Journalism and its Discontents

Sidney Blumenthal's afterward to the newly-released volume of Walter Lippmann's Liberty and the News has been published on Salon. It is a powerful piece of writing. In it, Blumenthal includes a history of Lippmann's career -- and ties is writing directly to the crisis we now face.

"Everywhere today," Lippmann wrote in Liberty and the News, "men are conscious that somehow they must deal with questions more intricate than any that church or school had prepared them to understand. Increasingly they know that they cannot understand them if the facts are not quickly and steadily available. Increasingly they are baffled because the facts are not available; and they are wondering whether government by consent can survive in a time when the manufacture of consent is an unregulated private enterprise."

Lippmann had witnessed firsthand how the "manufacture of consent" had deranged democracy. But he did not hold those in government solely responsible. He also described how the press corps was carried away on the wave of patriotism and became self-censors, enforcers, and sheer propagandists. Their careerism, cynicism, and error made them destroyers of "liberty of opinion" and agents of intolerance, who subverted the American constitutional system of self-government. Even the great newspaper owners, he wrote, "believe that edification is more important than veracity. They believe it profoundly, violently, relentlessly. They preen themselves upon it. To patriotism, as they define it from day to day, all other considerations must yield. That is their pride. And yet what is this but one more among myriad examples of the doctrine that the end justifies the means? A more insidiously misleading rule of conduct was, I believe, never devised among men."

Be sure to check it out.

Bob Drogin's Curveball

Great interview with Diane Rehm about the shadowy figure "Curveball"
who supplied German intelligence with false information to be granted
asylum from Iraq.
As Drogin's book makes clear, the lies of this man were just the
catalyst many were looking for to fulfill the false pretext for war
in Iraq.
It's also clear from this interview that Colin Powell has a lot to
answer for, and that George "Medal of Honor" Freedom is about as low
a form of life as you could ever want keeping you safe.
Interview is here: http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/07/10/22.php#13773

William Kristol on Iraq: Wrong, wrong, wrong: 2003-7

Here is a great blog post chronicling how wrong Kristol has been, over and over again.

Why is he on TV, in print, or anywhere at all, given this track record?

http://historyunfolding.blogspot.com/2007/10/william-kristol-on-iraq-2003-7.html is the post.

Here's a snippet:

Kristol has indeed been so consistently wrong that one can safely discount his current euphoria on the principle that even a stopped clock is right twice a day....But on the other hand, it turns out that anyone who wanted to understand Washington and Iraq during the last four years should have been reading Kristol. In detailing the arguments raging in Washington-arguments in which he has emerged as one of the victors-he was way ahead of me, and of just about anyone else that I can remember. The man may be an ideologue who has been repeatedly wrong, but he's well-connected and very much in tune with President Bush, and during the last four years he has triumphed over his enemies in the bureaucracy and the older generation-leaving the American people, of course, stuck with the bill.

Diane Rehm interviews Paul Krugman

New book: The Conscience of a Liberal

What does it mean to be a liberal? Why should one be proud of this word?

Universal healthcare.

A society which asks its rich (and everyone else) to contribute to the general welfare.

The principle that we are better individually when we take care of each other, rather than letting the young, old, weak, and sick fend for themselves.

It should be a pretty old idea for a nation that understands its own religious principles about peace and justice, but somehow these ideas have be argued for again and again.

Krugman does a good job of making the case.

The interview is here: http://wamu.org/programs/dr/07/10/15.php#13763

Arianna Huffington Interviews Nancy Pelosi

You can watch her answer the question: "Are you too well-behaved to get us out of Iraq?"

The Arc of History Bends Towards Justice

Andrew Leonard has a review up on Salong about Paul Krugman's new book, The Conscience of a Liberal.

Leonard says Krugman's book takes on the notion that American politics simply swings back and forth, and doesn't respond to situations, or movements, or political action.

... the most meta-level of all political economy arguments is the one that says that transient shifts in political direction don't really make that much of a difference to fundamental long-range changes in things like inequality. To this school, the rise and fall of inequality in the United States is like plate tectonics -- you can observe it, and try to understand it, but you can't actually do much about it.

To which Krugman convincingly says: Hogwash. The gross inequality of the Gilded Age that led up to the Great Depression morphed into a stunningly middle-class economy because of concrete initiatives forced through via Roosevelt's New Deal. The growing inequality of the past 30 years is directly attributable to policies enacted by the conservatives who first broke through with Ronald Reagan and reached their apogee with George W. Bush.

Middle-class societies don't emerge automatically as an economy matures, they have to be created through political action.

The corollary is that they can also be destroyed.

Krugman concludes: "Republicans increase economic inequality, Democrats decrease it, and so, politics matter."

He ties the long running disputes between the parties of race and civil rights to specific policy disagreements today, like health insurance. (He says Republicans originally opposed national health insurance, in the 1960s, because they feared it would lead to desegregated hospitals.) Leonard sums up 100 years of GOP history: "The transformation of the party of Lincoln to the party of Willie Horton is one of the abiding tragedies of American political history."

But Krugman believes this is a good time to be a progressive. And one signal trend on which he pins his hopes is increasing diversity among Americans, and a general tolerance toward each other.

Beyond the blunt, crude fact that America is getting less white, there's a more uplifting reason to believe that the political exploitation of race may be losing its force: As a nation we've become much less racist. The most dramatic evidence of diminishing racism is the way people respond to questions about a subject that once struck terror into white hearts: miscegenation. In 1978, as the ascent of movement conservatism to power was just beginning, only 36 percent of Americans polled by Gallup approved of marriages between whites and blacks, while 54 percent disapproved. As late as 1991 only a plurality of 48 percent approved. By 2002, however, 65 percent of Americans approved of interracial marriages; by June 2007, that was up to 77 percent.

We could certainly be in better hands than the current Democratic Party to seize this moment. But, if Krugman is correct, history seems to be on our side.

A Map of the Federal Budget

If you've ever wondered what the federal discretionary budget "looks" like, here's a great map. It divides the budget into its major categories, connects them to their subdivisions, and depicts them to scale.

It's particularly helpful to give some proportion to things that take up a very small portion of the budget, but an enormous portion of the right-wing's vitriol. The anecdote that justifies their hatred of government, even though it's a sliver of a sliver of the budget.

What will our interrogators say when they're 90?

Frank Rich, in his NYT column, quotes some World War II interrogators who kept their humanity while questioning some of the most ruthless people in history. This whole argument that "9/11 changed everything," and our Constitution has become a "suicide pact," ignores and betrays the courage Americans have shown throughout our history. (h/t Steve Benen.)

Our moral trajectory over the Bush years could not be better dramatized than it was by a reunion of an elite group of two dozen World War II veterans in Washington this month. They were participants in a top-secret operation to interrogate some 4,000 Nazi prisoners of war. Until now, they have kept silent, but America's recent record prompted them to talk to The Washington Post.

"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an M.I.T. physicist whose interrogation of Rudolf Hess, Hitler's deputy, took place over a chessboard. George Frenkel, 87, recalled that he "never laid hands on anyone" in his many interrogations, adding, "I'm proud to say I never compromised my humanity."

Our humanity has been compromised by those who use Gestapo tactics in our war. The longer we stand idly by while they do so, the more we resemble those "good Germans" who professed ignorance of their own Gestapo. It's up to us to wake up our somnambulant Congress to challenge administration policy every day. Let the war's last supporters filibuster all night if they want to. There is nothing left to lose except whatever remains of our country's good name.

Film Review: Randy and the Mob

I saw a screening of the movie, Randy and the Mob at the Austin Film Festival on Saturday. It's a pretty funny southern comedy by Ray McKinnon. If you're not familiar with him, he's best known as a director for a short film called The Accountant, but he's had a pretty successful career as a character actor. He played Vernon Waldrip (Holly Hunter's new fiance) in Oh Brother Where Art Thou. He also had a role on the HBO Series Deadwood, as Reverend Smith.

This movie is set in the south, and it makes fun of some standard southern stereotypes that are often funny, but only appreciated by southerners when another southerner is the one poking the fun. Fortunately for McKinnon, he's from Georgia, so he's securely in the make fun of the south with impunity club. As far as the plot goes it's pretty much a standard man gets into distress, gets out of distress and undergoes a transformation in the process plot line. The story is well put together, but it's really a vehicle to showcase the characters. McKinnon plays two roles, Randy, and his gay brother, Cecil. He really does a great job with both characters. Walton Goggins (best known for the role of Shane Vendrell on the TV series, The Shield) plays the most unusual character, a mobster named Tino Armani. This performance is almost robotic and devoid of emotion, yet this character has the majority of the most insightful and revealing lines in the movie. It's certainly not a believable portrayal of a normal human being, but if you can suspend disbelief, the robotic deadpan performance is an enjoyable addition to the movie.

If you're in the mood for Bergman or Kubrick, this isn't the right choice, but if you just want to relax and laugh a bit without thinking too much, I would recommend this movie to anyone. I think it has a bit of a Coen brothers type feel to it. Hopefully, you guys will have the opportunity to see it sometime soon. In the Q&A, the director said that he does have distribution, although right now it is limited to Georgia. I'm sure it will show up at your local independent theater or artsy movie rental joint sooner or later.

Why Gore Should Run

There's a lot of speculation going on about whether Gore will or should run.

I have no idea what he will do, but I think it's clear he should run.

There are several reasons.

First, there is no more powerful position to advance nearly any political agenda than the White House. As a public figure, Gore may grab the media's attention or they may tire of him. As president, he has the spotlight every day. Will people stop saying that "he can do more as a public figure"? That is pure B.S.

Second, many of the obstacles in the environmental movement have come from America's inability or unwillingness to sign on to international treaties, push for more regulation of CAFE standards, clean air, water, mercury, forest, mining, and other industries. For God's sake, the country has been in the hands of lobbyists for six years. Could there be a more important moment to get Gore in the White House and Robert Kennedy Jr. in the Cabinet? Seriously.

Third, it's not too late. He has enormous name recognition, big money connections, and now a slew of awards that guarantee that his intellect is listened to.

Finally, why not try now? He's young, still, and his fame can't get any greater. I could see Richardson as the running mate--a Hispanic with enormous international diplomacy credentials.

Do you have the stones, Al?

Yes, well...

War By the Numbers

Patricia Sullivan, assistant professor at the University of Georgia, has completed a major study of all 122 wars and military conflicts since World War II in which a major power was in conflict with a weaker power. She found the weaker power prevails 39 percent of the time.

“If you know some key variables—like the major objective, the nature of the target, whether there’s going to be another strong state that will intervene on the side of the target and whether you’ll have an ally—you can get a sense of your probability of victory,” said Sullivan, whose study appears in the Journal of Conflict Resolution.

Sullivan said the most important factor influencing whether the more powerful nation will be successful is whether its strategic objective can be accomplished with brute force alone or requires the cooperation of the adversary.

What does her research say about the current conflict in Iraq?

Sullivan said several factors contribute to the relatively low probability of success in the current Iraq war. Most importantly, the objective requires the support of the population and can’t be accomplished by force alone. Factional infighting, the insurgency and possible insurgent support by countries such as Iran and Syria further undermine the chance of success.

“No one could have predicted exactly what would happen after we overthrew the regime of Saddam Hussein,” Sullivan said. “But what my model could say was that if the population was not supportive of whatever new regime we put in power and the American strategic objective shifted from regime removal to maintaining the authority of a new government, the likelihood of a successful outcome would drop from almost 70 percent to just under 26 percent.”

So, if relying on brute force lowers your likelihood of success, does that mean the "surge" wasn't such a great idea after all? Hmmm.

What is a Group Blog?

A blog where a GROUP of people post regularly to the blog.

Just in case anyone was confused.

The New Mellencamp Video

The mayor of Jena says this video is just going too far. But the KKK rally in his town last week was nothing to be concerned about.

November, by Robert Frost

November

We saw leaves go to glory,

Then almost migratory
Go part way down the lane,
And then to end the story
Get beaten down and pasted
In one wild day of rain.

We heard " 'Tis Over" roaring.
A year of leaves was wasted.
Oh, we made a boast of storing,
Of saving and keeping,
But only by ignoring
The waste of moments sleeping,
The waste of pleasure weeping,
By denying and ignoring
The waste of nations warring.