them do seem to be Jewish!

There really are liberals running around who think that love and understanding can end war, and there really are conservatives out there who think that reading any book other than the Bible is a waste of time.

The rap on America's right-leaning folks as dumb has a heritage going at least back to President Eisenhower, who was portrayed as dumb, as were Republican Presidents Ford, Reagan, and Bush II. The other two Republican presidents were not considered dumb, but were considered either outright evil (Nixon) or out of touch patricians and corporate sellouts (Bush I). Bush II has the distinction of being slammed as evil, stupid, and a servant of corporations all at once--something of a hat trick for Republican stereotypes.

Where does this all come from? Well, it's quite true that most recent Republican Presidents have been less than stellar students in school. I seem to recall that even Eisenhower was not a particularly good student at West Point, with a reputation more as an athlete than a scholar (which, by the way, is not at all uncommon for officers who go on to great distinction).

I would think, too, that the notion that Republicans are stupid may have something to do with the fact that they will, when they go to college, be much more interested in business and professional degrees--more interested in making money, in other words, than academic achievement.

That said, it has come to the attention of any number of observers that over the last 20 years, the trend toward conservatives not being respected in academia, particularly our top universities, has become particularly pronounced. The number of registered Democrats on the tenured faculty at Harvard, Berkeley, the University of Michigan, MIT, and so on likely outnumbers registered Republicans by at least 5 or 6 to one--and I'm probably underestimating the disparity.

Almost every professor I know who has discussed politics in my presence has made clear his absolute and utter revulsion for Republicans in general and the current crop of them in particular. It doesn't seem to have occurred to most of them how insulated they may have become politically. I believe this is a serious problem at many of today's universities: when a majority of Americans perceive that Democrats are snotty elitists, this cannot be healthy for the body politic.

I seem to have wandered a bit far afield in this discussion, but the nice thing about being a blogger is that you can do that. In any case, I invite others to share their thoughts in the comments.

Two things. One, all the calls for federal government dependency. Various officials are on television calling for government aid and help from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This may sound callous, but I don’t believe that it is the job of the federal government - ahem, taxpayers across the country - to subsidize folks in certain states who are stupid enough to continually build in locales where Nature clearly does not want folks to build. Especially when they earn more money than I do. If they choose to do so, then they should reap the full monetary consequences of doing so.

Another issue, the charges of price gouging on generators and canned goods, etc. Most of what I am hearing being called price gouging ain’t so. Rather, it is supply and demand. When the demand goes up, of course the price will go up! If ya don’t wanna pay the higher prices, then folks who live in hurricane areas should prepare in advance. Folks who are late birds and were procrastinators shouldn’t pay the same prices as the early birds.

Tall Dave says that the real make-or-break for democracy in Iraq will be Iraq's economy, and has some numbers and analysis worth considering.

There's reason to be hopeful if it's so, because despite what you may have heard about China's fast-growing economy--growing at a whopping 9% last year--it pales in comparison to the rapid economic growth in the last two years in Iraq.

When I first heard about the movie Ray, I thought it looked likely to be good. When I finally saw it, I was blown away.

Now I see they're getting ready to release a movie about Johnny Cash.

I'm a big fan of Johnny Cash, but I must say: this trailer doesn't look promising. The actor neither looks nor sounds much like the guy, and the trailer looks a little, well, boring. I hope I'm wrong though.

(Thanks Casey.)

The situation in southern Louisiana looks increasingly dire. As in, truly horrific. It's due to hit landfall at 7:00 Central with winds over 150 miles per hour, waves estimated at over 20 feet--one was measured at well over 30 feet before contact was lost with the instruments. New Orleans is below sea level, only keeping the sea at bay due to extensive dykes that can only handle much smaller waves than that. Major chemical and petroleum plants are right in the danger zone. The whole city and surrounding areas are being evacuated.

Pundit Guy will be running regular updates on the situation.

* Update * Without trying to sound hysterical, it looks like those people who went to the Superdome for shelter may have made a horrible mistake. Let's hope not...

Quoted:

Both the young 2nd lieutenant and the young specialist were inside a shop when a close-quarters firefight broke out, and they ran outside. Not knowing how many men they were fighting, they wanted backup. LTC Kurilla began running in the direction of the shooting. He passed by me and I chased, Kurilla leading the way.

There was a quick and heavy volume of fire. And then LTC Kurilla was shot.

Kurilla was running when he was shot, but he didn't seem to miss a stride; he did a crazy judo roll and came up shooting.

...Kurilla, though down and unable to move, was fighting and firing, yelling at the two young soldiers to get in there; but they hesitated. BamBamBamBam!

This is not fiction.

In case it helps you, "LTC" is Lieutenant Colonel, and "CSM" is Command Sargeant Major. Now, go read the rest.

Then read more about Michael Yon.

Jessica's Journal quotes an historian who says that James Buchanan, 15th President of the United States, was gay.

I don't much care either way, except to note what the natural skeptic would point out: it is very easy to cherry-pick quotes and data to build a case like this. Such was done to Abraham Lincoln by those who wanted to say Lincoln was gay, but anyone who looks carefully and closely at the evidence knows it was always sketchy at best.

It wouldn't bother me if it were so. I just note that there are plenty of people with degrees in history who will say outlandish things just to be provocative. For example, there are a few people out there who will try to seriously make the case that the great classical music composer Beethoven was black, and they'll provide a list of quotations and descriptions from the era that would seem to back up the notion. The problem is they have to explain away all the paintings of the guy, and not just of him but also portraits of relatives of his. Again, denying that it's so is not a matter of not wanting it to be so--actually I think it would be cool as hell if it were so--but it's simply a matter of, "dude, it's just not not very likely. Some black blood would not be impossible, but really, it's a stretch." (SOURCE.)

On the case of Buchanan, it does seem more believable. With 43 having served in the office so far, for one of them to have had that inclination would not be a stretch at all. Especially in an era where people generally didn't prod too closely into personal affairs, and when being a "confirmed bachelor" was widely accepted as quite normal.

Sometimes you just can't beat the classics: Superman is a dick.

Anyone out there got a spare video card for Kevin?

Probably not

Via AP

Anti-gay protests at GI funerals

SMYRNA, Tenn. - Members of a church say God is punishing American soldiers for defending a country that harbors gays, and they brought their anti-gay message to the funerals Saturday of two Tennessee soldiers killed in Iraq.

The church members were met with scorn from local residents. They chased the church members cars' down a highway, waving flags and screaming "God bless America."..

..The Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist in Kansas, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.

The church members carried signs and shouted things such as "God hates fags" and "God hates you."

About 10 church members protested near Smyrna United Methodist Church and nearly 20 stood outside the National Guard Armory in Ashland City. Members have demonstrated at other soldier funerals across the nation.

The biggest problem: the clearly psychotic Reverend Phelps is walking the streets, a danger to himself and others. Our mental health agencies are, for the 1,236,457th + time, demonstrating ignorance and incompetence that borders on the criminal.

But back to the near-criminal idiocies of the press. Here's what they always get wrong about the Phelps "church".

1. Mainstream and fundamentalist Christians have denounced Phelps and his cult as a producer of anti-gay propaganda and violence-inspiring hate speech. His cult is composed of members of his own family who live within a family 'compound'. The press knows this, but they choose to call this psychotic family a "Church"

2. Fred Phelps is a registered Democrat. and the members of his cult have had very strong ties to the Democratic Party. From Wikipedia:

   In the 1980s, the Phelps family were strong political allies with then-senator Al Gore. The home of Fred Jr., Phelps' eldest son, located in the Westboro compound, acted as Gore's campaign quarters for one of his senate races, and the Westboro compound was host to a fundraiser. Numerous photos exist on the internet of Fred Phelps Jr. and his second wife, Betty Phelps-Schurle, posing with Al and Tipper Gore in Phelps Jr.'s home. Phelps also served as a Gore delegate on the floor of the Democratic National Convention in Atlanta in 1988.

The article could also be written this way..

Anti-war democrat protests at GI funerals

SMYRNA, Tenn. - Democrats and anti-war activists who claim that God is punishing American soldiers for defending this country brought their anti-America message to the funerals Saturday of two Tennessee soldiers killed in Iraq.

The Democrats were met with scorn from local residents. They chased the activists' cars down a highway, waving flags and screaming "God bless America."..

Anti-war activist Fred Phelps, a registered Democrat who was invited to (and who attended) the Clinton/Gore inaugural party in 1993, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God. Phelps' cult has been condemned by mainstream and fundamentalist Christians, and is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.

These anti-war democrats carried signs and shouted things such as "God hates America", "Thank God for 9/11" and "God hates you."

About 10 Democrats protested near Smyrna United Methodist Church and nearly 20 stood outside the National Guard Armory in Ashland City. Members have demonstrated at other soldier funerals across the nation.

The original AP article ends with one quote from "Danny Cotton, 56", who says, "If they were protesting the government, I might even join them," If Mr. Cotton weren't fed on a constant diet of half-truths and bias from the media he would realize that Fred Phelps does hate Bush and America. Phelps has offered support to Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein.

If baby-boomer Cotton realized that the press has been selling him similar half-truths about other totalitarian/extremist groups for decades, he might begin to rethink his views.

Or maybe not.

Check out Coloured Smoke.

(Via Jan Bussey.)

Some months ago someone asked me to list five "desert island" books. Usually when I'm asked that question, I answer books I read in my teens that I still 20+ years later enjoy re-reading for pleasure.

A separate question I find much more interesting is to ask what books shaped you. The books you read that made you feel like you were a different person after reading them. Books that stick with you for years because they altered how you see the world.

One such book that left an indelible mark on me was The Autobiography of Malcolm X. I could write endlessly about this book, and talk endlessly about it. Much to my frustration, I have only once or twice met anyone who's read it (and no, people who were assigned it in school and just skimmed so they could skate the exam don't count).

Usually, when I mention the book, people tell me it's something they have no interest in. That's the #1 reaction I get. People seem to think it's mostly about "black rage" and haranguing the reader with a "message." So some people, mostly white but they come in all races, feel that they don't want to read some "angry black man" screed. Then there are the people, mostly black but also others, who've never read it but think they don't need to because they "already get it."

I try to tell folks that there are parts of the book that are somewhat like what they think, but it's far deeper and more moving than all that superficial stuff. When I tell them Malcolm X is one of my personal heroes--which he is--they really don't get it. They assume I mean the radical politics (nope), the anger at white racism (nope), the "liberalism" (nope), the "political correctness" (nope), the "anti-establishment" mystique (nope) or even that I just like how it sounds (nope).

Malcolm was a man who grew up having lots to be angry about, who lashed out at the world due to his anger. He turned into the worst sort of street hoodlum. He then got in with a religious group, the "Nation of Islam," that helped him turn his life around. They taught him discipline, self-respect, a work ethic, the value of education. They helped him to have self-pride and self-value. They taught him how to be a responsible family man, father, and provider. They taught him to how to be a leader.

Then one day he made the most courageous and amazing transformation of all: he realized that despite all they had given him, there was something rotton at the core of the "Nation of Islam" group. He had the courage to face that, to say so openly, and to walk away--but to keep everything good he'd learned from them.

He also knew they probably would kill him for repudiating them--and they did. But he died his own man.

Sure I learned something about racism from that book--on a much more subtle and human level than I thought possible. But I learned even more about self-determination, and courage, and redemption.

What's most impressive of all is that the book never hits you over the head with a "message." It rarely lectures. It rarely tells you what you "should" think or what you "should" do. It merely tells an amazing tale, and lets you draw your own conclusions.

Try telling people about it who haven't read it, and they still look at you a little funny. What can you do but shrug?

I get similar reactions whenever I tell people that American History X is one of the greatest movies of the 1990s. I grew up in Neo-Nazi Central when I was a kid in Chicago, and that film was the most seeringly honest look at what those kids (they were mostly kids) are like that I have ever seen.

But when I try to tell people who haven't seen the film what it's about, and why I think it's important, they don't get it. They assume it's a movie that relentlessly hits you over the head with a "message," that it lectures, that it harangues, that it excuses, that it glorifies.... and it does none of those things. It's just brutally honest. You see it, and you draw your own conclusions.

People look at me funny when I say that too.

Anyone had similar experience with books or movies?

He's Not happy...

Share something interesting in the comments.

Joanie would like to tell you more.

project valour-it

Here's the best photo of grieving mom Cindy Sheehan yet:

Despite her many claims that this has nothing to do with politics (as if someone who writes for Michael Moore's web site and insists that the President is a brazen liar and that we're in a war for Israel and oil could seriously say that) I now see she's also targeting the House Majority Leader.

Good way to stay out of politics while you're grieving, Cindy.

Her most inspiring quote so far: "I'm just so honored that the universe chose me to be the spark that has set off a raging inferno."

Every time I think I'm done writing about Cindy Sheehan, the universe intervenes and prevents me from putting away my keyboard. Apparently the universe has chosen me to be the wet blanket for her glorious spark.

In any case, I'm glad to see that she's obviously happier and more fulfilled today than she probably has been in many, many years.

I was talking to a friend last night who told me he got into it with some kid at work who tried to claim the Bush administration had said that Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction were an "imminent threat." My buddy told the kid the President never said that, and the kid immediately promised to find him the exact quote.

Of course the kid couldn't, because that is the precise opposite of what the President said. It's also the precise opposite of what the other supporters of the war effort said back then.

I remember how on October 11, 2002, I was deeply grateful that Democratic minority leader of the House Dick Gephardt and Democratic Minority Leader of the Senate Tom Daschle led their party to do the right thing: ending the obscene sanctions regime, ending the absurd "no fly zones," ending 12 years of torture, and finally doing the right thing to take out a fascist dictator after a year of endless debate (and 12 years of impotent sanctions and empty threats).

I remember what Democratic leaders Daschle and Gephardt said and how they said it, and how much I admired their action, and how good I felt about the country and the bravery and committment and unity they showed.

I don't think I've ever forgiven Howard Dean for what he turned his party into a year later. Or the even more obscene Michael Moore. There's still some people I won't even speak to about it. The feeling of betrayal runs far too deep.

Ah, politics.

Well. That wasn't what I was expecting.

God hates you people down in Florida, doesn't he?

Freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength. That's the current motto of the right-left alliance that calls itself "anti-war".

Can you guess who said this?

There is no downside to dignified street activism. The Crawford, Texas encampment by Cindy Sheehan is arguably the single most brilliant tactical propaganda move in decades. What Cindy Sheehan did was simply to "do it".

She just got in her car and drove to Crawford to physically announce her righteous moral stand against a war based on lies.

We can do the same thing. We can also take advantage of the entire media of the world being in Crawford for the next few days. Or we can let the opportunity go. We can worry about whether our message will be properly understood. Or we can do what Cindy Sheehan did....just show up in front of Bush when he is cornered like a rat lolling about at his ranch. Clearing brush, riding his $3,000 bicycle, and catching up on his reading.

A basic principle is that "if you don't come to the dance, you don't get the girl".

We're going to the dance.

a) Joan Baez

b) David Duke

c) Al Sharpton

d) a member of the neo-Nazi Stormfront community

Hard to tell, isn't it? They all support Cindy, and they all use the same terminology.

If you said d), a member of the neo-Nazi Stormfront community, you're right.

The 21st century anti-war movement is not your parents' anti-war movement. The current anti-war movement is a rainbow coalition of hate; they claim to be anti-war while supporting the Palestinian war against Israel, the Intifada; Stalinists join hands with neo-Nazis, anarchists praise peace and threaten destruction, the head of the DNC proudly declares that he hates a large proportion of the American public.

They're converging on Crawford to sing Kumbaya and support Cindy Sheehan, the "peace mom".

UPDATE: They're also converging on Walter Reed Army Medical center, targeting wounded soldiers.

I took my son to see the new World War II pigeon movie, Valiant on Monday.

It is probably a mark of the film's mediocrity that I had completely forgotten I'd even seen it until today. It's not that this was a bad movie, it's just that it was utterly forgettable.

It's a cartoon of course, with quite impressive technology. Going in, there were things I expected to like about the story. I enjoy history, especially little odd stories like the use of carrier pigeons and other animals for the war effort. So a cartoon fantasy about the brave pigeons getting messages through to the front lines to help beat the fascist enemy in World War II France should appeal to my sense of fun and adventure.

Alas, despite its impressively artistic use of technology, the storytelling seems to have no real drive, and none of the characters comes across as particularly interesting. The hero, the plucky pigeon Valiant, is endearing enough to avoid being annoying, but he's otherwise terribly uninteresting. The same is true, alas, of the rest of the characters: the heroes manage to be moderately engaging without being particularly interesting or funny, and the villains are just evil enough to be villains, but are neither menacing enough to be scary nor incompetent enough to be funny.

Plot-wise, the creators also make a terrible mistake: they never make it clear what exactly is in the message the birds are carrying, and so we have no sense of its importance at all. Not that we need a lot of detail, but telling us that they are secret battle plans or captured enemy intelligence or something that may save lives would have made me care whether the bloody pigeons ever actually succeeded.

Mind you, it wasn't a horrible film. It had its amusing moments. My 7 year old enjoyed it, and so taking my son to see it was an entirely worthwhile way to spend an afternoon.

But as someone who enjoys cartoons and animation, I look for cartoons like Shrek and Finding Nemo and The Incredibles: lots of fun for adults as well as kids. In this case... nah. Your kids will probably enjoy it and that's about it.

I believe ol' Damon there is talking about this.

Patrick Ruffini notes that his online straw poll--with well over 16,000 participants, making it a statistically valid sample of "online activists" who are Republican or lean Republican--has Rudy Giuliani far and away the leading candidate.

He also notes that this is a surge for Giuliani over last month's online poll. He suggests that this is because conservatives are still shopping around for a candidate. I would think it may also be that many people were surprised to learn that Giuliani was a serious candidate until gallup released its own poll a few weeks ago showing Giuliani in the lead nationally.

Of course we're two years away from when the primaries begin in earnest. Anything can happen. I merely find it fascinating that he's a genuinely viable candidate--if you'd asked me two years ago I would have found the idea ridiculous: a Catholic, an Italian, and a guy who's "only" been the Mayor of New York City? Inconceivable!

Interesting: researchers at UT Southwestern Medical Center are suggesting that a protein controls insulin, and that insulin controls aging. Quoted:

Dr. Kuro-o and his colleagues originally discovered the Klotho gene in 1997, naming it after one of the mythical Greek fates who controlled the length of human life. Their previous studies have shown that mutant mice lacking the Klotho gene appear normal until about 3 to 4 weeks old, and then begin showing signs of age, such as skin atrophy, osteoporosis, arteriosclerosis and emphysema. The mice died prematurely at about two months.

For the current study, they created a second strain of mutant mice in which the Klotho gene generated more of the protein than in normal mice. Those mice lived between 19 percent to 31 percent longer than normal mice.

The researchers were especially interested in how the hormone affected insulin, because making an animal resistant to insulin increases its lifespan - a phenomenon found in animals ranging from worms to fruit flies to mice.

The mice with higher levels of Klotho had more insulin in their system than the normal mice, suggesting that the Klotho mice were resistant to insulin; they had to make more of it to make up for the resistance. The opposite was true with the mice deficient in Klotho. They were more sensitive to insulin and had reduced levels of it.

I find that fascinating, especially because intuitively it seems backwards. The current medical understanding is that if your body grows insulin resistant, your system starts making more insulin to compensate--which tends to cause your body to become even more insulin resistant. The result tends to be type II diabetes, and can even in extreme cases lead to Type I diabetes if the pancreas just burns out and can't produce insulin anymore.

Yet somehow they're suggesting higher levels of insulin, in these mice at least, tends to increase lifespan? Hmm. Something must be preventing the destructive cycle from occurring.

Over on my site, you can find out what one Holland library is doing

I've been seeing discussion threads lately (such as on my lovely wife's site or at Michael Totten's place) comparing Iraq's new proposed Constitution to Iran. They keep pointing out that they have elections in Iran and that they have Islamic law there, and so what's the difference? Some even say, well they have corrupt elections in Iran and they'll be corrupt in Iraq too so same thing right?

I understand this confusion, but it's simply confusion. You have to know something about how Iran's government works to even think this is a remotely reasonable comparison. Let's examine how Iran's system of government works:

1) Iran is a Constitutional Republic--a non-democratic Republic.

2) It is ruled first and foremost by what their Constitution terms "The Supreme Leader." This man is not elected. Current holder of the office is the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He is the Commander In Chief of the armed forces, the head of all intelligence and security forces absolutely. He and he alone has the power to declare war. He also has the unilateral power to appoint or dismiss judges, has complete control over all television and radio networks, and controls many other important functions--and once again, his control over most of these things is absolute. He also controls half of the "Council of Guardians," a group that interprets the Iranian Constitution.

How does Supreme Leader--i.e. Dictator For Life--get his job? He is "elected" by:

2) The Assembly of Experts. This body is made up of 86 clerics--mullahs, ayatollahs--who are "elected" to 8 year terms of office. One says "elected" with trepidation, because they have to be widely recognized religious figures. Widely recognized by who? By other religious men. Basically, if you aren't in the Ayatollah Club, you don't get to be on this assembly. Furthermore, this "Assembly of Experts" has never once been known to either overrule or remove from office any Supreme Leader.

3) Who is the Council of Guardians? A group of 12 quasi-judges who have the ultimate authority for interpreting the Constitution. By law, half of them are appointed and keep their job at the whim of the Supreme Leader and are always clerics. The other half are appointed by the Parliament. Oh, there's a "Parliament?" Sure. Sort of.

4) Parliament: An assembled body that gets to vote on budgetary matters and treaties and a few related issues. All their decisions are subject to approval or rejection by the Council of Guardians--and nothing they do can overrule anything done by the Supreme Leader. Furthermore, only candidates approved by the Council of 12 are allowed to run for office--and in every "election" ever held, the vast majority of people who wanted to run for office were denied the right to do so.

5) The "President" - electected every four years. Must be approved by the Council of Guardians and the Supreme Leader. Handles day-to-day executive duties, with formal approval of the Supreme Leader for anything controversial.

In all of this, there is no free speech, there is no free press, and the only people allowed to run for any office are those approved by the Supreme Leader and the mullahs who run the entire show. People are routinely jailed for criticizing the government. Most government power resides in figures who have never been elected to anything, nor even appointed by truly elected officials.

Oh yeah, and most of the evidence shows that despite all this, massive vote fraud has been normal in every election, since the vast majority of Iranians, especially young ones, think the elections are a complete joke and a waste of time. No real reformer is ever allowed to even run for office, let alone be elected. So the mullahs appear to use a lot of ballot stuffing just to make turnout look much higher than it is.

To call all of this "democratic" or even comparable to what real elections look like is ridiculous.

Compare all of this to the new proposed Iraqi constitution: It guarantees free speech. It guarantees free press. It guarantees all Iraqis the right to vote. It guarantees all Iraqis the right to run for office. All authority is vested in elected officials, or people appointed and approved by elected officials.

Is it possible that Iraq will become like Iran, an Islamic Republic? "Possible" is a big word, but the only way it could possibly happen is if they shred the proposed Constitution, throw an unelected religious nut in as dictator, with a bunch of other religious nuts to rubber stamp most of his dictates, and say "sorry, we were joking about the whole democracy thing."

There are also those who say the new Iraqi Constitution will harm women. Unfortunately some are saying dumb things like women were better off under Saddam--uhm, no. Under Saddam, a woman might have her tongue cut out or her children murdered in front of her eyes for offending the regime. Saddam's regime used to cut women's heads off and force their families to display the severed heads in their front yards. To this day we are still digging up mass graves including the bodies of countless women buried with their children, bullet holes in all their heads. Please stop making dumb comparisons like this, it's just obscene.

It is entirely possible women will end up with the short end of the stick in the new Iraqi system--but if so, it will be by their own choice. All women will have the right to speak, the right to pubish, the right to vote, and the right to run for public office, none of which they had under Saddam (and please, let's not call phony shows where Saddam's the only guy on the ballot an "election"). They'll also have an absolute minimum of 25% of the elected seats--far more than we have in Congress here in the US. So if things aren't fair, they'll have had a voice in making it that way, and will have an opportunity to object and make changes.

I wouldn't worry much about it though--surveys of the Iraqi people show that only about 25% of them want strict, conservative religious rule. Most want some aspect of the national religion in government but want moderation and secularism too.

In any case, comparing any of this to what's going on in Iran is ridiculous. The most likely scenario instead is that the Iranians will look at all the freedoms their Iraqi brethren have and begin to wonder why they can't have all that too.

The Iraq marshes are returning.

Meow!

Have I mentioned this lately?

Now.

Anyone want an invite? Email Me...

The following speech by Ben Franklin is widely considered a classic. It was addressed to the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787 (SOURCE):

I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others. Most men indeed as well as most sects in Religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome is infallible and the Church of England is never in the wrong. But though many private persons think almost as highly of their own infallibility as of that of their sect, few express it so naturally as a certain french lady, who in a dispute with her sister, said "I don't know how it happens, Sister but I meet with no body but myself, that's always in the right-Il n'y a que moi qui a toujours raison."

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other. I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution. For when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence to hear that our councils are confounded like those of the Builders of Babel; and that our States are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one another's throats. Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good. I have never whispered a syllable of them abroad. Within these walls they were born, and here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the objections he has had to it, and endeavor to gain partizans in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary effects & great advantages resulting naturally in our favor among foreign Nations as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent unanimity. Much of the strength & efficiency of any Government in procuring and securing happiness to the people, depends, on opinion, on the general opinion of the goodness of the Government, as well as well as of the wisdom and integrity of its Governors. I hope therefore that for our own sakes as a part of the people, and for the sake of posterity, we shall act heartily and unanimously in recommending this Constitution (if approved by Congress & confirmed by the Conventions) wherever our influence may extend, and turn our future thoughts & endeavors to the means of having it well administered.

On the whole, Sir, I can not help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument.

Thanks to Brian King for sending me that.

It is interesting to contemplate just how many of our founding fathers were deeply skeptical of the new Constitution and did not expect the system of government to last more than a few years. To get a real flavor for their debates, check out this cool web site: Yale Law School's archive of the Constutitional Convention debates--which are basically James Madison's notes of the goings-on at the historic convention.

Quoted:

Everyone should know that I don't forward this kind of stuff, but I really like this idea. The only comment I would add it this.....

Do you think the oil companies were making fat cash when the price of gas was $1.50 per gallon? You bet. Price isn't determined by what the product costs to produce, it is determined by what the market will bear..... and currently our market is bearing $2.50+ per gallon.

I hear we are going to hit close to $3.00 a gallon by the end of summer. Want gasoline prices to come down? We need to take some intelligent, united action. Phillip Hollsworth, offered this good idea:

This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy gas on a certain day" campaign that was going around last April or May!

The oil companies just laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to "hurt" ourselves by refusing to buy gas. It was more of an inconvenience to us than it was a problem for them. BUT, whoever thought of this idea has come up with a plan that can really work.

Please read it and join with us!

By now you're probably thinking gasoline priced at about $1.50 is super cheap. Me too! It is currently $2.75 for regular unleaded in my town.

Now that the oil companies and the OPEC nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a gallon of gas is CHEAP at $1.50-$1.75, we need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the marketplace.... not sellers.

With the price of gasoline going up more each day, we consumers need to take action. The only way we are going to see the price of gas come down is if we hit someone in the pocketbook by not purchasing their gas! And we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves. How? Since we all rely on our cars, we can't just stop buying gas. But we CAN have an impact on gas prices if we all act together to force a price war.

Here's the idea: For the rest of this year, DON"T purchase ANY gasoline from the two biggest companies (which now are one), EXXON and MOBIL. If they are not selling any gas, they will be inclined to reduce their prices. If they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow suit.

But to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of Exxon and Mobil gas buyers. It's really simple to do!! Now, don't whimp (sic) out on me at this point... keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach millions of people!! I am sending this note to about thirty people. If each of you send it to at least ten more (30 x 10 = 300)... and those 300 send it to at least ten more (300 x 10 = 3,000) .. and so on, by the time the message reaches the sixth generation of people, we will have reached over THREE MILLION consumers!If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends each, then 30 million people will have been contacted! If it goes one level further, you guessed it..... THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!! Again, all you have to do is send this to 10 people and DON"T purchase ANY gasoline from EXXON and MOBIL. That's all. (If you don't understand how we can reach 300 million and all you have to do is send this to 10 people.... well, let's face it, you just aren't a mathematician. But I am... so trust me on this one.)

How long would all that take? If each of us sends this email out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8 days!!! I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you! Acting together we can make a difference.

If this makes sense to you, please pass this message on.

PLEASE HOLD OUT UNTIL THEY LOWER THEIR PRICES TO THE $1.30 RANGE AND KEEP THEM DOWN. THIS CAN REALLY WORK

I invite you to use the comments to expound on the matter.

My dear wife (whose weblog you should read and put on your blogroll, hint hint) notes that the Daily Kos readers are now trying to oust centrists from the Democratic party. She thinks that would be great for Republicans and bad for Democrats and thus, ultimately, bad for the country.

While I initially agreed, as I think about it I'm not so sure. While I openly despise the people at Daily Kos--I consider them crypto-fascists and racists, and yes, I really do mean that--this might be a healthy thing. For if they fail, they will undoubtedly find themselves out in the dark, voting Green or something while the sane people keep control of the party. Which would definitely be a good thing. And if they succeed? Well, the Democratic Party will actually stand for something at least. One of my chief complaints about the Democrats for a long time now is that they have no coherent agenda, and maybe the Kosites would actually come up with one.

By the way, can we stop calling them Kossacks? That's an honorable name for a group of people who were brutally oppressed by Lenin and Stalin. Half the Kosites would probably deny that ever even happened.

Anyway: Both political parties have gone through these sorts of convulsions before. In the early 1950s a conservative grassroots revolt began in the Republican party. It took a few years but eventually they were able to take control of the party. The result was the candidacy of Barry Goldwater in 1964.

The result was also that Republicans took one of the worst drubbings at the polls in American history, losing hugely not just in the Presidential race but in congressional elections as well. Yet that movement also, over the next 40 years, came to dominate American politics, and led to the Presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and the eventual takeover of Congress by Republicans.

Many observers said these conservative activists were wild and dangerous radicals who the country would never support. For a while it looked like they were right--but they weren't. Voters did accept them, and did put them in power, and it wasn't a fluke. It was an enduring shift in American politics.

What the Kosites will need to do if they wish to be successful, however, is come up with a clear and coherent agenda, and a specific philosophy--besides hatred of their opponents I mean. A good starting point would be to read The Conscience of a Conservative, supposedly written by Barry Goldwater but in reality mostly ghost-written by the late L. Brent Bozell Jr. It laid out both a governing philosophy and a specific agenda. In the intervening 40 years, much of what it laid out actually came to pass, while others were all but forgotten. But the movement that came out of it remains the most powerful political bloc in the nation.

And I must say, the conservatives didn't get where they are by simple party unity. They had a philosophy and an agenda, and they were not opposed to casting out some from their ranks, either for being too "moderate" or for being too loony-tunes--the John Birchers, for example, were virtually hoist by their underwear and thrown through a plate glass window. Although it's not all that well known, Ayn Rand and her followers were also shown the door. Although people sympathetic to the Birchers or to Rand remained in the party, direct affiliation became quite rare.

Historically the Democratic Party has always been chary of ideology. It has instead always relied on cobbling together a wide array of special interests to form a coalition. And by "always," I really do mean "always," going all the way back to the days of Andrew Jackson. But they always managed to construct some ideology from their motley assortment of interests. The problem is that right now they don't have any discernible philosophy, and their old governing coalition isn't working: trade unions are increasingly irrelevant to most workers; black people are increasingly affluent and suburb-bound and not a single person under the age of 40 has ever seen a segregated lunch counter; most young women see feminism as irrelevant when they don't think of it as dumb; everyone cares about the environment but the air and water today are cleaner than they've ever been and so that fight is less pressing to most people.

While most people have negative feelings about the Republicans, even more of them have negative feelings about the Democrats. So, a complete re-tooling of the party seems to be in order, starting with redefining its core ideology and what interests it serves. Someone's got to start that process. This seems as good a time as any.

I'll be rooting for the Democratic Leadership Council over the Kosites to be sure. The people who gave us Bill Clinton--who for all the criticism he got, was a very good President--should not be the ones to lose out. But either way, this could be a healthy thing in the long run.

A good friend of mine thinks that he is in trouble. He runs a website for a local theater group. He posted a picture of one of the actors, a 12 year old girl, without parental consent and the mother went apeshit. He didn't realize it was a problem because she, the girl, is a member of the troup.

Problem number 2: She has occasionally IM'd him questions and he responded and he is worried that he is in trouble because the mother is making threats.

I know for a fact that this guy is no pervert. He's just a good guy that could have his life completely ruined by some angry, overreacting stagemom.

Read the complete story here.

Any advice?

..this time, Cole himself is responsible.

On his site, Informed Comment, Arabist Juan Cole has responded to Steven Vincent's widow's criticism.

In his response he displays the intellectual weight and the personal dignity of a tantrum-spewing five year old. He calls people names, he shows his contempt (and fear of?) women, he stomps his little feet and he just doesn't understand why clueless Americans keep picking on him.

Of course, since Cole is an American, and, by his definition, clueless, he may never figure it out.

When you read this, remember that this is a college professor. This is a spokesman for the Left. This was a grown man. This is Juan Cole:

The wingnuts are going crazy over this contretemps, which is what is really interesting. I think it is because Vincent is a symbol for the pro-War American Right. He was inspired to his journalism in Iraq by September 11. That was his first mistake. The poor Iraqis had nothing to do with September 11...

..Everything I have said here is true. Clueless Americans don't understand the principle of gender segregation for the most part, and if they do understand it they are horrified by it...

.. But in large swathes of the world, it just is not considered right for a male to be in the company of an unrelated female. It isn't just a matter of sleeping around, as my wingnut correspondents assume.

Clueless Americans don't understand gender segregation, and they don't understand clan honor as practiced in most Arab societies. We American men aren't dishonored in particular if our sisters sleep around, though I suppose in high school it can't be pleasant for a guy to have everyone taunt him that his sister is a slut. But in Arab culture, a brother can't show his face in public if his sister is known to be a slut.

* Update * More from Mrs. Vincent on Murdoc's page.