FYI

Icons are for libruls.

Reminder

From the desk of one Lisa Shiffren, c/o Teh Core:

Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus, who is smarter than your average feminist, (and has a Harvard law degree to prove it) has a column today which amounts to whining about the fact that Michelle Obama, who has a Harvard Law degree, has announced that she will be the nation's "mom in chief" above all other roles. Marcus frets that she is choosing to be "Jackie Kennedy" when her education and ambitions fit her to be Hillary Clinton.

Jen Rubin at Contentions finds this exaperating. Marcus's complaint, she notes, reminds us that feminism was never about choices. It was only ever about choosing power. ...

Reminder to all players: Every organization that continues to exist beyond a natural expiration changes its focus to seek power. Movements don't have a natural expiration.

Feminists wanted choices, won a bunch of them even. Now there's more free time for them to focus on what everyone wants before they die: abstract, amorphous, undefined and unlimited power.

Now someone tell me: if the average feminist has an implied lower intelligence than the rest of society, where does the average writer for The Corner fall?

Youthful Petulance

While I solidly attribute the downfall of the GOP to inevitable hubris following from lack of opposition, I'm also starting to get under the impression that the depths that they have sunk follow from a lack of willpower to take life seriously. Andrew Breitbart, everybody (*applause*):

The future of the Grand Old Party needs to be dangerously youthful, devastatingly attractive and outrageously fun.

Throw the liberal baby boomer bums out. And let's elect to higher office some good-looking, freedom-loving Net Generation babes. Face it: Democracy needs a face-lift and a youth movement. (I'm from Los Angeles, what can I tell you?)

These people just handed us off from a hobbled one-party nation without serious issues to a hobbled one-party nation (but different party) with deadly-serious issues. And the GOP needs to get fun again?

I have to say, I find this weird. I'm surrounded by twenty-somethings who have this traction with reality that I don't see in the media, those twenty-somethings just took over a large piece of the constituency, and the Republicans have failed to absorb any of it. They really did kick all the buzzkills out of their frat-house kegger just before the house came down, didn't they? Amazing.

LAWL

ROFFLE

But next time, really, make the message believable. Someone spouting off racism with frequency isn't going to say "my racism is a sham!" Go for: "so seriously, I was looking on Craiglist's casual encounters m4m section, and you wouldn't believe the number of dumb [redacted]ers posting pictures of their dicks. I mean, really, wow." You have to plant the seeds of doubt, let the victim walk into the trap.

>:3

That's my boy

Jerrold Nadler is trying to earn the vote I reluctantly gave him earlier this month. If he passes the resolution, and gets the independent counsel in play, he'll have earned it.

...different day

Sully thinks the first Internet-advertised suicide just happened recently. How blissfully unaware he is.

OK, resuming blogging

Too much to say, nowhere else to say it.

Comprehensive Chronology of Torture

Holy crap, is it ever comprehensive. And, open source.

If you like it, donate. They're barely slugging it out on their balance sheet.

Hat tip Sully

It's Only a Flesh Wound?

Mr. Larison admonishes the buzzing crowd; says that Clinton isn't done. His argument is that the early smack-down lowers expectations of Clinton's campaign, giving her more room to work. If she can leverage that effort, maybe she can pull ahead and then the media congratulates her for becoming a stronger person for it.

Sorry, but I can't buy that specifically. Obama has to keep knocking Hillary around, and not because there are no TKOs in politics, but because the media needs its darling. Hillary is catty, and Obama is not, and if Obama fails to bring CNN it's daily boost of bored white-trash-in-cubicles ratings, CNN will move the cameras back to their old dealer.

I'm hoping that Obama's akido yesterday caused Hillary's momentum to become his. It seems that way in Blog-o-land, but I don't know about in the media. I would say: wait until SNL is on this week, and see the next sketch with Hill in it. Does it have Obama in it, too?

But, wait, what's that? There's a writers strike going on? And politicians are our only entertainment?

That would mean that the politicians are many times more responsible for sating the media's appetite. And many times more in control.

Bush Never Disappoints

Hat-tip to John Cole: The White House is going to veto the bill that bans torture.

The stated reason? *scanning...* *scanning...* increase congressional oversight

Winning bet is on "Executive Privilege"!

It will be sweet, sweet Karma when a Democrat is in the office and Republicans run for cover from this expanded privilege. And while Republicans are fuming over the catastrophe they energetically ran into, where will Bush be?

Clearing brush on his ranch, unconcerned. Because he doesn't give a damn about the Republican party, and never has.

Makes me giggle. Like a computer programmer imitating a schoolgirl.

Game, Set, Match: Obama?

I think Obama stuck the knife in yesterday.

I say that only after reading one of Andrew Sullivan's readers (the first one). The reader points out something I didn't realize: Hillary was cackling. I initially heard it as "yeah, I was thinking that, too" laughter. But that was prejudicial on my part, because I thought it was a good question.

But she was cackling. And, unfortunately for her, the director probably dropped the microphone volume on the other four candidates (some of whom were laughing, too). So Hillary's voice, somewhat unfairly, was booming over the already-under-fire Obama.

And that's how I think Obama stuck the knife in. Because Hillary drew it out of her back pocket.

With that low-effort strike and excellent sound bite, Obama probably has this wrapped-up until Iowa.

I would like to say that I'm not necessarily pro-Obama, but I'm for anything that forces Hillary to actually tell me why I should vote for her. I'm sick of this shit where politicians try to attract me with at-least-I'm-not-him logic. They have to dance for me, first.

Who do they think they are in Jersey?

My home state of Joisey has all but abolished the death penalty.

I don't have much of an opinion on the politics. I see the death penalty as possibly useful but generally misused, as is much of the corrections system in this country.

I do have respect for my state when they buck the trend.

Also, this is probably good for them, because NJ is full of dopes. I mean, really, our criminals tend to be affable, goofy dorks rather than killa-gangstas (or whatever the term is now).

"Halliburton Derangement Syndrome"

That's all. Just wanted to introduce you to "Halliburton Derangement Syndrome"

Can modern Republicans even state their disagreement with a situation without tossing an ad hominem?

(labelling this log "trace", because I'll be damned if it's important or even useful)

Congress explicitly fixes torture ambiguity

Only took the Dems a full year to learn how to pronounce "yea"

Microsoft writes code faster than these people write laws.

(Hat tip: John Cole)

If you squint one eye...

and tilt the image this way... the global politics comes into focus.

(Hat tip: The Cunning Realist on second link)

Huck's Death Knell

From TPM: Excellent mystery video holding Huckabee accountable for the Dumond release, and the mystery un-mystery-ified

Anti-Semitism alert!

The Cunning Realist has the gall to notice that Israel expects tacit complicity from the States. Anyone have Abe Foxman's number?

(Edit: time zone switched to EST)
(Edit: tags added)
(Edit: typo. Hat Trick!)

NYT says CIA says I'm wrong

... and while I'm putting genuine effort into my shiny first post, Andrew Sullivan cites a NYT piece that disagrees with my worry that attitudes towards torture are shifting towards positive.

Shakedown Cruise

Is anyone else here noticing a large shift in rhetoric regarding the Waterboarding issue, starting at the revelation of the destruction of evidence of these interrogations?

Previously, every effort was made to deny that American facilities were engaged in explicit torture. Presumably, this was because the supporters would rather believe they were on the right side of the law at all times (or, in Bush's case, that he is equivalent to the law).

But now that the torture supporters are all wet, they all started swimming.

Crap. Not good. I was personally hoping these people would drown (in a harmless, simulated fashion, of course).Of course, this is naivete on my part. There was so much momentum to the concept that torture was being used effectively, no amount of propriety was going to stop it. Propriety being the window treatments on an already-established society, and inconsequential at best in a war, perceived or otherwise.

If we're going to start accepting torture, who's the next group that it's going to be used against to advance our safety? Obviously, they'll be Arab or Persian. But beyond that, I don't have much of a guess.

P.S. First Post boobies! (2 points to whoever gets the reference)

Hat Tips:
Andrew Sullivan
Balloon-Juice (& the commenters)

(Edit: font size increased)
(Edit: time zone changed to EST)