i cannot believe im writing this

i thoroughly enjoyed bill o'reilly's interview with obama! i actually think that in this scenario o'reilly's blowhardiness (and yes, occassional untruths that obama corrected) really forced obama to argue his case specifically and forcefully. parts 1 (where he chastizes obama about the surge) and 3 (where he goes after obama's 'shady affiliates') are pretty much a waste, but parts 2 (where they have a spirited debate about conservative vs. liberal economics) and 4 (where they talk about foreign policy) were really illuminating, and alot of fun.
It's by far the best interview with him that I have seen, and it really begs the question of whether Obama needs to be poked a little to stop delivering his "the glory of the american promise!" platitudes that, no offense, are putting everyone to sleep at this point. o'reilly really prods him, and you can see him get sharper as the interview goes on. Maybe we need to have Hannity moderate the debates! No, I didn't say that.

Parts 2 and 4 below.

the glory of radio lab, the missteps in pakistan

Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich give scientists everywhere hope. You know, hope that its possible that as a scientist, your friends won't, someday, exhaust every possible other conversation thread before, haltingly, delivering a "and how's work going for you?" with a heavy undertone of "don't you dare slip in some sort of name for a protein that's made out of numbers and capital letters." which eventually leads to the thousand yard stare, leading you to summarize with a "you know, ups and downs," and leaving your poor conversation-mate to breathe an (often audible!) sigh of relief and return to more human conversation.

don't think we can escape blame for this, scientists. we invariably respond to this snub by describing our jobs as solving the hidden secrets of the universe, one (incomprehensibly named) molecule at a time. this allows us to compartmentalize the rest of the world into people who are either a) too dumb to understand what we're saying, or b) too self-absorbed to care. (note: we also generally feel that group b) is too dumb to understand what we are saying). get real. we do some pipetting, drag and drop some stuff into analysis software, make an excel table, and get back to crafting the perfect Facebook status update (what's just snarky enough to say that my life is way too busy for Facebook?)

it's ok. Jad and Robert are here to show us the way. Robert alluded to this in a speech he gave at Caltech's commencement, entitled, Tell Me a Story. In it he implores scientists to find a way to make our work relatable. Tell a story, he says, and make people care. But why do we shoulder this burden? Simply put, the Sarah Palins of the world see scientific progress as antithetical to the religious beliefs that govern their value system. Learning about synaptic transmission takes away the wonder of God's work, apparently.

What these cats need is their own scientific experience. Anyone in science can tell you that new discoveries usually serve to show us the immense complexities and interplay within all living (and frankly, nonliving) things. The myriads of landmark discoveries haven't brought us much closer to *solving* the human experience, but they have helped us appreciate it. And within those complexities there is space for believers and nonbelievers. Whether the whole kit and caboodle is God's work or Darwin's work, solving a few mysteries isn't going to hurt anyone.

But Intelligent Design will. Teaching something like creationism in schools encourages kids to smother the curiosity that creates great scientists. Meanwhile, precipitous cuts to NIH funding stifle the perseverant scholars that keep the scientific dream alive. Opposing stem cell research is just another way of telling us that there's a limit to how high we can climb.

The point here, that Robert and Jad outright tell us (eloquently in this week's Radio Lab, "Making the Hippo Dance"), but also demonstrate with their weekly program, is that we have an opportunity to stem the tide. So. Don't hesitate. Talk about actin treadmilling over beers. You may get a few converts.

Random Aside: The amazing McSweeneys did a retelling of Hamlet with Facebook status updates. Ha.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the war in Pakistan. Does anyone doubt that the Bush Administration is going to screw the pooch on this one? The New York Times Magazine, as I mentioned before, delivered a stunning piece on the growth of Taliban influence in the Pashtun dominated northwest region. Now, reports have revealed that the National Intelligence Council warned Bush sometime ago that sending troops into Pakistan would be counterproductive. To quote:

The intelligence community believes U.S. military incursions into Pakistan will benefit the political-military organizations allied with the Taliban that are seeking to destabilize the national government in Islamabad.

Patrick Lang, former defense intelligence officer for the Middle East at the Defense Intelligence Agency, told IPS he understands the intelligence community issued a "pretty clear warning" against the commando raid. "They said, in effect, if you want to see the Pakistani government collapse, go right ahead," Lang said.

Another dead end military scenario. I think we get the next one free!

mark halperin is a HERO.

Thank god, someone had the intestinal fortitude to say it. From the Huffington Post:

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, listen, you can say all you want, John McCain said this about Hillary's health care proposal. But it was still foolish for Barack Obama to say because every night is precious for him, Anderson, in terms of getting his message out. This is one night lost on your program where his message got muffled by this silliness over lipstick on a pig.

COOPER: Mark, you're shaking your head.

MARK HALPERIN, "TIME" MAGAZINE: Stop the madness. I think, with all due respect to the program's focus on, listen to David just said. I think this is the press just absolutely playing into the McCain campaign's crocodile tears.

COOPER: Crocodile tears.

HALPERIN: Yes.

COOPER: They knew exactly what it is.

HALPERIN: They knew exactly what he was saying. It's an expression. And this is a victory for the McCain campaign in the sense that every day they can make this a pig fight in the mud. It's good for them because it's reducing Barack Obama's message even more. But I think this is a low point in the day and one of the low days of our collective coverage of this campaign. To spend even a minute on this expression, I think, is amazing and outrageous.

COOPER: Let's move on. David Gergen, what do you make of the McCain campaign's continuing use of Sarah Palin's line about the "bridge to nowhere," that she said thanks, but no thanks when clearly she supported it initially, then later on she changed her position, though she still took all the tens of millions, hundreds of millions of dollars that was supposed to go to the bridge and used it on other pet projects around Alaska?

GERGEN: Well, I'm surprised they're doing that. You know, and they've got enormous momentum. They still -- Ohio has changed over in her direction, as John King will soon report. But I'm surprised that they're continuing on that. I'm surprised that they're not letting her speak to the public. She's not taking public questions as she's moved about. She goes on her airplane and it's off the record for the press. You can't quote her there. They still haven't talked to the press. At the end of this week on 9/11 and very conveniently the day her son is going off to Iraq she's going to have her first press interview. I'm surprised by all of that. And I just tell you -- where I traveled -- I was in Washington today and Boston today talking to people, and there are just a lot of people now getting on both sides of this who are getting really angry or upset on both sides. Getting upset at the other side for what they think are -- I think Mark is right. There's a lot of lowness in all of this.

COOPER: Mark, has there ever been a vice presidential candidate who has yet to talk to the press at this point in the race?

HALPERIN: No. It's another thing that, again, I'm embarrassed about our profession for. She should be held more accountable for that. The "bridge to nowhere" thing is outrageous. And if you press them on it, they'll fall because they know they can't defend what they're saying. They're staying it on the stump as a core part of their message, it's in their advertising. I'm not saying the press should be out to get John McCain and Sarah Palin. But if a core part of their message is something that every journalist -- journalism organization in the country has looked at and says it's demonstrably false, again, we're not doing our jobs if we just treat this as one of many things that's happening.

COOPER: And yet, we're getting tons of e-mails from people saying that we're attacking Palin by looking at her record. It's fascinating to see how polarized people are.

HALPERIN: The other three people who are on the national ticket have been scrutinized for months and in cases, years. We've got less than 60 days to do this. We'd better get about doing it. And if she doesn't cooperate in that more than she has, the public should be told that clearly.

Obama on LGBT rights

This is an illuminating read. There's been a lot of static in the past 12 days (named Sarah Palin), to the extent that the core participants' values have been obscured. Read this interview and remind yourselves. It's a nice read. He doesn't go as far as I'd like him to go, but you read it and can remember, "Oh yeah, I'm supporting a guy who, to co-opt his own phrase, gets it."

lipstick fallout

ive got a blog on the amazing radio lab of yesterday coming, but of course, something wonderful has come out of the mccain campaign. the dreaded "lipstick" fallout.



now, obviously its taken out of context, and obviously, this represents yet another misappropriation of facts and statements, but come on, barack. stop saying "lipstick". Stop saying "pig". Stop saying "stupid". And good god, Joe Biden, start going after Sarah Palin so Barack Obama can recenter this election on the issues.

lightening it up. A LITTLE

this is so annie doesn't think im the biggest debbie downer ever.

michelle obama was on ellen (!!) and she's a good dancer. vogues. brushes her shoulder off. HOW CAN YOU NOT WANT HER TO BE THE FIRST LADY? also, her moves? way better than barack's. seriously. observe.

the future

with recent polls showing a marked bump from the RNC resulting in a national lead for mccain, its time to envision a potential mccain-palin administration! we should all really start thinking about this, particularly because the GOP ticket doesn't seem particularly interested in wading into issue-based discussions.

Abortion - I think we can all be sure that Palin's inclusion on the ticket indicates a strong pro-life stance. In addition, the party supports cutting funding on any family planning programs and exclusively supports abstinence-only education. birth control access? a thing of the past!
verdict: no abortions, no condoms, no birth control, but its ok, because, no sex before marriage! (and no sex during marriage except for all-important procreation)

Education - Well, we certainly won't be learning any evolution (and say goodbye to its ridiculous counterpart, genetics!). And prepare for your precipitous nosedive, public school systems! Especially because McCain-Palin would allow dissatisfied parents to opt out of their public school system and use their taxes towards charter schools, creating a spectacular brain drain in low SES areas! Plus, the abomination known as No Child Left Behind will be continued under the stark aegis of our new administration, continuing to penalize (rather than, and here's an insane thought, HELP) teachers and students that perform poorly. What's that you say? Your kid cares about the arts? Well fuck him! (Or her! Especially her! What is a girl doing in school anyway?) Schools need money, and they're only going to GET money in a palin-mccain administration if their kids do well on tests! So what will they learn? How to pass the test! and what will teachers learn? How to cheat for their students, so they get raises!
verdict: Goodbye Mendel, goodbye Darwin, Hello Adam, hello Eve. Goodbye choir, hello scantron sheets. Goodbye creative learning techniques, hello test-oriented teaching. Goodbye upward mobility for kids in poor educational systems, hello penalization of poor educational systems that give kids in ghettos the extra push towards crime that they really don't need.

Energy: drill, baby, drill! forget about being competitive in the rapidly emerging green technology market, a market that is guaranteed to synthesize new, sustainable jobs while being environmentally friendly. Our 2 pals of big oil aren't going to let Exxon Mobil suffer any monetary losses!
verdict: fuck you, prius.

Oh fuck this, time to streamline my tirade.
health care: bogus tax credits for people to "buy their own health insurance." Yeah, that's the problem of the 45 million uninsured. The taxes. So, get used to those crowded emergency rooms. What's the quote? Oh yeah. John McCain "supports a free market based health care system." How does that NOT mean "Rich people deserve better access to health care than poor people"? The reality is actually much, much worse. It's more like "Rich people deserve so much health care that poor people generally don't deserve it at all."

Foreign Policy: Get ready for military engagements in Georgia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. How, exactly, are we going to get the soliders for all these engagements? By reinstating the draft, of course.

Losing steam. They also suck ass when it comes to the housing crisis, ideas for stimulating the economy (where at least one of them doesn't understand how Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae work), and taxes. They don't think global warming is real. And Scalia is going to have a few new pals on the supreme court.

I know very few rational humans who are excited by the promise of what is aforementioned. yet, I watch coverage of this election season, and i start to think that I'm losing my mind. Why is the GOP so effective? Well, we know that. They brainwash you with repetition. They denigrate the opposition, and they protect themselves by demonizing the news media that would dare report on their lies and smear tactics. They call this "liberal media bias." Just once, I would love to see news media outlets come out and outline the following:

1. The function of the news media is to provide factual analysis. This is often dominated by the need to shed light on misleading statements by candidates. It is not 'liberal bias' to have to continually correct all of the contradictions and bullshit that emanate from the GOP.
2. Another significant function of the news media is to comment on the current state of affairs. Reporting our getting fucked over and left for dead by the Bush/Cheney administration isn't bias. It's fact.
3. Karl Rove is like the great equalizer. If he's a member of the news media, there's no such thing as liberal media bias. By the way, how in gods name does Bill O'Reilly get away with referring to NBC news as "liberal media fascists"????
3. Whether you like it or not, the private affairs of public officials are legitimate news items. In fact, they directly influence executive judgment, right, Monica Lewinsky?

Of course, the media hasn't done this. They've put their tail between their legs, clammed up, and conveniently removed the few reporters willing to speak out against explotative propaganda. as a result, today CNN viewers were treated to fascinating insights on what Sarah Palin's biographer and priest think of her abilities, rather than the monumental Bob Woodward story. I mean, Bob Woodward tells us that the surge, one of the wedge issues of the election, was a sham and had little if anything to do with the success in Iraq, and we care more what some biographer looking to capitalize on the newest GOP star has to say about her executive abilities? Jesus.

Honestly, I thought I had a much more fiery rant in me, but I don't. I'm tired of watching intelligent, thoughtful candidates lose out to sneering, dismissive, divisive, pandering smear tactics. I'm tired of watching terrified media veterans like Tom Brokaw championing the factless, soulless speech of Sarah Palin. I'm tired of watching McCain hold a white blanket over his pathetic sellout to the neoconservative Right, deliver a hollow speech on reform, and have everyone believe him. I'm tired. I can't imagine how Barack Obama and Joe Biden feel. I watch Biden struggle on Meet the Press to do battle with the issue-less rhetoric being put forth by Republicans and shamefully parroted by Tom Brokaw. I watch Barack Obama bravely face down a condescending Bill O'Reilly, delivering thought provoking responses that are sure to fall upon deaf ears. Their continued ability to maintain hope that the public is still interested in making an informed decision despite countless demonstrations that they have no interest in knowledge, only perception? Impressive, and certainly beyond my pay grade.

One more thing, on a personal note. The current administration has slashed NIH funding precipitously. The impact in science has resonated, and resulted in an exodus of legitimate talent from the field. I'm truly terrifed for the future of science in the hands of another Republican administration. This is an area of "American ingenuity" that nobody seems to give a shit about. And its dying.

A few final reads that I highly, highly recommend.
1. The New Yorker's piece on General Petraeus.
2. The New York Times Magazine on the emerging Taliban dominance of northwest Pakistan (amana, can you shed some light on this?)