Month: September 2011

Classic:

With aplomb:

It can be done. Ice cream.

Among the discovery options open to McGinniss would be to put the following people under oath:

Any and everybody who might have knowledge of the truth about Trig’s birth mother. Chapter 19 of Joe’s book related to the rumors that Trig is not Sarah’s child. Mr. McGinniss would have the subpoena power of the Courts to take the depositions of Cathy Baldwin Johnson, nurses at the hospital, and even require a DNA test of Sarah, Todd, and Trig. It would be a dream come true for thousands of people around the country, if Sarah and Todd Palin would be forced to testify under oath about whether or not Sarah concocted the entire Trig birth story!

Michael Moynihan has a nice review of Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith's new book The Dictator's Handbook:

How is it that undemocratic leaders—who exploit, imprison and brutalize their subjects—frequently maintain power for far longer periods than their democratic counterparts? Autocrats, the authors argue, need only reward only a small class of loyalists—the army, judiciary, an inner circle of advisers—who will reliably suppress opposition. While democrats likewise dispense rewards—sweetheart contracts, farm subsidies, welfare payments—they are constrained by a system of government that requires the loyalty of fickle voters. This ensures that if a leader accumulates wealth and power in a few hands, his job security weakens.

Wasn't all this written down half a century ago by naughty Nick? Bueno de Mesquita and Smith summarize their rules for dictators (as part of a series for The Monkey Cage) and apply them to Qaddafi:

Gaddafi was a successful leader. He outlasted seven U.S. presidents and survived for nearly 42 years. But complacency cost him more time in office—he did not pay enough attention to Rule 5. He was too nice. Conditions in Libya were certainly brutal under Gaddafi, but they could have been much worse. According to the index of press restrictions produced by Reporters Without Borders, Libya shifted from being more repressive than its neighbors in 2005 to being freer than Syria, Yemen, and Tunisia and on a comparable level with Saudi Arabia in 2010.

Last weekend Jay Ulfelder had some thoughts about how democracies survive.

Gotta question? askandrew@thedailybeast.com

The controversy is not going away. Joseph W. directly takes on Mearsheimer’s charge that one couldn’t infer anti-Semitism from the specific Atzmon book he blurbed by pulling a great number of absolutely horrific quotes from it. Among them:

“The Holocaust religion is, obviously, Judeo-centric to the bone. It defines the Jewish raison d’etre. For Zionist Jews, it signifies a total fatigue of the Diaspora, and regards the goy as a potential irrational murderer. This new Jewish religion preaches revenge. It could well be the most sinister religion known to man, for in the name of Jewish suffering, it issues licences to kill, to flatten, to nuke, to annihilate, to loot, to ethnically cleanse. It has made vengeance into an acceptable Western value.”

Then this excrescence:

65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz we should be able to ask – why? Why were the Jews hated? Why did European people stand up against their neighbours? Why are the Jews hated in the Middle East, surely they had a chance to open a new page in their troubled history? If they genuinely planned to do so, as the early Zionist claimed, why did they fail? Why did America tighten its immigration laws amid the growing danger to European Jews? We should also ask what purpose Holocaust denial laws serve? What is the Holocaust religion there to conceal? As long as we fail to ask questions, we will be subjected to Zionist lobbies and their plots. We will continue killing in the name of Jewish suffering. We will maintain our complicity in Western imperialist crimes.

David Bernstein attacks Mearsheimer’s broader defense of Atzmon’s views. The man in question, meanwhile, takes up blog-cudgels in his own defense:

To be honest, it is somewhat amusing that an ex concentration camp guard like Goldberg should label me a ‘Hitler apologist’ or a  ‘Holocaust denier’: after all, since Goldberg is an ardent pro-war Zionist who openly and enthusiastically supports a Jews-only, racist, expansionist state, it is clear that he is actually the one who is an advocate of a distinctly Nazi-like ideology and practice.

Ugh. He follows up here. Ron Kampeas can’t get particularly energized about a debate over a blurb. So allow me. I still haven’t read the book but the excerpts are so vile and the mind behind them so patently warped and hateful, I really don’t care to. Why would anyone blurb a book like this? I’m all for airing a variety of views, and provocative theories. That doesn’t mean you have to endorse poisonous, wounding hate.

Reader reaction to our new video feature is mixed. One writes:

"Gotta question?" Yes. Are you dyeing your beard again?

Screw you, hippie. Another asks:

The rotoscoping is just to hide the sexy greying of your beard, isn't it?

And screw you too. Another:

I'm asking you to stop making hostage tapes.  I'll chip in for the ransom.

Another:

Video answers are definitely a cool thing, but the filter is distracting and I can't stop looking at the cartoon eyebrows it gives you.

Another:

When did you become a Charles Schwab commercial?

Not all the feedback is critical:

Love the roto – makes the beard even more impressive.

Another:

I will definitely tune in to anything Andrew has to say. Now I don't have to wait for those long periods between appearances on Real Time With Bill Maher!

Another:

I just watched "Ask Andrew Anything" and was surprised that you have an English accent. (I'm an idiot.)  I wonder how many of your readers noticed the same thing.

Another did:

Jesus I never realized how ENGLISH you sound. You sound like Boris Johnson.

Another:

Nice use of the word "naff" – it was much appreciated by a fellow ex-pat.

Another:

It would be a most welcome feature if you could provide a transcript of the videos. Most people read much faster than you speak.

A transcript would kind of defeat the purpose of the feature. Another wants me to go Colbert:

I want to see a debate between Andrew and himself. Your tech wizards ought to be able to make it look like there are two or three Andrews having a real-time debate.

Another wants to turn me into Clippy:

Have your talking figure silhouetted on the page. In other words, have your video wizards figure out a way to do away with the rectangular box, which reduces him to a talking head like every other talking head on the tube. If you could have his face just talking on the page without the box – that would be cool!

Another:

I'm a Toronto Liberal and NDP voter and dedicated reader of you and The Dish from way back in 2000. I'm also an iPad user – as I believe you are – and was excited to hit up The Dish today to read about a new video feature.  Problem is, as you know, there's no flash for iPads and iPhones.  So there were those two big white blank spaces where the two vids have been placed. Is there any way that your cool Dish web dudes and dudettes could consider that the vids posted could be anything but Flash?

We will pass it along to the techies. An artist offers detailed tips:

Visuals –  Why not show a bit more of the body, placing him slightly behind, say, a tabletop the color of wood, or formica?  You already have the Charlie Rose black background setting him off, and there is a reason that Rose's style has held up for so many decades, er, years.  Rotoscoping is not my particular fave (nor its evil cousin, motion capture), but the effect is unfortunately making Andrew's beard the predominant focal point of his visage.  And the beard looks like someone went nuts with the smudge tool in Photoshop.  Possibly changing the camera angle could help this.

Movement and Emphasis –  The rocking forward and backward was enough to make me feel slightly queasy.  Gesturing hands disappearing and reappearing is also distracting.  Again, camera angle and/or presence of a piece of furniture could mask this.  The movement worked against, rather than with, the answers.  One shouldn't SEE evidence of his working on his spontaneous responses (all politicians have to get good at pulling out their thoughts or pre-canned responses, but we expect more from the non-politician (for now). I'm sure he'll get smoother, however. 

Format –  I'd like it better if there were a voice-over over the typed-out question, alternating male and female voices (note how NPR or the World, or Deutsche Velle uses different English-sounding translators from foreign languages.)  Two things going on here:  First, hearing a human voice different from Andrew's makes a better connection between the questioner (our surrogate) and the Answerer.  It also gives a greater feeling of the question coming from "outside" of the pre-arranged, slick Beast format.   Second, different spoken voices are inherently more interesting than the typing format – even if they may on occasion be a little distracting.

Thanks for reading, and good luck with the new feature.  I look forward to seeing how it develops.  

And your feedback is critical to that development. More thoughts at our Facebook page.

Romney goes after Perry on immigration:

 David Corn thinks Romney's criticisms may pay dividends:

Romney and his crew are trying to turn Perry's "discounts" for "illegals" into the Texas governor's own Romneycare-like problem. For his part, Romney has demonstrated a certain deftness in running from—or escaping—his past. He hasn't fully shed the flip-flop label, and he hasn't totally neutralized the Romneycare attacks. But he's achieved much on these fronts. After all, this mandate-imposing, former friend of the gays, abortion rights advocate, and gun-control supporter remains in strong contention for the Republican presidential nomination. Perry has yet to display a similar skill set, and Romney's strategy of the moment is to ensure that Perry has a mighty need for such talents.

Perry, meanwhile, released an an ad attacking Romney for healthcare flip-flopping. Ed Morrissey says it "has all the charm of a corporate flip chart, and even less in wit."

A profile in diplomatic courage in Syria.