|
Saturday, October 19, 2002
The Amsterdam News and Amiri Baraka what a lovely combination, assembled in this editorial. Getting Belafonte out of the way first:
As far as Harry Belafonte goes, I hadn't seen his comments anywhere other than on Drudge, and I think Drudge covered that himself instead of linking (which, by Mickey Kaus' measure, means it's only 80% true). So it doesn't really count as a major media onslaught. On the point of Belafonte getting assaulted on his statements for being black, I think one has to prove assault first, which they don't. But aren't Belafonte's comments about Colin Powell unacceptable? He's characterizing Powell's positions negatively on the basis of his blackness; doesn't that explicitly equal racism? It was a disgusting comment to make, completely disrespecting the idea that a guy like Powell -- who, oddly enough, has been the closest thing to a dove in this White House -- can animate himself; what Belafonte said was that Powell can't help but be dominated by white people. It's a disgusting thing to say about Powell, or any person, and should not be excused -- except for the fact that no one is calling him on this. Everyone else -- the Amsterdam News included, is focusing instead on the substance of his comments about Iraq, which are about as valuable as any singer's comments on world affairs can be (though when one adds in the racism inherent in our culture such that a singer may be the most prominent black and therefore the only outlet for widely-spreading a black opinion, his statements become more warranted -- but only to a slight degree, given that there are many prominent black officials whose opinions should come before his and be given their proper due -- yes, this includes Powell, and, for a few months at least, McKinney on the other end of the spectrum). Essentially, Belafonte gets away with being a racist because he's black -- that's no good, and any future comments he makes should be viewed through that prism unless he recants.
More on Baraka later, I guess...
Steven I. Weiss 10:51:00 PM
The Lower East Side's fading Jewish community is profiled in today's NYT...they apparently missed the story for the last thirty years and are playing catch-up now. It's a scorchingly long piece, far longer than that piece on the new dominance of the Orthodox some time ago. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but doubt that the rest of the story can top the following quote:
Two weeks ago, H&M Skullcap moved from its home on Hester Street, where it had been for half a century, to 13th Avenue in Borough Park, Brooklyn, a thriving Jewish business thoroughfare. "The Chinese don't want to buy yarmulkes," said Mendel Fefer, a salesman.
Steven I. Weiss 9:57:00 PM
Friday, October 18, 2002
Shmuley Boteach has something to say about Iraq in Jewsweek, and makes a good case for why sex writers shouldn't stray far from their calling. After all, it's not like Nerve.com is hosting any articles about the war, though, interestingly, they are hosting a story called "The Shabbat Goyim".
Steven I. Weiss 1:42:00 PM
New Parsha Senryu posted at Mimaamakim.
Steven I. Weiss 1:34:00 PM
The Jewish community chimes in on bilingual education in this Forward story. Of interesting note is the glaring contrast between organized support and the actual support of the community: the organizations that have taken sides in the debate oppose anti-bilingual bills, but the article cites a Zogby International poll which supposedly found that "82% of Jews say they would be inclined to vote for a ballot measure requiring English-only instruction, combined with an intensive one-year English immersion program for students not fluent in English." Neither Zogby nor Unz seem to list the poll on their website, however (another project for any researchers out there).
One possible explanation for the populace's support of repeal initiatives is raised in the article:
Critics of the organized Jewish community's stance say the organizations are putting political correctness ahead of the Jewish experience with English-only instruction — an educational practice that allowed previous generations of Jewish immigrants to flourish, they say.
But can't we come up with 1,001 ways in which the Jewish immigration experience was different and in which Jewish immigrants didn't get a lot out of their education?
Steven I. Weiss 12:27:00 PM
In one of the Times' most inarticulate and gratuitous Bush-bashings, the Gray Lady runs the alarmist headline "White House Joins Fight Against Electric Cars" over an article that completely fails to prove its thesis, but does a scrappy job trying (link via IdealRhombus). The article comes off like a paid advertisement for the Natural Resources Defense Council (full disclosure: I asked for a job there, they said "no").
Let's take this piece by piece. First, the lede:
The Bush administration went to court today to support the automobile industry's effort to eliminate requirements in California that auto manufacturers sell electric cars
First off, this makes it seem as though the Bush is the leading party in the case -- it's not, the automobile manufacturers are. Second, as the article notes later on, the reason why the White House is participating in the suit is due to a basic issue relating to federal/states' rights: according to the White House, only the federal government has the right to set emissions standards, not the states. One can respond by saying "Well, wouldn't W normally be for states' rights?" And the answer would be "yes, of course, except when it goes against his interests, as it does here." But the NYT never discovers this argument, so one can't defend them with it. Besides, the federal emissions standards are part of an implicit compromise by Republicans in which they'll allow fuel economy standards so long as any state has to take on the national oil/automobile lobby to make those standards better, and it is completely predictable that the White House would assert its jurisdiction.
Then, in an apparent attempt at "gotcha!" journalism, the article reveals in its second graf:
President Bush's chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., was the chief lobbyist for General Motors, one of the plaintiffs in the case. Mr. Card was also head of an auto industry trade association when California proposed to require electric vehicles, and has publicly opposed such a requirement.
Dun-dun-dun! This intrepid reporter has found an ever-elusive link between the automobile industry and a Republican White House. *Gasp* -- can it really be true? Apparently, the huge auto-industry PACs hadn't already tipped them off.
But the article doesn't stop there: it needs a better motive. So, it gives a shot with this:
The brief does not appear to raise any new substantive arguments, but it carries some political significance in that it appears to favor Detroit over Los Angeles. Mr. Bush lost Michigan in 2000 to Vice President Al Gore, and while Mr. Bush was defeated in California as well, the vote was far closer in Michigan. Mr. Bush has been reaching out to union voters and is hoping to capture the state in 2004 while the likelihood of California voting for him appears more remote.
Ummm...hmmm...no, not likely. Bush has been campaigning vigorously in California of late (though his candidate there, Bill Simon, can't seem to ever fully remove his foot from his mouth), and it's really stretching it to say that Bush has hopes of winning over union voters, especially after he pulled a near-Reagan with the dockworkers. Michigan is a swing state, but automobile manufacturers don't stay in Michigan because of emission standards, they stay there because it's either economically or politically more advantageous, and it would be positively impossible for any Republican to swoop into Michigan and pick up union votes because he fought against cleaner cars.
When the NYT's own arguments fail, it goes directly to the source:
"The major issue isn't the substance of the brief but the fact of the brief," said Daniel Becker, director of the global warming and energy program for the Sierra Club. "The fact that the Bush administration, with the former chief lobbyist of G.M. as a chief of staff, is weighing in on the side of G.M. to overturn California's efforts to clean the air that Californians breathe is outrageous."
Maybe, but it can only be said to be as outrageous as potential deals with oil companies and military manufacturers. This is more tapping into a general pool of outrage than anything specific. Yes, Andrew Card was GM's lobbyist for a year before entering the administration, but Cheney actually ran Halliburton. But, again, to say that the White House wouldn't be fighting in this case if Andy Card either weren't in the White House or hadn't been a GM lobbyist would seem ludicrous, so why make the argument?
What is the lone grounds for any of this? Well, buried way down in the article is this handy paragraph:
Congress has long allowed California to set its own emission standards because smog there is so bad. As a result, the state has set emission requirements that have forced car companies to invent new technologies for pollution control.
Well, now we have something new, and something worth arguing about. What does it mean? We don't know, the NYT doesn't bother to figure it out, even though it is the sole premise upon which their argument lies. Maybe some of us doing a little independent investigation can figure this one out?
Steven I. Weiss 9:41:00 AM
The newest Pataki scandal is now a series in the Daily News, with today's article reporting on the complaints of police officers who were forced by superiors to do campaign work for the governor. Of course, no mention of the scandal makes it to the Times, which would rather make a point of mentioning that the NOW sang "Happy Birthday" to him. So, to answer McKinley'squestion, why doesn't it seem to the Times that Pataki ever gets held to account for scandal? Because Times reporters don't bother to read the Daily News.
Steven I. Weiss 8:42:00 AM
Michael Bloomberg continues to warn of potential budget cuts, but does this seem like the ingenious-businessman way of doing things? The city is looking at certain short-term budget gaps brought about by some very specific problems: bad fiscal management by the Giuliani administration, which caused much of the budget gap to begin with, and all of the various 9/11-related extra expenditures and loss of revenue. Interest rates are now about as low as they can conceivably get, barring deflation, so we should be hearing story after story about refinancing city debt; why don't we? Even more, at near-to-nothing rates, the city can keep programs in place that build for the future -- like education -- banking on the results 10 years down the line. There may well be a lot of fat to trim in all of the city agencies, and that's worth doing anyway if it is really there -- and Bloomberg's target of 7.5% seems a reasonable estimation of how much waste a city agency could build up. But in the meantime, cutting vital services to close a budget gap when money now is about as free as it will ever get just doesn't make sense. By not ensuring that vital programs continue to make headway now, Bloomberg is sacrificing future revenue down the line.
Of course, the semi-stated undertone here is that Bloomberg continues to ponder exactly what cuts he may be planning, while everybody on the City Council can safely bet that he knows both exactly what they will be and exactly when they will have to be announced: as soon as Pataki's election is over, and their's begins.
Steven I. Weiss 8:34:00 AM
Thursday, October 17, 2002
The Village Voice chimes in on the stock market with this cartoon by Mark Fiore. It's cute and essentially on-target, but isn't the Voice supposed to be kinda/maybe/sorta anti-capital? Doesn't having a cartoon like this indicate that the Voice-types live beyond their populist-philosophy means?
Steven I. Weiss 10:21:00 PM
Bilingual education is tackled by the Crimson staff and is paired with a dissenting opinion. The article offers a concise and well-argued position statement from both sides. Free of jingoism, baiting, or sarcasm, it is refreshing to see arguments about bilingual education at such a sophisticated level -- all the policy rags and politicians can learn a lesson in honest disagreement from these undergraduates.
Steven I. Weiss 8:04:00 PM
Mr. Shapiro Joins the Blogosphere! Whether inspired by the Iabomber or acting completely on his own, we'll never know. Nevertheless, welcome to Democrat.
Steven I. Weiss 7:34:00 PM
Probing George Pataki's ability to dodge scandal, James Mckinley, Jr. goes to significant lengths in today's Times to mark him as the "Teflon Governor"(link via politicsny.com). Of course, what is odd about a newspaper reporting on a politician's ability to avoid scandal is that it is the newspaper's responsibility to make sure that that doesn't happen. It would be one thing if McKinley were trying to say that you just wouldn't expect a politician to be able to keep his nose this clean -- but he's not saying that, at all. He's shocked -- shocked! -- by the fact that when reporters seem to think they've caught him in a scandal, he actually refuses to answer their questions. Surely, this should not come as a surprise to a political reporter, yet it does. The Times as a whole, and its reporters individually, have been so lazy in reporting this race, that they don't even know how to find a scandal to report on.
McKinley's piece doesn't even mention any of Pataki's real scandals. Neither he, nor anyone else at the Times has reported on what may be the ultimate scandal of this election season, the contributions of those hired by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. The Post picked up the story, and it's supposed to be a low-quality, Republican-Party proxy paper. Instead of actual scandals involving Pataki, McKinley cites a series of occurrences that have only the slightest illusion of impropriety -- Pataki's endorsement by unions in exchange for gaining them a better contract, for example -- and then, to prove that Pataki knows how to avoid such potential improprieties, he cites Pataki's avoiding pointed questions about these topics. Of course, Pataki avoids the question, and that is certainly to his credit as a slick politician; but that he is allowed to avoid scandal is solely owing to the laziness of McKinley and his colleagues in reporting that.
It's as though McKinley is turning exasperatedly to the public and saying "why is George Pataki able to avoid your scrutiny?" As though it's the reader's job to use a lunch break to look through Pataki's records and campaign finance filings and then demand accountability...isn't that what Times reporters get paid for?
Steven I. Weiss 6:55:00 PM
Carl McCall has a new ad out to appeal to Hispanic voters, but this time he's using Jose Serrano and Alfonso Carrion instead of Ferrer & co. Could this mean that McCall is backing away from the support of Roberto Ramirez's machine, which has been supporting him only half-heartedly in recent months? (This is the link provided to the ad, but I can't get it to work)
McCall's previous Hispanic Dream Team that joined in his ads was Fernando Ferrer, Adriano Espaillat and Nydia Velazquez -- all decidedly in Ramirez's camp. Serrano has broken with Ramirez on several recent elections, though Carrion has always been assumed to be taking orders from Ramirez.
McCall would have a good reason to break with Ramirez: the fact that he and his proxies, including Espaillat, have closed their campaign offices that could be working for McCall, a tactic they used last year to help Michael Bloomberg defeat Mark Green in the mayoral election. Ramirez's crew could be upset with McCall for any number of reasons, but one certainly seems to be a split over the State Senate primary in which McCall supported Eric Schneiderman over Guillermo Linares; joining McCall in supporting Schneiderman was Serrano, though not Carrion, while Ramirez and Espaillat supported Linares.
That Upper Manhattan/Bronx Dems are now using the shuttered-office tactic for the second year makes this a trend and not a once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon.
As to exactly what is going on with McCall and Ramirez, only time -- and the next campaign-finance filings -- will tell.
An interesting distinction that pops out between McCall's English-language site and his Spanish-language version is that the Spanish version still prominently displays the news of Andrew Cuomo's and Charlie King's endorsements...is this a subtle recognition of the fact that Cuomo/King seemed to be leading in Hispanic support, despite the supposed Black/Latino alliance and McCall's relationship with Ramirez and nearly all other Hispanic electeds and union leaders in the state (other than Amigos de Pataki, of course)?
Steven I. Weiss 3:00:00 PM
How do you know when supposed patriotism is really just sickness? When you post signs saying "Think Big: Bomb Iraq" with pictures of craters, as the NYU Republican Club did recently, and as the author of this Op-Ed is correct to decry; removing the flyer, of course, was a stupid move, and just writing the Op-Ed without tearing the flyer would have been decidedly smarter...
UPDATE: How do you know when idiocy amongst student activists can be just as strong on the right as it can on the left? When an NYU Republican who designed the flyers refuses to own up to the reality that he promoted war in a jocular tone wholly unfit for "public debate" and disrespectful to the people of Iraq, many of whom will lose their lives and homes in an attack.
Steven I. Weiss 1:28:00 PM
Beginning the Blogging Journey on a self-referential note:
A Lanner piece...
Steven I. Weiss 1:08:00 AM
|