Now She’s Just Making It Too Easy For Me
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) today, discussing the census:
"Do they really need to know, like you said, the date and time that we leave mental stability?"
Great Moments In Pundtiry
Joe "the Plumber" Wurzelbacher, on the Constitution and Founding Fathers:
"They knew socialism doesn't work. They knew communism doesn't work."
The Constitution predates socialism by about 100 years.
Jackson Around The Net
New Republic's John McWhorter:
Michelangelo said that when he sculpted the David statue, David was already inside the block of marble and his job was just to take away what was not David. Jackson worked against nature’s endowment just as diligently, but surely the pale wraith he became was not something that had been waiting to see the light of day. Rather, what Jackson seemed to find was a negation, a mangling of personhood – what else can we say of someone attending a court date for child molestation in his pajamas? The irony is that despite this man’s towering stature as a keystone of American popular music’s history, there is surely a part of all of us that sees the man as more fortunate resting in peace.
I'll add more when/if I see something.
Oh, but can I say something? I cringe whenever I hear anyone say that Michael Jackson broke the color barrier. What is that — some kind of joke, given is changing skin color? Sure, before Michael came on, MTV didn't play black artists, and yes, MJ changed that. But it's not like there were a lot of black artists making videos and hits (this was in the post-disco, pre-rap days). And MTV was only a couple of years old anyway. And certainly, MJ didn't break the color barriers in music. Plenty of black artists had crossed over before him… for decades.
The Corner's Jonah Goldberg:
Calling Michael Jackson an icon doesn’t let him off the hook for anything. But to listen to the news anchors you’d think it absolves him of everything.
I say: Who cares who his famous friends were? Who cares what a “fascinating” person he was? If you want to talk about his death as an end of an era, have at it. But that’s not what the Barbara Walters set is doing.
I know that Michael Jackson wasn’t convicted of the despicable crimes he was accused of. And that’s why he never went to jail. Three cheers for the majesty of the American legal system. But in my own personal view, he wasn’t exonerated either. Nor was he absolved of his crimes because he could sing, moonwalk, or sell 10 million records. (Though many of us suspect the money and fame he made from those things is precisely what kept him out of jail).
And, while I merely think he was a pedophile, I know he was not someone responsible parents should applaud, healthy children emulate, nor society celebrate.
Take a gander at the current Amazon's Music Bestseller List. 19 of the top 25 are MJ.
TPM's Josh Marshall:
While I liked Jackson's music and had great respect for his talent, I just didn't have a strong emotional connection to him.
So, not sadder or more upset, but more shocked. And I was thinking last night, what feels different about this?
I think it's because so much of Michael Jackson's life seemed like make believe. Sometimes farcical. But always like play acting, somehow. So much theatrics. So many costumes. And on various levels the desire — often frighteningly realized — to deny or defy his physical self, his age and much more. Even the things that seemed terribly serious, perhaps especially those — the trials for child molestation which could have landed him in jail for years or decades — never seemed to stick. Whether he was truly guilty of these accusations or not, it always blew over. All together it conditioned me to think of Jackson as someone whose drama was always just drama — whether it was the threat of prison or vast debts or bizarre physical tribulations — all of it would pass or blow over, perhaps not even have been real, leaving him more or less in place, as weird or surreal as ever, but basically unchanged.
In the span of time between when news first broke that Jackson had been rushed to the hospital and when it was reported that he'd died, I actually saw some people speculating on the web that the whole thing might be a stunt to get out of his tour dates or perhaps some health emergency that was not quite as serious as it was being described. And even though these speculations turned out to be tragically, embarrassingly off base, I wasn't sure if they might not turn out to be accurate since it seemed somehow more in character, at least more in keeping with the never ending drama.
In the end death just seemed more out of character for Michael Jackson than for most people. Because through most of his life he and reality seemed at best on parallel but seldom overlapping courses. And death is reality, full stop.
Here's an especially stupid tribute, from the Cato Institute's Ilya Shapiro:
While the big news of the day wouldn’t seem to have a public policy angle, Michael Jackson’s death allows us to remember that such phenomenal career achievements can only be possible in an economic system that rewards and harnesses talent.
The King of Pop’s creativity allowed him and his family to make hundreds of millions of dollars, yes, but it also created thousands of jobs in the music and marketing industries and brought joy to fans around the world. Whatever his personal eccentricities — perhaps, in part, as a result of them — Jackson represents a capitalist success story.
No central planner could have invented him, and no government bureaucracy could have transformed pop music in the way he did.
So take that Obamasocialists!!!
Seriously, I don't think the death of Michael Jackson really adds much to the capitalism vs socialism debate. Sure, socialism didn't produce much to the pop music world, but so what?
Maybe I should note that Michael Jackson's early death at age 50 only proves that America has shitty health care. That would be a stupid point, too.
And by the way, some damn good movies come from socialist countries and totalitarian countries (the Iranian cinema is especially good; go rent The White Balloon if you can find it). Just saying…
Bad Day For Icons: RIP Michael Jackson
Unlike Farrah Fawcett, this was a total surprise.
He still had it in his later years. Here he is with Britney in 2001, singing another fave of mine "The Way You Make Me Feel".
NC Senate Passes Film Incentives
The movie industry got a step closer to better tax treatment in North Carolina as the state Senate on Wednesday approved a bill on a party line vote 27-17 to increase tax credits for qualifying expenses to 25 percent. It still has to be approved by the House before it is implemented, though.
Sweetening the incentive pot for the motion picture companies came to the forefront in recent weeks after the state lost out to Georgia for the production of “The Last Song,” which is based on the novel by Nicholas Sparks.
North Carolina’s present incentive of 15 percent has not kept up with the escalation other states have offered. Georgia’s package of incentives includes a 30 percent credit, and that has helped that state attract numerous productions that otherwise may have landed in North Carolina. North Carolina and Georgia were the finalists to produce “The Last Song,” but it went to the Peach State after the revenue officials here ruled that certain expenses would not qualify.
Opponents of the bill tried one final time to amend the bill and place a hard cap on the total amount of tax credit the state could offer in a year. That amendment also failed on a party line vote.
Sen. Julia Boseman, D-New Hanover, called the amendment bad policy because movie companies wouldn’t consider North Carolina if they were about to bump up against a tax credit cap.
“Movie companies wouldn’t come here if they knew they couldn’t get the tax credit,” Boseman said. “The movie industry can have a positive impact on the state because of the type of jobs it brings to the state.”
Sen. David Hoyle, D-Gaston, spoke in favor of the bill and explained how small businesses have benefited from being hired by production companies.
“In my area, there are a lot of commercials produced and when the production companies come here and contract with small businesses, those dollars are spent locally,” Hoyle said. “They’re hiring carpenters, electricians. Those jobs are easier to hire locally. It means a lot.”
How the tax credit fits into the final state budget picture remains unclear. It could be taken up as a separate issue by the House or it could just be rolled into the final state budget bill. By passing the Senate, it definitely is in play as the House and Senate budget negotiators begin their talks to finalize the new budget.
Who’s To Blame For The Sanford Affair?
Who is responsible for Sanford flying down to Buenos Aires to spend five days with his paramour?
Sanford, right? Seems like a good candidate for "the blame game".
Nope, you silly person. Rush Limbaugh once again sets us straight. It's Obama's fault.
Click here for the vid.
"This is almost like, 'I don't give a damn, the country's going to Hell in a handbasket, I just want out of here,'" said Limbaugh. "He had just tried to fight the stimulus money coming to South Carolina. He didn't want any part of it. He lost the battle. He said, 'What the Hell. I mean, I'm — the federal government's taking over — what the Hell, I want to enjoy life.'"
"The point is," he added, "there are a lot of people whose spirit is just — they're fed up, saying to Hell with it, I don't even want to fight this anymore, I just want to get away from it."
Thoughts On Monogamy
Heather in the comments raises an issue that I've thought about in the past 24 hours (in the wake of the Sanford emails):
I've begun to wonder if human beings are meant for monogamy at all. We seem to screw it up far more than we should if it was truly our destiny. Kind of makes me a little depressed.
Heather and I are certainly not the first to wonder if humans were meant to be monogamous.
Biologically, the odds are certainly stacked against us. There are anout 5,000 species of mammals, including humans, and only 3 percent to 5 percent of those mammals are known to form lifelong, monogamous bonds. Ironically, the beaver is one such animal. (Please, no emails/comments about this. I'm feeling punchy this afternoon).
And obviously, man spreading his seed all over the place is biologically-ingrained from an evolutionary standpoint. (Translation: We're not pigs, ladies. It's in our DNA!) (Second thought: okay, some men are pigs, notwithstanding the whole DNA thing.) [UPDATE: The notion that "man must spread his seed" from an evolutionary standpoint is challenged — H/T Heather]
So monogamy seems to be a social construct, borne of Judeo-Christian tradition. In other cultures throughout history (and even in the present), men had wives and concubines. Ours? Not so much.
But the monogamy construct is so ingrained in our culture that to even attempt to move away from it amounts to more trouble than it is worth. On the other hand, as Heather points out, perhaps the attempt to adhere dogmatically to the concept of monogamy is a fool's errand.
Perhaps the folly isn't monogamy per se, but lifetime monogamy. Perhaps we were meant to be serial monogomists, i.e., staying faithful to a relationship until we no longer can. That's not to suggest that we should abandon our commitments at the first hint of strife, but rather, perhaps to acknowledge that – sad as it is – even the best relationships run their course sometimes.
Frankly, a 20+ year marriage (like what Sanford had) is a darn good run in this day and age, and perhaps we should celebrate its longevity rather than mourn (or mock) its demise. Even better, perhaps we could celebrate the new hope for new love that it affords both Sanfords (and really, is there anything better than the discovery of "new love"?)
Regardless of whether or not we are meant to be serial monogamists, it seems pretty irrefutable that that is what we are. And if you don't believe me, check out the divorce rates. So one could argue that we should not fight it. Maybe we should just lower our expectations of enjoying lifetime commitment, so we won't find ourselves constantly disappointed when we see divorces, or it happens to us. Perhaps we are correct to think of marriage as the "new dating". At least we're not deluding ourselves.
In any event, the family values people should shut the fuck up. Of that much, I am sure.
SCOTUS Rules On Strip-Searching Case
One of the few cases I was following this year on the Supreme Court docket was Safford United School District v. Redding, a case out of Arizona where a 13 year old girl was search-stripped by school officials because of a "tip" that she had some ibuprofin. (She didn't, as it turned out).
I sketched the full details out in a post last April, including these details:
Ms. Redding, a model student, had never been in trouble with the law and never been so much as called to the principal's office. The other student who provided the "tip" to school officials was a former friend of Ms. Redding (the two had drifted apart — the friend had fallen in with the goth crowd, while Ms. Redding was one of the goody-two-shoes).
The strip search traumatized Ms. Redding to the point where she eventually changed schools (she is now a freshman in college).
I also covered the Court's demeanor at oral argument. It looked like it was heavily split on the counterveiling issues of privacy, and constitutional searches.
So you can imagine my surprise when the opinion (PDF) came out this morning. By a vote of 8-1, the Court ruled that the search was unconstitutional. Not even close.
(The dissenting judge was Justice Thomas. He has always taken the rather absurd opinion that the U.S. Constitution does not apply to state public schools, a rather crazy position which the 14th Amendment makes mincemeat of. I mean, even Scalia can't swallow that one.)
(The court also ruled, 7-2, that the school officials cannot be held liable, since the Fourth Amendment ruing was not "clearly established" at the actual time of the search. Ginsberg and Stevens dissented, arguing that controlling precedent had already established that strip-searching was unconstitutional).
The court reasoned:
Had Savana been suspected of having illegal drugs that could have posed a far greater danger to herself and other students, the strip search, too, might have been justified, the majority said, in an opinion by Justice David H. Souter.
“In sum, what was missing from the suspected facts that pointed to Savana was any indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity, and any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying pills in her underwear,” the court said. “We think that the combination of these deficiencies was fatal to finding the search reasonable.”
The ruling is significant because it comes at the end of a long line of SCOTUS opinions allowing student searches (locker searches, etc.). For a while there, it began to look like there was no zone of privacy for students at all. Well, apparently, we now have a line — you can't search their underwear or bodily cavities.
Well, you can, but you have to have some solid suspicion — something more than a hunch or a student tip — to justify the strip-searching of public school students. And the contraband has to be something more dangerous or potentially harmful than ibuprofin.
The other constitutional rule expressed in the opinion — searches of public school students’ backpacks, notebooks, other belongings, outer clothing, and pockets are generally allowed if they are based on “reasonable suspicion” — remains as it has for a quarter-century, but with a small amount of refinement, the exact scope of which is not quite clear.
RIP Farrah Fawcett
We saw this coming. Very sad. She passed only moments ago, fighting her battle with cancer the best she could until the end. She was 62.
The young model….
…turned iconic image of the 1970s…
…turned respected actress…
Even throughout her wildly successful Charlie's Angels phase (which only lasted one year with her), she was dismissed as an unserious blonde actress. Then came the classic TV movie The Burning Bed which established her as a serious actress. Unfortunately, with some exceptions (one of my favorite plays/movies, Extremities), Farrah could never quite escape the tabloids. Even in sickness.
Early early days:
Bachmann Follies [UPDATED with Video]
Yay! Our favorite Worst Politician In The World ™ is back in the news with some more batshit insanity.
Last week, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) said that she would refuse to complete the census when it rolls around next year (which is a crime, by the way).
Today on Fox News, she explained her reasoning:
"Take this into consideration. If we look at American history, between 1942 and 1947, the data that was collected by the Census Bureau was handed over to the FBI and other organizations at the request of President Roosevelt, and that's how the Japanese were rounded up and put into the internment camps," said Bachmann. "I'm not saying that that's what the Administration is planning to do, but I am saying that private personal information that was given to the Census Bureau in the 1940s was used against Americans to round them up, in a violation of their constitutional rights, and put the Japanese in internment camps."
Right. She's not saying that the Obama Administration is going to put people into forced camps. At least not now. She doesn't have to say it here and now. Because she's already said it.
Video:
There are many things wrong with Bachmann and host Megyn Kelly’s so-called analysis: First, both women were shocked that the Census would ask for people’s telephone numbers. However, that information is not required by law, and is used only to contact recipients who have incomplete forms.
Second, Bachmann is confusing the 2010 Census and the American Community Survey (ACS), a long-form survey sent out to one in 40 households (0.0028 percent of the American public) each year. The Census, sent out once every ten years, asks only about one’s age, race, and the type of home one lives in. The ACS, started in 1996, collects more detailed data used to distribute more than $300 billion in federal funds to local communities.
Most importantly, the questions that Bachmann is so concerned about — questions she suggests might somehow lead to internment — are not new questions (not to mention they frequently overlap with information given to the IRS every year). Census questions on race have been asked since 1790; home language since 1890; rent since 1880; and income since 1940. The Census has asked what kind of heating fuel heats Americans’ homes since 1940.
Finally, it’s a federal crime for any Census worker to violate the confidentiality of the Census form, punishable by a federal prison sentence of up to five years, a fine of up to $250,000, or both.
I Prefer Maple Syrup, Thank You
From Thisiswhyyourefat.com, a pancake fiasco:
Layers from bottom to top: pancake; cookie dough; pancake; peanut butter and jelly; pancake; chocolate and bananas; pancake; caramel, oreo, marshmallow, sprinkles, M&M’s; pancake; caramel buttercream frosting granished with Trix cereal.
Sacrilege.
Integrity and Analogies That Don’t Hold Water
From The Corner, K-Lo quotes Bill Bennett who quotes Chuck Colson (Watergate conspirator who became born again in prison)
Integrity is wholeness. Think about the Navy. You know what happens when a Naval ship takes off? Someone goes up to the captain on the bridge — the captain on the bridge says check for watertight integrity. And someone goes down through the ship and they check every single door to see that every door, every waterproof door, is sealed.
And they go back up and they say, "The ship has integrity." Integrity means every part of your body. It does not mean every part of your life. It means every single part of your existence. All those water tight doors are shut tight. And then there is integrity. You cannot say that someone can do something on the private side of their lives without it having public consequences, because you’ve opened one of those watertight doors and that ship will eventually sink. A cheat in private is going to be a cheat in public. Someone who lies in private is going to lie in public, and you can’t trust someone who does that.
If someone ever decides to give out Bad Analogy Awards, this is my nominee.
First of all, I cop to being ignorant about naval matters, but even *I* know that ships can stay float even if one, two or more watertight door fails. What Bennett/Colson is saying sounds good, but it simply is — well — a lie. And a moment's reflection (or the most rudimentary Google search) will expose this lie.
In fact, to the extent that ship integrity has any bearing on moral integrity, the opposite conclusion can be reached: One can lie from time to time in some areas of their life (particularly private matters), and still tell the truth publicly. If I'm sitting with the guys in the bar and telling tall tales (or outright lies) of sexual conquests, that does not mean I lie about everything. Even if I were to cheat on my wife, that does not mean I am cheating on my country by selling state secrets to terrorists.
I'm not defending Sanford (which is what Bennett was discussing in advocating that he "had to go"), Nor am I defending the act of lying — either lying in one's personal (e.g., having an affair) or lying in the public realm. But I am saying that there are degrees of lying and surrounding circumstances, and you simply cannot say that a person who lies in a particular situation will lie in ALL situations. That's absurdly moronic.
UPDATE: K-Lo is getting pushback from her brethren at The Corner:
Yes, integrity is wholeness, but here we're talking about the wholeness of human beings who, unlike vessels, are flawed by nature. It also seems absurd to me to suggest that affairs of the heart are not in any sense different from — or to be judged differently than — even a private person's professional obligations, let alone an elected or appointed official's public duties…..
It's certainly possible that someone who acts immorally in his personal life will be so pervasively immoral that it spills over into all facets of his life. But it's not my experience — and I've crossed paths with a lot of people who've done a lot of very bad things — that making a bad judgment, or even several, necessarily means the person is bad across the board. It is sometimes true, but it is not the rule.
Most of us (I would say all of us, but I'm not that presumptuous) have made some blunderous mistakes in our lives. I know I have. The hope is that if we are decent people, if we have integrity, it is in part because we have taken these errors to heart and become better because of them.
Yup.
Sanford Fallout
It really really looks like the GOP is revving up to cut ties with the religious right now. The Sanford Affair seems to have provided the opportunity to do this. Why do I think that? Well, the mainstream media is covered with stories about the downfall of social conservatism. And then there's quotes like this:
South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis… sees an opening for the Republican Party, a chance to “lose the stinking rot of self-righteousness” and “to understand we are all in need of some grace.”
That's a remarkable quote when you consider that Inglis made a name for himself "in the late 1990s as one of Bill Clinton’s most zealous pursuers, an impeachment 'manager' who attacked the moral failings of the president with a gusto".
A transformation of Inglis? No, he says. He's just as religious as ever. In fact, he claims to be more attuned to the Gospels compared to the days when he was railing against Clinton's indiscretions:
“They want me to walk around saying I am the paragon of virtue,” Inglis said. “But that is unrecognizable to the Gospels.”
A little late to the party, but welcome.