Friday, June 04, 2004


Posted here Friday, June 04, 2004 at 3:11:46 PM    

Good reminder that, so far, there are two parts of the campaign, and Bush has leverage on both. Hence

http://mt.skybuilders.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/771

Last Fall Bush knew that the jobs number was going to be the weak "headline hammer". That is, the talking point that would hammer his Presidency as being bad for the economy. So, as with every previous problem, the important task of the Executive was to fix the headline problem. We live in a country divided - one with a right wing press that reads the headlines, and one with a press that is more ambigious that reads the body.

Creating jobs is simple: crude fiscal stimulus in the form of spending on Iraq does the trick, and since the Democratic Congress will not hesitate to vote for "defense", which is really a slush fund for Bush's re-election, that was the road to go.

However, money is like water - the pressure comes out someplace, and in our case it is coming out as commodity inflation. The jobs we are seeing are low quality jobs, generated by rising prices - people take more work at lower wages, which raises productivity artificially, because GDP growth is inflated. These "Phillips Effect" jobs turn the obvious job loss problem - Bush needs 6 more months of averagish growth to get to even for his tenure - into, what was hoped to be an unheadlinable problem of people working more and getting less. No factoid, no problem, runs the Rovian Reasoning.


********

Posted here Friday, June 04, 2004 at 11:16:17 AM    

from A terrible love of war / James Hillman.

We can never prevent war or speak sensibly of peace and disarmament unless we enter this love of war. Unless we move our imaginations into the martial state of soul, we cannot comprehend its pull. ...Failure of imagination is another way of describing "persistence in error," which Barbara Tuchman says leads nations and their leaders down the road to disaster on "the march of folly,"' as she calls her study of wars from Troy to Vietnam. The origin of these disasters lies in the unimaginative mind-set of "political and bureaucratic life that subdues the functioning intellect in favor of "working the levers."8 Working the levers of duty, following the hierarchy of command without imagining anything beyond the narrowness of facts reduced to yet narrower numbers....


********

Posted here Friday, June 04, 2004 at 10:28:39 AM    

First report..

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/04/national/04clinton.html

Clinton, on the Road Again, Stumps for a Book, Not a Seat

By STEPHEN KINZER

CHICAGO, June 3 - Bill Clinton is back.

The former president kicked off his first book tour on Thursday with a wide-ranging speech here that touched on his great-uncle Buddy, the National Rifle Association, William Butler Yeats and political attacks "that would have blistered the hair off a dog's back."

Mr. Clinton spoke to a hall packed with more than 2,000 booksellers just weeks before the release of his memoir, "My Life," which is to be delivered to bookstores on June 22. Sonny Mehta, editor in chief of Alfred A. Knopf, which is publishing the book, said the first printing would be 1.5 million copies. Mr. Mehta called the book "the fullest and most nuanced account of a presidency ever written" and promised that "our author is going to work enthusiastically to assure its success."

If the Chicago speech was any indication, Americans are in for another round of Mr. Clinton's storytelling, homespun philosophy and political insights. But Bush-bashers may be disappointed.

Mr. Clinton was remarkably conciliatory toward the Bush administration, portraying it as trying to find a new political paradigm in a swiftly changing world and gently chiding those who are horrified by the nation's course.

"You shouldn't worry about this," he said. "What's going on has happened before in America, and it should be no particular cause for concern to you."

The closest he came to criticizing President Bush was when he asserted, "Politics is not religion, and we should govern on the basis of evidence, not theology." That line won the biggest applause of the evening, some of it evidently coming from listeners who were disappointed that he did not take a more critical tone.

Mr. Clinton said he had written his book in longhand, filling about 20 notebooks. He said his editor, Robert Gottlieb, had considerably influenced its contents, at one point telling him he could not write at length about his favorite movie, "High Noon," and at another point asking him, "Did you know any sane people as a child?"

Although he spoke warmly about old political rivals like Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich, Mr. Clinton did show a flash of anger when he mentioned Kenneth W. Starr, the special prosecutor who investigated him. He said that while writing about his confrontation with Mr. Starr, he had to take a four-hour break to calm himself.

"I don't spare myself in this book," he was quick to add. "I take on a lot of water for not just the personal but the political mistakes I made."

Mr. Clinton said his book told two sets of stories.

"You could almost look at it as two books," he said. "The first is the story of my life and the story of America and how my life interwove with America's story."

This part, he said, deals with his rural upbringing and political coming of age, with special focus on the 1960's.

"If you look back on the 60's and think there was more good than harm, you're probably a Democrat," he suggested. "If you think there was more harm than good, you're probably a Republican."

The second part of the book, Mr. Clinton said, is "almost like a diary of the presidency." He said there was "a lot of policy in it, some will say too much."

"I tell the story as it happened to me," he said. "I want people to understand what it was like to be president."

Once notorious for his lack of discipline, Mr. Clinton did something he said Mr. Mehta had told him not to do: tell stories from his book. Most were from his childhood, including one about a fat and unattractive schoolteacher who told his students that he began every day by looking in the mirror and telling himself, "Vernon, you're beautiful." He joked that some of the Arkansas characters he describes might have come from a novel by Gabriel García Márquez.

"There's a lot of personal stuff, even in the White House years," he said. "I try to tell how this little story is part of America's big story."

Mr. Clinton said his book concluded with reflections on "how I think my philosophy should operate in the post-9/11 world."

"A lot of presidential memoirs are dull and self-serving," he said. "I hope mine is interesting and self-serving."


********

Posted here Friday, June 04, 2004 at 10:14:28 AM    

And in the curent issue of the NYRB

Unfit to Print?
By Michael Massing
On May 26, The New York Times published a lengthy editors' note belatedly acknowledging that the paper's pre-war coverage "was not as rigorous as it should have been." According to the note, accounts of Iraqi defectors were not analyzed with sufficient skepticism, and "articles based on dire claims about Iraq tended to get prominent display" while follow-up articles that called the original ones into question "were sometimes buried. In some cases, there was no follow-up at all." The Times deserves credit for running a detailed mea culpa. Yet the note seems less than forthright.

The low key tone of the NYT apology makes it feel like their pre-war Iraq coverage was about something rather more trivial. thre is no sense of blood, or damaged US reputation.


********

Posted here Friday, June 04, 2004 at 9:59:06 AM    

Time for some catching up.

Susan Sontag's article on the photos seems lasting. excerpts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1223344,00.html

Considered in this light, the photographs are us. That is, they are representative of distinctive policies of this administration and of the fundamental corruptions of colonial rule. The Belgians in the Congo, the French in Algeria committed identical atrocities and practiced torture and sexual humiliation on despised recalcitrant natives. Add to this generic corruption, the mystifying, near-total unpreparedness of the American rulers of Iraq to deal with the complex realities of the country after its "liberation"- that is, conquest. And add to that the over-arching doctrines of the Bush administration, namely that the United States has embarked on an endless war (against a protean enemy called "terrorism"), and that those detained in this war are, if the president so decides, "unlawful combatants" - a policy enunciated by Donald Rumsfeld as early as January 2002 - and therefore, as Rumsfeld said, "technically" they "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Convention, and you have a perfect recipe for the cruelties and crimes committed against the thousands incarcerated without charges and access to lawyers in American-run prisons that have been set up since the attack of September 11th, 2001.

...

There is more and more recording of what people do, by themselves. At least or especially in America, Andy Warhol's ideal of filming real events in real time - life isn't edited, why should its record be edited? - has become a norm for millions of webcasts, in which people record their day, each in his or her own reality show. Here I am - waking and yawning and stretching, brushing my teeth, making breakfast, getting the kids off to school. People record all aspects of their lives, store them in computer files, and send the files around. Family life goes with the recording of family life - even when, or especially when, the family is in the throes of crisis and disgrace. Surely the dedicated, incessant home-videoing of one another, in conversation and monologue, over many years was the most astonishing material in Capturing the Friedmans (2003), Andrew Jarecki's documentary about a Long Island family embroiled in pedophilia charges. An erotic life is, for more and more people, what can be captured in digital photographs and on video.

..........The torture of prisoners is not an aberration. It is a direct consequence of the doctrines of world struggle with which the Bush administration has sought to fundamentally change the domestic and foreign policy of the US. The Bush administration has committed the country to a new, pseudo-religious doctrine of war, endless war - for "the war on terror" is nothing less than that...

and Elizabeth Drew  in the NYRB, a good summary of the republican approach to the election.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17176

Bush has told people that he wants a "mandate" in this election to carry out his deepest wishes. If he receives one, or believes that he has received one, it is altogether likely that the environment will be further damaged, civil liberties will be further threatened, the Supreme Court will likely be set in a radically conservative direction for many years to come, and there will be a greater effort to privatize or cut social programs. The President is likely to feel that he has an even freer hand in foreign policy and in the use of military power, and less need to be accountable to Congress. For these reasons—and probably some that we can't yet imagine—this is the most consequential election in decades.


********