New Debate Rule

From the Onion:

OXFORD, MS—Amid discussions of possibly postponing the debate altogether, Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and John McCain (R-AZ) were able to agree Thursday on a new guideline that would allow each candidate one 15-second strangulation during Friday night's presidential debate. "Both candidates will receive two minutes to answer each question, five minutes for discussion, and a one-time only option to walk over to his opponent's podium and cut off his oxygen supply for up to fifteen seconds," a statement from the Commission on Presidential Debates read in part, also specifying that debate moderator Jim Lehrer can exercise his own discretion in determining whether or not the strangulations go over time.  

First Dude

If this isn't one of the most awkward interviews you've ever seen...

Nice work, Fox News! Some really penetrating investigative journalism here. My favorite excerpt: 

Greta: What did you say to [Sarah] after her [convention] speech?

Todd: 'Great speech.' 

Greta: And what did she say?

Todd: 'Thanks.' 

What's Really Good?

I don't know how to begin talking about the election because I have so much that I want to say about it...but I will address one thing. I watched the entire Democratic National Convention, and since you can intelligently support something only when you know the other side of it, I've also been watching the RNC. I tried to look at it without giving in to my preconceived notions about the people on that hall floor, but it's impossible. Watching it was infuriatating.

Last night, it occurred to me that the RNC differs from the DNC in one striking way, and that's its nastiness. There's really no other word for it, and if you watched Rudy's speech, you know exactly what I mean. And when people cheered, and he laughed this scary, gleeful laugh in response, it reminded me of that scene in Borat when he's talking at the rodeo -- telling people he's against gay marriage and in support of bombing the shit out of other countries, basically -- and the crowd is hooting and hollering in delight. You know there's something wrong with your party when you use 'intellectual' as an insult, i.e. "the Obama-Biden ticket is for the intellectuals and has nothing to do with us." A hard-working farmer or factory worker can be smart, you know. He can be aware of the world and recognize the capacity for us to be better and want to be a part of that process.

Yes, it was frustrating to watch the convention of people that don't agree with me. But last night bothered me on a different level, too. It really spelled out to me what the Republican party is all about. I almost felt sick, for example, when Ms. Sarah Palin mocked Barack by saying, "Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America; [Obama's] worried that someone won't read them their rights?" This, to me, confirms the fact that Repubs believe that all people who look a certain way have a certain agenda. That we as a country have a right to detain people who fit a profile that we've created, torture them without having any real information on them, and ignore any notion of human rights. That we can scare and psychologically bully people into voting for military strength alone.

I'm already on Bush's list, so I'll put myself on another one by saying this: America creates terrorists. Let's say your city was being bombed constantly by another country. You couldn't go to school or work or on a date without worrying that you might get blown up or killed by foreign soldiers who treat you like you're subhuman. You move to that country to get work or live some semblance of a life, and get randomly searched and eventually arrested for traveling or walking down the street. You get thrown in a cell, no one asks you anything apart from shit you know nothing about, no one knows where you are, and you get tortured severely by people who think it's not torture. Would you not leave that cell with some kind of hate or disdain for that country and its government? Maybe it's unsafe to say something like that in such a public space and my Dad is always telling me to watch what I say around people, but I don't believe in censoring myself to make other people comfortable. I don't believe in not saying what I think, even if I live in a country that stifles honest and informed opinions.

Anyway. Here's a video and transcript of Palin's speech if you missed it. What strikes me the most is how nasty they're being, how derisive and belittling. And, in contrast, how gracious and graceful the DNC was, both in comparison and on its own. Well the pundits and reporters are saying what a hit the speech was, and I'd love to hear your thoughts. I don't plan on blogging after the McCain speech. I think I've been pretty controversial lately and I hope I'm not scaring anyone off. Hope you don't get arrested for reading this.

Happy Wednesday

Coney Island Gets Controversial

On 12th Street off Surf Avenue, you'll bump into this side show. If you climb to the top of the concrete steps, put a dollar into the little hole that the red arrow is pointing to and peek through the barred window, you'll see something you probably wouldn't expect to see on Coney Island. The show, created by artist Steve Powers, is called the "Waterboard Thrill Ride," and depicts Spongebob on the outside wall getting waterboarded by Squidworth and exclaiming, "It don't Gitmo better!" Pretty provocative stuff.

Put your dollar into the slot and a reenactment of a torture scene comes alive before your curious little eyes. There's literally a guy in a black hood pouring water into the mouth and nostrils of a figure in an orange jumpsuit for fifteen seconds.


A few things intrigue me about this. First, the juxtaposition of the scene you're watching through the bars with the backdrop of kids, the beach, rides, and hot dogs is pretty striking. Same kind of idea behind using a popular and notoriously naive cartoon character to advertise the show. And third, the following statement made by the artist (published in the Times today): "What's more obscene, the official position that waterboarding is not torture, or our official position that it's a thrill ride?"

What do you think? Is this an inappropriate show for Coney Island? Is the artist somehow trivializing or exploiting the torture method and/or victims of waterboarding?

"Believe Me, It's Torture."

Graydon Carter, famous editor-in-chief of Vanity Fair, asked writer Christopher Hitchens if he would agree to go through water-boarding and then write an article about it for the July issue of the magazine. Hitchens is a pretty sick opinion writer and does a lot of good stuff for Slate, where you may have run into his stuff. Water-boarding, if you're unfamiliar with the term, is a form of torture that's currently on the menu at Guantanamo Bay. They basically strap you down to something so that you're lying on your back, put something over your head (a mask, a bag, whatever) and pour water into your breathing passages so that you're pretty much drowning. Some people like to think that this isn't a form of torture, and the VF article is his response to that.

The site won't allow me to embed the video, but you should really click on this link and check it out (it's not long). Hitchens is given two balls, one in each of his hands, to release his grip from if he feels untolerable pressure or pain. I thought it was amazing how quickly he not only relesed his grip but flung the balls out of his hands, when the prisoners at Guantanamo are probably being subjected to this for hours at a time, if they don't die first. Watch the video and then tell me, do you think it's safe to call this practice "torture?" And do you think it's justifiable that they're doing this to people we're holding without any sort of hearing or trial?