When I read articles like this or watch CNN's coverage of what a disaster the relief effort in New Orleans has been so far is it out of bounds to ask how prepared we would be for something like a mass casualty terrorist attack?  I mean we at least had several days advanced warning about Katrina and how powerful she was, but besides getting people out of the city who had the means to leave can somebody point to any extraordinary steps taken to have things in position for a worst-case scenario?  I'm not trying to be snarky I'm just a little bewildered and saddened by it all and dumb statements like "nobody predicted the levees would break" don't quite cut it.

"AS THE EXTENT of Hurricane Katrina’s devastation became clearer on Tuesday — millions without power, tens of thousands homeless, a death toll unknowable because rescue crews can’t reach some regions — President Bush carried on with his plans to speak in San Diego, as if nothing important had happened the day before.

Katrina already is measured as one of the worst storms in American history. And yet, President Bush decided that his plans to commemorate the 60th anniversary of VJ Day with a speech were more pressing than responding to the carnage."

New York Times?  Washington Post?  Time?  Newsweek?  CNN?   Nope, the conservative Manchester Union Leader editorial page on Wednesday.

Kevin Drum delves into the recent Pew Research poll on Religion and asks how the 42% of respondents who believe the earth has existed in it present state since creation stand up against the 25% of respondents to a recent NSF survey who believed the sun revolves around the earth?  Hmmmm....

While we're on the subject of bashing foreigners, why is the Bush administration going out of it way to provoke a trade war with Canada?  This was just passing news last week but Ed Kilgore mentioned it at New Donkey the other day and it made me wonder what domestic political or business concern could place undermining the principle trade agreement with our largest trading partner above everything else?  Better yet, why did we go to all the trouble of creating a free trade agreement with Canada if we weren't going to respect the basic rules of the treaty? 

Yesterday in the amply misnamed "Common Sense" segment of his Fox News show, Neil Cavuto took advantage of the aftermath of Katrina not to offer words of encouragement, condolence or perseverence but to bash foreigners for not coming to our aid.    I've always thought Cavuto was a petty blowhard hosting a business show that rarely concentrates on much of anything related to business but this is ridiculous. 

Does Mr. Cavuto really want foreign governments to come to our aid?  Is he really even asking them too?  No, not really.  His so-called business program often plays like a grand showcase for American exceptionalism but evidently he couldn't pass up the chance at a good cheap shot.  Par for the course, I guess.

Update (9/1):  In an answer to Mr. Cavuto, there are evidently search and rescue teams from Canada waiting to head to Louisiana but there seems to be so much confusion within our own federal gov't at this time that they are waiting for clearance from Homeland Security?

Update II (9/1):  What's this?  You mean more outpouring of support from the rest of the world?

Tony Pierce has the goods.

Reading this article by David Segal about his remembrances of great unscripted rock concert moments from his days as a music critic at the Post brought back so many old memories of when I used to go see bands three or four nights a week that I was inspired to ask our loyal IRONMOUTH readers to write in with their own favorite Rock Concert moments.  I'll start us out:

My favorite rock and roll moment happened at the 9:30 Club in Washington DC in October of 1999.  The concert (dream) bill was Cheap Trick with Guided by Voices and some unknown Boston band opening.  During the Cheap Trick set, in the middle of  "Southern Girls" suddenly Bob Pollard from GBV drunkenly stumbles onto stage holding a half-drunk bottle of Jack Daniels, throws his arm around bassist Tom Peterssen's shoulder and starts belting out the chorus with the rest of the band.  The crowd went fucking crazy and I still reminisce about it with friends to this day.

Have fun!

I think I agree with Atrios when it come to this Sally Jenkins piece in the Post but right now I'm still trying to figure out what the hell she's talking about?  I've heard of using sports metaphors to explain things but this takes the case!

Right now its looking like Louisiana is in bad shape but missed the worst of Katrina, however coastal Mississippi is getting its ass kicked. 

 One of my colleagues at work has a sister who lives in New Orleans.  We asked her this morning what plans her sister's family had made to which she replied, "They went to Florida on Sunday."  Our other colleague replied, "You know its serious when people are going to Florida to avoid a hurricane."

CNN reminds us that today is the 25th anniversary of the founding of Solidarity, the first independent trade union movement in the Eastern Bloc and another nail in the coffin of Soviet control of Eastern Europe.  Funny, but I'm reminded of the old joke of how Ronald Reagan actually supported trade unions just as long as they remained in Poland.  Happy Birthday Solidarity!

Andrew Sullivan on the Iraqi "The dog ate my homework" constitution:

It reveals that although the U.S. is obviously heavily present as a force for ultimate order, the Iraqis themselves are figuring out how to run their country again.

You must be watching another war Andrew, because it sure seemed to me that the problem was that the U.S. wasn't acting as a force for order, ultimate or otherwise, and that the Iraqis had no clue how to defend themselves on their own or provide electricity or water, or pump out the oil that was supposed to make the occupation "pay for itself."

The unique facts about this war are that the Potemkin villages in Iraq exist only in right-wing pundit's heads. 

Yes, we are 1 year old today.  With this post on August 26, 2004 we opened up the Iron Mouth for everything in the world.  This is post number 542.  Alas, the world as it is, politics has been our primary focus since then.  Don't worry culture hounds, we will satisfy your appetites as the situation permits. 

So what has been the best thing about the Iron Mouth?  The commenters, of course.  With a relatively low visit count, we have had lively threads, sometimes reaching over 70 comments for a single post.  Although we have a leftward tilt, we have attracted an intrepid band from other parts of the poltical landscape, people looking for more than validation of their own point of view.  These sorts are rare indeed, and we hope they continue to visit us.

For a long time, pundits of the rightist persuasion have held that our presence in Iraq attracts terrorists there, making it easier to kill them.  Pundit no. 1 on this bandwagon was Andrew Sullivan, who proudly paraded it over his website on numerous occasions.  So it was quite a surprise to see Andrew's post today entitled "The Flypaper Fallacy," even if it was only a link to Greg Djerejian's post at the Belgravia Dispatch. 

But what I don't see Djerejian or Sullivan touching on is the utter stupidity of the idea on its face.  We are allegedly attempting to create a democracy in Iraq at the same time we are attempting to draw thousands of murderous terrorists from outside the nascent democracy who are attempting to tear it down.  Didn't anyone on the right ever think of this?  Its hard enough planting the seeds of democracy in a place where it has never existed while attempting to invite thousands of people to try and pull those seeds up at the same time. 

Tommorow . . .a very special day here.

Via Kevin Drum comes a post by Marc Cooper talking about how at a seemingly unrelated poker boot camp run by a former FBI intelligence officer the instructor used Rumsfeld as an example of how to tell when someone's lying or bluffing.    Feel free to apply the lessons to your own favorite talking heads and see what you get.

In an ongoing remembrance of past inconsistencies regarding steadfastly supporting the troops in the field, Billmon has a great post contrasting the American Legion's recent declaration of war on anti-war protesters with a letter the Legion sent President Clinton containing its resolution calling for the "immediate withdrawal" of American troops from Yugoslavia.  For those who don't remember NATO and US bombing of Serbia began in March 1999 and as you can see this letter was sent a couple months later.  Damn Veteran peaceniks!  Good stuff....

 

Monday - What he really said:

"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop.  We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."

Wednesday - What he claims he said:

"I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out.' 'Take him out' could be a number of things including kidnapping."

Which brings to mind Charles Barkley's famous quip about some of the claims he made in his autobiography: "I was misquoted."

Only Pat Robertson doesn't have Barkley's jump shot.  Or personality.  Or wit.

Putting aside the issue of whether Pat Robertson "misquoted" himself, is it appropriate for a Christian evangelical preacher cum Republican party presidential candidate to endorse kidnapping?

WWJD, Pat?

 

Salaam Pax has been watching for the announcement of the new Iraqi Constitution on al-Iraqiya and comes up short.   It appears after some suspense, that the various parties have not completed work on a new Iraqi constitution but have a partial or unfinished draft.  Instead of dissolving the Assembly they say they will discuss unfinished draft over the next three days?  Wonder how they're gonna spin this?  Ivo Daalder's piece asking what the back-up plan is seems pretty prescient.

I was looking at this rather amusing article at CNN about how the President is going to go to the well one more time and give another series of speeches with almost the same themes (9/11,9/11,9/11...) he's been using for four years now (with the unexpected addition of the new Iraq = WWII theme) when I saw something that looked out of place. 

I could be wrong but does that subtitle say, "Texas protests continue as Republicans disagree on conflict"?  Is that a typo?  I thought it was "set in stone" conventional wisdom that only the Democrats were divided on Iraq so what the hell are they talking about?  Are they getting tired of writing "weak, divided Democrats" stories?

I hope this is an aberration because it could really mess with my perceptions of a coherent national narrative regarding the political parties, foreign policy, and so forth.  

In the past couple months, it looks like Intelligent Design has gone mainstream.  The President likes it.  Dr. Frist, too.  And in the name of objectivity, from USA Today to the New York Times to elsewhere come the inevitable blurring of distinctions and the unfounded legitimacy of competing theories, nay, beliefs, which no ID proponent will ever have to seriously defend.  The game is to raise ID's profile enough so that the general impression is that within science there is an actual debate or competition that really doesn't exist.   After seeing Kenneth Chang's piece in the NYTimes today, Brad Delong probably best summarized the state of things when he wrote in response, "Darwinists have done a great deal to explain life's complexity. "Doubters" have done nothing at all to do so."    

When you get beyond all the gnashing of teeth, I have to say my favorite take on the ID mentality comes from the always humorous Jesse over at Pandagon: 

"I have a theory that microscopic gerbils under my bed have been making me appear older year after year. Don't believe me? Well, let's try it this way: empirically prove that they don't. You say it's a series of natural biological and environmental changes that affect how old I look? Prove the gerbils didn't cause them. You say it happens to everyone? Prove there aren't gerbils under everyone's bed. You can't find any? That's because they disappear when you look at them. What? Say something. You can't, can you? Because I'm right, that's why.

In public schools next fall: gerbilation. Soon, our entire national educational curriculum will be based on nothing but poorly applied fifth-grade logic, and then those fucking Japanese kids had better watch out - they'll only know "old" education, while Americans will lead the world in the educational revolution of the 21st century: complete bullshit."

UPDATE:  Okay, I almost forgot the ONION's take which is even funnier.

 

Bush is spiralling out of control, ladies and gentlemen.  His latest approval rating from American Research Group is (drumroll) 36%. THIS IS NOT A MISPRINT.

The Editors at Powerline seem to forget the basic rules of causation:

President Bush is having a tough summer, for reasons that are pretty much out of his control (continued terrorism in Iraq, gas prices)

Hate to point it out boys, but the continued terrorism in Iraq and gas prices have everything to do with the fact that we invaded Iraq.  Although I guess they are right in indicating that there's very little Bush has done to address either problem.

Mike Wallace: Mr. Thurm, let's be honest. We've seen the people working for pennies, making defective novelty items, which, at best, don't work, and don't provide hours of family fun; at worst, creating serious injuries.

Nathan Thurm: [ pause ] So, what are you saying?

Mike Wallace: I'm saying that your boss, Mr. Lee, is, in effect, the Mr. Big of the pirate novelty business.

Nathan Thurm: No, he isn't! You're just saying that to get higher ratings on your TV show!

Mike Wallace: No, I wish I were, but.. we saw your people making pirate Mickman schnozzes.

Nathan Thurm: [ shakes head ] I don't know what you're talking about. [ smiles ] It's funnythat you would say that! They don't make schnozzes. They make semiconductors for a very reputable computer company. What's wrong with that? Is there something wrong with that? Why, why, why is that something wrong to do? I don't understnad that. Why are you pointing the finger at other people all the time? Why don't you point the finger at yourself? Do a little more reading, maybe? Some time in court - maybe that would be effective for you!

Mike Wallace: Pardon me for saying this, but you seem defensive.

Nathan Thurm: I'm not being defensive! You're the one who's being defensive! Why is always the other person who's being defensive? Have you ever asked yourself that? Why don't you ask yourself that?

Mike Wallace: [ holds out paper ] This is an affadavit..

Nathan Thurm: I know that!

Mike Wallace: Well, let me finish. This is an affidavit from a woman who has severe nerve damage, on her upper thigh, from sitting on one of your defective whoopie cushions. Here, read it.

Nathan Thurm: You read it!

Mike Wallace: Well, I have read it.

Nathan Thurm: So, why do I have to read it?

Mike Wallace: Well, it does pertain to your company.

Nathan Thurm: I know that! Why wouldn't I know that? It's my company, I'm quite aware of that! [ looks at the camera ] Is it me? It's him, right?

During the election, Atrios wasn't somewhere I'd normally go.  But now that the political cultural war is the coin of the realm, no one beats his combination of snark and irony.

Sometimes you have to admit that you will never say it better:

Reader D writes in:

Hey, Atrios. The "wingnut debating school" thread was hilarious. I compiled the best ones (which was most of `em, actually) in case you want to repost the entire collection. My only criteria were that a) the term had to specifically reference a right-wing person or "institution" and b) the term could not just be the name alone (eg, "to Sullivan" wouldn't cut it). I also confess to "punching up" some of them, such as Acoulteration, Malkinization & Zellots, but I only gave credit to the original authors.

In alphabetical order:

Acoulteration (n.) - The act of adding copious endnotes in an attempt to give the sham appearance that one's writings are scholarly, methodically researched and based in fact. From Coulter, Ann. (Renato)

Audio'reilly (v.) - To adjust the sound level relative to the opponent, either electronically or vocally, to make one's argument appear stronger. From O'Reilly, Bill. (PapaJijo)

Cheney's Razor (n.) - A philosophic rule that the most complex explanation of an unknown phenomenon is probably correct. From Cheney, Dick. (CF)

Cotton Dandy (n.) - One who attributes greatness to his political patrons in the most saccharine, cliched, idealistic prose available, which under even mild scrutiny, fails to have any substance behind it. From Sullivan, Andrew. (Anon.)

Den Beste ex Machina (n.) - The creation of a fake political movement, such as Transnational Progressivism, that has virtually no basis in reality in order to disparage ideological opponents. From Den Beste, Steven. (Jesse Taylor)

Disinglennuousness (n.) - The practice of saying, after the fact, that just because you linked to something outrageous with "THIS IS INTERESTING" or "EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS", you don't necessarily agree with the linked sentiments, their having been exposed as utter pig-bollocks. From Reynolds, Glenn. (Nick Sweeney)

Freepler Shift (n.) - Claiming a source is further in one partisan direction than can reasonably be claimed. From Free Republic. (Lakema/Renato)

Glenndemma (n.) - When the disconnect between what you believe in and reality grows to such a degree that you become confused and either docile or unusually aggressive. Symptoms of Glenndemma include arguing that Bill Clinton and Paul Krugman are responsible for troop deaths (angry reaction) in Iraq, or refusing to discuss any issue relevant to global climate change (docile reaction). Bizarre leaps in logic are usually a certain sign of Glenndemma. Construction: "Reaching a" or "being in a". From Reynolds, Glenn. (RulerOfMyApartmentstania)

Glennuendo (n.) - The act of drawing a darkly ominous inference from an opponent's failure to discuss a political issue. From Reynolds, Glenn. (Vaara)

Grain of Galt (n.) - No matter the topic area, the assertion that you know someone who works in/is deeply involved in it, and therefore you know what you're talking about. From Galt, Jane. (Jesse Taylor)

Malkinization (n.) - Usage of questionable or irrelevant anecdotes in support of a position when statistics disprove the position. Cognates: Malkious, malkiniously. From Malkin, Michelle. (Hesiod)

O'Reillyus Interruptus (v.) - To be cut off from making a really good point or argument by a radio or cable TV talk show host. Usually involves being loudly shouted down, having one's mic cut (if in a studio), or being "potted down" (if calling in to a radio program). Odds of this happening are greatly increased the closer one gets to the truth. From O'Reilly, Bill. (Renato)

Penis Glennvy (n.) - The belief that by linking to Instapundit and his posts, rightwing bloggers can extend their influence and reputation into the
blogosphere. Indeed. From Reynolds, Glenn. (GFW)

Reductio ad Hannitum (n.) - To ask your evil liberal guest something patently ridiculous, then, while they roll their eyes, accuse them of "dodging the question". From Hannity, Sean. (Leo)

Rosh Herring (n.) - A post by a person, supporting himself, but posted under a pseudonym and pretending to be someone else. From Lott, John (aka Mary Rosh). (JH)

Sully (v.) - To pretend people who were clearly speaking metaphorically were speaking literally, and criticize them based on that. Also known as the "War on Metaphor". From Sullivan, Andrew. (Matthew Yglesias/Andrew Northrup)

Tucker Gambit (n.) - Baiting your opponent into a seemingly hypocritical position by using an irrelevant triviality as if it were germane to the topic; usually followed by shock and outrage at opponent's (expected) response. From Carlson, Tucker. (Kherr)

Zellmanella (n.) - Afflication whereby you claim that you are a "life-long Democrat", but now you're disgusted by the party's negativity, and you've fallen for the steely-eyed Dubya. Sufferers are known as "Zellots". From Miller, Zell.

The fundamental problem with Republican strategy is this: When you're strategy is to portray every Democrat as the farthest-to-the-left nutcase in existence, your strategy will fail when you make the nutcase tinfoil-hat conspiracy of far left come true.

For maximum effect, insert "Bush" in place of "Clinton" and "Iraq" in place of "Kosovo."