Just How Solid Is That Center? (washingtonpost.com)

Ever wonder just where you fit in the political spectrum? For a quick but insightful analysis, take this online poltical quiz at www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html.
For more info, here's the writeup from the Washington Post:
Just How Solid Is That Center? (washingtonpost.com):

"Forget poring over tedious policy papers: Someone has already come up with a quick way for you to find your place in the political spectrum.
In 1969, David Nolan -- a political scientist who had been frustrated by simplistic 'left-right' labels -- devised a chart to help delineate the shades of difference in between;categories also include authoritarian, libertarian and centrist (see below). Nolan believedhis chartwas a more accurate way tomeasure a person's political philosophy becauseit was based on how much, or how little, governmental control a person favored in matters of economics and personal freedom. "

Take the quiz: http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

A Libertarian View on Homosexuality from an Unexpected Source: Jamaica

Former Jamaican Attorney-General and Justice Minister, JLP's Ossie Harding has taken a progressive and aggressive position against anti-sodomy laws. Although the issue of homosexuality and gay rights is debated by the Jamaican public and in Jamaican culture, this is the first time I’ve seen a Jamaican politician take a serious stance on this issue. And it’s a progressive one, and it’s from the traditionally conservative JLP (Jamaica Labour Party). Essentially Harding argues for separation of religious morality and secular government. Proving you can be socially liberal and economically conservative/pro-capital (I was beginning to think this was a myth and that no politician is capable of speaking his own mind when contrary to popular opinion). To my mind this is an important and courageous stance.

Highlights from a Jamaica Observer report on Harding's October 2004 Institute of Law and Economics speech on the subject:

“THE law has no business in the private bedrooms of consenting adults, such as homosexuals and prostitutes, former attorney-general and justice minister, Dr.
Oswald Harding is insisting.
...some things are just not the law's business. Harding remains unconvinced by the argument that the law should be used to enforce moral codes, and argued that the private activities of consenting homosexuals and prostitutes should not be criminalised.”

Also:

[Harding] further posited that the Wolfden Committee's report reflected those of noted philosopher John Stuart Mill in his Essay on Liberty to the effect that the function of the law "is to preserve public order and decency, to protect the citizen from what is offensive or injurious, and to provide sufficient safeguards against exploitation or corruption of others, particularly those who are vulnerable because they are young, weak in body or mind or inexperienced".

Reframing the Culture Wars: Rove Backs Away from the Christian Right

Reframing the culture wars, an issue that feels newly relevant as pundits and real people debate the potential batting order for the presidential race in 2008...

(original post 7 Nov 2004)
Karl Rove is so smart it’s scary. He’s already downplaying the importance of abortion and gay marriage in W’s victory. (see the Meet the Press transcript) And trying to blame the media for the morals debate instead. It’s not about gays and abortion. It’s about what’s on TV. To a certain extent, I actually agree that’s true. The role of the east coast and west coast big media in stoking the flames of cultural war and rebellion must not be underestimated. The prominence of Will and Grace and Queer Eye aren’t helping democrats any, believe me. Despite that, Reverend Dobson and the Christian right are NOT going to be happy with this looser interpretation of values and their role in the election.

On Meet the Press, Russert asked Rove, “when you read or see or hear moral values what does that mean?”

Rove: “Well I think it’s people who are concerned about the coarseness of our culture. About what they see on the television sets. What they see in the movies. What they read in the newspapers. How they see the values of the country.”

Russert: But, how about the exit polls indicating morals were a definitive factor in the elections?

Rove: “I do have a little bit of a different view of those numbers. First of all if you take Iraq and terrorism and aggregate em, which I think are different sides of the same coin, 34% of the electorate are concerned with, if you will, the security issue. If you taxes and the economy and aggregate them, they’re 25% of the electorate. And then moral values is 3rd. That’s not to denigrate the importance of moral values, which have been traditionally about 16% of the electorate - had been concerned with that as their number one issue - in past races.

“What essentially happened in this race was, people became concerned about 3 issues: 1st the war; then the economy, jobs, and taxes; then moral values. And then everything else dropped off the plate. And security grew the most in comparison with past races but values grew 2nd, the 2nd most amount.”

Right, right, and right. So, Russert asks, how does Rove think the president can/should implement laws to address this type of moral value - coarseness of culture?

Rove suggests a variety of moderate measures: laws that "protect the weak", the partial birth abortion ban, the Lacey Peterson law, letting community based organizations play a bigger role in helping the poor, and the global aids initiative.

It's a long list. What's not mentioned? No same sex marriage ban, no outlawing abortion. Asked if Bush has a debt owed to the Christian right, Rove will only say: “The president has an obligation to serve all the people of America.”

If they’re smart, unlike Rev. Dobson, the Christian right will take Rove’s cues, tread lightly right now and fly under the radar later to get things done on their agenda. But are they as smart as Karl? Under his tutelage, they just might be.

Waging War on the Press?

In The Nation, two media critics compile a case against "Bush's War on the Press" and for a national shield law for journalists. On a related note, also check out Eric Alterman on the ongoing remodeling over at PBS.

With the November resignation of Moyers's nemesis, Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) board chair Ken Tomlinson, amid charges of personal and political wrongdoing and a host of other recent developments, it becomes increasingly clear that this White House is doing battle with the journalistic underpinnings of democracy. To be sure, every administration has tried to manipulate the nation's media system. Bill Clinton's wrongheaded support for the Telecommunications Act of 1996 cleared the way for George W. Bush's attempts to give media companies the power to create ever larger and more irresponsible monopolies. But with its unprecedented campaign to undermine and, where possible, eliminate independent journalism, the Bush Administration had demonstrated astonishing contempt for the Constitution and considerable fear of an informed public. Consider the bill of particulars...

Greek Tragedy: life observation

Personal, more than political reflection--one of my favorite bloggers offers insight about how women love, what we think we want. It's not a partner's imperfection that frightens us; it's ours. From Stephanie Klein's Greek Tragedy blog:

"Insecurity is our worst abuse. Women prefer imperfection because it makes us feel safe. It's false security, but it does its job at soothing us here and now. We don't want more women to notice him, and we don't want him to want beyond what we do. But when we turn it inward, we know our desire to become more tone has less to do with him and more to do with our ability to be outgoing, personable, happier when things button without sucking it in.

When my MID broke up with me, at sixteen years old, I phoned him months later to tell him I was thin. I thought he'd love me again if he knew. We can't control who loves us or who will cheat on us if they get extra attention. Love handles more than love handles; it handles washboards, ripped triceps, and plunging necklines. "

t r u t h o u t - Maureen Dowd | Woman of Mass Destruction

Maureen Dowd has got Judith Miller's number. From The New York Times, Saturday 22 October 2005:

"I've always liked Judy Miller. I have often wondered what Waugh or Thackeray would have made of the Fourth Estate's Becky Sharp. "

Buying the News is Bad- Who knew?

The problem with about this story is that the public is so scandal fatigued right now, I don't think it's possible for us to grasp the extent of the outrage. This one may have to take a number...

Buying of News by Bush's Aides Is Ruled Illegal - New York Times:

"WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 - Federal auditors said
on Friday that the Bush administration violated the law by buying favorable news
coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the
conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations
company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party."

Network TV Gets Real?!

EW.com and Salon. com are shining a light on the one thing that has partially restored my faith and interest in television news. They focus mainly on Anderson Cooper (deservedly). Personally, I was blown also away by Carl Quintanilla's sincerity and bravery on the Today Show this morning of all places:

"Understandably, many reporters have abandoned their pose of objectivity. (You'd be on edge too if you needed armed guards to protect you on the streets of an American city.) CNN's Anderson Cooper
(left) got so angry that he berated a U.S. senator during an interview. (Read the transcript here.) Yet this subjectivity could be just what TV news needs to restore its reputation. If nothing else, Katrina could be the event that gets viewers to stop seeing TV journalists as out-of-touch elitists, if only because the reporters have been forced to stop acting like out-of-touch elitists."

A Can't-Do Government - New York Times

As usual, Paul Krugman asks all the right questions below. You can read the editorial in full at Truthout.org.

"Before 9/11 the Federal Emergency Management Agency listed the three most likely catastrophic disasters facing America: a terrorist attack on New York, a major earthquake in San Francisco and a hurricane strike on New Orleans. 'The New Orleans hurricane scenario,' The Houston Chronicle wrote in December 2001, 'may be the deadliest of all.' It described a potential catastrophe very much like the one now happening. So why were New Orleans and the nation so unprepared? After 9/11, hard questions were deferred in the name of national unity, then buried under a thick coat of whitewash. This time, we need accountability.

First question: Why have aid and security taken so long to arrive? Katrina hit five days ago - and it was already clear by last Friday that Katrina could do immense damage along the Gulf Coast. Yet the response you'd expect from an advanced country never happened. Thousands of Americans are dead or dying, not because they refused to evacuate, but because they were too poor or too sick to get out without help - and help wasn't provided. Many have yet to receive any help at all. There will and should be many questions about the response of state and local governments; in particular, couldn't they have done more to help the poor and sick escape? But the evidence points, above all, to a stunning lack of both preparation and urgency in the federal government's response."

Time.com - Why You Can't Ignore Kanye

Time takes on hip-hop with a package that includes an in-depth cover story on Kanye West and a history of the roots of rap. Springboarding from Damon Dash's assertion that Kanye blends the sensibility of politically conscious rap with a more modern bling bling bravado, Time points out:

"That the 'urban demographic' needs 'superficialness' could be read as two euphemisms away from racism. But Dash, an African American who thinks exclusively in shades of green, is merely letting the world in on what's accepted as social fact by much of the record industry.

Hip-hop was born in the '70s as party music and evolved in the '80s into that rarest of pleasures--socially relevant party music. But in the mid-'90s, the genre came to be dominated by people like Snoop Dogg (sample track: Murder Was the Case), the Notorious B.I.G. (Ten Crack Commandments) and Jay-Z (Rap Game/Crack Game)--excellent rappers with a shrewd eye for journalistic detail but, to put it bluntly, ex--drug dealers.

'Rap changed a lot in the last few years,' notes comedian and hip-hop fan Chris Rock, who says he listens to The College Dropout while he writes jokes. 'In the early days, the best rappers weren't necessarily from the hood. Run-D.M.C. was from Hollis [Queens, N.Y.]. Eric B and Rakim were from Long Island. They lived next to the hood.'When the hard stuff sold well (hard stuff, in any medium, always does), the record labels, never bastions of original thought, asked for more. Soon rappers who had never got a speeding ticket were referring to themselves as pimps and hustlas, and what had started as ghetto reporting with a touch of caricature metastasized into caricature with no tether to reality. The result was a torrent of albums about the joys of acquisitiveness (bling, if you must), consequence-free violence and compliant women."