Times Torture
You know your news staff is in trouble when conservative pundit Bill Safire is more willing than they are to call torture by a conservative administration for what it is: torture.
Here's my take cross-posted at The Huffington Post:
With President's Bush's veto this weekend of a bill to outlaw the CIA's use of waterboarding, torture now becomes officially codified U.S. policy. But you'd never know it from the reading The New York Times.
At least, not the news pages. Yes, there was a prominent Times story this Sunday on the veto written by Washington-based reporter Steven Lee Meyers. But the only suggestion in the piece that we're actually talking about torture is the painful and intellectually insulting acrobatics and contortions that the reporter puts us through in avoiding any direct mention of the terrible T-word. The best Meyers can do is to refer to what he calls "harsh interrogation techniques." (You know, like calling really shoddy, third-rate journalism "something less than spectacular reporting").
As to waterboarding itself - a centuries-old method of torture that became commonplace in the interrogation dungeons of various Latin American dictatorships a few decades back--Meyers describes it blandly as "a technique in which restrained prisoners are threatened with drowning..." You know, like we tie your to hands to a chair with silk ribbons and wave a bucket of water in front of your nose instead of ...what? Maybe, actually tying you down to a board and, well, drowning you?
The American Heritage Dictionary defines drowning as "to kill by submerging and suffocating in water or another liquid." This is a precise definition of waterboarding with perhaps one asterisk: the torturer has the option of stopping the process right before death - or proceeding until death occurs. Or did I miss something?
To the shame of the reporter and editors on this Times story, readers can find out the harsh truths about waterboarding torture in the very same Sunday edition of the paper, but a few pages deeper into the book. Former Nixon speechwriter and conservative pundit William Safire devotes his popular "On Language" column this week to the "bland bureaucratic euphemisms [that] conceal great crimes." The title of the column is, indeed, "Waterboarding." And Safire comes right to the point:
If the word torture, rooted in the Latin for "twist," means anything (and it means "the deliberate infliction of excruciating physical or mental pain to punish or coerce"), then waterboarding is a means of torture. The predecessor terms for its various forms are water torture, water cure and water treatment....Why did boarding take over from cure, treatment and torture? Darius Rejali, the author of the recent book "Torture and Democracy" and a professor at Reed College, has an answer: "There is a special vocabulary for torture. When people use tortures that are old, they rename them and alter them a wee bit. They invent slightly new words to mask the similarities. This creates an inside club, especially important in work where secrecy matters. Waterboarding is clearly a jailhouse joke. It refers to surfboarding" -- a word found as early as 1929 -- "they are attaching somebody to a board and helping them surf. Torturers create names that are funny to them."
Safire makes a chilling point. Our national political discourse, and our paper of record, have adopted the dehumanizing language of the torturers themselves rather than honestly describing the torture they inflict. How embarrassing can it get for the Times that its conservative columnist Safire is more willing to accurately portray the "great crimes" of a conservative administration that is its own "objective" news staff.
Talk about the gag reflex!
March 9th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
I was content not knowing how they obtained information from terrorists as long as it stopped attacks and kept us safe. I wish there was as much outrage for Muslims who want to kill us as there is for people who want to protect us.
March 9th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
WaPo was worse; buried in a tiny item on page 9; a story about a snowstorm got more ink. See “Nation in Brief” -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/08/AR2008030802299.html
March 9th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
I’d be content knowing that my nation was obeying its own laws.
Darius Rejali is an expert on this subject and it’s worth noting how thoroughly full of crap the argument that torture can do anything to protect us is.
The law is the law. Torture is against the law. Waterboarding is torture. Waterboarding is against the law.
March 9th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Marc,
Don’t know if you’ve read Elaine Scarry’s The Body in Pain, but the first chapter details the use of torture and its history. Essentially, the role of torture is to substitute the torturer’s world for that of the torture victim.
Now it appears that the Times has decided to substitute the torturer’s world for that of the American public.
March 9th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Woody, given the torture going on, I would say that there has been a sufficient amount “outrage for Muslims”, especially for those Muslims who have nothing to do with “wanting to kill us”, whose only crime was being non-Christian in Iraq.
March 9th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
>>>I wish there was as much outrage for Muslims who want to kill us as there is for people who want to protect us.
Your wish has long since been granted, dude.
March 9th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Woody,
The STB(Czechoslovak secret police), used torture on a daily basis to gather information from perceived threats. Personal friends of my parents were were subjected to sleep deprivations and beatings, not to mention, knowing for a fact that their innocent children would be allowed, at best, to work in coal mines or as janitors. The rationale was that it was a necessary tool to protect society from foriegn agents and sabatours.
It is naive to assume your govt will only torture those who truly deserve it, and the moral implications of one mistake should deter any democratic country from even considering its practice.
Frydekmistek
March 9th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Please excuse my grammer, this is an emotional subject for me.
March 9th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Well, Frydek, your grammar is quite excused (didn’t notice anything amiss, especially considering that you are posting amongst Jim R., Woody, GM Roper, etc.).
March 9th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Frydek:
Thanks for your contribution. Torture is an unimagineable barbarity unless it has touched close to home.
I find this an astounding moment in American political life. Unilateral wars, pre-emptive wars, overzealous executive branches, domestic spying. we’ve all seen before. But this is the first time in my life when our govt condones torture it puts us at the same moral level as the Stasi and the Argentine fascists. Disgusting, really/
March 9th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Safire is saying something very important in “On Language” column this week to the “bland bureaucratic euphemisms [that] conceal great crimes” particularly in remaining torture. That’s one way that torturers triumph is that they create a language of lies to hide their crimes–see Orwell who analyzes this brilliantly. the Times reporter Myers is as Mark points out also renamed torture as “harsh interrogration techniques” so the crimes and the body of the tortured vanish. Myers is contributing to making torture acceptable when he renames it. A lot of work goes into making the body of the tortured disappear.
March 10th, 2008 at 6:39 am
Frydek-Mistek made the best point, which offers a reason for which he feels a personal connection. However, it’s a little over the bounds to compare our government and military, especially for isolated instances, to the Czechoslovak secret police, which was run by the Communist Party and committed gross atrocities against suspected political opponents. Most of the rest of you only express outrage because it’s a Republican administration in charge of protecting our nation.
March 10th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Most of the rest of you only express outrage because it’s a Republican administration in charge of protecting our nation.
Utter bullshit.
March 10th, 2008 at 6:51 am
Woody,
For that claim of yours to be true, we would have had to have advocated torture at some point.
So please enlighten us: when have we advocated torture?
March 10th, 2008 at 7:11 am
Randy, for it to be true all you would have to do is to not condemn torture by other nations or ignore it as did Bill Clinton. No, outrage is reserved for Republicans.
March 10th, 2008 at 7:52 am
Woody,
Again, where have I or anyone else here criticizing Bush willfully ignored torture by other nations?
Where have I praised Clinton’s human rights record? He fu’ed big time with regard to Rwanda and sucked up to China.
Jimmy Carter was wrong, wrong, wrong to claim that the Shah of Iran’s government in 1977 was stable and progressive (a comment that I have made here before). Our antipathy towards Vietnam led us to defend the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia against Vietnam’s invasion, also under Carter’s watch.
As usual, Woody, all you do is open your jaws before you engage any semblance of good sense and show that you do not know WTF you’re talking about.
March 10th, 2008 at 7:59 am
Randy, you ignore it here.
March 10th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Moreover, what we have here now is the son of the man who was VP when Ronald Reagan signed the Convention Against Torture and who (George H. W. Bush) signed into law the Torture Victim Protection Act now seeking to find ways to legitimize torture.
The self-awareness express rolls on and your refuse to board.
March 10th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Randy, you ignore it here.
March 10th, 2008 at 8:15 am
My full response didn’t show up.
That’s utter nonsense. I’m not ignoring anything.
You’re not a serious person, Woody.
March 10th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Woody,
I’m not directly comparing the Czechoslovak secret police to the American govt. I am saying that when you allow any police force, military etc. to use torture, a moral vacuum will emerge.
It will start with water boarding against only known members of al quaida. It will be claimed that it is only meant for extreme cases. However, if it isn’t seen as effective the line will be moved and new rationalisations will be invented. More torturers will be trained and a whole rotten subculture will be created.
I’ve read several interviews will former secret police. When asked about their practices, they simply state they bear no moral responsibility because they were following orders or genulinly believed their victims were threats to society. Not surprisingly, many former secret police officers have been directly implicated or linked to political corruption, shady politicians, sleazy businesses, and organized crime.
Use of torture by the communists consumed the party, it rightfully and permanently damned itself in the eyes of the world and its own people.
I’m not saying that right now America should be compared to the Communists, but copy their practices and who knows where it might end up.
March 10th, 2008 at 8:53 am
> But this is the first time in my life
>when our govt condones torture it
>puts us at the same moral level
>as the Stasi and the Argentine
>fascists.
As you obviously know, there are any number of examples of the US govt “condoning” torture; the most obvious would be Bill Clinton’s rendition program. There are plenty of Latin American examples of foreign military torturers who ultimately took their orders from the CIA, and of American intelligence and military personnel being present during torture. Nor is this the first time US personnel have used it directly on a large scale-it was certainly common in the Phillipines war, and there are conflicting sources on how much US forces directly used torture in VN (as opposed to turning POWs over to SVN personnel for torture, an everyday occurence.)
This may be the first time the US Govt has openly discussed its use of torture, but we’ve been doing it as long as we’ve been an empire. We can argue that that’s one of the reasons we should not try to rule the world, but I am not sure that’s the lesson most Americans will learn.
March 10th, 2008 at 9:21 am
>there are conflicting sources on
>how much US forces directly used
>torture in VN (as opposed to
>turning POWs over to SVN personnel
>for torture, an everyday occurence.)
this sounded dishonest due to poor editing by me. I should have added “…but it certainly happened at least occasionally.”
March 10th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Anyone who even glasnced at “Bush on the Couch” or read Tucker Carlson’s account of Shrub and the Carla Faye Tucker case knows that this little sociopath would veto any measure limiting “Harsh Interrogation Techniques”. What is more disturbing is the widespread approval of such “techniques” by the country at large. When a victim of same - like John McCain - urges Bush to cast his veto you know something has changed in these United states.
I don’t know when it started but somne time in the past twenty or so years we’ve become a much coarser place. Marc rightly notes the inability of the “paper of record” to use plain english here. But why should the most establishment of our media outlets not reflect the times. When a Harvard Law Professor - Alan Dershowitz - can seriously write opEd positions advocating the existance of “Torture Warrants” because of soem “Jack Bauer” fantasy; when the authors of memos condoning such acts - John Yoo - and declaring that the Geneva Convention is “quaint” - Alex Gonzales - can rise to the position of Prof of Law at Berkeley (and find students there willing to sign up for his course) and Attorney General of the United states; when a Justice of the Supreme Court - “Nino” Scalia - can chide the BBC for their naivity - well that’s the state of play.
We have fun here throwing stuff at each other but consider this. The whole world is watching our little presidential contest. It leads the news in Europe. I think its cause they want to see if we’re finally coming back to our senses. Canada will not accept any evidence we present from Gitmo prisoners because of the torture. Italy is trying - in absentia - CIA agents for crimes. Germany may soon join them. We’re probably close to the last chance. They accepted that 2000 was a coup - although I bet a lot were puzzled why we diodn’t rise up like the Ukranians or Lebanese. But 2004 was hard. Shenanigagans in Ohio aside Bush got more votes. Now its 2008 and he and our reputation in the world is in the crapper. If war and torture win this time decisions will be made abroad. I’m sure personal friendships will remain. But as a nation - forget it.
Then the cowardice of the NYT will be the least of our worries. Not that the Woody’s of the world give a damn.
March 10th, 2008 at 9:28 am
I guess some folks already forgot about the recent Abu Ghraib incident.
http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2444
‘
March 10th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Dear Woody: try to watch this documentary: Taxi to the Dark Side.
Staggering stat revealed in film: only 7% (!) of the detainees in so-called GWOT apprehended by US military. The other 93% are offered up to fill out bounties.
Apparently the torture has a “market”
March 10th, 2008 at 11:37 am
FrydekMistek: I’m not saying that right now America should be compared to the Communists, but copy their practices and who knows where it might end up.
I accept and realize that. The balancing act between rights and security is tricky. This also needs monitoring, but not one-sided attacks against our country.
Suppose that a nuclear explosion is set off in the U.S. because we failed in our intelligence gathering. Who knows where that might take us. Right now, in regards to foreign terrorists, I’ll give some leeway to those fighting for our security. If we don’t do that, then rights might cease entirely.
Hollywood gives us their liberal takes on such matters, but Jack Nicholson had a point in “A Few Good Men.” We need to be protected if we’re going to keep our freedoms. Unfortunately, fighting wars has some things that aren’t very pretty.
March 10th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Nicholson’s character, Woody, was a “bad guy” so your quoting of that monologue is akin to quoting Don Corleone on ethics.
Fact is, these imaginary situations, DO NOT EXIST. Every actual expert, regardless of political stripe acknowledges torture doesn’t work, people will say anything. Since disturbingly you don’t fint it immoral, at least acept the logic of it not working.
March 10th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
jcummings, if torture, as you call it, doesn’t work, then it would have been discontinued long ago, like bribing terrorists with chocolate for information. I think it was the North Vietnamese who offered that on the pillows at the Hanoi Hilton.
Yes, I realize that Jack Nicholson’s character was the bad guy, but that was Hollywood, so the macho side of the military has to be shown as evil. Nevertheless, what was said by him and Don Corleone still has some truth.
When I had someone screw me on a business deal and the court system was taking forever and costing a fortune, I envied the Mafia with their faster and less expensive system. I even had a client offer to “take care of” the crook, whatever that meant, but I played everything clean. (Just so that you can pick sides, the crook was one of those crazy Sons of Confederate Veterans who thinks the Civil War is not over and fights for the Confederate battle flag on state flags.)
I have trouble with torture, but I support the death penalty for terrorists, so torture to prevent American deaths seem like a temporary inconvenience. It’s tough, but it’s like asking me if I would rather have my leg or arm broken.
March 10th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
As an aside, New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer endorsed Hillary Clinton and is a Superdelegate. I wondered if he prostituted his vote for her.
March 10th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
>Every actual expert, regardless of political stripe acknowledges torture doesn’t work, people will say anything.
We’ve had this discussion here before, but whether it works depends on what the objective is. If the objective is gathering intelligence, it doesn’t work.
However, if the objective is terrorizing Iraqis into passive acceptance of our occupation of their country, it *may* be effective. If the objective is getting show-trial confessions from people like KSM as a propaganda measure, it is undoubtedly effective.
March 10th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
What if he had been a Republican?
AP Ignores Spitzer’s Democratic Party Affiliation
Mr. X, if waterboarding to gather information doesn’t work, then the practice would never have started. Fighting a battle without loading your rifle doesn’t work, so they keep loading them.
March 10th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
>Mr. X, if waterboarding to gather
>information doesn’t work, then
>the practice would never have started
From what we have all recently read, the earliest documented use of waterboarding was by the Inquisition. Their objective was not to gather information. It was to get Muslims and Jews to *say* they would become Christians.
Torturing KSM yielded a mixture of fact, fiction, and satire. No one really cares how accurate his confession is, do they?
Do you think the Abu Ghraib pyramid was designed to yield information or to demoralize the prisoners?
There are plenty of accounts of prisoners in both Iraq and Afghanistan who were tortured without any serious attempt to interrogate them at all.
>Fighting a battle without loading
>your rifle doesn’t work, so they keep
>loading them.
This is one of the weirder claims I have ever heard. Even if I thought the purpose of torture was to get information, people persist in all kinds of things that don’t work, like religion and conservative economics.
March 10th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
What if he had been a Republican?
Then he would be named David Vitter and he would still be in the Senate.
March 10th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
>What if he had been a Republican?
Fox would have said he was a Democrat, as they did with Larry Craig
March 10th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
I haven’t heard much today from this blog’s Washington Post and New York Times enthusiasts.
Both pro-torture “liberal” newspapers also supported Bush’s Assault on Iraq, 5 long years ago.
There is less oil.
There will be more war, more torture.
And tax cuts. I forgot tax cuts.
I feel so healthy today.
March 10th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
In Vitter Prostitution Scandal, Networks Spun: Whole GOP ‘In Crisis’
Sergio, you might want to check out China’s oil consumption to understand its effect on the market. However, you make a good point about more oil supplies. Let’s drill up ANWAR and off shore Florida.
How much torture would be occurring in Iraq if Saddam Hussein still ran the place? No one seemed as concerned about his tortures–which usually ended in death.
You can complain about the way things are as long as you don’t have to face worse things that might have been.
March 10th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Woody: When I had someone screw me on a business deal and the court system was taking forever and costing a fortune, I envied the Mafia with their faster and less expensive system.
This says it all.
March 10th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Thank you, Client #9. You’ve now helped ‘the cause’ in ways you’ll never even know. You’ve been ratted out precisely at a moment when, well, to be frank about it, we really wanted the press to be talking about something other than our ‘methods. Damn those pesky journalists who might be trying to raise a stink about our ‘methods.’
We thought this matter of our ‘methods’ might quietly go unnoticed. We ‘twisted McCain’s arm — no pun intended. Got the legislation passed that we needed. Everything was looking good. Yeah, sure, a few folks would be annoyed…
But then Safire has to open his goddamn proper-grammar-big f#@$ing mouth. Damn Safire. Damn those journalists who want to keep needling. Journalists, writers, muckrakers, f#@$ing radicals. And the bloggers. F#@$ them, too. They want to keep a ‘conversation’ about our ‘methods.’ Damn them all!
Excuse, me a moment while I get another pail of water….
…Still there, Client #9?
Thought so. Good.
As I was saying, we’re, and you don’t really need to know exactly who WE ARE. Let’s just say we’re with “the company.” Seriously though, we’re really grateful for your sacrifice. By the way, your wife…this is awkward as hell, she did a great job of standing by your side at the news conference. Musta been hell. By the way, if you ever, you know, need…
Well, you know.
Just wanted to say thanks for your invaluable contribution. We’ll remember this. I promise.
Gotta go. There’s this ‘thing’ I gotta do. It’s best if those f#@$in’ journalist are talking about you instead of us.
March 10th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Poor Woody. To support torture he cites fictional characters. To assert media bias he cites lack of a “D” in a story on Spitzer and ignores Vitter.
Well here’s an item that might upset him but I doubt it. After receiveing letters from whistleblowers at Halliburton/KBR and Army personnel Sen Byron Dorgon asked the Defense Dept. IG look into water contracts issued to the former to provide water to the troops. They were coming up with rashes and boils and it turns ot the liquid provided was more polluted than stuff from the nearby Euphrates.
But I bet Cheney’s bottom line improved.
Sorry Woodster I don’t listen to your bleats anymore since I’m suffering from outrage fatigue at the criminals in this administration that would poison the troops for an extra buck!
Those are your guys and you’re welcome to them! Slime all of them!
March 10th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Poor rlc, all his demons represent the USA rather than friends of the left.
March 10th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I knew it! Only you wood defend providing tained water to the troops. Capitalism at its finest, eh?
March 10th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
How much torture would be occurring in Iraq if Saddam Hussein still ran the place? No one seemed as concerned about his tortures–which usually ended in death.
That question should have been asked in 1983 when Saddam had no greater friend than Ronald Reagan. Perhaps if the Reagan administration hadn’t been supporting Saddam many fewer Iraqis would have been tortured.
March 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Actually, there probably would have been less torture under Saddam. It would be instructive to compare amnesty or HRW reports from say, 2002 and 2004 (give 2003 a pass for transition) in terms of raw data.
March 10th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
“Frankly, I Joined the Military to Fight Against People Who Torture”…
Marc Cooper notes how the New York Times inability to tell it like it is with regard to President Bush’s veto of a bill that would outlaw the CIA from practicing torture is not just poisoning our discourse, but also…
March 11th, 2008 at 5:24 am
Mr X writes: “However, if the objective is terrorizing Iraqis into passive acceptance of our occupation of their country, it [torture] *may* be effective.”
LOL! Yes. I was actually down with Dershowitz for a while (i.e., make torture safe, legal and — if the letter of the law is followed — so rare it never happens except on “24″.) Going his route, legally, meant you’d have a coherent answer to those who wring their hands over how to maintain a little temporary security, and you could still be 99.99+% on the side of preserving liberty. However, I’ve since added a new requirement: that any such Dershowitz Torture be legally classified as “terrorism”. Just to make a point to any public demanding it.
Except in the Dershowitz extreme hypothetical, torture has virtually no use except as a form of psychological warfare: it can help you deter an enemy from any activity that poses some threat of capture.
And there’s your answer to Woody, when he asks why the practice isn’t obsolete, if it’s so useless for intelligence purposes. The Hanoi Hilton’s operating costs were a negligible price to pay for the slight added protection gained by even one U.S. pilot’s added hesitation about getting shot down over North Vietnam. If even ONE pilot dumped his bomb load and aborted early, upon encountering stiffer-than-expected anti-aircraft fire, it was worth it to them.
Was it right for the North Vietnamese to do it? Obviously not. Was it right for Saddam to do it, to deter coup attempts? Obviously not. Is it right if WE use it to deter terrorists? Obviously not. (Or maybe not so obvious to some, but whatever you do, don’t give me that old-time religion about a lack of “moral equivalence” — I’ll feed Abu Ghraib right back at ya!)
But … could torture deter terrorists? Is there some higher good preserved, some greater evil to be fended off by engaging in it? Maybe to some extent, even if it’s described as “harsh interrogation” — AQ will know what’s meant in any case, since they’ll always have a thin trickle of tortured innocents being released from our secret prisons and staggering into AQ ranks, having been “converted” by us. And that’s some kind of slim reed of rationalization to cling to, in all this. Maybe it protects us a little more by scaring *them* a lot?
But: who can perform any precise and objective calculation showing that torture is more effective in preventing terror attacks on the U.S. than taking the moral high ground and forswearing the use of torture? Being simply better than the enemy (morally) is, itself, a form of psychological warfare — indeed, you could be completely amoral, and still figure out how that one works. Which is more effective? Which reduces the risks more? Who knows? Don’t tell me YOU do — show me the numbers!
Since nobody can perform any such precise calculation, I go with the higher moral ground — not because I’m a moral absolutist, but because doing the right thing is what you do, when there’s any doubt. This is something McCain can figure out. And so can William Safire. Why is it that so many conservatives CAN’T?
March 11th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Woody writes: “Suppose that a nuclear explosion is set off in the U.S. because we failed in our intelligence gathering. Who knows where that might take us.”
How about a more realistic scenario? Here’s one:
Suppose that a team of terrorists conspires to hijack four airliners and ram them into highly symbolic and strategic targets — and they actually succeed in hitting some of them, killing thousands of people? And let’s say that, in response to that, America invades not only the country in which the attacks were planned, but another one, just sorta for the hell of it? And let’s say that America tortures terror suspects, where the suspects might include lots of innocent people scooped up by bounty hunters? Think about it: might that not actually radically increase the number of people in the world who would think a nuclear attack on the U.S. was morally justified?
Oh, I dunno, I *guess* it’s a stretch …. maybe I read too much science fiction or something ….
March 11th, 2008 at 7:29 am
>Woody: When I had someone
>screw me on a business deal
>and the court system was taking
>forever and costing a fortune, I
>envied the Mafia with their faster
>and less expensive system.
Woody, never mind about my tax forms-I’ll do them myself. Don’t tell anyone about that deduction for the cement
March 11th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Torture just helps the Islamic terrorists get closer and faster to their seventy-two virgins. They should thank us.
March 11th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Speaking of taxes, what’s the hold-up with Hillary Clinton making hers public? Do you think that she hasn’t even filed 2006 yet?
Pressure Is High for Clinton to Release Her Tax Returns Since She Loaned Her Campaign $5 Million
Maybe it’s her bags of cement deductions that worry her.
March 11th, 2008 at 9:42 am
>Torture just helps the Islamic
>terrorists get closer and faster
>to their seventy-two virgins. They
>should thank us
don’t you think Osama makes the same joke about Xians?
March 11th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Mr. X,
Actually his statement shows a fundamental lack of awareness in the ways torture has been used post WWII.
In repressive regimes, doctors have been kept on hand to advise torturers how far they can go in torturing without killing th eperson being tortured. This has been documented in Chile, Argentina and Brazil. In the latter country, some doctors have recently had their license to practice medicine revoked when proof came out about their involvement.
Of course, the more things change . . .
March 11th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
X: don’t you think Osama makes the same joke about Xians?
The word is “Christians,” even though Christians are excluded from the political correctness code of liberals.
To answer your question–no. It’s the Islamics who are in such a hurry to kill themselves along with thousands of innocent people–not Christians. Muslims have been promised such great rewards in the after-life, such as the virgins, that they are happy to sacrifice themselves…when they aren’t pushing mentally challenged women to do their dirty jobs for them.
Why don’t we simpllify all the arguments. Most of you guys hate our military, hate our leaders, hate our country, think everything that the U.S. does is worse than what terrorists do, wish that we lived under a totalitarian system run by you, mock people who display patriotism, wish that Christians weren’t around to remind you of moral absolutes, blame the U.S. for everything first and foremost, are certain that we will be killed by U.S. created global warming, defend the sorriest, sleaziest radicals, think that money earned belongs to the government that just allows people to keep some of it, think that our best interests are whatever makes Europe happy with us, keep running tallies of military dead so as to give a phony appearance of caring but cheer at each milestone, blame Bush for gasoline prices but refuse drilling for oil in in ANWR and coastal waters, put animals above humans, think that George Bush is stupid but masterminds fantastic conspiracies, display wealth envy of successful people, put self-esteem above results and reality, thinks that the government owns our kids, believe that we are threatened by a Christian symbol in a city park or in schools, would take away all the guns actually believing that criminals would give them up also, support counter-productive union policies, wish that the U.N. had been allowed more time to issue another thirty resolutions against Iraq, and throw baseballs like girls–except Randy, who would deny fitting into these categories. If you accept this, then we won’t have to have the same philosophical arguments over different issues on these posts.
March 11th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
>The word is “Christians,†even though >Christians are excluded from the political >correctness code of liberals.
a) “Christ” is hard to type. Just be glad you’re not a Zoroastrian.
b) If I am not mistaken, the usage of X as a substitute for “Christ” originates in Christian usage.
I suppose I should now change my pseudonym from “Mr X” so I don’t get broken on the wheel for blasphemy. I’ve been meaning to do that anyway, will note when I do.
>It’s the Islamics…
Ironically after your little lesson on X, “Islamics” is a word you have just made up, unless you learned it from the Deciderator. Standard English usage is to use “Muslim” as a noun referring to a person, “Islam” as the name of the religion, and “Islamic” as an adjective.
>Muslims have been promised such
>great rewards in the after-life, such
>as the virgins, that they are happy
>to sacrifice themselves
No weirder or less plausible than the Xian heaven, just a lot more fun.
>When they
>aren’t pushing mentally challenged
>women to do their dirty jobs for them.
Thanks for not repeating the initial propaganda line about Down syndrome, which was later admitted to be a lie. Now the US spoke claims to know they had been seeing therapists. Believe what you want.
>wish that the U.N. had been
>allowed more time to issue another
>thirty resolutions against Iraq,
and just what would have happened if it had?
March 11th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
That’s a lotta straw men Woody. Maybe you can waterboard one of them, just in case.
March 11th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
>would take away all the guns
do we want to get into a mostly predictable debate about gun control on this board?
I own two shotguns and occasionally hunt ducks. I know very few people who have any interest in banning long guns, and I would oppose any effort to do this.
If I were in a snotty mood, I’d say that, since having a handgun poses a much greater risk to you than to anyone else, you should go right ahead. That’s the kind of thing you love about this board, isn’t it?
March 11th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
http://dennisperrin.blogspot.com/2008/03/pleasure-of-pain.html
March 11th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
X: If I were in a snotty mood….
You aren’t? I didn’t realize that I was being tested on my grammar and would be chastised on the proper usage of a term meant to be Muslims, especially from someone who spells Christ with an X and thinks that there is definitive historical evidence that Christians started its use.
But I did find that my usage of the word Islamics is accepted by the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. You would be surprised how our English language changes so frequently, such as turning nouns into verbs as when you “google” something.
Regarding the U.N. issuing resolutions and not backing them and what could happen…Iraq would have continued with no fear until the U.N. backed down, like it did when it it issued sanctions against Iran and then backed down from those.
If you want a better answer to your question, you’ll get it in about two years when the terrorist state of Iran has nuclear weapons because no one stepped in. But, at that time, you’ll blame Bush for not stopping Iran earlier and ignore the bribes of U.N. representatives.
March 11th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Woody is a buffoon.
Just for the record, I was an excellent right fielder and third baseman. I could probably still nail a peckerwood like you running to first base while I was on my knees digging out a grounder near third.
When it comes to immigration, you are always quick to say that you just want to see the law being obeyed, yet when it comes to torture, you have no problem with the law being broken.
Your ability to make a cogent argument doesn’t even rise to the level of a dilettante. When people call you on your nonsense, you flail around aimless and this is a classic example:
You can’t argue on the issues, so you hurl invective just to make yourself feel good. Instead, it merely gives the impression that you are flopping around aimlessly like a fish out of water.
Sometimes you’re downright Shakespearean: a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.
March 12th, 2008 at 3:33 am
Randy — and anyone else who took to heart Woody’s big steaming dump up there — you gotta understand something: tax season is coming up. Woody’s gonna be real busy, real soon.
Woody has this idea that if he does all his mid-March to mid-April trolling NOW, delivered in one big stinky snarly package, it’ll tide him over until he had some free time again. That’s not the way trolling works, of course, it’s actually highly inefficient, but …. maybe that’s how a beancounter brain works!
March 12th, 2008 at 5:29 am
Woody can’t actually believe what he says here, at least not in any intellectual way. To do so would require a level of objectivity and analysis that appear to be beyond Woody’s grasp.
He believes in the talking points he regurgitates in the same way I believe that Elvis Costello is a better performer than Elvis Presley. We could compare career album sales, critical acclaim, songwriting, concert repartee and what have you, but at the end of the day, none of that would ever matter: I’m sticking with Costello.
Woody does provide a service in that he faithfully parrots a point of view that isn’t insignificant in American politics. He reliably delivers the dumbed down, resentment-driven statist psuedo-conservatism that helps the GOP’s big white male tent get it up.
The intellectual template for him is not a matrix of fact, evidence and logic. It is a football game where one chooses sides and cheers.
Who was it that said:
“Never try to use facts and logic to persuade someone to change views they arrived at without the benefit of either.” ?
March 12th, 2008 at 6:37 am
BB, you actually think Elvis Costello is a better performer than Elvis Presley!?
You must hate America even more than I thought.
March 12th, 2008 at 6:51 am
“I did find that my usage of the word Islamics is accepted by the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. You would be surprised how our English language changes so frequently, such as turning nouns into verbs as when you “google†something.”
Yeah, and I googled something: uses of the word “islamics”, in both Google News and Google blogs. It certainly does appear that “islamic” as a noun is entering the language.
However, if the typical user of “islamics” is any guide, the word is being borne into the language almost entirely by bigots, ignoramuses and fearmongers.
But, hey, don’t listen to me. After all, if you look at my voting patterns and my opinions, I’m obviously one of those terrorist-loving Democratics.
March 12th, 2008 at 7:25 am
>Iraq would have continued with no fear
continued with what?
March 12th, 2008 at 7:29 am
>BB, you actually think Elvis Costello is a better performer than Elvis Presley
I don’t agree about the Elvii, but I’ll say this:
*Frank Sinatra had a mediocre voice*
do I hate America?
March 12th, 2008 at 7:55 am
Not if you think, as I do, that Tony Bennett was much, much better.
March 12th, 2008 at 8:12 am
“Tony Bennett was much, much better.”
Randy, I think that should read “Tony Bennett was much, much MUCH Better!”
March 12th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Whoops, I left out a comma before the last much. Had to confess my shortcomings and crimes before the grammar-police got me.
March 12th, 2008 at 8:22 am
(Changing my pen name to “Stu DeNimm,” which is funnier than “Mr X.”)
I have uncles, cousins, and colleagues who think just like Woody. We need to know what to expect and practice our responses to people like that. Argue with Woody but don’t flame him into quitting this board.
March 12th, 2008 at 8:54 am
“Muslims have been promised such great rewards in the after-life, such as the virgins, that they are happy to sacrifice themselves..”
What is ironic is Mohammad does not let them get any on earth, only the dear leader of course, else they would know it’s not virgins that are worth killing yourself over. It’s those with the experience. I can attest to this……..and so can Governor Spitzer.
I do think you hit a nerve with your list of leftist attributes Woody. I was surprised how many here I considered less sinful, by harboring just liberal thoughts in their heart, rose to denounce you with considered argument; buffoon, idiot, bigot, ignoramus….well enough. I’m convince already.
You were over the top Woody with this ‘hate America’ meme I think. Don’t confuse all the criticism as hate. It is another attribute of the left, in their endless search for a Utopian world, to see only things that fall short of the ideal and ignore all the rest.
It has its advantages after all. It points out our imperfections, while they come off as immature and inexperienced. Sort of like virgins, not worth killing yourself over.
March 12th, 2008 at 9:03 am
X: (Iraq) continued with what?
I’m sorry. I forgot that–to liberals–invading other countries, torturing citizens, committing mass murders, breaking terms of peace, ignoring U.N. resolutions and blocking inspections, bribing U.N. officials, stealing the wealth of a nation, and, yes, engaging in research and attempting to obtain materials for WMD’s are not crimes or worries if engaged by any country that opposes the U.S. Similarly, I remember the cheering from the bleachers of the left when Hugo Chavez “won” his election or Castro would do an “in your face” to the U.S.
My extensive list of liberal beliefs was only intended to shorten discussions, because it would cover a vast range of issues at one time rather than drawing them out.
Still, be sure to stay on topic about tortures. May we start with those by Saddam Hussein, such as running suspected enemies in a shredding machine feet first, because it’s more fun to watch their expressions as they die?
March 12th, 2008 at 9:05 am
PS, sometimes Woody’s comments are so precisely on the bubba mark (”Islamics…take away all the guns…throw like girls”) that I suspect he is really a leftist just acting as a sparring partner. I hope not, but either way his participation here is useful to us. Best to lighten up on the personal stuff.
March 12th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Randy and Ghost - I like Tony Bennet as much as the next guy but really!
They didn’t call Frank the “Chairman of the Board” for nothing. You guys deserve to be waterboarded just for you tortured understanding of American Popular Song.
There’s Sinatra and then there’s everyone else! (Guess you’re spending too much time listening to Woody)
March 12th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Oh, nuts. It looks as if the Democrats first 100 days gets extended further.
House Fails to Overturn Bush Veto of CIA Bill That Banned Waterboarding
March 12th, 2008 at 9:56 am
More helpful reading for you liberals, but you probably already read “The Village Voice”….
David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a ‘Brain-Dead Liberal’
If you believe in change, follow his example.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Mamet has ALWAYs been a misogynist reactionary. Good writer (Glengarry Glenn Ross, Untouchables, etc.) but he wrote Oleanna, which has to be the msot sexist thing ever written.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:28 am
“*Frank Sinatra had a mediocre voice*
do I hate America?”
I don’t know about the America part, but you certainly have no friends amongst the mafiosi.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Oh, and Sinatra himself said that Tony Bennett was America’s greatest singer.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Marc, time for a new post. This one is infested with trolls. What a borefest.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Gosh, Samuel, I’ve tried to get you guys back on topic. Okay, I’ll quit writing and let you get back to your interesting input and analyses.
March 12th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
“National Palestinian Radio”
Says it all about Mamet’s “conversion”, really. “Wow, Arabs are human beings? I’ll hae none of that!”
March 12th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
“Sinatra himself said that Tony Bennett was America’s greatest singer.”
Since Sinatra also said that George Jones was the “second best white male singer” I guess that means he thought he was in 3rd place.
I think that arguments about the greatest singer are obviously linked closely to taste, but I agree that Sinatra had the lesser voice compared to Bennet - and probably George Jones, for that matter - but also believe he was the greatest “white male singer.” I also think that Billy Holiday’s voice sucked in comparison to Ella Fitzgerald but that Billy was the greater singer, by far. Nobody on this planet ever sang more beautifully than Ella Fitztgerald - black, white, male, female. But she couldn’t move me the way Holiday did. And Bennet, for my money, never had the emotional impact of Sinatra. Honestly, to push the voice vs. “intangibles” thing to it’s extreme - I love listening to Louis Armstrong more than Tony Bennet, at least for a song or two. (Armstrong and Ella is the best of both worlds.) Sinatra was the musical equivalent of Bogart. I’m sure Laurence Olivier and a bunch of others could act circles around Bogart, but I never looked into Olivier’s face on the screen and felt the kind of connection that I got from Bogie.
March 12th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
It would be useful for Mamet, in writing about “liberalism” to actually know one iota of which he speaks. He obviously didn’t understand the underpinnings of liberal beliefs - not even a little bit - when he considered himself one. So his conversion is a traverse from one form of ignorance to another. To be honest, I’m about as interested in Mamet’s ruminations on political philosophy as I am in Angelina Jolie’s - except less because she actually does stuff.
March 12th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
House of Games is still on my desert island movie list.
March 12th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Mamet recently wrote a book about how Jews who aren’t Likudniks are not only self-hating but sinners and betrayers of God. Looks like Spinoza is a heretic to Herr Mamet.
March 12th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Shorter Mamet: I used to base my beliefs on left-wing bumper stickers, now I base them on right-wing bumper stickers, motherfucker.
March 12th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
“House of Games is still on my desert island movie list.”
Can’t argue with that. Mantegna at his best.
March 12th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I always thought the House of Games had a left - or at least rationalist theme - in its sort of demystification of capitalism, with con artistry standing in as microcosm..
March 12th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Pretty much agree with Reg. Two songs that never fail to move are:
“In the wee Small Hours of the Morning” - from the album of the same name by Sinatra (Nelson Riddle natch!)
“You go to my Head” - found this on “Billie Holliday - Love Songss” - a compilation CD
Got to say though - for sheer professionalism those Verve “Great American Songbook” albums by Ella are hard to beat.
March 12th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
did somebody say troll?
March 12th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Anyway, I guess we’re not supposed to notice that the Presidential Candidate Cooper is now getting ready to hand the election too….
A) defied his party as an anti-torture hero…
before
B) flip floping and caving in, REPEATEDLY.
No problem for Marc, he’ll just find another
Republican to praise; though this takes a little
effort on this one. No big sense of betrayal
on the stright talk express, Cooper just hails
a cab.
March 12th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Mr. Lo Cicero: “They didn’t call Frank the “Chairman of the Board†for nothing. You guys deserve to be waterboarded just for you tortured understanding of American Popular Song.”
I’m not sure that someone who abjures waterboarding as torture should be even making a joke about this. Chairman is also what they called Mao.
March 12th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
You guys should listen to the two Tony Bennett/Bill Evans albums. Also, Tony is still singing beautifully long after Frank couldn’t cut the mustard.
I was surprised how many here I considered less sinful, by harboring just liberal thoughts in their heart, rose to denounce you with considered argument; buffoon, idiot, bigot, ignoramus….well enough. I’m convince already.
Jim R,
With all due respect, what I find so consistently tiresome is the constant near-shrieking “if you don’t agree with my point of view you hate America and want the terrorists to win” that I consistently hear from the right.
I love my country and its ideals and passionately so. What I cannot abide is the corruption of its ideals by this administration through its acceptance of torture and its usurpation of the US Constitution. I gladly celebrate my rights as a US citizen, which includes the right to dissent peacefully. The last time I checked I had two legs, not four, didn’t have wool, but human hair and didn’t go baaaa when I made sounds.
Woody in the last week has effectively accused me of treason and terrorism. I don’t give the proverbial flying fuck if it was done in jest. I take umbrage at such accusations and consider words like buffoon and idiot to pale by comparison.
March 12th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
I also think that Billy Holiday’s voice sucked in comparison to Ella Fitzgerald but that Billy was the greater singer, by far. Nobody on this planet ever sang more beautifully than Ella Fitztgerald - black, white, male, female. But she couldn’t move me the way Holiday did.
Carmen McRae had the best of both while, Ella always great technically left me cold.
And Bennet, for my money, never had the emotional impact of Sinatra.
Funny, but I feel exactly the opposite.
March 12th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
I interrupt the diversion down musical lane to ask if everyone here has seen KO’s “Special Comment” tonight.
The Clinton’s must be so proud!
March 12th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
“the two Tony Bennett/Bill Evans albums. Also, Tony is still singing beautifully long after Frank couldn’t cut the mustard”
Agreed- great albums - but I’m not sure comparing Frank and Tony at this juncture is fair…
March 12th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Bennet, Sinatra, Fitzgerald…
Tell me, which one of them ever wrote a song?
Elvis Costello’s voice may lack both range and depth, but when he sings, he knows what he’s saying and he means it because he wrote it. The wit, the insight, the poetry. It’s all there.
“My Way”–get me to the vomitorium.
And anyone who disagrees is a moonbat islamocommunist America-hater.
Great Elvis Costello lyrics:
“Fear is here to say, love is here for a visit”
“It’s a death that’s worse than fate, it’s by no means second-rate.”
“All it takes is one itchy trigger, one more widow, one less white nigger.”
“You either shut up or get cut out;
they don’t wanna hear about it.
It’s only inches on the reel-to-reel.
And the radio is in the hands of such a lot of fools tryin’ to anaesthetise the way that you feel…”
I could go on, but I fear the Rat Pack hipsters here might waterboard me to coerce a confession that I’m a crass, superficially sentimental listener with no time for 60s crooners…
March 13th, 2008 at 12:06 am
Seems things have kinda gone ‘open mike’ @ Marc’s joint here…
BB, I’m in your corner regarding Frank, Bennet, etc. I was in Nevada when Frank died and saw the lights dimmed. Some actually said Frank’s death marked the end of the 20th century (1998). My thought then was, “Well thank god that’s over with.”
And incidentally, I’m also a huge Costello fan. I’ll be glad to argue with anyone that “Alison” is as near a perfect song as one can possibly compose. Totally agree that that Costello is a master poet of wit and insight. For other witty edgy radical stuff, I’ve got my favorite Bragg, Strummer, and Cave tracks going on the shuffle as I’m typing along now.
And for a little off topic of the off topic, here’s the WORST mayor in America, bar none:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxQF_su2du0
March 13th, 2008 at 5:29 am
I’ll see your Elvis Costello and raise you one Bob Dylan…
March 13th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Randy, below is what I wrote. You’re such a dumbass.
Most of you guys hate our military, hate our leaders,…and throw baseballs like girls–except Randy, who would deny fitting into these categories.
I quit commenting to give you guys a chance to write something substantive, but most of the discussion is about Italian singers. Happy, Samuel?
Marc’s topic is about “torture,” but there was not one respnse to my opening this matter: “House Fails to Overturn Bush Veto of CIA Bill That Banned Waterboarding” I guess those elections last fall didn’t change much.
March 13th, 2008 at 6:41 am
Woody,
Stop insulting my intelligence. I know sarcasm when I read it.
As for your final comment, go take a civics course. It takes a 2/3 majority to override a veto. It is exceedingly difficult. Given that the Democrats don’t control two-thirds of either house all your comment goes to show is that the Republicans are the pro-torture party.
March 13th, 2008 at 7:07 am
“I interrupt the diversion down musical lane to ask if everyone here has seen KO’s “Special Comment†tonight.”
Saw it and agreed with it wholeheartedly, (though his ornate sentence structure sometimes got in the way of the rant). I see at TPM that Hillary actually offered a couple of real-sounding apologies at a “forum sponsored by the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a group of more than 200 black community newspapers across the country.” Since I believe in the redemption of souls, I’d like to think that this contitrion was at least partly sincere and that she’s finally beginning to sense how fast she’s plunging into the rat-hole (and taking us all with her). Maybe I’m naive, or maybe it’s just the audacity of hope, or maybe it’s just a town called Hope or ….
March 13th, 2008 at 7:23 am
Randy, the Democrats promised change knowing that they didn’t have a 2/3 majority. Why did they do that?
Also, I wasn’t being sarcastic. I specifically excluded you because I know how you react to being lumped together with others–just like all liberals.
March 13th, 2008 at 8:31 am
““My Wayâ€â€“get me to the vomitorium.”
Bunker, You and Costello’s lyrics are showing your age. Still fighting the man. Sinatra’s show his age too. He was the man.
Here’s wisdom for the mortal, vomit for the immortal young.
http://tinyurl.com/krqjz
The maturity, the responsibility…….the wisdom. It’s all here.
Woody, I like George Jones and Tammy Wynette.
How about you.
March 13th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Drive to Macon, GA in June to attend the Macon Music minor league baseball game where it’s Eliot Spitzer night.
The plans call for an invitation extended to Spitzer to attend the game and throw out the first pitch.
Other elements for the promotion include:
- The Music will give away a trip to New York and a one-night stay at the Mayflower Hotel.
- The ninth fan – or Client No. 9, as Spitzer was known in the prostitution ring – into the ballpark will receive a free Music prize pack.
- Fans with the name Eliot, Spitzer or Kristen, along with any fan from New York, will receive $1 off admission. Any fan who has ever resigned a position will also receive $1 off admission.
- The Music will play Frank Sinatra songs throughout the night.
- Wire taps will be placed around the stadium.
- Fans will be able to use ATMs in the ballpark available for cash withdrawals not to exceed $5,000 per hour.
- The 871st fan through the gates will receive a gift certificate for the team store.
March 13th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Jim R. I can’t answer for Woody but I like a Gershwin tune, New York in June and holding hands at the movie show when all the lights are low . . .
I’d say more but then I’d owe ASCAP some dough.
March 13th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Grocholski, you’re right. People like Kriesler, Rubenstein, Gould, and Callas are all phonies since they just play and sing tunes others wrote.
Come to think of it - much of Miles, Max, Bill Basie etc. is just copying showtunes.
What phonies!
March 13th, 2008 at 11:16 am
>““My Wayâ€â€“get me to the vomitorium.â€
I’ve been wondering about this song ever since I first heard it in the 70s, when it had a brief radio vogue because of the Sid Vicious cover.
Good material and career-high performance by the mediocre-voiced crooner. Still, why did they ruin it with those godawful strings? I would have been much better with a piano at the beginning and brass coming in midway.
March 13th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Also, I wasn’t being sarcastic
Spare me your bs.
My Way is dreadful, but what would you expect from Paul Anka?
March 13th, 2008 at 11:48 am
I promise that I wasn’t.
March 13th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Richard, those folks you list aren’t phonies. They’re well talented. Frank and Tony too. I was mostly ’seconding’ BB’s point on Costello’s genius.
Covering others work…I’ll even agree that sometimes a song covered by another is vastly improved over the author’s version.
Dylan’s “Watchtower” is much better in the hands of Hendrix…
March 13th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Everything was better in the hands of Hendrix.
March 13th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Apples and oranges.
I’m a Jimi Hendrix fan, and he certainly did good covers of Dylan (LARS and Watchtower) you can’t quantify it as beter or worse. These are such great songs that if performed competently and uniquely, compliment the original version. Dylan himself preferred the Grateful Dead doing his songs to his own versions. Whatever the case, it is the songs themselves that are great. Subjective preference is second to objective canonical quality.
Hendrix did improve on the Troggs. In terms of his blues covers, it is almost aesthetically blasphemous to state that his =versions are better as opposed to stating a personal preference.
March 13th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Bragg’s Internationale improves on the original.
March 13th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
“Bragg’s Internationale improves on the original”
So, doesn’t asserting Bragg improved on the original Internationale lead to aesthetic blasphemy? Or is this somehow not a statement of personal preference?
March 13th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
No. I’m talking about how some songs can be improved (I referred also to the Troggs) and some can’t. In the case of hte Internationale, Bragg rewrote the lyrics (but kept the song itself) to fit with more current times.
March 13th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Jim R writes: “Bunker, You and Costello’s lyrics are showing your age. Still fighting the man. Sinatra’s show his age too. He was the man. ”
Thanks Jim R. for demonstrating my original point: for wingnuts politics isn’t about principle. It’s about position and no different from the decision to root for this or that football team or listen to this or that music.
Again, anyone who doesn’t love Elvis Costello’s every word is obviously a callow Islamolibtardcommiefreak who hates his mother and will sell out his country for a song…
March 13th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Alright jc, I just wanted to be sure that you weren’t suggesting that Bragg’s recorded rendition (a representation) wasn’t being compared to the song — wouldn’t that be to reify the material product over the act of singing it? My humble little thought regarding the Internationale is that what made that song so special is when it was actually sung by anyone. Didn’t some critic of socialism once remark that when the proletariat sung this song that — regardless of key or tone — there was some higher quality achieved by those singing (…their heads and hearts beat with ’solidarity’ …forgive me, I tried to find the actual quote, no luck..) Point being: it’s the praxis, more than the song itself.
March 13th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
I think I screwed that up, should be “… compared to the act of singing “
March 13th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
I’m partial to Leon Redbone.
March 13th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
I promise that I wasn’t.
Willing to get waterboarded to prove that?
March 14th, 2008 at 8:06 am
I’m willing if waterboarding me is going to save thousands of American lives. I’m telling the truth.
March 14th, 2008 at 8:30 am
There’s the rub. There’s zero proof that being waterboarded has saved one American life. If you’re being waterboarded you’ll say anything to get it to stop.
March 14th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Zero proof? Not from what I heard, but we don’t have top security clearance, do we? Maybe we could accept the word of a ex-CIA officer who used waterboarding and later regretted it.
Waterboarding Recounted
Ex-CIA Officer Says It ‘Probably Saved Lives’ but Is Torture
March 14th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Ahh yes the CIA always tells the truth. /snark>
March 14th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Note, as I said, that he was ex-CIA and regretted the wateboarding, even though it was effective. It seems that he has no ax to grind in his statement about the results.
March 14th, 2008 at 11:15 am
In an interview, Kiriakou said he did not witness Abu Zubaida’s waterboarding but was part of the interrogation team that questioned him in a hospital in Pakistan for weeks after his capture in that country in the spring of 2002.
Sorry, but “evidence” obtained through hearsay, like “evidence” obtained through torture is inherently not credible.
I’ll put more faith in the FBI.
May 10th, 2008 at 4:09 am
c7f54cf5045d…
c7f54cf5045def5cee25…