October 09, 2004
Some key moments:
1) When Kerry was trying to address the fact that we haven't had any major terrorist attacks since 9/11. This fact is one of his biggest weaknesses, and he knows it.
2) Kerry's handling of the stem-cell research question and the Federal funding of abortion question. In both instances he professed respect for life, and then essentially told the questioners to fuck off. With a lot of blah, blah, blah added in. This was one of the best opportunities for people to see through his lawyerly talk.
3) That moment when Kerry looked around the room and proclaimed that—from the looks of it—only he, the President, and Charlie made more than $200K a year among the people in that room. It seemed clear to me that he was making a classist judgment about what someone might look like who makes good money. As an Angeleno, I found it rather bizarre that one could presume to tell from someone's dress what sort of income they are pulling down. He might well have been correct, but his methodology was essentially a snobby one, and his outlook was very East Coast.
4) Bush's "timber" joke. It was the best line of the evening, and it broke through the audience's resistance to laughter (I suspect they had been instructed not to audibly react to what Bush and Kerry were saying).
5) The closing statements. Kerry stayed in one place and delivered some sort of little canned speech. In the background, a woman looked like she was slightly too bored to really be contemptuous of him. Very static.
When Bush gave his closing statement he walked around a little, and was animated. His entire demeanor was different from Kerry's.
The format, stilted as it was, played to Bush's strengths.
Posted by: Attila at
09:08 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.
With this news and that of Kenneth Bigley's murder, please keep our allies in your prayers. I'm unspeakably grateful that there are people around the world who understand what's going on.
Speaking of which, here's an impassioned piece by Silent Running (via My Pet Jawa) that I hope a lot of people read. There's a perception around the world that we in America are fierce in defending freedom, and have told the jihadists that we will destroy Mecca if they target New York or London or Sydney with WMDs. But I look at the polls, and I don't feel fierce: I'm just afraid. Afraid that there are an awful lot of people out there who simply don't get it.
Posted by: Attila at
08:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.
October 08, 2004
But, fear not. I have a plan for improving it. A plan!
You feel better already, don't you?
Posted by: Attila at
11:53 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.
(Yes, I took the day off. Yes, I'll have something to say about the debate. No, I'm not watching it live. Yes, I might not make it back until tomorrow morning. Enjoy the fine folks on my blogroll, and I'll catch you later when I've caught up on sleep.)
Posted by: Attila at
06:32 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.
October 07, 2004
Two senators didn't vote. Guess which ones.
Posted by: Attila at
01:38 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.
I wish we were fighting an enemy we could reason with or predict. These people aren't the same brand of evil as the Nazis, of course—but the Nazis were a more straightforward enemy to fight.
Posted by: Attila at
01:32 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.
Just three things about this matter of Cheney and Edwards having met before the night they debated:
1) If Cheney's misstatement was done on purpose, it's worthy of condemnation, because I don't want those of us on the libertarian/right side of things to get into the habit of thinking the ends justify the means. (Or that information can be "false but accurate.") That's for some of the other guys.
2) It seems perfectly likely that Cheney just didn't remember. Those of us who aren't in public life probably can't imagine what it's like to have a job that involves meeting people by the thousands, and smiling at them and shaking their hands. And Cheney has spent decades doing this; it might not be natural at all for him to remember one junior senator, before that senator rose to prominence.
3) The best evidence that it was a simple oversight is the fact that Edwards forgot as well. How do we know this? We know it because Edwards didn't say anything about it during the debate. And he would have, too: both men were entirely willing to finish up a previous question before moving on to the one they were asked to speak on at any given moment. It would have been very easy for Edwards to say, "Before I answer that question, let me point out that I met the Vice President at a prayer breakfast." He didn't do that.
Posted by: Attila at
12:58 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.
Thanks Miss Attila!
I thought the exact same thing once I heard they had been at the same prayer breakfast-thing. Edwards damn-sure would have corrected the VP if it had come to mind. Being in the same place, and even mentioning someones's name in a speech doesn't necessarily equate "meeting" someone. Edwards lack of memory of the event proves to me that they never "met"
Best Regards!October 06, 2004
Oh, yes. I am.
Posted by: Attila at
02:50 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.
I'm on Yahoo, and it's gone from bad to just horrible; I can't even get my mail half the time and when I do I can't respond to it.
Thanks!
UPDATE: Got one. Thank you for playing.
Posted by: Attila at
02:15 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.
That's what Edwards reminded me of last night: a little yipping dog.
Posted by: Attila at
01:28 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Attila at
12:41 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.
To recap Kerry's plan: a) call meetings b) do same thing as Bush only better cause I'm not Bush..
Posted by: Attila at
04:27 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.
I'd say Cheney made it clear that you can win a thing like this without losing your composure or lowering yourself to the other guy's level.
Kerry and Edwards are coming across as guys who have no better ideas than to attack everything the President does. And Edwards was painfully scripted tonight, repeating the same phrases over and over. When Cheney needed to underscore a point, he generally found fresh ways to express his most important ideas. (With the exception of his verbal tick, "the fact of the matter is." If Cheney were ever again to be in a public debate, that would be the drinking phrase.)
Note that on several occasions Cheney declined to use up all the seconds allotted to him, and on a few he "threw away" entire half minutes. He was selective about what he resonded to, and was entirely willing to wade out of the mud, as when he said his piece about gay marriage, heard that Edwards' rebuttal included an allusion to his own daughter—and when the spotlight came back to him simply thanked the senator "for his kind words about my family." This was an intensely classy way to avoid defending the one area where I suspect there is a policy disagreement with the course the administration has taken, and where there really wasn't anything left for him to say.
I was also struck by the fact that he listened closely to the instructions for the question about what they each brought to the table as potential VPs. He shared biographical material while also confessing his discomfort in talking about himself. He talked about why his working relationship with the President was so good, and what made it effective. And when it was Edwards' turn he couldn't even remember that he wasn't supposed to say his running mate's name, and shared nearly nothing about his own background. It was as if the prefabricated script had taken over, and the man himself had simply left the stage.
I'm hearing "first half to Cheney, second half to Edwards." The people who say that are grading on an age-adjusted curve. This one was Cheney's, in large part because people are not voting for a litigator: they want a Chief Executive. Someone who doesn't just poke holes in others' records, but gets things done.
Finally, the VP went on the attack early on when he felt he had to. Offered another opportunity to kick the senator in the teeth, he didn't do it. Another example of restraint.
I don't want to send anyone into a tizzy here, but I'm thinking of voting Bush-Cheney this November. Leaning that way.
Update: Joyner has his own analysis, plus a roundup-by-trackback.
Posted by: Attila at
01:08 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 470 words, total size 3 kb.
October 05, 2004
3. "When you mention ‘tax cuts for the wealthy,’ try not to giggle like you did that time with Kennedy over a pitcher of Bombay Sapphire martinis.
UPDATE: I'm taking input on whether I should delete the spam comment on this entry. It's kind of hilarious, and it clearly wasn't written by the person whose blog it's attributed to. Your thoughts?
UPDATE 2: The spammer is apparently stalking another blogger. I was asked to remove the spam, but I couldn't bear to—it's so . . . refreshing. So I've removed the web address of the blogger who's a victim of his/her efforts. For more information on the most bizarre stalker I've ever heard of, go here, and of course do check out the actual blog.
UPDATE 3: It's a Kate-a-lanche! Welcome, Small Dead Animals readers.
Posted by: Attila at
03:42 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.
Here's a teaser:
DW: Do you consider the members of Kerry's crew, who have backed his version of the story, to be liars? If not, why do you believe their perceptions of the events in question differ so widely from your own?VO: No I don't consider them liars. I consider them led by Kerry right now. One of the incidents that I can talk about, why I think their story differs, is that Rassman said he heard gunfire from the bank. I didn't see any gunfire and I was at the highest point of the field. I think Rassman just heard our gunfire, and when we realized we weren't under fire we stopped.
You would otherwise have to ask them why they think their memories are different. So far only Del Sandusky has been allowed to talk to reporters, so we really don't know what the others have to say.
I don't know why these guys' memories differ, you will have to ask them. I only know that over 60 who served in An Thoi--and we had about a hundred men in our division at any one time--we've got 60 people from there who say his service was questionable in Viet Nam and who take him to task for lying about us as murderers and war criminals when he came back in 1971. That stacks up to only 7 of his own swift boat people that follow him.
Read the whole thing; it's fascinating.
In other news, it's no longer called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The organization has merged with the POWs for Truth, and it's now Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth. A new commerical has come out that concentrates on the experience of POWs; you can watch it here, and you might note that the site now uses four different video players, so those of us who weren't able to watch the ads before can see them now.
The POWs for Truth also produced a long-running video, Stolen Honor, which you can see clips of and order here.
Posted by: Attila at
02:48 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 414 words, total size 3 kb.
October 04, 2004
Exclusive! Must Credit Little Miss Attila! My Interview with Michael Medved! According to Govindini Murty, co-organizer of the Liberty Film Festival, Michael Medved has been a tremendous supporter of her and her husband Jason Apuzzo—both as filmmakers and in their efforts to put together a kick-ass film festival that celebrated the free market, the open exchange of ideas, democracy, and the United States as a force for good.
Mr. Medved flew down to Los Angeles from Seattle yesterday and spent a good chunk of the day at the festival, both participating in a panel and providing a special introduction to their presentation of The Ten Commandments. He was extraordinarily generous with his time and energy.
As most of you know, Medved is nearly unique among conservative voices, in that he recognizes the importance of film as a medium and has an encyclopedic knowledge of movies. He was one of the forces behind the Golden Turkey Awards series (which helped to popularize Ed Wood's Plan 9 From Outer Space as a cult classic), and is the author of Hollywood vs. America, a dissection of the ways in which filmmakers systematically flout the values and beliefs of mainstream America.
And he frequently articulates—as he did last week on his radio show—the fact that beauty and truth, contra Keats, are not the same thing, and we can appreciate a beautifully made movie while recognizing that the values that inspired it—or the message it delivers—are misguided (and, in some cases, horrific).
Attila Girl: Do you see conservative and libertarian filmmakers creating an alternative power structure within the entertainment industry to market our own work?
Michael Medved: To some degree, though [such a structure] won't become the dominant force. You're not going to see Hollywood become a conservative bastion; that just will not happen.
But change will come as it did with the other Evil Empire: as a response to pressure from without.
Attila Girl: Do you envision a sea change occurring with events like this and the American Film Renaissance Festival in Dallas?
Michael Medved: Yes; the great thing is that people are finally tackling this issue. When you think about the forces of conservatism over the past few decades, people like William F. Buckley—despite their contributions to public debate—were mostly detached from popular culture, and that's now starting to change.
Attila Girl: Do you see us as ever reaching something close to parity within the film industry: say, 40%-60% in their favor?
Michael Medved: Maybe more like 30%-70%. I'll tell you, the one place where I do think we'll see 40%-60% is within the Jewish community. You saw that in our panel earlier, where we had participation from people like David Zucker.
Attila Girl: Almost half of you were Jewish, right?
Michael Medved: A few of us were. I've been very active within the Jewish Republican Coalition, and this election year we're seeing a real change, one that began after 9/11 and has gotten stronger.
Attila Girl: People have had enough?
Michael Medved: Yes. They have.
Note:The exchange above is not quite word-for-word, but pretty darned close. After getting that precious three-minute interview, I discovered that the battery on my tape recorder had given out, so I quickly jotted down the whole conversation from my memory, which is pretty good for this type of thing—though bad on where I put my keys.
Posted by: Attila at
06:09 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 577 words, total size 4 kb.
So he saw the first two films, which looked fascinating: Borrowed Fire, by Salil Singh, and Relentless: The Struggle for Peace in the Middle East. I felt bad about my late arrival, but I 1) overslept; 2) had to water the plants, which were languishing after days of neglect; 3) had to make some turkey sandwiches we could sneak into the theater for lunch; 4) was blinded by the sun, and overwhelmed by four opponents; 5) had my homework consumed by the house canine; and/or 6) thought it was the thing to do at the time.
I got there in time for Brainwashing 101, which was a rough/partial cut of Evan Maloney's expose on political bias in academia. Maloney and his equally brilliant cohorts have started a website that keeps students abreast of political correctness and other evidence of bias, and actively solicits their contributions for the feature form of the movie. It's a clever idea, actually.
One of the things that helps Maloney is that he is not a fire-breathing wingnut; he's a reasonable guy who just wants to see a little more dialogue, a little more rationality in the public debate. In other words, one senses he'd be interested in the excesses of the right, if he had the feeling they were being shoved down commoners' throats.
A panel discussion followed regarding the "new Hollywood blacklist," and this event included David Zucker, Michael Medved, Doug Urbanski, Morgan Brittany, Andrew Breitbart and Dan Gifford. The colorful-if-unrestrained Jim Hirsen (Tales from the Left Coast) moderated. The discussion included a mini-debate about whether the right-oriented media "lock out" dissenting views (e.g., should Waco: Rules of Engagement have attained more notice on talk radio?) and the issue of whether libertarian/conservative/WOT-supporting flimmakers should attempt to climb up within the existing industry structure, or build a parallel system that would allow them to bypass the "filtering" function of studio executives (who are often some of the, um, most limited people on the planet).
The only concensus appeared to be on the idea that the current "blacklist" is not one of names, but rather one of philosophy and ideas.
The surprise of the evening was Michael Moore Hates America, which was badly named. Director Mike Wilson picked a provocative title, and one that reflected his anger at a fellow midwesterner who appeared to slam his homeland, but the finished movie is a shockingly balanced look at Moore's work. It's also a meditative piece on Wildon's own life and history, and whether it's possible to tell the truth entirely when filming a documentary. Penn Jilette of Penn & Teller appears as the sort of angel who exhorts Wilson to tell the truth, no matter what, and not let the ends justify the means. (The carrot appears to be Wilson's desire not to turn into Michael Moore himself; the stick is Jilette's exhortation at the end not to distort his own views, or "I'll hunt you down and kill you.")
It's a beautiful film, but just the opposite of what you expect from hearing the title.
After this, my husband had to get home to conquer a few deadlines. I walked him most of the way to his car and got back to the theater just as they were dimming the lights.
This was for Impact: The Passion of the Christ, which discussed Passion, but also the effect it had on people worldwide. The documentary's stance is aggressively Christian. It was an affecting movie, but I think I prefer filmmakers who work in more shades of gray. Still, it was solid and informative: it visits the debate over anti-Semitism while also sharing stories of religious revival and the redemption of people's lives. If you're looking for a frankly joyful celebration of Christianity, this is your cup of latte. If not, there's still plenty of information in it.
There was a short break, during which I stalked Michael Medved in the lobby until he gallantly agreed to a two-minute interview just before he was due on stage. The evening ended with a showing of The Ten Commandments, which was introduced by Medved and included a short statement by Lisa Mitchell, who played one of Jethro's daughters and had a few words about how Cecil B. DeMille changed her life and her political philosophy.
I confess I tended to view the movie as a civil rights movie rather than a Cold War parable, but I see that it works as either. And though people were tired, they still clapped whenever Heston needed to stand tall and lay down the law.
I know everyone's going to get mad at me, but The Ten Commandments also works as soft-core porn: you end up seeing a fair amount of the young Heston's body, and a non-trivial amount of Yul Brynner skin. This worked fine as well.
More later. I'll be starting to post those interviews tomorrow; in the meantime it'll take me all week to get onto a non-vampiric sleep schedule. If, in fact, that happens at all.
Posted by: Attila at
04:57 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 874 words, total size 5 kb.
I could talk about the blogger party tonight where the luminaries of the Northern Alliance gathered to watch the debate, and peck out snark and insight. It was quite a sight: bloggers on the sofa, laptops open, family and friends gathered behind, all eyes and ears on the big TV. Behold the ankle-biting pajama-clad ticks!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I was standing behind the sofas, pacing, reading the blog entries before they were posted. (The very definition of having upper echelon access, perhaps.) But I had to leave early, and while I regretted leaving the party, I was also glad. I hate the debates. I have a vision of 65 million undecided Americans tuning in and making a snap judgment for all the wrong reasons. Wow, he pounded the podium to emphasize each word - but the other guy pounded each syllable. WhatÂ’s this about sealing Fallujer? Is it leaking? Did they have a flood?
But mostly I hate the debates because I simply cannot abide hearing certain statements I’ve been hearing over, and over, and over again. I can’t take any more talk about bringing allies to the table. Which ones? Brazil? Mynmar? Microfrickin’nesia? Are there some incredibly important and powerful nations out there whose existence has hitherto escaped me? Fermany? Gerance? The Galactic Order of the Belgian Dominion? Did we piss off the Vulcans? Who? If we mean “France and Germany,” then please explain to me why the reluctant participation of these two countries somehow bestows the magic kiss of legitimacy. They want in? Fine. They don’t? Fine. At this point mooning over France is like being that sophomore loser dorm pal who spent his dateless weekends telling his loser roommate about a high school sweetheart who stood him up for the prom. Give it up. Move on. I understand; they are wise and nuanced, we are young and dumb. We’re the cowboy leaning with his back against the bar, elbows on the rail, watching the door; we need our European betters to teach us how to ape the subtle forms of Nijinsky, limbs arrayed in the exquisite form of the Dying Swan. Understood. But I don’t want to be the Dying Swan. And I don’t want posture lessons from a country that spent the last 20 years flopping on its back and grabbing its ankles when Saddam showed up waving stacks of Francs in exchange for bang-sticks. Don’t you think I know about France’s relations with Saddam? Surely the advocates of the French Touch must know, and don’t care. Or they don’t know – in which case their advice is useless.
Germany? Whatever.
And it took lots of dead Americans to be able to say that.
Also dead Russians. Is Russia the great ally weÂ’ve dissed? If we invite Russia to help, then we have to tell them things. I donÂ’t want to tell them things. At least as they relate to the battlefield.
Perhaps the “ally” is that big blue wobbly mass known as the UN, that paragon of moral clarity, that conscience of the globe. You want to really anger a UN official? Tow his car. Short of that you can get away with anything. (Sudan is on the human rights commission, to cite a prominent and amusing detail. It’s like putting Tony Soprano on the New Jersey Waste Management Regulation Board.) I don’t worry that the UN is angry with us. I’d be worried if they weren’t. And I find it interesting that someone who would complain about outsourcing peevishly notes that we hired
HALLIBURTON to do the work instead of throwing buckets of billions to French and German contractors who sold them the jets and built the bunkers. . . . . . . . .
I’m not enthused about a [Arab] summit, unless we get to set the agenda. Item one: get over the frickin’ Jews, people. They’re not going anywhere, and if they do they’re taking all of you with them. Item two: You poke the hornet’s nest one more time and the skies of Tehran and Riyahd will darken with 747s, which will disgorge a fleet of Jeeps. We will ride around with bullhorns and announce that all women are free to leave, with their children, so they can live in a society where they get to show some shin without having some gynophobic wanker whip them with sticks. Your choice! Madrassas and no women, or a live-and-let-live world with women, and cable TV and the odd cold beer now and then, if you like. Beer will not be mandatory. We’re not the sort of people who impose beer on the unwilling. But you know, on 9/11 we recognized the downside of coexisting with societies that want to hang people for having a Pabst after a hot day. Your choice. Item three: we’re going to play a video of the events of 9/11. And then we’ll have a discussion. We’re willing to entertain all sorts of commentary, with one proviso: the moment you use the word “but,” you’re escorted from the building and put back on a plane home. You can never come to the US again. Your nice condo in the new Trump building will be sold for five dollars to a nice Jewish lesbian couple we met the other day at parent’s night at our school in Park Slope. One’s an artist, the other’s a lawyer.
. . . . . . . .
So, I get it. We are wrong and bad and stupid and stupidly wrong-bad. We failed to make France act as though it wasnÂ’t, you know, France, a militarily insignificant nation that is understandably motivated by self-interest, and we havenÂ’t convened a summit so we could be castigated for ignoring the extralegal use of Israeli helicopters to turn Hamas kingpins into indistinct red smears. YouÂ’d think we nuked Paris and converted everyone to Lutheranism.
HereÂ’s the thing. IÂ’d really like to live in John KerryÂ’s world. It seems like such a rational, sensible place, where handshakes and signatures have the power to change the face of the planet. If only the terrorists lived there as well.
That was a longish quote; hope he doesn't sue me. And, for crying out loud, go read the whole thing.
Posted by: Attila at
03:20 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1088 words, total size 6 kb.
Commenter Sharkman then suggests that the correct response from Condi was this:
“Look, you diminutive semi-gay-hair-dresser-looking (not that there’s anything wrong with that) snot-nosed pundit! The only thing you and your kind ever have to do is talk, talk, talk, but in MY world, in which I am an extremely POWERFUL WOMAN, ACTION must be taken! And so ACTION IS TAKEN, sometimes on the basis of information that is not 100% perfect. Now shut your cute little mouth and bring mama another espressso. Can you do anything about this hair . . . ?”
Apparently, it's supposed to be read in an Aretha Franklin voice, the premise being (I believe) that in a more enlightened time Aretha would have had Dr. Rice's amazing education and experience and could have been NSA. Of course, foreign policy's gain would have been art's loss. So it goes.
Posted by: Attila at
02:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.
Is his wife thinking of an intervention? And, if so, maybe she should just buy a new couch.
Posted by: Attila at
01:53 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.
218 queries taking 0.4686 seconds, 532 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
