A number of commentators (see, e.g., Matt Yglesias, here) have noted that the media seems to think that looting is like cholesterol - there is "good" looting and "bad" looting. (Matt goes on to point out this bit from Wonkette, in which we learn that - as far as the photo caption people at the AP are concerned, anyway - we can call this "looting" and "finding," depending in large part on the complexion of the looter/finder.)

There is an obvious truth here: Taking bread and fresh water from an abandoned grocery store in the face of overpowering hunger and thirst is qualitatively different from "liberating" a stereo from Circuit City. At least, it seems to be, when viewed from the demand side; on the other hand, when viewed from the supply side, both the bread and the stereo actually belong to someone else - and that "someone else" is likely in pretty dire straits him- or herself. In fact, given the tiny profit margin in the grocery industry vs. the relatively large profit margin in the consumer electronics industry, the bread-looter is probably doing greater damage. On the other hand, bread goes stale while stereos don't, so the actual calculus is - ooooh, my head hurts!

I only mention this because I recall my experiences living in Los Angeles during the 1992 riots. As I recall, based on my memory of anecdotal evidence from the time - and I am perfectly prepared to be smacked down by someone with actual statistics at hand - the most commonly looted items in L.A. were (1) shoes, (2) disposable diapers, (3) liquor, (4) guns, and (5) consumer electronics. And I remember thinking that stealing diapers and shoes (remember, we're not talking about Jimmy Choo or John Fluevog here; it was Payless Shoe Source that got cleaned out) reeked of desperation, but the others were about nothing but greed.

But then I got thinking a little more - suppose you're the guy who stole that big ass bag of Pampers. You don't feel especially good about it, but hell, if you don't take them, someone else will, and the baby's not going to stop peeing while you mull it over. So you take the Pampers, and maybe a bag of Fritos because your stomach has been growling since the Church's Fried Chicken shut down yesterday afternoon 'cause of the riots and all and you gave the last of the Rice-A-Roni that you had in the house to your wife and kids. And now, a line has been crossed. You're an outlaw. And you hate yourself for it. So you grab that bottle of Chivas on your way out to dull the pain a bit. And next thing you know, you're standing outside a Payless Shoe Source with a big, broken window. And one thing leads to another.

So now the kid has diapers, and you got yourself a pair of those $11.99 Adidas knockoffs that you've been needing since your last pair wore through at the soles, but you feel like shit because you're nothing but a common thief now, and also you're a little drunk from the half-bottle of Chivas you already swigged, and all of a sudden, you hear shots in the distance. Or maybe it's just someone's car backfiring, but it sure sounds like shots, and you're scared because the cops couldn't get to your neighborhood even if they tried (and there's no reason to think they're gonna try very hard, because they never do even when there aren't riots in the streets), and hell, there's a pawnshop with a cheap 9mm in the window and you're no better than a punk-ass thief anyway (on account of those diapers you already took - why the hell did you do that? - you were raised better!), and there's a brick in the street laying right there that's just the right size and weight to go through that window, and now you've got some protection, at least.

And at this point, why not stop at Circuit City and get yourself a nice little TV so you can watch it all go down once you get back home?

Which is not to excuse theft. Stealing other people's stuff is wrong, and it's inexcusable. Except we do excuse it when we start to talk about how it's understandable that someone would take a jug of water from the abandoned 7-11 when the city mains are dry and the person who takes it hasn't had access to clean water in 48 hours. But we have to remember that the jug of water belongs to someone else - someone who already paid hard-earned money for it, and who probably has kids at home who need diapers of their own.

My cousin Ed thinks a lot about the nature of "property," and how it's ironic that lots of people get all agitated about the idea of protecting their property from the government, when in fact "property" is best defined as "that which you can hold on to, either by force of your own strength or by force of government protection." All this talk of "good" looting and "bad" looting is nothing but a pack of rationalizations - it's all just theft, and none of it is "good" if you're the guy whose stuff is getting looted, while none of it is "bad" if you're the guy who needs a quart of Chivas to deal with the notion that you just stole a big ass bag of Pampers, and your mother would whip your ass if she knew. Which reminds me of a line from one of the greatest baby-boomer navel-gazing movies of all time:

Michael: I don't know anyone who could get through the day without two or three juicy rationalizations. They're more important than sex.

Sam: Ah, come on. Nothing's more important than sex.

Michael: Oh yeah? Ever gone a week without a rationalization?

And now, I think I'll go get myself a bag of Fritos. I'll even pay for them.

In light of all the bad news today - I haven't even mentioned this disaster yet, and I probably won't - are you ready for some comic relief (emphasis supplied)?

British tourists have left the residents of one charming Austrian village effing and blinding by constantly stealing the signs for their oddly-named village.

While British visitors are finding it hilarious, the residents of F---ing are failing to see the funny side, The Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported....

"We will not stand for the F---ing signs being removed," the officer told the broadsheet.

"It may be very amusing for you British, but F---ing is simply F---ing to us. What is this big F---ing joke? It is puerile."

Local guide Andreas Behmueller said it was only the British that had a fixation with F---ing....

"But for the British, it's all about F---ing."

Guesthouse boss Augustina Lindlbauer described the village's breathtaking lakes, forests and vistas.

"Yet still there is this obsession with F---ing," she said.

"Just this morning I had to tell an English lady who stopped by that there were no F---ing postcards."

As an aside, can anyone tell me what the idiogram "effing and blinding" means? Because I really want to know. (Despite its similarity in part to a common bowdlerization of the word, I assume it has nothing to do with F---ing.)

Meanwhile US President George W Bush has arrived in Washington to take charge of the recovery effort, cutting short a holiday in Texas.

Oh, shit.

(Via Auntie Beeb; emphasis supplied.)

In case you were wondering, this is what passes for "analysis" on FOX News (via TAPPED):

JACK CHAMBLESS, ECONOMICS PROFESSOR, VALENCIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE: Well, if we look at Article One, Section Eight of the United States Constitution — and I encourage all Americans to look at that before we start opening up our tax coffers to pay for all of this — we have every obligation to provide for New Orleans in terms of charity, private charity from one person to the other.

But the founding fathers never intended, Article One, section Eight of the Constitution, never intended to provide one dollar of taxpayer dollars to pay for any disaster or anything that we might call charity. What we now have is the law of unintended consequences taking place, where FEMA has come into New Orleans, a place where, ecologically, it makes no sense to have levees keeping the Mississippi River from flooding into New Orleans, like it naturally should.

Now with FEMA bailing out Louisiana, bailing out Florida and lowering the overall cost of living in these places, we have people with no incentive to leave. And the law of unintended consequences means that more people are dying with every one of these storms. They're becoming more and more expensive, more and more property loss, just because the federal government has violated the Constitution to provide for these funds.

Gee, I hate to argue with one who has achieved the lofty status of professor at Valencia Community College, but - bollocks.

First, on a practical and moral level, Prof. Chambless seems to think that (a) what happens in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast is of no immediate concern to the rest of the country, and (b) there is something about this particular part of the country that makes it uniquely vulnerable to natural disasters. Disposing of the second point first, it is of course true that the Gulf Coast is especially likely to suffer the effects of a hurricane - just as it is especially likely that Southern California will suffer a major earthquake, or Colorado will suffer a drought, or Iowa will suffer tornadoes, or ... well, you get the picture. It's all well and good to say that people should avoid living in the path of hurricanes, but the alternative is simply to trade the risk of hurricanes for the risk of some other natural disaster. And besides, there are often good reasons for people to live in endangered areas. No one likes floods, for instance, but everyone likes agriculture - which just happens to be most productive when conducted on flood plains.

Which gets to Prof. Chambless' first point - if people stopped living on flood plains, which is to say if people stopped farming, the effects would be felt by all of us. Likewise, the impact of Katrina will extend well beyond the Gulf Coast, and in fact will affect every American. Consider this, from Information Clearing House by way of MyDD:

The Port of Southern Louisiana is the fifth-largest port in the world in terms of tonnage, and the largest port in the United States. The only global ports larger are Singapore, Rotterdam, Shanghai and Hong Kong. It is bigger than Houston, Chiba and Nagoya, Antwerp and New York/New Jersey. It is a key link in U.S. imports and exports and critical to the global economy. The Port of Southern Louisiana stretches up and down the Mississippi River for about 50 miles, running north and south of New Orleans from St. James to St. Charles Parish. It is the key port for the export of grains to the rest of the world -- corn, soybeans, wheat and animal feed. Midwestern farmers and global consumers depend on those exports. The United States imports crude oil, petrochemicals, steel, fertilizers and ores through the port. Fifteen percent of all U.S. exports by value go through the port. Nearly half of the exports go to Europe. The Port of Southern Louisiana is a river port. It depends on the navigability of the Mississippi River. The Mississippi is notorious for changing its course, and in southern Louisiana -- indeed along much of its length -- levees both protect the land from its water and maintain its course and navigability. Dredging and other maintenance are constant and necessary to maintain its navigability. It is fragile. If New Orleans is hit, the Port of Southern Louisiana, by definition, also will be hit. No one can predict the precise course of the storm or its consequences. However, if we speculate on worse-case scenarios the following consequences jump out: The port might become in whole or part unusable if levees burst. If the damage to the river and port facilities could not be repaired within 30 days when the U.S. harvests are at their peak, the effect on global agricultural prices could be substantial. There is a large refinery at Belle Chasse. It is the only refinery that is seriously threatened by the storm, but if it were to be inundated, 250,000 barrels per day would go off line. Moreover, the threat of environmental danger would be substantial. About 2 percent of world crude production and roughly 25 percent of U.S.-produced crude comes from the Gulf of Mexico and already is affected by Katrina.

Thus - and this should be obvious to anyone except perhaps a professor of economics at Valencia Community College - rebuilding New Orleans and environs is not an act of charity, but an act of self-preservation for anyone who eats food, burns gasoline, works in an industry that relies upon imports or exports, &c. It is not unreasonable to expect those of us who depend on Gulf Coast infrastructure to help rebuild that infrastructure.

But morality and pragmatism aside, what of Prof. Chambless' constitutional argument (because, as we know, the Constitution is divorced and separate from morality or pragmatism)? Well, I'm afraid that - how shall I put this delicately? - the good professor is talking out of his ass. Article I, section 8, provides that Congress shall be empowered to "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;" to "regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States;" and to "make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States." Even a strict constructionist reading of this language ought to suffice to justify Congress' funding of disaster relief efforts through FEMA.

I guess we now know why Prof. Chambless teaches economics, rather than constitutional law, at Valencia Community College. What we don't know is why anyone would give this blithering twit airtime.

Allow me to be the 3,264th blogger to point out that the Chimperor has come clean and admitted outright what we all knew all along - it was always about the oil:

President Bush answered growing antiwar protests yesterday with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists.

The nice thing about trotting out this rationale now, aside from the refreshing honesty, is that we can recycle it when it comes time to get tough in Venezuela. Mission accomplished!

Regular readers (now enough to build a medium-sized deck in under 12 hours!) know to count me among those who fail to understand why the nominal-opposition Democratic Party refuses to demonstrate some actual spine when confronted by the sort of incompetence, fanaticism, and corruption that infests the ruling Republican junta. Now, it seems as though I'm part of a trend:

The poll numbers paint a portrait of national frustration with the direction and leadership of the country, which, if not reversed in coming months, is likely to color the environment for next year's midterm elections, putting incumbents in both parties on the defensive.

Dissatisfaction is not limited to the president. Fewer than four in 10 Americans -- 37 percent -- approve of the way the Republican-controlled Congress is doing its job, the lowest rating for lawmakers in nearly eight years.

The survey also provided bad news for Democratic leaders, who are judged as offering Bush only tepid opposition. Slightly more than half of those surveyed expressed dissatisfaction with congressional Democrats for not opposing Bush more aggressively.

Self-identified Democrats were particularly impatient. More than three in four said congressional Democrats have not gone far enough to oppose Bush on Iraq or on administration policies in general.

"Somebody needs to speak up," said Michelle Burgess, 41, a home health aide in St. Louis. "Enough is enough. I don't understand why we're over there in Iraq or what he's doing on other issues. There are too many lives being lost."

Independents were similarly dissatisfied with Democratic leaders for not challenging the president over the war and other issues, with six in 10 saying Democrats have been too meek.

So, solid majorities among both independents and the Democratic base are becoming increasingly frustrated by quisling Donkeys. And yet we see "centrists" such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and the dessicated ghost of Joe "Joementum" Lieberman named as likely nominees in '08, while firebreathers like Russ Feingold are hidden away in embarrassment.

All I can think is that the Democrats like losing.

Here's why I hate CNN - the following excerpts are taken from their most recent story, as of this writing, about Hurricane Katrina. The italicized portions in parentheses are links in the original, which I will not reproduce here because I think they're disgusting:

The death toll from the storm is estimated at 68 -- mostly in Mississippi. Officials stressed that the number is uncertain but likely to be much higher. (Watch the video report of a husband whose wife slipped from his grip -- 1:07)

***

In the city's 9th Ward neighborhood, rescue efforts continued throughout the night, with authorities in boats plucking residents from submerged homes after water topped another levee. (Watch the video account of unanswered screams -- 1:57)

Honestly - is there any purpose to be served by video footage such as described here that couldn't be served just as well by watching the old Faces of Death videos?

Sorry about my scarcity, but I spent most of yesterday dealing with a plumbing crisis. Sewage backing up in the basement, expensive fix in the offing, yada yada yada. Sounds pretty bad, until I put in in perspective.

Here's a heads-up: I will be guest-blogging again over at Patridiot Watch, starting Thursday or so. I'll see you there, or here, or wherever.

This is a bombshell story, which I had not seen before today even though it was published on Wednesday:

In the mid-1990s, long before oil prices topped $60 a barrel, U.S. companies sought access to Kazakhstan, a Central Asian nation that the U.S. State Department says will be among the world's top 10 producers of crude by 2015.

First, they had to win approval from Jim Giffen, a New York investment banker who became an official in Kazakhstan's government and held sway over its energy deals.

``You couldn't go to a Kazakh minister, particularly if you were an American company, without going through Giffen,'' says Ed Chow, who managed external affairs at Chevron Overseas Petroleum Ltd., a unit of San Ramon, California-based Chevron Corp....

Now, federal prosecutors say Giffen, 64, cemented his power by bribing Kazakh leaders with $84 million that Amoco Corp., Mobil Oil Co., Phillips Petroleum Co. and Texaco Inc. paid to win access to Kazakh fields. In January, Giffen goes on trial in federal district court in New York in one of the largest overseas criminal bribery cases ever....

[A conviction] would be a steep fall for a man who owns an $80,000 Bentley Brooklands and an 11-acre estate in Mamaroneck, a New York suburb. The investigation has ensnared others, too.

A Mobil executive who ran the company's oil efforts in Kazakhstan, Bryan Williams, 65, pleaded guilty in June 2003 to tax evasion stemming from the case....

Giffen's job included more than securing oil contracts. Elizabeth Jones, 57, who was U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan from 1995 to 1998, says Giffen told her he spearheaded a restructuring of the Kazakh government....

[Robert] Baer, the former CIA officer who's author of ``See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism'' (Crown Publishing, 2002), says Giffen also injected himself into U.S.-Kazakh relations.

Baer, whose book criticizes CIA anti-terrorism efforts, says the State Department turned to Giffen when it wanted to stop [Kazakh President Nursultan] Nazarbayev from selling surface-to-air missiles and other arms to North Korea and Iran.

He says Giffen reviewed a secret CIA report on government corruption in Kazakhstan. ``They went to Jim Giffen to make problems go away,'' Baer says. ``He was the channel.''

Defense attorneys [Steven] Cohen and [William] Schwartz say in court papers they'll point to such contacts as proof that the U.S. condoned Giffen's payments to build ties with an oil-rich nation in a strategic region.

They've demanded records of Giffen's communications with 15 former U.S. officials, including Secretary of State James Baker, National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and CIA Director Robert Gates.

The lawyers also say Giffen, as a Kazakh official, acted lawfully by heeding orders from Kazakh superiors to transfer funds to Switzerland. ``Mr. Giffen routinely reported to the CIA upon his return from his numerous trips,'' Schwartz said in court last year.

``When the government of the United States needed something to be done in Kazakhstan, Mr. Giffen was asked to do it,'' Schwartz said.

Let's do a little cocktail-napkin math here: We have about 130,000 soldiers in Iraq, give or take. That means we have almost as many people in country as Moqtada al-Sadr can mobilize on a moment's notice:

A hundred thousand Iraqis across the country marched on Friday in support of a maverick Shi'ite cleric opposed to a draft constitution that U.S.-backed government leaders say will deliver a brighter future.

The protest could reinforce the opposition of Sunni Arabs who dominate the insurgency and are bitterly against the draft.

Supporters of young Shi'ite firebrand Moqtada al-Sadr, who has staged two uprisings against U.S. troops, also protested against poor services during their marches, stepping up the pressure on the government.

A hundred thousand Sadr supporters marched in eight cities, including 30,000 people who gathered for a sermon delivered on his behalf in a Baghdad slum district.

They hardly noticed a huge government poster which read "One Nation, One People, One Constitution", instead seeking guidance from Sadr who inspires fierce devotion in his followers.

Here's a small stylistic point for Michael Georgy, the author of this report from Reuters - anyone who can get 100,000 people to march in the streets is not a "maverick." A demagogue, maybe, but not a maverick.

Why do our troops hate our troops?

As you know, this week's rationale for staying the course in Dick & Dubya's Excellent Invasion is that withdrawal now would dishonor the brave men and women who have already been slaughtered in the senseless carnage noble cause. Here's the Empty Flight Suit in Idaho earlier this week:

In this war, we have said farewell to some very good men and women, including 491 heroes of the National Guard and Reserves. We mourn the loss of every life. We pray for their loved ones. These brave men and women gave their lives for a cause that is just and necessary for the security of our country, and now we will honor their sacrifice by completing their mission.

Seems clear enough. So I ask you, what kind of traitorous bastard could justify emboldening our enemies and endangering our fighting men and women by saying something like this:

To be honest, it is time to pull out now. As you said, no one needs to die for others who have died. Everybody has their sacrifices. And we do not need to sacrifice more people. We know what everybody else has sacrificed, and we have to praise that right now.

That would be Spec. Jeans Cruz, unemployed Iraq war veteran and, in fact, one of the two soldiers who removed Saddam Hussein from his hiding place, speaking on Keith Olbermann's show (found at WTF Is It Now?!?).

I'm guessing that Spec. Cruz will not be receiving his invitation to join the American Legion anytime soon.

Digby's on a roll today, with not one, not two, but three must-read posts. Go catch up; I'll wait.

I missed posting last week's Friday Random Ten, being as I was at Dinotown and all. You'll just have to take my word for it when I tell you that I was listening to some hella cool jams - unlike the crap I usually post here.

Anyway, since I feel like I owe you one, I'm going to do something a little special today: Following the lead of Happy Furry Puppy Story Time's Norbizness - a man among men, known almost as much for his perspicacity as for his clever use of charming traditional Texas idioms ("do what now?") - I will just this once engage in the Random Ten Coolness Self-Audit, in which I assign an arbitrary coolness score to each selection on a 1-10 scale and then pathetically try to explain myself. Also, Norby often expands the list to 12 songs for reasons which are not at all clear (although today he stopped at ten, in a futile effort to avoid admitting that "Dance the Night Away" is a truly great Van Halen song), and since I could not bring myself to stop at 10 today (for reasons which will become abundantly clear in the fullness of time), you will be graced with two additional selections. Lucky you.

1. "The Ballad of Peter Pumkinhead" (XTC): Tim Russert's theme song! Big-beat drums, punky harmonica stylings, a delightfully unsubtle political allegory, and a hook a mile wide. We're off to a good start. 8/10.

2. "Send In the Clowns" (Judy Collins): Oh, shut up! Look, it was written by Stephen Sondheim, who's like a successful professional composer or something; it has an oboe in it; and anyway, I used to have a crush on Judy Collins (for reasons such as this). Collectively, these factors add at least two basis points. 3/10.

3. "Get Rhythm" (Johnny Cash): That's more like it. 10/10.

4. "Sleepwalker" (The Kinks): Not their best, not by a wide margin, but even when Ray Davies phones it in, he's still Ray Davies. 5/10.

5. "Romeo's Tune" (Steve Forbert): This is Forbert's best song; in fact, you couldn't prove by me that he ever wrote anything else. It's either quaint and charming, or insufferably twee, and (as Lou Reed once said) I don't have to choose, so I won't. 6/10.

6. "Fight For Your Right" (Beastie Boys): I have several brilliant Beastie Boys tracks in my library, but this ain't one of them. Still, it's catchy, I guess. The very definition of a 5/10 selection. 5/10.

7. "Talk of the Town" (Pretenders): I think this song is absolutely gorgeous, and it reminds me of those innocent days in my youth when I thought working as a dishwasher at the Old Spaghetti Factory and staying up 'till dawn getting as polluted as the Cuyahoga River was romantic. 8/10.

8. "Takin' Retards to the Zoo" (Dead Milkmen): This song seems to show up with alarming frequency on Friday mornings. Love it or hate it, it's only 48 seconds long, so deal with it. Personally, I think it rawks. 7/10.

9. "King of the Road" (Roger Miller): Ain't that America. 9/10.

10. "Easy Come, Easy Go" (Bobby Sherman): Okay, now do you understand why I couldn't stop at ten? It could have been worse, I suppose - if it had been "Julie, Do Ya Love Me?", I would have had to assign a negative value. 0/10.

11. "Dancing In Heaven (Orbital Be-Bop)" (Q-Feel): I like it. So sue me. 4/10.

12. "Powerline" (Hüsker Dü): An obscure gem from one of my top 5 albums of all time (New Day Rising). Buy it now, or die unhappy. 9/10.

Which averages out to - let's see; carry the two... - a spectacularly mediocre 6.2/10! If you think you can do better, well, that's what the comments are for. Have at it, my pretties.

Remember the story I mention a while back about the guy in the UK who got a debit card with the name "Dick Head" embossed on it? Here are some folks who feels his pain:

Officials at JP Morgan Chase have apologized and promised to improve their screening policies, after a credit card solicitation letter sent to a 54-year-old naturalized American citizen came addressed to "Palestinian Bomber."

The form letter for a Visa Platinum card arrived earlier this month at the home of Sami Habbas, a grocery store manager from Corona, Calif. The words "Palestinian Bomber" appear above his address and the salutation reads, "Dear Palestinian Bomber." The document included the signature of Carter Franke, chief marketing officer for Chase Card Services.

Habbas is a naturalized U.S. citizen of Palestinian heritage. He told ABC News he is "extremely upset" at receiving the letter, pointing out that he has lived in the United States for 51 years and also served in the U.S. Army, receiving an honorable discharge in 1969....

Habbas was even more shocked when, on several occasions, he said he called an 800-number for JP Morgan Chase and spoke to operators in an effort to complain. Each time, he says the operators called up his information on a computer but apparently didn't catch on. According to Habbas, "The operators always said, 'Yes, Mr. Palestinian Bomber, how can we help you...?' "

The incident comes on the heels of last week's announcement by Comcast that two customer service representatives in Chicago were fired after they changed a woman's name to "Bitch Dog" on her bill. She had repeatedly complained about bad service.

In fact, I understand how things like this happen - I used to work at a video store, years ago, where employees would sometimes place inappropriate comments in the customer database, which then sometimes showed up on address labels taken from the database and sent out with customet mailings. But I do not understand how a live telephone operator, even one functioning on autopilot, could fail to notice that he or she was addressing a customer as "Mr. Palestinian Bomber." I could understand "Throat Warbler Mangrove," but not "Mr. Palestinian Bomber."

Also, it would never, ever occur to me to call someone "Bitch Dog." I'm just not that creative.

Action figures from Walter Hill's The Warriors!

"Can you count, suckers?"

Yesterday, I got a bit sarcastic in proclaiming "good news!" from Iraq. Today, however, I actually do have good news:

Southern Iraq's once-lush marshlands - devastated by Saddam Hussein - are showing signs of rebirth: Plants are growing, former residents are returning, and hunting and fishing are reviving.

A new U.N. report, released Wednesday in Tokyo, sums up the progress, saying satellite imagery shows the marshes have regained 40 percent of their once-vast reach....

The largest wetland ecosystem in the Middle East and Western Eurasia, the marshlands provide a crucial route for migratory birds, support endangered species, sustain freshwater fisheries and support the marine ecosystem of the Persian Gulf.

Saddam drained much of the Mesopotamian waters between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the 1990s - building dams, dikes and canals to pull away the water - in an apparent punishment because the marsh inhabitants supported a Shiite rebellion after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Even more dams were built in neighboring Turkey, disrupting natural water cycles that helped nourish the wetlands.

Of the almost 3,600 square miles of marshes in 1970, the area shrank by 90 percent to 300 square miles in 2002. As recently as 2001, some experts forecast the marshlands would disappear by 2008.

Instead, the new satellite imagery shows a rapid increase in water and vegetation cover in just the past three years, with the marshes rebounding to about 37 percent of their 1970 reach, the United Nations Environmental Program said Wednesday.

This is without a doubt a wonderful thing. Of all the crimes and atrocities perpetrated by the Hussein regime, his destruction of the Mesopotamian wetlands had the potential to be the worst, in terms of the permanence and extent of the cultural (i.e., the obliteration of the "marsh Arab" society) and environmental harm done. It is important to note that the reversal of this damage has been accomplished almost entirely by native Iraqis, with little assistance from outsiders. Good thing, too, since it appears that international aid for the recovery is becoming a casualty of the stillborn efforts to draft an Iraqi constitution:

A donors conference to coordinate the revival of southern Iraq's once-lush marshlands has been canceled because of the ongoing stalemate in Baghdad over the country's constitution.

The summit had been scheduled for Thursday and Friday in Tokyo but was postponed after Iraqi Environment Minister Nermin Othman was needed at home for constitutional negotiations, said Robert Bisset, a spokesman for the U.N. Environment Program.

A new date and location have not been decided. Japan, which called off the meeting in consultation with UNEP, may offer to host a rescheduled event but must first discuss the matter with Iraq, the U.N. and other donors, Foreign Ministry official Yoshiko Nagayama said.

The United Nations had hoped the conference would raise more money for restoration and coordinate projects by Japan, the United States, Canada and Italy. The delay follows a UNEP announcement Wednesday that the marshlands have made a rapid recovery since being nearly decimated under the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Spokane mayor Jim West continues to die a political death by slow bleeding:

The Washington State Supreme Court yesterday affirmed a judge's ruling that a recall petition against Spokane Mayor Jim West can proceed.

Just hours after lawyers for West argued that the petition by Shannon Sullivan was factually and legally insufficient, the high court affirmed a lower-court ruling that the document bearing a single abuse-of-office allegation could proceed to signature gathering.

West, you will recall, is the man who built his political career on a platform of "traditional values" - specifically, the worst kind of hateful gay-baiting - only to get caught red-handed cruising for man-meat on the Internet. Worse yet, he appears to have offered lucrative city jobs in exchange for sexual favors. Oops!

Inexplicably, West has steadfastly refused to acknowledge the obvious fact that his career is not only dead, it is cold and putrefying. He has fought against this recall as though he honestly believes he has a future. And indeed, for the short term, at least, he may:

The ruling means recall supporters can begin collecting signatures immediately.

Spokane County Elections Supervisor Paul Brandt said it would be very difficult to get the required 12,600 valid signatures in time for an election this fall.

Brandt said the elections office would have to receive the signed petitions no later than tomorrow, because it will need four weeks to verify them and take other steps necessary to get the recall on the Nov. 8 ballot.

So Jim West may manage to cling to his position for a bit longer - but that just means that the rest of us can enjoy the death watch in the meanwhile.

In case you were wondering, almost 3 out of 4 Americans think it's perfectly acceptable for one to commit a violent criminal act - assault and battery - so long as the victim is the perpetrator's child. Broken down by state, nearly 9 out of 10 Alabamans approve of child abuse, the highest percentage in the nation, while "only" a little more than half of all Vermonters are comfortable with the idea of beating one's kids.

But the good news is that over two thirds of us are put off by the idea of washing a child's mouth with soap.

Disgraceful:

Delegates to the nation’s largest wartime veterans organization meeting here in national convention today vowed to use whatever means necessary to ensure the united support of the American people for our troops and the global war on terrorism....

“For many of us, the visions of Jane Fonda glibly spouting anti-American messages with the North Vietnamese and protestors denouncing our own forces four decades ago is forever etched in our memories,” [American Legion national commander Thomas P.] Cadmus said. “We must never let that happen again. I assure you, The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom loving peoples....”

“No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies,“ Cadmus said. “It would be tragic if the freedoms our veterans fought so valiantly to protect would be used against their successors today as they battle terrorists bent on our destruction."

This is the stuff of fascism, folks, pure and simple. It pains me to say so, given that membership in the Legion is restricted to men and women who have otherwise served this nation with courage and honor, but it is clear from the face of this pronouncement that it is no longer possible for one to be both an American (insofar as "American" is defined as an individual who honors the letter and the spirit of our Constitution) and a member of the American Legion. The Legion exists at the pleasure of Congress (which established the organization by charter in 1919); it is now incumbent upon Congress to demand that the Legion disavow the hateful and dangerous rhetoric spewed by Thomas Cadmus, or have its charter revoked. Along these lines, it would be perfectly appropriate to "present [your] views in correspondence to [your] elected officials" - while you still can.

Update: That strong scent of hypocrisy you detect is coming to you by way of the Whiskey Bar, where Billmon reveals that the [un-]American Legion was not always so hostile to the notion of protest against military adventures, at least not if a Democrat happens to be Commander in Chief.

Our intellectually challenged brethren on the right are always whining that no one ever focuses on the good news from Iraq. So, in the interest of fairness and balance, here's some good news:

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Tuesday tried to dispel concern over the possibility that a civil war could erupt in Iraq between Sunni Arabs and Shiite Arabs.

"People have been moving together, talking, discussing things," Rumsfeld said. "You can always find someone who's going to try to be a dead-ender and say, 'If you don't do this, I won't do that.' But that's part of negotiation. We see that in the Congress and we see it in democratic systems all over the world."

His remarks came amid a report that a Sunni Arab official believes civil conflict could arise from differences over the draft constitution.

There, now, isn't that great news? No less a personage than Little Donny Rumsfeld himself, our very own bag man in Baghdad, assures us that there will not be a civil war. That's simply outstanding! And it's a good thing, too, because without Rummy's reassurance it might be easy to misinterpret this sort of thing:

Fighting broke out in Baghdad and the holy city of Najaf on Wednesday between rival Shi'ite militias, raising fears of a renewed uprising by radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi army against the U.S.-backed government.

At least eight people were killed and dozens wounded, health officials said, in street battles in Najaf involving pro-government Badr Organisation fighters and supporters of Sadr, who has joined Sunni Arabs in denouncing a constitution the Shi'ite-led government is preparing to force through parliament.

More from Christopher Allbritton, who is in Baghdad:

Earlier this evening, Najaf police units, led by a Badr Organization commander, descended on Moqtada’s office in Najaf, located on the main street approaching the Imam Ali Shrine. In the clash, Moqtada’s office, only four meters from the shrine, was burned to the ground, according to Abu Hazzim, who worked in the Najaf office and fled for his life to Sadr City. He says 23 people have been killed, most of them Moqtada’s supporters, while media reports put the number between five and eight. Iraqi Army and police have been involved in the fighting. Many of the police and army units in the south are packed by Badr militiamen with more loyalty to the party than to the state. As I write, clashes continue.

Moqtada has put out an alert for the jaysh al-Mahdi militia to be on high alert in Sadr City, Najaf, Nasriyah, Amarah and Basra. In Sadr City and Basra, jaysh al-Mahdi members have asked to occupy/attack SCIRI and Badr offices, but so far they’ve been kept in check by Moqtada and Fatah al-Sheikh, one of Moqtada’s supporters in parliament.

Or at least he was. Earlier this evening, Moqtada gave the Jaafari government an hour to explain, pull back or apologize for these attacks. He also called on his supporters in parliament, Fatah and others from the NICE list, to resign because “Moqtada now considers the government illegal,” according to Abu Hazzim. Fatah has told me he has resigned. A press conference is imminent.

Fortunately, however, Secretary Rumsfailed has made it quite clear that there will not be a civil war in Iraq. I believe him, too, because he's been right about practically everything so far: WMD, our troops being greeted as liberators, the utter impossibility of theocratic values being enshrined in any Iraqi constitution, etc. So we can be quite certain that, no matter how many Iraqi militias slaughter each other in the streets of Baghdad, there will not - repeat, not - be a civil war in Iraq.

I saw this photo over at Happy Furry Puppy Story Time, and I just have to say - sometimes I'm so darned proud of my home town I could just spit!

(For the record, I was not at Hempfest myself; rather, I spent Sunday afternoon in the office. Just sayin'.)

How much courage does it take to viciously diss the Empty Flight Suit, in a very public manner, mind you, as he gives his canned speech before the VFW?

This much.

Which, when you think about it, is probably much less courage than this same man displayed earlier in his career.

Both Matt Yglesias and Mark A.R. Kleiman have pointed to this Harris Poll showing that the general public is bullish on ignorance:

"Regardless of what you may personally believe, which of these do you believe should be taught in public schools?"

Evolution only - 12%
Creationism only - 23%
Intelligent design only - 4%
All three - 55%
None of these - 3%
Unsure - 3%

...and let me just say, before I go on, that I am especially fond of the 3% who answered "none of these three," because while they are perhaps the least rational humans on the planet, they are at least utterly honest about their total hostility to any sort of highfallutin' book learnin' of any kind. That's refreshing.

More troubling is the substantial majority who are completely confused, and think that evolution and creationism and "intelligent [sic] design" ought to be in the curriculum. These are the people who would have been better served if the pollsters had provided a sixth option - "I have no idea what you're talking about and, more to the point, I don't care."

Matt and Mark seem to think (if I may be so bold as to speak on their behalf) that the existence of this 55% implies, on purely political grounds, that those of us in the reality-based community ought to just let this issue fade away (Kleiman: "Calling the majority fundamentalist boobs may be fun, but it's not helpful and, incidentially, not true. So let's practice a little bit of multicultural understanding, shall we?"). And, indeed, Yglesias provides a bit of sobering perspective: "But it's not such a great idea to mock a guy who has 55 percent of the public on his side when you have only 12 percent on yours. The evolution-only view is less popular than gay marriage, less popular than the abolition of the death penalty, and generally speaking one of the very least popular liberal cultural causes."

It is, however, the only intellectually defensible position.

The problem is, when one looks at the context in which these numbers arise, the situation is even worse than it appears on the already-ugly surface. Consider:

"Do you think human beings developed from earlier species or not?"

Did 38%
Did not 54%
Unsure 8%

"Do you believe all plants and animals have evolved from other species or not?"

Have 49%
Have not 45%
Unsure 7%

"Do you believe apes and man have a common ancestry or not?"

Did 46%
Did not 47%
Unsure 7%

"Which of the following do you believe about how human beings came to be? Human beings evolved from earlier species. Human beings were created directly by God. Human beings are so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them."

Evolved From Earlier Species 22%
Created Directly by God 64%
Powerful Force/Intelligent Being 10%
Unsure 4%

And so, while nearly half of all respondents (49%) agree that all plants and animals evolved from other species, and nearly as many (46%) agree that man and apes have a common ancestor, a much smaller number agree that man evolved from an earlier species. This makes no sense at all - if all animals evolved from an earlier species, and apes are animals, and man and apes share a common ancestry, then humans must be evolved from an earlier species, no? Worse yet, the number of respondents who answered that man evolved from an earlier species varies from a pathetic 38% to a mind-numbing 22% within the same poll! Sixteen per cent of the respondents couldn't even give the same answer twice!

Clearly, people simply aren't thinking rationally about this stuff. In the long run, the obvious solution is better science education (I'm no fan of "No Child Left Behind"-mandated testing, but if there is going to be such testing it seems that a successful test subject ought to be able, at minimum, to define a "theory"). But in the short run, I can't defend the willful tolerance of ignorance. Look, I understand the need for political pragmatism, but I refuse to recognize the benefit of pandering to a population that can't even remember the answer they gave five minutes earlier. This is ridiculous. I wouldn't necessarily suggest that any candidate make this a major campaign issue, but it's simply unconscionable to suggest that we should ignore reality and pretend like it's okay for students to avoid unpopular, but well-supported, truths.

The "Jesus made me; this I know, 'cause the Bible tells me so" crowd is wont to cry "elitist!" whenever anyone suggests that scientific reality is in some way objectively superior to their mythology. Maybe so. But I'll tell you what I think is elitist - writing off half of the population as being too stupid to grasp the truth if it is presented to them in a cogent, coherent manner. Science education in this country sucks, and it's not getting any better (look at the Harris poll numbers, and notice how much more ignorant we've become as a nation since the same questions were first presented, 11 years earlier). It's well past time to correct this outrage, and playing politics with objective reality is not helpful.

You know how some bloggers have a little tagline at the end of each post, describing their current mood (as if anyone cares) - you know, like

Mood: Giddy ;)

or

Mood: Sad :(

or

Mood: Horny :>

or something along those lines? Well, for the record, my current mood is that I have an overpowering urge to get stinking drunk and stay that way until sometime after Christmas. As if anyone cares.

Anyway, those of you who are following the bizarre saga of the Iraqi Constitution ought to go check out Prof. Cole:

According to the interim constitution, the permanant constitution should have been presented to parliament and passed by August 15. There should have been two readings of it, two days apart, before the vote. Otherwise, parliament should have been dissolved and new elections called. Parliament avoided this fate with a last-minute amendment of the interim constitution, allowed if by 3/4 vote, though the nicety of two readings of the amendment two days apart was dispensed with (arguably, unconstitutionally, though it is a relatively minor affair). The amendment stipulated that the new constitution would by passed by August 22, with other conditions unchanged.

The new constitution, with blank passages, was presented to parliament just before midnight on August 22. But parliament did not vote on it, and a "three-day delay" was announced.

Announced?

The rule of law is no longer operating in Iraq, and no pretence of constitutional procedure is being striven for. In essence, the prime minister and president have made a sort of coup, simply disregarding the interim constitution. Given the acquiescence of parliament and the absence of a supreme court (which should have been appointed by now but was not, also unconstitutionally), there is no check or balance that could question the writ of the executive.

It kind of makes you wonder why anyone is bothering to put much work into drafting a constitution, when past performance indicates that no one will pay much attention to it, anyway.

I predict that, if and when it is approved and brought to market, employer-funded health plans will have no problem paying for this product:

A drug dubbed CX717, made by Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Irvine, California, reverses the biological and behavioral effects of sleep deprivation, according to results of animal studies.

In an article in the research journal PLoS Biology, Dr. Sam A. Deadwyler and his associates propose that CX717 would particularly benefit individuals affected by extended work hours or night shifts....

"The fact that (compounds like) CX717 can temporarily alleviate the effects of prolonged periods of sleep deprivation...indicates their potential applicability to many circumstances in which human performance is compromised by extensive sleep loss," Deadwyler and his associates suggest.

They add that these new agents may be preferable to psychostimulants, caffeine or the relatively new anti-sleepiness drug Provigil, because these "may be limited due to their potential for addiction and/or their potent stimulant actions, which can distort cognitive and sensory processes at doses required to counteract the effects of sleep deprivation."

O, brave new world....

My goodness, but Hugo Chavez is a thorn in our side! There he is, hobnobbing with Fidel Castro, which is sure to make us cranky. Legend has it that he has been mucking about in the affairs of his neighbor states, which would be very naughty, if true. Clearly, he's not terribly fond of our current leadership, which would be a problem even if he wasn't sitting on huge oil reserves.

But the fact remains that he is the duly elected leader of his country, and apparently a very popular one at that. Only a year ago, he survived a recall election with a comfortable 59.2% of the vote - this in an election certified fair by the likes of the Carter Center and the OAS. Which is more than the Boy King can claim, by the way.

And so I find it especially appalling that a mainstream Republican (and noted man of God) like Pat Robertson would suggest - nay, state explicitly! - that we ought to have Hugo Chavez assassinated.

You know, that's just the sort of thing that leads some people to question our commitment to democracy. Go figure.

The utter intellectual bankruptcy of the unwashed masses comprising the right-wing blogosphere is now an open secret.

Thanks to Jesse at Pandagon for being the first to make this point, and he should also be credited for his important follow-ups here, here, here, here, an especially insightful analysis here, and, of course, here.

The fact is, although you will not read it in the radical MSM - or hear it from the politically correct crypto-fascists that dominate academia - the silent majority of real Americans "get it:" The right wing lunatic fringe is out of step with the pulse of the nation and, indeed, out of step with reality itself.

Fortunately, there are other voices (and no, I don't mean the ones in my head). For instance, Loaded Mouth conclusively demonstrates here (and here) that the liberal message is ascendant, a theme upon which Preemptive Karma expands in this trenchant post. The lesson is clear: Where the conservative noise machine is content to act collectively as a vacuous mutual admiration society, progressives have a different agenda - specifically, to avoid sucking. Or, put another way, conservatives are objectively pro-suckage.

(Politblogo has more, as if more is needed.)

But it is not enough to point out the insipid nature of conservative "thought." When confronted with what may well constitute a threat to our very way of life, it would be irresponsible not to speculate - do conservatives hate children? Do they sacrifice goats and other small ungulates to appease the blackened soul of Oliver Cromwell? Do they actually wish for our defeat at the hands (or tentacles, as the case may be) of evil space aliens? Disturbing, if true.

For now, the last word goes to John M. Burt, who (as always) puts a bow around the whole, sordid affair. To which one can only add: Heh. Indeed.

Here's something you can try at home: First, read this article from the Paper of Record regarding the so-called "theory" of Intelligent Design (note that ID is not a "theory" at all, in the sense that the word is properly used, but never mind that for now). Then read this article from The Onion (hat tip to TPM, BTW) about the theory of Intelligent Falling, and how it explains gaps and inconsistencies in the traditional, presently embattled theory of gravity.

Now, then - explain to me exactly how anyone can determine which of these articles is an intentional joke, and which is merely unintentionally ridiculous. I submit that it is impossible, and furthermore that the impossibility can be soundly established by experiment.

Robert Moog, the father of modern electronic music, has died.

(Via Science and Politics.)

So, it's back to the regular grind after a (mostly) lovely week in the Great White North. Didja miss me? Well, then - will you pretend that you did?

On several occasions during our travels, I found myself thinking about security. Or, more accurately, I found myself thinking about the illusion of security. It began on the ferry from San Juan Island to Victoria, B.C., when I heard someone on the public address system announce rather breathlessly that an "unidentified parcel in the shape of a guitar case" had been spotted on one of the decks. The owner was directed to claim it immediately, or else ... well, the "or else" was left unspecified, but the announcer's tone of voice left little doubt that the consequences would be dire.

This small crisis struck me odd in a couple of different ways. First, I would bet my last dollar that the parcel in the shape of a guitar case was, in fact, a guitar case. I will grant that calling it a guitar case still leaves some unanswered questions - specifically, is there a guitar in the guitar case, or is there something else, something sinister, hidden away in this particular guitar case - but calling it a guitar case doesn't sound nearly as ominous as calling it an unidentified parcel in the shape of a guitar case. So why do we suppose that the announcer chose to avoid calling a guitar case a guitar case?

But more to the point, it seemed rather odd to me that anyone would get all that concerned about a guitar case anyway, or even an unidentified parcel in the shape of a guitar case, for that matter. Not that a nefarious actor couldn't use a guitar case for evil purposes; why, there might be some kind of suitcase bomb (or, more properly, "guitar case bomb") lurking in that unidentified parcel in the shape of a guitar case. No guitar case can be above suspicion in our post 911 reality, I suppose. But really, unidentified parcels sneakily disguised as something innocent are not at all unusual on a ferry. In fact, this particular ferry held three whole decks of unidentified, abandoned packages, each capable of carrying explosives or other nasty items, and no one even noticed them. The worst part about all of these abandoned packages is that each one was cleverly disguised as an automobile! Some of them probably even had guitar cases packed away within them, and no one would be the wiser.

Seriously, if you were an international Islamofascist terrorist with heaven on your mind, determined to blow up a ferry, would you really drive on board - completely unmolested and unsearched, mind you - and park your car, only to carry your unidentified parcel of doom to the upper decks in a guitar case? Or, would you pack the trunk with C4 and blow the whole damn boat out of the water?

The problem, of course, is that there is no practical way to search every car boarding the ferry; in fact, given the volume of traffic, there is no practical way to search any of the cars boarding the ferry. If someone is really committed to the idea of doing mayhem on a ferry, we can't stop them. But we can make a big show out of tracking down the owners of unidentified guitar cases, and that makes us feel better. And after all, that's what it's all about - "security" as theater; the illusion of safety.

It's the same impulse that leads to checking ID when someone enters a federal building. Here's a news flash - bad guys carry ID, too. Checking ID does nothing to make anyone actually more safe, but it sure makes us feel good. Or, think of the stupid questions they ask at the airport check-in counter: Did anyone ask you to carry anything on board for them? No, certainly not, not unless you count this heavy package wrapped in brown paper that is mysteriously ticking even as we speak. I mean, really - is it even theoretically possible that a terrorist attack might be thwarted this way?

On Saturday morning, we returned to the States via the Sumas border crossing - not exactly a high-traffic route. Even so, the wait to get through customs took about 45 minutes. When we finally got to the gate, the man asked where we were going. "Home, to Seattle," I said. Did we have anything to declare? "A bag of corn. Twelve ears." To which the customs man replied, and I quote, "See ya." That was it - "see ya." He didn't even ask to see our ID (I guess it's easier to get into the country than it is getting into the local IRS office). Not an especially careful inspection, but realistically, our 45 minute wait would have been several times as long if even a fraction of the vehicles crossing the border were subject to much more scrutiny than that. Border guards and ID checks and inane questions ("did you pack your own bags?") and tracking down the forgetful owners of unidentified parcels in the shape of guitar cases do little if anything to increase actual security. But they sure make us feel safer, and I guess that's the important thing.

Finally - wireless access!

I'm in lovely Vancouver, B.C., just a block south of the famous "Little Amsterdam" district. Our hotel is a restored Victorian style place called, creatively enough, the Victorian Hotel. We spent a night on San Juan Island, where we enjoyed a successful whale watching cruise, and then two nights in Victoria before we got here. Tomorrow, we're off to Harrison Hot Springs and, for our son anyway, the climax of our trip - Dinotown!

Some thoughts about Canada: My Lovely Bride noticed that one hears a lot more languages and/or accents on the street here than we would in Seattle. I presume this is because Canada tends to be more welcoming of immigrants and foreign tourists than are the States. Although B.C. is about as American as any foreign country could be - after all, we're less than a day's drive from home - every now and then you get a subtle reminder that this is actually another country. The money, of course; not just the pretty currency, but the $1 and $2 coins in lieu of bills (according to the cashier at the hotel restaurant in Vistoria, these are known as "unies" and "twonies," but I presume she was pulling my leg - no one could really call their money such silly names, could they?). The metric stuff, even though I occasionally hear people slip and mention weight in pounds. The weirdest stuff, though, is the little differences. Danon Yogurt is Danone Yogurt, with the accent shifted to the second syllable. In the TV commercials, "Mazda" is pronounced with a short, broad "a" sound ("Mazz-da"). Odd little quirks like these make me quite aware that I'm in a foreign place. A really pretty, really cool foreign place.

I've not been keeping up much with the news before tonight, and I'm surprised (and disappointed, I guess) by how little I've missed. Current events truly are like a soap opera - there's the illusion of rapid change, but skip a week and you can still pick right up where you left off.

Anyway, I'll be back blogging regularly when I return from this little voyage. In the meanwhile, keep the fire burning. Happy trails.

We're going on a spur-of-the-moment vacation next week (Dinotown, here we come!), so I'm stacked up today getting the decks cleared here at work. I'll have my laptop with me when I'm gone, but I don't know how much I'll actually use it. In other words, I may be scarce for the next ten days or so; in the meanwhile, please do visit some of the fine sites lited to your left (my right).

But, of course, I couldn't let you go without inflicting another Random Ten on ya':

1. Gloria (Grateful Dead)
2. Telegram (Nazareth)
3. Rock and Roll, Hoochie Koo (Rick Derringer)
4. Brilliant Mistake (Elvis Costello)
5. Stacey's Mom (Fountains of Wayne)
6. Thank You (Falletinme Be Mice Elf Agin) (Sly & the Family Stone)
7. Eep Opp Ork Ah-Ah (Means I Love You) (Violent Femmes)
8. Six Months In a Leaky Boat (Split Enz)
9. Tempted (Squeeze)
10. Heaven (Joan Armitrading)

Speaking of the Violent Femmes - we saw them at Woodland Park Zoo the night before last, and it was a pretty good show. All the hits, yada yada yada. One thing was really weird, however - because it was at the zoo, there were a lot of kids there (including my own). Well, that was fine and dandy, and the band even made allowances (censoring the lyrics to "Add It Up," for instance), but I kind of got the creeps when they played "Country Death Song" and I looked around to see oodles of aging punks - and their toddlers - enjoying an ode to filicide together. Other than that, though, it was just wholesome family fun, as I'm sure you can imagine.

The backpeddling begins.

God help me, but I only just this moment learned that Dolly Parton, one of the great treasures of American song, covered "Stairway to Heaven." The result is ... surprisingly not bad.

Atrios has this excerpt from Cindy Sheehan's appearance on the Bill Press show:

I didn’t know Casey knew Michelle Malkin…I’m Casey’s mother and I knew him better than anybody else in the world…I can’t bring Casey back, but I wonder how often Michelle Malkin sobbed on his grave. Did she go to his funeral? Did she sit up with him when he was sick when he was a baby?

I was ahead of the curve on this one - I pegged Michelle Malkin as a despicable lintbrain back when she was writing venomous screeds (that no one read) for the Seattle Times. Now that she's hit the big time, she's really hit her stride; she would have to take a self-improvement course to get back to the level of "despicable lintbrain."

Evidently, the 8 or 10 hours a day I spend obsessively following the news isn't enough, because somehow I missed this (thanks to corrente):

An Oklahoma man was taken into custody after he tried to carry a bomb on board an airplane on Wednesday in Oklahoma City, an FBI spokesman said.

Charles Alfred Dreyling Jr., 24, was detained on Wednesday morning after a security screener using an X-ray machine saw the device in his luggage as he tried to board a flight to Philadelphia at Will Rogers Airport in Oklahoma City.

"Although the investigation is in its initial stages we have found no apparent connection to any type of terrorist activity or group," FBI spokesman Gary Johnson said.

This bizarre comment only makes sense if one assumes that terrorism is the exclusive domain of swarthy people - which will no doubt come as a great relief to the relatives of Timothy McVeigh's victims.

Is it just me, or is it warm in here?

A vast expanse of western Sibera is undergoing an unprecedented thaw that could dramatically increase the rate of global warming, climate scientists warn today.

Researchers who have recently returned from the region found that an area of permafrost spanning a million square kilometres - the size of France and Germany combined - has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago at the end of the last ice age.

Article continues
The area, which covers the entire sub-Arctic region of western Siberia, is the world's largest frozen peat bog and scientists fear that as it thaws, it will release billions of tonnes of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.

It is a scenario climate scientists have feared since first identifying "tipping points" - delicate thresholds where a slight rise in the Earth's temperature can cause a dramatic change in the environment that itself triggers a far greater increase in global temperatures.

Wow. It's a good thing that global warming is a good thing, or we might have a problem.

The Rude Pundit must be distracted by his upcoming "legitimate theater" debut, because he managed to get through an entire post without mentioning marital aids, scatological sexual practices, or Karl Rove's leather slave. In fact, his description of the new Green Day video displays a positively (and heretofore unknown) sensitive side:

Now, in the video for the seemingly straightforward power ballad "Wake Me Up When September Comes [sic]," Green Day makes an answer to every Army-of-One bullshit ad. The video begins with a sappy teen love story, complete with the music low and the dialogue audible, until we see the weeping teenage girl going up to the teenage boy, begging to know if what she heard is true. The boy explodes that she doesn't understand, and then we see what they're talking about, with the boy going off in a bus, having his head shaved, being trained by the military, and sent to an urban battlefield that is presumably Iraq.

There, guitars peaking in the background, we watch as the boy's patrol comes under fire from an unseen enemy, with explosions and bullets all around them. As he watches his fellow soldiers being hit, we see the boy, scared, confused, hidden in one of the bombed out buildings. The thing is that it's filmed as if it is one of those Army or Marine ads, except it looks fucking scary. And then it ends with the teenage girl back at home, sitting on bleachers. We don't know if the boy lives or dies (perhaps there's a sequel in the offing?), but we know that the innocence of the early part has been compromised, and that there's no way that girl and that boy can ever connect again.

Simple. A bit sappy. And as effective as a mallet to the head. Or that bleeding heart grenade on the cover of the album itself.

While some of my hipper-than-thou friends (and who isn't hipper-than-me?) don't understand why I am so enthralled by American Idiot, the fact is that I think it might be, start to finish, the best record I've heard since Hüsker Dü's New Day Rising. The title track is nearly perfect, but "Wake Me Up When September Ends" is the song I keep going back to. In part, this may have something to do with my personal connection with the season (I'll turn 45 the day before Labor Day) and my deep affection for nearly all songs about the month of September (e.g., Big Star's "September Gurls;" Lou Reed's cover of "September Song"). Structurally, this song represents the dramatic highlight of the album, and it provides a necessary counterbalance to the athletic workouts "Jesus of Suburbia" and "Homecoming," the twin homages to the Who's "A Quick One (While He's Away)" that carry the bulk of the album's narrative weight. ("Boulevard of Broken Dreams" plays a similar role, but is nowhere near as good.)

I'm no big fan of the video format (it killed the radio star, after all). I hardly ever see new videos any more, but this is one I'll seek out. Thanks to Rude Boy for bringing it to my attention.

This is funny: You may be aware that the new Rolling Stones album is in the news because it will feature a song called "Sweet Neo Con," which includes lyrics such as these:

You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite
You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of shit

Now, I will grant that this is not the height of poesy. Maybe Keef got some bad methadone or something. Personally, I'm not sure that the term "neo con" could ever be used in a lyric without sounding a bit clunky, but what do I know? I would have advised Mssrs. Blackmore, Gillan, et al. that the phrase "some stupid with a blowtorch" sounded dumb, and then the world would have been denied the sublime pleasure of "Smoke On the Water." Anyway, here's the funny part (via Needlenose):

Here's the ticket: a private evening rockin' the night away with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger during the kickoff of the Rolling Stones' "A Bigger Bang'' U.S. tour on Aug. 21 at Boston's Fenway Park.

Here's the bottom line: $10,000 a pop to get in on a private preconcert reception and front-and-center seats to watch the show -- or $100,000 to sit with the governor in his luxury box.

Der Gropinator will probably be arrange to be off in the little boys' room when "Sweet Neo Con" comes up - but no doubt he'll be up and shaking his Aryan booty during "Sympathy For the Devil."

Meanwhile, Atrios links to this story about another casualty of Dick & Dubya's Excellent Invasion:

"So we're driving down the road and it's midnight, so it's pitch-black, and when you're driving at night, you don't use any lights," says Terry Rodgers, "but we can see fine because we've got night vision goggles."

He's sitting in the living room of his mother's townhouse in Gaithersburg, telling the story of his last night in Iraq. He's still got his Army crew cut and he's wearing a T-shirt with an American flag on the chest.

"We're driving down this road and there's this tiny bridge over a little canal," he says. "They had rigged up this bomb and they had a tripwire running across the bridge and we hit it and it blew up."

Like the rest of the 13,877 Americans wounded in Iraq, Rodgers has a story to tell. He tells it in a matter-of-fact voice, like he's talking about making a midnight pizza run or something. He's sitting in an armchair with his right leg propped on an ottoman, the foot encased in a soft black cast that reaches almost to the knee. His crutches are lying on the rug beside the chair....

Rodgers was flown to Baghdad, then to Germany, then to Washington, where he was taken to Walter Reed Army Medical Center on Memorial Day. But he doesn't remember any of that.

"The first memories I have turn out to be hallucinations," he says. "I thought my leg was burned off. I thought half my face was blown off. I thought little kids were jumping on me, stealing my eyes and my teeth."

He was doped up on pain medicine that made him see things that weren't there.

"He kept yelling at me to get the people behind him," his mother, Ann Rodgers, recalls. "He said, 'Get them away from me!' I said, 'There's nobody behind you.' He asked me if I could see the back of his eye because his face was gone. I said, 'Your face isn't gone.' He said, 'Liar!' "

His real injuries were almost as bad as the ones he hallucinated. He had a broken femur, broken jaw, broken cheekbone. His right calf was blown away. Also, his right ear couldn't hear and his right eye couldn't see.

He spent a month and a half at Walter Reed. The doctors wired his jaw shut, put a metal rod in his leg, did nine hours of surgery on his eye, reconstructed his calf, and did skin grafts....

One day a nurse came in to ask Rodgers if he wanted to meet President Bush, who was visiting the hospital. Rodgers declined.

"I don't want anything to do with him," he explains. "My belief is that his ego is getting people killed and mutilated for no reason -- just his ego and his reputation. If we really wanted to, we could pull out of Iraq. Maybe not completely but enough that we wouldn't be losing people -- at least not at this rate. So I think he himself is responsible for quite a few American deaths."

As you were, soldier! If you have a boo-boo, we can give you something for that:

I presume that you're familiar with Cindy Sheehan, mother of Army Spc. Casey Sheehan (KIA 4/4/04) and founder of Gold Star Families for Peace. I presume further that you are familiar with her heroic vigil on a dusty road leading to the Boy King's primary residence (I understand he occasionally visits the White House, as well), and the reprehensible efforts of the usual wrong-wing knuckle-draggers (Drudge, Malkin, etc. ad nauseum) to vilify her.

I presume you know about all that, but if you don't, then take a moment to catch up.

Perhaps the most amazing thing about this story is how poorly President Rove and his faithful sidekick, the Half-Wit Chimp, are handling it. Maureen Dowd makes the point (NYT link here, with the essential details available at War and Piece for those - like me - who resist the Times registration wall):

It's amazing that the White House does not have the elementary shrewdness to have Mr. Bush simply walk down the driveway and hear the woman out, or invite her in for a cup of tea. But W., who has spent nearly 20 percent of his presidency at his ranch, is burrowed into his five-week vacation and two-hour daily workouts. He may be in great shape, but Iraq sure isn't.

The Rude Pundit is also perplexed, in his own rude way:

Public relations-wise, this is an easy one, isn't it? If you're the President, you meet with Sheehan. You invite her in. You give her some lemonade. You listen. You say you're sorry. And then you let her go back out. PR problem over, no? Fuck, while she's talkin', you can have monkeys dancin' in your head. But doesn't this seem like a no-brainer?

Unless, of course, you don't give a shit. Unless, of course, you think of yourself as unquestionably right and, frankly, you couldn't give a happy monkey fuck what the opposition says. And, of course, Bush doesn't.

Exactly. What has happened here is that the Empty Flight Suit has in his infinite arrogance and stupidity picked an unnecessary fight, and then stood by impotently as it spiraled out of control until, finally, there is no way left to win. I just wish I could think of a metaphor for that.

Wait a minute, here's one:

Sweet Baby Jesus on a crisp Ritz cracker!

Q: What is the America Supports You Freedom Walk?
R: The America Supports You Freedom Walk is an event on September 11 that allows citizens the opportunity to remember the victims of September 11, honor our veterans past and present, and celebrate our freedom.

Q: When is the ASY Freedom Walk being held?
R: The Freedom Walk is being held on September 11, 2005, beginning at 10 a.m. at the Pentagon South parking lot.

Q: What is the ASY Freedom Walk route?
R: The America Supports You Freedom Walk begins near the Pentagon crash site, crossing Arlington National Cemetery, passing several National memorials, and concluding adjacent to the National Mall and Reflecting Pool with an America Supports You concert by country superstar singer and songwriter Clint Black. For more information, visit www.AmericaSupportsYou.com and click on the Freedom Walk icon.

Q: What is America Supports You?
R: " America Supports You," is a nationwide program launched by the Department of Defense (DoD) to recognize citizens' support for our military men and women and communicate that support to members of our Armed Forces at home and abroad. For more information, visit www.AmericaSupportsYou.com.

I'm sure you're wondering - how is the Liberal Media® responding to this shameless display of necrophilia?

Q: Who is supporting the Freedom Walk?
R: The America Supports You Freedom Walk enjoys the support of Stars and Stripes newspaper, Pentagon Federal Credit Union, Subway, Lockheed Martin, The Washington Post [emphasis supplied], WTOP Radio Network, and ABC WJLA-TV Channel 7 & NewsChannel 8, among others.

And the $10,000 (or, in the alternative, 1800+ lives) question:

Q: Why is DoD organizing this event?
R: Since September 11, 2001, the Pentagon has provided citizens with opportunities to commemorate September 11 in meaningful ways. The America Supports You Freedom Walk is the fourth September 11 commemorative activity sponsored by the DoD. The goal for the 5th anniversary in 2006 is for each state to host a Freedom Walk in order to provide an opportunity for as many citizens as possible to reflect on the importance of freedom.

And lest you think that I am being unfair in suggesting that there is a connection between this stunt and the IraQuagmire:

Administration supporters insisted Rumsfeld was right to link Iraq and September 11, and hold the rally.

"We are at war," said Representative Pete King, (Republican, New York).

"It's essential that we support our troops."

He also said attacking Iraq was necessary after September 11.

"You do not defeat al-Qaeda until you stabilise the Middle East, and that's not possible as long as Saddam Hussein is in power."

Of course - Hussein was the source of instability in the Middle East, which is why it's so much more stable now that he's been deposed.

I presume that most of you are already familiar with "Dr." James Dobson's list of warning signs that your beloved prepubescent son is a proto-faggot:

Evidences of gender confusion or doubt in boys ages 5 to 11 may include:

1. A strong feeling that they are “different” from other boys.

2. A tendency to cry easily, be less athletic, and dislike the roughhousing that other boys enjoy.

3. A persistent preference to play female roles in make-believe play.

4. A strong preference to spend time in the company of girls and participate in their games and other pastimes.

5. A susceptibility to be bullied by other boys, who may tease them unmercifully and call them “queer,” “fag” and “gay.”

6. A tendency to walk, talk, dress and even “think” effeminately.

7. A repeatedly stated desire to be — or insistence that he is — a girl.

If your child is experiencing several signs of gender confusion, professional help is available. It’s best to seek that help before your child reaches puberty.

I further presume that you have seen one or more of the righteous smackdowns of this particular bit of idiocy that are making the rounds among reality-based bloggers, including those from Norbizness and (thank you, Baby Jesus!) Fafblog. And I am still waiting for someone to explain what it means for a child to "'think' effeminately."

But the biggest problem here, I think, is that "Dr." Dobson has no advice for the parents of girls. Rarely is the question asked, is our children learning to be rug-munchers? So, I thought I'd step in to help out...

Signs Your "Little Princess" Is Lesbo-licious:

1. A strong feeling that she can beat up other boys.

2. A tendency to play soccer, tolerate spiders, and express an interest in plumbing.

3. A persistent preference to get her hair cut like Dora the Explorer.

4. A strong preference to get a Rottweiler.

5. A susceptibility to be bullied by other girls, who may tease them unmercifully and call them “dyke,” “lesbo” and “that bitch my boyfriend is always hanging out with.”

6. A tendency to walk, talk, dress and even “think” like someone who intends to exercise her right to vote.

7. A repeatedly stated desire to be — or insistence that she is — an independent human being rather than her future husband's chattel.

If your child is experiencing several signs of gender confusion, professional help is available. It’s best to seek that help before your child buys her first pair of sensible shoes.

This is an actual billboard (though the eyes and forehead were apparently, uh, improved by some unknown third person) for Hell Pizza in New Zealand. Another billboard by the same company uses the same photo and the phrase "Hell. Too good for some evil bastards."

So, some people on the opposite side of the earth feel exactly the same way about our Dear Leader as I do. I guess maybe he is a uniter and not a divider, after all.

(A doff of the chapeau to Poppy.)

From the Guardian:

In a war marked by sectarian bombings and civilian casualties, Juba is unusual in targeting only coalition troops, a difficult quarry protected by armoured vehicles, body armour and helmets.

He waits for soldiers to dismount, or stand up in a Humvee turret, and aims for gaps in their body armour, the lower spine, ribs or above the chest. He has killed from 200 metres away.

"It was the perfect shot," the battalion commander, Lt Col Kevin Farrell, said of one incident. "Blew out the spine.

"We have different techniques to try to lure him out, but he is very well trained and very patient. He doesn't fire a second shot."

Some in the battalion want marksmen to occupy rooftops overlooking supply routes, Juba's hunting ground, to try to put him in the cross-hairs.

"It would be a pretty shitty assignment because he's good," said Spc Burress. "I think it's a sniper's job to get a sniper, and it'd probably take all of us to get him...."

Some worry that Juba is on his way to becoming a resistance hero, acclaimed by those Iraqis who distinguish between "good" insurgents, who target only Americans, and "bad" insurgents who harm civilians.

The insurgent grapevine celebrates an incident last June when a four-strong marine scout sniper team was killed in Ramadi, all with shots to the head.

I refuse on principle to register for the NYT online, so I only get to see what Krugman has to say when someone else writes about it. Fortunately, Rising Hegemon has the goods on his latest column (original here, if you care):

Even when reporters do know the difference, the conventions of he-said-she-said journalism get in the way of conveying that knowledge to readers. I once joked that if President Bush said that the Earth was flat, the headlines of news articles would read, "Opinions Differ on Shape of the Earth." The headlines on many articles about the intelligent design controversy come pretty close.

Finally, the self-policing nature of science - scientific truth is determined by peer review, not public opinion - can be exploited by skilled purveyors of cultural resentment. Do virtually all biologists agree that Darwin was right? Well, that just shows that they're elitists who think they're smarter than the rest of us....

The important thing to remember is that like supply-side economics or global-warming skepticism, intelligent design doesn't have to attract significant support from actual researchers to be effective. All it has to do is create confusion, to make it seem as if there really is a controversy about the validity of evolutionary theory. That, together with the political muscle of the religious right, may be enough to start a process that ends with banishing Darwin from the classroom.

Matthew Yglesias is frickin' nuts when he says that this issue doesn't matter - it matters a great deal, at least it does for those of us in the reality-based community who continue to believe that, on balance, the Enlightenment was a good thing. In fact, in many ways the anti-evolution trend is more troubling than most of the willfully ignorant bullshit (Copyright © 2005 Robert Novak) promulgated by the faith-based charlatans, because while the assault on reason represented by (for example) denial of global warming or rejection of stem cell research gains little traction beyond the wingnut base, evolution seems to be a difficult concept for a broad majority of well-meaning but poorly educated people to grasp. I seem to recall reading somewhere that more people believe in angels than in the truth of natural selection; whether or not my recollection is accurate on this point, I know anecdotally that a good many of my own friends and family members don't get the idea of Darwinism. It is thus an effective wedge issue for political purposes, because it has resonance beyond the usual morons. And, once the anti-Enlightenment yahoos get their foot in the door, and unpopular (but scientifically well-established) concepts fall prey to political pressures, then "truth" becomes a function of polling. And so the foundation is laid for institutionalized ignorance. This result has dire consequences for the body politic - and Krugman's mention of supply-side (AKA "voodoo") economics is a good example of what I mean.

At least since Adlai Stevenson was marginalized for being an "egghead," and probably much earlier (remember the "Know-Nothing Party"?), anti-intellectualism has been a festering sore in American culture and politics. The ascendancy of "Intelligent Design" mumbo-jumbo tells us that things are not getting better.

Update 8/9/2005: Matt is starting to see the light....