« July 2007 | Main | September 2007 »
August 27, 2007
Vacation Interruptus -- Again
The ventriloquist dummy took a powder, Stephen Lee Myers reports in The New York Times.
Copy that, said MSNBC.com, which ran his report as its cover story (per the illustration, above), since replaced by the AP report.
There will be many thumbsuckers mulling the whys and wherefores of the dummy's departure, but here's ours (click the photo there or below):
It's our fave foto of El Senor Gonzales because it puts him in the proper perspective. May it long be remembered.
But here's a more important story of this dog day, reported by the AP's Deborah Hastings and published in the Navy Times:
One after another, the men and women who have stepped forward to report corruption in the massive effort to rebuild Iraq have been vilified, fired and demoted.Or worse.
For daring to report illegal arms sales, Navy veteran Donald Vance says he was imprisoned by the American military in a security compound outside Baghdad and subjected to harsh interrogation methods.
That's just the beginning of the story, which details the BananaRepublic's treatment of whistleblowers in ways you won't believe.
Posted by jherman at 9:09 AM
August 13, 2007
Vacation Interruptus
Straight Up's Calvin Trillin offers this comment on today's White House resignation:
BODY POLITIC
Farewell to Bush's brain, Karl Rove,
Whose loss will never drain us;
Now when do we wipe away Dick Cheney,
The boss's raging anus?
Postscript: Now watch Bill Moyers's beautiful kiss-off, delivered on Aug. 17:
Karl Rove figured out a long time ago that the way to take an intellectually incurious draft-averse naughty playboy in a flight jacket with chewing tobacco in his back pocket and make him governor of Texas, was to sell him as God's anointed in a state where preachers and televangelists outnumber even oil derricks and jack rabbits.
And that's just for starters. Has anybody said it better?
Posted by jherman at 6:20 PM
August 7, 2007
Banana Days Are Here Again
The BananaRepublic has gained a new lease on life from a craven combination of mindless BananaRepublicans and feckless BananaDemocrats. The dog days of summer are upon us, too. See ya later.
Aug. 10: Oh, and before I go ... here's a postscript: Something even scarier, pointed out by mi amigo with reference to the "brown-skinned shadows" in Iraq, "whose violent demise need not touch the American realm."
Posted by jherman at 8:30 AM
August 6, 2007
It Takes a Genius
The U.S. military can't find 190,000 weapons given willy-nilly to Iraqi forces when security training was run by Gen. David Petraeus.
Which raises fears, as The Washington Post delicately puts it, that the military genius who is now the top U.S. commander in Iraq has armed the insurgents fighting U.S. troops.
Makes you wonder what else besides AK-47s, pistols, body armor and helmets will have gone missing by September, when Petraeus is scheduled to report to Congress about "progress" in Iraq.
Thousands of Iraqi civilians maybe? More U.S. troops killed and wounded? Political sanity?
Postscript: And now for a minor update.
Iraq Weapons Are a Focus of Criminal InvestigationsBAGHDAD, Aug. 27 -- Several federal agencies are investigating a widening network of criminal cases involving the purchase and delivery of billions of dollars of weapons, supplies and other matériel to Iraqi and American forces, according to American officials. The officials said it amounted to the largest ring of fraud and kickbacks uncovered in the conflict here.
The inquiry has already led to several indictments of Americans, with more expected, the officials said. One of the investigations involves a senior American officer who worked closely with Gen. David H. Petraeus in setting up the logistics operation to supply the Iraqi forces when General Petraeus was in charge of training and equipping those forces in 2004 and 2005, American officials said Monday.
Wanna bet the Petraeus report will not mention American war profiteers?
Posted by jherman at 8:59 AM
August 1, 2007
Over the Cliff With Rupe
Is Rupert Murdoch good or bad for The Wall Street Journal? That's the burning question. Today's WSJ editorial assures us, "No sane businessman pays a premium of 67% over the market price for an asset he intends to ruin." Well, nobody has said he intends to ruin it. To use a favorite word of the WSJ editorial board, that's a canard.
Rupe simply intends to run the Journal the way he wants. He has said so himself -- emphatically. No sane businessman pays $5 billion for an asset and does otherwise. Which is no good for the independence of the WSJ news department.
I speak from experience. Once upon a time I worked for a newspaper he took over -- the Chicago Sun-Times. He started it on its downhill slide. Downhill? Ha. He drove it over a cliff.
Personally, I had no cause to complain. He leafed through the paper page by page, an eye witness told me, and stopped at my Sunday "Hanging Out" column. He read it, pointed to it, and said he wanted "more of that." Which is why, in addition to Sundays, I suddenly had a column on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. This suited me fine. I even got along with Charles Wilson -- then the deputy editor of The Times of London, later its editor -- who was temporarily installed as the Sun-Times editor in chief. It was only afterward, when one of Murdoch's chief Australian henchman, Frank Devine, replaced Wilson as the permanent editor, that I resigned (following an argument we had about a new assignment, to write a team column modeled on the NY Post's Page Six -- but that's another story).
The Sun-Times is not the Journal and never was. When I began working there, however, it was a really fine daily filled with first-class writing and reporting and a steady diet of major investigative series. During the Murdoch takeover many reporters and editors got out. Not all. Staffers like lifelong Chicagoans Zay Smith, the late Bill Newman and Henry Kisor stayed -- as did others like John Schulian, who remained for a while, and Roger Ebert, who was already a Sun-Times institution -- because they refused to flee to the Tribune or couldn't or had nowhere else to go if they wanted to continue working in their hometown. Mike Royko did eventually cross the street, despite his vow that he never would. But that, too, is another story.
Will the staff dissolve at the Journal? Different paper, different times. But I have no doubt same old Rupe, contrary to the opinion of another old Sun-Times hand. Some folks will be elevated, others ignored -- and many will flee while the fleeing is good or not so good. "I expect the Journal will become even more a place of favorites and outcasts," a longtime WSJ reporter says.
A few marquee names will get more dough and some freedom. They'll be promoted on Fox TV, etc., while those with nowhere else to go will slave on, pressed to churn out more and complain less. Those in the middle will flee when they can. Probably quite a few will leave journalism, because what's the point if it isn't fun and means nothing?I don't think RM cares about any particular staffers at WSJ, but it seems possible that, to the extent the current regime under the very ambitious and generally respected Marcus [Brauchli, the managing editor,] stays intact, they will want to keep people they like in place rather than watch an exodus that will both make it harder to run the newspaper and prove the critics were right about the instant diminution of the Journal's reputation. Once RM's crew insinuate themselves throughout the hierarchy, such attitudes will doubtless change.
Better believe it. And that's no canard.
PS: Lede-ing question
Not to make a big deal about COPYING A LEDE, which wasn't a piece of genius anyway, but have a look:
THE PHOENIX
August 8, 2007
When Rupert came to Boston
Just how badly will Rupert Murdoch screw up the Wall Street Journal?Ever since Murdoch's just-accepted $5 billion offer for Dow Jones, the Journal's parent company, became public this past May, this has been journalism's great burning question.
A reader writes: "Seems like he ripped off the entire premise -- what did Rupert do at the Bos Herald, just like you did Rupert at the S-T."
Posted by jherman at 10:31 AM