Month: May 2011

A reader writes:

Why is BHL’s statement being treated as him standing up for his "class"?  When I read this, I don’t see a “closing of elite ranks”, but rather a man rising to make a public defense of the character of his friend, expressing his disbelief that his friend could have acted as accused. It's admirable that BHL would risk ridicule by standing up for his friend.  He acknowledges at the outset that he doesn’t actually know what happened; he's just giving a character reference. This is, of course, worthless as evidence in court, but why castigate him for this?

Another writes:

You said, "I find the perp-walk theatrics and the public humiliation of someone merely accused of a crime to be troubling, which is the grain of truth in BHL's defense of DSK." I agree with this, and I also agree that it's a natural impulse to defend a friend accused of doing something terrible, something made easier by our reflexive unwillingness to believe the accusation.

What I found particularly galling about BHL's piece, however, is his implicit claim that DSK, by virtue of who he is, ought to have been accorded special treatment: "This morning, I hold it against the American judge who, by delivering him to the crowd of photo hounds, pretended to take him for a subject of justice like any other." The hypocrisy really kicks into overdrive when, a few paragraphs later, BHL praises DSK for policies "that were less lenient toward the powerful."

Another:

Isnt the more obvious, most recent, parallel to the DSK situation the Roman Polanski one? At least here, DSK's friends can pretend to fall all over themselves claiming innocence until proven otherwise – and there's some truth to that – while Roman's friends readily accept that he drugged and raped a teenager but don't seem to really care.  I find the hypocrisy sickening, and depressing when it plagues people I otherwise admire (Bernard Henri Levi here, Spielberg there).

A reader forwards some findings that complicate Gallup's latest:

You want to have some idea of exactly how pathetic Palin is? PPP ran a poll pitting her against Dennis Kucinich:

… Trump is not the weakest Republican in the two hypothetical match ups we tested with Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich's lead over Sarah Palin if they were to face off would be 43-36. In that scenario Kucinich gets 16% of Republicans to Palin's 12% of Democrats and leads her by 10 points with independents at 42-32.

Obviously none of these match ups will ever happen but we were trying to get a gauge of just how weak these two Republican contenders would be and I think the fact that voters would take Dennis Kucinich over either of them gives us our answer. Full results here [pdf].

A reader sends the above photo and writes:

A Sarah Palin for Governor sign is being used as a weather vane.  It is symbolically attached to the vents from the Alaskan homeowner's septic tank.  Kachemak Bay is in the background near Seldovia, Alaska. I took this picture Sunday evening.

Is this is a crime? But of course, the notion that a birth certificate could be faked is just absurd, ridiculous conspiracy-mongering, and utterly beneath a serious press inquiry.

Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 4.45 pm

Some quotes for the day:

"'How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?'

Winston thought.

'By making him suffer,' he said.

'Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own?'"

– from George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four.

"Enhanced techniques were not used to gain intelligence from detainees — they were used to compel their cooperation. While applying enhanced techniques, interrogators would ask detainees questions to which the interrogators already knew the answers, so they could judge when the detainees had made the decision to begin cooperating. Once they did so, the techniques stopped and the detainees moved into noncoercive debriefing."

– Marc Thiessen.

"'Do you know where you are, Winston?' he said. 'I don't know. I can guess. In the Ministry of Love.' 'Do you know how long you have been here?' 'I don't know. Days, weeks, months — I think it is months.' 'And why do you imagine that we bring people to this place?' 'To make them confess.' 'No, that is not the reason. Try again.' 'To punish them.' 'No!' exclaimed O'Brien.

His voice had changed extraordinarily, and his face had suddenly become both stern and animated. 'No! Not merely to extract your confession, not to punish you. Shall I tell you why we have brought you here? To cure you! To make you sane! Will you understand, Winston, that no one whom we bring to this place ever leaves our hands uncured? We are not interested in those stupid crimes that you have committed. The Party is not interested in the overt act: the thought is all we care about. We do not merely destroy our enemies, we change them.'"

– George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four.

"This idea that we didn’t ask that question while Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was being waterboarded, [John McCain] doesn’t understand how enhanced interrogation works. I mean, you break somebody, and after they’re broken, they become cooperative."

– Rick Santorum, on Hugh Hewitt's radio show.

I wish I didn't have to be blogging and could make it there in person, but here's a live-stream of the presentation of the two legal fighters for marriage equality. It's scheduled to start around now.

Tim Murphy reports on her close ties to Bradlee Dean, a Minnesota radio host, anti-gay activist, and drummer for the heavy metal band Junkyard Prophet:

On his radio show, he's alleged that gays were responsible for the Holocaust, and that gay men will, on average, molest 117 people "before they're found out." He's also suggested that extremist Muslims who call for the execution of American gays are morally justified. "If America won't enforce the laws, God will raise up a foreign enemy to do just that," Dean explained. "[Homosexuals] play the victim when they are, in fact, the predator."

Yep, they've agreed to do an "It Gets Better" video. There seems to be a bit of a shift in pro sports on this question, doesn't there? 

What I love about this campaign is that it requires no top-down control, no fundraising, no distortion through identity politics, and no government support to work. This video came about through an online petition organized by a fan, Sean Chapin. And it all started with one viral video from Dan and Terry. It has no political power – just cultural power. This was always the ace card of the movement. We are so much better at shifting culture than lobbying Washington. That, of course, was one of the original arguments of the very first homocons.

On related news, Dan and Terry will be New York Pride's Grand Marshalls. It was once unthinkable that Dan – who has long been a bete noire of the gay rights establishment – should be honored in such a way. But then it was once unthinkable that a pro football baseball team would be backing gay rights, or that New York City's mayor and New York State's governor would be campaigning for marriage equality because it's the right thing to do, even though it may not be that effective.

[Update: Yes, my sports illiteracy has been exposed again.]

Marcy Wheeler does due diligence.