March 09, 2009
11:31 am
The Disneyland Story
So, I spent about an hour writing a really long blog entry, filled with complaints and observations about my trip to Disneyland this last weekend... and by the time I tried to save it, my blogging software had timed out and I lost it all. Of course, this gives me the opportunity to start again and write something less scathing and MUCH shorter, instead focusing on the positive. But really, is that likely? Me? Positive?
The Brand
If there is just one thing I could complain about regarding today's Disneyland, it's the branding. The incessant, in-your-face, EVERYWHERE branding. I mean, you're in DISNEYland, right? So why do they feel it is necessary to continue to brand every little thing within the park with the Disney logo? I can't help but wonder if Walt Disney, who famously went ballistic upon seeing non-Frontier vehicles and employees in Frontierland, would sanction the appearance of the Disney logo all over things in the old west, or emblazoned on signs in Fantasyland.
My lost post also went on at length about the inclusion of Disney film characters into rides where they previously did not exist; along with the ubiquitous gift shop at the exit of said rides; as well as the insane focus everywhere on pirates and princesses — even to the extent of jarring shifts in theming such as on the Rivers of America where one encounters, in rapid succession, Pirates on the Mississippi and then Indians (who, instead of setting fire to a settler's cabin now gather to hear a politically correct lecture on musical instruments from a shaman). I went on and on, but I now realize that plenty of other outlets are complaining about the same thing so I'll jettison that complaint now.
Meta Disneyland
Disneyland itself has become so self-referential that its mere existence is an attraction in its own right. The trivia about the park that I once reveled in is now referenced everywhere; it is sort of difficult to enter that world inside the berm and immerse one's self in the fantasy because it is constantly interrupted by self-reference.
Hell is other people
Lots of little things annoyed me at the park, from the shops that all stock the same things and no longer fit a theme to the high price and low nutrition of the food. But one thing stands out above it all: the crowds. As the weekend progressed, the crowds grew to uncomfortable then oppressive size, bringing with them lethal numbers of strollers and scooters. On Friday we could walk right onto rides, Saturday the lines were 20-30 minutes, and by Sunday the lines were so long that Fastpass return times were up to 5 hours later.
I actually enjoyed the vast majority of the children, waving and talking to them; it was the adults who bothered me. The parents who forced kids to overstay (even when the kids were wise enough to tell mom that they were tired and wanted to leave); the scary trashy people who used the F word liberally and needed some training in living in civilization; and, mostly, the gaggles of high school girls who formed large groups, stopped in the middle of pathways to text each other and screamed at everything up to and including a Goofy sighting.
But did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
I loved it, warts and all, especially The Haunted Mansion and California Screaming. My favorite attraction started out amazing, became dated and kitschy, and ended up retro and revered: thank you, Disneyland, for keeping the Enchanted Tiki Room intact and resisting the urge to "update" it with characters or hip hop (see Walt Disney World). Thanks to Jose, Michael, Fritz and Pierre I can't walk down a street now without expecting the flowers to sing to me.
Which just goes to show, Disneyland still has the ability to make an adult feel like a kid despite its many modern corporate flaws.
So, I spent about an hour writing a really long blog entry, filled with complaints and observations about my trip to Disneyland this last weekend... and by the time I tried to save it, my blogging software had timed out and I lost it all. Of course, this gives me the opportunity to start again and write something less scathing and MUCH shorter, instead focusing on the positive. But really, is that likely? Me? Positive?
The Brand
If there is just one thing I could complain about regarding today's Disneyland, it's the branding. The incessant, in-your-face, EVERYWHERE branding. I mean, you're in DISNEYland, right? So why do they feel it is necessary to continue to brand every little thing within the park with the Disney logo? I can't help but wonder if Walt Disney, who famously went ballistic upon seeing non-Frontier vehicles and employees in Frontierland, would sanction the appearance of the Disney logo all over things in the old west, or emblazoned on signs in Fantasyland.
My lost post also went on at length about the inclusion of Disney film characters into rides where they previously did not exist; along with the ubiquitous gift shop at the exit of said rides; as well as the insane focus everywhere on pirates and princesses — even to the extent of jarring shifts in theming such as on the Rivers of America where one encounters, in rapid succession, Pirates on the Mississippi and then Indians (who, instead of setting fire to a settler's cabin now gather to hear a politically correct lecture on musical instruments from a shaman). I went on and on, but I now realize that plenty of other outlets are complaining about the same thing so I'll jettison that complaint now.
Meta Disneyland
Disneyland itself has become so self-referential that its mere existence is an attraction in its own right. The trivia about the park that I once reveled in is now referenced everywhere; it is sort of difficult to enter that world inside the berm and immerse one's self in the fantasy because it is constantly interrupted by self-reference.
Hell is other people
Lots of little things annoyed me at the park, from the shops that all stock the same things and no longer fit a theme to the high price and low nutrition of the food. But one thing stands out above it all: the crowds. As the weekend progressed, the crowds grew to uncomfortable then oppressive size, bringing with them lethal numbers of strollers and scooters. On Friday we could walk right onto rides, Saturday the lines were 20-30 minutes, and by Sunday the lines were so long that Fastpass return times were up to 5 hours later.
I actually enjoyed the vast majority of the children, waving and talking to them; it was the adults who bothered me. The parents who forced kids to overstay (even when the kids were wise enough to tell mom that they were tired and wanted to leave); the scary trashy people who used the F word liberally and needed some training in living in civilization; and, mostly, the gaggles of high school girls who formed large groups, stopped in the middle of pathways to text each other and screamed at everything up to and including a Goofy sighting.
But did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
I loved it, warts and all, especially The Haunted Mansion and California Screaming. My favorite attraction started out amazing, became dated and kitschy, and ended up retro and revered: thank you, Disneyland, for keeping the Enchanted Tiki Room intact and resisting the urge to "update" it with characters or hip hop (see Walt Disney World). Thanks to Jose, Michael, Fritz and Pierre I can't walk down a street now without expecting the flowers to sing to me.
Which just goes to show, Disneyland still has the ability to make an adult feel like a kid despite its many modern corporate flaws.
February 28, 2009
09:10 am
Looking Up
Standing at the doors to the backyard, coughing my brains out, I noticed it was snowing. Sort of. My gaze moved up the birch trees in the backyard where there are dozens of birds enjoying a meal of the fuzzy seed pod things; the seeds raining down on the backyard as they snacked. Out of the dozens of everyday finches are two striking yellow versions, looking as if they just escaped from a pet store.
A weird looking amphibious plane, bulky and square, flew by. From Moffett Field? Who knows. I should look up more often.
Standing at the doors to the backyard, coughing my brains out, I noticed it was snowing. Sort of. My gaze moved up the birch trees in the backyard where there are dozens of birds enjoying a meal of the fuzzy seed pod things; the seeds raining down on the backyard as they snacked. Out of the dozens of everyday finches are two striking yellow versions, looking as if they just escaped from a pet store.
A weird looking amphibious plane, bulky and square, flew by. From Moffett Field? Who knows. I should look up more often.
February 27, 2009
08:39 am
This has happened before and will happen again
My jaw dropped when I read this; although given the Republican predilection for stupid speeches you'd think I wouldn't be surprised.
Let's do the most cursory of deconstruction, shall we?
"We know we did wrong. My bad." Wha? Decades of destructive policies, fattening the rich and destroying the economy, alienating the rest of the world, causing countless deaths, creating a new police state, ceding American freedom into a fundamentalist Christian version of the Taliban, etc. etc... and all you have to say is "My Bad?" Okay, no prob dude, all is forgiven.
"But we go forward in appreciation of the values that brought us to this point." Um, aren't the values that brought you to this point the very same values you just acknowledged were wrong? As we saw in Gov. Jindal's remarks earlier this week, the Republicans have nothing new to say and after acknowledging their missteps they go right back to stepping them again.
My jaw dropped when I read this; although given the Republican predilection for stupid speeches you'd think I wouldn't be surprised.
From Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele [at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday]:
"Tonight, we tell America: we know the past, we know we did wrong. My bad. But we go forward in appreciation of the values that brought us to this point." [CNN]
Let's do the most cursory of deconstruction, shall we?
"We know we did wrong. My bad." Wha? Decades of destructive policies, fattening the rich and destroying the economy, alienating the rest of the world, causing countless deaths, creating a new police state, ceding American freedom into a fundamentalist Christian version of the Taliban, etc. etc... and all you have to say is "My Bad?" Okay, no prob dude, all is forgiven.
"But we go forward in appreciation of the values that brought us to this point." Um, aren't the values that brought you to this point the very same values you just acknowledged were wrong? As we saw in Gov. Jindal's remarks earlier this week, the Republicans have nothing new to say and after acknowledging their missteps they go right back to stepping them again.
February 24, 2009
11:50 am
Mare, dog and pony
All during the Bush administration I rarely watched or listened to the Democratic response to his speeches — mostly because I knew they wouldn't be nearly as insane nor entertaining in a horrifying way.
But tonight? Ooohhh, boy! On the heels of Barack Obama's informal State of the Union we can expect some fun from the Republican Rebuttal. (Although I often wonder why these are necessary, and why we don't hear a response from any other parties.)
The Republicans, having destroyed their own party from within over the last couple of decades, are desperately trying to find a way to present themselves that won't shoot them in the foot. Their idea? Wallpaper! Yes, the same old rich white men who have run the party and the country into the ground while diverting as much money as possible into the pockets of their cronies are expanding their plan from the 2008 election — you know, the one where they say "Hey! The Democrats are running a women, so WE'LL run a woman!" "Hey! The Democrats elected a black man, so WE'LL elect a black man!"
Tonight, they take this one step further by saying, "Hey! The liberals love the Indians, so WE'LL show them an Indian! After all, that movie did so well, didn't it?"
This sudden transformation — on the surface — to an "inclusive" party is whiplash-inducing. And yet, when one looks at any gathering of the GOP it is remarkable how the room contains a sea of white faces. The "inclusive" part is reserved for the carefully controlled media.
Is it just possible that a woman, a black man, and an Indian man could hold conservative views? Well, of course. And it would be ridiculous to infer otherwise. Is it odd that they have never been so prominent on the GOP's national stage until the devastation wrought by a truly diverse Democratic party? Nope. Not in the least.
The GOP's attempt to plaster on a veneer of diversity is too little, too late, and too insulting to anyone with a modicum of intelligence.
You know, I thought that after the Obama administration took the reigns I'd have to start writing about the Democrats. I should have known better: the Republicans continue to be such a rich pile from which to mine comedy gold.
After Obama reaches out to them repeatedly (in what appeared, at least, to be a sincere desire) and made compromises they demanded, they slapped away his hand of friendship and then claimed that he wasn't bipartisan.
In a calculated political move to ensure their future deniability, they voted, in lockstep, against stimulus... then went home and claimed credit for the spending the bill brought to their districts.
A GOP senator chomps at the bit to be Commerce Secretary and implores the president for a bipartisan gesture... then humiliates the president by changing his mind and withdrawing his bid on ideological grounds.
Obama, possibly not having learned his lesson, invites these same asses to his Fiscal Responsibility Summit, where they continue to slap away at him like jilted lovers while criticizing him for decisions made by his predecessor.
The irony of all this? The Republicans don't seem to have figured out that Obama is simply giving them opportunity after opportunity to show a willingness to unite in the face of crisis, and instead they are taking opportunity after opportunity to show the public that divisiveness is still all they have to offer.
All during the Bush administration I rarely watched or listened to the Democratic response to his speeches — mostly because I knew they wouldn't be nearly as insane nor entertaining in a horrifying way.
But tonight? Ooohhh, boy! On the heels of Barack Obama's informal State of the Union we can expect some fun from the Republican Rebuttal. (Although I often wonder why these are necessary, and why we don't hear a response from any other parties.)
The Republicans, having destroyed their own party from within over the last couple of decades, are desperately trying to find a way to present themselves that won't shoot them in the foot. Their idea? Wallpaper! Yes, the same old rich white men who have run the party and the country into the ground while diverting as much money as possible into the pockets of their cronies are expanding their plan from the 2008 election — you know, the one where they say "Hey! The Democrats are running a women, so WE'LL run a woman!" "Hey! The Democrats elected a black man, so WE'LL elect a black man!"
Tonight, they take this one step further by saying, "Hey! The liberals love the Indians, so WE'LL show them an Indian! After all, that movie did so well, didn't it?"
This sudden transformation — on the surface — to an "inclusive" party is whiplash-inducing. And yet, when one looks at any gathering of the GOP it is remarkable how the room contains a sea of white faces. The "inclusive" part is reserved for the carefully controlled media.
Is it just possible that a woman, a black man, and an Indian man could hold conservative views? Well, of course. And it would be ridiculous to infer otherwise. Is it odd that they have never been so prominent on the GOP's national stage until the devastation wrought by a truly diverse Democratic party? Nope. Not in the least.
The GOP's attempt to plaster on a veneer of diversity is too little, too late, and too insulting to anyone with a modicum of intelligence.
You know, I thought that after the Obama administration took the reigns I'd have to start writing about the Democrats. I should have known better: the Republicans continue to be such a rich pile from which to mine comedy gold.
After Obama reaches out to them repeatedly (in what appeared, at least, to be a sincere desire) and made compromises they demanded, they slapped away his hand of friendship and then claimed that he wasn't bipartisan.
In a calculated political move to ensure their future deniability, they voted, in lockstep, against stimulus... then went home and claimed credit for the spending the bill brought to their districts.
A GOP senator chomps at the bit to be Commerce Secretary and implores the president for a bipartisan gesture... then humiliates the president by changing his mind and withdrawing his bid on ideological grounds.
Obama, possibly not having learned his lesson, invites these same asses to his Fiscal Responsibility Summit, where they continue to slap away at him like jilted lovers while criticizing him for decisions made by his predecessor.
The irony of all this? The Republicans don't seem to have figured out that Obama is simply giving them opportunity after opportunity to show a willingness to unite in the face of crisis, and instead they are taking opportunity after opportunity to show the public that divisiveness is still all they have to offer.
February 23, 2009
05:21 pm
Boost your self-esteem by laughing at the beautiful
It's heartening to know that the beautiful people are just like us: not beautiful at all when someone's taking pictures willy-nilly at a party.
It's heartening to know that the beautiful people are just like us: not beautiful at all when someone's taking pictures willy-nilly at a party.
February 19, 2009
12:57 pm
86 Prop 13
California's budget mess is making headlines these days, so I thought a little illustration of it's major shortcoming would be appropriate.
Proposition 13 became law back in 1978. It, along with the recent Proposition 8, are clear indicators that the proposition system should be abolished. People with axes to grind or ideologies to push use propositions to codify their ideas into law.
Since propositions are voted upon directly by citizens, they are usually pushed with over-the-top fear campaigns and misleading tactics.
Proposition 13 has two major parts: first, it requires a 2/3 majority of the legislature for any tax increases. Second, and arguably more damaging, it radically changed property taxation.
The gist of it is this: property is only assessed when it is sold, and after it is assessed the taxes can't be more than 1% of that value. This was promoted as a way to save seniors from the rising value of their property and keep them in their homes. They were the only ones who benefited. The rest of us got the shaft.
Here's a clear demonstration of the effect Proposition 13 had on my neighborhood. Here are eight houses around mine (my house has the bold outline), listing the square footage and the annual tax paid last year.
(Disclaimer: while my house has the highest taxes in this image, there is one house on my street just out of view which paid $200 more, it is 936sf.)
It is worth noting that while there is a great disparity in taxes paid, the largest and most shocking difference is those two houses across the street from me. Both of them are owned by an elderly couple who also own houses on the next street. They are all rentals — the seniors do not actually live in them and I can only assume that they never lived in all of them at once. The renters have tried to buy the houses but were rebuffed because the houses are in trust for their descendants... which means that those houses will continue to generate little tax revenue even after the "owners" have died. Prop 13 has created a disparity far outside the "save seniors money" claim. It has resulted in huge sales tax increases and fees tacked on everywhere; as well as special assessments.
Even though I pay $6,300 more per year in taxes, I don't get better services from the county. We share the same street pavement, the same streetlight, the same sewer service. The owners of those houses are raking in rent every month for a collection of paid-off houses with a total annual tax bill that's less that what I pay in a quarter.
This is not only ridiculously unfair, but explains why California has so much trouble paying its bills. The proposition system provides Californians with a way to directly control taxation, but it also gives them a way to directly control spending — and people live to pass propositions to spend money on pet projects without a thought as to how they'll be paid for. They want more and more government services, but don't want to pay for them; even going so far as to restrict the legislature's ability to generate the revenue to pay for what they voted for.
If the tax burden of these eight houses was split equitably, we'd all pay $3700 a year. For most people, that would be a marginal increase, for me it would be a huge reduction. And for the landlords across the street it would be $240 a month less of a profit. I don't think I'd cry too much for them.
California's budget mess is making headlines these days, so I thought a little illustration of it's major shortcoming would be appropriate.
Proposition 13 became law back in 1978. It, along with the recent Proposition 8, are clear indicators that the proposition system should be abolished. People with axes to grind or ideologies to push use propositions to codify their ideas into law.
Since propositions are voted upon directly by citizens, they are usually pushed with over-the-top fear campaigns and misleading tactics.
Proposition 13 has two major parts: first, it requires a 2/3 majority of the legislature for any tax increases. Second, and arguably more damaging, it radically changed property taxation.
The gist of it is this: property is only assessed when it is sold, and after it is assessed the taxes can't be more than 1% of that value. This was promoted as a way to save seniors from the rising value of their property and keep them in their homes. They were the only ones who benefited. The rest of us got the shaft.
Here's a clear demonstration of the effect Proposition 13 had on my neighborhood. Here are eight houses around mine (my house has the bold outline), listing the square footage and the annual tax paid last year.
(Disclaimer: while my house has the highest taxes in this image, there is one house on my street just out of view which paid $200 more, it is 936sf.)
It is worth noting that while there is a great disparity in taxes paid, the largest and most shocking difference is those two houses across the street from me. Both of them are owned by an elderly couple who also own houses on the next street. They are all rentals — the seniors do not actually live in them and I can only assume that they never lived in all of them at once. The renters have tried to buy the houses but were rebuffed because the houses are in trust for their descendants... which means that those houses will continue to generate little tax revenue even after the "owners" have died. Prop 13 has created a disparity far outside the "save seniors money" claim. It has resulted in huge sales tax increases and fees tacked on everywhere; as well as special assessments.
Even though I pay $6,300 more per year in taxes, I don't get better services from the county. We share the same street pavement, the same streetlight, the same sewer service. The owners of those houses are raking in rent every month for a collection of paid-off houses with a total annual tax bill that's less that what I pay in a quarter.
This is not only ridiculously unfair, but explains why California has so much trouble paying its bills. The proposition system provides Californians with a way to directly control taxation, but it also gives them a way to directly control spending — and people live to pass propositions to spend money on pet projects without a thought as to how they'll be paid for. They want more and more government services, but don't want to pay for them; even going so far as to restrict the legislature's ability to generate the revenue to pay for what they voted for.
If the tax burden of these eight houses was split equitably, we'd all pay $3700 a year. For most people, that would be a marginal increase, for me it would be a huge reduction. And for the landlords across the street it would be $240 a month less of a profit. I don't think I'd cry too much for them.
09:44 am
They paved paradise and put up a 3,000 sq ft McMansion
Sometimes I get a little bug in my head, which means research — I don't know anyone as dorky as me, who finds research to be an interesting hobby. Of course, these days doing research is far less difficult thanks to teh interweb and apps like Google Earth.
The current version of Google Earth has a great new feature: historical imagery. It's not at all complete, most areas don't have any imagery before the mid 1990s. Still, there is interesting insight to be found in the small patches of old aerial photos. Luckily, the question I was asking happened to be covered by an old image.
When I was a kid, my grandparents lived here in San Jose and I have many disjointed memories of landmarks I saw. There are fragments of wineries stuck in my head, trips to vineyards with my grandfather that are still firing in the synapses. When I moved here a few years ago I was confused that so many of my memories didn't seem to jibe with what I saw. The library on Pearl Avenue was still there, but where was the Alpha Beta supermarket? Houses sat there now.
Turns out that houses are everywhere, obliterating the landmarks of my early years. Every open space in the Santa Clara Valley was paved over and covered with housing, the orchards destroyed, and finally even landmark buildings torn down to make way for yet another residential development.
I started out looking for this building:
I remembered the distinctive spire and circular building, but had no idea what winery it was. I thought it might be Almaden Winery, but after searching images with every winery name I could think of, it finally appeared. This was the Paul Masson Champagne Cellars in Saratoga, photographed by none other than Ansel Adams. A landmark, right?
It was — for it's now gone — located on Saratoga Avenue. Here's what the spot looked like in 1948:
This image is pretty much the same as the entire valley in 1948: covered as far as the eye can see with orderly orchards.
Imagery at this point jumps fifty years, and we can see the Masson buildings — although in this image taken in 1991, the facility has already had its heyday and been closed.
The orchards are completely gone, replaced by tract housing and cleared for construction of highway 85. Jump ahead to today:
... and there is no sign that this area was once covered with orchards, vineyards, and a landmark wine cellar. Other than a few streets evoking Masson, of course.
In south San Jose, the historic Almaden Winery was demolished as far as the law would allow, up to the edge of the historic 1800s building. Expensive housing was built right up to it and the developer, in a sop to preservationists, created a small park around the remains of the winery. Still, what's the point? It's just an old building now.
This change in land use is evident everywhere in Silicon Valley. Here's a series that spans only 10 years, showing the Mirrasou winery that once existed on the east side of San Jose. The vineyards dwindled to nothing, the winery (the oldest in San Jose) was sold, and the buildings left to rot while real estate prices rose to ridiculous levels and more condos were built.
Even as the real estate market crashes around us, we can't go back in time. We can't tear down the overpriced housing and rebuild the architectural landmarks that were destroyed.
Sometimes I get a little bug in my head, which means research — I don't know anyone as dorky as me, who finds research to be an interesting hobby. Of course, these days doing research is far less difficult thanks to teh interweb and apps like Google Earth.
The current version of Google Earth has a great new feature: historical imagery. It's not at all complete, most areas don't have any imagery before the mid 1990s. Still, there is interesting insight to be found in the small patches of old aerial photos. Luckily, the question I was asking happened to be covered by an old image.
When I was a kid, my grandparents lived here in San Jose and I have many disjointed memories of landmarks I saw. There are fragments of wineries stuck in my head, trips to vineyards with my grandfather that are still firing in the synapses. When I moved here a few years ago I was confused that so many of my memories didn't seem to jibe with what I saw. The library on Pearl Avenue was still there, but where was the Alpha Beta supermarket? Houses sat there now.
Turns out that houses are everywhere, obliterating the landmarks of my early years. Every open space in the Santa Clara Valley was paved over and covered with housing, the orchards destroyed, and finally even landmark buildings torn down to make way for yet another residential development.
I started out looking for this building:
I remembered the distinctive spire and circular building, but had no idea what winery it was. I thought it might be Almaden Winery, but after searching images with every winery name I could think of, it finally appeared. This was the Paul Masson Champagne Cellars in Saratoga, photographed by none other than Ansel Adams. A landmark, right?
It was — for it's now gone — located on Saratoga Avenue. Here's what the spot looked like in 1948:
This image is pretty much the same as the entire valley in 1948: covered as far as the eye can see with orderly orchards.
Imagery at this point jumps fifty years, and we can see the Masson buildings — although in this image taken in 1991, the facility has already had its heyday and been closed.
The orchards are completely gone, replaced by tract housing and cleared for construction of highway 85. Jump ahead to today:
... and there is no sign that this area was once covered with orchards, vineyards, and a landmark wine cellar. Other than a few streets evoking Masson, of course.
In south San Jose, the historic Almaden Winery was demolished as far as the law would allow, up to the edge of the historic 1800s building. Expensive housing was built right up to it and the developer, in a sop to preservationists, created a small park around the remains of the winery. Still, what's the point? It's just an old building now.
This change in land use is evident everywhere in Silicon Valley. Here's a series that spans only 10 years, showing the Mirrasou winery that once existed on the east side of San Jose. The vineyards dwindled to nothing, the winery (the oldest in San Jose) was sold, and the buildings left to rot while real estate prices rose to ridiculous levels and more condos were built.
Even as the real estate market crashes around us, we can't go back in time. We can't tear down the overpriced housing and rebuild the architectural landmarks that were destroyed.
February 09, 2009
08:33 am
By your logic, I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away
Last month I noted that the GOP talking points include an assertion that Bush was a fantastically successful president because no further terrorist attacks occurred. That's like saying I am perfectly healthy and fit because I haven't had another heart attack.
Glenn Greenwald over at Salon points out another view of this — that the Bush strategy of military action and wasps' nest stirring is just as successful as... pulling out and leaving them alone.
Perhaps the SImpsons explained it best:
Last month I noted that the GOP talking points include an assertion that Bush was a fantastically successful president because no further terrorist attacks occurred. That's like saying I am perfectly healthy and fit because I haven't had another heart attack.
Glenn Greenwald over at Salon points out another view of this — that the Bush strategy of military action and wasps' nest stirring is just as successful as... pulling out and leaving them alone.
In 2004, Al Qaeda bombed the Madrid subway. The Spanish government then withdrew from Iraq and gave the accused terrorists full due process rights -- and there have been no terrorist attacks since.
BBC - March 11, 2004:
Powerful explosions have torn through three Madrid train stations during the morning rush hour, with latest reports speaking of 173 people killed.
Near simultaneous blasts hit Atocha station in the centre of the Spanish capital and two smaller stations.
Guardian - March 15, 2004 (4 days later):
José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, whose socialist party yesterday won a sensational election victory, today vowed to pull Spanish troops out of Iraq.
The prime minister elect used his first full media interview since last night to affirm that he intended to follow through on what had become a key election promise.
"The Spanish troops in Iraq will come home," he told Cadena Ser radio.
Associated Press - April 19, 2004:
Spain's prime minister yesterday ordered Spanish troops pulled out of Iraq as soon as possible, fulfilling a campaign pledge to a nation recovering from terrorist bombings that Al Qaeda militants said were reprisal for Spain's support of the war.
BBC - May 21, 2004:
The last Spanish soldiers withdrawing from Iraq have crossed the border to Kuwait, fulfilling the new Spanish government's pledge to pull out.
The final contingent handed over its base in the southern town of Diwaniyah to US forces before departing.
The Los Angeles Times - November 1, 2007:
A Spanish court Wednesday convicted 21 men in the 2004 bombings of Madrid’s train system, the deadliest terrorist attack in continental Europe, but acquitted an Egyptian national whom authorities once touted as the mastermind. . . .
The investigation eventually revealed a “franchise” of Islamic militants, inspired by Al Qaeda but who originated in the Maghreb region of northern Africa. . . .
Number of terrorist attacks by Islamic radicals on Spain since March, 2004 -- i.e., the last 5 years: none.
Using the prevailing media-logic applied to Bush's counter-terrorism policies such as torture and Guantanamo (i.e., if a country is attacked by Terrorists, its Government then does X, and there are no Terrorist attacks for some period of time thereafter, then that is "proof" that "X stops Terrorism"), I believe these events in Spain constitute proof that the way to stop Terrorism and to keep the citizenry safe is to stop invading and occupying Muslim countries and take accused Terrorists and put them on trial with full due process rights before putting them in cages for life. After all, that's what Spain did, and there's not been another Terrorist attack for five years. Therefore, those policies have kept the Spanish people safe.
Perhaps the SImpsons explained it best:
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.
Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
[A beat]
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
February 06, 2009
10:44 am
If you don’t have anything nice to say, come sit by Bush
Former Bush aides are having a field day criticizing everything about the Obama administration, and he hasn't even been in office for a month yet. I'm not entirely sure what their strategy is — maybe they think they are still relevant?
Except when Bush was in office, when such criticism was called "treason" and "anti-American" and "supporting terrorists."
I wonder if he was disappointed to see male prostitutes roaming around the West Wing during the reign of the previous occupant? Talk about a locker room experience.
F'ing hypocrites. I really thought that I'd have to turn my attention to corrupt, hypocritical Democrats once Bush was gone, but it seems that the Bush era is the gift that keeps on giving long after it should have twitched its last.
Former Bush aides are having a field day criticizing everything about the Obama administration, and he hasn't even been in office for a month yet. I'm not entirely sure what their strategy is — maybe they think they are still relevant?
Dick Cheney says President Obama's policies will make it easier for terrorists to kill Americans. Alberto Gonzales says the new attorney general could be undermining the morale of U.S. intelligence officials.
And Andrew Card, George W. Bush's first chief of staff, took Obama to task for allowing shirtsleeves and loose collars in the Oval Office -- arguing it was a clear departure from Bush's sterner sartorial rules.
... "It's certainly unbecoming, especially for a former vice president," Thomas E. Mann, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, said in reference to the remarks by Cheney and others. "It reinforces the fact that there's a lot of bitterness about the low public standing of Bush and the administration as they left office, and the soaring standing of Barack Obama. A lot of these people are still caught up in these ideological battles and can't let go."
Brian Darling, the Senate relations director for the conservative Heritage Foundation, said the criticism "is part of democracy and the free exchange of ideas."
Except when Bush was in office, when such criticism was called "treason" and "anti-American" and "supporting terrorists."
The remarks by Card, meanwhile, also suggest that no issue is too small to escape notice. Obama has attracted attention for ditching his suitcoat while in the Oval Office and letting others do the same. Although Bush did on occasion work in his shirtsleeves, he generally enforced a more formal dress code for the presidential office.
"I'm disappointed to see the casual, laissez faire, short sleeves, no shirt and tie, no jacket, kind of locker-room experience that seems to be taking place in this White House and the Oval Office," Card told talk show host Michael Medved last week. He did not respond to an e-mail request for comment.
I wonder if he was disappointed to see male prostitutes roaming around the West Wing during the reign of the previous occupant? Talk about a locker room experience.
F'ing hypocrites. I really thought that I'd have to turn my attention to corrupt, hypocritical Democrats once Bush was gone, but it seems that the Bush era is the gift that keeps on giving long after it should have twitched its last.
February 05, 2009
10:06 am
If you’d kept your mouth shut we might have thought you were clever
Will we never be rid of her?
Sarah Palin gave an interview to Esquire in which she continues to rail against the media and "pathetic bloggers"... but ends up just giving them more fodder with some insights into her reasoning such as:
Will we never be rid of her?
Sarah Palin gave an interview to Esquire in which she continues to rail against the media and "pathetic bloggers"... but ends up just giving them more fodder with some insights into her reasoning such as:
Palin said she named Bristol in part for Bristol, Conn. — home of the sports network ESPN.
"When I was in high school, my desire was to be a sportscaster," she said. "Until I learned that you'd have to move to Bristol, Connecticut. It was far away. So instead, I had a daughter and named her Bristol."
February 03, 2009
07:48 pm
Smallest, largest… size isn’t everything, you know
The web's LARGEST collection!
Hmm...
They must have been measuring in AOL inches.
The web's LARGEST collection!
Hmm...
They must have been measuring in AOL inches.
January 30, 2009
10:00 am
Don’t trust them! They’re just like us!
From Republican National Committee chair Mike Duncan:
In other words, he claims that the Democrats are going to do exactly what the Republicans did over the last dozen or so years: explode the size and spending of government (Bush's deficits so big they defy understanding, wiretapping, homeland security dept.)... check! Crush the opposition through procedure and redistricting... check check! Indoctrinate children (um, ever heard of "No Child Left Behind"? Check!) to the nanny state (Bush's bank bailout, FCC censorship "won't someone think of the children? other than parents? Tax cuts for the rich and coddling corporations? How about the police state Bush left us?)... check check check!
I'm really astonished — although I shouldn't be — at the increase in hypocrisy displayed by the GOP as their party falls into total disarray and cannibalism. It's incredible how quickly their house collapsed; the current understanding seems to be that they have only five reliably conservative states in their column these days.
From Republican National Committee chair Mike Duncan:
"The Democrats mean to use this opportunity of unchallenged power to explode the size and scope of the federal government, to take control of entire sectors of our economy, to crush the conservative opposition through parliamentary procedure and redistricting," he told RNC members, winning applause. "The goal is to indoctrinate a generation of American children to the gentle comforts of the nanny state ... The only thing standing between their agenda and success is the Republican Party."
In other words, he claims that the Democrats are going to do exactly what the Republicans did over the last dozen or so years: explode the size and spending of government (Bush's deficits so big they defy understanding, wiretapping, homeland security dept.)... check! Crush the opposition through procedure and redistricting... check check! Indoctrinate children (um, ever heard of "No Child Left Behind"? Check!) to the nanny state (Bush's bank bailout, FCC censorship "won't someone think of the children? other than parents? Tax cuts for the rich and coddling corporations? How about the police state Bush left us?)... check check check!
I'm really astonished — although I shouldn't be — at the increase in hypocrisy displayed by the GOP as their party falls into total disarray and cannibalism. It's incredible how quickly their house collapsed; the current understanding seems to be that they have only five reliably conservative states in their column these days.
January 28, 2009
09:50 am
Oh, you wanted a network with that?
I've been reading this morning about AT&T's new 3G MicroCell device. Simply put, it creates a 3G "cell" in your home, routing your cell phone calls and data over your internet connection.
At first, I thought this was cool — I get poor reception in the house, and this would begin to move me toward living a cell-phone only life.
Then, I started thinking more critically.
Using this device would incur yet another monthly fee from AT&T above and beyond the cost of buying the device itself. This would seem to offset the savings of disconnecting the landline phone.
And then I starting thinking even more critically: what would be the reason for spending that money and using such a device? That's right — the inadequacy of AT&T's coverage.
The bottom line? Rather than spend the money needed to build out their network and improve coverage in neighborhoods, AT&T has decided to let customers themselves build out the network and pay for the privilege. I already pay AT&T $140 each month for substandard cell coverage and a landline that is unusable when it rains; but hey — for a premium on top of that I can have more intelligible calls? Bonus!
I've been reading this morning about AT&T's new 3G MicroCell device. Simply put, it creates a 3G "cell" in your home, routing your cell phone calls and data over your internet connection.
At first, I thought this was cool — I get poor reception in the house, and this would begin to move me toward living a cell-phone only life.
Then, I started thinking more critically.
Using this device would incur yet another monthly fee from AT&T above and beyond the cost of buying the device itself. This would seem to offset the savings of disconnecting the landline phone.
And then I starting thinking even more critically: what would be the reason for spending that money and using such a device? That's right — the inadequacy of AT&T's coverage.
The bottom line? Rather than spend the money needed to build out their network and improve coverage in neighborhoods, AT&T has decided to let customers themselves build out the network and pay for the privilege. I already pay AT&T $140 each month for substandard cell coverage and a landline that is unusable when it rains; but hey — for a premium on top of that I can have more intelligible calls? Bonus!
January 25, 2009
11:04 am
Don’t Peak Too Soon
Wow. I was unemotional and pretty pragmatic about Obama's inauguration, but I have to say I've been impressed by the first 3 or 4 days.
Wow. And it's only been 4 days.
These were, of course, the easy ones. Hope this trend continues, and it will be interesting to see he manages the issues that can't be addressed by executive order.
I have to say that I am very impressed by the new White House website — until now, the site has always been pretty much useless, but the new blog makes it timely and imparts a feeling of connectedness. One can read clear positions and agendas, and it almost feels like one knows what the president is doing each day. Let's hope they can keep it up for years. Eight?
Wow. I was unemotional and pretty pragmatic about Obama's inauguration, but I have to say I've been impressed by the first 3 or 4 days.
- Halted implementation of the last of Bush's restrictive and destructive orders
- Shut down the CIA secret prison system
- "Outlawed" torture
- Ordered the closure of the Guantanamo detention camp
- Appointed envoys to the Middle East and Afghanistan/Pakistan, restarting diplomatic efforts there after a solely military policy
- Strictly limited the role of lobbyists in government
- Froze the pay of senior staff in the White House
- Called for more transparency in government and undid the Bush administration policy on withholding government information (including a new White House website that doesn't have restrictions on searching/cataloging content)
- Removed the so-called "gag rule" which prevents any discussion of abortion by groups receiving US funds
Wow. And it's only been 4 days.
These were, of course, the easy ones. Hope this trend continues, and it will be interesting to see he manages the issues that can't be addressed by executive order.
I have to say that I am very impressed by the new White House website — until now, the site has always been pretty much useless, but the new blog makes it timely and imparts a feeling of connectedness. One can read clear positions and agendas, and it almost feels like one knows what the president is doing each day. Let's hope they can keep it up for years. Eight?
January 23, 2009
08:25 am
Let’s improve our word power
You'd have thought that a few days after President Obama took office I'd be turning toward the future rather than continuing to blast the Bush administration. Looks like that won't be the case, as the GOP continues its ridiculous traditions by jabbing and insulting and being generally obnoxious.
Example #1
I need to brush up on my vocabulary 'cos I'm not sure what the word is that describes someone claiming victory by using a negative — saying that something that didn't happen means that someone did something good.
It's worth noting that the author, Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen starts his clock on the day after the September 11 attacks. I think the more interesting way to read these numbers is that the Bush administration managed to go only 234 days without a terrorist attack; and this after being specifically warned not only of the pending attack but of the specific method to be used. [UPDATE 2/12/09: Mea culpa. After reading the infamous memo myself, I tend to think that it is not necessarily the smoking gun so many have made it out to be. Read it here. It simply states the obvious — that Bin Laden was determined to strike, was looking at buildings in NYC, and planning hijackings... since 1997, which would tend to indicate it wasn't about to happen a few weeks later.]
It is also worth noting that Thiessen claims a terrorist attack would doom the Democratic party for a generation; possibly the most ridiculous and hypocritical nonsense I've heard today (never misunderestimate the ability of Republicans to reach new heights of hypocrisy). Maybe Mr. Thiessen, like many in the GOP, thinks that the massive repudiation of the Republican party over the last few years is because a magical fairy sprinkled liberal dust on America? Golly, do you think it could be because the American people are tired of the fear mongering of the GOP? Not content to learn the lesson, the GOP talking points today, when people are celebrating the triumph of hope over the politics of fear, are the same as they have been for the last 7 years.
Since George Bush has little concrete success to crow about, he's forced to brag about things that didn't happen. Since his base mainly consists of people who can't seem to think for themselves and have no critical abilities, this makes perfect sense — bragging about something that didn't happen is no different than a televangelist claiming that the hurricane didn't hit because of his prayers, that the rain came because of a dance, or that millions of people weren't killed in Africa... oh, wait.
You know what's gonna make the GOP unelectable for a generation? Their dire harping on TERRORISM! TERRORISM! YA'LL GONNA DIE IN THERE!
Example #2
Missouri Senator Kit Bond (R, duh) and Florida representative Bill Young (R, America's Wang) says that the prisoners at Guantanamo should be transferred to... Alcatraz. 'Cos those hippies in San Francisco were against torture and unlawful detention. Gosh, this San Francisco bashing gets funnier and funnier everytime some nutcase right winger opens his mouth. (That's a real purty mouth, by the way.)
San Francisco is a major American city. And in an era where it's even become passe to criticize Hollywood, it's the last city that politicians feel comfortable railing against. Funny, isn't it? How the GOP, which purports to be so UHMERICUN tends to paint some Americans as the enemy? The people of San Francisco — and judging from the election results, the people of many other cities — are concerned about morality and our constitution, about human rights and the integrity of our nation. Too bad these things are so far from the tiny minds of politicians like Bond and Young (wow, there are two names that go great together, especially in a GOP airport bathroom), who are mainly concerned with how many cheap shots they can take rather than how they can solve problems.
And yeah, I'm having fun taking cheap shots myself today, so I understand their glee.
Example #3
Saw a clip of Minority Leader John Boener (R, of course) on NewsHour last night, railing about how the Democrats in Congress are marginalizing the Republicans and not listening to them. In other words, he's complaining that the Dems are acting just like Republicans. Not fair!
You'd have thought that a few days after President Obama took office I'd be turning toward the future rather than continuing to blast the Bush administration. Looks like that won't be the case, as the GOP continues its ridiculous traditions by jabbing and insulting and being generally obnoxious.
Example #1
I need to brush up on my vocabulary 'cos I'm not sure what the word is that describes someone claiming victory by using a negative — saying that something that didn't happen means that someone did something good.
2,688 Days
By Marc A. Thiessen
Washington Post, Thursday, January 22, 2009; A17
When President Bush left office on Tuesday, America marked 2,688 days without a terrorist attack on its soil. There are 1,459 days until the next inauguration. Whether Barack Obama is standing on the Capitol steps to be sworn in a second time depends on whether he succeeds in replicating Bush's achievement.
As the new president receives his intelligence briefings, certain facts must now be apparent: Al-Qaeda is actively working to attack our country again. And the policies and institutions that George W. Bush put in place to stop this are succeeding. During the campaign, Obama pledged to dismantle many of these policies. He follows through on those pledges at America's peril -- and his own. If Obama weakens any of the defenses Bush put in place and terrorists strike our country again, Americans will hold Obama responsible -- and the Democratic Party could find itself unelectable for a generation.
It's worth noting that the author, Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen starts his clock on the day after the September 11 attacks. I think the more interesting way to read these numbers is that the Bush administration managed to go only 234 days without a terrorist attack; and this after being specifically warned not only of the pending attack but of the specific method to be used. [UPDATE 2/12/09: Mea culpa. After reading the infamous memo myself, I tend to think that it is not necessarily the smoking gun so many have made it out to be. Read it here. It simply states the obvious — that Bin Laden was determined to strike, was looking at buildings in NYC, and planning hijackings... since 1997, which would tend to indicate it wasn't about to happen a few weeks later.]
It is also worth noting that Thiessen claims a terrorist attack would doom the Democratic party for a generation; possibly the most ridiculous and hypocritical nonsense I've heard today (never misunderestimate the ability of Republicans to reach new heights of hypocrisy). Maybe Mr. Thiessen, like many in the GOP, thinks that the massive repudiation of the Republican party over the last few years is because a magical fairy sprinkled liberal dust on America? Golly, do you think it could be because the American people are tired of the fear mongering of the GOP? Not content to learn the lesson, the GOP talking points today, when people are celebrating the triumph of hope over the politics of fear, are the same as they have been for the last 7 years.
On Tuesday, George W. Bush told a cheering crowd in Midland, Tex., that his administration had left office without another terrorist attack. When Barack Obama returns to Chicago at the end of his time in office, will he be able to say the same?
Since George Bush has little concrete success to crow about, he's forced to brag about things that didn't happen. Since his base mainly consists of people who can't seem to think for themselves and have no critical abilities, this makes perfect sense — bragging about something that didn't happen is no different than a televangelist claiming that the hurricane didn't hit because of his prayers, that the rain came because of a dance, or that millions of people weren't killed in Africa... oh, wait.
You know what's gonna make the GOP unelectable for a generation? Their dire harping on TERRORISM! TERRORISM! YA'LL GONNA DIE IN THERE!
Example #2
Missouri Senator Kit Bond (R, duh) and Florida representative Bill Young (R, America's Wang) says that the prisoners at Guantanamo should be transferred to... Alcatraz. 'Cos those hippies in San Francisco were against torture and unlawful detention. Gosh, this San Francisco bashing gets funnier and funnier everytime some nutcase right winger opens his mouth. (That's a real purty mouth, by the way.)
San Francisco is a major American city. And in an era where it's even become passe to criticize Hollywood, it's the last city that politicians feel comfortable railing against. Funny, isn't it? How the GOP, which purports to be so UHMERICUN tends to paint some Americans as the enemy? The people of San Francisco — and judging from the election results, the people of many other cities — are concerned about morality and our constitution, about human rights and the integrity of our nation. Too bad these things are so far from the tiny minds of politicians like Bond and Young (wow, there are two names that go great together, especially in a GOP airport bathroom), who are mainly concerned with how many cheap shots they can take rather than how they can solve problems.
And yeah, I'm having fun taking cheap shots myself today, so I understand their glee.
Example #3
Saw a clip of Minority Leader John Boener (R, of course) on NewsHour last night, railing about how the Democrats in Congress are marginalizing the Republicans and not listening to them. In other words, he's complaining that the Dems are acting just like Republicans. Not fair!
Previous Page
