John Roberts: it could be a lot worse, people

This morning, I came across this petition asking demanding that the White House release key documents on Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. I signed the petition (in part because it’s a kind of neat interface with the map and all) and I agree that the White House ought to be more forthcoming with information on Roberts. To give this guy a fair hearing, we need to find out who he is.

But c’mon, people. Roberts is about as good as we’re going to do.

I don’t think there’s any question that Roberts is indeed a conservative. But as far as he’s been portrayed so far in the media, he does not seem to be an ideologue in the stripe of someone like Thomas or Scalia. And with W. et al, it could have been a lot worse. A LOT. I saw an article in the paper the weekend before Roberts nominated about a movement to convince Bush to nominate Roy Moore, who was the Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice who was impeached/fired because of this whole Ten Commandments deal.

Okay, maybe nominating a nutjob like this guy was never going to happen. But still, considering the possibilities of who Bush could have named, I think liberal-types got off relatively easy. I don’t know if Bush actually “won” the election (Harper’s this month has an interesting article that still raises questions about 2004 and Ohio), but I do know that Kerry didn’t and I also know the dems lost seats in the Senate. The only thing the left can do about the Supreme Court (and everything else, for that matter) is to fight harder and try to turn the tide.

As I typed that, I am listening to an NPR “Morning Edition” story about how Army recruiting is way down. It’s stories like this (and Bush’s approval rating and Rove’s criminal activities and a whole bunch of other things) that give me hope for 06.

“I just wanted a video game…”

From a web site titled “The Best Page in the Universe” (a pretty funny site, albeit a bit frat boy-ish, if you ask me) comes this commentary on the controversy surrounding the video game “Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas” called “I just wanted a video game, not eternal damnation in hell.” If you missed it, there is a secret way to alter the PC version of the game so that you can see the characters having badly animated video game sex. ABC Nightly News (I suppose the other networks too) ran this story over and OVER again for about a week as if it was somehow as much a national tragedy as, oh, I don’t know, real people actually getting killed.

I like this passage from Maddox’s entry on the game:

The creator of the game, Rockstar Games, has stated that it will offer a downloadable patch to fix the sex issue in the PC versions, and is working on a new version of the game that will prevent this content from being unlocked in the future.

Thank God. I’ll be the first person to download and patch my PC version of “Grand Theft Auto.” I want to shoot people in the face, bang prostitutes, traffic drugs, steal cars, and terrorize police officers without this filthy smut in my game. Frankly, I’m appalled that Rockstar would allow such wholesale corruption of our youth. Years from now when America has become a withered husk of the morality it once stood for, historians will look back at what triggered it all and point to one event: a boolean variable that unlocked a simulated sex scene in a video game.

Oh, and I didn’t realize this either: the original rating for “Grand Theft Auto” (and most of the other games that are rather violent) is “M” for “Mature,” meaning that they recommend that players be 17 or older. “AO”, which stands for “Adults Only” and which is the new rating assigned to the game, means that the game should only be played by folks 18 or older. Ah yes, what difference a year makes….

How much is the war costing us, anyway?

Check out the Cost of War web site, which includes a rolling counter for the cost of the war in Iraq and points of comparison. As an example: according to the web site, for the amount of money we have spent so far in Iraq, the U.S. could have hired an additional 3,217,823 teachers.

It’s part of the National Priorities Project. And you’ll note the handy counter I’ve added to my sidebar, too.

The Daily Show and its Turd Blossom Coverage

There have been numerous NUMEROUS reports about Karl Rove’s lying and leaking ways on the web– Wonkette, Daily KOS, Skippy the Bush Kangaroo, you name it. I’m not going to bother to link to these things because if you throw a brick at the blogosphere, you’ll hit a Rove critique. Or, if you are in a right wing mood, apologies.
But last night’s The Daily Show talk about all this was the best I’ve seen so far (be warned– this is a big QuickTime file). What I like most about this piece is that Stewart et al reminds us that this whole deal with Rove ratting out the CIA agent (and lying about it) really dates back to the beginning of the Iraq war when Bush claimed in his State of the Union address that we needed to take action because Iraq was trying to get the raw materials for making nuclear weapons (BTW, that turned out to be a lie, too).

Anyway, check it out, or watch the repeat of The Daily Show when you get a chance.

Happy July 4 (more or less…)

Will watching the fake calliope

You know, it’s kind of a scary time right now, if you ask me. Sandra O’Connor retiring from the Supreme Court prepares the way for a potentially ugly political battle and it will give us a chance to see W.’s stripes clearly. If he’s a “uniter,” as he claims to be, he’ll pick a moderate kind of like O’Connor. If he’s not, he won’t. Guess which one I’m guessing on.

And Iraq goes badly and the trouble with Social Security reform and the rest of the world hates us, blah blah blah….

But hey; let’s have a parade!

The annual Ypsilanti July 4 parade featured all the usual sorts of things and was lots of fun for one and all. I’ll just offer three quick thoughts for now:

  • They should have had a lot more candy throwers and they should have had them earlier. The kids were getting pretty antsy that no candy was being tossed until about 45 minutes into the thing.
  • The theme this year was “salute to the military” and here’s one particularly disturbing image:
    Marching kiddies
    These are members of the “junior Marines,” kids of about 10 or so marching in fatigues and (presumably) being convinced to enlist when the time comes. Right when they marched by us, an old B-17 or some such plane flew right over us. Annette said later “Gosh, I felt like we were at war or something; which we are.”
  • But I don’t want to dwell on the negative here– really, it was overall good and clean American fun. And because he said he wanted it to be on my blog, here’s a picture of Andre and family:

Andre et al

Where’s my burning flag?/The Dick Durbin apology

This is a sort of “two-fer” deal in terms of posts:

  • Isn’t it interesting, during a news cycle where we are learning that Bush’s war in Iraq is going quite badly and where poll numbers indicate that most Americans now thing this is a bad idea, that the Republicans try a diversion like the whole flag burning thing?
  • My favorite commentary on flag burning came years and years ago from Miss Manners. This had to be at least 15 years ago when I was living in Richmond and regularly reading The Washington Post. Miss Manners pointed out that the issue with burning the flag has nothing to do with it being legal or not. It’s just rude, and, as Miss Manners pointed out, sometimes people do all sorts of things that are rude just to make a point.
  • I don’t think that Dick Durbin has any reason to apologize. What he said was we were behaving like Nazis or old time Soviets with this prison in Git-mo, not that we were Nazis or old time Soviets. Anybody who doesn’t understand this ought to be forced to retake high school English….
  • Taxing Ypsi

    Ypsilanti is thinking about a local income tax, and, apparently, so is Ann Arbor. There’s a couple of good write-ups about all of this at Mark Maynard’s blog and at ypsi~dixit.

    I don’t know a whole lot about what’s going on with these proposals, I don’t know much about the financial status of Ypsilanti or Ann Arbor (though, given that these places are in Michigan, where the economy is in the crapper, I’m sure things ain’t good), and while I like Ypsilanti, I am not loyal to Ypsilanti. I’m from Iowa; I just live here now. We’re almost certain to move in the next two or three years, probably to Ann Arbor, though maybe to one of the townships (more on that in a second). And I also don’t want to sound like some kind of “don’t you dare tax me or my guns” kind of Republican, either.

    But I will say this:

    • I understand the dire straits that the city is in funding-wise, I really do. But charging an income tax for people working in Ypsi doesn’t really seem like a way to attract businesses to town.
    • If Ypsi wants to keep “upper/middle-class professional types” like me in town, then I’m not sure the issue is taxes and city services. People in my circle of Ypsi friends (with kids) often say things like “Ypsi is a great place to live, but the schools get kind of dicey from junior high on, so that’s probably when we will move.” So, it seems to me that if the tax was targeted to something like the school system, and if people saw some benefit to the schools, then I think folks might be happy with that. I know I could deal with it.
    • Ultimately, the problem is the township system in Michigan. We could literally move to a house four blocks away that was not technically in the city of Ypsilanti but in Pittsfield Township and I bet we could save 33% to 50% on property taxes. Which is a lot of money and which is why people move to the townships in the first place. I mean, why not? My kids go to the same school, and, as far as I can tell, I get similar services in terms of police and fire and all of that. And, if we move close enough to Ann Arbor in one of the townships, Will goes to the same Ann Arbor schools as the kids who live in the fancy-pants neighborhoods.

    This is all probably a moot point though. Both Mark M. and YD suggest that the likelihood of this tax being passed is pretty low.

    Books Republicans love to hate

    Here’s an interesting list: “The Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries,” put out by the obviously conservative group called “Human Events.” Pretty funny list. The “usual suspects” are there– The Communist Manifesto is number one, The Kinsey Report is number four, and The Feminine Mystique is number seven. The commies, sex, and them “damn feminists,” that seems consistent with the right.

    But then there are some surprises. There’s Hitler’s Mein Kampf, which I suppose they put on there because Hitler is everyone’s number one “bad guy” of the twentieth century. But considering the fact that Pat Buchanan recently said that the U.S. and Great Britain should have been with Germany during World War II to fight the commies, I’m sure there are a few conservatives saying “hey, hey, wait a minute: lay off the Nazi.”

    And then, oddly at number five, there’s John Dewey’s Democracy and Education, which I suppose is on the list because of the word “Democracy” is too close to “Democrat.” And then there’s a bunch of philosophers on the list that are pretty much “common reading” in graduate programs in this country: Nietzsche, Foucault, Adorno, Gramsci, etc.

    Update:
    Via Maud Newton’s blog, I came across this article, “Better read than dead,” which was published in the Toronto newspaper, Eye Weekly. Here’s my favorite paragraph:

    Likewise, the harmful nature of many books on Human Events’ shit list — selected by a “panel of 15 conservative scholars” — can’t really be quantified in the loss of human life or destruction of property; rather, the selected books have been deemed most harmful because they dared to question the individual’s God-given right to accumulate maximum wealth despite the social consequences and to go home and be cared for by a dutifully subservient wife. (However, none of the books is so harmful as to escape the grasp of capitalism; the list comes complete with purchase links to Amazon.com.)