Solipsistic

Here's a hilarious, but not very fair, juxtaposition of images from the Lamont and Lieberman campaigns. Very good propaganda.

From the Jerusalem Post:

[Israeli] Defense officials told the Post last week that they were receiving indications from the US that America would be interested in seeing Israel attack Syria.

Just what the Mideast needs: further destabilization. Neverending war for everlasting peace.

Via TPM.

Here's a refreshing story from the New York Times concerning one pastor's attempts to reset his church's moral compass:

Like most pastors who lead thriving evangelical megachurches, the Rev. Gregory A. Boyd was asked frequently to give his blessing — and the church’s — to conservative political candidates and causes.

The requests came from church members and visitors alike: Would he please announce a rally against gay marriage during services? Would he introduce a politician from the pulpit? Could members set up a table in the lobby promoting their anti-abortion work? Would the church distribute “voters’ guides” that all but endorsed Republican candidates? And with the country at war, please couldn’t the church hang an American flag in the sanctuary?

After refusing each time, Mr. Boyd finally became fed up, he said. Before the last presidential election, he preached six sermons called “The Cross and the Sword” in which he said the church should steer clear of politics, give up moralizing on sexual issues, stop claiming the United States as a “Christian nation” and stop glorifying American military campaigns.

“When the church wins the culture wars, it inevitably loses,” Mr. Boyd preached. “When it conquers the world, it becomes the world. When you put your trust in the sword, you lose the cross.”

Mr. Boyd says he is no liberal. He is opposed to abortion and thinks homosexuality is not God’s ideal. The response from his congregation at Woodland Hills Church here in suburban St. Paul — packed mostly with politically and theologically conservative, middle-class evangelicals — was passionate. Some members walked out of a sermon and never returned. By the time the dust had settled, Woodland Hills, which Mr. Boyd founded in 1992, had lost about 1,000 of its 5,000 members.

But there were also congregants who thanked Mr. Boyd, telling him they were moved to tears to hear him voice concerns they had been too afraid to share.

“Most of my friends are believers,” said Shannon Staiger, a psychotherapist and church member, “and they think if you’re a believer, you’ll vote for Bush. And it’s scary to go against that.”

... Mr. Boyd said he never intended his sermons to be taken as merely a critique of the Republican Party or the religious right. He refuses to share his party affiliation, or whether he has one, for that reason. He said there were Christians on both the left and the right who had turned politics and patriotism into “idolatry.”

He said he first became alarmed while visiting another megachurch’s worship service on a Fourth of July years ago. The service finished with the chorus singing “God Bless America” and a video of fighter jets flying over a hill silhouetted with crosses.

“I thought to myself, ‘What just happened? Fighter jets mixed up with the cross?’ ” he said in an interview.

Patriotic displays are still a mainstay in some evangelical churches. Across town from Mr. Boyd’s church, the sanctuary of North Heights Lutheran Church was draped in bunting on the Sunday before the Fourth of July this year for a “freedom celebration.” Military veterans and flag twirlers paraded into the sanctuary, an enormous American flag rose slowly behind the stage, and a Marine major who had served in Afghanistan preached that the military was spending “your hard-earned money” on good causes.

In his six sermons, Mr. Boyd laid out a broad argument that the role of Christians was not to seek “power over” others — by controlling governments, passing legislation or fighting wars. Christians should instead seek to have “power under” others — “winning people’s hearts” by sacrificing for those in need, as Jesus did, Mr. Boyd said.

“America wasn’t founded as a theocracy,” he said. “America was founded by people trying to escape theocracies. Never in history have we had a Christian theocracy where it wasn’t bloody and barbaric. That’s why our Constitution wisely put in a separation of church and state.

“I am sorry to tell you,” he continued, “that America is not the light of the world and the hope of the world. The light of the world and the hope of the world is Jesus Christ.”

Mr. Boyd lambasted the “hypocrisy and pettiness” of Christians who focus on “sexual issues” like homosexuality, abortion or Janet Jackson’s breast-revealing performance at the Super Bowl halftime show. He said Christians these days were constantly outraged about sex and perceived violations of their rights to display their faith in public.

“Those are the two buttons to push if you want to get Christians to act,” he said. “And those are the two buttons Jesus never pushed.”

America is not the city on the hill nor is it the de facto kingdom. If Christians ever become too comfortable in any one party, then they are not fulfilling their Biblical mandate to be "salt and light."

Thanks to my wife for pointing the article out to me.

According to Newsweek editor Fareed Zakaria:

[If I were running against conservatives,] I would make up a campaign commercial almost entirely of Donald Rumsfeld’s press conferences, because the man is looking — I mean, it’s not just that he seems like a bad Secretary of [Defense]. He seems literally in a parallel universe and slightly deranged. If you listen to what he said last week about Iraq, he’s living in a different world, not a different country.

Why is Rumsfeld still the Secretary of Defense? Even many war supporters believe that tactical mistakes in this conflict have been legion.

From the New York Times:

An Israeli air raid on the southern Lebanese town of Qana killed dozens of civilians on Sunday, many of them children, marking the bloodiest day of this conflict and putting enormous pressure on Israel and the United States to move rapidly toward a cease-fire.

Late Sunday, Israel agreed to suspend its airstrikes for 48 hours while it investigates the bombing of Qana, a State Department spokesman said. The spokesman, Adam Ereli, told reporters in Jerusalem that Israel would coordinate with the United Nations to provide a 24-hour period during which residents of southern Lebanon could leave area safely.

“Israel has, of course, reserved the right to take action against targets preparing attacks against it,” he said.

Israel said the Qana strike was aimed at Hezbollah fighters firing rockets into Israel from the area, but an explosion caused a residential apartment building to collapse, crushing Lebanese civilians who were spending the night in the basement, where they believed they were safe. The Israelis raised the possibility that munitions stored in the building blew up hours after the airstrike, destroying the building.

Estimates of the death toll varied. The Lebanese Red Cross counted 27 bodies, and as many as 17 were children. Some officials put the death toll higher, with the Lebanese prime minister, Fouad Siniora, saying there were more than 50 people killed and news agencies saying the toll was at least 57.

Residents said as many as 60 people were inside the building, most of them unaccounted for...

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice canceled a planned trip to Beirut and decided to return to Washington on Monday to work out a speedy resolution to the conflict that could be brought before the United Nations this week.

“I will continue to work and work and work, that is what we can do,” a visibly shaken Ms. Rice said. “If there is a way humanly to accelerate our efforts, I would do it.”

Tragic, but not surprising given Israel's methods since the beginning of bombing. The Secretary of State could have a cease fire as soon as she asked for it, but we continue to provide cover and weapons for the destruction of Lebanon.

John Podhertz says the US and Israel may be too nice to destroy other nations:

What if liberal democracies have now evolved to a point where they can no longer wage war effectively because they have achieved a level of humanitarian concern for others that dwarfs any really cold-eyed pursuit of their own national interests?

What if the universalist idea of liberal democracy - the idea that all people are created equal - has sunk in so deeply that we no longer assign special value to the lives and interests of our own people as opposed to those in other countries?

What if this triumph of universalism is demonstrated by the Left's insistence that American and Israeli military actions marked by an extraordinary concern for preventing civilian casualties are in fact unacceptably brutal? And is also apparent in the Right's claim that a war against a country has nothing to do with the people but only with that country's leaders?

Can any war be won when this is the nature of the discussion in the countries fighting the war? Can any war be won when one of the combatants voluntarily limits itself in this manner?

Could World War II have been won by Britain and the United States if the two countries did not have it in them to firebomb Dresden and nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Didn't the willingness of their leaders to inflict mass casualties on civilians indicate a cold-eyed singleness of purpose that helped break the will and the back of their enemies? Didn't that singleness of purpose extend down to the populations in those countries in those days, who would have and did support almost any action at any time that would lead to the deaths of Germans and Japanese?

What if the tactical mistake we made in Iraq was that we didn't kill enough Sunnis in the early going to intimidate them and make them so afraid of us they would go along with anything? Wasn't the survival of Sunni men between the ages of 15 and 35 the reason there was an insurgency and the basic cause of the sectarian violence now?

If you can't imagine George W. Bush issuing such an order, is there any American leader you could imagine doing so?

And if America can't do it, can Israel? Could Israel - even hardy, strong, universally conscripted Israel - possibly stomach the bloodshed that would accompany the total destruction of Hezbollah?

If Lebanon's 300-plus civilian casualties are already rocking the world, what if it would take 10,000 civilian casualties to finish off Hezbollah? Could Israel inflict that kind of damage on Lebanon - not because of world opinion, but because of its own modern sensibilities and its understanding of the value of every human life?

Where do these questions lead us?

What if Israel's caution about casualties among its own soldiers and Lebanese civilians has demonstrated to Hezbollah and Hamas that as long as they can duck and cover when the missiles fly and the bombs fall, they can survive and possibly even thrive?

What if Israel has every capability of achieving its aim, but cannot unleash itself against a foe more dangerous, more unscrupulous, more unprincipled and more barbaric than even the monstrous leaders of the Intifada it managed to quell after years of suicide attacks?

And as for the United States, what if we have every tool at our disposal to win a war - every weapons system we could want manned by the most superbly trained military in history - except the ability to match or exceed our antagonists in ruthlessness?

Is this the horrifying paradox of 21st century warfare? If Israel and the United States cannot be defeated militarily in any conventional sense, have our foes discovered a new way to win? Are they seeking victory through demoralization alone - by daring us to match them in barbarity and knowing we will fail?

Are we becoming unwitting participants in their victory and our defeat? Can it be that the moral greatness of our civilization - its astonishing focus on the value of the individual above all - is endangering the future of our civilization as well?

"What if the tactical mistake we made in Iraq was that we didn't kill enough Sunnis in the early going to intimidate them and make them so afraid of us they would go along with anything?" Yeah. That's what was wrong with Iraq. We weren't brutal enough. You don't have to worry about hearts and minds if you obliterate em.

If the only way we can win is to engage in greater brutality then what are we winning?

Via Digby.

On a discussion board, I got into a "flame war" today and in retrospect it was a very sad, ridiculous undertaking. I ran into a guy who wouldn't really answer my questions and made many comments about my intelligence, faith, and sanity. I took the bait and made myself look really petty.

How geeky and sad.

Just finished this absolutely beautiful novel about prodigal fathers and sons. A really fantastic story which honors believers and celebrates sacraments. Sad, hilarious, incredibly moving.

Read this beautifully crafted novel by Marilynne Robinson now.

Kevin Smith's diehard fans are going to love this film. The rest of us will be unable to overlook Kevin Smith's consistently stiff direction and will not be able to get past the achingly bad acting of star Brian O'Halloran. It's up to this guy to carry the movie, but his line delivery is painful. He was sort of winning in the low budget, "let's put on a show" "Clerks." Many were amazed by that movie because of what Smith was able to accomplish on a small budget, but as Smith's budgets have increased, his rudimentary direction has remained. And in a bigger budget picture, O'Halloran's flaws become more apparent. He has to do most of the emotional heavy lifting and be the film's moral center, but he is not likeable or versatile enough to pull it off.

Smith is great at finding and displaying twisted but winning smartasses and this movie has two of the greats: Jason Mewes as the always reliable Jay and Jeff Anderson reprising his role as Randal Graves. These guys, along with the luminous Rosario Dawson, carry the film. But Smith goes the "American Pie" route mixing gross out with an achingly earnest tale of romance and friendship. Smith does not have the deft touch to carry off the latter. The late, very earnest scenes in the movie where all the characters grow and learn to be better people do not work.

The movie has numerous big laughs all courtesy of Mewes and Anderson. I enjoyed parts of it immensely, but on the whole the movie falls flat. A very long scene involving a donkey and an exotic dancer quickly go from outrageous to tedious. That last sentence will also let you know immediately if this is the movie for you.

Anglican Bishop Riah:

Dear Friends,

For the past forty years we have been largely alone on this desert fighting a predator that not only has robbed us of all but a small piece of our historic homeland, but threatens the traditions and holy sites of Christianity. We are tired, weary, sick, and wounded. We need your help.

We have seen and we have been the recipients of the generosity of our American and British friends. We cherish the support of everyone throughout the world who stands with us in solidarity. Daily, I hear from many of them who express outrage at the arrogant and aggressive positions of President Bush, Secretary Rice, Senator Clinton, and Prime Minister Blair. I am saddened to realize just how much the deserved prestige of the United States and Britain has declined as a result of politicians who seem to devalue human life and suffering. And, I am disturbed that the Zionist Christian community is damaging America’s image as never before.

Little more than a week ago, we were focused on the plight of the Palestinian people. In Gaza, four and five generations have been victims of Israeli racism, hate crimes, terror, violence, and murder. Garbage and sewage have created a likely outbreak of cholera as Israeli strategies create the collapse of infrastructures. There is no milk. Drinking water, food, and medicine are in serious short supply. Innocents are being killed and dying from lack of available emergency care. Children are paying the ultimate price. Even for those whose lives are spared, many of them are traumatized and will not grow to live useful lives. Commerce between the West Bank and Gaza has been halted and humanitarian aid barely trickles into some of the neediest in the world.

Movement of residents of the West Bank is difficult or impossible as “security measures” are heightened to break the backs of the Palestinian people and cut them off from their place of work, schools, hospitals, and families. It is family and community that has sustained these people during these hopeless times. For some, it is all that they had, but that too has been taken away with the continued building of the wall and check points. The strategy of ethnic cleansing on the part of the State of Israel continues.

This week, war broke out on the Lebanon-Israeli border (near Banyas where Jesus gave St. Peter the keys to heaven and earth). The Israeli government’s disproportionate reaction to provocation was consistent with their opportunistic responses in which they destroy their perceived enemy.

In her recent article, “The Insane Brutality of the State of Israel,” American, Kathleen Christison, a former CIA analyst says, “The state lashes out in a crazed effort, lacking any sense of proportion, to reassure itself of its strength.” She continues, “A society that can brush off as unimportant an army officer’s brutal murder of a thirteen year old girl on the claim that she threatened soldiers at a military post (one of nearly seven hundred Palestinian children murdered by Israelis since the Intifada began) is not a society with a conscience.” The “situation” as it has come to be called, has deteriorated into a war without boundaries or limitations. It is a war with deadly potential beyond the imaginations of most civilized people.

As I write to you, I am preparing to leave with other bishops for Nablus with medical and other emergency supplies for five hundred families, and a pledge for one thousand families more.

On Saturday we will attempt to enter Gaza with medical aid for doctors and nurses in our hospital there who struggle to serve the injured, the sick, and the dying.

My plan is that I will be able to go to Lebanon next week - where we are presently without a resident priest - to bury the dead, and comfort the victims of war. Perhaps as others have you will ask, “What can I do?” Certainly we encourage and appreciate your prayers. That is important, but it is not enough. If you find that you can no longer look away, take up your cross. It takes courage as we were promised.

Write every elected official you know. Write to your news media. Speak to your congregation, friends, and colleagues about injustice and the threat of global war. If Syria, Iran, the United States, Great Britain, China and others enter into this war - the consequence is incalculable. Participate in rallies and forums. Find ways that you and your churches can participate in humanitarian relief efforts for the region. Contact us and let us know if you stand with us. I urge you not to be like a disciple watching from afar.

2 Corinthians 6.11:
“We have spoken frankly to you Corinthians, our heart is wide open to you. There is no restriction in our affections, but only in yours. In return - I speak as to children - open wide your hearts also.”

In, with, and through Christ,

The Rt. Rev. Riah H. Abu El-Assal
Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem

Via Informed Comment.

Outstanding story from Salon--it's long but well worth reading to understand the full extent of the destruction being inflicted by Israel:

The bombs came just as night fell, around 7 p.m. The locals knew that the 10-story apartment building had been the office, and possibly the residence, of Sheik Tawouk, the Hezbollah commander for the south, so they had moved their families out at the start of the war. The landlord had refused to rent to Hezbollah when they requested the top floors of the building. No matter, the locals said, the Hezb guys just moved in anyway in the name of the "resistance."

Everyone knew that the building would be hit eventually. Its location in downtown Tyre, which had yet to be hit by Israeli airstrikes, was not going to protect it forever. And "everyone" apparently included Sheik Tawouk, because he wasn't anywhere near it when it was finally hit.

Two guided bombs struck it in a huge flash bang of fire and concrete dust followed by the roar of 10 stories pancaking on top of each other, local residents said. Jihad Husseini, 46, runs the driving school a block away and was sitting in his office when the bombs struck. He said his life was saved because he had drawn the heavy cloth curtains shut on the windows facing the street, preventing him from being hit by a wave of shattered glass. But even so, a chunk of smoldering steel flew through the air, broke through the window and the curtain, and shot past his head and through the wall before coming to rest in his neighbor's home.

But Jihad still refuses to leave.

"Everything is broken, but I can make it better," he says, surrounded by his sons Raed, 20, and Mohammed, 12. "I will not leave. This place is not military, it is not Hezbollah; it was an empty apartment."

Throughout this now 16-day-old war, Israeli planes high above civilian areas make decisions on what to bomb. They send huge bombs capable of killing things for hundreds of meters around their targets, and then blame the inevitable civilian deaths -- the Lebanese government says 600 civilians have been killed so far -- on "terrorists" who callously use the civilian infrastructure for protection.

But this claim is almost always false. My own reporting and that of other journalists reveals that in fact Hezbollah fighters -- as opposed to the much more numerous Hezbollah political members, and the vastly more numerous Hezbollah sympathizers -- avoid civilians. Much smarter and better trained than the PLO and Hamas fighters, they know that if they mingle with civilians, they will sooner or later be betrayed by collaborators -- as so many Palestinian militants have been.

For their part, the Israelis seem to think that if they keep pounding civilians, they'll get some fighters, too. The almost nightly airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut could be seen as making some sense, as the Israelis appear convinced there are command and control bunkers underneath the continually smoldering rubble. There were some civilian casualties the first few nights in places like Haret Hreik, but people quickly left the area to the Hezbollah fighters with their radios and motorbikes.

But other attacks seem gratuitous, fishing expeditions, or simply intended to punish anything and anyone even vaguely connected to Hezbollah. Lighthouses, grain elevators, milk factories, bridges in the north used by refugees, apartment buildings partially occupied by members of Hezbollah's political wing -- all have been reduced to rubble.

In the south, where Shiites dominate, just about everyone supports Hezbollah. Does mere support for Hezbollah, or even participation in Hezbollah activities, mean your house and family are fair game? Do you need to fire rockets from your front yard? Or is it enough to be a political activist?

The Israelis are consistent: They bomb everyone and everything remotely associated with Hezbollah, including noncombatants. In effect, that means punishing Lebanon. The nation is 40 percent Shiite, and of that 40 percent, tens of thousands are employed by Hezbollah's social services, political operations, schools, and other nonmilitary functions. The "terrorist" organization Hezbollah is Lebanon's second-biggest employer.

People throw the phrase "ghost town" around a lot, but Nabatiya, a bombed-out town about 15 miles from the Lebanon-Israel border, deserves it. One expects the spirits of the town's dead, or its refugees, to silently glide out onto its abandoned streets from the ruined buildings that make up much of the town.

Not all of the buildings show bomb damage, but those that don't have metal shutters blown out as if by a terrible wind. And there are no people at all, except for the occasional Hezbollah scout on a motorbike armed only with a two-way radio, keeping an eye on things as Israeli jets and unmanned drones circle overhead.

Overlooking the outskirts of this town, which has a peacetime population of 100,000 or so -- mostly Shiite supporters of Hezbollah and its more secular rival Amal -- is the Ragheh Hareb Hospital, a facility that makes quite clear what side the residents of Nabatiya are on in this conflict.

The hospital's carefully sculpted and trimmed front lawn contains the giant Red Crescent that denotes the Muslim version of the Red Cross. As we approach it, an Israeli missile streaks by, smashing into a school on the opposite hilltop. As we crouch and then run for the shelter of the hospital awning, that giant crescent reassures me until I look at the flagpole. The Lebanese flag and its cedar tree is there -- right next to the flag of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It's safe to say that Ragheh Hareb Hospital has an association with Hezbollah. And the staff sports the trimmed beards and polite, if somewhat ominous, manner of the group. After young men demand press IDs and do some quick questioning, they allow us to enter.

Dr. Ahmed Tahir recognizes me from a funeral in the nearby village of Dweir. An Israeli bomb dropped on their house killed a Hezbollah cleric and 11 members of his immediate family, mostly children. People in Lebanon are calling it a war crime. Tahir looks exhausted, and our talk is even more tense than the last time.

"Maybe it would be best if the Israelis bombed your car on the road here," he said, with a sharp edge. "If you were killed, maybe the public outcry would be so bad in America that the Jews would be forced to stop these attacks."

When I volunteered that the Bush administration cared little for journalists, let alone ones who reported from Hezbollah territory, he shrugged. "Maybe if it was an American bomb used by the Israelis that killed an American journalist, they would stop this horror," he said.

The handful of people in the town include some from Hezbollah's political wing, as well as volunteers keeping an eye on things while the residents are gone. Off to the side, as we watch the Israelis pummel ridgelines on the outskirts of town, one of the political operatives explains that the fighters never come near the town, reinforcing what other Hezbollah people have told me over the years.

Although Israel targets apartments and offices because they are considered "Hezbollah" installations, the group has a clear policy of keeping its fighters away from civilians as much as possible. This is not for humanitarian reasons -- they did, after all, take over an apartment building against the protests of the landlord, knowing full well it would be bombed -- but for military ones.

"You can be a member of Hezbollah your entire life and never see a military wing fighter with a weapon," a Lebanese military intelligence official, now retired, once told me. "They do not come out with their masks off and never operate around people if they can avoid it. They're completely afraid of collaborators. They know this is what breaks the Palestinians -- no discipline and too much showing off."

Perhaps once a year, Hezbollah will hold a military parade in the south, in which its weapons and fighters appear. Media access to these parades is tightly limited and controlled. Unlike the fighters in the half dozen other countries where I have covered insurgencies, Hezbollah fighters do not like to show off for the cameras. In Iraq, with some risk taking, you can meet with and even watch the resistance guys in action. (At least you could during my last time there.) In Afghanistan, you can lunch with Taliban fighters if you're willing to walk a day or so in the mountains. In Gaza and the West Bank, the Fatah or Hamas fighter is almost ubiquitous with his mask, gun and sloganeering to convince the Western journalist of the justice of his cause.

The Hezbollah guys, on the other hand, know that letting their fighters near outsiders of any kind -- journalists or Lebanese, even Hezbollah supporters -- is stupid. In three trips over the last week to the south, where I came near enough to the fighting to hear Israeli artillery, and not just airstrikes, I saw exactly no fighters. Guys with radios with the look of Hezbollah always found me. But no fighters on corners, no invitations to watch them shoot rockets at the Zionist enemy, nothing that can be used to track them.

Even before the war, on many of my trips to the south, the Lebanese army, or the ubiquitous guy on a motorbike with a radio, would halt my trip and send me over to Tyre to get permission from a Hezbollah official before I could proceed, usually with strict limits on where I could go.

Every other journalist I know who has covered Hezbollah has had the same experience. A fellow journalist, a Lebanese who has covered them for two decades, knows only one military guy who will admit it, and he never talks or grants interviews. All he will say is, "I'll be gone for a few months for training. I'll call when I'm back." Presumably his friends and neighbors may suspect something, but no one says anything.

Hezbollah's political members say they have little or no access to the workings of the fighters. This seems to be largely true: While they obviously hear and know more than the outside world, the firewall is strong.

Israel, however, has chosen to treat the political members of Hezbollah as if they were fighters. And by targeting the civilian wing of the group, which supplies much of the humanitarian aid and social protection for the poorest people in the south, they are targeting civilians.

Earlier in the week, I stood next to a giant crater that had smashed through the highway between Tyre and Sidon -- the only route of escape for most of the people in the far south. Overhead, Israeli fighters and drones circled above the city and its outlying areas and regular blasts of bombs and naval artillery could be heard.

The crater served as a nice place to check up on the refugees, who were forced by the crater to slow down long enough to be asked questions. They barely stopped, their faces wrenched in near panic. The main wave of refugees out of the south had come the previous two days, so these were the hard-luck cases, the people who had been really close to the fighting and who needed two days just to get to Tyre, or who had had to make the tough decision whether to flee or stay put, with neither choice looking good.

The roads in the south are full of the cars of people who chose wrong -- burned-out chassis, broken glass, some cars driven straight into posts or ditches. Other seem to have broken down or run out of gas on the long dirt detours around the blown-out highway and bridge network the Israeli air force had spent days methodically destroying even as it warned people to flee.

One man, slowing his car around the crater, almost screams, "There is nothing left. This country is not for us." His brief pause immediately draws horns and impatient yells from the people in the cars behind him. They pass the crater but within two minutes a large explosion behind us, north, in the direction of Sidon, rocks us.

As we drive south toward Tyre, we soon pass a new series of scars on the highway: shrapnel, hubcaps and broken glass. A car that had been maybe five minutes ahead of us was hit by an Israeli shell. Three of its passengers were wounded, and it was heading north to the Hammound hospital at Sidon. We turned around because of the attack and followed the car to Sidon. Those unhurt staked out the parking lot of the hospital, looking for the Western journalists they were convinced had called in the strike. Luckily my Iraqi fixer smelled trouble and we got out of there. Probably nothing would have happened -- mostly they were just freaked-out country people who didn't like the coincidence of an Israeli attack and a car full of journalists driving past.

So the analysts talking on cable news about Hezbollah "hiding within the civilian population" clearly have spent little time if any in the south Lebanon war zone and don't know what they're talking about. Hezbollah doesn't trust the civilian population and has worked very hard to evacuate as much of it as possible from the battlefield. And this is why they fight so well -- with no one to spy on them, they have lots of chances to take the Israel Defense Forces by surprise, as they have by continuing to fire rockets and punish every Israeli ground incursion.

And the civilians? They see themselves as targeted regardless of their affiliation. They are enraged at Israel and at the United States, the only two countries on earth not calling for an immediate cease-fire. Lebanese of all persuasions think the United States and Israel believe that Lebanese lives are cheaper than Israeli ones. And many are now saying that they want to fight.

Via Juan Cole.

From the AP:

Israel struck a Lebanese army base outside Beirut and flattened a house near the border, killing at least 16 people in a new wave of bombings, while Hezbollah fired more rockets at northern Israel. Diplomats stepped up efforts to end the conflict, which has sent foreigners fleeing by land, sea and air.

A commercial ship, the Orient Queen, escorted by a U.S. destroyer was due to begin evacuating some of the 25,000 Americans in Lebanon on Tuesday, joining U.S. military helicopters that have already ferried about a score of U.S. citizens to a British base on the nearby Mediterranean island of Cyprus. More helicopter transfers were planned, a U.S. official said.

The base in the southern area of Kfar Chima took a direct hit as the soldiers rushed to their bomb shelters, leaving at least 11 soldiers dead and 35 wounded, the Lebanese military said.

The Lebanese army has largely stayed out of the fighting, but its positions have been repeatedly attacked by Israeli warplanes, undermining Israel's call for it to help push back Hezbollah from the border.

Why is Israel attacking the Lebanese military if this war is all about destroying Hezbollah?

I had a nightmare last night that Bush decided to launch nine nuclear missiles against Iran. Everyone who was with me had a look of shock and horror on their faces.

I don't think this is seriously going to happen, but it is reflective of my fears on where Mideast violence is taking us and my anxiety regarding Bush's competence.

Frum--Bush speechwriter, neo-con, creator of the term "axis of evil"--believes we have lost Iraq.

The likelihood of Iraq descending into sectarian violence does not seem to have been considered by the war boosters and planners. Have we given birth to an actual incubator of terrorism as opposed to theoretical one?

From USA Today:

Up to two-thirds of the Army's combat brigades are not ready for wartime missions, largely because they are hampered by equipment shortfalls, Democratic lawmakers said Wednesday, citing unclassified documents.
In a letter to President Bush, Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said that "nearly every non-deployed combat brigade in the active Army is reporting that they are not ready" for combat. The figures, he said, represent an unacceptable risk to the nation.

At a news conference, other leading Democrats said that those strategic reserve forces are critically short of personnel and equipment.

"They're the units that could be called upon or would be called upon to go to war in North Korea, Iran, or any other country or region," said Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., a decorated Marine who has called for a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

Via Kos.

The Pentagon just approved $11 billion for the development of the feared obsolete F-22. Priorities appear to be out of order.

is neglecting the war in Lebanon. Why?

Retired Israeli colonel explains reason for massive destruction of southern Lebanon:

According to retired Israeli army Col. Gal Luft, the goal of the campaign is to "create a rift between the Lebanese population and Hezbollah supporters." The message to Lebanon's elite, he said, is this: "If you want your air conditioning to work and if you want to be able to fly to Paris for shopping, you must pull your head out of the sand and take action toward shutting down Hezbollah-land."

This doesn't sound very effective or just and very much like terrorism.

Yeah, well just try it and see what happens.

New film trots out the old canard popular on late night call in radio shows that our tax system is unconstitutional.

Yesterday, my little blog had a bit of boom in visitors. There were over seventy unique visitors to my site yesterday. This is more than triple the average. Hopefully some will return and we will see an upward trend in viewership.

To new readers, welcome. Come back soon and drop a message in the comments section.

The US allows Israel to continue two more weeks of their destruction of southern Lebanon.

Much funnier than anything David E. Kelley ever created. Hilarious legal hi-jinks. Some strong language included.

Via Andrew Sullivan.

From the AP:

A senior Hezbollah official said Tuesday the guerrilla group did not expect Israel to react so strongly to its capture of two Israeli soldiers.

Mahmoud Komati, deputy chief of Hezbollah's political arm, also told The Associated Press in an interview that his group will not lay down arms.

"The truth is — let me say this clearly — we didn't even expect (this) response.... that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us," said Komati.

He said Hezbollah had expected "the usual, limited response" from Israel to the July 12 cross-border raid, in which three Israelis were killed.

In the past, he said, Israeli responses to Hezbollah actions included sending commandos into Lebanon to seize Hezbollah officials or briefly targeting specific Hezbollah strongholds.

He said the Shiite group had anticipated there would be negotiations on exchanging the Israeli soldiers for three Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails, with Germany acting as a mediator as it did before.

Israel's initial explanation for the rapid escalation of their attacks against Lebanon was that Hezbollah attacked a border patrol station in Israeli territory and took Israeli soldiers hostage.

This was not the case according to the AP:

The militant group Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes Wednesday across the border in southern Lebanon, prompting a swift reaction from Israel, which sent ground forces into its neighbor to look for them.

The forces were trying to keep the soldiers' captors from moving them deeper into Lebanon, Israeli government officials said on condition of anonymity.

Via BrickBurner.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Israel's military response by air, land and sea to what it considered a provocation last week by Hezbollah militants is unfolding according to a plan finalized more than a year ago.

In the years since Israel ended its military occupation of southern Lebanon, it watched warily as Hezbollah built up its military presence in the region. When Hezbollah militants kidnapped two Israeli soldiers last week, the Israeli military was ready to react almost instantly.

"Of all of Israel's wars since 1948, this was the one for which Israel was most prepared," said Gerald Steinberg, professor of political science at Bar-Ilan University. "In a sense, the preparation began in May 2000, immediately after the Israeli withdrawal, when it became clear the international community was not going to prevent Hezbollah from stockpiling missiles and attacking Israel. By 2004, the military campaign scheduled to last about three weeks that we're seeing now had already been blocked out and, in the last year or two, it's been simulated and rehearsed across the board."

More than a year ago, a senior Israeli army officer began giving PowerPoint presentations, on an off-the-record basis, to U.S. and other diplomats, journalists and think tanks, setting out the plan for the current operation in revealing detail. Under the ground rules of the briefings, the officer could not be identified.

In his talks, the officer described a three-week campaign: The first week concentrated on destroying Hezbollah's heavier long-range missiles, bombing its command-and-control centers, and disrupting transportation and communication arteries. In the second week, the focus shifted to attacks on individual sites of rocket launchers or weapons stores. In the third week, ground forces in large numbers would be introduced, but only in order to knock out targets discovered during reconnaissance missions as the campaign unfolded. There was no plan, according to this scenario, to reoccupy southern Lebanon on a long-term basis.

This is not surprising. A confrontation was likely so it made sense for Israel to plan an offensive, but it strikes me that Israel viewed the kidnapping of soldiers as the go-ahead on their plan to cripple Hezbollah, rather than as a necessity due to the kidnapping.

Unless we have all forgotten, the kidnapping preceded the rocket attacks by Hezbollah. These rocket attacks from Hezbollah were preceded by attacks against Beirut's infrastructure by the Israelis, attacks Israel had been preparing for at least a year.

Some of the biggest liberal blogs have comments sections after each post: Daily Kos, Eschaton, Crooks and Liars. Talking Points Memo does not, unfortunately, but does have separate communities within its sphere that allow for discussion.

The bigger conservative blogs Powerline, Instapundit, and National Review's The Corner are comment free. Why?

Rev. Sharpton was in Saint Louis today to protest a proposed rate increase by Ameren following their work on restoring Saint Louis's power infrastructure following last week's pair of devestating storms.

From the Post-Dispatch:

The Rev. Al Sharpton appeared in front of Ameren Corp. headquarters calling for the company to roll back rates and table the search for a fee hike.

Sharpton appeared with state Rep. Yaphett El-Amin asking that Ameren reduced cost by 10%, because of the inconvience customers suffered during the recent blackouts. "This is a national concern. There have been blackouts in New York, there have been blackouts all over the country." Sharpton said. "When power companies fail people should not have to pick up the tab."

Sharpton said, that he would give Ameren time to respond before there would be "demonstration" or "confrontation". The outages are an issue that impact the poor and affluent alike, Sharpton said. "One thing about living in a mansion or a housing project. . . .it all looks the same in the dark."

Sharpton arrived at Ameren Corp's headquarters on Chouteau Ave. in style pulling up in a black BMW sedan that stayed parked in the street, while Sharpton addressed the media. The New York preacher and former presidential candidate is no stranger to St. Louis, he was here several years ago to protest the lack of minority jobs on I-70's construction. In 2003 Sharpton was part of a protest of the first day of the St. Louis city schools.

My DD offers its take on the string of power outages across the nation:

All over the country, America is enjoying a series of free market blackouts. California, New York City, and St. Louis have all been hit with electricity outages due to a poor electricity infrastructure. This infrastructure is a result of a reliance on a free market and tax cuts instead of public infrastructure investment.

Gotta love that free market, it really handles hurricanes, wildfires, and heat waves exceptionally well.

I'm hearing this from more than one source that privatized utilities are not properly investing in upkeep and innovation which is leading to power outages.

Can we stop with the "surprise" visits by the White House already?

I was glad to hear NPR use the phrase "unscheduled visit" yesterday. Rice needed to visit the Mideast. Such a visit was inevitable and necessary. It's such a transparent and tiresome PR stunt by now to grab headlines by labeling all visits to the region as "surprises."

Are we supposed to impressed? Delighted? Why, because they're doing their jobs?

...but did not inform Congress. Because as we know, all branches of our government serve the Executive.

From the Washington Post:

Henry D. Sokolski, the Defense Department's top nonproliferation official during the George H.W. Bush administration, said he was most surprised by the way news of the reactor in Pakistan became known.

"What is baffling is that this information -- which was surely information that our own intelligence agencies had -- was kept from Congress," said Sokolski, now director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. "We lack imagination if we think that this is no big deal."

Via Washington Monthly.

How do diplomats carpool?

In one Accord.

(Copyright Solipsistic 2006)

UPDATE: How does John Bolton carpool?

By himself.

Arlen Specter is seeking to pave the way for the creation of an executive branch not beholden to the authority of the courts or Congress. He is seeking to fundamentally alter the system of checks and balances.

If, like me, you believe that no man is above the law, especially the President, then contact your senators and tell them to oppose the Specter bill. Let them know you take privacy, the rule of law, and the Constitution seriously.

If you want to go into "Lady in the Water" completely ignorant of its story, don't read the following info.

A work called "The Cookbook" plays a significant role in "Lady in the Water." The book, though, given it's content, probably should be called "To Serve Man."

A nice, funny nod by Shyamalan to the fantastic storytellers that have come before.

Daniel Ausiello at TV Guide has read the premiere episode script for new showrunner Rosenthal's "Gilmore Girls."

What's prognosis?

He's got Amy and Dan's style down pat. When I finished the script, I almost had to look back at the byline to make sure the last name was Rosenthal and not Palladino. Honestly, I could not tell the difference. Besides nailing the banter, several of his one-liners were classic, laugh-out-loud Palladino. On the downside, like his predecessors, he overestimates viewers' appetite for one Taylor Doose.

Let's hope his diagnosis is true.

Via AICN.

Press on this movie prior to its release stated that it was a meta-fairytale: fairytale characters realize they are living in a fairytale and then take an active role in finishing their story. Shyamalan's tale, though, isn't nearly that brainy or post-modern. It's a story about fairytales, myths, the fantastic being very real and having faith in the existence of the supernatural. It's an incredibly earnest faith tale that's even more didactic than "Signs."

Once again we find Shyamalan inserting the fantastic into the mundane. This time, Shyamalan constructs a very complicated mythology full of narfs, elons, scrunts, and the Tartutic--all invented by the writer, producer, director. As the story proceeds, Shyamalan keeps expanding upon and modifying this mythology. "Oh wait! Sometimes scrunts will attack narfs, if the narf is a maiden." This plays like "The Princess Bride" without the irony. (Or exactly like Episodes I-III of the Star Wars series.)

Your enjoyment of the movie will depend on how much of this you can tolerate. I was refreshed by the movie because of its novelty, the outstanding cast (Paul Giamatti, Jeffrey Wright, Bob Balaban), and Shyamalan's ambition. I did find it a bit ponderous, though, particularly Bryce Dallas Howard as the narf. She is so pure, so virginal, and very boring. She is merely a device, but is on screen for about 2/3rds of the movie.

(SPOILERS)The larger point of the movie, though, seems to be that M. Night Shyamalan is a brave visionary whose work angers some, but is of the utmost importance to mankind. The narf--water nymph--is discovered in the pool of The Cove apartment complex by Cleveland Heep (Paul Giamatti), the super. He discovers that many of the residents of The Cove have a role to play in helping to complete the narf's mission. The mission of the narf, ultimately, is to inspire actor/director/writer M. Night Shyamalan, playing struggling writer Vick Ran, to complete his master work. He learns that his work will change mankind for the better, but will make him a martyr. This will either anger you, or you will be able to look past it, but it ultimately makes the movie about massaging the director's ego.(SPOILERS END)

An interesting misfire that I look forward to seeing again. I just find Shyamalan's work wholly hypnotic even when he fails.

What with the storm and trying to get caught up on school work, today has been a blogging bust.

Tune in tomorrow for fresh goodies and a review of "Lady in the Water."

It appears the power is finally back to stay in my neighborhood. We've been spending time at my very generous sister-in-law's. Sorry about not posts yesterday. The aftermath of the storm has been a little crazy.

Oh please.

Buchanan's not criticizing Israel for not being Christians. He is criticizing world response to Israel's actions and specifically calling out Christians for their unwavering support of Israel's tactics.

Why can one not validly criticize the policies of Israel without being labeled an anti-Semite? It's reminiscent of when conservatives tried to accuse Democrats of being opposed to Alito and Gonzalez because they hate Italians and Latinos.

From Editor and Publisher:

While it’s not surprising that nearly every editorial page in the U.S. has offered support for Israel's right to retaliate against Hamas and Hezbollah, it’s a disgrace that few have expressed outrage, or at least condemnation, over the extent of death and destruction in and around Beirut -- and the attacks on the country’s infrastructure, which harms most citizens of that country.

Hundreds of civilians have been killed in Lebanon, dozens of bridges and part of Beirut’s airport destroyed, power stations and ports short-circuited. Latest reports put the number of refugees at half a million, with thousands of Americans waiting for evacuation.

Amazingly, criticism of the extent of Israel's bombing -- and its policy of collective punishment -- has actually decreased as the carnage has mounted.

The editorial response is all the more scandalous because this is not some distant conflict where America is merely a third party. The U.S. is Israel’s prime (sometimes virtually its only) major ally, and the funder or producer of much of the armaments landing on Lebanon – though you’d never know of this special link from reading most of these editorials.

Even if readers here don’t fully appreciate it, the U.S. and Israel are indivisible in the eyes of many if not most in that region. Every bomb that kills civilians in Lebanon might just as well have emerged from our war planes or artillery, in their eyes.

Via The Horse's Mouth.

...and Ann Coulter is atrocious.

Today's example from a recent Coulter column:

Some have argued that Israel's response is disproportionate, which is actually correct: It wasn't nearly strong enough. I know this because there are parts of South Lebanon still standing.

There is much to be said for ignoring Ann Coulter. The only problem is too many Americans don't. Her books sell very well. She gets invited on "The Tonight Show." Her column is printed in newspapers throughout the US.

Until a majority of her current fans stop listening to her, it will always be necessary to critique Coulter. In the above instance, how is Ann's call to level Lebanon not a "Godless" act?

Federal district court agrees to hear case against AT&T which claims the NSA wiretapping program is illegal. The White House claimed that state secrets would be revealed--a claim they have used successfully in the past. The court's have deferred to the White House previously, but decided in this instance to hear the case.

From the court's decision:

To defer to a blanket assertion of secrecy here would be to abdiate that duty, particularly because the very subject matter of this litigation has been so publicly aired. The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one. But dismissing this case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security.

Glenn Greenwald at the consistently excellent blog Unclaimed Territory--see under "Links" on the sidebar--has more.

The administration has fought tooth and nail to not even have the legality of this program examined. It appears that they will no longer be able to hide behind their inflated claims of executive privilege.

You must watch this video where Matthews and Buchanan eviscerate the neo-cons. The WWIII rhetoric we're hearing is dangerous, scary, and about launching a massive worldwide conflict. Buchanan stands up for Lebanon as well. Outstanding.

Via Daily Kos.

Just caught a few minutes of Hannity's show while trying to keep out of the heat. Hannity's guest just stated that Israel is bombing Lebanon's infrastructure. Sean told the man this was false. Read the truth here.

What would Hannity lie to Americans about this? I know he's not known for his integrity, but what's his angle here?

David Horowitz was also on the show to debate the guest mentioned above. He called Hamas and Hezbollah "Nazis." I had no idea these groups supported the ascendance of the Aryan race? You learn something new everyday.

So says Charles Barkley.

Irredentism.

Very useful when reading stories about Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

From the BBC:

John Hagee is the pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, and a long-time fervent supporter of Israel.

In common with many American evangelicals, he believes that God gave the land to the Jewish people and that Christians have a Biblical duty to support it and the Jews.

His latest book, Jerusalem Countdown: A Warning to the World, interprets the Bible to predict that Russian and Arab armies will invade Israel and be destroyed by God.

This will set up a confrontation over Israel between China and the West, led by the anti-Christ, who will be the head of the European Union, Pastor Hagee writes.

That final battle between East and West - at Armageddon, an actual place in Israel - will precipitate the second coming of Christ, he concludes.

It is not clear how many evangelicals believe literally in those type of prophecies.

I certainly don't. Believe me that the Bible says nothing about the European Union or China fighting the West. Hagee's interpretation reminds me of folks who try to tell you that Nostradamus predicted the advent of the submarine or that the Bible Code predicted 9-11.

He's agin it:

Asked to comment on the deaths in an Israeli air strike of eight Canadian citizens in southern Lebanon Sunday, he said: "it is a matter of great concern to us ...that these civilian deaths are occurring. It's a tragedy."

"I think it would be a mistake to ascribe moral equivalence to civilians who die as the direct result of malicious terrorist acts," he added, while defending as "self-defense" Israel's military action, which has had "the tragic and unfortunate consequence of civilian deaths".

The eight dead Canadians were a Lebanese-Canadian couple, their four children, his mother and an uncle, said relatives in Montreal.

The Montreal pharmacist and his family had arrived in Lebanon 10 days earlier for a vacation in his parents' home village and to introduce his children to relatives, they said.

Three of his Lebanese relatives died too, a family member told AFP.

"It's simply not the same thing to say that it's the same act to deliberately target innocent civilians, to desire their deaths, to fire rockets and use explosive devices or kidnapping versus the sad and highly unfortunate consequences of self-defense," Bolton noted.

The overall civilian death toll from the Israeli onslaught in Lebanon since last Wednesday reached 195, in addition to 12 soldiers, officials said. Twenty-four Israelis have also been killed since fighting began last Wednesday, including 12 civilians in a barrage of Hezbollah rocket fire across the border.

Whenever you fire destructive weapons into civilian centers, you are purposefully targeting civilians. This destruction, civilian life and infrastructure, is meant to cripple Lebanon.

Look at this statement from the above piece: "it is a matter of great concern to us...that these civilian deaths are occurring. It's a tragedy." Civilian deaths "are" occurring. It's passive voice. No actor carrying out the action. It sounds like Bolton's talking about a natural disaster. There's no culpability.

And rightfully so:

When Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert unleashed his navy and air force on Lebanon, accusing that tiny nation of an "act of war," the last pillar of Bush's Middle East policy collapsed.

First came capitulation on the Bush Doctrine, as Pyongyang and Tehran defied Bush's dictum: The world's worst regimes will not be allowed to acquire the world's worst weapons. Then came suspension of the democracy crusade as Islamic militants exploited free elections to advance to power and office in Egypt, Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank, Iraq, and Iran.

Now Israel's rampage against a defenseless Lebanon – smashing airport runways, fuel tanks, power plants, gas stations, lighthouses, bridges, roads, and the occasional refugee convoy – has exposed Bush's folly in subcontracting U.S. policy out to Tel Aviv, thus making Israel the custodian of our reputation and interests in the Middle East.

The Lebanon that Israel, with Bush's blessing, is smashing up has a pro-American government, heretofore considered a shining example of his democracy crusade. Yet, asked in St. Petersburg if he would urge Israel to use restraint in its air strikes, Bush sounded less like the leader of the Free World than some bellicose city councilman from Brooklyn Heights.

What Israel is up to was described by its Army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz when he threatened to "turn back the clock in Lebanon 20 years."

Olmert seized upon Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers to unleash the IDF in a pre-planned attack to make the Lebanese people suffer until the Lebanese government disarms Hezbollah, a task the Israeli army could not accomplish in 18 years of occupation.

Israel is doing the same to the Palestinians. To punish these people for the crime of electing Hamas, Olmert imposed an economic blockade of Gaza and the West Bank and withheld the $50 million in monthly tax and customs receipts due the Palestinians.

Then, Israel instructed the United States to terminate all aid to the Palestinian Authority, though Bush himself had called for the elections and for the participation of Hamas. Our Crawford cowboy meekly complied.

The predictable result: Fatah and Hamas fell to fratricidal fighting, and Hamas militants began launching Qassam rockets over the fence from Gaza into Israel. Hamas then tunneled into Israel, killed two soldiers, captured one, took him back into Gaza, and demanded a prisoner exchange.

Israel's response was to abduct half of the Palestinian cabinet and parliament and blow up a $50 million U.S.-insured power plant. That cut off electricity for half a million Palestinians. Their food spoiled, their water could not be purified, and their families sweltered in the summer heat of the Gaza desert. One family of seven was wiped out on a beach by what the IDF assures us was an errant artillery shell.

Let it be said: Israel has a right to defend herself, a right to counterattack against Hezbollah and Hamas, a right to clean out bases from which Katyusha or Qassam rockets are being fired, and a right to occupy land from which attacks are mounted on her people.

But what Israel is doing is imposing deliberate suffering on civilians, collective punishment on innocent people, to force them to do something they are powerless to do: disarm the gunmen among them. Such a policy violates international law and comports neither with our values nor our interests. It is un-American and un-Christian.

But where are the Christians? Why is Pope Benedict virtually alone among Christian leaders to have spoken out against what is being done to Lebanese Christians and Muslims?

When al-Qaeda captured two U.S. soldiers and barbarically butchered them, the U.S. Army did not smash power plants across the Sunni Triangle. Why then is Bush not only silent but openly supportive when Israelis do this?

Democrats attack Bush for crimes of which he is not guilty, including Haditha and Abu Ghraib. Why are they, too, silent when Israel pursues a conscious policy of collective punishment of innocent peoples?

Britain's diplomatic goal in two world wars was to bring the naive cousins in, to "pull their chestnuts out of the fire." Israel and her paid and pro-bono agents here appear determined to expand the Iraq war into Syria and Iran, and have America fight and finish all of Israel's enemies.

That Tel Aviv is maneuvering us to fight its wars is understandable. That Americans are ignorant of, or complicit in this, is deplorable.

Already, Bush is ranting about Syria being behind the Hezbollah capture of the Israeli soldiers. But where is the proof?

Who is whispering in his ear? The same people who told him Iraq was maybe months away from an atom bomb, that an invasion would be a "cakewalk," that he would be Churchill, that U.S. troops would be greeted with candy and flowers, that democracy would break out across the region, that Palestinians and Israelis would then sit down and make peace?

How much must America pay for the education of this man?

Via James Wolcott.

My wife and I braved out the brunt of the storm at the Whole Foods oragano-superstore. On the drive home down Interstate 40--for those of you keeping score at home--we saw substantial portions of the city without power. Our neighborhood got hit pretty hard with trees down everywhere and power off in most of it.

Our AC, of course, was out and, like most of the rest of the nation, Saint Louis is in the middle of a heatwave. We opened up all the windows on the back porch and laid down some cushions preparing for sleep. The storm brought some cool air in to the city so it was relatively cool on the porch.

But then the shooting started. Some one(s) was in our neighborhood's vast network of alleys firing off multiple shots. The police, who no doubt experienced numerous reports of recklessness and violence last night, were singularly unimpressed. I didn't see any police cars showing up. It appears that when the power goes out, some take it as an excuse for lawlessness. People were driving recklessly, stopping suddenly in the middle of the street to check out the damage, etc. Power outages bring out the worst in folks. It makes you think society hangs on by a very thin thread and that maybe Hobbes was right about us. (The intriguing film "The Trigger Effect" examines just this issue with an extended power outage in LA bringing out the worst in folks.)

Having just seen "Straw Dogs" earlier this week, the violent Peckinpah film about home siege, my mind inevitably raced with violent visions of thugs storming my second floor walk-up. My wife was freaked out as well--although she handled the whole thing much better than Susan George in "Straw Dogs"--so we fled the city and spent the evening with my sister-in-law in suburbia. I always figured we'd abandon the city for the suburbs, I just didn't expect the flight to be so accelerated

There is a tornado warning for Saint Louis right now leaving my wife and me trapped in the Whole Foods organic superstore. We are in the bath and body section giving me easy access to loufas in case of emergency.

Bill Kristol claimed on Fox News that Iranians would welcome an attack by the US.

This is practically the exact same rhetoric used to raise public support for our war against the people of Iraq. Kristol must think we are idiots. Or maybe he really believes this. The former is certainly more comforting.

How have Americans in Lebanon been advised to proceed with evacuation? Wait by your phone for a call from the embassy and check the embassy website.

But Israeli bombing raids have targeted infrastructure like power plants. Some cell phone networks are out entirely.

The plan is clearly flawed.

This clearly seems to be a case when we are treating Israel's needs and goals as synonymous with our own to the detriment of our citizens.

This big screen rehashing of the Comedy Central show owes a great debt to John Waters. Jerri Blank (Amy Sedaris), ex-con, ex-prostitute, and ex-junkie, enters a white bread world and introduces unbridled raunchiness and perversity. But as in Waters work, the perverts are pretty good folks at heart and the world is better for having them in it.

46 year-old Jerri gets out of prison and returns home to find that her father (Dan Hedaya) is in a coma and her stepmother (Deborah Rush) now rules the roost. The family doctor--hilariously portrayed by Ian Holm--advises Jerri that by making her father proud, she might bring him out of his coma. To accomplish this, Jerri decides to reenter high school. Along the way she confronts drugs, peer pressure, and the pains of coming-of-age. Well, sort of.

Jerri Blank is a truly unique and fascinating comic creation. She is foul, but winning. Stephen Colbert is great as Jerri's sexually confused science teacher. Principal Onyx Blackman (Greg Hollimon) is hilarious and provides the movie's best moments.

Some of the movie's humor falls flat, but on the whole the movie is so bizarre and Sedaris is so committed to her character, that it scores.

Recommended.

After seeing "The Proposition," a mind-numbingly violent film which shook me deeply, I wanted to be inspired and buoyed by art. With this in mind, I picked up Marilynne Robinson's "Housekeeping," a book I believed was an inspiring story about familial love and triumph over adversity.

Who knows where I got this idea because the book is actually profoundly sad. It is, though, an amazing, lovingly crafted work. Though the book is just a little over two-hundred pages, it took me a very long time to read. It is a book--refreshingly--where exposition is secondary to establishing character and place. Each sentence is carefully constructed, but, like poetry, the meaning of each is not readily apparent and must be constructed. It is a book that rewards a long, slow reading. The moment I finished the book, I felt a deep urge to restart it in order to grasp the work completely. (It was just too sad, though, to reread immediately.)

The story follows young sisters Ruthie and Lucille as they are transferred from one guardian to another after the death of their mother. Finally, they come into the care of their once-transient Aunt Sylvie. Sylvie's unique parenting methods upset the tiny village of Fingerbone and lead to a final, dramatic family upheaval.

"Housekeeping" is a haunting, but rewarding work. It examines the dangers and allure of a life untethered by responsibility to family, community, and self. Ruthie leads a life constantly plagued by cruel memory and the ghosts of loved ones. Will she face down her demons or become a ghost herself?

This is pretty embarrassing. In many workplaces, this could get you fired or at the very least severely reprimanded.

Another look.

Pride or shame?

"I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not, and I'm sick and tired of being told that I am."

Monty Python quote

If the President doesn't want his policies investigated, he has the ability to block said investigation.

What happened to restoring integrity to the White House?

It sounds like a good idea. The Iraq war is getting a little stale. Time to roll out a new product.

Bill Carter's follow-up to his excellent dishy tell-all "The Late Shift" is an intermittently exciting read. The book tells the story of the successes and failures of the Big Four television networks over the past few seasons. The book is fascinating when it follows the iconoclast Mike Darnell, director of reality television at FOX, who brought us both "World's Deadliest Swarms" and megahit "American Idol." Also interesting is the story of Marc Cherry, creator of "Desperate Housewives," and his rise from obscurity to celebrity. You will also be amazed at how many of the biggest hits of the last few years--"CSI," "Survivor," "Lost"--came very close to never making it on the air. (Though I think this may be more a dramatic device on Carter's part than a strictly factual account.)

Overall, though, the book is somewhat dry and the office politics of the networks just aren't interesting enough to carry the book through it's 400 pages. Fans of "The Late Shift" and behind the scenes entertainment tales should give this a look. The rest of you should just pick it up and read the chapters on Mike Darnell.

From the Washington Times:

U.S. war commanders think some level of American forces will be needed in Iraq until 2016 and those forces will receive continued support from the vast majority of Iraqis.

I don't think I'm the only one that finds both these statements highly optimistic.

Via Salon.

From Think Progress:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Extremists now appear to have been emboldened. The moderates appear to be in retreat. There is no peace process. There is war. How do you answer administration critics who say that the administration’s actions have unleashed, have helped unleash the very hostilities you hoped to contain?

RICE: Well, first of all, those hostilities were not very well contained as we found out on September 11th, so the notion that policies that finally confront extremism are actually causing extremism, I find grotesque.

As is clear from viewing the Mideast since our invasion of Iraq, the region has indeed stabilized.

It was nice to hear Juan Williams lay into Kristol on Fox News Sunday yesterday:

You just want war, war, war, and you want us in more war. You wanted us in Iraq. Now you want us in Iran. Now you want us to get into the Middle East. … You’re saying, why doesn’t the United States take this hard, unforgiving line? Well, the hard and unforgiving line has been, we don’t talk to anybody. We don’t talk to Hamas. We don’t talk to Hezbollah. We’re not going to talk to Iran. Where has it gotten us, Bill?

Kristol, a booster for war with Iraq as far back as the Clinton administration, should be talked to like this more often especially since his causes have proved faulty and destructive.

From TPM:

But what stands out to me right now is the seeming irrelevance and marginality of the United States.

Where is America? Whoever you believe is right or wrong in this mess, I doubt very much that the powers directly involved have the will and ability to de-escalate the situation. Some want to. Others don't. But take the region as a whole and the differences between will, desire and ability fade into insignificance.

Some might say that the Bush administration's silence is acquiescence or approval of the Israeli raids into Lebanon and Gaza. But I think it's more than that. This is silence born of over-extension and policy exhaustion. Thinking back through the 1960s, 70s, 80s, and 90s -- with key crises in each decade -- I don't think there's any example where an American administrtion has so thoroughly marginalized itself or shown such impotence and irrelevance.

Is Bush's relative silence a sign of irrelevance? Acquiescence? Both?

Thanks to my regular readers for your daily pilgrimage. Have a good Lord's Day and get some rest.

Specter's proposed FISA bill is not a blow to Bush administration but a way to legitimize President's decision to spy on whomever he deems necessary.

The Washington Post has more:

The bill would, indeed, get the NSA's program in front of judges, in one of two ways. It would transfer lawsuits challenging the program from courts around the country to the super-secret court system that typically handles wiretap applications in national security cases. It would also permit -- but not require -- the administration to seek approval from this court system, created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, for entire surveillance programs, thereby allowing judges to assess their legality.

But the cost of this judicial review would be ever so high. The bill's most dangerous language would effectively repeal FISA's current requirement that all domestic national security surveillance take place under its terms. The "compromise" bill would add to FISA: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the constitutional authority of the President to collect intelligence with respect to foreign powers and agents of foreign powers." It would also, in various places, insert Congress's acknowledgment that the president may have inherent constitutional authority to spy on Americans. Any reasonable court looking at this bill would understand it as withdrawing the nearly three-decade-old legal insistence that FISA is the exclusive legitimate means of spying on Americans. It would therefore legitimize whatever it is the NSA is doing -- and a whole lot more.

Allowing the administration to seek authorization from the courts for an "electronic surveillance program" is almost as dangerous. The FISA court today grants warrants for individual surveillance when the government shows evidence of espionage or terrorist ties. Under this bill, the government could get permission for long-term programs involving large numbers of innocent individuals with only a showing that the program is, in general, legal and that it is "reasonably designed" to capture the communications of "a person reasonably believed to have communication with" a foreign power or terrorist group.

The bill even makes a hash out of the generally reasonable idea of transferring existing litigation to the FISA court system. It inexplicably permits the FISA courts to "dismiss a challenge to the legality of an electronic surveillance program for any reason" -- such as, say, the eye color of one of the attorneys.

This bill is not a compromise but a full-fledged capitulation on the part of the legislative branch to executive claims of power. Mr. Specter has not been briefed on the NSA's program. Yet he's proposing revolutionary changes to the very fiber of the law of domestic surveillance -- changes not advocated by key legislators who have detailed knowledge of the program. This week a remarkable congressional debate began on how terrorists should face trial, with Congress finally asserting its role in reining in overbroad assertions of presidential power. What a tragedy it would be if at the same time, it acceded to those powers on the fundamental rights of Americans.

Make no mistake. We are nation on the brink of radically altering our constitution. The President must not be given a blank check. We must not sacrifice our civil liberties in the name of this undefined, neverending "war on terror."

Pride or shame?

No one questions a nation's right to self defense, but the purposeful bombing of civilians is unjust. While I am aware that Israel is surrounded by powers that want them wiped out and target civilians as well, this does not justify Israel's current methods.

The Christian Science Monitor has more details on the destruction:

Mohammed Akkash's voice cracked as he listed the names of his 10 grandchildren who were killed just hours earlier in an Israeli air raid on his son's home.

"The youngest one, Safat, was just 6 months old. Is a 6-month-old baby a resistance fighter? What happened is a crime," he says, as other mourners sitting on plastic seats outside his home nodded quietly in agreement.

Throughout the dusty hill villages and deep valleys of south Lebanon, similar displays of grief and anger were evident Thursday as the district reeled beneath the most intensive series of Israeli airstrikes mounted in 10 years. Roads and bridges here were systematically blown up, part of Israel's strategy of targeting the militant group Hizbullah's infrastructure that has effectively cut off south Lebanon from the rest of the country.

Sayyed Adil Akkash, a Shiite Muslim cleric allegedly connected to Lebanon's Hizbullah party, was killed along with his wife and 10 children in a predawn air raid in which up to 40 missiles struck his three-story home on a stony hillside outside this village. The missiles leveled the building, leaving a pile of rubble and coating a field of green tobacco plants in a thick layer of dark gray dust.

The whisper of Israeli jets could be heard as they passed high above, hidden by the scudding clouds.

"It's a massacre," sobbed a woman, held up by her husband as they stepped gingerly though the rubble.

Mr. Akkash was apparently a member of Hizbullah, the militant anti-Israel group whose battle-hardened fighters on Wednesday grabbed two Israeli soldiers along Lebanon's border with Israel and killed eight more. Israel has vowed to restore its long vaunted powers of deterrence by striking a decisive blow against its Lebanese Shiite Muslim foe.

The soft thump of distant explosions echoed throughout the south Thursday as Israel pressed forward its attack. Israeli aircraft destroyed all the bridges crossing the Litani River, which cuts across much of south Lebanon. By midafternoon, it had become impossible to enter the border district along the coastal region, cutting off tens of thousands of civilians as well as UN peacekeepers deployed along the border.

Thursday, Hizbullah fired dozens of rockets deep into Israel, most of them conventional 122mm Katyushas. But Hizbullah announced that it had also fired, for the first time, a new rocket known as a Raad-1 at an Israeli air control center on Mount Meron, nine miles south of the border.

Also Thursday, at least one rocket fired from Lebanon hit Israel's northern port city of Haifa, but there were no reported injuries. In an interview with Al Jazeera Thursday, a Hizbullah spokesman denied that the group fired the rockets at Haifa.

But Hizbullah has warned that it would attack larger civilian targets if Israel bombed Beirut. "If they attack Beirut, we will attack Haifa," says Hussein Naboulsi, a Hizbullah spokesman. "So far we have not used the weapons that we are supposed to use," he adds, hinting at Hizbullah's alleged arsenal of long-range rockets. "If the situation escalates, something totally unexpected might happen."

Those were hardly reassuring words for Israel or for the Lebanese, many of whom had fervently hoped to have seen an end to their country becoming embroiled in the interminable Arab-Israeli conflict.

Israel abandoned its occupation zone in south Lebanon in 2000 and Syria withdrew its troops last year. Many Lebanese have hoped that despite a fractious political climate, the situation would steadily improve. Tourists have been returning to Lebanon in greater numbers with each passing year since the end of the 1975-90 civil war. Lebanon's stagnant economy relies heavily on the influx of wealthy Gulf tourists and expatriate Lebanese who come here each year, filling hotels and beaches.

Israel's military planners also seemed to have taken Lebanon's valuable tourist season into account when Israeli jets Thursday morning bombed the runways of Beirut International Airport, shutting the facility down and forcing all flights to be diverted to Cyprus.

"The services sector in Lebanon has worked so hard trying to generate some kind of industry, and now this has to happen," says Michael Karam, editor of Executive, a monthly English-language business magazine. "They are looking to the Lebanese government for some kind of leadership but they aren't getting it."

Overt criticism of Hizbullah, which participates in the government, so far has been relatively muted, with cabinet ministers biting their lips and instead focusing on arranging a cease-fire to end Israeli attacks.

"Lebanon's main demand is a comprehensive cease-fire and an end to this open-ended aggression," said Ghazi Aridi, Lebanon's information minister and close political ally of Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, a staunch critic of Hizbullah.

President Bush in a news conference with Putin at the ongoing G-8 summit:

During a joint news conference Saturday in St. Petersburg, Bush said he raised concerns about democracy in Russia during a frank discussion with the Russian leader.

"I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world, like Iraq where there's a free press and free religion, and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope that Russia would do the same," Bush said.

To that, Putin replied, "We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy that they have in Iraq, quite honestly."

President Bush: Just wait.

Uggh. Via Atrios.

Wow. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is getting pretty scared as to where this thing might be heading. For me to say more would be to display my total ignorance of the area and its history. But from the look of things around the blogosphere, I'm not the only one.

It does seem, though, that the White House has done little if anything in response to the situation.

Below is the fantastic poster for "Junebug"--reviwed below--recalling the work of such folk artist's as Pennville, Georgia's own Howard Finster.



That catchy piece of music playing over the beginning and end credits is "Harmour Love" by Syreeta. You're going to want to track this one down after hearing it.

One of last year's best film's, "Junebug" is a quiet, contemplative look at small town life in North Carolina. Embeth Davidtz plays Madeleine, a dealer in folk art, who travels to a small town in North Carolina with her new husband George (Alessandro Nivola) to track down an artist she wants to represent and to finally meet the in-laws.

Her in-laws are standoffish, particularly her quietly hostile mother-in-law. She is embraced gladly, though, by her brother-in-law's wife Ashley (Amy Adams) who is desperate for friendship. Adams is amazing and was Oscar-nominated for her role as the loving, effusive Ashley. Truly a magnificent performance.

Director Phil Morrison does an excellent job of capturing the rhythms and speech of the small Southern community. He captures small town life without resorting to ridicule, overt nostalgia, or quirky preciousness. Like David Gordon Greene, Morrison lets his camera linger on the countryside and often fills the screen with quiet, sensuous visuals.

Highly recommended.

This companion piece to the hilarious and informative "The Music Snob*s Dictionary" takes a look at the film enthusiasts who are most interested in collecting arcane knowledge about the movies and lording it over the uneducated. This particular brand of snob is not a cinema booster like Scorsese, waxing enthusiastic about the classics, but is someone who collects arcane knowledge of the movies in order to feel superior to you. This snob is just as likely to praise Z-grade Mexican wrestling films ("Santo & Blue Demon vs. Dracula & the Wolfman") as they are to knock the works of Frank Capra as populist claptrap.

The book is amusing and a good primer on art house and exploitation cinema, but it misses the mark on many occasions. It continually lumps in Tarantino in with the snobs, but anyway who has watched Quentin wax enthusiastic in his introductions to his Rolling Thunder reissues will realize that he is just as much a booster as Scorsese. The authors, David Kamp and Lawrence Levi, also knock "Office Space" as some sort of snob cause that no one else "got." This is a pretty clueless observation. "Office Space" is just popular, if not more, with my generation as were past comedy favorites like "Animal House." Everyone in their 20s and 30s loves "Office Space." Its hardly some snob holy grail.

Also, the book makes a glaring omission by not mentioning Paul Morissey, Udo Kier, or their collaboration on such snob faves as "Blood for Dracula." This soft core horror film is truly horrible, but is adored by snobs. Film historian Maurice Yacovar discussing the socio-political implications of Morrissey's direction, which is included on the Criterion DVD, defines snobbery.

Recommended, but the authors are off base on more than one occasion.

TPM Muckraker has a breakdown of the suit filed by the Wilson's.

How is the Auburn University sociology department like school on Saturday?

No class.

A graphic popped up on James Gundlach’s television during an Auburn football game in the fall of 2004, and he could not believe his eyes.

One of the university’s prominent football players was being honored as a scholar athlete for his work as a sociology major. Professor Gundlach, the director of the Auburn sociology department, had never had the player in class. He asked the two other full-time sociology professors about the player, and they could not recall having had him either.

So Professor Gundlach looked at the player’s academic files, which led him to the discovery that many Auburn athletes were receiving high grades from the same professor for sociology and criminology courses that required no attendance and little work.

Eighteen members of the 2004 Auburn football team, which went undefeated and finished No. 2 in the nation, took a combined 97 hours of the courses during their careers. The offerings resemble independent study and include core subjects like statistics, theory and methods, which normally require class instruction.

"The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy" by American professors Mearshimer and Walt caused a big brouhaha a few months back by painting a portrait of Israel's influence in Washington that many felt was shortsighted, unfair, and dangerous.

Michael Massing, a contributing editor to the Columbia Journalism Review, published this fascinating piece in the New York Review of Books that dissects the paper, the response to it, and looks at what influence the Israel lobby really has in Washington. If you have a little bit of time, go read it. Eye opening.

And no "Big Love" until next Summer. And in case you haven't heard, Alan Ball who created the uneven, but often amazing "Six Feet Under," is bringing us a vampire show in Fall 2007. Sweet!

I think I agree with the opninion that I read somewhere on the internet that "The Sopranos" finale that we saw in May was the false happy ending that will contrast sharply with the show's final episodes when everything crumbles. Great tragedy and whackings all around.

Brilliant men are destined to philander:

So Albert Einstein did not, after all, spend all his waking hours chalking up complex symbols on a blackboard. According to letters newly released this week, he devoted quite a bit of it to chasing the ladies. And with considerable success.

To many, the idea of Einstein having 10 mistresses does not fit the classical image of the great, remote genius. Why was he wasting his valuable time with the exhausting business of conducting a string of illicit affairs - affairs that would cause havoc with his family life, damaging especially his relationship with his sons?

The answer is that he, like many other intensely creative men, was over-endowed with one of the human male's most characteristic qualities: the joy of risk-taking.

Every creative act, every new formula, every ground-breaking innovation, is an act of rebellion that may - if successful - destroy an old, existing concept. So every time a brilliant mind sees a new possibility, it is faced with a moment of supreme risk-taking.

The new formula, the new invention, may not work. It may turn out to be a disaster. But the man of genius - such as Einstein - has the courage to plough ahead, despite the dangers, both on and off the intellectual field.

Not that Einstein is by any means an isolated instance. Indeed, far from being the exception he is closer to the norm where great men and sex are concerned.

I guess my wife should be glad I'm a dumbass. (My words, not hers. She seems to really dig me for some inexplicable reason.)

Via The Corner.