Our belongings are in the new house, but I'm at Grand Rapids Public Library (Main Branch) as the DSL is not hooked up till tomorrow. The boxes have been disappearing at a surprising rate but my hunch that the further into the process the box comes the longer it will take to unpack appears to have been correct.
And this is my 200th post on this blog.
While on the subject of Slacktivist, he has also had some amusing critiques of Bush's recent claims regarding Social Security. It would appear that the President is not aware of how his own Social Security system works, believing it to be a savings programme rather than a tax that provides for the current generation of retirees.
Perhaps Bush was confused as I was when Kari's most recent Social Security statement arrived, showing how much she had contributed over the years. I had always understood Social Security to work the way it does in fact work, but receiving such a document forced me to go back and check. Perhaps the President was confused by the misleading propaganda that arrived in his mailbox?
The blog world has been awash with commentary on the Washington Post's recent attempts to defend their editorial decisions in the run up to the Iraq war. In the wake of print media's critical take on blogging during the Democratic National Convention the opportunity to let loose at a bastion of the traditional press has been too much to resist for many who see blogging and traditional journalism in opposition. It is sad that such an opposition between two complementary mediums continues.
Perhaps the best critique of the Washington Post's articles comes from the always-reliable Slacktivist. He provides a neat critique of the Post's statements and the ludicrous understanding of 'journalism' they appear to hold, closing out with:
Downie thinks his job is only to repeat to us what others have said, not to try to find out whether or not it's true. That's not journalism. That's gossip.
There was, however, one statement of which I'm not entirely convinced:
Kurtz doesn't explore this aspect of the Post's coverage of Powell's speech, but it's worth noting that while the American newspapers found his performance so utterly convincing, the speech was actually a failure. It was supposed to be convincing to the members of the Security Council, but they were decidedly unpersuaded.
This assertion reminded me of a niggling suspicion that arose while watching Colin Powell's appearance before the Security Council. That speech was so transparently flawed (and Powell clearly realised it) that there was never any chance that it would convince the Security Council's members.
Could it be that the objective of the speech was in fact to convince the American public and (perhaps more importantly) press that the US government did have clear evidence, that it was interested in multilateral support, and that it had acted in good conscience. A play on the UN stage? A ruse?
Through Salon I picked up this piece in today's Guardian. In it, Simon Tisdall, the lynch-pin of the Guardian's US election coverage speculates that:
The US charge sheet against Iran is lengthening almost by the day, presaging destabilising confrontations this autumn and maybe a pre-election October surprise.
and goes on to suggest that:
The US will ask a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency on September 13 to declare Iran in breach of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, a prelude to seeking punitive UN sanctions.
It's an alarming article, not least as a result of the suggestion that Israel might strike pre-emptively against Iran if it is not satisfied that the West is being suitably harsh with the Iranian regime. I keep wondering how long it will be before I cease to be surprised that an administration that got their information so catastrophically wrong about Iraq's supposed posession of weapons of mass destruction could be quite so aggressive again so soon.
It is said that western culture has forgotten history, that the United States leads the pack in its amnesia, but this administration seems almost more reminiscent of the lead character in Memento. It is fixated on a few simple plot points and lacks the ability to build new memories. That loss of memory leads to simplistic attempts to defend acts that are at best morally dubious, and for which defenses it lacks credibility.
Condi Rice is characteristically bullish, quoted saying I think we've finally got the world community to a place, the IAEA to a place, that it is worried and suspicious
. As Kari commented, the establishment of worry and suspicion is perhaps the one area where the current administration has succeeded, but that a statement like this should slip through seems a reminder of the continuing PR implosion of the Bush junta.
Of course the United States is not going to pursue military action against Iran any time soon. Even Donald Rumsfeld recognises that the military is too hard pressed fighting on two fronts (what can we expect from an Afghan presidential election with eighteen candidates?) to engage on a third. The loose canon is, as ever, Israel. They're not averse to acting in isolation and to a backdrop of international condemnation. They are used to finding that condemnation to be so much posturing.
Two links worth passing on here.
I've been meaning to post about The Polyphonic Spree's new album. I never quite get there, and the cancellation of their Grand Rapids show contributed to that failure. But it is worth noting that at least one member has appeared on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List.
On an entirely different (I think) note, Change for America carried this piece on the state of journalism in the US. The story is worth it for the Jon Stewart link alone.
A brief glance at email this evening proved rewarding given this notice from the USCIS Status Monitor:
On August 6, 2004, after approving your application, we ordered you a new card. Your card will be mailed to you as soon as it is ready.
No mention of how long that will be, but it is rather reassuring to know that should someone offer me a job I'd be able to take it!
Next step... Green Card.
John Kerry may be the best option for America, but he'd be hard pressed to make a case that he's the most punctual. Today we queued with what organisers claimed was between twelve and twenty thousand others (I'd guess more like ten, though Michigan Radio say City Officials concur with the twenty) to join what we're told was Grand Rapids' biggest ever political rally and hear the man put his case. The merchandise peddlers along the line provided some entertainment (the claims from one that his wares were "ebay ready" produced the largest smile) but it showed the faithful's commitment that many spent more than two hours queueing in the sweltering heat.
I've been considering blogging some thoughts on Kerry for a while. The appropriate moment never seemed to quite present itself before today's rally. He didn't impress me during the primaries and it wasn't till a C-Span interview I happened to catch a couple of months ago that my interest was piqued. I was well aware that no politician who was remotely close to my mix of political stances was going to be elected, but it seemed that at least here was a man who would know his own strengths and weaknesses, listen to arguments and defend his decisions.
Watching Convention speeches streamed through the Democrats' website, he didn't impress me like some other headliners, but today in Grand Rapids he seemed to have hit his stride. To my surprise there were clear policies spelled out. The promise of pressure for environmental and labour standards in international trade agreements drew my applause; there was also the familiar pledge to implement the 9-11 Commission's recommendations in full, mention of four years' state university tuition free for any 18 year olds who spend two years working in a voluntary service programme, and health care reforms that will reduce the burden on business of providing health insurance, along with other sketchier offerings. He was touting a book in which he claims all his policy objectives are laid out.
I like to think I don't fall into the "anyone but Bush" camp. I'd at the very least add the proviso "almost" to the start of the phrase (the thought of Cheney taking Bush's place, for example, is mortifying) but I did rather take to Naomi Klein's piece in last week's Guardian: "Anybody but Bush - and then let's get back to work".
Klein is entirely right that with Kerry at the helm the left's job will not be done. What his speech on C-Span and each appearance since has left me feeling is that at least he would be a president with whom those of other persuasions could enter into dialogue. That in itself would be progress. It's sad, but that is why I've volunteered to help the campaign.
Naturally, there is a photo here.
