In search of a theme

Women's Rights or "How often is a philosopher right about the future?"
Iranian women (bloggers!), challenging unwritten bans on attending public events, are bussed away from the stadium by public officials, but vow to continue challenging restrictions. The philosopher? Habermas.

Speaking of women's rights, this defense of Roe v. Wade points out some of the intellectually dishonest and legally dangerous arguments made against the case, and against our rights generally. And, lest you think that opposition to Roe is "tactical", several liberal bloggers have been arguing that they really mean it and we should oppose them accordingly. I've always felt that treating your political opponents with respect was important: one element of that is assuming, unless there's clear evidence to the contrary, that they mean what they say. They've been consistent, so should we. The issue is an international one because our anti-choice groups are going international, and our anti-choice government keeps scuttling international meetings related to reproductive rights and health at their behest.

We're dumber than we think
The Pentagon, frustrated by "slow" bomb delivery systems that work at twice the speed of sound, is considering putting conventional warheads on Trident Missiles. As Linus Kafka points out, one problem with this plan is the danger that someone might think we were launching a nuclear attack, and respond accordingly. I'm pretty sure, though, that anyone we dropped a Trident missile on, conventional or not, would be pissed and would respond.... if there's anything left.

Whose Beauty
From the Feminist Carnival I didn't have time to read earlier this week, I found a wonderful post on beauty standards which concludes: "I say we should reclaim beauty. Once upon a long time ago, for reasons not immediately clear to me, we yielded it to the beholder. And in so doing yielded also, our self-esteem on a yo-yo string. No more."

1+1=2. Literally!

There is, my friends and readers, an entire weblog devoted to tracking uses and misuses of the word "literally" in English. Really! (gotcha!)

There's also a blog devoted to tracking good and bad math, the latter of which is far more common than the former, it seems.

Will it, in fact, raise the level of literacy and numeracy on the web to know that someone is watching?

I doubt it. But it's nice to know there's someplace we can go for a little relief.

Link and Learn

The Carnival of the Vanities is up, after what sounds like some technical difficulties. Don't they ever have liberal hosts?

Anne Zook routinely does something that should be annoying, but she does it with such flair, and she's always right about the posts being worthwhile. Seriously: I could highlight one or two that are most worth reading, but I'd just be picking at random.

Everyone's linking to Odom's Iraq=Vietnam piece. Just in case you're not reading everyone....

I'll always link to a good discussion of Orson Welles' War of the Worlds, particularly one that puts it into such interesting historical context: the Martians were Germans...

Speaking of Germans, Orac noted the firebombing of the Holocaust History Project offices (as well as the ongoing cyber attacks) and is spearheading a drive to get lots of folks linking to them in defiance of the holocaust deniers. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Update: The Carnival of Satire is up! The New Revised (PC/Liberal) Standard KJV is reasonably funny; the Rabbit Liberation Front (yes, I'm making up my own descriptive titles) is bloody and violent, but well done; the de-motivational poster version of the President is nicely done. But the cream of the crop has to be "Study Proves Universe Created By Committee"

“Biodiversity is the primary stumbling block,” said Dr. Pootle. “Whoever created this cacophony of species would have had to be infinitely powerful and infinitely creative, but also infinitely schizophrenic to come up with the myriad different solutions to identical problems that the creators of the universe have. Either that, or we’re looking at a different kind of process altogether.”
...
An alternative explanation, that the randomness and diversity of life on Earth may be caused by the progressive alteration of species over successive generations due to small variations caused by spontaneous and random cellular mutations, with those members of a species best equipped for survival also proving most likely to successfully reproduce, as theorized by Charles Darwin, is discounted by Pootle and Frick as “mystical speculation”.

Now that's funny. Also: the 45th Carnival of Comedy is up!

If Bush Met Gandhi....

Personally, I think the ethical/anti-ethical collision would produce a moral implosion the likes of which the universe has rarely seen.

Snark aside, pdcs has a lovely analysis of the different views on civilization, liberty and freedom of the two men. No surprise: Gandhi's views are based more in individual self-transformation and a realistic view of civilization-as-process that requires a long-term and morally consistent approach; Bush's views are largely negative definitions and his ability to justify means with ends is nearly unparalleled in the history of democratic leadership. [via]

Happy International Women's Day

I was wondering what I would post in honor of the day, but the Tenth Carnival of Feminists has solved that problem.

I'll add, from my quotation collection,

"In societies where men are truly confident of their own worth, women are not merely tolerated but valued." -- Aung San Suu Kyi, September 1995

non sequitur: Speaking of women, I'd like to thank Avedon Carol for her links here and here, giving Ahistoricality its first 200+ visitor day.

Actually, I'm best known for my chocolate chip cookies....

You Are Rain

You can be warm and sexy. Or cold and unwelcoming. Either way, you slowly bring out the beauty around you. You are best known for: your touch Your dominant state: changing

What Type of Weather Are You? [via]

Top Ten Screwups: How many are impeachable?

Juan Cole points out that the Bush Administration's misteps are Iraq's sufferings. His list of the Top Ten Mistakes the Bush Administration made in going after al-Qaeda makes me wonder: how many of them are impeachable, violations of international law, or just broken promises? Let's see...

1. Bush vastly exaggerates al-Qaeda's size, sweep and importance, while failing to invest in genuine counterterrorist measures such as port security or security for US nuclear plants.

I suppose that could be seen as "dereliction of duty" which would be considered a crime in military circles.

2. Bush could have eradicated the core al-Qaeda group by putting resources into the effort in 2002. He did not...

see above

3. Bush opened a second front against Iraq before he had put Afghanistan on a sound footing.

Stupidity is not criminal. Not even in Presidents

4. Bush gutted the US constitution, tossing out the Fourth Amendment, by assiduously spying on Americans without warrants. None of those spying efforts has been shown to have resulted in any security benefits for the United States. ...

Yes

5. Bush attempted to associate the threat from al-Qaeda with Iran and Syria. ... Bush and Cheney have cynically used a national tragedy to further their aggressive policies of Great Power domination.

Unless it's under oath, I can't see that being impeachable. Though, under the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal standard of "conspiracy to wage agressive war" (which was a pretty weak echo of Nuremberg, I'm afraid) they're toast.

6. Bush by invading Iraq pushed the Iraqi Sunni Arabs to desert secular Arab nationalism. ... Bush has spread political Islam and has strengthened its influence.

Stupidity still isn't criminal. Not even for Presidents.

7. Bush diverted at least $1,000,000,000 in US security spending from the counter-terrorism struggle against al-Qaeda to the Iraq debacle, at the same time that he has run up half a trillion dollar annual deficits, contributing to a spike in inflation, harming the US economy, and making the US less effective in counterterrorism.

see above. If we start criminalizing bad economic policy, we're all criminals. At least those of us with credit card balances....

8. Counterterrorism requires friendly allies and close cooperation. ... Bush is widely despised and has left America isolated in the world. Virtually all the publics of all major nations hate US policy.

They don't vote; no wonder the administration spin machine can't handle them

9. Bush transported detainees to torture sites in Eastern Europe. Under European Union laws, both torture and involvement in torture are illegal,and European officials can be tried for these crimes. How many European counterterrorism officials will want to work closely with the Americans if, for all they know, this association could end in jail time? Indeed, in Washington it is said that a lot of our best CIA officers are leaving, afraid that they are being ordered to do things that are illegal, and for which they could be tried once another administration comes to power in Washington.

Yes, plus it's strategically stupid. Bush has been very sparing in his use of pardon authority, and has proven entirely willing to let underlings and foot-soldiers hang in his stead. Loyalty, however highly valued in the abstract, is not a one-way street.

10. Bush's failure to capture Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri allows them to continue to grandstand, to continue to frighten the public, to continue to affect financial markets, and to continue to plot. ... If al-Qaeda does pull off another American operation, it may well give Bush and Cheney an opportunity to destroy the US constitution altogether, finally giving Bin Laden his long-sought revenge on Americans for the way he believes they have forced Palestinians and other Muslims to live under lawless foreign domination or local tyranny.

There's stupidity and there's malice: the stupidity is proven, but the malice is still inchoate potential. Can't impeach on that, though we really ought to be able to bring down a few of the underlings. interfering with military operations and discipline ought to be enough to smoke out some of the more obvious political operatives: how many Scooters do they have in this administration?

Speaking of impeachment fodder, how about the new information about when Bush (and Blair) were resolved to go to war in Iraq and what they were prepared to do to get there? That's a pretty clear case of consipiracy to violate international law, a better indictment than most of the "legal victories" the administration has achieved in Federal court.

Speaking of screwups, did you know that we take hostages and abuse family members as interrogration tactics? No, I'm not kidding. That's how we add fuel to the insurgency.

This isn't impeachable either, though it ought to be: Bush Administration takes budget priorities from Peter Singer.

Don't think impeachment is possible? There is real momentum and the Administration is actually concerned [via]. It's becoming Mainstream Media fodder, and the usual plaints about our republican-not-democratic political system are starting to be heard (get over it, and get on with the actual work, will you?)

My own roundup of impeachment charges and possibilities is here. Shout them down!

I like Boston and Irish Coffee. Big surprise.

You Are Boston

Both modern and old school, you never forget your roots. Well educated and a little snobby, you demand the best. And quite frankly, you think you are the best. Famous (living, pop culture) people from the Boston area: Conan O'Brien, Ben Affleck, New Kids on the Block

What American City Are You? [via]

You Are an Irish Coffee

At your best, you are: wild, spontaneous, and outgoing At your worst, you are: too extreme and reckless You drink coffee when: you want to keep drinking booze Your caffeine addiction level: low

What Kind of Coffee Are You?

Well, they got the last one wrong. Way wrong. The rest of it's not bad.

Go Read Someone Else....

I had not intended to blog as extensively or intensively yesterday.... it's time for some carnivals!

The second Carnival Of Blog Coverage has some pretty good stuff, but inexplicably omits the Pseudonymous meme which swept the academic blogosphere recently.

The fourth Asian History Carnival has lots of fantastic stuff, visual and historical.

You can Carry a Gun; You Can't Marry A Gay or Label Your Food

In the hypocrisy hall of fame, American attitudes towards "states' rights" occupy one of the places of honor. I was going to say "Republican attitudes" but frankly, liberals have pretty mixed records on this as well; people with well-considered and consistent positions on the matter are pretty rare on both sides. No, I don't include hard-core "states' rights" neo-secessionists as "well-considered" any more than I do the "abolish the states/federalize everything" busybodies. Personally, I think the commerce clause is pretty thin basis for our current level of federalization, but that it's irrational to consider only commerce as a matter where national consistency is worth overriding local particularism.

So, in the "amazing but not surprising" category comes two new Republican initiatives (they're in power, so their hypocrisy is most obvious) to obliterate states' rights with regard to safety issues. The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Bill would require the same treatment of concealed carry gun permits as of drivers' licenses: "full faith and credit" overriding local laws about whether and to whom concealed carry permits should be issued.

In states that issue concealed firearm permits, a state`s laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its own borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal "bright-line" standard would permit carrying in places other than police stations; courthouses; public polling places; meetings of state, county, or municipal governing bodies; schools; passenger areas of airports; and certain other locations.

There's lots of pseudo-social science in the justifications section. I note, though, that Vermont has no licensing requirement: would full faith and credit require that all current and former Vermonters be allowed unlicensed national permission to carry handguns?

And the US House is also considering a bill that would obliterate state food labeling requirements which were in any way more stringent or complete than federal requirements.

Attorneys general from 37 states wrote lawmakers Wednesday in opposition to the measure.

The obvious target, they wrote, is California's Proposition 65, a law passed by voters requiring companies to warn the public of potentially dangerous toxins in food. The law has prompted California to file lawsuits seeking an array of warnings, including the mercury content in canned tuna and the presence of lead in Mexican candy.

Frankly, the national trend has usually been "California first, then everyone," so this is definitely swimming against the tide. Call it the "National Food Lobby Efficiency Act" because it would mean there was only one legislature and one set of agencies to pressure.... and who cares about those pesky consumers voters?

Of course, the full hypocrisy of this is only realized when you consider the effect of "Marriage Protection" legislation that flies in the face of "full faith and credit." I can't believe the Supreme Court has let this stand....

Update: Oh, medical insurance coverage is now a federal issue, because states are requiring insurance companies to actually cover things....