Month: November 2010

Photos of the ad – containing full rear nudity – here. Ben Reininga sets it up:

Right-wing Swiss party, the Swiss People's Party, has released a series of controversial new, anti-immigration ads. The two-part ads show a photo of beautiful, naked, white women walking into a pristine lake, followed by an image of old women wearing head scarves bathing in filthy water. Presumably, they're a warning about the horrors that come with a more open immigration policy.  

The ads come as Switzerland prepares to vote on whether illegal immigrants who commit crimes should be expelled from the country. In a notoriously xenophobic (and racially homogeneous) nation, the ads are also a reminder of the struggles many Western European nations have faced with immigration — especially by Middle Eastern and Muslim people. 

The Swiss People's Party is the largest in parliament.

Alex Morgan proposes:

Why shouldn’t harassed gay kids get a chance to use a school voucher to attend a progressive Quaker or Jewish day school even if their parents can’t afford it?  Even Catholic schools, which are more systematically hateful, are actually physically safer for gay kids than public schools.

Conservatives have long argued that vouchers represent a way out for those trapped in poverty. Conservatives have also long enjoyed bullying and demeaning gay people as if for sport.  Maybe it’s time to use the conservative “weapon” of school vouchers and use it to protect kids from that other favorite conservative “weapon”: political homophobia that directly enables school bullies and even prevents school districts from introducing anti-bullying laws and policies.

The inevitable single-serving blog.

A reader writes:

I would just like to point out that the lead singer of Midnight Oil, Peter Garrett, has been an MP in Australia since 2004 and has served in two ministerial positions. While the song may indeed be preachy, this is not your typical "Rock Star Preaching." At least Garrett had the guts to place his ideas before the electorate and has tried to make substantive changes in Australian politics and policy.

Another writes:

I think the nomination of "Beds are Burning" for pretentious pop song is a mistake. 

You can nominate Midnight Oil for being preachy, perhaps, but that's pretty much their entire catalogue.  They also put their money/time where their mouth is.  The lead singer has run for office and the band has been activist in support of indigenous causes for years.   To be nominated for "shut up and sing", I think it has to be sufficiently inauthentic/pretentious earnestness.  One can be annoyed with a bunch of rich white guys singing about Aborigine issues, but I'm guessing it's not quite what you were after, considering the honest efforts they've put forth to actually address some of the issues they've sung about.

Another:

Indeed, Garrett spent some six years as president of Australia's Conservation federation and has been on the international board of Greenpeace. Just because we do not want actors or rock stars or athletes to preach to us because they are actors or rock stars or athletes, it does not invalidate the commitment of some of them who, in this case, went on to do considerably more to tackle political issues than blogs or bitchy anonymous commenters.

Nyhan suspects that Palin would throw off this election model, which is premised on economic fundamentals:

What makes the 2012 campaign especially hard to predict is that Sarah Palin has a significant chance to be the GOP nominee (currently estimated at 20.9% on Intrade) despite having what seem to be unprecedented negatives among an early-stage presidential candidate … Obama should lose if the economy is bad, but we don't have a good precedent for a presidential nominee who enters the primary campaign with an unfavorable rating of 52%. It's possible that Palin would significantly underperform the forecast, giving Obama a chance in circumstances where he might otherwise face near-certain defeat.

Conor wants to shrink it:

[W]e need to give our presidents fewer tasks to perform well, rather than asking that they give their attention to everything from childhood obesity to North Korean nukes to stem cell policy to the future of GM to… well, you get the idea.

Bernstein parries:

I think Friedersdorf is mistaken.  Indeed, one can see his mistake in the title of his post: "The Presidency is 'To Big For One Man.'"  Yes, it is too large for one person — which is why, basically from the time of Harry Truman, the presidency has grown to include (depending on how one counts it) hundreds, or even thousands, of people.

It's true that as recently as the 1930s, we elected a president.  Now, we elect an entire presidency. 

Today on the Dish, Andrew heralded a huge advance in preventative HIV drugs. We assessed Palin's favorable numbers, Alexandra Petri wondered if Palin was a farce planned to elect Romney, and Andrew asked if Huckabee could outlive his pardon. Palin's TV ratings plummeted, but she was huge among Israel settlers. Shmuel Rosner took issue with Andrew's Likudnik tally, and gestures can mean more than you think in the peace process. Readers defended Twain's distaste for occupations, and TNC was changing Andrew's mind on "ni**er."

North and South Korea clashed, Thomas P.M. Barnett collected his thoughts, and we provided the historic primer. Brian Ulrich highlighted new Iraq revisionism from the 1990s, and fake divorces helped the Chinese get a second home.

Alexis Madrigal wanted to scramble TSA scanners, and we imagined getting patted down as a transgendered person. Peter Smith explained why airline food sucks, Katie Roiphe wondered if parenthood was running wild, and readers had run-ins with urban coyotes. Mark Peters defended the gay as lame definition, and parents airbrushed their children's school photos. Chuck Hassebrook urged us to stop welfare to big ag, cutting earmarks could help the deficit a little, and Mark Kleiman wants to charge you more for drinks. Virginia Postrel chalked up our romance with wind turbines to glamour, and Reihan was drunk on American diversity and choice.

A Midnight Oil, Madonna's American Life, Gypsy Woman, and Where Is The Love were entered into our Shut Up And Sing contest. VFYW here, DADT update here, MHB here, quote for the day here, Malkin award here, short history of the USSR here, Jesus kicking ass on the cross here, FOTD here, and VFYW contest winer #25 here.

–Z.P.

Ed Kilgore outlines it:

Texas Governor Rick Perry’s recent demand that Romney repudiate his Massachusetts health care plan is just the first thump of an endless drumbeat which will play all the way to 2012, a period during which Republican efforts to repeal Obamacare will be featured on Fox News every day and night. If Romney persists in making convoluted distinctions between the two plans, he will simply draw more attention to his problem. If he finally bends at the knee and disavows his own proudest domestic policy achievement, he will add another chapter to his long history of flip-flops. Like Jonathan Chait, I don’t think Romney can get out of this trap, particularly if his main credential is that establishment Republicans, the 'lamestream media,' and Democrats think he’s the sanest Republican option.

Meanwhile, Jonathan Bernstein focuses on the role party leaders play in the nominating process and what it means for Palin.

Thomas P.M. Barnett collects his thoughts:

Any subsequent show of force that involves the usual suspects (America, South Korea, Japan) simply gives Pyongyang exactly what it wants: more justification for military standoffs. A game-changer would be to invite the Chinese navy to join in our next joint "peace exercise," because nothing would shut up the Kims faster than seeing its economic patron's naval vessels out there.