Bush-Clinton Fatigue

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

AP:

Forty percent of Americans have never lived when there wasn’t a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. Anyone got a problem with that?

Ummm, I might, yeah.  But mostly, I agree with Professor Gitlin:

The thought is seconded by Todd Gitlin, a professor at Columbia University’s School of Journalism who has written a new book about national politics. He said that while some people are bothered by the dominance of the two families, "right now there is one massive fatigue in America and that is with George Bush. No other fatigue comes close."

9/11 Survivor’s Tale Turns Out To Be B.S.

Ken AshfordWar on Terrorism/TortureLeave a Comment

From CBS News:

The six-year anniversary is, apparently, when the gloves come off.

The New York Times has a brutal take-down of a 9/11 survivor activist whose sob story of lost love and heroic escape in the flames of the crumbling World Trace Center appears to be almost entirely bunk.

Tania Head – possibly not even her real name – sure did have a good story, though. She said she survived the terror attack on the World Trade Center despite having been badly burned when the plane crashed in the upper floors of the south tower. Crawling through the chaos, she said she encountered a dying man who handed her his wedding ring, which she later returned to his widow. Her own life was saved, she said, by a selfless volunteer who put out the flames on her clothes and carried her down the stairs.

She was only able to make it, she said, by imagining the beautiful white dress she would wear at her coming marriage to a man named Dave. But later she discovered that Dave, her fiancé, perished in the north tower, she said.

It turns out that almost none of the story could be corroborated once the Times reporters began picking it apart – nor could most of the biographical details she has put forward.

As a result of the paper’s prying, this week the Survivors Network booted her from her position as president and a director of the nonprofit group. Officials at the Tribute Center said they’d no longer let her volunteer as a tour guide.

Saddest of all, the family of Dave, who refused to disclose their last name, say they’ve never heard of her, and none of their lost loved one’s email correspondence suggests there was a relationship.

Amazon’s Music Service vs iTunes

Ken AshfordPopular CultureLeave a Comment

Mp3storefrontlogo_v29364269__2Walmart, Napster and some other online places sell music, but nothing comes close — market share wise — to Apple’s iTunes.

But the Big Apple might have a serious contender in the already-established Amazon.com, who premiered their online music downloading site this week.

How good is it?

Well, let’s get some comparisons out of the way.

Amazon’s typical song costs 89 cents, compared to iTune’s 99 cents.  An album on Amazon typically costs $8.99, a dollar less than it is on iTunes.

Amazon’s store sells MP3 tracks encoded at a 256 kbps variable bit rate, while most songs on iTunes are encoded as AAC files with a bit rate of 128 kbps (unless you get the more expensive iTunes Plus version).  While AAC is probably a better format than MP3, the bit rate for Amazon is better.  Bottom line: the sound quality is about the same.

Amazon’s MP3s are, well, MP3s.  This means they will play on anything.  Technically, songs downloaded from iTunes will play on anything, too, but you have to convert them.  Without conversion, they are limited to being played on Apple products (iPods and iPhones).

Amazon’s MP3s are DRM-free.  What does that mean?  It means you can copy them, burn them, back them up, whatever, a limitless amount of times.  iTunes just offered DRM-free music through iTunes Plus, but you have to pay something like 30 cents more per song.

iTunes wins out (so far) on selection.  They have something like 6,000,000 songs in its library; Amazon has about 2,000,000, with music provided by just two major labels — EMI and Universal.  But Amazon does seem to have a lot of top hits, and it even has some artists that iTunes doesn’t have. For instance, you can buy each of Radiohead’s albums on Amazon for just $8.99; not one is on iTunes.

I checked out the Broadway musical listings on Amazon, and was, at first, please.  They have a "Broadway" category, whereas iTunes only has a "soundtrack" category (which is mostly populated by movie soundtracks).  Sadly, Amazon’s categorization leaves much to be desired, since they’ve mixed vocalists with Broadway soundtracks.  I mean, "Mary Clooney Sings Jerome Kern" isn’t really a Broadway album.

So my recommendation is this: If you want to download music, start with Amazon.  It’s cheaper and the quality is just as good.  If they don’t have it, THEN go to iTunes.  iTunes is nicely intergrated with the iPod, and it may take an extra step to load your Amazon music into your local iTunes, and then into your iPod.  But it’s not that difficult, and you’ll save some money.

And even if you end up preferring iTunes, you should at least welcome the competition that Amazon offers.  It might force Apple to do better.

Housecalls

Ken AshfordHealth CareLeave a Comment

Doctor Jay Parkinson just opened up a medical practice in Brooklyn. 

What makes his practice newsworthy? 

He makes housecalls.  In fact, he only makes housecalls.

For the kids: A "housecall" is a long-forgotten custom in which the doctor comes to your house to treat you when you are sick.  See, e.g., Little House On The Prarie, The.

But before you think this is quaint and old-timie, think again. He’s blogging his adventures.

RELATED:  Yes, there are still milkmen!

Dispatch From The Family Impact Summit

Ken AshfordGodstuff, Sex/Morality/Family ValuesLeave a Comment

At their yearly gathering of Christian fundies in Tampa this year, things went askew when a member of the audience at a symposium entitled “Defending Marriage: What’s At Stake?” stood to ask the panel a question:

After the panelists had their say (after about an hour of this, I might add), the “town hall meeting” was finally opened up to questions from the floor. And the second questioner, a brave young woman wearing a red tee-shirt, was a stunner:

Hi. My names is Cathy James and I would like to challenge all of the individuals here listening today to really take a look at some of the rationale and some of the comments that speakers have given in regard to things such as …why government gets involved with personal relationships, that is, for the procreation of children. I think as most of the attorneys will tell you, that civil marriage was created for one purpose only, and that was property and how to divide property.

And so I am a lesbian, I live in the Riverview area with my partner of thirteen years and our son who is seven. And I go to work Monday through Friday and attend church weekly, I volunteer at the school, I volunteer at the homeowners association. And what I have a hard time understanding is why you are interested in keeping a legal framework from us in being able to handle the same things as heterosexual couples and such things as visitation, and hospital…. And how to divide our property in the same way, and how to parent our child?

The stunned silence was amazing. John Stemberger thanked her for coming and tried to stammer out an answer. He said that some forms of discrimination are perfectly legitimate (“home ownership benefits society in the way renters do not.”) and ended by saying, “marriage uniquely benefits society in the way same sex couples do not.” But Cathy remained calm and firm:

But in what way? What’s the difference in the benefit? How does your marriage benefit society more than my relationship with my same gender partner does not?

Peter Sprigg jumped in to assert that “without question” the best family structure was headed by a man and a woman. But Cathy persisted:

…But now you’re devaluing, what, over fifty percent of the children who live with one parent or that one parent as died or that they’re divorced and now they’re just living with one parent. You’re devaluing them and that’s not fair.

By now the panel was speechless, leaving Peter Sprigg to stumble around trying to get his footing. “Each person’s relationship choices serves as an example to the rest of society… and if that example becomes more widespread, more people will make the same choice, more children will suffer.”

So you’re saying a man and a woman in a marriage are valued higher than single people? They’re valued higher than…

Sprigg cut her off and instead of relying on his own outwitted wits, he decided to read from David Blankenhorn’s book, The Future of Marriage. And as he read, his voice rose, becoming more strident, more angry, more sharp with each word. “I would be rich if I had a nickel for every time someone who knows almost nothing about marriage has told me that historically marriage was all about property. That is nonsense!” But as he continued to spit out the words, it slowly dawned on him that Blankenhorn was talking about dowries and gifts to the bride’s family – which had nothing do with Cathy’s questions.

Clearly Sprigg is a man who doesn’t like having his reputation as an “expert” challenged. And it became obvious that he wasn’t up to this particular challenge. But he kept reading, vainly looking for the rescue that he was sure he’d find in Blankenhorn’s book. But it wasn’t there. He finally gave up and Cathy graciously thanked all of the panelists for their time.

From Box Turtle Bulletin

Speaking of gays, Juan Cole at Informed Comment makes a good connection:

"… Ahmadinejad’s bigotted statement that there are no homosexuals in Iran derived from his rightwing religious commitments. What he said is very serious. He erased gays right out of existence. The ultimate in denying people their rights is to deny they even exist (the nonexistent obviously have no rights.) There could be a debate over whether the gay lifestyle exists in Muslim countries, as a matter of identity politics, of course, but Ahmadinejad is not that sophisticated. He was saying that all Iranians are straight. Of course, gays are punished very severely in Iran, in reality.

It would be nice for the US Right to have us forget that they pull the Ahmadinejad act with regard to gays every day. Denying gays the right to marry is a way of erasing them from civil society. It is a way of denying that they really love one another, as straights do. It is a way of asserting that they do not exist.

The "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy in the US military (so unlike the one followed by many NATO allies) is also a way of erasing gays. They don’t exist unless they themselves press the case that they exist. In order to remain in their jobs, they are forced to erase themselves by their silence. The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is a way of pretending that there are no gays in the US military. For if it could be proven that anyone is gay, he is immediately expelled. It is just as silly as what Ahmadinejad said, and just as pernicious. That policy is supported by the entire American Right, which is no better than Ahmadinejad in this regard.

Flashback To 2003

Ken AshfordIraqLeave a Comment

Remember why we invaded Iraq in the first place?  Bush and his supporters will tell you its because Saddam didn’t comply with the U.N. resolutions.

They’ll say Saddam wouldn’t disarm.  Of course, Saddam, not having WMDs in the first place, couldn’t disarm.

They’ll say that Saddam wouldn’t allow the UN inspectors to complete their inspections, which — while true for a while in 2002 — was not true at the time that Bush declared war.  Remember, Bush had the UN inspectors pulled from Iraq; Saddam didn’t throw them out.

Of course, many (like me) believe that Bush was going to invade Iraq anyway regardless of any UN resolutions.

And now there’s a smoking gun proving it — transcripts of a Bush discussion with the Spanish prime minister on February 22, 2003:

El Pais, the highest-circulation daily in Spain, today published what it said was the transcript of a private talk between President George W. Bush and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar on February 22, 2003, concerning the coming U.S. invasion of Iraq. It took place at the ranch in Crawford, Texas.

The conversation took place on the President’s ranch in Crawford, Texas. The source for the leak was said to be someone in the Spanish government.

Bush purportedly said he planned to invade Iraq inf March "if there was a United Nations Security Council resolution or not….We have to get rid of Saddam. We will be in Baghdad at the end of March."

He said the U.S. takeover would happen without widespread destruction.

Aznar pleaded for patience and replied that it was vital to get a U.N. resolution, noting that public opinion in Spain was strongly against the war.

Bad Taste

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

Giuliani Fundraiser to Charge $9.11 Per Person

WASHINGTON — A supporter of Rudy Giuliani’s is throwing a party that aims to raise $9.11 per person for the Republican’s presidential campaign.

Abraham Sofaer is having a fundraiser at his Palo Alto, Calif., home on Wednesday, when Giuliani backers across the country are participating in the campaign’s national house party night.

But Sofaer said he had nothing to do with the “$9.11 for Rudy” theme.

“There are some young people who came up with it,” Sofaer said when reached by telephone Monday evening. He referred other questions to Giuliani’s campaign.

Little Rock — 50 Years Later

Ken AshfordHistory, Race5 Comments

Fascinating article should be read here at Vanity Fair.  It focuses on this famous iconic picture:

Cuar01_littlerock0709

The picture was taken on September 4, 1957.

The black girl is Elizabeth Eckard, one of the Little Rock Nine, the group of black students who attempted to go to school in one of the first desegregated high schools in the South. 

Standing behind her, taunting her with insults, was a student at the high school.  Her name is Hazel Bryan.

A painfully shy girl, Elizabeth arrived earlier than the rest of the Nine that day, and was "welcomed" by reporters and a large hostile crowd:

Elizabeth’s knees started to shake. She walked toward Central’s main entrance and tried a third time; again, the soldiers blocked her way, but this time told her to cross the street. Now the crowd fell in behind her, shouting: "Lynch her! Lynch her!" "No nigger bitch is going to get in our school! Get out of here!" "Go back to where you came from!" Looking for a friendly face, she turned to an old woman, who spat on her. Before long, some 250 whites were at her heels. She knew she couldn’t go back the way she’d come. But if she could only get to the bus stop a block ahead, she thought, she would be safe. She wanted to run, but thought she might fall down… "Lynch her!" someone shouted. "Send that nigger back to the jungle!"

290pxlittle_rock_desegregation_1957One of Elizabeth’s tormentors was Hazel Bryan, a junior at the high school:

Hazel, her eyes narrowed, her brow furrowed, her teeth clenched as if about to bite, shrieked: "Go home, nigger! Go back to Africa!" Click.

The pictures show here were taken by an Arkansas Democrat photographer, Will Counts.

Elizabeth made it back to the bus stop and sat on a bench with the angry mob around her.  Reporters on the scene became human beings and protected her by forming a loose cordon around her, and making sure their cameras and microphones were trained on her.

With the help of an elderly (white) woman, Elizabeth got out of that hairy situation. 

But what of Hazel?

As for Hazel, …she was "rather pleased with herself"—so much so that two days later, she was in front of Central again, telling reporters that no way would she attend an integrated Central High School. "Whites should have rights, too!" she barked at a television camera, as [Hazel’s friends] Mary Ann and Sammie Dean looked on with approval. "Nigras aren’t the only ones that have a right!" At first, [Central High Vice Principal, Ellizabeth] Huckaby couldn’t place the screaming white girl in the picture, but she later remembered her from the previous winter: Hazel had played hooky to be with her boyfriend, and had failed some courses. The school notified her parents; her father said he did not want to beat her, but sometimes couldn’t help himself. Hazel subsequently swallowed some poison, and was briefly hospitalized; Mrs. Huckaby sent a teacher to check on her. The story even made the papers.

Now Hazel was in them again, far more prominently, and the irate vice principal hauled her into her office. Hatred destroyed haters, the older woman said. Hazel only shrugged; "breath wasted," Mrs. Huckaby later wrote. And she was right: the following Monday, Hazel was at Central again, telling newsmen that had God really wanted whites and blacks to be together, "he would have made us all the same color." "The boys and girls pictured in the newspapers are hardly typical and certainly not our leading students," Mrs. Huckaby wrote her brother in New York. "The girl (with mouth open) behind the Negro girl is a badly disorganized child, with violence accepted in the home, and with a poor emotional history." Hazel’s parents promptly pulled her out of Central and put her in a rural high school closer to her home. America had seen its last of Hazel Bryan for the next 40 years—except, that is, for the picture, which popped up whenever Little Rock in the 1950s, or the civil-rights movement or race hatred, was recalled.

The years passed for both girls.  And then:

Elizabeth, now 21, was visiting Little Rock in the summer of 1963 when she got a most surprising message. Someone had called whom she’d never heard of before. Her name was Hazel Bryan.

At 16, Hazel had married a schoolmate, Antoine Massery, then dropped out. But Hazel, by now the mother of two and living off a gravel road in South Little Rock, had an intellectually curious, independent streak: she chafed at the regimentation and racial intolerance of her church, for instance, and was eventually kicked out of it. Seeing Martin Luther King and the civil-rights protesters on television made her think of Elizabeth, and what she’d done to her six years earlier. Never mentioning it to her husband, she called the first Eckford in the phone book—Elizabeth’s grandfather—and left several messages for her. Finally, Elizabeth got back to her. "I just told her who I was—I was the girl in that picture that was yelling at her, that I was sorry, that it was a terrible thing to do and that I didn’t want my children to grow up to be like that, and I was crying," Hazel says.

Honestly, Elizabeth wasn’t sure just which girl Hazel was. Far from studying the picture, she avoided it; all those white people in it had merged. But she accepted Hazel’s apology, because she seemed to be sincere, because her grandfather and father urged her to, and because Hazel so clearly craved forgiveness.

Elizabeth had a hard life.  She never completed college, had a broken engagement, couldn’t get a job, and ended up in the Army.  After leaving that, she had two sons by two different man (neither of whom she married), and lived a quiet life of desparation.  Her depression made it impossible for her to keep a job.  This went on for over a decade, until a change in her medication started to turn things around.

In 1996, Oprah Winfrey did a show on the Little Rock Nine.  And Elizabeth was one of the seven who came for the reunion.  Also coming was Hazal Bryan:

Hazel Bryan Massery had three adult children and seven grandchildren. She had grown more prosperous—her husband had gone into antennae and satellite-TV installation—but also more unsettled. She had joined peace groups, done spiritual things, taken up belly dancing and screenwriting and feminism and performing as a clown. Much she did in secret, so that her husband couldn’t disapprove. On racial matters, she tried making amends, working with young black mothers-to-be and counseling minority students….

And there was a reunion:

Then, 40 years and a couple of weeks after their first encounter, Elizabeth and Hazel were together again. This time, they talked—about flowers and children and clothes. Hazel apologized to Elizabeth, thanked her for agreeing to meet…

And Will Counts, the photographer who, forty years earlier, had snapped thosee iconic pictures above was there — to take another picture of the two women in front of Little Rock’s Central High School:

Cuar06_littlerock0709

Healthy Children Or War?

Ken AshfordHealth Care, IraqLeave a Comment

President Bush has threatened to veto legislation renewing and expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). The legislation would extend health coverage to as many as 10 million children — four million of whom are currently uninsured.

Bush has claimed the SCHIP bill contains “excessive spending”, even as he’s requested $200 billion more for the war in Iraq..  When compared to what we’re spending in Iraq, insuring an additional four million children is a bargain:

Iraq_vs_schip_blog

Bill Scher has even more on the bill and its importance, as does Scarecrow.  And even more from Howie:  here, here and here.  This from The Nation.  And a piece from The Hill today as well.

SCHIP is up for a vote today.  And these kids need your help.  Here are some toll free numbers to the switchboard, and also the names and numbers of folks who could use calls today on behalf of children in need.  Please make a call today to your House member — whether they are on a lsit below or not, please call every member of the House – it could make a world of difference for some kids in your community and all over this nation of ours.

Toll-free numbers to the switchboard (via katymine):

1 (800) 828 – 0498
1 (800) 459 – 1887
1 (800) 614 – 2803
1 (866) 340 – 9281
1 (866) 338 – 1015
1 (877) 851 – 6437

Stupid Computer Thief Uploads Pictures Of Himself

Ken AshfordCrime1 Comment

From Boing Boing:

Last week a number of computers were stolen from our office in Vancouver, BC. One of those computers was a shared iMac with Flickrbooth, an app that automatically uploads photo booth shots to our flickr account, installed on it. Just this morning a friend called to tell us that there are photos of whoever has the computer now in our flickr stream! Obviously the guy didn’t know he was uploading images of himself and his awesome tattoos.

Here’s the guy:

1431892021_f2e9492b64

Check out the comments on Flickr.

Well, I’M Convinced

Ken AshfordEducation, Godstuff, YoutubeLeave a Comment

Creationist arguments:

The really cute part is that they keep saying that evolution is "obviously" a "fairy tale" (because if you say it several times, it MUST be true).  Then they debunk evolution by mis-stating its founding principles.  While energy may have played a role in the origins of life, the first life created was microscopic in size.  And THEN, having mistated the role of energy in the origins of life, they ignore it altogether in their peanut butter experiment.

I did a little research on the guy in that video, Chuck Missler.  He’s not a scientist.  He’s (surprise, surprise) a preacher with his own ministry.  He’s also a UFO nut, thinking (from scripture and his research) that aliens have already invaded us.

But here’s my favorite part of one of the bios I read:

Chuck Missler is an extremely intelligent man who loves the Lord and has a heart to serve God and others. The only possible negative thing that can be said about Chuck is that he tends to speak slightly above the comprehension of most people. One woman was overheard commenting, "I have no idea what Chuck is talking about, but he must be right."

I worry about the people who think that Chuck is speaking above them.

Another popular evolution-debunking video stars Kirk Cameron (who doesn’t say much) and this guy (ray Comfort).  Rather than debunk science, they simply say that God must have created everything because the banana is so utilitarian.  They call the banana (no, I’m not making this up) "The Atheist’s Nightmare".

My question is this: If the banana is so perfect in design that only God could have created it, then why aren’t all fruits and vegetables shaped like a banana?  Are they less than perfect?  And if so, why did God design them?

But there’s an even greater flaw with this video — bananas like the one he is holding are domesticated fruits.  In other words, they were designed — agriculturally engineered — by man over the course of many centuries: