San Francisco's Goodbye

Good find Eddie!

The Inauguration

After listening to the talking heads this morning wax poetic about how Obama and Bush had eaten sponge cake together on a replica set of Lincoln's china, I was not sure if I could bear much more of the symbolism and hoopla. But then Obama spoke, and again, I was taken aback at just how articulate he is, and how he is able to inspire. I particularly liked this part.

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our founding fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.

I could not think of a more fitting "good bye" to W. Good riddance. And isn't it wonderful that we now have a president who is so well-spoken that he out-did the poet?!?!

Throw a shoe at double u

Well it took the internets about 30 seconds to come up with this game:

http://www.ridiculopathy.com/crappy_flash_games.php?gamename=bushoes


At first I was a little shocked, but them I remembered that there have been those irritating flash games where you get to punch bush 4 times to win an ipod or something that have been around for years.

This is pretty funny though. Good find Dianne!

I think W's best attribute is his reflexes

When I first saw a headline involving an angry Iraqi and a shoe, I thought it involved someone paying homage to Khruschev's tantrum incident at the UN.

But no. This reporter actually took his shoes off and threw them at Bush. He had decent aim, but Bush was just too quick.



Unsurprisingly, he was not given a high five and allowed to leave the building in his socks. A bit more surprising, but not totally shocking, the shoe hurler is now a pan middle eastern hero. From Jordan to Palestine, most look at the journalist with a nasty slider to be a brave man.

I have some mixed feelings about this. First, this is not the first time W has had stuff thrown at him. Second, though this is by definition a violent act, it is pretty tame compared to what most normal Iraqis might encounter during their daily routines, and is probably as close to "non-violent" protest as Iraq has ever seen. In any event, the purpose (notwithstanding the velocity of the left one), I think, was symbolic, as in Arab culture, showing the soles of your feet to someone is an insult. And, as here at home, Bush just doesn't speak with people who don't agree with him, so maybe a little reality check is a good thing.

On the other hand, like him or not, I don't like people throwing hard objects at the President, because if you hit him, it will cause a major shit storm here at home.

Bin Laden's Driver Convicted, Faces Sentencing

Update: He got 5 and 1/2 years

GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, Cuba (Reuters) - A jury of U.S. military officers sentenced Osama bin Laden's driver to 5 1/2 years in prison on Thursday for providing material support for terrorism, concluding the first U.S. war crimes tribunal since World War Two.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Salim Hamdan, whose detention at Guantanamo Bay since 2002 prompted the Supreme Court Decision concluding that the original tribunals set up by Bush did not conform with the Geneva Conventions, was convicted of providing material support for terrorism, but was acquitted of conspiracy (interestingly, the government only added the supporting terrorism charge after the Supreme Court case, because it was not previously a codified crime!).

While this is being heralded as a "success" for the military commission, some serious questions remain, including whether any of the crimes actually have any foundation in the law of war, or whether conviction under these novel theories of criminal law might violate the ex post facto clause.

For me, I think the fact that this is the first and strongest case for the government is extremely telling. Are you telling me that of all of the detainees from Guantanamo, who the government has been trying to keep locked up indefinitely without recourse to counsel or the courts because they are "high value," the best we can do is the fucking chauffeur? Not even the government claims that he had any real involvement in the September 11 attacks. It seems Hamdan was mostly motivated by having a job, rather than any strong ideological camaraderie (a notion I can actually empathize with).

If anything, the fact that the first successful conviction 1) of someone who is about as connected with September 11 as the guy who runs the laundromat where the hijackers took their dry cleaning (hey how about the guys who taught the fuckers how to fly?), 2) by a "court" hastily set up with very little regard for the detainees' rights, 3) based on violations of law that did not exist at the time, and 4) almost 7 years later shows how completely backward the Bush administration's (and Congress') "war on terror" has been.

What comes around

So, I have a confession to make. For a few months I was a commenter on a right wing blog. I know, I know, but hear me out. Here in SF I am surrounded by people who more or less agree with my more or less liberal viewpoint. I don't really do any good by *ahem* preaching to the choir.

So instead, I went on a proselytizing mission.

And let me tell you, the natives were having none of it.

Actually many were very nice and were willing to find at least some common ground. But others weren't. I was called a "liar" and an "idiot" and was eventually kicked off for being a general thorn in their sides. But I learned some interesting things while there, and I think we have to be careful that we don't do the same thing.

One is "post hoc ergo propter hoc," which I posted on there in latin just to get their panties in a wad. All this latin phrase means is that just because two things happen in sequence does not mean that the first thing caused the second thing. I guess it's sort of a first cousin of "correlation does not mean causation." I learned this because there were many (MANY) posts about how talking with "America's enemies" was a horrible idea, and for support, many of them used the example of WWII and how it would have been futile (or was futile if you were Stalin) to negotiate with Hitler (I also think they just like to bring up the Nazis for inflammatory effect). Now despite some very good WWII historians (and theorists) on the site, they didn't get that the fact that the lack or failure of negotiations in stopping WWII did not automatically mean equal "all negotiations with our enemies are fruitless."

Another good one I saw was result oriented thinking. In many of their posts talking about the shortcomings of Barrack Obama (who they repeatedly said was supported by Hamas) they listed "lack of knowledge/inexperience of foreign policy." When I asked them why this was now suddenly important to them now, when it didn't seem to matter with Bush in 2000 and 2004....well...I actually can't remember what they said, but something to the extent of well, NOW it's important and that W had really learned a lot. While I will say that W has learned some things on the job, he is still not the guy I want representing this country on the global front. He just called Berlusconi his "amigo," for pete's sake. How in the world can you now say that foreign policy experience is important when you voted for this frickin' guy? It's only important now because now it's the alleged shortcoming of the democratic candidate.

Come on guys. Think about it.