the Greater Nomadic Council

Closed Chambers

I'm reading a book now that I think would appeal to many of you. Those that take the Supreme Court seminar at our school read it as a required course; I'm not in the class, but I know the prof and she suggested I read it for kicks. It's called Closed Chambers, The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court. I'm less than halfway through (247 of 518 or so of actual text--the rest is footnotes and an index), but here's a little about it. I suggest you pick it up.

It's written by Edward Lazarus, who is currently a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, but was a clerk for Justice Blackmun in 1988-89. This book was published in 1999. It is clear from the preface that Lazarus tends left and has sharp criticism for the current court and its balkanized factions, but the balance of the book proper is relatively even-handed. (The author greatly admires Scalia's intelligence, writing that he is "brash, didactic, outspoken in his desire to reshape and limit the role of the federal courts, and he promised to bring to the Court more pure cerebral firepower than any Justice since Douglas had gone into decline.") Parts of it are gossip and behind-the-scenes intrigue (for example the sections on Judge Bork's nomination and eventual defeat in the Senate). Much of it is history, giving a good description of the major eras in the Court's history from Chief Justice Marshall to the trail-blazing Warren court, the Burger court, and the current Rehnquist court. It is written for non-lawyers, so it's accessible for everyone. Much of it is stuff that you simply don't learn in law school, for instance the Court's own procedural rules and chamber ettiquite: e.g. how conferences are taken, when and how votes happen, how Justices are selected to write opinions and how others join, other ministerial duties that Justices have for the federal circuits, how many votes are needed to accept a case for cert, etc. Some of the rules are court-made and informally enforced out of deference to tradition; others are statutory.

The first large section of the book deals with death penalty cases. A few chapters choose a single case, and describe everything about it, from the case facts, to its process up through the lower courts and the sometimes last-minute decisions that affect whether that phone will ring or not. Another large section deals with racial equality. (I was particularly inspired by the future Justice Thurgood Marshall's work as a trial lawyer for the NAACP.) An interesting portion deals with the twenty-seven year old Rehnquist, then a clerk to Justice Jackson, and his position on federal habeas corpus and the status of Plessy v. Ferguson (which upheld a law providing "separate but equal" accomodations on a train).

Habeas corpus is a last ditch effort to require the state or the federal government to justify a person's imprisonment. I won't get too far into it, but when a defendant has exhausted his direct appeals through a state court, he may apply for habeas relief in federal district court to get a due process review of his conviction. In 1952, federal courts were using habeas review to subject the work of state judges (particularly those in the south) to sharp scrutiny, often overturning convictions where black people were sentenced to death by all white juries for crimes against whites. The idea is that federal judges, who serve life tenures, are more insulated from political pressures and are generally better educated on Constitutional issues than their state court counterparts. Rehnquist, writing to his boss Justice Jackson, pushed for the strictest habeas review, wanting to make state court judgments rejecting due process claims final and unreviewable. This would essentially perpetuate the good ol boy courts in the south that so grossly ignored the rights of black citizens.

Here's the really shocking part: When Brown v. Board of Education came up for Supreme Court review (which eventually held that separate was inherently unequal), Rehnquist counseled Jackson that Plessy "was right and should be re-affirmed" on much the same states' rights argument that he had put forward against federal habeas. "If this Court," Rehnquist wrote, "because its members are 'liberal' and dislike segregation, now chooses to strike it down, it differs from the McReynolds court [striking down economic legislation] only in the kinds of litigants it favors and the kinds of special claims it protects."

Of course, Brown is one of the most important Supreme Court decisions of all-time, was a turning point in the Court's sometimes turgid march toward equality, and was the most lasting decision from the Warren era.

In 1971, Rehnquist wrote the Senate Judiciary Committee that his memo "was prepared by me as a statement of Justice Jackson's tentative views" and was not "an accurate statement of my own views at that time." A study of Jackson's draft writings in Brown, a comparison with Rehnquist's other memos to Jackson during his clerkship, and the recollections of Rehnquist's co-clerks all contradict this claim.

This is the part that I found most appalling. I think you guys will benefit from the education in this country's highest court, as I have. Just in case you never read this, and are inclined to be cynical, much of this book is downright inspiring. Some battles are narrowly lost, others are impressively and indelibly won. The gossipy parts are interesting, too. Following the publication, the Court has changed the confidentiality governing law clerks to demand absolute secrecy forever. This may be the last book of its kind.

But don't take my word for it! (Amazon here--new for 12, used for 5.)

Latest Zogby

Just got a Zogby fax with the latest numbers from S. Carolina, Missouri, Oklahoma and Arizona:

S.C.
Edwards 25%
Kerry 24%

MO
Kerry 45%
Edwards 11%

OK
Clark 27%
Kerry 19%
Edwards 17%

AZ
Kerry 38%
Clark 17%

Of note from Zogby: In S.C. Sharpton is getting 5% and only 10% of blacks Zogby calls him no Rev. Jackson . . . .Kerry is he only person who will likely take delegates from all four states . . . Edwards strong among independents and NASCAR but Kerry strong every where else.

Caffeine Jolts the Blogosphere

The bloggers are getting jittery:

A Dialogue: Blood Sugar and Neurotransmitter Levels

Professors On Coke

Who Wants Caffeine?

Liquid Attention Span

The Coffee Time Big Leagues

The Great Coffee Controversy

The Coffee-Powered Academy

Since I'm neither a professor nor a theologian, perhaps I'm not qualified to state my own caffeine preferences, but I've been slowly weaning myself from coffee. I think it just makes me more tired in the long run and I don't like being dependent on it to stay awake. I still drink two to three cups of green tea a day, but the caffeine content is very low. Plus, I already have a problem with insomnia. I don't need coffee conspiring with my brain to keep me awake at night.

Coming This Summer . . . Mos Def is . . .

FORD PREFECT! That's right, Mos has inked a deal to play the coolest alien ever in the upcoming film version of Hitchhiker's Guide. This is officially awesome. Now if only we can get a two-headed Ludacris in as Zaphod Beeblebrox, it'll be gold. Gold, Jerry, gold!

Via J-Smooth.

Nit-Picking the Lord of the Rings

Although most of Jackson's deviations from the book didn't bother me, I never understood why he made some of the most egregious ones. This guy takes it a bit far, though. Still, it's a nice, detailed list of everything Jackson changed.

Russian Roulette, You Know, For Kids!

This is great. I think I'll buy one for my nephew.

Major Changes in Politics

Jeff Alworth has a nice explanation of what happened to Dean and what changes his campaign may signal.

Material Support

Doesn't this count as material support for terrorists? Shouldn't Perle be held to the same standards as others? I say lock him up without access to a lawyer, then try him in secret.

Sixth Matter Form Created

There are now six forms of matter.

Dean Replaces Trippi

I guess this shouldn't be so surprising considering his recent showing, but I was shocked when I heard Dean had replaced his campaign manager, Joe Trippi with Roy Neel. Apparently Trippi was advising Dean to wait until Michigan to really try and win, but Dean wants to fight in every state. What effect will this have on his campaign? I certainly don't know, but despite the amazing harnessing of the Internet that Trippi engineered, he hasn't been able to help Dean beat Kerry. I just hope that even if Dean doesn't win the nomination, future candidates will recognize that the power of the Internet in politics will only continue to grow and that, at some point, they will be forced to embrace it.

UPDATE: Not only has Trippi left the campaign, they're also broke. So much for Dean's financial lead. Unless he can raise some more money quickly, he'll be out after February 3rd which should mean Kerry coasts to victory. I was counting on Dean to hang around and tear Kerry down some so Edwards would have a shot, but it looks like that's unlikely to happen now.

The Case for Marriage

This article discusses the mental and physical health benefits of marriage, whether it's of the hetero- or homosexual variety. The author includes a wealth of links to support his argument.

Soma

Anybody want some soma?

Ikeaphobia

Here's a good pro-Ikea, pro-Starbucks rant. Well, to be honest it's more of an anti-self-righteous-but-misguided-Ikea-and-Starbucks-haters rant, but nobody likes it when the linked words take up most of a post. It offends the sensibilities.

On a related note, a while back my wife and I were sitting outside at a CCs coffee down on Lamar (the one just south of Waterloo Records) getting a caffeine boost when an old, ratty van carrying two young, ratty hipsters drove by with the windows down. The passenger leaned out to berate us for drinking coffee from a *gasp* corporation and then pointed to his head and commanded us to "Think!" One of the employees heard this and mentioned to us that all CCs are actually franchises and, hence, individually owned. This is an example of exactly the kind of behavior exhibited by hipsters and the young self-righteous left that annoys me as well as the author of the aforementioned rant.

Sullivan on Kurtz

Andrew Sullivan dissects Kurtz's awful article, too.

Digital Paper

Philips is set to start manufacturing digital paper that could be rolled up, in some cases, to a size smaller than a pen when not in use. Ars Technica has more on this.

This is something I've been waiting for for years now. My dream device should be here in 5-15 years. It will be a handheld device with the computing power of a modern desktop and the ability to work as a cell phone. It will have a full color, paper-thin display that can retract into the body of the device, high speed wireless Internet access, decent sound, and it'll be relatively cheap (under $500).

Kurtz, Marriage, Gays, and Speciousness

File this article from Stanley Kurtz under "Correlation Does Not Equal Causation". Kurtz spends almost all his time in the article discussing the decline in heterosexual marriage and the increase of cohabitation and out-of-wedlock births in Scandinavian countries, then blames the homosexuals. He even manages to undermine his own argument with these two paragraphs:

In Sweden, as elsewhere, the sixties brought contraception, abortion, and growing individualism. Sex was separated from procreation, reducing the need for "shotgun weddings." These changes, along with the movement of women into the workforce, enabled and encouraged people to marry at later ages. With married couples putting off parenthood, early divorce had fewer consequences for children. That weakened the taboo against divorce. Since young couples were putting off children, the next step was to dispense with marriage and cohabit until children were desired. Americans have lived through this transformation. The Swedes have simply drawn the final conclusion: If we've come so far without marriage, why marry at all? Our love is what matters, not a piece of paper. Why should children change that?

Two things prompted the Swedes to take this extra step--the welfare state and cultural attitudes. No Western economy has a higher percentage of public employees, public expenditures--or higher tax rates--than Sweden. The massive Swedish welfare state has largely displaced the family as provider. By guaranteeing jobs and income to every citizen (even children), the welfare state renders each individual independent. It's easier to divorce your spouse when the state will support you instead.

So, he lays out the very reasons for the decline in marriage then, in his hasty conclusion, writes this:

This suggests that gay marriage is both an effect and a cause of the increasing separation between marriage and parenthood. As rising out-of-wedlock birthrates disassociate heterosexual marriage from parenting, gay marriage becomes conceivable. If marriage is only about a relationship between two people, and is not intrinsically connected to parenthood, why shouldn't same-sex couples be allowed to marry? It follows that once marriage is redefined to accommodate same-sex couples, that change cannot help but lock in and reinforce the very cultural separation between marriage and parenthood that makes gay marriage conceivable to begin with.

We see this process at work in the radical separation of marriage and parenthood that swept across Scandinavia in the nineties. If Scandinavian out-of-wedlock birthrates had not already been high in the late eighties, gay marriage would have been far more difficult to imagine. More than a decade into post-gay marriage Scandinavia, out-of-wedlock birthrates have passed 50 percent, and the effective end of marriage as a protective shield for children has become thinkable. Gay marriage hasn't blocked the separation of marriage and parenthood; it has advanced it.

In other words, since these other cultural factors led to the decline of heterosexual marriage and increased the acceptance of homosexual marriage, homosexual marriage is a Bad Thing. His claim that gay marriage "lock[s] in and reinforce[s]" the cultural attitudes that have led to this decline in the first place is particularly weak. It is akin to claiming that the act of eating dessert has locked in your choice of entree.

Now, I don't necessarily disagree with him that marriage as a norm may be healthier for both those married and any children they may have, but if Kurtz is serious about increasing heterosexual marriage rates, he should be advocating that, not using the choices a bunch of breeders have made to blast queers. Otherwise, he's just being intellectually dishonest and hateful.

Nevertheless, Kurtz does score one point by showing that arguments like Andrew Sullivan's that homosexual marriage would strengthen the institution of marriage are almost equally feeble. However, gay marriage proponents' motivations in advancing this line are quite different from Kurtz's. They are trying to combat prejudice and ignorance in service of social goods - tolerance and acceptance of homosexual relationships and recognition that homosexuals can be just as committed as heterosexuals. That this particular argument is largely speculative just means they should choose a better one. There is a plethora of good reasons to support gay marriage; the primary one, for me, is the simple recognition of gays as equal to and deserving of the same rights as heterosexuals.

This is what Kurtz hopes to destroy through his fallacious reasoning and fear-mongering.

B-Boys and Da Pope

Does this mean breakin' ain't cool no mo?

You Are Kermit

Yes, I realize these sorts of quizzes are old news and everyone has probably already seen this particular one, but I thought the result was funny considering that I've been compared to Kermit when on the dance floor more than once. (You should see me dance at home with my cat though. Woo boy! I can really get down!)

You are Kermit the Frog.
You are reliable, responsible and caring. And you
have a habit of waving your arms about
maniacally.

Why Politicians Won't Answer The Question

An interesting article that explains why politicians don't answer the questions they're asked. Short answer: the interviewers won't make them.

Kaiju Big Blog Battel!!!!!

I can't listen to the actual audio, since I'm at work, but I can already tell that this is a classic. Jay Smooth over at hiphopmusic.com, my favorite hiphop blog, has kicked a wicked diss track at Jessica Hopper, mad genius of The Unicorn's Tear. Can Sullivan rocking bulletproof be far behind?

P.S. As Jay makes clear, it's all in good fun.

P.P.S. I think the similarities and differences between this post and Mike's immediately previous one are really interesting.

Atrios and Sullivan

Talking about the blogosphere. I didn't get to listen to the whole thing so I don't know if this MP3 gets to the other bloggers (Josh Marshall was supposed to appear among others), but I did hear Sullivan let loose some juicy attacks on Atrios.

Funniest. Dilbert. Ever.

I read Dilbert every day, but this has to be one of the funniest to date.

Dean: The Remixes

I think the media attention paid to Dean's barbaric yawp is ridiculous, but how can I pass up sharing this? Many, many remixes based on the Dean Scream. Thus I become PartOfTheProblem.

Another ARG Poll

This is going to be my last post of polls in New Hampshire, since anyone who wants to can go look them up themselves.

So, Clark is still flat, Dean is hemorrhaging support, Kerry is the front-runner, and my dark horse favorite, Edwards, is about to pass Dean.

Hey Ya, Charlie Brown

Are you tired of Hey Ya! yet? No? Good! Check out this video of it then.

Edwards Moves Up

According to this Rasmussen survey, Kerry holds almost a 10 point lead in New Hampshire, while Edwards, Dean, and Clark are fighting it out for second. The ARG poll doesn't show quite such a dramatic rise for Edwards, but it's pretty close and the overall picture is the same. Either way, it's clear Kerry has become the man to beat. Can he handle the front-runner mantle this time around?

UPDATE: Apparently, the Rasmussen poll is a national poll, so not necessarily indicative of the trend in New Hampshire. Guess I should pay more attention.

New Hampshire Round-Up

My entirely excessive New Hampshire debate summary can be found here.

You people are turning me into a monster. I'm actually thinking of getting cable connected at my house.

A Few Quick Rants About the Presidential Campaign

1. I watched the debate last night and it was largely a draw. Dean and Edwards were on top form--just excellent. Edwards could hardly have been better. As for Dean, don't count him out yet. He still raised more money post-Iowa than Kerry and Edwards combined. And the public has a short memory.

Kerry also did great, but partially because his questions were softballs. Clark had some tough questions, including being asked to denounce some comments by Michael Moore accusing Bush of being AWOL that were spoken in Clark's presence. What rot! How can they hold Clark responsible for Moore's mouth? Who cares if he doesn't know whether Bush was AWOL or not? Then they asked Clark how he could be pro-choice and Catholic at the same time. Clark did well, but he failed to simply make a distinction between his public views and religious views.

Unsurprisingly, some are spinning last night as a Clark defeat. Yet Clark did what he had to do--he looked and sounded like a Republican while actually articulating Democratic positions. This is a guy that can appeal to GOP voters at a gut level and I think he's still a better speaker and debater than Bush or McCain. With all of his electoral assets, Clark doesn't have to seem as articulate as the more experienced Dems, and since he was good enough last night, he looked strong to me.

I don't know. I'm torn between Clark and Edwards as our best bet, but I wish both of them had a lot more experience.

2. I watched Dean's post-Iowa remarks on CSPAN. In itself, there was nothing wrong with Dean's speech, although Harkin's intro was pretty pathetic. I suppose it didn't sound good on radio (perhaps one couldn't hear him laughing?), but seriously, how can the way the media spun this be interpreted as anything other than a smear? Reading the headlines, it's getting hard not to be something of a conspiracist these days. I guess the likliest explanation is that most members of the media simply don't like Dean and were eager to go for the throat. Obviously that doesn't bode well for Dean. I suppose Kerry and Edwards are capable of sucking up to them more effectively and have greater respect for the power of the image, which is damn important.

The other day I was speaking to one of my roomates about the primary, and she asked me.

"Who is the guy with the terrible red face who goes around yelling "You have the power. You have the power!"?

"That was Dean. Where did you see that?"

"Oh, on the news the other day."

If there's one lesson coming out of Iowa--it's this. Television, and not the Internet, is the dominant media for the vast, vast majority. We need a master of the medium. This campaign is going to be won or lost in news clips and we need to get used to it.

3. Meanwhile, Dean and his wife apparently endured an interview with Dianne Sawyer yesterday (eeek). I suppose Maureen Dowd will have a wonderful little column about Judith's wardrobe in her next NYT op-ed.

I wonder if Dean ever asks himself-why didn't he just stay in Vermont and let these vampires feed somewhere else?

Update Timothy Noah nails Sawyer and Dowd much better than I ever could. And check out Suellentrop's wrap up of the debate on the same site.

Bush, BBQ Pusher

Read this strange conversation between Bush and the press pool. Some highlights:

"Put some of your high-priced money right here"
"My job is to secure the homeland and that's exactly what we're going to do. But I'm here to take somebody's order"
"Let me explain how the economy works"

(emphases mine)

There's more. What really gets me about this, beyond Bush's single-minded devotion to buying some ribs, is that he feels the need to elevate the act of buying them into some grand statement ("I'm here to help this restaurant by buying some food") as if it's some supremely moral act.

Maybe I'm just feeling grumpy. It's funny, slightly disturbing stuff, either way.

How Would Rove Attack Kerry?

Since Kerry seems to now be the front-runner, which a win in New Hampshire would probably cement, perhaps we should all start to fret about his electability. This article at TNR does just that, showing the many ways the Rove Propaganda Machine would smear Kerry.

As for me, I want Edwards to win. A couple of years ago, he looked like the best candidate; he still does today. His wonderful communication skills, his personality, and his positive, populist campaign would make him a formidable opponent for Bush. Of course, he has to place at least a strong second in New Hampshire, if not win it outright (talk about beating expectations) and then win South Carolina to have a chance.

Kerry Takes the Lead

It looks like Kerry's momentum and Dean's slipping support have given Kerry the lead in New Hampshire. Daily Kos has a roundup of the tracking polls. Granted, these aren't exact, but they're all showing the same trend; Kerry is shooting up, Dean is slipping, Clark is stagnant, and Edwards is getting a miniscule bump. I'm really interested to see if Dean can reverse things and if Edwards can make another meteoric rise through campaigning.

I Used to Believe

This site is something like Group Hug, but without all the incest and other strange or disgusting problems.

Instead, it's about the strange things we believed as children. Check it out.

The Sidewalk Opened Up To Swallow Their Souls

Check out the pictures at the top and bottom of the page. My favorites are the ones at the bottom.

Sidewalk chalk art

Kerry, the Hypocrite?

A quote from John Kerry in the Times:

"I know what it's like to stand up to a president who's leading our nation in a radically wrong direction," Mr. Kerry said at the morning rally, singling out two Republicans General Clark has said he supported.

"There are veterans here who stood up to Richard Nixon and his war in Vietnam," Mr. Kerry said, pointing to supporters arrayed behind him. "There are veterans here who stood up to the illegal war that Ronald Reagan was conducting secretly in Central America."

Now, everything Kerry says is true - his record on Vietnam is sterling. But he's clearly trying to steal Dean's thunder as an anti-war candidate, when in fact he voted for the war in Iraq. Should he be judged by this one act, so clearly motivated by political calculation rather than moral judgment or plain good sense? I say yes. The course the Democrats have allowed the War in Error to take is simply unacceptable, and Kerry abdicated his chance at opposition. Though I'm sure I'll support Kerry if he gets the nomination, and probably even campaign for him (as well as I can in Texas), I won't be doing so in full throat. John McRory calls it the deal-breaker - he failed to show his mettle in one of the most important political moments of the past decade.

Art Restoration Controversy

An interview on the New Scientist website discusses the problems of art restoration and the restoration of Michelangelo's David specifically. One part of the interview particularly stood out for me:

A work of art is pretty much like a human being. We all get battered, we break bones, they mend, we go and get some disease, we get cured, and then we die. There's an organic life to a work of art, too. It accumulates experience as humans do, and those experiences shape it. Once you've understood that, the idea of going back to the original seems pointless, even if it were possible.

I've felt something of the same thing when I've seen restorations done on some of the major buildings in Paris. One image that struck me was the cleaning of a building along the Seine. Half the building was a dirty marble color, while the other was an abnormally bright, teeth-bleached white. The dirty, unrestored side was majestic and old, a part of France's history. The other side hurt my eyes.

Take that, our children's future!

I got a raise this month. According to this table, I, a not-too-glorified secretary, now make more than a starting teacher in all but the 17 top-paying states. And I'm a government employee. And you're not even supposed to have a degree to do my job.

That, my friends, is messed up. Furthermore, after living on a salary in the mid-20's (comfortably, but by no means opulently), I have to quite simply question the sanity of anyone who willingly enters the profession in, say, Iowa, where the average starting salary is $24,000, and the overall average is only 40% more than that. Especially when that profession requires a whole extra year of schooling, and all of the debt that entails for most people. We need to get over our belief in teachers as some inherently selfless breed of flawless saints and realize that we're only going to get good educators if we pay them more.

Sorry to bring up a painfully obvious point, but now that I've actually got a real job, I have a whole other frame of reference for understanding the problem.

Discussing the Patriot Act

Here's the transcript from a debate on the PBS show Uncommon Knowledge between Edwin Meese, a former Attorney General, and Dorothy Ehrlich, an Executive Director of the ACLU. They don't get a chance to go into great detail, but it's an interesting read. The host seems to be convinced by Meese's arguments over Ehrlich's, which is not surprising. Ehrlich seems to have difficulty making a point based on anything other than fear, whereas Meese does a good job of relating the Patriot Act to pre-existing laws. It hasn't made me a sudden supporter of the act, but it did give me some information about the safeguards and precedents for it that I hadn't come across before.

Kerry Wins Iowa

Yeah, so Kerry won Iowa. I have nothing intelligent to say on the subject, but personally, I think we could be totally fucked.

Discuss.

Headphones and Drums

A cool shockwave animation. Make sure you turn your sound on.

Drum Machine

Torture and Coercion in Interrogations

The Dark Art of Interrogation is a fascinating and provocative article about coercion and torture. At the end, the author writes:

Candor and consistency are not always public virtues. Torture is a crime against humanity, but coercion is an issue that is rightly handled with a wink, or even a touch of hypocrisy; it should be banned but also quietly practiced.

It's a difficult issue and I don't know if I agree with the author's conclusion or not, but it's well worth reading regardless of how you feel about it.

SOTU Drinking Game

Since the State of the Union address is on Tuesday, check out this drinking game.

Sport and the Casual Fan

I enjoy cycling. I wonder, though, if my interest in the sport provokes the sort of disdain that I have for part-time hockey fans or fair weather football fans. I watch, sometimes with manic intensity, the entire season of all four major sports, hockey and pro football especially. Originally, I think that I got into sports in order to relate better to other guys. I remember envying guys who could talk knowledgeably about the best second baseman in the modern era, who could drop names like Rogers Hornsby, Nap Lajoie, and the greatness of Ryan Sandberg without hesitation. After a while (circa 1996, if you would like to be an unofficial biographer), I got hooked and began fearing that I've gone too far.

Now, I'm certainly no sports computer, but if it's a major American pro sport, I can hold my own in a conversation with most people. Year-round, I am also interested in men's tennis and, to a lesser extent, men's golf and college sports in general. I greatly dislike most motor sports, particularly drag racing, NASCAR, and the mother of all redneck sports, powerboat racing. Most of my interest in the world of sport, these days, is well summarized by ABC's old Wide World of Sports intro: "The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat." I love it. I love the individual dedication, the front-office politics, the back-door scandals, the colorblind meritocracy of it all; I love the winning and the losing. Part of the satisfaction I get out of being a homer, though, is that natural pride of being in on the ground-floor of something special, something in which you have been emotionally invested.

So my point (um, kinda): Is my once-a-year interest in the Tour, a period of a couple of weeks in which I watch OLN and read reports on the riders' progress, subject to the same condescension from European fanatics and Austinite Johnny-come-latelys? Does cycling hold the same dramatic appeal for true fans as they follow their favorite (hometown?) athletes through the various worldwide circuits, predicting their finishes, moaning their injuries, vilifying their opponents and the like?

Anyway, what is the place of the casual fan? Is it his place to take what enjoyment he can from his level of investment, a mild curry in the pot, and suffer the disdain of the face-painted rabble?

Dean's Strategy

As I've pointed out in the comments, Dean's stated strategy in the general election is to fire up the base and ignore the center, something I consider political suicide. The Dean-o-phobe agrees and discusses where Dean discovered this strategy. Nick Confessore has even more about Dean's strategy. Calpundit also has a post on this topic, though it's not directly discussing Dean.

Brief Apologia: As myself and others have pointed out in other comments, since the Democratic candidates are so ideologically similar, the issues that primary voters should be considering are exactly these general election strategy and viability ones. There are few candidates that should lead one to favor philosophical or ideological purity over more practical concerns in this primary, hence the emphasis I've been placing on discussing strategy and tactics over policy. Also, to clarify, I do realize that there are differences between the candidates, but none so great that they would lead the average Democratic supporter to not support the eventual nominee, regardless of who that is.

Football as a Center

As the Philadelphia Eagles' Hank Fraley demonstrates, the behemoth who snaps the ball must also be one of the most mentally nimble players on the field

A really fascinating article about one of the most underappreciated jobs in football.

Tyler Hamilton

Has a new team. Let me go ahead and predict that next to Ullrich Hamilton will be Armstrong's main rival next year. Neither Armstrong nor Ullrich was at their best in 2003, and if Tyler hadn't crashed, I think he would have won. Unfortunately Tyler seems to have a strange propensity to crash often. This is his main weakness, and the given the strength of his new team, the only thing likely to keep him away from the 2004 Tour podium.

Kerry's resurgence

The talk of the blogosphere is the stunning new Zogby poll showing Kerry 5 points ahead of Dean and Gephardt. Some comments and discussion can be found here, here, and here. Basically the story is that sinking Dean numbers, a negative ad war between Gephardt and Dean, Kerry's apparent appeal to women, and solid organization in Iowa have catapulted Kerry to the top, although he may succumb to Dean and Gephardt's more numerous armies in the end. And as Josh Marshall notes, Kerry is moving up in New Hampshire as well.

Should Kerry actually win Iowa, this is fugly stuff for both Dean and Clark. If Dean's numbers have acutally sunk to the point where he can't win a close 4-way race, this suggests he won't be able to defeat the inevitable "anti Dean" (Dean will almost certainly be one of the last 2 guys standing). Clark, the presumed anti-Dean, would be forced to deal with Kerry because they appeal to the same demographic--indecisive on the war, impressed by military brass, and looking for a more electable alternative to Dean. This might lead to a real snipefest and give Dean a fresh opening to rebuild his support. A lot of commentators, however, might bet Kerry's political experience will give him the ability to outmaneuver Clark when it gets down and dirty--this remains to be seen.

Kerry is a much more serious challenger than Gephardt or Edwards, because he's got essentially unlimited funds. Were Gephardt to win Iowa (still a possibility) it wouldn't really be a setback for either Dean (as long as he takes 2nd) or Clark, because Gephardt would need to win big in order to convince people to donate, which isn't going to happen. Gephardt has run a good campaign and he's a good guy but he's done.

As for Edwards, I am pleasantly surprised to seem him moving up, as he is IMO the best alternative to Dean (narrowly edging out Gephardt). But the scenario for him winning the nomination is far-fetched. I would say he needs a herculean comeback victory in Iowa combined with bad news for Clark in New Hampshire and subsequent drop-out, leaving Edwards the last southerner standing. Highly unlikely.

If Kerry pulls through in Iowa and confirms with at least a strong 3rd in New Hampshire it's likely an open 3-way race, where Dean will have the initial advantage.

Protecting our borders: Is it good for them also?

It is often assumed that those who oppose liberalizing America′s immigration laws do so as a response to some sort of nationalistic tendency that is concerned with American interests and American interests only. But what if America’s generous policies also hurt Latin America? Matt Mehan, in his second article to be published on NRO, addresses the question and does an excellent job in my opinion. Last week′s immigration proposal by Bush intrigued me. As a Catholic I firmly believe that the wealth and opportunity that our country can offer the "least among us" gives us different moral obligations that other nations in regards to immigration; this belief is pretty firmly enshrined in Catholic social teaching. Still something in the back of my mind bothered me and I think Mehan identifies it:

The El Norte phenomenon renders every village a microcosmic medieval fiefdom. The high-walled keep will occasionally lower its drawbridge and, with treasures from the north, will enlist the peasants to make improvements upon the moat. There is no doubt that an influx of cash from loved ones in El Norte helps economically. To build those fine homes money must be paid into the local economy for cement, bricks, and labor. Yet over the long haul, the choice for El Norte seems a self-defeating cycle for a village. Imagine what our small towns and cities would be like if the gutsiest, hardest-working, most risk-taking, most entrepreneurially minded neighbors always went to Canada but left their families behind in the states.

Read the whole thing.

Get Your Mars On

Aw yeah...

The Campaign Desk

One of the minor rituals of American presidential politics is the post-election self-examination (or perhaps I should say self-flagellation) by the press. Quadrennially, we regret having pursued some lines of inquiry while ignoring others, or having gotten caught up in momentary feeding frenzies over unimportant things, or having been too susceptible to spin -- and then we resolve to do a better job next time. But now we have a new tool. In 2004, the Web makes it possible to analyze and criticize press coverage in real time, so that suggestions for improved coverage might actually be heeded, and incorporated into campaign coverage, while the campaign is still under way.

This real-time fact-checking idea has been tossed around in the past on other blogs, though primarily as a way of debunking or discrediting the Bush administration. Let's hope at least some major journalists find out about this site. Perhaps a letter writing campaign is in order? The never forgetful hive mind of the blogosphere is becoming a wonderfully powerful thing.

Amazon's Jungle

Has anyone searched for books on Amazon lately? They've completely fucked their search up, and don't seem to have noticed. They've now got searchable text from a large portion of their holdings online, which I'm sure is great for hardcore bibliophiles - but they haven't provided an easy way to distinguish between this material and more common title/author/subject fields. And don't tell me to go to "Advanced Search" - if you have to go to "Advanced Search" to search a bookstore's catalog by title without having a million irrelevant hits choking the results, something is quite simply wrong with the whole damned system. The system, I say!

Billions More to the Moon

Gregg Easterbrook has a good post on Easterblogg discussing the infeasibility of the small spending increases Bush has proposed for NASA achieving the stated goals for CEVs, a moon base, and manned flight to Mars.

So, not only is Bush continuing his reckless spending, but he's lying about the actual spending that's going to have to happen to achieve his goals. What's worse, I'm not even surprised.

Iraqi Governing Council Oks Sharia

The Iraqi Governing Council has just approved the use of Sharia. Juan Cole and Calpundit have more, but River Bend's comments, coming from an Islamic woman living in Iraq, are the most specific when it comes to what this will mean.

For my part, I'm not surprised. As has been pointed out many times, Iraq did not possess the prerequisites for a secular, liberal democracy before we attacked. To expect anything other than some form of theocracy to arise through democratic elections is foolish. But hey, maybe this will lead to peace in the Middle East. Iran and Iraq can be buddies now instead of fighting.

Lance and Sheryl sittin in a tree.....

And the first of what is likely to be a long list of annoying cycling posts....is.....

Lance and Sheryl, public at last.

From the looks of the picture, Lance remains solidly in the geek camp. Maybe he's just having a good ol time mixing with those Hollywood types, without the necessity of rivaling Brad Pitt's style. Yet pressing questions remain for our hero. Can he maintain his stoic discipline in the company of a woman who toured with Michael Jackson and "likes a good beer bout as early in the morning"? Will his All-American image withstand association with a rabid Hollywood anti-war type? Or is Ullrich's day about to come? Come on Lance. We're counting on you to rout the Krauts.

Want to Buy a Record Label?

Grand Royal, the Beastie Boys bankrupt record label, is on auction.

Robot Scientist

A team of British scientists have created a "robot" that can formulate hypotheses, design experiments, and interpret results on par with the best of their human counterparts

The robot itself looks boring, but it's cool. Now if they'll just combine that with Sony's humanoid robot and put a lab coat on it...

Dean is Winging It

This is a great overview of Dean's political career and his life to date. It also gives what seems to be a clear, unbiased picture of his personality and what drives him. Excellent read.

"The Money Quote"

Easily my favorite blogcentric neologism. I don't know if I should be so surprised, but Krugman used it yesterday. How long until Safire goes at it in the NYT Magazine? I give it two months.

Also, yet another example of the deep penetration of pornography into the mainstream of American life.

UPDATE - Clarification for non-masturbators: "Money Shot" is the porn term from which the phrase is derived. In porn, the money shot is the part that everyone is waiting for - a culmination, if you will, of all that led up to it (use your imagination). "Money Quote" is sort of an elliptically metaphorical construction - the "money quote" of a news piece or blog entry is not necessarily an expression of the main idea or a strong statement of the piece's conclusion. Often, it's the most shocking or glaring element of a piece. More intriguingly, it can be a phrase that, often unintentionally, highlights the piece's perspective and/or the flaws of its principal subjects, which are frequently, by virtue of the quote's placement in a specific context (i.e. a right-wing quote on Atrios) glaringly obvious to all who read even that lone, striking sentence.

The House of Cards

The last few days have seen a minor eruption of high-profile episodes in the ongoing unravelling of the Bush administration's arguments for war in Iraq. The WMD search team has been withdrawn, administration officials have made low-key admissions about their misrepresentations, and various low and high-ranking people in government have begun to openly critique the process. It remains to be seen whether this will really take a bad turn for Bush, but I don't know if the Democrats have a better, or more morally correct, strategy available than to hammer home the fact that the current administration has led many of America's fighting men to their death through systematic deception and fearmongering.

Entres le deluge:

Powell withdraws al Qaeda link.
Former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill on Bush's pre-9/11 lust for war.
Marshall cites Diane Sawyer going hardball on Dubya.

Sending Billions to the Moon

President Bush on Wednesday will call on Congress to increase funding for NASA by nearly a billion dollars annually over the next five years

While I realize that $5 billion isn't that large of an increase compared to the U.S.'s total budget I have to ask: What the hell is Bush smoking? We have the largest deficit in American history and, thanks to massive tax cuts, lower revenue. The IMF is worried that our economy might fail suddenly, much like Argentina's. Even ignoring the two expensive wars we have going on right now, this doesn't seem like the right time to start funding new, massively ambitious and completely optional programs. I would love to see us establish a permanent base on the moon and send manned explorations to other planets, but now is not the time. Of course, as Cheney said, "deficits don't matter".

While numerous liberal hawks have begun to support Bush despite his disastrous domestic policies because they feel that terrorism threatens to destroy our nation, few fiscal conservatives have turned away from Bush. I recognize that terrorism is, indeed, a threat to our security, but it does little good to neutralize it if reckless fiscal policies leave us with a massive deficit, a weak dollar, millions out of work, reduced civil liberties, and little hope for recovery. Bush is dismantling the very things he claims to be protecting.

A Bold Strategy for a New Democratic Majority

After meditating on the wisdom of Lawrence Kaplan over at TNR, I've finally come to my senses. We need a world congenial to the U.S. interests and a Democratic Party freed from cliches like "multilateralism," "interdependence," and the "will of the international community". Let us ditch once and for all that "lousy Democratic foreign policy thinking spun from opposition to the war in Vietnam".

Support Matt Taibbi's call for a bold new America.

We Have a Winner

The winner of MoveOn.org's ad contest has been chosen and might air during the Super Bowl. It it does, it will reach a much different demographic than it might otherwise. Of course, even if they reach their $10 million goal so they can afford to air the commercial then, there's no guarantee the network would actually accept it. In fact, I would wager against it.

UPDATE: The $10 million is actually just a fund-raising goal. Apparently, the commercial would only cost $1.6 million to air during the Super Bowl. I assume the rest of that is for other ad space as they plan to air it on CNN during Bush's State of the Union address on January 20th.

I'm surprised at you guys . . .

Lying down on the job, are we? Well, since I've just gotten my link to the update page back, I'll pick up the slack. Here is the link to a Post article about the people within the Army who have issued a "scathing" assessment of the war in Iraq. As someone who was in DC marching two full years ago, I have a message for the rest of America - I told you so I told you so I told you so ItoldyousoItoldyousoItoldyouso.

A Note To Law School Applicants

Seriously, folks, all I've got to say is, chill the fuck out. Stop calling us. I mean, it's not like we're deciding whether or not you get into heaven. Also, if your LSAT is below, like, 160, don't even bother. Unless you're a senator's gay lover. State senators only - D.C. has no power over our funding. Also, we don't really need to know that you got elected treasurer of the glee club for the fifth semester running. All of your inane mail and phone calls are going to drive me to arson. So just, please, stop . . . before I kill again.

RIAA Police

The RIAA now employs ex-cops dressed "like classic LAPD, DEA or FBI... right down to the black 'raid' vests the unit members [wear]". Nice. Though the article is clear to point out that they don't actually carry weapons and aren't allowed to present themselves as police, the RIAA's intention is clear. Reminds me of the independent law enforcers in Snow Crash.

Structured Procrastination

Become productive and efficient through procrastination.

TNR Editors Regret Lieberman Endorsement

Maybe I'm missing something here, but if a Senior Editor and the Executive Editor of TNR both think Lieberman was a bad choice for the magazine's endorsement, then who overruled them? I realize TNR has many writers, but the endorsement itself states that it is by "The Editors". Furthermore, given that they had to have known who the magazine was going to endorse and obviously disagreed with it, why did it take them five full days to post a response? If their objections were kept under wrap until now to keep them from undermining TNR's endorsement, then why allow them to be posted now? Is it possible this is just an attempt for them to save some face after being roundly lambasted for their choice? Who knows, but their anti-endorsements are certainly more convincing than the original, anti-Dean-but-not-really-pro-Lieberman endorsement.

Cool Customers: Part 3

Sleep Not Work has Part 3 of his Cool Customers essay up on his site now. He finally gets around to discussing how advertising and the consumer culture relate to hip-hop, claiming that hip-hop undermines the revolutionary impulse inherent in much consumption. I'm not convinced though. He points out that the majority of hip-hop consumers are young, white males. Given that, their assumption of hip-hop style and values is pretty clearly an attempt to reinvent themselves by identifying with a group to which they are not native and this is largely the demographic to which hip-hop-themed advertising is aimed. Of course, there is a difference between the musicians themselves and the consumers of their music and style, so his claim that "[hip-hop is] not about revolution – it's about joining and adding your own little touch" remains valid for the most part. Anyways, go check it out.

French Corruption

As much as people (myself included) complain about the biased news coverage and corrupt politicians here in the U.S., it's nothing compared to France. The amount of control the French elite have over the media and judicial investigations is staggering.

Lego Mulls Layoffs

This is sad. Lego is in serious financial trouble, has fired several of its executives, and is considering laying off up to 8,000 workers. When I was a kid, Legos were my favorite toy. I typically had a huge pile of them right in the middle of my floor and would spend hours building spaceships, cars, and other things. Let's hope they manage to right themselves and stay in business.

Brooks Was Only Kidding

Apparently, when David Brooks wrote "the people labeled neocons (con is short for 'conservative' and neo is short for 'Jewish'", he was only joking. What a relief that he didn't really mean his accusations of anti-semitism against anyone who believes that neoconservatives exist and have substantial influence with our current administration. For my part, I find his apology/explanation a bit disingenuous. Rereading his original article, there's nothing to suggest he means any of it as a joke. He even manages to smear Wesley Clark while he's at it ("shadowy neocon influence has now hardened into common knowledge. Wesley Clark, among others, cannot go a week without bringing it up"). A supposedly responsible journalist and political opinionist should know better. Of course, this is David Brooks we're talking about here. Joe Conason has more.

Bush, Rice, Iraq, and Baby Food

From this New York Times article.

Ms. Rice was in similar lock step with Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, on going to war with Iraq, senior advisers to the president said, and served as an implementer of the president's wishes. Richard Haass, the former director of policy planning at the State Department who is now the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, recalls going to see Ms. Rice in July 2002, well before the president began making a public case for ousting Mr. Hussein, to discuss with Ms. Rice "the pros and cons" of making Iraq a priority.

"Basically she cut me off and said, `Save your breath — the president has already decided what he's going to do on this,' " Mr. Haass said.

As anyone who's been paying attention already knows, the Bush administration had plans to invade Iraq shortly after September 11th; it was a knee-jerk response not based upon any facts, just something they wanted to do and saw an opportunity that would allow them to do so. That that revelation is buried on page three of this story is sickening, but then the news media have consistently given Bush a pass on this.

However, as mad as that makes me, I find this part of the article hilarious:

Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security adviser, stood in front of Mr. Bush's desk in the Oval Office last summer and tried to coax the president into something he did not want to face.

"I can't do it with Schröder," Mr. Bush told Ms. Rice, according to a senior administration official who witnessed the exchange. Ms. Rice, who had not directly suggested that Mr. Bush meet with Mr. Schröder, rushed to reassure. "No, no, no, we won't make you do it with Schröder," she said. But Mr. Bush seemed to know what Ms. Rice had in mind. "Wait a minute, you'll get me back with Schröder, I know what you're trying to do," the president said, the official recounted.

(emphasis mine)

Is it just me or does Bush not come off like a child being forced to eat his vegetables? I mean, we know that the man's an intellectual light-weight that prefers to have his daily news pre-chewed and spoonfed to him, but at least that just makes him seem lazy and incurious. This latest article makes him sound childish, too.

It's Worth a Pause

to take this story in.

Butch Enough to Win?

Richard Goldstein on Dean and the politics of masculinity.

Brain Upgrades

The first brain prosthesis is ready to be tested. It would replace the hippocampus, which is responsible for encoding experiences into memory. In related, but less ambitious news, the first brainstem implants on humans have been performed in an attempt to cure deafness. Though it's too soon to tell for one of the women, the other had only a slight increase in her ability to hear which will help her lip-reading, but not give her the ability to actually understand speech. Finally, a double-amputee received thought-controlled arms a few months back.

I predict that, within our lifetimes, we will see thought-controlled phones and wireless internet access implanted in a person's brain with the ability to overlay a display on whatever they're looking at. The technological revolution is just getting started. It's pretty clear that advances will increase close to exponentially, especially once nanotechnology, bioengineering, quantum computing, and neurology all mature. I feel sorry for the luddites.

When Houseguests Go Bad

The walls, ceiling, cabinets and everything in between shimmered

An Entire Apartment Encased in Tinfoil.

It sounds rather beautiful to me. I'm particularly impressed by the attention to detail. Once, I went out of town for a weekend and came back to find the two girls who had been watching my apartment had redecorated for me. They put my rug on the ceiling, rearranged my furniture, and made other small changes. It was a nice improvement. Now I realize that they must just not have cared enough about me to wrap all my change, books, and CDs in tinfoil, the bitches.

Bush in 41.2 Seconds

A parody from Liberal Oasis of MoveOn.org's Bush In 30 Seconds ad contest. Funny stuff, if you already don't like Bush. You need sound and it's NSFW (language).

TNR Endorses Lieberman

In an attempt to make Kos's campaign to get everyone to revoke TNR's liberal credentials much easier, TNR has endorsed Lieberman. Essentially, they endorse him for being unapologetically hawkish on the Iraqi war, then spend most of their time bashing Dean rather than building up Lieberman. Calpundit and Atrios have more.

Chimps vs Humans

Chimpanzees struggling to survive amid the destruction of their forest habitat have begun snatching and killing children.

The rabid animal lover in me wants to say, "That's what we get for destroying their habitat."

Then I feel bad because of the children (Won't somebody think about the children?!).

Then I expect a worldwide battle between chimpanzees and humans that, through a clever alliance with the dolphins, the chimps win. All hail our new chimpanzee overlords!

Oh yeah, the article.

A Limit for the Internet in Politics?

Might Dean's campaign be growing too large for the Internet to have any meaningful impact on his policies anymore? Does the law of diminishing returns apply here? Over at The Cardinal Collective there's an intriguing post asking this.

I must admit, this is something I hadn't considered before, but it seems plausible. However, not everyone who supports his, or anyone else's campaign, must have their own blog devoted to the topic. I suspect that once the number of supporters becomes so large that newcomers are dissuaded from starting their own blogs the community will gravitate towards a few, high-profile blogs and use the discussion boards to air their opinions instead. Of course, if the candidates aren't listening, it becomes meaningless, but that's a different problem.

Clark IRC Chat

Wesley Clark will be chatting with a few bloggers on IRC tonight at 5pm EST.

Details

Photoshopped Celebrities

What do celebrities look like before their pictures are air-brushed? Find out:

Detouching

Dean, the Internet, and the Blogosphere's Responsibility

Despite all the talk about how Dean's use of the Internet in his campaign has been revolutionary, this article from Wired is the first I've read that breakdowns how and why it happened. The most interesting thing about this piece is that Dean's Internet support has less to do with Dean himself and his policies than one might expect. It's almost as if he were a catalyst for a chemical reaction, but has remained relatively unchanged afterwards, somewhat like the poet's mind in T. S. Eliot's essay Tradition and the Individual Talent. In other words, the truly important aspect of Dean's campaign is the previously unseen confluence of technology and politics that promises renewed democracy and a healthier government; it just happens to have centered on him. Now, regardless of whether Dean wins in 2004 or not, the blogosphere must work to ensure that this is a permanent, positive change if this promise is to be realized.

Cool Customers: Part 2

"The Conquest of Cool", by Thomas Frank
Part two of a series on consumerism, counterculture, and hip hop.

(Part One)

This is a book about advertising, but it's sure to be more interesting to almost anyone reading this blog (be you a hip hopper, a dropout, or a contrarian egghead) than any other book about advertising out there. This is the story of the events that took advertising from the pseudoscience and nauseating Rockwellian fantasies of the 1950s to the sneering, winking, downright rebellious advertisements of the late sixties (and the early nineties, and pretty frequently since then). This is (though it doesn't deal with the subjects directly) an explanation of why Sprite chose to highlight underground rappers for its mid-'90s spots, of why Coke pitched the comically blase "OK Cola" around the same time, and why commercials to this day are so frequently more entertaining than the shows they sandwich.

The standard story of this transformation told in academic and countercultural circles is that of "co-optation" – the idea being that advertising firms have long cherry-picked superficial aspects of the counterculture, and later youth culture, as a way to get the kids to buy products. But by approaching the story from the perspective of the agencies and admen themselves, author Thomas Frank, (editor of the Baffler), puts the lie to this standard story, and constructs a new, far more complex one of his own. As combative as the title is, the story Frank tells is not one with any clear cut aggressor, conqueror, or even victor. Rather, it is the story of how divergent segments of the larger culture, specifically the counterculture and the decidedly more straitlaced world of advertising, converged at a specific point of time, specifically the 1960s, with far-reaching results.

To set the stage for his narrative, Frank describes to us the Madison Avenue of the 1950s, a place that gave birth to the images of the Man in the Grey Flannel Suit and the Organization Man – a world of hierarchy and regimentation, in which the philosophy behind ad-making maintained that it had been honed to nearly-scientific levels of precision, with ads made according to an assembly-line like set of rules. Into this world came Doyle Dane Bernbach, an upstart agency with a completely different philosophy about creativity, and which designed a groundbreaking campaign for Volkswagen in the late fifties and early sixties. In contrast to the white-picket-fence idealism of previous car ads, the Volkswagen ads took such bold steps as highlighting the car's unchanging 'ugliness', directly lambasting American automakers for their campaigns of planned obsolescence, and, perhaps most boldly, explicitly selling Volkswagen as a car for those alienated from the conformity of the era.

This was the watershed moment – a group of ad writers fed up with the status quo of their corner of the world tapped into a wider dissatisfaction within the populace, ultimately changing both advertising and the culture as a whole. It may at first seem a bitter pill for proponents of the old co-optation thesis to swallow: in Frank's interpretation, the Bug, that seemingly primordial symbol of hippie freedom, became a counterculture symbol largely because of the advertising campaign that cast it as such. But of course, this ultimately speaks to something even more insidious than co-optation, something that casts doubt on the whole project of counterculture: this was perhaps the first time a product was pitched, not as a way to join some idealized 'in' crown, a necessity in the neverending race to keep up with the Joneses, but as a way to break away from the herd. This was the birthing moment of what we see everywhere today: consumption as the path to individuality and rebellion.

At first, the fallout from this was simply an increase in 'creative' ads, largely those that copied the straight-talking feel of the Volkswagen ads. But soon, outright countercultural imagery and rhetoric started showing up, as in a 1965 Calvert's Gin ad prominently displaying the slogan "Resist the Rising Tide of Conformity." Some ads were more subtle than others, with some (the best still from DDB) questioning the very underpinnings of consumer culture itself, while still managing to sell product. From there, it's a hop, skip and jump to 1969, by which time Madison Avenue looked a lot more like what we would expect today – copywriters and art designers dressed like freaks, with "youth" increasingly the watchword. Frank tells several anecdotes that convincingly establish that, far from co-optation, this revolution was the result of an essential consensus that emerged between Madison Avenue and the counterculture itself. Admen, having recently escaped from the culture of the Gray Flannel Suit, genuinely thrived on the air of revolution that prevailed in the country, and touted it in their ads with an enthusiasm that often defied colder reasoning (Frank in particular points out advertising's thorough neglect of the 'silent majority' during the period – almost noone was writing ads aimed at football players and general's sons, who doubtless still had money to spend). This is when the theories that now drive the advertising industry were first developed, in tandem with the values that now drive consumer society as a whole; most notably, advertising was learning that if you sell young, older folks will buy, at the same time that 'youth' and 'rebellion' were first becoming virtues in and of themselves in the larger culture.

What this meant for consumer capitalism as a whole was profound. Theorists of commerce had long described the ideal state of capitalism as a consumer-centered "permanent revolution," and now the ideology was in place to make it a reality. Towards the end of the book, Frank turns effectively to the fashion of the late sixties to illustrate the point. Like advertising, men's fashion had long been a staid, methodical industry, with styles changing over the course of six or seven year cycles, as opposed to the one-year cycles of women's clothing. The turning point came when the 'mod' look that had originated on London's Carnaby Street made the trip to the States. We would recognize mods today as near-metrosexuals, fops with discriminating and fast-shifting tastes that could not have contrasted more profoundly with the staid grayness of their parents' generation. Despite their association with the counterculture, they were very much consumers, concerned with products and looks and styles – Frank describes the booming business in Mod that smaller boutiques throughout the country did in 1966 and part of 1967, thanks both to more legitimate young turks and the fast-growing number of oldsters who were finding a new sense of vitality, meaning, or just fun in such "youth" trends. Mod burned itself out quickly, but this was not seen by the fashion industry as a bad thing – in fact, such quick-cycling trends were just what the industry needed for rapid expansion. Other industries were soon to catch on.

It's not as if the Mods were embodiments of true political rebellion. They did break down barriers, but as with most movements of the sixties, their priority was to break down barriers of consumption – to create a space in which people could wear, listen to, or smoke what they liked. The sense that there was a revolution goin' on was important to the romance of these trends, and has remained so with those that followed; then as now, the convenient bogeyman of the past, and all it embodies, was the default perpetrator of oppression against which to rebel. 'The Fifties' almost magically persist in our culture, constantly churning out new images of calculating scientists, expressionless corporate drones, and stodgy deans against which we can rebel. < /SPAN>The past, today and forever, is straight-laced, dictatorial, and unfeeling, while the present is youthful, freewheeling, and actively insurrectionist. And of course, to be part of today, to be part of the permanent revolution, you must consume today's amazing new products, its beautiful new fashions, and its happening new music.

The story that Frank tells is not one in which conniving admen clumsily regurgitate the superficial trappings of fads. Instead, the most daring of them anticipated, perhaps even in some small way precipitated, the social schism that defined the second most culturally important decade of the 20th century (the most important, of course, being the '20s). In diving so headlong into the ideology of rebellion, through their enthusiasm rather than through scheming, they tapped into a deep, dark, unspoken truth about counterculture, one which the counterculture of the '60s failed, or perhaps refused, to recognize: that the rhetoric of rebellion is the most powerful device ever conceived for selling people shit they don't need.

Yeah, But Can He Deliver A Burger With Murderous Efficiency?

Brace yourself, folks, 'cause here it is - The Awful Truth About Howard Dean and Ninjas.

Poststructuralism--RIP

Has contemporary cultural theory failed to meet the challenges of the day? Yes, according to Terry Eagleton. Profile from the NYT.

Clark's Tax Plan

Read it here.

At first glance this is good, very good. Politically it is very safe--the Pubs can't say it will decrease incentive to work because Clark's only raising taxes on those earning more than 1 million, and only by 5%. The only drawback is Clark won't be getting many corporate contributions after this

Still, I would like to see the Bush tax cuts go first--otherwise how do we pay for health care, education, and Iraq? In the real world, either taxes need to be raised or something needs to be cut. But since the public doesn't seem to care about deficits the Clark plan may be the smarter way to go politically.

Update: It appears that Clark does indeed account for deficit reduction. He reverses the Bush tax cuts for those earning 200K and above. Apparently the tax increase on those making 1 million a year comes on top of reversing the tax cuts.

Uh, Um, Like You Know?

Disfluencies such as "uh", "um", and "like" convey actual meaning, regardless of what your speech teacher might think.

Best of 2003

My best of went live a while back, but I didn't have access to Nomads at the time, so at long last, here it is.

Essentially, all you need to know is to buy the Dizzee Rascal album. But as a bonus to Nomads readers, I think it's worth mentioning two albums in addition to those on my list - The Rapture's Echoes, which is about as simultaneously fun and soulful as anything that's not funk can get, and the Books' The Lemon of Pink, which will teach you everything you ever wanted to know about melodic abstraction but were afraid to ask.

Favorite Music of 2003

Yeah, it's a little late, but since everyone else is doing it, I thought I'd chime in with my favorite new albums of 2003. Naturally, this order is only a rough approximation. Each of the following albums was, at one point, the album I was listening to most.

1. Celso Fonseca - Natural
2. Blur - Think Tank
3. Outkast - The Love Below/Speakerboxxx
4. The Rapture - Echoes
5. Erykah Badu - Worldwide Underground
6. Rosalia de Souza - Garota Moderna
7. Radiohead - Hail to the Thief
8. Prefuse 73 - One Word Extinguisher
9. Lyrics Born - Later That Day...
10. The Shins - Chutes Too Narrow
11. Smokey and Miho - The Two EPs

What were your favorite albums?

For the Pundits

This is a year of turmoil and terror in the Democratic Party: Their likely presidential nominee battered, bloodied, and ridiculed even before the general election has begun

and

"The halls of Congress are filled with Democrats wringing their hands over their prospective nominee,"

Clearly another article about Dean's unelectability, right? Except it's from 1992 and about Clinton.

(via Joe Conason)

Of course, Dean has yet to prove that he possesses Clinton's political genius, though it may be possible. Any judgment will have to wait to see what he does in the general election, provided he wins the nomination which is not a certainty. For my part, as excited as I am about the method of Dean's campaign and the way it might herald a renewal of true grassroots democracy, Dean himself worries me. He seems too prone to mispeak, saying offensive, ignorant, or just stupid things. Of course, it's also possible that his apparent lack of polish might be exactly what the voters will find appealing. Just look at who go elected last time.

The Motive Behind Ashcroft's Recusal

Over on Slate, Tim Noah suggests that perhaps Ashcroft's recusal from the Plame investigation might, in fact, be simply a stall tactic intended to help Bush's reelection. Though I don't necessarily agree, it's an interesting hypothesis. I prefer to think Ashcroft recused himself due to new evidence that pointed strongly towards Rove and his coterie, but that could very well just be wishful thinking.

The "Liberal" New Republic

There's an interesting series of posts from Daily Kos, as he embarks on a jihad against TNR. One of the take-downs Kos links to is an old Prospect article scrutinizing the new TNR owners. The underlying motivation behind this is of course the absurd lengths TNR has resorted to in its quest to stop Howard Dean.

Kos' goal is to get the CW to agree that TNR is a "center-right" publication. It is obvious to everyone in-the-know that TNR doesn't represent the mainstream Left, but "center-right" is a tough case, no longer how essential TNR's hawkish views are to their identity. Because it allows its writers relative freedom to express their actual views, TNR comes out on balance more left than right, though more center than left.

TNR's main problem is of course it's strongly Likudite editorial bias (exerted by the hopeless Peretz and his puppet Beinart), which ends up influencing all of its foreign policy stands. While it is of course true that most TNR writers aren't Liebermanicas, Beinart and Peretz clearly are. One could and should worry about the unfortunate effect this bias has on the liberal intelligentsia, and hence the need for an alternative. The American Prospect would hope to provide this, but despite UTNE Reader's efforts to believe otherwise, TNR remains way more interesting, although I haven't given up hope that TAP will make the changes necessary to displace TNR and The Nation as the premier liberal rag. At least Matt Yglesias works for them.

I think that if TAP hopes to do this, then they have to work on the cultural side of the magazine and naturally the web site. One of the reasons people subscribe to TNR is that it is a forum for critics and academics to reach a wide yet intellectually sophisticated audience (some examples are recent articles by Dale Peck, Richard Posner, Richard Rorty). For years, TNR has been one of the main places to make a sweeping statement or indulge in a shocking hatchet job, and any magazine that would hope to displace it has to provide this kind of space.

Taboo and Morality

The aim of this activity is to tell you something about your moral intuitions. It was first developed for the games and activities section of The Philosophers' Magazine web site.

The quiz: Taboo

An interesting quiz about morality from Butterflies and Wheels.

A Second Photo of Emily Dickinson?

To date, there is only one verified image of Emily Dickinson, a daguerreotype from either 1846 or 1847, held in the Amherst College Archives and Special Collections. However, a second image may have been found. Although it has yet to be absolutely identified, it has also not been possible to say that it is not Dickinson. This poem of hers seems to sum up the situation nicely:

XXVIII

A charm invests a face
Imperfectly beheld,—
The lady dare not lift her veil
For fear it be dispelled.

But peers beyond her mesh,
And wishes, and denies,—
Lest interview annul a want
That image satisfies.

Gollum Raps

Watch Gollum rap about the ring.