Round the Bloggerhood
Matt Yglesias takes a (welcome) turn left, describing the "creeping Putinization of American life." Examples:
...the Sinclair incident, the threatening letter to Rock The Vote, the specter of the top official in the House of Representatives making totally baseless charges of criminal conduct against a major financier of the political opposition [shades of Mikhail Khodorovsky], the increasing evidence that the 'terror alert' system is nothing more than a political prop, the 'torture memo' asserting that the president is above the law...
and about ten more all in the same paragraph.
Annatopia on the 100,000 who marched against the Iraq War in London today. Among those providing messages of support was the family of beheaded British hostage Kenneth Bigley.
Daily Kos reminds us that Florida early voting begins Monday.
If you're in Florida, start draggin everyone you know to your local election offices.
Jesse Taylor at Pandagon explains why the Chicago Tribune's endorsement of Bush today was really an endorsement of Kerry.
Avedon Carol has an excellent roundup of weekend blog posts at Sideshow. One she points us to is Paul Rosenberg debunking the myth that Vietnam war protesters spat on returning vets. The post quotes a book on the subject, and links to this online speech by the book's author which is a must-read, particularly further down where he traces the spitting myth to October 15, 1969, the hugely successful day of anti-war demonstrations across America, and explains how Nixon engineered the myth in response.
The problem with the Administration's strategy was that by 1969, thousands of Vietnam veterans were, themselves, part of the anti-war movement and hundreds of men still in the service were openly opposing the war. In Vietnam on October 15, some soldiers wore black arm bands to show their support for the Moratorium; some combat units even refused orders to fight on that day. The Nixon Administration's response was to challenge the credibility of these anti-war warriors (Moser, Richard, 1996; Wingo, 1969).
Why does it matter:
Reclaiming our memory of the Vietnam era entails a struggle against very powerful institutional forces that toy with our imaginings for reasons of monetary, political, or professional gain. It is a struggle for our individual and collective identities that calls us to reappropriate the making of our own memories. It is a struggle of epic importance. Studies of the twentieth century will shape America's national identity for decades to come. How Vietnam is to be remembered looms large on the agenda of turn-of-the-century legacy studies.
Remembered as a war that was lost because of betrayal at home, Vietnam becomes a modern-day Alamo that must be avenged, a pretext for more war and generations of more veterans. Remembered as a war in which soldiers and pacifists joined hands to fight for peace, Vietnam symbolizes popular resistance to political authority and the dominant images of what it means to be a good American. By challenging myths like that of the spat-upon Vietnam veteran, we reclaim our role in the writing of our own history, the construction of our own memory, and the making of our own identity.
After reading through the speech, it was definitely time to lighten up, so I turned to Skippy who didn't disappoint with this very funny take on the Jon Stewart-Tucker Carlson show and a very convoluted roundup of "dead trees endorsements" for the candidates.
And now it's now time to watch tv.
| < Support Those Who Support Civil Liberties | The Importance of Electing Prosecutors > |
