May 29th, 2008
This kind of thing makes me feel better about the country’s future.
UPDATE: On a more serious note:
Concerning the service of Mr. Charles Payne: C.T. Payne was a soldier in the 89th Infantry Division. He served in the 355th Infantry Regiment, Company K. The 355th Infantry Regiment was the unit to liberate Ohrdruf. Mr. Payne was there.
For those who seek to minimize the horrors of Ohrdruf since it was a ‘work’ camp and not a ‘death’ camp, we have but one word: shame. Ironically, this argument has been made to us time and time again by various Holocaust-deniers and other pro-Nazi groups. We will let the testimony of survivors and veterans speak for themselves.
It has been recorded that in Ordruf itself the last days were a slaughterhouse. We were shot at, beaten and molested. At every turn went on the destruction of the remaining inmates. Indiscriminant criminal behavior (like the murderers of Oklahoma City some days ago). Some days before the first Americans appeared at the gates of Ordruf, the last retreating Nazi guards managed to execute with hand pistols, literally emptying their last bullets on whomever they encountered leaving them bleeding to death as testified by an American of the 37th Tank Battalion Medical section, 10 a.m. April 4, 1945.
Today I’m privileged thanks to G-d and you gallant fighting men. I’m here to reminisce, and reflect, and experience instant recollections of those moments. Those horrible scenes and that special instance when an Allied soldier outstretched his arm to help me up became my re-entrance, my being re-invited into humanity and restoring my inalienable right to a dignified existence as a human being and as a Jew. Something, which was denied me from September 1939 to the day of liberation in 1945. I had no right to live and survived, out of 80 members of my family, the infernal ordeal of Auschwitz, Buchenwald, Ordruf, and its satellite camp Crawinkle and finally Theresinstadt Ghetto-Concentration Camp.
Rabbi Murray Kohn
Nice company these fools keep, eh? There are literally no depths to which these people will not sink. They attack war heroes and little boys and rescuers of Nazi victims indiscriminately, all for the “crime” of not agreeing with them. They — and the people they imitate, the Limbaughs and the Malkins and the Swift Vote Boat Vets and the Karl-whispering-campaign-Roves — are terrible, broken people. There is no space in their mind for the concept of differing opinions, or live and let live, or agree to disagree. Anyone differing from them in the slightest is the greatest evil the world has known and must be completely and utterly destroyed. It is as cowardly as it is pathological. Sometimes it seems as if almost the entire GOP blogosphere is nothing more than the faint click of marbles and the distant odor of strawberries.
Categories: Bloggin, General, Politics |
9 Comments
May 28th, 2008
California might not vote to enshrine discrimination into the state Constitution:
The Field Poll survey found 51 percent against approving a possible November ballot measure to prohibit gay marriage, with 43 percent in favor. A slightly differently worded question on the same issue found 54 percent opposed and 40 percent in favor.
In the long term, this appears to be a done deal, at least in California:
The poll found a strong generational gap on the issue, with those aged 18-29 approving of gay marriage by 68 percent and those 65 or older disapproving by 55 percent.
I have said this before, but my kids are going to look back on the anti-equality forces with the same mix of contempt, disgust, and confusion that I look back on people like Nixon and Bull Connor. There is no good reason to deny homosexuals equality in civil marriages. None. There are only vague notions that expanding the number of married people somehow weakens the institution of marriage (and if the illogic of the notion doesn’t turn you off the notion, the big fat lack of decline in marriage in Mass and Denmark and Canada should), tradition (as if an old bad idea is somehow made good my the passage of time) and religious based condemnations. A religious objection is a perfectly acceptable reason for a church to refuse to marry homosexuals but it is not and cannot be a reason for denying equality in civil rights to homosexuals. That way lies the politics of division, of religious bigotry, and of “my God can beat up your God”. Unless there is a very good reason to do otherwise, different classes of people shold be treated as equally as is humanly possible.
Fear of the future, hatred of people not like you, and your own personal religious preferences do not qualify as very good reasons. it is heartening to see that simple truth becoming more and more accepted.
Categories: Church & State, Culture, Legal Issues, Privacy, Religion |
9 Comments
May 27th, 2008
I never quite got around to posting my ever-so-confident finals predictions, after being nearly perfect in the last two rounds. I was going to say Penguins in five. Oops. Maybe I had the number of games right, anyway…
Categories: NHL, Sports |
No Comments
May 27th, 2008
What’s surprising about these revelations?
- Bush relied on “propaganda” to sell the [Iraq] war.
- the Iraq war was not necessary.”
- [T]he White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.
- [T]wo top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them
- [A]fter Hurricane Katrina, the White House “spent most of the first week in a state of denial,”
Only their source: Bush loyalist (until now, apparently) Scott McClellan
Categories: Iraq, Katrina, Politics |
4 Comments
May 27th, 2008
Okay, old news, but Joan Walsh seems to think that any outrage over Clinton’s comments is manufactured:
Thanks to my long weekend, I could probably get away without addressing the controversy over Clinton’s RFK remarks, which is finally dying down. But I think this is an important and disturbing issue for Democrats. Criticize Clinton’s vote to authorize the Iraq war, her pandering on the gas tax holiday, her lame remarks about “hardworking Americans, white Americans,” her response to Obama’s “bitter” remarks, her lackluster campaign strategy coming into 2008. I’ve criticized all of that, and more. But to argue that she was suggesting she’s staying in the race because Obama might be assassinated — even after both Clinton, and the journalists who interviewed her, said her reference was to RFK’s June campaign, not to his heartbreaking murder — requires either a special kind of paranoia or venal political opportunism.
This is very wrong, and it is wrong in a way that highlights some of the blindness of certain Clinton supporters. The Clinton campaign has unabashedly been, at least in part, about the notion that Clinton is more electable than Obama. Her arguments about winning in swing states is one example, but much of the argument has been a more subtle version of “the black guy can’t win”. When Clinton talks about how Obama cannot connect with hardworking, white Americans, when her camp says that when Bill tries to discount Obama’s victory in South Carolina by saying African Americans always win South Carolina, when the campaign is slow to distance from Ferraro after her racist remarks, when Clinton refuses to clearly state that Obama is not a Muslim on 60 minutes the implication is pretty clear: Obama cannot win because he is Black. The argument isn’t really being made very subtly anymore, and it is that argument that needs to be kept in mind when viewing the reaction to her comments about RFK’s assassination.
From Edgar Mevers to Martin Luther King, Black political leaders have been removed by the simple expediency of a bullet. It is a known and frightening part of our history, and it is no secret that racism is a live and well in this country and in this campaign. So when Clinton, after months of sometimes clumsy and offensive variations of the argument “the black guy can’t win”, implies that she needs to stay in the race because a popular candidate was killed late in the primary process, it is a legitimate window into her thinking. Clinton has stubbornly and steadfastly clung to the fiction that Obama is simply unacceptable to white working class males and thus must lose the general election. No one seriously thinks that she believes that Obama is likely to be assassinated, but I think it is reasonable to note that the comment is just an extreme version of an argument that is simply and obviously not correct. That Clinton would, even in an unguarded moment, use the death of a popular leader as a reason she must continue her campaign against an African American candidate it is a disturbing look at just how deeply Clinton and, by extension, her campaign has internalized the notion that “the black guy can’t win”.
And that is a worrying sign. Because if they believe it that deeply, then it is much more likely that they will continue to run a campaign that makes, sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly, the argument that the Democrats cannot risk running a black man for the Presidency. There is nothing at all good that can come from that and that is absolutely something to be concerned about.
Categories: General, Politics |
9 Comments
May 27th, 2008
Yeah, it’s been a while, sorry. My wife has gone through a mini-medical crisis (stabilized now) and work has been extremely busy. Combined with the drudgery of the never-ending primary, I haven’t had the interest or energy to blog. But lately I have been composing posts in my head, so I suppose that means the interest is back. So I will be around more often from here on out. Thanks for your patience. If you are still here …
Categories: Bloggin, General |
6 Comments
May 27th, 2008
You know Hillary’s oft-repeated claim that it’s “unprecedented” for someone to ask a second-place candidate to quit the Democratic primaries when a clear favorite has emerged, but has not yet clinched the nomination? Turns out, not so much, with her husband’s 1992 campaign having done pretty much exactly the same thing. Wort a read. Via TPM.
Categories: Politics |
1 Comment
May 26th, 2008
Our thoughts are with those who have lost loved ones to war (any war), and with those who have loved ones in harm’s way now.
It’s easy to forget that Memorial Day is about a lot more important things than weekend getaways and back yard grilling. Try to take a moment to remember what’s important.
Categories: Holiday |
22 Comments
May 24th, 2008
Frontline: Bush’s War
Be prepared to invest some time, though: It’s four and a half hours. It’s maddening at times, but worth every minute, to get a good idea of how we got where we are today, and the problems that face us. I just finished it today.
This, by the way, is what good documentary journalism looks like. Not some Michael Moore or Fox News partisan hack job, it’s a detailed, and well researched history of the war so far. It includes interviews with key players like Richard Armitage, L. Paul Bremer III, Ahmad Chalabi, Richard Clarke, John Yoo, Philip Zelikow, David Kay, several military commanders, Iraqi expatriates, etc.
Categories: Iraq |
No Comments
May 23rd, 2008
So I was just watching the 1955 version of Daddy Long Legs on TCM, and this type of movie has always creeped me out. What is it with “classic” movies, where there’s always some fifty-something or sixty-something guy romancing an 18 or 20 year old girl, and nobody finds anything wrong with this? My Fair Lady is another example. What’s up with that?
Categories: Culture, I do too have a life |
22 Comments
May 21st, 2008
I took this photo of a riser display selling US flags at Lowe’s in Memphis, TN. Click the image for a larger view.
I laughed my ass off.
Categories: Humor |
5 Comments
May 19th, 2008
Hilzoy, on the GOP’s currently bleak outlook: They Should Have Read Their Hayek.
Categories: Politics |
No Comments
May 15th, 2008
I’m no fan of Chris Matthews — not by a longshot — but we need more of this (video via TPM). When some pinhead — and I don’t care if he’s from the left, right, or center — goes on and obviously doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about, he needs to be called on it. And when somebody uses rhetoric that’s obviously bullshit, that needs to be pointed out, too.
Now if only more of the media would do it, and do it less selectively. I long for a news media where guests know that they’d better not go on expecting to be able to parrot talking points, and where they know that they’d better know what the hell they’re talking about. But I’ll never see that day, I’m sure.
Categories: Media, News & Current Events, Politics |
39 Comments
May 8th, 2008
I got the conference semis all right (Kevin can’t say the same), even if I missed the number of games. Time to put my good streak on the line with the conference finals.
Flyers vs. Penguins: This is a tough series to call, because brawn usually beats finesse in the playoffs, but I think Pittsburgh (the finesse team) is a much better team than Philadelphia. So I’m going with Penguins in 7
Stars vs. Red Wings: It’s always hard to pick these, especially when I despise both teams involved. 
The Red Wings are looking like the team to beat this year, and with two quality netminders, I don’t think the Stars have quite enough to take them, even though Turco’s playing about as well as he ever has in net for Dallas. Red Wings in 6
P.S. Sorry, Ang. Being a Sharks fan has to be a tough life!
Categories: NHL, Sports |
3 Comments
May 8th, 2008
Josh Marshall offers a standard on-the-one-hand, on-the-other analysis of the question whether Hillary would or should accept an offer of the VP slot on the Democratic ticket: she’d have to wait 8 long years, and be 69 years old, before she could run for Pres. again, and she may have more influence in the Senate; but it would be an unprecedented achievement and a chance to be right at the center of power once more. He concludes she’d be better off in the Senate, where the Democrats are likely to be the majority and she’ll accrue enough seniority to really get things done.
Most people who accept the vice presidency do so either because they believe it will line them up to succeed to the presidency or because it brings them to a level of power and honor their careers held little prospect of bringing them otherwise. But neither applies to Hillary Clinton. She’s already of the stature and standing to run for president. She’s a genuinely historic figure. And she’s already been heavily involved in a successful two term administration.
Remember too that the recent trend for greater vice presidential involvement in key administration decision-making has brought with it a flat requirement that vice presidents be strictly loyal and politically subservient to the president. Quite simply, the vice presidency is beneath Hillary’s stature. It’s not clear to me why Hillary would want to spend four or eight years in a position that I think would actually diminish her stature for the possibility of running for president again almost a decade from now.
As it goes, it’s not an unreasonable analysis. And, as he notes, there is a serious question whether Obama can overcome the bitterness of the campaign to trust her as VP, or even see her as the best choice. But I think there is a way to swing the deal that would work tremendous benefits for both of them and the country.
(more…)
Categories: General, News & Current Events, Politics |
21 Comments
May 3rd, 2008
Brooklynite, one of our sometime commenters here, has been working on a great essay on white anti-racism - the work that white people are obligated to do to reduce the impact of racism on society, and the difference between that - being actively anti-racist - and being “non-racist”. He’ll be posting it soon, so keep an eye out. But it has prompted some counter-revolutionary thinking on my part, which has caught me predictable amounts of shit over on his blog. Even so, something that occurs to me off and on about the question of the “obligation to activism” - the idea that we are all morally required to put effort into making the world better for the oppressed - has been triggered by that discussion, as well as by the recent furor in the feminist/person-of-color blogosphere over perceived white indifference to POC issues. I never know quite how to express this thought, or what significance it has given the world we actually do live in, but I’ll try it out here in the hope that no one will notice.
What occurs to me is this: anti-oppression activism of all kinds is a kind of contingent undertaking - a reaction to conditions as they are (and should not be) that seeks to achieve conditions as they are not (but should be). It is in a way Utopian, in that it seeks what in practical terms is unlikely, but more to the point in that it is reactive to conditions that simply should not be allowed to exist and conceivably might not if the world were a better place, or if we succeed in making it one in the future. In other words, action against inequality seeks to put itself out of business - to eliminate the conditions that make it necessary. The fact that it is currently necessary is a failure of those living today to undertake the work of eliminating it. To the extent that each of us has not adopted the anti-racist mindset, racism persists; to the extent that we do successfully spread anti-racism, racism will die, and with it the need for and practice of anti-racism. If this is true, the lack of engagement in activism against oppression may be a sign, in some cases, not of anti-progressive attitudes, but of overly optimistic, and progressive, ones.
(more…)
Categories: Culture, General, Politics |
8 Comments
