Roger Ailes, The Musical

And you thought watching CNN reporting on blogs was painful. Check this out:

Melding two chic cultural forms, the documentary drama and the blog, the Six Figures Theater Company has turned the online writings of Riverbend, the pseudonym of a 25-year-old Baghdad woman who has become something of an Internet celebrity, into a dramatically awkward series of readings....

While Riverbend has a fascinating voice, this production, adapted by Kimberly I. Kefgen and Loren Ingrid Noveck, never makes the case for her blog as a piece of drama. What is lost is the sense of one singular, idiosyncratic personality, which, of course, is exactly what emerges so vividly from the blog. Instead of building a character, the show includes readings of her words from three women and one man, which adds to the muddled feel.

When not speaking, the actors pace in a triangle or perform synchronized gestures that make them look like backup singers to a 1960's pop band.

No, it's not from The Onion.

Unfortunately, the photograph accompanying the article, depicting the cast standing around gaping at a glowing laptop screen, is not online.

I hope riverbend's getting a cut, although I can't imagine the production is making money.

Meet Your Liberal Media: Let Them Eat Lamb in Chile Ancho Pepper Sauce and Orange-Garlic Juice with Mezcal Infusion ($25) Edition

I'm having a little trouble identifying the premise of Maureen Dowd's latest column in the Times:

The Fiesta Americana Grand Aqua is on Cancun's main hotel strip - a Vegas-like stretch of hotels, bars, restaurants and clubs (Boulevard Kukulcan, km. 12.5, Zona Hotelera). Rates for double rooms start at $498 a night during high season (Dec. 18 through New Year's Day), $393 during middle season (Jan. 2 through April 30) and $215 during low season.

For reservations or more information, call the Fiesta Americana general reservations line at (800) 343-7821 or visit the site www.fiestaamericana.com. The direct number is (52-998) 881-7600.

Is it about free trade, third-world debt or exploitation of foreign workers?

How Many Hits Did He Get?

Prosecutors argued that [Thomas E.] Murray killed his ex-wife because he was furious about possibly losing custody. They said he gave different stories on his whereabouts and had conducted Internet searches on how to commit murder, including "how to murder someone and not get caught" and "murder for hire."

(From CNN.com)

What The Hell Took Me So Long?

X, CI, R.I.P.

Weblogs of The Rich and Heinous

Did you know that Lawrence "Cokie" Kudlow has a blog, called Money Politic$? It's a freebie Blogspot blog, so I guess Kudlow isn't doing as well as we think.

Maybe he's still paying off his blow bill. Or maybe he's just a cheap mofo.

In his latest entry, CNBC's Nose-Candy Crowley applauds the verdict of the Ebbers jury:

Free market capitalism must be based on the rule of law. By enforcing the law, the twelve Ebber's [sic] jurors did far more for honest accounting and healthy, functioning markets than thousands of regulatory pages, such as the onerous Sarbanes Oxley.

(The rules of punctuation are optional.)

But if Kudlow really believed in the rule of law, wouldn't he be cleaning toilets at his halfway house right now, instead of blogging?

I'm excited about this celebrity blogging trend though: First, Sam Francis, before his superior genes failed him, and now Kudlow. If anyone spots other semi-famous hacks expanding their empires into the blogging arts, please send the link along.

We're the richest state in the wealthiest nation in human history. Yet we're 48th out of 50 states in student achievement, and we have a Governor who wants to cut 15,000 dollars out of every public school classroom. A Governor who broke a 40-year-old covenant, by telling 25,000 hungry young minds -- kids who worked hard, made all the grades -- that there was no room for them at our state colleges and universities.

We're the richest state in the wealthiest nation in human history. Yet the gap between the rich and the poor is widening. And we have a Governor who thinks it's fine to cut assistance to children, to the poor -- that somehow, if we just shower more fortune on the fortunate, the crumbs will reach the rest, like the leftovers of a Hollywood dinner party....

And I'll tell you why: unlike Governor Schwarzenegger, I don't believe in a Charles Darwin fiscal policy, and I don't believe in a Marie Antoinette tax policy. I don't believe a great state's economy should be a race to the bottom, where we reward quick profiteering at the expense of long-term growth and opportunity.

So I pushed the State's major pension funds to dump all their tobacco stocks, because it's wrong to reward companies that target and poison our kids. I led the fight against the Enron-style fraud that ransacked the hard-earned savings of millions of Americans. And I've worked to end investments in companies that use sweatshop labor and child labor. These are billions of dollars of your pension money. I want them invested in ways that make your lives better, not worse.

I've led this state to invest in our neglected communities -- because I believe we will never achieve our full potential if anyone is left behind.

I've pushed the State to invest in technologies that clean up the environment and combat global warming -- so we can be the State that sells them to the world and creates good jobs.

Schwarzenegger and his goons and apologists -- the Murphys, the Kauses and the Kurtzes -- will be on the attack soon. That will be Angelides' first test.

Bull Disclosure

At National Review Online, Father Rob Johansen writes about the legal proceedings surrounding Terri Schiavo. The point I'm interested in is Johansen's contention that "[e]xpert witnesses in court are supposed to be unbiased: disinterested in the outcome of the case. Part of the procedure in qualifying expert witnesses is establishing that they are objective and unbiased." Johansen argues that an expert witness, Dr. Cranford, who testified Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state was a biased witness because he is allegedly an advocate "in the 'right to die' and euthanasia movements." Says Johansen, "one needs to know a little about Cranford's background and perspective" in order to evaluate Cranford's opinions.

To support his argument, Johansen quotes some neurologists to whom he provided a selective account of the medical evidence and legal proceedings.

Among them, there's "Dr. William Bell, a professor of neurology at Wake Forest University Medical School." For some strange reason, Johansen doesn't think we need to know a little -- or anything -- about Bell's background or perspective. Among other things, Bell is a member of the Christian Medical and Dental Society. Although Johansen obviously thinks otherwise, you might be interested to know that the Christian Medical and Dental Society believes that "[t]he human body belongs to God," holds some bigoted psuedo-scientific views about homosexuality, and compares embryonic stem cell research to Nazi war crimes.

No bias or interest there. And I'm sure Johansen picked Bell entirely at random, as opposed to selecting him for the outcome he desires.

Then there's "Dr. Thomas Zabiega, who trained at the University of Chicago." I think we can presume that's Thomas Zabiega, M.D., Vice President for Legislative Affairs for the Catholic Physicians' Guild of Chicago. Let's keep that Father Rob's little secret, shall we?

In the article, Father Rob makes it sound as if Dr. Bell is hearing about the Schiavo case for the first time. ("I have spent the past ten days recruiting and interviewing neurologists willing to come forward and offer affidavits or declarations concerning new testing and examinations for Terri....") Yet Bell, apparently accepting Father Rob's version as gospel, has made up his mind: "It seems as though they're fearful of any additional information," "medical realities are no longer governing this case," "once a decision is made they don't want additional information." No prejudgment there either.

Father Rob is a man who likes to cherry-pick his experts and avoid disclosure of important but inconvenient facts. If we judge him by his own standard, he can't be trusted.

p.s. Here's more on the "pro-lifers" with a keen interest in the Schiavo case.

I Don't Know, But I Am Told

Wingnut hacks are getting old.

Anne Applebaum is a pure merit hire; all the rest of you are quota queens. Or so she thinks. You see, she was hired to write a column based on her glorious reporting career, but, "thanks to [Susan] Estrich," all other female writers "will have to wonder whether it was [your] knowledge of Irish politics, [your] willingness to court controversy or just [you] gender that won the editor over."

And Anne demonstrates her mad reporting skillz, too.

"I am told, for example, that there is pressure at Harvard Law School, and at other law schools, to ensure that at least half the students chosen for the law review are women. Quite frankly, it's hard to think of anything that would do more damage to aspiring female lawyers. Neither they nor their prospective employers will ever know whether they got there as part of a quota or on their own merits."

I am told that the federal government is controlled by the Jews; it must be so. That's the kind of in-depth investigative journalism that would earn Ann a job at FrontPage Magazine.

Does Apple Annie believe half the students chosen for law review wouldn't be women if applicants were judged solely on their merits? And does she believe that the prospective employers of law school graduates no longer look at grades or writing samples or references or experience to make their hiring decisions? Why, oh why, are all these inferior women trying to make Anne look bad?

After this column, we'll all have to wonder whether Applebaum got her column due to her love of right-wing cliches, her wilingness to spout conventional wisdom, or because Margaret Carlson declined Kinsley's offer.

The Area Between Pistof's Ears

"Ambitious, high-achieving women are still a turnoff in many areas, particularly if they're liberal and feminist." -- Nick Kristof

Ex-bigot and ex-blogger (!) Sam Francis would be rolling over in his grave but for the fact his huge carcass is too tightly wedged in the coffin to allow such movement.

The Talmudic boner scholars at the FCC have ruled that the Monday Night Football intro which had Sam's sheets in a knot was not indecent:

We conclude that the material in question is not patently offensive, and thus, not indecent. In particular, the "Monday Night Football" segment, although sexually suggestive, is not graphic or explicit. 15 Owens is fully dressed throughout the segment, and, with the exception of a moment when her bare back is exposed to the audience, Sheridan is at all times fully covered with a towel. No sexual or excretory organs are shown or described, and no sexual activities are explicitly depicted or described. Furthermore, the scene where Sheridan drops her towel and jumps into Owens's arms is brief. Although the scene apparently is intended to be titillating, it simply is not graphic or explicit enough to be indecent under our standard.

Meanwhile, the forced dis-integration of Mr. Francis will continue unabated for the foreseeable future.

The End Of The Whine

Was there ever a bigger joke than Daniel Okrent, the constantly-whining "readers representative" who accomplished nothing during his 18 month vacation from reality?

I exaggerate. He accomplished what he set out to do: obtain another little-work, no-responsibility and no accountability academic gig for himself.

NEW YORK Nearing the end of his 18-month stint as The New York Times' first public editor, Daniel Okrent compared the assignment to a root canal -- but says he's glad he took it.

Just hours after hearing that he had successfully landed a fellowship for next spring at the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University, Okrent told E&P that the Times job offered him unparalleled access to readers and editors but also some of the most difficult working conditions imaginable.

Yes, the pampered fat ass can't imagine the working conditions of farm workers, miners, humanitarian aid workers, medical caregivers, soldiers or firefighters, to name just a few.

At one point, Okrent said he changed his reading habits to stop looking at e-mails or blogs before going to bed because he would be unable to sleep. "I sleep better now," he added.

Among the biggest surprises for Okrent were issues surrounding presidential campaign coverage, he said. "It focused attention on the Times' role, and there was a constant assault from people who were inflamed by the coverage," he explained. "What was surprising was the viciousness of the attacks on the paper. The defensiveness of the paper was understandable."

Why should Jokrent have to concern his beautiful mind with readers' opinions of the Times' coverage of an important news story? It's so unpleasant.

Okrent felt the most threatened after his controversial Oct. 10, 2004, column, which he ended by mentioning a person who had e-mailed Times reporter Adam Nagourney. Okrent drew criticism after naming the man [sic -- and identifying where the man lived] and calling him a coward. "He wrote letters demanding I resign and apologize," Okrent recalls. "In the blog world, I got the s--t kicked out of me."

Sorry, Danny. If you had the shit kicked out of you, there would be nothing of you left.

One blogger threatened to post Okrent's home address, home phone number, and the location of his daughter's college campus on his blog in response to the column. "That was very unpleasant," he said.

But not as unpleasant as Okrent actually publishing the name and location of a reader, without permission, which led to exactly the type of harassment the coward Okrent thinks he alone should be exempt from.

Good riddance. Let's hope the next ass-kisser Keller hires at least has the grace not to whine about the smell.

On The Road To Victory

Seems that shooting of an Italian journalist in Iraq resulted from additional checkpoints that were created to protect His Excellency, John D. Negroponte, who was en route to a dinner engagement with the American general in charge of military operations in Iraq, stationed at "Camp Victory." The shooting took place about an hour and twenty-five minutes or so after Negroponte passed, so it's not clear why the checkpoint was still there. As the people of Honduras know all too well, being in a country where Negroponte is ambassador can be hazardous to your health.

Ooops, I Knew I Forgot Something

Correction: I've conflated the Berkman conference with another conference on "Media, Technology and the Common Good" held at Harvard by the American Press Institute at the beginning of March. Apparently you can't throw a stone in Cambridge without hitting a conference discussing blogs (and the same people too). I apologize for confusing the two, as well for as the resulting mischaracterizations of the positions of the parties based thereon.

With respect to the issue of the gender makeup of invitees to the the conferences, however, I counted 14 women and 36 men on the invite list for the Berkman conference (link) and 13 women and 33 men at the API conference (link). So not much difference there. If there weren't "many other women in attendance" at the API conference, there weren't many other women at the Berkman conference. Why was the gender disparity so noteworthy at the API conference and not at the Berkman event? And, contrary to the MSGOP article, most of the invitees at the API conference were not "top 100 bloggers," or bloggers at all. So the point of blaming the bloggers for the lack of diversity at conference not run or controlled by bloggers also stands.

An article from MSGOP.com asks why the blogosphere is dominated by white males:

March 21 issue -- At a recent Harvard conference on bloggers and the media, the most pungent statement came from cyberspace. Rebecca MacKinnon, writing about the conference as it happened, got a response on the "comments" space of her blog from someone concerned that if the voices of bloggers overwhelm those of traditional media, "we will throw out some of the best ... journalism of the 21st century."

...

After the comment was posted, a couple of the women at the conference -- bloggers MacKinnon and Halley Suitt -- looked around and saw that there weren't many other women in attendance. Nor were the faces yapping about the failings of Big Media representative of the human quiltwork one would see in the streets of Cambridge or New York City, let alone overseas. They were, however, representative of the top 100 blogs according to the Web site Technorati -- a list dominated by bigmouths of the white-male variety.

Shouldn't this article be about the perpetuation of white male dominance at Harvard academic conferences, rather than while male dominance of the blogosphere?

Last time I checked, it wasn't blogs or the blogosphere that was sending out the invites to the Berkman Center For the Internet and Society's "invitation only" circle jerk. From the website, it looks like Ms. MacKinnon had something of a say in who got invited to the event. She certainly knew who was on the guest list well before the conference began. So why did she have to look around "after the comment was posted" to realize there weren't many other women in attendance? Had Jeff Jarvis told Ms. MacKinnon he was born a woman? Did she believe that Robert Cox, John Hinderaker and Dave Winer were drag kings?

Here's a radical suggestion for MacKinnon if she wants more diversity at her next blogfest: Invite more women and people of color. Until then, stop pretending that your problem and Harvard's is someone else's.

Ten Hours From Truthful

President Bush will nominate one of his closest longtime advisers to a key State Department post in an effort to help repair the United States' image abroad, especially in the Arab world, a senior administration official said Saturday.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the announcement that Bush has selected Karen Hughes to be undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs will be made early next week, possibly as early as Monday. The position requires Senate confirmation.

The official said that Hughes, 48, will spearhead the administration's campaign to promote democracy in the Middle East....

As undersecretary, Hughes' main responsibility will be to repair the image of the United States which was badly tarnished abroad by anger over the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq and overthrow its government.

If everything goes as planned, foreign countries will be persuaded that the United States never abused drugs and alcohol, never failed to perform required military service, and writes its own books.

Oh, and that Bush Administration gives a shit about democracy in the Middle East.

Well, at least Jerry and Robert got a reprieve.

Nick Kristof Is Wrong Once Again

In his Saturday diatribe against "tree huggers," Little Nicky Pistof confesses he was "once an environmental groupie." What he did with the pine cones, you don't want to know.

Anyway, Kristof is convinced environmentalists have lost all credibility:

"The fundamental problem, as I see it, is that environmental groups are too often alarmists. They have an awful track record, so they've lost credibility with the public. Some do great work, but others can be the left's equivalents of the neocons: brimming with moral clarity and ideological zeal, but empty of nuance. (Industry has also hyped risks with wildly exaggerated warnings that environmental protections will entail a terrible economic cost.)"

Yet apparently industry didn't lose its credibility, or at least Kristof doesn't think it worth discussing.

Kristof's proof of the "awful track record" and frequent alarmism of environmental groups? Here's his entire argument, and his best two examples:

Example one: "In the 1970's, the environmental movement was convinced that the Alaska oil pipeline would devastate the Central Arctic caribou herd. Since then, it has quintupled."

Example Two: "When I first began to worry about climate change, global cooling and nuclear winter seemed the main risks. As Newsweek said in 1975: 'Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend ... but they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.'"

Not even "the environmental movement," or environmentalists, but meterologists. Purportedly talking about a trend with a 25-year impact -- the cause of which they disagreed about.

Yes, environmental groups are so frequently alarmist that the most recent examples of their incorrect alarmism Pistof can cite are 30 years old. And he doesn't mention any group by name.

Pistof also mentions Paul Ehrlich's "The Population Bomb," for the wild-eyed notion that overpopulation will cause starvation, and a book from 1959 entitled "Too Many Asians," which, as we all know, is the Satanic Bible of the environmental movement. (A classic attempt by Pistof to smear his political opponents as racists. I wonder how that out-of-print tome found a home on Pistof's bookshelf.)

After castigating screeching extremists, Pistof concludes:

"Given the uncertainties and trade-offs, priority should go to avoiding environmental damage that is irreversible, like extinctions, climate change and loss of wilderness. And irreversible changes are precisely what are at stake with the Bush administration's plans to drill in the Arctic wildlife refuge, to allow roads in virgin wilderness and to do essentially nothing on global warming."

Extinctions? Climate change? But... but ... environmentalists have no credibility on Arctic drilling or global warming! What about those caribou? And the meterologists?

I think I've got whiplash.

In summary, Kristof's column brims with moral clarity and ideological zeal, but is empty of nuance. And fact.

For Further Reading: Dave Johnson tells Kristof to read the whole thing.

It Don't Come Easy

A reader cites a prime example of the Kerfuffle Rule, which, minus the TBogg Exception, states that one should never credit the opinion of anyone who uses the term kerfuffle to describe a brouhaha, imbroglio or rowdydow.

In her Sunday column, MoDo spouts off on the underrepresentation of women writers on the nation's op-ed pages. After digressing to talk about herself for the first half of the column.

Dowd asks why people call her writings "mean." Actually, those people mean to say insipid; they're just being polite. She gripes at length about being perceived as castrating and man-hating for expressing strong opinions, and wonders why Tom Friedman doesn't get the same criticism.

May I suggest an answer, Maureen? Your column is criticized in ways Friedman's is not because it is entirely lacking in substance. It is always filled with lame insults more appropriately found in a Tonight Show monologue, labored -- and unfunny -- premises and analogies, and egocentric whining. It lacks any point of view except that its author is more clever than everyone else. It is deviod of a coherent philosophy, insight, conviction or reporting. In a word, it's crap.

After moaning that mean people called her mean, MoDo states:

The kerfuffle over female columnists started when Susan Estrich launched a crazed and nasty smear campaign against Michael Kinsley, the L.A. Times editorial page editor, trying to force him to run her humdrum syndicated column.

Anyway, I should've stopped at kerfuffle; it's all downhill from there.

MoDo goes on to explain why there aren't more women opinion columnists:

Gail Collins, the first woman to run The Times's editorial page and the author of a history of American women, told The Post's Howard Kurtz: "There are probably fewer women, in the great cosmic scheme of things, who feel comfortable writing very straight opinion stuff, and they're less comfortable hearing something on the news and batting something out."

There's a lot of evidence of that. Male bloggers predominate, as do male TV shouters. Men I know and men who read The Times write me constantly, asking me to read the opinion pieces they've written. Sometimes they'll e-mail or fax me their thoughts to read right before I have lunch with them. Women hardly ever send their own rants.

There's been a dearth of women writing serious opinion pieces for top news organizations, even as there's been growth in female sex columnists for college newspapers. Going from Tess Harding to Carrie Bradshaw, Dorothy Thompson to Candace Bushnell, is not progress.

This job has not come easily to me. But I have no doubt there are plenty of brilliant women who would bring grace and guts to our nation's op-ed pages, just as, Lawrence Summers notwithstanding, there are plenty of brilliant women out there who are great at math and science. We just need to find and nurture them.

Fair Condi and the All White Knights

To start things off, a long-time e-mailer sends in this tale of fair maiden Condi paying a visit to the White Knights and Imperial Wizards of Moon Table. "Miss Rice" breaks editorial bread with vile racists Pruden and Coombs and anti-semite Tony Blankley and the other hoary white heads doing the Father's business.

The roundtable interview is mostly foreign policy, of course. Foreign Editor David Jones (who?) poses a question about North Korea without mentioning one of that country's most generous benefactors or the nuclear weapons development paid for with that benefactor's largesse.

Then there's this bitter laugh line:

Miss Rice: I'm never going to underestimate al Qaeda -- Never.

As the evening progresses, the conversation turns to God and Condi 08:

Mr. Sammon: Before we let you get away, we've got to talk about the fun political stuff. And that is starting with, are you would you consider running for president in 2008?

Miss Rice: Oh, jeez [sic -- Jeez].

...

Miss Rice: I know. I have never wanted to run for anything. I don't think I even ran for class anything when I was in school. I'm going to try to...

Mr. Pruden: But you could save us from Hillary (laughter).

...

Mr. Sammon: So are you ruling it out?

Mr. Pruden: Will you do a Sherman? (Laughter.)

Miss Rice Oh, that's not fair, but -- (Laughter.)

Mr. Pruden: Newspapers aren't fair.

(Editor's note: Mr. Pruden is asking if Miss Rice intends to burn down his house and Mr. Coombs' house.)

Miss Rice: Oh, that's not fair, but ... I really can't imagine it.

Mr. Sammon: Well, let me just follow up on this because that's perfectly understandable. But one of the things people are confused about and they understand your foreign policy positions, you've been very clear about those but there is some confusion about some of your domestic policy issues. And I know that's not your bailiwick, but, for example, I interviewed Colin Powell last year as secretary of state and he talked about how he was pro-choice, how he was pro-affirmative action, how he was against an amendment that would ban the burning of a flag, these kinds of social issues. I "googled" Condi Rice and abortion and I've gotten so much murky, contradictory information. Could you clear it up for us today? Are you pro-life? Are you pro-choice? What is your thought on abortion?

Miss Rice: I believe if you go back to 2000, when I helped the president in the campaign, I said that I was, in effect, kind of Libertarian on this issue, and meaning by that that I have been concerned about a government role in this issue. I'm a strong proponent of parental choice, of parental notification. I'm a strong proponent of a ban on late-term abortion. These are all things that I think unite people and I think that that's where we should be. I've called myself at times mildly pro-choice.

Mr. Sammon: That was the phrase that kept coming up.

Miss Rice: Yeah, mildly pro-choice. That's what that means. I think that there are a lot of things that we can unite around, and that's where I would tend to be. I'm very comfortable with the president's view that we have to respect and need to have a culture that respects life. This should be an issue pretty infrequently because we ought to have a culture that says that, "Who wants to have an abortion? Who wants to see a daughter or a friend or, you know, a sibling go through something like that?" And so I believe the president has been in exactly the right place about this, which is, we have to respect the culture of life and we have to try and bring people to have respect for it and make this as rare a circumstance as possible.

Mr. Sammon: The only reason I even brought it up was because there is a school of thought that says that no conservative Republican can be elected president if they are not firmly pro-life. I know you haven't ruled anything in or out but...

Miss Rice: I'm not trying to be elected.

Mr. Sammon: But it sounds like you do not wish to change the laws that now allow ...

Miss Rice: Well, I don't spend my entire life thinking about these issues. You know, I spend my time really thinking about the foreign policy issues. But you know that I'm a deeply religious person and so, from my point of view, these extremely difficult moral issues where we have -- where we're facing issues with technology and the prolongation of life and the fact that very, very young babies are able to survive now -- very small babies are able to survive -- these are great moral issues.

What I do think is that we should not have the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other. So, for instance, I've tended to agree with those who do not favor federal funding for abortion, because I believe that those who hold a strong moral view on the other side should not be forced to fund it.

Unlike, say, the invasion of Iraq.

Given the foregoing dance, it seems that Condi's set to do a reversal on her purported choice position should the Father's paper demand it.