Bush his own Gerald Ford

I think the most impressive thing about the W. Bush presidency is all these historical-doppleganger poses Bush goes through. Forget all that Freudian stuff with his dad, lately I find his parallels with Nixon more interesting. He's got Nixon's scandals in spades by now, but with the Republican Senate and Congress and the perennially conflicted left, he won't be impeached so Bush get's to be his own Gerald Ford too, presiding for years with a dubious cloud over his head.

TV, what can it not do?

http://www.onthemedia.org/

On the Media sound clips, 6/10/05:

"Watching television hastens puberty."

"Exposure to positive portrayals of gay characters on TV shows [...] can reduce prejudice among viewers. So TV can make us more sensitive, except when it doesn't.

"The more television four year olds watch, the more likely they are to become bullies at school."

Segment blurb on Web site:

Data Crunch
Conventional wisdom holds that too much TV watching is bad for you. But how bad is it, exactly? And is some programming less unhealthy than others? Luckily, scientists worldwide are hard at work determining the precise effects of television on the human subject. In the interest of keeping listeners up to date with the latest research, we bring you the highlights of the past year in media studies.

NPR on the Bolivian election

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5058713
Covering the Bolivian election on 12/16, Julie McCarthy described Evo Morales as reflecting the "leftist tide that is washing over South America."
I don't question the general accuracy of the claim, but the characterization is disquieting to me because I fear the way it will incite the less rational anti-left elements of our country. Some old asshole in a cabin someplace will be dozing off, but when McCarthy says that he'll jump right out of his chair, grab his gun from the wall and run off out the door.

Bush reads some lines (pho-NE,-ti?-ca-ly.)

Bush (12/14) on why we went in: Saddam was making money on the black market through Oil for Food, and he had plans to restart his weapons programs once the sanctions broke down. But how does Bush know the sanctions would break down? Because his administration was undermining them? Or Clinton's?

Scalia at the mic

http://audio.wnyc.org/otm/otm120205e.mp3

This is a perfect commentary on Antonin Scalia's absurd insistence on blocking any audio-visual recordings of his public appearances. Antonin Scalia influences the life of every American through his decisions about our laws - how dare he refuse to be recorded when he makes public speeches about the law! For fear of distortions we get no record at all? Is that it, Antonin, only if somebody is willing to read ponderous legal documents can they try to follow the thinking behind one of the most powerful people in our democracy? Especially since you also object to audio-visual equipment during Supreme Court hearings? And for what? To prevent "excerptation." Wow, far be it for somebody to quote you! As if "excerptation" is not kosher by the First Amendment!

Anyway, I don't care if it is true that the First Amendment gives Scalia the right to determine whether he is recorded. It takes a lot of nerve and gall for him to exercise that right, given his position in our society. It is a grave insult to common Americans, at once elitist, mistrustful and condescending in the extreme.