Dispatch from a Red State, which asked to remain anonymous

Biscuit's on a reduced posting schedule for a few days, as we are visiting my natal home to give the kid some quality time with my parents.

Unfortunately, I grew up in a red state. Fortunately, it's a warm red state, with fresh orange juice. (The state forgot to request that I obscure identifying features when it asked for anonymity.) Since Boston is buried in more snow than we've seen in a hundred years, it was a perfect weekend to leave town. Also, my father bribed us with tickets to some lunch with Russ Feingold, who for not-quite-clear reasons no doubt involving a potential presidential run, was making the rounds.

My hometown is, um, a lovely place full of thoughtful, intelligent, kind, and tolerant people. For example, just outside of town a group has generously invested in an educational billboard. Last time the biscuit family visited, we came down for the week before the election to get out the vote for the Kerry campaign. Biscuit baby spent many hours on the grimy floor of the campaign office playing with a Mr. Potato-head of unknown origin. We made it back to Boston just in time to go mill around outside of Faneuil Hall while Kerry conceded the election. (There may have been some angry chanting involved, and I lost a lens out of my sunglasses and didn't notice till we got home.) Like everyone sensible, we then descended into a pit of despair.

So we were a teeny bit reluctant to come back to what for us was the scene of democracy's last stand. But, sun, warmth, no snow. Feingold was very nice. I thanked him for voting against Gonzales and gave him crap for approving Condi Rice. The Senator seems to think there's some hope that this administration will dig its own grave in the next four years, causing Americans to finally see the light. It's adorable, this optimism. Me, I think Americans will be digging graves for their sons and daughters for a long time yet, and all the time preaching of Patriotism, and Freedom, and Prosperity, and Strength, and Resolution, and Liberty. And the more graves they dig, the worse things get, the more certain people will become that the cause for which they sacrifice is a great one, that we are living in historic times, and have an opportunity to end tyranny forever and ever and ever. Cause geez, if that story's not true, then what are we dying for?

Feingold said something -- I don't quite remember what his exact words, but he was talking about Condi Rice comparing the post-WWII period with today and saying how we too had to work to spread liberty so that future generations -- points to Biscuit baby, nursing at the table immediately in front of him -- would reap the fruits of their vision. I'm not sure what particular statement he was referring to, but the general sentiment to which he referred is clearly part of the current 'message' from the administration. And don't get me wrong, Feingold was certainly not approving the administration's vision. He was saying yeah, we do have to think about future generations, and this administration is not.

But actually, he reminded me that I've been meaning to discuss the new message, and just how dangerous it seems to me, not because it's utterly hypocritical for the administration to talk about spreading freedom (although it is), but because it is a prophetic, totalizing, and apocalyptic vision of the future. Here's Condi in her opening statement during her confirmation hearing (all the emphasis is mine):

And in these extraordinary times, it is the duty of all of us, legislators and diplomats and civil servants and citizens, to uphold and advance the values that are core to our identity and that have lifted millions around the world. One of history's clearest lessons is that America is safer and the world more secure than ever and wherever freedom prevails. It is neither an accident nor a coincidence that the greatest threats of the last century emerged from totalitarian movements. Fascism and communism differed in many ways but they shared an implacable hatred of freedom, a fanatical assurance that their way was the only way, and a supreme confidence that history was on their side. At certain moments, it seemed that history might have been on their side. During the first half of the 20th century, much of the democratic and economic progress of earlier decades looked to be swept away by the march of ruthless ideologies armed with terrible military and technological power. Even after the Allied victory in World War II, many feared that Europe and perhaps the world would be forced to permanently endure half enslaved and half free.

The cause of freedom suffered a series of major setbacks: communism imposed in Eastern Europe, Soviet power dominant in East Germany, the coup in Czechoslovakia, the victory of Chinese communists, the Soviet nuclear test five years ahead of schedule, to name just a few. In those early years, the prospect of a united, democratic Germany and a democratic Japan seemed farfetched. Yet America and our allies were blessed with visionary leaders who did not lose their way. They created the great NATO alliance to contain and eventually erode Soviet power. They helped to establish the United Nations and created an international legal framework for this and other institutions that have served the world well for more than 50 years. They provided billions in aid to rebuild Europe and much of Asia. They built an international economic system based on free trade and free markets to spread prosperity to every corner of the globe. And they confronted the ideology and propaganda of our enemies with a message of hope and with truth. And in the end, though the end was long in coming, their vision prevailed.The challenges we face today are no less daunting. America and the free world are once again engaged in a long-term struggle against an ideology of hatred and tyranny and terror and hopelessness. And we must confront these challenges with the same vision and the same courage and the same boldness that dominated our post-world war period. In these momentous times, America has great tasks and American diplomacy has great tasks First, we will unite the community of democracies in building an international system that is based on shared values and the rule of law. Second, we will strengthen the community of democracies to fight the threats to our common security and alleviate the hopelessness that feeds terror. And third, we will spread freedom and democracy throughout the globe. That is the mission that President Bush has set for America in the world and is the great mission of American diplomacy today.
[...]
[Re: Cold War]The road was not always smooth, but the basic unity of purpose and values was there and that unity was essential to our eventual success. No president and no secretary of state could have effectively protected American interests in such momentous times without the strong support of the Congress and from this committee. And the same is true today. Our task and our duty is to unite around a vision and policies that will spread freedom and prosperity around the globe. I've worked directly with many of you and in this time of great challenge and opportunity, America's co-equal branches of government must work together to advance freedom and prosperity. In the preface to his memoirs, published in 1969, Dean Acheson wrote of the post war period that, Those who acted in this drama did not know, nor do any of us yet know, the end, close quote. Senators, now we know. And many of us here were witness to that end. The end was a victory for freedom, the liberation of half of a continent, the passing of a despotic empire and vindication for the wise and brave decisions made at the creation. It is my greatest hope and my deepest conviction that the struggle we face today will someday end in a similar triumph of the human spirit. Working together, we can make it so.

I distrust all talk of ends. Stories end. Movies end. Individual lives end. But history does not end. We could do with less rhapsodizing on these momentous times, our great mission, the end of tyranny, and the need for unity of purpose and values. From the mouths of reasonable people, these words would seem to me merely misguided hot air. But this administration is not 'reasonable people'. They are revolutionaries in the name of freedom! They will spread their freedom and democracy throughout the world, once and for all, even if they have to kill us all to do it.

"It's not censorship if we do it ourselves!" says PBS Prez

Via TPM, here's a Globe article on the Spellings-Lesbian-PBS thing. :

Last week, PBS agreed with WGBH that it was appropriate to air. On Friday, a PBS spokeswoman said that the PBS president, Pat Mitchell, had viewed the episode and was satisfied with its contents, especially in light of the fact that WGBH pushed back the air date of the episode from Feb. 2 to March 23 to allow member stations time to review the contents.

Over the weekend, Mitchell had second thoughts, said Wayne Godwin, chief operating officer of PBS. Her concern, he said, was that ''the debate surrounding this might cause parents to be concerned about PBS as a safe harbor. There is a concern that this particular material at this age group might not be appropriate.'

Godwin said that Mitchell reached her decision before she received a letter from Spellings. Godwin said he does not agree with those who say the government is censoring public television. ''There's always a tendency to dash to that conclusion,' he said.

In fact, Godwin said, PBS needs to evaluate itself to determine how such an episode reached an ''advanced stage of acceptance without us having more thoughtful involvement.'

One result of this incident may be the creation of a panel that would evaluate whether children's programming is suitable for broadcast, he said.

So we are actually expected to believe that the president of PBS changed her mind her ownself over the weekend, before she got the letter from Spellings. But in any case, PBS will set up a special panel right now to ensure that nothing that might get them in trouble with Spellings will ever show up on the network again.

Self-Esteem Suffers From Low Self-Esteem After New Studies Tell It It's Worthless

Via Crooked Timber

Kevin Drum relays the bad news that high self-esteem is basically good for nothing in terms of tangible outcomes. These findings sound much like the literature on optimism and pessimism, which finds that optimists overvalue their abilities and blame others for their mistakes. People with sunny dispositions are a real menace to society.

This tidbit of news is a perfect opportunity for me to get on one of my parenting soapboxes (a parent's best defense against being endlessly preached to about how best to raise one's child: preaching louder). It's not related to the usual biscuit diet of torture, torture, and more torture, but nicely dovetails with the "pessimism" aspect of the blog.

Max and I have noticed that other upper-middle-class parents (besides enrolling their babies in lots and lots of classes to teach them things like "movement") are always telling their kids "good job!" This is because the parenting experts have told them that they should praise their kids a lot so they'll have high self-esteem. This has driven us crazy ever since we read John Holt on how to turn your children into "praise junkies". Holt basically says that kids, like adults, know perfectly well when they've accomplished something worth praising, because they feel pride about it their ownselves. People are always telling their kids "good job!" (and telling OUR kid "good job") about stuff that is really no big deal. I've had people tell biscuit baby "good standing!", "good sitting!", "good eating!", etc. Of course, when your kid does something he's been working on for a long time, it's appropriate to share his excitement with him. But it doesn't make any sense to praise a kid for something he's not especially impressed about himself. It either causes your kid to lose touch with his own pride in his accomplishments, or else to react with cynicism and contempt when adults praise him. (Did the A's I got in school mean anything to me? Of course not -- I knew they hadn't taken any effort to get, so what did I care about Honor Rolls? )

Refraining from indiscriminate praise is not the same as withholding love. I'm pretty sure our kid knows we love him more than life itself, whether or not he's currently doing anything impressive. But I think most adults find that praise from others is ultimately hollow -- I don't know why we think that kids should experience it some other way. No one can fill the hole at the center of our being -- like humans have always, we must just live with it.

I want my kid to get good at living with that hollow place, because I don't believe anything I do as a mom can make it go away. I want him to not be so afraid of the hollow place, to not spend his whole life in a mad rush to fill it up with accomplishments and awards and things and people. I want him to know the hollow place won't make him crazy (something I am still trying to learn!), that love is possible despite the hollow place. We do not have to say "alas!" that we are hollow men. We can simply lean together, and live.

"this kind of subject matter"

TAPPED has a tidbit on one of the first acts of our new Education Secretary, Margaret Spellings, which was pressuring PBS to pull a show that incidentally included two lesbian couples.

I fear for our country.

Highlights from the Rice Hearings, Part #1

I've been reading the transcripts, just for fun, and also to see what else was said besides the widely-reported Rice-Boxer catfight. Here's what I've found so far:

1) Most hysterical statement about Saddam Hussein ever: "We knew that he was an implacable enemy of the United States, who did cavort with terrorists."

2) Rice on 'living in a fear society': "If a person cannot walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment and physical harm, then that person is living in a fear society. And we cannot rest until every person living in a fear society has finally won their freedom."

I would direct her attention to this report from The Hill, regarding a Senate staffer who was arrested for holding up a "No War" sign at the Bush Inauguration:

Ackerman, who said he plans to plead not guilty to the charge that he was “disorderly, loud and boisterous,” said that he thought his sign was within size restrictions and that he saw a government placard posting limits on the allowable size of signs at a security checkpoint.

But a Capitol Police spokesman, Sgt. Michael Lauer, said the Inaugural Committee clearly prohibits signs and banners. “You’re not allowed to protest on Capitol grounds unless you have permission to do so,” he said.

3) Senator Allen, after praising Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an evil empire, which paved the way for " hundreds of millions of people tasting that sweet nectar of liberty" in Central Europe, refers to the Voice of America and asks Rice what we can be broadcasting now to the Arab world to make sure they understand "our motivation or just the concepts of freedom, so that the people of Iraq and others in the Arab world have a fair and balanced view of the United States and our purposes and the concepts of individual liberty?"

You can't make this shit up.

4) Most Impressive Failure to Answer a Question:

VOINOVICH: But I am very concerned about what's going on in Serbia- Montenegro today. I'm very concerned about what's happening in Kosovo. Because I really believe that, unless things are stabilized in Serbia-Montenegro and we stabilize things in Kosovo, that we could very well have another crisis on your hands this year, particularly because we're discussing the final status of Kosovo, what's going to be happening there. I'd like to say that Mark Grossman has done a good job. I'd like to know, where is that on your priority list? And are you familiar with it? And what do you -- you know, we've got our NATO forces over there.

RICE: And so I think we have to have a new, renewed effort on that piece of it, getting our message out. We also have to have a new, renewed effort on getting our people back and forth. Because people, when they come to the United States and see who we are and can get past some of the filter of perhaps some of the sides of America that are not well-liked or respected, I think do come away with a different view of us. And so I will have a strong emphasis on getting our message out, on getting the truth to people, on diminishing the -- on doing something to mitigate against the propaganda that's out there against us, but also on going to our long-time partners and friends, and saying, We have a common purpose here, a great cause ahead of us. And the trans-Atlantic alliance, you know, sometimes it's a little bit like whatever it was that Mark Twain said about Wagner's music. I think he said it's better than it sounds. Well, in fact, our trans-Atlantic alliances are really better than people give us credit for. We're cooperating in a lot of places. We're working hard together in a lot of places. We've had a lot of successes. But we can do more in this period of tremendous opportunity to unify the great democracies, the great alliances for a push to spread freedom and liberty. I think it's an agenda that is inspiring. And I think we've done a lot already, but there is much more that we can do.

VOINOVICH: Thank you.

5) Best attempt to ask a question involving global warming without actually saying, you know, global warming:

MURKOWSKI: And there's a lot of focus right now on what's going on up north because of the climate change. We're wondering whether or not this is a permanent event or whether it's just part of a natural cycle. But we do know that it's a reality. We do know that it will have an impact on our lands, particularly up north. And what we're seeing is there's a potential for increased circumpolar maritime commercial activity, which is going to impact our northernmost boundaries, as well as substantial new scientific exploration in the Arctic region.

6) Statements in Rice opening remarks most likely to increase world cynicism:

It is neither an accident nor a coincidence that the greatest threats of the last century emerged from totalitarian movements. Fascism and communism differed in many ways but they shared an implacable hatred of freedom, a fanatical assurance that their way was the only way, and a supreme confidence that history was on their side.

Every nation that benefits from living on the right side of freedom has an obligation to share freedom's blessings.

We are joining with developing nations to fight corruption, instill the rule of law and create a culture of transparency.

We will insist that leaders who are elected democratically have an obligation to govern democratically.

We -- and I know you, Mr. Chairman; and I want to thank you for your role in this -- were heartened by the refusal of the people of Ukraine to accept a flawed election and heartened by their insistence that their democratic demands would be met.

Yeah, I know I'm supposed to get over it, and bothering to post excerpts when Condi's been confirmed is, as our dear friend John McCain might say, evidence that I'm a sore loser. What can I say? I'm not just a freedom-hater. I'm a sore-losing, baby-killing, gay-sex-loving, Christian-hating, commie-pinko-feminazi liberal supporting-the-terrorists freedom-hater.

Who says women can't have it all these days?

Salon on the "press conference"

Commenting on one reporter's "question", Salon asks::

Why not make it easier on everybody and just go with, 'Mr. President, do you believe that by criticizing your war policies Senators Kennedy and Boxer are in fact standing with the terrorists against democracy?'

A Few of My Favorite Senators

8 Senate Dems who voted No on Gonzales
Kennedy
Leahy
Biden
Feinstein
Schumer
Durbin
Edwards
Feingold

13 Senate Democrats who voted no on Rice
Akaka
Bayh
Boxer
Byrd
Dayton
Durbin
Harkin
Jeffords
Kennedy
Kerry
Lautenberg
Levin
Reed

Kennedy and Durbin get a special shout-out for voting no on BOTH!

Dissembler-in-Chief

I am watching GWB on the Cisco IPTV Viewer over which the undisclosed financial institution where I work streams MSNBC. I am agog. Why do reporters treat this pathological shitsmearer with deference? His false jocularity which is really open hostility; his complete evasion of questions with catch phrases like "I am going to speak directly to the American people on this one"; his endless hammering on his totemistic keywords "freedom" and "democracy."

I didn't notice him correcting reporters for using the term "private account", though see TPM for some creepy, creepy Orwellian language-shifting.

I'd love to see a White House press conference empty of any reporters. That way he could "speak directly to the American people," without the corrupting influence of insufficiently respectful (yet still utterly cowed) journalists.

God Bless Ted Kennedy

His office says he plans to vote against both Rice and Gonzales. Here's the statement.

Also, call these senators this morning, rumor has it that the judiciary committee is going to vote on Mr. Torture today. Call them even if they're not yours, they're keeping tallies of everyone who calls, not just constituents:

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), committee chair 202-224-4254
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), minority leader 202-224-4242
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) 202-224-5323

DailyKos Blogger Petition on Gonzales

There finally seems to be some momentum in the 'um, as human beings, we oppose the Gonzales nomination' department. DailyKos has a petition, and he can count Biscuit in: "With this nomination, we have arrived at a crossroads as a nation. Now is the time for all citizens of conscience to stand up and take responsibility for what the world saw, and, truly, much that we have not seen, at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere."

To Senators thinking of confirming the guy, I say: "This will go down on your permanent record!" And it won't be pretty.

What's worse than sanctioning torture? Lying about getting the Guv'ner off of jury duty

...notes TPM: "In our up-is-down political world, authoring memos which for the first time put the United States government on record sanctioning torture probably can't get you nixed for Attorney General. But fibbing about your role in covering up one of the president's DUIs just might. Newsweek's Isikoff is on the case."

Because we need more drug convictions in this country, damnit!

SCOTUSBlog:

The Supreme Court, in a 6-2 decision Monday, ruled that police do not violate the Fourth Amendment when they use a drug-detecting dog to locate illegal drugs in the trunk of a car during a legal traffic stop. In an opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the Court declared: 'A dog sniff conducted during a concededly lawful traffic stop that reveals no information other than the location of a substance that no individual has any right to possess does not violate the Fourth Amendment.'

The Court majority stressed that it was ruling only narrowly, in a situation where a dog was used only to check out the exterior of a car stopped for speeding. Thus, the Court appeared to leave open the question of conducting a dog-sniff investigation outside of a home, if that were capable of detecting legal activity going on inside the residence. A number of cases are pending at the Court challenging the use of dogs to sniff the exterior of homes.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David H. Souter dissented, but each indicated they were not saying police could not use dog-sniffs to detect explosives or biological weapons, perhaps used by a terrorist. The case was Illinois v. Caballes (03-923).

God Bless Ruthie and David. May they live, and serve, a long, long time.

The "Democrat" party.

It's official -- it is now the "Democrat" party -- since the WH has its official spokespeople calling it that, as shown in this WaPo story today: "'As we move forward with our efforts to talk about the problem and the need for reform, administration officials are talking about what leaders of the Democrat Party have said about the problem,' White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said."

They probably like it cause it sounds like "Bureaucrat". And it's insulting, but in a way that no one can quite articulate. And if asked, they can always claim it's all just a slip of the tongue. As though, if Nancy Pelosi started calling them the "Republic" party in official statements, it wouldn't be questioned.

UPDATE:
Kos has a discussion of this here.

Actually, not just a slip of the tongue. Here are two written press release examples of Republican groups using the term:

Texas GOP Press Release, June 2004

New Hampshire Republican State Committee Press Release, April 2004

Everyone else who uses it seems to be an insane right-wing fanatical freak.

I wonder if I can get Bill Safire to do a words column and research the history of this use of the term for me. Ooh, and today was the last day I have to read his annoying op-eds in the Times.

God grants Bush second term, says He hates liberals

Prayer starts Bush's second term -- The Washington Times: "President Bush began his second term in office yesterday by praying for guidance at a church service in which the Rev. Billy Graham credited God for the president's re-election.
    'We believe that in Your providence, You've granted a second term of office to our president, George W. Bush, and our vice president, Richard Cheney,' the evangelist, 86, said in an opening prayer at the National Cathedral in Washington.
    'Their next four years are hidden from us, but they are not hidden from You,' said the preacher, who persuaded Mr. Bush to turn to God and away from the bottle at age 40."

Front Page News: Look America, Torture Works!!!

Boston.com / News / World / Europe / Guantanamo tip tied to arrests of 22 in Germany: "Information obtained through the interrogation of a Guantanamo Bay detainee led to a spectacular series of counterterrorism raids in Germany this month, in which more than 700 police swept through mosques, homes, and businesses in six cities and arrested 22 suspected militant extremists, according to a senior Defense Department official."

If I say I'm cynical about this revelation, which comes immediately before the Alberto Gonzales vote, was disseminated by an anonymous DoD official, and is reporting news that is two weeks old (so as not to be overshadowed by the Coronation parties), does that make me a terrorist sympathizer? Of course it does. I hate freedom, don't I?

Today's snowstorm

The snow.

Also, I appear to be blithely participating in an extraordinarily convenient information-gathering apparatus (Google's, who owns Blogger, Picasa, Gmail, and Hello) that can be coopted by our increasingly authoritarian state at some time in the future. They can search all of our political rants, and some of our photo library too! Whee!

Oh look, the military has deployed special ops domestically! What fun!

Sayeth The Times: Commandos Get Duty on U.S. Soil