HorsesAss.Org

“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.”

Had President Barack Obama made this statement, instead of President Dwight Eisenhower (50 years ago today), he would no doubt be attacked by conservative Republicans and their media surrogates as a communist, a weakling and a friend of terrorists.

I’m just sayin’.

Last week’s contest was won by Brian. The correct answer was the church at the end of the movie Sixteen Candles, which is located in Glencoe, IL.

This week’s is a random location in Washington, good luck!

Also, this week’s View From Your Window contest at Andrew Sullivan’s blog looks like it could be from around these parts, but I haven’t pinpointed it yet. Does anyone know?

Zephaniah 1:14-18
The great day of the LORD is coming soon, very soon. On that terrible day, fearsome shouts of warriors will be heard everywhere. It will be a time of anger–of trouble and torment, of disaster and destruction, of darkness and despair, of storm clouds and shadows, of trumpet calls and battle cries gainst fortified cities and mighty fortresses. The LORD warns everyone who has sinned against him, “I’ll strike you blind! Then your blood and your insides will gush out like vomit. Not even your silver or gold can save you on that day when I, the LORD, am angry. My anger will flare up like a furious fire scorching the earth and everyone on it.”

Discuss.

With the Green Bay victory in Atlanta tonight, the Seahawks are playing for the right to host the NFC Championship next weekend. They take on Chicago at 10am tomorrow morning.

Oy…

A Washington Times editorial defends Sarah Palin’s use of the phrase “blood libel” in the wake of the Tucson shootings, by calling media criticism of Palin “the latest round of an ongoing pogrom against conservative thinkers.”

Palin had been criticized for using the term “blood libel” to characterize media attacks against her, because of associations between “blood libel” and persecution of Jews in Europe. The term has its roots in the false charge that Jews would murder children and use their blood in religious rituals.

The choice by the Times to describe media attacks as “pogroms” is even more unfortunate since the term usually refers to destructive riots that targeted Jews during the time of the Russian Empire, and often resulted in massacres.

I’m starting work on the Fiddler on the Roof parody right away. My working title: “Didier on the Roof.”

I just spent most of the day writing a thousand-word examination of waste in higher education spending. And… well… it’s over on Slog, so go check it out.

Clearly, Rep. Filner should be ashamed of himself for demonizing the opposition, and resorting to such inflammatory rhetoric.

[In a fit of nostalgia (and laziness), I’m marking my remaining days here on HA by posting links to some of my favorite and most influential posts. If you have favorites you’d like to see, please let me know.]

06/03/2005: Dog day afternoon

Yesterday was a bad day for Feisty, my petulant little puppy. We awoke at 6 am to empty her young bladder, but on our way to the backdoor she took a shortcut on the living room rug. Later, annoyed with me for paying more attention to Kirby Wilbur than to her, she made every effort to voice her opinion on the air. The difficult behavior continued. She chased the cat. She dug a hole in the backyard, caking herself with mud. And when not chewing on my hands, ankles and feet, she destructively masticated whatever piece of furniture or household object was most convenient.

Finally, at the end of this long, tiring day, I returned Feisty to the family from whom we had adopted her, locked her in the kennel with her last remaining litter mates, got back in the car, and drove off.

Assuming dogs have the ability to reason (and for rhetorical purposes we’ll leave that assumption unchallenged,) one could hardly blame her for having the impression that, angry and exasperated, I had abandoned her. That would be a logical conclusion… at least, for a dog.

When I asked my co-bloggers for their suggestions as to which posts deserved inclusion into this Best of HA series, Darryl and Carl both nominated the above. It’s hardly my most influential, nor my best written, and in the larger scheme of things, the subject matter is rather inconsequential. But it’s also kind of a classic, both in the way it epitomizes my tendency to forego a proper lede, instead taking my readers on a winding path toward the ultimate thesis, and in the way my trolls are so quick to jump to conclusions… and for the worst.

Anyway, read the whole thing.

– Pete Guither sees a glimpse of the kind of nightmare that would be unleashed by outlawing tobacco.

– Innocent man in New York finally frees himself from a phony murder conviction after 15 years.

– Nick Baumann writes about the American teenager stuck in Kuwait and allegedly tortured after he was placed on a no-fly list for traveling to visit family in Somalia and Yemen.

– Brown University Professor of Psychiatry Peter Kramer has a very good post on paranoia related to Jared Loughner and our political climate.

I tuned in to NPR’s To the Point this morning, just in time to hear Republican framing guru Frank Luntz insist that liberal political rhetoric has been just as violent and inflammatory as that on the right. And to prove his point, Luntz referenced former Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson’s infamous health care speech, in which he provocatively proclaimed:

“If you get sick in America, this is what the Republicans want you to do: If you get sick America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly.”

Uh-huh. As I tweeted back at Luntz a few minutes later: “No, saying your opponents want to kill you is not as inflammatory as saying you want to kill your opponents.” So far, Luntz has yet to reply.

Luntz is no idiot. In fact, he’s probably the best there is at what he does. So the fact that Luntz is out there pushing the bullshit frame that liberal rhetoric has been just as violent and inflammatory as right-wing rhetoric, pretty much establishes this frame as the default posture for the Republican Party as a whole, and their surrogates. No apologies, no regrets.

So the GOP establishment not only defends its violent rhetoric, apparently, they think it’s a winning strategy.

[In a fit of nostalgia (and laziness), I’m marking my remaining days here on HA by posting links to some of my favorite and most influential posts. If you have favorites you’d like to see, please let me know.]

04/25/2008: Goldy’s Adventures in Muniland

I crashed the Municipal League’s 2008 Civic Awards last night at the Olympic Sculpture Park, where my friend and colleague David Postman was being honored for “Governmental News Reporting of the Year.” Knowing that Postman’s bosses at the Seattle Times had forbade him from accepting the award in person so as not to compromise his impartiality—and unencumbered by these (or any) ethical burdens of my own—I realized that there must be an unused name tag at the registration table with at least half my name on it… and sure enough I managed to sign in as Postman, no questions asked.

His “Honoree” name tag firmly pinned to my lapel and a surfeit of free drink tickets in hand, I strolled into the PACCAR Pavilion determined to do Postman proud by mingling with our city’s power elite on his behalf. As it turned out, I would need the drink tickets.

I don’t do nearly enough straight satire here on HA, but this was certainly one of my best. Read the whole thing.

Sarah Palin murdered my daughter and used her blood in one of her bizarre religious rituals. There… I said it.

Once again the Seattle Times editorial board is arguing for moving the ballot deadline from postmarked by election day to received by election day, and once again they don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about.

Reed’s other proposal is a perennial, because lawmakers are immune to change. Ballots in Washington take forever and a Sunday to tally because the state foolishly allows voters to postmark them by Election Day. A better idea is to have ballots received by Election Day. Then Washington can join the rest of the country reporting useful results that week.

Yeah, well, except, as I’ve explained again and again, the bottleneck is not the ballot deadline, but rather the ballot processing capacity:

This bottleneck is perhaps best illustrated by comparing the 641,658 ballots King County reported tallied by the close of business Monday, to the 619,485 mail-in ballots it had received by the time the polls closed last Tuesday. As you can see, it took nearly an entire week for King to finally catch up with its election night backlog, and to start counting those ballots that arrived thereafter. And the county still estimates about 120,000 ballots remaining, not much less than the 147,616 ballots that arrived last Wednesday, 11/3, just a day after the election.

With a peak processing capacity of little more than 75,000 ballots a day, the 373,941 ballots King County tallied on Tuesday night barely exceeded the 349,670 ballots it had received as of the Friday before the election. Indeed, by the time the elections center opened its doors Monday morning, its staff had already fallen hopelessly behind.

With 98% of valid ballots arriving by the day after election day, the ballot deadline simply cannot be the cause of our week-plus-long vote-counting vigils. It’s simple math. Indeed, the only way to dramatically speed up ballot counting is to dramatically expand ballot processing capacity. But the Times won’t advocate for that, because that costs money.

So for the Times to attack lawmakers as “foolish” for refusing to make a change that cannot achieve the promised result, is foolish in itself.

Ya think anybody on the Seattle Times editorial board sees the hypocrisy in this?

ON Monday, the state Senate changed one of its long-standing rules in a way that suggests seriousness about the state budget. It repealed a rule that once a budget was voted on to the Senate floor, a 60 percent vote was required to amend it. For the first time since 1915, a floor amendment can be done on a simple majority.

So… a supermajority requirement to amend the budget on the Senate floor is bad, while a supermajority requirement to raise taxes or eliminate exemptions is good. And because…?

Well, I suppose because, in the Times’ ed board’s mind, eliminating the former while retaining the latter makes it easier to use our current revenue deficit as an opportunity to punish state employees. And barring any further explication from the Times on their glaring hypocrisy, I’ll just have to go with that.